Wikipedia

Criticism of Prem Rawat

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CynthiaG (talk | contribs) at 21:51, 13 September 2004 (→External Links: It's a fact ~~~). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Totallydisputed Prem Rawat, also called Maharaji and formerly known as Guru Maharaj Ji, along with the enthusiasm he inspires in his students, have been the subjects of controversy and criticism to some degree since his early beginnings.

Sources of criticism

In the 1970s when Prem Rawat first arrived in the West at the age of thirteen, the media subjected him, his organization, and his followers to a fair amount of scrutiny and attention, some of it negative.

Since the mid 1990s, the main criticism against Prem Rawat, his students, and the affiliated groups, The Prem Rawat Foundation and Elan Vital has been focused through a group of vocal ex-followers with an active presence on the Internet. The group members call themselves "ex-premies," based on the practice, discontinued in the West but ongoing in India, of Rawat's followers calling themselves "premies."

Many of these ex-premies have rejected the teachings and the teacher after years of practice. They say that they are not a group, in the sense that they do not assemble (although they communicate extensively via an on-line forum), but a small number of internationally dispersed individuals who say they do a public service by warning people about what they allege is a harmful, small cult. The majority of these people left the practice of "Knowledge" more than 20 years ago, but some say they feel still feel betrayed, angry and disillusioned. The size and true influence of the ex-premie group are in dispute. The group asserts that while it is small, its viewpoint would be shared by a large number of disgruntled ex-students of Prem Rawat if asked, while supporters of Rawat assert that the bulk of former students have simply moved on with no ill will toward him and do not agree with the group.

Supporters label the group an insignificantly small hate group of no more than a few dozen obsessive Internet addicts who speak for no one but themselves, use the Internet to magnify their importance [1] by spamming search engines, and manipulate the media to shed negative light on Rawat [2].

In the early 1980s the late Dr. Margaret Singer, a controversial anti-cult activist, included an earlier, since-superseded organization, the Divine Light Mission, in her list of cults. Criticism by the anti-cult movement have diminished, in the course of time, but have not disappeared. The Christian countercult activists Anton and Janet Hein, and some controversial anti-cult activists better known for their former deprogramming practices, like Rick Ross, and Steven Hassan have listed Elan Vital (one of the organizations that supports Rawat's work), on their websites. [3], [4], [5]

Claims of divinity

One of the ex-premie's central criticisms is that Prem Rawat formerly made public claims of personal divinity and continues privately to make such claims while denying them in public.

In the 1970's, when Rawat arrived from India, followers addressed him with greetings such as "Master" or "Lord" and with songs of adoration, or performed rituals that critics claim were affirmations of his personal divinity. One of these rituals, darshan, is generally reserved in Hinduism for the worship of holy persons or deities. Another one, arti or arathi, a devotional song, is generally reserved for deities. Critics also point to publications of the Divine Light Mission written by students and published in the 1970s that contain claims of Rawat’s divinity [6]. They note he used to dress up as Krishna, and at the age of sixteen promised to personally establish peace in the world [7]. They demand that Rawat and/or Elan Vital disabuse all his followers of such claims.

Critics claim Rawat discouraged critical thinking in order to maintain followers' unquestioning loyalty and devotion to him, warning them that the mind was dangerous and an enemy [8], and emphasizing faith in him and surrender to him [9]. Followers say that Rawat inspires them to think for themselves and encourages them to "stand on their own feet"[10].

Supporters and Elan Vital characterize the expressions of veneration as trappings of Hindu culture that are not personal claims of divinity when understood in their original cultural context. They assert that in Indian culture it is routine to declare that a guru is as God or even greater than God. To the average person in India, they say, "Guru is greater than God" is a common statement, talk of lords and masters is commonplace [11], and the title "Lord" simply denotes affection or admiration [12]. They assert that since Rawat was only a teenager when he came to the West, the presentation of the Knowledge techniques and his public persona were handled by Indian adults steeped in traditional Indian ways, which were acceptable to people of the hippie generation who tended to be more open to such rituals [13].

Supporters praise Rawat for leadership in leaving behind outdated cultural forms, and in the 1980's, dismantling the remnants of Indian culture and adopting a more egalitarian Western approach. He asked that the title "guru" be dropped from his name and that he be referred to simply as "Maharaji" [14]. They characterize Rawat in the last decade as replacing all the old forms with a presentation of himself simply as a teacher, guide, and friend, being human rather than godlike [15]. They say the specific quotes from the 1970s claiming personal power and divinity are taken out of context.

Prem Rawat's transformation has itself generated controversy. Ex-premies who say they once believed in Rawat's divinity see this evolution as a source of their disillusionment. They criticize Elan Vital for revisionism and obscuring the past. At some point Rawat or Elan Vital asked his students to throw away old books, magazine and videos that included forms of veneration—the ex-premie group considers this revisionism, while supporters describe this as evolution.

