Innocence <3
The innocent have no sorrow, no suffering, though they have had a thousand experiences. It is not experiences that corrupt the mind but what they leave behind, the residue, the scars, the memories. These accumulate, pile one on top of the other, and then sorrow begins. This sorrow is time. Where time is, innocency is not. 

The word `innocence' means `incapable of being hurt'. To have a mind that is not capable of being hurt, does not mean that it has built up a lot of resistance - on the contrary, such a mind is dying to everything that it has known in which there has been conflict, pleasure and pain. Only then is the mind innocent; that means it can love. You cannot love with memory, love is not a matter of remembrance, of time.

How simple it is to be innocent! Without innocence, it is impossible to be happy. The pleasure of sensations is not the happiness of innocence. Innocence is freedom from the burden of experience. It is the memory of experience that corrupts, and not the experiencing itself. Knowledge, the burden of the past, is corruption. The power to accumulate, the effort to become destroys innocence; and without innocence, how can there be wisdom? The merely curious can never know wisdom; they will find, but what they find will not be truth. The suspicious can never know happiness, for suspicion is the anxiety of their own being, and fear breeds corruption. Fearlessness is not courage but freedom from accumulation.

Where time is, innocency is not. 

J.Krishnamurti

Religion - The Last Luxury
Question 1:

BELOVED OSHO,

ARE YOU AGAINST ALL RELIGIONS? ISN'T RELIGION SOMETHING ESSENTIALLY NEEDED BY MAN?

Yes, I am against all the religions, because I am for religion.

The very fact that there are so many religions is enough to prove that something is basically wrong, that we have not been able to discover the truth about religion, because the truth can only be one - lies can be hundreds. Fictions, you can create as many as you like; it is your imagination. But the truth is not your imagination.

The truth is a revelation. It is already there.

You have not to invent it; you have to discover it.

I am against all the religions, because all these religions are not religions. If they were religions there would have been only one religion in the whole world. There is no possibility of there being even two religions, what to say about three hundred religions - it is absolutely absurd. It is strange that man continues to tolerate it. These are all fictions, created by different people, different societies, different geographies. They have nothing to do with religion as such, because religion is not geographical, is not historical. Religion is not racial, is not national. All these categories are irrelevant as far as religion is concerned.

Do you ever think of science in terms of nations, races, countries, historical periods, geography? If the water boils at a hundred degrees here, today, it has always been boiling at a hundred degrees everywhere, in the past, and it is going to boil at a hundred degrees in the future too. It will not make any difference whether the person who is boiling the water is a Jew or a Hindu or a Christian or a communist; whether he believes in God or does not believe in God; whether he is a sinner or a saint.

It won't make any difference at all; the water will boil at a hundred degrees all the same. That's a truth, and you need not create any fiction about it.

Religious experience is a truth. When you discover it, you will not find that it is Christian or Hindu or Mohammedan or Buddhist. It has nothing to do with all these words.

The moment you discover religious truth, all space, all time, become irrelevant. It is simply beyond time and space. It is immaterial. Five thousand years before, five thousand years afterwards, it is exactly the same. The universe remains authentically itself. It is not wearing phony masks that it goes on changing, so when one mask suits, it uses it; when another mask suits, it uses that. The universe has no masks, it is utterly naked. It is not like you; it has no personality. Truth has no personality.

You have not only personality, you have personalities, each one of you many personalities, because you need different faces in different situations with different people. When you are talking to your wife you need one personality: the personality of a husband. When you are talking to your girlfriend you talk differently; you are using the personality of a lover. When you are talking to the priest, you certainly behave in a different way.

And when you are talking to your servant, do you behave in the same way as you behave with the rabbi, with the pope, with the mahatma? No, when the servant passes through your room, you don't even take any notice that a person is passing by. The servant is not human. You don't say hello to him; he does not expect any hello from you. He comes and goes, does his work - he is a robot, he is paid for that. You go on reading your newspaper, you don't even give a single glance to the person. You don't ask him anything, not even "How are you?" No, that is not expected; you are the master.

But when you go to the office and stand before your boss, then the situation is just the reverse - now you are the servant. You are standing there and the boss goes on turning his file as if you are not standing there, as if there is nobody there. He may not be looking for anything in those files, he may be just turning those files to show you where you belong; there is no need for him to take any notice of you.

If you watch yourself, you will see in twenty-four hours how many times you go on changing your personality. And it becomes such an automatic process that you need not even make an effort to change it; the change becomes automatic. You see your wife coming - it automatically changes.

You see your boss coming - it automatically changes. It has been your routine for so long, that now....

You have to understand one thing about man: that man's mind has a robot part in it. When you learn something, you have to be alert. For example, if you are learning driving you have to be alert, watchful of so many things: the road, the people, the other vehicles passing. You have to be aware of your steering, you have to be aware of the brake, you have to be aware of the gears.

And in the beginning when somebody learns, he finds it very difficult to take care of so many things simultaneously. Once you have learned it, what happens? Then you can sing and drive, talk and drive, listen to the radio and drive. Your mind has taken "driving" to another section, and that section is the robot section of the mind. Now the robot takes care of everything that you were required to take care of in the beginning.

The same happens with your personalities. So you are not even aware that you change so quickly - no sound is made, no visible change - but if you watch, you will see everything has changed.

I was traveling in a train from Delhi to Amritsar. In my compartment there was a woman, young, very beautiful. And at each station, the man who was traveling with her - he could not get a seat in the coupe, because in the coupe only two people can sit, so he had to travel in another compartment, but at each station he would come running, sometimes bringing sweets, sometimes bringing fruits, sometimes bringing this, sometimes bringing that.

I asked the man, "Are you married to this woman?"

He said, "Yes. We have been married seven years."

I said, "Don't tell a lie to me. You have not been married even for seven days."

He looked shocked, but he said, "How did you find out?"

I said, "This is enough. No husband would come at every station with sweets, fruits, and inquiring, 'Do you need anything?' and hugging and kissing. No husband... and married for seven years?

Impossible! You are not married to her at all."

He said, "It is true. She is somebody else's wife. I am also married, and married for seven years, but that is to another woman. And with that woman - what you are saying, actually that's what I do.

