God, the Avathar and the Intellectual - By Prof. G.Venkataraman

[Guest guest]

God, the Avathar and the Intellectual

By Prof. G.Venkataraman

INTRODUCTION

This article is triggered by one of the many that appeared in a special 80th

Birthday feature published by a prominent Indian Weekly named

THE WEEK. This weekly magazine is published from Kerala, and is a part of the

famous MALAYALAM MANORAMA group of publications. For years, the MALAYALAM

MANORAMA has been writing many articles on Swami, all reverential, I must add.

The companion magazine THE WEEK apparently decided that Sathya Sai Baba also

was news and featured Swami in its issue dated 27 November, 2005 as the Cover

Story. For the record I must mention that the MALAYALAM MANORAMA brought out a

special souvenir of its own on the occasion of the 80th Birthday, very well

done it must be said.

In the feature published by THE WEEK, there are several small pieces by many

guests, besides some stuff written by staff writers from Bangalore. In typical

modern journalistic fashion, the magazine presents "both points of view", that

is to say, material that is complimentary and also material that is critical. I

will not go into all of that but would like to stick mainly to an article by a

well-known award winning writer and social activist from Bangalore named U. R.

Ananthamurthy.

Mr. Anantamurthy - A Typical Intellectual

Ananthamurthy hails from a traditional background and acknowledges that his

parents paid their respects to Swami. But he himself is cast in a different

mould, and, pained by the deep inequities that existed [and in some measure

continue to exist] in Indian Society, Ananatamurthy has been continually

registering his disapproval and protest through his various writings, novels

and speeches. In the special issue of WEEK that I mentioned earlier,

Ananathamurhty has a piece – actually, it is not an article by him as such but

an "as told" piece, that is to say what Ananathamurthy said to a staffer.

Ananthamurthy, I must admit, does not cast aspersions nor sling mud. But he does

not hesitate to question, disapprove and dismiss without any semblance, I regret

to say, of deep analysis. This of course is quite typical of many intellectuals

when it comes to Spiritual matters. Before I come to intellectuals and the

problems many of them have in accepting God, I should mention that

Ananthamurthy, while dismissing Swami, does not appear to reject Spirituality.

On the contrary, he accepts and admires a host of evolved souls like Kabir,

Basava, Tukaram, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Ramana Maharishi. However, he is

not sure where to fit in Swami in all this. He is aware that people flock to

Swami in hundreds of thousands but dismisses all that with the remark, "But

that magnetism is not spiritual". He adds, "Spiritualism requires a kind of

mind like Jiddu Krishnamurthy. I could argue with him. With Sai Baba, either

you believe him or you don't."

WHY INTELLECTUALS FIND IT DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT GOD

So much for an introduction. Let me now leave this eminent intellectual aside

and turn to the main topic of intellectuals and Avatars. I shall come back to

the remarks of Ananthamurthy later. These days, most intellectuals tend to be

agnostic at best and atheist at worst; often it is the latter. Dazzled by the

achievements of man in so many dimensions, they are unable to accept God

because they are confronted with so many questions for which they do not have

answers.

Einstein And Abdus Salam - Scientists With A Difference

Having said this, I must point out that there have been and there still are many

intellectuals [possibly a minority] who do believe in God, scientists included.

Einstein was a famous example. He freely acknowledged that he believed in a

Superior Being although his God was not One who sat in judgment, inflicted

punishment and all that.

Talking of scientists, I must not forget to mention late Abdus Salam of

Pakistan, who won the Nobel Prize for his incisive work on electro-weak

unification. I had the privilege of meeting Salam once when he came to address

a conference on high-energy physics that was held in the lab where I was

working at that time. It was my job to receive Salam at the airport and take

him to our Centre. Later in the evening, when he was returning to the airport,

Salam who was then riding in the car said his evening prayers as all Muslims

are expected to. A Westerner once asked Salam, "How come you, a scientist,

believe in God?" Salam gave a terse reply, "Science is all about the outer

world. God is all about the Inner world. Where is the contradiction?"

In what follows, I shall focus heavily on scientists for two important reasons.

One, I know something about scientists; two, in many respects scientists set

the fashion in questioning God, a fashion that other intellectuals are eager to

adopt.

THE TRAP OF LOGIC – WHY INTELLECTUALS REJECT AVATARS

I would now like to deal briefly with the topic of Avatars and how people react

to them. Here, I have found a very strange phenomenon. I know of many who are

ready to accept Rama and Krishna as

Avatars without batting an eyelid, but when it comes to Swami, they dismiss Him

summarily. I am sure these people all have their own reasons but I always

wonder: "How come they accept as Avatar both Rama and Krishna whom they have

never seen, but are unwilling to accept Swami who can be seen?" Perhaps these

persons accept that Rama is God and that Krishna is God, because they have

heard that frequently from their parents, right from childhood. Maybe that is

all there is to it.

