It seems that John has gone from one extreme into the other with his apology. I do not find this suprizing because cult involvement is a complicated, ununusal experience that is difficult to interpret.

Hi Andries,

I don't think it's accurate to suggest that John's gone from one extreme to the other as I think that if that were the case he'd be jumping back into the cult.  As some have noted, John doesn't actually retract a single allegation he wrote about Rawat, he just beats himself over the head for putting himself in harm's way and goes through some ridiculous contortions to beat himself over the head for standing in Rawat's way.  But I have to correct that; John did retract one major allegation and that's that Rawat is responsible for people following him.  John parrots the stupid cult line that it was his choice every step of the way.  True, but only on the most meaningless, superficial level.

Of course, both the guru and the follower are responsible for being a follower for such a long time. Like John, I have been thinkingn about this question, in my case due to the the writings of David G. Bromley and Anson Shupe.

I think to answer the question who is repsonsible one has to ask whether there has been any false advertisement (or even deception) or whether it was just a contagious illusion. I do think that there was some false advertisement (e.g. Maharaji's drinking habits) so it is not entirely the mistake of the followers.

What are you talking about, "some" false advertising?  Come on, Andries, Rawat claimed to be God and warned us that turning our backs on him would lead to a fate worse than death.  Literally.  That was the major false advertising.  That and I guess the fact that he was on the verge of bringing peace on earth and we'd be complete idiots to miss the boat.  The drinking etc. was small change in comparison although, to the extent that Rawat hid such habits from us, that was false advertising too. 

But the way you put it -- some false advertising ... not entirely the mistake of followers .. Christ, Andries, do you still not get it?