User:Steven Crossin/Mediation/Prem Rawat/Proposal6

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This page is for drafts related to the Prem Rawat. Users should: Add their proposed wording to a new section Not sign their section with the standard ~~~~ Not comment on other sections, this will be done at the discussion page Not change the wording of drafts, they should add a new draft with the changed wording Reception section Draft 0 (current version) == Reception == According to Ron Geaves, one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat who later became a Professor of Religion in the UK: "Prem Rawat has been successful since he left India in 1971, establishing his teachings in over eighty countries, and his original vehicle Divine Light Mission was described as the fastest growing new religious movement in the West." Stephen A. Kent, in the preface of his book From Slogans to Mantras, described his disappointment at hearing what he considered to be a poorly delivered and banal message by Rawat in 1974, and was surprised that his companions spoke glowingly about the same message. According to Ron Geaves, one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat who later became a Professor of Religion in the UK: "Prem Rawat has been successful since he left India in 1971, establishing his teachings in over eighty countries, and his original vehicle Divine Light Mission was described as the fastest growing new religious movement in the West." Stephen A. Kent, in the preface of his book From Slogans to Mantras, described his disappointment at hearing what he considered to be a poorly delivered and banal message by Rawat in 1974, and was surprised that his companions spoke glowingly about the same message. Following Estimates of the number of Rawat's adherents varied, and became less certain over time. Petersen states that Rawat claimed 7 million disciples worldwide in 1973, with 60,000 in the U.S. Rudin & Rudin give a worldwide following of 6 million prior to the family schism of 1974, of which 50,000 were in the U.S. According to these authors, these figures had fallen to 1.2 million for Prem Rawat's personal worldwide following in 1980, of which just 15,000 were in the U.S. Palmer and Keller published a general DLM membership of approximately 1.2 million worldwide, with 50,000 in the U.S., in 1990 and 1997. Paul Schnabel notes a steady growth of adherence in the U.S. until 1975 (numbers for 1974: 50,000 premies, of which 1,200 living in ashrams), with a steep decline afterwards. Army Pamphlet 165-13 (1978, reprinted 2001) estimated 50,000 adherents in the U.S., of which 10,000 to 12,000 were considered very active. Melton & Moore suggested a U.S. following of no more than 3,000 committed followers in 1982 out of some 50,000 who had been initiated into the Knowledge meditation. By 1993 it was no longer possible to obtain estimates from Rawat's organisations. Paul Schnabel indicated that in 1980 the number of DLM adherents in the Netherlands had fallen to 150, 15 of which were living in a community setting. In 1983 the following of Rawat in Fiji was around 1,000. For West Germany, 800 members were recorded in 1987. Media After Prem Rawat's first arrival in the United Kingdom and United States in 1971 at the age of thirteen and through the 1970s he, his students and his organizations attracted media scrutiny and attention. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include a 1974 article in Rolling Stone magazine and a 1979 article in the New York Review of Books. In 1973, the 50-member public relations team of the Divine Light Mission who met to talk about the guru's image, concluded that he was seen as a "fat 15-year-old with pie in his face ... and a Rolls-Royce ... who was arrested for jewel smuggling", and pointed at the necessity to establish his credibility beyond his age and body shape. Authority Note: This section is being worked out at User:Steve Crossin/Mediation/Prem Rawat/Proposal2 In 1982, the Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho but no less charismatic. Schnabel stated that Rawat's charisma was in a certain sense routinized (inherited) charisma, but that this was hardly a factor for how he was perceived by his Western following. There, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization. Ron Geaves writes that Prem Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis of his authority. Critical viewpoints Schnabel observed, referring to research by the psychologist of religion Van der Lans, that among his Western students, Rawat appeared to stimulate an uncritical attitude, giving them an opportunity to project their fantasies of divinity onto his person. According to these authors, the divine nature of the guru is a standard element of Eastern religion, but removed from its cultural context, and confounded with the Western understanding of God as a father, what is lost is the difference between the guru's person and that which the guru symbolizes—resulting in what they refer as