Talk:Criticism of Prem Rawat

---

Archive 11 • Archive 10 •Archive 9 • Archive 8 • Archive 7 • Archive 6 • Archive 5 • Archive 4 • Archive 3 • Archive 2 • Archive 1

---

Ladies and Gentlemen, a toast!!

(Before reading this, go here and click on "The 20th-Century Fox Fanfare with Cinemascope Extension" link.)

Seconding Zappaz, "whew!" I have now prominently flagged this version in the edit history for future editors as the "baseline reference consensus version", and will flag it below on this page as well. This is not to say the article won't change, but whereas before I considered it to be an incomplete article on its way to completion, I now see it as a completed article that will be tweaked and updated over time.

As I previously suggested, now is the time for us all to band together and protect this article and its bretheren from attacks. Good faith edits are always welcome, but we can be on the lookout for deletes that take material away without compensating with new material, or bulk adds that duplicate what is already in the article. As was noted, there have already been some attacks, these particular ones from an "anti" perspective, and it would do my heart glad to see "anti" editors help revert "anti" vandalism, and "pro" editors help revert "pro" vandalism, as a statement of, "I may agree with your position, but that's not how we do things around here."

You know, I originally came here essentially as an observer, at the invitation of Jossifresco and Andries, and my initial intention was mostly just to add another voice in hopes of mediating disputes. As I got drawn in to editing and writing myself, however, I came to feel a personal attachment and obligation for getting to a consensus version of a finished article. Now that, in my view, we have arrived, I may stay around and actively edit, but I no longer feel that I need to, and in the face of this completed article version as a baseline, it may be that I will step back and move on, with only the occasional look-in.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would now like to raise a glass and propose a toast: To cooperation and consensus, to Prem Rawat and Bob Mishler, to Wikipedia and to us. I'm pretty happy with these articles, and very happy with how we all pulled together despite conflicting viewpoints to make this process work. Maybe we should nominate them for Wikipedia featured articles, as much to showcase the success of our process of working together as to showcase the articles themselves. I extend my hand to each of you, "pro" and "anti", whether you edited or not; somehow we all fit in together and played a part in bringing the articles to fruition. I hope you will all extend your cyber-hands as well to shake each other's, especially those on the other side of the aisle from you.

Just in case I do hit the road, I would like to close with something borrowed from a different religious tradition. My apologies to that tradition for borrowing it since I am not really one of its members, but it's a nice piece because whether you are religious or atheist, Western or Eastern, you can usually adapt the phrasing of its sentiment to suit your beliefs:

The Lord bless you and keep you,

The Lord make his face to shine on you and be gracious unto you,

The Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace.

Thanks, everyone. [A deep bow and a salute.] Channel clear. --Gary D 03:04, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, Gary. Realy hope you stick around and help with the upcoming additional articles. ≈ jossi ≈ 03:29, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

thanks. Gary, working on this article was a tough job for me. Thanks for using your writing skills to this subject. I agree that the Prem Rawat article is good enough to be a featured article, though I think it is better too wait a bit and I am a bit concerned about the underdeveloped state of important ancillary articles such as the Divine Light Mission, with its somewhat confusing history, and beliefs and practices.. Andries 04:42, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Many thanks, Gary. I recognise that, although I believe there is too much supporters' POV in the article, supporters probably believe there is too much critics' POV. If supporters such as Jossi can accept the article as is, then I certainly can. I'll be posting on the ex-premie forum that I think this is the best we can hope for, and to discourage any vandalism. I would also like to thank Andries for his persistence when no ex-premie had the patience or belief to work on the article. Of course, if significant verifiable additional information comes to light, then I will add it to the article, but with appropriate discussion here. --John Brauns 05:14, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Gary. You brought some logic, balance, and sensibility to this article. It's not perfect -- but nothing is. I have taken the time to ask folks on the ex-premie forum not to vandalize the article as it now stands (there are people who are not happy with it). There is always room for improvement, but I do appreciate the time and work involved. Btw, how do you guys manage to do this Wiki stuff and earn a living?  :-)

Best wishes...

CynthiaG 18:51, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Proud of you fellas! I know it was not easy, so take a well deserved break. And Amen to that Gary! --Senegal 18:18, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're all very welcome! My parting flourish above says more about my sense of the dramatic than about any imminent departure, and it's likely I'll hang around with at least some degree of involvement. I really appreciate John's and Cynthia's efforts to ward off vandalism—I'm sure we all do!—and John, if new information comes to light, Wikipedia wants it! Oh, and the person who really gets shafted from my time here is my wife: "Are you doing that stuff again?" Once again, everybody, good job! --Gary D 19:52, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

NOTE TO FUTURE EDITORS: BASELINE REFERENCE CONSENSUS VERSION

The present version of the article represents the completed form of a baseline reference consensus version, arrived at after extensive negotiations between Prem Rawat supporters and critics (see archives 2 through the present one), and it is so marked in the edit history for easier locating. We do not expect that this page will not change from here, but you may find it useful as a baseline and as a reference should future edits get out of hand or the article become corrupted. If you should become unsure about what may be acceptable to both sides of the controversy and dispute, we offer this version for your consideration and use. We commend it to your good discretion, and wish you the best! --Gary D 03:04, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Emile said that the site had been removed because of copyright violation

Well, anyway where can I find the TOS complaint to Geocities then I can check it out? Thanks.Andries 17:12, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That is just speculation. I don't think you can know the exact reasons for Geocities removing that website... Geocities has very stringent TOS. For example. some of the possible TOS violations of that website .(Highlights are mine):

• (a) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, ibelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;

• (c) impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a Yahoo official, forum leader, guide or host, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity;

• (e) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that you do not have a right to transmit under any law or under contractual or fiduciary relationships (such as inside information, proprietary and confidential information learned or disclosed as part of employment relationships or under nondisclosure agreements);

• (f) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party;

• (l) "stalk" or otherwise harass another;

Full list here: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/geoterms.html ≈ jossi ≈ 20:31, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

Guess what Jossi

it is becoming a predictable, I disagree with your edit. :-) The sentence that I inserted [1] after the quote that Zappaz inserted is directly relevant to the paragraph. What I wrote is far more NPOV than using a very selective out-of-context quote as Zappaz did. Andries 22:32, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

:) The book in question is already in the references. All I did wat to move some of your text to the references section. I did not understand why it was relevant to that paragraph. If you think it is, please add it back and clarify it here. Thanks ≈ jossi ≈ 04:11, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

Links to gallery

Removed links to gallery in which scanned material is displayed. Once the sources, dates and attibutions are added to these pages (as promised by owenr of website) these can go back. Othwewise these links are in contravention to wikipedia fair use guidelines. --64.81.88.140 16:44, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Not all scans in the gallery have source and dates mentioned, I have to admit. I have restored the links to a webpage of the Gallery that does not break any copyrights and in such a way the article adheres to Wikipedia guidelines. Andries 12:01, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Former Followers' Status

I have reverted this line 'Some of these ex-premies are former senior staff within the organizations and former instructors appointed by Rawat.' Someone had inserted 'claimed to have been'. There is no question about the status of Bob Mishler, Mike Dettmers, Mike Donner, Mike Finch and Jean Michel Khan with the organisations that support Rawat's work. What is disturbing is that this change was made from the agreed baseline version without any justification in this Discussion section.--John Brauns 00:29, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

John - Sorry about that (newbie here). I added that 'claimed to have been' without entering anything in the discussion page. Sorry about that - will not do that again. By the way, the reason for qualifying their roles is that most anyone can claim high-ranking positions. The reality of their position might not be the same as they claimed. Chuck 01:42, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Removal of sentence...

Andreis - I agree with your deletion of that sentence. Thank you for cleaning up the paragraph on the legal status of the Indian car accident. I am a little new to this and should not have been so forcefull in debunking anyone who would ignore the court's decision. Chuck 18:10, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

John MacGregor arrest warranty, please provide references

I removed the following sentence that can be re-added after providing references.

"In October 2004, after being discovered that Macgregor lied under oath and after failing to appear in court, an Australian-wide arrest warrant was issued against him for criminal perjury. "

Andries 18:05, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The following sentences is against the guidelines that disencourage unattributed opionions.

"It is assumed that he left the country to avoid the arrest. "

Andries 18:05, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Andries, that is a fact. He knows that. The ex-premies know that. So what is the deal? An arrest warrant was issued and he failed to appear in court. I will remove just the last sentence about "it is assumed" --203.200.122.1 05:10, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wim Haan is biased because he was a Catholic?

Jossi, in another article in Wikipedia I read that Catholics practice Knowledge. Can you please explain or delete the remark that Haan was biased? Thanks Andries 22:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This is information you provided, Andries... That Haans belonged at that time to a group of catholic critics. This needs to be disclosed, same way we are diosclosing that Dr. Geaves is a student of Prem Rawat. ≈ jossi ≈ 07:56, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)

True, I had copied what Haan wrote but how can he have a negative bias only because he is a catholic while other catholics became students of Prem Rawat and remained catholics. I think this is inconsistent.

About the two years, Haan just recently wrote in Dutch http://www.forum8.org/forum8/posts/8818.html that he was involved for two years.

"Andries, i reply in dutch, because that is my native language:

1) mijn betrokkenheid bij DLM was er niet één van enkele maanden maar van circa twee jaar, en mijn contacten met 'premmies' van veel langere duur, tot op dit moment zelfs; alleen is in die contacten DLM compleet naar de achtergrond gedrongen, ik heb een aantal goede vrienden eraan overgehouden, waarbij DLM niet meer aan de orde is; "

Translation, "1) My involvement with the DLM was not one of several m

onths but of about two years [..]"

Andries 08:02, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, are you sure that you want the statement that Wim Haan was biased to be retained? Here is what he writes about it.

Copy from http://www.forum8.org/forum8/posts/9195.html

”Dear Andries,

The comment from premies that i was a member of critical movement within the catholic church and hence the whole article is biased is the most stupid i have ever heard or seen. I ask myself who is biased here. Everyone has his or hers own background. All academics have that background. It is important to have a critical discussion with your own background, and that is what i did.

My article has appeared in a dutch academic magazine. Before it was published it I have received several comments and changed the article on many points. Especially on topics where my own opinion was that there was a certain bias in the article.

What the premies actually mean is that no one who hasn't experienced the "Knowledge" can have a reasonable opinion about it: and that is ridiculous. When that would be so, no one could write a book about the Middle Ages at this moment, because we don't live in that timeframe.

So again, the comment is to stupid to take serious notice off.

Greetings,

Wim”

Not at all.... Haans statement should be retained, just that we needed to disclose his bias. Nothing wrong with that. And, BTW, a "scholar" that uses the word "stupid" to address a disclosure request as this one, is IMO, very unscholarly. Thanks to your posting here, Haans's words will be saved for posterity... Please note that Haans uses the word "article" and not "study". Also, we have not disclosed what kind of scholar Mr. Haans is. Is he a professor? a student? a researcher? That could be also important information for the reader. Could you ask him about what was is tenure at the time he wrote this article? ≈ jossi ≈ 23:12, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, please take into account that not every supporter will agree that Haan was biased only because he was a Catholic and I do not think that dismissing every critical remark as coming from a biased source or from a hate group, instead of honestly admitting mistakes, will increase the credibility of the supporters' view. Besides this strategy may create unnecessary enemies. I mean, look at Haan's reaction hereabove. Haan has by the way still friends from his DLM time. Andries 10:42, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think that you do not understand. I am not saying in the article that Haans was biased, just that he belonged to a catholic critics group. If Haans was biased or not is for the readers to decide. All we are doing is disclosing Haans allegieances. BTW, we are still imssing info about who Mr. Haans was when he wrote the article. Could you ask him? Thanks ≈ jossi ≈ 15:52, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

He said that writing this article was part of his study theology at the "Hogeschool voor Theologie en Pastoraat at the town of Heerlen". That is what he wrote in the article. Andries 18:11, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, just what I thought... Hann wrote this article while being a student of theology, in a small Pastoral and Theology school. We should add this to the article. Otherwise readers may wrongly assume that Haan was a scholar. Another option would be to delete this reference altogether. ≈ jossi ≈ 00:08, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, I reverted one of your edits because it was about proven and documented facts, which should not be phrased as an assertion i.e. "Critics assert that Haan critically etc." Andries 03:26, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK. I understand. ≈ jossi ≈ 03:29, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

DuPertuis

well, thank god there is ex-premie.org or what do you think zappaz?. Actually if you read the footnote, it says that this(fullfilment) explains the reason for the disintegration of the communities.But we know it better, don't we? Wasn't it Rawats endeavor to strip the trappings that caused this change? You can have it only one way. And if DuPertuis is wrong with his conclusion, he might be wrong with his statement(the fullfilment) in the first place. Nevertheless this happens when you work with a strongly biased attitude, and why the hell, if you want to push this view forward, haven't you received knowledge yet? thomas

Thomas, I do not understand what you mean by "thank god there is ex-premie.org". And I do not understand what is the point you are trying to make. And I less understand what this has to do with receiving the knowledge. Is this a conspiracy theory thing again?

FYI, the reason for including Dupertius assertion about the disintegration of communities is that it counteracts the widely held assumption by the ex-premie group that those that left the teachings of PR, left with a negative feeling about PR and the teachings. --Zappaz 17:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

sure, i understood you point quite clearly. Most of the people that i know (and i know a lot) that left, didn't leave because they were fulfilled or angry, but because they were bored. Bored of the ongoing demands to surrender, bored to always hear that they aren't good enough. But that is only my practical experience with that matter. The disinformation managament from rawat worked quite well. IMO the most bad feelings came up, when those that have left, discovered what was going on behind the curtain. IMHO you can go on, do your little advertisements (ah , even if you leave, you leave fulfilled, nice club...) and keep on heightening the "quality" of wiki.

i just wanted to add why you "should" receive this knowledge:

• if it is worth to make those people that leave such a group and continue to speak out, to categorize them into introvigne's apostate III level, across the board, not caring what these people have to say, no mercy
• if for you, rawat is the immaculate teacher who always was misunderstood, who has no guilt and responsibility in the "misunderstandings" and
• if rawat is something for you that must be worth it, no matter how long you stay( because you will leave fullfilled anyway).

than wouldn't it be straightforward to gain that thing? I mean, if not, what are you doing anyway?thomas

Jan van der Lans

I have tried to locate that book but it is only available in Dutch. Andries: could you provide the citacion used by der Lans to support his assertion? ≈ jossi ≈ 18:18, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

1. If found the quote by van der Lans in another book (Dr. Reender Kranenborg's book "Oosterse Geloofsbewegingen in het Westen" published in 1982 so I do not have the exact context. I had read van der Lans' book years ago but had totally forgotten this quote. I can easily borrow van der Lans' book from public library though. Andries 18:36, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
2. It is not true that van der Lans' book is a critical study about gurus. I remember the chapter about the Hare Krishna's that I had read years ago and that was quite positive. Andries 18:36, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
3. It is an exaggeration to say that it was for clergy. I mean, it is a well known book about the subject here. Andries 18:36, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
4. I do not think that he was ever ordained as priest. Andries 18:38, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Guru Maharaj Ji is the example of a guru who has become a charlatan with a double life. On the one hand, he tries to remain loyal to the role that was forced upon him (it appears by his mother) and to the expectations that his followers have of him. In private however, he leads a life of idleness and pleasures. If he visits a festival then a floor of a hotel is hired for him and his family. His visits to premies are only casual and he spends the rest of his time watching TV or rented videos and visiting night clubs. Only a small circle of insiders know this and know his life style. Based on this information, one could easily say that he is a fraud. Using a different approach, one could see him as victim of his surroundings. "

