Contents & comments of my FB post: Time to close our Madhusudan Rao Naidu spiritual fraud petition?

Last updated on 30th Jan. 2019.

Given below are contents of my recent Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2399854756897754, and most of my comments on it.

Time to close our Madhusudan Rao Naidu spiritual fraud petition? Please let me know your thoughts

In the past around 10 days there has been only one additional signature to our petition: Declaration by Sathya Sai devotees and alumni & staff of Sai educational institutions, condemning spiritual fraud Madhusudan Rao Naidu, https://www.change.org/p/sathya-sai-devotee-fraternity-worldwide-we-condemn-spiritual-fraud-madhusudan-rao-naidu.

So I think it is time to close the petition now with a final petition-closure update thanking all those who signed and commented for the courage they have shown in publicly associating their name with this declaration condemning spiritual fraud Madhusudan Rao Naidu.

As of now we have 363 (+ 1 test) signatures from around 40 countries in the world. Those are sizeable numbers (both number of signatures and number of countries).

I will publicly share the final signatures list as well as comments list, after whitening test data. So this will be a public record accessible on the Internet for those who search the Internet (e.g. using Google search) for terms like:
Madhusudan Naidu spiritual fraud petition list of signatures

If required I can create a country-wise list of signatures and publicly share that too. The default list from change.org is chronological and NOT country-wise.

Please let me know what you think about this.

----end of FB post text ----

In response to comments I wrote (slightly edited):
[Thanks] --name-snipped-- and --name-snipped-- for your views that it is best to wait for a little longer, and pray to Swami for the answer. I will bear that in mind as I view other responses. Thanks.
----

In response to a comment that it will not be useful to publish the data as there surely are many more people against MDH, I wrote (slightly edited):
Thanks for your valuable view --name-snipped--. What I feel is that while there are many more who are upset with Madhusudan Naidu's outrageously false claims, only a few are willing to publicly say so.
Others prefer to stay silent publicly.

So I thought I should acknowledge the courage of the ones who are willing to say so ***publicly***.
I will await the views of the others on this. Thanks again.
----

In response to a comment that it would not be useful to publish the outcome and that it looks like a defeat and laughable and gives more power to MDH, I responded (slightly edited):
I certainly don't view it as a defeat. It was an individual's effort and certain individuals responded. I am NOT an office bearer of International Sai orgn. or Indian Sai orgn. If I had been one and put up a petition under that banner then it would have been a defeat.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if this petition contributed in some way to the top 3 Sathya Sai organizations in India and the world making specific mention of Madhusudan Naidu and denouncing him in strong words in their recent 'Note'/announcement.

Thanks for your comment even if I disagree with you. I will await the views of the original group who supported the idea of me as an individual putting up the petition.
----

In response to comment that it definitely was not a defeat as it was intended to be a small scale effort, and whether we could harness the result, I wrote (slightly edited):
Thanks --Name-snipped-- sir for your view that it is definitely not a defeat. Regarding harnessing the result, I leave it to others to consider it. I might join such a "harnessing the result" effort but as a contributor and not taking the lead like I did with this petition. In the petition I was focused on only providing a platform to interested individuals in stepping forward publicly and saying that Madhusudan Rao Naidu is a spiritual fraud.

Note that one of the major reasons for Muddenahalli group and Madhusudan Naidu to have grown and trapped many in its spiritual fraud is that few people were willing to publicly criticize them. This, very unfortunately, even included some top office bearers of Sathya Sai orgn. in India (e.g. All India President of Sathya Sai orgn.) and the world. Fortunately, the top 3 Sathya Sai orgn/institutions in India and the world recently put out a note clearly denouncing Madhusudan Rao Naidu. As I said earlier, I think our petition may have had some role in this clear denouncement of Madhusudan Rao Naidu in that Note. Of course, the Sathya Sai orgn. top office bearers will not openly acknowledge that our petition played such a role.

One of the reasons I want to publish the final list at petition closure time is to provide data to others who would like to harness the result of a list of courageous people who have publicly condemned Madhusudan Naidu from around 40 countries in the world.

