That is what I believe too. But this shows the danger of using selective out-of-context quotes to prove something. That is why I generally oppose quotes in Wikipedia.

Andries,

If people are going to be dishonest or careless enough to take things out of context, anything they say will be unreliable.  There's nothing special about quotes in that respect.  Like statistics or any other kind of facts, they can be mischaracterized or twisted.  In fact, that's just what Zappaz is doing.  And I repeat, if he was sincere, he'd be more than happy to debate the issue.  The fact that he refuses says it all.  Don't you agree?  Indeed, if you think he really might be sincere, why not ask him why he's not willing to have a thorough discussion about Rawat's quotes and claims of divinity?  What a joke, really, for Zappaz to claim that he's a scholar of this subject when he shies away from properly analyzing the most essential issue of how to interpret Rawat's words.  Again, don't you agree?