Robert Priddy: Response 2

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

Referenced from: home.no.net/anir/Sai/enigma/dis2.htm

Part Two - Escapism in a spiritual guise

Nearly all devotees believe that they are exceptionally privileged compared to other people (i.e those 'outside the Sai family') and they are encouraged to believe that they will no longer really be touched by bad, ill or evil events. They are supposedly under special care and protection. Everything that happens has in SSB's view to be regarded as 'maya' (i.e. the illusion of the 'unreal' profane world)., so they shoud learn to see all events - good or bad, as being but an illusion, a passing figment. Since they think SSB is God and thus the creator of maya, they feel secure with his boast that no devotee of his will ever come to real harm. There are, however, countless documented examples of the failure of SSB to protect or help those who fall into major problems from illness to destitution to despair and death... matters which those in the Sai movement cover over, explain away, leave strictly unpublicised and hope to forget. They have a set of set answers for every kind of situation... eg: she was not a 'true' devotee, it was their bad karma, he was a 'bad man', Swami is testing their faith, Swami has delivered him or her from the chains of life... and similar denials of the harsh facts.

My Response: This is completely untrue. I have no idea where Robert Priddy is getting this information. Once again, it seems that Robert Priddy is sharing what HE believed about SSB. SSB has repeatedly said that we must endure pain, anguish and suffering with fortitude and perseverance. SSB often refers to sufferings as "passing clouds" and often makes references to the inevitability of death. SSB has even talked about the significance of the vibuthi he materializes and it's symbolic meaning of death and destruction and how we must strive to makes our lives worthwhile, knowing that death awaits us all. Consequently, SSB does not say that his devotees will not suffer and no harm shall befall them. Just as there are countless instances where SSB has failed to protect devotees who have fallen into illness, destitution, despair and death, the same can be said of Jesus, Krishna, Allah, Buddha and YHWH. I have personally heard Christians say that other Christians suffered because they were not true to their faith, it was the devil, they were being punished or that Jesus now took them to heaven, etc., etc. The very reasons that some devotees use to explain away suffering and death, are used by others in every other world religion. It is not unique to SSB and his followers.

This belief in protection is sheer escapism and is very restrictive of any further psycho-social and personality development. Not being able to face facts for what they are - but having to transform them into figments through immature phantasy - is a known cause of arrested psychological development. Such a stgnation can occur at any and every phase of life, it is not confined to the early years. The results of it can be observed by staying at ashrams, like those of SSB, which are populated very largely by persons whose lives have become centered on their own persons and that of Sathya Sai Baba (often but to the exclusion of healthy interest in almost anything else), which thereby narrows perception and wears down the mind socially, mentally and emotionally. This soon amounts to the well-known spiritual escapism so common to many Eastern religions. Mental, emotional and/or physical wrecks resulting from it litter the streets of India everywhere and are found in connection will all virtually Sai communities I have visited or had much information about. One does not, however, have to live in any ashram to be largely encapsulated and cut off in the same cocoon of sentiments and concerns.

My Response: Yes, believing one will be protected from everything is sheer denial. I agree that some sort of stagnation does occur when one isolates him/her self in an ashram. However, it is commonly seen that one need not join an ashram, or go to an ashram, to find people who are "centered on their own persons" and stagnated in their own beliefs. Usually when a person chooses to live in any ashram, they are doing so because that is what they want. Whether it is right or wrong for them to do so, is not for me to say, as it is their life and they can live it as they choose.

Perhaps Robert Priddy's perception was narrowed, and it wore down on his mind "socially, mentally and emotionally". "Spiritual escapism" is not confined to Eastern religions. The mere phrase "spiritual escapism" denotes trying to find solace and refuge through some sort of spiritual means. Something that billions of people happen to do! Billions of people seek spiritual solace and refuge in their own religion and chosen belief systems. That Robert Priddy is trying to make this a highly selective criticism of Eastern religion and gurus, is disingenuous. All of his remarks, and comments, can apply to any one of the major world religions.

Most persons come to SSB due to personal problems that they cannot solve elsewhere. The novelty of finding a new reason for living, a retreat and a refuge, 'a spiritual home' and what one believes more and more to be a divine teacher with all conceivable powers and graces, can be sustained for years and only wears off gradually. I have experienced all this myself. But when the day-to-day necessities of life eventually reassert themselves in the life of a devotee - such as they will certainly do after having taken up permanent ashram residence - a process of increasing self-doctrination and self-denial is necessary to cope with the problems encountered. The detritus of inner conflicts piles up: all ashrams are constantly plagued by problems of rivalry and envy, (mostly hidden and denied outwardly for face-saving purposes). Personal and social difficulties interpreted in terms of the new doctrine are not solved and the teaching invariably denies them to be of any importance except as material for critical self-examination and guilt. Above all, perhaps, the initiate has to deal with the immensely slippery and confusion of problems which the doctrine creates in maintaining a stark schizm between the 'otherworldly reality' and so-called 'worldliness' ... or in Eliade's words, 'between the sacred and the profane'. This dualistic doctrine - and the ill that comes of it - is further analysed in another article by me as 'Spiritual Doublethink'

My Response: The same reasons why people come to SSB, are the very same reasons why people search out religion, spirituality, God and something to believe in. Comparatively speaking, very few people take up permanent residence at SSB's Ashram, or at Puttaparthi. The people who Robert Priddy is talking about are not more than a hundred, at most. One does not need to be confined to an Ashram to get caught up in "self indocrination" and "self denial". It is true that all ashrams are plagued by problems of rivalry and envy. However, this is also true in most spheres of life that have nothing to do with ashrams! I am not sure about the "schism" that Robert Priddy talks about, that is between the "otherworldly reality and so called worldliness". I am assuming this to mean one's physical desires and needs, versus ones' spiritual concepts and ideas. I think true, spiritual paths forge themselves to ultimately find a balance between body, mind and spirit. Undoubtedly, imbalances arise as people try to forge a path that is unnatural. This can create physical, mental and spiritual illnesses. This is seen in every world religion and is not isolated to Eastern religions or to SSB.

This easily develops into a life-denying syndrome, urging one to project most or all values into an unseen and transcendental reality, a kind of never-never land usually considered attainable only in the afterlife (if lucky). Though suicide is looked down upon as cowardly in the Sai doctrine, it has tempted enough devotees to try it, often succeeding... for it seems to offer a release from this world into a problem-free Sai Baba heavenliness or whatever (no one knows quite what, of course). Our truly human concerns 'here and now' are systematically undermined as relative, non-essential, and somehow mostly incompatible with the 'spiritual life'. The main emphasis is not on daily concerns or active spirituality in everyday life, not on self-fulfillment in 'external activities', but on one's relationship to that unseen, virtually unknown transcendent 'reality', which is the realm of the Divine and God. All suspicions that arise about SSB, his associates and the teachings due to the repeated intrusions of untoward facts and events, have to be suppressed and 'rationalised'... if, that is, the indoctrination has not already rendered one fully incapable of normal reasoning and common sense evaluation.

My Response: Although it is true that the "unseen and transcendent reality" is a type of "never-never land considered attainable only in the afterlife (if lucky)", it is also true that this "unseen never-never land" is the heaven that Christians, Muslims and Hindus hope to attain in the afterlife (if lucky)! As one can see, Robert Priddy is trying to undermine Sai Baba and what he considers Eastern Philosophy, yet makes a case against all religions, even though he is trying to have the reader view his articles with blinders on.

Robert Priddy is completely disingenuous when he says that the "main emphasis is not on daily concerns or active spirituality in everyday life, not on self-fulfillment in ‘external activities', but on one's relationship to that unseen, virtually unknown transcendent ‘reality', which is the realm of the Divine and God". This is simply untrue. Perhaps he can give us names of SSB's devotees who live their lives like this? SSB runs numerous colleges that educate and prepare many students to work in society. If SSB's devotees were truly engaged in a "relationship to that unseen, virtually unknown transcendent reality", they wouldn't be devotees of SSB, as his form would only be an impediment to their relationship with that formless and transcendent reality! I think I have already shown how Robert Priddy is incapable of "normal reasoning and common sense evaluation". Robert Priddy is somehow contrasting himself with SSB devotees who have been "indoctrinated" and who somehow have lost their "normal reasoning and common sense evaluation".

However, what would you say if someone were to take murder pictures, of young men who have been shot in the face, hands, and torso, saturated in blood, and publicly showcased these images (in true tabloid style) on the world-wide internet, in complete and utter disregard towards the families of these young men? These images are also publicly displayed, without any warning, and can be easily accessed by children.

