Few who visit, however, are aware that they are under constant surveillance by numerous paid undercover agents, employed by the ashram and paid from the apparently bottomless funds available through the Central Trust. Almost anything one says anywhere in the ashram (or even outside it) that can be picked up can be - if at all suspicious - be reported by snoopers, and by the average of 500 unpaid volunteers for the Seva Dal who also to partake in surveillance precautions since the 1993 grand slaughter in SB's own bedroom. They come in groups for a one or two week tour of guard and similar duties, usually for 12 hours of each day, organised on a rotating basis between the states of India. They are brought in shifts from all over India continually to guard Prashanthi Nilayam and now function as a backup to this security system, whether they quite realise their role or not. It is hard to see what kind of 'Supreme Peace' (i.e. 'Prashanthi') this may speak.

Who is the target of the feared attacks and why assume that there is reason to attack anyone? I shall be detailing these events that are the main turning point in the fortunes of SB and the reader can investigate my findings and then draw her/his own conclusions! SB has many times proclaimed that no one and nothing can harm him. He named his ashram 'The Abode of Supreme Peace' (Prashanthi Nilayam). In numerous books blessed by Baba it is stated that visitors to Prashanthi are under the protection of SB, no harm can befall them etc. The SS Org. encourages its members to visit SB ashrams, often arranging group visits and making their travel arrangements. The information given in advance to newcomers is, in all permitted literature and in talks given about conditions there is seriously lacking in frankness as to certain dangers that can be met, even within the ashrams. All information about deaths therein, murders, suicides, fatal accidents and other untoward incidents is suppressed. Those who have found out, usually by chance or private contacts about such events, have had to rationalise hard to sustain belief in all that SB promises about his protection and with his much-publicised motto 'Why fear when I am here?'

In my diary/notebook covering my visit to Puttaparthi in 1995/6, I wrote what V.K. Narasimhan told me on 1/1/1996 exactly as follows: "Sai is spending 50 lakhs a month on his own protection, with 50 private security men in plain clothes in the ashram and within his building, says Narasimhan. Why, if nothing can harm him? SB said it was for the benefit of devotees. Why did Sai announce in an interview that he would be killed during an attempt in October 1995?"

The official line, of course, parrots SB's sly claim that the massive security is for the protection of devotees... a convenient rebuff to those who begin to ask why the invincible Avatar of the Kali Age might need such excessive protection. Oddly, however, few of the most hardened believers actually deny that it is for protecting SB himself, at least since the alleged assassination attempt on him (which he has publicly denied was against him).

The view that there was an attempt of SB's life is convenient for those who have most to cover up, not least his younger brother, the multi-millionaire Puttaparthi property mogul, Janaki Ramiah, and other ashram and Central Trust officials, who publicly claimed that it was an assassination attempt on SB. SB himself was never actually attacked, as he made clear when refusing to bring charges against the two who were said to be the 'master-minds' behind the attack. Because of this they were freed, but this also meant that they were unable to defend themselves in court, and their motives and roles in the episode were thus officially covered-up. Nor could the claims set forth that one of the intruders' motives was to stop SB sexually abusing his students could not be examined in public. As another consequence, neither was the widely-held view that the intruders wished to stop widespread financial irregularities and other injustices within the ashrams investigated by any independent body

Here are very big and demonstrable 'vested interests' of several kinds. Whether the intrusion of June 1993 was an attempt at taking SB hostage and changing the ashram or actually did aim at killing him (for whatever reasons) makes fairly little material difference now, for the blackmail by SB officials of the police resulting of the execution of the intruders while SB stood by close at hand (meanwhile consulting with his officials) is by far the most outstanding judicial human rights issue. It is a make or break issue for faith, one which few devotees dare even consider! It may have been, as claimed by some, an attempt to stop the sexual slavery SB allegedly imposes on his most attractive and captive male students. The case has never been cleared up properly, as I shall detail here later. All in all, then, the safety of devotees today is seen most obviously to be a most secondary consideration at the ashrams, at best. There are no armed guards around their quarters, as there always are around SB's! It is well-known too that SB has had constructed for himself a veritably invulnerable abode with balconies that cannot be scaled from the ground and with rooms that are sealed off from the ground floor by a lift, which is deactivated when SB so desires, such as at night. Moreover, as anyone can observe, there are two sets of identical-looking apartments and balconies etc., one on either side of the Poornachandra Hall.

A very costly and massive array of Black Beret commandos take over at functions which the P.M. and President of India attend, often causing crowd crushes, such as at the bi-decennial birthday celebrations (i.e. 65th, 70th etc,) Bomb threats received by the ashrams are never made known (except by independent sources in the press), and devotees are left in the belief that there are no threats of such dangers. A bomb threat from Tamil Eelam was received prior to the 75th birthday, which was quietly reduced in size by the ashram authorities without giving the reason as reported in the Indian press.

Top sacred, top secret?

Serious discussion of certain types of fact, - matters such as I outlined in the first part of this series - is taboo in the Sathya Sai Org. Everything about SB and his works is regarded as sacred and, if it smells at all fishy, it is kept well hidden away. The conflict of belief and reality, and of word and action this involves raises many questions that are quashed by issuing spiritual directives on how it is best to mind one's own business, examine oneself instead, do not try to understand Sai Baba etc.

What appears harmful to us, it is repeatedly told, must be in accordance with the All-Good, All-Knowing Divine Will of SB. Everything that ever happens as all good, says SB but also - on the other hand - there is no good or evil anywhere! He teaches that it is better not to question anything about him because we cannot ever understand him or anything of what he does! The attitude one is supposed to take is that, if SB allowed an event to happen in his ashrams (or nearby or even anywhere in the world!), it must be for the best… be it contagious illness, serious injury, sudden death, murder, cover-up, harassment by his officials, beatings by his gatekeepers etc., the sexual abuse of minors etc. To anyone who has not through SB's subtle means been entranced and entrapped in the web of deceptions that surround him and which he covertly supports, this seems incredible and fantastic or even a form of induced madness. The question from outsiders, "How could you ever possibly have believed in all that?" is admittedly something very hard to explain. But we try… Most ashrams in India practice internal secrecy and censorship along with outward cover-ups of unfortunate, not to say criminal, incidents, and SB's ashrams are certainly no exception, to the contrary. For example, the International Chairman of the SS Organisation, Indulal Shah is a conniving accountant trained in Indian political manipulations - who is also on the super-rich and secretive SS Central Trust. He told pressmen about the six murders in Sai Baba's apartment on 6-6-1993, "the matter is purely internal and we do not wish to have any law-enforcement agency investigating into it" (according to the Staff Reporter of The Hindu 10-6-1993). The chief lackey, Indulal Shah, lied about there being official UNESCO participation in SS Org. matters, which in fact never occurred. This has been documented from his own published words! (See 'UNESCO conference without UNESCO' by S. Badaev). His statements says it all about the set-up over which Sai Baba rules.

Obtaining any plain facts, even about seemingly trivial matters, is mostly fraught with difficulty at SB ashrams, especially for foreigners, and not at all only due to language and cultural differences. Various officials are as sparing as possible with information other than that they wish to impress on visitors, and may become very recalcitrant and obstructive at any hint of taking issue with their decisions. There is a strong culture of "mind you own business" throughout the Sai movement. SB condones this, for he invariably does not react to letters of complaint against maltreatment by his staff (except in the case of a small handful of favourites like Mr. Kaw of Delhi, the late John Hislop etc.) Nor does he react against the ingrained culture of racial discrimination (esp. against Eurasians - which usually just means whites) met from some servitors by many a visitor sooner or later. The residents are also mostly very cautious, speaking only in lowered voiced privately about anything not thought to be wholly positive about the ashram or could reflect on SB. This secrecy creates an atmosphere of self-censorship and that aids power-wielders and those having any corrupt motives.

