I certainly agree with Cynthia that substance addiction has many differences to cult involvement. And Joe you respond addiction is physical and a cult isn't.

But in my mind, the word 'addiction' applies to both physical addiction and to psychological dependency, such as to gambling or a cult. My dictionary defines 'addiction' as:

Being abnormally tolerant to and dependent on something that is psychologically or physically habit-forming.

In that case, I think the word 'addiction' is a good word to use of Rawatism. I was undoubtedly addicted to Maharaji, and to all aspects of living the life of a premie.

Clearly, what one is addicted to makes a difference: there are different sets of problems if you are addicted to drugs, to drink, to gambling, or to a guru. In fact, even which drug you are addicted to has its own set of unique problems - kicking coke is quite different from kicking heroin or speed, although there are many similarities (yes, congratulations Jonathan on your effort).

So in place of Joe's comment addiction is physical and a cult isn't, I would write something like 'physical addiction has many differences from cult addiction'.

Joe, you then go on to say The only two similarities I see are denial and separation from feelings and emotions. But why the word 'only' - those are **huge** similarities, which I think makes it both useful and accurate to compare Maharaji-addiction to physical addiction.

I get a fair volume of emails from my site from partners or spouses of premies, who are disturbed by their premie partner's behavior. They describe living in a secret world in which they (the non-premie partner) is second place to Maharaj in the relationship; in which the premie will go off to see M dropping all obligations and responsibilities to do so (sound familiar?); even in which the premie partner will secretly donate $$ from the couple's joint bank account to Maharaji, without the non-premie partner's permission.

When I write back, I find the addiction analogy helpful to use. Most people have some idea of what addiction means - the denial and refusal to face feelings and emotions, as Joe says, but also the compulsive behavior, even if the addict understands that such behavior may be destructive. And to use the word 'addiction', like using the word 'cult', is a powerful and succint way of expressing the fundamental message about Maharaji and premies' behavior to outsiders; and I think that this description is both honest (ie is not misleading) and can be supported. I got both words into the title of this post!

If and when I get into the analogy, I prefer to liken Maharaji-addiction to gambling addiction, rather than physical substance addiction, for the reason Cynthia mentions (Addiction to substances is a bona fide, diagnosable and incurable disease.).

Also, the point that once you get out of the cult you are free for good (whereas once you break a physical addiction people often go back) is not a clear-cut difference. Again, take gambling - once you break a gambling addiction, it is very easy to go back, just like to alcohol or drugs.

And while most ex-premies do not go back and become premies again, they often are on the look-out for the next guru or method of enlightenment - sometimes in such a compulsive way that again 'addiction' is a good description.

Great post Joe to spawn this thread.