The text describes Sai as having "no name or village" but the book is full of stories about "Sai". Isn't this a fundamental contradiction?

This is an insightful point that touches on the dual nature of Sai Baba as described in Chapter 36. The phrase "To him who has no name or village" refers to his transcendent, unattached, and absolute reality, beyond worldly labels. However, in the phenomenal world, he is known by the name "Sai" to his devotees. The chapter explains this by stating that while he is "staying distant and detached from his name," he still "causes various events to occur" for the benefit of his devotees. Therefore, it is not a contradiction but a description of a divine being who is simultaneously formless and assumes a form and name for the sake of his followers.