Misplaced Pages

Criticism of Prem Rawat: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:09, 10 December 2005 editJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 editsm →Criticism and observations in several scholarly articles← Previous edit Revision as of 16:17, 10 December 2005 edit undoAndries (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers27,090 edits re-inserted removed information by JossiNext edit →
Line 8: Line 8:
After Prem Rawat's first arrival in the ] and ] in ] at the age of thirteen and through the ] he, his followers, and his organizations attracted a fair amount of media scrutiny and attention, some positive and some negative. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include an ] article in ]{{ref|RStonesMag}} and a ] article in the ]. {{ref|NYRB}}. During the ]s and until the late ], there was very little media coverage of Prem Rawat and his organizations, either positive or negative. After Prem Rawat's first arrival in the ] and ] in ] at the age of thirteen and through the ] he, his followers, and his organizations attracted a fair amount of media scrutiny and attention, some positive and some negative. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include an ] article in ]{{ref|RStonesMag}} and a ] article in the ]. {{ref|NYRB}}. During the ]s and until the late ], there was very little media coverage of Prem Rawat and his organizations, either positive or negative.


==Criticism by the ex-premie group== ==Criticism by the ex-premies==
Since the late 1990s, with the arrival of the Internet, the main criticism against Rawat, his students, and affiliated groups The Prem Rawat Foundation and Elan Vital, has been orchestrated by a group of vocal ex-followers with an active Internet presence. They call themselves "Ex-Premies," based on the practice, largely discontinued in the West but still used by Rawat, of Rawat's followers calling themselves "]." Since the late 1990s, with the arrival of the Internet, the main criticism against Rawat, his students, and affiliated groups The Prem Rawat Foundation and Elan Vital, has been orchestrated by a group of vocal ex-followers with an active Internet presence. They call themselves "Ex-Premies," based on the practice, largely discontinued in the West but still used by Rawat, of Rawat's followers calling themselves "]."


Line 15: Line 15:
===Allegations=== ===Allegations===
====Claims of personal divinity==== ====Claims of personal divinity====
One of the ex-premie group's central criticisms is that from the age of eight until his mid-twenties Prem Rawat made public claims of personal divinity and that he and his followers continue to make such claims in private while denying them in public. They demand that Rawat and/or Elan Vital explicitly disabuse all his current followers of such claims. They point to statements made by Rawat like "Guru is greater than God" (an expression also voiced by Brahmanand and somewhat in correspondence with the elevated status that some traditional Indian saints gave their guru), and "The only one who can settle the governments down is the Perfect Master, the incarnation of God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind." Tokyo, Japan, October 3, 1972 (from the Divine Light Mision magazine ''And it is Divine'', July 1973) One of the ex-premie group's central criticisms is that from the age of eight until his mid-twenties Prem Rawat made public claims of personal divinity and that he and his followers continue to make such claims in private while denying them in public. They demand that Rawat and/or Elan Vital explicitly disabuse all his current followers of such claims. They point to statements made by Rawat like "Guru is greater than God" (an expression also voiced by Brahmanand and somewhat in correspondence with the elevated status that some traditional Indian saints gave their guru), and "The only one who can settle the governments down is the Perfect Master, the incarnation of God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind." Tokyo, Japan, October 3, 1972 (from the Divine Light Mision magazine ''And it is Divine'', July 1973) In a 1979 radio interview on ], Bob Mishler, the ex-president of the Divine Light Mission said he had persuaded the nineteen-year-old Prem Rawat to retract any claims of divinity in ] but that Rawat had hesitated because it would mean less control over his followers and as a result less income from them. Mishler said he resigned from the DLM in January 1977 because of Rawat's refusal to change his luxurious life style and retract his claim to be ] . Supporters dismiss his charges as coming from a disgruntled ex-employee after being fired.