As far as I know, there is no such list available publicly. The earlier petition two years ago gathered around 1500 signatures, https://www.change.org/p/president-of-indiamr-pranab-m-p-m-narenda-modi-mr-rajnath-singh-u-m-h-mr-arun-jaitley-f-m-to-stop-muddenahalli-scam-of-sri-sathya-sai-baba-impersonation-in-public-interest. But it did not publish any list of signatures. So there is no data for other activists to examine and consider additional actions.

Therefore I think we should publish the final list (the earlier lists for this petition have already been published).
----

A person responded (slightly edited) to above: Absolutely sir, a defeat by no means. This was a zero budget, zero advertising/marketing, purely voluntary effort. It is true that a typical mdh gathering might get more attendance than our survey responses, but one must not forget that a lot of money and extreme propaganda has gone into the making of the mdh. Therefore if laughability is being claimed it's not an apples to apples comparison. A more apt comparison could be that of a small Diya/lamp (your survey) amidst the thick smoke/darkness being spread by mdh.
Hats off to you!
----

I wrote (slightly edited):
Thank you so much --name-snipped-- sir for your encouraging words. My pranams to you sir.
----

The person responded (slightly edited):
Absolutely sir, and at the risk of sounding cheesy and sentimental, let me say this too: let's hope small lamps that are being lit by individual leaders like you and Ganti Sir are used to light several other lamps across the entire world until the darkness/illusion of mdh gets dispelled completely.
----

I wrote (slightly edited): Ravi S. Iyer Aap ke muh me ghee shakkar --name-snipped-- sahab! [Idiom in Hindi, meaning may your words come true].
----

In response to a comment that said that the petition has not been circulated enough and ..., I wrote (slightly edited):
Noted your views --name-snipped--. Thanks. Regarding the petition being circulated at Sai centers - that will have to be considered by official Sathya Sai orgn. Not in our hands, I think.
----

In response to another comment, I wrote:
Noted your view that we should not stop the petition now. Thanks for your view. Will bear it in mind.
About "why not try" - I think you are referring to Sai centers matter. I am NOT associated with any Sai center or Sai orgn. now. So I am not in a position to try that. Somebody else who is associated with Sai orgn. could try.
----

I wrote:
Ideally, Indian and International Sathya Sai orgn. should put up such a petition. So should the educational institutions of Prasanthi Nilayam (e.g Sai university). And announce it in Sai centers and the educational institutions. That will result in huge number of signatures, I am sure.

But the problem is that the top office bearers of Sathya Sai orgn. in India and at international level, and the Sai university administrators, do not seem to be interested in such sort of activism.
----

I wrote (slightly edited):
Initially I wanted to ignore the word 'laughable' in a comment response by --name-snipped--. Perhaps the person who made the comment did it in a spirit to help. I wanted to go the extra mile to avoid any issues.

But now I feel that it will be appropriate to comment on it. The point made was that the outcome "looks like a defeat and laughable and gives more power to mdh".

I have already addressed the defeat part of the comment. Now I would like to focus on the 'laughable' part.

I think it is particularly unhelpful when people who have not taken an active role in promoting the petition, step in and mock it as a laughable outcome. I mean, if they do not want to contribute to promoting it, that's fine. But to not contribute and then mock it as looking like a laughable outcome, is not being a good member of the team, in my considered opinion.

I certainly do not consider the outcome of 364 (+ 1 test case) signatures, (we have one more signature now), from around 40 countries, as laughable. I am grateful to those who stepped up to sign an individual's petition which was promoted by a few people but NOT promoted by an institution or organization.

Perhaps some people think anything below 3000 or 30000 signatures in this matter is laughable. OK, they are entitled to their view. But let me ask them: Have they initiated a new petition against Muddenahalli group that will get 3000 or 30000 signatures? If not, then what right do they have to call our petition's 364 signatures from 40 countries as laughable?

