I would advice young people to judge a cult by the extent to which selfless service to others is part of their doctrine.  You can't prevent people from being naive (especially young people), but at least if the cult that they get involved in has a committment to helping people (that's helping rather than changing), they will at least be doing a bit of good while they come to their senses.

I think cults will always be with us in one form or another: they reflect a deep human need for brotherhood and belonging but also a natural fear and aversion of impersonal authority structures (most cults are reactions against something, eg established religions or governments).  Rather than try to define what it is about a cult that is inherently bad, or try to distinguish religions from cults, we should rather look at what are the positive attributes of people coming together for idealist purposes, what behaviours and social structures are likely to enhance the satisfaction of members and benefit society, and what are likely to be damaging and unproductive.

If Rawat had used a substantial part of his wealth and the premies energies to alieviate human misery in some sort of practical way - however small - then the fact that he's a charlatan would not matter. (Might even have been able to put the years wasted in the cult on my resume.)

Rob