Talk:Prem Rawat/scholars

message: "Subgroups in Divine Light Mission Membership: A Comment on Downton" by Frans Derks and Jan M. van der Lans in the book Of Gods and Men: New Religious Movements in the West. edited by Eileen Barker. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, (1984), ISBN 0-86554-095-0 pages 303-308 
copyright © 1983 Mercer University Press
:You are welcome to provide a few cites from this material, if you have it available, but please do not link to pages that are unreliable and that carry copyright violations. Thanks. ˜ jossi ˜ (talk) 16:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The source is accurate. I checked it. Andries 16:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Derks and Lans 1984

message: :Note: Ron Geaves is a Professor of Religion at Liverpool Hope University in England. He was one of the earlier students of Prem Rawat. He was formerly Programme Leader and Chair in religious studies at the University of Chester in England and Head of Department at the University of Chichester.
===Geaves 2002===
;Geaves, Ron, From Totapuri to Maharaji: Reflections on a Lineage (Parampara), paper delivered to the 27th Spalding Symposium on Indian Religions, Regents Park College, Oxford, 22–24 March 2002
; Abstract
During the early years of the 1970s, Divine Light Mission experienced phenomenal growth in the West. The teachings of  the young Guru Maharaji (now known  as Maharaji), based upon an experience of fulfilment arrived at by four techniques that focused attention inward, spread quickly to Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Scandinavia, Japan, South America, Australasia, Canada and the USA. Today, the teachings have gone worldwide to over 80 countries. 
This paper will firstly demonstrate that these various scholars who identify Maharaji’s roots as Sant Mat, or more specifically Radhasoami, are mistaken. Secondly, it will show that a more accurate exploration of Maharaji’s historical background provides an excellent opportunity to study the complexity of  the various ways of organising such lineages and can demonstrate how intricately major strands of Hinduism can interweave with each other to create new paradigms to assert an ancient teaching capable of transcending discrete religious borders. Thirdly, this investigation of lineage will throw light on the relationship between charisma and institutionalisation in the Indian context and will allow for a revisiting of Gold’s classification of Sant tradition in particular.
[...]
the main focus of scholarly interest came from sociologists who were primarily concerned with issues of membership, charisma, and debates concerning cult/sect definition and formation.  Very little attention was received from scholars of religion and the little that was received tended to come from those who were aware of North Indian sant tradition and its lineages. The majority of these assumed that the teachings of Maharaji could be placed in the Sant Mat revival, best represented by the Radhasoami movement. Some even went as far as to establish Shri Hans Ji Maharaj’s credentials by asserting that he had been taught the four techniques of Knowledge by Radhasoamis, probably in the period of his life when he relocated in East Punjab from his birthplace near Bodrinath. Olsen (v) asserts that Divine Light Mission was a Radhasoami-inspired movement that had the ‘greatest public American presence’. Dupertuis goes even further and claims that ‘the gurus of Divine Light Mission traced their spiritual lineage from Sant Mat and Radhasoami traditions’ (vi). Melton further compounds the theory by identifying Shri Hans Ji Maharaj’s guru  as ‘Dada Guru’ who he claims is of the Sant Mat tradition and who initiated Maharaji’s father into surat shabd yoga (the yoga of the sound current) (vii).  
This paper will firstly demonstrate that these various scholars who identify Maharaji’s roots as Sant Mat, or more specifically Radhasoami, are mistaken. Secondly, it will show that a more accurate exploration of Maharaji’s historical background provides an excellent opportunity to study the complexity of  the various ways of organising such lineages and can demonstrate how intricately major strands of Hinduism can interweave with each other to create new paradigms to assert an ancient teaching capable of transcending discrete religious borders. Thirdly, this investigation of lineage will throw light on the relationship between charisma and institutionalisation in the Indian context.
The scholarly literature that ascribes a Radhasoami background to the life of Maharaji’s father has been used by a small but vociferous dissatisfied opposition of ex-members as evidence that Maharaji himself is a fraud who has constructed a false account of history that reinvents himself.  However, Maharaji’s history is linked to the lineage of Advait Mat, a north Indian cluster of movements which perceive themselves as originating from Totapuri, the teacher of Ramakrishna Paramhans with claimed ancient links back to Shankaracharya through a succession of Das Nami sadhus. Maharaji has referred to this lineage as his own on his website as follows:
Shri Totapuri ji Maharaj (1780-1866)
Shri Anandpuri ji Maharaj (1782-1872)
Param Hans Dayal Shri Advaitanand ji (1840-1919)
Shri Swarupanand ji Maharaj (1884-1936)
Yogiraj Param Hans Satgurudev Shri Hans ji Maharaj (1900-1966) 
There is no doubt that Shri Hans Ji Maharaj was a prominent disciple of Shri Swarupanand Ji. This was confirmed on field research at Nangli Sahib in Uttar Pradesh in February 2001. 
[...]
Conclusion
The lineage from Anand Puri to Maharaji provides an interesting source of research for those interested in the relationship between founders, paramparas and panths. It is clear that the lineage is not proven to be connected to the Radhasoamis although it develops historically in the same period and in the same region of Northern India and has some similarities regarding organisation and symbolic language at various stages of its development. It is also questionable to label the lineage as Advait Mat as opposed to Sant Mat as the term Advait Mat seems to have been developed by the institutionalised developments after the death of Swarupanand Ji. It does not figure in the language of the masters themselves, including Shri Hans Ji Maharaj and his son Maharaji. Although Advaita forms of nirguna doctrine would have permeated the movements which developed particularly under the first two gurus, because of their origins in Das Nami renunciate traditions that emerged from the teachings of Shankacharya, these would have become less important when Swarupanand Ji was alive. His promotion of the teachings on a large scale to the common people of the Punjab brought about both organisational changes and a transformation of the symbolic language used to express the teachings. It is this change which appears to bring the tradition closer to Sant Mat and has probably created the confusion of a Radhasoami connection. The response of the masses who received the techniques from Swarupanand Ji was to declare their master an avatar of Krishna. This is not a usual feature of the nirguna bhakti of northern Sant tradition and probably arises from the Hindu devotion to Krishna in the region combined with the remnants of Advaita symbolic language that focuses on the Bhagavad Gita. 
It is certainly possible to label the two other traditions at Anandpur and Nangli Sahib which appeared as offshoots from Swarupanand Ji as Advait Mat to differentiate them from Sant Mat, but each of the masters who formed the lineage from Anand Puri to Maharaji were unique in their own right and are not easily bracketed into any parampara tradition, other than their focus on the need to find a master who is able to transform human existence through correct knowledge of the immanent divine and their promotion of the need for experience. Their lineage is akin to that of single charismatic masters such as Kabir or Nanak who had little interest in founding institutions. The point for scholars of Indian traditions who are interested in the formation of sampradayas, is how the meeting with a charismatic master and the apparent fulfilment of a ‘truth search’ can create the possibility for a leap across traditions.  Both Advaitanand Ji and Swarupanand Ji maintained the Das Nami suffix of ‘Puri’ when renaming their renunciates on initiation to the order but neither indicated any particular affiliation to the Das Namis and also used the Sannyasi suffix of ‘Anand’. Shri Hans Ji Maharaj, as a householder guru, dropped the suffix ‘Puri’ completely from his own order of renunciates and used only the ‘Anand’ suffix, this removing any connection to Das Namis. Prem Rawat (Maharaji) has dropped any association to a Hindu renunciate order in recent years and appoints instructors with no lifestyle commitments linked to Indian renunciate orders who assist him in teaching and disseminating the four techniques.  It would appear that this kind of fulfilment is able to cross the boundaries of traditional Hindu darshanas and sampradayas and assist in the creation of new forms of both institutional and charismatic organisations. 
The various offshoots from Swarupanand Ji demonstrate the complexity of sampradaya formation after the death of such a charismatic master, and as such provide the opportunity for study of the process. As a result of this research, Gold’s categories can be adapted as follows:
a) The solitary figure such as  Kabir, Nanak, or Ravidas can become a line of masters whose authority is derived from their own personal charisma and focus on individual experience. An institutionalised parampara need not develop if a strategy of seperating the material inheritance from the spiritual inheritence is developed. In this case, the lineage consists of a series of solitary figures such as exemplified by the succession from Anand Puri to Maharaji. 
b) As stated by Gold (viii), a lineage can develop in which the dominant focus of  spiritual power is still contained in the living holy man but the institutionalisation process develops alongside charismatic authority. Such a lineage develops into a parampara. This kind of organisation is not manifested in this case study as there was always a loss of the previous master’s material inheritence when the new master succeeded the previous one.
c) A panth, as defined by Gold, where the teachings of the past Sant(s) are claimed to be represented, but the dominant  focus of spiritual power now resides in ritual forms and scripture and officiated over by a mahant who looks after the ritual and administration is seen at the progressively institutionalised lineage from Vairaganand Ji in Anandpur. The mahant's charisma is clearly derived from his position, and his traditional connection to the original Sant.
d) A panth can develop around the samadhi of the deceased Sant in which the focus of worship manifests as veneration of the deceased master. Although the shrine will be administered by successors of the sant (either by blood relatives or mahants), their authority derives from the spiritual presence of the dead Sant embodied in the remains and within the follower’s heart. The samadhi panths are looser knit organisations than sectarian institutions and can provide the inspiration for new forms of the traditon to emerge as a result of contact with the blessings of the deceased master. Such shrine forms of religious organisation develop into pilgrimage centres and this can be seen materialising at Nangli Sahib.  
More research needs to be done by treating each form of organisation as a unique case study as well as comparative studies. Swarupanand Ji was not an insignificant figure in the history of North Indian nirguna bhakti traditions. Contemporary sources suggest that he had ten thousand followers and over three hundred ashrams in Northern India. Shri Hans Ji Maharaj extended this activity throughout India.  Both masters require more scholarly attention to place them in modern Indian religious history.  Finally, it is time to reconsider the work of Maharaji who has successfully brought these ancient teachings from India to the world arena and given them such a unique new form in which they are able to be uprooted from their origins in the subcontinent whilst maintaining the essential message of the previous master. Maharaji’s mode of teaching and delivery of the message provides an insight into the iconoclasm, universalism, spontaneity and renewal that was also a feature of the teachings of the mediaeval solitary Sants and he is also an important figure in any assessment of emergent forms of spirituality in contemporary western society.  
;Notes : (v)   Olsen, Roger  (1995), ‘Eckankar: From Ancient Science of Soul Travel to New Age Religion’ in Miller, Timothy (ed), America’s Alternative Religions, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp363-364.
:(vi) Dupertius, L (1986) ‘ How People Recognise Charisma: The Case of Darshan in Radhasoami and Divine Light Mission’,
:(vii) Melton, Gordon J. (ed) (1996 5th edition), Encyclopaedia of American Religions, Gale Research, p.890.
:(viii) Gold D., (1987) The Lord as Guru: Hindu Sants in the Northern Indian Tradition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.85.
===Geaves 2002/2004===
;Geaves, Ron, From Divine Light Mission to Elan Vital and Beyond: An Exploration of Change and Adaptation, Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, March 2004, Vol. 7, No. 3, Pages 45-62
;Abstract: 
The Following article will put forward the argument that it is necessary to take into account the worldview of the insider in order to appreciate the coherence or “rationality” of actions of a religious-spiritual teacher or organization. As a case study, the article examines the transformations that have occurred in the organizational forms utilized by Prem Rawat (a.k.a. Maharaji). While bringing readers up todate with Maharaji’s activities since the 1980s, I argue that these developments owe more to Maharaji’s self-perception of his role as a master and his wish to universalize the message historically located in the teachings of individual sant iconoclasts, than to external or internal pressures brought to bear upon the organizational forms themselves.
[...]
Daniel Foss and Ralph Larkin noted that by 1973 [t]he organization had developed a centralized bureaucracy with rampant titleism and a penchant for office forms and organizational charts. Observations of the Mission led us to the conclusion that the primary function of the staff was monitoring of its own activities. In effect, the Mission represented the ultimate parody of bureaucracy in the wider society—functionally rational but substantively irrational. Failures and bungling on the part of the Mission staff were repeatedly demonstrated, yet the symbolic forms of the organizational seriousness and managerial competence had a compelling emotional appeal to both the Mission staff itself and to many potential converts.1 Foss and Larkin were intrigued by the contradiction offered by the manner in which large numbers of young people, including “political radicals, communards, street people, rock musicians, acid-head ‘freaks,’ cultural radicals, [and] drop-outs”2were participating in Divine Light Mission. These young people were participating in and developing an organizational form that displayed many of “the elements of the social patterns of the wider society which they had rejected,” in particular bureaucratic hierarchies. Foss and Larkin explained this anomaly by suggesting that the Mission was able to maintain the support of its ex-dissident members by claiming that it was carrying on revolution by other means and in the process “emphasized formal structure without substantive content.” With this statement, Foss and Larkin declared their own bias in regard to religious or spiritual commitment. Maharaji’s message, which had attracted thousands, was summarily dismissed as possessing no “substantive content” and this was further expressed by the suggestion that the organization was “functionally rational but substantively irrational.”4 Maharaji’s own behavior was described as “nonsensical” and “unpredictable.”5However, the label of “irrationality” applied to new or traditional religious forms needs to be reviewed. It is resonant of crude reductionism sometimes found in the social sciences in regard to religious phenomena, described by Stark as the “old paradigm” in which social scientists “dig as deep as possible” to penetrate the real causes of religious phenomena while dismissing the realm of the sacred.6Stark asks his readers to acknowledge a new paradigm that argues that religion is rooted in the world of the rational and therefore to explore religious explanations for religious phenomena.7 Stark suggests that humans, when faced with choice, choose the “most rational” or reasonable option. In order to understand this process, the motivations and interpretations of the actors must be taken into account. It is only from the “inside” that the degree of rationality or reasonableness can be acknowledged. 
[...]
The most useful theory to elucidate the relation between Maharaji’s charismatic authority and his institutions are those provided by postWeberian discourse of sociologists such as Thomas O’Dea,20combined with the work of Indian religion scholars focused specifically on the sant tradition, such as Charlotte Vaudeville and Daniel Gold. Maharaji does not see himself as bound by conventional beliefs or practices of any institutionalized religion or tradition-honored worldview. He is essentially an iconoclast who plots his route by pragmatic decisions to meet the demands and challenges that occur in his public career as a teacher striving to convince people of the value of self-knowledge. It is hard to ascertain exactly where the lines of strategic adaptation and continuation are drawn, except that they seem to lie somewhere around the inviolacy of the teacher/student relationship and Maharaji’s own trust in the efficacy of the techniques to provide individuals with an inner awareness of what is permanent and unchanging within human beings. Although Maharaji does not see himself as part of a tradition or as having to conform to the behavior of any predecessor, in my view, the best way to place him is to identify him with Vaudeville’s definition of the sant. Vaudeville describes a sant as a holy man of a rather special type, who cannot be accommodated in the traditional categories of Indian holy men—and he may just as well be a woman. The sant is not a renunciate.... He is neither a yoginor a siddha, practices no asanas, boasts of no secret bhij mantrasand has no claim to magical powers. The true sant wears no special dress or insignia, having eschewed the social consideration and material benefits which in India attach to the profession of asceticism.... The sant ideal of sanctity is a lay ideal, open to all; it is an ideal that transcends both sectarian and caste barriers.
However, I wish to make a clear distinction between Sant Mat, often associated with Radhasoami lineages, and individual founder-sants. Although early scholars often identified Maharaji with Sant Mat and even Radhasoami lineages, there is no evidence to link Maharaji or his predecessors with that tradition.22 Sant Mat lineages usually display organizational forms that conform to Gold’s categorization of parampara orpanth. Individual sant-founders in Vaudeville’s terms are generally not concerned with organizational forms or institutionalized religion and display considerable iconoclasm in regard to ritual and doctrinal dimensions. Maharaji fits most aspects of the santcategorization by Vaudeville, even though he does not use this category as a self-definition. If being asant implies an iconoclasm that breaks the bounds of tradition while maintaining an emphasis on the inner experiential dimension, then Maharaji would conform to that definition. However, Maharaji is insistent that he should not be categorized into any traditional definition, including that of sant. 
[...]
CONCLUSION 
Building on the analysis of Gold and Vaudeville of the sant tradition, it could be argued that Maharaji perceives himself as the solitary sant whose authority derives from his personal charisma and is not part of any overarching formal organization, and does not have to subscribe to any particular worldview. Maharaji’s students echo this position and are united with their teacher on the primary value of personal experience. Gold argues that such figures have little inclination to establish a panth or sectarian institution,38although these may develop later.Thus, any understanding of Maharaji’s motivations would have to take into account the challenge to maintain the purity of his teachings from any sign of institutionalization. In Thomas O’Dea’s terms, this is a classic confrontation between charisma and institutionalization. O’Dea argued that the founder-innovator is only concerned with communicating the message and maintaining the spontaneity of the transcendental experience.39 Although O’Dea perceived these conflicts and tensions chronologically as a way of exploring the development of charismatic authority to institutional authority, an analysis of this new sant phenomenon still at the first stage of development provides an example of how a contemporary santmaster, the first to globalize fully his teachings, grapples with and seeks innovative solutions to the problems of institutionalization. Although there may be pragmatic problems, such as financial stability, the attitudes of the wider society, and the opposition of former practitioners, focusing on these as the prime factors of change and adaptation misses the opportunity for far more significant study of the relationship between charisma and institutionalization. In particular, Maharaji’s movement promises fascinating insights into the fine balance of maintaining the integrity of teaching and experience over the apparently inevitable processes of organizational and sectarian development wherever a sant figure has gathered students around the experience of “self-knowledge” or inner realization of “truth.” Maharaji has chosen a route of perpetual transformation in which organizational forms are created and utilized and then destroyed, thus providing flexibility to deal with rapidly changing social attitudes, to provide pragmatic solutions to internal problems, and above all to keep his students focused on the core message rather than the peripheral requirements of organizational forms. 
=== Geaves in Partridge (2004) ===
;Ron Geaves in  Christopher Partridge (Eds.),  New Religions: A Guide: New Religious Movements, Sects and Alternative Spiritualities pp.201-202, Oxford University Press, USA (2004) ISBN 978-0195220421
(Note: This piece was written by Ron Geaves, confirmed by visiting the library and checking the book). ˜ jossi ˜ (talk) 16:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geaves 

message: ;Ron Geaves in  Christopher Partridge (Eds.),  New Religions: A Guide: New Religious Movements, Sects and Alternative Spiritualities pp.201-202, Oxford University Press, USA (2004) ISBN 978-0195220421
(Note: This piece was written by Ron Geaves, confirmed by visiting the library and checking the book). ˜ jossi ˜ (talk) 16:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geaves in Partridge (2004) 

message: Melton J. Gordon Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America. New York/London: Garland, 1986 (revised edition), ISBN 0-8240-9036-5, pp. 141-145 
:(note: misspelling of the names of Mishler and Durga were made by the author(s))
----
;D. DIVINE LIGHT MISSION
The arrival in the United States in 1971 of a 13 year old religious leader from India was met with some ridicule but, more importantly, an extraordinary amount of interest from young adults who were willing to seriously examine his claims of being able to impart direct knowledge of God. From that initial support, Guru Maharaj Ji was able to establish a flourishing American branch of the Divine Light Mission.
Founders and Early History
The Divine Light mission was founded by Shri Hans Maharaj Ji (d. 1966), the father of Maharaj Ji. Early in life he encountered Sarupanand Ji, a guru of the Sant Mat tradition by whom he was initiated. Though Sarupanand Ji had told his disciples to follow Hans Maharaj Ji, after the guru’s death another disciple, Varaganand, claimed the succession and took control of the guru’s property. Hans Maharaj Ji began to spread the teaching independently in Sind and Lahore, and in 1930 he established an informal mission in Delhi. His following grew steadily. In 1950, shortly after Indian independence had been declared, he commissioned the first mahatmas, followers who had the ability to initiate and who devoted themselves full time to the work of propagating the teachings of Shri Hans Maharaj Ji. He also began a monthly magazine, Hansadesh. By 1960 followers could be found across northern India from Bombay to Calcutta, and the need to organize them more formally led to the founding of the Divine Light Mission (Divya Sandesh Parishad).
just six years after the founding of the Mission, Shri Hans Maharaj Ji was succeeded by his youngest son, Prem Pat Singh Rawat (b. 1957), who was but eight when he was recognized as the new Perfect Master and assumed the title, Maharaj Ji. Maharaj Ji had been recognized as spiritually adept, even within the circle of the Holy Family, as Shri Hans Maharaj Ji’s family was called. He had been initiated (i.e., given knowledge) at the age of six and soon afterward gave his first satsang (spiritual discourse). After his father’s death he heard a voice commissioning him as the one to take the knowledge to the world. He assumed the role of Perfect Master at his father’s funeral by telling the disciples who had gathered, “Dear Children of God, why are you weeping? Haven’t you learned the lesson that your Master taught you? The Perfect Master never dies. Maharaj Ji is here, amongst you now. Recognize Him, obey Him and worship Him.” Though officially the autocratic leader of the Mission, because of Maharaj Ji’s age, authority was shared by the whole family.
During the 1960s Americans in India searching for spiritual guidance discovered the Mission and a few became initiates (i.e., “premies,” or “lovers of God”). They invited Maharaj Ji to the United States. In 1970 Maharaj Ji announced his plans to carry the knowledge throughout the world and the following year, against his mother’s wishes, made his first visit to the West. A large crowd came to Colorado the next year to hear him give his first set of discourses in America. Many were initiated and became the core of the Mission in the United States. Headquarters were established in Denver, and by the end of 1973, tens of thousands had been initiated, and several hundred centers as well as over twenty ashrams, which housed approximately 500 of the most dedicated premies, had emerged. The headquarters staff expanded to 125, and social service facilities, such as a medical clinic in New York City, were opened. Two periodicals, And It Is Divine, a magazine, and Divine Times, a tabloid, were begun. Enthusiasm ran high.
After a spectacular beginning in North America, the Mission suffered a major setback in November 1973  It rented the Houston Astrodome for “Millennium 73,” an event celebrating the birthday of Maharaj Ji’s father and designed to announce the beginning of a thousand years of peace and prosperity. The event failed; attendance was miniscule. The Mission was left with a $600,000 debt which required it to cut its staff and programs.
Millennium 73 was but the first of a series of events which gradually led the Mission to withdraw from the public scene. It was staged just as the anti cult movement reached national proportions and turned its attention upon the Mission. Several deprogrammed ex members became vocal critics of the Mission. Through his Executive Secretary, Maharaj Ji announced that he was replacing the predominantly Indian image with a Western one. Among other changes, he began to wear business suits instead of his all white Indian attire. Many of the ashrams were discontinued.
To the problems caused by the debt and the attack of anticultists were added internal problems within Maharaj Ji’s family. In December 1973, when Maharaj Ji turned 16, he took administrative control of the Mission’s separate American corporation. Then in May 1974, he married his 24 year old secretary, Marolyn Johnson, and declared her to be the incarnation of the goddess Dulga usually pictured with ten arms and astride a tiger. Premies purchased an estate in Malibu into which the couple moved. Mataji, Maharaj Ji’s mother, disapproved of the marriage and the life style of the now successful guru. Relations within the Holy Family were strained considerably. Accusing her son of breaking his spiritual disciplines, Mataji took control of the Mission in India and replaced him with his eldest brother. In 1975 Maharaj Ji returned to India and took his family to court. In a court decreed settlement, he received control of the movement everywhere except in India, where his brother was recognized as its head. Publicity about the marriage and the subsequent family quarrels caused many Western followers to leave the Mission, though a large membership remained.
By the late 1970s the Mission in the United States had almost disappeared from public view. Maharaj Ji continues to travel the globe speaking to premies, and the Mission, while growing little in the United States, has expanded significantly in Southern Asia, the South Pacific and South America.
Beliefs and Practices
The Divine Light Mission is derived from Sant Mat (literally, the way of the saints), a variation of the Sikh religion which draws significant elements from Hinduism. It is based upon a succession of spiritual masters generally believed to begin with Tulsi Sahib, an early nineteenth century guru who lived at Hathrash, Uttar Pradesh. It is believed that the person mentioned as Sarupanand Ji in Mission literature is in fact Sawan Singh, a prominent Sant Mat guru. In any case Hans Maharaj Ji claimed a Sant Mat succession which he passed to Maharaj Ji. Maharaj Ji, as do many of the other Sant Mat leaders, claims to be a Perfect Master, an embodiment of God on earth, a fitting object of worship and veneration.
The Mission has as one of its stated goals the instruction of the world in “the technique of utilizing the universal primordial Force, that is, the Holy Name (Word) which is the same as the Divine Light and which pervades all human beings thus bringing to the fore the eternal principle of unity in diversity.” In the Sant Mat tradition this practice is called surat shabd yoga, the practice of uniting the human spirit with the universal divine sound current. The particular methods of accomplishing that union vary from group to group and are one reason for their separation. Within the Divine Light Mission, initiation into the yoga is by a process known as giving knowledge. Though premies were instructed not to talk about their initiation outside of the Mission, details of the process were soon revealed by ex members.
At initiation, a mahatma, the personal representative of Maharaj Ji, introduces new members to four yogic techniques, all of which are quite common within Sant Mat circles, although equally unknown to the average person, even to the average Indian. These four techniques reveal the means of experiencing the divine light, sound, word, and nectar. To experience the divine light, one places the knuckles on the eyeballs, a process which produces flashes of light inside the head (and also pinches the optic nerve). To discover the divine sound or music of the spheres, one plugs the ears with the fingers and concentrates only on internal sounds. The third technique involves concentration upon the sound of one’s own breathing. Finally, to taste the nectar, the tongue is curled backward against the roof of the mouth and left there for a period of time. Once learned, these techniques are practiced daily. Frequently, meditation is done under a blanket, both to block outside disturbances and to conceal the techniques.
Unlike many Sant Mat groups, the Divine Light Mission has had a social program from its beginning. Shri Hans Maharaj Ji called for a balance between temporal and spiritual concerns, and the Mission's stated goals include the promotion of human unity, world peace, improved education for all (especially the poor), and relief from the distress caused by ill health and natural calamities. The Mission made provision for the establishment of hospitals, maternity homes, and residences. This emphasis upon social programs was transferred to the United States.
Three holiday festivals which members are expected to attend are held annually. The Holi festival is in March or April. The Guru Puja (Maharaj Ji's birthday) is in July. Hans Jayanti (Hans Maharaj Ji's birthday) is in November.
Current Status
Since 1974, the Divine Light Mission has increasingly kept a low profile and at present is virtually invisible in the United States. In 1979 the Denver headquarters quietly closed, and both it and Maharaj Ji moved to Miami Beach, Florida. From there, two periodicals are currently published, Divine Times and Elan Vital.
In 1980, the Mission reported 10,000 to 12,000 active members in the United States. The Mission is headed by Maharaj Ji, its Spiritual Leader and the Board of Directors which supervises the 23 branches. Ministers (mahatmas) lead the Mission centers around the world. Many of them travel from center to center to give initiation and satsang (spiritual discourses). Members are required to participate in meditation daily and attend satsang each evening.
Controversy
During the first years of the Divine Light Mission in the United States, both it and Maharaj Ji were constantly involved in controversy. The teachings of the Mission, particularly the public discourses of Maharaj Ji, were condemned as lacking in substance. Maharaj Ji, who frequently acted like the teenager that he was in public, was seen as immature and hence unfit to be a religious leader. At one point, a pie was thrown in his face (which led angry followers to assault the perpetrator). Ex members attacked the group with standard anti cult charges of brainwashing and mind control.
However, as the group withdrew from the public eye, little controversy followed it except for the accusations of Robert Mishner [sic] the former president of the Mission, who left in 1977. Mishner complained that the ideals of the group had become impossible to fulfill and that money was increasingly diverted to Maharaj Ji's personal use. Mishner's charges, made just after the deaths at Jonestown, Guyana, [1978] found little support and have not affected the progress of the Mission.
References
*Shri Hans Ji Maharaj (Delhi: Divine Light Mission, n.d.).
*Guru Maharaj Ji, 
**Reflections on an Indian Sunrise (Divine Light Mission, 1972).  ,
**The Living Master (Denver: Divine Light Mission, 1978).
**Light Reading (Miami Beach, FL: Divine Light Mission, 1980).
**Who Is Guru Maharaj Ji? (New York: Bantam Books, 1973).
*James V. Downton, Jr., Sacred journeys (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979)
*Maeve Price, "The Divine Light Mission as a Social Organization," Sociological Review 27, 2 (May 1979), 279 96.
----
;Comments
:I think that Melton is not the author, because he only wrote the preface. Individual entries were in many cases not written by Partridge. Who was the author of this entry? Andries 10:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Melton and Patridge are listed as Eds. (editors) so it is unlikely one of them wrote it. I will need to check the book next time I go to the library. I had this on my files for a while. ˜ jossi ˜ (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazon.com cannot be trusted, as can be seen also at talk:Lord of the Universe (documentary). I saw the lousy book (the entry on SSB contained a mistake in every sentence) and I think that Melton only wrote the preface. Andries 23:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Who cares if it is Melton or Patridge, it's all there in black and white.Momento 09:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Melton -  Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America