SBE,

Your blog is inconvenient to me. So, let's talk here.

I am asking you to give this a serious thought(don't call me cute). Until we conclude our discussion I request you to remove your incest claims from your blog. Your incest claim goes well for all Hindus of AP state.

Now, have you researched the Hindu marriage practice in Andhra Pradesh? Do you acknowledge that it is well practiced custom in AP state?

Beast master, I find your enthusiasm rather cute but I'd really appreciate it if you'd stick to one place for discussions on this subject. You are already carrying on this discussion here and here so I'd really like it if we could stick to one arena. I don't mind talking in several different places but then I enjoy the luxury of having different types of discussions in different places, and I'm sure you can understand how tiring it might be to repeat the same points in more than one arena.

Hope you understand the problem and will stick to the original arena. Feel free to repost your points here to there if you like.

SBE,

In your blog you said, "I still find it incredibly absurd that incest is justified as "normal" and so forth."

You committed 2 errors in one sentence!

1. Begging the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_argument)
2. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance)

First, you assume it is incest. Second, you can't take the fact due to your lack of knowledge.

Why don't you research before committing more errors?

.BM

SBE,

You said, "..I have nothing more to add except to say that I firmly disagree with your conention that such marriages are "normal practice.."

Tell me how did you come to the conclusion of firm disagreement.

It is a simple fact that it is a popular Hindu marriage practice in AP state. Give us some business(I won't guarantee it will entertain you:-), watch this 2005-06 movie- http://www.khojhyderabad.com/Ent/Movies/Display.asp?q=859&H=2

Hero-Heroine relationship in this movie is #2 from my list(2. father's sister's daughter).

SBE,

You said, "So which definition listed above do you think describes sex as we know it?"

Depends on the context. From your list, #1 as in "what is your sex?". #5 as in "SB attempted to have sex with AR".

Per Hindu marriage practice in Andhra Pradesh, the following marriages are *not forbidden*.

A man with his-

1. sister's daughter
2. father's sister's daughter
3. mother's brother's daughter

The following marriages are *forbidden*.

A man with his-

4. sister
5. mother
6. daughter
7. brother's daughter
8. father's brother's daughter
9. mother's sister's daughter
10. mother's sister

You fail to observe the distinction between 1-3 and 4-10. In my part of the world, 1-3 are *not incest*. 4-10 are *incest*.

.BM

Edited by author 07-03-2006 09:09 PM
Just for reference, here is the response to Beast-Master's other points as registered here:

If you want to define everything with a dictionary, I suppose you'll agree that sex (for example) is nothing more than:

1. The property or quality by which organisms are classified as female or male on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions.
2. Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, of this classification.
2. Females or males considered as a group.
3. The condition or character of being female or male; the physiological, functional, and psychological differences that distinguish the female and the male. See Usage Note at gender.
4. The sexual urge or instinct as it manifests itself in behavior.
5. Sexual intercourse.
6. The genitals.

So which definition listed above do you think describes sex as we know it?

Similarly I am not concerned with the legality of the parents' marriage and nor am I concered with what were the "proper" practices, it is an undeniable fact that incest is morally abhorrent.

By the way, what do you mean that cousin-marriage is not forbidden by Hindu religious practice? Perhaps you are not familiar with the Manu-smriti (Laws of Manu) that states, among other things:

"He who has approached the daughter of his father's sister, (who is almost equal to) a sister, (the daughter) of his mother's sister, or of his mother's full brother, shall perform a lunar penance. A wise man should not take as his wife any of these three; they must not be wedded because they are (Sapinda-) relatives, he who marries (one of them), sinks low." - Manu-smriti 11.172-173

Pedda Venkappa Raju indeed went against Hindu religious practice by violating the above Law of Manu. He approached (let's not get technical here) Easwaramma who was the daughter of his father's sister.

By the way, how about the fact that Venkamma (Baba's sister) married her uncle, Easwaramma's brother?

As I've already answered the majority of your point here, I have nothing more to add except to say that I firmly disagree with your conention that such marriages are "normal practice".

It may be widespread and it may be carried out even today, but that doesn't disprove my basic point that incest is morally abhorrent and as such, Sai Baba should have been more choosy about which family to take birth in. Avatars supposedly retain such exclusive rights.

As for last names and so on, you're very welcome to explain your points there.

Sai Baba EXPOSED,

1. Sai Baba was borned to Pedda Venkamma(ppa ??) Raju (father) and Eswaramma (mother)

2. Pedda Venkamma Raju was borned to Kondamma Raju(father) and Lakshamma(mother)

3. Eswaramma was borned to Meesaraganda Subba Raju(father) and Venkata Subbamma(mother)

4. Kondamma Raju(male) and Venkata Subbamma(female) are siblings(brother and sister).

Validity by close relation: By local customs the marriage of Pedda Venkamma Raju and Eswaramma is not only valid but it is a *very common* practice.
Age: Given the year(old India) of the marriage though I am not sure of the legality, I am very sure it is not uncommon.

Run this by some folks who lived in Andhra Pradesh before respodning to me. I can see that you don't know the "last name" nomanclature of Andhra Pradesh. "Raju" indicates caste but not the "last name". Naming is a little tricky in Andhra Pradesh.

I am afraid you should research this and remove the incest claim immediately from your blog, to save your credibility.

hi all from freestone the moderator.

well I found that video upload site the
http://www.youtube.com

and I did a search for baba videos that were made by interested parties.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=sai+..._type=search_videos

there are a bunch, maybe about 20 or so of them!
There are several made by visitors and devotees where jewlery and vibuti
were "manifested" by baba.
then there are videos that slightly lampoon him, a video made by a class project, several 10 minute videos of baba presentations.

all good Fodder for research, or just to take a look at baba!

http://www.flickr.com
has many pictures uploaded and thus one can do a search for "sathya sai baba" or "sai baba" to find yet MORE baba stuff!

have fun.

post here any Findings or insights, from these videos or pictures!



freestone

Edited by author 06-27-2006 04:25 PM
You said it. Most of the critics of Sathya Sai only present thousands of cool facts, not demonisations such as you now blatantly admit you do! Your presence everywhere you post shows that you are about the lowest kind of mentality to be found on the web. Congratulations, every sentence you write exposes you as a defamer, demoniser, person without facts or reason. Just keep on going, you seem unable not to condemn yourself with every posting. It is highly amusing to see. You do not recognise the right of anonymity on the internet when it is to protect against demonisers like you claim to be! If anonymous posters are cowardly, then millions are cowards. But you tried to hide your identity for ages, but I note that you were found out - I saw that on Yahoo sathyasaibaba2 group!

It looks pretty obvious to me (and everyone else) who's temper tantrums are increasing. :-)

We "demonise" the critics who "demonise" Sai Baba because they LIE, LIE, LIE and REFUSE to correct their disinformation. They know they cannot win without lying and manipulating the truth.
They are the ones doing sleight of hand with the facts as ALL are becoming increasingly aware.

Their temper tantrums are increasing.

The anti-Sais can't even keep their stories straight! So Sanjay makes Tony out to be a liar by saying the Doordarshan video did make it to tv. And if someone "smuggled" the Doordarshan video out of the Doordarshan Studio, that's called stealing so did Premanand receive stolen property? Do the anti-Sais EVER analyze and ask "rational" questions about WHAT they are reading? Doesn't look like it.

What the BBC brought to light is how awful their reporting is. Now that Alaya Rahm proved what a liar he is (not ONE witness showed up to back his claims even though he, his family, and the anti-Sais claimed they had scores of witnesses...there were 40 complainants listed on their filing!), the BBC is left with egg on their face and who knows, maybe now someone will sue them since the anti-Sais won't shut up are still using the poorly-researched piece of garbage to further their hate campaign.

Make up your mind, ex-premie. One minute you say I am hiding. The next you say I am trying to make a name. All my facts regarding the lies and criminal behavior of the anti-Sais are documented on the internet for those who are honest enough to look at them. The anti-Sais cannot even make it into a court room, which is what I predicted over the last few years and is also WELL-DOCUMENTED on the internet. You, on the other hand are full of hot air (and a coward to boot) and that is why you have to hide behind a phony user name. Several of the people smearing Prem Rawat have criminal histories too so that doesn't surprise me although you sound just like Reinier van der Sandt or one of his criminally-minded friends. The only thing people like you seem to be good at is harassing people, I'll give you that. That's why so many of you end up in jail in the end.

Edited by author 06-11-2006 09:53 PM
Sai Baba: Demonising The Critics - See this article to see a complete list of Sai Baba's repulsive and contradictory behaviour against his critics. For a so-called embodiment of love, he sure has a few gripes against people who pullaway his robe and expose him for the fraud that he is. See how he calls his critics 'Judases', 'cawing crows', alleges bribery, and much more false and unfounded accusations.

On the other hand, I do agree that my recent "incest" article was a nice try; it has produced a host of successive articles:

Sai Baba: Incestuous Reflections

Kasturi's Incestuous Revisionism

Far From The Incestuous Crowd

:-)

And many more earth-shaking revelations to be revealed. Tough luck, Mr. Judas, the Gospel of Judas has not been universally recognised as authentic. :-) What does Jesus have to do with this anyway? Are you contending that our recent revelations have no basis in truth, despite being recorded in official devotional literature? Careful. ;-)