limitless personality worship. Schnabel writes that this kind of understanding of the master-disciple relationship, alien to the original Eastern guru-disciple context, often ends in disillusionment for the disciple, who finds that the teacher in the end fails to live up to his or her expectations. Based on an analysis of Sophia Collier's Soul Rush, Barbour concludes that her deconversion from DLM was uncharacteristic compared to other deconversions from other movements, in that Collier's deconversion brought her no emotional suffering. When former officials of Rawat's organisations voiced their criticism in the aftermath of the Jonestown drama in the late 1970s they didn't limit themselves to the movement, but included its leader in their comments, for instance that money was increasingly diverted to Rawat's personal use. "Ex-premie" became a term with which to indicate former followers. A website started in 1996 utilizes the term, www.ex-premie.org. Elan Vital has characterised former followers that became vocal critics as disgruntled former employees. Draft 1 == Reception == According to James V. Downton, many people watched with amazement the 13-year-old guru that attracted a mass following during 1971-73 — mainly young people from the counterculture — who accepted him as a "Perfect Master" despite his youth. Melton describes his arrival to the West as met with some ridicule but highlights, that more importantly, he attracted an extraordinary amount of interest from these young adults that where willing to examine his claims to be able to impart a direct experience of the Divine.</ref> Downton observed that from his early beginnings Prem Rawat appealed to his followers to give up concepts and beliefs that may impede them from experiencing "Knowledge" or life force, more fully, and yet this emphasis on giving these beliefs did not prevent them from adopting a fairly rigid set of ideas about his divinity as well as project millennial preconceptions. In 2003 David V. Barrett wrote that although Prem Rawat is still actively involved in the movement, he has stepped back from his traditional Hindu position as a guru, and due to the sweeping changes he introduced, the movement is less focused on him than in the past, and more likely to continue after his death. Stephen A. Kent, in the preface of his book From Slogans to Mantras, described his disappointment at hearing what he considered to be a poorly delivered and banal message by Rawat in 1974, and was surprised that his companions spoke glowingly about the same message. Ron Geaves, one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat who later became a Professor of Religion in the UK: states that Prem Rawat has been successful since he left India in 1971, establishing his teachings in over eighty countries, and cites that his original vehicle, the Divine Light Mission, was described as the fastest growing new religious movement in the West. [... ] Charisma and leadership To be added after consensus is reached at User:Steve Crossin/Mediation/Prem Rawat/Proposal2 ... ... Following Estimates of the number of Rawat's adherents varied, and became less certain over time. Petersen states that Rawat claimed 7 million disciples worldwide in 1973, with 60,000 in the U.S. Rudin & Rudin give a worldwide following of 6 million prior to the family schism of 1974, of which 50,000 were in the U.S. According to these authors, these figures had fallen to 1.2 million for Prem Rawat's personal worldwide following in 1980, of which just 15,000 were in the U.S. Palmer and Keller published a general DLM membership of approximately 1.2 million worldwide, with 50,000 in the U.S., in 1990 and 1997. Paul Schnabel notes a steady growth of adherence in the U.S. until 1975 (numbers for 1974: 50,000 premies, of which 1,200 living in ashrams), with a steep decline afterwards. Army Pamphlet 165-13 (1978, reprinted 2001) estimated 50,000 adherents in the U.S., of which 10,000 to 12,000 were considered very active. Melton & Moore suggested a U.S. following of no more than 3,000 committed followers in 1982 out of some 50,000 who had been initiated into the Knowledge meditation. By 1993 it was no longer possible to obtain estimates from Rawat's organisations. Paul Schnabel indicated that in 1980 the number of DLM adherents in the Netherlands had fallen to 150, 15 of which were living in a community setting. In 1983 the following of Rawat in Fiji was around 1,000. For West Germany, 800 members were recorded in 1987. Schnabel observed, referring to research by the psychologist of religion Van der Lans, that among his Western students, Rawat appeared to stimulate an uncritical attitude, giving them an opportunity to project their fantasies of divinity onto his person. According to these authors, the divine nature of the guru is a standard element of Eastern religion, but removed from its cultural context, and confounded with the Western understanding of God as a father, what is lost is the difference between the guru's person and that which the guru symbolizes—resulting in what they refer as limitless personality worship. Schnabel writes that this kind of understanding of the master-disciple relationship, alien to the original Eastern guru-disciple context, often ends in disillusionment for the disciple, who finds that the teacher in the end fails to live up to his or her expectations. Hunt asserts that Prem Rawat was once viewed by his followers as Satguru or Perfect Master, but now he has surrendered his almost divine status as a guru, and the spiritual growth of his followers is ascribed to the nature of his teachings and its benefits, rather than his charisma as a guru. Public image During the 1970s multiple references about the young guru appeared in the media. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include amongst others a 1974 article in Rolling Stone magazine and a 1979, several Time Magazine stories, and an article in the New York Review of Books. In 1973, the 50-member public relations team of the Divine Light Mission who met to talk about the guru's image, concluded that he was seen as a "fat 15-year-old with pie in his face ... and a Rolls-Royce ... who was arrested for jewel smuggling", and pointed at the necessity to establish his credibility beyond his age and body shape. Rawat was interviewed in 1973 on the The Merv Griffin Show in which the first question asked was related to his youth and people putting their faith on Rawat despite his age. The 15-year-old Rawat answered that it was not a question of faith but a practical experience. Griffin's other questions also referred to his age, asking what kind of experience can a 15-year-old have, to which Rawat responded that this particular experience is unrelated to age. Public appearances, honors and awards In 1970 at age 12, at the culmination of the largest recorded procession in New Delhi estimated at 1,000,000 people over 18-miles, Rawat, then known as Sant Ji addressed a large gathering at a public event According to the website of the Prem Rawat Foundation, Rawat received the keys to the cities of New York City, New Orleans, Oakland. Kyoto, Detroit, Miami Beach, Miami, and Quito, as well as numerous resolutions and proclamations from state and federal government officials in the US. Draft 2 This proposal is in progress == Reception == According to James V. Downton, many people were amazed at the mass following the 13-year-old guru attracted during 1971-73. He noted that most were young people from the counterculture, and they accepted him as a "Perfect Master" despite his youth. Melton describes his arrival in the West as being met with some ridicule, but agrees that he attracted an extraordinary amount of interest from the young adults open to his message. Downton observed that from his early beginnings Prem Rawat appealed to his followers to give up the concepts and beliefs that might impede them from fully experiencing the "Knowledge" or life force, but this did not prevent them from adopting a fairly rigid set of ideas about his divinity, and to project millennial preconceptions onto him and the movement. Ron Geaves, one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat who later became a Professor of Religion in the UK states that Prem Rawat has been successful since he left India in 1971, establishing his teachings in over eighty countries, and cites that his original vehicle, the Divine Light Mission, was described as the fastest growing new religious movement in the West. During the 1970s multiple references to the young guru appeared in the western media. In 1974 there was a Rolling Stone magazine article, and in 1979 several Time Magazine stories, and one article in the New York Review of Books. In 1973, the 50-member public relations team of the Divine Light Mission who met to talk about the guru's image, concluded that he was seen as a "fat 15-year-old with pie in his face ... and a Rolls-Royce ... who was arrested for jewel smuggling", and pointed at the necessity to establish his credibility beyond his age and body shape. Rawat was interviewed in 1973 on the The Merv Griffin Show. The first question asked was related to his youth, and to people putting their faith in him despite his age. The 15-year-old Rawat answered that it was not a question of faith but a practical experience. Griffin's other questions also referred to his age, asking what kind of experience can a 15-year-old have, to which Rawat responded that this particular experience is unrelated to age. According to sociologist Pilarzyk the youth culture response — mainly from decidedly leftist political ideologies — was somewhat ambiguous, combining indifference with some instances of overt hostility. Pilarzyk mentioned that these criticisms usually focused on what they perceived as phoniness of the "blissed-out premies", and referring to the "hocuspocus" aspects of the meditation, and the "materialistic fixations" and physical condition of the guru. These accounts are described by Pilarzyk as being quite negative and full of distortions from the DLM's adherents point of view, which drew responses from them that varied from bewilderment and amusement to extreme defensiveness. Positive comments came from youth culture "folk heroes" as anti-war activist as Rev. Daniel Berrigan, radical lawyer William Kunstler, and singer-songwriter Cat Stevens. Stephen A. Kent, in the preface of his book From Slogans to Mantras, described his disappointment in 1974 at hearing what he considered to be a poorly delivered and banal message by Rawat, and was surprised that his companions spoke glowingly about the same message. In 2003 David V. Barrett wrote that although Prem Rawat was still actively involved in the movement, he had stepped back from his traditional Hindu position as a guru, and the sweeping changes he introduced had made the movement less focused on him than it had been, and more likely to continue after his death. Charisma and leadership Several scholars refer to Max Weber's classification of authority when describing Rawat as a charismatic leader. This type of leadership, in Weber's words, rests "on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him." Melton refers to Rawat's personal charisma as one of the reasons for the rapid spread of his message among members of the 1960's counterculture. The Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic. Schnabel remarks that although Rawat's charisma was partly routinized as it resulted from a hereditary succession, this type of routinization played a negligible role for his Western followers; there, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization. Meredith McGuire sees formalization resulting from Rawat's desire to consolidate his power and authority over the movement in the United States. Lucy DuPertuis, a sociologist and follower who assisted James V. Downton with his book about the Divine Light Mission, described Rawat's role as a Master as emerging from three interrelated phenomena: traditional or theological definitions of Satguru, adherents' first-hand experiences of the Master, and communal accounts and discussions of the Master among devotees. Her ultimate assertion is that imputation of charisma is an active, conscious, changing process which, in this context, involves non-cognitive modes of perception. She also observed that Rawat's charisma did not prevent some devotees from discovering that they had learned the "experience of God" on their own, and to drift away, not in disillusionment but in fulfillment. David G. Bromley describes the difficulty of a charismatic leader in proving to be above normal human failings such as not to suffer ill health or indulge in worldly pursuits. He presents Rawat's marriage as such a situation, which is then exploited by the media to discredit charismatic claimants in the eyes of the general public. Bromley describes Prem Rawat and other founders of new religions as being held in awe by their early followers, who ascribe extraordinary powers to them that set them apart from other human beings – in the words of Max Weber, a "prophet" or bearer of charisma who proclaims alternative or new revelations. Bromley asserts that recent scholarship gives emphasis to social construct aspects of charisma, rather than relying solely on individual personality.Thomas Pilarzyk, a sociologist, wrote in a 1978 paper that the distribution of power and authority in the DLM was officially based on the charismatic appeal of Maharaj Ji, which he describes as being somewhat ambiguous, and that many followers were not certain about his position in the organizational scheme of the movement, or the claim that he was the only true spiritual master. Stephen J. Hunt observes that in Rawat's case the notion of spiritual growth is not derived — as is traditionally the case with other gurus — from his personal charisma, but from the nature of his teachings and the benefits to the individuals applying them. Ron Geaves, a professor of religion and one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat, states that Rawat is not a renunciate, and he has made great efforts to assert his humanity and take apart the hagiography that has developed around him. He further writes that Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis for his authority, and that Rawat could only be defined as charismatic in the sense of charisma having an antagonistic relationship with tradition. Following Estimates of the number of Rawat's adherents has varied. William J. Petersen states that in 1973 Rawat claimed 7 million disciples worldwide, with 60,000 in the U.S. Rudin & Rudin give a worldwide following of 6 million prior to the family schism of 1974, of which 50,000 were in the U.S. According to these authors, in 1980 these figures had fallen to 1.2 million for Prem Rawat's personal worldwide following, of which just 15,000 were in the U.S. In 1990 and 1997, Palmer and Keller estimated a DLM membership of approximately 1.2 million worldwide, with 50,000 in the U.S. Paul Schnabel notes a steady