by Ernst Hayim
Early in 2005, I found out that god was in fact, a pedophile. Curiously, this discovery occurred through an expose on the Internet by a British pianist I had met in India several years ago.
David was a staunch devotee then and we had both belonged to the Sai Baba cult. He had grown weary of Western Rationalism and had traveled halfway around the world for less depressing answers to questions about the “meaning of life,” whereas I had just stumbled upon the cult by an accident of geography. In the late nineties, David had spent an afternoon at my house in India. He was entirely unremarkable and the only reason I remembered him was because I was told by an uncle that he was an extremely skilled pianist who performed for the royal family.
An Introduction to Sai Baba
Pullquote: The conglomerate has also built up a massive network of influence and power, which they have used ruthlessly to preserve the illusion as well as the illusionist, whose failings have made the occasional murder necessary.
With the highest per-capita number of godmen on the planet, India is a (pardon the mixed metaphor) Mecca for spiritual wanderers. Our particular godman, Sathya Sai Baba, had a following in excess of six million (the devotees will quote a hundred million). From an early age the Baba was convinced that he was a reincarnated god and along the way, he had managed to convince a few other people as well.
This fanciful delusion was powerful in a land where no one has a coherent idea of what it means to be Hindu, although Hinduism is the religion they profess to practice. As a result, they are extremely susceptible to almost anything that will ease the pain of their existence. This confused polytheistic condition is, I imagine, similar in some small way to those that preceded the birth of monotheism and is probably responsible for the surplus of godmen found in India.
On a daily basis since 1940, people have queued up and waited patiently for hours to watch a small man in a saffron gown and an oversized afro wander around while doing mightily impressive sleight-of-hand “miracles.” This phenomenon is called a “darshan” (translated as a viewing).
Among the assembled thousands are wanderers like David, who, if initially dubious, are eventually convinced by the massive spectacle of the thousands of adoring throngs. Over the past half century the Baba’s religious empire, henceforth referred to as the Baba conglomerate, has amassed considerable wealth and power and invested in socially conscious projects while simultaneously defrauding thousands spiritually and financially. The conglomerate has also built up a fanbase – a massive network of influence and power, which they have used ruthlessly to preserve the illusion as well as the illusionist, whose failings have made the occasional murder necessary.
My Own Nefarious History
So what was David doing at my house all those years ago? To help you understand, I must reveal my own nefarious history. My grandfather was a self-made wealthy agricultural baron in Andhra Pradesh, India, where Sathyanarayana Raju, later to become Sai Baba, was born. My grandmother had given birth to ten children and successfully raised six. In the late 1950’s, suffering from empty-nest syndrome, she discovered Sai Baba (he wasn’t very far away) and became an instant convert.
Godmen, like most entrepreneurs, need to form powerful alliances, and our influence meant that there were benefits to be had from our support. The Baba himself visited us on a few occasions, and many years later my cancer-stricken dying grandmother refused to die until she was taken to the Baba’s darshan where she then peacefully passed away. Since then, however, even as our collective devotion to the Baba grew, the family’s wealth and stature declined, and subsequent generations were pushed down the pecking order of the Baba juggernaut that was turning into a worldwide phenomenon.
My uncles turned from trusted lieutenants into tour guides and traveling salesmen. Their responsibilities now included entertaining “special guests.” Broadly speaking, if you were white and weren’t a hippie, you were a special guest. If you weren’t white, you had to be a politician, a bureaucrat, an industrialist, a movie actor, or a famous sports personality to qualify as special. Although my father wasn’t involved with the Baba Conglomerate, close family ties meant that his brothers, my uncles, frequently brought visitors. It was during one of these chance encounters that I met David. He had just been introduced by the Baba to his future wife, a wanderer like himself and had seemed, like everyone else, to be completely in awe of the Baba.
The Findings: Child Abuse and Murder
Pullquote: The Baba was not only responsible for child abuse but also complicit in murders that had ostensibly resulted from these events.
I thought little of David for the next several years until I heard of him in dramatically altered circumstances in 2005. He had published a book titled “The Findings” which contained details of his investigations into child abuse allegations against the Baba. His thesis was that the Baba was not only responsible for child abuse but also complicit in murders that had ostensibly resulted from these events. The hydra that had once cradled him in its tentacles had now begun an all out attack aimed at discrediting him and destroying his reputation.
At this point in time, I was still firmly entrenched in the Sai Baba cult. Upon reading David’s document, I was shaken as a number of loose threads of information began to fit together for the first time. I knew of the corruption within the conglomerate. I had even met the Baba’s nephew, the crown prince to the sprawling Empire his father had built with his demagogue brother’s talents. I had wondered several times whether divinity was genetic and if so, how it was possible that people so closely related to the Baba could be so soundly unqualified.
Everything David had written seemed not only plausible but unmistakably true. I proceeded to be as iconoclastic as I possibly could as I raised a stink within the family about what I had found.
Persecution
Pullquote: David began to attract death threats, as well as slander and defamation aimed at discrediting him.
Most people didn’t care if it was true. They had already committed themselves to disbelieving it. Some seriously warned me to “stay out of trouble.” These were very powerful people I was dealing with, and I was related to some of them by blood. The few doubters were reluctant to actually acknowledge that their fears had been accurate. There were consequences to free speech that I was ill-equipped to understand, they said. This was also quite possibly the first time my family began to think I was crazy.
David received thousands of letters detailing similar abuses, confirming the credibility of his findings. He also began to attract death threats, as well as slander and defamation aimed at discrediting him. The “devotees” who had sworn by the Baba’s slogan “Help ever hurt never” were now coming after the pianist in droves with pitchforks in hand. The recrimination was bad enough to force David and his wife to relocate to an undisclosed location in France.
The Baba conglomerate also decided to pursue an alternate course of damage control in the form of “debunkings” of David’s argument on their official website. I can only imagine business must have suffered, otherwise it really is horrible PR to put such damning information on an official website. Some of the essays and comments posted by the “debunkers” are fascinating for the insight they provide into the lengths people will go to to protect their crumbling understanding of the universe.
Unbelief
Pullquote: Any actively involved guardian or intelligent “supreme being” must either be completely inept, or a cruel and sadistic son of a bitch, to tolerate the horrors committed by the false idols in his name.
Without the powerful shackles of blind faith, my fidgety mind was free to graze on other questions as I wandered away from the Sai Baba problem. I had seen a real-life example of how mass hysteria can perpetrate itself and how people can be completely powerless to discard false but long-held beliefs. It seemed completely plausible for such a process to occur on a much larger scale, particularly if it weren’t crippled by such a flawed idol.
This radically altered perspective led to several spells of depression and considerable substance abuse along with the occasional moment of clarity. I found that rational thought was staggeringly powerful but simultaneously ridiculously depressing. Escapism comes in many flavors, and religion just happens to be one of the more addictive and mentally damaging ones.
The Baba himself is now a decrepit old man. My father has attempted to convince me there is no way the Baba is still molesting children. “Think about it,” he said, “Do you really think he can get it up anymore?” Perhaps not, but there are other forms of abuse.
And of what of the hundreds that have already suffered that fate? Or the many that were swindled of their life’s earnings? What about those that were murdered? These aren’t easily rationalized moral conundrums. The universe cannot possibly be a moral place. Any actively involved guardian or intelligent “supreme being” must either be completely inept, or a cruel and sadistic son of a bitch, to tolerate the horrors committed by the false idols in his name.
There is, however, pleasure to be taken at the state of disarray in which the conglomerate finds itself. Now that the deity is nearly dead, the hunt is on for a successor to replace him. Viewer ratings are almost certain to decline. Crucial cast member changes can often be difficult to stomach for an audience. But the producers are hopeful and there are several subplots to the Baba saga that are likely to be compelling — Is the new Baba going to keep the Afro? Is he going to continue the tradition of wearing saffron gowns? And what of the powerful blood-relatives of the Baba? Can they logically be related to the new Baba? And if not, will they keep their position of prominence? And finally, what about the gigantic empire of self-interest that they have assembled over the years? How will it adapt? Will it splinter and die or will it evolve, and perpetrate an even greater hoax?
It seems silly now to even contemplate the existence of a god. The term itself is so distorted and is such an amalgam that it has no real meaning. “God” is merely what people choose to call their psychoses, which are occasionally manifested as an imaginary friend that they need to talk to in order to remain sane.
Related: BBC Documentary on Sai Baba
Ernst Hayim blogs at Writing Sedition.
Wow. It was really fascinating and horrifying reading this. Although I’ve been an atheist blogger for a while now, having left the Christian faith, the real beginnings of religion for me was being born into a Sai Baba worshipping Hindhu family. My grandparents were Sai Baba devotees – my mother has become increasingly so, and even visited the ashram in India. I only recently discovered that this is actually a cult. It seems strange to think these things about a face I have been familiar with since childhood – the countless books, stickers and photos. I literally see this guy’s face everytime I go to our fridge. There’s a massive portrait of him hanging in one of our rooms where the prayer-lamp is. If that weren’t strange enough, my grandfather was a friend of Sai Baba and travelled to India almost every year to visit at the ashram. Sai Baba gave him an emerald ring; one of those orange saffron gowns hangs in my grandmother’s house a few steps away from where I live.
