User:Steve Crossin/Mediation/Prem Rawat/Proposal2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is for proposals related to the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-20 Prem Rawat. User should:
- Add their proposed wording to a new section
- Not sign their section with the standard ~~~~
- Not comment on other sections, this will be done at the discussion page
- Not change the wording of proposals, they should add a new proposal with the changed wording
Contents |
[edit] Proposal 0
(current version)
In 1982, the Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho but no less charismatic. Schnabel stated that Rawat's charisma was in a certain sense routinized (inherited) charisma, but that this was hardly a factor for how he was perceived by his Western following. There, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization.[1]
Ron Geaves, a Professor of Religion at Liverpool Hope University in England who is one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat,[2] writes that Prem Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis of his authority.[3] |
[edit] Proposal 1
|
[edit] Proposal 2
Several scholars have discussed the Weberian aspects of charismatic authority as it relates to Prem Rawat.
Melton refers to Rawat's personal charisma as one of the reasons for the rapid spread of his message among members of the 1960's counterculture.[4] The Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic. Schnabel stated that Rawat's charisma was in a certain sense routinized (inherited) charisma, but that this was hardly a factor for how he was perceived by his Western following; there, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization.[1] Lucy Dupertuis, chair of the department of sociology at the University of Guam,[13] describes Rawat's role as a Master as emerging from both theological and experiential aspects, and as not being the sole focus or generator of charisma; she also observed that charisma did not prevent some devotees from discovering that they had learned the "experience of God" on their own, and to drift away, not in disillusionment but in fulfillment.[14] David G. Bromley describes the difficulty of a charismatic leader in proving to be above normal human failings such as not to suffer ill health or indulge in worldly pursuits. He presents Rawat's marriage as such a situation, which is then exploited by the media to discredit charismatic claimants in the eyes of the general public.[7] Bromley describes Prem Rawat and other founders of new religions as being held in awe by their early followers, who ascribed extraordinary powers to them that set them apart from other human beings – in the words of Max Weber, a "prophet" or bearer of charisma who proclaims alternative or new revelations. Bromley asserts that recent scholarship gives emphasis to social construct aspects of charisma, rather than relying solely on individual personality.[8] Pylarzyc observed that the distribution of power and authority in the DLM was officially based on the charismatic appeal of Maharaj Ji, which he describes as being somewhat ambiguous, and that many followers were not certain about his position in the organizational scheme of the movement, or the claim that he was the only true spiritual master.[15] Ron Geaves, a professor of religion and one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat,[16] writes that Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis for his authority.[17] Hunt describes Rawat's charisma in a similar manner, observing that the notion of spiritual growth is not derived, as is traditionally the case with other gurus, from his personal charisma, but from the nature of his teachings and the benefits to the individuals applying them.[12] |
[edit] Proposal 3
===Charisma and leadership===
Several scholars refer to Max Weber's classification of authority when describing Rawat as a charismatic leader. This type of leadership, in Weber's words, rests "on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him."[18] Melton refers to Rawat's personal charisma as one of the reasons for the rapid spread of his message among members of the 1960's counterculture.[4] The Dutch sociologist Paul Schnabel described Rawat as a pure example of a charismatic leader. He characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic. Schnabel remarks that although Rawat's charisma was partly routinized as it resulted from a hereditary succession, this type of routinization played a negligible role for his Western followers; there, his charisma was primarily the result of careful staging supported by a whole organization.[1] Meredith McGuire sees formalization resulting from Rawat's desire to consolidate his power and authority over the movement in the United States.[19] Lucy DuPertuis, a sociologist and follower who assisted James V. Downton with his book about the Divine Light Mission, described Rawat's role as a Master as emerging from three interrelated phenomena: traditional or theological definitions of Satguru, adherents' first-hand experiences of the Master, and communal accounts and discussions of the Master among devotees. Her ultimate assertion is that imputation of charisma is an active, conscious, changing process which, in this context, involves non-cognitive modes of perception. She also observed that Rawat's charisma did not prevent some devotees from discovering that they had learned the "experience of God" on their own, and to drift away, not in disillusionment but in fulfillment.[20] David G. Bromley describes the difficulty of a charismatic leader in proving to be above normal human failings such as not to suffer ill health or indulge in worldly pursuits. He presents Rawat's marriage as such a situation, which is then exploited by the media to discredit charismatic claimants in the eyes of the general public.[7] Bromley describes Prem Rawat and other founders of new religions as being held in awe by their early followers, who ascribe extraordinary powers to them that set them apart from other human beings – in the words of Max Weber, a "prophet" or bearer of charisma who proclaims alternative or new revelations. Bromley asserts that recent scholarship gives emphasis to social construct aspects of charisma, rather than relying solely on individual personality.[8]Thomas Pilarzyk, a sociologist, wrote in a 1978 paper that the distribution of power and authority in the DLM was officially based on the charismatic appeal of Maharaj Ji, which he describes as being somewhat ambiguous, and that many followers were not certain about his position in the organizational scheme of the movement, or the claim that he was the only true spiritual master.[21] Ron Geaves, a professor of religion and one of the earliest Western students of Prem Rawat,[22] states that Rawat is not a renunciate and he has made great efforts to assert his humanity and take apart the hagiography that has developed around him. He further writes that Rawat himself has stated that he does not consider himself to be a charismatic figure, preferring to refer to his teachings and the efficacy of the practice of the four techniques on the individual as the basis for his authority.[23] Stephen J. Hunt describes Rawat's charisma in a similar manner, observing that the notion of spiritual growth is not derived — as is traditionally the case with other gurus — from his personal charisma, but from the nature of his teachings and the benefits to the individuals applying them, and that Rawat could only be defined as charismatic in the sense of charisma having an antagonistic relationship with tradition.[12] |
[edit] Proposal 4
===Charisma and leadership===
Several scholars referred to Max Weber's classification of authority when describing Rawat as a charismatic leader.[19][1][24] This type of leadership, in Weber's words, is "resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him."[18] In Rawat's case, the factor "exemplary character" is seen as irrelevant: Schnabel characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic;[1] according to Geaves, "Rawat is not a renunciate" and "he has gone to great lengths to assert his humanity and deconstruct the hagiography that has developed around his life."[25] As for routinization, that is, in Weber's sociological analysis, the compound of factors with which charismatic authority can be consolidated and which ultimately leads to a more formalized or bureaucratic type of leadership: Schnabel remarks that although Rawat's charisma was partly routinized as it resulted from a heriditary succession, this type of routinization played a negligible role for his Western followers.[1] McGuire sees multiple elements of formalization resulting from Rawat's desire to consolidate his power and authority over the movement in the United States.[19] In 2006 Geaves writes that Rawat could only be defined as charismatic in the sense of charisma having an antagonistic relationship with tradition.[25] [...] |
[edit] Proposal 5
Lucy DuPertuis, a sociologist, describes Rawat's role as a Master as emerging from three interrelated phenomena: traditional or theological definitions of Satguru, adherants' first-hand experiences of the Master, and communal accounts and discussions of the Master among devotees. Her ultimate assertion is that imputation of charisma is an active, conscious, changing process which, in this context, involves non-cognitive modes of perception..[26] |
[edit] Proposal 6
===Charisma and leadership===
Several scholars have referred to Max Weber's classification of authority when describing Rawat as a charismatic leader..[19][1][24] This type of leadership, in Weber's words, is "resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him."[18] In Rawat's case, the factor "exemplary character" is seen as irrelevant by Schnabel who characterized Rawat as materialistic, pampered and intellectually unremarkable compared to Osho, but no less charismatic [1]. Geaves states that "Rawat is not a renunciate" and "he has gone to great lengths to assert his humanity and deconstruct the hagiography that has developed around his life." Geaves also asserts that in a Weberian context Rawat could only be defined as charismatic in the sense of charisma having an antagonistic relationship with tradition.[25] Schnabel remarks that although Rawat's charisma was partly routinized, as it resulted from a hereditary succession, this type of routinization played a negligible role for his Western followers.[1] Bromley refers to the difficulty of a charismatic leader in proving to be above normal human failings such as not to suffer ill health or indulge in worldly pursuits. He presents Rawat's marriage as such a situation, which is then exploited by the media to discredit charismatic claimants in the eyes of the general public. [7] Bromley describes Prem Rawat and other founders of new religions as being held in awe by their early followers, who ascribe extraordinary powers to them that set them apart from other human beings – in the words of Max Weber, a "prophet" or bearer of charisma who proclaims alternative or new revelations. Bromley asserts that recent scholarship gives emphasis to social construct aspects of charisma, rather than relying solely on individual personality.[8] Dupertuis, working from the statement that “in Weber's formulations, charisma clearly appears in the eyes of the beholders” concluded that Rawat's role as a Master emerged from both theological and experiential aspects, and was not the sole focus or generator of charisma. Dupertuis also observed that charisma did not prevent some devotees from discovering that “they had learned the "experience of God" on their own, and to drift away, not in disillusionment but in fulfilment”.[27] Pilarzyk, observed that the distribution of power and authority in the DLM was both officially and symbolically based on what Pilarzyk termed the “somewhat ambiguous charismatic appeal of guru Maharaj Ji”. Pilarzyk considered that “the development of the DLM in America had substantiated Wallis' contention that cults are inherently fragile social institutions which are constrained from effective institutionalization by internal factors”.[28] McGuire, referencing Pilarzyk, and noting Weber, saw multiple elements of formalization resulting from Rawat's desire to consolidate his power and authority over the movement in the United States[29] |
[edit] Proposal 7
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 8
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 9
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 10
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 11
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 12
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 13
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 14
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
[edit] Proposal 15
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |
- Edited to add reference information
[edit] References
References |
---|
The following is a discussion that has been placed in a collapse box for improved usability. |
|
The above is an extended discussion that has been collapsed for improved usability. |