Satya Sai Baba - man or God?

[Gaura Priya]

for the same reason you have no respect for jesus?

Jesus never said he was Jehovah God, but the Son of God, in that He was a Prophet, a Messenger of God.


"Now one of the scribes that had come up and heard them disputing, knowing that he had answered them in a fine way, asked him: 'Which commandment is first of all?' Jesus answered: 'The first is, 'Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah, and you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength.' "

-- Mark 12:28-30

 

[nameless]

Jesus never said he was Jehovah God, but the Son of God, in that He was a Prophet, a Messenger of God.


"Now one of the scribes that had come up and heard them disputing, knowing that he had answered them in a fine way, asked him: 'Which commandment is first of all?' Jesus answered: 'The first is, 'Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah, and you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength.' "

-- Mark 12:28-30

there are lots of verses jesus claiming to be god, anyway this thread not suits to discuss that. You can refer Did Jesus say he was God??? thread

 

[Gaura Priya]

there are lots of verses jesus claiming to be god, anyway this thread not suits to discuss that. You can refer Did Jesus say he was God??? thread

Then don't use Jesus and compare Him to Satya Sai Baba.

I will never respect Satya Sai Baba for his personal activities and usage of siddhis for followers. I'm sorry, but that's my ahankara talking.

 

[Wombat]

Anyone can make accusations against anyone. What we need is evidence, which is missing.

The video evidence of Sai Baba using basic magic trick/misdirection/sleight of hand and hidden panels in objects to "materialise" diamonds (for the powerful/influential) and Verbuti(?- 'sacred dust/ash') for commoners is conclusive- smoking gun to any claim of divinity. As recomended...Youtube search 'Sai Baba fraud'....lots to choose from.
For a long time there was a group of Indian students who traveled India with video footage exposing Sai Baba's tricks....they would also dublicate all his 'materializations' and explain/expose how done.

Didn't stop the Indian Science Minister from being a devotee.....but then again...he had been the recipient of a 'materialised' Rolex.

Pull a Rolex out of thin air for me and I may think you're divine too:yes:

 

[nameless]

Then don't use Jesus and compare Him to Satya Sai Baba.

im not comparing, but your reasoning for not having respect for sai baba makes you unqualified to be a follower of jesus. Quoted below what you have said.

I have absolutely no respect for any person who allows eir followers to call em God

I will never respect Satya Sai Baba for his personal activities

his personal activities are nothing other than charitable works, and it involves more than rs 40,000 crore across 166 countries, still you can disrespect him.

usage of siddhis for followers.

if he used siddhis to get millions of followers to contribute to his charitable works, what better way one can make use of siddhis?

btw, you can say you just dont respect sai baba, and that will be fine

I'm sorry, but that's my ahankara talking.

same here

 

[Gaura Priya]

im not comparing, but your reasoning for not having respect for sai baba makes you unqualified to be a follower of jesus.

Jesus said that the Father is greater than He is. He said that know one knows the hour of the Last Day but the Father alone. And Jesus makes a distinction and prays to the Father... why would Jesus pray to Himself?


"Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

-- Matthew 4:10


Unlike most Christians, Jesus never claimed to be God... the idea of Jesus as God incarnate was not developed until about 300 years after the death of Jesus, through the Nicene Councils.

Along with Satya Sai Baba, He can not compare to the works of Jesus, Muhammad, Zoroaster, Buddha, Krishna, etc. His writings can not compare to any of these great Men.

his personal activities are nothing other than charitable works, and it involves more than rs 40,000 crore across 166 countries, still you can disrespect him.

Sri Chinmoy also did the same with spreading the Message of Peace through concerts, music, and a very basic spirituality... however, his was that of a personality cult that focused more on his image and meditating on him and his so-called 'prowess' than any of the worship of Ishvara.

This is the same with Osho Rajneesh, or Sri Mataji Nirmala Devi.

if he used siddhis to get millions of followers to contribute to his charitable works, what better way one can make use of his siddhis?

btw, you can say you just dont respect sai baba, and that will be fine


same here

People call the Catholic Church corrupt, and yet it has thousands and thousands of charitable auxiliaries. Or they'll derail the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and yet they are also quite charitable.

And yet I feel that the organisation for Sathya Sai Baba care only for his people to carry his image everywhere, to pray to him as a god, to seek his knowledge as if it were shastra, and to hold sway over the opinion of his followers.

He claims to be Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient, and an Avatara. I simply can not accept it, and I will never... for God is too powerful, too great, too perfect, to take up or embody a human nature and mind that is limiting.

