If Sai Baba is guility BlackBillBlake, then let karma run it's course. I just don't think it help's anyone's spiritual path arguing over something none of us has many facts about. TV programmes have been known to be wrong is all I am saying, not that Sai Baba is innocent. Some people seem to be posting like the tv programmme on BBC 2 is a court of law, which it is not. Innocent until proven gulity the UK justice system works by. Let's all hold that frame of mind until something more concrete comes along.
I am not BBB, and for that I apologise, but can I express my incredulity at your above statement? You mean to say that if Sai Baba is guilty then we should let karma run its course, even if that means allowing Sai Baba to rape and perform anal and oral sex on MORE innocent young boys? Seriously, is this what you are suggesting? What else could you possibly mean by suggesting that karma should take its course? Did you think that perhaps it is the karma of those who are exposing his dastardly activities to expose him? How about that? Perhaps you might like to get in touch with those who do have plenty of facts. Would you like to visit Exbaba, for instance? It is an indisputable fact that TV programmes can be wrong and it is certainly not a court of law. However, please do bear in mind that the BBC spent several months investigating all these allegations. Contrary to what appears in the final edit, I can tell you that they have over 80+ hours of footage and damning interviews with a large cross-section of devotees and former devotees alike. I happen to know this for a fact. Please remember that the BBC simply filmed these interviewees, did a little of their own research and presented their conclusions. They certainly did not present a large hoo-ha sort of documentary. In any case, you might like to know that two of Sai Baba's biggest devotees - Michael Goldstein, a medical practitioner, and Isaac Tigrett, the ex-hippy co-founder of the Hard Rock Café who donated millions to Sai Baba to build a super-hospital - were exposed as fools. Why? Why well, Goldstein has laid himself open to losing his medical licence because he wildly alleged that he was able to tell who is a sex abuse victim on sight, a statement that he has no right or qualification to make. He was also exposed on hidden camera stating quite clearly that a legalistic investigation into the allegations is not necessary simply because he believes it is "not appropriate", despite stating that he himself does not believe that the allegations are true. In stark contrast, Isaac Tigrett does believe that the allegations are true! Imagine that! He has no qualms about worshipping Sai Baba as God on earth even though God may be a homosexual paedophile who is implicated in murder and financial scandals! Pretty cool, eh? How more concrete do you want to get, dude? Let's just imagine a hypothetical situation, no offence: What if you were sexually abused just now? How on earth are you going to "prove" that you were sexually abused? All you can really do is go to the police, file a report, employ a lawyer and get the molestor to caught, and maybe get a conviction if you are lucky. This is just hypothetical of course. But really, what are you waiting for that is "concrete"? He was exposed in the BBC Documentary as having FAKED the Sivaratri lingam "miracle" since nothing came out from his mouth except for regurgitated water and perhaps a little vomit. Bear in mind that this event was being broadcast live all over India too, by Indian TV. Even the ex-Home Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Velayudhan Nair, frankly states that the events of 6th June 1993 was "cold-blooded murder". The police reports were "riddled with inconsistencies and lies", he states? And he is so sure of himself that he plans to re-open the case. Please, without jumping to Sai Baba's defence with appeals of "please hold on until we get something concrete", why not just accept the available evidence and admit that Sai Baba is SUSPECT, to say the least?
What I mean by karma is that if Sai Baba is guility he will be punished for his crimes in this life or another. I am in no way condoning his behavior in any shape or form. If he is gulity, then it is a horrific crime. I only saw the last second half of the programme and before that had never heard of Sai Baba. I just am not comfortable saying someone is 100% guility from watching that tv programme. It didn't show any conclusive proof such as evidence of his crime. Just people accusing him. I have no idea whether Sai Baba is guility of not. That programme would lead me to the conclusion he maybe. But it is only created from an accusation standpoint. I dont think anyone can say 100% he is guility or innocent. Only God, Sai Baba and the accusers know that. I agree that the person who said he didn't care even if Sai Baba did the crime is a disgusting thing to say. And person who got hidden camera filmed was a horrible swearing individual. If these people are part of Sai Baba's company it is a bad indication. I definitely agree there needs to be a proper investigation and there is definietly evidence to support this investigation. Thats why I said lets not say he is guilty or innocent until something like a lawful investigation finds either. Remember the journalist at bbc who made up all that info about the iraq war and bbc had to apologize to the UK government. The bbc do make mistakes.