Gandhiji On God

This raises a fundamental question: "Who is God?" Many answers have been given

over thousands of years by sages and philosophers in all lands, but I like best

the definition given by Gandhi. I have quoted this often and I hope the reader

would not mind if I quote the same one more time, because it is so pertinent to

what I am discussing.

Gandhi said, "He is no God who merely satisfies the intellect. God to be God

must rule the Heart and transforms the senses. He is LOVE." Now I ask you. Does

not this definition fit Swami like a glove?

Many decades ago – around 1950, Swami paid His first visit to Venkatagiri, in

response to continuous prayers by the then Rajah of Venkatagiri. [in the

November 2005 issue, H2H carried a conversation with the Rajah's Son, to read

that now, go

here]. On that occasion, the Rajah took the initiative to bring many Vedic

scholars to the Divine presence so that there was a discussion of spiritual

matters.

Swami was hardly known at that time, and the proud Vedic scholars took a dim

view of the Rajah inviting a "young and unknown upstart". As happened on such

occasions with Swami, the Vedic scholars were soon put in their place when they

realized that Swami knew far more about the Vedas than all of them put together.

 

Ramana, Ramakrishna And Sai - The Difference

That filled them with wonder: "How does He know all this when He has not spent

even a single day in a Vedic school?" They then asked Swami, ‘What exactly is

the difference if any between You and great souls and saints like Ramana,

Ramakrishna etc?"

Swami responded with a gesture rather than with words. Swami held the left hand

at the level of the chest with the palm facing upwards and the right hand at

the level of the face with the palm facing downwards. The Vedic scholars were

nonplussed. They wanted to know what exactly this gesture meant.

Swami explained: "The saints and sages you are referring to are humans who were

in the process of evolving towards God. I, on the other hand, am God come down

in human form – that is the difference."

There you have it – Swami was making abundantly clear that He is an

Avatar.

Why Modern Scientists Find It Difficult To Accept God?

Not withstanding all this, intellectuals have a big problem in accepting

Avatars – I mean when they cannot accept God Almighty, how can they accept a

human manifestation of the same Supreme Lord? This gives me an opening to

discuss briefly the reservations most modern scientists and indeed

intellectuals have in accepting God. Barely fifty years ago, we knew very

little about the Universe. In fact, around 1920 or so, most scientists believed

that the Universe consisted of just the galaxy Milky Way, of which our solar

system is a part. Almost all astronomers believed then that there was no galaxy

in the Universe apart from the Milky Way. And then suddenly things

changed, thanks to a few major scientific discoveries, as a result of which we

now know that there are billions of galaxies!

In this way, our knowledge of the Cosmos and the stuff it is made of has

increased enormously. True there is a lot more we still do not know but what we

presently know is already mind-boggling.

The Current Dogma of Science

Thanks to this tremendous leap forward in scientific knowledge, all of which has

occurred in about fifty short years – and this includes not only physics and

astronomy but every scientific discipline all the way to molecular biology -

scientists have become very cocky and arrogant. The current dogma of Science is

that a theory of Science might be accepted based on currently known facts but

must not be regarded as the eternal truth; there could well be new discoveries

that disprove existing theories or limit their scope. Everything is subservient

to logic and must be applicable within the boundaries as stipulated by Science.

In particular, the prevailing belief is that Science progresses best by a

systematic effort to prove wrong currently accepted hypotheses. Any proposition

that refuses to accept these terms and look beyond does not deserve the

attention of scientists.

Modern Science - Experiments Hold The Key

That is the way scientists of today operate. Logical analysis is supreme and

hypothesis becomes a fact only when tested thoroughly by experiments. Just to

make my point clear, I might mention that the famous scientist Stephen Hawking

has written many epoch-making papers on exotic astrophysical objects called

Black Holes.

There is hardly anyone who disputes the theories of Hawking. And yet, though the

results obtained by Hawking are of profound significance, and though he has been

hailed widely as a genius, he is yet to receive the Nobel Prize because his

theories have not yet been tested experimentally. I mention all this just to

make the point how experiments hold an important place in the scheme of

Science.

Having said all this, I must hasten to add that one should not find fault with

the above methodology of Science, for such rigour is very much needed in

Science. The problem arises when some of this discipline is applied in domains

where it is neither relevant nor applicable. And that problem lies not in

Science but with scientists. What exactly is the problem? That is what I shall

discuss next.

THE BOUNDARIES OF SCIENCE

The most important thing about Science is that it is bound by the limitations of

both Space and of Time or, Space-time as pundits would like to put it. There is

nothing wrong with it.

Science seeks answers about the material Universe as it evolved and as it exists

today, and since the Universe is bound by Space and Time, Science too has to

observe the same limits.

Can Science 'Experience' Life?

So far so good. Where then does the problem lie?

The problem surfaces when one starts asking questions that lie

beyond the purview of Science as is currently accepted. Are there such things at

all that lie beyond Science? Of course there are, like LIFE, for example.

Ask a scientist to define life, and you would find he is in trouble

straightaway. Yes he would give all kinds of shady and cagey answers but he

cannot really answer the question. Some would honestly say, "Listen, I cannot

answer that question; it is beyond Science as we currently know it." Others

more arrogant would say, "Well, I cannot answer it now but be assured that one

day Science would be able to answer that question. You do not need to invoke

God and all that to explain life."

How far is this defence valid? We can get a better appreciation of it by

considering an everyday example. Let's say there are two people watching a

glorious sunset. As you know, the Sun turns deep red as it goes down the

horizon. This is due to what is known as the Tyndall effect, and students of

Physics know all about it. No dispute there. But just consider this. I say the

Sun appears red, because I experience a sensation thanks to the eye-brain

combination, and I describe this sensation by saying that the appearance of the

Sun is red. The red colour I see is a sensation within me. Another person

watching the sunset would also say the Sun appears red. He says so because of

the sensation within him. But then, how do we know for sure that the sensation

that I experience is exactly the same as the sensation he experiences?

Science Can Measure a Sunset, But Can Science Feel It?

This is not a silly question; on the other hand it is an important and

non-trivial question. To make clear what I mean, let us go back to the sunset.

If a spectrometer were to be directed towards the Sun, it would show a spectrum

with a strong peak at a frequency that we would describe as red. The

spectrometer would just generate an electrical signal and a graph – that is

all. On the other hand, the sensation of seeing a red colour is a property of

the senses.

It is connected with an EXPERIENCE that a living entity has. Experience and life

are thus intimately connected, and Science, as presently structured can never

address these aspects of Creation. In turn this means scientists can never get

answers about God when all doors are shut; that is to say, it is not meaningful

to either "deduce" or reject God via Science. It is like trying to talk about

the third dimension, living in a two-dimensional world.

With our sense organs we can feel, touch, smell, taste and see.

These FEELINGS or

SENSATIONS are unique to the living being, and as far as I know, they are not

and can never be accessible to any scientific instrument. There is a simple

reason for this. All scientific instruments, including the very best in the

world are inanimate – they can never have any experience, which is possible

only for an entity with a life force within it.

It is no doubt possible to have an instrument that detects the molecules that

produce the fragrance of fresh jasmine, but no instrument can feel that

fragrance the way you and I do.

I can, using MRI [Magnetic Resonance Imaging], print out the waveforms produced

in the brain of a Yogi who is experiencing Bliss, but a waveform is mere data

while Bliss is the EXPERIENCE of a living person. The two belong to different

domains, with the waveform representing a mere projection of EXPERIENCE into

the lower domain of inanimate instruments.

Expereince of a Living Entity - Not Accessible to Science

Basically, the point is simply this: The experience which a living entity has

belongs to a dimension

beyond the inanimate, and is NOT accessible to Science as structured at present.

Yet, through the instruments of Science we can even study living systems and

their parameters such as blood pressure, sugar level in the blood and so on.

But no instrument can taste the sweetness of sugar although there are

instruments that can tell you all you want to know about its molecular

structure etc.

In short, Science, which is bound by Space and Time, is related to the gross

inanimate world. It does not, as it stands, extend to the subtle world to which

we have access through our senses. This is particularly evident when one

considers Consciousness. Even scientists admit that there is a thing called

Consciousness but ask them to define it, and they would throw up their hands.

This being the case, scientists, if they have any sense of humility, would

recognise their boundaries and limitations and not comment on things they do

not know about. When they lose their humility, they become arrogant and

arrogance blinds one to basics. That is what happens almost invariably.

Double Standards Of Science

Consider a biologist. Most biologists would not know much about the theory of

relativity although almost everyone would know that it was Einstein who gave

that theory. Ask a biologist, "Do you believe in the theory of relativity?" He

would promptly say yes, even though he has not studied it and in fact knows

practically nothing about it. How come? Because he has faith in Einstein.

Now if in the same way I were to say that I believe God exists because Adi

Shankara says so, my fellow scientists would say I have become senile.

I am dismissed for having faith in God based on what Adi Shankara has taught and

experienced, but it is OK for a biologist to have total faith in relativity

without understanding a word of it, just because he has faith in Einstein. I

would call this double standards.

Proving God's Existence Through Science!

Another argument that scientists often give is that in Science one can prove

laws through experiments. Newton's laws can be proved by experiments and indeed

first year students do this all over the world. More complex laws like that of

electro-weak unification require billions of dollars for setting up the

equipment, and at the end of it, the law can be proven, as did Carlo Rubbia.

Citing all this, scientists often say that you cannot prove the existence of

God in this manner. This is where I disagree.

Let us take a material like lead. Suppose one took a wire made of lead and

cooled it to say a temperature of 5

degrees absolute. This is a very low temperature - such temperatures are not

encountered even in Antarctica in winter - and one needs very special apparatus

to reach such a low temperature. Let us say this has been done. It would then be

found that the lead wire can carry electric current without any losses

whatsoever; that is to say, it would lose all its electrical resistance. This

is the phenomenon of superconductivity. A lead wire at room temperature will

not show superconductivity. Unless one takes the trouble of cooling the wire to

a very low temperature, one cannot make lead into a superconductor. In the same

way, anyone in principle can have the Darshan of the Divine, like Ramakrishna

Paramahamsa did; however, if someone wants God to appear before him, then that

calls for special effort on the part of that person. It is very much like in

experimental science.

Divine Experience Through Scientific Instruments - A Flawed Approach

The effort made to see God directly involves achieving a state of high internal

purity through strict sense and mind control. Those are the conditions under

which God will manifest. Many sages and saints have had the Darshan of the Good

Lord in this manner, but tell this to any scientist and he would scoff at you.

He would assert that in Science you can observe a phenomenon only when the

experimental conditions are right. Yet, most scientists are unwilling to accept

a similar stipulation in the case of God and Spirituality. In Science one uses

inanimate instruments to detect the phenomenon one is interested in, no matter

how complex the phenomenon. In Spirituality, the instrument is the human being

itself.

Experiences related to the Divine cannot be had through inanimate instruments

alone, even if one spends trillions of dollars. This is the basic truth that

scientists of today simply do not understand or refuse to.

Most intellectuals, scientists being prominent among them, try to explain all

that we see through the "Head" alone but when it comes to God, the "Heart" HAS

to come into the picture. The Heart being BEYOND the Mind, the tools of Science

will not work; instead, we need the tools of meta-science or meta-physics, if

you will. It is at this point that the modern physicist loses patience, makes

his sarcastic comments and withdraws with the feeling that those who believe in

God need to be pitied rather than censured.

In passing I might mention that most of the problems faced by humanity today are

caused by the Head, and if we are serious about finding solutions to them, we

HAVE to go beyond the Head to the realm of the Heart. This, incidentally, is

the core of most of Swami's Discourses, and this is where Spirituality becomes

most essential. Intellectuals, I am afraid, hardly appreciate this.

SOME QUESTIONS RAISED BY MR. ANANTHAMURTHY

Now if a [modern] scientist has so much difficulty in accepting God, how is he

going to accept an Avatar, that is, God come in human form? This is reflected

in the following quote from Ananthamurthy. He says, "What puzzles me is that he

[swami] claims he is God and I laugh at him. People also laughed at Lord Krishna

when he claimed he was God. I used to wonder if Sai Baba also is God, and if we

are refusing to acknowledge it?"

Ananthamurthy goes on: "I like certain things about Sai Baba. When BJP leader

L.K.Advani went on a Rath Yatra, Sai Baba is believed to have said, why build

Ram temple at Ayodhya when he is present everywhere. [This is a reference to

Advani, a politician, who made a political issue out of the construction of a

temple for Lord Rama at Ayodhya, the birth place of Rama.] I appreciate his

drinking water and healthcare initiatives. One more thing I like about him [sai

Baba] is that he is not an English-speaking person." Ananthamurthy is of the

opinion that English has done much harm to the various Indian languages,

relegating almost all of them to a second-class status.

His parting line is: "The land that gave birth to great people like Gandhi and

Ramana deserves better." In my view, this casual remark makes it abundantly

clear that Ananthamurthy's thinking is highly flawed and superficial. He says

that he finds it laughable when Swami says He is God. But he seems to

conveniently forget what Swami adds, namely that we also are God.

Ananathamruthy praises Ramana Maharishi. That is the way it should be; but does

he remember Ramana's perpetual question?

Does he not recall that Ramana invariably asked every one to examine the issue:

"Who am I?" As we know very well, Swami too has discussed this topic in so many

of His Discourses.

Swami and Ramana

Let us focus on this question: "Who am I?" What does Ramana say about this? He

says that every human being is really Divine. Swami says the same. So, if you

and I are God why cannot Sai Baba be God? Or is it that Ananthamurthy is not

prepared to accept this fundamental teaching of Ramana whom he holds in such

high regard?

At this stage, I wish to make one thing very clear: I am not speaking against

Ramana; on the contrary I hold him in the highest regard. Swami too has high

praise for Ramana, as should be evident from the remarks He has made at various

times. By the way, we have on video tape the recollections of an old devotee

who, along with her family, used to be in the Paatha Mandiram or Old Mandir

where Swami stayed from 1940 to 1950. She recalls in that tape how Ramana sent

two of his disciples to Puttaparthi over sixty years ago to have the

Darshan of God! So you know what Ramana thought of Swami as far back as the

forties, when Swami was little known in the outside world.

THE HEAD VERSUS THE HEART

Changing gears let me now make a few spiritual arguments, starting with Swami's

observation that a human being is a combination of the gross body, the subtle

Mind and the immortal Atma. Combining the three letters M [for Mind], B [for

body] and A [for the Atma], Swami sometimes jocularly says that everyone is a

MBA! For convenience, let me use the word Head for the Mind and Heart for the

Atma.

Now what is the hierarchy amongst these three? Swami says it should be the Heart

first, the Head next and Body and Senses last. In the world of today, the

priorities are different, with the Heart more or less left out most of the

time. Intellectuals in particular, are dominated by the Head. When that

happens, logic takes precedence and the feelings of the Heart take a back seat,

especially faith.

For one on the spiritual path, faith is perhaps the most important requirement.

Maybe for some, when the journey begins, faith takes root through enquiry and

questioning but there comes a stage when logic simply has to be thrown away,

and this is something few intellectuals of would be prepared to do. Which

brings me to the subtle way in which the Avatar moves about amongst us. One saw

this earlier in the Shirdi Avatar and one sees it now in the Sri Sathya Sai

Avatar also.

THE AVATAR HAS A HUMAN FORM BUT HE IS VERY DIFFERENT

There are innumerable things that an Avatar does, some of which we can perceive

and understand, while others are far beyond our comprehension; this is a fact

we must be prepared to accept. From what I have seen, I would like to say that

there are at least four aspects of the Avatar on constant display. Firstly, He

showers Love on all. Next, He responds to our distress calls. Thirdly, He gives

advice. Fourthly, He tests. The last point needs some elaboration.

There are two key Slokas in the Gita that offer a clue to the point that I just

made. The first of these is Sloka [9.22] which, by the way, Swami refers to as

the fulcrum of the

Gita since it occurs right in the middle of the eighteen chapters of this sacred text.

In this

Sloka the Blessed Lord essentially says: "Repose steadfast faith in Me and think

of Me always. I shall then carry your burden entirely." The second Sloka that I

hold to be relevant is [18.66], wherein Krishna declares that he who totally

surrenders to the Lord would be fully redeemed. If we keep these two key

declarations of the Krishna Avatar in mind, then we would realise that often

times Swami is really testing us about the quality of our surrender.

Total Surrender - Not Easy For Devotees, Hard for Intellectuals

Devotees, especially while in the euphoric state inside the Interview Room,

declare ecstatically, "Swami, I have surrendered to You." However, seldom is

this a serious statement. As Swami often tells students, "People say they have

surrendered their Mind to Me. Yes, they give their Minds to Me but only for a

few seconds. They take it back when they go out of the Interview Room!" Though

said in a light-hearted manner, there is profound truth in this statement. All

of us are highly prone to deposit our Minds with the proverbial monkey rather

than entrust it to God for safe custody. Now if we so-called devotees have so

much problem with the Mind, how much more difficult it would be for the

intellectuals?

Yes, as Swami often reminds us, the Mind is the key to our future; it can take

us to God or to the Devil, which ever we please. We have to make the choice,

not God. God will only help by giving advice and setting examples to follow;

but the buck really stops with us. However, if we surrender totally, then God

would get into the driving seat and take us safely to our destination.

THE TESTS THE AVATAR GIVES US

People ask: "Why does God have to test us? Does He not know where we stand? Why

can't He help us? Why all this test business? It is so unfair." I would like to

respond with a direct personal experience of mine.

Once many years ago when I was the Vice Chancellor, exams were in progress. I

went round the various rooms where the boys were taking the exams and later I

reported about the exams to Swami, who, you must remember, is the Chancellor of

our Institute. Swami asked me how many students were absent – it always happens

a few students are absent due to sickness. I thought I was very smart and said,

"Swami, You know everything!"

Swami looked at me sternly and replied, "I know how many were absent but do you

know?" I hung my head down for I actually did not know how many were absent.

Swami was sending me a signal that as the VC, I had better know more about what

was expected of me.

I am citing this incident merely to state that God always knows everything about

us but He tests us nevertheless so that we may know where exactly we stand.

These tests are really tests of our faith. It is up to us recognise the tests –

Swami will never say, "Here is a test for you"; we have to figure out when He is

testing and when He is not. Having spotted the test, we must measure up to it.

We must constantly keep in mind Swami's statement: "Test is taste for Me!"

SURRENDER AND FAITH

Surrender involves going beyond the domain of the Mind and that is something

intellectuals cannot easily do, trapped as they are in the illusion that they

are free, when in fact they are prisoners of logic and the Mind. Actually, we

should not blame intellectuals when we devotees also are given to questioning

the actions of the

Avatar. Take, for example, the Rama Avatar.

People have been asking from time immemorial, questions like, "Why did Rama

banish Sita to the forest, especially after having made her go through fire

earlier? Is this not gross injustice?" My response to this is the following: If

you and I who have come thousands of years after Rama and Sita know her to be

pure and chaste, would not Rama, who was supposed to be God incarnate have

known that? We must have the faith that God never does anything without a

purpose. I maintain that Rama was actually establishing certain norms for

people in high places, for all times, especially during this Kali Age.

To stress my point I would like to point out that there was some years ago, a

well-known politician, hailed by all as an upright man; he even rose to become

briefly, the Prime Minster of India. He had a son, who throughout the political

career of his father exploited his father's high position to make all kinds of

shady deeds. The whole world knew about it, but the father consistently turned

a blind eye, not withstanding the frequent discourses he gave on the Ramayana!

If this politician had read his Ramayana right, he would have learnt that Rama

banished innocent Sita to stress that even if a relative is blameless, one must

have nothing to do with that person, in order to establish high standards of

probity. In short, here was the

Avatar, who, as a part of His drama was teaching a lesson and instead of

learning it, humans are passing judgement on Him as if the Avatar was just

another human being.

Many alleged scholars of the epics often indulge in judging Avatars by applying

norms that apply only to humans, which is a fatal mistake. Surrender demands

faith, and total surrender demands total faith; this is not possible for

intellectuals but is possible for those who believe in God. Let us never forget

that in the processing of drawing the devotee closer, the Lord will test for

sure, sometimes sorely!

This digression into the business of testing is needed because this is something

unique to the Avatar. With due respect to them, saints like Ramana and

Ramakrishna do not do this. God alone tests because it is to God alone to whom

we must totally surrender; and when we do, He will take full charge of us as He

has assured in the

Gita. Thus, this testing game goes on constantly to pick out the winners and

separating them from those who have to try more. Intellectuals will never

understand this and people like Ananthamurthy would be totally perplexed by

many of the things that Swami does. Indeed, all who "see" with their Heads

would have this difficulty and end up dismissing Sai Baba. God, as Swami often

reminds us, can never be understood but only experienced.

JUDGEMENT WITHOUT KNOWING THE FACTS

Ananathamurthy has correctly identified three key phenomena of the twentieth

century: "hunger for social justice, hunger for spirituality and hunger for

modernity." According to him, all these three go together. Ananthamurthy then

goes on to describe how these three hungers have manifested and who has done

what about them. I have no argument with any of these. But he makes all these

remarks as if Swami has done nothing about them. On the contrary, Swami has

shown how starting from Spirituality, one can indeed solve most of humanity's

problems, including social injustice, besides blending the best of today with

the best of olden times as He has done in His Institute for example. But

Ananthamurthy, it seems, knows hardly anything about it.

Let us start with social justice. Many fight for social justice through

agitations. Swami rejects that approach. He concentrates instead on

transforming individuals and sensitising them. In the long run this is the only

workable approach. Take caste discrimination or race discrimination. One can

pass all the laws one wants to prevent these but in the ultimate analysis it is

people who have to change and give up prejudice. That can happen only when there

is a change of Heart, and change of Heart, I maintain, can never be brought

about through agitations, or legislation or the cudgel. Ananthamurthy talks of

the hunger for Spirituality. Yes there is such a hunger, and when that is taken

care of, problems of poverty, problems of hunger, etc., can all be mitigated in

substantial measure. That is what this Avatar is all about. It is great pity

that Ananthamurthy does not have one single word to say about Swami's infinite

Love and how Pure Love can solve all man-made problems.

Swami Teaches Love In Action

In general, intellectuals like Ananathamurthy are utterly ignorant about the

incredible service of Love being rendered by the Sri Sathya Sai Organisation

throughout the world. Here, I would like to make a personal appeal to the

readers of this article. Please do make time to read

our regular reports on Sai Seva in Heart2Heart and tell as many as you can about

these inspiring stories. In a nutshell, by helping every individual to

spiritualise himself or herself, Swami is in fact leading a silent revolution.

Take His Institute, for example.

Does Ananathamurthy, or for that matter any so-called intellectual in India,

know how much Seva the old boys are doing silently in many places in India

throughout the year? Do they know that every time the old boys gather here,

they not only run medical camps in the neighbouring villages but also go out at

night and cover street-sleepers with blankets? Do they know how our old boys

(past students of the Sathya Sai University) went to Jammu and Kashmir to help

quake victims there, against great odds? I would like to know of one University

or College in the country [other than Swami's] whose alumni reached out in such

a fashion. Maybe they wrote cheques but did they actually go there and serve

the victims?

INTELLECTUALS AND SWAMI'S MATERIALISATIONS

One thing that intellectuals seize upon to denigrate Swami is the

materialisation that Bhagavan often performs, like creating

vibhuti, or a ring or a chain etc. Science phooh-phoohs miracles and

intellectuals invariably seize upon it to cry fraud. I don't have to convince

you about the genuineness of these demonstrations of para-normal phenomena but

I do think it is important that you hear Swami's own observations on the

subject. Here is what He says:

You must have heard people say that mine is all magic. But the manifestation of

Divine Power must not be interpreted in terms of magic. Magicians play their

tricks for earning their maintenance, worldly fame and wealth. They are based

on falsehood and they thrive on deceit. However, this body can never stoop to

such low levels. This body has come through the Lord's resolve to manifest in

human form. That resolve is intended to uphold Sathya or Truth. Divine resolve

is always true resolve. Remember, there is nothing that Divine power cannot

accomplish. It can transmute earth into sky and sky into earth. To doubt this

is to prove that you are too weak to grasp great things, and the grandeur of

the Universe.

I guess I have said enough about intellectuals and how they are not equipped to

comprehend phenomena like Avatars. I took time off to write about intellectuals

because many people hear what they say, read what they write and get disturbed

by it. I hope I have succeeded in convincing you that there is nothing to be

disturbed about.

Putting The Facts Straight

There is one other matter that many devotees have been quite agitated about, and

maybe I should add a few remarks about that also, and that concerns the

notorious so-called documentary on Swami produced by BBC. We received many,

many letters and mails asking us to do something about it.

However, we did not react in the way most people expected us to, but respond we

did, in our own way though. I don't wish to go further into that. But I thought

you might be interested to know what was said by one of the writers who

contributed an article to the special issue of

THE WEEK that I alluded to in the beginning.

The writer in question is Bill Aitkin, an Englishman who for decades has made

India his home. For many years he has been coming to Puttaparthi, but so

quietly that hardly anyone here knew about him. He came to some prominence with

his recent book Sri Sathya Sai Baba, A Life.

Aitkin has given a stirring defence of Swami, not that Swami needs any defence

from mortals. But records do need to be set straight and Bill Aitkin does that

with pungent fervour! Here are some quotes:

The critics are so intemperate in their dislike that their vituperation now

comes across as almost near comical in its predictability. Nothing that Baba

can say or do meets with their approval. If he provides drinking water to

thirsty villagers, they scent a scam but if doesn't provide drinking water, he

is anti-poor. ….. Probably because of the intensity of their hate, when it

comes to a serious, forensic examination of their allegations, they resort to

bluster and evasion instead of hard facts. Smearing sexual innuendo is a

traditional ploy but on failing to substantiate their charges, the critics

switch to another unrelated subject.

They will claim that all of Sathya Sai Baba's materialisations are phoney.

However, this cannot stick, because millions have witnessed the outpouring of

vibhuti at Shivarathri. So then, financial irregularities are imputed to the

saint, and when these are likewise found to be unproductive of scandal, mafia

happenings are evoked. ……… The strategy of the critics seems to be that if

sufficient mud is thrown, some might stick. ………..

Here is what Aitkin has to say about the BBC, and he gives on behalf of all of

us a stinging reply to slander with all the required passion! Aitkin says,

The latest in these so-called exposes is the BBC documentary whose agenda was so

predetermined to denigrate Baba that it stooped to the unethical use of a spy

camera. In a last farcical gesture, the producer hired some roadside

entertainers to attempt to simulate Baba's chamatkar [materialisations]. The

result is so ludicrous that it leaves the viewer wondering as to who is funding

this bizarre display of hostile reporting. The BBC is ultimately governed by the

Anglican establishment, and churches in the west are losing out financially to

the appeal of the Sai Baba movement.

As a commercial broadcaster, the BBC's opting for sleaze would have the dual

advantage of discrediting a rival as well as getting a good audience rating.

The Church of England can have no objection to programmes that weaken perceived

threats – like the Papacy or Hindu holy men – to its declining influence in the

world. Posing as a lion in Asia, the BBC is a mouse in Britain. It dare not

criticise public icons like the Queen, who happens to be the supreme of the

Anglican Church.

Well, there it is - all the rebuttal of the BBC that you have always wanted,

that too from an Englishman! To the above, I would like to add a few comments

of my own. When Hardy the BBC producer came to Prashanti Nilayam at the time of

Shivarathri to shoot some scenes, I met him briefly. It was apparent even then

that Hardy was out to smear tar. When the so-called documentary was released,

my worst fears were confirmed. Do you know that in this much touted video there

is a character who goes about shouting that Sai Baba wants to kill him? As

though Swami has no better business! Hardy was able to get away with pure

nonsense because in those countries where this film was shown, most people had

absolutely no idea of who Swami is.

I ask you: suppose some TV channel in India had produced a similar,

poorly-researched documentary on a person in the West held in high public

esteem; would the people and the media there have kept quiet? On the other hand

when this rubbish that carried a brand name was telecast, so many papers in

England hailed it as a great expose. No surprise in that because sometime

earlier, the famous London

Times, carried a similar shabby, ill-researched article on Swami that made

waves. I then wrote a letter to the Editor, as did many prominent devotees from

America. None of these were published, quite contrary to the usual practice of

giving some space to counter opinion. So much for the much taunted objectivity

of the Media of those countries.

I do not wish to make a blanket condemnation of all that comes from the West. A

few days ago, a devotee here shared with me his copy of an article entitled

GOOD GURU GUIDE, that appeared in 1994 in the famous journal ECONOMIST,

published from London. I don't know who the author is but this is a penetrating

article on various successful people and intellectuals like George Soros, a

financial wizard, Tom Peters, Peter Drucker and Michael Porter, all celebrated

Management Gurus, Noam Chomsky, a renowned professor of linguistics in MIT.

What stunned me was that Swami has been mentioned in this article and in a

reasonably complimentary manner too! Here is what the article has to say about

Swami. After commenting on Indian Gurus who globetrot, it observes:

Sai Baba stayed home and succeeded splendidly. His message of peace and love,

like his beatific smile, has not changed since he was a child prodigy. Now he

is more popular than ever – so much so his hometown of Puttaparthi a couple of

hours drive from Hyderabad boasts a new airstrip. ……..

Over the years, dozens of implacable rationalists and other mischief-makers have

tried to discredit him, but never successfully. Sai Baba has ignored, outlived

or outpaced them all.

These days, miracle-wise, he concentrates on holy ash. But he is also a popular

philanthropist running schools and colleges and an enormous hospital for the

poor. Judges, politicians, bureaucrats and film stars cringe and crave an

audience. Tom Peters, eat your heart out!

How do you like that?

MY OWN CROSSOVER AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

Some of you might say, "Listen, you are supposed to be a scientist, are you not?

What about you? Were you ever on the other side of the fence, and if so, how did

you come over to this side?" I have, I believe, described all this in one of my

radio talks; even so, the present occasion warrants a brief statement. Yes, a

long time ago, I was on the other side of the fence. However, I did not deny

God nor did I denigrate Swami. I just remained indifferent to Swami; He was, so

to say, not in my radar screen. And then when the time came, Bhagavan Baba

pulled and strongly too, with a few telling traumatic experiences.

As Swami says in the Gitavahini, misery is indeed a great friend, because it

draws one to God; in this case, it brought me to the Living and Loving God. I

must mention that when I was first drawn to Swami I thought He was just a saint

or something of that sort. I did not know then that He was actually an Avatar.

That realisation came later. In the precursor period, shall I say, I did not

also believe in materialisations. I dismissed them as impossible because they

defy all laws of Science – the usual, ignorant prejudice. And one fine day when

Swami actually materialised

vibhuti for me, it hit me like a ton of bricks. I had actually seen a

materialisation, beyond the so-called laws of Science and I had to accept it.

A Cold Fig On A Hot Afternoon by Swami!

Since then I have seen so many of these materialisations, some of them quite

exotic. Once, a few years ago, we were all seated in the afternoon on the lower

porch in the Sai Kulwant Hall.

It was a hot afternoon. A few of us were around Swami, and seated in the Hall

were thousands. Suddenly in the middle of causal conversations, Swami

materialised a fig fruit in full view of the huge gathering. He then passed the

fig around to us and when I received it I found it was cold, as if it had just

been taken out of a deep freeze! Imagine getting a cold fig on a hot summer

afternoon. Later Swami made it into pieces and distributed the fruit, and I got

a piece too! Hmmmm, it was delicious!!

I shall conclude with the story of another such materialisation, which was

remarkable in its own way. This happened during the period when I was the

Vice-Chancellor. Those days, after Darshan was over, Swami would invariably

call me and a few others connected with the Institute into the Interview room

to spend some time with Him. That day, the Warden of our Hostel here was also

present. As a small but intensely loving gesture, the Warden had brought with

him in a silver vessel, some shelled groundnuts or peanuts as they say in

America.

Amazing Billet From A Peanut!

The Warden offered it to Swami who first refused but later pooped one nut into

His mouth. He then started giving us one nut at a time. He did one round, then

another and then started on the third. Everyone put out his hand to receive the

Prasadam from Swami and when my

turn came I did the same. But what fell into my hand was not a piece of

groundnut but an enamel billet with some art work on it. I gave Swami a puzzled

look and He said, "See what it is."

I took it near the window of the Interview room and tried to see what was on the

billet but could not see clearly since I did not have my glasses on. Swami then

made some teasing remarks and said,

"This billet shows the Cosmic Form of the Lord. Embedded in it are the forms of

Shirdi Baba and Swami. I have left some space for Prema Sai also. Shall I

include Prema Sai also?" We remained silent, stunned by the experience. He then

smiled and said, "No I shall not include Prema Sai because you faithless fellows

would desert Me and go after Him!" We all laughed.

Swami then took the billet, held it near His mouth and started blowing on it. I

thought He was going to make it disappear; instead, it became a full-fledged

ring, shining brilliantly! Swami held it high showing the ring to all of us,

even as we were dumbstruck. He said,

"A goldsmith would take fifteen days to make a ring, but I have done it in less

than fifteen seconds!"

He then asked me to stretch my right hand. I simply could not believe myself.

In this world where there were so many wonderful devotees, Swami was giving this

extra-ordinary ring to me of all persons. But then that is God. As Ramakrishna

Paramahamsa once said, "Nobody can say who will receive God's Grace. There may

be very eligible people, but the Lord, for reasons best known to Him, may

choose someone far less deserving." Very true indeed, as I can say from

personal experience.

Well, what do you think? Do you agree with the many things I have said? Whether

you agree or disagree, I would be happy to know your reactions. I can be easily

reached via our Heart2Heart e-journal.

Jai Sai Ram!

Source:

Radio Sai E-Magazine, January 2006 Issue

http://www.radiosai.org/Journals/Vol_04/01JAN06/god-the -avatar-and-the-intellectual.htm

[Guest guest]

Excellent piece of writing by the professor.

Swami had said repeatedly - 'No need to waste our time understanding Him-the

creator of the entirety including the so called intellectuals. SWAMI is all

pervading,omnipresent,omnipotent & omniscience which we as devotees know very

well.

SAI RAM