Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
dattaswami
Posts: 652
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by dattaswami »

Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

[Smt. K. Padmaram asked:- Shirdi Saibaba told that He is in the dog and the dog is in Him. Hence, He told that giving bread to the hungry dog is equal to giving bread to Him. Is this not supporting Advaita philosophy?]

Swami Replied:-
Such statements are called as ‘Arthavaadas’ which mean telling a lie in order to accomplish a good purpose. The lie has to be told as per the requirement of the context. I will give a similar example from the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna told Arjuna that He Himself is Arjuna (Pāṇḍavānāṃ Dhanañjayaḥ…-Gita). In that case, why should God Krishna preach Arjuna when Arjuna himself is Krishna? Does it not mean that Krishna is preaching to Himself? Then, why did Krishna say that Arjuna is Krishna?

The answer is that you shall see the context in which Krishna told like this. Krishna is encouraging Arjuna by boosting his confidence because Arjuna lost confidence due to the grief that covered his mind due to fascination to his grandfather (Bhishma) and teacher (Drona). In that context, raising the confidence of Arjuna was very essential. If Arjuna was really Krishna, why did Krishna scold Arjuna that he was controlled by ego (Yadahaṃkāramāśritya)? Does this mean that Krishna is scolding Himself?

At several places, Krishna told Arjuna to worship Him in various ways (Manmanā bhava…). Does this mean that Krishna is advising Himself to worship Himself? Hence, to accomplish an urgent solution in an urgent ignorant situation, God uses twisted concepts, which will be explained by Him in course of time.

Shankara told that every soul is God to the atheist to convert him into theist and devotee slowly. He told this lie to the atheist in order to make him say that God exists. He told 1) You are God, 2) You exist, 3) Therefore God exists. Later on, He corrected this twisted concept by saying that the atheist shall worship God to become God practically by attaining purity of mind. He also practically demonstrated to prove that His wrong concept is wrong by saying that He alone is God Shiva (Śivaḥ kevalo'ham).

Coming to Shirdi Sai Baba, the context is that He wanted to make the people feed any hungry dog. In support of this aimed result, He told that He is the hungry dog. This is Arthavaada. He Himself being God, why did Baba repeatedly tell that Allah is God (Allah Malik)? The context is that if Baba says that He is God, everybody will say that he/she is also God. To protect the devotees from this danger, He told that He is the servant of God. In another place, He told that He is the creator of this entire prakruti (creation). Do these two statements contradict each other? Not at all! Because the contexts are different.

The correct concept is that every soul is not God and only a specific human being (like Krishna, Shankara, Baba, etc.) selected by God becomes God, as the human incarnation. The Veda says that nothing in this creation is God (Neti Neti ityācakṣate tadvidaḥ). In the Gita also, God told that all the creation is in Him, but, He is not present in the creation (Na cāhaṃ teṣvavasthitaḥ, Na tvahaṃ teṣu te mayi).

In the Brahmasutras, in the first Adhyaya-first paada, there are several sutras refuting that the soul is God (Netataro'nupapatteḥ). In this way, we must understand the true concepts with the help of the original three scriptures (The Veda, the Gita and the Brahmasutras) considered to be authorities in the Hindu religion. We shall not be misled by the Arthavaadas used by God for a good purpose. The mother tells the child that if it eats the food, the moon will come down. It is a lie, but, it is permitted since it is useful in making the child eat food and grow well.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6666
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by Iwannaplato »

We hear of Sai Baba's miracles. We hear of him sexually abusing young men from many young men and witnesses.

For us rumors floating around, some positive, some negative.

No clear path to resolving them.

But no reason to assume, for us, that the man had any authority. And no need to appeal to it or assume it.
dattaswami
Posts: 652
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by dattaswami »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:31 am We hear of Sai Baba's miracles. We hear of him sexually abusing young men from many young men and witnesses.

For us rumors floating around, some positive, some negative.

No clear path to resolving them.

But no reason to assume, for us, that the man had any authority. And no need to appeal to it or assume it.
There are several types of miracles performed by Baba and one type is creating holy ash or an article by moving the hand. Based on some video (some allege that miracles are fake!) let us assume that all miracles of Baba are magic only. But, this statement is valid provided Baba does only miracles by moving hand alone. But, Baba did so many miracles in which there is no movement of hand.

Also, the video shown is based on the type of miracle involving the movement of hand only and not touching other types of miracles in which movement of hand is not involved. Other 99% types of miracles in which movement of hand is not involved are like:- formation of sacred ash and divine nectar on photos in houses far from Baba (even foreign countries), curing diseases by performing operations in dream (even the bed sheet gets stained with blood) etc. Why don’t they disprove these types of miracles exposing the truth?

A devotee reported to Baba that he was tested to have cancer in final stage. Baba said “Cancer cancel”. When the devotee got tested, the cancer disappeared and test was negative. The devotee lived for many number of years after that! Since these atheists could not disprove the other types of miracles, they have totally failed to disprove the unimaginable nature of unimaginable God present in Baba in merged state. These atheists are jealous of Baba, but, they are not understanding that the miracles are actually done by the unimaginable God present in Baba in merged state.

Hence, by disproving one type of miracles of Baba, they could not disprove the unimaginable nature of unimaginable God since they failed to disprove other types of unimaginable miracles. Analyzing all this, we are forced to conclude that this video in which miracles of hand movement were shown, must have been a forged video in which certain photographic tricks are introduced. They have not caught the hand of Baba directly on the spot, but, they have shown only the video in which such tricks are not impossible.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6666
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by Iwannaplato »

dattaswami wrote: Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:49 am
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:31 am We hear of Sai Baba's miracles. We hear of him sexually abusing young men from many young men and witnesses.

For us rumors floating around, some positive, some negative.

No clear path to resolving them.

But no reason to assume, for us, that the man had any authority. And no need to appeal to it or assume it.
There are several types of miracles performed by Baba and one type is creating holy ash or an article by moving the hand. Based on some video (some allege that miracles are fake!) let us assume that all miracles of Baba are magic only. But, this statement is valid provided Baba does only miracles by moving hand alone. But, Baba did so many miracles in which there is no movement of hand.

Also, the video shown is based on the type of miracle involving the movement of hand only and not touching other types of miracles in which movement of hand is not involved. Other 99% types of miracles in which movement of hand is not involved are like:- formation of sacred ash and divine nectar on photos in houses far from Baba (even foreign countries), curing diseases by performing operations in dream (even the bed sheet gets stained with blood) etc. Why don’t they disprove these types of miracles exposing the truth?

A devotee reported to Baba that he was tested to have cancer in final stage. Baba said “Cancer cancel”. When the devotee got tested, the cancer disappeared and test was negative. The devotee lived for many number of years after that! Since these atheists could not disprove the other types of miracles, they have totally failed to disprove the unimaginable nature of unimaginable God present in Baba in merged state. These atheists are jealous of Baba, but, they are not understanding that the miracles are actually done by the unimaginable God present in Baba in merged state.

Hence, by disproving one type of miracles of Baba, they could not disprove the unimaginable nature of unimaginable God since they failed to disprove other types of unimaginable miracles. Analyzing all this, we are forced to conclude that this video in which miracles of hand movement were shown, must have been a forged video in which certain photographic tricks are introduced. They have not caught the hand of Baba directly on the spot, but, they have shown only the video in which such tricks are not impossible.
You don't seem to have understood my post. Unless you think accusations of sexual abuse from young men who are not atheists somehow is the equivalent of the skepticism about miracles by atheists.
alan1000
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:03 am

Re: Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by alan1000 »

And I think to myself, what a wonderful world... (sorry, Louis!)
Constantine
Posts: 409
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2023 12:34 am

Re: Saibaba said that giving bread to a dog was equal to giving bread to Him. Is it not Advaita?

Post by Constantine »

Asprin can kill a dog. A individual not understanding medicine from a veternarian perspective but understanding it from a human could confuse the two. If he hurts, or thinks baba hurts, or the dog as baba, innocently feeding the asprin to the dog.... then they likely lack context or understanding as to why the dog died. They couod notch it to the mysterious or to karma and not themselves.

This stupidity too could be advaita, as in non-dualism. But it isn't a moral ground for justification for all actions. Ethics and reason and knowledge must play a part contradicting advaita, for it to be humane and negative karma free. Without this, advaita can be a great evil, and saintly acts hellish. Duality has a supreme position.
Post Reply