>then the children of those premies having very high and constant levels of peace and bliss, if there any, would be more likely to become premies than those with parents whose lives were, well, not very peaceful or blissful.<

That is an interesting proposition - but one which I have serious doubts about. The relationship between parent and child is fundamental to human existence - without a sound parent/child relationship not only are the individuals invloved - parent and child,  and invariably the wider family - inhibited in their own personal development/enjoyment of happiness but the culture in which they exist is depleted in its richness. On an evolutionary level if human parent/child relationships were to 'fail' at a species level, we would rapidly face extinction.

The peace/bliss typically expressed by premies - and the majority of the worlds 'spiritually enlightened' or 'divinely blessed' - is something which separates the individual from society and culture, and even places a barrier on intimate relationships. Far from being a desirable attribute in a parent - being in that 'inner place' enjoying that 'personal contentment' would be akin to purposly adopting 'autistic' behaviours. My guess is that many premie children have a sense that their parents are always somewhere else and that they (the children) have been set an impossible task - not merely to attain the psychotic dettachment confered by Rawat's Knowledge and which is held by their parents as an attainment of perfection - but that only by attaining that perfection can they ever get close to their parents.

Parenting is not about bliss (well there a few rare moments along the way), children need parents who can express, share and value the full range of human experiences and emotions - the self centred, self absorbed, monoegoic state that premieism conferes is likely to produce unhappy children no matter how blissed the parent is.

Nik