Criticizing others is very easy, laughing at work done by others is very easy. The challenge is to do such work themselves and show that they can get 3000 or even 30000 public signatures (which can be verified if needed) against Madhusudan Naidu and/or Muddenahalli group. Then at least their laughter will carry some weight.
----

In response to comment, "Those who laugh last, laugh the best. Thank you again Sir", I wrote (slightly edited):
Thanks --name-snipped-- sir.
----

In response to a comment I wrote (slightly edited):
--Name-snipped-- - Thanks for your comment and the words that 'laughable' was not "the most appropriate word". I certainly found that word to be hurtful to our petition work and not helpful, and so had to express my views on it.

It has been my experience in the Sathya Sai fraternity that at times cold water is thrown at those who take up initiatives while most prefer to be bystanders watching the show.

Now that you have expressed the view that "laughable" was not the most appropriate word, I think it is appropriate to the let the matter go. Thanks again for the clarification.

I would also like to share my view that I had not expected three hundred and fifty to sign the petition when I put it up as an individual. I was expecting a less than hundred number, say in the thirties or forties. And was fine with such an expectation as my intent was to show that I and Mr. Vr Ganti were not stopping at only asking Sai university alumni and Sai university alumni-staff (most of whom, very unfortunately, are playing silent witness or sitting-on-the-fence role in this Muddenahalli big & divisive split in Sathya Sai fraternity) to put up a change.org petition against Madhusudan Rao Naidu aimed at alumni and staff of Sai educational institutions.

The Sai university alumnus-person whom I had asked to put up a petition and also told him not to worry if only a few people sign the petition, did not go ahead. So I felt that I or Mr. Ganti should show that we will 'walk our talk' but with the petition aimed at Sathya Sai fraternity at large with specific mention of "alumni & staff of Sai educational institutions". That's how the petition got put up. Though I am certainly less popular than Mr. Ganti who has a very large following on Facebook, after discussion with Mr. Ganti, I decided to put up the petition on my name as I am a **former** teaching-staff in the Sai university and also provided that information in the petition. I felt that would add some weight as the petition was aimed in part at the Sai educational institutions' alumni and staff.

I was NOT AFRAID of getting few signatures. At least the petition would have been put up and we would know what the situation is.

Now, as expected, very few alumni and staff of Sai educational institutions stepped forward to sign the petition. As expected, most prefer to be silent witnesses to Madhusudan Naidu spiritual fraud and play safe, sitting on the fence without wanting to offend their friends in Muddenahalli group, and so, I think, did not sign the petition.

Another point is that I ***know*** that I am NOT a popular person, especially among Sai university alumni, as I have been a whistle-blower of the tragic betrayal by top Sai university administrators from Jul 2011 to Nov. 2014 which is one of the main reasons why Muddenahalli group grew unhindered during those years and now has become such a big and divisive threat to Sathya Sai movement worldwide. Truth-tellers and whistle-blowers are not popular people among the communities about whom they have spoken the truth and blown the whistle.

Therefore, in the petition itself, I wrote, "If some readers of some group agree with the declaration but are not comfortable with signing it due to issues with the petitioner, they are free to get their group to create a similar petition under some other person's name and then sign it along with others of their group."

This was in the hope that much more popular people than me among Sai educational system alumni, even if they are not alumni themselves but have social media pages and forums which are popular among alumni, would put up a similar petition, and get lots of alumni signatures against Madhusudan Naidu. But, so far at least, that has not happened.

But what we have now is this petition with 364 individuals from 40 countries in the world, who have shown the courage to take a ***public stand*** against Madhusudan Rao Naidu. I am very happy that this petition was able to get these many signatures. And these many signatures were made possible only because of the support provided by many to spread the word and encourage their friends and readers to sign the petition. I thank all those who provided this support and all those who signed the petition.

I repeat that in my considered view, this petition is NOT a defeat. Others may view it as such and they are entitled to their view.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
I don't care how Muddenahalli guys respond. They can laugh or cry or do whatever. They have chosen to follow and promote a spiritual fraud and surely will have to face the consequences of that.

If you, --name-snipped-- sir, find it laughable, then we can discuss the matter. Of course, I will find it very offensive if you find it laughable but we can have a frank exchange of views on it.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
Well, the laughable part of your comment is somewhat confusing as it does not correctly convey what was mentioned in the original comment - I do not want to get into details as I don't want to rake up the issue further.

