“Swami said that nothing could happen to His Body and all these so-called ailments were only accidents. Swami then indicated to devotees that He had agreed to come down from the balcony due to the Love expressed by His students. Swami said that such noble boys were His only Property and He too loved them equally. Swami also said that the Gown that He had adorned was offered to Him lovingly by His Students. Swami explained the ease of use of the same and expressed His Joy at their loving care for Swami. He said that one could not find such service elsewhere.” Easweramma Day : Sai Showers in Trayee Brindavan Part II -
Posted by exbaba admin on Friday, May 07, contributed by saikramesh: (from http://www.kingdomofsai.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=66 entire major pro-Sai site since removed)
Sathya Sai Baba himself showed here yet again what he has always denied, that he accept goods from others! But that is glaringly obvious anyhow by all the riches he freely disposed over, not least the palace-like apartments he was ever getting built on donated funds for himself. The latest palaces were very costly twin buildings opposite his earlier-built twin apartments at the end of the Poornachandra Hall. However, he does not live in either of the two very costly museums he had built at Prashanthi Nilayam in his own honour for his self-advertisment.
Sai Baba has warned in discourses, “Properties are not proper ties“. So what about “His only Property”, the boys? Are they proper ties? Was he a slave-owner to speak of them as his ‘properties’. Well, we have already been told plenty in many testimonies about the kind of ‘service’ he got from boys and young men in the interview room, not to list all those who have slept in his bedroom, with ex-student Sathyajit as his last trusted boyfriend.
See? Having always claimed that he is the Lord himself, he speaks to his devotees like an Indian zamindar, prime exploiter of bonded labourers:-
“… every one of you is living off the property of God, for does not all this belong to Him? And what do you do in return for all the benefits you derive from the property of the Lord? You cannot eat it and sit quiet. You must at least give some physical labour in return; he who does not work but eats is a cheat.” Sathya Sai Speaks Vol.1, p.220f.
ALSO: The property of Sai is only all his students Sathya Sai Speaks Vol. 15, p. 179
This from one of the biggest (covert) property owners in India! (He said he did not own anything, but that was but a mere formality to confuse and avert criticism of his massive extravagance, despite his granting the use of other donations for social improvements. For example, he alone could use or dispose of about 10 luxury apartments built from devotees’ donations). It is known from close servitors and close ex-devotees that most ARE luxurious inside. I saw inside Muddenahalli Sai temple apartments myself (and met the architect), and he hardly ever even used them.
It is convenient for him that – as the self-proclaimed One God, “Deity of deities” who lays claim to own the entire created Universe, lock stock and barrel! Cosseted, protected by armed guards and undercover agents, and having strolled about for constant adulation for decades, he did nothing remotely resembling what most people (and he too) know to be real work himself – that is the hard work of physical labour!
He told people he did everything for himself, even sweep his room out. This was simply not true. Here is some strong evidence documented back in 1973:-
But he most certainly eats well enough, but has not prepared or cooked for many decades. A former devotee friend of mine, Mr. V. Ramu, a vigilance officer of the Indian Administrative Service (author of the hagiographic book ‘Waiting for Baba’), who attended a luncheon given for Sai Baba in Bangalore in 1996 at the house of Central Trust member, Mr. Prasad, told me that Sai ate well. I was surprised and wondered if I had heard correctly. He assured me, “Swami ate heartily of all the many dishes provided, served to him by Mr. Prasad’s son.”
This is not a thing you will hear from others who never say anything that could cast the slightest doubt on ‘Swami’ as having been anything but a perfect renunciate, which was simply not true, neither as to food, pomp, acceptance of worship, outward show galore or his sexual satisfaction.