My view: Part of Indian Sathya Sai orgn. state president job is to raise money required to meet Sai orgn. needs through donors but individual devotees should not be pressurised for donations
Given below are details of a recent conversation I had with a few others. It started with this post put up by Mr. V.R. Ganti (of Singapore): https://www.facebook.com/vr.ganti.1/posts/10213200128822456, dated 15th Sept. 2018.
Mr. Ganti wrote:
WHILE ALL INDIA DICTATOR (PRESIDENT) OF SATHYA SAI SEVA ORGANISATION IS OUSTING THE STATE PRESIDENTS, HIS WIFE IS SEEKING DONATIONS FROM SEVADALS GOING TO PARTHI FROM VARIOUS STATES.
The attached letter by KAMALA PANDYA GARU is self explanatory. The tone of the letter as also the rate of donations or contributions suggest that it is more of a DEMAND. If the Mahila wings are desirous of making contributions they may but a general circular of this kind to all States is not what BHAGAWAN would approve in my considered opinion. Also this appears to be MHALLI (Muddenahalli group) way of functioning.
WILL SWAMI APPROVE SUCH ACTIONS SEEKING DONATIONS IN KIND?
THE APPROVAL OF SSSCT DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN SOUGHT.
[The pic below was also attached. To open pic in higher resolution, right-click on pic followed by open in new tab/window. In new tab/window you may have to click on pic to zoom in.]
--- end (slightly edited) contents of Mr. Ganti post ---
Note that Mrs. Kamala Pandya is the wife of All India President of Sathya Sai orgn. Mr. Nimish Pandya. Mrs Pandya, I believe, heads the Ladies (Mahila) side of the Indian Sathya Sai orgn.
Given below are some comments on the above post:
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: I don't know whether it is a request for Seva Dals themselves to contribute. I think it is more of an effort to provide support to EWWT from Indian state organizations.
I think it is no secret that Prasanthi Nilayam ashram system depends on financial and other support including Seva Dal manpower from state organizations of India.
And the letter also has the sentence about any state that finds it difficult to meet the request could discuss it with Mrs. Pandya.
So I think this is not that unusual. Earlier when Bhagavan was in living form, I think money for such things could get organized far more easily.
Now I think it may be tougher.
I have learned one big thing about Prasanthi Nilayam ashram system after Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi. In this post-Mahasamadhi period, if the ashram institutions have to run, they need money. If decent salaries are not paid, salaried people who form the core of the ashram institutions, will just quit and go!
PN ashram system now is not like sannyasi or sannyasini run system where many people offer services at very low salary or for free.
Being Indian Sai orgn. state president, even when Bhagavan was in physical form, needed the ability to muster required financial and other resources, some of which were used for supporting PN ashram system.
But this burden must NOT be passed on to Mahila Seva Dal. During my (Maharashtra state) Prasanthi Seva days (1990s) I saw that many of Seva Dal were coming from lower middle class background and sometimes were poor. Food coupons used to get offered free, at times (not on all occasions) for those doing Seva Dal duty, and that was a significant benefit to the lower middle class and poor Seva Dal from rural parts of Maharashtra. So if such burden is passed on to Seva Dal then it would be a significant disincentive for them to volunteer for Prasanthi Seva, which they offer free of charge.
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Seeking donations is not at all desirable leave alone from Seva Dals but from anyone. If you cannot afford don’t do that Seva or undertake that project- is the recommendation from Bhagawan I think
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Vr Ganti sir, At the end of the day, the state president has to foot the bill and organize the manpower needed. That's how it was even when Bhagavan was in physical form, as per the impression I got from my years in Maharashtra Sai orgn..
But perhaps such things were done discreetly, with moneyed devotees being tapped for money.
Now, especially with Muddenahalli poaching lots of moneyed donors, perhaps things are tougher for Sai orgn.
Closing down Seva activities is easy sir. Re-starting them may take a long time. I understand the pressure that leaders will have to try to keep the show going on.
----
Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen wrote: Demanding payment in any form does not ring true with Swami's teachings. End of story.
