12

It's unfortunate to Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) that there are apparently some fake Babas or Swamis who exploit gullible people in India and abroad. Even few famous saints or Swamis face legal allegations in India and either they will be convicted or acquitted of alleged crime.

Obviously most users on this site are enthusiasts who like studying scriptures (either on their own or under guidance of a Guru) and don't know nitty-gritty of those allegations or legal details, unless if users work in courts or law enthusiasts . As per site rules, we allow "words of saints" as acceptable source. Followers of these Swamis say they were framed and general public have different opinions.

Recently, i stumbled upon Youtube video of spiritual discussion of Swami Nityananda with Rajiv Malhotra and looks like he was knowledgeable in Agamas and Hinduism (i'm definitely not his follower).

Now, it is tedious to decide whether we should allow words of those saints who face the allegations. I will try to divide it into three categories and let's see those three categories (do mention in comments if i miss anything).

  1. Swamis who face allegations and verdict has yet to announced by Judiciary (Indian or abroad)?
  2. Swamis who are convicted of a crime?
  3. Swamis who are acquitted by court?

Post your opinions as answers and let's decide what should be the community stand on words of saints who face allegations?

| |
  • 2
    Works of Swamis who are convicted for a crime of a murder or a rape should be banned. – Mr. Sigma. Apr 26 '18 at 11:14
  • And the users citing their works should be banned. Like a user if cite Gurmeet Ram Rahim should be banned or suspended. – Mr. Sigma. Apr 26 '18 at 11:16
  • 1
    Category 3 may not be required. Because usually, a person is not guilty until proven so. – iammilind Apr 26 '18 at 11:51
  • @iammilind Yes. It is not needed. But there's also a possibility that one could use power to escape from law. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '18 at 12:10
  • But why is the issue important? Have u found users using such persons' quotes in support of their claims? – Rickross Apr 26 '18 at 13:13
  • @Rickross Yes. A user posted an answer with Nityananda video source as reference and thought it would be better if we decide it. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '18 at 13:15
  • Okay @TheDestroyer.. – Rickross Apr 26 '18 at 13:16
7

WHAT HAPPENS OUTSIDE THE SITE SHOULD REMAIN OUTSIDE.

It has always been so; please don't change it now.

As I will illustrate below, changing this rule will make the site very messy to handle especially for moderators.

Example

A guru who is no less than god to his followers one day inspires all of them to give up their earthly bodies to reach one of the higher planes (Brahmāloka, Vaikuṇṭha, Goloka, etc). It has happened once in the US.

The courts consider this act as mass suicide. In the view of courts there is no such thing as heaven, hell or a "higher loka". Earth is the only loka that there is.

The majority of Hindus may disagree with this view of courts. They are reminded of a scene from the epic Rāmāyaṇa where Rāma walks into river Sarayu and gives up his life by drowning. And how he inspired the citizens of Ayodhya to follow him into the river.

How is one supposed to know if the guru was really a deluded person or did all souls of those dead people really reach a higher plane?

Are moderators going to follow the news daily to see outcome of the courts' decision? On Day 100, the courts rule that the guru is responsible for the lives lost, is a mass murderer, goes on to issue an order to shutdown the organization.

Are they going to side with what Hindu scriptures say on this or the court's decision?

In this particular instance, let's say the mods decide to go with courts decision to take down all answers on the site that cite the guru's words or his works and on Day 200, if an appeal is filed and a higher court reverses the decision of lower court, are they going to undelete those answers?

Bottom line: Why should this site be in the business of outlawing certain gurus, their works or their followers?

| |
  • "Why should this site be in the business of outlawing certain gurus, their works or their followers?" - goes to show authenticity of the guru, reliability of their teaching and quotability of their expressed knowledge. That said the rest of your answer is good. – user1195 Apr 26 '18 at 19:21
  • 1
    Agreed. What remains outside the site should be outside of the site. The personal and internal affairs of swamijis or organisations are not the business of our site. We should see what they say is relevant or irrelevant to the answer. Agree with the newspaper point and deletion part also. – Sarvabhouma Apr 27 '18 at 4:56
1

I will answer from bottom to top.

Swamis who are acquitted by court?

Should be allowed. Because anyone can file a case against anyone but since there is no proof, we should not disallow.

Swamis who are convicted of a crime?

Should not be allowed.

Swamis who face allegations and verdict has yet to announced by Judiciary (Indian or abroad)?

Should not be allowed until the case is pending because no one knows the outcome. If they will be convicted then we need to delete the posts and if they will be acquitted then we can allow.

| |
  • 1
    Good one. Will also wait for other answers. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '18 at 12:08
-4

This is absurd. We cite Krishna all the time who admits himself that he got the Pandavas to commit adharmic acts because otherwise the war could not be won. The Jains say he went to hell for his acts in the Mahabharata. If Court verdicts are to be used, then what the courts say about Hinduism must also be allowed but is vehemently opposed.

| |
  • Yup, you mean court's laws are not necessarily be consistent with Hinduism. that's why in the comment I had said only who had been convicted for murders and rapes according to nation's constitution should be banned. – Mr. Sigma. Apr 26 '18 at 12:27
  • 1
    and wasn't valmiki a robber @rohit? – S K Apr 26 '18 at 12:28
  • 3
    What Krishna done was for Loka kalyanam but actions of convicted has anything to do with Loka Kalyanam?? Krishna finally established Dharma but what Dharma are they teaching when they get convicted in some crimes. These kinds of Sadhus are not even sadhus by definition. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '18 at 12:29
  • 1
    First of all whether someone is guilty or not can ONLY be determined by courts. It is nonsensical to say what courts say about Hinduism is not relevant, but what they say about people is relevant These Sadhus do kalyanam for those who believe in them. Devotees believe even after conviction. There is enough punitiveness here, please don't add to it @the destroyer – S K Apr 26 '18 at 12:42
  • So what does Court say about Lord Krishna? I think Bhagavad Gita has been used for taking oath in courts previously. But now it is not in practice. Still Supreme Court building has following inscriptions: Yato Dharmahstato Jayah – Triyugi Narayan Mani Apr 26 '18 at 12:50
  • 1
    There is no evidence that Krishna composed the Gita. – S K Apr 26 '18 at 12:52
  • 1
    What kind of evidence you want? – Triyugi Narayan Mani Apr 26 '18 at 12:52
  • 1
    @TriyugiNarayanMani He wants Krishna to come down and personally tell him. – Ikshvaku Jan 30 '19 at 3:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .