India’s guru, revered by the government and some millions, speaks ill of others
Despite his calling it the greatest of sins to speaks ill of others, Sathya Sai Baba occasionally does so outright in public, but more often in the privacy of the interview room, where recording is not allowed. He often refers to persons known to interviewees, saying ‘he is a bad man’ and so forth. Thus he has set a standard for his chosen representatives, his ‘leaders’ who are rather persons themselves led like the blind. While many office-bearers left the Organisation when four young men were shot down in cold blood in Sai Baba’s bedroom while he stood by, when the sex abuse testimonies became overwhelming many more joined them. I was one if these, though I had never been able to be such a blind believer in everything Sai Baba claimed, much of which was impossible for me and which caused me much soul-searching even before the murders took place and were shamelessly covered up with governmental help. Only a few defectors were Sai Baba’s top international coordinators, i.e. those who get most privileges and who – when ‘tested’ by the guru for faith in him - wilfully rationalise away any untoward incidents, from sex abuse to murder. Since 2000, when the dam broke and the flood of testimonies came forth on the Internet, there has been less and less excuse for following Sai Baba.
Mindlessly following the lead of their guru Sathya Sai Baba, various Central Coordinators have made a number of disrespectful and derogatory statements about Sai critics in widely-disseminated printed circular letters and e-mails. Notable was Jadadeeshan who identified critics’ and or their allegations as “faeces on the ground”, a vile slander on many outspoken victims who courageously told of being sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba -often repeatedly and in perverse ways. Even when I pointed out to him that he is breaking with the strongest warnings of Sathya Sai Baba, he has not even apologised in public to the offended parties. This Malaysian Indian has long been a top leader chosen by Sathya Sai Baba for his organisation, where leaders are supposed to have ‘quality’ and be moral examples). Several Sai Org. office-bearers have characterised various Sathya Sai Baba critics as ‘sick’ and in worse terms. European and Danish leaders (Thorbjørn Meyer & Steen Piculell) stigmatised ex-devotee victims through proven untruths to the media to the effect that they were known as paedophiles! They have not had the decency to apologise, but they will certainly come to rue the day.
Invariably, none of these leaders have taken steps to make contact with those they malign, and are quite evidently unwilling seriously to investigate any facts reported by victims of Sathya Sai Baba’s sexual attentions. Many devotees and leaders turned like a driven herd of pi-dogs barking out slander and back-biting rumours against those who were for many years much, much closer than they to Sathya Sai Baba, the two formerly effusive pro-Sai authors, David Bailey and Dr. Bhatia, when these independently of each other spilled the beans in a big way about Sathya Sai Baba’s constant sexual escapades with young male foreigners, Sai college students and underage boys.
Mindless subservience is nearly achieved in full, it would seem, by some of his servitors some of the time. Names spring forth like Indulal Shah, Anil Kumar, Michael Goldstein, Dr. G. Venkataraman, T. Ramanathan, Jumsai, Hira, and ‘Brother’ Jagadeeshan, William Harvey, Leonardo Gutter and there are many more hardly worth mentioning. They manage to appear as mere puppets, lying when required, and behaving towards those who fall outside the pale of their brotherhood in truly adharmic and uncaring, high-handed ways (taking Sathya Sai Baba as their example?).After years and years of ideologisation, the devotee’s ego gets more and more securely woven into a mental-emotional and social web which hold them back from all further intellectual or social expansion and development and fixates their minds on the barren round of sameness, repetitions and ingrown ashram habits. This is seen by the uninspiring parrot-like way they hold talks and answer people and by the sheer ineffectuality and unoriginality of anything they write. The internal memos of the Sathya Sai Organisation are almost entirely laughably pompous official talk and patronizing advice. Some have been exhibited on the exbaba.com website for the delectation of those who have escaped the Sai spider web enough to dare to read what critics say on the world-wide web! Escape from the condition described above is extremely difficult. Reality that may impinge on the sense is pre-interpreted according to a preset mental response mechanism which is designed to interpret anything so as to ward off any shocks to the system, dull the conflict of thoughts and feelings and keep off the social humiliation of feeling one has make a cosmic mistake and wasted years of one’s life, energy and prestige. The character-testing process that the transition process enforces is too much for most long-term devotees. However, many have done so already. The many of these known to me are certainly not anything like demons, but are caring and concerned persons who are open to help others in travail.