Even if I can get a seat in the same compartment I don't. I travel in another compartment, finding any excuse. And once I leave her in her compartment, then only at the station on which we are going to get down do I come again, not in the middle." What he said was, "But how could you find out?"

I said, "There is nothing in it to find out, it is so simple. Even after seven days of marriage, this stupid behavior that you are persistently doing here at every station drops, simply disappears, because this behavior is foreplay, not afterplay."

He said, "What do you mean by foreplay and afterplay?"

I said, "Just exactly those words: fore-play.... Before you have got hold of the woman, this is foreplay; you are persuading her. And what you are doing with your wife is afterplay. Then you hope that somehow the compartment gets thrown into the river, falls off the rails: some miracle happens and you do not have to meet that woman again at the coming station where you are going to get down.

You think a thousand and one things, that 'Miracles after all happen. She can get lost. Somebody may steal her, or somebody may kill her; anything is possible in this big world, so many things happen every day.' But nothing happens. You find your wife there, you are standing there and you are again saying sweet nothings to her: 'How much I wished to be with you, how much I missed you, how much I remembered you continuously.' Yes, you remembered, but for different reasons!"

Existence has no personality. No question of personalities, it simply is whatsoever it is.

To experience existence as it is, is to know the truth.

The closest is to move from your own center, because that is where you are joined with existence.

Your hands can touch a flower; your eyes can see the colors of the clouds, sky, sunset. Your ears can hear the music of the birds, the sound of the running water or just the breeze passing through the trees; or in the fall, the leaves falling silently, but still whispering something....

But there is a gap between you and the cloud, between you and the falling leaves, between you and the stars. Howsoever close you come, there is still a gap. The very word closeness means two people, two things, not one. The gap is there, howsoever close. You come closest in a love affair with a person, perhaps for a few moments - I will not say for a few hours, a few days - perhaps for a few moments you come closest to a person, but still... there is a gap. You can shout, but your sound will not reach. You can stretch out your hands, but you cannot touch. The gap, howsoever small, is still big enough to keep you two separate entities.

You would like to become one, and that's the misery of all lovers and the reason why all love affairs fail. They are bound to because they are trying to do the impossible. It is nobody's fault. They come close... the moment of closeness is so beautiful that they would like to come even closer, but there comes a limit. Where is the limitation? The other is other, and there is no way that you two can become one.

Jean-Paul Sartre says, "The other is hell." This man is not a psychoanalyst, but it has happened often that painters, poets, novelists, dramatists, artists, have come to discover something which the so-called experts, who are supposed to discover it, go on and on and never find. Now, Freud never found out that the other is the hell - neither did Jung, nor Adler, nor the whole company that has followed them. Jean-Paul Sartre, in this small statement, says something so tremendously deep and profound, that it is a revelation - the other is hell. Why? - because you want to merge, melt, so that the two-ness disappears and you become one, unified... so that you can see out of the eyes of your beloved, and you can smell, and you can taste, and you can hear, not as a separate being, but as one with the person you love... so that both your centers jump into each other and become one center.

That is where Sartre's profound insight comes in. He said, "The other is hell." There is no way. The other remains the other, continues to remain the other. Whatsoever you do, everything fails. And it is not the fault of the other. The other is also trying to do everything possible, but you remain the other. Both are trying, but they are going to fail because what they are desiring is impossible. Their alonenesses are their very being.

No trespass is possible, you cannot trespass the being of another person. And it is good, because if people were able to trespass other people's beings, then there would be no hope for humanity.

Then there would be no hope for real freedom to exist, ever. ... Because why should only one person trespass? - many can trespass you. Once it is possible, then many people can trespass you. Your purity, your sanctity, your individuality, will lose all meaning.

Sartre is right. He has understood the point, that the other is going to remain the other, and the loving heart wants to become one with the beloved. It is going to fail. And that is the misery of lovers. Nobody knows misery more than lovers. Nobody knows suffering more than lovers.

So when he says the other is hell, he is saying many things. He is saying there is no other hell - only that one experience: when you come so close, where you feel just one step more and the paradise is yours, but that one step you cannot cross.

The goal is in front of you. You are standing at the door, but somehow you cannot even knock on the door. It is there, waiting, not only waiting, welcoming, but somehow you are paralyzed. There is some invisible circle around the other person which you cannot cross, and at that moment you will become aware that the same circle is around you. The circles, when they come close, touch each other, but only at the circumferences of the circles. More than that is not possible. To turn back from the doors of paradise is hell. There is no other hell.

The stubborn reality of the other, that it is going to remain other, becomes your failure, becomes the other person's failure too. And you cannot remain stuck at that point. Try to understand: in existence, in life, nothing remains static; either you go forward or you move away. Forward you cannot move - the invisible wall hits your head and there is no way - and nothing remains static, you start moving away... and the painful memory of failure, the painful memory of reaching so close and yet losing it....

The nearest you can come is in love, but love becomes anguish; ultimately love becomes anguish.

Hence, blessed are those who have never loved, because they will never know that the other is the hell. To protect you from this experience all societies have tried, in some way or other, to prevent love happening - marriage is good. And of course, living with somebody for years, you start having a certain companionship, a certain need for the other. The other becomes a habit.

If your wife goes away for a few days, you are at a loss. You wanted her to go for a few days at least, and when she goes then you are at a loss. You cannot find where your shoes are, you cannot find anything you want in your own house. Suddenly the wife is missed - and you think it is because of love? No, she had become a habit with you, she had taken every care in her hands; without her you are at a loss as to what to do. Even fighting with her had become a routine part of your life. Now there is nobody to fight in the house. You go from one room to another - even the fight is missed.

You come home late, nobody quarrels... you just go to your bed. And the quarrel every night has become such a routine part of you that you cannot fall asleep without it. It is just like a teddy bear.

I sleep with three pillows: one on each side and one under my head. While I was traveling in India I had to carry all three pillows, and I use very big pillows, perhaps the biggest size, so one very big suitcase was just for the three pillows. Whenever I used to stay with somebody, and he would open my suitcases and in one suitcase - and it was a big suitcase, the biggest suitcase available - only three pillows! He would say, "What! This big suitcase and you are carrying just three pillows...7"

I would say, "I cannot sleep without those two. Those two are absolutely part of my sleep. If somebody takes one of my pillows, then it is difficult for me to sleep. I will miss him the whole night."

