Frequently Asked Questions
FAQs Menu (click on a link to go to relevant section):
- Why is the purpose of this website?
- I would like to contact you by phone. What is your phone number?
- If you do not provide your phone number or address, how can we verify who you say you are?
- Why don’t you answer your phone?
- Are you a Sathya Sai Baba devotee?
- If you are not a devotee, why did you create this website?
- Who helped you create this website?
- Is anyone funding or contributing money to your website?
- Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba is God?
- Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba has genuine paranormal powers?
- Do you believe Sathya Sai Baba has sexually abused people?
- What about the claims that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile / paedophile who engaged in acts of pedophilia / paedophilia?
- Why would anyone want to lie about Sathya Sai Baba?
- What about the claims that you ‘slander’, ‘libel’ and ‘defame’ Ex-Devotees and critics of Sai Baba?
- What about the evidence against Sathya Sai Baba?
Why is the purpose of this website? 
My Response: To expose the lies, deceit, misrepresentations, conflations, exaggerations and contradictory allegations made against Sathya Sai Baba by Anti-Sai Activists who disperse their propaganda on websites, blogs and various forums on the internet.
I would like to contact you by phone. What is your phone number?
My Response: I do not discuss any matters related to Sathya Sai Baba over the phone or in person. I am only willing to have these discussions through email correspondence. This is the policy I have adopted so that I can retain an actual transcript to my words so they will not be misunderstood, misinterpreted or misrepresented. This policy applies to devotees, non-devotees and ex-devotees alike.
The Sathya Sai Baba debate is a highly charged one in which many people say many things. Those who investigate the Sathya Sai issue with an open mind, and who refuse to accept the negative and one-sided viewpoints of those inimical towards Sai Baba, are often the targets of vicious character assassination. With the many hearsay accounts dispersed on Anti-Sai webites, I have approached this entire issue in a structured and consistent way. I attribute the success of my viewpoints due to this approach.
If you do not provide your phone number or address, how can we verify who you say you are?
My Response: The same way you can verify the identity to numerous Anti-Sai Activists who do not divulge their phone numbers or addresses either.
As a matter of fact, the new ploy being used by Anti-Sai Activists is that if people do not provide their full names, addresses and phone numbers, they are not who they claim they are. Of course, this puts Anti-Sai Activists in a tenuous position considering that an overwhelming majority of their Anti-Sai articles do not divulge the full names, phone numbers and addresses to the people who allegedly wrote them. This must mean (according to this type of logic/illogic) that most of the authors to Anti-Sai articles are not who they claim they are.
Neither phone numbers or addresses are accurate ways of identifying a person’s identity, as both of these can be changed or modified to a friend or family member located anywhere in the world. One will also notice that Anti-Sai Activists have double standards. No where do they demand the full names, phone numbers and addresses to those sympathetic with their cause. This is hypocrisy, clear and simple.
I have received vast amounts of hate mail from Anti-Sai Activists and even a death threat. Also, taking into consideration the group thuggery tactics employed by Anti-Sai Activists, I choose not to divulge my phone number or address for self-evident reasons (even though it is fairly easy to find out my phone number and address). I have been contacted by phone by both Pro-Sai and Anti-Sai Activists. The most recent being Ojvind Kyro. If I am not who I say I am, these people would not have been able to contact me. Now would they?
Robert Priddy, in particular, should vindicate his dedication to the truth by first of all divulging his own phone number and address clearly on his website and then have all the people who have written articles for Anti-Sai websites to divulge their full names, addresses and phone numbers so that people can verify their identity as well. Since Robert Priddy wants to set the standard, he should practice it first.
Update: April 24th 2005: Reinier Van Der Sandt published my full name, address and phone number on his website. Consequently, there should be no doubt that I am who I say I am. Reinier Van Der Sandt published my personal information after he was caught using fake online identities. Click Here to view RVD Sandt’s admission after he was caught in such dishonest behavior. Since Reinier Van Der Sandt published my contact details, I published Anti-Sai Activists contact details.
Why don’t you answer your phone?
My Response: I have a fully functional answering machine. Feel free to leave me your name, email address and a detailed message. However, once you leave your message on my recorder, your message becomes my property and all messages will be made into voice files and saved on computer disks for future reference. If you do not want your messages possibly broadcast on the internet, I suggest you email me. Contact links are located on just about every page on my website. Depending on the content of your emails, I generally do not put them on the internet and maintain complete confidentiality when requested.