growth of adherence in the U.S. until 1975 (50,000 premies in 1974, of which 1,200 were living in ashrams) then a steep decline afterwards. Army Pamphlet 165-13 (1978, reprinted 2001) estimated 50,000 adherents in the U.S., of which 10,000 to 12,000 were considered very active. Melton & Moore suggested a U.S. following of no more than 3,000 committed followers in 1982 out of some 50,000 who had been initiated into the Knowledge meditation. By 1993 it was no longer possible to obtain estimates from Rawat's organisations. Paul Schnabel indicated that in 1980 the number of DLM adherents in the Netherlands had fallen to 150, 15 of whom were living in a community setting. In 1983 the following of Rawat in Fiji was around 1,000. For West Germany, 800 members were recorded in 1987. Paul Schnabel, referring to research by the psychologist of religion Van der Lans, observed that Rawat appeared to stimulate an uncritical attitude in his western students, which gave them an opportunity to project their fantasies of divinity onto his person. According to these authors, the divine nature of the guru is a standard element of Eastern religion, but removed from its cultural context and confounded with the Western understanding of God as a father, the difference between the guru's person and that which the guru symbolizes can get lost, which results in what they refer as unlimited personality worship. Schnabel writes that this misunderstanding of the master-disciple relationship, removed from the context of the original Eastern guru-disciple tradition, often ends in disillusionment for the disciple, who finds that the teacher fails to live up to his or her expectations. Stephen Hunt asserts that Prem Rawat was once viewed by his followers as Satguru or Perfect Master, but has now surrendered his almost divine status as a guru, and the spiritual growth of his followers is ascribed to the nature of his teachings and its benefits, rather than his charisma as a guru. Prem Rawat established The Keys, a DVD-based system for describing his message, which includes "Key Six", a special session for teaching the techniques of Knowledge. According to The Keys website of the Prem Rawat Foundation, as of May 2008, Key Six sessions have been held in 621 cities in 67 countries in the last eight years, and has been attended by 365,237 people during that period. Public appearances, honors and awards In 1970 at age 12, at the culmination of the largest recorded procession ever held in New Delhi estimated at 1,000,000 people, and over 18-miles long, Rawat, then known as Sant Ji addressed a large gathering. According to the website of the Prem Rawat Foundation, Rawat received the keys to the cities of New York City, New Orleans, Oakland, Kyoto, Detroit, Miami Beach, Miami, and Quito, as well as numerous resolutions and proclamations from state and federal government officials in the US. Draft 3 "Reception" paragraph in Prem Rawat#Coming of age (currently 7th paragraph of that section): [...§1-6...] Following the Jonestown suicides in November 1978, Bob Mishler, co-founder of DLM in the United States and former president of the business side of the mission, and Robert Hand, a former vice president of the movement, warned of similarities between Guru Maharaj Ji and Jim Jones. In January 1979 the Los Angeles Times reported that Rawat maintained his Malibu following despite a rising mistrust of cults. [...§8...] ==Reception== According to Ron Geaves, one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat who later became a Professor of Religion in the UK: "Prem Rawat has been successful since he left India in 1971, establishing his teachings in over eighty countries, and his original vehicle Divine Light Mission was described as the fastest growing new religious movement in the West." Stephen A. Kent, in the preface of his book From Slogans to Mantras, described his disappointment at hearing what he considered to be a poorly delivered and banal message by Rawat in 1974, and was surprised that his companions spoke glowingly about the same message. According to Stephen J. Hunt critics have, over time, focused on what appears to be Rawat's opulent lifestyle and argue that it is supported largely by the donations of his followers. Media perceptions (moved to User:Steve Crossin/Mediation/Prem Rawat/Proposal9 (Media)#Draft 1) Charisma and leadership Several scholars refer to Max Weber's classification of authority when describing Rawat as a charismatic leader. This type of leadership, in Weber's words, rests "on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him." Melton refers to Rawat's personal charisma as one of the reasons for the rapid spread of his message among members of the 1960's counterculture. The Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic. Schnabel remarks that although Rawat's charisma was partly routinized as it resulted from a hereditary succession, this type of routinization played a negligible role for his Western