|
|
|
In the summer of 1976, Michael Dettmers said to me, “The only way to access Maharaji is through Bob Mishler, and that doesn’t sit well with me.” Dettmers had his own ideas about how things should be done. He had a vision of Maharaji as a humanitarian world leader. That was the thinking that prevailed for a period of time. So essentially, there was something of a power struggle between Michael Dettmers and Bob Mishler, who was taken from being the overall Chief Executive to simply being the head of North American Operations. Obviously, that didn't sit well with Mishler at all. But what about Rawat's own vision? What was that? Seeing as he's now trying to go the revised humanitarian world leader route, or something along those lines, you'd think Knight should be saying that Dettmers more or less had it right. Of course he can't do that, though, because Dettmers has denounced Rawat and the last thing the cult wants is to support or agree with him about anything. Hm ...
|
|
|
|
This whole website is officially sanctioned by TPRF, which is trying to revive the "humanitarian leader" and "world peacemaker" crap about Rawat, and here the old devotional types are criticizing Dettmers and Mishler for proposing the exact thing in 1976, like it was bad or something. As I read this website, it almost seems like TPRF is reverting to LordoftheUniverseland without the words. Just read the spiritual/mystical bullshit of Bahari Singh and Charanand, not to mention Jon Knight and Jon Hampton. Strange. But that's what makes cults interesting. They do not in any sense function in a logical manner. I personally think it's because of Rawat's personal involvement, and the fact that he seems to feel contradiction is always somebody else's problem.
|
|
|
|
It's true, isn't it? You never know what kind of idiocy they'll come up with. Over time they've scoffed at every idea they've ballyhooed either before, after or even simultaneously. I guess that's the magic or something. LOL! 
|
|
|
|
......that's what gave the cult a peculiar hold over me. I could never quite make sense of anything; put my finger on it; so I remembered holy name ,never left doubt in my confused and bewildered mind and danced away with the fairies.In the end I gave up even half trying to make sense out of it as I knew it was a fruitless task. It quite sad to realise that those same premies ...that I knew ( at least by sight and their satsang ) when I was young ,are still living in loonyland.
Modified by Lexy at Thu, Dec 22, 2005, 19:38:28
|
|
|
|
But that's what makes cults interesting. They do not in any sense function in a logical manner. I personally think it's because of Rawat's personal involvement, and the fact that he seems to feel contradiction is always somebody else's problem. Absolutely right Joe, (I reposted this from below.) The scan from Hilltop shows that as late as June/July 1978, a 21-year-old Mr. Rawat was singing the praises of the book Who Is Guru Maharaj Ji and comparing it to scripture. In this book Maharaji’s mother is spoken of as the Divine Holy Mother of All Creation, his oldest brother is compared to Christ, and one brother is praised as the Divine Incarnation of Music. On the back cover of Who Is Guru Maharaj Ji, Maharaji himself is acclaimed as the “greatest incarnation of God that ever trod the face of the planet.” That was in 1978. And lo and behold in 2005 Maharaji says that he has never ever, ever claimed to be anything but a human being. That's what makes cults interesting and humorous.
Related link: http://www.prem-rawat-talk.org/forum/posts/167.html
Modified by Steve at Thu, Dec 22, 2005, 21:47:29
|
|
|
|
is the fact that for the last few years they've accused the " hate group" of being "trapped in the 70's" Well blow me down with a feather...they're dredging up quotes from 71/72 to further their personality cult interests. ( well, ok, harking back to that time, at any rate...just re-checked....noticed the " this happened in... " Still hilarious, though. It's hard to believe there are still sycophants willing to spin for Prem Rawat. From rebirth to the grave...no doubt.
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Dec 22, 2005, 15:41:27
|
|
|
|
>[Bob Mishler] who was taken from being the overall Chief Executive to simply being the head of North American Operations< How was Mishler 'taken' ? Who arrived at this decision ? How does the Chief Executive (of an incorporated body) simply have his post taken away ? Nik
|
|
|