 

[nameless]

Jesus said that the Father is greater than He is. He said that know one knows the hour of the Last Day but the Father alone. And Jesus makes a distinction and prays to the Father... why would Jesus pray to Himself?


"Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

-- Matthew 4:10

Unlike most Christians, Jesus never claimed to be God... the idea of Jesus as God incarnate was not developed until about 300 years after the death of Jesus, through the Nicene Councils.

if you missed the muffled's post that i requested you to refer, its below ..

I have been asked to produce evidence of the divinity of Jesus. This is not just good evidence, it is overwhelming evidence.


Words of Jesus

John 14:9 ... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father
John 14:10 ... the words that I say unto you , I speak not from myself but from the Father abiding in Me doeth His works
John 14:11 ... I am in the Father and the Father in Me
John 10:30 I and My Father are one
John 10:33 ... thou being a man makest Thyself God
John 8:58 Jesus said ... before Abraham was born, Jah (Jah is the short form of Jeshovah)
John 8:59 They took up stones therefore to cast at Him
Mark 2:5 and Jesus seeing their faith saith ... thy sins are forgiven
Mark 2:7 ... who can forgive sins but one, even God
Mark 10:17 ... good teacher Mark 10:18 Why callest Me good? None is good save one, even God John 10:11 I am the good shepherd
Mat. 1:21 ... call his name Jesus; for it is He that shall save his people from their sins
Prophecies of the Messiah Jesus
Isa. 45:21 ... I, Jehovah? and there is no God else besides Me a just God and savior, there is none besides Me
Isa. 7:14 ... a sign: behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel (God with us)
Isa 9:6 a son is given, and the government shall be upon His shoulder, and His name shall be called: Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace

Attributes of God
Omnipresence
John 1:46 Nathaniel saith unto Him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him Before Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
John 1:49 Nathaniel answered him, Rabbi thou art the Son of God; thou art King of Israel.
John 1:50 Jesus answered ... thou shalt see greater things than these
Omniscience
Luke 6:8 ...the Pharisees watched Him ... that they might find how to accuse him but He knew their thoughts
John 4:17 ... Thou sayest well, I have no husband
John 4:18 for thou hast had five husbands and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband
Omnipotence
Mark 4:41 ... Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?

(He turned water into wine, multiplied bread, healed the sick and the blind, raised a man who was dead for four days)
Authority
Luke 4:36 ... for with authority and power He commandeth the unclean spirits and they come out
Mat 7:29 for He taught them as one having authority
Mat 28:18 ... Jesus ...spake... saying, all authority hath been given unto Me in heaven and on earth
The "I am" statements of Jesus
John 8:12 ... I am the light of the world
John 14:6 ... I am the way, the truth and the life
John 6:35 ... I am the bread of life
John 10:9 I am the door, by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved
John 11:25 ... I am the resurrection and the life
John 15:1 I am the true vine (this is a reference to Jesus being the Paraclete)

Along with Satya Sai Baba, He can not compare to the works of Jesus, Muhammad, Zoroaster, Buddha, Krishna, etc. His writings can not compare to any of these great Men.

like you believe he cannot be compared with jesus and muhammad, there are people who had wonderful experiences with saibaba, and they believes vice-versa.

Sri Chinmoy also did the same with spreading the Message of Peace through concerts, music, and a very basic spirituality... however, his was that of a personality cult that focused more on his image and meditating on him and his so-called 'prowess' than any of the worship of Ishvara.

This is the same with Osho Rajneesh, or Sri Mataji Nirmala Devi.

this is hinduism, hindus regards guru is greater than god, or in otherwords there is no god other than guru (brahman is not god, it simply exists and is helpless). So their paths are exactly as per hinduism, if you think they are wrong, then its problem with hinduism. It requires fundamentalist belief to state this practice is wrong.

People call the Catholic Church corrupt, and yet it has thousands and thousands of charitable auxiliaries. Or they'll derail the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and yet they are also quite charitable.

as chisti told in this thread, he is Innocent until proven guilty. Some people did some wrong does not mean everyone is bad.

And yet I feel that the organisation for Sathya Sai Baba care only for his people to carry his image everywhere, to pray to him as a god, to seek his knowledge as if it were shastra, and to hold sway over the opinion of his followers.

that is his way to help people, and his millions of followers are very thankful to him for it worked well for them.

