God, the Avathar and the
Intellectual
By Prof. G.Venkataraman
INTRODUCTION
This article is triggered by one of the many that appeared in a
special 80th Birthday feature published by a prominent Indian
Weekly named THE WEEK. This weekly
magazine is published from Kerala, and is a part of the famous
MALAYALAM MANORAMA group of publications. For years,
the MALAYALAM MANORAMA has been writing many articles
on Swami, all reverential, I must add. The companion magazine
THE WEEK apparently decided that Sathya Sai Baba also
was news and featured Swami in its issue dated 27 November, 2005
as the Cover Story. For the record I must mention that the
MALAYALAM MANORAMA brought out a special souvenir of its
own on the occasion of the 80th Birthday, very well done it must
be said.
In
the feature published by THE WEEK, there are several
small pieces by many guests, besides some stuff written by staff
writers from Bangalore. In typical modern journalistic fashion,
the magazine presents "both points of view", that is to say,
material that is complimentary and also material that is
critical. I will not go into all of that but would like to stick
mainly to an article by a well-known award winning writer and
social activist from Bangalore named U. R. Ananthamurthy.
Mr. Anantamurthy -
A Typical Intellectual
Ananthamurthy hails from a traditional background and
acknowledges that his parents paid their respects to Swami. But
he himself is cast in a different mould, and, pained by the deep
inequities that existed [and in some measure continue to exist]
in Indian Society, Ananatamurthy has been continually
registering his disapproval and protest through his various
writings, novels and speeches. In the special issue of
WEEK that I mentioned earlier, Ananathamurhty
has a piece actually, it is not an article by him as such but
an "as told" piece, that is to say what Ananathamurthy said to a
staffer.
Ananthamurthy, I must admit, does not cast aspersions nor sling
mud. But he does not hesitate to question, disapprove and
dismiss without any semblance, I regret to say, of deep
analysis. This of course is quite typical of many intellectuals
when it comes to Spiritual matters. Before I come to
intellectuals and the problems many of them have in accepting
God, I should mention that Ananthamurthy, while dismissing
Swami, does not appear to reject Spirituality. On the contrary,
he accepts and admires a host of evolved souls like Kabir,
Basava, Tukaram, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Ramana Maharishi.
However, he is not sure where to fit in Swami in all this. He is
aware that people flock to Swami in hundreds of thousands but
dismisses all that with the remark, "But that magnetism is not
spiritual". He adds, "Spiritualism requires a kind of mind like
Jiddu Krishnamurthy. I could argue with him. With Sai Baba,
either you believe him or you don't."
WHY INTELLECTUALS
FIND IT DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT GOD
So
much for an introduction. Let me now leave this eminent
intellectual aside and turn to the main topic of intellectuals
and Avatars. I shall come back to the remarks of
Ananthamurthy later. These days, most intellectuals tend to be
agnostic at best and atheist at worst; often it is the latter.
Dazzled by the achievements of man in so many dimensions, they
are unable to accept God because they are confronted with so
many questions for which they do not have answers.
Einstein And Abdus
Salam - Scientists With A Difference
Having said this,
I must point out that there have been
and there still are many intellectuals [possibly a minority] who
do believe in God, scientists included.
Einstein was a famous example. He
freely acknowledged that he believed in a Superior Being
although his God was not One who sat in judgment, inflicted
punishment and all that.
Talking of scientists, I must not forget to mention late Abdus
Salam of Pakistan, who won the Nobel Prize for his incisive work
on electro-weak unification. I had the privilege of meeting
Salam once when he came to address a conference on high-energy
physics that was held in the lab where I was working at that
time. It was my job to receive Salam at the airport and take him
to our Centre. Later in the evening, when he was returning to
the airport, Salam who was then riding in the car said his
evening prayers as all Muslims are expected to. A Westerner once
asked Salam, "How come you, a scientist, believe in God?" Salam
gave a terse reply, "Science is all about the outer world. God
is all about the Inner world. Where is the contradiction?"
In
what follows, I shall focus heavily on scientists for two
important reasons. One, I know something about scientists; two,
in many respects scientists set the fashion in questioning God,
a fashion that other intellectuals are eager to adopt.
THE TRAP OF LOGIC
WHY INTELLECTUALS REJECT AVATARS
I
would now like to deal briefly with the topic of Avatars
and how people react to them. Here, I have found a very strange
phenomenon. I know of many who are ready to accept Rama and
Krishna as Avatars without batting an eyelid, but when
it comes to Swami, they dismiss Him summarily. I am sure these
people all have their own reasons but I always wonder: "How come
they accept as Avatar both Rama and Krishna whom they
have never seen, but are unwilling to accept Swami who can be
seen?" Perhaps these persons accept that Rama is God and that
Krishna is God, because they have heard that frequently from
their parents, right from childhood. Maybe that is all there is
to it.
Gandhiji On God
This
raises a fundamental question: "Who is God?" Many answers have
been given over thousands of years by sages and philosophers in
all lands, but I like best the definition given by Gandhi. I
have quoted this often and I hope the reader would not mind if I
quote the same one more time, because it is so pertinent to what
I am discussing.