----
Alok Dara Shikoh wrote (slightly edited): Ravi S. Iyer sir, I am already seeing some whatsapp msgs amongst mdh groups (unofficially, not endorsed by their vahini or their trust) citing this letter as an example of how the official Sai org is attempting to solicit while blaming mdh for solicitations.Their stand is that : money is necessary, but discreetness that Bhagawan showed is more evident in methods of mdh than ptp...
Be that as it may, my personal view is that the general image of ptp is that money is accepted if donated voluntarily but never solicit ed directly or indirectly... This image is definitely a tad bit tarnished in the above circular unfortunately
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen, Alok Dara Shikoh - Let's know the realities on the ground.
1) This leaked letter of Mrs. Pandya (which I presume is genuine) seems to be for top office bearers of Sai orgn state units/orgns in India and is NOT aimed at individual Sai devotees at all. The principle of Sai orgn. and PN ashram system of NOT soliciting money from individual Sai devotees/visitors is NOT broken, in my considered view.
2) Running PN ashram institutions as well as state Sai orgn. institutions needs money! Otherwise you cannot run the show. Period. I have fairly intimate knowledge of the financial challenges that were involved in meeting Sathya Sai Samithi Dombivli related such issues in the 1990s and early 2000s when I was associated with it. Discreetly and sometimes not-so-discreetly information about the finance needs would be mentioned which would stir up people to contribute with the few moneyed people contributing significant chunks of the money required.
You may be surprised but for the water project in the 1990s (if I recall correctly), Swami had taken a loan from an Indian bank. An announcement was made about it after Thursday bhajan and devotees were encouraged to contribute to PN ashram so as to help repay the loan.
3) I am under the impression that expenses towards major functions in PN ashram system is, to a significant extent at least, borne by Indian state Sai organizations. I don't know how exactly it is handled. But, as an example, the Ashadi Ekadasi program (a few days before Guru Purnima) in PN is Maharashtra state function. That means Maharashtra state has to organize everything about the function, which involves managing the people and money needs. Without moneyed people coming forward and contributing significant money to handle these expenses, that Ashadi Ekadashi program cannot be held by Maharashtra state in PN! As simple as that.
When Swami was in physical form, Maharashtra state would have the privilege of seating a group of its people right next to Swami while the drama and other programmes of Ashadi Ekadashi would be held in Swami's physical presence. The impression I had is that major financial contributors would be included in this group. And I felt that was fine.
These are the practical realities.
Note that at no point in such matters were devotees forced to pay up. At times, devotees would be informed of the money needs. But the impression I have is that within the top office bearers of the state Sai orgn. in India, the money needs would be openly discussed and it was the responsibility of these top office bearers to meet those needs.
Perhaps you folks have not dealt with these practical realities of being part of Sai orgn. and having the burden of managing Sai orgn. events. I have, to some extent, in my nearly ten years in Sai orgn. Maharashtra (around 1993 to 2002). This includes one Prasanthi Seva stint where I was the leader of the Mandir Seva Dal group and so got direct exposure to the immense pressure on the Mandir (Kulwant Hall in PN) discipline Seva Dal group leader. He was partly responsible for physical security of Bhagavan while Bhagavan was in Sai Kulwant Hall. Note that I also was part of this Mandir discipline Seva Dal group for the other 5 stints of Prasanthi Seva I did. For a software technical consultant like me, it was a huge responsibility and a big eye opener about the challenges involved in providing security to physical form of Swami and ensuring discipline among the devotees/visitors, while he was giving Darshan in Sai Kulwant Hall and also later when he was in Kulwant Hall but among his staff and students where the protection burden would largely fall on the leaders of the staff and students.
Manpower was the big issue for Mandir discipline Seva Dal work. I later learned that sometimes some wealthy devotees would sponsor the trip of some Maharashtra Seva Dal to PN! So there was a financial need angle to that too.
The big difference between MDH and this case, is that MDH solicits money from devotees openly with Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudan Naidu openly speaking about it. I have never seen Sathya Sai doing so.
So I don't think Mrs. Pandya's internal letter to Indian state orgn. senior office bearers about this additional financial burden, should be equated with Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudan Naidu's solicitation of money. I mean, Mrs. Pandya has not said this in a public speech, has she?
----
Alok Dara Shikoh wrote (edited): Ravi S. Iyer sir thanks for the detailed note. Wow, you do have a great background. and i now understandyour position much better.
----
Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen wrote: Ravi S. Iyer, thank you for your perspective about finances at PN. You have made it clear that it was not the devotees who were being asked for donations.
----
Vr Ganti wrote (edited): Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen I don’t agree at all. Ultimately it is only devotees who are made to pay and not the leaders.
----
Vr Ganti wrote (AID is reference to AIP): The problem as I see is that AID and his Wife appear to be weakening the Organization. I requested, pleaded, begged and cried with AID for taking action against Mhalli Gang for stopping their game. I did not understand the reason why AID did not move a bit even. Slowly I am coming to know of the possible nexus AID has with MHALLI Gang directly or indirectly. Otherwise by this time AID should have either issued a public statement against and about Mhalli or he should have like a gentleman quit his position.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): Vr Ganti sir, my view is that Mr. Nimish Pandya has failed in his Sathya-Dharma duty to make a public statement about his reported visit to have "Darshan" of Madhusudan Naidu in 2014/2015, and to make a public statement condemning Madhusudan Naidu for imitating our beloved Lord, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
I find it very strange that nobody from current office bearer holding positions in Maharashtra Sai orgn. has forced Mr. Pandya to either make the public statement condemning Madhusudan Naidu or resign from position of All India President of Sathya Sai orgn.
But then I have seen many, many strange things in Parthi after Bhagavan Mahasamadhi in April 2011 till now. So I am not surprised. Fear is the big factor in Sai orgn. when it comes to these matters involving top people, whether it is PN ashram system or Sai orgn. I think people in Maharashtra Sai orgn. may be afraid to directly question Mr. Pandya and force him to publicly respond. That I think is the reality. Sad but such is life..... [In Telugu] Antah Maya, Ganti Garu. Meeka antah telusandi, nenu meeku em cheppalandi? :-)
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Ha ha very funny indeed.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Vr Ganti, Alok Dara Shikoh, Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen
An update on the matter. I have been given to understand that the below message from Mr. Nimish Pandya, All India President Sai orgn. has been shared with a lot of people:
Loving Sairam, Important message from AIP as follows:-
SAIRAM
This is to inform everyone that due to an unfortunate leak, a draft programme of proposed November Programme is being circulated
Please note that this programme is not final and will go thru a drastic change after a committee which is constituted for it finalises the same on 22nd September 2018
Please this message communicated to all in your states.
Nimish Pandya
AIP
Message ends
Ravi: I think the "proposed November Programme" is what has been shared by Mr. Ganti on his post above. I have no idea of what the "drastic change" will be, when the programme gets finalized on 22nd Sept. 2018.
======================================================
Given below are some comments from my Facebook post,
https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2291496844400213, associated with this blog post:
Vr Ganti wrote: You have been factual as usual. SAI BABA has been amply clear without any ambiguity whatsoever that the committee members of organisations should sit in a meeting and discuss about various projects they propose to undertake. Also the estimated expenditures for each project be discussed in detail and then in the corner of the meeting room a small box be kept for the committee members to go individually and contribute. Obviously each committee member knows the project cost and the number of committee members and so it is easy for them to workout each members expected contribution. Hence, after everyone visits the corner where the box for collecting money had been placed the box is brought to the meeting table and opened. Just in case the collection falls short the above procedure is to repeated for meeting the shortfall.
Just in case the shortfall continues the project cost is supposed to be brought down by cutting such items as is possible to be avoided.
So now do you understand why I say Kamala Pandya Garu is absolutely wrong.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Sairam Vr Ganti sir, I think you have great knowledge of Swami words on many matters. That is wonderful!
But sometimes the practical realities on the ground can be somewhat different and that sort of exposure comes only from experience of being in the orgn. and/or ashram system. Note that I was in Sai orgn. for around 9 years and in Sai university for around 9 years, and so I have 18 years experience from within Sai orgn/PN ashram system.
