Sai Baba of Shirdi

              SAINTS WILL AID

              1. SHIRDI SAI BABA

Sai Baba of Shirdi is probably the most popular Saint in India today. His following has grown over the last 100 years without any organization, any hierarchy, any successor. It has spread entirely by word of mouth  of actual followers. And almost every one has become a follower after an event considered a 'miracle', or some such event has occurred soon after becoming one. No one who came to him returned 'empty handed'.

We do not know whether he was a Hindu or Muslim. His dress was a long 'kafni' like that of a Muslim fakir. But his ears had marks of having been bored like a Hindu. He sat in a dilapidated masjid, renovated by Hindus. But he called it "Dwarkamai" -Mother Dwaraka. Baba had a 'dhuni' going there all the 24 hours,to which he fed fuel with his own hands. The 'udi'- ashes from this was given to everyone by Baba with his blessings, himself applying it on the forehead of devotees often.There were oil lamps in rows, burning bright. There was a Tulsi Brindavan in the front courtyard. He invoked Allah Malik or Fakir, but allowed Ram Navami and Krishna Janmashtami to be celebrated in the masjid with all pomp and ceremony. Bhajans were conducted regularly with all the traditional musical instruments. He himself was worshipped by Hindus in the Hindu fashion, complete with Aarti,blowing of conch shells, ringing of bells. He never preached about Islam to the Hindu followers. He was not observed saying the namaz, though he was familiar with the Quran. On one occasion when a Hindu who had converted to Islam came before him, Baba slapped him on the face,asking whether he was not ashamed to change his father.He encouraged Ramayana, Bhagavat and such other Hindu devotional literature to be studied or recited with due reverence. His talk was the purest Vedanta, of which he had the most intimate knowledge. Never in the form of a general talk or discourse, it was always addressed to a specific person, tailored to his immediate needs.. He had appeared to his devotees in the form of their own family or favourite Deities like Rama, Krishna. He insisted on people honouring  their traditional gurus, their family deities. fulfilling their vows, keeping up the sacred observances, festivals, etc. On one occasion, when he had to  give evidence in a court case, he stated his caste as 'parvardigar', his religion as 'Kabir" and his Guru as "Venkusa". Parvardigar means something like the Hindu 'Atiashrami', beyond all social distinctions; Being a Kabir means not having formal affiliation to any religion but treating  and respecting all alike, especially Hinduism and Islam. Venkusa is of course a Hindu name. His Hindu devotees far outnumber those of other faiths, though all come to him.
Let us also remember that days prior to his Samadhi, Baba asked a devotee to read Ram Vijay in his presence. He also indicated that he would occupy the Wada constructed by Buti, where he inteded to erect a mandir for Murlidhar!

 Does it now matter whether he was a Hindu or Muslim?

In the course of time, it is often the devotees who paint the Saints in a particular way, foist some rituals on them, make them appear as belonging to this  or that tradition. Or create a tradition or sect around them. Thus, the management of Ramakrishna Order went to the Court, declaring that Sri Ramakrishna was not a Hindu, that they were following 'Ramakrishnaism', and that they should be considered a separate sect, and a minority! All because they wanted to run some educational institutions! Curiously, some followers of Sri Aurobindo approached the court pleading that he should be considered Hindu! The court declined.

We see another curious development in the case of Ramana Maharshi. As we see now, the official set-up shows a distinctly orthodox south-Indian Brahminical flavour, complete with Vedic chanting, ritual worship and other ceremonial observances in the orthodox fashion. Even his teaching is given a distinctly Vedantic-Advaitic colour, of the Sankara School. But if we read Sri Ramana's own works, we do not get any such idea at all! The only teaching of Ramana was to enquire and find out the reality of one's own existence, one's own self.  The only dictum was: 'Enquire or Surrender'. He never advocated any particular philosophy or theology. He never followed any particular guru or tradition. His only attachment was to Arunachala, a hill outwardly, but the Self within, and of the Universe. His only worship was by circumambulating the Hill. He did not leave Arunachala even for a day in 54 years, and walked on it bare-footed. 

Every practice surrounding him was initiated by devotees on their own. The educated devotees and followers who came to him were mostly from the middle class families, orthodox south Indian brahmins. Most of them were of the Smarta tradition, following Sankara. There were others also from other traditions. So, their talks, questions, understanding and interpretation were from that standpoint. In answering them, Ramana had to use the words and concepts familiar to them. But this he did in respect of all: he spoke to men of each faith on their own terms. In the beginning, he lived by begging, sharing  it the with the few who kept him company. As visitors  started coming in numbers, they brought some offerings like fruits or sweets, which were shared on the spot, though this was found inconvenient. Later. in 1917, when his Mother came to stay with him, she started cooking out of the things received, in the way she knew- as in South Indian brahmin houses.The visitors were mostly the middle class South Indians,  some of whom desired to stay for long or short periods. So they arranged cooking and other facilities to cater to their needs  and tastes, after Mother's samadhi in 1922. Since Ramana had no personal agenda,he submitted to what his followers arranged. In course of time a  type of management, with brahminical touches, emerged. Even the later formal management was decided by the devotees. 

The origin of some of the practices is noteworthy. In the beginning, Sri Ramana was simply wandering on the hill and chose some old temples or cave for stay.Soon people started coming and one or two stayed with him. They used to read some old religious books and recite devotional  hymns of the old Saivite saints, or the verses rendered by Ramana in Tamil. Later, some Vedic pandits visiting from the town started  chanting the Veda. Ramana would sit listening attentively, self-absorbed. But orthodox elements objected to this, on the ground that such recital took place in a burial ground which was not approved. The pandits referred the matter to Ramana, who told them to decide for themselves! He had not initiated it, and had no mind ,one way or the other. Some of them decided to continue. Later, in the 30s, a foreign devotee, Major Chadwick, who had settled in the Ashram took initiative to have a Vedic school started there. About the only thing Ramana said about Vedic chanting was that it helped one to concentrate or meditate better!
Ramana did not want any new practice or reform started in his name or presence. In those orthodox days, brahmins and other did not inter-dine.So in the Asramam too, the common food was served to brahmins and non-brahmins alike, but seated separately, with Ramana sitting in the middle. Some reform minded brahmin youth would try to break the arrangement, saying  such separation should not be followed in the Asramam. Ramana would ask them whether they followed the reform in their own homes! This silenced them.

It so happened that South Indian brahmins were fond of coffee and started making and taking it, clandestinely. Ramana knew it, but let them enjoy their game. But once he told them if they wanted coffee, why not make in the open? Once, some one from the group offered coffee to a foreign visitor, saying it was 'prasad'. This gentleman had his doubt and asked Ramana straight. Ramana told him bluntly it was no such thing, those people wanted coffee, so they made it and drank it, but merely used his name! This is how traditions are created. Thus he was himself a prisoner of the 'establishment' that grew around him- a point at times  made by Sri Aurobindo, in good humour!

 But his teachings are so universal, they can be interpreted in terms of any religion, or no religion at all. Surrender for instance is nothing other than 'Islam' -submission  to the will of God! Enquire who you are, is nothing other than "Know Thyself". Insistence on finding your true Self is nothing other than finding "The Kingdom of God is within you". His  prescription to know "Who Am I" is strongly reminiscent of the Biblical saying " I AM THAT I  AM"-the only words to be printed in capital letters in the entire Bible , as Ramana himself pointed out. Even venerating the Mother's Samadhi is not far different from the Muslims venerating their Dargahs! His teaching is close to Buddha's own teaching- there is no philosophy, no theology, but only a practical method! In other hands, an entirely different system of worship or ritual could have been developed! Or, it could have been regarded as what people nowadays call "spiritual but not religious". I am not suggesting that what has happened  or prevails is wrong, but only that it is just one of the many possibilities! Akin to exactly how we give a name and form to the Formless and Nameless Supreme!

Even so it is with our Baba. There are orthodox elements who object to Hindus venerating Baba. But they overlook one historic fact. In the last 1000 years, India has been subject to foreign invasions and rule-both political and religious. India has declined in all respects- her glory is just a-n-c-i-e-n-t! Even her economic supremacy declined after the mid-18th century.  Orthodoxy has totally declined in all spheres. If Hindu orthodoxy is so infallibly correct, eternal as they would describe it- why has it fallen? Why were the Gods for whom such magnificent temples were erected not willing or able to prevent the Muslims from  desecrating or destroying them? Our own free Independent govt. has by legislation interfered with and altered many orthodox Hindu laws. What could orthodox establishments do about it? How many advocates of orthodoxy are sincere- eg. how many of them who talk about the greatness of Veda let their own children study the Veda in the orthodox manner?And how many of those who so study use their knowledge except as source of income? How many of them even study Sanskrit?  Do our marriages now comply with orthodox requirements?And has any head of any orthodox Mutt been able to prevail upon his own followers not to let their girls seek employment, as demanded by orthodoxy? How many Sanyasins do now live alone in the orthodox manner, as in the olden days? Maintaining and supporting the Mutt itself has become the main orthodoxy now!

The philosophical and cultural achievements of Hindus are great indeed. In some respects they are also unique. India is the native home of Hindus and it is the only home, as Hinduism does not believe in proselytising and converting other countries or peoples. So it must retain its predominantly Hindu character. But Hindus cannot live in splendid isolation any more!  Providence has poured every race, language, religion etc into India as the rivers pour their waters into the ocean! India has absorbed  everything and still remained India! This is what we have to  safeguard.

It is where Saints like Sai Baba  function as the instruments of Providence. How he forced his followers to keep their own dharma and traditions! How he instilled in them the basic moral virtues and religious spirit! How he forced them to remember and honour their own family deities! How he got local temples renovated, maintained and honoured! How he always held up before them the spiritual goal!

More than anything, his appeal undoubtedly rests on his ability to bring succour to suffering people. This is  happening even now, 96 years after his Samadhi. Sages may quote scripture and say one has to pay for one's past karma. Sages know the Truth, and expound Wisdom. But Saints help people directly, and bring light and happiness into their lives. Saints prepare the way for Sages. But where the Saint is also the Sage, what more can one aspire for? Sai Baba of Shirdi was one such. As he himself said, he gave people what they wanted so that they could be prepared to take what he himself wanted to give viz spiritual knowledge. Very much like the mother offering children some candy or chocolate, to induce them to take the medicine!

Orthodox religion is high-brow. It is based on the belief that the higher reaches of society should follow their dharma, which would set the example for the whole society. It is fine, like the modern mainstream economic orthodoxy, advocating 'trickle down' theory. Only, it doesn't work in practice: what trickles down is misery, not wealth or prosperity, which stagnates in limited pools. In the last 1000 years, orthodoxy has been on retreat in India. Literally, mutts moved places, murtis from temples were taken away and hidden, etc. It was not orthodoxy which helped people  face Muslim conquests or prevent conversion; it was the work of poet-saints who took simple practical religion  to the door steps of the people, speaking and singing in their own languages! Or like Samarth Ramadas  who showed people practical ways to outwit the restrictions imposed by the sultans and badshah on Hindu religious worship.  They brought the high philosophy to the common man, from the grand sutras to the ground level. They filled the gap created by the very failure of orthodoxy! Sai Baba of Shirdi has to be viewed in this context. 

Those who can practice orthodoxy, may go ahead with it by all means. But they should not decry other sources of wisdom or weal, unless they can fill the gap.