I think, living so far the epicenter means most of my Sai Baba devotee family members are wholly unaware of the scandal and controversy surrounding this man. They see him as a prophet and wise man. He claims to be the human embodiment of all gods. I think, despite my mother’s comparatively more educated and modern approach to life, hearing her beliefs described as a cult would come as quite a surprise to her. She thinks my stint in the church was me dallying with a cult (she only thought of this after I’d left) – it goes to show, most people are unaware of what it actually is they are subscribing to.
Fascinating story. Thank you for sharing it.
I recently knew that Sai Baba was in fact a Spirit of Error. just by chance. If you really want to know who he really is, chech this link, I’m sure that at least you will find it interesting:
http://unveiledsecretsandmessagesoflight.blogspot.com/2009/07/sai-baba.html
Spirit of Error? That’s a really weird way to put it.
Describing him as a “Spirit of Error” is no more strange than describing him as the incarnation of the Anti Invisible Pink Unicorn.
I’m surprised that you think it’s weird.
It’s all weird.
For those of you who may not understand what is going on in this interview, Johnakan Ur-El is an alleged spirit entity, purported to be an “expert” on Sai Baba, channeled through a medium named Jorge Olguin!
I find it odd that no atheists took exception to this unless they didn’t understand the issues.
Calling someone a pedophile without proof is not only VERY irresponsible but libelous! for claiming to be a “rationalist” you are not very smart. It seems that the rationalists are the least rational and gullible of all when they perpetuate stories that are as lacking in credibility as David Bailey’s and other sex abuse accusers who claim Sai Baba is a fraud yet can supernaturally morph his genitalia from male to female. Do you know David wrote a book (A Journey to Love) extolling Sai Baba’s miracles which he personally witnessed and has changed his story in a way that makes him out to be a liar? Funny too that so many of the ne’er do’wells like you admit to substance abuse problems. I also wonder if you realize you admitted in your writing that “rationalism is depressing”! Perhaps is rationalism isn’t working for you, you ought to try something different like the Truth for once!
“Perhaps is rationalism isn’t working for you, you ought to try something different like the Truth for once!”
Because the truth isn’t rational?
Go back to worshiping a pedophile and let the grownups talk.
The truth IS rational, NOT depressing as Ernst said. And calling someone a pedophile (and pedophile worshipper) without proof is about as irresponsible as one can be. Your bullying tactics may have worked in high school. All it shows is that you cannot argue your point in a “rational” manner without bullying. The finer intricasies of superconsciousness are lost on people like you who think you know it all.
CO2000: “Calling someone a pedophile without proof is not only VERY irresponsible but libelous!”
So? Where is your proof that he has no proof? By your own reasoning, calling his actions “irresponsible” and “libelous” without presenting proof of same is itself irresponsible and libelous. (Remember, that’s by your reasoning, not mine.)
What I’ve heard from people I’m inclined to trust tells me that convincing proof of pedophilia may well exist. From there, it’s really not a big stretch to consider the possibility that the writer has same in his possession.
May I suggest that rather than throwing around loaded words like “irresponsible” and “libelous” it would be more appropriate for you to ask to see whatever proof he has? If he does not respond, people will see that you have made your point, without your having to be rude about it. If he does respond …. well, maybe that could be a source of concern for you?
ok this is a little frustrating. I have an entire post typed up with references and despite my numerous attempts to post it, it seems like its being intercepted by some sort of filter because of the abundance of URLs. Click on my name and you should be able to get to my blog where all the references can be found.
Hopefully Daniel will be able to fix the system so the links appear here too.
I’m pretty sure it’s a moderation filter. Anything with swears or more than a certain number of links is held for approval. I got a post caught in it once for using “(word for cat)-footing” in a post.
I must tell you about my holiday in Scunthorpe sometime!
Ted you are too funny (and very gullible)! You think pedophile isn’t a loaded word? You people all need help. Just don’t come crying to me when someone accuses you of a sex crime over the internet (or anywhere else) that you didn’t commit! Since you all seem to think you are legal experts, maybe you should try passing the bar exam then maybe we can talk!
CO2000: Ted you are too funny (and very gullible)!
All I asserted was that “convincing proof of pedophilia may well exist” and that perhaps “the writer has same in his possession.” Until/unless you have researched the references he has since provided, and thoroughly refuted them, you are hardly in a position to call me “gullible” for making such a watered-down assertion.
CO2000: …then maybe we can talk!
Not until you learn to refrain from beginning a post with personal insults.
I’ve been researching these issues for almost SEVEN years and written about them extensively. It is for a court of law to prove guilt. The fact that it hasn’t happened in over seven years is proof enough that the claims do not hold up.
It would also be nice if you and your cohorts would follow the same rules you try to
impose upon others. The tone, harassment, disinformation and know-it-all
(condescending) attitude coming from anti-Sai activists for YEARS is deplorable. They have lost their case and still they continue to harass the innocent with lies and other unethical tactics.
Here is some more information that might be useful to those actually interested in ascertaining what the truth is. You should be warned-none of this information is pleasant and some of it is downright repugnant. Now I will admit that a number of these websites are small scale, DIY type operations, but that doesn’t make them nutjob conspiracy theorists either. They did what they could with the means at their disposal. The fact that the BBC concurs with them should go some way towards establishing legitimacy. Every one of these people has been vilified by the conglomerate at one stage or the other so make sure you’re at your most discerning when parsing through this information. Without the benefit of an editor, these people may certainly be guilty of a little bit of exaggeration. But how much?
Exhibit A-i: The Findings, by David and Faye bailey
http://www.npi-news.dk/page152.htm
Exhibit A-ii: Letters from the victims
http://www.rfjvds.dds.nl/ex-baba/engels/findings.html (same content as exhibit A, except broken down into sections)
Exhibit B: A phone conversation with David Bailey
http://www.saibaba-x.org.uk/9/David_Bailey_phone_testimony.html
Exhibit C: Responses on the official website (the fact its even on their official website is, in my opinion, a tacit admission of guilt)
http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/Ex-Baba.com/Findings/exbaba-findings.html
Exhibit D: Information on Sai Baba Propaganda activists (Lisa deWitt is featured prominently on CO2000’s website, as is, oddly enough, Michael Jackson):
http://www.saibabaexpose.com/
http://www.saibabaexpose.com/LisadeWitt.htm
http://citizeninitiative.com/sathya_sai_and_wikipedia.htm
Exhibit E: Additional literature
http://robertpriddy.wordpress.com/2008/09/19/1298/
http://www.rickross.com/reference/saibaba/saibaba6.html
And that’s excluding all the circumstantial evidence I have been privy to over the years. To give you two examples ,I know someone who was abused at the Sathya Sai Baba school and he did his very best to keep his little brother out of the holy man’s sight for fear that he might demand that he be brought for an “interview”.
I also have an uncle that went to the school and ended up getting kicked out. He never talks about it, but despite his parents’ fanatical faith, he will never go to see Sai Baba (He’s plenty religious otherwise, and believes in all sorts of merry godmen and swamis).
Then of course, there was the execution of the former students who tried to murder him. It was common knowledge in India that it was a stinking cover up. Many of the believers in my family had their faith jarringly shaken but it was nothing a fresh round of brainwashing couldn’t fix.
The stomach churning thing of it is, when I was born, my mother took me for Baba’s blessing, and he touched me on the head and said “he will be a big man”. If he meant I’d be successful, boy was he wrong.
Then again, something tells me he may not have been talking about success at all.
Ernst, you are putting words in my mouth. My point is the accusers are claiming two opposites at the same time. ONE, that Sai Baba is a fraud and TWO, that he can supernaturally morph his genitalia. Apparently the BBC didn’t do very good research or they would have known this. Or they knew and didn’t care as long as they made money. Is it two difficult for you to understand the problem with this issue? I’m not making any claims here. I am pointing out the illogic. In the same way I am pointing out how gullible “rationalists” are when they believe anything they hear, while demanding that everyone (except them!) be skeptical! Can you not see how illogical and hypocritical you are with your double standards? “Do as I say not as I do!” TOO FUNNY! How can anyone carry on a conversation with such illogical people?
Indeed!
“Evidence” is something presented in a court of law. A video on the internet which can be tampered with is NOT evidence. A video is a form of documentation which is ONLY evidence if it is used in a court of law and qualified by an EXPERT, which you obviously are NOT.
The problem with anti-Sais is they think anything they babble about, including non-verifiable second-hand stories, is “evidence”.
Exhibit F: For more details, see the section of the original article entitled “Persecution”. Refer specifically to last paragraph.
I agree with you.