Are you a Sathya Sai Baba devotee?
My Response: I am not a Sathya Sai Baba devotee. I was a devotee from the age of 18 to the age of 25. I had/have basic philosophical differences of opinion, with several aspects to Sai Baba’s teachings (in particular, God Concepts & Karma), and I left the Sai Movement for that reason. Nevertheless, I had many beautiful, powerful and spiritual experiences with Sathya Sai Baba, as I have had with many other spiritual personalities. My opinions about Sathya Sai Baba (based on my personal experiences with him) are positive. I do not belong to, go to, or affiliate myself with any Sai Centers or the Sathya Sai Organization. I am an open-minded (but not gullible) agnostic.
If you are not a devotee, why did you create this website?
My Response: I believe the only type of person who can present a balanced view into the Sathya Sai debate is one who is extremely familiar with Sathya Sai Baba but not to the extent of making excuses for him (as devotees generally do). As one will notice on my website, I provide links to all the articles I take issue with or discuss. I do not try to suppress other viewpoints. However, Anti-Sai websites refuse to provide links to my website and have even banned my website from linking to them. I think this proves that Anti-Sai websites have much to fear and operate on the premise of deceit, lies and suppression to promote their agenda of hate and propaganda at any cost.
Who helped you create your website?
My Response: I created the template design (and many of the images) used on my website by myself. I am the sole author for the articles on my website and I alone can access, modify, edit, delete or add articles on my website. Although I have been emailed information, suggestions and ideas for my articles, I make the final determination on what information is used and how it used. I give full credit to those whose articles I cite. As a rule of thumb, I only accept information that I can verify for myself or information based on my own personal observations and experiences.
Is anyone funding or contributing money to your website?
My Response: Anti-Sai Activists have recently resorted to cheap propaganda tactics by accusing me of being "secretly funded" and that I am making "profits" off of my "expensive" websites. This is wholly untrue. Currently I am spending about US $184 per year on my domain-names and web hosting. That is approximately US $15 per month. I do not make any profit from my website, nor do I request or receive any type of donations. Futhermore, who is financing the "expensive web pages" to Anti-Sai websites? What profits are they making and from whom? Anti-Sai websites have been on the internet much longer than mine and there are no less than ninety plus (90+) of them. Since I am knowledgable with web design, I do not need to employ anyone to create my websites. I created them myself.
Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba is God?
My Response: No, I do not believe that Sathya Sai Baba is God.
Do you believe that Sathya Sai Baba has genuine paranormal powers?
My Response: Based on my own personal experiences with Sathya Sai Baba, yes, I do believe he possesses genuine paranormal powers. As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy and Barry Pittard (two of the most outspoken Anti-Sai Activists on the internet) have said (even after their defection) that they believe Sathya Sai Baba does possess genuine paranormal powers:
"Some of what I experienced of SSB’s extraordinary and positive powers through many years is undeniable, even after the most rigorous skeptical investigations, and I do not regard him as any ordinary human being." ~ Robert Priddy
"I can tell you that I and others have witnessed hundreds - and ones of the most profoundly beautiful sort - both mediated in his own person and in places far from him but in their style connected with him. My own view is this: that they are happening on a tremendously wide scale; that they cannot all be explained away as faked...From November 1975, I began to experience many profound and beautiful phenomena. Wherever I travelled in the world, they manifested far away from, yet were often clearly related to, his physical presence on the planet...I have had thousands of experiences that transcend scientific or intellectual explanation...I have many times experienced supranormal phenomena related to him, which there is no explaining away...Their sheer magnitude round the globe is bound to attract history’s final verdict that they are real, and do happen." ~ Barry Pittard
Do you believe Sathya Sai Baba has sexually abused people?
My Response: I must admit that when I first read the many articles of sexual abuse, alleged against Sathya Sai Baba on Anti-Sai websites, I fully and blindly believed them and reacted the way many people did, i.e., with disbelief, shock and anger.
Being personally touched by sexual abuse through close friends (unrelated to Sai Baba), I gave the benefit of the doubt to alleged sexual abuse victims. Until just recently (May 3rd 2006), I stated that I believed Sathya Sai Baba did "sexually" abuse men. I held this position despite being questioned on how I could believe the allegations when alleged victims never even tried to take their case to a court of law, despite being offered free "world class legal resources". I was open-minded about the allegations even though some alleged victims (who were very vocal on the internet) were unwilling (for some unknown reason) to file their cases in a court of law in India.
In light of a recent major development, I am retracting my comments about believing Sai Baba "sexually" abused men. The sole reason why I held on to this position was due to what I perceived as sincere and genuine accounts made by Alaya Rahm on the internet and on the Secret Swami documentary. Click Here to read about this major development.
The testimonies of Alaya Rahm are sanitized versions of what Alaya actually encountered with Sai Baba. In Alaya’s testimonies, Sathya Sai Baba is depicted as a human, with no paranormal powers, who is forcing Alaya into having sex with him. However, factor in the accounts that Alaya gave to Alexandra Nagel where Baba literally went from having male genitalia to female genitalia and things begin to appear quite different. Of course, by adding the information that Alaya gave to Alexandra, many would doubt Alaya’s testimony. Perhaps that’s why it was never mentioned. However, factoring in the miraculous genitalia change, if it were true (and why would Alaya lie about it?), one could most certainly reason that since Sathya Sai Baba has the miraculous ability to literally change from one gender to another, his actions, no matter how sexual, cannot be equated with those of a normal human being. This is not making an excuse for what happened to Alaya. It is simply a very valid observation based on the miraculous, physical transformation that Alaya attributed to Baba, but did not discuss in his public testimonies.
Some have attributed this "genitalia switch" to Sathya Sai Baba being a hermaphrodite. However, if we are to truly believe the accounts made by Alaya, Sathya Sai Baba had a fully functional penis as Alaya claimed he saw it.
As a matter of fact, Keith Ord gives a very compelling sexual encounter with Sathya Sai Baba that Anti-Sai websites fail to list in their sexual abuse section. Why? Because Keith Ord talks about Sathya Sai Baba literally morphing his penis into a vagina! Keith Ord specifically said that SSB was not a hermaphrodite, but that SSB literally changed his penis into a vagina. Of course, this claim makes Keith Ord’s sexual encounter, with SSB, sound crazy and that is why it is not listed under ExBaba’s sexual abuse section. Furthermore, David Bailey accepted Keith Ord’s story, but snipped out the "penis turned vagina" section because David Bailey knew it would cast serious doubt on Keith Ord’s credibility. If Keith Ord’s testimony is seen as being unbelievable (because of the genital switch story), why is Alaya Rahm’s not seen as being the same?
MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS:
What about the claims that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile / paedophile who engaged in acts of pedophilia / paedophilia?
My Response: Anti-Sai Activists wage an unremitting smear campaign against Sathya Sai Baba that accuses him of "serial pedophilia" and the sexual abuse of "boys" and "children". These comments are fallacious, unsustantiated and wholly untrue. "Pedophilia" is the sexual abuse or exploitation of a boy, girl or child 12/13 years of age or younger (Ref). There are no testimonies from boys, children or parents of children that support the erroneous claim that Sathya Sai Baba is a pedophile (paedophile) who engaged in sexual interactions with children. As a matter of fact, the youngest, non-anonymous testimony came from a 16 years old teenager (Jed Geyerhahn) who claimed he received a non-sexual "oiling". All the other alleged victims were 18 years of age or older. This once again goes to show how those inimical towards Sathya Sai Baba resort to cheap propaganda and blatant disinformation because the truth simply does not argue in their favor.
View Witnesses Section
Why would anyone want to lie about Sathya Sai Baba?
My Response: There are many people who would want to lie about Sathya Sai Baba. Click Here to read my article containing factual information regarding the Christian Anti-Sai/Hindu movement. The International Sai Organization is composed of millions of people and is seen as a direct threat by orthodox, evangelical and fundamentalist Christians. Christians were spreading Anti-Sai propaganda many years before the accusations that were later to be made public.
Click Here to view my articles about Critics, Skeptics and Ex-Devotees of Sathya Sai Baba. On these pages, I document the shocking and very disturbing online behavior, attacks and smear campaigns waged by Anti-Sai Activists. These pages sum up my entire view about Anti-Sai Activists and how they are a mob of angry, vindictive and hateful individuals who place their own agenda of deceit and dishonesty above all else. Particularly disturbing are the smear campaigns waged by usedbybaba, Barbara Dent, Tony O’Clery, Robert Priddy and Sanjay Kishore Dadlani.