He claims to be Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient, and an Avatara. I simply can not accept it, and I will never... for God is too powerful, too great, too perfect, to take up or embody a human nature and mind that is limiting.

you feels so because you think they are limited to their body, once realized god is one, everything is omnipotent and omniscient and limitless.

 

[Bismillah]

everything is omnipotent and omniscient and limitless.

Huh, I guess I'm not. Want to take my midterm for me O omniscient one?

 

[Gaura Priya]

if you missed the muffled's post that i requested you to refer, its below ..

Many of those verses are taken from the Jewish Scriptures, which could be exaggerated to be attributed to Christ. Christ never claimed omniscience, or omnipresence, or omnipotence... He said, "I and the Father are One... JUST as my disciples are one with Me." That does not make US gods as well!

Every Manifestation of God had a human station and a spiritual station. The spiritual station is that of the Mouthpiece of God on Earth. Jesus was such.

this is hinduism, hindus regards guru is greater than god, or in otherwords there is no god other than guru (brahman is not god, it simply exists and is helpless). So their paths are exactly as per hinduism, if you think they are wrong, then its problem with hinduism. It requires fundamentalist belief to state this practice is wrong.

This is NOT Hinduism... this is Neo-Hinduism.

I have practiced from the Vaishnava standpoint and knowing the extreme importance of the parampara and the immediacy of the guru. Any guru who claims to be God, that there is no God, or that we are all gods, should be outrightly rejected as false, as opposed to one who teaches about becoming a servant of God.

Gurus have been charlatans and mudhas for the people, and have taken advantage of them. And yet there have been genuine gurus such as Sri Ramakrishna, Guru Nanak, and the guru that I learned some shastra through his books, Srila Sridhar Maharaj, founder of Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math (SCS Math), in the lineage of Vaishnavism.

as chisti told in this thread, he is Innocent until proven guilty. Some people did some wrong does not mean everyone is bad.

According to the Vaishnava, the guru is not God, but he is as good as God. So if a guru does not have godlike qualities and conducts himself in a manner that is unbeseeming, it is falsity and famosity alone that fuels such 'devotion.'

you feels so because you think they are limited to their body, once realized god is one, everything is omnipotent and omniscient and limitless.

I am not a pantheist, nor will I ever become one. I only follow the philosophies of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, Achintya-Bheda-Abheda-Tattva, and panentheism. God alone is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Limitless, while we are weak, ignorant, and limited, save the soul, which is a part and parcel of God.

While God is Sacchidanandam (Truth, Consciousness, Ecstasy), our limited lives are asatya, achitya, and nirananda, falsity, unconsciousness, and unquickening. Only through realising the Lord and His grace over us can we cross over the ocean of birth and death.


"Free from all material conceptions of existence and never wonder-struck by anything, the Lord is always jubilant and fully satisfied by His own spiritual perfection. He has no material designations, and therefore He is steady and unattached. That Supreme Personality of Godhead is the only shelter of everyone. Anyone desiring to be protected by others is certainly a great fool who desires to cross the sea by holding the tail of a dog."

-- Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.9.22

 

[Riverwolf]

This is NOT Hinduism... this is Neo-Hinduism.

Have you read the Guru Gita?

Guru is Shiva, Guru is God. Guru is the relative of all embodied beings.
Guru is the Self. Guru is Jiva. There is nothing other than the Guru.
(87)

 

[K.Venugopal]

Huh, I guess I'm not. Want to take my midterm for me O omniscient one?

It would appear we are not the ultimate. But that's only because we identify with our body. If we identify with that which enlivens our body, we would realize we are the ultimate. In that stage, there would be no need for midterms!

 

[gnomon]

He was a man.

He's dead.

For the sake of being nice I shall say no more.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Have you read the Guru Gita?

Guru is Shiva, Guru is God. Guru is the relative of all embodied beings.
Guru is the Self. Guru is Jiva. There is nothing other than the Guru.
(87)

I have not, prabhu, but at the same time, the Guru is only as good as God if they display the qualities of a guru. If they do not, they must be downright rejected.

Sri Anandamayi Ma, Sri Ramakrishna, and even Srila Prabhupada and Satguru Shivaya Subramuniyaswami, to me, are bona fide gurus, agents of God.

The qualities of the guru will be reflected upon the disciples, and out of my false ego, I can not for my life ever claim that Satya Sai Baba's sadhana is for me.

http://www.energygrid.com/spirit/ap-falsegurutest.html this is how I feel.

Siddhis and charitable works are moot if the base teachings are not a reflection of the former parampara or sampradaya. Siddhis any yogi and magician can do; it takes real guts to proclaim the message of Vedanta in a pristine way for each and every disciple of eirs.

 

[Riverwolf]

I have not, prabhu, but at the same time, the Guru is only as good as God if they display the qualities of a guru. If they do not, they must be downright rejected.

Sri Anandamayi Ma, Sri Ramakrishna, and even Srila Prabhupada and Satguru Shivaya Subramuniyaswami, to me, are bona fide gurus, agents of God.

The qualities of the guru will be reflected upon the disciples, and out of my false ego, I can not for my life ever claim that Satya Sai Baba's sadhana is for me.

The False Guru Test this is how I feel.

Siddhis and charitable works are moot if the base teachings are not a reflection of the former parampara or sampradaya. Siddhis any yogi and magician can do; it takes real guts to proclaim the message of Vedanta in a pristine way for each and every disciple of eirs.

I was never a big fan of Satya Sai Baba, either. I once picked up one of his books, and found absolutely NOTHING new in it; it seemed like just a copy-paste job of things I had read elsewhere. (That was before I saw the videos of his magic tricks being demonstrated as such.)

Granted, I never much cared for Sri Prabhupada's teachings, either, but only because I was kind of offended by his attitude towards advaitins (so, that's my own ego talking. lol). Then again, I didn't feel much offended at all when I later learned of Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami's opinion of the Bhagavad-Gita, so... maybe I've matured a bit since I read Sri Prabhupada.

Thanks for the link. I shall keep it in mind.

BTW, why'd you call me Prabhu? I'm not sure I even qualify as a real sishya. I just love books.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,
Had visited Puttaparthi twice without any questions or expecting anything from anyone.
The whole town from the railway station to the airfield to medical hospital to university besides the arrangements for devotees to stay the opportunity to serve others to pray etc. are all efforts of this one gentleman.In fact the development of this town is due to his efforts.
The word *godman* is simply to state that the man is more in tune with the *whole/god/etc* than others who are all *mangod* i.e. to state that the man which has evolved is yet to tune with the source or the whole. Each human is a medium for the *whole/existence to evolve and one that becomes a medium for millions are more evolved than others who are yet to be mediums in the true sense as their minds are still pre-occupied with sense gratifications to even consider themselves to be mediums.
All in all Satya Sai was an evolved individual who in spite of few human short comings became a medium for millions others to evolve to be godmen from mangods sometime in the future.
He never married nor left any will for anyone specifically which shows his non attachment to the material world which itself is a sign of an evolved enlightened individual but at the same time his stating that he will again take birth shows that his karma still remains unfulfilled for that merging with the whole remains incomplete and so he will be born again but that should be his last as have heard that those who take birth consciously and leave the body consciously becomes their last birth as human beings.

Love & rgds

 

[Gaura Priya]

I was never a big fan of Satya Sai Baba, either. I once picked up one of his books, and found absolutely NOTHING new in it; it seemed like just a copy-paste job of things I had read elsewhere. (That was before I saw the videos of his magic tricks being demonstrated as such.)

Granted, I never much cared for Sri Prabhupada's teachings, either, but only because I was kind of offended by his attitude towards advaitins (so, that's my own ego talking. lol). Then again, I didn't feel much offended at all when I later learned of Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami's opinion of the Bhagavad-Gita, so... maybe I've matured a bit since I read Sri Prabhupada.

Thanks for the link. I shall keep it in mind.

BTW, why'd you call me Prabhu? I'm not sure I even qualify as a real sishya. I just love books.

Hahah, sorry... it's a Gaudiya cultural thing. Generally we call men prabhu, and women, didi... to emphasise equality between all people and devotees of the Lord, as well as respect, especially to one's elders (in ISKCON men are 'prabhu' and women are 'mataji')! I was following Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, founded by His Divine Grace Srila Sridhar Maharaj, who was the elder godbrother of Srila Prabhupada, and shiksha guru, even for much of the Gaudiya lineage today.

Here is one of his books, called Search for Sri Krishna: Reality the Beautiful.


"What is Krishna consciousness? Krishna consciousness means real love and beauty. Real love and beauty must predominate; not selfishness, or exploitation. Generally, whenever we see beauty, we think that beauty is to be exploited, but actually, beauty is the exploiter, beauty is the master, and beauty is the controlling principle."

-- Srila Sridhar Maharaj


He wrote another beautiful book, called Sri Guru and His Grace, and he poetically elucidates scripturally how a true Vaishnava is a guru; and the necessity of guru is to be found both within and out of shastra; the different spiritual levels of a guru, and how his position is that of a bridge between man and God. First, everyone must possess and embody qualities of a guru... and then one should take shelter under the guru through Guru, Sadhu-sangha, and Shastra.

Srila Sridhar Maharaj was a poet at heart, a philosopher and a spiritualist of the Gaudiya siddhanta par excellence. If there is any equivalent to the great Shaiva, Satguru Shivaya Subramuniyaswami, in the Vaishnava lineage, it would be Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur, and this param-param guru, Srila Bhakti Rakshak Srila Sridhar Dev-Goswami Maharaj.

Although I am not sure if the Gaudiya lineage fully represents me spiritually anymore as it did in the past, I wholly appreciate its movement in my life.


"Sri guru is not exclusively the same as the Supreme Lord Himself, but he fully represents the essence of the whole normal potency and embodies the most comprehensive and excellent service and favor of the Lord. As he is the fittest servitor of the Lord, he is empowered by the Lord to reinstate all misguided souls to their best interest.

So guru is the divine messenger of immortal hope and joy in this mortal and miserable world. His advent is the most auspicious and happy event to the suffering animation, and can be compared to the rising of the morning star that can guide the traveller lost in the desert. A gentle touch of sri guru’s merciful hand can wipe away the incessant tears from all weeping eyes. A patriot or philanthropist makes the problem only worse in his frantic and futile attempt to alleviate the deeprooted pain of a suffering soul, as an ignorant doctor does in eagerly handling an unfortunate patient. Oh the day when this poor soul realizes the causeless grace of sri gurudeva."

-- Srila Sridhar Maharaj

 

[Gaura Priya]

Om ajnana timirandhasya
jnananjana shalakaya
chakshur unmilitam yena
tasmai shri gurave namah

Applying the soothing salve of sambandha-jnana, a proper acquaintance with the environment, my spiritual master hath opened mine inner eye and thereby rescued me from the darkness of ignorance, fulfilling my life's aspirations. I offer my respects unto Shri Gurudeva.

:namaste

 

[nameless]

Many of those verses are taken from the Jewish Scriptures, which could be exaggerated to be attributed to Christ. Christ never claimed omniscience, or omnipresence, or omnipotence... He said, "I and the Father are One... JUST as my disciples are one with Me." That does not make US gods as well!

just your viewpoint, christians dont believe so.

This is NOT Hinduism... this is Neo-Hinduism.

Any guru who claims to be God, that there is no God, or that we are all gods, should be outrightly rejected as false, as opposed to one who teaches about becoming a servant of God.

you see krishna as a prophet, did not krishna claims in the BG he is the godhead? and he existed eternally?

The 4 vedas, all saying the same.

1.Prajnanam Brahma - "Consciousness is Brahman" (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)
2.Ayam Atma Brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)
3.Tat Tvam Asi - "Thou art That" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)
4.Aham Brahmasmi - "I am Brahman" (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)

does these vedas belongs to neo-hinduism?


Here is what Sai baba said - "I am God but so also are you. The only difference is that I know I am God while you do not."

In the BG Krishna makes almost the same point to Arjuna, that they both always existed, krishna remembers it but Arjuna not.

help me to understand how it contradicts vedic teachings.....

I have practiced from the Vaishnava standpoint and knowing the extreme importance of the parampara and the immediacy of the guru.

hinduism is not just vaishnavism, dont know that? you are just attacking others schools in hinduism using vaishnava view point. Im not sure if you are purposefully acting ignorant.

Gurus have been charlatans and mudhas for the people, and have taken advantage of them.

exactly, there are fraud gurus for sure, but the topic is about sai baba, you should present proof to accuse him.

According to the Vaishnava, the guru is not God, but he is as good as God. So if a guru does not have godlike qualities and conducts himself in a manner that is unbeseeming, it is falsity and famosity alone that fuels such 'devotion.'

again the same useless point..... generalizing hinduism using vaishnavism.

I am not a pantheist, nor will I ever become one. I only follow the philosophies of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, Achintya-Bheda-Abheda-Tattva, and panentheism. God alone is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Limitless, while we are weak, ignorant, and limited, save the soul, which is a part and parcel of God.

i wonder what point you are trying make here, no one asked you to follow anything. But you want hinduism to be dualistic alone, and claimed monistic and atheistic branches are neo-hinduism. The Samkhya and Mimamsa are the oldest schools in hinduism and they both are atheistic.

