02 Apr 2022
i) Why was the incarnation Shri Satya Sai Baba not mentioned in any scripture?
[Ms. Laxmi Thrylokya asked:- Pādanamaskāram Swami. I watched a video where an ISKCON devotee was refuting the claim that Shri Satya Sai Baba was an incarnation of God Krishna. Many devotees believe in Baba and revere Him as the Lord because of the miracles performed by Him and the excellent knowledge preached by Him. But, the ISKCON devotee being a devotee of Lord Krishna denies this based on the following points.
The arrival of Lord Krishna on Earth was written in Scriptures including the names of His parents and His village. The next incarnations of Krishna such as Buddha, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu were also mentioned. Between Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Kalki Avatar, no other incarnation is mentioned. It is written that Lord Krishna will come only after 42,000 years. The arrival of Shri Satya Sai Baba was not written in any scripture.]
Swami Replied:- (a) God Krishna said that He would come down whenever there was a danger for justice (Yadā yadā hi dharmasya… - Gītā). In the 10 incarnations, only Krishna and Buddha were told, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is an insertion only. Do you mean that between the times of Krishna and Buddha, even if there was damage of justice, Krishna should not have come? If we agree Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as the incarnation of Krishna, why can we not agree Sri Satya Sai Baba also as an incarnation of Krishna? Actually, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is an incarnation of Radha, Who is the incarnation of Sage Durvasa, Who is the incarnation of God Shiva. If you don’t like Shiva, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu will become a problem for you. The Bhagavatam says that the incarnations of God Vishnu are uncountable (Avatārā hyasaṃkhyeyāḥ) and in such case, this statement suits to the above Gita verse. It means that God Krishna will come down whenever there is necessity and hence, the incarnations of God are uncountable.
(b) ISKCON worships Rama in par with Krishna. Rama did not show any miracle and just behaved like an ideal human being. Sri Satya Sai Baba performed several miracles from childhood like Krishna. You reject Baba but accept Rama! Rama is said to be an incarnation of twelve kalaas (Pūrṇāvatāra) and Krishna is said to be an incarnation of sixteen kalaas (Paripūrṇatamāvatāra). How are you accepting Rama and Krishna on par with each other when there is a clear statement that Rama is lesser than Krishna in the number of kalaas? I can give the answer for this. All incarnations are equal in the possessed power, but, differ in the exhibited power because the requirements of their programs are different from each other. This means that Rama exhibited twelve kalaas only even though, He possessed sixteen kalaas. Krishna exhibited all the possessed sixteen kalaas.
(c) You supported Islam (due to your fear for them) and Christianity (because you are patronized in Christian countries). Even Muslims and Christians worship Baba as the incarnation of God throughout the world.
ii) Why do only a few people find Baba beautiful?
[Lord Krishna comes with highest beauty (Madana Mohana). The beauty of Krishna is mesmerized by everyone but only few people find Baba beautiful.]
Swami Replied:- (a) This is the most foolish point. The beauty of the body is temporary and when the body is cremated, physical beauty disappears. Real and permanent beauty means only the good qualities, which form the internal beauty. If you say that the incarnation of God Vishnu must be beautiful, it is not a fact because God Vishnu came as fish, tortoise, wild boar and lion, and are these forms beautiful externally?
(b) You have not seen Krishna with your naked eyes, whereas, Baba is seen with naked eyes and His photos are based on the clearly seen personality of Baba. How can you compare their beauty when one is imaginary, and the other is visible? You can’t compare a really seen beauty with an imaginary beauty.
(c) Poets describe with exaggeration since they are very strong devotees of God and such expressions indicate their deep devotion. You say that Krishna is more beautiful than Cupid (Madana mohaka) and you have neither seen Krishna nor Cupid. Hence, this becomes a stupid argument. Even if you do penance, Krishna may appear before you, but Cupid will not appear before you because God Shiva smashed him into ash and God gave a boon to his wife that she alone can see him.
(d) It is true that Krishna was born with the climax beauty for human level. There was a reason for such external beauty of Krishna. Gopikas were re-born sages and their romance with Krishna was based on their pure devotion to God and not based on the hormonal lust that is connected to the external physical beauty. God wanted to test the Gopikas as to whether their practical lust towards Him was based on the pure devotion to God or due to the climax level external beauty of Krishna. God can know the mind of any soul since He is Omniscient. Such a program of sweet devotion (Madhura Bhakti) existed in the program of the incarnation as God Krishna. In the incarnation of Baba, such program did not exist and hence, there was no need to come with climax beauty.