followers; there, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization. Meredith McGuire sees formalization resulting from Rawat's desire to consolidate his power and authority over the movement in the United States. Lucy DuPertuis, a sociologist and follower who assisted James V. Downton with his book about the Divine Light Mission, described Rawat's role as a Master as emerging from three interrelated phenomena: traditional or theological definitions of Satguru, adherents' first-hand experiences of the Master, and communal accounts and discussions of the Master among devotees. Her ultimate assertion is that imputation of charisma is an active, conscious, changing process which, in this context, involves non-cognitive modes of perception. She also observed that Rawat's charisma did not prevent some devotees from discovering that they had learned the "experience of God" on their own, and to drift away, not in disillusionment but in fulfillment. David G. Bromley describes the difficulty of a charismatic leader in proving to be above normal human failings such as not to suffer ill health or indulge in worldly pursuits. He presents Rawat's marriage as such a situation, which is then exploited by the media to discredit charismatic claimants in the eyes of the general public. Bromley describes Prem Rawat and other founders of new religions as being held in awe by their early followers, who ascribe extraordinary powers to them that set them apart from other human beings – in the words of Max Weber, a "prophet" or bearer of charisma who proclaims alternative or new revelations. Bromley asserts that recent scholarship gives emphasis to social construct aspects of charisma, rather than relying solely on individual personality. Thomas Pilarzyk, a sociologist, wrote in a 1978 paper that the distribution of power and authority in the DLM was officially based on the charismatic appeal of Maharaj Ji, which he describes as being somewhat ambiguous, and that many followers were not certain about his position in the organizational scheme of the movement, or the claim that he was the only true spiritual master. Stephen J. Hunt observes that in Rawat's case the notion of spiritual growth is not derived — as is traditionally the case with other gurus — from his personal charisma, but from the nature of his teachings and the benefits to the individuals applying them. Ron Geaves, a professor of religion and one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat, states that Rawat is not a renunciate, and he has made great efforts to assert his humanity and take apart the hagiography that has developed around him. He further writes that Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis for his authority, and that Rawat could only be defined as charismatic in the sense of charisma having an antagonistic relationship with tradition. Public recognition [...] Estimates of numbers of followers Estimates of the number of Rawat's adherents varied, and became less certain over time. Petersen states that Rawat claimed 7 million disciples worldwide in 1973, with 60,000 in the U.S. Rudin & Rudin give a worldwide following of 6 million prior to the family schism of 1974, of which 50,000 were in the U.S. According to these authors, these figures had fallen to 1.2 million for Prem Rawat's personal worldwide following in 1980, of which just 15,000 were in the U.S. Palmer and Keller published a general DLM membership of approximately 1.2 million worldwide, with 50,000 in the U.S., in 1990 and 1997. Schnabel notes a steady growth of adherence in the U.S. until 1975 (numbers for 1974: 50,000 premies, of which 1,200 living in ashrams), with a steep decline afterwards. Army Pamphlet 165-13 (1978, reprinted 2001) estimated 50,000 adherents in the U.S., of which 10,000 to 12,000 were considered very active. According to Melton, the same estimate of active U.S. members was reported by the Mission in 1980. Melton & Moore suggested a U.S. following of no more than 3,000 committed followers in 1982 out of some 50,000 who had been initiated into the Knowledge meditation. By 1993 it was no longer possible to obtain estimates from Rawat's organisations in the U.S. Schnabel indicated that in 1980 the number of DLM adherents in the Netherlands had fallen to 150, 15 of which were living in a community setting. In 1983 the following of Rawat in Fiji was around 1,000. For West Germany, 800 members were recorded in 1987. Rawat and his students [...] Schnabel observed, referring to research by the psychologist of religion Van der Lans, that among his Western students, Rawat appeared to stimulate an uncritical attitude, giving them an opportunity to project their fantasies of divinity onto his person. According to these authors, the divine nature of the guru is a standard element of Eastern religion, but removed from its cultural context, and confounded with the Western understanding of God as a father, what is lost is the difference between the guru's person and that which the guru symbolizes—resulting in what they refer as