-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba - any views?
- Thread starter nnmartin
- Start date
K.Venugopal
Immobile Wanderer
Satya Sai Baba, who died recently, was an enigma. His followers believe that he was an avataar or God come down in human form. Howsoever you might want to believe that, the corpus of his teachings are huge and a plunge into it would indeed be refreshing. Best would be to subscribe to the monthly magazine "Sanathana Sarathi", which you would be able to do at the locality they have their meetings. Before long you would be sufficiently equipped to form your own opinion about Satya Sai Baba.
Gaura Priya
IRL
Yeah... he's pretty controversial.
On one hand, I've read some of his teachings and, while fairly standard, they're not bad. In addition, I've heard he founded some free schools and hospitals. (As did Amma, who IMO is the greatest human being alive right now.) On the other hand, his "miracles" have proven to be hoaxes, and he declared that he'd die in 2019, but died earlier this year.
In short, I don't think he was a bad man at all, but I don't consider him an avatar. I like Shirdi Sai Baba better. ^_^
In short, I don't think he was a bad man at all, but I don't consider him an avatar. I like Shirdi Sai Baba better. ^_^
kaisersose
Active Member
You do not know until you try it out. He has millions of ardent devotees.
He has a few critics as well, but their criticism is all hearsay, without a shred of evidence.
The fact that most of his miracles have been repeated by stage magicians, and one of them even exposed on youtube, helps my skepticism of his divinity.
What? I'm just skeptical of his divinity. I don't mean disrespect to him or his followers.
Like I said, I believe he founded a few free hospitals and schools. That alone puts him leagues above several other religious leaders I could name.
I'm not sure how declaring skepticism for various reasons is "hurtful."
kaisersose
Active Member
I know one person who claims Sai Baba appeared in his dreams and cured him of a chronic illness. For him, it is a miracle and one that cannot be copied by magicians.
Anyway, should miracles be the criteria? All so-called miracles that have been reliably witnessed by the general public in this world are reproduced easily by magicians. Miracles like walking on water, dancing on the heads of large snakes, etc., have no reliable eye witnesses.
Key word: most. ^_^
I've also heard of a devotee in either Central or South America (not sure which) who was given a bag of Vibhuti that would never run out, which supposedly hasn't.
Metempsychosis
Reincarnation of 'Anti-religion'
My two cents:
I have personally seen some of his Vibhuti Miracles in my house.
...I don't think this that can be done by any magicians.The internet miracles seem to be fake though.And Ironically none of his ardent critics have any tangible proof to incriminate him.But he is still an enigma to folks like me and many others.
Most of his teachings make sense in an Advaitic standpoint and again some of them are quite controversial ..Shridi Sai is in whole different plane though.
I have personally seen some of his Vibhuti Miracles in my house.
...I don't think this that can be done by any magicians.The internet miracles seem to be fake though.And Ironically none of his ardent critics have any tangible proof to incriminate him.But he is still an enigma to folks like me and many others.Most of his teachings make sense in an Advaitic standpoint and again some of them are quite controversial ..Shridi Sai is in whole different plane though.
Ekanta
om sai ram
I went 2 times to India and met with Sathya Sai Baba. I stayed a total of 6 months in his ashram and also got a private interview with him. I will say a little...
Its said that at the time of Rama, the evil was in the forest and elsewhere. At the time of Krishna it was in the family. At our time its in the individual... with this as background its easier to understand his emphasis on the school system based on human values. "The end of education is character" as he puts it, or "culture is that which purifies". I think his vision is that this schools system will spread and out of it will emerge a new character for humanity.
Anyway, many "strange things" happened when I was there. Doors that were locked were always open when I came to my room, at the amazment of my room mates. My sandals that were totally borken were made whole again.
The experience of peace, power, love at the interview and his deep looking into my eye's for a long time which, wow, that experience cant be named. I was about to merge in brahman, but had to turn my gaze away to save my litte ego from destruction (that's MY experience of it).
There is also the other side of the story... My room mates had the theory that Sathya Sai Baba was faking the vibhuti (ash) materialisation with small vibhuti balls he had in his hand and that we should keep watching for those during darshan (when he comes out and walks among he followers). Of course I too did that... And we all saw those vibhuti balls clearly. I personally can witness that I saw those very clearly held right in the open. But no one around me saw them. And that I still cant understand. The next day, all three of us had severe eye inflamation and had to go to the doctor and get pencilin.
Personally, he is my guru and God (when I want to think of a form). He has guided me in dreams for 20 years and given answers to all my questions. Even today after his physical death its the same.
I can understand that he is controversial... but what else can I do than post an answer according to my experience... Take it as such.