(e) In the case of an incarnation, every point has a purposeful part of the divine program. God Hanuman is the incarnation of God Shiva and the same God Shiva incarnated as the beautiful Adi Shankara. While Shankara debated with several scholars throughout India, facial attraction was necessary for Him as the initial factor for attracting people in the debates.
(f) Rama was also very beautiful, Who attracted even the sages in the forest, who proposed hugging Him by turning into females using their miraculous power and this led to the further story of the Gopikas in the next birth. Sri Satya Sai Baba was also beautiful, Whose personality attracted a large number of devotees of even foreign countries. Shirdi Sai Baba was not beautiful because He confined Himself to a petty village with rural culture. Like this, as per the divine program of the incarnation, different aspects appear.
(g) Sage Valmiki named the canto related to Hanuman as ‘Sundarakanda’ and it is said that Hanuman is very beautiful (Sundare sundaraḥ kapiḥ). It is also said that everything is beautiful regarding Hanuman (Sundare kiṃ na Sundaram?). This shows that beauty really means good and great qualities, but not physical beauty.
(h) It is said that Goddess Parvati is very beautiful and at the same time, more sacred even than sages by firmly sticking to God Shiva only, even though She was terribly discouraged by others. This stands for the saying that beauty has no connection with loose character (Yaducyate Pārvati pāpavṛttaye, na rūpamityavyabhicāri tadvacaḥ - Kalidasa). Even Rama, the most beautiful personality, maintained perfect character. It is also said that good qualities can follow beauty (Yatrākṛtiḥ tatra guṇāḥ).
iii) Every incarnation of Krishna has markings on the body to prove Him as God. But Baba doesn't?
Swami Replied:- Did you see the markings on the body of Krishna with your naked eyes? Poets will exaggerate everything due to their excellent devotion to God.
iv) Can you call anyone, who cures cancer and sells ash as incarnations?
[iv) Krishna did extraordinary miracles like lifting a Hill on HIs little finger and duplicating Himself 16000 times etc. But, Baba just created ash using hands and cured cancer patients. There are many doctors who have cured cancer and many people are selling ash as well. Can you call them as incarnations?]
Swami Replied:- (a) Miraculous creation is unimaginable irrespective of the size of the created item. The generation of any item of any size is miraculous and you can’t say that the generation of a small item is not miraculous, but the generation of a big item alone is miraculous. Several times, Satya Sai Baba controlled rain by moving His hand. Krishna could not control rain and lifted the mountain for protection. Who is more powerful between Baba and Krishna? I talked like this only to refute your logic. Actually, both the incarnations have the same power. God selected one way in one situation and another way in another situation. Can you create even the smallest atom? The very concept of creation of matter is of the fundamental importance in a miracle and not the size of matter. A miracle is a miracle irrespective of the size of the created item. It is the question of creation of matter from space. Baba’s photos even in foreign countries generated plenty of ash and plenty of divine nectar. In the time of Krishna, such miracles did not happen and can we say that Krishna could not do the miracle which was done by Baba? We are forced to ask such questions provoked by your foolishness. Actually, both are one and the same and the miracles only differ from one program to the other.
(b) Do you mean that the sellers of ash are also creating ash by moving their hands like Baba? How could you compare Baba with sellers of ash? Doctors cure cancer in early stage using medicines and sophisticated electronic instruments. But Baba cured cancer just by an oral statement “your cancer is cancelled”. Do you say that doctors are also curing the cancer by their simple oral statements? How could you compare Baba with these ordinary physicians?
v) Krishna killed the irreligious elements and so atheism wasn’t there but how did irreligious elements exist during Baba’s time?
[When Krishna was present, He killed all the irreligious elements in the society and there was no atheism. When Baba was there, irreligious elements were still present. Therefore, Baba is not the Lord. These are the 5 reasons he has given to disprove Baba as God. Swami, please enlighten us with truth.]
