Gerald Joe Moreno

Posts Tagged ‘Guru

‘Howlers’ Robert Priddy Claims 2002 Interview Was Given In 2010

Senile Robert Priddy (a caustic critic and defamer of Sathya Sai Baba who once hailed the Guru as God Incarnate) recently wrote an article for his Anti-Baba blog entitled “Interview With Sathya Sai Baba 2010”.

The only wee problem with Robert Priddy’s hysterical and pathetic article is that the interview he claimed to have occurred in 2010 actually happened in 2002, or eight years ago! As a matter of fact, Robert Priddy’s screencap (yes, the one he made himself) showed the 2002 date in it. Furthermore, Robert Priddy was attempting to expose “new howlers” against Sathya Sai Baba. How ironic! Let us take a look at Robert Priddy’s senility in action:

Senile Robert Priddy Cant Read Either

Senile Robert Priddy Can't Read Either

robertpriddy.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/interview-with-sathya-sai-baba-2010
Robert Priddy: “Once again Sathya Sai Baba has given an interview, this time to Russian ladies. It is mostly the same in content as thousands of interviews, the same words to the same questions. The same superficial and flawed answers, but this time introducing a couple of new howlers of the kind only Sai Baba can manage in all seriousness. Why the website saibabaofindia.com posts such rubbish would be a mystery, but evidently those responsible do not realise the absurdity:”

And now for an epiphany…Yes, once again Robert Priddy tried to dupe his readers with disinformation…The same superficial and flawed disinformation, but this time introducing a couple of new howlers of the kind only Robert Priddy can manage in all seriousness. Why Robert Priddy posts such rubbish would be a mystery, but evidently he does not realise the absurdity!

Welcome to Robert Priddy’s looney-tune world. If you look on the right-side menu, you’ll notice a blurb under Robert Priddy’s picture that says in part:

Robert Priddy: “I was 73 last September, am healthy and with unimpaired mind and memory…”

“Unimpaired mind and memory”? Apparently, Robert Priddy doesn’t realize the absurdity of that comment either.

Now, let us take a look at a screencap from the original saibabaofindia.com article. Notice the unmistakable date (given twice, one in bold & large font) as “25.06.2002” (June 25th 2002).

Very Clear 2002 Date

Very Clear 2002 Date

One will also notice that Robert Priddy’s alleged screencap of the saibabaofindia.com domain is not how their page looks like. This is not surprising considering Robert Priddy’s brazen acts of screencap fraud, which now seems to be extending to other websites as well.

Attention Robert Priddy: Step away from the computer and seek medical and psychiatric help for your problems, as they seem many. Also, Gerald Moreno suggests you buy a mirror if you really want something to “howl” at.

Ranjitha & Swami Nithyananda Sex Scandal And A Comparison To Sathya Sai Baba

Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy (both caustic critics and defamers of Sathya Sai Baba and others) wrote amusing articles on their Anti-Sai WordPress blogs feebly attempting to draw caricatured comparisions between the Paramahamsa Nithyananda Swamiji “sex scandal” and Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

What actual comparisons can be drawn between Nithyananda and Sathya Sai Baba? What actual parallels can be made? Let us find out:

COMPARISON ONE:

About Paramahamsa Nithyananda: There are actual videos with actual footage of Swami Nithyananda engaging in consentual & intimate behavior with Tamil actress Ranjitha: YouTube Video 01YouTube Video 02.

About Sathya Sai Baba: There are no videos with actual footage of Sathya Sai Baba engaging in any sort of consentual & intimate behavior with anyone.

CONCLUSION: There is simply NO comparison between Nithyananda and Sathya Sai Baba whatsoever.

COMPARISON TWO:

About Paramahamsa Nithyananda: Nityananda admitted he was the person in the YouTube videos and admitted that the Tamil actress Ranjitha engaged in the behaviors recorded therein (Reference).

About Sathya Sai Baba: Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) made any sort of admission to any sort of inappropriate behavior and there are no videos of the guru engaging in any sort of questionable behavior.

CONCLUSION: There is simply NO comparison between Nithyananda and Sathya Sai Baba whatsoever.

COMPARISON THREE:

About Paramahamsa Nithyananda: Official court cases were filed against Nityananda in India and Nityananda himself submitted a writ petition defending himself (01020304).

About Sathya Sai Baba: No alleged victim has ever filed (first-hand) a single court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India for any alleged acts of impropriety. Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) had to obtain legal representation and has never (ever) submitted a writ petition defending himself. Furthermore, no basic police complaints have ever been filed first-hand against Sathya Sai Baba in India by any alleged victim (Reference).

CONCLUSION: There is simply NO comparison between Nithyananda and Sathya Sai Baba whatsoever.

The fact of the matter is that Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy are bitter and vindictive extremists who argue their case via conspiracy, speculation and homo-erotic self-projection. It is apparent that Pittard & Priddy are attempting to gain cheap publicity (the only kind they can obtain) for their blogs by writing about the highly-charged controversy surrounding Swami Nithyananda and Tamil actress Ranjitha.

Gerald Joe Moreno has written a strongly defended article entitled Refuting The Allegations Against Sathya Sai Baba With Factual Information that exposes the many gutter and smear campaigns waged by Barry Pittard, Robert Priddy and Ex-Devotees on the internet.

Despite Pittard & Priddy’s desperate and frenzied attempts to smear Sathya Sai Baba and draw dubious comparisions with Swamiji Nithyananda and Swamiji Bhimanand, Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) had a single police complaint filed against him by any alleged victim and not even one mother or father has come forward with a public grievance or court case in India alleging impropriety against the Guru.

How’s that for a real eye-opener?

Neal Ungerleider And Parikshit Luthra – Sleazy & Shabby Writers In The Shiv Murat Dwivedi Sex Scandal

Shiv Murat Dwivedi (alias “Ichchadhari Sant Swami Bhimanandji Maharaj Chitrakootwale” alias “Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi” alias “Karan Kumar Dwivedi”) received world-wide attention for a sex scandal racket in India that has been widely broadcast through international television, newspapers, magazines, online news sites and YouTube. The “fraud Godman” Dwivedi was accused of being a prostitution ring leader who used the name, form and fame of Shirdi Sai Baba to bolster his pseudo-guru reputation.

Although numerous media broadcasts correctly stated that Shiv Murat Dwivedi claimed to be a devotee of Shirdi Sai Baba, some unscrupulous journalists and writers have erroneously and falsely published that Shiv Murat Dwivedi was a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba. Shiv Murat Dwivedi was NOT a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba, nor did Shiv Murat Dwivedi ever claim to be a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba.

The following two articles are sleazy media publications that falsely claimed that Shiva Murat Dwivedi was a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba:

Parikshit Luthra – CNN-IBN Sleaze Journalist Falsely Claimed Shiv Murat Dwivedi Was A Devotee Of Sathya Sai Baba

Sleazy godman under police net worth Rs 500 cr
Parikshit Luthra / CNN-IBN

Delhi: The latest godman in the Delhi police net, Swami Bhimanand, is worth almost Rs 500 crore and used to cater to high end clients.

The long, divine sounding name Ichchadhari Sant Bhimanand Ji Maharaj could not even save the godman from the long arm of the law.

Swami Bhimanand professed to be a devotee of Satya Sai Baba and among his thousands of followers boasted prominent politicians and bureaucrats. But on the side, he was running a sex racket for 10 years which the Delhi police busted last week.

“We will be booking him under MCOCA as his past has all the necessary ingredients,” said Delhi Police Commissioner HGS Dhaliwal.

The 39-year-old Swamin Bhimanand, whose real name is Shreemurath Dwivedi, started work in Delhi as a security guard in 1988. In 1997 he was arrested for managing a prostitution ring. When he got out of jail, he took up religion simply as a front to his sleazy dealings.

He used to supply women, including air hostesses, to high end clients all across Delhi and used to earn approximately Rs 2.5 lakh everyday.

When produced in court on Wednestday, the godman of course denied all these charges.

“I have been framed. All allegations against me are false,” the swami said.

But police have recovered five diaries from him which have the names, phone numbers and even rates of certain prostitutes.

Sources say Swami Bhimanand had a very wide network of pimps and prostitutes and was worth more than Rs 300 crore. The police now wants to take him on remand to know more about his dealings and also about the politicians whose patronage he always enjoyed.

(Reference)

Neal Ungerleider – Shabby Researcher Who Cannot Get His Facts Right About Shiv Murat Dwivedi & Sathya Sai Baba

Hindu ‘God-Man’ in British Airways prostitution scandal
Neal Ungerleider

A Hindu clergyman and self-styled “god-man” with over 100,000 reputed followers in India has been caught running a US$10 million high-end prostitution racket involving British Airways hostesses.

Shiv Myra Dwivedi, aka Ichchadhari Sant Swami Bhimanand Ji Maharaj Chitrakoot Wale, 39, claims to be a follower of the legendary Sathya Sai Baba. Dwivedi was allgedly using his Sai Baba Temple in Khanpur, South Delhi as a front for an operation that employed somewhere between 60 and 200 prostitutes across India. Also found inside Dwivedi’s temple were drug and pornography caches on an epic scale. Adding to the fun, it appears that phone records found inside the temple link the prostitution operation to prominent Delhi cops, Indian television stars and politicians.

The Indian press is already calling Dwivedi the “pimp guru.”

The operation of the “pimp guru” employed mainly students and air hostesses, including British Airways and Jagson employees. Dwivedi was arrested over the weekend by Delhi police while conducting a deal with another (alleged) pimp behind a cinema in the city’s Saket neighborhood. A police team sent to raid Dwivedi’s temple subsequently found a labyrinth of hidden tunnels and rooms that contained personal diaries, cash, financial records for the operation and healthy supplies of pornography and undisclosed illegal drugs. According to Delhi authorities, the Swami hid the entrance to the secret tunnels in a meditation room.

The “pimp guru” also runs a 200-bed hospital and has several power political patrons in the Samajwadi Party and reportedly has several well-known politicians among his clients.

But for all of Dwivedi’s religious trappings, his pimp skills seem defiantly old-school:

“He used the guise of spirituality to run an organised prostitution racket since 1999 and has made billions of rupees by supplying women to his high-profile clients,” said a police officer, refusing to be named.

“He would force young women to join the sex racket, offered them money, expensive gifts and had even provided them with cars.”

Apart from the Delhi temple, the prostitution operation also rented out of several rented houses in Delhi and in the state of Uttar Pradesh. According to Indian sources, his non-Indian prostitutes would dress only in saffron clothes in public to avoid suspicion.

Dwivedi, a native of Uttar Pradesh, worked his way up from a security guard at a massage parlor in the 1990s to become a prominent guru. But he had trouble along the way: Dwivedi was previously arrested in 2000 for running a prostitution ring centered around yoga and meditation workshops.Strangest of all, reports indicate that Dwivedi’s father and brother were previously arrested on unrelated murder allegations in his hometown of Chitrakoot.

British Airways is investigating the allegations.

Reference

YouTube Videos With Actual Footage Of Shiv Murat Dwivedi Posing In Front Of Pictures And Idols Of Shirdi Sai Baba

Needless to say, there are several YouTube videos that provide actual footage of Shiv Murat Dwivedi posing in front of pictures of Shirdi Sai Baba, NOT Sathya Sai Baba. See for yourself:

In the following YouTube video, one can see Shiva Murat Dwivedi performing his “snake dance” in front of a Shirdi Sai Baba picture. The news broadcast also stated that the fraud Godman Shiv Murat Dwivedi pretended to be a devotee of the Sai Baba of Shirdi. Dwivedi also sold CDs and DVDs of himself in direct association with Shirdi Sai Baba.

The following YouTube video shows the sex-scandal-imbroiled Shiva Murat Dwivedi doing his “snake dance” in front of a picture of Shirdi Sai Baba. The YouTube video exposes the Fraud Godman’s sex racket & sex scandal.

When news broadcasts stated that Shiva Murat Dwivedi claimed to be a devotee of Shirdi Sai Baba, people dismissed Dwivedi as a fraud with no suspicions of impropriety against Shirdi Sai Baba. However, when news broadcasts incorrectly and falsely stated that Shiva Murat Dwivedi claimed to be a devotee of Sathya Sai Baba, people suggested and implied impropriety against Sathya Sai Baba!

Barry Pittard’s Queer Obsession With Allegations Of A Sexual Nature

Barry Pittard (a caustic critic and defamer of Sathya Sai Baba and others) constantly immerses himself in allegations of sexual abuse (almost on a daily and/or weekly basis as evidenced on his Anti-Baba blog) like a sexual deviant who has nothing better to do with his time.

Barry Pittard is so thoroughly obsessed with allegations of sexual molestation, he intensely meditates and visualizes those acts with such intensity, he actually praised and eulogized Robert Priddy‘s sexual molestation libels against Gerald Joe Moreno. If Barry Pittard has the audacity to endorse fabricated sexual abuse allegations against Gerald Joe Moreno, what other fraudulent sexual molestation accusations are he endorsing as well?

Barry Pittard never (ever) witnessed a single incident of alleged abuse by Sathya Sai Baba. Nor was Barry Pittard ever sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba. Therefore, why does Barry Pittard appoint himself as a proxy defender of alleged victims? Are alleged victims incompetent? Are alleged victim’s mothers and fathers incompetent as well? Not even one alleged victim and not even one alleged victim’s mother or father has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India. Why then is Barry Pittard making such a fuss if not to delude, deceive and mislead? Barry Pittard’s prurient, queer and fetish-like obsession with allegations of sexual abuse should raise a red flag about his character.

Needless to say, Barry Pittard has a long and established history of distortions, lies, defamations and libels.

Of course, none of these things are surprising considering that Barry Pittard is allied with Bisexual & Psychic Trance Medium Conny Larsson and Child Porn Purveyor RFJ Sandt, Pathological Liar Robert Priddy and Perverted Fetishist Sanjay Dadlani. Barry Pittard is also a staunch promoter of New Age Advocate & Reincarnator Alan Kazlev and Guru & UFO Promoter Timothy Conway (who actually believes that Sathya Sai Baba may have molested alleged victims like aliens are alleged to do through abductions!).

The only people guilty of running “massive disinformation and cover-up campaigns” are Barry Pittard and Ex-Devotees who have attacked hundreds of Sai Devotees & Non-Devotees alike and who have created hundreds of webpages to defame, libel and smear Gerald Joe Moreno. What more can one do but laugh at loud at Barry Pittard and his hypocritical finger-pointing?

Robert Priddy’s Queer Obsession With Allegations Of A Sexual Nature

Homoerotic Fantasizer Robert Priddy (a caustic critic and defamer of Sathya Sai Baba and others) constantly immerses himself in allegations of sexual abuse (almost on a daily basis as evidenced on his Anti-Baba blogs and websites) like a sexual deviant who has nothing better to do with his time.

Robert Priddy is so thoroughly obsessed with allegations of sexual molestation, he intensely meditates and visualizes those acts with such intensity, he actually falsified sexual molestation accusations against Gerald Joe Moreno. If Robert Priddy has the audacity to fabricate sexual abuse allegations against Gerald Joe Moreno, what other sexual molestation accusations are he falsifying as well?

Robert Priddy never (ever) witnessed a single incident of alleged abuse by Sathya Sai Baba. Nor was Robert Priddy ever sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba. Therefore, why does Robert Priddy appoint himself as a proxy defender of alleged victims? Are alleged victims incompetent? Are alleged victim’s mothers and fathers incompetent as well? Not even one alleged victim and not even one alleged victim’s mother or father has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India. Why then is Robert Priddy making such a fuss if not to delude, deceive and mislead? Robert Priddy’s prurient, queer and fetish-like obsession with allegations of sexual abuse should raise a red flag about his character.

Even more disturbing is how Robert Priddy claimed to possess telepathy without the aid of LSD and claimed to possess telepathy with the aid of LSD! This is the same man who wants us to believe his hateful and bitter accusations against Sathya Sai Baba!

Needless to say, LSD advocate Robert Priddy has a long and established history of distortions, lies, defamations and libels.

Of course, none of these things are surprising considering that Robert Priddy is an LSD Advocate who is thoroughly obsessed with genital oilings and who relishes projecting his homoerotic fantasies onto Moreno. Robert Priddy is allied with Bisexual & Psychic Trance Medium Conny Larsson and Child Porn Purveyor RFJ Sandt and Perverted Fetishist Sanjay Dadlani. Robert Priddy is also a staunch promoter of New Age Advocate & Reincarnator Alan Kazlev and Guru & UFO Promoter Timothy Conway (who actually believes that Sathya Sai Baba may have molested alleged victims like aliens are alleged to do through abductions!).

The only people guilty of running “massive disinformation and cover-up campaigns” are Robert Priddy and Ex-Devotees who have attacked hundreds of Sai Devotees & Non-Devotees alike and who have created hundreds of webpages to defame, libel and smear Gerald Joe Moreno. What more can one do but laugh at loud at Robert Priddy and his hypocritical finger-pointing?

Sathya Sai Organisation Needs No Defense

Robert Priddy (a caustic critic and defamer of Sathya Sai Baba and others) said the following about Dr G Venkataraman and Joe Moreno’s defense of the Sathya Sai Organisation:

Robert Priddys Ridiculous Claims About The Sathya Sai Organisation

Robert Priddys Ridiculous Claims About The Sathya Sai Organisation

Robert Priddy: “Despite Moreno’s oyymoronic claim that the Sathya Sai Organization needs no defending, it has been defended by Dr. G. Venkarataman of Radio Sai and also massively by Moreno himself. This defense was done because of documented evidence and testimony on a large scale of its unaccountability, planned disinformation and deceptions of the public, covering up and ignoring crimes, including murder and sexual molestations of which all its leaders are aware. They have failed to exercise duty of care and ignored mandatory reporting.”

It is entirely true that the Sathya Sai Organisation does not need to be defended from any bona-fide or legal complaints because none have ever been filed with the police or courts of law in India.

The only defenses offered by Dr G Venkataraman and Joe Moreno for the Sai Organisation are those that expose the massive fraudulence of critic’s smear, disinformation, hate and defamation campaigns against Sathya Sai Baba on the internet.

Robert Priddy said that the Sai Organisation “failed to exercise duty of care and ignored mandated reporting” regarding allegations of sexual abuse (an argument parroted by Barry Pittard). Actually, the only people who have “failed to exercise duty of care and ignored mandated reporting” regarding sexual abuse are alleged victims and their mothers and fathers who have all (without exception) failed and refused to file a single police complaint, court case or public grievance in India against Sathya Sai Baba. These irrefutable facts strongly argue that Sathya Sai Baba never abused anyone and alleged victim’s accounts are highly unbelievable and come from non-credible sources.

The big question that Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard and other critics continually ignore is:

WHY should the Sai Organisation resort to the legalistic process of “mandated reporting” regarding internet rumors when all of the alleged victims (without exception) and all of their mothers, fathers and relatives (without exception) have all failed and refused to resort to the legalistic process of “mandated reporting” themselves against the Sai Organisation?

Robert Priddy’s argument is reverse logic. Instead of harping on the legal and moral duties of the Sai Organisation, he should be focusing on the legal and moral duties of alleged victims and their mothers and fathers (all of whom have never filed any sort of legalistic complaints in India against Sathya Sai Baba).

Priddy’s argument is akin to accusing a person of theft, demanding that the thief publicly repent and turn himself into the police although there are no police complaints or court cases alleging theft!

Robert Priddy can interpret Moreno’s exposure of his embarrassing lies as a “defense” of the Sai Organisation if he so chooses. In fact, if anyone is defending the Sai Organisation, it is Robert Priddy! Why? Because Robert Priddy’s claims are so exaggerated, his pathos so caricatured, his libels so brazen, his arguments so flawed, his bitterness so palpable, his hissy fits so shrieking, no one in his/her right mind can believe anything Robert Priddy has to say against the Sathya Sai Organisation.

Robert Priddy is an LSD Advocate and publicly defends Alaya Rahm (the prime interviewee on the Secret Swami Documentary) although Alaya self-disclosed (in official court records) that he was a college drop-out and a decade-long daily-user of illegal street drugs and alcohol seeking a large money settlement from the Sathya Sai Baba Society Of America! The end result of Alaya’s court case: Self-Dismissed With Prejudice! Robert Priddy is also a fierce defender, promoter and associate of Conny Larsson, an ex-devotee turned self-professed Prophet and Psychic Trance Medium! And to top it all off, Robert Priddy fabricated sexual molestation claims against Moreno. If Robert Priddy has the temerity to falsify sexual molestation claims against Moreno, what other stories of sexual molestation is he falsifying as well?

Thank goodness that very few revel in Robert Priddy & Barry Pittard’s bigoted campaigns to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. The only defense the Sai Organisation requires is against the voluminous lies, conspiracies, propaganda and rhetoric dispersed against it by people who have shown themselves (time and again) to be pathological prevaricators.

Sathya Sai Baba Birthday Debate

Sanjay Dadlani recently published three blogged articles pertaining to Sathya Sai Baba’s birthday date and stated that there is conclusive proof that Sathya Sai Baba was not born on November 23rd 1926, but rather was born on October 4th 1929. As will be shown, Sanjay’s conclusive proof is not conclusive at all.

First and foremost, Sanjay’s critiques and criticisms about Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate are not unique. Sanjay heavily relied on Brian Steel‘s past research regarding this matter and re-packaged it, trying to pass it off as something new. It isn’t.

Sanjay believes that he has conclusively proven that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929 based exclusively on the following four “proofs”:

  1. One Kamalapuram school transfer certificate that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1929”.
  2. One Bukkapatnam school record that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1929”.
  3. One Uravakonda school record that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1939 (which was corrected to “October 4th 1929 33 years later by some unknown person).
  4. One quote from the book “Anyatha Saranam Nasthi” – by Smt. Vijayamma Hemchand (aka Kuppam Vijayamma), a Sai Devotee.

That’s it.

Now, let us take a look at Sanjay’s four “proofs”.

KAMALAPURAM TRANSFER CERTIFICATE DETAILS:

Transfer Certificate

Transfer Certificate

*Name of the school which the pupil is leaving: B.M. School Kamalapuram
*Name of the pupil: Ratnakaram Satyanarayana
*Date of birth as entered in the admission register: 4.10.1929 (Fourth October Nineteen Twenty Nine)
*Class or form in which the pupil was [unintelligible] at the time of leaving (in words): First Form
*Date of admission or promotion to that class or form: 11.6.40
*Date when the pupil actually left the school: 22.4.41
*Date on which application for transfer certificate was made on behalf of the pupil by the parent or guardian: 20.6.41
*Date of transfer certificate: 20.6.41

It is my contention that Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate was incorrectly recorded on the Kamalapuram school record, which was transferred to Sathya Sai Baba’s subsequent school at Bukkapatnam, and the incorrect birthdate was copied from it. Sanjay attempted to refute this contention by stating the following:

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, Moreno’s argument is changing with the wind! Stop talking bullshit, Moreno, LOL! The earliest (English) record is the Kamalapuram transfer form, which has the same birthdate as the Bukkapatnam record. Whaddya know? The same birthdate occurs in the Uravakonda school records. And Moreno wants us to think that these records were copied from each other at a time when it was very difficult to travel by bullock cart, let alone by foot.

Since the earliest record is a transfer certificate, this record was required to be presented to the next school in order for the admission to occur. The information on the Bukkapatnam school record was copied from the Kamalapuram transfer certificate. Sanjay poorly attempted to argue that this was not the case because “it was very difficult to travel by bullock cart, let alone by foot”. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the Kamalapuram transfer certificate was required as proof that Sathya Sai Baba passed his previous schooling and qualified for promotion to the Bukkapatnam school. How else was the Bukkapatnam school to ascertain whether or not Sathya Sai Baba passed his previous schooling? Therefore, contrary to Sanjay’s claims, this record was shared between schools and information was copied from it.

BUKKAPATNAM SCHOOL RECORD DETAILS:

Full Bukkapatnam School Record

Full Bukkapatnam School Record


Click Here For The Full Image (And Text Transcription) To The Bukkapatnam School Record

The Bukkapatnam school record is extremely important because it shows:

  1. How poorly birthdates were recorded.
  2. The apathy and lack of importance given to valid birthdates.
  3. How early Indian school-records from rural villages are wholly unreliable means of ascertaining someone’s birthday.

The LIMF image to the Bukkpatnam school record shows the names to the following 16 students who were admitted in July 1941:

  1. 462 Gludappa 1-7-34 (7 years old)
  2. 463 Adeppa 1-7-35 (6 years old)
  3. 464 Gangappa 1-7-35 (6 years old)
  4. 465 Ganganna 1-7-34 (7 years old)
  5. 466 Sathyanarayana 4-10-29 (12 years old)
  6. 467 Narayana Mulu 1-7-34 (7 years old)
  7. 468 Venkatesh 1-7-33 (8 years old)
  8. 469 Nanjuda Rao 1-7-34 (7 years old)
  9. 470 Frakrodeem 1-7-35 (6 years old)
  10. 471 Modeen Sab 1-7-26 (15 years old)
  11. 472 Ranganna 1-1-30 (11 years old)
  12. 473 Narayana Ganta 1-7-25 (16 years old)
  13. 474 Venkataramulu 30-1-28 (13 years old)
  14. 475 Mohammad Peer 1-7-35 (6 years old)
  15. 476 Narayana
  16. 477 Sallappa

Only 14 of these students have their birthdates showing. As one can clearly see, 11 out of the 14 students are listed as being born on exactly July 1st. This is wholly and completely improbable. These 11 students have different last names and different fathers (therefore, none of them are brothers, twins, triplets, etc.).

Out of these 11 students: Frakrodeem, Mohammad Peer, Adeppa and Gangappa were allegedly born on July 1st 1935. Gludappa, Ganganna, Narayana Mulu and Nanjuda Rao were allegedly born on July 1st 1934. Venkatesh was allegedly born on July 1st 1933, Modeen Sab was allegedly born on July 1st 1926 and Narayana Ganta was allegedly born on July 1st 1925.

These utterly improbable birthdates (defying lottery odds many times over) prove that the Bukkpatnam school record is inaccurate and did not record valid birthdates.

Looking at the ages, we also see that we have children and teenagers all in the same 8th standard class ranging between 6 – 16 years of age! This simply is not possible. There are four 6 year olds, four 7 year olds, one 8 year old, one 11 year old, one 12 year old, one 13 year old, one 15 year old and one 16 year old. Half the class (on this school-record page) was composed of 6 and 7 year olds.

Consequently, this Bukkapatnam school record does not provide proof to conclusively support any speculation that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929. The only proof that this school record provided is proof to the apathy and lack of concern for recording valid birthdates by Indian school officials in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s in rural villages in India. The Bukkapatnam school record solidifies the perception that Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate is just as unreliable as the other birthdates listed on the school record.

Funny enough, Sanjay said:

Due to the pre-Independence situation of not keeping records correctly, is it at all surprising that that ten students share the same birthdate with differing years? Who knows whether the families of the students were not in posession of the knowledge, or whether it was down to a lazy school clerk who just rubber-stamped the papers and put them in his outbox?

That’s right:

**Who knows “whether it was down to a lazy school clerk who just rubber-stamped the papers and put them in his outbox” when it came to Sathya Sai Baba’s alleged birthdate?

**Who knows if the “pre-independence situation of not keeping records correctly” would account for an inaccurate birthdate given to Sathya Sai Baba?

Sanjay just fully conceded to the inaccuracies and significant discrepancies in the Bukkapatnam school record! Nevertheless, Sanjay flip-flopped (as he often does) and argued that this very same flawed Bukkapatnam school record indisputably recorded Sathya Sai Baba’s genuine birthdate! Sanjay’s arguments are wholly absurd and contradictory.

Sanjay also tried to pull the wool over his reader’s eyes by making the following comment about student 470, whose name is listed as “Fakrodeem Puttaparthi”. “Puttaparthi” is not a last name, but a village name. Sanjay said:

Is it really that important if Frakrodeem’s surname is ‘Puttaparthi’, the name of the village? Perhaps Frakodeem and/or his family wished to be known as in ancient times according to the land of their birth; ‘Frakrodeem of Puttaparthi’, as exists in classical literature.

Sanjay’s response is utterly preposterous. As if resorting to a “classical literature” explanation from “ancient times” is not embarassing enough, Sanjay apparently overlooked the simple fact that Frakrodeem is not from Puttaparthi. He is from Bukkapatnam. Sathya Sai Baba is the only student listed from Puttaparthi on the Bukkapatnam school record. All the other students are from Bukkapatnam, without exception. If Frakrodeem is from Puttaparthi, then one is left to wonder why his village name is listed as Bukkapatnam. Either way, the entry is incorrect. So once again, why is Frakodeem’s last name listed as “Puttaparthi” when Puttaparthi is not a last name but a village name? Why would an accurate and reliable school record make this glaring mistake and fail to correct it?

URAVAKONDA SCHOOL RECORD DETAILS:

Full Uravakonda School Record

Full Uravakonda School Record


Uravakonda School Record

Uravakonda School Record

*Student Number: 422
*Name in full: R. Satyanarayana
*House or village name: Rathanaharam
*Parent: R.P. Venkappa
*Residence: Puttaparthi
*Ocupation of parent or guardian: Teacher
*Date of admission: 1-7-43
*Date of birth: 4-10-39 (October Thirty Nine)
*Religion: Hindu
*Caste: Rajapuri
*Class on admission: III F.

As one can see, the Uravakonda school record documented Sathya Sai Baba as being born on October 4th 1939 (and even spelled it out as “October Thirty nine”). This error was left in place for 33 years before an unknown person corrected it on August 11 1976, after comparing it to other school records.

The first correction reads:

Fourth October Nineteen Tweny Nine (signature unintelligible) 11-8-76 (August 11th 1976)

The second correction reads:

Compared with the original (unintelligible) register & date of birth corrected as 4.10.1929. (p. 32 of the register regs.) (signature unintelligible) 11-8-76 (August 11th 1976)

Despite the fact that the official Uravakonda school record documented Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as being October 4th 1939 (and it stayed that way for 33 years), Sanjay had the audacity to state that the Uravakonda school record is an “independent piece of evidence that confirm Sathyanaraya Raju’s birthdate as October 4th 1929! Talk about denial, desperation and true-believer syndrome! The Uravakonda school record does not provide proof to conclusively support any speculation that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929. The only proof that the Uravakonda school record provided is a another contradictory date as to when Sathya Sai Baba was allegedly born.

VIJAYAMMA’S “ANYATHA SARANAM NASTHI” CITATION:

The following quote was cited from Vijayamma’s book to support a 1929 birthdate:

In 1945 the little girl’s cousins were strolling in the affluent Bangalore suburb of Malleswaram when they heard bhajans being sung and entered the house to listen. Sai Baba, who was present there, invited them to go to Puttaparthi (whose name they had never heard). When they returned to their town of Kuppam (south-east of Bangalore, but in today’s Andhra Pradesh), the cousins told the girl’s mother about their meeting. The latter was keen for them all to go, but the idea was vetoed by the father, who said: ‘You tell me He is sixteen years old and claims to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai. This is all humbug’. (p. 12)

This quote did not say anything about when Sathya Sai Baba was born. The quote indirectly implied that Sathya Sai Baba was sixteen years old in 1945. If this is true, Baba’s year of birth would be 1929.

First of all, Vijayamma’s notes were never written from a historical perspective. Although these stories were taken from Vijayamma’s notes, the above story reads as if Vijayamma was repeating a story told to her in which she was not personally involved. Therefore, these quotes do not provide any proof that Sathya Sai Baba was born in 1929. There are other devotees who indirectly claim that Baba was born in 1926. Does this mean that one can conclusively state that the majority opinion is correct? Since when is one indirect quote from a devotee’s book conclusive proof for a 1929 birthdate?

Furthermore, if Vijayamma honestly, reliably, accurately and objectively gave information that supported Sanjay’s conclusions (as he contends), then this must mean that Vijayamma also honestly, reliably, accurately and objectively related first-hand miracles that she personally experienced with Sathya Sai Baba (which even included the alleged resurrection of her own father). Nevertheless, Sanjay adamantly refuses to accept the writing of Sai Devotees (who he often bashes and trashes as “liars” on the internet) and even stated about them:

…any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt…

Therefore, Sanjay’s reference to “Anyatha Saranam Nasthi” (authored by a Sai Devotee “favorable to Sathya Sai”) needs to be taken “with a pinch of salt”.

Sanjay also said:

Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.

Since Sanjay feels this way, his reference to Vijayamma’s book cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because it talks about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like.

Of course, this is not the first time that Sanjay flip-flopped regarding books authored by Sai Devotees. Click Here To Read My Article About Sanjay’s Acceptance Of LIMF (a book he later bashed and trashed as “bullshit”).

BRIAN STEEL’S OBSERVATION:

Brian Steel made the following observation:

As for the possible day of birth, in the school Register photostats in LIMF it is given as 4 October (1929). But maybe it WAS 23 November after all, as has been celebrated, at least since 1946 when we find the first reference in LIMF to an official birthday. It was also celebrated on 23 November in 1950, as Vijayakumari notes, with the Inauguration of Prasanthi Nilayam: “Till that day, prominence had not been given to Swami’s Birthday. But that day we prayed to Swami to permit us to celebrate it” (Vijayakumari, p. 161) (In the Discourses recorded in Sathya Sai Speaks, the first to be labelled as a Birthday Discourse is the one for 1960.)

Therefore, Sathya Sai Baba‘s November 23rd birthday was known as far back as 1946 when he was 20 years old (if born in 1926) or 17 years old (if born in 1929). Furthermore, LIMF records a first-hand account where a fellow classmate of Sathyanarayana Raju (Sai Baba) stated that Sathya was one year senior to him in school (meaning Sathya would have been born in 1926). Read the following clarification from LIMF.

LIMF’s (Love Is My Form) CLARIFICATIONS:

On pages 68 & 69 the LIMF editors stated (about Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate):

“Sathya’s date of birth in school records, however, is recorded as the 4th of October 1929 – and not the traditionally recognized date of the 23rd of November 1926. Talipineni Kesappa, son of Talipineni Ramappa maintains that Sathya was one year senior to him at school; therefore, Kesappa’s date of birth being 11th of June 1927, Sathya’s year of birth definitely is 1926. It has long been a practice in the schools to record a date of birth as being much later than the ‘actual’ date of birth – in order to facilitate career prospects. Sathya’s parents wanted Sathya to become an educated officer. This, possibly could be the reason for the discrepancy. In addition, in 1926, people in remote villages like Puttaparthi, in pre-independent India, were not very particular about dates and birth registration was done much later.”

Sanjay responded to LIMF’s explanation by saying:

Plenty of other evidences have proved the 1929 birthdate. LIMF’s ‘reason’ is bullshit, and they have made many more bullshit explanations, all of which have been discussed and dismissed in my exposé series. I personally do not care, it is a problem for devotees not for me. LOL.

Sanjay did not think LIMF was “bullshit” when he heavily relied and cited from it (admittedly) to make his pathetic “Sai Baba Shirdi Lies” series (See my responses: 010203). I would also like to see the “plenty of other evidences” which prove the 1929 birthdate. For some mysterious reason, Sanjay can only cite 3 inaccurate school records and 1 statement from a book authored by a Sai Devotee. That’s it! Where are the “plenty of other evidences” that come from neutral, non-devotee sources?

When Sanjay is trying to advance an argument against Sathya Sai Baba, he has no problem citing self-serving quotes from Sai Devotees that he considers reliable, accurate and objective. When it comes to other quotes made by these same Sai Devotees (that Sanjay considered worthy enough to reference before) Sanjay trashes and bashes them as “liars” and calls their explanations “bullshit”. Sanjay is such a wishy-washy, hypocritical and duplicitous critic, one must take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

SATHYA SAI BABA’S BIRTHDAY – IN CONCLUSION:

Since no one has been able to produce Sathya Sai Baba’s original birth-certificate (or a copy to it), there is no conclusive proof as to which date or year he was actually born. Even though Sathya Sai Baba has a passport (from his visit to Africa in 1968, which would have required legitimate documentation for a date of birth), Sanjay said he would reject it because he claimed that someone in his family has an inaccurate date of birth in his/her passport. Therefore, Sanjay will accept nothing less than the original birth certificate to accept Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as being November 23rd 1926 (and more than likely he would reject that as well).

Ironically enough, although Sanjay’s standards are extremely rigid when it comes to a 1926 date of birth, his standards are extremely flaccid when it comes to a 1929 date of birth. Just more proof that Sanjay is a self-serving hypocrite who cannot take a rational, sober, fair or consistent stance against Sathya Sai Baba.

Although many Sai Devotees have written extensively about Sathya Sai Baba’s early years, none of them ever mentioned that Baba changed his birthdate. Both Ganapathi and Kasturi had full access to Sathya Sai Baba’s parents, relatives and old devotees. Based on their early interviews with Baba’s parents, relatives and old devotees, it was ascertained that Baba was born on November 23rd 1926. Even LIMF was able to trace the earliest reference to Baba’s November 23rd birthday back to 1946.

And to put the final nail in the coffin (to Sanjay’s dead-in-the-water arguments) there are no government, official or reputable organizations, institutions, corporations, agencies or offices that accept school records as proof for one’s date of birth. Not even one!

As a matter of fact, on the Littler Mendelson Legal Corporation website, there is definitive legal information regarding birth certificates and how school records cannot be substituted for them:

Birth, Marriage, Divorce Certificates: India:
Birth Certificates:
Birth Certificates are available to any applicant born after April 1, 1970, on payment of nominal fees to the appropriate government agency. Prior to 1970, however, reporting of births was voluntary. Therefore, if you are unable to obtain a birth certificate from the appropriate government agency or if the information on the birth certificate is insufficient, alternative documents may be submitted.

Two sworn affidavits executed by parents, siblings, aunts, or uncles (blood relatives) may be presented in lieu of a birth certificate when a birth certificate is not available. The affidavits should set forth the relationship between the deponent and the applicant, the date and place of the applicants’ birth, the names of both parents and other related facts. The affidavits must be witnessed and stamped by an advocate/notary. In addition, these affidavits must be accompanied by a document from a competent governmental authority stating that the certificate did not exist or no longer exists.

NOTE: School records and “birth records” issued by a hospital or church are insufficient substitutes for birth certificates. (Reference)

Consequently, Sanjay comical citations to school records as conclusive proof (supporting an October 4th 1929 date of birth for Sathya Sai Baba) is not only absurd, it is wholly without merit or legal substantiation.


Gerald Joe Moreno Archives

Gerald Joe Moreno Categories