Philuk is an interesting case. He says he knew nothing about Sai Baba before he saw the last part of the 'Secret Swami' documentary, but he is willing to air views on the subject. Why should anyone take any notice whatever. He defends Bhaskar, who has demonstrated that he is a consummate dupe... one must not point out things like that, according to Philuk. But people who want to be in the kitchen and tell others what to believe and do must learn to stand the heat... or get out, as Bhaskar has done. The boon of free speech has some drawbacks, that we have to put up with totally uninformed and opinionated persons sounding off about things that they should not meddle in.
Are you referring to yourself Alano. Please inform me of your vast personal experience of both Sai Baba and his accusers. Have you been a disciple of Sai Baba ? , are you a friend or family of his accusers ? If not then your opinion is no more informed than mine. Bare in mind I am totally neutral on this topic and haven't expressed an opinion to favour either side. I only express an opinion when I have direct experience of which I speak. I was only requesting that others posting in this thread do otherwise. Your definition of free speech Alano would be slander in some courts of law. The programme on BBC2 was purely from the prosecution standpoint, there was noone delivering a well formed defense. Only with these two standpoints expressed could any 'informed opinion' be formed. Even then many innocent people have been sent to jail and many guility people escaped prison. I leave this thread at this point. I am neutral on this topic and support neither camp.
I suppose that is true in a sense. Here is what Dr. Michael Goldstein, the World Chairman of Sathya Sai Organisation had to say about "defending" Sai Baba: 10.50.33 Tanya Datta You sound to me that you’re completely unafraid of these allegations because you don’t believe them for one second… 10.50.38 Dr Michael Goldstein That’s right. That is right. 10.50.40 Tanya Datta Then why don’t you allow some transparency into the investigation of them. 10.50.43 Dr Michael Goldstein Transparency in what sense? 10.50.45 Tanya Datta Why don’t you have thorough investigations, instead of just asking one question to one person… 10.50.49 Dr Michael Goldstein What do you mean by thorough investigation? 10.50.51 Interviewer Objective investigators, not someone asking the perpetrator whether he, he carried out the act. But someone, you know, a proper legal process or a legalistic process should I say. 10.51.04 Tanya Datta Yes. 10.51.05 Dr Michael Goldstein Because I don’t believe that’s appropriate with Sai Baba. 10.51.08 Interviewer Why not? 10.51.09 Dr Michael Goldstein Because my heart and my conscience tell me that it’s not possible. 10.51.12 Tanya Datta Is Sai Baba above the law then? I mean… 10.51.14 Dr Michael Goldstein No, no, he’s not above the law, I don’t believe that it’s possible that he could do anything like that. --------------------------- So the WORLD CHAIRMAN says a legalistic investigation is not possible simply because he believes it is "not appropriate." With dunces like this, is it any wonder that Sai Baba looks so unimpressive?
Yes the people in Sai Baba's organisation did not paint a pretty picture did they. But the problem is they are two of maybe many. Only if we had indepth footage of them could we get a better opinion. That's all I am saying. It needs a more objective investigation. Every stone needs to be turned over. I doubt it will ever happen with the polictical system in India. But it would be the best thing for everyone including Sai Baba. So that everyone knows the truth, and followers can have a untroubled heart if he is innocent. Or can follow a better path if he is guility.
So much then for 'leaving it to karma'! You are right about the need for an investigation, but as came out in the 'Secret Swami' documentary the Indian authorities regard him as beyond reproach, almost above the law. So I doubt we will see any meaningful investigation. Meanwhile, his followers will still close their minds to the allegations,(unless they accept them but have decided it's ok) and the abuse, if it is real, and I think it probably is, will also continue. Perhaps this is the price people pay for 'packaged spirituality', particularly when this is rooted in another culture.
Yes I didn't mean do nothing when I said 'leaving it to karma' You obviously dont understand karma if you think it does nothing. The Soul of Sai Baba will make sure he is "punished" if he is guility. In this life or the next. There is no need to worry about this. Maybe he would be abused in his next life. Surely this would be better punishment than just going to jail. To know the torment of the abused. As the saying goes "those who pick up the sword, die by the sword"
Philuk wrote about Sai Baba: "Maybe he would be abused in his next life. Surely this would be better punishment than just going to jail. To know the torment of the abused." This is exactly the kind of argument some Sai devotees (eg. Ram Das Awle) use to defend Sai Baba! According to them, Sai Baba is now abusing persons who were abusers in their former life or lives... and, being God, he is just doing his duty. What a load of old cobblers! The theory of karma has logical weaknesses, and it has to be believed in because it is unproven, of course. It is easily misused to mollify people and put off human justice, leaving everything to 'automatic retribution' according to the laws of karma - now, this year, next year or sometime in the blue. However on Philuk's theory, sexual abuse could just go on and on through lifetimes without end. The same applies to karma... there is no end to it, as one cannot be alive and not act ('karma' means 'action'). Though it does allow that one can act (by one's free will) so as to reduce 'bad karma' and increase 'good karma' so as to get an all-credit account. Even that does not stop the process, however, for one must live on to reap the rewards! Since freedom from karma means freedom from the living body (and any rebirth), it is for all human intents and purposes strongly biassed towards automative determinism and unfreedom, where democratic choice also becomes as an empty sham. (even emptier than it actually is in most Eastern countries). To alleviate this weakness in the theory, some proponents declare that God, being Almighty, can lift karma by his own inscrutable will (i.e. arbitrarily, illogiaclly by his grace etc.) and Sai devotees even think God (for them, Sai Baba) 'takes on' the karma of others to lessen their burden, such as through suffering heart attacks and what have you! (But this is only for the chosen very few, as Sai Baba hasn't got time for many illnesses!) Quite an ideological mess, most people would say. Either one believes without knowing or thinks without believing it is correct.
When you are self realised only love will be expressed, this is the end of karma. God is perfect he doesn't abuse, therefore Sai Baba can't be God if he abused. Has any other past master such as Jesus or Buddha ever abused someone and said it's God's work. If anyone in Sai Baba's organisation knows he abused and still thinks its God's work then he can't be any more further away from God. Of course you have choice, in every action you take. This will determine future karma and the ability to become self realised. But you only have two choices in reality, the path towards God or away. Of course the game is fixed, your soul is God and will one day return, so in the long run you are right. You have no choice. We are all God, and this is Me, You, Jesus, Sai Baba and Hitler. As Jesus sais, "Ye are Gods" There is no right or wrong (only exists in our mind), only becoming closer or further away from the truth that you God. When you realise this you will realise you are pure love and nothing else. And it would not be possible to abuse anyone sexually. Therefore if Sai Baba is guility then he is not self-realised or enlightened. And the followers who except his behavior are so so far from the truth. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again he still hasn't been proven guility. Unless he confesses or he is caught red handed we will never truely know. It is only your opinion Alano.
what's an Advaitin ? You guys seem more like a lynch mob, even before the trial you are saying the man is guilty. I believe in innocent until proven guility. Why not except the fact you don't know the truth. Appeal for a proper investigation of Sai Baba. Let's just hope the investigation or jury does't include the people posting on this thread. Objectivity is none of your strong points. Please point out the mistake I have made while posting in this thread ? All I have said is, A, None of us know 100% if Sai Baba is guility or not. B, Let's have a proper investigation to see. C, Even if Sai Baba is guility and doesn't get investigated, under the laws of karma which I believe in he will be perfectly punished in this life or the next.
A model of karma where SB would have to suffer abuse in a subsequent life doesn't seem a very realistic one to me - for one thing it would presumably mean that abuse must go on indefinitely in this world in order that the SBs of this world can be punished. And those who are being abused now shouldn't grumble, as they are very likely suffering the reaction of their own misdeeds in past lives. Not only that, but the thing is far from a proven fact. Human institutions of justice are unfortunately a necessary feature of the real world. It is no good saying that God will punish Baba (although He may) or that Baba's own atman or his karma will punish him. Also, justice for Baba is only half of the equation. There is also the question of the influence he exerts and the devotion he commands from millions. If the allegations are true, these people are all being led up the garden path by a charlatan - and very likely new 'recruits' are going to him all the time They have a right to know - in fact they must face the truth about SB, no matter how unpalatable that is.
I have said this a number of times before. Let me again state my view on this topic, - A proper investigation needs to be done - If SB is guility he needs to be punished You will never get justice BlackBillBlake. Even if SB is guility and gets sent to jail I doubt that will equal the crimes he did. Karma will dole out the proper justice. That is what i meant by the statement "leave it to karma". Not that an investigation should not be done. Criminals need to be stopped. All I have ever said is that with abuse / rape cases it's very hard to prove 100%. We will probably never know if SB is guility or not. Only God, SB and the accusers know that. And BlackBillBlake what about if SB is innocent. What will you think then ? It is still quite possible he is innocent. I am open minded, I do not judge people unless I have the total 100% facts. You Dont have the 100% facts do you BlackBillBlake. Your opinion is only formed from a one sided tv programme. I would be worried if my opinion was swayed and manipulated so easily. I like to know 100% for sure before I open my big mouth. Maybe you should. That's all I've been saying. I am no fan or supporter of SB.
I am not so concerned about punishment here ( although if guilty he should be punished)- I would consider it more important that people should be protected from false doctrine etc. Also, my doubts about SB do not arise from only one TV programme, but also from much I have heard over the last few years regarding SB. Were a full investigation to take place, and if Baba was cleared, then I would accept he is innocent of the crimes he is accused of. This doesn't mean I would accept him as an avatar, or even a particularly high level teacher.
Philuk is a believer in the same theory that Sai Baba 'teaches' about karma, that all are God, that there is only love. I suppose that Sai Baba is where he got it from, he states it in such a similar fashion to Sai Baba. He presents this from a 'know-all' standpoint, yet then he claims that we do not have "100% facts". It is a simplistic notion that one can have "100% facts" anyhow, but he thinks he knows the ultimate fate of everyone! There is certainly something very wrong with philuk's attitude to truth. It is also very simplistic to think, as he evidently does, that a person cannot be guilty before proven so (presumably in a court). Apart from the obvious fact that many courts condemn innocents, and let the guilty go free (not least in corrupt, caste-ridden India), persons who were abused by him know better. (I was not sexually abused, but my faith was and he lied to me and was guilty of fraud towards me, which I KNOW with full certainty) When there is compelling evidence - not least highly credible victim testimony from so many around the world - it is legitimate to claim his guilt before he is brought to justice. This is not a "lynch mob", but people crying out for resourse to justice. Besides, clincing forensic proof is not impossible even here. There exist several prints, AND the original negative, of Sai Baba engaging in oral sex with a former student. The person in India who currently holds these for future court presentation has been burgled three times in the past year by persons searching in his albums and his computer. Noew who might they be and on whose errand? Certainly it has to do with protecting Sai Baba. Fortunately he had the negative in safe-keeping. Many people have seen these photos, actually, in India. The standpoint that a person is innocent until proven guilty has major weaknesses when made into something more embracing that it is intended to be. It is a formal principle, of course. His critics are not saying that he has been proven guilty, but asser that he is nevertheless not innocent, is guilty. It should be easy to understand, for example... Saddam Hussein is not proven guilty of anything criminal. Nor was the belgian rapist/murderer for six long years... but all 'knew' her was guilty. The young girls who escaped and were saved from his cellar were proof enough to any right-thinking person. Of course, it does not constitute legal proof, but that is another thing. There are moral laws as well as social law, neither of which are infallible. So those who know sufficient facts (including me) have investigated them and contacted those alleging abuse. We have viewed the massive evidence from all conceivable angles through years and have wanted to know the truth about it. I can assure all that those of us who were devotees for decades did this most seriously and circumspectly, because it was a massive step for us to take after having involved ourselves totally in the Sai movement and sacrificed almost all our energies to that end... you can only vaguely imagine it until you are in such a position yourself. Philuk can believe what he wants... anyone can, it's easy, unless you have an active conscience and are interested in the truth. But a tough examination of the testimony and evidence is the decider in this case. Look at www.saiguru.net... that is a good start!
I did some reading and surfed around for a little on the baba, still don't know where to stand in the issue... I don't buy that he is an avatar, although he is God, as are you, and everyone else. This leaves all kinds of possibilities open. A fraud, a creepy guy who gave into the shadow side of the mystical path, a honorable guru spreading love who is being accussed wrong and misunderstood depending on the action, a mixture of these in other words a cosmic joke guru, and so on and so on and so on... So all and all... I draw a big blank. The whole thing seems very cosmic joke, paradoxical, dharmic humor to me. This is the most clear in a website that I must show you guys, you must check it out... http://www.saibaba-aclearview.com/ The whole thing is basically written by a very dedicated devotee that has to have a pretty decent cosmic joking sense of humor to have written something so paradoxical which all mysticism is, it is the realm of the inner heart beyond the rational mind, of feeling things out, inner knowing and seeing! so it's up to you to find the truth, because in the higher planes winning lots of debates in logic class is a burden. It is inspiring to cosmic chuckles in a very odd sort of way... hehehe, irrational rationalization? So what did he write? Well this guy believes pretty much most of the allegations against the being, sexual abuse, false miracles and all kinds of things, yet still accepts that he is a divine avatar, better then the rest, in fact THE BEST, and so everything he did was for the good of the devottees. Ironically this is true in a cosmic joking sense, because everything that happens is done for the best, everything is perfect, divine will and perfection, the world is all conspired to do ya sum good... that goes for everyone's actions, right and wrong... so, every guru, really pure, pure and fake, sat, upa, and no label, but that all includes everyday peeps, and clowns, and presidents, mass murders and pelicans and hare krishna hare krishna krishna krishna hare hare hare rama hare rama rama rama hare hare! And that's my THREE cents! Love all! And when it comes to right and wrong, there is the chirst heart with the Buddha mind. Praise Allah, you spinning Sufi you! From www.ramdasstapes.org, sums up morality perfectly for me. 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind." This is the great and foremost commandment. "And a second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." (Jesus as quoted by Matthew 22:37) "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (Jesus as quoted by John 13:34-35) "You must accept the teachings of Christ and follow them. Christ said to be like a little child-never think or speak anything, that could harm anyone ....... He was crucified so that his spirit could spread throughout the world . He sacrificed his body for the dharma. He never died, he never died. He is Atman (The Soul) living in the hearts of all........Why was Christ so maligned?" Maharajji was asked."It is so with all saints, they see only love in everyone. You should not speak, hear or do evil. You should see love everywhere and in everyone. See the good in all." excerpts from Miracle of Love Stories about Neem Karoli Baba by Ram Dass And don't do anything that would harm anyone either... Abusing unwilling people sexually through manipulation, status, power and so on, is wrong, and even wronger with young kids. So if Sai is guilty of this, he has given over to the dark forces. Reguardless if he is guility or not guilty, his manifestation serves as a powerful lesson for many spiritual seekers... His presence is a blessing, as is all that is!
A kind of warped humour here. This man is not only misleading others with false claims to Avatarhood, but is quite possibly a child abuser, and is implicated in at least one murder. Clear enough that those devotees who stand by him whilst accepting the allegations are lost souls.
I think he is a fraud. I would not trust him as far as i could throw him. http://home.no.net/anir/Sai/enigma/Rum4.htm http://www.skeptica.dk/2001/01_1.htm?FACTNet http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/religion/sai.htm http://www.saibabalinks.org/ warning graphic pictures... http://home.no.net/anir/Sai/enigma/Murders.htm Take a look at the 5th one [ AKA the oldest trick in the book] http://sathyasaibaba1.tripod.com/movie_clip.htm
