Misplaced Pages

Criticism of Prem Rawat

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by StopItTidyUp (talk | contribs) at 19:08, 10 September 2006 (→Sites responding to critics: remove rebuttal links - see talk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:08, 10 September 2006 by StopItTidyUp (talk | contribs) (→Sites responding to critics: remove rebuttal links - see talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Main article: Prem Rawat

Prem Rawat (also called Maharaji and formerly known as Guru Maharaj Ji attracted controversy and criticism since he started delivering his teachings in the 1960s. This criticism has also been directed at related organizations such as Divine Light Mission, now known as Elan Vital.

The sources of criticism come from individuals related to the anti-cult movement of the 1970s, media articles from the 1970s and 1980s, and articles by several scholars in the 1970s and early 1980s.

Since the 1990s, a number of former students who call themselves "ex-premies." level criticism at what they consider claims of divinity made by Prem Rawat, their unresolved issues about their former belief in Rawat's personal divinity, and his newer image as human teacher; at what they view as apparent historical revisionism, financial exploitation, hypocrisy, encouragement of uncritical acceptance, and at other issues. The criticism by these former students 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 purposely 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. Unfortunately though, Gubler was not able to provide evidence to the court that he had made the affidavit under duress and the court would not allow him to retract it. The court stated that there was a "credibility handicap" in Gubler's claim.

Criticism and observations in several scholarly articles

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 of Amsterdam in 1981, a university that upholds the tradition of Christian standards and values. 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 claims of 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. Haan never learned the techniques of Knowledge about which to base these strongly critical opinions.

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 students, 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 Dutch religious scholar and Christian minister 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. Such criticism, however, does overlook the opulent lifestyles led by many prominent Christian evangelists and politicians.

The sociologist Ralph Larkin wrote together with Daniel A. Foss 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.

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 students' view of the guru and their projections on him.

The psychiatrist Saul V. Levine, who published several articles about cults and new religious movements, wrote in an 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" His analysis was based on practices, such as the monastic life in ashrams, that were abandoned in the 1980s when Prem Rawat threw off anachronistic Hindu religious and cultural trappings previously associated with his message. See Prem Rawat: The 1980s & 1990s.

Other scholars and authors that have written about this subject but who do not level criticism against Prem Rawat include: Andrew Kopkind, Charles H. Lippy , John Bassett McCleary,, Ruth Prince and David Riches, Bryan R. Wilson, Dennis Marcellino, Erwin Fahlbusch, Tim Miller, Raymond Lee, Rosemary Goring, George D. Chryssides, David V. Barrett, Lucy DuPertuis Gordon J. Melton, Jeffrey K. Hadden, Eugene M. Elliot III, Sandra S. Frankiel, and James Lewis. Barret, Dupertuis, Melton and Lewis mention criticism by the media, Rawat's mother, Bob Mishler, and anticultists respectively. Stephen A. Kent makes self-admitted subjective criticism (lacking substance) based on his personal experience with Prem Rawat and treats the criticism by the countercultural left on him in the 1970s.

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 students and his organizations attracted media scrutiny and attention. Examples of articles appearing in the mainstream press in that decade include a 1974 article in Rolling Stone magazine and a 1979 article in the New York Review of Books. During the 1980s and until the late 1990s, there was very little media coverage of Prem Rawat and related organizations.

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 then disbanded and replaced by the non-religious, educational nonprofit, 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 by former followers that call themselves ex-premies

Some of this section's listed sources may not be reliable. Please help improve this article by looking for better, more reliable sources. Unreliable citations may be challenged and removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Since the late 1990 the main criticism levelled against Rawat, his students, and affiliated groups The Prem Rawat Foundation and Elan Vital, has been voiced by a group of critical ex-students. They call themselves "ex-premies," based on the practice that was used in the 1970s and 1980s of calling Rawat's followers "premies". Outside India, that practice has been discontinued.

Ex-premies' criticisms are outlined in the form of a letter titled The 14 objections, An Open Letter to Prempal Rawat's Followers. The criticisms and 14 objections are: claims of divinity made by Prem Rawat; financial exploitation; demands by Rawat to live in ashrams; the techniques of the Knowledge meditation; Rawat's lineage claims; X-Rating of premies who work closely with Rawat (inner circle); his $7 million yacht; front row seats at programs and darshan for sale; Rawat's encouragement that the premies' inner experience is a due to his grace; and Rawat telling his followers that they should rely solely upon him as their "inner friend," eschewing all other human relationships. Ex-premies view the way that Rawat and his current students explain these fourteen issues as apparent historical revisionism.

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 similar grievances and allegations are presented. Some of these websites contain scanned pages of publications of the Divine Light Mission from the 1970s. 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 claims 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 about 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 students 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 students of such claims. They point to statements supposedly made by Rawat—there is no evidence that he made them—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 1971 Rawat said "What is God? You don't know what God is. God cannot be a human being. God is Light; God is power. God cannot talk" . In Westminster in 1971 Rawat said "The world thinks, people think, that God is man. People think that God has got ears, nose, teeth, and he rises daily in the morning, brushes his teeth and washes his mouth. And they think he is an old man and has a beard. All these things people think. But no, God is energy. God is perfect and pure energy" . And again in Colorado in 1971 Rawat said - "Some people think that God is a human being but he is not. God hasn't got ears like us. nose like us,teeth, tongue, lungs, chest, bones. He isn't like that" .And 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 also 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 students 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."

Allegations 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 Haagse Post in which ex-premie Jos Lammers complained about Prem Rawat's behavior when visiting the Netherlands. His complaints were that Rawat surrounded himself with "security premies", refrained from associating with local premie leaders and required the local DLM center to pay for his shopping while, at the same time according to Lammers, he received huge amounts of financial donations during his programs.

Elan Vital and the Prem Rawat Foundation claim 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. Elan Vital and The Prem Rawat Foundation state in their websites that Prem Rawat supports himself and his family through private means and receive no compensation for his public appearances.

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.

Allegations of lack of credibility

The ex-premie group contends Prem Rawat has no credibility in his teachings because of a large gap that exists between what he once prescribed for his personnel and students and what he practised himself, a gap they characterize as hypocrisy. This criticism is based on allegations made by Michael Donner, Bob Mishler and Michael Dettmers in the 1970s and early 1980s, in which they accuse Rawat of alcoholism, marijuana use, anxiety 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 website describes 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.

Allegations 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. Rawat has never claimed they were and current practitioners of the techniques state that whether they are unique or not is irrelevant, that the experience that they bring to the individual in the moment is what matters.

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

Allegations against claims 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 Master. Supporters say that indeed Prem Rawat 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 "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.

Other

Dr. Mike Finch who was a student of Prem Rawat for 30 years after which he became a critic, writes in response to allegations by Elan Vital that the critical ex-followers calling themselves "ex-premies" are a hate group, 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. Current supporters of Prem Rawat say that many aspects of Maharaji's past speeches, while consistent in message and meaning to his message today, involved references to defunct means of outreach and use of terms that, rather than serving as sources of embarrassment, would confuse a person today who is being introduced to Maharaji's message.

Elan Vital's complaints against the "ex-premie" group

Elan Vital, characterizes the critical ex-followers that call themselves "ex-premies" as an insignificantly small group and dismiss their criticism of Prem Rawat generally as fallacious, ill-intended, and unfounded hearsay. Elan Vital Australia has published a long list of the activities of the ex-premies, 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 Prem Rawat, 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."

In an 2005 affidavit filed under oath, former ex-premie John Macgregor seems to confirm many of the allegations made by Elan Vital about the ex-premies. 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 an 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 Indian 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 (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 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. 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.
  • In February 2004, Marianne Bachers an employee of the State of California Public Defender’s Office and according to sworn court papers a prominent individual belonging to the "Ex-Premie Group" , filed a “John Doe” defamation complaint in the Superior Court of California . The Complaint centered on allegations on www.one-reality.net that Bachers was actively harassing and “cyberstalking” Maharaji’s students. By filing a defamation suit against allegedly unknown “John Does,” Bachers used the discovery methods in litigation to issue subpoenas to interrogate Prem Rawat’s students ostensibly about the identity of the webmaster of that page. Legal commentators have decried the use of such tactics as antithetical to free speech and the First Amendment According to court papers, Bachers never wrote to the anonymous webmaster of www.one-reality.net and never demanded that he remove the posting. Bachers’ court papers say that she tried and failed to obtain personal information about various people by issuing subpoenas to various Internet Service Providers and web hosting companies.
    According to court documents, in May of 2005, Geoff Staker, a resident of Japan came forward and told the Court that he was the webmaster of One-reality.net and was solely responsible for the material at issue. Staker also filed a Notice to Strike under California’s Anti-SLAPP Law. Staker’s legal papers argued that Bacher’s defammation complaint was designed to use the discovery process as a method of harassment, one of the methods of attacking First Amendment rights raised by experts . Although Bachers no longer needed to pursue discovery against unknown John Does, Bachers insisted that she had the right to continue to attempt to depose Prem Rawat’s students. One deponent, Carlos Harden, was granted a Protective Order by the Court from Bachers in terms of being questioned about his spiritual or religious beliefs .
    Although Bachers would later claim in an April 2006 internet posting to have been granted the right to depose various students of Prem Rawat, in May 2005 based on her legal tactics in the Harden deposition, the Court expressly denied Bachers’ request to pursue any discovery pending the substantive outcome of Staker’s SLAPP motion.
    In October 2005, the lower court denied Staker’s motion Without Opinion, automatically rendering the matter for adjudication by the appellate court, under California’s First Amendment case law. According to court documents, had the case proceeded after appeal, Staker was prepared to prove that: the statements about Bachers were true; that her Complaint was invalid for Statute of limitations reasons; that his statements were constitutionally-protected opinion; and that as a limited-purpose public figure, Bachers could not prove “actual malice” as required by the First Amendment. Instead of pressing her case, Bachers asked for the matter to be mediated, and the two parties reached an agreement. On April 20, 2006, Bachers withdrew the Complaint and Staker withdrew his appeal. The two are barred from discussing each other further.

References

  1. http://ex-premie.org Ex-premie.org website (Retrieved September 2005)
  2. http://www.elanvital.com.au/faq/idx/11/085/article Elan Vital Australia FAQs
  3. http://www.elanvital.org/faq/JMG_AFFIDAVIT.pdf Affidavit by John Murray Macgregor, http://elanvital.com.au/faq/PDF/gubler.pdf Affidavit by Thomas R. Gubler
  4. Website purportedly by Thomas Gubler (Retrieved Oct 2005)
  5. State Reporting Bureau - Supreme Court of Queensland, Order 9538 01/03/2004 p.5-7 "The affidavit also makes it plain that the interaction between those present on this occasion was not stressful and that no illegitimate pressure was brought to bear. Gubler suffers from the credibility handicap of having sworn one thing in one occasion and another on a later occasion after having spoken to a party to the proceedings about his evidence" J. Muir.
  6. Haan, Wim (Dutch language) De missie van het Goddelijk licht van goeroe Maharaj Ji: een subjektieve duiding from the series Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland: Feiten en Visies nr. 3, autumn 1981. ISBN 90-242-2341-5 (Based mainly on the Dutch branch of the Divine Light Mission.) Note: Haan was part of a critical movement within the Catholic church
  7. Lans, Jan van der (Dutch language) Volgelingen van de goeroe: Hedendaagse religieuze bewegingen in Nederland page 117, written upon request for the KSGV published by Ambo, Baarn, 1981 ISBN 90-263-0521-4
  8. Kranenborg, Reender (1982) Oosterse Geloofsbewegingen in het Westen/Eastern faith movements in the West (Dutch language) ISBN 90-210-4965-1
  9. Schnabel, Paul Dr. (Dutch language) Between stigma and charisma: new religious movements and mental health Erasmus university Rotterdam, Faculty of Medicine, Ph.D. thesis, ISBN 90-6001-746-3 (Deventer, Van Loghum Slaterus, 1982), Chapter II, page 33, Chapter IV page 99, page 101-102, Chapter V, page 142
  10. Levine, Saul V. Life in the Cults, article that appeared in the book edited by Marc Galanter M.D., (1989), Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the American Psychiatric Association, ISBN 0-89042-212-5
  11. Kopkind, Andrew. The Thirty Years' Wars pp.233-4. Verso, ISBN 1-85984-096-5
  12. Lippy, Charles H.Pluralism Comes of Age: American Religious Culture in the Twentieth Century p.114, M. E. Sharpe (2002), ISBN 0-7656-0151-6
  13. McCleary Bassett, John. The Hippie Dictionary: A Cultural Encyclopedia of the 1960s and 1970s. p.140, Ten Speed Press(2004), ISBN 1-58008-547-4
  14. Prince Ruth & Riches Davies, The New Age in Glastonbury: The Construction of Religious Movements, pp.99-100, Berghahn Books (2001), ISBN 1-57181-792-1
  15. Wilson, Bryan, New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response. pp.268-9, Routledge (UK), ISBN 0-415-20049-0
  16. Fahlbusch E. (Ed.) The Encyclopedia of Christianity (1998). p.861, ISBN 90-04-11316-9
  17. Goring, Rosemary. Dictionary of Beliefs & Religions. p.145, Wordsworth Editions (1997), ISBN 1-85326-354-0
  18. Hadden, Jeffrey K. and Elliot III, Eugene M. "Divine Light Mission/Elan Vital" in Melton, Gordon J. and Bauman, Martin (Eds.) "Religions of the world: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of beliefs and practices" ABC-CLIO (2002), ISBN 1-57607-223-1
  19. Frankiel, Sandra S. in Lippy, Charles H. and Williams. Peter W. (Eds.) Encyclopedia of the American Religious Experience p.1521, harles Scribner's Sons (1988), ISBN 0-684-18863-5 (Vol III)
  20. Rolling Stone Magazine. The Seventies: A Tumultous Decade Reconsidered. Rolling Stones Press, 1998. p. 102, ISBN 0-316-75914-7
  21. du Plessix Gray, Francine. Blissing out in Houston. The New York Review of Books. vol.20, no. 20 (December 13, 1973)
  22. Rick Ross, Steven Hassan and Anton Hein pages and links on Elan Vital (Retrieved Sept 2005)
  23. Forum8.org ICANN registry information (Retrieved September 2005)
  24. Documentation of ownership of websites by John Brauns (Retrieved Aug 2005)
  25. FAQs elanvital.org FAQs (Retrieved Aug 2005)
  26. The Living Master -Quotes from Guru Maharaj Ji - Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 2 1971
  27. "Who is Guru Maharaj JI" Bantam Books
  28. "Who is Guru Maharaj JI" Bantam Books
  29. Marcellino, Dennis Why Are We Here?: The Scientific Answer to This Age-Old Question (That You Don't Need to Be a Scientist to Understand).Lighthouse Publishing, 1996. p. 129. ISBN 0-945272-10-3
  30. Press conference. Astroworld Hotel, Houston Texas, November 9, 1973.
  31. "At the Capitol Theatre, Sydney, Australia, on 18 October 1975," The Golden Age 24 (September 1975), 6–13.
  32. "An interview with Guru Maharaji," The Golden Age 54 (July 1979), 3–5.
  33. About Elan Vital, Prem Rawat (Retrieved Sept 2005)
  34. Accounts attributed to Michael Dettmers , Mike Donner and the alleged transcipt of a radio interview by Bob Mishler - (Retrieved Sept 2005)
  35. 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
  36. Press Release by The Prem Rawat Foundation (Retrieved Sept 2005). See also Wikiquote: Accolades by business and government leaders.
  38. FAQs elanvital.org FAQs (Retrieved Aug 2005)
  39. Affidavit by John Murray Macgregor, Affidavit by Thomas R. Gubler
  40. Hate group harasses EV and Maharaji's students Elan Vital FAQ (Retrieved Sept 2005)
  41. Drug Bust: $2.5 million marijuana haul in Ipswitch PDF (Retrieved Sept 2005)
  42. Quin & Scattini Lawyers (Retrieved Feb 2005)
  43. The Prem Rawat Foundation v. Jeff Leason Claim Number: FA0401000231883
  44. A statement from Dr. Ron Geaves
  45. Complaints against the "ex-pemie" group
  46. http://www.ospd.ca.gov/main.html
  47. http://www.one-reality.net/images/Aff_of_M.pdf
  48. Case Number: CGC-04-428487, MARIANNE BACHERS VS. DOES 1 TO 20, available on line at http://www.sftc.org/Scripts/Magic94/mgrqispi94.dll?APPNAME=IJS&PRGNAME=ROA&ARGUMENTS=-ACGC04428487
  49. http://www.chillingeffects.org/johndoe/; http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/internet/topic.aspx?topic=online_libel; See also, “SILENCING JOHN DOE: DEFAMATION & DISCOURSE IN CYBERSPACE”, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Available on line at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dlj/articles/dlj49p855.htm
  50. http://www.cyberslapp.org/about/page.cfm?PageID=7
  51. http://www.sftc.org/minds_asp/Mainpage.asp?web_server=207.215.212.15&minds_server=ntimagex&category=C&DocID=01114129
  52. http://www.sftc.org/minds_asp/Mainpage.asp?web_server=207.215.212.15&minds_server=ntimagex&category=C&DocID=01198387
  53. http://www.one-reality.net/

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 students.
  • 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



Prem Rawat (related topics)
Teachings
Books
Films
Related
Categories:
Criticism of Prem Rawat Add topic