Gandhi said, "He is no God who merely
satisfies the intellect. God to be God must rule the Heart and
transforms the senses. He is LOVE."
Now I ask you. Does not this definition fit Swami like a
glove?
Many decades ago around 1950, Swami paid His first visit to
Venkatagiri, in response to continuous prayers by the then Rajah
of Venkatagiri. [In the November 2005 issue, H2H carried a
conversation with the Rajah's Son, to read that now, go
here]. On that occasion, the Rajah took the initiative to
bring many Vedic scholars to the Divine presence so that there
was a discussion of spiritual matters.
Swami was hardly known at that time, and the proud Vedic
scholars took a dim view of the Rajah inviting a "young and
unknown upstart". As happened on such occasions with Swami, the
Vedic scholars were soon put in their place when they realized
that Swami knew far more about the Vedas than all of
them put together.
Ramana,
Ramakrishna And Sai - The Difference
That
filled them with wonder: "How does He know all this when He has
not spent even a single day in a Vedic school?" They then asked
Swami, What exactly is the difference if any between You and
great souls and saints like Ramana, Ramakrishna etc?"
Swami responded with a gesture
rather than with words. Swami held the left hand at the level of
the chest with the palm facing upwards and the right hand at the
level of the face with the palm facing downwards. The Vedic
scholars were nonplussed. They wanted to know what exactly this
gesture meant.
Swami explained: "The saints and sages
you are referring to are humans who were in the process of
evolving towards God. I, on the other hand, am God come down in
human form that is the difference."
There you have it Swami was making abundantly clear that He is
an Avatar.
Why Modern
Scientists Find It Difficult To Accept God?
Not withstanding all this, intellectuals have a big problem in
accepting Avatars I mean when they cannot accept God
Almighty, how can they accept a human manifestation of the same
Supreme Lord? This gives me an opening to discuss briefly the
reservations most modern scientists and indeed intellectuals
have in accepting God. Barely fifty years ago, we knew very
little about the Universe. In fact, around 1920 or so, most
scientists believed that the Universe consisted of just the
galaxy Milky Way, of which our solar system is a part. Almost
all astronomers believed then that there was no galaxy in the
Universe apart from the Milky Way. And then suddenly things
changed,
thanks to a few major scientific discoveries, as a result of
which we now know that there are billions of galaxies!
In
this way, our knowledge of the Cosmos and the stuff it is made
of has increased enormously. True there is a lot more we still
do not know but what we presently know is already mind-boggling.
The Current Dogma
of Science
Thanks to this tremendous leap forward in scientific knowledge,
all of which has occurred in about fifty short years and this
includes not only physics and astronomy but every scientific
discipline all the way to molecular biology - scientists have
become very cocky and arrogant. The current dogma of Science is
that a theory of Science might be accepted based on currently
known facts but must not be regarded as the eternal truth; there
could well be new discoveries that disprove existing theories or
limit their scope. Everything is subservient to logic and must
be applicable within the boundaries as stipulated by Science. In
particular, the prevailing belief is that Science progresses
best by a systematic effort to prove wrong currently accepted
hypotheses. Any proposition that refuses to accept these terms
and look beyond does not deserve the attention of scientists.
Modern
Science - Experiments Hold The Key
That is the way scientists of today operate. Logical analysis is
supreme and hypothesis becomes a fact only when tested
thoroughly by experiments. Just to make my point clear, I might
mention that the famous scientist Stephen Hawking has written
many epoch-making papers on exotic astrophysical objects called
Black Holes.
There is hardly anyone who disputes the theories of Hawking. And
yet, though the results obtained by Hawking are of profound
significance, and though he has been hailed widely as a genius,
he is yet to receive the Nobel Prize because his theories have
not yet been tested experimentally. I mention all this just to
make the point how experiments hold an important place in the
scheme of Science.
Having said all this, I must hasten to add that one should not
find fault with the above methodology of Science, for such
rigour is very much needed in Science. The problem arises when
some of this discipline is applied in domains where it is
neither relevant nor applicable. And that problem lies not in
Science but with scientists. What exactly is the problem? That
is what I shall discuss next.
THE BOUNDARIES OF
SCIENCE
The most important thing about Science is that it is bound by
the limitations of both Space and of Time or, Space-time as
pundits would like to put it. There is nothing wrong with it.
Science seeks answers about the
material Universe as it evolved and as it
exists today, and since the Universe is bound by Space and Time,
Science too has to observe the same limits.
Can Science
'Experience' Life?
So
far so good. Where then does the problem lie?
The problem surfaces when one starts asking questions that
lie beyond the purview of Science as is
currently accepted. Are there such things at all that lie beyond
Science? Of course there are, like LIFE,
for example. Ask a scientist to define life,
and you would find he is in trouble straightaway. Yes he would
give all kinds of shady and cagey answers but he cannot really
answer the question. Some would honestly say, "Listen, I cannot
answer that question; it is beyond Science as we currently know
it." Others more arrogant would say, "Well, I cannot answer it
now but be assured that one day Science would be able to answer
that question. You do not need to invoke God and all that to
explain life."
How
far is this defence valid? We can get a better appreciation of
it by considering an everyday example. Let's say there are two
people watching a glorious sunset. As you know, the Sun turns
deep red as it goes down the horizon. This is due to what is
known as the Tyndall effect, and students of Physics know all
about it. No dispute there. But just consider this. I say the
Sun appears red, because I experience a sensation thanks to the
eye-brain combination, and I describe this sensation by saying
that the appearance of the Sun is red. The red colour I see is a
sensation within me. Another person watching the sunset would
also say the Sun appears red. He says so because of the
sensation within him. But then, how do we know for sure that the
sensation that I experience is exactly the same as the sensation
he experiences?
Science Can
Measure a Sunset, But Can Science Feel It?
This is not a silly question; on the other hand it is an
important and non-trivial question. To make clear what I mean,
let us go back to the sunset. If a spectrometer were to be
directed towards the Sun, it would show a spectrum with a strong
peak at a frequency that we would describe as red. The
spectrometer would just generate an electrical signal and a
graph that is all. On the other hand, the sensation of seeing
a red colour is a property of the senses.
It is connected with an EXPERIENCE that a
living entity has. Experience and life are thus
intimately connected, and Science, as presently structured
can never address these aspects of Creation. In turn
this means scientists can never get answers about God when all
doors are shut; that is to say, it is not meaningful to either
"deduce" or reject God via Science. It is like trying to talk
about the third dimension, living in a two-dimensional world.
With our sense organs we can feel, touch, smell, taste and see.
These FEELINGS or
SENSATIONS are unique to the
living being, and as far as I know, they are not and can never
be accessible to any scientific instrument.
There is a simple reason for this. All
scientific instruments, including the very best in the world are
inanimate they can never have any
experience, which is possible only for an entity with a life
force within it.
It
is no doubt possible to have an instrument that detects the
molecules that produce the fragrance of fresh jasmine, but no
instrument can feel that fragrance the way you and I do.
I
can, using MRI [Magnetic Resonance Imaging], print out the
waveforms produced in the brain of a Yogi who is experiencing
Bliss, but a waveform is mere data while Bliss is the EXPERIENCE
of a living person. The two belong to different domains, with
the waveform representing a mere projection of EXPERIENCE into
the lower domain of inanimate instruments.
Expereince of a
Living Entity - Not Accessible to Science
Basically, the point is simply this:
The experience which a living entity has belongs to a dimension
beyond the inanimate, and is
NOT accessible to Science as structured at
present. Yet, through the instruments of Science we
can even study living systems and their parameters such as blood
pressure, sugar level in the blood and so on. But no instrument
can taste the sweetness of sugar although there are instruments
that can tell you all you want to know about its molecular
structure etc.
In short, Science, which is bound by
Space and Time, is related to the gross inanimate world. It does
not, as it stands, extend to the subtle world to which we have
access through our senses. This is particularly
evident when one considers Consciousness. Even scientists admit
that there is a thing called Consciousness but ask them to
define it, and they would throw up their hands. This being the
case, scientists, if they have any sense of humility, would
recognise their boundaries and limitations and not comment on
things they do not know about. When they lose their humility,
they become arrogant and arrogance blinds one to basics. That is
what happens almost invariably.
Double
Standards Of Science
Consider a biologist. Most biologists would not know much about
the theory of relativity although almost everyone would know
that it was Einstein who gave that theory. Ask a biologist, "Do
you believe in the theory of relativity?" He would promptly say
yes, even though he has not studied it and in fact knows
practically nothing about it. How come? Because he has faith in
Einstein.
Now if in the same way I were to say that I believe God exists
because Adi Shankara says so, my fellow scientists would say I
have become senile.
I
am dismissed for having faith in God based on what Adi Shankara
has taught and experienced, but it is OK for a biologist to have
total faith in relativity without understanding a word of it,
just because he has faith in Einstein. I would call this double
standards.
Proving God's
Existence Through Science!
Another argument that scientists often give is that in Science
one can prove laws through experiments. Newton's laws can be
proved by experiments and indeed first year students do this all
over the world. More complex laws like that of electro-weak
unification require billions of dollars for setting up the
equipment, and at the end of it, the law can be proven, as did
Carlo Rubbia. Citing all this, scientists often say that you
cannot prove the existence of God in this manner. This is where
I disagree.
Let us take a material like lead. Suppose one took a wire made
of lead and cooled it to say a temperature of 5
degrees
absolute. This is a very low temperature - such temperatures are
not encountered even in Antarctica in winter - and one needs
very special apparatus to reach such a low temperature. Let us
say this has been done. It would then be found that the lead
wire can carry electric current without any losses whatsoever;
that is to say, it would lose all its electrical resistance.
