We'll have to drop the word guru because it is contaminated now. When talking about revisionism I find the following an example of extreme revisionism comparable or even worse than that of Rawat/Elan Vital.
"Want to know just how far the word guru has fallen into disrepute in the spiritual world? The organization of one of the most renowned, controversial, and susccessful Indian gurus of the last century has decided that their late founder ..... is not a guru. Osho, once known as Bhagwan Sri Rajneesh, was the popular seventies spiritual teacher most Americans known for his notorious commune at Oregon, his predilection for Rolls Royces, and his many Western students [..] "Not only is Osho not a guru, his whole approach is to demolish the guru game", reads the official ashram website. [..]Indeed, Osho was a force of personality unlike anything the spiritual world had seen in some time, and love him or hate him he was a guru -fully completely, unabashadley. Pulse has been told that that kind of subversive talk - guru-talk - is off limits..."
From the magazine "What is enlightenment?" founded by the American guru Andrew Cohen that is quite pro-guru magazine and the Aug-Oct. 2004 issue nr. 26, in the section Pulse: news and gossip from an emerging culture page 28.
Note that several former prominent editors of the magazine are now critical former followers students of Andrew Cohen
Andries
