Conman Or Guru? The 'Nithyananda' Documentary

When Nithyananda burst forth as a phenomenon in Tamil Nadu, it was quite remarkable. A young, energetic, charismatic guru clad in saffron started dishing out wisdom in the pages of the then most popular Tamil weekly, Kumudam.

He amassed a lot of followers and wealth in a short span of time and soon became one of the most popular of the modern gurus in southern India.

But, by 2010, with the surfacing of a video, his downfall began.

Then came reports of a 'non-disclosure agreement' that his institution allegedly made some of his disciples sign. It was reportedly an agreement to allow what could be perceived as sexual transgressions.

The young guru, now caricatured as the quintessential 'fake sadhu', also faced rape charges.

From this point on, the young guru, moving into his middle ages, started making exorbitant claims. From delaying the sunrise at a particular geographical spot, to opening the third eye of children in his gurukul, to manifesting materials, to psychokinetic powers, to being an alien, Nithyananda's claims grew in ridiculously deluded grandeur month after month.

At one point, a person from this guru's organisation used to call me and ask me to come and witness the power manifestations. I used to tell him politely that I could be easily deluded by parlour tricks as I am not even an amateur magician. If he wants to test the powers, they should arrange a panel of professional magicians and test the children in a neutral venue. I also told this person that there is a possibility of child abuse in the organisation.

Months later, the same person contacted me with a voice heavy with sadness. He said his daughters had been abducted by the then absconding Nithyananda. In fact, it is the story of this person, Janardhan Sharma, which forms an important part of the recent documentary series on Discovery+.

After watching the series, here are my reactions:

The series definitely has elements of Hindumisia. For example, Hindus (Indians) are characterised, through some participants, as having a propensity to fall for gurus without questioning. But, in reality, the public mindset is often that ochre-robed gurus are 'probably vagabonds or cheats' unless otherwise proven.

So, to suggest that a guru gathers followers because of blind faith is wrong. A guru finds a lot of followers despite the negative stereotype and overall scepticism in the public psyche. It is this aspect that has to be investigated.

In fact, there are testimonies in the series itself. Bhargavi Hemmige, who was a devotee between 2002 and 2009 acknowledges on camera that there was a kind of 'energy field' around Nithyananda.

Bhagwan Singh, a former bureau chief of Deccan Chronicle, who too had moved away from Nithyananda, acknowledges that there is a phenomenon that has to be explained.

Even more problematic is the testimony of Jansi Rani, the mother of a Tamil girl called Sangeetha who died under mysterious circumstances in the ashram. The grieving mother is convinced that the whole organisation is a sham and, more, a predatory enterprise than a spiritual movement.

Yet, she too speaks about the unexplainable attraction that oozes out of Nithyananda — at least in the initial days — which she perceived as his spiritual aura and transparent simplicity.

Many who have moved away from Nithyananda make similar statements.

Even Sharma, who is determined to see Nithyananda's downfall so that he can get back his daughters, acknowledged in personal conversations that Nithyananda is a person with extraordinary powers, almost bordering on the parapsychological.

The cases of former disciples Sarah Landry and Jordan Lozada are interesting. They have taken up bold campaigns against Nithyananda after having been staunch disciples and powerful persons in his organisation. Landry also faces a hate campaign. They both come from Western culture and yet have shown extraordinary maturity not to essentialise Hinduism with their experience of abuse.

I do not believe in the supernatural or in magical healing. I am a sceptic and even a materialist when it comes to believing in 'siddhis' or 'shaktis', preferring the Occam's razor instead. But, if we are to understand a phenomenon like Nithyananda, we need to investigate these dimensions, if needed, with a better framework.

Perhaps, one person, a scholar featuring in the series, who could have done that was Raghav Shastri. I think he could have built a robust critique of the Nithyananda phenomenon using yogic psychology framework. Unfortunately, the series does not utilise him adequately.

Often, the defence of Nithyananda is of two types. One, the whole thing is a conspiracy by anti-Hindu forces because Nithyananda is reviving and validating Hinduism like never before. Two, if Nithyananda is a fraud, we should not criticise him in public because there is the greater danger of Christianity and Islam.

Both these arguments are wrong.

Nithyananda is not reviving Hinduism. He is using the Hindu cover for his narcissistic personality cult. In fact, the kind of allegations he has made against the Government of India and Hindutva, from his so-called Kailasa, are not much different from the kind made by 'Breaking India' forces in public.

The so-called scientific validation of powers is laughable, if not for the innate dangers it carries. Most of the demonstrations of the so-called shaktis have been carried out by stage-magicians. Using children for these demonstrations also means either making them believe they have genuine powers and/or making them accomplices in a con-game. This is not validating Hindu Dharma.

Secondly, tolerating the abusive cult of Nithyananda — only because there are more dangerous threats to the civilisation — is to forsake the freedom that Hindu Dharma recognises.

There are two reasons why we should face this problem head-on.

The guru is an important phenomenon in Hindu Dharma. Spiritual sadhana, cutting across the Hindu family of religions, places great emphasis on the centrality of guru to liberation. So, being a guru demands highest authenticity to oneself because to be a shishya to a guru means complete surrender. This is a situation pregnant with possibilities of abuse by gurus who may be corrupt or who may slip on the path.

There is now a credible volume of literature that shows the problem a guru faces in the modern environment. A person becoming a guru can command a transnational empire. They may have a lot of followers of all genders who are ready to surrender their everything, including their cognitive abilities, at the feet of the guru.

So, power over material and psychological assets of a vast population, along with political connections, can turn dangerous.

Perhaps, the time has come for us as a civilisation-in-progress to work out a manual of sorts for guru-shishya relations, with traditional Hindu acharyas, psychologists, and cult-deprogramming experts coming together.

A shishya can be made aware of red flags in the relationship — when the demands of the guru may indicate that it is not for the spiritual progress of the shishya but for the gratification of the guru.

A guru demanding a Rolls-Royce car or inappropriate pictures from the disciple need not be obeyed even if the discourse of the guru might have helped them psychologically or spiritually. Similarly, a guru may also be given points for self-check when he slips from being a guru and on to a narcissistic and abusive personality — so that he can self-correct during the very first steps of deviation.

If we, as a civilisation, want to fulfill our potential, we need to take these steps. Hiding behind allegations of 'Western conspiracies' and whatabouteries are not going to help.

In this way, this documentary series has played an important role and, as a Hindu, one will benefit immensely from watching it.