Swami Replied:- Killing an atheist by a weapon is not extraordinary, but changing a person with the help of the knowledge-sword that kills ignorance is a greater achievement. Even Krishna told this point in the Gita (Tasmādajñāna saṃbhūtaṃ, hṛtsthaṃ jñānāsinā...). Even Baba told the same “in the old time, few atheistic demons existed and God killed them so that the rest can be protected easily. But today everybody is partially divine and partially demonic. Today, if I have to kill, I have to kill everybody. Hence, the old policy is changed and God wants to try to change everybody with the help of very powerful spiritual knowledge.” How noble is the statement of Baba!
vi) Which God worships Baba?
[Scriptures say that many gods and demi-gods worship Krishna including Lord Brahma, Lord Indra, etc. Even Adi Shankara worships Krishna. Which God worships Baba?]
Swami Replied:- (a) Did you see gods and demi-gods worshipping Krishna with your eyes? Even scriptures are sometimes polluted by insertions and deletions. Authority of the word (śabda pramāṇam) is not greater than perception (pratyakṣa pramāṇam). You can’t compare a perceived item with an imaginary item heard from a book. Sometimes, you have to take the meaning of the word angels as good human beings. Several good human beings worshipped Baba and we can thus say that angels worshipped Baba.
(b) You say that Adi Shankara also worshipped Krishna. But, My dear friend! Adi Shankara says that every soul is God. This means that God worshipped God. Several human beings or souls also worshipped Baba and hence, as per Adi Shankara, several Gods worshipped God Baba!
vii) If Baba was God, He should have preached new knowledge?
[Lord Krishna gave a new teaching to the world which is the Bhagavad Gita and He didn't quote from previous scriptures to prove His points. So did Jesus Christ and Mohammad. But, Baba is quoting from Scriptures and giving the same message given by Krishna. This is not original. If Baba were God, He is supposed to reveal new teachings. At Your divine lotus feet, Thrylokya.]
Swami Replied:- (a) Do you agree that Adi Shankara is also an incarnation of God Shiva (Śaṅkaraḥ Śaṅkaraḥ sākṣāt)? But Adi Shankara also quoted several scriptures in His commentary. Even Krishna quoted Brahmasutras in the context of proving a concept (Brahmasūtrapadaiścaiva…) in the Gita.
(b) Truth is one only. Expressing the same truth in different ways make you feel that something new is told (Ekam sat viprāḥ bahudhā vadanti…). A new teaching means telling the same truth in a different angle because truth is one only. In the speeches (published as books) of Baba, you will find several new angles of the spiritual knowledge. Baba gives very powerful analysis of spiritual concepts with new dimensions opening. Please read them and then talk. By criticising Baba, you have criticised Lord Krishna, because both are one and the same God.
Conclusion: ISKCON also worships only Krishna like Christianity and Islam. Worshipping one single liked form of God is in fact good, which is called as ‘ekabhakti’ (single pointed devotion). Islam is rigid in its single point devotion, but, does not criticize other religions aspiring for the other religious people to join their religion. But Christianity is very famous in transferring other religious people into their religion and in this process, they abuse other religions saying that the Gods of other religions are not true Gods. ISKCON is also like Islam, but now I find ISKCON to be like Christianity abusing other forms of God of other religions praising always one’s own religion and own form of God. I feel that ISKCON is influenced by the foreign Christian countries.
This critic feels that he has gone to a very high spiritual level so that he can be able to examine the incarnations of God and declare who is a true and who is a false incarnation! This person has not even reached the true path to reach God, which is that a fan of a specific form of God shall not criticize the forms of God of other religions. He feels that he has already reached God and became beyond all divine forms so that he can examine all the divine forms of God! This is the climax of ego. If one criticizes other forms of God, he is criticizing his own form of God indirectly because in all the forms of God, the one and the same unimaginable God or Parabrahman exists. The Brahmasutrams say that you can praise a low-grade item as God, but shall not insult God to be a lower grade item (Brahmadṛṣṭirutkarṣāt). This means that you can praise a peon of the collector’s office as a collector, but you shall not scold the collector as the peon. The first case is excusable, but, the second case is punishable. There is a saying that nobody knows which type of snake exists in which type of ant-hill! If you insult even the peon of a department, the topmost officer will become angry with you because his department is insulted. Hence, even if you criticize the lowest grade devotee, God will become angry with you.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★