Robert Priddy: Response 1

A response to Robert Priddy's Disempowerment In Worshipping Gurus: Article One:

Referenced from: home.no.net/anir/Sai/enigma/dis1.htm

Part One -The Nectar that turns into Opium

One main problem in worshipping a person as God, as devotees worship their gurus, is that one invests one's own energies and identity in that person (as if further to empower that supposed ' God' and forward his interests) and so drains oneself of autonomy. This is a special form of disempowerment of oneself, which often goes under the name of 'surrender' or 'giving up of ego' or even 'destruction of ego'.

At first, it may seem to be an empowering relationship, because of the experience of newness, a surge of faith to ride, new people and engagements... new opportunities for self-expression and so on. This seems to be a gift of grace from the guru, even though the changes are actually made by oneself in the belief that the guru is guiding and enhancing this. It may be that the guru actually does contribute something too. Nonetheless, the largest contributions over time, in whatever form they take, are always made by the disciple.

My Response: Anyone who worships God, through a guru, picture, deity or concept, are investing their "own energies and identity" in that guru, picture, deity or concept. That is just plain common sense. As a matter of fact, whenever anyone focuses on anything (that does not have to do with religion or spirituality at all), they are investing their "own energies and identity" in it. Since there are billions of people who invest their "own energies and identity" in their own chosen faith, guru or spiritual path, I must take difference with Robert Priddy's blanket statement that they are "draining themselves of autonomy". Although there are certainly examples of disempowerment in both the worldly and spiritual spheres of life, God concepts and belief systems mostly affirm one's identity in some sort of eternal or heavenly role. Most efforts to disaffirm oneself in the form of "surrender" or "giving up of ego" only seeks to aid in affirming a different aspect of one's self. After all, there is "someone" who is "surrendering" and "giving up". That is identity.

Although it is true that the disciple makes the largest contributions towards their path to spiritual fulfillment or understanding, the prime motivation for the disciple is their God, guru, deity or concept. One cannot be a Christian without Jesus. Nor can one be a Buddhist without Buddha. The disciple makes all the effort, but the motivation for this effort is found through the disciples chosen God, guru, deity or concept. It is indeed true that all positive and transforming changes, in one's life, are made entirely through self-effort and perseverance. It is also important to point out that when Robert Priddy talks about "God" and a "Guru", this can easily be applied to Organized Religion. So many of these observations, made by Robert Priddy, can clearly be paralleled with Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. For example, if one substitutes "Jesus" for "Guru", one can clearly see the similarities.

Furthermore, Robert Priddy said in his book, Source Of The Dream (page 41; Chapter: Not to Follow Blindly), "The best a teacher can do is limited to the guidance of pointing out the correct way, Sai Baba assures us. Though such knowledge is priceless, all the rest is up to ourselves: it is we who must actually walk the path, step by step...This must be why Sai Baba has frequently said that he is not a personal guru in the traditional sense..." Robert Priddy is basically saying now what he said in his book. However, despite Robert Priddy making this very same point in his book, Robert Priddy is now implying that SSB teaches something different! Consequently, Robert Priddy refutes himself by using SSB's teachings to support his current argument!

Depending upon the personal history and relative maturity of the person involved, what begin as attempts at self-improvement through serving the guru's (apparent) wishes and reducing unnecessary desires so as to improve the quality of life etc., can soon turn into unhealthy kinds of self-effacement and even self-elimination. The process – what is actually happening to oneself – often goes quite unremarked by those involved, for there are many tricks of thought provided which help one to ignore negative consequences of all kinds and turn them into apparent plusses. All this applies the more forcibly to people who have not already developed a sound personal autonomy in having liberated themselves from various forms of self-oppression experienced during early years and/or from other social pressures which have kept them under and denied any fuller self-discovery and self-affirmation.

My Response: Is Robert Priddy anti-Religion? His points of "serving God/Guru" and "reducing desires as to improve the quality of life" are seen in every world Religion. Suicide rates are higher in atheist, Buddhist and Christian countries, as compared to Hindu and Muslim countries. Clearly, there are many people who search and do not find, and who are in denial of the pain, anguish and emptiness in their lives. This is perhaps the single greatest reason why people search for God through Organized Religion and Spiritual Gurus or Teachers. Whether it be ceaselessly condemning oneself as a "sinner" or trying to become a better person by denying one's own self (suppression of "ego"), every world religion, and guru, has used various techniques, to indoctrinate, subordinate and manipulate it's adherents. These points, made by Robert Priddy, are not unique to Guru's. They are prevalent, world-wide, in every religion and spiritual path. Are there any religions that do not focus on controlling or limiting unnecessary desires?