My personal view: Sathya Sai Baba an enigma? Of course he's an enigma! Isnt maya supposed to be a play of enigma? Through devotion he can be known. And he doesnt even have to be known since God can be known through other forms also, etc etc.
Its said that at the time of Rama, the evil was in the forest and elsewhere. At the time of Krishna it was in the family. At our time its in the individual... with this as background its easier to understand his emphasis on the school system based on human values. "The end of education is character" as he puts it, or "culture is that which purifies". I think his vision is that this schools system will spread and out of it will emerge a new character for humanity.
Anyway, many "strange things" happened when I was there. Doors that were locked were always open when I came to my room, at the amazment of my room mates. My sandals that were totally borken were made whole again.
The experience of peace, power, love at the interview and his deep looking into my eye's for a long time which, wow, that experience cant be named. I was about to merge in brahman, but had to turn my gaze away to save my litte ego from destruction (that's MY experience of it).
There is also the other side of the story... My room mates had the theory that Sathya Sai Baba was faking the vibhuti (ash) materialisation with small vibhuti balls he had in his hand and that we should keep watching for those during darshan (when he comes out and walks among he followers). Of course I too did that... And we all saw those vibhuti balls clearly. I personally can witness that I saw those very clearly held right in the open. But no one around me saw them. And that I still cant understand. The next day, all three of us had severe eye inflamation and had to go to the doctor and get pencilin.
Personally, he is my guru and God (when I want to think of a form). He has guided me in dreams for 20 years and given answers to all my questions. Even today after his physical death its the same.
I can understand that he is controversial... but what else can I do than post an answer according to my experience... Take it as such.
My personal view: Sathya Sai Baba an enigma? Of course he's an enigma! Isnt maya supposed to be a play of enigma? Through devotion he can be known. And he doesnt even have to be known since God can be known through other forms also, etc etc.
Last edited:
magalaan
Member
All people are Divine
Why do you deny this to Sai Baba?
It is hurtful to those who regard him special
Even if someones mother is prosititute
They still are hurt when people call her a whore
In Hinduism a "truth" that hurts is not considered true
The True intention is lacking
God is both Love and Truth,
not the one without the other.
Last edited:
We also have a saying in the West: a stallion must first be broken before its full potential can be realized.
Sometimes that which hurts a bit can be ultimately beneficial. Real harm is causing a deep scar that will never heal, and causes no benefit whatsoever. Getting a medical shot, for example, can sometimes be very painful, but the hurt only lasts for a while, and results in great health.
In terms of all people being divine, then of course he was divine, but not any more so than the rest of us.
I'm simply declaring my skepticism. It doesn't harm me when people declare skepticism for my Gods, even if it does sting a little. But it also stings a little when someone says they don't like a movie that I do like. It's not ultimately harmful.
magalaan
Member
Ram Ram Riverwolf,
True the West is a great believer in benefits of suffering
this is logical since their God brought and brings release through suffering
I recently read a story of a man burning his sons hand on the furnace to stop him from touching the Bible. The burning wounds are hurtful but he reasoned it would keep him out of hell later which is more hurtful.
See that is the problem. Once you start believing that the end justifies the means, the most glorious ends become good reason for the most nasty means.
Hinduism is not like that. First yama is Ahimsa (not hurting), it comes before Satya (truth). That way nobody can use the truth to hurt people. Nothing is more dangerous than to use truth to hurt. You talk about small hurt. But where is the line between small hurt and big hurt? there is no clear line, since only the person hurting can tell. And deepest wounds are often not made by swords but by words spoken carelessly.
You were not curing people here. Again this is a dangerous road: "I know better than you, so I will tell you the truth for your own good, even if it hurts". This leads directly to conversion practices and all the rest. Once you start believing people go to hell if not converted it becomes an act of mercy to put the sword against their throat to save them.
It all depends then how strongly you believe in these things. It starts harmlessly and ends with bloodshed.
It is better not to go that road at all. As Rama teaches us: NEVER USE MEANS THAT ARE UNWORTHY. Not even if it would mean you lose the war. Rather accept defeat than use means that will harm your soul. Because all this means nothing and is merely a role we are playing, but our soul is important.
Personally I have nothing with skepticism, I think it is a weakness. People that can not open their heart to things, start seeking for proof. But proof is something the mind produces in abundance. What ever we like to believe we find proof for.
Jai Ganesha!
True the West is a great believer in benefits of suffering
this is logical since their God brought and brings release through suffering
I recently read a story of a man burning his sons hand on the furnace to stop him from touching the Bible. The burning wounds are hurtful but he reasoned it would keep him out of hell later which is more hurtful.
See that is the problem. Once you start believing that the end justifies the means, the most glorious ends become good reason for the most nasty means.