There is a very well known Sathya Sai Baba devotee from Surinam, named Emilia, who was one of Baba’s primary gardeners at Prashanti Nilayam. Emilia is well known to Anti-Sai Activists and Ex-devotees (including Hans De Kraker). Emilia personally told me, first-hand, that she was approached by foreigners who refused to identity themselves who were willing to pay her money in exchange for information about various ashram officials and ashram incidents that she was well acquainted with. Needless to say, she declined their offer. The fact that people were willing to pay money for information about ashram officials and ashram incidents points to some sort of funded Anti-Sai activity.
Click Here to see how white supremacists are posting their propaganda in a Sathya Sai Baba Yahoo Group. What are white supremacists doing in a Sathya Sai Group to begin with? It is apparent that there are white supremacists who are spreading lies about Sathya Sai Baba. I even received a racist email where Baba was referred to as a "black b*st*rd"!
There are also many people, all around the world, who dislike or are jealous of Sathya Sai Baba. These people have been spreading lies, rumors and slanderous articles against Baba for years, through various media. These people are usually devotees of other gurus, who continually deride Sai Baba as a fraud. Since Sathya Sai Baba claims to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai Baba, there are some Shirdi Sai Baba devotees who deride him as a fake and an imposter. One need go no further than Sai-related Yahoo Groups to see this widespread Anti-Sai activity in action. Many people, under the guise of complete anonymity, spread unsubstantiated allegations and libelous stories against Sathya Sai Baba. Anti-Sai websites have even cut and pasted many of these anonymous postings on their websites.
I have personally heard slanderous and fake rumors directly from the Kashmiri shopkeepers, outside SSB’s ashram, who run various gift shops. These shopkeepers volunteered this information to me, unasked, and were also relating all sorts of ridiculous stories without verifying them. One such story was about how everyone who goes into Baba’s ashram, were asked, at a certain check point, to take off all their clothes because the Ashram was a gated, nude community! And this man was completely serious and argued with me when I denied it! He even had Kashmiri "witnesses"! I heard these stories from several different shopkeepers and was also told unbelievable stories of a sexual nature, regarding Sathya Sai Baba. Again, all this information was divulged unasked and without any sort of prompting whatsoever, going back to 1988.
Because of the widespread claims to Baba’s miracles, the Indian Radical Humanist Association, Federation of Atheist, Humanist, and Rationalist Organizations in Andhra Pradesh, Federation of Indian Rationalists, Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal in India and James Randi have all tried to expose Sathya Sai Baba using all means, fair and foul. For example, click here to view an anonymous letter dispersed by Basava Premanand (an Indian Rationalist, Atheist and Anti-Sai Activists since 1968). Premanand agreed with Dr. Kavoor about how anonymous stories, relating to Baba’s miracles, are false, fabricated and could never be accepted as the truth. Then Premanand turns right around and distributes an anonymous letter against Sathya Sai Baba (that appears to have been written by Premanand himself) as the truth! If these Rationalist and Atheist organizations employ these types of double standards and resort to this type of subterfuge publicly, one can only imagine the prevalence of "behind-the-scenes" Anti-Sai activity.
For example, Dale Beyerstein said, “‘Sam Dalal’ is a name given by James Randi. Randi in a phone conversation said that Sai Baba ‘materialised’ a Seiko watch for a Seiko watch company executive visiting India. Sam Dalal asked for the serial number from the executive as I understood it, and got it.” However, Dr. Kavoor said he contacted Shoji Hattori and Mr. Hattori said he never knew or heard of Sathya Sai Baba and never received a watch from him! After doing some basic research into this claim, I discovered that James Randi was the source for this 20 year old untruth. Click Here to view my article about Sam Dalal, James Randi and Dale Beyerstein and a lie that has been published on Anti-Sai, Rationalist and Skeptic websites for years.
Basava Premanand has also rightly developed a reputation as a sensationalist tabloid critic who is neither scientific nor rational. For example, click here to read one example (out of many) where Premanand related an utterly unbelievable and unsubstantiated story against Sathya Sai Baba. Click Here to read my article about Premanand’s conspiracy theory about the 1993 police shootings. Click Here to view screen captures where Basava Premanand’s personally claimed, on SaiPetition.net, that he was a follower of Sri Sathya Sai Baba from 1968 to 1974 and was the "best worker in the SSB Org., Podanur". However, in the Secret Swami Documentary, Basava Premanand claimed that he was never a follower and had been trying to investigate SSB since 1968 itself. To further this argument, click here to read an article that was published in the The Independent, on December 24th 2000, where it was claimed that Premanand had "spent nearly 50 years touring Indian villages, drawing crowds of people by demonstrating how "miracles" are performed". When this article was written, Premanand was 71 (he was born in 1930). Premanand had been exposing gurus since the age of 21 or 22. This means that in 1968 (at the age of 38, or 16 years after he was a rationalist) Premanand was not a follower of Satya Sai Baba. Consequently, Premanand lied.