The wife was wanting to go just for a rest for a few days. She is wiped out - I think that is the exact expression, wiped out - by all these children and this husband. A time comes when it is all too much. But when she goes on a holiday, she starts missing the kids, their noise, their fight. She starts missing the husband. Whom to nag? Nagging is such a power trip, and such a joy. And the poor fellow cannot do anything, the wife is so powerful. And she knows that outside this man is a lion; that gives more joy in nagging him, and proving him to be just a rat - nothing else. You may be a lion in the outside, but when you come home, then keep your tail down, and remember that here you are not a boss.

She starts missing... with whom to fight? She starts missing all the care she takes; now there is nobody to take care of. Small things start coming to her memory: in the morning she brings the newspaper to the husband.... She had never liked it; the very idea of the husband sitting in front of her, hidden behind the newspaper... she knows why he is reading the newspaper, just to avoid her, so she is not seen. But now, away from home, she starts thinking about whether somebody has given him his newspaper or not. And how is he going to find his shoes... and the clothes?

And he is bound to do something stupid in the kitchen. The house may catch on fire - anything is possible..."What have I done? Why have I come here? And there is nothing to enjoy...." All those dreams that she was having at home have all flown away. Now she is hankering just to be back as quickly as possible. They have become habits to each other.

This is not love. But all the societies have tried this simple formula to protect you from the experience - which is terrible in a way but which can also become a transformation. It never became a transformation for Jean-Paul Sartre. I feel sorry for the man. He had come very close when he said the other is the hell. But even in coming that close, to that insight, he is still missing something more significant. His emphasis is still as if the other is responsible for being a hell. No, the other is not responsible. He is not yet seeing the other part, the other half: that you are also the other, from the other side. Are you creating hell for the other person? You are not creating hell. Then be a little more understanding: the other is also not creating hell. Don't dump it on the other.

It is simply a natural phenomenon that you can come closest in the experience of love, but only closest. You cannot be welded into one being.

Your aloneness becomes for the first time crystal clear. No matter what, you are alone. And all the fiction that there may be somebody who is just made for you, there may be somebody who will fill this gap, this emptiness in you.... Nobody can do it; not because nobody wants to do it, no, everybody would love to do it, but it is just not possible in the very nature of things. And it is good, I repeat, that it is not possible in the very nature of things, because if it was possible then there would be no necessity for religion - no need of religion.

You ask me, "Is there any essential need of religion for man?" Yes, but it comes only after you have experienced that your aloneness is absolute.

You cannot deceive yourself by friendship, by love, by money, by power. You cannot go on deceiving yourself for long. A moment is going to come when you will see all your efforts have utterly failed:

you are still as alone as you have always been. This is the moment when religion comes in. Religion is nothing but a one hundred and eighty degree turn - from the other to yourself.

You have tried the other; it does not work. The other is not responsible. The other has not created the universal law. The other is as much part of this universal law as you are. If your understanding goes a little deeper... Sartre was just on the brink where he could have turned towards himself, but he stopped there: The other is hell. He condemned the other, but he didn't turn to give a try to himself.

You have given a try to many people in your life, reaching to the farthest person, trying to bring him close to you. You succeeded in bringing him very close, very close, and at the last moment, just one step more... and it has failed. The human mind says, "Perhaps this is not the right person.

Find another person. Go on finding another person." The mind goes on giving you hope: "If it has not happened with this woman, this man, it may happen with somebody else. Perhaps you were trying with the wrong person." The mind goes on finding consolations, excuses, explanations, rationalizations, but all those are futile. Those rationalizations, explanations, excuses, consolations, will keep you away from religion.

Sartre could have become one of the religious men, which is very rare: a very ordinary phenomenon, but very rare, because nobody tries the ordinary; everybody is after the extraordinary.

Religion is when love has failed.

I am for love. I have been teaching my whole life in favor of love. The reason is strange. But I am an eccentric man. I have been teaching you to go for love because I know that unless you come to this crucial point, where the other is hell, you will never become religious.

I am not for love. My whole effort is for religion.

The pseudo-religions just give you readymade formulas, and I want to give you the real experience, but I cannot give it to you. I can only show you the path, can explain to you how it happens, and then leave you free to experiment with it if you want.

If love has not failed, then you are not yet adult enough for religion. You are below age. Whatsoever your age it does not matter; it may be sixty, may be seventy, it does not matter. If you are still hoping that love can succeed, then you're yet under age. But if you have come to realize this totally, that it is against the nature of things, existence does not work that way.... You are you, the other is other.

If you want to taste the experience of existence, it is not via the other, it is a direct jump within yourself. It is via you, through you.

And only love and its failure can throw you inside. Nothing else can throw you inside, because everything else is far below love.

Money - you may have enough and you may be fed up with it, but that does not mean that you will move towards religion. There are so many other things. You may start thinking that money is useless, but money can give you power. It can make you the president of the country. Perhaps there is the thing that you are looking for. You can become the president of the country or a prime minister of a country. And life is short; much of it you have wasted in earning money and now you will waste it to get into power. And there is a ladder; rung by rung, you have to go up the ladder. And there is always a rung higher than you, signaling you: "Come up, here is the thing that you want."

When you reach that rung, there is another rung above you. Once in a while, some stubborn idiot succeeds in reaching the last rung, from where there is nowhere to go because there is no higher rung any more - the ladder has ended. But when you have made so much effort to reach it, can you admit to those who are struggling below you, "Don't bother. I have found nothing here. I have wasted my whole life and now I am standing on the ladder's highest rung, and all I can do is jump and commit suicide. There is nothing else here"? Now, that will mean you accept your stupidity. No, a man who has been working so hard to reach the top... and by the time he reaches, he is almost near his grave. Now it is better to go on, smiling - a Jimmy Carter smile.

