Charisma and Abdication: A Study of the Leadership of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh

Author(s): Susan J. Palmer

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Sociological Analysis, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Summer, 1988), pp. 119-135
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3711009 .
Accessed: 21/02/2012 20:57
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and Association for the Sociology of Religion, Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Sociological Analysis.

http://www.jstor.org

Sociological Analysis 1988. 49. 2:119-135

Charisma
and
Abdication:
the
Leadership of Bhagwan

Study

of

Shree

Rajneesh'
Susan J. Palmer
DawsonCollege,Montreal,PQ.
Thisstudy attemptsto apply Roy 6Wllis'model of a charismaticleader'sfour responses to
institutionalizationto the career of BhagwanShree Rajneesh,founder of a new religious
movement.Afteroutliningsevenphases of Rajneesh'scareer which can be interpretedas
differentstrategic responses to institutionalization,the conclusion is drawn that Wallis'
model oversimplifies the relationship between charisma and institutionalizationand is
inadequateas a tool to explain the behaviorof this particularleader. It is proposed that a
fifth category, that of Abdication,be added to Wallis'four, and that a distinctionbetween
two aspects of charisma, the Performerand the Pastor, be drawn in order to understand
this new category.
A study of the career of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, the 55-year-old guru from India,
revealsa leadershipwhich constantlyfluctuatesin its style and in its authoritativeclaims. The
history of his movement, the RajneeshFoundationInternational(RFI), is remarkablefor its
abruptchanges in policy, and the variedand contradictorydemandsmade upon its members.
Due to his considerable personal charm and a certain dramaticflair, Rajneesh was able to
render these divagations coherent and meaningful to his disciples for whom their leader's
inconsistences were an integralpart of his charisma. As one member explained:
When you are with Bhagwanyou never know what to expect. He takes you on a journey
thatis full of surprisesand mystery.He says whathe is experiencingat thatmoment, so he
might say the opposite the next day. If you are looking for a dogma, a creed, you are
wasting your time. He is a reflection of life itself which is a paradox and full of
contradictions.
In order to interpretthis patternof unpredictableand apparentlyarbitrarychange which
has characterizedRajneesh's leadership, I will refer to Roy Wallis' theory of relationships
between charismaand institutionalizationwhich is outlined in his paper, "Charisma, Commitment, and Control in a New Religious Movement" (1982).
Wallis attemptsto refine Max Weber's theory of charismaticauthority,which he finds
Birdforsuggesting
theResponsibility/Performance
1. Theauthorwishesto thankDr.Frederick
modelof
charismaandfor explainingWeber'svariousroutesto institutionalization.

119

120

ANALYSIS
SOCIOLOGICAL

"relativelybriefandnotentirelylackingin ambiguity"(Wallis,1982: 73). WhileWeber's

or traditionalization
afterthe leader's
theorytracesthe variousroutesto bureaucratization
death,Wallisis concernedwith the livingleader'sstruggleto keephis or her charismatic
Wallisfocuseson the careerof
authorityuntrammelled
by the forcesof institutionalization.
of the Childrenof God, a deviantChristiangroupwhich
MosesDavid,the prophet-founder
betweencharismaandits
originatedin Californiain 1968,andthenanalyzestherelationship
four
leaders
"nemesis,"institutionalization,
by identifying possibleresponsesof charismatic
to thisproblem.The responsesare: Encouragement,
and
Acquiescence,Displacement, Resistance.Wallisthen arguesthat the seeminglyerraticbehaviorof "Mo" Davidcan be
as an exampleof Resistance;a deliberatestrategyintendedto underminethe
interpreted
his movement.He describesthis
attemptsof his followersto stabilizeand institutionalize
follows:
as
response
leaderforeseesthethreatof institutionalization
... in whichthecharismatic
subverting
his authorityandtakesactiveandeffectivestepsto forestallit (Wallis,1982: 119).
as anexampleof Resistance,
Inattempting
to explainRajneesh'sleadership
I encountered
a series of obstacleswhichsuggestthatthe relationship
betweencharismaand institution
buildingis morecomplexthanWallis'fourcategoriesallowfor.AlthoughRajneeshemployed
the strategyof Resistanceat manypoints in his career,he also adoptedthe strategyof
as a process
WallisdescribesEncouragement
Encouragement.
in whichthecharismatic
leaderembracesthepossibilitiesinvolvedin institutionalization
andactivelydirectstheprocessin sucha wayas to controlit andutilizeinstitutionalized
to buttresshisauthority,
ratherthanallowingit toconstrainhim
andprocedures
structures
(Wallis,1982: 117).
In outliningthesevenphasesof Rajneesh's
to showthathe vacillated
career,I haveattempted
betweenthese two extremes.On the one handhe encouragedstrongleaderswithinhis
movementand conferreduponthemconsiderable
On the other
powerin decision-making.
handhe occasionallychallengedthemor destroyedtheirinstitutions
if theyweresteeringthe
movement
in a directionnottohisliking.Sincethesetwopoliciesareapparently
contradictory
caserepresents
a differentrelationit is clearthatRajneesh's
responsesto institutionalization,
ship betweencharismaandinstitution
buildingthanMo's.
The seconddifficultyin fittingRajneesh'scase to Wallis'modelof Resistance,is that
Rajneeshdid not appearto shareMo's desireto controlanddirecthis followers'lives. The
on September26,
outstanding
examplewhichillustratesthis is Rajneesh'sannouncement
1985, thathe was renouncinghis role of guruand endinghis religion,Rajneeshism.He
advisedhis followerson this occasionto stopwearingred andthe mala (necklacebearing
whichweresymbolsof initiationintothemaster-disciple
Rajneesh's
photograph)
relationship.
Thisextraordinary
gesturemightappearto be an extremecase of Resistance,as it delivered
the deathblowto the institutionsof the movement,butinsteadof strengthening
the leader's
it
over
his
it
weakened
Therefore
I
would
like to
followers,
(see
seven).
authority
phase
proposethata fifth categorybe addedto Wallis'fourwhichrepresentsa new relationship
betweencharismaandinstitutionalization.
ThisI shallcallAbdication.Inorderto explainthe
the meaningof Abdication,andto explore
vacillationsin Rajneesh'sleadership,to interpret
the innerlogic of this new categorymy strategywill be as follows:
(1) Todescribethe peculiarnatureof Rajneesh'scharisma,andto examinethe mechanismswherebyhe protectsandenhancesit.

CHARISMA
AND ABDICATION

121

(2) To describe seven phases of Rajneesh's career, which represent different strategic
responses to the problemof institutionalizationand exhibit his tendency to vacillate between
the two extremes of Resistance and Encouragement.
(3) To arguethata close examinationof Rajneesh'scareer revealsthathis incompatibility
with the process of institutionalizationarose not from his desire to exact total obedience from
his followers (as was the case with "Mo"), but rather from a reluctance to assume the
responsible, authorizingrole. By distinguishingbetween two aspects of charismaticauthority,
(i) Performance, and (ii) Responsibility, I will attempt to prove that Rajneesh's behavior
indicateda desire for the adulation, deference, and fame that come with performance, but a
dislike for the responsibility that leadership entails. I will then argue that Rajneesh was a
brilliant performer but a weak or recalcitrant pastor, and that he chose to delegate the
responsible role to various members of his core group. His final gesture of Abdication I
interpretas his solution to the problem of responsibility and of institutionalization,in that it
enabled him to get rid of his fully committed followers, or "flock," while retaining his
devoted (and rotating)audience.

METHODOLOGY
This study is based on my involvement with the Montreal Rajneesh center as a participant-observerfrom October 1984 to September 1986. During this period I interviewed ten
sannyasinsand attendedfive therapygroups and various ritual and social events at the center.
Initially my aim was to collect data for my Ph.D. dissertation on women in spiritual communes, but when Rajneeshpuramfell I became fascinatedby Rajneesh himself. Throughout
the exercise I managedto remainimpervious to his charisma, but not to his charm. I feel it is
importantto note that while Wallis' theory is a useful tool for interpretingthe history of the
RFI, it is inadequateas a means of fathomingthe inner workingsof the complex and creative
mind of a spiritualmaster. That is to say, this study is not meant to imply that Rajneesh is
acting out of secular motives ratherthan respondingto an inner religious drive.

THE NATUREOF RAJNEESH'SCHARISMA

Rajneesh was born in 1931 in Kuchwada, India, to a Jain family of wealthy cloth
merchants.While teachingphilosophyat the University of Jabalpurhe laid the foundationfor
his career as a spiritualleader by giving lecture tours in which he expounded his eclectic and
controversialideas. He conductedmeditationcamps, and in 1966 resigned his teachingpost to
travel across India criticizing local religions and preaching that the individual was his own
religion or god. In 1968 he delivereda series of lectures on sex as a meditativefirst step on the
path to enlightenment,which attracteda large following of American and Europeantourists.
By 1970 he had settledin Bombayand begun to initiatea group of disciples, which markedhis
transitionfrom an intellectualcritic of religion to a spiritual master.
If a leader's charisma can be measured by the number of his followers, Rajneesh's
authorityhas been considerable,extendingto approximately350,000 sannyasins, or initiates,
according to the claim of the Rajneesh 7imes, October 14, 1983. The Oregonian notes,
"Figures supplied by Rajneeshee officials and by outside observers . . . were often wildly
different"and quotes an "insider's figure of 60,000" (Oregonian, 1985: 3). Rajneeshmanifested his charismathroughhis "discourses" or public lectures, which have been transcribed

122

ANALYSIS
SOCIOLOGICAL

intoseverallanguagesinover350 booksandalsorecordedon videocassette.

Thesediscourses
I interviewed
effecton his followers.Severalsannyasins
havehadan extraordinary
saidthey
"fellin lovewithBhagwan"throughexposureto his discourses.Evenhis criticsattestto the
accountof life
powerof Rajneesh'spresence.SallyBelfrage,whowrotea ratherdisparaging
in the RajneeshAshramin India,confessedon viewinghim in person,"He was AB-SOLUTE-LYR-IVET-ING"
(Belfrage,1981: 131). The Oregonianclaimsit is his message
ratherthanhis presencewhichhas attracteddisciples:
Theirguru'slectures... tell his disciplesto live life to its fullest,to abandontheirown
andto viewsexas ... creativeenergyleading
consciousness
egosin favorof a communal
to enlightenment.Sin and guilt are not worthworryingaboutand everyonehas the
andworship(Oregonian,
potentialto realizea personaldivinitythroughdailymeditation
1985:2).
to Weber'smodelof the exemplaryleader,not the ethical
Rajneesh,however,corresponds
prophet.
manwho,byhispersonalexample,demonstrates
to
... theprophetmaybeanexemplary
othersthe wayto spiritual,
salvation,as in thecase of theBuddha.Thepreachingof this
typeof prophetsaysnothingabouta divinemissionor anethicalduty,butratherdirects
to themthe same
itselfto the self-interestof thosewho cravesalvation,recommending
pathas he himselftraversed(Eisenstadt,1968: 263).
Rajneeshis the livingexampleof his messageof self-realization:
I amabsolutelycontent.If I wereto die thisverymomentmylifewouldbecomplete(The
Wayof the Heart, 1984: videocassette).

One"who returns
His charismaticauthorityis basedon his claim to be the "Enlightened
themillenniato awakenspirituallyanelitegroupof seekers.Manyof hisdisciples
throughout
believetheyhaveresumedworkwithhimbegunina previouslife. Rajneesh
stressesthenotion
transcendseventhe limitationsof death.
thatthe master-disciple
relationship
Weberstates:
The . . . leader may be requiredperiodically to offer miraculoussigns as proof of his

(Weber,1947: 359).
powersin orderto maintain[his followers']commitment
A testimonial
to Rajneesh's
relationships
powerof maintaining
throughthereincarnation
whohaslivedwithhimsince 1971,
cycle is offeredby MaAnandVivek,an Englishwoman
whomhe describesas his "caretaker."
of his
Rajneeshclaimedshe was the reincarnation
before
shediedin 1947,madehimpromiseto waitforher
childhoodsweetheart,
Sashi,who,
return.Vivekstates:
Oneof the firstthingsBhagwansaidto me ... was, "Do yourememberme?"I went
click! "I rememberthat you're someone I loved very much" (Joshi, 1982: 107).

Unlikemanywell-knownspiritualleaderswho assumethe role andimageof fatherin

relationto theirfollowers(as, for example,ReverendMoon),Rajneeshis describedby his
a child.Althoughhe appeared
to be, at age55, a frail
disciplesas a lover,and,paradoxically,

AND ABDICATION
CHARISMA

123

old man with long white hair and whiskers, his personality was that of a mischievous and
intellectuallyprecociouschild. He was surroundedby his core groupof attractivewomen who
played the role of the doting (but sexually liberatedand expressive) mother to the brilliant,
capricious prodigy.
Wallis notes:
Since the charismaticidentity is precarious, it must be protectedagainst subversion or
challenge by hiding the prophetawayfrom general contact, carefullyvettingall who may
come into his presence, and immediatelyexcluding those who do not display complete
surrender(Wallis, 1982: 5).
To this end the core group at the ashramin Indiacreateda distancebetweenBhagwanand the
large mass of his following. A bodyguardcontrolled access to the guru's presence. Sally
Belfrage describes the proceduregoverningadmission to the evening darshan at Poona:
At least half a dozen people are turned away from darshanevery night, it seems, for
failing to pass the sniff-at-the-gatetest, which has become more stringentlately because
one womanslipped throughwith a perceptibleodor of perfumeand it madeBhagwansick
the whole of the next day.Some people havebeen turnedaway. . .. I havewashedmy hair
eight times. . . . Shiva, a red-beardedScottish sannyasin who seems to be his chief
bodyguardintonesthe drill beforethe smelling starts. Personalquestionsabout Bhagwan
are not permitted. Do not go nearerto BhagwanShree Rajneeshthan a meter. Do not
touch him except his feet. If you are turnedaway,wash hardernext time (Belfrage, 1981:
137ff).
An importantfeatureof Bhagwan's special status (and regardedin the RFI as a sign of
enlightenment)is his reputedautonomyand self-sufficiency. Throughoutthe RFI literature
this notion is stressed. Stories of his childhoodpicturehim as an independent,anti-authoritarian being who was impossible to influenceor control. Even in infancyhe was supposedly not
dependenton his mother:
It is said thatthe child neithercried nor acceptedany milk for the firstthreedays (Sannyas
5, 1980: 8).
Bhagwanhas described himself as follows:
I have never been initiated into society. I entered as an individual, and I have remained
aloof and separatelike an island (Sannyas 5, 1980: 10).
In this respect he remained distant from his sannyasins, whose communal lifestyle and
encounter group experiences encourage gregarious behavior and physical and emotional
intimacy.

124

ANALYSIS
SOCIOLOGICAL

THE SEVENPHASESOF RAJNEESH'SCAREER

Phase I-Initiation and Discipleship: Claiming Charisma
In 1970 Rajneeshcreatedhis ritualof initiationdarshanor "takingsannyas," in which he
touched initiates on the "third eye," endowed them with Sanskritnames, gave each a mala
(necklace of wooden beads bearingRajneesh'sphotograph)and requiredthem to wear orange
(later changed to red).
Through this ritual Rajneeshestablisheda following and claimed a charismaticstatus as
an enlightenedmaster. He explainedthe meaningof initiationas a surrenderof the ego to the
master.
When you become a sannyasin I want to destroy that identity.... When all these
identities have been destroyedyou will know who you are: the unidentified, the nameless, the formless, the indefinable(Joshi, 1982: 17).
Rajneeshbegan to live in a close community of devoted followers which he termed his
"buddhafield."
To create a buddhafield, to create a sanqha means you are now creating an alternate
society. Youare no longer a single individual;you aregatheringpower. . . . Now you can
create a revolution(Joshi, 1982: 100).
RobinTheobaldhad observed that an "Attitudeof complete submissionis what is requiredof
disciples who form partof the Gemeinde"(Wallis, 1982: 107). The buddhafieldcorresponds
to Theobald's description of the Gemeinde or household living in "an emotional form of
communal relationship"with the leader. Spheres of authorityare not clearly defined and the
leader assigns duties on an ad hoc basis and intervenesat will. Membersare chosen not for
their skill or training, but rather,Weberargues, for their charismaticqualities. Wallis adds
that an equally importantquality is the intensityof their devotion. Rajneesh'score group of
women invariablydescribed themselves as "in love with" their leader.
Phase II-From Acharya to Bhagwan: Building Charisma
In 1971 Rajneeshchanged his name from Acharya(which means teacher) to Bhagwan
(which means "blessed one" or "God"). Joshi narratesthe event as follows:
I was knownall over the countryas Acharya. ... I was teachingand travelling.That was
just the introductorypartof my work . .. one day the wordteacherwill not be enough. .
.. Find something which is universal. .. And then he found "Bhagwan"(Joshi, 1982:
112).
This change in title implies not only that he was claiming greatercharisma, but that he
affected a change in type as a spiritualleader. Accordingto FrederickBird's typology of new
religions (Needleman and Baker, 1978: 173), there are three types: Devotee, Apprentice,
and Disciple, each of which featuresa differenttype of leader-followerrelationship.The role
of the apprenticeleader is to be a teacherof techniqueswhich the apprenticelearns in orderto
tap a source of sacred power which is perceived as located within the self. The devotee type

AND ABDICATION
CHARISMA

125

leader is looked up to as a lord, avatar, or Second Coming and is perceived to be the

transcendentsource of sacred power to which the devotee must surrenderin order to find
salvation. What is interestingin the case of Rajneeshis that he managedto retainsome of the
characteristicsof the apprenticegroup, such as each individual being the source of sacred
power, while raising his own status to that of the most powerful type of leader, the devotee
type. His reply to the question, "Why do you call yourself Bhagwan?"demonstratesthis:
Because I am-and becauseyou are-and because God is. . . . WhenI call myself God, I
mean to provokeyou, to challenge you. I am simply calling myself God so that you can
also gathercourageto recognize it. If you can recognize it in me, you havetakenthe first
step in recognizing it in yourself (Joshi, 1982: 114).
Like the initiationritual, this move was effective as a test of loyaltyandservedto weed out
the less committedof his members:
. . . people who used to come to me to gather knowledge they stopped.The day I called
myself Bhagwanthey stopped. It was too much for their egos, somebodycalling himself
Bhagwan(Joshi, 1982: 113).
Phase Ill-The Poona Ashram: Encouragement
In 1974 Bhagwanmoved from Bombay to Poona where he foundedthe Shree Rajneesh
Ashram.The daily programbegan with the Dynamic Mediation, and in the eveningBhagwan
would deliver his increasinglyfamousdiscourses. By 1975 western-styletherapygroupswere
incorporatedinto the program and drew an internationalcrowd of one to two thousand
participantsa week, accordingto the Oregonian. Timemagazine reportedthat between 1974
and 1978 more than 50,000 seekers had tried the therapiesat Poona (Oregonian, 1985: 9).
The fast-growingmembershipand the transientpopulation meant that the leader could no
longer be personally availableto his sannyasins, except for a small core group. Thus the
problem of institutionalizationarose. Bhagwan's response at this point of his career fits
Wallis' category of Encouragement.Bhagwanencouragedgrowthand approvedthe efforts of
his "power ladies" to establish an efficiently run ashram while trying to imbue the growing
superstructurewith his own personal mystique. The ubiquity of his photographserved this
purpose. Besides being displayed on every disciple's chest in the mala, his smiling visage
decoratedthe walls of the ashram, inviting Belfrage's comparisonsto Orwell's Big Brother.
Another strategy was to insist that Bhagwan was even more present to his disciples in his
absence. For example, an empty chair was placed on the podium when he stoppeddirecting
the Dynamic Meditation.Joshi explains:
The master was present-but now his disciples had to feel Him on a more subtle level.
Bhagwan reassuredthem: "even if I am not here in the body, the contact will not be
lost." This placedthe onus on the followersto cultivatetheir awarenessof his occult presence,
and constituteda test of faith.
A strongcore groupof whatWalliswould term "institutionbuilders"ranthe ashramwith
maximumefficiency-and they were sufficiently high-handedand dictatorialin their modus
operandito be labelled the "powerladies," and, by a disgruntledexsannyasin,as the "dowager duchesses." These women were chosen for their charismatic qualities which, in
Bhagwan'sterms, meantreceptivityto his "energy." He explains in TheBookthatwomen are

126

SOCIOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS

superiorto men becausethey are morereceptive,less aggressive,andthe essenceof the

The Oregoniansuggeststhathe preferred
to workwithwomenbecause
mysticis receptivity.
theyweremoreobedientthanmenandofferedno competition.
UnlikeMosesDavid,Bhagwanallowedhis coregroupa considerable
degreeof powerin
and leadership,but at the same time he foundwaysto underminetheir
decision-making
complacencyand to maintaintheirdependenceon his charisma,so as to discourageany
signsof charisma.Of his personalsecretary,Laxmi,who
tendencyto developindependent
he said,
becamethe managingtrusteeof the RajneeshFoundation,
"Alwaysrememberthat Laxmineverdoes anythingon her own. She is the perfect
is saidshedoes"(Joshi,
vehicle,thatis whyshe is chosenforthiswork.. .. Whatever
1982: 102).
Accordingto the OregoniantherearemanyindicationsthatBhagwantookcareto keephis
core groupundercontrol:
headsandpittedthemagainstone another.
He chosethe ashram'sdepartment
her
Althoughhe delegatedoffice dutiesto Laxmi,he was knownto countermand
decisions.
There was a hierarchy,but no one was protected. ...
(Oregonian, 1985: 5).

He was alwaysthe final word

At the earlyperiodof Poona,Bhagwanappearsto havebeen in close touchwithevery

aspectof the ashram.He wouldlistento reportsfromthe individualtherapygroups,offer
personaladvice,andperformthe initiationdarshanshimself.
a healthyrivalryamonghis powerladiesandprevented
the formaBhagwanencouraged
tionof permanent
offices(oneof theperennialsymptomsof institutionalization)
by allowing
themto oust eachotherfromtheirposts:
saidSheelaedgedoutPremArupforthe numbertwospoton Rajneesh's
Ex-sannyasins
officestaff.
Bhagwanappearedto encouragecompetitionandquarrelsamongthe powerladies
andallowedSheelato oustLaxmias his personalsecretary(Oregonian,1985: 7).
ThisstrategyresemblesMosesDavid'stendencyto demoteor rotatehisleaders,andis an
exampleof Resistanceto the processof institutionalization.
In thelasttwoyearsof the Poonaera, Bhagwanplayeda less activerolein ashramlife,
due to his declininghealth.Afflictedwithasthma,diabetes,andbackpains,he temporarily
silentmeditation.
In 1981he
stoppedgivingdiscoursesanddarshansin 1979,andsubstituted
withdrewhis physicalpresencefromthesesessions,andit wasannounced
that"Bhagwanis
enteringinto the ultimate,silentstageof his work"(Joshi,1982: 155). Threecore group
memberswereappointed
to performtheinitiationdarshansas "Bhagwan's
mediums"andin
May,Satsangwas introduced,"the silentcommunionbetweenmasteranddisciple."The
emptychairstrategywasreintroduced:
Thedayyouareableto see thischair,thisbodyempty,thisbeingempty,you will have
seenme ... that'sthe realmomentwhenthe disciplemeetsthe master.It is a dissolution, a disappearance. . . the dew dissolving into the ocean. . . . And there prevails

profoundsilence(Joshi,1982: 158).

CHARISMA
AND ABDICATION

127

The gacchammi ritual was incorporatedinto the satsang meetings at this time, which
involved bowing to Bhagwan'sempty chair or photo while chanting the buddhistcreed:
Buddhamsharanamgacchami
sangham sharanamgacchami
dharmamsharanamgacchami
This is translatedby sannyasinsas "I go to the feet of the EnlightenedOne. I go to the feet of
the communityof the EnlightenedOne. I go to the feet of the Ultimate Truthof the Enlightened One." This is clear indicationthat the institutionalcharismaof the sangha, or community, now equalledthe personalcharismaof the master,and thatdue to his physical inaccessibility Bhagwanwas in danger of being reduced to a symbol, or (in Durkheimianterms), a
totem of his community.
In 1981 Bhagwanleft the Shree RajneeshAshramin Poona and flew to the United States.
The move to America appearsto have been a unilateraldecision on the part of Sheela, who
claimed it was for medical reasons. She oversaw the buying of the 64,229 acre ranch in
Oregonand began to supervisethe buildingof what would soon be the city of Rajneeshpuram.
Phase IV--The Silence: Acquiescence
Bhagwan'ssilence began in the spring of 1981, and ended in October, 1984.
During the silence the institutionbuilders were active, and Bhagwan's response at this
time appearsto conform to Wallis' description of Acquiescence; ". . . in which the charismatic leader, finding himself trammelledand constrained, acquiesces to the situation with
more or less good grace" (Wallis, 1982: 117)."
As Bhagwan withdrew into self-imposed solitude and silence, and made Ma Anand
Sheela his representative,he became increasinglyunawareof the administrativedecisions, the
political struggles with local authorities,and even the innovationsin religious life takingplace
in his commune. In 1981 RajneeshgrantedSheela limited powerof attorney,and removedthe
limits in 1982. In 1983 Sheela announcedthat "He" would only speak with her. At this stage
it appears that his knowledge of goings on in the commune was exclusively derived from
Sheela. He claimed in a later press conference that she kept him in ignorance.
When I was in silence I was completely unaware ... for eight months I supported
Sheela. ... All things came to my knowledgeyesterday.... I was in isolation (September 16, 1985).
The rapiddevelopmentof institutionscan be observed duringthis phase. Sheela's book,
Rajneeshism(1983) is a striking example of the routinizationof charisma. It describes the
newly createdAcademyof Rajneeshismas an "ecclesiasticalorganization"in which there are
three categories of ministers: Acharyas, Arihantas, and Siddhas. A symptom of creeping
institutionalizationfor Wallis is the appointmentof officials "on the basis of their qualifications and experience rather than on their inspirationalvirtues" (Wallis, 1984: 116). Rajneeshism stipulates:
To be eligible for the ministry,a person must have the following experience and training:
a minimum of
-two years as a neo-sannyasin
-two years of participationand practice in meditation

128

SOCIOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS
-one year of worship-meditationor apprenticeshipin Rajneeshism
-specific orientationfor the ministerial duties (Rajneeshism,1983).

Aside from creating a "charismaof office," Sheela seemed to be claiminga charismatic

statusby conferringupon herself titles like "Boddhisattva"anddressing long red silk robes in
her office as Chancellor of Rajneeshism. She declared in an interview, "I am the head of a
religion" (Oregonian, 1985: 16). The head therapist,SwamiAnandTeertha,performedmost
of the Ranch initiations and began to exhibit signs of independent, non-Bhagwan-derived
charisma;-it was rumoredthat he was enlightened.
Another sign of the routinizationof charisma was the creation of permanentoffices.
Webernotes that it "takes the form of the appropriationof powersof controland of economic
advantagesby the followers" (Weber, 1947: 367). Wallis adds that the officials "hope to
preserve their hitherto ad hoc status and enjoy a commensuratelifestyle and thus press for
some tenure of office and the regulation of office-holding in a non-arbitraryway" (Wallis,
1984: 116). Rajneeshpuramwas governed by an efficient hierarchyof female coordinators
called "moms" who were in turn directed by a small core of "supermoms."The Oregonian
contraststhe luxurious lifestyle of the supermoms with the ascetic regimenof the rank-andfile sannyasins.Sheela kept her office as Bhagwan'spersonal secretaryfor almost five years
and held executivepositions in all the majororganizationsof the city. "I am going to live like a
princess. That's my style!" (Sheela, interviewedin the Oregonian, 1982: 16).
Wallis notes that "to pay for the 'permanentroutinestructure'. .. some formof rational
fiscal basis for the movementmust be secured" (Wallis, 1982: 116). A host of small chain
businesses was established out of Rajneeshpuram,such as boutiques, restaurants,discos,
therapy centers, and bookshops. An interesting effort was made to imbue these rational
workadayventureswith mystery and humor (Rajneesheecharismaticqualities). The twelvehour day of unpaid labor expected from all residents was described in Rajneeshismas "An
abundance of creativity" and was regarded as a form of meditation-in-the-worldcalled
"Worship."The Rolls Royce collection was a wise investmentof the commune's money but
explainedto a skeptical public as "a sign of the great love between masterand disciple," or,
alternatively,as a "joke":
Bhagwan is like a child who delights in his toys. He has 92 Rolls Royces, the most
expensive car in the world, and yet he ... can only drive one at a time, and for only half
an hour a day. For us, it is a great paradox, a great joke.
Sheela organizeda Rolls Royce Raffle for which every sannyasinwas expectedto buy tickets,
and the winnerinvariablygave the Rolls back to Bhagwan.In Rajneesh'ssystemgamblingcan
be a spiritual exercise as it involves "taking a risk" (in the language of Encounter); The
RajneeshpuramCity Council passed an ordinancein September1982 requiringthat a joke be
told at the beginning and end of every meeting. This appearsto have been an attemptto retain
an atmosphereof spontaneityin the face of an increasing tendency towardorganization.
Phase V-Prophecy and Resistance
When Rajneeshcame out of silence in October 1984 his first discourse was what Weber
would call a "charismaticdisplay." Havinghad the good fortuneto be presentat the Montreal
Rajneeshcommune on this occasion, I witnessed the extraordinaryeffect on his disciples of
their master's (taped)voice. Approximately300 people wept, laugheduncontrollablyor sank
to the groundas if in a swoon. It was clear from his wordsthathe was claimingan increase in

CHARISMA
AND ABDICATION

129

charisma.He said that he had travelledso deeply into the Absolute throughhis silence that he
was now virtually indistinguishablefrom It.
Bhagwanannounced on this occasion that there was no God, which had the effect of
elevating his own status to the next best thing. The convention of referringto Rajneesh as
"He" and "Him" in the RFI literaturecertainlyimplies this. Bhagwanproceededto denounce
great religious leaders to whom he had referredfavorablyin the past. He then claimed to have
founded "the first and the last religion," Rajneeshism,and explainedhow it was superior to
all previous attempts:
Rajneeshismis a kind of religion-ness, not a dogma, cult, or creed, but only a quality of
love, silence, meditation, and prayerfulness.Hence it can never end. . . . Jesus did not
know about Buddha, Buddhadid not know about Lao Tzu. ... I have travelledall the
paths ... WhatI am saying is going to last foreverbecause nothingmore could be added
to it.
This move can be interpretedas a strategyof Resistance. Rajneeshismwas contradicting
previousstatements.In Poona he had often referredto God and had declared in 1971 that all
religions were acceptable paths leading to the superconsciousness.
Wallisexplains how Mo of the Childrenof God constantlycontradictshimself in order to
resist institutionalization.
Thus the prophet'scharismais furtherheightenedthroughthe fact thatthe only certainty
left is himself. The arbitrarinessof his statementsentailed that one should not even be
committed to any particularthing he said but to Mo regardless of what he said.
Rajneeshalso attemptedto de-institutionalizeRajneeshismby explaining it as "the laughing
religion," a "religion-ness," "the religionless religion."
In March 1984 Rajneeshprophesiedthe death of two thirdsof humanityfrom AIDS, the
"spiritualdisease." As a result, sannyasinswere requiredto wear rubbergloves and condoms
while making love and to refrainfrom kissing. This developmentresembles Moses David's
millennarian prophecies which Wallis interpretsas examples of Resistance. Certainly the
newly institutedsexual taboos were a Resistancestrategyinsofaras they served to breakdown
exclusive ties between couples and emphasized the ritual function of sexual activity. I have
arguedelsewhere thatthe AIDS threatencouragedRenunciation,one of Kanter'ssix commitment mechanisms (Palmer, 1986).
Rajneesh undermined the claims to charisma among his core group in the following
manner: two sannyasinsintervieweddescribed his readingout a list of one hundredpeople in
the commune whom he pronouncedenlightened. This caused a sensation, and excited rivalry
and argumentuntil Bhagwanadmittedlater the whole thing had been a joke. One sannyasin
who described the incident to me saw it as a test:
It was to show what big egos people had, that they could ever imagine they were on the
same level as Bhagwan.
Rajneeshbegan to oppose Sheela's efforts to build a solid institutionto survive his death,
and to ensure her succession. Over the summerof 1984 she had announcedthat Rajneeshhad
createdthree sansads to offer spiritualguidance after his death. On August 19th of the same
year Rajneesh flatly contradictedher in a deposition filed in Multnomah County Circuit
Court:

130

SOCIOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS

I am not making anybody head of my religion because I don't want any books to be
followedby me exploitingpeople in my name. I am not going to be succeededby anybody.
The day I am dead I am dead. There is no question of any succession.

Phase VI-Sheela's Betrayal: AttemptedDisplacement

On September 16, 1985 Bhagwanheld a major press conference at Rajneeshpuramin
which he revealeda series of crimes allegedly carried out by Sheela and her "fascist gang."
These alleged crimes included three poisoning attempts, salmonella food poisoning in The
Dalles, wiretapping, bugging rooms, and financial abuse which left the commune
$55,000,000 in debt.
From the evidence at hand it appearsthat Sheela's alleged crimes (of which she is now
convicted and serving a prison sentence) were the end-resultof an unsuccessful Displacement
attempt. Wallis describes the response of Displacement as follows:
A third case is that which institutionalizationproceeds without clear recognitionby the
charismatic leader of what is occurring until too late for him effectively to reverse the
situation despite a strong antipathytowardsit (Wallis, 1984: 118).
A close look at her alleged crimes suggests that she was attemptingto preserve her exclusive
access to the guru, which she had enjoyedduring his silence. Her three poison victims were
the only sannyasinswho were close to him. The bugging devices found in his rooms suggest
she wished to control his sources of information.Some of her statementsfrom prison indicate
that she might have intendedto displace Rajneeshas the head of Rajneeshism:
She said the allegations were merely a device used by Bhagwanto keep the sannyasins
movementunitedbehindHim. Otherwiseit would have split into two camps, one following her and the other stayingwith Bhagwan .... "I'm still your Mom. Youmay not have
a Dad any more but I'm still your Mom" (Rajneesh, March 11, 1986).
Rajneesh appearedto regardher actions as a displacementattempt:
It seems these people could haveeven killed me. If I was dead they could haveworshipped
my dead body and have full power to do whateverthey wanted to do (September 1986
press conference).
He ascribed her motives to jealousy of his charismaticauthority:
As I startedto speak again, a strangething happened.Sheela became very sad. Everyone
was ecstatic thatI spoke again except Sheela. Strange!Withina few days it became clear.
While I was in isolation she had become a celebrity throughthe news media. She was
famous all over the world. When I startedspeaking again Sheela's swollen ego started
shrinking.If I speak myself thereis no need for a mediator,a messenger,a representative.
I said .... "Youhave become addictedto being famous ... the worstdrug in existence"
(September 16 press conference).
Bhagwan's first reaction to Sheela's displacementattemptwas to protect his own charisma. He disassociatedhimself from her activities by publicly denouncingher. This laid him

AND ABDICATION
CHARISMA

131

open to the chargeof irresponsibilityand weak leadershipin remainingignorantof her abuses.

However,he deportedhimself with his characteristiccharmand managedto treadthe fine line
betweenacceptingresponsibilityand disclaiming responsibilityfor the unfortunateevents. On
one hand he showed concern over the gravity of the situation:
They were absolute criminals, inhuman, fascist in outlook!
On the other hand he joked about it: "Adolf Hitler has died again!"
He promised to take responsibilityfor the welfare of his commune in the futureI am going to continue to speak for the rest of my life. I will be here!
-and yet disclaimed responsibility for Sheela's behavior: "One can never really know
another human being."
Another strategy (eagerly embraced by his sannyasins who wished to preserve their
absolutefaithin theirleader's infallibility)was to blameeverythingon the followers. Bhagwan
hinted that he had allowed the situation to develop as a learning "device":
People were almost asleep. Unless somethingreally shakesthem up they don't see much.
We have seen in time!
One sannyasinechoed this notion:
We thoughtwe were surrenderingto Bhagwan,but it turnedout we were obeying Sheela.
It was our own fault what happened. Bhagwanhas always warnedus not to give up our
independentjudgment, not to be blindly obedient. He allowed Sheela to go crazy with
power and it was a great learning experience for all of us.
Phase VII--"I am not your guru ": Abdication
On September 26, Bhagwan told his sannyasinsto stop wearing the color red and the
mala, theirtraditionalsymbols of initiation(RajneeshTimes, 1986: 27). All malas were to be
sent back to the ranch. When his followers protested,Bhagwanrelentedand allowed them to
keep the mala. He announced the end of Rajneeshism, saying "A religion has died." A
celebrationof the death of Rajneeshismtook place at Rajneeshpuramin which a bonfire was
made of copies of Sheela's book Rajneeshismand her "pope's robes." The RajneeshTimesof
October 4, 1985 offers Bhagwan's explanations which reveal his acute concern for the
problem of institutionalization.
In an interview with Bill Gravesof the Bulletin, Bhagwansaid he decided to take these
steps in an effort to keep his movement from becoming institutionalized.
The book and the word "Rajneeshee"were developedby Ma Anand Sheela against
his wishes during his three-and-a-halfyears of silence.
"I hate the word 'ism.' "
Bhagwancontinued to deliver blows to the institutionsof his movement. The Rajneesh
Times of October II reports that he abolished the daily "gacchamis" or bowing ceremony
"which he said was too similarto ritualChristianand Mohammedanprayers"and at the same

132

ANALYSIS
SOCIOLOGICAL

time he put an end to the terms "worship" and "temple" which were to become plain old
"work" and "department"again. He attackedthe large internationalcommunesby declaring
"I am absolutely against centralization"and invited his sannyasinsto start new communes.
On October 18 the Rajneesh Times announced "Friends of Rajneesh Internationalis
born" meaning the name of the movementwas no longer The RajneeshFoundationInternational. This move was inspired by Bhagwan's statement that he was not a guru to his
sannyasins, but merely a friend.
On October27 Rajneeshboardeda Learjeton what he claimed was to be a vacation, but
he was forced to land, was arrested,jailed, and charged with arranging"sham marriages"
among his disciples in order to bypass U.S. immigrationlaws. He entereda technicalplea of
guilty (while privately denying the charges) and on November 14 was deported from the
United States. Rajneeshpuramofficials decided to close down their utopian city, since
Sheela's alleged "financial abuse" had left them 55 million in debt, the Rajneeshwould no
longer be in residence to attractthousandsof visitors to the summer festivalswhich were the
city's main source of income. The internationalcommunes began to disband, the Montreal
commune following suit in April 1986.

AND RESPONSIBILITYTWOASPECTSOF CHARISMA

PERFORMANCE
In orderto accountfor the divagationsin Rajneesh'scareerandto explainhis abdicationit
is useful to distinguishbetween two aspects of charismaticauthority: (1) Performance,and
(2) Responsibility.
Performance.A charismaticleader's authorityrests on his ability to demonstrate"exceptional powersor qualities," to convince others of his "supra-mundanepoweror knowledgefor
which [he provides] the channel of which [he is] the source" (Wallis, 1982: 2). In this
capacity his role is not unlike the inspired performer or the creative artist who receives
adulationfrom his audience or fans.
Responsibility. This role demands the leader's willingness and ability to provide a
directionfor the movement,to set policies and handleadministrativedecisions. It also entails
giving counsel to his followers, and settling conflicts arising within the group and also from
without: in confrontationswith the largersociety. In this capacitythe leaderassumes the role
of the pastor who protects and guides his "flock."
The portraitwhich emerges from a close study of Rajneesh's career is of a man who
excels as a performer but is weak or recalcitrantas a pastor. Although Rajneesh showed
considerable leadership ability in phases 1, 2, and 3 of his movement he demonstratedan
increasingunwillingnessto assume the responsible, authorizingrole after 1980 and appeared
to shy away from the active exercise of power, leaving the direction of his movementin the
capable hands of Sheela. Many of the changes in his movementcorrespondwith shifts that
allowed him to back away from assuming the authorizing,responsible role. The effect has
been to preserve his personal, exemplary charisma as an object of devotion and to avoid
institutionalrestrictionson this authority.
Interviews with Montrealsannyasinssupportedthis view of Rajneesh'sleadership. His
gifts as a performerwere praised:
Bhagwanwouldget up thereandjust do his own thing. Youcould tell he was havinga ball!
-The first thing I thought was, "This guy is a brilliantcomedian!"
He was often described as childlike, innocent, carefree:

CHARISMA
AND ABDICATION

133

Bhagwanis like a child, awakein the momentand filled with the wonderof life. . .. Even
when he found out he was going to jail his reaction was, "What fun! Will they put
handcuffs on me? I've never tried handcuffs before!"
Many disciples did not appearto expect concrete guidance from their leader:
Bhagwannever tells us what to do.
After you took sannyas, it was up to you. Whateveryou chose to do with Bhagwan's
energy, it was your affair.
This analysis of Rajneesh's leadershipexplains his tendency to vacillatebetween Resistance andEncouragement.His aversionto the pastorrole led him to delegatethe responsibility
of leadershipto Sheela and her core group of "supermoms"who were energetic and determined institutionbuilders. Rajneeshappearedto view his female leadersas receptaclesof his
own charisma. His writings stress the passive, receptivequalitiesof women, and his policy of
makinga woman-ruledcommune was a means of extendinghis charismainto the government
of his movementthroughthe channelsof women devotees who were filled with his "energy."
Free from the constraintsof responsibility,Rajneeshcould pursuean untrammelledcareer as
the performerwhose gesturesof Resistancewere often his most exciting acts. Thus his jokes,
tantrums,and shock tactics were a means of pruningthe institutionsto his own taste without
necessitatingan active involvement in decision-makingprocedures,and at the same time a
means of entertaininghis disciples, who interprethis more outrageousmomentsas "a device
to wake us up."
It could be argued, therefore, that Resistance and Encouragementare not necessarily
contradictorystrategies, and that Rajneesh'scase challenges the assumptionunderlyingWallis' theory;that the process of institutionalizationinevitablyconstitutesa threatto the leader's
charisma. Even in his example of Mary Baker Eddy as a successful case of Encouragement,
Wallis sees her institution-buildingas "a process of bureaucratization"in which "some
charismaticelements were retained"whereas "initially ChristianScience was emphatically
charismatic" (Wallis, 1982: 117). Weber,however,does distinguishbetween several typical
patterns.There can be institutionalizationthatamountsto an eclipse of the charismaticquality
of devotionto authority: this occurs with bureaucratizationand traditionalization.There are
also forms of institutionalizationthat attempt to (or are able to) preserve the charismatic
qualities. Weber discusses these in relation to the terms "routinizationof charisma" and
"hierocracy." Rajneesh's strategies of Encouragementand Acquiescence, therefore, could
perhaps be better described as the routinizationof charisma.
Throughoutthis study I was confrontedwith the difficulty of distinguishingbetween the
"pure" type of personal charisma and the slightly institutionalizedform which serves to
buttressit. In other words there is no clear boundarybetween charismaand institutionalization. The relationship between the two is a subtle one, for charisma cannot exist without
institutions,and the process of institutionalizationis fed by charisma.There were indications
that Rajneesh'scharismawas enhancedby some modes of institutionalizationbut threatened
by others. For example, one sannyasinclaimed "Bhagwanwas at his most powerfulduringHis
silence." AnothercomplainedaboutSheela's book Rajneeshismas "a MickeyMouse version
of Bhagwan's religion." When Rajneeshdestroyedthe institutionsin his movementby abdicating, he inevitably underminedhis own charismatic authority.A therapist, Amitabh, is
quotedin Rajneeshsaying Bhagwanhas "lost it." Manyformerdisciples interpretedhis act as
a loss of charisma, and some are writing books with titles like Bhagwan, TheGod WhoFailed
and Oranges and Lemmings. Certainly in terms of possessing a visible following with a

134

ANALYSIS
SOCIOLOGICAL

distinctive philosophy and life style, Rajneesh's authority is diminishing. These examples
suggest that the relationshipbetween charismaand institutionbuilding is more complex than
Wallis' model permits.
Abdication:. Rajneesh'sdecision to abdicateis in partto be understoodin relationto his
being a prophetof the exemplarytype. He lacked a world historicalmission and thus failed to
satisfy some Oregonians'expectationsof anotherJonestown.Insteadof urginghis followersto
defy state authoritiesunto death he remainedtrue to his claim as the "EnlightenedOne" to
being "aloof and separate as an island," and therefore simply negotiated for the lightest
sentence and skipped the country leaving his flock to fend for itself.
Rajneesh'sabdicationhas met with a widely variedresponse from his sannyasins.Some,
like the therapistAmitabh, feel "He" has "lost It" (Rajneesh,July 16). Othersexpressed in
interview the notion that Bhagwanhad proved himself to be an authenticspiritualmaster by
cutting his disciples off. This was explainedas the final stage of a spiritualpath in which the
disciple has to prove himself or herself by continuing alone, giving up dependence on the
guru. Some sannyasinsreferredto Krishnamurti,who establishedhis credentialsas a master
by in fact disclaiming the role of avatarwhich Annie Besant had preparedhim for. Others
referredto the Russian mystic, Gurdjieff, whose style of spiritual teaching often involved
shocking his students or sending them away.It is perhaps significant that recent editions of
Rajneesh have contained frequentreferencesto Krishnamurtiand Gurdjieff, who both abdicated from positions of responsible leadership. One article describes how Gurdjieffclosed
down his communityin Fontainebleuin 1924 andconcludes: "any resemblancebetweentheir
experiences and our life . .. may be coincidental.Be aware,however,thatthe Master's ways
are many" (Rajneesh 7imes, September8).
Rajneesh,KrishnamurtiandGurdjieffsharesimilarcharacteristics.They are all examples
of what R. S. Ellwood would term the "hermetic magus" type of leader, representativesin
their own way of the gnostic tradition(Ellwood, 1973: 49). The spiritualpaths they outlined
emphasize liberation from mechanical patternsof thought and behavior. The source of the
sacred is perceived to lie within the self and the function of the master is to awaken the
disciples from sleep, or to shock them out of theirpreconditionedpatterns.This is achievedby
puttingdisciples throughordeals or stoppingthe mind throughoutrageousbehavior(as in the
case of Gurdjeiff)or destroyingrationalthoughtprocesses throughparadox(as in the case of
Krishnamurtiand Rajneesh).In this sense their philosophiescould be describedas individualistic and antinomian.
These masters exhibited an aversionto institutionsand an impatience with routine patterns of economic and social life. The modus operandiof each leader could be interpretedas
an extreme example of Resistance.
Each master stressed the impermanenceof life and the importanceof learningto live in
the present moment. Rajneeshcalls it the "herenow," Krishnamurtithe "eternal present."
They possess a certain detachmentfrom or self-consciousness towardstheir role as spiritual
master, an elusiveness and a shamanicability to disappearor to change shape. For example
when Rajneesh adopted the name, "Bhagwan," he called it a "device" which he could
"drop" when the time came.

CONCLUSIONS
Thus far I have attemptedto establishthat Abdicationdoes representa new relationship
between charismaand institutionbuildingand that the meaningof this strategyin Rajneesh's
case can be understoodby distinguishingbetween two aspects of charisma: Performanceand

CHARISMA
AND ABDICATION

135

Responsibility.Having shown by my examples that Rajneeshis strong in the first aspect but
weak as regardsthe second, I will conclude by arguingthathis abdicationsolved the perennial
problem of institutionalizationin several ways:
First, it enabledhim to renouncethe responsible role of pastor,while retainingthe role of
performer.He relinquishedhis followers but kept his audience and devoted "Friends."
Second, it was undoubtedlya step to salvage his reputationand protect his personal
charismawhich Sheela's scandalousbehavior threatenedto discredit. Thus he disassociated
himself from the organizationand religion, Rajneeshism,which had sufferedan institutional
"loss of charisma."
Third, it servedas a sort of shaman'sordeal of initiation,a symbolicdeathwhich enabled
him to change shape. Rajneeshchose to become a disembodiedsymbol, a mythic figure, on
par with Gurdjieff and Krishnamurtiwho, even in death, resist attemptsto systemize or
institutionalize.Thus his Abdicationwas a means of transformationfromone type of charismatic leader to another: in Fred Bird's typology it would representa transition from a
Devotee-typeto an Apprentice-typeleader. Insteadof presidingover a utopiancity, Rajneesh
has become an itinerantperformer,and is producingphilosophicalliterature.(Krishnamurti
and Gurdjieffwrote or dictatedprolifically after they abdicated.)Recenteditionsof Rajneesh
havecomparedtheir leaderto "The UnknowableGurdjieff"(Bennett1973). Both mastersare
mysterious, unattached, and elusive, "teachers" who communicate their vision through
verbalperformancesand cryptic behavior ratherthan throughthe creationof coherentbelief
systems or the building and governing of utopian societies.

REFERENCES
Belfrage,Sally.1981.Flowersof Emptiness.New York:Dial Press.
Books.
Bennet,J. G. 1973.Gurdjieff.Makinga New Fbrld.London:Turnstone
andRitualsin New ReligiousMovements,"
in Understanding
New
Bird,Frederick.1978. "Charisma
Religions,eds. G. BakerandJ. Needleman.SeaburyPress, 1978.
Braun,Kirk.1984.TheUnwelcome
Society.Oregon:ScoutCreekPress.
Eisenstadt,S. N. 1968. Max Weberon Charismaand InstitutionBuilding.Chicago:Universityof
ChicagoPress.
Ellwood,R. S. 1973.ReligionsandSpiritualGroupsin Moder America.NewJersey:PrenticeHall.
and Commitment.
Mass:HarvardUniversity
Kanter,RosabethMoss. 1972. Community
Cambridge,
Press.
Oregonian,"ForLoveandMoney,"a 20-partseries.June30-July19, 1985.Portland,
Oregon.
andCommitment
in the RajneeshFoundation,"
Palmer,SusanJ. 1986. "Community
Update.Aarhus,
Denmark.
Rajneeshism,
Academyof Rajneeshism.1983. RFI.
1980-85.
Rajneeshlimes, publishedin Rajneeshpuram,
Boulder,Colorado.
Rajneesh.1986. Ed. Friendsof RajneeshInternational.
Sannyas,1980: 5. Poona,India.
TheBook,1984,Academyof Rajneeshism.
andControlin a NewReligiousMovement,"
Commitment
Wallis,Roy.1982."Charisma,
in Millennialismand Charisma,ed. RoyWallis.Belfast:The Queen'sUniversityPress.
New York:FreePress.
Weber,Max. 1947.TheTheoryof SocialandEconomicOrganization.