limitless personality worship. Schnabel writes that this kind of understanding of the master-disciple relationship, alien to the original Eastern guru-disciple context, often ends in disillusionment for the disciple, who finds that the teacher in the end fails to live up to his or her expectations. [...] Former followers In the mid-1970s several ex-members became vocal critics. James Lewis wrote that they attacked the movement with charges of brainwashing and mind control. Based on an analysis of Sophia Collier's Soul Rush (published 1978), Barbour concludes that her deconversion from DLM was uncharacteristic compared to other deconversions from other movements, in that Collier's deconversion brought her no emotional suffering. In the late 1970s Bob Mishler, a former top official of the movement, complained that the ideals of the group had become impossible to fulfill and that money was increasingly diverted to Rawat's personal use. "Ex-premie" became a term with which to indicate former followers. A website started in 1996 utilizes the term, www.ex-premie.org. Elan Vital has characterised former followers that became vocal critics as disgruntled former employees. Draft 4 Opposition and Criticism Sociologist Jeanne Messer describing Rawat says "Any man who says that all scriptures are true, that Buddha, Mohammed, Moses, Jesus, Krishna, and a host of others were all Christ, is a heretic everywhere". . And Rawat has been confronted with opposition since he became a guru. People have doubted his age and claimed he mouthed to a pre-recorded speech. . His meetings were often marred by riots and disturbances. In Bihar the Arya Samaj, a Hindu organization plastered anti Rawat posters all over the city, his meeting had to be cancelled and Rawat was threatened with death. Rawat’s emphasis on an individual, subjective experience rather than on a body of dogma was criticized by religious scholars in both India and the West. On arriving in the west Rawat was criticized by Christian scholars who claimed he was too young to be a teacher, that his claim to offer a direct experience of the Divine lacked intellectual content and that he shouldn’t live a luxurious lifestyle. Never the less the DLM was considered the fastest growing NRM of the time. The end of 1973 saw DLM hold Millennium ’73 in the Astrodome in Houston. Whilst the premies inside were happy and unruffled Christians and Hare Krishna demonstrated against him outside. One Christian evangelist claimed that Rawat was the most popular religious figure on the planet. The disappointing attendance of Millennium coupled with mismanagement by organizers left the DLM with a massive debt and negative publicity. It was staged just as the anti cult movement reached national proportions and turned its attention upon the Mission. Several deprogrammed ex members became vocal critics of the Mission. Some critics, including the controversial deprogrammer and hero of most anticult parents, Ted Patrick, charged DLM with using hypnotism to recruit young men and women into their ranks. But sociologists say “ they have yet to meet a cult member, or former cultist, who has convinced us that he was hypnotized into a new religion”.. When Rawat turned 16 he seized control of DLM in the West from his family, began dismantling the organization and stopped giving interviews to the media.In the early 80s dropped the title Guru, closed the last of the ashrams and removed the last of the Indian elements from his teachings. He continued touring and having events for his followers. There was little criticism of Rawat in the 80s and 90s until an anti-Rawat formed on the internet by Canadian lawyer Jim Heller. In 2002 a so called “ex-premie” tried to crash a truck into a conference centre being used by Rawat before being stopped by the police. In 2003 two Australian “ex-premies” John Macgregor and Tom Gubler stole and published material about the private lives of Rawat’s followers. In a court case that followed both members were found guilty of theft and contempt of court. Macgregor later apologized to Rawat and his followers and characterized the ex-premie group in an affidavit to the Supreme Court of Queensland as “obsessive, malicious and destructive in nature”. He named John Brauns, Jim Heller and Nic Wright as the prominent members. Praise and Honors To come Draft 5 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 6 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 7 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 8 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 9 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 10 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 11 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 12 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 13 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 14 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Draft 15 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. References Content of re-used stray footnotes: References