While God is Sacchidanandam (Truth, Consciousness, Ecstasy), our limited lives are asatya, achitya, and nirananda, falsity, unconsciousness, and unquickening. Only through realising the Lord and His grace over us can we cross over the ocean of birth and death.

*conditions apply*, true for only vaishnavists.

 

[Gaura Priya]

just your viewpoint, christians dont believe so.

That's not true. All Biblical Unitarians take that stance. Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians, Church of God General Conference, the original Seventh-Day Adventists, the Seventh-Day Baptists, most Sacred Name groups, Iglesia Ni Cristo, and even the big Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a church against the Trinity and have their own viewpoint of Christ.

I was born and raised Christian, and there are many different types of Christians out there, as well as there are many Hindus.

you see krishna as a prophet, did not krishna claims in the BG he is the godhead? and he existed eternally?

Yes, the idea of Krishna existed eternally, just as Christ said that I and the Father are one, or Muhammad saying that he who has seen His face has seen the Face of God, or how the Buddha is the Dharmakaya, the Embodiment of the Dharma, or even how Baha'u'llah claims to be the Ancient Beauty.

The 4 vedas, all saying the same.

1.Prajnanam Brahma - "Consciousness is Brahman" (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)
2.Ayam Atma Brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)
3.Tat Tvam Asi - "Thou art That" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)
4.Aham Brahmasmi - "I am Brahman" (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)

...And?

does these vedas belongs to neo-hinduism?

Here is what Sai baba said - "I am God but so also are you. The only difference is that I know I am God while you do not."

In the BG Krishna makes almost the same point to Arjuna, that they both always existed, krishna remembers it but Arjuna not.

help me to understand how it contradicts vedic teachings.....

Krishna is Purna-avatara. He is established in the Vedic literatures as a bona fide representative of the Lord. Sathya Sai Baba is not, and his hundreds of allegations against him, the amounts of worshipping Him as God Almighty, as omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent are warning signs for me.

ESPECIALLY when he has many ex-devotees and allegations of fake miracles. If miracles are a testimony of his nature and brilliance, then it is up to subject questioning and prodding. I would prefer a guru who does not utilise siddhis to amaze his followers.

hinduism is not just vaishnavism, dont know that? you are just attacking others schools in hinduism using vaishnava view point. Im not sure if you are purposefully acting ignorant.

I was never attacking Sanatana Dharma using Vaishnavism, or even Advaita Vedanta... I do not agree with Sathya Sai Baba, and will never see him as a guru for me personally. Sure, he will give jnana to others, but certainly not for me.

exactly, there are fraud gurus for sure, but the topic is about sai baba, you should present proof to accuse him.

again the same useless point..... generalizing hinduism using vaishnavism.

i wonder what point you are trying make here, no one asked you to follow anything. But you want hinduism to be dualistic alone, and claimed monistic and atheistic branches as neo-hinduism. The Samkhya and Mimamsa are the oldest schools in hinduism and they both are atheistic.

*conditions apply*, true for only vaishnavists.

I don't deny that there are Samkya and Mimamsa schools within Sanatana Dharma.

What I do not agree with is Sathya Sai Baba's miracles used as testimony that he is God or an incarnation of God. Making gold watches out of thin air? Ash? Shivalingam? These things are worth zilch if they can not give a true understanding between the soul and God.

[youtube]uyZ5NI_QjXw[/youtube]
YouTube - Sai Baba's magic trick

I have nothing against respectful gurus who teach some form of Advaita Vedanta, such as Sri Ramana Maharshi. However... Sathya Sai Baba is of a different character and story, backed by a powerful organisation. I could show you websites of these allegations against him, but you may still disagree with me.

He reminds me too much of Swami Nityananda, Mataji Nirmala Devi, and Sri Chinmoy.

Sri Chinmoy is another person who I can not consider guru for myself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Chinmoy#Weightlifting_hoax

If a guru completely closes his disciples to everyone but him, and uses threats, then I can not consider him a guru. Heck, even Vaishnava gurus I can not take, if they tell me that the internet or what have you is maya.

 

[K.Venugopal]

Now that Satya Sai Baba is no more, I guess those who are not convinced of his greatness would want to watch his organization carry forward his legacy. For starters, his organization conducted the funeral rites magnificently. If the organization continues to run with great cohesion and inspiration, even his critics might want to reevaluate the personage of Satya Sai Baba. Jesus said a tree is known for its fruits.