Hinduism is not like that. First yama is Ahimsa (not hurting), it comes before Satya (truth). That way nobody can use the truth to hurt people. Nothing is more dangerous than to use truth to hurt. You talk about small hurt. But where is the line between small hurt and big hurt? there is no clear line, since only the person hurting can tell. And deepest wounds are often not made by swords but by words spoken carelessly.
You were not curing people here. Again this is a dangerous road: "I know better than you, so I will tell you the truth for your own good, even if it hurts". This leads directly to conversion practices and all the rest. Once you start believing people go to hell if not converted it becomes an act of mercy to put the sword against their throat to save them.
It all depends then how strongly you believe in these things. It starts harmlessly and ends with bloodshed.
It is better not to go that road at all. As Rama teaches us: NEVER USE MEANS THAT ARE UNWORTHY. Not even if it would mean you lose the war. Rather accept defeat than use means that will harm your soul. Because all this means nothing and is merely a role we are playing, but our soul is important.
Personally I have nothing with skepticism, I think it is a weakness. People that can not open their heart to things, start seeking for proof. But proof is something the mind produces in abundance. What ever we like to believe we find proof for.
Jai Ganesha!
Last edited:
kaisersose
Active Member
I differ. Skepticism is healthy. Else, we would have to believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and in Hindu ancestors returning as crows on festival days to eat rice. Coincidentally, this only happens in places where crows are found. I could wait all day in Seattle and not one ancestor will show up, but in Bangalore, I can have a dozen of them show up in under five minutes.
I see lack of skepticism as an insult to human intelligence.
This is a clever line used by Gurus to discourage questioning - especially uncomfortable questions that they have no answers for.
There is no proof for a saree of infinite length as found in the Mahabharata. There is no proof that Jesus walked on water. There is no proof that Udipi Krishna turned 180 degrees for his devotee.
It does not matter how much one loves to believe in such stories - there is not a shred of evidence. It has to be and is accepted solely on faith and nothing else.
K.Venugopal
Immobile Wanderer
I think there is something indefinable about truth. I can point out the big banyan tree in my compound and therefore we would suppose the banyan tree to be a truth in existence. But a thousand years later, there may be no trace whatsoever that the banyan tree existed except for some diary jottings of an ancestor. Then the banyan tree would no longer be true except as a story. The point is, wouldn't the story itself be true as a story? Meaning, truth can exist at any level, even at the level of a lie - anything that exists in whatever form, even if in the form of a lie, is a truth in itself. Therefore it has to be accepted that truth, like beauty lying in the eyes of a beholder, lies in the mind of the propounder (and sometimes only in the mind of the propounder).
kaisersose
Active Member
There is a difference.
I have no reason to doubt the existence of a banyan tree from a thousand years ago. But a saree of infinite length goes against simple laws of nature as we know them regardless of the date of the claim. It is impossible today just as it was impossible thousands of years ago. Of the two possible options - it was a divine miracle vs. it was the result of someone's imagination, the latter easily takes precedence.
magalaan
Member
Ram Ram kaisersose,
Hinduism is not a religion in which you have to believe a doctrine. There is no doctrine. Nobody forces you to believe anything.
You do not have to believe any of those things. They mean nothing to you, so why would you believe them? You would be a fool to believe things that you could not experience yourself. Nobody asks you too.
And that is not what this discussion is about. The discussion is about Respect. If others do believe those things, is it up to you to tell them they are wrong? If you think that, you simply say: I am the knower of truth, I shall enlighten all. That would be contradictory. As a skeptic You do not want others to tell you what to believe, but you want to tell others what to believe?
Anyway what are you doing here? You seem to got lost.
Jai Ganesha!
Hinduism is not a religion in which you have to believe a doctrine. There is no doctrine. Nobody forces you to believe anything.
I figured as much
A guru does not discourage questioning. Hinduism believes that the path of enlightenment is one of personal growth, rather than following a book. A guru will want people to discover truth for themselves in experience. And it is not the guru that seeks people to enlighten, people seek a particular guru to enlighten them. Why specially him? Because they think he is good for them, his ideas and methods are good for them. It is their choice. A guru will only ask that they are serious about it, or otherwise stop waisting his time and leave. You seem to confuse Hinduism with other religions .
You do not have to believe any of those things. They mean nothing to you, so why would you believe them? You would be a fool to believe things that you could not experience yourself. Nobody asks you too.
And that is not what this discussion is about. The discussion is about Respect. If others do believe those things, is it up to you to tell them they are wrong? If you think that, you simply say: I am the knower of truth, I shall enlighten all. That would be contradictory. As a skeptic You do not want others to tell you what to believe, but you want to tell others what to believe?
Anyway what are you doing here? You seem to got lost.
Jai Ganesha!
Last edited: