It is a shock to the followers of the Kanchi Mutt that Jayendra Saraswati had met with Nithyananda of Ranijtha, Rape fame at Kumbh Mela ,Allahabad.
I received a cal today from a friend of mine who is an ardent follower of the Kanchi Mutt(who knows me and my views on Jayendrar and Kanchi Mutt )when he expressed his anguish at the News and he has been flooded with emails of Sankara Mutt Devotees being deeply wounded.
He wanted my views.
The reply I gave him is posted here..
Look at this Video by The Nithyananda Ashram and Jayendrars’ encomiums on the Nithyananda Peetham(?) and Nithyananda’s speech.
YouTube Description.
‘Published on Feb 8, 2013
Jan 7 2013 – Event in Mahakumbhapuri Prayag :
One of the famous Tamil nadu math Kaanchi kaamakodi Peetathipathi Sri Sri Sri Jayendra saraswathi swamigal Visited Nithyananda Dhyanapeetam at Mahakumbhamela. He met Paramahamsa Nithyananda Swamigal. And he spoke about the greatness of Dhyanapeetam and Swamiji.’
My comments.
Though I am critical of Jayendra Saraswati,I have the highest regard for Maha Periyava, as my readers know.
Jayendra Saraswati, according to a news Report met with Nithyananda at Allahabad and had a discussion(!) with him.
Jayendra Sarswati is yet to extricate himself from the Shankara Raman Murder, Cell Phones threatening the Judge who is trying the Sankar Raman Case,Misappropriation of Kamakshi Amman Gold cases.
Not to forget his running away to Talacauvery episode.
There were also reports of a controversy in Coastal Andhra which was suppressed .
As I said earlier, if not being a Guru, let him stop becoming a sore thumb of Hinduism and sully the name of his Guru, Maha Periyava.
He may not be affected by criticism, surrounded by chamchas and yes-men who seek a living by being near to him.
It is the Brahmin Community, for the sin of having been born a Brahmin has to become the butt of ridicule in the Society, which as it is, is being targeted in Tamil Nadu in particular.
The Reverence one has for Maha Periyava and Gurus(as described by the Vedas-of course Jayendrar does not belong to this category) can only take this much.
Time he is disowned publicly as the Madurai Adheenam was, when he consorted with Nithyananda.
Related.
http://ramanisblog.in/2012/07/01/nithyananda-ranjithatwo-more-girls-54-videos-recovered/
Related Articles
- Jayendra Saraswati Acquittal Baffling (ramanan50.wordpress.com)
One can keep arguing. Iam proud of the fact that Iam not a saffron clad fraud or bushy haired paedophile & have better moral & ethical standards over them.
Iam sure if at all I wear Saffron after renunciation,, then I would stick to the laid down norms.
It is money, sleeze , sex,& power politics in play in all our Religious Institutions–better to keep miles away from them. I would rather donate to a well run NGO .
Why should we ever look at these controversial Gurus ? Just do your daily prayers & your work sincerely & you’d achieve whatever you are ordained.
I think we should give Swamigal a break. There are a lot of suppositions
1. Jayendrar and Paramacharya had many differences in view which could not be easily reconciled and this led to the former leaving the mutt. This may be a fact. It does not follow that Jayendrar’s vision was hollow or he did not have a high spiritual standing. When a person goes against one’s Guru he is looked upon unfavorably by the society. However we cannot make any further conclusions especially because Paramacharya accepted him back. If Jayendrar is indeed incapable or corrupt , then Paramacharya should have been considered guilty on two counts- Not being able to make a good choice for a successor and making the same mistake twice. I think the truth was in between. Paramacharya knew what the differences were, and he must have realized that Jayendrar had still many virtues that qualified him to continue and that Jayendrar had not done something which could not be pardoned.
2. Allegations on Kamakshi temple Gold. Accusations must be looked at with a very neutral eye. What is the standing of Jayendra Saraswati and what is the standing of Radhakrishnan. One has no proof that the latter’s conduct was superior to Jayendrar. Nothing remarkable about his public life either. There is an English proverb that “There can be no smoke without fire”. In this case we only have heard about the smoke , even that has not been proven in a court of law. So before debating and getting angry with this saint for a supposed crime, let it be established that there was a crime at all. We do agree Radha and Shankar were both subjected to Violence. This may point to something from the mutt, However, we do not know who in the mutt. We cannot presume Jayendrar’s responsibility over the actions of every character in the mutt. All this should only be discussed if we are really sure that the mutt had played any role in the violence on Radha or Shankar. The author here visibly distrusts the seer. But I had to put this comment to reassure the mutt devotees that the author is not likely to have more information on the violence against Shankar or Radha any more than you or I and that such things should not disturb the devotee unless one sees some concrete evidence against any senior person in the mutt. If we were devoted to the mutt, neither court case has come to a point where we should revise our view on Jayendrar.
3. Jayendrar and Publicity – The actions of holiness lead many to believe that he may be publicity hungry. Everyone knows that his holiness cannot stay silent on things which he wants to comment about. Neither does he seem to be patiently hoping for a silent revolution to transform the society. He wants to be in the thick of action. It is true that many of these initiatives have been partly unsuccessful atleast. That cannot be a crime that can be held against him. Is it not true that even if any other living person had taken effort in these matters,they may have been equally unsuccessful. It is indeed a matter of perception whether an active person like Jayendrar who is extremely passionate about transforming the society, was really publicity hungry.
4. Women and Jayendrar – Anuradha Ramanan- Police were working towards identifying women who could be associated with Jayendrar. None of these women took the bait. The pathetic attempts to associate him with Usha is indeed an indication of the motive of the Goverment. Anuradha suddenly made a claim about an incident having occurred many years back. However she herself had written articles praising the swamigal. If a person comes to praise a wrong person in public forums, even after knowing that he had done wrong and then suddenly without evidence, and without presenting circumstances that can stand in a court of law, reverts her position as an admirer, then that person’s words should have no consequence in the mind of the devotee. The concerned was an unreliable person, no matter how close he or she may have been to her. One cannot give more weightage to the accusation of Anuradha, on grounds of familiarity with her because another person could defend Jayendrar on the grounds of being familiar with him. To add a note, it is not true that all people related to Anuradha shared a great opinion about her. So in my view that is even more damaging. The devotee can therefore consider Anuradha’s accusations as of no consequence at all.
5. Nithyananda- Not only Nithyananda, swamigal met Sai baba of Puttaparthi, he met Asaram Babu, Anandamayi and others . Some of them are controversial but Nithyananda is not first in this list. Most of these people cannot be put in black and white including Nithyananda. If saying a few things in praise of some activities which were genuinely being done Nithyananda’s ashram is so wrong, why has this very author who seems to admire Ramana , not question Maharishi for his statement praising hitler, something which affected Paul Brunton. As far as I can see, swamigal seems to want the hindu community to stay united and especially in opposition to christian agression. I see these activities in this background. Swamigal had been to Kumbha mela not to meet Nithyananda. Nithyananda indicated he met Swamigal and had a long talk with him and invited him to speak up. If swamigal had felt that there was something good Nithyananda was doing, and also felt that Nithyananda had left his mistakes or not commited them at all, then he could not be blamed for just coming over and saying some good things which were true. Did anyone interview swamigal about his reasons for speaking to Nithyananda.
How then can accusation be made. Most swamigals have knowing met people whose character does not deserve any praise. Some of them have even thanked them or praised them. On one hand, for people we admire, we give them a clean chit for their actions or motives, but we do not give this to others?
I just added this note for the sake of Swamigal’s devotees that if they were very devoted to swamigal, none of the above incidents should bother them, or change the way they regard him.
1.Yes, Jayendrar should be given a Break, that’s the purpose of the post.
It is evident from the comments,that you agree that there have been differences between Periyavar and Jayendrar and that Periyavar could have reconciled to to the fact that Jayendrar was what he was.
There is a possibility that Periyavar put up with Jayendrar for any other action would have tarnished the image of The Mutt .
Unfortunately, Jayendrar did not mend his ways, and the cure proved to be worse than the disease.
2.Kamakshi Gold.
The fact there is a controversy confirms that there is something amiss.
If people wanted to sully the name of Jayendrar they could have done in other instances where Jayendrar was involved in heavy transactions.
Has nay body noticed the fact while it was reported that Jayendrar pestered the Trust which was administering the Gold to such an extent that the Chairman resigned?
The Trust had not rebutted it, but kept a discreet silence, being what he is, a devout Nattukkottai Cheetiar.
Things have come to such a pass that Jayendrar’s character has to be weighed against Radhakrishnan, who is branded as a blackmailer of the Mutt!
One does not become pure as snow because he occupies a seat.
He should earn the respect and regards by behavior.
3.On seeking Publicity.A Sannaysin should shun from it, Sastras say.
Nothing more to add.
These people do not protect Hinduism ;Hinduism protects them.
Hinduism does not need protectors, that too, of dubious character.
4.Anuradha Ramanan.
The logic that’One cannot give more weightage to the accusation of Anuradha, on grounds of familiarity with her because another person could defend Jayendrar on the grounds of being familiar with him’ holds no water as is this not what evidence Act about, the credibility.
Her credibility was her silence for years out of respect for the Mutt.
By your Logic all corruption charges about Karunanidhi should be dismissed because there are always people who are against him, as he often says ‘I am a sudra’
5.Meeting Nithyananda.
People should associate themselves with only men of good character, and a Mutt head?
or we going to say say the ‘ credibility factor’ should be applied to Nithyananda as well?
Well if some one were to praise Nithyanda’s Mutt, well… I can say nothing.
6.Comment on Ramana Maharishi.
Here is the quote’
“And Ramana seemed unconcerned regarding World War II. He is reported to have once remarked, “Who knows but that Hitler is a Jnani, a divine instrument.” (Chadwick, 35).”
“In neo-Nazi circles, it is even claimed (here by Claudio Mutti on p.26), on the authority of one Sadhu Arunachala: A Sadhu’s Reminiscences of Ramana Maharshi (1994, p.52) that Ramana Maharshi (d.1950), indisputably one of the greatest Hindu yogis of the 20th century, had declared: “It is possible that Hitler is a jnani, a divine instrument.” If the account is true, Ramana’s utterance sounds to me like the answer to a question posed by a visitor eager to hear a confirmation of his own idealization of Hitler: the sage did not commit himself to such a confirmation, but politely allowed that it was “possible”,– like most things. Note the difference with Savitri Devi’s rendering of Ramana Maharshi’s opinion: “Someone asked Ramana Maharshi (..) what he thought of Hitler. The answer was brief and simple: ‘He’s a jnâni’, i.e. a sage (…).” (p.73) This is her word against Sadhu Arunachala’s. Either the latter has rendered Ramana’s words softer and more conditional in deference to the anti-Hitlerian mood of the times, or she has rendered his words more decisive and unconditional to satisfy her own ideological preferences.”
http://guruphiliac.blogspot.in/2006/03/ramana-hearted-hitler.html
If Ramana Maharishi had said it with the intention that Hitler was great then it is wrong.
Your heading is wrong.A sanyasi doeat own anything.He is doing for us.So time to disown yourself and take a path which suits you.please show some ethics when you put a healine.I will call you attention grabber.Lost all respect for you.
My mom will always say one should never advise to stupids.You are right in saying nothing afttects our devotion to people who just dont go for the pretence of going and submitting wedding card but who have deep faith.I had the opportunity to be a part of mutt social welfare prog as well as religious ones due to my family attached to mutt.Today on threashold of verdict I say on record for me my Guru is everything.he has got us back from a sinking boat. Not that I visit him regularly its 3 years since i have seen him but at every hreashold when i crumble he is there for me to make me stand back.Now iam a lady and so dont come to any stupid ideas.MY gurus of Kanchi are everything for me.I place Puduperiva above God.My personal opinion and what factors have afftected my life and what way we have seen mutt is a big factor to contribute to this thinking. So nothing in the world can change our thinking,no mattr whatever absurd you write.All jounalists are of same standard.write anything for ppublicity.I hopr my comment is not moderated
Contradiction no 1.
a. “If Jayendrar is indeed incapable or corrupt , then Paramacharya should have been considered guilty on two counts- Not being able to make a good choice for a successor and making the same mistake twice.”
b. “We cannot presume Jayendrar’s responsibility over the actions of every character in the mutt.”
Contradiction no 2.
Anuradha suddenly made a claim about an incident having occurred many years back. However she herself had written articles praising the swamigal. If a person comes to praise a wrong person in public forums, even after knowing that he had done wrong and then suddenly without evidence, and without presenting circumstances that can stand in a court of law, reverts her position as an admirer, then that person’s words should have no consequence in the mind of the devotee.
Similarly Paramacharya chose JayEndra as his successor, then dismissed him, then took him back. So the same yardstick that applies to Anuradha should apply to him as well, Mr devotee.
The problem is when crimes happen, we should see the accused as an accused & not as our Swamigal.
The true words that you have said are, “On one hand, for people we admire, we give them a clean chit for their actions or motives, but we do not give this to others?”.
And it applies to you more than anyone else.
Very few Hindu Religious Mutts are running a clean administration & doing what they are supposed to do for the upliftment of the Religion.
Money power, political patronage, thousands of acres of landed property , hundreds of bank accounts & blind faith of devotees who would never question & do not want to accept the truth are some of the reasons these Pontiffs rule the roast aided by self serving retired Govt officials. Every one has his hands in the pie.
Few people who raised their heads had to pay with their lives.
After becoming a Sanyasi, many of them cannot even control their basic instincts like sex, greed, etc. How are they going to show the Spiritual Path to their Devotees ?
Even God cannot save the glorious Hindu Religion.
Iam yet to understand this –if the earlier Pontiff is God Incarnate–why did he have to choose Jayendrar ( J) & Vijayendrar ( V) as his Heir to the Mutt– could not he have known that these two would bring shame to the Mutt & Hinduism ?
Why would retd IAS/ Bank/ Income Tax officials show so much interest in Mutt’s day to day activities ?
Poor Sundararaman paid with his life for bringing it out.
It is all Politics & Money power.
1.Unlike the other Religions,Sankara Mutts do not select by Divine interventions, nor do they claim to be doing so.
As for as Maha Periyavar is concerned he has never made a statement to his effect.
The procedure is to select young poor Brahmin boys from orthodox family who have a spiritual inclination and whom the Acharya feels can take over, are appointed and trained.
There is no doubt that the Periyavar was a Realized soul, but to attribute Godhood is the Bhaktas’ perception and I do not question that as it is purely personal as is based on their experiences.
That the Periyavar appointed two people to succeed is not as per the laid down norms of Adi Sankara,for that matter The Kanchi Mutt is not founded by Adi Sankara.
I am not sure whether the Periyavar appointed the second one because he was dissatisfied with Jayendrar.
But I know from very reliable sources close to the Mutt that it is because he was not given full authority to run the Mutt is one of the reasons for Jayendrar to leave The Mutt and go to Talacauvery.
Periyavar was unhappy with Jayendrar was conveyed to Jayendrar and the relationship was at best frosty.
2.As to IAS officers etc;They enjoy the social recognition,power and the respect associated with the Mutt
I recall Ramana Maharishi on this.
A Guru with no sishyas anointed by him.
For queries on becoming a Shisya his refrain was ‘who is Aguru and who is a shisya? If you want to realize God , you have to strive for it.
I can not do anything.
Can I eat because you are hungry or will you be satisfied if I eat”
On another occasion Paul Brunton told him.
‘what you say is ‘Advaita”
Ramana replied
I do not know anything.
Scholars like you say that what I say and what Sankara said are the same and it called Advaita.
I do not know “
I am appalled by the way you all describe a Guru not one which he founded but a one run by Paramacharya whom mostly rever as God hmself.If that is true he has chosen his disciple who are we to think forget discuss question about this,I fail to understand human nature. one side he is god another side he was unhappy with his disciple.Lets not forget if u throw muck at others you hands get dirty. If you dont want to consider him your Guru keep off.Nobody requested you al to be part.Number of temples which he has
renovated herculian task. My personal opinion he is more than God to me.At times when i dont se any hope he answers my prayers,so do my son.So stop all allegations baseless ones.Those who think they beleive in mahaperiva or respect him in reality never does because if you have faith in paramacharya you will not queestion his wisdom.Dont say he committed a mistake.again you are questioning your faith towards him.Analyse youself.Periva has given action to paramacharya vision.Iam from Pondicherry so we know better .Sankara vidyalaya has progressed greatly under him.Iam a witness to this.He was very enthusistic that it should be started.One who is part of mutt kows the turth. And we dont need to clarify to anyone who is a non beleiver.Time will tell.
excellant ; well founded.