This is the phenomenon of superconductivity. A lead wire at room
temperature will not show superconductivity. Unless one takes
the trouble of cooling the wire to a very low temperature, one
cannot make lead into a superconductor. In the same way, anyone
in principle can have the Darshan of the Divine, like
Ramakrishna Paramahamsa did; however, if someone wants God to
appear before him, then that calls for special effort on the
part of that person. It is very much like in experimental
science.
Divine Experience
Through Scientific Instruments - A Flawed Approach
The effort made to see God directly involves achieving a state
of high internal purity through strict sense and mind control.
Those are the conditions under which God will manifest. Many
sages and saints have had the Darshan of the Good Lord in this
manner, but tell this to any scientist and he would scoff at
you. He would assert that in Science you can observe a
phenomenon only when the experimental conditions are right. Yet,
most scientists are unwilling to accept a similar stipulation in
the case of God and Spirituality. In Science one uses inanimate
instruments to detect the phenomenon one is interested in, no
matter how complex the phenomenon. In Spirituality, the
instrument is the human being itself.
Experiences related to the Divine cannot be had through
inanimate instruments alone, even if one spends trillions of
dollars. This is the basic truth that scientists of today simply
do not understand or refuse to.
Most intellectuals, scientists being
prominent among them, try to explain all that we see through the
"Head" alone but when it comes to God, the "Heart" HAS to come
into the picture. The Heart being BEYOND the Mind,
the tools of Science will not work; instead, we need the tools
of meta-science or meta-physics, if you will. It is at this
point that the modern physicist loses patience, makes his
sarcastic comments and withdraws with the feeling that those who
believe in God need to be pitied rather than censured.
In
passing I might mention that most of the problems faced by
humanity today are caused by the Head, and if we are serious
about finding solutions to them, we HAVE to go beyond the Head
to the realm of the Heart. This, incidentally, is the core of
most of Swami's Discourses, and this is where Spirituality
becomes most essential. Intellectuals, I am afraid, hardly
appreciate this.
SOME QUESTIONS
RAISED BY MR. ANANTHAMURTHY
Now if a [modern] scientist has so much
difficulty in accepting God, how is he going to accept an
Avatar, that is, God come in human form? This is reflected
in the following quote from Ananthamurthy. He says, "What
puzzles me is that he [Swami] claims he is God and I laugh at
him. People also laughed at Lord Krishna when he claimed he was
God. I used to wonder if Sai Baba also is God, and if we are
refusing to acknowledge it?"
Ananthamurthy
goes on: "I like certain things about Sai Baba. When BJP leader
L.K.Advani went on a Rath Yatra, Sai Baba is believed
to have said, why build Ram temple at Ayodhya when he is present
everywhere. [This is a reference to Advani, a politician,
who made a political issue out of the construction of a temple
for Lord Rama at Ayodhya, the birth place of Rama.] I
appreciate his drinking water and healthcare initiatives. One
more thing I like about him [Sai Baba] is that he is not an
English-speaking person." Ananthamurthy is of the opinion that
English has done much harm to the various Indian languages,
relegating almost all of them to a second-class status.
His parting line is: "The land that gave birth to great people
like Gandhi and Ramana deserves better." In my view, this casual
remark makes it abundantly clear that Ananthamurthy's thinking
is highly flawed and superficial. He says that he finds it
laughable when Swami says He is God. But he seems to
conveniently forget what Swami adds, namely that we also are
God. Ananathamruthy praises Ramana Maharishi. That is the way it
should be; but does he remember Ramana's perpetual question?
Does he not recall that Ramana invariably asked every one to
examine the issue: "Who am I?" As we know very well, Swami too
has discussed this topic in so many of His Discourses.
Swami and Ramana
Let us focus on this question: "Who am I?" What does Ramana say
about this? He says that every human being is really Divine.
Swami says the same. So, if you and I are God why cannot Sai
Baba be God? Or is it that Ananthamurthy is not prepared to
accept this fundamental teaching of Ramana whom he holds in such
high regard?
At
this stage, I wish to make one thing very clear: I am not
speaking against Ramana; on the contrary I hold him in the
highest regard. Swami too has high praise for Ramana, as should
be evident from the remarks He has made at various times. By the
way, we have on video tape the recollections of an old devotee
who, along with her family, used to be in the Paatha
Mandiram or Old Mandir where Swami stayed from 1940 to
1950. She recalls in that tape how Ramana sent two of his
disciples to Puttaparthi over sixty years ago to have the
Darshan of God! So you know what Ramana thought of Swami as
far back as the forties, when Swami was little known in the
outside world.
THE HEAD VERSUS
THE HEART
Changing
gears let me now make a few spiritual arguments, starting with
Swami's observation that a human being is a combination of the
gross body, the subtle Mind and the immortal Atma.
Combining the three letters M [for Mind], B [for body] and A
[for the Atma], Swami sometimes jocularly says that
everyone is a MBA! For convenience, let me use the word Head for
the Mind and Heart for the Atma.
Now what is the hierarchy amongst these three? Swami says it
should be the Heart first, the Head next and Body and Senses
last. In the world of today, the priorities are different, with
the Heart more or less left out most of the time. Intellectuals
in particular, are dominated by the Head. When that happens,
logic takes precedence and the feelings of the Heart take a back
seat, especially faith.
For one on the spiritual path, faith is perhaps the
most important requirement. Maybe for some, when the journey
begins, faith takes root through enquiry and questioning but
there comes a stage when logic simply has to be thrown away, and
this is something few intellectuals of would be prepared to do.
Which brings me to the subtle way in which the Avatar
moves about amongst us. One saw this earlier in the Shirdi
Avatar and one sees it now in the Sri Sathya Sai Avatar
also.
THE
AVATAR HAS A HUMAN FORM BUT HE IS VERY DIFFERENT
There are innumerable things that an Avatar does, some
of which we can perceive and understand, while others are far
beyond our comprehension; this is a fact we must be prepared to
accept. From what I have seen, I would like to say that there
are at least four aspects of the Avatar on constant
display. Firstly, He showers Love on all. Next, He responds to
our distress calls. Thirdly, He gives advice. Fourthly, He
tests. The last point needs some elaboration.
There are two key Slokas in the Gita that
offer a clue to the point that I just made. The first of these
is Sloka [9.22] which, by the way, Swami refers to as
the fulcrum of the Gita since it occurs right in the
middle of the eighteen chapters of this sacred text.
In
this Sloka the Blessed Lord essentially says: "Repose
steadfast faith in Me and think of Me always. I shall then carry
your burden entirely." The second Sloka that I hold to
be relevant is [18.66], wherein Krishna declares that he who
totally surrenders to the Lord would be fully redeemed. If we
keep these two key declarations of the Krishna Avatar
in mind, then we would realise that often times Swami is really
testing us about the quality of our surrender.
Total Surrender -
Not Easy For Devotees, Hard for Intellectuals
Devotees, especially while in the euphoric state inside the
Interview Room, declare ecstatically, "Swami, I have surrendered
to You." However, seldom is this a serious statement. As Swami
often tells students, "People say they have surrendered their
Mind to Me. Yes, they give their Minds to Me but only for a few
seconds. They take it back when they go out of the Interview
Room!" Though said in a light-hearted manner, there is profound
truth in this statement. All of us are highly prone to deposit
our Minds with the proverbial monkey rather than entrust it to
God for safe custody. Now if we so-called devotees have so much
problem with the Mind, how much more difficult it would be for
the intellectuals?
Yes, as Swami often reminds us, the Mind is the key to our
future; it can take us to God or to the Devil, which ever we
please. We have to make the choice, not God. God will only help
by giving advice and setting examples to follow; but the buck
really stops with us. However, if we surrender totally, then God
would get into the driving seat and take us safely to our
destination.
THE TESTS THE
AVATAR GIVES US
People ask: "Why does God have to test us?
Does He not know where we stand? Why can't He help us? Why all
this test business? It is so unfair." I would like to respond
with a direct personal experience of mine.
Once
many years ago when I was the Vice Chancellor, exams were in
progress. I went round the various rooms where the boys were
taking the exams and later I reported about the exams to Swami,
who, you must remember, is the Chancellor of our Institute.
Swami asked me how many students were absent it always happens
a few students are absent due to sickness. I thought I was very
smart and said, "Swami, You know everything!"
Swami looked at me sternly and replied,
"I know how many were absent but do you know?" I
hung my head down for I actually did not know how many were
absent. Swami was sending me a signal that as the VC, I had
better know more about what was expected of me.
I
am citing this incident merely to state that God always knows
everything about us but He tests us nevertheless so that we may
know where exactly we stand. These tests are really tests of our
faith. It is up to us recognise the tests Swami will never
say, "Here is a test for you"; we have to figure out when He is
testing and when He is not. Having spotted the test, we must
measure up to it. We must constantly keep in mind Swami's
statement: "Test is taste for Me!"
SURRENDER AND FAITH
Surrender involves going beyond the domain of
the Mind and that is something intellectuals cannot easily do,
trapped as they are in the illusion that they are free, when in
fact they are prisoners of logic and the Mind. Actually, we
should not blame intellectuals when we devotees also are given
to questioning the actions of the Avatar. Take, for
example, the Rama Avatar.
People have been asking from time
immemorial, questions like, "Why did Rama banish Sita to the
forest, especially after having made her go through fire
earlier? Is this not gross injustice?"
My response to this is the following: If you
and I who have come thousands of years after Rama and Sita know
her to be
pure and chaste, would not Rama, who was supposed to be God
incarnate have known that? We must have the faith that God never
does anything without a purpose. I maintain that Rama was
actually establishing certain norms for people in high places,
for all times, especially during this Kali Age.
To
stress my point I would like to point out that there was some
years ago, a well-known politician, hailed by all as an upright
man; he even rose to become briefly, the Prime Minster of India.
He had a son, who throughout the political career of his father
exploited his father's high position to make all kinds of shady
deeds. The whole world knew about it, but the father
consistently turned a blind eye, not withstanding the frequent
discourses he gave on the Ramayana! If this politician had read
his Ramayana right, he would have learnt that Rama banished
innocent Sita to stress that even if a relative is blameless,
one must have nothing to do with that person, in order to
establish high standards of probity. In short, here was the
Avatar, who, as a part of His drama was teaching a lesson
and instead of learning it, humans are passing judgement on Him
as if the Avatar was just another human being.
Many alleged scholars of the epics often
indulge in judging Avatars by applying norms that apply
only to humans, which is a fatal mistake.
Surrender demands faith, and total surrender demands total
faith; this is not possible for intellectuals but is
possible for those who believe in God. Let us never forget that
in the processing of drawing the devotee closer, the Lord will
test for sure, sometimes sorely!
This digression into the business of testing is needed because
this is something unique to the Avatar. With due
respect to them, saints like Ramana and Ramakrishna do not do
this. God alone tests because it is to God alone to whom we must
totally surrender; and when we do, He will take full charge of
us as He has assured in the Gita. Thus, this testing
game goes on constantly to pick out the winners and separating
them from those who have to try more. Intellectuals will never
understand this and people like Ananthamurthy would be totally
perplexed by many of the things that Swami does. Indeed, all who
"see" with their Heads would have this difficulty and end up
dismissing Sai Baba. God, as Swami often reminds us, can never
be understood but only experienced.
JUDGEMENT WITHOUT
KNOWING THE FACTS
Ananathamurthy has correctly identified three
key phenomena of the twentieth century: "hunger for social
justice, hunger for spirituality and hunger for modernity."
According to him, all these three go together. Ananthamurthy
then goes on to describe how these three hungers have manifested
and who has done what about them. I have no argument with any of
these. But he makes all these remarks as if Swami has done
nothing about them. On the contrary, Swami has shown how
starting from Spirituality, one can indeed solve most of
humanity's problems, including social injustice, besides
blending the best of today with the best of olden times as He
has done in His Institute for example. But Ananthamurthy, it
seems, knows hardly anything about it.
Let us start with social justice. Many fight for social justice
through agitations. Swami rejects that approach. He concentrates
instead on transforming individuals and sensitising them. In the
long run this is the only workable approach. Take caste
discrimination or race discrimination. One can pass all the laws
one wants to prevent these but in the ultimate analysis it is
people who have to change and give up prejudice. That can happen
only when there is a change of Heart, and change of Heart, I
maintain, can never be brought about through agitations, or
legislation or the cudgel. Ananthamurthy talks of the hunger for
Spirituality. Yes there is such a hunger, and when that is taken
care of, problems of poverty, problems of hunger, etc., can all
be mitigated in substantial measure. That is what this
Avatar is all about. It is great pity that Ananthamurthy
does not have one single word to say about Swami's infinite Love
and how Pure Love can solve all man-made problems.
Swami Teaches Love
In Action
In
general, intellectuals like Ananathamurthy are utterly ignorant
about the incredible service of Love being rendered by the Sri
Sathya Sai Organisation throughout the world. Here, I would like
to make a personal appeal to the readers of this article. Please
do make time to read
our
regular reports on Sai Seva in Heart2Heart and
tell as many as you can about these inspiring stories. In a
nutshell, by helping every individual to spiritualise himself or
herself, Swami is in fact leading a silent revolution. Take His
Institute, for example.
Does Ananathamurthy, or for that matter any so-called
intellectual in India, know how much Seva the old boys are doing
silently in many places in India throughout the year? Do they
know that every time the old boys gather here, they not only run
medical camps in the neighbouring villages but also go out at
night and cover street-sleepers with blankets? Do they know how
our old boys (past students of the Sathya Sai University) went
to Jammu and Kashmir to help quake victims there, against great
odds? I would like to know of one University or College in the
country [other than Swami's] whose alumni reached out in such a
fashion. Maybe they wrote cheques but did they actually go there
and serve the victims?
INTELLECTUALS AND SWAMI'S
MATERIALISATIONS
One thing that intellectuals seize upon to
denigrate Swami is the materialisation that Bhagavan often
performs, like creating vibhuti, or a ring or a chain
etc. Science phooh-phoohs miracles and intellectuals invariably
seize upon it to cry fraud. I don't have to convince you about
the genuineness of these demonstrations of para-normal phenomena
but I do think it is important that you hear Swami's own
observations on the subject. Here is what He says:
You must
have heard people say that mine is all magic. But the
manifestation of Divine Power must not be interpreted in
terms of magic. Magicians play their tricks for earning
their maintenance, worldly fame and wealth. They are based
on falsehood and they thrive on deceit. However, this body
can never stoop to such low levels. This body has come
through the Lord's resolve to manifest in human form. That
resolve is intended to uphold Sathya or Truth. Divine
resolve is always true resolve. Remember, there is nothing
that Divine power cannot accomplish. It can transmute earth
into sky and sky into earth. To doubt this is to prove that
you are too weak to grasp great things, and the grandeur of
the Universe.
I
guess I have said enough about intellectuals and how they are
not equipped to comprehend phenomena like Avatars. I
took time off to write about intellectuals because many people
hear what they say, read what they write and get disturbed by
it. I hope I have succeeded in convincing you that there is
nothing to be disturbed about.
Putting
The Facts Straight
There is one other matter that many devotees have been quite
agitated about, and maybe I should add a few remarks about that
also, and that concerns the notorious so-called documentary on
Swami produced by BBC. We received many, many letters and mails
asking us to do something about it.
However, we did not react in the way most people expected us to,
but respond we did, in our own way though. I don't wish to go
further into that. But I thought you might be interested to know
what was said by one of the writers who contributed an article
to the special issue of THE WEEK that
I alluded to in the beginning.
The writer in question is Bill Aitkin, an Englishman who for
decades has made India his home. For many years he has been
coming to Puttaparthi, but so quietly that hardly anyone here
knew about him. He came to some prominence with his recent book
Sri Sathya Sai Baba, A Life.
Aitkin has given a stirring defence of Swami, not that Swami
needs any defence from mortals. But records do need to be set
straight and Bill Aitkin does that with pungent fervour! Here
are some quotes:
The critics are so
intemperate in their dislike that their vituperation
now comes across as almost near comical in its
predictability. Nothing that Baba can say or do
meets with their approval. If he provides drinking
water to thirsty villagers, they scent a scam but if
doesn't provide drinking water, he is anti-poor.
..
Probably because of the intensity of their hate,
when it comes to a serious, forensic examination of
their allegations, they resort to bluster and
evasion instead of hard facts. Smearing sexual
innuendo is a traditional ploy but on failing to
substantiate their charges, the critics switch to
another unrelated subject.
|
They will claim that all of Sathya
Sai Baba's materialisations are phoney. However, this cannot
stick, because millions have witnessed the outpouring of
vibhuti at Shivarathri. So then, financial irregularities
are imputed to the saint, and when these are likewise found
to be unproductive of scandal, mafia happenings are evoked.
The strategy of the critics seems to be that if
sufficient mud is thrown, some might stick.
..
Here is what Aitkin has to say about the BBC,
and he gives on behalf of all of us a stinging reply to slander
with all the required passion! Aitkin says,
|
The latest in these so-called exposes is the BBC
documentary whose agenda was so predetermined to
denigrate Baba that it stooped to the unethical use
of a spy camera. In a last farcical gesture, the
producer hired some roadside entertainers to attempt
to simulate Baba's chamatkar [materialisations]. The
result is so ludicrous that it leaves the viewer
wondering as to who is funding this bizarre display
of hostile reporting. The BBC is ultimately governed
by the Anglican establishment, and churches in the
west are losing out financially to the appeal of the
Sai Baba movement.
As a commercial broadcaster,
the BBC's opting for sleaze would have the dual
advantage of discrediting a rival as well as getting
a good audience rating. The Church of England can
have no objection to programmes that weaken
perceived threats like the Papacy or Hindu holy
men to its declining influence in the world.
Posing as a lion in Asia, the BBC is a mouse in
Britain. It dare not criticise public icons like the
Queen, who happens to be the supreme of the Anglican
Church.
|
Well, there it is - all the rebuttal of the
BBC that you have always wanted, that too from an Englishman! To
the above, I would like to add a few comments of my own. When
Hardy the BBC producer came to Prashanti Nilayam at the time of
Shivarathri to shoot some scenes, I met him briefly. It was
apparent even then that Hardy was out to smear tar. When the
so-called documentary was released, my worst fears were
confirmed. Do you know that in this much touted video there is a
character who goes about shouting that Sai Baba wants to kill
him? As though Swami has no better business! Hardy was able to
get away with pure nonsense because in those countries where
this film was shown, most people had absolutely no idea of who
Swami is.
I
ask you: suppose some TV channel in India had produced a
similar, poorly-researched documentary on a person in the West
held in high public esteem; would the people and the media there
have kept quiet? On the other hand when this rubbish that
carried a brand name was telecast, so many papers in England
hailed it as a great expose. No surprise in that because
sometime earlier, the famous London Times, carried a
similar shabby, ill-researched article on Swami that made waves.
I then wrote a letter to the Editor, as did many prominent
devotees from America. None of these were published, quite
contrary to the usual practice of giving some space to counter
opinion. So much for the much taunted objectivity of the Media
of those countries.
I
do not wish to make a blanket condemnation of all that comes
from the West. A few days ago, a devotee here shared with me his
copy of an article entitled GOOD GURU GUIDE,
that appeared in 1994 in the famous journal
ECONOMIST, published from London. I don't know who
the author is but this is a penetrating article on various
successful people and intellectuals like George Soros, a
financial wizard, Tom Peters, Peter Drucker and Michael Porter,
all celebrated Management Gurus, Noam Chomsky, a renowned
professor of linguistics in MIT. What stunned me was that Swami
has been mentioned in this article and in a reasonably
complimentary manner too! Here is what the article has to say
about Swami. After commenting on Indian Gurus who globetrot, it
observes:
Sai Baba stayed home and
succeeded splendidly. His message of peace and love, like
his beatific smile, has not changed since he was a child
prodigy. Now he is more popular than ever so much so his
hometown of Puttaparthi a couple of hours drive from
Hyderabad boasts a new airstrip.
..
Over the years, dozens of implacable
rationalists and other mischief-makers have tried to
discredit him, but never successfully. Sai Baba has ignored,
outlived or outpaced them all.
These days, miracle-wise, he
concentrates on holy ash. But he is also a popular
philanthropist running schools and colleges and an enormous
hospital for the poor. Judges, politicians, bureaucrats and
film stars cringe and crave an audience. Tom Peters, eat
your heart out!
How do you like that?
MY OWN CROSSOVER
AND CONCLUDING REMARKS
Some of you might say, "Listen, you are
supposed to be a scientist, are you not? What about you? Were
you ever on the other side of the fence, and if so, how did you
come over to this side?" I have, I believe, described all this
in one of my radio talks; even so, the present occasion warrants
a brief statement. Yes, a long time ago, I was on the other side
of the fence. However, I did not deny God nor did I denigrate
Swami. I just remained indifferent to Swami; He was, so to say,
not in my radar screen. And then when the time came, Bhagavan
Baba pulled and strongly too, with a few telling traumatic
experiences.
As
Swami says in the Gitavahini, misery is indeed a great
friend, because it draws one to God; in this case, it brought me
to the Living and Loving God. I must mention that when I was
first drawn to Swami I thought He was just a saint or something
of that sort. I did not know then that He was actually an
Avatar. That realisation came later. In the precursor
period, shall I say, I did not also believe in materialisations.
I dismissed them as impossible because they defy all laws of
Science the usual, ignorant prejudice. And one fine day when
Swami actually materialised vibhuti for me, it hit me
like a ton of bricks. I had actually seen a materialisation,
beyond the so-called laws of Science and I had to accept it.
A Cold Fig On A
Hot Afternoon by Swami!
Since then I have seen so many of these materialisations, some
of them quite exotic. Once, a few years ago, we were all seated
in the afternoon on the lower porch in the Sai Kulwant Hall.
It was a hot afternoon. A few of us were around Swami, and
seated in the Hall were thousands. Suddenly in the middle of
causal conversations, Swami materialised a fig fruit in full
view of the huge gathering. He then passed the fig around to us
and when I received it I found it was cold, as if it had just
been taken out of a deep freeze! Imagine getting a
cold fig on a hot summer afternoon. Later Swami made it into
pieces and distributed the fruit, and I got a piece too! Hmmmm,
it was delicious!!
I
shall conclude with the story of another such materialisation,
which was remarkable in its own way. This happened during the
period when I was the Vice-Chancellor. Those days, after
Darshan was over, Swami would invariably call me and a few
others connected with the Institute into the Interview room to
spend some time with Him. That day, the Warden of our Hostel
here was also present. As a small but intensely loving gesture,
the Warden had brought with him in a silver vessel, some shelled
groundnuts or peanuts as they say in America.
Amazing Billet
From A Peanut!
The Warden offered it to Swami who first refused but later
pooped one nut into His mouth. He then started giving us one nut
at a time. He did one round, then another and then started on
the third. Everyone put out his hand to receive the Prasadam
from Swami and when my
turn
came I did the same. But what fell
into my hand was not a piece of groundnut but an enamel billet
with some art work on it. I gave Swami a puzzled look and He
said, "See what it is."
I
took it near the window of the Interview room and tried to see
what was on the billet but could not see clearly since I did not
have my glasses on. Swami then made some teasing remarks and
said, "This billet shows the Cosmic
Form of the Lord. Embedded in it are the forms of Shirdi Baba
and Swami. I have left some space for Prema Sai also. Shall I
include Prema Sai also?" We remained silent, stunned
by the experience. He then smiled and said, "No I shall not
include Prema Sai because you faithless fellows would desert Me
and go after Him!" We all laughed.
Swami then took the billet, held it near His mouth and started
blowing on it. I thought He was going to make it disappear;
instead, it became a full-fledged ring, shining brilliantly!
Swami held it high showing the ring to all of us, even as we
were dumbstruck. He said, "A goldsmith
would take fifteen days to make a ring, but I have done it in
less than fifteen seconds!" He then asked me to
stretch my right hand. I simply could not believe myself.
In
this world where there were so many wonderful devotees, Swami
was giving this extra-ordinary ring to me of all persons. But
then that is God. As Ramakrishna Paramahamsa once said, "Nobody
can say who will receive God's Grace. There may be very eligible
people, but the Lord, for reasons best known to Him, may choose
someone far less deserving." Very true indeed, as I can say from
personal experience.
Well, what do you think? Do you agree with the many things I
have said? Whether you agree or disagree, I would be happy to
know your reactions. I can be easily reached via our
Heart2Heart e-journal.
Jai Sai Ram!