I really feel sorry for Jimmy Carter. He is really a poor man. He had to come down from the topmost rung - back to earth. Now all the smile has disappeared. I have seen his photographs since he lost the election, continually looking at his photographs: not a single photograph of that big smile, which must have been the biggest in the whole world. What happened to that smile? That smile was phony. Even when he was on the last rung it was phony. But when you have been in the game of phoniness, in the game of politics, you become so accustomed to it that even seeing that by your side is just suicide....

The American people are very wise. They have assassinated twenty percent of their presidents.

That is great wisdom. They saved those twenty percent of presidents from the same situation in which Jimmy Carter is. If somebody had shot him while he was smiling, at least he could have had the last smile. Death anyway is going to come. Now it will come, but there will be no smile.

Anyone becoming a president of a country then tries to remain the president until he dies. Everybody wants to die as the president, as the prime minister - whatsoever is the highest post. Because he has devoted his whole life to growing this phony personality, now at least let him have the honor of death as a president of the country, or as a prime minister of a country. Yes, he deserves it; he has worked hard for it. And mostly it happens that either he is assassinated, or he dies of a heart attack.

India has had six prime ministers since independence. The first prime minister was Jawaharlal Nehru, the best politician amongst all the political leaders of the world, for the simple reason that he was not a politician. He was drawn to the freedom struggle of India, and had no idea of being in power. He was not meant to be a politician. He had such a sensitive soul that he could have been a great poet, painter, musician - anything, but not a politician.

I had several meetings with him. He was in absolute agreement with my ideas, but said to me with tears in his eyes, "Whatsoever you are saying can transform the whole future of India, but you don't have any idea of the collective mind of the masses. They cannot understand what you are saying; they will be against you. You cannot succeed in transforming their mind, you can only succeed in being crucified by them."

He was shocked by the Chinese invasion of India. He fell sick and could never recover from the shock. He died as the prime minister of India. He was a great preacher of peace, brotherhood, love, and he had created a third world bloc against the Soviet Union and America, so that these two camps are not the only camps in the world, there is another camp which is neutral. And he had succeeded in creating a third camp which is neutral. China was part of it, and China was the biggest part of it, the most important part of it, and China attacked India.

Now, on the Himalayan borders it is very difficult to fight the Chinese. Indians live not in the Himalayas but on the plains. This side of the Himalayas is Indian, the other side is Chinese. Now, millions of Chinese live on the other side, and they are accustomed to the Himalayan eternal snows.

They can fight. You cannot survive with them. In the Himalayas, if a fight goes on, nobody can defeat them.

Just as it used to happen with Germany.... In the first world war it happened; when Napoleon attacked Russia it happened; in the first world war when Germany attacked Russia it happened. In the second world war Hitler made the same mistake: he attacked Russia. It happened because Russia is vast, one sixth of the land mass of the whole earth, and for six to nine months it is covered with snow, so only for three months can you fight. The moment snow starts falling, then nobody can fight with the Russians. They are accustomed to it; their physiology for millions of years has been accustomed to it. It is their home. But for anybody else, it is death.

Napoleon was finished there. The first world war was finished there, and Adolf Hitler was finished there. In fact it was a challenge, that's why he attacked Russia. Because Napoleon had been defeated there and in the first world war Germany was defeated there, Adolf Hitler wanted to prove that Russia is not something unconquerable. But it was a purely natural thing. When the snow starts falling, then nobody can be victorious in Russia; then you cannot fight with the Russians.

The same is true about the Chinese. China has one fifth of the population of the world - the biggest of any country in the world. When China attacked India it took over thousands of miles in the Himalayas and India could not do anything. It was such a serious shock to Jawaharlal, who was always healthy before it, that he suddenly started shrinking, dying. As far as I understand, he died a psychological death. To be more accurate he committed a psychological suicide. He lost all hope for peace, for no war in the world, because China had been the closest friend to India. If you cannot trust your closest friend, whom are you going to trust? He simply lost all joy. Suddenly he became old.

The second prime minister was Lalbahadur Shastri. He was interested in me very much, and promised that although his party and colleagues did not agree with it, he would try his best to implement my ideas. But he died of a heart attack in the U.S.S.R. His secretary reported to me that all the way on the journey he was reading my book, Seeds of Revolutionary Thought. And the night he had the heart attack, another of my books, The Perfect Way, was in his hands.

The third prime minister of India has just been assassinated. She was the most courageous, and ready to do even things which go against the mass mind. I had suggested to her that she should throw people like Morarji Desai out of her cabinet. She said, "He is one of the most stubborn fanatics, and believes that he is always right...." He was the deputy prime minister, just second to Indira Gandhi, but she said she would try to throw him out, and she did it.

The fourth prime minister was Morarji Desai. Nobody thought him worth assassinating, so he is still living and now trying to become a holy sage - the same ego trip again. Charan Singh, the fifth prime minister, is not even worth mentioning. And Rajiv, we have yet to see whether he proves worthy of his grandfather and mother, or not. I have an inner certainty that he will not disappoint the country.

Jimmy Carter suddenly became ten years older the moment he lost the election; in one day, ten years simply passed. When people are in power, they can keep their face. It may be painted, but still they can look young, alive, strong; and in fact they are, because they have succeeded, although at the last point of success they find it is futile. But what is the point of saying it? - the whole world will laugh. It is better to keep silent about it and go on smiling. So you can move from money to power, or from power to money. There are many ways.

I have heard of one rich American man who became fed up with all the money he had earned...

and he had wasted his whole life. Somebody suggested, "Why don't you go to the East in search of some mahatma, some sage who can teach you how to be calm and quiet and blissful?" So he rushed to India, went to the Himalayas and asked who was the biggest saint - as if there are smaller saints and bigger saints.

But he was a man who knew money and knew that if you have little money you are a little man, if you have more money you are a bigger man, and if you have even more, you are the biggest. The same must be true in spirituality - how much have you got? He had lived with quantity his whole life. Money is quantity, spirituality is quality. They are not transferable. But in India also, people think in the same way as everywhere else. They said, "Yes, there is one, the biggest sage, the greatest mahatma who lives in the Himalayas, in the highest peaks, very difficult to reach. Many, in finding him, have died or were lost forever in the snows."

But the rich man said, "I have nothing to lose. I have seen all the pleasures of the world and there is nothing any more of interest to me. This challenge is exciting, that nobody has yet found him. I will try." Again the juice starts flowing, the same way as that day when he had started running after money - the same ego. "Nobody has found him; I will find him. You just describe to me the person's face and on what peak he lives, and I will go." They described him in detail, and he went.

It was really a torturous journey, but he knew how torturous it was when he was earning money. And if he could reach the top as far as money is concerned, he would manage this journey too. And he managed. Tattered, almost dying, finally he reached there and saw the man sitting on the top. He fell, not in gratitude, just tired. Otherwise Americans don't know how to fall at the feet when they meet the master - he had simply fallen. He was losing hope, he was almost on the verge of thinking, "It is hoping against hope."

At that moment that man, that old sage is there. The rich man falls, and just so that he does not die before he can manage to talk, he spreads his hands and takes the sage's feet in his hands and says, "You are a great sage and I have come from America, thousands of miles. But that was nothing.

This Himalayan pilgrimage, walking, on foot... but I am happy that I have reached. Now, please tell me what should I do."

The mahatma said, "First do me a favor. Have you got a cigarette - an American brand?"

The man was very shocked. But he had heard that the sages are strange people; perhaps there is some trick in it. He pulled out a cigarette and a lighter, and gave one to the sage and said, "Now, what do you say to me?"

The sage said, "Please go back the same way as you have come. But remember: if you come again, don't forget to bring cigarettes; they are so peaceful, so blissful. I really loved this one."

You can go from one stupidity to another stupidity, but if you fail in love... and failing in love means not what you ordinarily mean by it - that the beloved deceives you or that the lover deceives you.

No, that is not failure; in fact, that is avoiding the failure. If your beloved deceives you before the failure - my failure she has saved you, she has given you again hope. You will run after another woman.

By failure I mean when you reach to the point where you would like to merge with the other, and suddenly you find a universal law against the merger: bodies can meet, beings cannot. At that moment either you become sour and bitter about love - that's how all the religions have become, bitter and sour about love. But that is pseudo-religion. No, I don't see that you have to become sour and bitter. In fact, you should be ecstatic that you have found a very foundational law of life, that you have come to a point from where turning inwards is possible. There is nowhere to go. You can fall upon yourself. If that happens, then you will say, "The other is heaven, not hell." Then you will change that statement, because the other made it possible for you to fail in merging, melting, gave you the chance to turn towards yourself; you will be grateful for ever. Then the other is heaven.

Once you enter into your own being, you have entered the temple. This is what religion is all about.

This entry into oneself is the ultimate growth. You suddenly blossom. It is not a slow gradual growth, no. The word growth gives a wrong impression, as if slowly, slowly.... No, it is a sudden outburst.

One moment you were nothing; another moment, a quantum leap - you are all, because you have tasted your being and that being is exactly the same as the universal being. But that is the only door available. There is no other door. No church can help you, no synagogue can help you, no temple can help you. There is only one door which can help you, and that is within you.

Taking a jump into yourself, you have plunged into existence.

In that moment you feel a tremendous oneness with all.

Then you are no longer lonely, no longer alone, because there is nobody who is other than you.

There is only you expanded in all directions, in all possible manifestations. It is you flowering in the tree; it is you moving in a white cloud. It is you in the ocean, in the river. It is you in the animals, in the people. And it is not something that you have to project or think. That's what pseudo-religions have been doing. They tell you, "Think that you are one with all. Concentrate, discipline your mind to believe that you are one with all." Yes, if you try hard you may start believing it, that you are one with all, but that will be simply a belief.

One Sufi was brought to me; he had many followers. And many followers of his had come to me and told me, "When our master comes, we would like you to meet."

He used to come only once a year to that place, so I said, "Whenever he comes you bring him."

They said, "He is a realized man. He sees God everywhere."

I said, "I will not comment on it till I see him." The day came, he arrived. I told his disciples, "You bring him directly to me. Let him be my guest." They brought him directly from the station, and he was in an ecstatic fever; that's what you can call it. His eyes... his body was all not in an ordinary state - vibrant. Anybody could see it. And he would hug the trees.... I had a beautiful garden. Only I used to call it a garden, everybody else used to call it a jungle. It was really a jungle, because I don't like English gardens - well cut, symmetrical. No, I want something like a jungle, natural, where no symmetry exists.

He came inside the gate, and just by the side of the gate there was a beautiful maulshree tree. He hugged it. It was in blossom, and it is one of the most beautiful perfumes. He started crying in joy. I had to take him away from the tree. I said, "The tree is not that strong yet. You may kill the tree. You please come in the house, and if you want to hug the trees, I have many big trees; you can do as much hugging and wrestling and gymnastics and whatsoever, as you want to do. But this tree, don't torture it!"

Suddenly anger: "What!" he said, "Are you saying I am torturing the tree? I was loving it."

I said, "I know. Sometimes you can hug somebody lovingly. It used to happen to me when I was traveling in Punjab...."

Punjab must be the Oregon of India. Somehow all the idiots of the country have managed to live in Punjab. And it was so difficult for me to get from the railway platform to the car, because everybody was hugging, and out of love - and a Punjabi hug... you cannot imagine it: my whole body felt the ache, particularly my ribs. And I told my friends, "Please, these hugs - I am not ready to receive that much love. It is too much. You have to prevent it, otherwise I will stop coming to Punjab." These idiots don't know that "hug" does not mean that you crush the other person. And certainly they were doing it very lovingly, but you can kill very lovingly.

So I said to the Sufi, "Come into the house. Don't be angry. That tree is not strong enough, and that tree is very special; don't destroy it. I became enlightened under a maulshree tree, so my people have brought that tree from the original maulshree tree, as a seed. They have grown it, and it is still not strong enough for your hug. You come inside."

He came inside, and he started talking in the same way he must have been talking to his disciples:

"I see God everywhere, only God and nothing else."

I said, "If you see only God and nothing else, then to whom are you talking? If there is only God and nothing else then to whom are you talking and for what purpose? God must know it. Keep silent!" When all his disciples had gone I told him, "I know what has happened to you. You have been hypnotizing yourself for thirty years to feel that God is everywhere, and now it has become a continuity of a certain posthypnotic suggestion that you are carrying. And you are continuing it because you know perfectly well that if you stop talking about it, it will disappear within hours."

He said, "No, it cannot disappear. I see God everywhere."

I said, "Then for three days stop talking about God, and stop practicing anything. That 'God is everywhere' - don't repeat it; for three days forget about it. For thirty years you have done your work, now for three days let me show you what you have gained in thirty years."

And it didn't... it was not necessary even to take three days. Just the next morning he said to me, "What I had gained in thirty years, you have destroyed in one day. You are against religion - you are an enemy of religion!"

I said, "Of course I am an enemy of religion - the kind of religion that you have believed in. And I am against all this nonsense, because what is the meaning of thirty years practicing if it can be lost in one day? Then practicing even for three hundred years, it can be lost in three days! Or for three lives in maybe three months - but it can be destroyed. It is not your experience; it is just an imposed idea."

So I don't say that you have to start thinking in terms of everything being divine and that all is God.

That is rubbish. Never start from anything which is basically a belief. Just take a jump into yourself, and don't ask me what you will find there, because if I tell you what you will find there, you will immediately start hypnotizing yourself for it. Then you will find it, but it will not be the true thing. It will only be a hallucination.

Just take the jump within, and you will come to know. You will come to feel. You will come to experience.

Religion is experiencing the truth.

Man needs religion; it is the last luxury, the ultimate luxury. Below it is love. And I have been teaching about love so much so that you can come to that crucial moment where you feel the other is hell - because that is the point of turning. Sartre needed somebody to tell him, "The other is hell." What about you? You have tried so hard to become one with the other, why not try a little bit to be one with yourself? - because that is not going to be difficult. You are already one with yourself, you just have to look inwards. A little turning in, and the happening.

But then you are not a Christian, nor a Hindu, nor a Mohammedan, nor a Jew - you are simply religious.

I am for religion, for religiousness, and I am certainly against all religions, because they are all pseudo.

Okay Sheela?
~Osho.

[ From Unconsciousness To Consciousness ]

Osho - Aloneness and Loneliness.
The aloneness is total and complete. Not loneliness but aloneness. Loneliness is always concerned with others; aloneness is concerned with oneself.

Aloneness is the joy of being just yourself. It is being joyous with yourself, it is enjoying your own company. There are very few people who enjoy their own company. And it is a very strange world: nobody enjoys his company and everybody wants others to enjoy his company! If they don’t enjoy he feels insulted – and alone he feels disgusted with himself. In fact, if YOU cannot enjoy your own company, who else is going to enjoy it?

Aloneness, solitude is positive. It is overflowing joy for no reason. It is our very nature to be joyous; hence there is no need to depend on anybody else. There is no other motive in it, it is simply there. Just as the water flows downwards, your being rises upwards. Just give it a chance – give it solitude. And remember again, solitude is not solitariness, just as aloneness is not loneliness.

Only a no-thought is pure, because then you are utterly yourself, alone, nothing interfering. Jean-Paul Sartre says: The other is hell. And he is right in a way, because whenever you are thinking of the other you are in hell. And all thoughts are addressed to others. When you are in a state of no-thought you are alone, and aloneness is purity. And in that aloneness happens all that is worth happening.

Your aloneness is your essential being.

Meditation is total freedom, aloneness, the flight of the alone to the alone. There is no other, so there is no question of drowning yourself, but one hundred percent mindfulness will be needed – less than that won’t do.

Meditation means being ecstatic in your aloneness. But when you become ecstatic in your aloneness, soon the ecstasy is so much that you cannot contain it. It starts overflowing you. And when it starts overflowing you it becomes love. Meditation allows love to happen. And the people who have not known meditation will never know love. They may pretend that they love but they cannot. They will only pretend – because they don’t have anything to give, they are not overflowing.

You can be alone, but that aloneness may not be true aloneness. It may be only loneliness, and you may be thinking and fantasizing about all kinds of things. Aloneness comes out of awareness; it has nothing to do with where you are in the outside world but where you are in the INSIDE world.

Through aloneness, the ego is shattered. It has nothing to relate to, so it cannot exist. So if you are ready to be alone, unwaveringly alone, neither escaping nor falling back, just accepting the fact of aloneness as it is – it becomes a great opportunity. Then you are just like a seed that has much potential in it. But remember, the seed must destroy itself for the plant to grow. Ego is a seed, a potentiality. If it is shattered, the divine is born. The divine is neither “I” nor “thou,” it is one. Through aloneness, you come to this oneness.

Consciousness has come to the point now where you know that you are alone. And only in aloneness can you attain enlightenment. I am not saying loneliness. The feeling of loneliness is the feeling that comes when one is escaping from aloneness, when one is not ready to accept it. If you do not accept the fact of aloneness, then you will feel lonely. Then you will find some crowd or some means of intoxication in which to forget yourself.

The first thing we must do is to accept aloneness as a basic fact and learn to live with it. We must not create any fictions. If you create fictions you will never be able to know the truth. Fictions are projected, created, cultivated truths that prevent you from knowing what is. Live with the fact of your aloneness. If you can live with this fact, if there is no fiction between you and this fact, then the truth will be revealed to you. Every fact, if looked into deeply, reveals the truth.

If you become aware of your aloneness, then you become aware of the aloneness of others also. Then you know that to try to possess another is trespassing.

You must make a distinction between two words: lonely and alone. In the dictionary they carry the same meaning, but those who have been meditating, they know the distinction. They are not the same, they are as different as possible. Loneliness is an ugly thing; loneliness is a depressive thing – it is a sadness; it is an absence of the other. Loneliness is the absence of the other – you would like the other to be there, but the other is not, and you feel that and you miss them. YOU are not there in loneliness, the absence of the other is there. Alone? – it is totally different. YOU are there, it is your presence; it is a positive phenomenon. You don’t miss the other, you meet yourself.

Then you are alone, alone like a peak, tremendously beautiful! Sometimes you even feel a terror – but it has a beauty. But the presence is the basic thing: you are present to yourself. You are not lonely, you are with yourself. Alone, you are not lonely, you are with yourself. Lonely, you are simply lonely – there is no one. You are not with yourself and you are missing the other. Loneliness is negative, an absence; aloneness is positive, a presence.

If you are alone, you grow, because there is space to grow – nobody else to hamper, nobody else to obstruct, nobody else to create more complex problems. Alone you grow, and as much as you want to grow you can grow because there is no limit, and you are happy being with yourself, and a bliss arises. There is no comparison: because the other is not there you are neither beautiful nor ugly, neither rich nor poor, neither this nor that, neither white nor black, neither man nor woman. Alone, how can you be a woman or a man? Lonely, you are a woman or a man, because the other is missing. Alone, you are no one, empty, empty of the other completely.

And remember, when the other is not, the ego cannot exist: it exists with the other. Either present or absent, the other is needed for ego. To feel ‘I’ the other is needed, a boundary of the other. Fenced from the neighbors I feel 'I’. When there is no neighbor, no fencing, how can you feel 'I’? You will be there, but without any ego. The ego is a relationship, it exists only in relationship.

First move from things to thoughts, then from thoughts to the thinker. Things are the world of science, thought is the world of art and the thinker is the world of religion. Just go on moving inwards. The first circumference around you is of things, the second of thoughts, and the third, the centre, your very being, is nothing but consciousness. It is nothing but a witnessing. Drop things and go into thoughts; then one day thoughts also have to be dropped and then you are left alone in your purity, then you are left absolutely alone. In that aloneness is God, in that aloneness is liberation, moksha, in that aloneness is nirvana, in that aloneness for the first time you are in the real.

Ordinarily a man is alone, a woman is alone. Loneliness is there. Even if you are attached to a man or woman or a friend, and it is only the attachment of lust, you will remain lonely. Have you not watched it? Attached to a woman, attached to a man, but still you remain lonely. Somewhere deep down there is no communication with the other; you are cut off, like islands. Even dialogue seems to be impossible. Lovers ordinarily never talk to each other, because each talk creates argument, and each talk brings conflict. By and by, they learn to be silent; by and by, they learn somehow to avoid the other, or at the most, tolerate. But they remain lonely. Even if the other is there, there is space; the inner space remains unfulfilled.

On the path of meditation, aloneness is sought, desired, hoped for, prayed for. Be alone. So much so that not even in your consciousness does any shadow of the other move. On the path of love, get so dissolved that only the other becomes real and you become a shadow and by and by you completely disappear. On the path of love, God remains, you disappear; on the path of meditation, God disappears, you appear. But the total and the ultimate result is the same. A great synthesis happens.

In fact, mountain/valley are one thing, so are love and meditation, so are relationship and aloneness. The mountain of aloneness rises only in the valleys of relationship. In fact, you can enjoy aloneness only if you can enjoy relationship. It is relationship that creates the need for aloneness, it is a rhythm.

Aloneness makes you overfull. Love receives your gifts. Love empties you so that you can become full again. Whenever you are emptied by love, aloneness is there to nourish you, to integrate you. And this is a rhythm.

I have always been alone on my path. Even today I am absolutely alone. Your being here does not make any difference – my aloneness remains untouched – because aloneness is so intrinsic. Nobody can enter into your aloneness. You can be in the crowd and absolutely alone, but you may be alone and not alone at all. You can sit in a cave in the Himalayas and still think of the crowd, of the girlfriend and the boyfriend and the marketplace and what is going on there….

Aloneness is also one of the fundamental experiences as you enter silence. In silence there is nobody else, you are simply alone. The deeper your silence will be, thoughts will be gone, emotions will be gone, sentiments will be gone – just pure being, a flame of light, burning alone. One can get scared because we are so much accustomed to living with people – in the crowd, in the marketplace, in all kinds of relationships. You may not be aware that in all these relationships – with friends, with your husbands, with your wives, with your children, with your parents – you are basically trying to avoid the experience of aloneness. These are strategies so that you are always with somebody.

It is a well-known fact, psychologically established, that if a person is left alone in isolation, after seven days he starts talking… a little like whispering. For seven days he keeps talking inside, keeps himself engaged in the mind, but then it becomes too much – things start coming out of his mind through his mouth and he starts whispering. After fourteen days you can hear him clearly, what he is saying. After twenty-one days he does not bother about anybody, he has gone insane; now he is talking to walls, to pillars, “Hello friend, how are you?” – to a pillar, hugging a pillar! And this is true not about somebody special, it is true about everybody. He is trying to find some relationship. If he cannot find it in reality, he will create a hallucination.

You will see: just stand by the side of the road and watch people going from the office to the house, and you will be surprised. They are alone – although there is a crowd all around – but they are talking to themselves. They are making gestures, they are telling somebody something… because the crowd around them is not related to them. They are alone in the crowd, so they are trying to create their own illusion. Maybe they are talking to their wife, to their boss – there are many things which cannot be said but right now they can say them. In front of the wife they cannot say it, but in this crowd, where everybody is engaged in his own thing, everybody is doing his own thing, they can say things to the wife. Nobody is listening, and at least one thing is certain – the wife is not there! But they need the wife, they need someone to talk to. And after thirty days of isolation, a dramatic change happens: it is not only one- sided; it is not only that they are talking to the pillar, the pillar also starts talking to them! They do both things: first, “Hello, how are you?” and then, “I am good. I am fine, doing well.” They answer from the side of the pillar too – in a different voice. Now they have created a world of their own, they are no longer alone. No madman is alone. Either you are mad or not. If you don’t know aloneness, there is something of madness in you.

Only pure aloneness gives you a clean sanity. You don’t need the other; the dependence on the other is no more there, you are enough unto yourself. Language is meaningless because language is a medium to relate with the other. The moment you are no longer dependent on the other, language is meaningless, words are meaningless. In your silence – when there are no words, no language, nobody else is present – you are getting in tune with existence. This serenity, this silence, this aloneness will bring you immense rewards. It will allow you to grow to your full potential. For the first time you will be an individual, for the first time you will have the touch and the taste of freedom, and for the first time the immensity, the unboundedness of existence will be yours with all its blissfulness.