Critics charge that claims of Prem Rawat's personal divinity are still being made in India, pointing to excerpts from some of his addresses given there in the early 1990's [16]. Critics also say that secretly, these claims are still being made in the West, but only slowly revealed to those who progress as students. One ex-premie alleges a darshan line took place in in September 2001 in Scottsdale, Arizona in the U.S. at a program for major Western donors [17]. There has been no documentation produced of recent divinity claims in the West.

In 1979, ex-premie Bob Mishler, then ex-president of the Divine Light Mission, gave a radio interview in which he said he had persuaded the nineteen-year-old Prem Rawat to retract his claims of divinity in 1976 but that Rawat had allegedly hesitated because it would mean less control over his followers and as a result less income from them. [18]. Mishler said he resigned from the Divine Light Mission in January 1977 because of Rawat's refusal to change his luxurious life style and retract his claim to be God [19]. Mishler's statements are denied by Rawat and have not been independently verified. Supporters dismiss his charges as coming from a disgruntled ex-employee after being fired.

Complaints of financial exploitation

Ex-premies complain that Prem Rawat exploited them to build a luxurious lifestyle for himself. They note he has access to luxuries that average American citizens do not enjoy [20]: For example, he lives in Malibu, a city with a median family income of $125,000, lives in a house whose value critics estimate at $20-25 million, and through an arrangement with his organization has exclusive use of a Gulfstream V jet and two helicopters. They also argue that his wealth could not have come from any source but his followers' donations, since he came from India with little or no money, has never had a job outside of his religious work, and was disinherited by his mother after a family rift. Ex-premies have filed complaints with tax and charity authorities, but these have not resulted in Rawat or related entities being charged with wrongdoing [21]. Ex-premies blame themselves for being gullible and naive to have given undocumented donations.

Supporters note that Prem Rawat's lifestyle is not a secret, and that he has never been charged with breaking the law in taking donations. According to them, Rawat and his family are entirely supported by personal business investments[22][23] with no money flowing to them from the organizations supporting his work. Supporters point to the variety of charitable work overseen by The Prem Rawat Foundation as inconsistent with a goal of personal enrichment [24] [25]. They note Rawat is a pilot and flies the leased aircraft himself; they classify the aircraft as tools for conducting Rawat's work rather than perks, asserting as an example that the aircraft enabled Rawat to reach one million people in India in 2003 [26].

Miscellaneous criticism

  • Public relations and media - Ex-premies allege Prem Rawat and his organizations engage in various practices to falsely magnify his perceived significance and prestige. They claim his organizations intentionally inflate the estimates of the numbers attending his meetings. They also charge that Rawat arranges speaking engagements that falsely imply association with prestigious institutions such as the United Nations. They further accuse Rawat of buying media attention and uncritical magazine interviews, then passing these off as bona fide journalism [27], [28], [29] because such interviews contain no questions about controversial topics such as past claims of divinity. Supporters and the organizations deny these claims, saying that the audiences of Rawat's meetings at prestigious institutions include dignitaries, university students, educators, and staff from these institutions, and they note that representatives from these institutions have introduced Rawat at these events and praised his work. [30][31][32]. The organizations supporting Rawat's work say that no official figures are kept of meeting attendance, and supporters note no documentation of the attendance inflation claim has been offered by critics.
  • Lineage challenge - Prem Rawat's eldest brother, Satpal, claims that their father, Hans Ji Maharaj, "bequeath[ed] his mission and unfinished work" to Satpal, not to Prem, and so he and not Prem is the sole legitimate heir of their father's guru lineage[33]. Prem's supporters discount Satpal's claim as a late change of heart, asserting that Satpal and the rest of the family originally accepted and supported Prem's declaration of succession when it was made, removing their support eight years later after a family rift over Prem marrying a Westerner.
  • Credibility - Ex-premie group members assert Prem Rawat has no credibility in his teachings because of a large gap they claim 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 a 2000 account related by group member Michael Dettmers, who was Rawat's finance manager in the 1970s and early 1980s. According to Dettmers, he was in Rawat's inner circle in 1974, responsible for organizing his touring arrangements. He claims that during a fifteen year period beginning in 1974 he witnessed a sixteen-year-old Rawat drink every day and often get drunk, claims that he and Rawat smoked marijuana together, that he ingested hashish with Rawat in India, and alleges that Rawat had affairs with various women. Contrary to a characterization of hypocrisy, however, Dettmers opined that Rawat's behaviors he claimed to have witnessed were not cynical, but that Rawat truly believed he was a satguru who had transcended the need for the disciplines and restrictions he required of his followers. In his 1979 interview, Mishler also commented that the teenaged Rawat had suffered from anxiety he attempted to alleviate with alcohol rather than through Knowledge techniques[34]. Michael (Mike) Donner, who also claims to have been part of Maharaji's inner circle, made similar allegations after he was fired. [35], [36], [37].
Supporters say that by focusing on Rawat's personal life rather than his message, these allegations miss the important central question, which for them is whether or not Rawat's message of peace has the potential for bringing individuals and experience of peace. Supporters dismiss many of these claims as utter fabrications and as coming from disgruntled ex-employees. They categorize these men's remarks as the allegations that apostates typically make. as explained in an article by sociologist and CESNUR’s president Massimo Introvigne in which the causes for this behavior are studied. [38].
  • Uniqueness of Knowledge techniques - Ex-premies say the Knowledge techniques Prem Rawat teaches have been taught for hundreds of years and are not unique. Supporters acknowledge these techniques are referred to throughout history in writings and poems, maintaining the important point is that the techniques, to be effective, require preparation and the help of a skilled teacher, and Rawat is one.