However, in an interview with in 1973 ] host of "The Tomorrow show" TV series, Snyder asked Prem Rawat: "Now I'm not trying to be disrespectful but' Ive got to ask you this question: Many of your followers say that you are God. What do you have to say about this?" To which Rawat replied: "No, I am not God. I am only a humble servant of God." {{ref|Tom_Snyder}} However, in an interview with in 1973 ] host of "The Tomorrow show" TV series, Snyder asked Prem Rawat: "Now I'm not trying to be disrespectful but' Ive got to ask you this question: Many of your followers say that you are God. What do you have to say about this?" To which Rawat replied: "No, I am not God. I am only a humble servant of God." {{ref|Tom_Snyder}}
Line 28: Line 28:


====Claims of financial exploitation==== ====Claims of financial exploitation====
The ex-premie group complain that Prem Rawat exploited them to build a luxurious lifestyle for himself, and blame themselves for being gullible and naive in giving donations. On 14 February 1981 an article appeared in the Dutch magazine ] in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Maharaji's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints are that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies" and refrained to associate with local premie leaders and having the local DLM center having to pay for his shopping, while at the same time, according to Lammers, Rawat received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs. Several ex-premies complain that Prem Rawat exploited them to build a luxurious lifestyle for himself, and blame themselves for being gullible and naive in giving donations. They characterize Rawat's lifestyle as filled with luxuries average ] citizens do not enjoy: For example, he lives in ], a city with a median family income of $125,000, in a mansion of approximately 25,000 square feet (2,300 m²) on an almost five-acre (20,000 m²) mountain ridge top, ocean-view parcel purchased in the 1970s, whose value today critics estimate at $20-25 million, also uses at least one other house, in ], ], flies a ] jet worth approximately $40 million, and up until recently sailed a $7 million yacht and flew a ] helicopter worth approximately $4.5 million. They note that in the 1970s he made use of a group of luxury vehicles including ]s. On 14 February 1981 an article appeared in the Dutch magazine ] in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Maharaji's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints are that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies" and refrained to associate with local premie leaders and having the local DLM center having to pay for his shopping, while at the same time, according to Lammers, Rawat received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs. On 14 February 1981 an article appeared in the Dutch magazine ] in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Maharaji's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints are that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies" and refrained to associate with local premie leaders and having the local DLM center having to pay for his shopping, while at the same time, according to Lammers, Rawat received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs.


Elan Vital and the Prem Rawat Foundation report that the financial records of these organizations are impeccable in this regard, that absolutely no money flows from these organizations to Prem Rawat or his family and that he receives no benefit from the activities of the not-for-profit organizations supporting his work and no income from attendance at his addresses or from the sale of materials. He supports himself and his family through private means.{{ref|money}}. Elan Vital and the Prem Rawat Foundation report that the financial records of these organizations are impeccable in this regard, that absolutely no money flows from these organizations to Prem Rawat or his family and that he receives no benefit from the activities of the not-for-profit organizations supporting his work and no income from attendance at his addresses or from the sale of materials. He supports himself and his family through private means.{{ref|money}}.
Line 83: Line 83:


==Criticism and observations in several scholarly articles== ==Criticism and observations in several scholarly articles==
The psychiatrist Saul V. Levine, who published several articles about cults and new religious movements, wrote in a undated article titled ''Life in Cults'' published in a 1989 book that he believed that public perception saw the ] the ], ], ] as cults held in low esteem and that families' perception ''"that their children are being financially exploited"'' is seen as one of the most pernicious and malevolent aspects of these group, while ''"the leaders live in ostentation and offensive opulence."'' He also writes that ''" in the Divine Light Mission, members are expected to turn over all material possessions and earnings to the religion and to abstain from alcohol, tobacco meat, and sex"'' His analysis was based on practices, such as the monastic life in ashrams, that were abandoned in the 1980's when Prem Rawat threw off anachronistic Hindu religious and cultural trappings previously associated with his message.{{ref|levine}} See ]. The psychiatrist Saul V. Levine, who published several articles about cults and new religious movements, wrote in a undated article titled ''Life in Cults'' published in a 1989 book that he believed that public perception saw the ] the ], ], ] as cults held in low esteem and that families' perception ''"that their children are being financially exploited"'' is seen as one of the most pernicious and malevolent aspects of these group, while ''"the leaders live in ostentation and offensive opulence."'' He also writes that ''" in the Divine Light Mission, members are expected to turn over all material possessions and earnings to the religion and to abstain from alcohol, tobacco meat, and sex"''. He further wrote that members may donate liberally in their true believer state of mind until they start to feel the double standards and hypocrisies and then the blind acceptance is replaced by scorn and questioning. His analysis was based on practices, such as the monastic life in ashrams, that were abandoned in the 1980's when Prem Rawat threw off anachronistic Hindu religious and cultural trappings previously associated with his message.{{ref|levine}} See ].


Jan van der Lans, a professor in ] at the ], wrote in a book about followers of gurus commissioned by the KSGV, a Netherlands based , published in ], that Maharaji is an example of a guru who has become a charlatan leading a double life: on the one hand, he tried to remain loyal to the role in which he was forced and to the expectations of his followers, on the other hand, his private life was one of idleness and pleasure, which was only known to small circle of insiders. According to van der Lans, one could consider him either a fraud or a victim of his surroundings. Van der Lans treated several gurus but was only critical about Rawat, but does not provided citations for his very critical assessment.{{ref|lans}} Jan van der Lans, a professor in ] at the ], wrote in a book about followers of gurus commissioned by the KSGV, a Netherlands based , published in ], that Maharaji is an example of a guru who has become a charlatan leading a double life: on the one hand, he tried to remain loyal to the role in which he was forced and to the expectations of his followers, on the other hand, his private life was one of idleness and pleasure, which was only known to small circle of insiders. According to van der Lans, one could consider him either a fraud or a victim of his surroundings. Van der Lans treated several gurus but was only critical about Rawat, but does not provided citations for his very critical assessment.{{ref|lans}}

Revision as of 16:17, 10 December 2005

Prem Rawat (also called Maharaji and formerly known as Guru Maharaj Ji; see main article: Prem Rawat), although an object of inspiration for his students, has attracted controversy and criticism since he started delivering his teachings in the 1960s. This criticism has also been directed at the associated organizations Divine Light Mission and Elan Vital.

The sources of criticism include individuals related to the anti-cult movement of the 1970s, some media articles from the 1970s and 1980s, articles by several scholars in the 1970s and early 1980s, and since the 1990s, a small group of former students who call themselves "ex-premies" . The criticism is levelled at what they consider claims of divinity made by Prem Rawat, their unresolved dissonance between their former belief in Rawat's personal divinity, and his newer image as human teacher; at apparent historical revisionism, financial exploitation, hypocrisy, encouragement of uncritical acceptance, and at other issues.

The criticism by ex-premies is dismissed by Elan Vital as allegations typical of apostates. Their character and motives are also questioned, and they are described as "an insignificantly small hate group of no more than a handful of individuals who constantly harass Rawat and his students" . Elan Vital supports these statements with sworn affidavits filed with the Supreme court of Queensland by two ex-premies who allege that the underlying purpose of the ex-premie group is to harass, defame and annoy Rawat and his students, and to purposefully interfere with the rights of people to experience their own spiritual discovery and their right to peacefully assemble. In a website that claims to be authored by Tom Gubler, one of the affidavit signatories, the author claims that he signed the affidavit under duress and he ridicules and criticizes the affidavit he signed. . On the basis of a "credibility handicap", the allegations made by Gubler of signing under duress and his attempt to retract his testimony were negated by the court.

Criticism in the 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 followers, and his organizations attracted a fair amount of media scrutiny and attention, some positive and some negative. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include an 1974 article in Rolling Stone magazine and a 1979 article in the New York Review of Books. . During the 1980s and until the late 1990s, there was very little media coverage of Prem Rawat and his organizations, either positive or negative.

Criticism by the ex-premies

Since the late 1990s, with the arrival of the Internet, the main criticism against Rawat, his students, and affiliated groups The Prem Rawat Foundation and Elan Vital, has been orchestrated by a group of vocal ex-followers with an active Internet presence. They call themselves "Ex-Premies," based on the practice, largely discontinued in the West but still used by Rawat, of Rawat's followers calling themselves "premies."

Some of these critics claim to have been former senior staff within the organizations and have rejected Rawat and his teachings after years of practicing his techniques. They deny belonging to an organized group, asserting instead they are a small number of internationally dispersed individuals tied together only by their common history and criticism, although many of the webpages utilized by the Ex-Premies are ostensibly registered with ICANN as organizations. John Brauns, a member of ex-premie group has put online multiple websites from which simliar grievances and allegations are presented. The FAQ of Elan Vital asserts that "'the purpose of this trick is to try and flood internet search engines with a skewed amount of negative websites." Elan Vital further complain that Brauns has made no effort to provide journalists or interested parties with any independently verifiable documents or factual support for the allegations appearing on his websites.

Allegations

Claims of personal divinity

One of the ex-premie group's central criticisms is that from the age of eight until his mid-twenties Prem Rawat made public claims of personal divinity and that he and his followers continue to make such claims in private while denying them in public. They demand that Rawat and/or Elan Vital explicitly disabuse all his current followers of such claims. They point to statements made by Rawat like "Guru is greater than God" (an expression also voiced by Brahmanand and somewhat in correspondence with the elevated status that some traditional Indian saints gave their guru), and "The only one who can settle the governments down is the Perfect Master, the incarnation of God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind." Tokyo, Japan, October 3, 1972 (from the Divine Light Mision magazine And it is Divine, July 1973) In a 1979 radio interview on KOA, Bob Mishler, the ex-president of the Divine Light Mission said he had persuaded the nineteen-year-old Prem Rawat to retract any claims of divinity in 1976 but that Rawat had hesitated because it would mean less control over his followers and as a result less income from them. Mishler said he resigned from the DLM in January 1977 because of Rawat's refusal to change his luxurious life style and retract his claim to be God . Supporters dismiss his charges as coming from a disgruntled ex-employee after being fired.

However, in an interview with in 1973 Tom Snyder host of "The Tomorrow show" TV series, Snyder asked Prem Rawat: "Now I'm not trying to be disrespectful but' Ive got to ask you this question: Many of your followers say that you are God. What do you have to say about this?" To which Rawat replied: "No, I am not God. I am only a humble servant of God."

At a press conference during the 1973 Millennium gathering, Rawat denied to the press that he believed himself to be the Messiah, characterizing himself instead "as a humble servant of God trying to establish peace in this world." A reporter then asked him about "a great contradiction" between what he said about himself and what his followers were saying about him, and he responded by suggesting the reporter ask the devotees themselves about that. In a still-later speech, Rawat was to characterize as mistaken the early Western reaction to him upon his arrival, saying, "when people saw me at that time, they really didn't understand what it was all about."

In 1975, at a program at the Capitol Theatre in Sydney, Australia, he said: "...here's this little kid who doesn't know anything about God. Their parents tell them about God but if the kid turns around and asks, 'What is God anyway, who is He?' they try to project an image to him." Prem Rawat went on to say that the parents probably had not touched or experienced God either, so they were just guessing as to what He was like.

In a proclamation published in 1975, Rawat also said, "I do not claim to be God, but do claim I can establish peace on this Earth by our Lord's Grace, and everyone's joint effort".

In an interview with the Miami Magazine, in 1979, Prem Rawat spoke of what he believed God to be. In answer to the question, "If God is within, can't people experience God without the help of someone else?", Prem Rawat said, "God being within is one thing, and experiencing God is another. Just like having water in front of you is one thing, and drinking is another. God is within you. God is omnipresent.".

Claims of financial exploitation

Several ex-premies complain that Prem Rawat exploited them to build a luxurious lifestyle for himself, and blame themselves for being gullible and naive in giving donations. They characterize Rawat's lifestyle as filled with luxuries average American citizens do not enjoy: For example, he lives in Malibu, a city with a median family income of $125,000, in a mansion of approximately 25,000 square feet (2,300 m²) on an almost five-acre (20,000 m²) mountain ridge top, ocean-view parcel purchased in the 1970s, whose value today critics estimate at $20-25 million, also uses at least one other house, in Queensland, Australia, flies a Gulfstream V jet worth approximately $40 million, and up until recently sailed a $7 million yacht and flew a Bell helicopter worth approximately $4.5 million. They note that in the 1970s he made use of a group of luxury vehicles including Rolls Royces. On 14 February 1981 an article appeared in the Dutch magazine Haagse Post in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Maharaji's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints are that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies" and refrained to associate with local premie leaders and having the local DLM center having to pay for his shopping, while at the same time, according to Lammers, Rawat received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs. On 14 February 1981 an article appeared in the Dutch magazine Haagse Post in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Maharaji's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints are that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies" and refrained to associate with local premie leaders and having the local DLM center having to pay for his shopping, while at the same time, according to Lammers, Rawat received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs.

Elan Vital and the Prem Rawat Foundation report that the financial records of these organizations are impeccable in this regard, that absolutely no money flows from these organizations to Prem Rawat or his family and that he receives no benefit from the activities of the not-for-profit organizations supporting his work and no income from attendance at his addresses or from the sale of materials. He supports himself and his family through private means..

Members of the Ex-Premie group have filed complaints with tax and charity authorities in several countries, but none of these have resulted in Rawat or related entities being charged with any wrongdoing.