Care has doubtless to be taken by any serious spiritual movement as to what is made public knowledge, for any admission of wrongdoing is easily ripped out of its context and make into a feast by anti-spiritual media persons. An unproven allegation is sufficient for many newspapers to print; thin evidence of the slightest misdemeanour is often enough for a field day. Even when certain facts are known with considerable accuracy, they are often interpreted very differently, according to the commentator's character, beliefs or purpose. However, where murders and cold-blooded executions are involved, why do SB and his officials not wish people to know the facts? Nor, extraordinarily, do the majoity of Indian news media now want to report on or pursue the many and very weighty sexual allegations. I leave the reader to ponder over this. I firmly believe in the adage, 'Tell the truth always, even when the truth doesn't favour your viewpoint". This, unfortunately, is not practised at SB institutions and most definitely and despicably in many instances not by SB either, who boasts that his first name is 'truth' (i.e. Sathya). This has been well-documented on quite some scale both by others and I). Because of this, he is bringing down upon himself considerable public criticism and condemnation, which can only grow if he should ever become at all widely known in educated and more democratically accountable societies. The gradual emergence of the web of lies and half-truths that enwrap almost everything connected with SB eventually became too much for my wife and I to bear, especially when we found out definitively about the murders and the sexual abuses, so we had to break out of it. Now I am airing this for the benefit of others and for posterity.

That some criticisms of SB may not be properly justified does not alter the rightness of many of them. Yet his claim of personal perfection and moral superiority in all ways over all human beings dead or alive is the real petard by which he is hoisted. Because of his political influence at the highest levels in India, SB can afford to ignore criticism and leave all injured parties to rot, which he unconcernedly allows. Attempts to obtain justice and reparation by injured parties are suppressed through his network of followers in the Indian judiciary. The relatives of murdered devotees and many others are without recourse to legal compensation. However, foreign critics cannot be silenced so easily and the reduction in the flow of foreign visitors and the massive donations from abroad has already apparently caused him to let fly his wrath at anyone who will not bow to what he outspokenly asserts as his divine prerogatives. Until all this secrecy and misrule is radically changed, the criticisms and very substantial and well-documented allegations will surely not go away, and are already firmly attached to his chosen name 'Sai Baba', (itself perhaps the usurpation of the prestige of the former popular saint, Sai Baba of Shirdi, as claimed by many of that saint's followers).

Positive misinformation is, at bottom, no better than the negative sort... it may sway public opinion for some time and induce vicarious pseudo-experience. Both extremes, however, misrepresent human experience and so distort the truth. Everyone with any kind of decent upbringing practises some kind and degree of self-censorship in considering people's feelings and so forth, and we would not want it to be otherwise. Writing just anything in public cannot be a worthwhile goal except for total anarchists or, say, the mentally or emotionally disturbed. Therefore, instead of being against all forms of censorship, the question must be, where to draw the limits?

Granted, spiritual movements and persons do mostly fare ill in the media world, where worldliness is the grist on which both the jaws of gossips and the mills of the press feed. Total freedom of expression can lead to much confusion and ills, but the world increasingly agrees that secrecy and censorship are yet worse, much worse! The crucial importance of press freedom is that it ultimately supports the truth and helps honest journalists dig deeply into suspected injustices, wars, genocide, corruption, and every kind of crime and cover-up. Otherwise powerless individuals - and society as a whole - become the pawns of more or less despotic forces, of whatever ilk. Most Sai devotees are constantly faced by a dilemma, for they are kept in the dark about serious matters and told to have no doubts whatever, but they cannot avoid repeatedly hearing disturbing facts, uncontrollable ashram rumours of all kinds... and not least (indirectly) from those who have left the Sai movement. There are few covert grapevines to compare with those in SB ashrams! This dilemma of censorship vs. freedom of speech is nicely illustrated by an anecdote from occupied Norway, where the Nazis imposed a rigorous censorship (to enforce evil propaganda untruths and hide terrible crimes), broken often only on pain of death. One of the German occupiers was amazed to hear that there had been full press freedom previously, because he could not understand how one then could know what was the truth. This neatly sums up the attitude of SB, his officials, VIPs and office-bearers throughout the Sai Organisation.