Let me put it this way, sir. I have been able to come to terms with, and understand, material life only when I view it as shades of grey rather than Black or White. I think similarly one can come to terms with, and understand, Sai orgn. functioning when things are viewed as shades of grey rather that just Black or White.
Black or White views in running not only Sai orgn. but perhaps any significant sized spiritual orgn. may lead to dysfunction and the orgn. not being able to meet its basic goals.
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Ravi S. Iyer. For your kind information I was also in the org for about a decade and we put the above direction of SWAMI into practice to the letter and I am sure it is still continuing in Katong Centre.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: This is a sensitive matter. So I do not want to comment further. I think money matters are the most sensitive matters in Sathya Sai movement. .. In PN ashram they are just super, super sensitive. When I was with PN ashram, I saw that my colleagues had to take extra precaution in money matters, including donations, cash/kind provided to the institution we were associated with. As I was a free service guy, I had the liberty to completely avoid getting involved with any donations in kind to the dept. that I was serving with. But paid employee colleagues had to take that responsibility and be very careful with it, so that, on one hand the needs of the dept. are handled, and on the other, no complaints are made about donations being accepted. Of course, my colleagues who were involved in such matters, got the clearance from appropriate authorities. But still it was sensitive.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Just to give readers a sense of perspective of how expensive running some institutions in PN ashram system can be, I would like to share a light-hearted remark made by a person in the know about such matters, sometime before Swami Mahasamadhi, if I recall correctly. He said something on the lines of: Along with his morning cup of tea, the Director of Super hospital (the Super speciality hospital in Puttaparthi) needs tens of lakhs of Rupees to run the show for the day! [A lakh is one hundred thousand]
Of course, this should not be taken literally. It light-heartedly conveys that per day expense for the Super hospital (before Swami Mahasamadhi) ran into tens of lakhs of Rupees. I don't know how accurate this view is. But I think it should be quite accurate.
Running a samithi (Sathya Sai centre) is one thing - one can think of a collection box kept in a corner of a room which would be enough to manage the show. Running a super speciality hospital which offers its services completely free of charge to all its patients OR, for that matter, running a university whose campuses offer free education to all its students, are completely different things. I mean, we are talking of apples and oranges here, or I should say micro-apples and mega-oranges!
----
Mr. Ganti wrote:
WHILE ALL INDIA DICTATOR (PRESIDENT) OF SATHYA SAI SEVA ORGANISATION IS OUSTING THE STATE PRESIDENTS, HIS WIFE IS SEEKING DONATIONS FROM SEVADALS GOING TO PARTHI FROM VARIOUS STATES.
The attached letter by KAMALA PANDYA GARU is self explanatory. The tone of the letter as also the rate of donations or contributions suggest that it is more of a DEMAND. If the Mahila wings are desirous of making contributions they may but a general circular of this kind to all States is not what BHAGAWAN would approve in my considered opinion. Also this appears to be MHALLI (Muddenahalli group) way of functioning.
WILL SWAMI APPROVE SUCH ACTIONS SEEKING DONATIONS IN KIND?
THE APPROVAL OF SSSCT DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN SOUGHT.
[The pic below was also attached. To open pic in higher resolution, right-click on pic followed by open in new tab/window. In new tab/window you may have to click on pic to zoom in.]
--- end (slightly edited) contents of Mr. Ganti post ---
Note that Mrs. Kamala Pandya is the wife of All India President of Sathya Sai orgn. Mr. Nimish Pandya. Mrs Pandya, I believe, heads the Ladies (Mahila) side of the Indian Sathya Sai orgn.
Given below are some comments on the above post:
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: I don't know whether it is a request for Seva Dals themselves to contribute. I think it is more of an effort to provide support to EWWT from Indian state organizations.
I think it is no secret that Prasanthi Nilayam ashram system depends on financial and other support including Seva Dal manpower from state organizations of India.
And the letter also has the sentence about any state that finds it difficult to meet the request could discuss it with Mrs. Pandya.
So I think this is not that unusual. Earlier when Bhagavan was in living form, I think money for such things could get organized far more easily.
Now I think it may be tougher.