Claims of lack of credibility

The ex-premie group contends Prem Rawat has no credibility in his teachings because of a large gap they assert exists between what he once prescribed for his personnel and followers and what he practiced himself, a gap they characterize as hypocrisy. This criticism is based largely on allegations made by Michael Donner, Bob Mishler and Michael Dettmers in the 1970s and early 1980s, in which they acusse Rawat of alcoholism, marijuana use, anxietly and infidelity, that they made after they left the organization or were fired. . Elan Vital characterizes these people and their testimony as fitting the profile of "Type III" apostates, who become "professional enemies" of the formerly revered organization.. Ex-premies also allege that organizations engage in various practices to magnify his perceived significance and prestige such as intentionally inflating the estimates of the numbers attending his meetings and arranging speaking engagements that falsely imply association with prestigious institutions such as the United Nations.

The Prem Rawat Foundation discusses in its website that the audiences of Rawat's meetings include dignitaries, university students, educators, and staff from the host institutions, noting that representatives from these institutions have introduced Rawat at these events and praised his work. . See also Wikiquote: Accolades by business and government leaders.

Claims that the techniques of Knowledge are not unique

The ex-premie group claim that the techniques of Knowledge Rawat teaches have been taught for hundreds of years and are not unique.

See also Techniques of Knowledge, References to the Krias and the Teacher.

Assertions of being the only "Perfect Master"

The ex-premie group claim that Rawat's credibility is further undermined by his claim to be the only Perfect Master. They point to an interview conducted in August 1973 with the Boston Globe in which Rawat expressed the opinion that there was only one Perfect Mater. Supporters say that indeed Maharaji expressed his understading that there is only one perfect master, but that he never said he was one and that is up to the student to to "find the one you can trust to help you get where you want to go and stick with him."

See also Teachings of Prem Rawat: Importance of the living teacher.

Elan Vital's complaints against the ex-premie group

Elan Vital Australia has published a long list of the activities of the ex-premie group, stating that "using the anonymity of the Internet, they have discussed various plans and threats" including inciting people via the Internet to drug and kidnap members of Maharaji's family, conducting physical assaults, mounting campaigns of telephone calls and letter writing to the employers of Maharaji's students "warning" them that they employ "a member of a dangerous cult", and more.

Elan Vital, UK, a charitable organization established in the United Kingdom, present their opinion in this matter: "Elan Vital supports freedom of speech and the rights of an individual to express differing opinions. Any legitimate disagreements are looked at sympathetically and responded to accordingly. Over the past thirty years, many thousands of people in Britain have practised Prem Rawat's teaching of inner peace and found them of great benefit in their lives. At the same time, many have also decided not to pursue them and have moved away with no ill feelings. However, to our chagrin, a very small number have formed themselves into a vociferously complaining opposition of whom some actively work against Prem Rawat and Elan Vital in a way that can only be characterised as that of a 'hate group'. For a few years, a small Internet-based hate group of approximately twenty disgruntled former students operating under the cloak of anonymity has been harassing Maharaji, his students and Elan Vital. They have made no effort to provide journalists or interested parties with any independently verifiable documents or factual support for any of their allegations. Using mostly anonymous Internet postings, the front of an unregistered association and a Webmaster in the Republic of Latvia, they have committed harassing and sometimes unlawful acts."

Dr. Mike Finch who writes under his real name and became an ex-premie after 30 years writes in response that he has seen very little hate and characterizes the emotions as grief, embarrassment for their gullibility, anger perhaps — but not hate and that, in his opinion, there is no harassment in the legal sense of the word. He also asserts that when a person is in a cult, there are no 'independently verifiable documents' which tell their personal story. According to Finch, there are, however, Maharaji's speeches from the past, namely his own journals and magazines, which Elan Vital has tried to collect from all the premies and take out of circulation, as they are so embarrassing to him.

In an 2005 affidfavit filed under oath, former Ex-premie John Macgregor seems to confirm many of these allegations. He names as the most prominent members and central organizers of this group John Brauns, Jim Heller, Marianne Bachers, Nick Wright and Jean-Michel Kahn. Macgregor says that in his personal experience many of the people in the ex-premie group are "irrational, obsessed, and motivated by ill-directed anger and that when they purport to report on factual matters they are frequently false and defamatory, unsupported by actual fact basis, and motivated in many instances by hatred, ill will and spite." Macgregor also admitted that with the support and encouragement of the Ex-premies, he filed several frivolous complaints to tax and regulatory bodies around the world, "hoping to initiate expensive and burdensome investigation of Rawat and related volunteer entities". Macgregor also admitted that he "had no factual basis upon which to make such allegations" and that the complaints were supported by "unauthenticated, incomplete or out-of-context documents designed to paint a sinister picture."*.

