COMMENTARIES BY ROBERT PRIDDY

Vivekananda describes a man, a yogi, who had similar powers to those we observe in Sai Baba:

"He had only a strip of cloth about his loins, we took of everything else from him. I had a blanket which I gave him to wrap round himself, because it was cold, and made him sit in a corner. Twenty- five pairs of eyes were looking at him. And he said, “Now, look, write down anything you want”. We all wrote down names of fruits that never grew in that country, bunches of grapes, oranges and so on. And we gave him those bits of paper. And there came from under his blanket bushels of grapes, oranges and so forth, so much that if all that fruit was weighed, it would have been twice as heavy as the man. He asked us to eat the fruit. Some of us objected, thinking it was hypnotism; but the man began eating himself - so we all ate. It was all right. He ended by producing a mass of roses. Each flower was perfect, with dew-drops on the petals, not one crushed, not one injured. And masses of them!

(Vol. 2, p. 11. “The complete works of Swami Vivekananda” ( Pulished by Swami Mumukshananda, President Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta).

Three close devotees of Sai Baba among his prominent ‘special guest VIPs’ (S. Piculell, T. Meyer and Jack Hawley), have openly claimed to know that Sai Baba is innocent of the sexual charges, a conviction frequently also held by other close followers and office-bearers. This claim is transparently self-defeating, however, because none of them have been able to monitor Sai Baba’s activities in more than a few dozen interviews lasting an hour or so, plus the rather limited periods that Baba is seen in public during darshans, festivals and such like. Their observation of Sai Baba’s activities cannot cover more than a tiny fraction of the time at his disposal, which also applies to everyone else without any exception. Therefore, they cannot presume to ‘know’ much at all about what Baba may do in private interviews or during the nights etc.; all they could truthfully say is that they believe this or that, more or less strongly, and that their belief in Baba’s purity is fundamentally and overwhelmingly based on subjective faith. Besides, no one can ‘know’ that Sai Baba is omniscient or an avatar, for such direct knowledge requires knowing everything oneself… which the persons involved do not, and that is at least quite certain! I have experienced all such people long enough to realise that they have rid themselves of their individual judgement, always trying to do what they are told to do and say what they are told to say… according to each their perceptions of Sai Baba’s will. Therefore their claims have no validity whatever in deciding this matter.

If we were to apply Baba’s own advice and ‘see only good in everyone’, then surely we should not assume that those who tell of being molested are liars? Rather they should be treated with civility and sympathy and given a hearing, at least. But Sai Baba held, in his Xmas 2000 discourse, that they did lie about this for money. “Speak no ill of others”, says Sai Baba, and proceeds to do so himself. This sweeping accusation by him is particularly unsavoury disunity between word and act. It is patently incredible that 20 persons in different parts of the world should be found, convinced and paid by someone to make such charges, especially as all would realise the trouble and criticism they would have to face in so doing.

David Bailey collected and published at least seven highly convincing e-mails he received alleging serious molestations. It was well-known in Prashanthi Nilayam that he did not have the means to pay what such a demanding smear campaign would doubtless have cost, even if he’d had a credible motive for so doing. He was a remarkable favourite of Sai Baba, and knew he would lose all the apparent boons, blessings, benefits and ashram privileges that such closeness is believed by all devotees to give. All this increases the likelihood that Sai Baba is lying about his accusers. Such deceitful behaviour by him is in fact reported quite widely in literature by devotees, not least by some who experienced it from Sai Baba in very early days, such as by Vijayamma, Varadu, M. Krishna and others who were once very close to him.

Around 1990, Sai Baba recommended three books to various interview groups. The foremost of these was “I Am That” by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj. This book is a verbatim record of very incisive questionings by truth seekers and remarkable answers by the fully realised Nisargadatta. It is a tour de force in advaitism, being in no way a mere exercise in knowledge of doctrine, but vibrant and amazingly original explanations which directly answer the essence of each question put. In short, not as vague and generalised as the constantly repeated standard teachings of Sai Baba or the stock answers he delivers to questions put to him, if and when he happens actually to answer rather than avoid the issue or change the subject. It is therefore very interesting to note the following question and answer:

Questioner: What is realization? Who is a realised man? By what is gnani recognised?

Maharaj: There are no distinctive marks of gnana. Only ignorance can be recognised, not gnana. Nor does a gnani claim to be something special. All those who proclaim their own greatness and uniqueness are not gnanis. They are mistaking some unusual development for realisation. The gnani shows no tendency to proclaim himself to be a gnani. He considers himself to be perfectly normal, true to his real nature. Proclaiming oneself to be an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent deity is a clear sign of ignorance.” (‘I Am That’ Ch. 43, p. 193)

This book was recommended by one who claims just these things. One wonders, did he actually read the book. No… Sai Baba is SO exceptional that he doesn’t need to learn anything! I don’t think.

MONKEY MIND

SB is ever going on about people having ‘monkey minds’, and – if they ask questions about anything he finds unacceptable, ‘mad monkey minds’. He explains this sometimes by the well-worn Eastern analogy to the monkey trap - monkeys put a hand into a tight-necked jar and grasp a nut in their fist, but can’t get their hand out, nor can let go of the good thing. So they are caught. This is supposed to be a lesson about ‘worldly attachments’ and how one must attach only to Sai Baba’s teaching and preferably to the whole excessive personality cult around him. The compassionate SB loves to tell people in interviews that they have ‘monkey minds’ and try to raise a laugh by saying they do not have monkey minds, but ‘mad monkey minds’. Interviewees laugh willingly with glee at others expense. How charming!

However, how does SB himself ‘catch’ his followers? It is not as simple as catching a monkey, but they do get hold of something which they cannot release – the belief that they have found the one who has THE ANSWERS to everything, and to their own sorry lives. Part of SB’s ‘trap’ is to tell them that they have to hold on tight, whatever the cost, to what they have found – him, the Full Avatar of the Age, perfect, able to save them from anything and everything for ever.

The other side of this monkey-mind warning is clearly designed to stop any kind of natural curiosity about anything other than what SB teaches and tells one to do. Especially any curiosity to find out about his private affairs, and he is a very secretive person who hides away and controls his contacts through the ‘filters’ that many persons around him serve as. Any kind of interest in finding out what SB wants kept secret may be attacked as ‘monkey-mindedness’. His followers use it regularly against anyone who raises questions as to the credibility of SB’s claims.

With the vague proverb of the three monkeys he borrows, SB preaches that one should “Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil”. Only what is said against him is ‘evil’ enough to arouse his ire enough for him to lash out. This is seen by his strict and damning warning to devotees not to go onto the Internet when it was humming with more and more new allegations of sexual abuse by SB. Meanwhile, he gives his blessing to official Sai Baba websites to spread his ‘eternal message’, particularly how surpassingly wonderful he and his works are. So he evidently prefers people who are willing to be at least half-deaf, half-blind, half-dumb and completely mindless… whenever his claims, words and acts are questioned.

Robert Priddy