Critics' character and motives questioned

Supporters say that the ex-premie group harbors the hatred and ill-will typical of a hate group[39] in, for example, maintaining what they characterize as an anonymous web page and hate speech chat room [40] exhorting violent acts such as plans to drug and kidnap members of Rawat's family.[41]. They complain that ex-premies have engaged in cyber-harassment, for example by publishing on the Internet the floor plans of the house where Rawat and his family reside [42], and in cyber-terrorism through computer and email attacks intended to discourage third parties from doing business with students.

Prem Rawat supporters also characterize members of the ex-premie group as not credible in their criticism, due to members' character problems such as obsessive Internet postings, extensive illegal drug use and drug dealing, criminal history, and involvement with pornography [43]. They point to the conviction of one central group member, Neville Ackland[44][45], for possession of $2.5 million worth of drugs and illegal weapons [46]. They characterize ex-premie group members as fitting the psychological profile identified in an article by Massimo Introvigne as "Type III" apostates, who become "professional enemies" of the formerly revered organization[47]. Ex-premies characterize these charges about personal problems as argumentum ad personam attacks, and say their character flaws are private and irrelevant to the question whether Prem Rawat is a reliable and competent teacher of effective meditation techniques.

In 2004, persons apparently having an anti-Rawat agenda forged the email address of Brisbane attorney Damian Scattini who represents Elan Vital in Australia[48], sending to many Australian lawyers, journalists and business leaders an email purporting to be an invitiation from Scattini, who is not a student of Rawat's, to "worship" Rawat and containing the same photographs of Rawat in Hindu religious clothing as appear on the ex-premie websites. Scattini filed a now-pending criminal complaint with Queensland authorities.

Supporters say that ex-premies' letter-writing campaigns organized through its Internet chat rooms and websites are harassment intended to threaten students' jobs and careers. They point to an effort launched on the Internet in September 2004[49] using an anonymous website at Geocities [50] to coordinate, what supporters see as, a cyberstalking attack on the credibility of Dr. Ron Geaves with the Chester College, his employer. In their attack, they allege that Geaves published papers they believe favorable to Rawat in academic publications allegedly without informing the publications that he was a follower of Rawat's, and ask chat room members to write to the college to impose sanctions against him. Supporters consider this an attempt to have Geaves fired for his religious beliefs. A Terms of Service violation has been filed with Geocities.

Organizations affiliated with Prem Rawat have recently been successful in civil actions against members of the ex-premie group for wrongful activities directed against the organizations.

  • 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 [51][52]. Macgregor ran away from court officers, trying to prevent his computer from court-ordered examination, but relented after being held in contempt of court [53]. Gubler originally testified in an affidavit that the ex-premies were a hate group, and existed 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 [54]. Gubler later recanted that testimony, asserting he signed this affidavit under duress [55]. Gubler and Macgregor asked the affidavit be withdrawn from the court's consideration, but the court refused [56], finding Gubler and Macgregor lacking in credibility. [57]. Macgregor mounted the defense that his goal was to expose wrongdoing by the organization, but the court held that was an insufficient justification, and noted the misappropriated material did not show any wrongdoing by Rawat or the organizations [58].
  • In late 2003, The Prem Rawat Foundation brought a successful Internet domain name administrative proceeding, known as a "UDRP proceeding," against group member Jeffrey Leason (also known as "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 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 material 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 [59].

Ex-premies' websites

Websites of organizations that support the work of Prem Rawat

Satirical sites

References and bibliography

  • Benschop, Albert, Dr. - CyberStalking: menaced on the internet - Social & Behavioral Sciences / Media Studies University of Amsterdam, Netherlands. Available online
  • Barrett, D. V. The New Believers - A survey of sects, cults and alternative religions 2001 UK, Cassell & Co ISBN 0-304-35592-92-5 [60] pages 65, 305-329
  • Elliot, M. E. Elan Vital. Research paper written by a student of the late Jeffrey Hadden of the University of Virginia in 1999, mainly based on information from the ex-premie website Available online
  • Introvigne, Massimo Defectors, Ordinary Leavetakers and Apostates: A Quantitative Study of Former Members of New Acropolis in France, Paper delivered at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Religion, San Francisco, November 23 1997. Available online.
  • 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.Available online.
  • Melton, J. Gordon and Lewis, R. James. Department of the USA Army, Office of the Chief of Chaplains Religious Requirements and practices. A Handbook for Chaplains written by The institute for the study of the American religion (ISAR) 1993 [61]
  • Melton, J. Gordon Encyclopedia of American Religions, 7th edition ISBN 0-7876-6384-0 - page 1055
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Prem_Rawat&oldid=5863931"