It is clear that FARA, CSICOP, and other Rationalist and Atheist organizations have a keen Anti-Sai agenda whose track record is far from being spotless! As a matter of fact, it was Babu Gogineni (Executive Director of the International Humanist and Ethical Union) who was one of the major players responsible for trying to get the British Parliament to pass a motion against Sathya Sai Baba.
Just recently, Andries Krugers Dagneaux (a vocal Anti-Sai Activist) divulged the fact that Lousewies van der Laan (the woman who questioned the European Commission about Sathya Sai Baba) is his cousin!
It is also clear that the Adeliaide Institute, which the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs considers to be both a hate group and Anti-Semitic, is waging their own Anti-Sai crusade. The Adelaide Institute had published various Anti-Sai articles, written by Barry Pittard, on their website. What do holocaust deniers and Anti-Semites have to do with Sathya Sai Baba in the first place?
What about the claims that you ‘slander’, ‘libel’ and ‘defame’ Ex-Devotees and critics of Sai Baba?
My Response: Anti-Sai Activists have been resorting to group thuggery tactics and are collectively accusing me of “slandering”, “libeling” and “defaming” them. These absurd claims are patently false and not even one critic has attempted to sue me for slander, libel or defamation despite indirect legal threats. Unlike Ex-Devotees, I back up my claims with factual and verifiable information, links and screen-caps. If anyone is slandering, libeling or defaming others, it is Ex-Devotees against me. I have refuted many of Ex-Devotee’s malicious defamations and gutter untruths about me on my personal webpage and on my article entitled ‘Open Letter’: Anti-Sai Propaganda, Rhetoric And Hypocrisy Exposed. It is also a fact that Ex-Devotees were threatened with legal action for their defamations and they put up a disclaimer stating that the information they provide is not necessary valid or true (Ref). You will find no such disclaimer on this website (Ref).
What about the evidence against Sathya Sai Baba?
My Response: Anti-Sai allegations are made despite NO court cases ever being filed, first-hand, in a court of law in India. Not even one alleged victim has utilized FREE, "world class legal resources" to bring Sathya Sai Baba to justice. Not even ONE single affidavit has ever been made public (despite numerous claims to "20", "scores" and "over a hundred" affidavits being in existence and published on the internet). The petition signatures have NEVER been independently verified. "Evidence" is cited from mostly anonymous sources or people using a first name or a pseudonym. Anti-Sai’s have slandered Sathya Sai Baba in the most vile way, yet whenever anyone questions them and their character, all of a sudden they are beyond reproach. All of this points to a Cultish, Secretive, Hate-Group, that tries to mislead the general public with propaganda. No documents. No affidavits. No court cases. No first-hand complaints filed in India. No independent agencies verifying their alleged data. No anything!
Despite these facts, Anti-Sai Activists have the audacity to attack those who question their viewpoints and unsubstantiated claims. If the "evidence" is so compelling, why has it never been taken to a court of law? I do not want excuses. I want to know why not even one victim has even tried to take their case to a court of law in India? My website exposes the Anti-Sai Movement for what it is: A dishonest and deceitful hate-group that wages an unremitting smear campaign against Sathya Sai Baba because they have failed to make any leeway against him in a Court of Law. This highly suggests that the "evidence" against Sathya Sai Baba is inadequate or non-existent.
People are finally beginning to see through these baseless allegations, which are full of weasel-words like "claim", "if", "possibly", "maybe", "probably", "alleged", "seem" and various other words denoting exceptions and/or admissions of limitations to the allegations leveled against Sai Baba. These numerous weasel-words leave the allegations looking inconclusive at best and works of fiction at worst.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been proven to be a "charlatan".
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been convicted of any crime.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never been charged with any crime.
- Sathya Sai Baba has never had even one single complaint lodged against him by any alleged victim, first-hand, in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India (the only place where courts would have jurisdiction over Baba as an individual defendant).
These are the cold, hard facts and no rationalist, critic, skeptic or ex-devotee can provide a scintilla of verifiable evidence to the contrary (Ref).
Search This Website Using Google: