A few days ago I got a message, shared below, from someone about flooding caused by a religious organization. The Dera, in India’s Punjab, is the headquarters of Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB), a religious group that I was an active member of for 35 years, and have written about quite a bit on this blog. Gurinder Singh Dhillon has been the RSSB guru since 1990 and now is sharing guru duties with another man, to my understanding.
Hi Mr Hines, Greetings.
As you know Punjab in India is devastated by floods. Though Dera chief Mr Dhillon is trying to project that Dera is helping flood victims, using your resources, please cover if Dera Beas’s land encroaching policies made surrounding areas more prone to flood.Keep up the good work. Thank you very much.
I responded that I knew very little about this subject, so asked this person to share with me any news or other stories that talk about the Dera making neighboring areas more prone to flood. Or to share any information the person was aware of personally. Here’s the response I got:
Hi Brian, I initially got info from a freelance youtube video in Punjabi language showing an interview with the villagers from a village endangered by flood near Dera. Here is an interesting copied and pasted text obtained by putting a search in Google AI (“Did dera beas land encroachment caused flood around dera worsen?”).
Below is the Google AI search result. Obviously I can’t vouch for the truth of it, but it sounds credible to me. The recent floods in the Punjab regions of both India and Pakistan have indeed been serious, judging from a bit of Googling I did myself. I’ll share a photo from one of the news stories of Beas River flooding. The Beas River is close to the RSSB headquarters, the Dera. The bold faced title is the question asked of Google AI. The answer by Google AI follows.
Did dera beas land encroachment caused flood around dera worsen?
Yes, land encroachment and illegal construction have exacerbated flooding along the Beas River, with specific allegations raised against the Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) organization. The diversion and encroachment of river floodplains, including by Dera Beas, are cited by experts and authorities as a major contributing factor to the increased severity of floods in Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.Allegations of encroachment against Dera Beas
- Court notice issued: In January 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High Court issued a notice to the Punjab government regarding a plea alleging that RSSB has illegally usurped land, mined sand and earth, and caused the Beas River to change its course.
- Blocked flood channels: Reports indicate that RSSB has built infrastructure directly on the river’s floodplain, which obstructs the natural flow of water. Experts and environmentalists state that constructions on floodplains, including the Dera, disrupt natural drainage and increase the risk of devastating floods.
- Illegal mining: The allegations also include illegal sand and gravel mining on land diverted to the organization, which further disrupts the river’s ecosystem and increases vulnerability to flooding.
- Violation of conditions: Legal documents related to another RSSB property in Haryana accuse the organization of violating terms and conditions for land use, including building various structures and conducting illegal mining on diverted forest land.
The broader context of floodplain encroachment
- Human-induced disaster: Environmental experts argue that factors like land encroachment and illegal mining contribute to what they call a “human-made” or “human-induced” disaster, making floods much more severe than they would otherwise be.
- Increased flood impact: During severe flooding events in 2023 and 2025, floodplains—the areas where rivers naturally expand—were already constricted by construction and encroachments, leaving the rivers nowhere to go and worsening the inundation in surrounding areas.
- Lack of enforcement: Despite repeated court orders and warnings from bodies like the National Green Tribunal (NGT) regarding illegal construction on river floodplains, enforcement remains a persistent issue across India.
RSSB relief efforts during floodsIt is important to note that while faced with allegations of contributing to the flood problem, the RSSB has also conducted significant relief efforts during flooding events. During the 2025 Punjab floods, the organization opened its doors to displaced residents, provided food through community kitchens, and mobilized volunteers to assist affected families.
To me, this problem of RSSB making flooding worse along the Beas River is an instance of a general problem: a religious organization becoming so large, it deviates from the spiritual values it espouses. Nothing in the RSSB teachings says that it is a good thing when spiritually-minded people make flooding worse. Yet it sure seems like the leadership of RSSB, who definitely consider themselves spiritually-minded people, acted in a manner that harmed those who live and make a living in the Beas River floodplain.
I actually played a small role in this. A very small role. In December 1977 I went to India and spent two weeks at the Dera. I’d never seen in person the guru who initiated me in 1971, Charan Singh. So my trip was a pilgrimage of sorts to see a holy person in a holy place, the Dera. At least, that’s how I viewed the guru and the Dera at that time.
In a 2007 blog post, I wrote about the experience of being part of a volunteer effort to fill in land near the Beas River, not using heavy equipment, but baskets of sand carried atop the heads of RSSB sevadars, volunteers, of whom I was one. The photos in “Servitude, sand, and satguru” aren’t showing. Here’s how the post begins.
Catherine’s questioning of Sant Mat, including the possibly detrimental consequences of “mitti seva” (volunteers moving dirt by hand at India’s Dera Baba Jaimal Singh), brought to mind the two weeks I spent at the Dera in December 1977.
“Seva” means service. Serving the guru was a big part of the daily routine both for Western visitors and Indians. While I was there, mitti seva was in full swing from about 3:30 to 5:00 in the afternoon.
In Radhasoami Reality, Mark Juergensmeyer describes the scene:
“One of the most dramatic examples of ritual humiliation in Radhasoami is mitti seva, the service of dirt. At Beas, when thousands take part, the scene looks like something out of a biblical epic: thousands trudging over a levee with wicker baskets on their heads filled with mud, marching orderly lines to the edge, where they dump their loads and return for more.
The dust in the air gives a gauzy, surreal quality to the panorama, especially from the vantage point of a nearby cliff, where Master Charan Singh sits, dressed in immaculate white and shielded by a temporary awning as he oversees the whole affair.
The devotees carrying the dirt—including businessmen in smudged white shirts and housewives in soiled saris—affirm that they are not only helping the master’s construction projects; they are learning something about submission, humility, and service.”
The 2007 blog post linked to in the passage above was called “Some South African Sant Mat questioning.” Here’s part of what Catherine had to say.
In the old days, we marvelled at Mitti Seva and the diverting of the Beas River. Today, I see it as short-sighted and selfish. Even to me, when conjuring up the wonderful romantic images of Charan sitting on the hill with thousands of people filling in dongas, each with small flat baskets of sand on their heads, this seems an unfair comment and it is difficult to make.
When a river is diverted, it takes the land from someone else. Today, the farmers on the opposite bank are asking for land or compensation. Not only that, but the land that the Beas Dera sits on has the Sikhs up in arms today, because they claim it belongs to someone else and Sikhs consider it to have been stolen.
Unfortunately, Radha Soami Satsang Beas, like so many large religious organizations, has lost its spiritual way in some respects. At least, that’s how I see it. Others certainly have different opinions. I’m just presenting some apparent facts about how RSSB has encroached upon the Beas River floodplain, which has made flooding along the river worse.
Discover more from Church of the Churchless
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Glad to see you using AI to post content on this forum. No hypocrisy there.
You’re right. There’s no hypocrisy here. As I’ve said before, I criticized your use of AI in comments because you didn’t mention that the content was AI generated, and the content was very long. Your AI comments below also are very long, but I’ll give you a pass on that for now, since you indicated what your AI prompt was and what AI model you used.
Different prompts and different AI models will give different results about the issue of RSSB encroachment on the Beas River floodplain worsening flooding on neighboring areas. Common sense argues that this might well have happened. When land is built up on one side of a river, by a levee or otherwise, rising water will go more elsewhere, such as the floodplain on the other side of the river. This happens on the Mississippi River. Attempts to stop flooding upstream cause more flooding downstream because more water is flowing downstream.
Here’s a story in The Sikh Times about this issue. The farmers who filed a complaint against Radha Soami Satsang Beas seem to have a valid complaint. My understanding of the India legal system is that it often doesn’t work well to protect those who aren’t part of the “rich and powerful” group that has much influence in India, as everywhere, notably including the United States. So the lack of a judicial judgment against RSSB doesn’t mean RSSB is innocent, in my opinion.
http://www.sikhtimes.com/news_050906a.html
Also, keep in mind that AI models are not all-knowing omniscient beings. Their knowledge comes from wandering through the vastness of the internet, collecting what has been communicated about different subjects, then summarizing it in words. That’s why they’re called Large Language Models.
AI models don’t know what the truth of something is. They only know what has been said about that thing. If there’s a lot of garbage information on the internet about some subject, the result will be a garbage response. So it’s important to not take what AI models say literally. That’s why I said in this post, “Below is the Google AI search result. Obviously I can’t vouch for the truth of it, but it sounds credible to me.”
You can’t vouch for the truth of what you shared either. The single link I shared above from The Sikh Times may contain more truth about flooding along the Beas River than the AI results you shared. Or, it may not. All of us have to use our judgment here.
I asked Perplexity A: “does radhasoami satsang beas stand credibly accused of causing flooding”
Perplexity AI’s answer to this query:
There is no credible or substantiated evidence linking Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) to the cause of the Beas River flooding. Current evidence attributes the flooding to natural factors, including relentless heavy rainfall and the controlled release of water from major dams along the Beas and other rivers in the region, not to the activities or presence of RSSB.
Official Accounts of Flooding Causes
Extensive news coverage consistently cites excessive rainfall across north India and dam releases as the principal causes for the Beas River flooding.
Major rivers in Punjab and Himachal Pradesh, including the Beas, Sutlej, Ravi, and Ghaggar, overflowed their banks following this dramatic weather, submerging vast areas and damaging infrastructure.
There are no authoritative reports—by government, environmental agencies, or leading media organizations—stating that RSSB or its construction or operations contributed to the cause or exacerbation of the floods.
RSSB’s Documented Role
The only clear evidence concerning RSSB during the floods is of their active role in disaster relief: providing shelter, distributing food and supplies, and organizing volunteer support for affected people.
RSSB’s main center is located on the banks of the Beas River, but its operations are reported as humanitarian, and no sources allege any environmental or hydrological wrongdoing.
Lack of Credible Accusations
While social media and opinion forums occasionally mention rumors or “accusations,” no formal, investigated, or evidenced link between RSSB and the cause of Beas River flooding exists in verified public record.
In summary, the evidence overwhelmingly attributes the Beas River flooding to extreme natural causes and water management decisions, not to any activity of Radha Soami Satsang Beas.
************************************************************************************************************
I also asked Perplexity AI if RSSB is conducting illegal mining on land that it owns. Perplexity AI’s response to this query:
There are allegations—but no confirmed independent evidence—linking Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) to illegal sand mining on its land and the resulting flooding.
Legal and Governmental Proceedings
A petition was filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court in January 2024 alleging illegal land usurpation and sand extraction by RSSB in Amritsar, specifically accusing the organization of increasing its land by unscrupulous means and facilitating changes in the Beas River’s course, which allegedly caused the loss of cultivable land.
The court issued a notice to the Punjab government and sought a response from the Dera itself but has not issued a legal finding confirming the allegations.
Official Inspections
An official inspection report from August 2024 relating to environmental complaints against RSSB states, “during inspection no mining activities were recorded,” meaning no direct illegal sand mining was found during the government’s on-site examination for this case.
News and Independent Reports
There are reports and claims in the press and in court cases about environmental changes and river course alteration associated with RSSB operations.
No published independent hydrology or environmental report directly confirms that RSSB is actively allowing or engaged in illegal sand mining on its property.
Summary of Evidence
Allegations and legal petitions exist, but independent, on-site government inspections have found no illegal sand mining activity directly attributable to RSSB as of August 2024.
There is no substantiated, peer-reviewed hydrological evidence or completed legal ruling confirming that flooding has been caused by any such activities on RSSB-owned land.
Current public records indicate the existence of accusations, but not verified evidence of illegal sand mining by RSSB or a proven link to Beas River flooding.
***********************************************************************************************************
There’s also an allegation that RSSB violated land use agreements in Haryana. I asked Perplexity AI about this, and it replied:
Yes, it is accurate that legal documents related to a Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) property in Haryana allege violations of land-use terms, specifically those governing diverted forest land. According to government inspection records, RSSB was granted use of 40.34 hectares of forest land in Panchkula district, Haryana, with the explicit condition that the land be used solely for afforestation and without any construction of permanent structures.
Details from Official Documents
The official Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) inspection report (August 2024) found that permanent structures such as office buildings and Satsang areas had indeed been constructed by RSSB on this land, without required Central Government approval, which constitutes a violation of the original terms of diversion under the Forest Conservation Act.
The same legal applications included accusations from residents and environmental activists of illegal mining of soil and gravel, unauthorized commercial agriculture, tree cutting, and other environmental violations. However, the government inspection and site visit did not find direct evidence verifying the illegal tree cutting or illegal mining activities on the property, though violations regarding unauthorized construction were confirmed.
The legal and factual findings are now under further administrative and legal review, but the breach of land use conditions related to construction is formally acknowledged in government documentation.
In summary: RSSB is credibly documented to have violated land-use conditions for diverted forest land in Haryana by constructing permanent buildings; allegations of illegal mining and tree felling were investigated but not confirmed by direct site evidence.
**************************************************************************************
Note:
40 Hectares ≈ 0.154441 Square Miles
I asked Perplexity AI if what RSSB has done on this 0.16 sq mile plot of land (about the size of 3 football fields) is responsible for India’s floods. You know the answer already.
In sum, there’s no actual evidence to support this blog’s conclusion that RSSB is causing flooding in India. Faithful readers of Church of the Churchless know this isn’t the 1st time this blog has tried to pass off allegations as facts. Or the 10th time, for that matter.
Wait, I stand corrected. I asked PERPLEXITY AI to list how the Dera’s land development has created environmental problems. They include, and here I quote PERPLEXITY AI:
“High greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions primarily from transportation sources, with more than half of emissions linked to vehicle travel and commuting!
Decrease in tree canopy, reducing natural carbon absorption and biodiversity!
Air pollution associated with increased travel and urban activity!
Increased stormwater runoff contributing to flooding and water pollution due to impervious surfaces and urban sprawl!
Habitat disruption and displacement of sensitive fish and wildlife due to urban expansion!
Challenges related to land use in environmentally sensitive areas, advancing urban sprawl!
Problems with walkability, transit friendliness, and low bicycle/pedestrian use contributing to reliance on cars and pollution!
Energy use and emissions from natural gas combustion in buildings (stationary combustion)!
Waste generation creating additional emissions and environmental load!
Urban development leading to degradation of local stream ecosystems! (ok, emphasis mine)
These environmental issues stem from the city’s growth and land use patterns typical of expanding urban areas, creating pressures on natural resources and ecosystems.
************************************************************************
So there you have it — damning evidence that the RSSB Dera has run roughshod over the pristine Beas environment.
But wait — I lied. My query to PERPLEXITY AI wasn’t about the RSSB Dera’s land use. It was about the land use in Salem, Oregon.
Hey PERPLEXITY. have land use issues in Salem Oregon contributed to recent flooding?
“Yes, land use issues in Salem, Oregon have contributed to recent flooding problems. Specific points include:
Development in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) continues, with about 4,000 acres inside the city limits identified as flood-prone, including around 3,000 existing structures. New building permits in these areas allow ongoing risk exposure.
Impervious surfaces from urban development increase stormwater runoff, overwhelming drainage systems and contributing to localized flooding.
Coastal areas like Salem’s Juniper Point neighborhood experienced flooding due to a seawall failure during a severe storm and king tide in early 2024, causing unprecedented flooding for parts of the city.
Increasing precipitation events, projected to rise with climate change, are intensifying flood risks in Salem and increasing water levels in rivers and streams.
Challenges with regulating floodplain development and providing adequate flood control infrastructure complicate effective flood risk mitigation.”
*********************************************************************
So the blog author’s enlightened hometown is guilty of contributing to flooding, but that doesn’t get mentioned. I could harp on that, but will just leave a broader point:
Whether in Beas India or Salem Oregon, land development almost always involves trade-off. In order to develop land the land has to be changed, and change always complex factors and unintended results.
With that in mind, neither Salem Oregon or RSSB Beas should be portrayed as an eco-villain. To do so would be silly. Good Lord, the Mitti seva to build a place to feed hungry thousands was something to be ashamed of?
At the very least, if anyone thinks that the RSSB Dera’s development from a wild wasteland to a clean and green city is an environmental crime, they should compare it to the city where they live. Sort of like, don’t throw stones if you live in a glass house on land that you fought shouldn’t be developed for low income housing.
It’s wonderful that you’re so interested in Salem, where I live. However, I fail to see how there is any resemblance between Salem and the Dera, headquarters of Radha Soami Satsang Beas. Just to clue you in about this, here’s some of the many differences.
(1) Salem is run by a democratically elected city council. The city council hires and fires the City Manager. RSSB is run by a guru appointed by the previous guru who is accountable to no one, since the RSSB board rubber stamps the guru’s decisions.
(2) Salem has never been accused by anyone, so far as I know, for illegal development that contributes to flooding in other parts of the Willamette River, which flows through Salem. RSSB has had to deal with such accusations for a long time, at least since 2006, as evidenced by the story in The Sikh Times that I shared previously.
(3) Salem is in Oregon, which has strict land use rules governing how and where development can occur. Violations of those rules can be appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals. LUBA decisions can be appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals and then to the Oregon Supreme Court. My understanding, which is borne out by your AI reports, is that the Punjab and India in general has a much less effective and efficient legal system for handling land use cases.
So the fact that RSSB hasn’t been convicted of some of the wrongdoings that it has been accused of, doesn’t mean a whole lot. At least, not compared to what it means in Oregon. After all, the RSSB guru has been accused of financial fraud, and there is plenty of evidence supporting the accusation, but so far as I know the wheels of justice in India have ground to a stop when it comes to judging the guru innocent or guilty. There’s just no decision at all.
Just testing to see if a new commenting feature works. Yes, it does. Now it is possible to edit a comment within five minutes of posting it.
Cool feature! (And the five-minute window you’ve provided is perfect, it gives us time enough to take care of typos as well as inadvertent missed thoughts; while at the same time not admitting of a substantive, and potentially disruptive, do-over of the comment itself).
edit: test
edit: testing if we can do this more than once
edit: yes we can! And it seems the overall edit window remains at 5 minutes, cumulatively for all edits. Cool.
Hard to say. Land use contributes but rivers change course on their own…
“Shifting is in a river’s nature.”
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/why-rivers-suddenly-change-course
“One recent example occurred in 2008, when the Kosi River in India shifted its course by over 60 miles in a matter of days, displacing over 3 million people.”
https://www.greenbiz.com/article/satellite-imagery-helps-us-understand-how-rivers-suddenly-change-course
This is …insane, this AI halfwittery!
Let me put down my own views about using AI like this. Brian has telegraphed as much himself in his comments here. But I’d like down to put down my thoughts on this as well, and at some length, because I happen to have strong views about this.
And this is over and above and beyond surreptitiously using AI without clearly declaring this. To do *that* is simply dishonest. But here’s why it’s not cool to habitually use AI chatbot generated content, not even when that has been clearly admitted.
———-
When you ask AI something, then AI draws on its extensive training material, and spits out the statistically likely answer to the question asked —- without actually “knowing” what has been asked, nor what it is answering. Over and above that, mainstream AI today has also incorporated real-time data access, as well as rudimentary logic systems. So, when you ask AI something, you get an answer that apparently sounds right: but it is no more than merely the outer form of the question-answer process, essentially a *simulation* of the critical thinking process. The answer may happen to be right, or may happen to be somewhat wrong, or may happen to be arrantly wrong, or may happen to be actually nonsensical — and, importantly, you have no way of knowing which it is, if you’re simply relying on AI.
Sure, if something is completely trivial, and you are literally spending just a few seconds looking something up for no important reason, well then I suppose you might glance at AI, if you’re so inclined. But nothing more! If a thing is important enough for you to write about, then it is important enough for you to spend a minute or two checking out the actual references and quoting those.
Only an intellectual cretin uses AI like ChatGPT and Grok and whatnot, in the way that we’re seeing here. Either that, or a troll. In either case, such an individual does not deserve to be taken seriously, or given even a moment’s attention.
———-
In this instance? It wasn’t Brian putting out that AI-composed whatsit. It was Brian’s correspondent. …And nor do I really blame Brian’s correspondent either, because maybe he or she wasn’t aware of what I’ve said just now, above.
But here’s the thing. Ignorance can be made allowance for, and remedied. But after this has been spelled out one time, two times, ten times? After that ignorance can no longer be used as excuse. To still persist in doing this, after having been correct repeatedly? That is simply trolling.
———-
What the hell is even the sense in something like what we’ve seen here? This argument-by-AI thing? That’s …like halfwittery distilled. Who in their right minds will spend their time effecting an abomination like the “discussion” we see here? It is either someone pretending to know a lot, on a subject they actually know nothing about; or else someone pretending to have coherent views about something they have given no thought to; or else someone who does not know or understand the nature of present-day AI chatbots; or else someone simply doing whatever it takes to waste other people’s time with nonsense. Either which way, trolling is all this is.
This subject, this whole artificially-induced/exacerbated flooding business, over at Beas? Certainly it can admit of counter-argument: but if you’re inclined to present such, then draw on your own knowledge to do that, or else spend the time and effort and the basic intellectual capital necessary for looking up reliable information from reliable sources in order to do that. As Brian himself has done, in the Comments section. And as you, Sant64, conspicuously have *not*, not even when challenged with actual facts and actual arguments and actual evidence (as opposed to the simulation of such via AI halfwittery).
True, Brian’s correspondent did use AI to begin with. Again, he (or she) is new here, and may not have encountered this objection to AI use before, and may not realized the incoherence and …halfwittery, that is inherent in doing that. Sant64, you could have chosen to give them the benefit of the doubt, and provided a coherently researched rebuttal yourself. Or, if you were not charitably inclined, and not inclined to go out of your way to do that — which is your prerogative, and would be completely entirely fair — well then you could have directly asked him (or her) to provide coherent citations backing up their allegations. But this …this deluge of AI-chatbot halfwittery instead? That’s simply trolling.
———-
Apologies, Brian, for going off on that rant! In this Age of Caliban, in this halfwittery-infested idiocratic cretinocratic nightmare world that we find ourselves in, this is one of the things I particularly loathe, this AI chatbot halfwittery, and this kind of trolling.
And nor was it simply letting off steam. You’ve touched on these very points yourself, and I suppose you will not mind having these points further spelled out for all of your readers. I mean, it’s all obvious enough: but still, clearly there’s some that are not aware of this; and they might benefit from, and appreciate, having this spelled out clearly. At least they will if their intentions are sincere. And as for the inveterate trolls, that keep on doing this despite being told not to? I don’t suppose they’ll change their ways, trolls don’t: but occasionally having their halfwittery and their trolling called out clearly is probably not a bad idea.
TLDR:
Show me someone that argues by AI chatbot, and I’ll show you someone ignorant of the actual nature of present-day AI. But show me someone to whom the nature of AI chatbots has been pointed out, clearly and repeatedly; and who nevertheless keeps on citing AI-chatbot-generated content: and I’ll show you an intellectual cretin and/or a troll.
I agree with what you’ve said. AI models have their benefits. Also, their weaknesses. I believe they’re best suited for simple factual questions, as you noted.
Otherwise, as you also correctly said, they simply reflect the sum total of what they’ve gleaned from roaming the Internet, which could contain either a lot of truth or a lot of falsehoods. I’ve heard that Russia put up thousands of web sites espousing their twisted view of the Ukraine war in an effort to manipulate the AI models into reporting the Russian lies about the war.
Last night I used Google AI results in a post about Charlie Kirk. I felt this was justified, because the results mirrored what I already generally knew about Kirk. See:
https://salempoliticalsnark.com/2025/09/charlie-kirk-didnt-deserve-to-be-killed-but-he-spewed-falsehoods-and-hate/