I ask this in all humility, as I respect the amount of research and knowledge that is typically brought to bear in discusions of Rawat and the various institutions that have variously grown up to support his endeavors.To me, this is a cult, not a "personality cult." Hell, great musicians and various charsimatic individuals, political and cultural and other can have "cult" followings. but somehow the term doesn't carry enough of the weight of evil that this group deserves.
Yes, the cult revolves around Rawat - in that sense "personality" as a descriptor seems redundant - in other words, do not all "cults" revolve around charismatic individuals?
On a humourous note - it can't possibly be a "personality cult", because if anyone actually was exposed to Rawat's personality, (or lack thereof) they would almost certainly be so suddenly and abrubtly disenchanted that they would. appalled and horrified and mortified, bow out with all due haste.
But what am I saying? - the rat takes care of that eventuality by such severe and instensive screening for personal "service" that one must be essentially brain dead to get anywhere near the fucker.
Once in a while - those who are close can't stomach the wretched reality of the situation anymore, and in spite of impulses born of the need for the survival of the psyche, face the unfaceable and call the sorry charade for what it is.
Proximity is probably the greatest fear for the rat - and paradoxically an inescapeable need. Those mishapen psychologies addicted to adoration and adulation do not enjoy the luxury of indifference - the horrible craving and need for the re-inforcement of their self-image is undeniable and relentless.
This affliction will be Rawat's undoing. For in its insatiability is written exposure, and lack of due caution. When the monster is revealed - that monstosity, that aberation, that horrible need and pathology will repel and horrify all but those so sated in delusion as to be, for all intents and purposes- utterly insensate.