I have met a huge number of devotees believing that one or another person is God Himself. Most of my experiences of this were in connection with the Sathya Sai Baba movement, where I too came to embrace this 'bottom line belief' required of any 'genuine follower'. SSB insists both that he is "all Gods rolled into one" to whom all prayers to any God eventually reach. But also - with his typical duplicity - he says that he only represents but one of the forms of Divinity (the human form of Sai Baba). He extends this mind-puzzling conundrum by holding at one and the same time that every human actually is Divine too, being made in the same image of God.

My Response: I have met very few devotees who think that SSB is "God". As a matter of fact, most devotees, that I have spoken to, found this the single greatest obstacle to accepting Sathya Sai Baba's divinity. As a matter of fact, I had this very problem as well. I could not accept Sathya Sai Baba as "God". I still can't. I have met many Indian devotees who do not see Sathya Sai Baba as God, but as a very highly advanced yogi (Raj Yogi). I do not know about Robert Priddy, but I most certainly could never accept anyone as "God" simply because they made that claim or it was a "bottom line belief". Robert Priddy accepted (and preached) that Sathya Sai Baba was God, not because it was a "bottom line belief", but due to Robert Priddy's experiences of SSB's genuine and positive paranormal powers! A claim, that to this day, Robert Priddy still professes. In this paragraph, Robert Priddy gives us a very watered down version of his own devotion to Sathya Sai Baba. Robert Priddy seems to suggest that the reason why he accepted SSB as "God" was because it was something "required of any genuine follower". His book, about SSB, entitled "Source of the Dream", tells quite a different story.

In Source Of The Dream (page 202; Chapter: Sai "Prema" Is Supreme), Robert Priddy said, "The effect that Sai Baba's unqualified and pure love has on the open-minded seeker is known best to themselves and to Baba. I can speak only for myself in confirming the miracle of personal transformation that Baba stimulates and supports in us. To that end, among the chief gains from Bba's advent in my life is genuine and lasting peace of mind, thorugh being increasingly able to let go of many 'things' - from futile thoughts and moods to fruitless wants and ambitions - and discovering a richness of life that would otherwise be clouded by the products of egoism." This is hardly the description of a "bottom line belief"!

This implies that the progress possible towards self-realisation derivable directly from Sathya Sai Baba (SSB) in his physical presence has limits. He accepts this, while also repeatedly teaching that only by his divine will can anyone reach God! He says he does not wish to be worshipped, but accepts massive personal worship and tells people to repeat his name constantly and concentrate ceaseless on his form!

My Response: SSB teaches that every single person has the capacity to experience a transcendent state, through self effort and perseverance. Although SSB says that everything is the "Will of God", SSB does not teach that God can only be attained by his will alone. SSB teaches that one's own effort is the one true liberator. Robert Priddy is being disingenuous when he says that SSB "tells people to repeat his name constantly and concentrate ceaseless on his form". SSB says people should repeat the name of their chosen form of God and concentrate on that form. SSB does not demand that people take up his name and form. That one sees people focusing on SSB's name and form, is due to the self-evident fact that the people, who gather at SSB's ashram and centers, are mostly devoted to him!

Admittedly, I was drawn to visit SSB through a number of indisputable para-normal events, so I have passed through the devotee mentality myself. It led to realisations I had not expected, mostly about the mentality and the spectrum of ways in which it works. I therefore have sympathy with those still under its sway and wish them well on the next steps of the process of self-realisation, doing my utmost to provide all the information needed to shake off the illusions inculcated in them by SSB. However, since the factual evidence about SSB's covered-up activities is now available, I take issue with anyone who tries 'automatically' to defend SSB and thereby quails from investigating the matter thoroughly.

My Response: Here, we have Robert Priddy admitting that he had experienced "indisputable para-normal events" through SSB. Despite making this comment several times, in his writings, Robert Priddy calls SSB a fraud magician! One must remember that people who are affected by the "devotee mentality" number in the billions. Organized Religion has numerous adherents who fully engage in a "devotee mentality". Consequently, Robert Priddy is setting himself up as a world teacher, who is advising the billions of religious adherents, of the world, that they are wrong and need to shake off their religious fervour and devotion to their chosen God, Guru or Spiritual Teacher!

It is also amusing that Robert Priddy is professing to have had some sort of "self realization"! First, Robert Priddy talks about how his "devotee mentality" led him to "realizations" that he had not expected. Then Robert Priddy wishes those who are under the "sway" of the "devotee mentality" well, and hopes that they will take the "next steps of the process of self-realization" to reach a place that Robert Priddy has reached! It cannot be overemphasized that Robert Priddy's "realizations" are ones that have made him more negative, angry and vindictive! Hardly realizations worth striving for!

It is also amusing that Robert Priddy states that there is "factual evidence" about SSB's "covered up activities". Despite Robert Priddy making this claim repeatedly, neither he, nor anyone else, has even tried to file a court case against SSB for alleged improprieties. This is because Robert Priddy's claim to "factual evidence" is based mostly on speculation, newspaper clipping and anonymous stories. For example, despite Robert Priddy investigating the 1993 murders for many years, Robert Priddy could not even get basic newspaper articles correct! Robert Priddy embellished articles and made claims based on sheer metal whimsy.

Robert Priddy has just admitted that he takes issue with people who try to "defend SSB". In all honestly, Robert Priddy takes issue with anyone who brings his factual inconsistencies to his attention, about SSB. Robert Priddy does not care if people lie about SSB. However, Robert Priddy cares very deeply if SSB or the SS Organization lies. Robert Priddy is two-faced and claims to be adverse to dishonesty and deceit, yet praises and advocates for anti-SSB sites that are openly dishonest and deceitful. Don't expect Robert Priddy to divulge the fact that he is resorting to plagiarizing my titles, descriptions, keywords, metatags and javascripts (verbatim) in a desperate attempt to outrank my site! I even have it screen captured.

The 'overnight conversion' Many devotees have told how they were suddenly 'converted' to believe he is what he claims he is, often through some paranormal event like synchronous coincidences, dreams of SSB, auditory and visual perceptions of him or substances and objects connected with hyim etc. These 'miraculous' experiences, which SSB calls his 'visiting cards' are intended mainly as an introduction to his doctrine and to following him and his advice and commandments. Not all followers converted quickly, many came by the slow road... by gradual steps. The 'end results' are frequently indistinguishable.

My Response: Very few devotees are "suddenly converted". Most have experiences, over the course of years, that keeps them devoted to SSB. All too frequently, one sees people discard their belief in SSB, not so much because of rumors, but because SSB does not look at them or call them for an interview!

The so-called 'eternal teachings' of Sathya Sai Baba affect his followers in much the same way over time. They are so designed that - once one puts faith in SSB and initially accepts the more feasible and morally attractive part of his teachings, one begins to reinterpret all one's personal experiences in ways which develop an illusory view of people and the world. The teaching rejects any views that conflict with itself (unless they too are part of the teaching!). All questioning of their divine truth is to be avoided as an expression of ignorance, sine or often also evil. In this way devotees create interpretations of everything, which amounts to nothing short of a delusional system that takes over and virtually "thinks the believer" . The delusion expands, and sucks in all that can support it. In many instances this rooted inner mental and emotional condition becomes an insurmountable hindrance to authentic experience and living. It takes a strong personality with considerable inner resources not to give in to the wilder parts of the teaching. It requires a yet more healthy character structure and self-knowledge for one eventually to break with this self-reproducing delusion and the social and other connections which reinforce it and increasingly cut one off from alternatives and ways of retreat.

My Response: This is simply untrue. SSB has often said that we must individually weigh the merits of his words within ourselves. I have always been one to question and challenge beliefs, and I have found that there are many people who do, in fact, hold on to concepts and beliefs without questioning why they hold on to them. I have also met people (far fewer) who do question their beliefs and experiences. However, once again, blind acceptance is not limited to SSB devotees or Eastern Religions. Blind acceptance is practiced, to some extent or other, by all the world religions.

What is amusing about this diatribe, by Robert Priddy, is that he is criticizing SSB's teachings and devotees, yet is actually criticizing himself because he once fully accepted SSB's teaching and was an ardent devotee! What shook Robert Priddy away from SSB and his teachings were not his "strong personality" or his "self knowledge", but allegations against SSB that he poorly researched and believes! Oddly enough, Robert Priddy refuses to accept the many factual errors that he disperses as the truth. I would remind Robert Priddy that it takes a "strong personality with considerable inner resources not to give in to the wilder parts" of rumors, anonymous and unsubstantiated stories!

Robert Priddy devoted a full chapter entitled Understanding Baba's Teachings in his book, Source Of The Dream. Robert Priddy claimed that he spent "many years" studying SSB's teachings. At that time, Robert Priddy had nothing but praise about SSB's teachings and even made an index titled Back to the Source that contained 18,000 "separately-detailed entries"! To formulate an index with Eighteen Thousand Separately-Detailed Entries would require vast study and research into SSB's teachings. Robert Priddy now talks about SSB's teachings as if they are primitive, unintelligent jibberish. However, here are some quotes from Robert Priddy and what he had to say about SSB's teachings in Chapter 22 of Source Of The Dream: "It is truly impressive how, wherever Sathya Sai Baba has spoken and whatever his audience, his vision has always had a one-pointed focus...Unlike other major educators or spiritual masters whose lives are known from youth, Sai Baba has never had to modify any tenets of his public teachings or to develop them through time. Such confident consistency is truly striking...Baba's way of teaching is unique and uncommonly attractive, in its dealings with everything from everyday problems to the deeply mysterious, from the most serious questions of life to the humorous. No one to my knowledge gives such directly simple, yet deceptively deep and subtle, answers to the most enigmatic of questions, nor does so in more straightforward and powerfully-convincing ways than does Baba...No spiritually-interested person who reads Sai discourses or writings can fail to be impressed by the clarity and simplicity of these teachings, which bear comparison with any known higher spiritual teaching...Some insights surpass those to be found in any scripture or comparable work known, at least, to the present writer..." These comments, by Robert Priddy, reveal his awe, enthusiam and praise for SSB's teachings and totally refute any sort of indoctrination, delusion and avoidance of answering questions.

Many adherents of Sathya Sai Baba will retort that his teaching leads to good experiences, a more 'spiritual' and useful life and moreover, that they are entirely positive and in line with the best spirit of most religions. These positive experiences are usually - if not invariably - mostly felt in the initial phase, often described (nostalgically) by devotees as 'the honeymoon period', when everything is novel and fresh and one's life seems to have taken a final, radical turn for the better... a promise of blessings, fulfilment, even personal salvation.

My Response: This sounds like Robert Priddy's own experience. Most devotees do not have a "honeymoon period". I never had one and I have not met others who have. Most people have beautiful experiences combined with very difficult lessons in self discovery. As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy has written elsewhere how many, many devotees fall away from SSB and the turn-over rate of devotees is high. If things were as good as Robert Priddy is trying to make it sound, there shouldn't be a high turnover rate, as he suggests. Robert Priddy is basically saying that he had a "honeymoon period" and held on to a "promise of blessings, fulfilment and even personal salvation".

The positive attraction that SSB and his teaching have initially (before penetrating to the depths) is very considerable, as is seen in the hyperbole and exaggerated euologies of hundreds of followers who have written books or otherwise told about their miraculous experiences. What is on offer is a refuge, an escape, from the 'hard reality' of one's former life. The accuracy of following succinct and accurate quotation cannot be over-emphasised.

My Response: Robert Priddy was one of these hundreds of followers who resorted to "hyperbole and exaggerated eulogies" by writing a book (and many positive articles in Sanathana Sarathi) about SSB. As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy admitted giving "exaggerated, positive accounts" about SSB when he was a devotee! The fact remains that thousands of people have experienced SSB's powers in their lives. I can personally attest to SSB's powers through my own personal experiences. I did not need a book to believe. And I do not believe every story I am told either. I have seen that many miracle stories, attributed to SSB, are oftentimes embellished. Even Robert Priddy has a tendency to embellish (admittedly so). A characteristic he still maintains when writing against SSB!

"Many of Sai Baba's miracles are carefully calculated in terms of their timing and psychology and, therefore, aim to stun the potential disciple to put him or her off balance and, in that way, win over his or her doubt and resistance. They are part of the aforementioned puzzling games and the building of a personal relationship in which Sai Baba holds all the strings in his hand. It is important to see through Sai Baba's purpose in making people defenseless through his demonstrations of power." (from "Guru, Miracle Worker, Religious Founder: Sathya Sai Baba" by Dr. Reinhart Hummel)

My Response: I had first-hand, miraculous experiences with SSB before I ever saw his human form. I never belonged to a SSB group, center or associated with any SSB devotees, before seeing SSB. I talked to one SSB devotee, twice, two months before I first left to India, but we mostly discussed local customs and travel precautions for India. Consequently, speaking for myself, SSB never had the time to "carefully calculate" his miracles to throw me "off balance". I never felt "defenceless" either. It never ceases to amaze me how people will ceaselessly give excuses for their own failing and disillusionments, and include others along with them, so they will not be alone in their failings and disillusionements! Even to the point of denying others rights to believe as they choose, according to their own personal, spiritual experiences!

RELATED BLOG LINKS: » » Robert Priddy: Response 1 (you are here) » » Robert Priddy: Response 2 » » Robert Priddy: Response 3 » » Robert Priddy: Response 4 » » Robert Priddy: Response 5 » » Robert Priddy: Response 6