So far, Ernst hasn’t presented proofs of his claims. So far, Sai Baba hasn’t, either. The difference is, I can live without knowing if said Sai Baba is a pederast as it’s not in my hand to judge and punish him, and I’m not following his teachings.
And you? Would suppose a change in your life knowing that Sai Baba is not a god, but a lier and a pretty “normal” person?
So what “evidences” did you ask Sai Baba for before choosing him as your idol?
“So far, Ernst hasn’t presented proofs of his claims”
And then I read the comments til the end, sorry Ernst
No worries Francesc. It took me three hours to figure out I could break the post up so it didn’t get caught in the moderation filter because of the abundance of links. Co2000 is right. I must not be very smart!
First of all, you are making the mistaken assumption that a person’s guilt or innocence is tied to religious beliefs. This is just ONE the hallmarks of the smear campaign against Sai Baba.
Secondly, you like most atheists, are trying to argue that one MUST be an intellectual to know or experience the truth about life and its many manifestations and that if there
were a God, ONLY atheists would be able to find “Him” since they are so smart!
You are also trying to act like you know what my religious beliefs are, which you do not. Additionally, you are trying to act like you understand Hinduism and its beliefs, which you do not or you would not be making the ignorant statements and assumptions you are making.
There are many scriptures in Hinduism which are orientated toward teaching people at different levels of understanding since truth is considered relative (to both
understanding & perception) and is divided into two philosophies, one called advaita (non-duality) and one called dvaita (duality). Advaita is based on the teachings of formlessness
and its relationship to consciousness. Dvaita is based on the phenomenal world and its relationship to consciousness. Most people in all religions tend to worship God, or
higher intelligence as form (as a human-like being) because this is more natural for them.
Advaitists realize God is universal superconsciousness and so they tend to worship God as being formless and infinite intelligence.
“First of all, you are making the mistaken assumption that a person’s guilt or innocence is tied to religious beliefs”
I’m not, of course. I’m making the assumption that a pedophile leader doesn’t deserve to be followed without schepticism, whatever he tells.
“Secondly, you like most atheists, are trying to argue that one MUST be an intellectual to know or experience the truth about life and its many manifestations”
Where am I arguing that? One has to think before taking a decision. Now, I should add that “experiencing the truth”, so far, has not been proven possible.
“if there were a God, ONLY atheists would be able to find “Him” since they are so smart!”
“You are also trying to act like you know what my religious beliefs are, which you do not”
You are trying to act like you know what rational thinking means, wich you do not. For example, if there were an abrahamic god, everything is possible. World could have been created a moment ago, and we still would believe that “yesterday” we were alive. So not, It’s improbable that I would be the first to find “Him”.
“Additionally, you are trying to act like you understand Hinduism and its beliefs, which you do not or you would not be making the ignorant statements and assumptions you are making”
As said before, I’m not making a lot of assumptions, only that you follow Sai Baba’s teachings and that you think that he can do “supernatural” things. I don’t care about your beliefs, sorry, nor is Hinduism involved in what I said.
“There are many scriptures in Hinduism…Advaita…Dvaita…”
So you know about Hinduism more or less the same I could check on wikipedia?
“Advaitists realize God is universal superconsciousness and so they tend to worship God as being formless and infinite intelligence”
Are you sure the word “realize” is the best fitting word in that sentence? I could suggest a much more neutral word, like “believe”.
“In truth, the REAL intellectuals believe as it says in the Bhagavad Gita, that God is simply another word for the superconcious intelligence which exists in ALL matter and non-matter”
Yeah, sorry, you know the truth and we all are wrong.
Any idea of how that intelligence works? Oops, sorry, being rational again. You don’t care how such an intelligence can work, you only have “experienced” it.
Prove that he is a pedophile in court then and quit acting like a fascist.
Funny that you bozos are such skeptics, or I should say pseudo-skeptics when it suits your agenda.
If you knew what “rational thinking” means you wouldn’t be calling someone a pedophile without proof. Accusations are NOT proof and if you think they are you need help.
How do you know “experiencing truth” has not been possible? You are trying to claim that you know the “truth” that others have or have not experienced..
On the contrary it is atheists (similar to some bible-thumping evangelicals, like Tal Brooke) who have an all-knowing attitude and think YOU can dictate it to everyone else., You guys are the ones claiming you know it all yet demand others have proof which you yourself cannot provide..
I think you people need to ask yourselves why you seem to be so angry with others and feel the need to argue with and condescend to everyone about their beliefs. If your beliefs are working so good for you you shouldn’t have to argue and bash others.
I am not going to argue with you about your beliefs because I can see that you think you are more rational than anyone else when the facts and attitude on this board show me otherwise. You people also seem to have problems with auhority as when even the laws tell you the truth you do not abide by them.
In this world intelligence is measured by I.Q. Do you have an I.Q. or do you not believe in that either? Or is intelligence measured by your subjective opinion?
Here is the reality:
1. ALL men are INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law. It is NOT the other way around. Pseudo-skeptics contradict themselves when they expect others to believe accusations without PROOF.
2. ALL alleged victims MUST file charges with the police and prove they are victims.
If the internet can be used to convict people by mere accusation we are all in trouble. Especially when gullible people (many who call themselves skeptics) believe everything they read on the internet and spout ti as if it is the Gospel truth.
3. There is no law against being ignorant even if atheists act like there is. Ignorance is the cause of most human tragedies. I’m sure there are atheists that have very low I’.Q.s (I’ve seen a few myself). Perhaps atheists will want to test to keep out the rift raft they are so worried about. :)
BTW, why aren’t the atheists up in arms about the accusations regarding James Randi?
There is stuff on the internet claiming James Randi was having sexually explicit
phone conversations with minors (under 18). According to Ed Curly, this info was also in court records in the lawsuit filed by Uri Geller against Randi. When there seems to be court documentation regarding this behavior, why are atheists holding up Randi as a role model? Do you know Randi had to step down from his board position at CSICOP because of the lawsuit?
When god is fake what do u call godmen? Saibaba is a corrupt bastard who came into prominence due to the illiterate, the stupid and the gullible masses! I will celebrate on the day that asshole dies!!
If you are a product of great intellectual advancement I’m scared!
In truth, the REAL intellectuals believe as it says in the Bhagavad Gita, that God is simply another word for the superconcious intelligence which exists in ALL matter and non-matter. This is the super-intelligence which creates and runs your body (which modern science is just beginning to get a handle on) and everything else in the universe.
Atheists do not realize that by denying a higher intelligence they are therefore claiming basically that MAN is the highest intelligence in the universe (since other intelligent life has yet to be revealed or proven) which we know by deductive reasoning is just not true!
You know you can’t just pull this shit out of your ass.
Atheists do not realize that by denying a higher intelligence they are therefore claiming basically that MAN is the highest intelligence in the universe (since other intelligent life has yet to be revealed or proven) which we know by deductive reasoning is just not true!
Why the lack of a higher intelligence automatically implies humans are the highest intelligence?
Define intelligence. Go on. I dare you.
Then what is the highest KNOWN, measurable “form” of intelligence if man is not?
Here, argue with Merriam Webster about the definition of intelligence:
Main Entry: in·tel·li·gence
Pronunciation: \in-ˈte-lə-jən(t)s\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin intelligentia, from intelligent-, intelligens intelligent
Date: 14th century
1 a (1): the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason ; also : the skilled use of reason (2): the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one’s environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests) b Christian Science : the basic eternal quality of divine Mind c: mental acuteness : shrewdness
2 a: an intelligent entity ; especially : angel b: intelligent minds or mind
3: the act of understanding : comprehension
4 a: information, news b: information concerning an enemy or possible enemy or an area ; also : an agency engaged in obtaining such information
5: the ability to perform computer functions
“Then what is the highest KNOWN, measurable “form” of intelligence”
Not yours, I hope.
A linguistic definition of a word is pretty far from a useful definition in scientific terms, what I guess siberia is asking for. Anyway, how is the assumption of “there is not a supernatural highest intelligence in the earth” implying that there is not a highest intelligence than ours in the universe?
And… how can you proof deductively that human intelligence is not the highest? I’m curious. I think it is improbable, but I would never say it is impossible -as far as we know
I just said the intelligence which runs the human body IS “higher” than ours. “WE” humans cannot always heal the human body through scientific means because we do not understand its intelligence and the multitude of chemical reactions which keep it running. We also do not understand the relationship between this innate intelligence and its relationship to consciousness. It hasn’t been that long since man figured out how babies were even created! It hasn’t been that long since man discovered bacteria and viruses exist and cause disease. Man has even had to outsmart them in order to survive. And even then, these critters have the intelligence to develop a resistance to the drugs scientists create.
Man takes for granted the wonders around him which show there is an intelligence operating in the background of life. And he fails to ask, where did that intelligence come from?
So… the “intelligence which runs the human body” is actually chemistry and physics? And because we’re ignorant of some things about this universe God exists? Wow, aren’t we revolutionary in our thought. [/sarcasm]
We also do not understand the relationship between this innate intelligence and its relationship to consciousness.
Yet. When we do, will God cease to exist?
It hasn’t been that long since man figured out how babies were even created!
But we did manage to create them. Six to seven billion of them and counting. Sometimes, knowledge isn’t the be-all of existence.
It hasn’t been that long since man discovered bacteria and viruses exist and cause disease. Man has even had to outsmart them in order to survive. And even then, these critters have the intelligence to develop a resistance to the drugs scientists create.
It’s very simple, really. It’s called reproduction and mutation. The ones who are weak to a drug die, the ones that aren’t survive and multiply. No existence required – in fact, perfectly simulated. Obviously you aren’t familiar with the concept of evolutionary computation, are you?
Man takes for granted the wonders around him which show there is an intelligence operating in the background of life. And he fails to ask, where did that intelligence come from?
Evolution. The synaptic connections of the brain. We can simulate it in a computer. We can reproduce it quite faithfully, if not completely. There’s a whole field of mathematics and computer science dedicated to it. It’s called artificial intelligence.
Siberia, regarding your very condescending tone in the message below, the paradox is, if you actually KNEW everything like you think you do you would be God…lol.
I wonder why you are so bitter and angry that other people believe in God. Are you jealous they might know or experience something you haven’t? You cannot prove God doesnt’ exist and no one is mocking you for that. Or are you just uncomfortable with not knowing the truth so you have made your decision and, by God (sarcasm), everyone else MUST live by your dictates? Atheists want people to accept them for their beliefs yet bash others, totally forgetting they are also part of the religious tolerance equation.
Surely the world is big enough for us all?
I also find it very interesting that you are so arrogant as to make assumptions regarding what I do or do not know. I was one of the first students to work on “artificial intelligence” machines, aka computers in the late 70s and I was taking college science courses while I was still in high school. Not everyone on the internet is a ‘rocket scientist’ like you seem to think you are and my writing is written simply so that hopefully most anyone reading can understand what I am trying to say.
“I just said the intelligence which runs the human body IS “higher” than ours”
You didn’t say that. There is an intelligence running human body? Perhaps I have a different notion than yours, about what is “an intelligence”. We cannot always heal the human body because or science is still improving. But hey, it is more effective than praying!
“We also do not understand the relationship between this innate intelligence and its relationship to consciousness”
I won’t accept there is any intelligence involved without any proof of it
“It hasn’t been that long since man figured out how babies were even created!”
Goddidit
“…bacteria and viruses exist [...]. And even then, these critters have the intelligence to develop a resistance to the drugs scientists create”
That’s not called intellinence, it is evolution. Imagine than millions of humans died for drinking milk, and the ones who can’t -intolerant to lactose- survived. How could call it “innate intelligence”? Are you forgetting that “those critters” die by millions, before some of them “”"develope”"” that resistance?
“Man takes for granted the wonders around him which show there is an intelligence operating in the background of life. And he fails to ask, where did that intelligence come from?”
Hey, a new argument! You could call it “the anthropic principle”. By the wsay… It shows nothing.
Siberia, regarding your very condescending tone in the message below, the paradox is, if you actually KNEW everything like you think you do you would be God…lol.
Fuck no. I’d be an educated human being. I’ve no wish to be God. It must be terribly boring – or terribly lonely.
I wonder why you are so bitter and angry that other people believe in God. Are you jealous they might know or experience something you haven’t?
Not really. I’m neither bitter nor angry, though I admit I may sound like that. It’s the whole “Internet” thing – you can’t tell how I truly feel, other than by the tone of my words and I do have a tendency to come off as utterly mean and condescending when that isn’t my intention. I’ve friends and acquaintances throughout most of major religions (including Hinduism) and yet I find there’s nothing to be jealous of, not really, especially not the wide-eyed, star-in-your-eyes passion for the metaphysical. I feel enough wonder without needing to populate the darkness with gods and demons.
You cannot prove God doesnt’ exist and no one is mocking you for that. Or are you just uncomfortable with not knowing the truth so you have made your decision and, by God (sarcasm), everyone else MUST live by your dictates?
Funnily, I had this wild impression we were just discussing world views, not trying to force you or anyone to live by my dictates (of which you know nothing, other than the fact I am in fact an atheist).
Atheists want people to accept them for their beliefs yet bash others, totally forgetting they are also part of the religious tolerance equation.
Surely the world is big enough for us all?
And yet I see nobody oppressing anyone here. Is questioning your beliefs that bad? I question mine all the time. I’m not afraid to do so. I just don’t think yours are all that convincing, or as rational as you’d like to believe they are.
I also find it very interesting that you are so arrogant as to make assumptions regarding what I do or do not know. I was one of the first students to work on “artificial intelligence” machines, aka computers in the late 70s and I was taking college science courses while I was still in high school.
Good! I wish I had this opportunity. I’m glad you did.
Not everyone on the internet is a ‘rocket scientist’ like you seem to think you are and my writing is written simply so that hopefully most anyone reading can understand what I am trying to say.
That’s fine. Doesn’t bother me. I’m sorry if I come off as rude. I’ll try to tone it down.
I suppose man is the “highest” known form of “intelligence” we have knowledge of, but then, we don’t even know what intelligence means, let alone how to define what’s high and what’s low. You give me a Merriam-Webster definition and that’s all fine and dandy, but that isn’t all. For instance, the dictionary says,
1 a (1): the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason ; also : the skilled use of reason
And yet several animals do present this ability. Intelligence isn’t as simply defined or measured as the pretty words in the dictionary. I can speak three languages fluently and I’m learning a fourth, but I can’t solve mathematical problems as easily as, say, a friend of mine. He, on the other hand, can hardly speak our birth language correctly, let alone learn a second. Who’s more intelligent?
The dictionary also defines intelligence as the ability to perform computer functions. Does that mean the Roadrunner – one of the fastest supercomputers around – is one of the most intelligent thing we’ve knowledge of? It performs computer functions most, if not all, humans can’t, after all.
The main difference between us is that I don’t see “intelligence” as the end-all, be-all of existence, and I have no need to extrapolate it to the metaphysical to try and make sense of reality. Intelligence is a nifty evolutionary skill, much like wings or claws are, and we’ve thrived because of it just as ants thrive because they’ve managed to establish a rather impressive social strategy. That’s all. There’s nothing intrinsically special about it that the universe – beautiful and vast and unknown – has to revolve around it. To think so is to be so anthropocentric you narrow everything down to your human perspective. Because humans are intelligent and we’re oh-so-special intelligence is everything. It follows the universe is oriented around intelligence, because we perceive the universe and we’re intelligent, so…
Yeah. I don’t buy that. It reeks of arrogance of epic proportions.
And even if there is a superintelligent conscious entity out there (because intelligence doesn’t imply consciousness, either), it doesn’t follow that it even knows about us, let alone care about whatever we do. Why should I care about it? It doesn’t need me. I don’t need it. If it’s so pervasive that it’s everywhere, inseparate from us, then we can’t know it any more than any individual molecule of our body knows about us, so what does it matter?
Right, there are many different forms of intelligence.
More than likely, intelligence is a function of consciousness. Consciousness implies awareness. Intelligence increases as awareness increases. So what are the limits of awareness and WHERE does awareness come from?
God implies unlimited awareness of truth. The sum of all intelligence.
Who can say what is possible or impossible when man is doing things now that were only written in science fiction books decades ago?
More than likely, intelligence is a function of consciousness. Consciousness implies awareness. Intelligence increases as awareness increases. So what are the limits of awareness and WHERE does awareness come from?
The biological synapses of your brain. Have you ever been under general anesthesia? I have. No awareness, no consciousness. Not even dreams. It’s like that time of your life simply didn’t exist. Pretty much like death.
The fact we can simply shut it down should give you a clue about its entirely biological nature.
God implies unlimited awareness of truth. The sum of all intelligence.
God is a mathematical variable, then? Or rather, meaningless. It’s just a word you’ve ascribed to everything you can’t understand, apparently. You don’t know where awareness comes from, therefore God. Nice.
Who can say what is possible or impossible when man is doing things now that were only written in science fiction books decades ago?
Certainly not your metaphysical woo.
CO2000: More than likely, intelligence is a function of consciousness. Consciousness implies awareness. Intelligence increases as awareness increases. So what are the limits of awareness and WHERE does awareness come from?
Siberia (the ‘skeptic guru’): The biological synapses of your brain. Have you ever been under general anesthesia? I have. No awareness, no consciousness. Not even dreams. It’s like that time of your life simply didn’t exist. Pretty much like death.
The fact we can simply shut it down should give you a clue about its entirely biological nature.
CO2000: How do you know what death is like? Are you a ‘rational’ ghost…lol?
People who have had out of body experiences would disagree with you.
According to them, awareness is NOT dependent on the body. And according to scientific studies on thousands of people who have had near death experiences (NDEs), there is a sort of etheric body (like a blueprint) that leaves the physical body.
CO2000: God implies unlimited awareness of truth. The sum of all intelligence.
Siberia (the ‘skeptic guru’): God is a mathematical variable, then? Or rather, meaningless. It’s just a word you’ve ascribed to everything you can’t understand, apparently. You don’t know where awareness comes from, therefore God. Nice.
CO2000: Man ascribes words to a lot of concepts he does not totally understand. Is there a law against it?
Well, it seems to me that God is the greatest scientist. I believe that there is a superconsciousness that permeates everything that ever existed or will exist.
I believe that man is evolving toward this superconsciousness.
No law against belief (which is a form of speculation just like atheism) either. Why are atheists trying to make atheism a ‘forced’ definite without scientific validation?
So you are trying to play God again and claim that you KNOW where awareness comes from! Seems to me you are trying to set yourself up as God! Imagine that!
CO2000: Who can say what is possible or impossible when man is doing things now that were only written in science fiction books decades ago?
Siberia (the ‘skeptic guru’): Certainly not your metaphysical woo.
CO2000: Scientists at universities as well as government intelligence have been studying metaphysical phenomena for decades so apparently you are not as avante-garde as you seem to think you are. Scientists who work on classified information are approximately 40 years ahead of mainstream science. The documentation on this is on the internet if you care to look.
Y’know, I think it’s the first time that someone ever called me a guru. I’m flattered, but I’m no guru. I’ve never swindled money and adoration out of anyone, after all. Too antisocial, I guess. Plus, morals. Pesky thing, those.
How do you know what death is like? Are you a ‘rational’ ghost…lol?
Thankfully no. I’ve survived both surgeries in sound health. Of course I have no idea what happens after we die. I don’t know, you don’t know. We can all speculate, but until someone proves s/he’s gone there and back, in a way we can’t really disprove, then we’ll never know until we get there.
I admit I expressed myself wrongly: I meant not unlike I think death is like.
People who have had out of body experiences would disagree with you.
They disagree with each other, too. Sometimes even with themselves.
According to them, awareness is NOT dependent on the body. And according to scientific studies on thousands of people who have had near death experiences (NDEs), there is a sort of etheric body (like a blueprint) that leaves the physical body.
I’d like to see these studies; I never heard of them concluding anything of the sort other than “people who have had NDE say…”. In fact, what I do remember is there have been studies concluding otherwise: that certain conditions present at near death could generate certain stimuli, which would explain the impressions people have during NDEs. There was even one, a couple months ago (or more, I don’t remember – I’ll have to check it out) explaining how religious experiences could be simulated by feeding the mind a certain set of stimuli. Interesting stuff.
But, if there have been studies pointing at the opposite direction, by all means, tell me. I’d love to read them. Are they published in Nature?
Man ascribes words to a lot of concepts he does not totally understand. Is there a law against it?
Of course not. I’m just trying to ascertain whether I’m grokking your POV or not.
Well, it seems to me that God is the greatest scientist. I believe that there is a superconsciousness that permeates everything that ever existed or will exist.
I still don’t understand the concept. If there’s one superconsciousness that permeates everything, then we are part of it; if we’re part of it – let’s say we’re a cell in one great body; a neuron in a super-brain – what makes you think we’d be aware of the whole any more than an individual neuron is aware of the body it belongs to? Or that that superconsciousness is aware of us? Maybe it is in general terms (as we’re aware we have neurons) but do you believe it is especially conscious of our existence in particular? Of anyone’s existence in particular? Is it aware of everything, simultaneously? Do you believe that, to it, any part of it – say, tapeworms and humans – is more relevant to it than any other part? Why?
What makes you think you could even understand or recognize such a consciousness? It’d be so utterly, fundamentally different from us – because it isn’t like us in any level – that it’d be nary impossible to understand it. At least, that’s what I think. You’re free to believe otherwise. I just don’t think it very logical to assume that, even if such a consciousness existed – call it God, call it whatever you want – that we’d be able to communicate with it, or it with us. The difference in perspective would be immense.
Then again, I may be wrong. I know that. I just don’t feel compelled to believe something because you say so, or ancient writings say so, or because a lot of people believe it so. I follow Buddha’s advice: Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.
Theorizing about unprovable superintelligences, while fun, does not fall in any such category to me. I don’t feel compelled to believe such a creature exists, any more than I feel compelled to believe there are invisible pink unicorns parading on my bedroom right now.
I’m reminded of science fiction writer Stanislaw Lem. He was one of the few to posit that alien minds are alien – that we would be utterly unable to understand a mind so fundamentally different from what we understand that we would be unable to communicate with it. Alienness of aliens, he called it. He thought it was silly how many sci-fi writers made aliens look and sound like mere advanced humans, or differently-shaped humans.
I believe that man is evolving toward this superconsciousness.
That assumes evolution has a direction, from strains of self-replicating molecules to superconsciousness. As I’ve said before, I don’t see intelligence as some sort of goal that all life is marching to. I’ve no reason to believe that is the case, in special when, as you’ve so aptly put, bacteria and virii are so more effective than we are, no intelligence required. I also think humankind isn’t that special – we’re just animals. Clever animals, but animals nonetheless.
But I’m again reminded of science fiction. Arthur C. Clarke’s Childhood’s End, this time.
No law against belief (which is a form of speculation just like atheism) either.
There isn’t. But I, as a human being, like to argue and debate and try to understand things. I, as a human being, am wary of wild speculation when it affects the minds and lives of other people – even people who do not believe. I think of homosexual people shunned and reviled because of someone’s god’s perceived hatred of them. I think of pedophiles granted immunity to the law because the masses of followers they gather protect them and lie for their sake (and no, I don’t mean Sai Baba – I’m thinking Catholic priests here). I think of religious figures inciting hatred against certain groups of followers. I think of poor people dying of AIDS because someone’s wild speculation led them to believe using condoms are evil. I think of children burnt and hurt by their parents because they think they’re witches. I think of people swindled out of their money, families, lives, because they’re gullible enough to follow anyone who decrees himself a Godman. I think of people who die in misery and pain because of someone’s wild speculation that suffering leads to godliness. I think of how many people were murdered because someone thought they were better than others (which is as wild a speculation as any). I think of all animals (and people!) dead because humans feel entitled to destroy what they perceive as their lessers. I think of all the bad consequences wild speculation can have, and I worry.
Which is why I am a skeptic and question everyone’s wild speculations, including my own.
Why are atheists trying to make atheism a ‘forced’ definite without scientific validation?
“Forced”? I’m not forcing you to stop believing any more than you’re forcing me to believe. I don’t think any atheist is forcing anyone to do anything. What I am doing is questioning your beliefs. That’s all. No ulterior motive required.
So you are trying to play God again and claim that you KNOW where awareness comes from! Seems to me you are trying to set yourself up as God! Imagine that!
Good grief, no. I have no wish to be God, or set myself as God. I’m content with being just an ape.
Scientists at universities as well as government intelligence have been studying metaphysical phenomena for decades so apparently you are not as avante-garde as you seem to think you are. Scientists who work on classified information are approximately 40 years ahead of mainstream science. The documentation on this is on the internet if you care to look.
How exactly did such classified information end on the Internet? Why hasn’t it been wildly broadcast by the mainstream media?
I know universities everywhere study different things – hell, my own university had a course on naturopathy! That doesn’t make it real. Belief doesn’t make it real. I’d be thrilled if such a thing was discovered – it’d be great! But I don’t think it has been, at least, not yet. I’ve no evidence it has been other than conspiracy theorists’s words.
I’ll check it out. I’ve seen things about it before, but they were always reeking of woo – that is, believers trying to justify their beliefs, without evidence – or conspiracy theories – which is virtually the same, but under a different paradigm. But, who knows, maybe I missed something.
(Also: I’m not all that avant-garde. Curious, yes, but I’m well aware there’s a helluva lot that I’m not even aware of, let alone knowledgeable in. To believe otherwise would be terribly arrogant, don’t you think?)
Dear Ernst Hayim,
You are not to be blamed for your views regarding the Sai Controversy. The information against Sathya Sai Baba has been spammed through hundreds of websites (and through thousands of posts, blogs, comments, free-press release websites, etc.) and can be overwhelming and seemingly difficult to refute. However, it is never too late to fully familiarize yourself with both sides of the debate. Here is the real truth about the Sai Controversy:
- Sathya Sai “Sex Scandal” Myth
Regarding the pedophilia accusations, see:
- False Pedophile Allegations Against Sathya Sai Baba
And regarding the BBC documentary “Secret Swami”, I guess a decade-long daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol seeking a money settlement is, by your standards, credible. This information about Alaya Rahm was purposely suppressed from the general public by the Rahm Family, the BBC and Ex-Devotees. Alaya self-disclosed these facts and they are recorded on Official Court Records.
If you would like to discuss the alleged discrepancies in Sai Baba’s discourses, I’d be happy to oblige. Or, you can view my page about Brian Steel, which discusses this issue in depth.