Elan Vital characterizes the ex-premie group as unreliable in their allegations because of members' personal credibility problems such as obsessive internet postings, illegal drug dealing, criminal history, mental illness, and involvement in manufacturing pornography. It points to the conviction and incarceration of one group member, Neville Ackland, for possession of $2.5 million worth of drugs and illegal weapons.

Legal actions and disputes - Chronology

Disputes and civil actions have ensued between organizations affiliated with Prem Rawat and members of ex-premie group since 2002. In the legal arena, members of the ex-premie group have yet to prevail in formal legal complaints.

  • In 2002 allegations were made against members of the ex-premie group to have engaged in distributing forged a email purporting to come from Brisbane attorney Damian Scattini who represents Elan Vital in Australia. That email was designed to embarrass Scattini, containing a falsified "invitation" from Scattini, who is not a student of Rawat's, to "worship" Rawat. The bogus email contained the same photographs of Rawat in Hindu religious clothing as appears on the ex-premie group's websites. Scattini filed a now-pending criminal complaint with Queensland authorities. Ex-premie Jim Heller has applauded and defended the scheme, but denied any involvement.
  • In April 2003, lawyers acting for Elan Vital, Inc. in the USA sent letters to the hosts of the ex-premie websites, mirror sites (ex-premie.org, ex-premie2.org, ex-premie3.org), and also to Google, claiming that pages on these sites violated Elan Vital's copyright on certain material, including Prem Rawat's quotations, photos, and song lyrics. The webmaster of these sites, challenged these claims, asserting that publication of the material was allowed under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
  • In late 2003, The Prem Rawat Foundation brought a successful Internet domain name administrative proceeding, known as a "UDRP" against ex-premie group member Jeffrey Leason (a.k.a. "Roger Drek") for registering the Internet domain name "TPRF.biz" and using it to surreptitiously direct Internet users to his own website critical of TPRF, apparently in an exercise of the non-commercial variant of cybersquatting known as "cybergriping." The administrative tribunal in 2004 ruled against Leason, reasoning that his actions were not protected as free speech because he used for his domain name the precise name of his target rather than a distinctive variant, leading to the conclusion that his motivation was either to deceive Internet users into believing the website was sponsored by TPRF or else to drive them away from TPRF websites. The tribunal held this to be a bad faith use of the TPRF.biz domain name and directed the domain name be transferred over to the organization.
  • Two ex-premies, Tom Gubler and John Macgregor, were found civilly liable in January 2004 for a scheme to misappropriate data from Elan Vital's computers, and were enjoined by an Australian court from using the wrongfully taken documents and ordered to pay Elan Vital's legal costs. Gubler was a computer repair technician with access to Elan Vital's computers who at the behest of Macgregor, a freelance journalist, surreptitiously copied Elan Vital's data and emailed it to Macgregor and others. Their activities were exposed and Elan Vital brought injunction actions against both men. Macgregor ran away from law enforcement officers to keep his computer from a court-ordered examination, but relented after being held in contempt of court . Gubler originally testified in an affidavit that the ex-premies were a hate group existing as part of a conspiracy of ex-premies designed to harass Rawat and his students and to interfere with the ability of persons to follow their spiritual beliefs. Gubler later attempted to recant that testimony, claiming he signed this affidavit under duress, . Finding Macgregor and Gubler "utterly lacking in credibility" the court refused to allow Gubler to withdraw his earlier admissions.,. Macgregor unsuccessfully mounted the defense that his goal was to expose wrongdoing by the organization, but the court held this an insufficient justification, and noted that misappropriated material did not show any wrongdoing by Rawat or the organizations.
  • In September 2004 on an anonymous website hosted at free hosting provider Geocities to coordinate a campaign to write to University College Chester (now the University of Chester), the employer of Dr. Ron Geaves, asking that he be sanctioned for publishing papers favorable to Rawat in academic publications without informing the publications that he was a follower of Rawat's. Geaves replied that he has always been open about his allegiances, and faults his critics for not identifying themselves. Supporters see this as a cyberstalking attack on Geaves' professional life and an attempt to have him fired for his religious beliefs. Geocities removed the site in October 2004 after a Terms of service violation was filed.
  • In October 2004, after being discovered that John Macgregor lied under oath, and after failing to appear in court, an Australian-wide arrest warrant was issued against him for criminal perjury. In January 2005, in a post on an ex-premie discussion board titled "Apology to Maharaji and premies", Macgregor ostensibly apologized for causing pain to Rawat's family and to his students, and admitted that he had been "irrational" and "obsessed." His apology generated a variety of responses, including criticism from other ex-premies that doubted his sincerity, and he was accused of "selling them out" by attempting to appease Elan Vital with his apology.
  • In April 2005, in an affidavit filed under oath, John Macgregor emphasized his early apology by affirming under oath that " I owe Prem Rawat, the claimants, their legal advisers and all of Rawat's students and apology for my actions, and for allowing myself to be used by the ex-premie group. I believe that persons have the right to chose their own path of spiritual discovery, and the right to leave a chosen path, but that people do not have the right to incite hatred and interfere with other's choices."
  • In June 2005, Elan Vital Inc., USA, sent a letter under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to the hosts of prem-rawat-maharaji.info claiming that photographs shown on the site violated Elan Vital's copyright, thus temporarily closing down the website. John Brauns issued a counter-notification stating he was willing to defend his right to publish the material in federal court. Elan Vital declined to pursue their claims.

Criticism by protagonists of the anticult movement

In the early 1980s the late Dr. Margaret Singer, a controversial anti-cult activist, included the DLM (since renamed Elan Vital) in her list of cults. Criticism by the anti-cult movement has diminished over the course of time but has not disappeared. The Christian countercult activist Anton Hein and controversial anti-cult activists and former deprogrammers Rick Ross and Steven Hassan list links about Elan Vital on their websites.

Criticism and observations in several scholarly articles

The psychiatrist Saul V. Levine, who published several articles about cults and new religious movements, wrote in a undated article titled Life in Cults published in a 1989 book that he believed that public perception saw the Divine Light Mission the Hare Krishna, Unification Church, Children of God as cults held in low esteem and that families' perception "that their children are being financially exploited" is seen as one of the most pernicious and malevolent aspects of these group, while "the leaders live in ostentation and offensive opulence." He also writes that " in the Divine Light Mission, members are expected to turn over all material possessions and earnings to the religion and to abstain from alcohol, tobacco meat, and sex". He further wrote that members may donate liberally in their true believer state of mind until they start to feel the double standards and hypocrisies and then the blind acceptance is replaced by scorn and questioning. His analysis was based on practices, such as the monastic life in ashrams, that were abandoned in the 1980's when Prem Rawat threw off anachronistic Hindu religious and cultural trappings previously associated with his message. See Prem Rawat: Transition in the 1980s.

Jan van der Lans, a professor in psychology of religion at the Catholic University of Nijmegen, wrote in a book about followers of gurus commissioned by the KSGV, a Netherlands based Catholic Study Center for Mental Health, published in 1981, that Maharaji is an example of a guru who has become a charlatan leading a double life: on the one hand, he tried to remain loyal to the role in which he was forced and to the expectations of his followers, on the other hand, his private life was one of idleness and pleasure, which was only known to small circle of insiders. According to van der Lans, one could consider him either a fraud or a victim of his surroundings. Van der Lans treated several gurus but was only critical about Rawat, but does not provided citations for his very critical assessment.

The sociologist Dr. Paul Schnabel wrote in a 1982 Ph.D. thesis about new religious movements and mental health that the message of the Divine Light Mission could be summarized on the person of Guru Maharaj Ji, in which divine love and truth are manifested, and that by completely surrendering oneself to the guru or perfect master (the revealer of that truth and love), one can be a part of it. He further wrote that Prem Rawat was at that moment one of the purest examples of charismatic leadership. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, spoilt, and intellectually unremarkable and asserted that Rawat stimulated an uncritical attitude of the followers' view of the guru and their projections on him.

Professor Eileen Barker refers for more information about the DLM to an article written by Winn Haan that was published in the official magazine about religious movements of the Free University in 1981. Wim Haan, a member of a critical movement within the Catholic Church wrote this article while he was a student of theology at a Pastoral and Theology school in a small town in the Netherlands. In that article, based on his involvement with the DLM during two years in the Netherlands, he asserts that Rawat's battle against the mind sometimes degenerated in complete irrationality, that sometimes premies branded every criticism and objective approach as "mind", and that they often avoided discussions with outsiders because these discussions could possibly stimulate the mind. See also Past teachings of Prem Rawat, "Mind and Heart".

The Dutch religious scholar and Christian reverend Reender Kranenborg wrote in a 1982 article that "in Maharaj ji's satsangs one can notice a speaking style that resembles very much some Christian evangelization campaigns: a pressing request, an emphasis on the last possibility to choose before it is too late and a terminology in which one is requested to surrender to the Lord, in this case Maharaj ji himself. The contents of the message is not Christian, though.". He also described his impression that the person of Maharaj ji became more central in the course of years and his assertions about himself and his vocation went further as he became more aware of the extent of his divinity. Kranenborg asserted that Jos Lammers, whom he labelled "ex-premie", made similar comments as van der Lans about Maharaji's lifestyle in his interview with the Dutch magazine Haagse Post. He further wrote that when Christians get into dialogue with premies that the life style of the guru is of great importance. He argued that a satguru, who drives in expensive cars, who owns a big yacht may not be a problem for premies, but it is a problem for Christians and that they should ask premies why Maharaj ji does not live what he considers to be a normal and simple life.

The sociologists Foss and Larkin wrote in 1978 that the DLM "emphasized formal structure without substantive content." The religious scholar Dr. Ron Geaves who is a student of Rawat accused them in response of bias, pointing to the number of students that were attracted to the DLM.

There are other scholars that wrote about this subject that do not level criticism against Prem Rawat, like Dennis Marcellino, Tim Miller, Raymond Lee, Rosemary Goring, and George D. Chryssides. Other scholars, like David V. Barrett, DuPertuis and Gordon J. Melton do not criticize Rawat themselves but they mention criticism by others, the media, Rawat's mother, and Bob Mishler respectively. Stephen A. Kent makes self-admitted subjective criticism (lacking substance) on Prem Rawat and treats the criticism by the countercultural left on him in the 1970s.

References

Bibliography

  • Benschop, Albert. CyberStalking: menaced on the Internet Social & Behavioral Sciences/Media Studies, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  • Barrett, David. V. The New Believers - A survey of sects, cults and alternative religions 2001 UK, Cassell & Co ISBN 0-304-35592-92-5 pages 65, 305-329
  • Cameron, Charles. Who Is Guru Maharaj Ji?, 1973, Bantam Books - Presented as an authorized biography by followers.
  • DuPertuis, L. (1986) How people recognize charisma: the case of darshan in Radhasoami and Divine Light Mission. Sociological Analysis, 47, Page 111-124. University of Guam
  • Elliot, M. E. (1999). Elan Vital - research paper by a student of the late Jeffrey Hadden of the University of Virginia
  • Turner, Nancy What is a Hate Crime, International Association of Chiefs of Police - Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police Officer's Guide to Investigation and Prevention.
  • Introvigne, Massimo. So Many Evil Things: Anti-Cult Terrorism via the Internet - paper delivered at the 1999 Annual Conference of the Association for Sociology of Religion, Chicago, Illinois, August 5, 1999.
  • Kent, Stephen A. Dr. From slogans to mantras: social protest and religious conversion in the late Vietnam war era Syracuse University press ISBN 0-8156-2923-0 (2001)
  • Melton, J. Gordon and Lewis, R. James, Institute for the Study of the American Religion (ISAR) (1993). Religious Requirements and practices. A Handbook for Chaplains Department of the USA Army, Office of the Chief of Chaplains.
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Encyclopedia of American Religions, 7th edition ISBN 0-7876-6384-0 - page 1055

External links

Critic's websites

ex-premie group websites

  • ex-premie.org - website critical of Prem Rawat and the organizations that support his work. Owned by John Brauns
  • Prem Rawat Maharaji info Information about Prem Rawat written by former followers, Owned by John Brauns
  • Prem Rawat Critique critique of the current promotional activities pursued by Prem Rawat and related organisations

Other ex-followers websites

FAQs related to critics published by organizations related to Prem Rawat

Sites responding to critics

Prem Rawat (related topics)
Teachings
Books
Films
Related
Categories: