Talk:Divine Light Mission/Reception draft

''This is a draft for a proposed new and improved "Reception" section as discussed in Talk:Divine_Light_Mission. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Reception
The Divine Light Mission has been described in various and sometimes conflicting terms. It has been called a new religious movement, a cult, a charismatic religious sect, an offshoot of Sant Mat, an alternative religion or spin-off from other traditional religions, a Radhasoami offshoot, an orthodox Sikh community, an Advait Mat related tradition, and a defunct religious movement.

David G. Bromley describes the Divine Light Mission as belonging in a "medium tension category", among other groups which were seen by the public as peculiar rather than threatening. These groups, while viewed as religious in nature, were ostracized for their unconventional beliefs. Bromley attributes the decline of the mission and other movements to internal factors, but also in part to the news media's uncritical acceptance of discrediting reports by the anti-cult movement and those of apostates, accounts which created a wide-spread public perception of "mind control" and other "cult" stereotypes. Bromley's assessment of the public's perception of DLM was echoed by the psychiatrist Saul V. Levine, who wrote in a paper published in 1989 that the DLM, the Hare Krishna movement, the Unification Church and the Children of God were widely held in low esteem – families felt that their children were being financially exploited, while the groups' leaders lived in "ostentation and offensive opulence."

In a comparison of new religious movements, Gratell and Shannon noted that people appeared to seek out such religious organizations to get answers to questions about ultimate meaning as well as answers to more prosaic issues. In discussing the differences in recruiting tactics employed by these groups, they placed the Divine Light Mission in the middle ground between movements in which recruits were love bombed, or overwhelmed by waves of intense sentiment, and those in which affective bonds were discouraged. They reported that close ties between newcomers and DLM members developed gradually over a period of three to four months, between initial contact and their attending a "Knowledge session", and the emergent friendships were an important forum in which recruits aired doubts and discussed DLM beliefs. These relationships thus supplemented a very cognitive conversion process, in which active consideration of the movement's ideas and beliefs was encouraged from the outset. They found little evidence to suggest that social rewards were orchestrated by the movement, either in degree or timing. In the context of long-term membership, Marc Galanter wrote that "over the long term of membership, meditation also played an important role in supporting a convert's continuing involvement." An analysis of the time members spent in meditation revealed that greater meditation time was associated with diminished neurotic distress. This association suggests that the emotional response to meditation acts as a reinforcement for its continued practice. The more a member meditated, the better the person was likely to feel.

Other studies of group members, such as one by James T. Richardson, led to the claim that "life in the new religions is often therapeutic instead of harmful", and that other information would suggest that the young people attracted to these movements were affirming their idealism by their involvement. Richardson asserted that there is little data to support the almost completely negative picture painted by a few mental health professionals and others.

The sociologist James V. Downton, who studied the DLM for five years, reported that "idealism was one of the motivating forces behind people's conversion to DLM. They wanted to create a more caring world." Five years after the subjects of his study became premies he wrote, "There is little doubt in my mind that these premies have changed in a positive way. Today, they seem less alienated, aimless, worried, afraid, and more peaceful, loving, confident, and appreciative of life. We could attribute these changes to surrender, devotion, and their involvement in the premie community. Each of these undoubtedly had a positive impact, but, if we accept what premies say, none were as critical as their experience of the universal spirit. Meditating on the life-energy for five years, they report having more positive attitudes about themselves."

David V. Barrett noted that the DLM movement was often criticized for emphasizing the superiority of subjective emotional experience over intellect. The sociologists Ralph Larkin and Daniel A. Foss made similar observations in 1978. In response, the religious scholar Ron Geaves, himself a member of the movement, accused Foss and Larkin of bias, pointing to the number of people attracted to the DLM. Geaves also stated that although the Divine Light Mission was established as an organization for promoting Prem Rawat's teachings, it developed into a vigorous new religious movement with its own specific traits that included characteristics of a contemporary North Indian Sant panth and nirguna bhakti, combining intense reverence for the living satguru with the millennial expectations of the 1970s counter-culture.