from the 1981 book "Volgelingen van de goeroe: Hedendaagse religieuze bewegingen in Nederland" (Followers of the guru: current religious movements in the Netherlands) http://www.ksgv.nl/2-18.html page 117 by Jan van der Lans http://www.psywww.com/psyrelig/obits/vanderlans.html, professor in psychology of religion at the Catholic University of Nijmegen Andries 18:36, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Lans was an ordained Roman Catholic priest. Check his Bio.
• You did not include "Catholic" in the University of Nijmegen mention (I added it already)
• Read the description of the book by the KSGV http://www.ksgv.nl/2-18.htm. It is clearly a studies of gurus, sponsored by the KSGV (Catholic Study for Mental Health),. Would you care to translate the summary?
• The cites for what I consider very speculative assertions must be based on media stories from the 70's or quoting another scholar that cites these. I mean, his assertion about the role being impossed by his mother is completely erroneous, and how does he knows that Maharaji watched TV in his hotel or visited night clubs?

I would appreciate if you get the book and check othe sources for his citacion.

≈ jossi ≈ 21:08, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

• I checked his bio and the bio says that he received a training as a priest. It does not say that he was a priest. Andries 22:16, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• I do not know how he could write it with so much certainty but I think that his opinion worthy of inclusion. I mean, he does not think that the stories are all a conspiracy by apostate former members. That is significant. Andries 22:16, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Van der Lans is not alone in his opinion (which he did not write down as a fact) that Prem's mother was the leader. Kranenborg shared this opinion writing, "After the death of her husband the mother of Maharaj Ji, known as Mata ji is the actual leader of the movement." in his 1982 book "Oosterse Geloofsbewegingen in het Westen" ISBN 9021049651 page 52 Andries 22:16, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• I could translate the Dutch information about the book, which says very little, but please believe I generally do not use information from anti-cult crusaders, or from evangelical Christians who write about "cults" for their congregation. There are some but I chose not to use their books. Andries 22:16, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I did some research. Clearly der Lans is a Cahtolic theologian and surely critical, by nature. The KSGV undertake its activities from a Christian inspiration as per their website, and their publications are targeted at the '"pastoorat", i.e. pastors, churches, etc. We ought to find out what are his citacions for that assertion. I will be not surprised to see a "circular reference" here. ≈ jossi ≈ 19:41, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, you may be right about the circular reference. I found van der Lans' book in the public library and I think -it is not very clear from the text - he bases his harsh judgement on the German book by Reinhard Hummel Indische Mission und neue Frömmigkeit im Westen Stuggart 1980. But you are wrong in your assessment that it was written for clergy. After all, it is available in the public library . Besides the Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel cites van der Lans in his 1982 book Tussen Stigma and Charisma: nieuw religieuze bewegingen en geestelijke volksgezondheid/Between stigma & charisma: NRMs & public mental health ISBN 9060017463 on page 173 as if it were a neutral source when writing about the mental health of the members of the DLM. Besides I think, van der Lans would not risk his reputation as a respected scientist by writing a biased, prejudiced book. I asked Thomas to get Hummel's book. Andries 14:01, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The KSGV is a publisher wit a very specific POV and the majoriy of its books targeted at clergyman and pastors (look at their list of publications). As a "sponsored" book it clearly supports that POV and expects a readership that will not question anything negative about "gurus", thus the lack of citacions provided by der Lans. IMO, this reference is indeed helplessly biased. You can leave it, but do not delete the assessment of it.≈ jossi ≈ 18:50, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, I really think that followers make a fool of themselves by dismissing every tiny bit of criticism as biased (van der Lans and probably you will say the same about Hummel and Kranenborg), or coming from a hate group (ex-premies), or from people colluding with a hate group (me), or from a person who has no credentials (like Haan with two years of participant observation). Why can't you admit that some mistakes have been made in the past? Van der Lans wrote about many gurus and groups, like Bhagwan, Hare Krisna/Praphupada, 3HO/Yogi Bhajan, DLM/Maharaji, Yoga, Unfication church/Moon but he wrote only about Maharaji as an example of a charlatan (Kranenborg had accidentally change an into the when quoting van der Lans). Andries 19:39, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, Andties, you and your ex-premie friends are the fools here. The fact that you keep trying to "dig dirt" by briging up "scholars" like Haans (widely demostrated here that he was not a scholar, but a student of an small religious school), or helplessly biased authors such as Lans, is plenty proof of that. How can Lans accusse Maharaji of being a "charlatan' without himself becoming one? on what basis, if not his own bias and lack of committment to thruth did he write that? Pity that he is now dead, otherwise we could have asked him about his reasons for writing that. The only fools here are the ex-premies, and mostly you for helping them. Maharaji keeps receiveing awards and recognition around the world, for his work and his relentless pursuit of peace, hundreds of thousands of people are interested in his message and thousands upon thousands of people have chosen to become his students (this year more than 50,000). So whatever a small group of ex-followers, you Andries , and critical authors such as Haans and de Lans say is pretty much irrelevant. ≈ jossi ≈ 19:57, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, I think that van der Lans wrote this based on the book by Hummel and media reports, some of them in Dutch language (Volkskrant newspaper, and Haagse Post magazine) to which I do not have access. Andries 09:12, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Linking to user pages

Thomas: linking to a user page from an article is quite unusual. By doing so you also eliminate the possibility of someone seeing that there is no article about Anton Hein and deciding to write one. --Zappaz 22:00, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sources of criticism

For the second half of the last sentence in this section (in italics) to stand: "Supporters say that this alleged support from journalists is a figment of Finch's imagination, and that Rawat continues to be welcome to speak at public forums and his message being hailed as unique and noble by academy and business forums throughout the world." I would think we'd need to have some citations from some of these groups who say they find his message to be so. Otherwise, the statement as it is seems just so many weasel words. Fire Star 23:50, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There are plenty of quotes to support that statement in Wikiquote: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Maharaji#Quotes_about_Prem_Rawat. You could add a link to there. ≈ jossi ≈ 00:41, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Good enough. Fire Star 00:51, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ex-pemie.org no longer registered to an association

After contacting the orginal webmaster of ex-premie.org, the registration of the domain name, ex-premie.org, now reflects the reality that the domain name, and the website, are privately owned, and not owned by an organisation. The domain names ex-premie2.org, ex-premie3.org, ex-premie4.org have always been registered privately. The article has been amended accordingly. --John Brauns 22:14, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I recorded the fact that the ownership was changed in December 2004 after 8 years under ownership by "Ex-Premie Organization"≈ jossi ≈ 01:16, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, Jossi. I've corrected the 8 years to 7 (ex-premie.org was first registered in 1997), and I've made the wording a little more precise, as I'm sure you know registration of a domain name does not imply ownership of the site. The site is owned by whoever has the contract with the hosting company. I personally think this is far too much detail on this minor point, but if we are going to have this level of detail, then it should be accurate. --John Brauns 22:49, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Zappaz, I notice you have changed the text under discussion (calling it 'simplification'), and I accept most of your minor changes. You have however, introduced misleading text, when you state that 'Brauns asserts that...'. Yes, it is true that I assert that, but the reason I linked to the site history webpage is that it was written by all the webmasters, so it is evidence that it is not just my assertion. I think given that the ownership of the site is being put into the spotlight here, it is important to link to the site's history. In the spirit of cooperation, I won't correct the text before you've had a chance to comment. --John Brauns 22:41, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am breaking my silence here ... I hope that is not a mistake. We shall see...

The assertion made by you is that ex-premie.org does not belong to an organization. The link to the webmaster page is what lawyers call "self-serving", so I consider the statement to be an assertion made by John Brauns, the current webmaster (previous webmasters are not making that assertion in that page, only that they were webmasters). That is exactly what the text says, together with the fact that for a number of years it was registered to an organization called "Ex-premie organization". Let the reader be the judge. --Zappaz 23:03, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Zappaz, no it won't be a mistake - I will not make any further allegations about your motives in editing pages related to Prem Rawat and Ex-premies. So in view of your reply, may I reinsert the link to the site history page so that, as you say, readers can judge for themselves? --John Brauns 23:28, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Schnabel

Yet another case of circular references. Schnabel cites Van der Lans, that in turn does not provide citacions for his critical assessment. The other references provided by Schnabel do not have any of the bulshit written by der Lans. I will add that to the paragraph as a rebuttal.