I have learned one big thing about Prasanthi Nilayam ashram system after Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi. In this post-Mahasamadhi period, if the ashram institutions have to run, they need money. If decent salaries are not paid, salaried people who form the core of the ashram institutions, will just quit and go!
PN ashram system now is not like sannyasi or sannyasini run system where many people offer services at very low salary or for free.
Being Indian Sai orgn. state president, even when Bhagavan was in physical form, needed the ability to muster required financial and other resources, some of which were used for supporting PN ashram system.
But this burden must NOT be passed on to Mahila Seva Dal. During my (Maharashtra state) Prasanthi Seva days (1990s) I saw that many of Seva Dal were coming from lower middle class background and sometimes were poor. Food coupons used to get offered free, at times (not on all occasions) for those doing Seva Dal duty, and that was a significant benefit to the lower middle class and poor Seva Dal from rural parts of Maharashtra. So if such burden is passed on to Seva Dal then it would be a significant disincentive for them to volunteer for Prasanthi Seva, which they offer free of charge.
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Seeking donations is not at all desirable leave alone from Seva Dals but from anyone. If you cannot afford don’t do that Seva or undertake that project- is the recommendation from Bhagawan I think
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Vr Ganti sir, At the end of the day, the state president has to foot the bill and organize the manpower needed. That's how it was even when Bhagavan was in physical form, as per the impression I got from my years in Maharashtra Sai orgn..
But perhaps such things were done discreetly, with moneyed devotees being tapped for money.
Now, especially with Muddenahalli poaching lots of moneyed donors, perhaps things are tougher for Sai orgn.
Closing down Seva activities is easy sir. Re-starting them may take a long time. I understand the pressure that leaders will have to try to keep the show going on.
----
Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen wrote: Demanding payment in any form does not ring true with Swami's teachings. End of story.
----
Alok Dara Shikoh wrote (slightly edited): Ravi S. Iyer sir, I am already seeing some whatsapp msgs amongst mdh groups (unofficially, not endorsed by their vahini or their trust) citing this letter as an example of how the official Sai org is attempting to solicit while blaming mdh for solicitations.Their stand is that : money is necessary, but discreetness that Bhagawan showed is more evident in methods of mdh than ptp...
Be that as it may, my personal view is that the general image of ptp is that money is accepted if donated voluntarily but never solicit ed directly or indirectly... This image is definitely a tad bit tarnished in the above circular unfortunately
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen, Alok Dara Shikoh - Let's know the realities on the ground.
1) This leaked letter of Mrs. Pandya (which I presume is genuine) seems to be for top office bearers of Sai orgn state units/orgns in India and is NOT aimed at individual Sai devotees at all. The principle of Sai orgn. and PN ashram system of NOT soliciting money from individual Sai devotees/visitors is NOT broken, in my considered view.
2) Running PN ashram institutions as well as state Sai orgn. institutions needs money! Otherwise you cannot run the show. Period. I have fairly intimate knowledge of the financial challenges that were involved in meeting Sathya Sai Samithi Dombivli related such issues in the 1990s and early 2000s when I was associated with it. Discreetly and sometimes not-so-discreetly information about the finance needs would be mentioned which would stir up people to contribute with the few moneyed people contributing significant chunks of the money required.
You may be surprised but for the water project in the 1990s (if I recall correctly), Swami had taken a loan from an Indian bank. An announcement was made about it after Thursday bhajan and devotees were encouraged to contribute to PN ashram so as to help repay the loan.
3) I am under the impression that expenses towards major functions in PN ashram system is, to a significant extent at least, borne by Indian state Sai organizations. I don't know how exactly it is handled. But, as an example, the Ashadi Ekadasi program (a few days before Guru Purnima) in PN is Maharashtra state function. That means Maharashtra state has to organize everything about the function, which involves managing the people and money needs. Without moneyed people coming forward and contributing significant money to handle these expenses, that Ashadi Ekadashi program cannot be held by Maharashtra state in PN! As simple as that.
When Swami was in physical form, Maharashtra state would have the privilege of seating a group of its people right next to Swami while the drama and other programmes of Ashadi Ekadashi would be held in Swami's physical presence. The impression I had is that major financial contributors would be included in this group. And I felt that was fine.
These are the practical realities.
Note that at no point in such matters were devotees forced to pay up. At times, devotees would be informed of the money needs. But the impression I have is that within the top office bearers of the state Sai orgn. in India, the money needs would be openly discussed and it was the responsibility of these top office bearers to meet those needs.
Perhaps you folks have not dealt with these practical realities of being part of Sai orgn. and having the burden of managing Sai orgn. events. I have, to some extent, in my nearly ten years in Sai orgn. Maharashtra (around 1993 to 2002). This includes one Prasanthi Seva stint where I was the leader of the Mandir Seva Dal group and so got direct exposure to the immense pressure on the Mandir (Kulwant Hall in PN) discipline Seva Dal group leader. He was partly responsible for physical security of Bhagavan while Bhagavan was in Sai Kulwant Hall. Note that I also was part of this Mandir discipline Seva Dal group for the other 5 stints of Prasanthi Seva I did. For a software technical consultant like me, it was a huge responsibility and a big eye opener about the challenges involved in providing security to physical form of Swami and ensuring discipline among the devotees/visitors, while he was giving Darshan in Sai Kulwant Hall and also later when he was in Kulwant Hall but among his staff and students where the protection burden would largely fall on the leaders of the staff and students.
Manpower was the big issue for Mandir discipline Seva Dal work. I later learned that sometimes some wealthy devotees would sponsor the trip of some Maharashtra Seva Dal to PN! So there was a financial need angle to that too.
The big difference between MDH and this case, is that MDH solicits money from devotees openly with Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudan Naidu openly speaking about it. I have never seen Sathya Sai doing so.
So I don't think Mrs. Pandya's internal letter to Indian state orgn. senior office bearers about this additional financial burden, should be equated with Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudan Naidu's solicitation of money. I mean, Mrs. Pandya has not said this in a public speech, has she?
----
Alok Dara Shikoh wrote (edited): Ravi S. Iyer sir thanks for the detailed note. Wow, you do have a great background. and i now understandyour position much better.
----
Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen wrote: Ravi S. Iyer, thank you for your perspective about finances at PN. You have made it clear that it was not the devotees who were being asked for donations.
----
Vr Ganti wrote (edited): Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen I don’t agree at all. Ultimately it is only devotees who are made to pay and not the leaders.
----
Vr Ganti wrote (AID is reference to AIP): The problem as I see is that AID and his Wife appear to be weakening the Organization. I requested, pleaded, begged and cried with AID for taking action against Mhalli Gang for stopping their game. I did not understand the reason why AID did not move a bit even. Slowly I am coming to know of the possible nexus AID has with MHALLI Gang directly or indirectly. Otherwise by this time AID should have either issued a public statement against and about Mhalli or he should have like a gentleman quit his position.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote (slightly edited): Vr Ganti sir, my view is that Mr. Nimish Pandya has failed in his Sathya-Dharma duty to make a public statement about his reported visit to have "Darshan" of Madhusudan Naidu in 2014/2015, and to make a public statement condemning Madhusudan Naidu for imitating our beloved Lord, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
I find it very strange that nobody from current office bearer holding positions in Maharashtra Sai orgn. has forced Mr. Pandya to either make the public statement condemning Madhusudan Naidu or resign from position of All India President of Sathya Sai orgn.
But then I have seen many, many strange things in Parthi after Bhagavan Mahasamadhi in April 2011 till now. So I am not surprised. Fear is the big factor in Sai orgn. when it comes to these matters involving top people, whether it is PN ashram system or Sai orgn. I think people in Maharashtra Sai orgn. may be afraid to directly question Mr. Pandya and force him to publicly respond. That I think is the reality. Sad but such is life..... [In Telugu] Antah Maya, Ganti Garu. Meeka antah telusandi, nenu meeku em cheppalandi? :-)
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Ha ha very funny indeed.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Vr Ganti, Alok Dara Shikoh, Barbara Joy Plattner-Mullen
An update on the matter. I have been given to understand that the below message from Mr. Nimish Pandya, All India President Sai orgn. has been shared with a lot of people:
Loving Sairam, Important message from AIP as follows:-
SAIRAM
This is to inform everyone that due to an unfortunate leak, a draft programme of proposed November Programme is being circulated
Please note that this programme is not final and will go thru a drastic change after a committee which is constituted for it finalises the same on 22nd September 2018
Please this message communicated to all in your states.
Nimish Pandya
AIP
Message ends
Ravi: I think the "proposed November Programme" is what has been shared by Mr. Ganti on his post above. I have no idea of what the "drastic change" will be, when the programme gets finalized on 22nd Sept. 2018.
======================================================
Given below are some comments from my Facebook post,
https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2291496844400213, associated with this blog post:
Vr Ganti wrote: You have been factual as usual. SAI BABA has been amply clear without any ambiguity whatsoever that the committee members of organisations should sit in a meeting and discuss about various projects they propose to undertake. Also the estimated expenditures for each project be discussed in detail and then in the corner of the meeting room a small box be kept for the committee members to go individually and contribute. Obviously each committee member knows the project cost and the number of committee members and so it is easy for them to workout each members expected contribution. Hence, after everyone visits the corner where the box for collecting money had been placed the box is brought to the meeting table and opened. Just in case the collection falls short the above procedure is to repeated for meeting the shortfall.
Just in case the shortfall continues the project cost is supposed to be brought down by cutting such items as is possible to be avoided.
So now do you understand why I say Kamala Pandya Garu is absolutely wrong.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Sairam Vr Ganti sir, I think you have great knowledge of Swami words on many matters. That is wonderful!
But sometimes the practical realities on the ground can be somewhat different and that sort of exposure comes only from experience of being in the orgn. and/or ashram system. Note that I was in Sai orgn. for around 9 years and in Sai university for around 9 years, and so I have 18 years experience from within Sai orgn/PN ashram system.
Let me put it this way, sir. I have been able to come to terms with, and understand, material life only when I view it as shades of grey rather than Black or White. I think similarly one can come to terms with, and understand, Sai orgn. functioning when things are viewed as shades of grey rather that just Black or White.
Black or White views in running not only Sai orgn. but perhaps any significant sized spiritual orgn. may lead to dysfunction and the orgn. not being able to meet its basic goals.
----
Vr Ganti wrote: Ravi S. Iyer. For your kind information I was also in the org for about a decade and we put the above direction of SWAMI into practice to the letter and I am sure it is still continuing in Katong Centre.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: This is a sensitive matter. So I do not want to comment further. I think money matters are the most sensitive matters in Sathya Sai movement. .. In PN ashram they are just super, super sensitive. When I was with PN ashram, I saw that my colleagues had to take extra precaution in money matters, including donations, cash/kind provided to the institution we were associated with. As I was a free service guy, I had the liberty to completely avoid getting involved with any donations in kind to the dept. that I was serving with. But paid employee colleagues had to take that responsibility and be very careful with it, so that, on one hand the needs of the dept. are handled, and on the other, no complaints are made about donations being accepted. Of course, my colleagues who were involved in such matters, got the clearance from appropriate authorities. But still it was sensitive.
----
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: Just to give readers a sense of perspective of how expensive running some institutions in PN ashram system can be, I would like to share a light-hearted remark made by a person in the know about such matters, sometime before Swami Mahasamadhi, if I recall correctly. He said something on the lines of: Along with his morning cup of tea, the Director of Super hospital (the Super speciality hospital in Puttaparthi) needs tens of lakhs of Rupees to run the show for the day! [A lakh is one hundred thousand]
Of course, this should not be taken literally. It light-heartedly conveys that per day expense for the Super hospital (before Swami Mahasamadhi) ran into tens of lakhs of Rupees. I don't know how accurate this view is. But I think it should be quite accurate.
Running a samithi (Sathya Sai centre) is one thing - one can think of a collection box kept in a corner of a room which would be enough to manage the show. Running a super speciality hospital which offers its services completely free of charge to all its patients OR, for that matter, running a university whose campuses offer free education to all its students, are completely different things. I mean, we are talking of apples and oranges here, or I should say micro-apples and mega-oranges!
----
Comments
Post a Comment