I think you're right that we all come to looking back on our involvement with this cult from our own particular experiences, and then we expand that into the more general discussion of positive and negative in the abstract, and that's all going to be a bit vague.

And I agree with Pat that this medium tends to make everyone appear to be more "black and white" than they probably are, because you can't see body language, voice inflection, and you can't follow up with any kinds of qualifiers.  Like he said, you have to kind of state your position a little more curtly than you might want to, otherwise you would be writing essays.

But I actually haven't seen all that much criticism of "premies" here, except sometimes for the ones who come here and are abusive, evasive, or just trying to piss people off.  There is a general characterization of the premie mind-set, which I think is actually pretty accurate (after all, we all were premies, too, so we know what we thought), but the idea that there is some kind of stereotype presented that premies are all deadbeats, I haven't really seen, except to the extent people say the premies THEY know are deadbeats.

I also know some premies who are pretty much just having the "Rawat Religion," and it's like what I mentioned to Paddy, that many people can fall into a situation where they put it someplace in their lives with everything else.  But I doubt Rawat would agree with that.

But there is an area that is pretty much essential to be a premie, and it is pretty much unexamined in most premies, and it's that Rawat is infallable, beyond criticism, and that knowledge is an "ultimate" experience that is due completely to Rawat.  That's the essence of it, and it's really what makes it a cult.  And it's the main think that ex-premies dispute.

Now, what effect that has on people probably varies considerably, and these days, for most premies, it probably doesn't affect their day-to-day lives all that much, except to the extent that one is believing they have the answer to something and they don't, but then only to the extent that they shut off other things as a result.  But as you say, other belief systems can do that too.

I was one of those ashram-types who got all the fire and brimstone from Rawat at ashram meetings, but to be fair he was pretty fire and brimstone to almost everyone for some years there. It was very damaging to me and others, but one of the main topics here is pointing out that Rawat hasn't taken any responsbility for it, or even admitted it happened.  So, to the extent premies say he doesn't have to, or deny the experiences that we had, or blame the victim, then exes can get a bit testy with premies for obvious reasons, because it becomes personal.

I have always said that if somebody is "happy" as a premie, EPO and ex-premies aren't going to be an issue for them, but if they are not, then EPO is there to help them figure out how to get out and move on.

And one other ponit.  Many of the premies who come here, seem to think that criticism of Rawat by the ex-premies somehow is wrecking their experience, of making it impossible for them to have it.  This never made any sense to me.  They also say that criticism of Rawat is somehow libellous, or personally hurtful to premies.  Again, I don't buy it, and it only makes sense if you think that Prem Rawat being unexamined the criticized is essential to your personal well-being.