Andries,

                This question of Rawat's culpability as a child and adolescent has proved quite divisive on this forum and its forerunners in the past.  And you do need to be aware of how necessary it is for ex premies to establish a clear narrative of what the cult's history was given the decades of disinformation and confusion to which we were subjected,  and the personal disjunction that it caused.

However - although it does cause discomfort, IMO seeking other narrative explanations of the history of Rawatism that are more equivical is worthwile - I couldn't find anything in the archives - but here's something I wrote a couple of years ago:Of course he was just a kid, even if people like us found it convenient to have that aspect of his life suffocated.

To argue that Rawat is uniquely responsible for the con that is Rawat world simply creates the mirror image of Rawat as uniquely divine. The people at the centre of the organisation - the family, the mahatmas and the Honcho westerners in the period 1970 - 1975 all have a considerable responsibility for shaping the cult. Those westerners who conspired to have a sixteen year old boy married against the wishes of his family have a very particular responsibility for the way the cult and Rawat ultimately developed.

Nik