Regarding your edit, I don't have a problem having that there but you have make a better translation of the text. Now it reads pretty poorly. If you place the Dutch text of Chapter II, page 33 from Schnabel thesis, I'll get it properly translated. ≈ jossi ≈ 16:26, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

It is not a circular reference. Schnabel refers in that section to an article "Wereldbeschouwelijke aspecten van de exotische tegenstroom: Een inleiding vanuit de empirisch-kritische benadering/Aspects of the world view of the exotic counterculture: an introduction from the empirical-critical approach" – In: Derks o.c.,67-89 (1981) by van der Lans that van der Lans wrote in the same year as his 1981 book "Volgelingen van de goeroe/Followers of the guru". Schnabel refers to that book on page 173 (I think when writing about the mental health of the followers) Andries 17:30, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC) (amended on 17 Dec. 10:23)

Here is what Schnabel wrote, which I translated in English. I do not understand why I have to type in the original Dutch text. The ex-premies thought that the English was good enough. Andries 17:48, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Chapter II, page 33

"The message of the DLM focuses completely on the person of Guru Maharaj Ji. Divine love and truth manifest in him. One can have part in this by surrendering totally to the guru whom one will always follow. If one does this then one will become conscious of one's core inner self (Knowledge). One experiences Knowledge during meditation of which there are four types: meditation on light, on sound, on the name, and on nectar.

Apart from the meditation, the DLM knows yet two other basic rules i.e. satsang and service. Satsang means here discourses in which the Knowledge is propagated, in which one testifies of the omnipresence of Maharaj Ji, and in which advice is given to solve problems. Service means here to serve and fulfilling service. Every member is expected to do effort for the movement, for the propagation and for its preservation.

The guru Maharaj ji takes a central place in the presentation by the DLM. He is the perfect master who can reveal the truth to everybody, who has the answer to all questions. The DLM always tries to refer to the guru in its advertisements. One tries to recruit new members by organizing lectures, introduction evenings, and by sending propaganda material. "

Used literature for the above mentioned paragraphs:

• Van der Lans - (Dutch language) Wereldbeschouwelijke aspecten van de exotische tegenstroom: Een inleiding vanuit de empirisch-kritische benadering – In:Derks o.c.,67-89 (1981)
• Pilarzyk, Th. – The origin, development and decline of a youth culture religion: an application of sectarianization theory – Review of Religious Research 20 (1978) 1, 23-24
• Köllen, K. - (Dutch language) Jeugdsekten in Nederland – Amsterdam, Allert de Lange, (1980)
• Foss, D.A. & R.W. Larkin - Worshipping the absurd and the Negation of Social Causality among the followers of Guru Maharaj Ji – Sociological Analysis (1978)
• Messer J. – Guru Maharaj Ji and the Divine Light Mission – in Ch. Y. Clock & R.N. Bellah (Ed.), o.c., (1976) 52-72
• Mildenberger, M. – (German language) Die religöse Revolte. Jugend zwischen Flucht und Aufbruch – Frankfurt a.M. , Fischer (1979)
• Downtown Jr. J.V. – Sacred journeys:The Conversion of Young Americans to the Divine Light Mision – New York, Columbia Un. Press (1979)
• Downtown Jr. J.V. – An Evolutionary theory of spiritual conversion and commitment: the case of the Divine Light Mission –J. Scientific Study of Religion 19 (1980) 4, 381-396

Note: Schnabel refers in his dissertation to hundreds of sources but he mentioned the above sources when writing about the beliefs and practices of the DLM. Andries 09:26, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Chapter II, page 33 (Dutch original)

"De boodschap van de Divine Light Mission concentreert zich helemaal op de persoon van goeroe Maharaj Ji. In hem manifesteren zich goddelijke liefde en waarheid. Hieraan kan men deel hebben, door zich volledig over te geven aan de goeroe, die men dan ook altijd zal volgen. Als men dit doet, dan zal men zich bewust worden van de innerlijke wezenskern (Knowledge). 'Knowledge' ervaart men tijdens de meditatie; er zijn vier meditatietechnieken, te weten: meditatie op het licht, op geluid, op woord en op nectar.

Naast de meditatie kent de Divine Light Mission nog twee andere grondregels, namelijk: satsang en service. Onder 'satsang' verstaat men voordrachten, waarin de kennis gepropageerd wordt, waarin getuigd wordt van de alom-aanwezigheid van Maharaj Ji, waarin raad gegeven wordt ter oplossing van problemen. 'Service' betekent dienen en dienst doen. Van ieder lid van de beweging verlangt men dat zij/hij zich inzet voor de beweging, voor de verspreiding en de instandhouding ervan.

In de presentatie staat de figuur van goeroe Maharaj Ji voorop. Hij is volkomen meester, die aan ieder de waarheid kan onthullen, die het antwoord heeft op alle vragen. In de werving wordt dan ook altijd verwijzen naar de goeroe. Nieuwe leden tracht men te werven door het organiseren van lezingen, het houden van introductieavonden, het toezenden van propagandamateriaal."

---

Perfect Master

.140 The paragraph about the implausibility of the claim to be the only Perfect Master is not only about succession of his father but also about other persons claiming to be Perfect Masters. Andries 12:50, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Your wrong again Andries. Maharaji never said he was the only perfect master, or that he his one. He always said that there is one perfect master and that it is up to each human being to look for such one, and if you find him to follow him. --64.81.88.140 16:54, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It won't be difficult to find an academic source that says that Maharaji did claim to be a Perfect Master, and the source will be right. Maharaji suggested strongly that he is the Perfect Master. Andries 21:49, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You are clueless, Andries. It is delusional wishful thinking. Face it: You have no understanding beyond the one that comes from your collusion with the ex-premies to pile-up on the criticism. It is disgraceful and shameful. They curse you, accuse you of crazy stuff, and you keep going back to them. Unbelievable that you do keep doing their dirty work for them after all they say about you.

I have reverted your edits. Please desist from loading up this page for no reason. It is already 42 K and what you have added is already been said in this and the main article.--64.81.88.140 22:37, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jossi, where in the main article? How is this voiced there as criticism? If this article gets too long then please remove some of the rebuttals; This article is called "Criticism of Prem Rawat" not "Rebuttals to Criticism of Prem Rawat. I do not rely only on the information of ex-premies as can be read on the discussion board where I openly voice my skepticism. Apart from their information I also rely on scholarlry NRm information . I would like to hear more from premies but there is hardly information on wwww.maharaji.nl and when I ask them they tell me to watch the Keys- videos. That is not constructive. Also I do not trust their intellectual honesty. Andries 06:57, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why do you call me Jossi? I am not Jossi. If you think that I will let you write whatever garbage you want without a rebuttal just because this article is about criticism, you can forget it. I just removed the stuff about the succession, because it is covered in the main article, in the Divine Mission article, and in the Hans Ji Maharaji article. Enough said. I neither trust your intellectual honesty, nor your motives for helping the ex-premies. You must have a real problem if you accept their vitriolic attacks against you and continue helping them. Take a vacation.--64.81.88.140 16:11, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sorry but German Translation got completly crippled

German editors found our articles "Prem Rawat" and "Kritik an Prem Rawat" so obscure that they categorized it under [2], which means, they suspect the whole construct to be done as a catalyst for linkspamming. The critics-article will get deleted because they see it's mere existence as POV. And the main article is already completely shortened. None of those editors have read the originals or are even interested in it. So much to Wikipedia - Germany.Thomas h 18:37, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, I put this article on VfD, too. --Pjacobi 18:41, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)