Again, all who have spent more than a week or so at SB ashrams know the sense of having to tread very carefully. The conspiracies of silence and secrecy cover up injustices by making for a kind of 'double-accounting' in which two versions of the facts exist, one closer to reality for insiders and another one that hides or else hushes up all potentially destructive information for everyone else. To cover up facts is one thing, but to censure those who do not concur is hardly the way to communicate ideals of truth, love and non-violence. Those who are not confirmed devotees will be put off questioning for evidence of wrongdoing. Any community that fails to allow for healthy feedback will eventually run into difficulties of credibility and in fulfilling its aims. This is what increasingly occurs at SB's ashrams and in his various organisations.

The inexpressible 'Truth' of which SB talks so often is one thing. But any so-called 'Truth" that flies in the face of facts actually hides the greater truth is of no value at all to genuine seekers. Such claims abound in SB's own discourses and in the 'positive propaganda machine' that SB institutions are all geared up to. The result is that rumours fly all the faster and the one incredible positive story and fanciful invention after the other becomes as if factual to many devotees just because they are left to flourish, are never refuted by SB or his staff... except in the most embarrassing or unavoidable extreme circumstances. SB actually condones and even loves the rumour mill, as long as it is about his miraculous acts and omniscient and total divine power. Left alone untruth festers. Well-investigated, undeniable 'negative' facts need to be brought into the light of day.

The staff at SB's ashrams do offer a minimum of neutral, fact-based guidance to visitors which, if followed to the letter, would go some way in protecting them from unfortunate experiences while staying there. They warn that one should look carefully after one's personal property at all times, for thieves cannot be kept out of the ashram. They also repeat SB's advice not go outside to Puttaparti village to shop or socialise. Had they told the details of some previous incidents, visitors would surely take this advice much more seriously than they mostly do. But this, including major thefts, a number of murders of foreign devotees both in the village and inside the ashram, would surely lead to much discussion which leads to doubts about the supposed 'divine protection' of SB! This would surely deter many new visitors and mar what good experiences might befall one from visiting the ashram and SB. (Young men, unsurprisingly, are never told what behaviour like oiling of genitals or sexual advances it is possible they will meet from SB in the privacy of the interview room).

SB warns his followers not to enter into arguments with others about spiritual matters or about his nature and mission. This surely functions too as is part of the clamp-down on talk that can give away facts that are to be kept under wraps. He minimises the importance of facts, scientific or scholarly investigation etc. as mere passing phenomena, He emphasizes personal self-investigation and improvement, mainly on an inner level through repeating his name and visualising him. Yet educated people today rightly often expect open debate with a free exchange of opinions and frank critical evaluations. No one can live in a complete social vacuum solely with one's own thoughts... not even a hermit, not SB either, for they carry with them the culture and memories of others that nurtured them.

As SB has pointed out and complained mightily about many times, despite some selfless achievements by his followers, many problems still beset and even dominate his movement. Ashrams led by a guru usually function best when they are not too large. The apparatus around SB has grown to huge proportions and he has long since delegated most of its daily running to others. All reports from organisation conferences, and also from interviews SB has given to his office-bearers, indicate that SB gives very few definite answers on specifics of organisational activity, confining himself mainly to general directives, usually aphorisms concerning the kind of 'spiritual life' he recommends. This is also his well-known indirect or elliptical style in discourses and most interviews. Therefore, much is left to persons appointed by SB, who seem to have a free hand to ignore or overrule when it suits them. If it is found out that they criticise him or his directives, express any serious doubts or leak sensitive information, however, they are expelled without further ado.

Observant persons find official versions of events full of convenient omissions, and find it hard to tell what comes from SB and what is merely someone's interpretation. This lack of clarity is taken advantage of by many of the leaders and officials who wish to impose their own views or manipulate people for their personal reasons. How, in such circumstances, to distinguish even SB's teaching from the many distorted interpretations of it also becomes a real problem. How to interpret his living message, which he says is his life, is difficult when he is not easily distinguished from what occurs around and even close to him. Add to this the much more challenging problem of reconciling an increasingly large number of SB's words with his actions, as is now being demonstrated widely on this website and several others!

It is not exactly pleasant to mention unpleasant facts, but since the full truth is bound to come out eventually somehow (so they say, and SB had to agree with this too), someone has to do it. I am reminded of SB's words when inaugurating the Venkatagiri Girls' High School many years ago, "Speak the truth always, for falsehood is the result of cowardice" (Sathyam, Sivam, Sundaram Vol. I. p.79). His present mendacity and despicable hypocrisy in covering up his misdeeds belies his words as mere lip service. However many efforts are made to cover up significant facts, they will not succeed in the long run, especially if or when the SB mission really sometimes should become known about very widely. Penetrating investigations are already being made about many hitherto concealed matters and those who are beginning to speak out find that they have a forum and an exposé movement to support them. If, as SB insists, the truth will ultimately raise SB's public reputation, why does he not correct the one-sided propaganda of his followers, dispel the countless 'positive' rumours and excessive miracle stories that circulate through the Sai movement and instead offer a balanced presentation of facts? Can the answer conceivably be anything but 'there is far too much that will not stand the light of day'?

A proportion of visitors to the ashrams quite evidently have rewarding experiences there and are impressed by the para-psychological powers of SB, which are admittedly strong. Yet I also know from many conversations and letters that some good people and keen devotees do suffer unduly at the ashrams, sometimes very badly - especially mentally and spiritually - due to the ignorance, antagonism and injustice of certain of the staff - and often from other devotees. Believing as some do that SB is always the ever-present doer of all deeds, the sufferers imagine that they are being punished or corrected for some unknown fault by SB through his staff or in other mystical ways! All this misunderstanding about almost anyone with a badge or an office being 'SB's instrument' makes the manipulation of others easier.

Just as we always appreciate and remember helpfulness, openness and concern, we are all free to make our own observations and note when fine words about truthfulness, compassion and service are not followed up in actual behaviour. Reluctance to speak straight has led an unknown number of people - both Indian and foreign followers - into serious problems and even death, as discussed previously. The activities that permit (and cover up) this cannot be said exactly to have the stamp of Divine protection, compassion or service! SB's words, "Why fear when I am here?" are shown to an empty vanity. Even though SB is there, I know how much some of them still fear... and most of them fear him most of all! One should fear sinning, but surely not anyone purporting to be divine? All important staff at Prashanti Nilayam and the Central Trust are under duress to inform nothing that can harm SB's image, even to non-devotee relatives and dependents of persons killed.

Censorship is so rigorously applied that exclusion from the ashrams for ever is a frequent event, and some are taken into police custody. Beatings of unrepentant devotees have occurred, even in the darshan lines! In trying to contain the situation and keep everyone ignorant of the true state of affairs, a draconian regime is enforced at times of crisis, sending all foreign visitors out with less than a days' notice and without any explanation. This has occurred at least a dozen times in the last two decades, several times due to separate incidents of killings of visiting devotees, not least from abroad.