But let me presume that you, --name-snipped-- sir, are of the view that the 364 signatures from 40 countries we got for our petition is NOT laughable. You have also said that "the number is good considering the kind of likes at least my notes relating to Mhall receive". I think that is a very accurate view of the reality on the ground despite the supposed 5 million Sathya Sai devotees worldwide.

Thank you sir.
----

In response to comment, "Ravi S. Iyer thank God you understood", I wrote (slightly edited):
Sorry --name-snipped-- sir, if I was being too nitpicky. It is my computer software developer background that kicks in, at such times, where I try to look at the implication of every word in all the sentences like I used to as a software developer, in documents like software specifications and design specifications and even computer program source code.

Once a software engineer/developer perhaps forever a nitpicky guy when it comes to important matters. It may be a boon at times, and a curse at other times. C'est la vie!
----

In response to a comment that mentioned cheating by some software engineers, I wrote:
Oh! There are ethically good software engineers and ethically bad software engineers. I was not claiming that all software engineers are ethically good.

What I was trying to convey was that the profession of software engineering forces the practitioner (software engineer) to minutely understand software specifications, analyze it, minutely understand design specifications and minutely understand software program code, if they want to be a good (not ethically good but professionally good) and competent software engineer.

The computer is a ruthlessly logical machine. If the program code has bad logic it will follow the bad logic and deliver wrong results which sometimes can have terrible impact on human systems, and eventually terrible impact on the software engineering team that developed it (e.g. getting fired from the job).

So fear of getting fired from the job forces a competent software engineer to minutely examine documents like system specifications and design specifications and also program code. Otherwise the lack of competency gets exposed quickly and the person may lose his/her job.
----

I wrote (slightly edited):
Aum Sri Sai Ram!

All the three responses on the main question I raised about whether it is time to close our petition, are that I should NOT do so. As suggested by some, I also prayed to inner Swami. One of the issues I have in such prayer to inner Swami is that I just get into a beingness state, and don't get a specific response. So I am sorry on that count. But my feeling is that I should go along with the view expressed that I should NOT close our petition.

So I have decided to follow the unanimous majority view expressed by 3 persons (--names-snipped--) and keep the petition open. Unless some major event happens in this context, I plan to keep it open for long. And, if at all, sometime in future, I think it may be time to close the petition, I will ask you folks again. BTW I don't know if there is any time limit in change.org to keep a petition open. If I get any intimation of time limit being crossed from change.org I will let you folks know.

Thanks for your views on this matter.

I also am planning not to publish any more information on signatures for this matter (other than what has already been published) as that has been the view expressed by 2 persons (--names-snipped--). If at all somebody asks me why his/her name is not present in the list already put up, I will reconsider the matter. Otherwise I will just keep the petition open without any further updates or any further sharing of data.

--Names-snipped--, you may want to view this comment.

Thanks to all for their comments and interactions on this matter. Jai Sai Ram!
----

In response to comment, "Yes,. and.. Have you been invited to sign the members of Mr. Samuel Sandweiss's group? Ravi S. Iyer ?" I wrote (slightly edited):

I am afraid that I am not willing to go so far as Mr. Sandweiss has gone where Muddenahalli group were compared to Mahishasura demon and devotees were urged to become like Durga fighting Mahishasura. I have great fear that that brings in violence overtones. So far our fight against Muddenahalli has been a NON-VIOLENT fight. Therefore I did not join Mr. Sandweiss' group. But neither am I coming in the way of their approach against Muddenahalli group. I wish them all the best and pray that there will be ***NO VIOLENCE*** in our fight against Muddenahalli group.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
I think I am being very responsible in my comment. I saw the concerned videos about Mahishasura and Durga with a Professor (perhaps of Sanskrit or Hinduism or South Asian Studies). I have to go by my impression of those videos. You seem to have got a different impression of those videos and you have to go by your impression.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
I did not say that Dr. Sandweiss' group has violent leanings. You are misreading what I have said. I wrote: "I am afraid that I am not willing to go so far as Mr. Sandweiss has gone where Muddenahalli group were compared to Mahishasura demon and devotees were urged to become like Durga fighting Mahishasura. I have great fear that that brings in violence overtones."

What I have said is based on the video(s) I saw. The issue was the message conveyed in the video(s) and NOT that the group has become violent.

Perhaps you are not so exposed to how messaging in such matters can result in undesirable effects. I have done a lot of study of these things over the past few years. And I feel it is appropriate for me to air my view on this matter. You are free to ignore my view on the matter. Thanks.
----

In response to a comment, "I would like to learn more about this comparison to Durga and Mahishasura... Is there a place where one can find more? I do find it a tad bit humorous if true.", I wrote (slightly edited):
Dr. Sandweiss publishes his videos online here: http://blog.pathoftransformation.org/countering-the-split/ . While I don't recall the exact titles of the videos referencing Mahishasura and Durga, I think this video title and its immediately preceding and following videos may have that reference: "Can strong dark forces from the spiritual realm camouflage and mimic God — causing chaos and disruption in the world? An interview with Sanskrit scholar Professor Sthaneshwar Timalsina Ph.D gives answers found in numerous spiritual texts."

The impression I have is that Dr. Timalsina may not really know the full context of Muddenahalli group and Madhusudan Naidu. His expertise seems to be in Sanskrit scripture and so he perhaps has an exaggerated view of how Muddenahalli group is operating, thereby bringing in a comparison with Mahishasura and Durga, which was a horrendously violent fight.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
I did NOT say that Dr. Sandweiss is violent. I am talking about the messaging in the video(s) he put out about Durga and Mahishasura. Hindu scripture has a very strong influence on me. Like me, I am very sure that Hindu scripture has a very strong influence on many Hindus, especially those who live in India. Durga and Mahishasura are very well known in India even today, with Durga being celebrated annually in a big way at Durga Puja functions and other functions.

My fear is that such messages about Durga and Mahishasura in the context of our NON-VIOLENT fight with Muddenahalli group's Madhusudan Naidu spiritual fraud, may easily get interpreted in a wrong way by some viewers of such videos. Now that may not be Dr. Sandweiss' intent. But that's how it may get interpreted. Therefore I view it as my duty as a responsible social media writer on these matters to point out this serious concern that I have.

Now you may not have felt that it could get misinterpreted. Fine. That's your view and you are entitled to it. But, based on a lot of study I have done on these matters in India today, I certainly have a concern about that getting misinterpreted in India by some Hindu followers of our beloved and revered Lord, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, who I and many others view as Kali Yuga Avatar and Shiva-Shakti Swarupa with teachings that are appropriate for our Kali age. Thanks.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote (slightly edited):
Sai Ram brother. Well, there was an earlier change.org petition titled, "Stop Madhusudan Naidu from Muddenahalli Tantric Scam using Sri Sathya Sai Baba name." in 2016 if I recall correctly, https://www.change.org/p/president-of-indiamr-pranab-m-p-m-narenda-modi-mr-rajnath-singh-u-m-h-mr-arun-jaitley-f-m-to-stop-muddenahalli-scam-of-sri-sathya-sai-baba-impersonation-in-public-interest. It garnered 1520 signatures.

So our petition is not the first such petition with signatures against Madhusudan Naidu. However, our petition is very focused on Madhusudan Naidu spiritual fraud, and aimed at the Sathya Sai fraternity itself rather than Prime Minister, President and other top govt. leaders of India. The previous petition outcome in terms of whether any letter was sent to top Indian govt. leaders and who were the signatories in any such letter, was NOT shared publicly. So it is difficult for other activists against Muddenahalli and Madhusudan Naidu spiritual fraud to build up on that petition's work.

I tend to agree with you that our petition would have influenced the recent Note put up by all top 3 Sai orgn/institutions in the world - SSSCT, Indian Sai orgn and International Sai orgn. I think the parts related to Madhusudan Naidu in the Note would have been influenced by our petition.
----