I find this topic very interesting, namely -  what are current long-time premies thinking these days?

I wanted to know the answer to this question so I thought about all my premie friends and decided that most of them would not be willing and able to answer my questions fully.  But there was one possibility, a former ashram mate of mine.

We talked on the phone and emailed at length.  It took a long time, several days and several communications.  But I finally found out the basic difference between us.   The difference between premies and ex-premies is very subtle.

My premie friend still believes that there is something to discover within through the practice of Knowledge, and that people who don't have Knowledge are missing an "inner understanding" that he enjoys through Knowledge.   I, in contrast, do not believe that I have something that other non-premie people do not have, and I believe that what we can discover or understand about ourselves is not dependent on Knowledge or even particularly helped by practicing Knowledge. 

The difference is hard to grasp.  My friend said many other things that were of no help to me, such as saying that "I know who I am and other people do not know who they really are."  This is too vague for me.  He also said that in the 70's we misunderstood satchitanand, but again what kind of misunderstanding he was talking about I could not grasp.  He could not adequately describe to me the difference between enlightenement and "inner peace."  I think these two concepts must remain confused in order for a premie to continue to practice Knowledge. 

I myself can no longer emotionally tolerate the kind of mental outlook that I use to hold to as a premie, namely that there is some sort of "higher" state of mind that I need to discover by meditation.  I believe that current long-time premies think in a way that is actually very close to my way of thinking, namely that our fulfillment comes from acceptance of the reality of the here and now and that there is no perfect state to grasp for.  We share the human wish to simply open ourselves to beauty and truth.   The difference is that premies approach beauty and truth through the framework that Rawat presents, whereas I see this framework as unnecessary and even invalid. 

Continuing to perceive the framework of Knowledge as the legitimate path to inner peace must be difficult to premies.  They must be confronted with the obvious fact that they are not enlightened or even more peaceful than other people generally.  The must be confronted with the fact that so many former premies discount the validity of Rawat and the path of Knowledge.  

Still, beauty does exist.  And truth does exist.  And we can align ourselves with these things as far as we are willing and able to do so.   The problem with Knowledge is that it is far too narrow to fit the truth.  The "Unlit Match" speech by Rawat reveals his narrowness in blazing light.  Knowledge suffers the inadequacies and failures of all religions.  I find that premies are narrow people following a narrow path, just as all the other religious people are doing on their respective paths.  The result is a shallow and narrow peace, not the universality of truth.