| 
Part XI : Epilogue 1990 onwards : Osho talks
about his vision, and his books
I am not creating any religion. It is only a religiousness, a
diffused kind of religiousness, not very tangible. You cannot
make a creed out of it, you cannot make a church out of it—impossible!
I am not leaving a single Bible or Koran or Gita so you can make
a church out of it. When I will leave the world I will leave at
least one thousand books, so contradictory to each other that
anybody trying to make out any dogma out of them will go crazy.
It is impossible to make any dogma out of my ideas, but you
can transform your being through them. ggate210
I have been constantly inconsistent so that you will never be
able to make a dogma out of me. You will simply go nuts if you
try. I am leaving something really terrible for scholars. They
will not be able to make any sense out of it. They will go nuts;
and they deserve it, they should go nuts. But nobody can create
an orthodoxy out of me, it is impossible….
From my words you can get burned, but you will not be able to
find any kind of theology, dogmatism.
You can find a way to live but not a dogma to preach.
You can find a rebellious quality to be imbibed, but you will
not find a revolutionary theme to be organized.
My words are not only on fire. I am putting gunpowder also here
and there, which will go on exploding for centuries. I am putting
more than needed—I never take any chances. Almost each sentence
is going to create trouble for anybody who wants to organize a
religion around me.
Yes, you can have a loose community, a commune. Remember the word
loose: everybody independent, everybody free to live his own way,
to interpret me in his own way, to find whatsoever he wants to
find. He can find the way he wants to live—and everybody
unto himself.
There is no need for somebody to decide what my religion is. I
am leaving it open-ended. You can work out a definition for yourself,
but it is only for yourself; and that too you will have to continuously
change. As you understand me more and more, you will have to change
it. You cannot go on holding it like a dead thing in your hand.
You will have to change it, and it will go on changing you simultaneously.
person08
Do you want me to say that I bring you the last message? I am
not going to say it. I am not going to be in the company of all
these fools who have been trying somehow to make their religion
look bigger, higher, truer.
I say to you that I am not bringing anybody's message—because
there is nobody! I want you to understand that I am simply trying
to share my experience with you. It is always fresh, always young;
it is always in the now, in the here. That is a fundamental quality
of truth.
And I'm not saying that after me there will be nobody who will
experience it. On the contrary, I am saying to you that if you
understand me, there are going to be millions of people after
me who will go on and on and on discovering more and more. Even
if they have to contradict me, don't bother about it—let
them contradict. Who am I? I am not closing the doors. I am not
putting a lock on the door and taking the keys with me. My house
is without doors. It is open from everywhere—and I want
it to remain always open.
Naturally, people who will be coming will make new arrangements
of the furniture in the house. They may plan a new architecture
for the house, they may make new plans for the garden. I leave
it to them, but the process will be the same. false21
One of the most important things to be remembered by all is the
way you have started your question. The question is, "I have
heard You say." Usually, people drop the first part. They
simply say, "You have said this." And there is such
a great difference between the two, such an immense difference
that it is unbridgeable, and needs a great understanding.
Whatever you hear is not necessarily the thing said; what is said
is not necessarily what you hear. The obvious reason is that I
am speaking from a different space of being, and you are hearing
from a totally different space. In the transmission, many things
change.
It is always a sign of understanding to remember that whatever
I have said may be totally different than what you have heard.
Your question should be about what you have heard, because how
can you ask a question about something which you have not heard?
golden11
So the greatest work for sannyasins is to keep the message pure,
unpolluted by you or by others—and wait. The future is bound
to be more receptive, more welcoming. We may not be here but we
can manage to change the consciousness for centuries to come.
And my interest is not only in this humanity; my interest is in
humanity as such.
Keep the message pure, twenty-four carat gold. And soon those
people will be coming for whom you have made a temple—although
it is sad when you are making the temple; nobody comes. And when
people start coming, you will not be here. But one has to understand
one thing: we are part of a flowing river of consciousness.
You may not be here in this form, you may be here in another form,
but keep it in mind never to ask such a question that I should
be more acceptable, more respectable, more in agreement with the
masses. I cannot be. And it is not stubbornness on my part. It
is just that truth cannot compromise. It has never done it; it
would be the greatest sin. sermon12
The Masters have always believed in the spoken word; there are
reasons for it. The Masters have never written books. The spoken
word has a lively quality to it; the written word is dead, it
is a corpse.
When I am speaking to you it is a totally different thing than
when you will be reading it in a book, because when you are reading
in a book it is only a word; when you are listening to the Master
it is more than the word. The presence of the Master is overpowering!
Before the word reaches you, the Master has already reached; he
is already overflooding you. Your heart is breathing with the
Master, beating with the Master in the same rhythm. You are breathing
in the same rhythm. There is a communion, an invisible link. the
presence of the Master, his gestures, his eyes…the words
spoken by him are ordinary words, but when spoken by a Master
they carry something of the beyond; they carry some silence, some
meditativeness, some of his experience, because they come from
his innermost core.
It is like passing through a garden: even though you have not
touched a single flower, but when you reach home you can still
feel the fragrance of the garden; your clothes have caught it,
your hairs have caught it. The pollen of the flowers was in the
wind. You have not touched anything, but the fragrance was in
the air; it has become something part of you. ithat09
Jesus' recorded life was very poor because his followers were
obsessed with history. They could not write anything that was
beyond history.
The eastern mind could see that we cannot do justice to Krishna
or Buddha if we limit ourselves to bare events. This will be an
injustice because the real has happened somewhere else. Then how
to record the real? It cannot be recorded. But, we can create
a myth. And that myth can indicate, can show something about it.
Those who will read the myth will not read a bare statement of
events. They will go deep into the poetry of the myth, deep into
the imagination. And it may be possible that somewhere, from their
own imagination not from the facts—very far from the facts,
from somewhere deep in their own unconscious minds, from what
Jung calls 'archetypes'—they might get a glimpse; they may
be able to know what has happened beyond history. They may be
able to know, from deep down within themselves.
History cannot go deep inside you. Only poetry can. But only from
within you can something happen which will be in sympathy with
the nontemporal, which can be in communion with the nonhistorical.
Krishna's life and Buddha's life are only jumping points to enable
you to go deeply inside yourself. If you read Tulsidas, a western
historian will say that this is not history; this is imagination.
It is. But I still say that Tulsidas does more justice to Ram
than Luke can ever do to Christ because he knows the secret. By
going deeply into what Tulsidas has written, you will again relive
the whole phenomenon. Time will be transcended; you will again
be in the time of Ram. Now there are no space/time relationships.
Deep within yourself, you are in Ram's milieu—as if Ram
was present, as if he was somewhere nearby….
This is a mythological approach to the nontemporal. Re-enacting
it. Reviving it. Resurrecting it. History cannot do this; only
myth can do this. Myth is helpful but not substantial: A creative
imagination is needed to fill in the substance….
When we live in time, in the world of events, if someone is not
doing anything it seems as if he is not. Doing is everything.
Doing is in the realm of history, but being is in the realm of
the spirit. You are; you just are. You are not doing anything,
not even mentally. Nothing either physical or mental is happening
There is no doing at all, no ripple of action at all you are in
an absolute nondoing state. But you are!
This beingness is the vertical dimension. Through this beingness,
you jump into the unknown, into the divine. And unless one jumps
into this non-historical, non-temporal moment, one has not known
what life is. quest06
The first thing you have to understand is the difference between
the fact and the truth. Ordinary history takes care about the
facts—what actually happens in the world of matter, the
incidents. It does not take care about the truth, because it does
not happen in the world of matter; it happens in consciousness.
And man is not yet mature enough to take care about the events
of consciousness.
He surely takes care about events happening in time and in space;
those are the facts. But he is not mature enough, not insightful
enough to take care about what happens beyond time and beyond
space—in other words, what happens beyond mind, what happens
in consciousness. One day we will have to write the whole of history
with a totally different orientation, because the facts are trivia—although
they are material, they don't matter. And the truths are immaterial
but they matter.
The new orientation for a future history will take care about
what happened inside Gautam Buddha when he became enlightened,
what went on happening while he was in the body for forty-two
years after his enlightenment. And what was happening in those
forty-two years is not going to be discontinued just because the
body drops dead. It had no concern with the body. It was a phenomenon
in consciousness, and consciousness continues. The pilgrimage
of the consciousness is endless. So what was happening in the
consciousness inside the body, will go on happening outside the
body. That is a simple understanding.
So this story is a story of inner happenings. rebel27
Lao Tzu, one of the most important figures in the history of
non-doing…. If history is to be written rightly then there
should be two kinds of histories: the history of doers—Genghis
Khan, Tamerlane, Nadirshah, Alexander, Napoleon Bonaparte, Ivan
the Terrible, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini; these
are the people who belong to the world of doing. There should
be another history, a higher history, a real history—of
human consciousness, of human evolution: the history of Lao Tzu,
Chuang Tzu, Lieh Tzu, Gautam Buddha, Mahavira, Bodhidharma; a
totally different kind. upan28
It is one of my deep desires that when our mystery schools are
functioning, slowly slowly, we will bring from all over the world
the great mystical scriptures, without any consideration of to
whom they belong, and publish them with the latest commentaries,
so that mysticism does not remain just a word but becomes a vast
literature, and anybody can devote his whole life to understanding
what the mystics have given to the world. transm25
What I am doing here is play—it is not work. When I am
gone, my work is to be known as play, never as work. So take it
non-seriously. Seriousness is a disease and through seriousness
no one has ever gone beyond. Seriousness is so heavy that it makes
you rooted in the gravitation. One needs to be very playful, then
one can go beyond gravitation—one can fly!
A great unburdening is needed, so just be playful about it. When
I say, 'when walking, watch,' I mean be playful. If sometimes
you forget, nothing is wrong in it. Watch that too—you have
forgotten, good! Then again you remember, good! Both are good.
In fact there is a rhythm. You cannot constantly watch; it is
just like breathing in, breathing out. whip08
Life is love and love is celebration. Celebration is the very
core of religion, the soul. Without celebration religion becomes
a corpse. And that's what has happened to religions in the past
again and again: they become serious. And the moment they become.
serious, only the dead body is there.
Religion remains alive only through celebration. When Buddha
is there, there is celebration. When Krishna is there, there is
celebration. When Jesus is there, there is celebration. The moment
the Master leaves the body the disciples become very serious,
they become fanatics, and they start becoming missionaries: they
want to convert the whole world. They start arguing, proving,
disproving; they create theology. And slowly slowly the soul dies—they
become too engaged with other things. Religion lives only through
celebration, as celebration. But this point has been missed again
and again; that's why so many religions were born but they all
died, and they all died a premature death. It was not necessary
to die; they could have lived and served humanity.
I want to make it very conscious in my sannyasins not to be
serious; be sincere but don't be serious. And remember continuously
that existence is in a constant celebration. When you are in celebration
you are in tune with existence, in tune with God, in tune with
Tao. When you become serious you fall apart.
The old proverb is right: When you laugh the whole world laughs
with you, but when you cry, when you weep, you weep alone. People
are ready to share with you if you are happy. They themselves
are in enough misery—who wants to be with a serious man?
The serious man is heavy.
It is said that you cannot live with a saint twentyfour hours
a day: you will die of boredom. But of course, these are not saints
about whom that is said; otherwise you can live with a saint for
eternity and you can go on celebrating. But then the saint has
to have a different taste, a different flavor to him. That flavor
is called utsavo.
My sannyasins have to be laughing, dancing, singing. That is
their prayer. If you can laugh a heartful laugh, it is prayer.
If you can dance to abandon, it is prayer. If you can sing your
being, that is prayer. And there is no need to take religion seriously.
Seriousness is pathological. Children are not serious, because
they are very close to the source of life. The birds are not serious;
nobody has ever come across a bird who is serious. The trees are
not serious; nobody has ever seen a tree serious. It is all joy…it
is continuous celebration.
Even when a flower is dying and the petals are falling there
is no seriousness at all; even in the dying flower you will see
joy and beauty and thankfulness. And that's how a man should live
and should die. Dancing one should live, and dancing one should
die. I teach the dancing God. athing05
|
