Nithyananda and his mountain of LIES

Nithyananda Lies - its hard to tell where the lies begin and surely they are still going on endlessly!! Here are a few examples of the lies spun by Nithyananda and his aides. If Nithyananda has lied about all these things, then can we really believe him when he/his aides says he is enlightened, he is an avatara purusha (incarnation of God)? You be your own judge.

LIES ABOUT THE CONTROVERSIAL VIDEO


Nithyananda 's Lie Exposed - VIDEO PROVED LEGIT



For the lay, Nithyananda’s transcendental lies
By Chandan Nandy

It took A Rajasekharan, alias Paramahamsa Nithyananda, the man masquerading as a spiritual leader and healer of mental and physical afflictions, nearly two weeks to come out and claim that he was in a ‘trance’ when he was filmed having sex with a Tamil actress. Obviously, Nithyananda, who claims to have experienced ‘truth’ and ‘enlightenment’, is not anywhere near speaking the truth.

The ‘paramahamsa’ does not even have the courage to own up to the fact that he gave in to a moment of human weakness (it is another matter that it was not simply a momentary lapse of ascetic strength; that was his wont and the sine qua non of his so-called spiritual movement). How do we describe such a man? A fraud? A confidence trickster? A villainous manipulator? A sociopath on the loose?

The common dictionary definition of trance is “a half-conscious state, seemingly between sleeping and waking, in which ability to function voluntarily may be suspended”. If Nithyananda is trying to tell the world at large, and especially his disciples, that he was in fact violated by Ranjitha, the Tamil actress he is shown to have sex with, he is lying. For, nobody who has seen the video clips would be fooled about his claim. It is pretty much obvious that Nithyananda was not in a state of trance, or as he put it, ‘in deep samadhi’. He was, to use his own cultic language, in a state of extreme ecstatic bliss.

What Nithyananda has attempted to do through his statements aired via his own website or a couple of television news channels is to sway the flagging support among his youthful followers. The efforts to clear himself by replying to inspired questions put by a researcher of little academic recognition, the use of spurious cultic language (‘deep silent meditation’) and other forms of half-baked comments exposed an essentially flawed and devious mind incapable of taking on the truth. But these, according to sociological studies of the 1950s, also indicated that as a cult leader Nithyananda tried to change his devotees’ and television viewers’ belief systems via ‘sensory overload’ and subverting their ability to reason.

Even if it is assumed that some of the studies used over-generalised stereotypes of deception on the part of cult leaders, there is no denying the fact that Nithyananda is now employing a stratagem to trick people into believing that he committed no wrong. He has persuasion techniques, but part-admitting to have been ‘served’ by Ranjitha and lying on his state of consciousness will not go a long way to establish his credibility among the people at large. In many ways, Nithyananda has been found out. The videos ensured that first and then his statements left no doubt in the minds of the people that the man they watched on the television screen was an inveterate liar.

Credibility

Duping people by half-baked tantric concepts like being in a state of trance will only alienate his cultic order from those who are more rational in judging and concluding the moral worth of a man who claims to be, and is projected by some of his associates, as an ‘enlightened Master’.

Nithyananda was mistaken to be a charismatic leader by members of his cult. A deviant and perverse impersonation of malignity, Nithyananda tried to use the sublime ideals of Hinduism and Brahminism to achieve a rather base objective — wealth accumulation the easy way.

There is a large and established body of scholarly literature, far more credible and grounded in rationality than the mish-mash of Brahmanical and occult practices that Nithyananda bandied about through his teachings and sermons, but which are, to say the least, a perverse attack on the ideals of Brahmanism, Sanatana Dharma and Vedanta philosophy. He tried to hijack all of these in one go without even adequately comprehending them in their fullest depth. He tried to sell them expensive, the cost of which he is now paying by way of social revile.

It is best left to scholars of theology, religion and cults to ascertain what Nithyananda’s organisation, which sociologists would agree was formed to satisfy the personal interests of its leader and a few others, attempted to propagate was impairing and destructive. Nithyananda is no Moses trying to deliver his fringe flock to freedom. His seven-year movement, if it can be described as one at all, is an experiment with a self-deceiving, illusory conception of an alternative way of life that was not altruistic in the sense that it was not directed at ameliorating the lot of the poor, the marginalised, the disempowered and the wretched of society.

Nithyananda tried to engineer the beliefs of many young people that the freedom to lead wholly self-indulgent lives could provide them with the sense of purpose and direction in life they so ardently sought. Having taken the pendulum of freedom to its outermost limits, after throwing hundreds of young minds back into a regressive mode by inculcating in them the idea that he was their Master, the arbiter of their souls, and by telling them that their salvation lay at his ‘lotus feet’, Nithyananda has now found a barren vista.

LIES ABOUT HIS BIOGRAPHY INCLUDING HIS BIRTHDAY, AGE AND WANDERING




Sincere monk goes astray

Swami Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Swami Vivekananda had inspired him to become a monk when Rajasekharan was a poor youth in Tamil Nadu’s holy town of Tiruvannamalai years ago.

But apparently “unable to withstand the rigours” of advanced spiritual training at the Ramakrishna Mutt and Mission, Rajasekharan who later turned as the self-styled Godman, Swami Paramahans Nithyananda, “left the monastic order on his own”. Swami Abhiramananda, Manager of the Ramakrishna Mutt in Chennai, in an exclusive conversation with ‘Deccan Herald’ on Thursday, said Rajasekharan had joined the monastic order in 1995.
After nearly four years of training here that included courses in Hindu scriptures, Sanskrit, meditation and ‘yoga’, he was sent for the advanced course at their Headquarters, Belur Mutt, near Kolkata. But he left the Mutt in 2000, said Swami Abiramananda.

All aspiring monks will have to go through the Mutt’s spiritual rigour for ten years before they are each given a ‘Sanyasa name’. Rajasekharan obviously did not qualify for it, but “he was a keen student, sincere and intelligent,” to the extent Abiramananda knew him. Rajasekharan did have “some power in him”, the monk observed.


Mystery over Swamy's age

Authorities at the supposed alma mater of self-styled godman Paramahamsa Nithyananda, in the midst of a murky sex scandal involving a Tamil actress and other female disciples, on Monday said the institution's management will likely to inquire into the circumstances under which an under-age boy was given admission.


Nithyananda's educational attainment has come under a cloud after it was found that he was given admission to a three-year mechanical engineering diploma course at Rajagopal Polytechnic College in Gudiyattam in Tamil Nadu's Vellore district when he was 12 years old.

According to the college website, Nithyananda received his diploma in 1993 when he would have been only 15 years old. This is evident from the college website on which he has been eulogised as: "An alumni, Swamiji Nithyananda has donated magnanimously Rs 200,000 (Rs two lakh) for Noon Meal Scheme. Each year he used to donate huge sum whole-heartedly. We proudly register here that he is our old student, did his Mechanical Engineering (1990-1993)."

When contacted, college principal R J Kumar told Deccan Herald over phone that he was admitted to the mechanical engineering course in 1992 and studied in the institution till 1995 when he earned his diploma in "first class with distinction.”

Discrepancy

Kumar's version is also full of discrepancy since Nithyananda, who claims to have been born in 1978, would have been only 14 years old at that time. According to rules in vogue in Tamil Nadu a diploma course could be pursued if the candidate seeking admission to any specific programme has passed Class X at age of 16. At that time, Nithyananda was known by the name A Rajasekaran.

Kumar, who said he had checked the records, said he would request the college management to undertake an inquiry into the matter.

He also said he would instruct the college technical staff to "correct" the entry from the website.

The questionable part of Nithyananda's supposed education at Rajagopal Polytechnic was the age factor. He claims in his autobiography that he was born in 1978. That makes him 12 years of age in 1990, the year he supposedly was enrolled in the college. On the other hand, if Kumar's claim that Rajasekaran was enrolled in 1992 is correct, then the boy was only 14 years at that time.

Inquiry to be ordered

When contacted, mechanical engineering head of the department P Pannerselvam said he would order an inquiry into the circumstances under which an under-age boy was admitted to the diploma course.

"I am on medical leave, but once I rejoin work I will ask the college authorities to go into the matter. After all, the reputation of the college is at stake," Pannerselvam told Deccan Herald over phone.

Clearly concerned over the prima facie bending of rules to award a diploma to an under-age boy, Pannerselvam said, "it might be that he got admission under the management quota," adding: "He might have produced false certificates."

While a thorough check will shed light on Nithyananda's educational qualifications and whether he had earned the diploma fairly, there are some college staff, including civil engineering department head R Amutha, who claimed she taught her subject to Nithyananda "in 1992-93."

When contacted, Amutha, who claims to have a 31-year teaching career, did not dispute the fact that she is a devotee of Nithyananda whom she met in 2001 “when he lived in Erode.”

Amutha, who admitted to paying money to have Nithyananda's darshan and partake of his teachings, claimed that “most of the staff in the college are his devotees.”