I was recently
contacted by a historian at the University of ?? in the USA re
research she was doing for a book about charismatic leadership. She
was trying to learn more about the career of Prem Rawat. I replied
I’d be happy to hear the thoughts of an associate professor of
religion re Rawat’s charisma because I’ve been wondering about it
for 50 years.

She replied: "From
the outside it’s just completely baffling"

She was interested
in Rawat’s career because he appeared so devoid of charisma and yet
was a successful cult leader.

I don’t believe in
'charisma,' I believe there are people who are more interesting
and attractive than the norm and in the appropriate circumstances can
influence others to a greater extent than would otherwise be
expected. Rawat is an outlier, a person with less than the average
ability to interest and attract others who nevertheless became a cult
leader.

In Rawat’s case at
least I think we can safely say it was the time and the place and
having the Indian infrastructure and followers and mahatmas and the
insane enthusiasm of his early Western followers that provided the
mise-en-scène in which he acted out the role of Perfect Master and
Lord of the Universe. Once inside that bubble it didn’t matter how
bad his act was, everything could be explained. In retrospect it’s
even more bizarre than it appeared at the time.

If you are contacted by this researcher I recommend you have a chat with her.