Sincerely,
Joe
Dear Joe,
Firstly, thank you for the tone of your message. Its good to know we can debate this in a civil manner. However, I disagree with you on multiple counts.
Assuming the Rahms’ version of events is true, has it occurred to you that what Alaya must have had to endure when he was performing sexual favors for this guru that his entire social universe worshipped? He kept it secret because he was frightened his family would pick Baba and then he would be all alone. He continued to do it because his family was getting a lot of attention from their Guru and were ecstatic about it. All the while he went to school, played the jock and led this twisted double life in a small cult that he belonged to. Thats a lot for an adolescent to handle. That alone could explain an individual’s inclination toward substance abuse.
Now, lets not assume the official version is true and examine your claim of Alaya being a daily drug user. I would love to see actual evidence of this. I have read Kreydick’s testimony and while he makes references to conversations with Alaya in which he would discuss occasional drug and alcohol use, there was nothing in there to suggest crippling addiction so it would appear you’re distorting the truth there.
Either way, my point is that occasional substance abuse is not an automatic disqualifier. If he were a daily user, then we would want to examine the particular drugs he was ingesting and the quantities of said drugs to figure out their mind-altering capabilities and whether he was doing these drugs on a daily basis at the time the molestation occurred, since as I mentioned, they could well be a consequence of the experiences he is detailing.
Thank you for providing me with links to your website. I had the opportunity to look at it briefly and would like to point out several problems with your assertion that Alaya Rahm was effectively discredited because he was forced to withdraw his case, because of Mr. Kreydick’s testimony (which, by your description sounds indubitably conclusive).
Since Kreydick’s testimony lies at the heart of your argument, I took the time to read and analyze it to see whether the conclusions you were drawing were well-founded. I have read all 12 pages of scanned copies, and Kreydick is not nearly as certain about several key details as he would need to be for your argument to hold any water.
(For interested readers, relevant portions have been highlighted by scanned page number and the precise time comments were made. Since its easy to take things out of context, I’d recommend you read the entire document. To get to it, go to Joe’s own website at http://www.saisathyasai.com/Rahm-Public-Court-Records/ and click on the scanned copies of the testimony.)
Back to you Joe. Instead, rather damagingly, Kreydick reports Baba giving Alaya money (p 9 11:49:43), as well as several private audiences Alaya had with the Baba that Kreydick wasn’t part of. Kreydick also describes Alaya having kissed him on the mouth quite soon after an interview (p6 11:21:18) with the Baba. He then he goes on to say that Alaya described having been kissed on the mouth by the Baba himself (p6 11:22:29).
Later, the Baba apparently also told Alaya not to tell anyone what happened in the interview room (p9 11:54:31), which Kreydick speculates was because the Baba thought “the other children will be jealous”.
Kreydick also says, “yes he told me everything that happened” only to contradict himself a moment later to say “I don’t know what happened actually” (p12 13:49:46).
This is not the only time this type of disorientation occurs. He confuses dates and years on a pretty frequent basis (p5 11:02:49) in addition to being confused about whether people were with him at a particular time or not (p8 11:38:37).
Now in your post, you say
“And regarding the BBC documentary “Secret Swami”, I guess a decade-long daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol seeking a money settlement is, by your standards, credible. ”
Lets look at Kreydick through the same feces-colored glasses. Without making concessions for people’s tendencies toward irrational beliefs guided by emotion, this guy sounds cuckoo to me.
He describes a medical operation at Sai Baba’s medical center, only to follow up with “Baba gave this man eyes” (scan 12: 13:43:49).
He ascribes “miracle” status to a demonstrable feat of modern medicine. That, to me, is extremely worrying and indicative of problems distinguishing between the real and the “spiritual”. And this isn’t the only case, he sounds as enthralled by a child is by a magician’s tricks, and seems absolutely incapable of an objectively considered position. I’m also worried about how credulous he appears to be, and how vulnerable a subject he could be to manipulation. His is not a lucid and rational account, and for that same reason, it is weak from a legal standpoint.
In summary, Kreydick is hardly a reliable witness for your case or mine.
Finally, as you’re probably well aware, the reason Alaya’s lawsuit couldn’t move forward is because there was no one to sue, no legal US based entity anyway, other than the Sathya Sai Society which claimed to merely be “the bookstore”, NOT, as you suggested, because Alaya’s testimony was false.
I have one “bigger picture” question for you. Assuming you really believe your argument, if Alaya really was the degenerate you claim he was, shouldn’t the “omniscient” Baba have done something to mend the path this clearly beloved disciple was on? If you’re saying he imagined all this perverse stuff because he was high, why was this “omnipotent omniscient being” even interested in seeing him? And why would he give him money to fuel his addictions? Is this really the kind of divine entity that deserves worship?
Last, I really hope you’re convinced that the argument you’re putting forward is genuine. It would be a terribly cruel thing to do to further malign a young man who has already had to suffer considerably with lies and utterly terrible falsehoods.
As long as you are interested in the truth (as opposed to the Truth), I’m prepared to debate any other information that you wish to bring up. I will, however, need to check with Daniel whether he’s ok with this sort of thing on here.
Best,
Ernst Hayim
Ernst, maye when people like you and the anonymous “guest” change their TONE, everyone else can too! Why are you people allowed to bully, ridicule and talk down to others but whine when you get your own attitude mirrored back to you?
Ernst, please tell me what is credible about a six foot tall, 18 year old ADULT who claims he went for “20 interviews” and was forced to have sex with a seventy-some year old man who stands about 5 feet tall and weighs less than 110 pounds? What 18 year old do you know who would return to be “molested sexually” twice much less “20 times”?
The following article was written using the pseudonym Sam Young who is in fact Alaya Rahm.
Excerpt from the Divine Downfallarticle:
“Eighteen months later, the Youngs returned to Puttaparthi; again Sai Baba singled out Sam and called him and the family for an interview. ‘He made [a big fuss of] our group,’ said Jeff. ‘He materialised a ring for my son. He told everybody that Sam had been a great Shirdi Sai devotee in a previous life – he just poured it on.’
During the course of that visit, the Youngs were called for seven interviews, while Sam had some 20 private meetings. The family felt blissfully privileged. Baba advised Jeff on his business, signed the bylaws for their community and told them that one day he would come to their home. He materialised rings, watches, bracelets, gave them robes and the silk lungi he wore next to his skin. ‘People were saying, what’s with you guys?’ said Jeff. ‘One guy actually said to me, when I die I want to come back as you’. And Baba was telling us not to talk a lot, to keep it quiet, because it causes jealousy in others – which is true.’
The following year, the family returned to Puttaparthi three times. On each occasion they would be gifted with two or three interviews. Sam had twice as many. ‘We had no idea what was going on,’ said Jeff. “
Ernst, please tell me what is credible about a six foot tall, 18 year old ADULT who claims he went for “20 interviews” and was forced to have sex with a seventy-some year old man who stands about 5 feet tall and weighs less than 110 pounds? What 18 year old do you know who would return to be “molested sexually” twice much less “20 times”?
Physical subjugation isn’t the only weapon you can use when you want to molest someone, you know. There’s this itty bitty thing called psychological pressure, as well as social, and that’s utterly independent of age and height and weight and whatever measure you want to raise. There are several ways one can oppress another human being and subjugate him or her – threats, for instance, and blackmail.
If I say “have sex with me or I’ll digrace you and your whole family”, how is that not molestation?
You are speculating when the facts show otherwise. Alaya claims he had “twenty-some interviews” when the truth was he only had seven and then went back the next year for more when he was then 19 years old. After the set of interviews where he claims he was sexually abused he wrote a spiritual love poem to Sai Baba. Then he went to a function and gave a positive speech about Sai Baba. Then he went back to the ashram for more interviews.
When an adult goes back willingly numerous times for more sex it is called consentual sex, NOT molestation please get your facts right. There is absolutely no proof Alaya had sex or was coerced into having sex. His actions afterward of returning to the ashram the next year and begging for more interviews does not imply he was coerced in any way.
The anti-Sais lied and tried to tell me Alaya was a “child” when he most certainly was NOT.
Actually if you read what I wrote I only argued that physical subjugation is not the only way to coerce someone. I never said whatshisface did or didn’t do anything argued in the context of this thread. Frankly, this is the first time I even heard of this guy’s existence at all. I wouldn’t know.
What I did point out is that your argument that “he couldn’t possibly have coerced a young man into sex because he wouldn’t be physically capable of doing so” is fundamentally flawed because there are other ways of coercion that have nothing to do with relative ages and body mass, but everything to do with the amount of psychological and social power one has. Only because there may not have been physical violence involved does not automatically imply there was no coercion.
Again, whether he did rape this man or not, I have no idea. I hope he hasn’t, because the alternative is too cruel, not to him, but his victims.
Now I will admit that a number of these websites are small scale, DIY type operations, but that doesn’t make them nutjob conspiracy theorists either. They did what they could with the means at their disposal. The fact that the BBC concurs with them should go some way towards establishing legitimacy.
Further, every one of the victims has been vilified by the conglomerate’s smear campaign at one stage or the other so make sure you’re at your most discerning when parsing through this information. Without the benefit of an editor, these people may certainly be guilty of a little bit of exaggeration. But how much?
In almost seven years, I haven’t found even ONE accuser who is credible (whose story is consistent, believable, has corroborating witnesses and who would file a deposition with police). Let me know if you do. Even Tony Blair told anti-Sais they need to file charges. THAT is all that matters and the rest is tabloid material, period. End of story.
Sai Baba is being used as a tool by racists to smear Hinduism and the Indian government.
Telling (documenting) the TRUTH about accusers’ (they are not “victims” until they prove so) lies and contradictions is not vilification. Sai Baba is the one being vilified by mostly white foreigners who understand VERY little about Hinduism (which they show every time they open their mouths).
Anti-Sai activists DEMANDED that devotees “investigate” the allegations (and pronounce Sai Baba guilty) and when many devotees did and started pointing out inconsistencies in anti-Sai activists’ stories, the anti-Sai activists started insulting and harassing. I know because I am one of the ones they harassed through email and verbal abuse. Robert Priddy, along with others, is still lying about and harassing people to this day, even trying to get an English lawyer fired from his job for being a devotee.
oh man guys. He put truth in all caps. He MUST be right.
I’m a SHE, Mr. observant. Try using your brain to refute my claims instead of just running your mouth to make ridiculous assumptions.
Silly. There are no women on the internet. It’s a Myth.
Everyone on the internets are middle-aged hairy fat men, with poor hygiene.
A collection of (republished) articles from more reputed sources. Take these with a grain of salt since there is the probability, however low, that segments of the articles could have been forged. I dont have the originals on hand to compare them with so I cant rule out that possibility. I’m sure they exist though, on microfilm somewhere.
http://www.flameout.org/flameout/gurus/satya_testimonies.html
I researched the owner of this website (flameout.org) and he is a gay activist and crossdresser in the UK who lists his email address on site registration as flameout666 (plus his name is Damon!) which indicates he may be a satanist. He also tries to smear the Dalai Lama on his website claiming he eats meat.
It is no secret that atheists, evangelical Christians and disgruntled ex-devotees have joined forces to smear Sai Baba. The problem is, not one accuser has ever even tried to file charges!
This racist campaign is trying to make it appear that Indians are afraid of Sai Baba when the truth is that all the identifiable accusers are WHITE adults who are foreigners. All stories claiming Indians were abused are second-hand or anonymous claims which cannot be verified.
Damon lists himself as the CEO of GMAF with a link to
Gracelife Ministeries.
I don’t think this info was available a few years ago when I researched his claims (which I thought at the time appeared to target ONLY colored people). More than likely Damon thinks all religions other than Christianity are evil.
Sathya Sai Baba for children
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/8178990288/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=304485901&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=8178990849&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=089S0HMC4BWYQXYZ2BYV
http://www.amazon.com/Sathya-Baba-Life-Story-Children/dp/8178990849
http://www.amazon.com/Sri-Sathya-Sai-Baba-Children/dp/8178990911/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247835333&sr=1-1
Ernst Hayim. Thank you for your comments. Using your own standards and logic, Alaya Rahm is not credible because he claimed that Sathya Sai Baba literally morphed his penis into a vagina and vice versa twice. So when you go around telling people how Alaya claimed he was molested, don’t forget to include that part where Alaya claimed that Sathya Sai Baba literally morphed his penis into a vagina and vice versa. Alaya Rahm also claimed that when Sathya Sai Baba materialized objects, he looked under Baba’s palm despite the objections of others. Baba also offered to materialize a necklace for Alaya with a pendant of his (Baba’s) face on it. Just before Baba waved his hand, Alaya told Baba he wanted a Golden Om pendant instead. According to Alaya, Baba materialized, right then and there, a necklace with a Golden Om pedant on it. What magician can materialize an on-the-spot request? Are these miraculous experiences indicative of Alaya’s non-crediblity? You tell me. Yes, keep on defending a man who claims that Baba morphed his penis into a vagina and vice versa. People will laugh in your face. And the talks given by the Rahms on various occasions indicated that Alaya was not devoted to Sathya Sai Baba. They Rahm’s had family problems and Alaya only became more devoted when he had all those interviews he later claimed he was allegedly molested in. Also tell people how Alaya Rahm bragged about being so desperate to have interviews with the Guru, he carried two scarves so he could double his chances to be with Sathya Sai Baba. That doesn’t sound like a person who was being seriously sexually abused to me. As a matter of fact, Alaya Rahm wrote a love poem to Baba during the time he was later to claim to have been sexually abused. None of it adds up. Combine this with Alaya Rahm’s admission to being a decade-long daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol in official court records and any rational person would doubt his conflicting testimonies. Period.
Whats the matter, Moreno? Too many victims to keep track of? As I imagine you’re well aware, the individual who claimed the “genital morphing” was Tal Brooke, not Alaya Rahm. Alaya has, in fact, claimed nothing of the sort. You continue to spew forth with lies and false information designed to do nothing but malign and inflict damage. Since it is apparent that you are not interested in ascertaining the truth and are not interested in a fact-based discussion, I have nothing further to say to you. The house of cards has already collapsed and there is little that agents like you can hope to accomplish despite your willingness to falsify events and occurrences. This should be patently obvious to anyone who takes even a cursory glance at your “body of work”.
My work here is done.
You are absolutely WRONG Ernst. There were several other accusers in ADDITION to Alaya Rahm (using the pseudonym Sam Young for the first few years) who claimed the supernaturally morphing genitalia. Can you name them? If you had read the articles on my blog by clicking on my username you would be able to do so easily as I not only named them but I also put links to Joe’s website where he addresses this issue.
Unfortunately, you are trying to act like you know what you are talking about when you don’t. Joe and I have both researched and documented these issues extensively over the last several years. We did this because of people like you are are not doing your research and are completely misleading people.
Ernst Hayim, although I have maintained a civil tone with you, your tone has been nothing but uncivil, mocking, defamatory and negative. You have the audacity to sit there and call me a liar regarding Alaya Rahm’s “morphing penis” claims, which he most certainly did make. Since you are apparently too lazy to do the footwork for yourself, let me provide you with some verifiable facts. Alexandra Nagel (a critic and ex-devotee of Sathya Sai Baba) spoke to Alaya Rahm and personally (first-hand) asked him about the morphing penis stories. Alaya Rahm told Alexandra Nagel (after his defection, while an ex-devotee) that he had experienced the phenomenon on two different occasions. I have written about these things in my article entitled Sathya Sai Baba, Hermaphrodite? If you want to obtain this information from Anti-Baba websites, search for “Sai Baba as Shiva-Shakti: a Created Myth? Or? by Alexandra Nagel”. Therefore, the only person not interested in “ascertaining the truth” and not interested in engaging in a “fact-based discussion” is yourself. I can back up all my claims with references. I do not simply call others “liars” without making an earnest inquiry into the veracity of their claims. You, on the other hand, cannot support your smear campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba with any credible, legal and/or independent sources, references or citations. It is apparent you are not interested in another point of view, so my responses end here.
Interesting how all your “verifiable facts” can only be found on your own website or your accomplice Lisa De Witt’s literary efforts. It should be patently obvious that I did take the time to provide a reasoned refutation of your earlier claim, during the course of which, I realized who you are and what you represent. To do so again, only to have you distort the argument to suit your position, is pointless.
All the sources I have provided so far are indisputably independent and, at least in my opinion, credible. Your claims on the other hand, are backed up by nothing more than your and your associate Lisa De Witt’s “literary attempts”.
Contrary to your allegation, I am not “too lazy”. Rather, I realize the futility of arguing with a propagandist. I am open to another point of view, but it has to come from an honest place, not from the twisted mind of a well known internet propagandist like yourself.
Your sources are not “independent”. Not one of those sources attempted to tell the WHOLE truth. Like you, Ernst, they cherry-picked their information in order to make it as negative as possible. They failed to tell people Alaya Rahm was an 18 year old ADULT when he claims he was sexually abused. They, along with the pseudo-skeptics like Premanand and YOU Ernst, failed to tell people Alaya Rahm and several other accusers who were also ADULTS claimed Sai Baba’s genitalia supernaturally morphed from male to female.
I notice you are totally avoiding the issues and all you are doing is posting hate propaganda which, unfortunately for the anti-Sais had enough incriminating documentation to totally discredit them even though they cherry-picked their information and tried to cover up the truth regarding the accusers and their lack of credibility. If these people had done this to anyone else they would have been sued for defamation. Because of peole like you, there is now a movement to deal with false allegations (which run as high a 48%). People who make false allegations and engage in this type of harassment should be prosecuted.
I’m glad your blog and your friend Joe’s blog back you up. Its just lovely to know that your multiple personalities can, in fact, hold a consistent position. I’m sorry I cant name all the victims who claimed the genital morphing but I’m sure you can (since you made it all up).
Did you know, both of you are certifiable nutjobs? Its all in my blog.
I also don’t know about your “superconsciousness” or “superintelligence”, mostly since your fraudulent idol made them up for the benefit of gullible morons like yourself.
“Help ever, hurt never” says the pedophile, only to do the exact opposite. No surprise then that his minions are following suit.
Gallery of Rogues
Analyzing Joe Moreno’s Internet Attack Style
http://barrypittard.wordpress.com/2009/04/15/sathya-sai-baba-apologist-joe-morenos-random-personal-attack-style-1/
Co2000/Lisa De Witt
(the genius who thinks anything written against Sai Baba is a massive conspiracy by Evangelical Christians and Atheists – you know, those two groups filled with love for each other)
http://saibabaexposed.blogspot.com/2006/05/naughty-children-lisa-de-witt.html
This represents my final post on this topic. The “genital switch” argument traces itself to a solitary article by a woman called Alexandra Nagel who claims that numerous victims have told her this had occurred. It appears not to have been a fabrication by Moreno and Dewitt so a correction of my previous comment is in order.
Whatever the truth behind the alleged pedophile’s genital switching, the entire basis for this argument comes from a single article, and cannot be verified anywhere else (other than Moreno and Dewitt’s literary efforts).
In every single case, the perverse old man would hold a victim;s hand and guide it to his genitals which he would make them feel through a robe, “magically” making his penis disappear. I can think of a few ways (although I’d much rather not) that the dirty old man might have done this within the folds of his robe.
In any case, this argument is little more than misdirection.
Moreno and Dewitt use this article as a jumping board to suggest that all of the accusers must be insane/lying when in fact, a logical first step would be to question whether the author’s information (from the victims) was accurate and whether the author Alexandra Nagel was, in fact, being honest, or engaging in hyperbole.
Then, it would become necessary to investigate the circumstances under which these events occurred in order to establish whether they actually occurred or whether the individuals concerned had just been fooled into thinking they did, much like the magic ash and the rest of the sleight-of-hand “miracles”.
Of course, the firm of Moreno & DeWitt has no interest in doing any such thing.
There, is, I believe, enough information available for readers to make up their own minds. This sordid story has already consumed enough time and there are other things I’d like to move on to.
I will leave you with the continuing adventures of Moreno and DeWitt.
http://indiansceptic.org/nov2007/art7.htm
http://robertpriddy.wordpress.com/2009/04/22/joe-moreno-as-sathyasaibaba-with-smear-campaign/
http://morenojoe.blogspot.com/
http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/joe_morenos_mo.htm
Please don’t tell me you are really this ignorant, Ernst. I already told you I posted the names of the accusers along with links to their background info on my blog. Why haven’t you read it? Is the truth too sour for you? Instead you are making false claims and avoiding the issues..
It’s obvious that you are not interested in the truth Ernst. Why is it that atheists seem to have to try to prove their case by hatefully bashing and even defaming others?
You wrote:
“”God” is merely what people choose to call their psychoses, which are occasionally manifested as an imaginary friend that they need to talk to in order to remain sane.”
How can someone be considered sane if they are psychotic Ernst? Do you think everyone in your family is therefore psychotic except YOU Ernst? Do you think that atheists are the ONLY sane people in the world? If so, then why is the incarceration rate for atheists higher than all the supposedly insane people running around?
Do you know the person you are posting hate material for was documented on the internet soliciting jesus porn and posting misogynistic material on a blog where he posted pics of women who he made very sexually perverted and derogatory comments about? I seriously question your ability to determine who is a “nutjob” and who is not Ernst. And whatever happened to that “civil tone” you were blathering about. It was not in your original article and it most certainly is not evidenced here either.
We dont need proof and investigation. We have been given two eyes to see and reason.
This Baba wave his hand like a magician and this is the proof that he is not God. Weaving hand is art of magician to hide thair tricks and this guy do the same thing.
Why everytime he needs a bundle of towel before taking out egg from his mouth??/
Why doesnt he take out watermelon from his mouth?? But i know watermelon is quite big to hid in the towel and digest in mouth..
His fellow men often can be seen in white are his puppet and loyal men who help him and co-ordiante him to do all his magic trick.
He is a simply God with his fault… Now God is walking on wheelchair….so funny.
Awake o u ignorant and devotee of homosexual baba….
See his old time pics dressed in women clothes…wearing sarees and bangless….
wow God like to cross dress…
Als,!! so many are still affected with believer syndrome..
Karwan
You DO need proof to prove criminal accusations of pedophilia or fraud (which are EASILY documented and provable in a court of law…so why hasn’t anyone done it?). Why is it that atheists blather about proof but then claim THEY do not need to prove anything?
Karwan, I seriously doubt you have ever even seen Sai Baba.
I think atheists should mind their own business and stick to talking about their OWN life experiences and quit arrogantly bashing others experiences whom they could not possibly know about. In other words, many atheists are just as ignorant and dogmatic as they claim everyone else is and are very arrogant to act like they know things they do not and cannot possibly know.
Nobody has a right to judge MY spiritual experiences. They WEREN’T there and cannot possibly judge what I have experienced. This is the reason for the concept of “religious freedom.” When atheists try to label others who have religious experiences as “lunatics,”
they are in fact acting as inquisitors (and practicing medicine without a license), contrary to Sam Harris’s claim that they aren’t. Atheists are engaging in the very same practices they abhore in religious zealots. The only difference is, they are anti-religious zealots. As much as they would like to, atheists cannot take themselves out of the religious equation.
The truth is, people have all kinds of beliefs which may or may not be religious or harmful!
The issue is about beliefs, NOT religion. Atheists are not immune to having wrong or detrimental beliefs or being irrational either.
So you have the same mentality of those who are atheist. They need solid proof of existence of God. They dont see the indirect sign of God as universe all the living creatures and sign in their body itself.
For people like you if some killed a person and is not caught by the police then he is innocent. This is how you justify your baba because he has not been proved guilty in the court of this world. But remeber there is another court that is Court of the real God where your baba will be prosecuted for his trick, cheating, fraud and molesting of of male devotees.
The thing which he did behind the curtain is not accessible to the masses but only testimony of ex devotees of Baba well spoken.
And all those which he did in the public like Materialising the Wibhuti, Making neklace , pendant , Japanece watch is proof of him being a fraud and cheater and how he did these things. These things were captured by modern days camera. This camera caught him performing the false miracle in the name of God.
Why Sai baba of Shirdi is respected by everyone where is Sathya sai baba is full of controversy? Why Shirdi mof Sai baba prefered simple life but sathya sai baba like luxury cars, Chariot made of God and silver and staute of Gold. Why God this time started loving all these material thinsg? Shirdi of Sai baba perfomed many greater miracle than this this Thug baba.
I know you are emotionally attached to your baba because of His hospital, water canal projets and university and blah , blah. One more thing you have to know that Baba was not a king or Lord or a businessman. All these works is contribution of his faithful devotees like you but they are no where in the picture. All praise is for baba. But the actual contribution is of the devotees.
One more thing you know that one who borne and die is not God. It is not the character of GOd. He is the first and the Last. He is the creater of universe , the earth and which which lies between them. What your Baba has created? What is his share in the kingdom of God? He is simply a part of the creation of God. Who has the more right to worship , creator or the creature? He is a creature who will live on the earth for a time being and will die as normal human being.
I am not bothere by what type of spirutuality you have experince with Baba. Becuase very sweet words come from his mouth. The word full of Wisdom to change anyone life. But not able to change himself. Do you know that the one who preach hardly practise.
He talks about humanity and peace and love of all religion. But why did he build 3 temple?
Is he concern about humanity? Simply No!!
If he would have been then we could have seen one temple, one mosque and one church. True symbol of love and peace. For the person like me I am not inspired and impressed by some one by beautiful words . I am impressed by his action and practise.
Doing trick to gain the faith of Masses is not the charcter of God.
Singing and praising to the false god is defaming to the real God of universe.
Karwan, you have just admitted you have no respect for the law. By your rules, people can be thrown in jail merely by accusation without proof. Put your money where your mouth is and prove it in a court of law buddy! The Indian laws have statutes against (religious) fraud or do you not know this? Nobody with a brain cares about an opinion without proof.
And I could care less what you think about Sai Baba, Karwan. You are obviously VERY ignorant and think that people can and should be be found guilty without proof.
I am not attached to Baba. I am attached to the truth and fairplay. If I had found fraud or child abuse I would have reported it and insisted the alleged victims file charges just as I am demanding of you and your sordid accusations. Otherwise I would not have researched these accusations for almost SEVEN years and written publicly about them. Too bad you cannot see how you are playing into the racists and religious bigots smear campaign by buying into their drivel. All these campaigns against gurus were started by racists who are either atheists and evangelicals. None of these bozos would even be allowed on a jury due to their conflict of interest and bias.