The same applies to problems devotees experience due to financial irregularities connected with donations. Not least also to money problems with the Sai Books and Publications Trust, concerning which I know five reliable persons involved in transactions with Mr. Suri, the previous Convenor, who have told in detail from personal experience in these affairs, not least by the senior Indian journalist V.K. Narasimhan, for two decades the editor of SB's monthly journal. The Convenor was found by investigating journalists during the 1993 incident with an unregistered sum of Rs. 2 lakhs (i.e. 200,000) in his apartment, taken from the ashram's publishing trust. SB then spoke out in a July 1993 discourse in defence of all his officials as being beyond any suspicion of misusing funds! Months later he quietly dismissed several Central Trust and ashram officials from their positions, including at long last also Mr. Suri.

The extreme secrecy of persons around SB about what goes on, what he does when not visible at darshan etc. is part of this, and it may sometimes be a result of SB's using paranormal abilities to influence the minds of people - even manipulate their sensory perceptions. Nonetheless, it is also remarkable how so many matters that SB and his minions evidently thought were safely covered-up have surfaced through unexpected channels and how the evidence that backs this up begins to accumulate from here and there. One must at least agree (also with SB) that "the truth will out"!

Once very close ex-devotees like Conny Larsson, David Bailey, and Dr. Bhatia... plus the very courageous and damning TV interview in the film 'Seduced' with the abused US minor "Sam" and many others who have sworn affadavits all claim that SB is guilty of sexual molestation of young men and pederasty with minors. He has long been reported from various quarters to be an active homosexual (despite his pretense of being a celibate) and a misuser of young men. Such activities make for a 'secret society' of implicated abusers. This is a major key to understanding the development of a culture of tight secrecy by SB. The extent and weight of evidence indicates that SB has taken his sexual behaviour even to include his wholly defenceless under-age students and makes it very likely that claims of there being a considerable number of his victims who now also 'follow the divine example' in this too very likely. When engaging in these practices, which are extremely taboo in the Indian social environment, it creates cliques with ever-widening needs for confidential contacts and complicity in cover-up. Fear of disclosure, of blackmail, and also of murder are strong motives for not 'breaking faith'. This is a now an all too well-known pattern from many institutions (especially religious ones) where it has in recent decades been increasingly uncovered that such abuse was sustained over long periods. We can suspect that the reactions to those who speak out in person about this would be draconian, to say the least.

It is quite amazing how blind followers still are when they simply overlook the killing of six devotees in June 1993 right under the nose of the self-proclaimed "omnipotent" SB after hours of discussions by his officials with the police, who then shot down the four intruders. The whys and wherefores of SB's standing by while foul executions take place under his absolute jurisdiction in Prashanthi Nilayam and at the instigation of his own younger brother and other of his officials will simply not go away. Those incidents did cause a number of visitors who were there to leave SB permanently, including a few leaders, but the "spiritual doublethink" mechanism (the teachings' effective white-washing of anything done by the self-proclaimed Godhead) kept the vast majority of followers well in line. It is instructive how blinded people can be made to be, and how it is possible... which I have tried to explain quite fully elsewhere from my own experience and observations (see http://www.saibaba-x.org.uk/5/index.html)

Until all these matters are aired freely and cleared up in an unbiased court, the suspicion that the claims made by several closely-informed persons of SB's secret sexuality being one of the motives in the cover-up will remain factually wholly irrefutable. Some time after the murders and executions, the Indian government reportedly came under pressure from various groups to provide security for SB. They reportedly declared SB to be a 'national treasure', and insisted on installing its own security system with guards and metal detectors at the main ashrams, which has been in place since. This also is fully in character with the involvement of the Indian government in whitewashing SB by quashing the murder investigations. Now the Indian PM Vajpayee and other top officials are publicly backing SB as innocent, though they know full well that there was a massive cover-up. What could be more despicable and prove a greater blot on India's name in the world... unless it will be perhaps the the bungling use of their atomic weapons in a crisis with Pakistan. The right-wing Hindu 'Sai devotee' PM Vajpayee and various of his sabre-rattling ministers got elected as the new Indian President another visitor to SB, who is adored in India because he actually designed the delivery vehicle for nuclear weapons! This is the new dharmic India SB claims to be presiding over!

May the true God of all mankind forbid!