One would rightly say that the person who did this abominable action, does not have "normal reasoning" and most certainly does not have "common sense evaluation". However, this is exactly what Robert Priddy did. He took images of young men, who had been shot in the face, hands and torso, saturated in blood, and is proudly displaying them on his website, for the world to see. Robert Priddy cares less about the mothers and fathers who must endure the unspeakable anguish (and untold horror) in seeing pictures of their son's bloodied bodies being publicly showcased, on Robert Priddy's site. Robert Priddy did not even try to obtain permission from the familes to disperse these images of their sons corpses on his website. Robert Priddy displays these images without even providing a shred of proof that SSB had anything to do with it! As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy embellished newspaper clipping, trying to make it appear as if the newspapers said something they never did! The parents of these deceased boys still maintain their devotion to SSB. Perhaps that is why Robert Priddy contemptuously and heartlessly posts these murder pictures on his website. He wants to desperately hurt someone, anyone, who is associated with Sathya Sai Baba.

Robert Priddy does the same thing with V.K. Narasimhan, who was a staunch Sathya Sai Baba devotee to his death. Despite this fact, Robert Priddy is using V.K. Narasimhan's pictures on his Anti-SSB website! Robert Priddy also tries to convince everyone that V.K. Narasimhan related all sorts of negative things, about SSB and the SSB Organization, to him. If all this were true, why did V.K. Narasimhan remain a faithful devotee of Sathya Sai Baba until his death? In this instance, we must give up our "normal reasoning and common sense evaluation" in order to believe Robert Priddy.

When East is still East and West is still West The neglect of 'worldly spirituality' is clearly seen in India, where traditional 'otherworldly' spirituality is predominant in the indiginous religions fostered there. The big emphasis is on the world's impermanence and hence supposedly 'unreal nature'. Human attempts at understanding nature and life, such as through the sciences, are looked upon pessimistically as largely irrelevant to the spiritual life, even as a direct hindrance. Much more than Western religions like Judaism and most mainstream sects of Christianity, Indian-based religions tend to ignore life problems and produce societies of a traditionally static and repressive or despotic, strictly hierarchical kind. It is noteworthy how persons who become Sai devotees soon begin to show easy acceptance of authoritarian practices, undemocratic ideas and handed-down social and other superstitions which excessively infest countries like India. (Such as at what time to begin a journey or launch an undertaking, what colour foods to prefer and avoid, which gemstones to wear to protect against which planetary evils, which rituals placate spirits of the departed and lots of other nonsense also recommended and practised by Sathya Sai Baba). They live as privileged Westerners in the midst of one of the most disasterous calamity-striken societies, but pampered beyond what the majority of Indians can dream about for themselves, yet thinking they are making spiritual sacrifices that will secure them grace, such as by their dropping certain luxuries they are otherwise used to have.

My Response: This is a very misleading generalization about India. What Robert Priddy forgets to mention is that India is a third world country, racked by poverty and is the second most populated place on Earth. Robert Priddy also forgets to mention that nearly half of the population in India is Muslim. Consequently, Robert Priddy is attacking Hinduism and Islam. Robert Priddy praises Christianity and Judaism, but fails to tell everyone that Christians and Jews often live in advanced societies that are wealthy. The superstitions that Robert Priddy pointed out, are not the cause of the suffering in India. If India was truly a place where, "human attempts at understanding nature and life, such as through the sciences, are looked upon pessimistically as largely irrelevant to the spiritual life", then perhaps Robert Priddy can tell us why Indians excel (and tend to dominate) in the science field, computers and electronics and in medical fields?

I completely agree with Robert Priddy's assessment of foreigners who live in India, in the lap of luxury, who claim they are making sacrifices by living without certain amenities that they are otherwise used to. However, what is ironic about this, is that Robert Priddy lived this very same lifestyle! Now that he is not a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba, he is pointing it out in derisive tones. However, when Robert Priddy lived in India, he lived in the exact way he is now criticizing others for!

Robert Priddy speaks derisively of superstitions in India. However, Robert Priddy praises Christianity and Judaism, yet fails to address some of the interesting superstitions of these religions. For example, the fear of the number "666", supposedly the sign of the beast. Fear of the number 13, as Judas, the traitor, was the 13th person at the Last Supper. Bad luck from walking under a ladder came from the Christian faith that somehow symbolized a breaking of the trinity. Making the sign of the cross, on one's body is supposed to ward off evil. Jews and Muslims use a Hamsa (Khamssa) to ward off evil spirits. Natural disasters are God's wrath. Placing the Bible on the ground would curse the person who put it there, etc., etc., etc.

No doubt some people do benefit for a shorter or longer period from the associations and life changes that joining the movement involves, including Westerners. There can be permanant benefits too... not least in learning some good things from the foreign culture. No doubt many good people are there who do good works, or at least try to do them. And the credit for everything has to be given exclusively to Sathya Sai Baba at all times... everything considered 'good', that is, while everything else is due to one's own failings, bad acts, being a sinful person etc. Add to this the undisputed fact that SSB increasingly acts contrary to his constant admonitions and advice, and is himself under the gravest suspicion of crimes which are unsolved so far. His declaration "My Life is My Message" is thereby undermined and shown to be based on deception and sham. The message should rather be that your life is yours to live autonomously. That ideal expresses faith in people and encourages them to free themselves of psychological and superstitious bonds from the primitive past of mankind.

My Response: It is a fact that most world religions follow in the same footsteps of giving full credit to their religion when they do good, and attributing failures to either oneself, temptation or the devil when something ill befalls them! So it is not surprising to see devotees of SSB doing the same thing that other religions do. However, SSB does not teach that we must dedicate all good works in his name. SSB says we are to dedicate all good works in the name of our chosen faith. SSB also has said that there will be failings, however we must learn how to endure success and failure with equal pose and equanimity.

And notice that Robert Priddy says that SSB is "under suspicion of crimes which are unsolved so far". Despite this admission, from Robert Priddy, he continues, to this day, to post the murdered bodies of young men on his website, despite admitting that the 1993 Murders are "unsolved". Despite this admission, Robert Priddy has written several long articles, on the 1993 Murders, in which he claims to know what really happened!

Serguei Badaev has made the following interesting points on the guru-addiction problem:

"People who desperately need to be under protective guidance are ready to surrender their critical thinking and moral autonomy to gain inner peace. It seems to me that it might be a similar psychological mechanism to chemical drugs. The reasons for people becoming drug addicted might be very similar to the reasons for becoming guru-addicted."

My Response: Although there is a definite difference beween drugs and devotion (one being a physical substance and the other being a mental state), Serguei's perceived "psychological mechanism" is not limited to "gurus". This "mechanism" can also apply to world religions, God-concepts, sex, belief systems, hobbies, gambling, sports, music, school and numerous other things. One can become "music addicted", "sports addicted", "religion addicted", "sex addicted", etc., etc. Consequently, the "psychological mechanism" that Serguei points out, affects just about everyone, to some extent or other!

Serguei: "I dare put forward a hypothesis about one of those reasons. Our inner impulses drive us to feel happy. Critical thinking often stops this drive because a fulfillment can have distant negative consequences. In other words, critical thinking often prevents us feeling happy in the short-term perspective (but increases the probability of being happy in the long-term). Alas! We often want to be happy just now not in the future! If this want is too strong one might rather choose to be happy now no matter what the consequences. So the key question is, why and when does this striving for happiness become too strong? Generally I guess (and may be banally), if children get enough love and protection from their parents and other authoritative adults in childhood, then when they grow up they are strong enough not to discard critical thinking because of some bitter truth or other."

My Response: "Critical thinking" can also have instant, near term effects, if we so choose. Unless, of course, Serguei is suggesting that "critical thinking" postpones our happiness for some future time. One can certainly use critical thinking to appreciate things in our present moment that gives us a clearer sense of inner peace and contentedness. Serguei must define "critical thinking". There are many people who feel that their chosen spiritual path, religion and belief systems (yes, including guru worship) are a result of their own "critical thinking".

All too often, one finds that people try to impose their concepts and belief systems on others, because they believe that their concepts and belief systems are better thought out than others! Serguei is criticizing others for being devoted to Gurus, saying that they must be unhappy and are thereby forfeiting their critical thinking capacities for short term happiness. Far be it from anyone to tell others how to live their life and how to find happiness, especially when they have not found happiness themselves!

It is also possible, using Serguei's logic (illogic), that guru-worshippers are happy now, as a result of "critical thinking" used in the distant past, to get them where they are at now! This all boils down to: Robert Priddy and Serguei Badaev should both accept full responsibility for their own actions and choices and stop blaming others and saying how others are wrong to believe as they once did.

Serguei: "I can't but mention an important point here: parental love and protection should not enslave - but empower - a child. That means this love and protection are to let a child to mature and become independent enough to be a responsible person from the moral point of view. So I would search for the main root of guru-addiction in poor family and education practices."

My Response: I guess Serguei is saying that both he and Robert Priddy were both victims of "poor family and education practices" and that is why they both ended up being devoted to SSB! ((laughs)) The fact remains that there are many, many families, with well educated family members, who are fully devoted to SSB and who do not see SSB as stifling their growth in being responsible, ethical and contributing members to society!

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