Response Series, Part Seven





Response Series, Part Seven


Posted: Barry Pittard. 


Date: Tuesday August 11, 2003





Note: A long letter from an SSB devotee named Seema is the basis for this series, in which the one devotee's letter is readily seen to reflect many points scattered throughout many devotee letters received by SSB Exposé activists.


Soon to come: responses by highly qualified therapists from different countries, including an Indian, who have read Seema's letter. They have a keen interest in the psychological in-denial response of those blind to their religious teacher's and his (so-called divine) Sathya Sai Organisation's failings.


Seema's words are in red.



When and only when you have a deep, deep and underlying love for God it's only then he reveals his beauty to you, little words cannot describe that feeling.


Again, you presume to know the heart of others – people you know nothing about?


Among other beauties is the beauty of the innocence of the young, and none must be permitted to outrage it. Another beauty is the beauty of service on behalf of those who often cannot defend themselves. They must be defended. We are entitled to speak out. It is typical of authoritarian cults to deny this basic human right.

Listen Robert round up all the little story telling homos and get every single one of them to pay for lie detector tests by the best you have in Australia and then see the results before your very eyes.


You are speaking to Barry, not Robert. Whichever former devotee activist you speak to you will find that we have done our homework. The devotees who berate us have not. We have vast evidence, and have gone to considerable lengths to present it to our police, governments and the quality media. Typically, and with great intellectual and moral irresponsibility, devotees sidestep issue after issue. Leaders shield the rank and file from the allegations. The authoritarianism and cover-up from the very top are to be seen in Indulal Shah’s directive (September 18, 2001) to high office-bearers in the Sai Organisation that discussion of allegations against Sai Baba appearing on the Internet and elsewhere be banned in Sathya Sai Baba centres worldwide. This, Seema, is antidemocratic, and further defines the Sathya Sai Organisation as a cult.


Your use of the language of slurs further betrays your homophobia. Rather than arriving at the truth via an open mind, and an open heart, you react from defensiveness.  


The proof that you have is some words from a hundred or so people, if that many.


From where do you pluck this figure? It is actually much higher than that, and keeps growing as we intensify the Sathya Sai Baba Exposé.


The proof that I have are the words of an Avatar, countless miraculous personal experiences and millions of people whose lives have changed very positively by directly applying the teachings of Sai Baba in their daily lives.


Many former devotees have had “countless miraculous personal experiences.” This does not mean that we should ignore the overwhelming evidence of the presence of a very dark side. A correct use of intelligence is to hold in mind irreconcilables, contraries, contradictions and not be swayed to one side or the other by bias. There is everything wrong with his preaching in public what he violates in private.

If I take my little ones anywhere, they are never without me for one second … As for my children. Why will I allow them to be molested? Do I sound like a fool to you?


You sound like you may be wise with your own children. I question whether you are being wise about other peoples' children. Perhaps you will know - since you have mentioned exploring - serious questions about Sathya Sai Baba have been raised (quite apart from parents and their children) by several distinguished authorities.


Have you read the UNESCO Media Advisory? See this and the astute comments by Serguei Badaev, the former and (until he dared to suggest that the allegations should be discussed openly) very highly regarded leader of the Sathya Sai Organisation in Russia:


On September 9, and again on the 15th, UNESCO posted a Media Advisory, which cited lack of consultation by the Institute of Sathya Sai Education; the improper scheduling of some sessions at his ashram, instead of outside it; and the inclusion of some delegates without their prior consent. Above all, it stated, "The Organisation is deeply concerned about widely reported allegations of sexual abuse involving youths and children that have been leveled at the leader of the movement in question, Sathya Sai Baba." Glen Meloy, others and I were privy to the correspondence, and we know that UNESCO moved only after first obtaining reports from the French National Police (the Sureté).


Have you read the US State Department Travel Advisory (‘India - Consular Information Sheet,’ November 23, 2001)?


Did you know that (after the most exacting investigations) three Vice-Chancellors (University of Manchester, UK, University of Flinders, and University of Adelaide) have prohibited Sathya Sai functions within their walls, as have heads of several other institutions in the UK such as University College of London, Downey House public school, and Lord Wandsworth College?


That at Glastonbury, the Catholic bishop banned from its premises the well-known Ramala Centre, founded by high-profile Sai devotees David Jevons and his wife?


That the Sai School in Hartford, Connecticut, USA, although fully sanctioned to commence operation, was closed by the intervention of several well-informed citizens who petitioned for its closure?


That in Denmark, the municipal authorities rescinded the six million US dollar sale to Sathya Sai Baba interests of the famous castle Arresødal in Copenhagen, which was to have been used as a Sai international school?


That in the British House of Commons, questions about Sathya Sai Baba have been raised of Prime Minister Tony Blair? We have, via Tony Colman MP, a written assurance by Mr Blair that he will not meet with Sathya Sai Baba, and assurances to the British Parliament that he will require the relevant government officials to investigate the allegations as they relate to British citizens.


That World leading media have carefully and responsibly researched the issue? Dishonestly ignoring this clear fact, Indulal Shah, the world convener of the Sathya Sai Organisation, sent a circular  (September 18, 2001) to leaders of the world Sathya Sai Organisation. Making a huge generalisation, and appealing to populist media prejudice, he inveighed against the media, saying that it has “a strong propensity for sensationalism. A whiff of scandal always helps their sales and therefore they do not even pause to verify the truth." Again, as in your own case, we see a steering away from confronting the facts being presented, and filling the atmosphere with smoke.


As one who was often closely involved, I can tell you that the media we have contacted went to great lengths to verify our veracity. They also gave your teacher’s leaders and other Sai devotees ample opportunity to put their side of the story. In a manner all too clear to the intelligent reader, the Sai devotees were evasive and slanderously dismissive of former testimony, attributing to us, without knowledge of the facts, the worst motives.


…if my children complain to me for any reason, I go directly to the source of the problem.


In relation to SSB, if this is not foolish, then I wonder what is. When leaders, like the head of an official Sai centre I used to attend at Amamor in South Eastern Queensland (Conny Simms) asked him about the allegations, SSB relied, "Swami is pure." The source of the problem is the offender. Do you mean to tell me that you would go to an offender and expect an honest answer? If we suspect sexual molestation has occurred, then we must go to the source of the allegations accompanied by those such as the police, a lawyer, a magistrate or judge and jury, and ensure that a child is availed of the services of an experienced sexual abuse counselor.


But here is a typical example (I can give others) of the contempt for fair and reasonable processes of the law exhibited by Indulal Shah. Questioned by the press concerning the 1993 police killings - where the evidence overwhelmingly shows that Sai Baba stood by, having all the time and the absolute authority to act, but did nothing to stop the slayings - Shah is reported as saying, “the matter is purely internal and we do not wish to have any law enforcement agency investigating into it.” (The Hindu, June 10, 1993).