So whatever happens in silence – either sadness or aloneness – remember, in silence nothing wrong can ever happen. Whatever happens is going to enhance the beauty of it, deepen the charm of it; anything that happens will bring more and more flowers, more and more fragrance to it.

Loneliness is a negative state of mind. Aloneness is positive, notwithstanding what the dictionaries say. In dictionaries, loneliness and aloneness are synonymous – they are synonyms; in life they are not. Loneliness is a state of mind when you are constantly missing the other, aloneness is the state of mind when you are constantly delighted in yourself. Loneliness is miserable, aloneness is blissful. Loneliness is always worried, missing something, hankering for something, desiring for something; aloneness is a deep fulfillment, not going out, tremendously content, happy, celebrating. In loneliness you are off center, in aloneness you are centered and rooted. Aloneness is beautiful. It has an elegance around it, a grace, a climate of tremendous satisfaction. Loneliness is; beggarly; all around it there is begging and nothing else. It has no grace around it. In fact it is ugly. Loneliness is a dependence, aloneness is SHEER independence. One feels as if one is one’s whole world, one’s whole existence.

Living in an Insane World -The world is the extension of the individual.. you are the world.


Second Talk in The Oak Grove

To those who have come here today for the first time I shall briefly explain what we talked about last Sunday. Those of you who are earnestly following these talks should not become impatient, for we are trying to paint in words as complete a picture of life as possible. We must understand the whole picture, the complete attitude towards life, and not merely a part of it.

I was saying last week that there cannot be peace or happiness in the world unless we as individuals cultivate that wisdom which brings forth tranquillity. There are many who think that without considering their own inward nature, their own clarity of purpose, their own creative understanding, by somewhat altering the outer conditions they can bring about peace in the world. That is, they hope to have brotherhood in the world though inwardly they are racked with hatred, envy, ambition, and so on. That this peace cannot be unless the individual, who is the world, brings about a radical change within himself is pretty obvious to those who think deeply.

We see chaos about us and extraordinary brutality after centuries of preaching of kindliness, brotherhood, love; we are easily caught up in this whirlpool of hatred and antagonism, and we think that by altering the outward symptoms we shall have human unity. Peace is not a thing to be brought from the outside, it can only come from within; this requires great earnestness and concentration, not on some single purpose, but on the understanding of the complex problem of living.

I took greed as one of the principal causes of conflict in ourselves and so in the world - greed, with its fear, with its craving for power and domination, social as well as intellectual and emotional. We tried to differentiate between need and greed. We need food, clothes, and shelter, but that need becomes greed, a driving psychological force in our lives when we, through craving for power, social prestige, and so on, give to things disproportionate value. Until we dissolve this fundamental cause of conflict or clash in our consciousness, mere search for peace is vain. Though through legislation we may have superficial order, the craving for power, success, and so on will constantly disturb the cement that holds society together and destroy this social order. To bring about peace within ourselves and so within society, this central clash in consciousness caused by craving must be understood. To understand there must be action.

There are those who see that the conflict in the world is caused by greed, by individual assertion for power and domination, through property, and so they propose that individuals shall not hold the means of acquiring power; they propose to bring this about through revolution, through state control of property - state being those few individuals whose hands hold the reins of power. You cannot destroy greed through legislation. You may be able to destroy one form of greed through compulsion but it will take inevitably another form which will again create social chaos.

Then there are those who think greed or craving can be destroyed through intellectual or emotional ideals, through religious dogmas and creeds; this again cannot be, for it is not to be overcome through imitation, service, or love. Self-forgetfulness is not a lasting remedy for the conflict of greed. Religions have offered compensation for greed, but reality is not a compensation. The pursuit of compensation is to remove the cause of conflict which is greed, craving, to another level, to another plane, but the clash and sorrow are still there.

Individuals are caught up in the desire to create social order or friendly human relationship between people through legislation, and to find reality which religions promise as a compensation for the giving up of greed. But, as I pointed out, greed is not to be destroyed through legislation or through compensation. To grapple anew with the problem of greed, we must be fully aware of the fallacy of mere social legislation against it and of the religious compensatory attitude that we have developed. If you are no longer seeking religious compensation for greed, or if you are not caught up in the false hope of legislation against it, then you will begin to understand a different process of dissolving this craving wholly, but this requires strenuous earnestness without emotionalism, without the deceits of the cunning intellect.

Every human being in the world needs food, clothes, and shelter, but why is it that this need has become such a complex, painful problem? Is it not because we use things for psychological purposes rather than for mere needs? Greed is the demand for gratification, pleasure, and we use needs as a means to achieve it and thereby give them far greater importance and worth than they have. So long as one uses things because one needs them, without being psychologically involved in them, there can be an intelligent limitation to needs, not based on mere gratification.

The psychological dependence on things manifests itself as social misery and conflict. Being poor inwardly, psychologically, spiritually, one thinks of enriching oneself through possessions, with ever-increasing complex demands and problems. Without fundamentally solving the psychological poverty of being, mere social legislation or asceticism cannot solve the problem of greed, craving. How is this to be overcome fundamentally, not merely in its outward manifestation, on the periphery? How is thought to be liberated from craving? We perceive the cause of greed - desire for satisfaction, gratification - but how is it to be dissolved? Through the exertion of will? Then what type of will? Will to overcome, the will to refrain, the will to renounce? The problem is, is it not, being greedy, avaricious, worldly, how to disentangle thought from greed?

For thought is now the product of greed, and therefore transitory, and so cannot understand the eternal. That which can understand the immortal must also be immortal. The permanent can be understood only through the transitory. That is, thought born of greed is transient, and whatever it creates must surely also be transient, and so long as the mind is held within the transient, within the circle of greed, it cannot transcend nor overcome itself. In its effort to overcome, it creates further resistances and gets more and more entangled in them.

How is greed to be dissolved without creating further conflict if the product of conflict is ever within the realm of desire, which is transitory? You may be able to overcome greed through the mere exertion of the will of denial, but that does not lead to understanding, to love, for such a will is the product of conflict and therefore cannot free itself from greed. We recognize that we are greedy. There is satisfaction in possession. It fills one's being, expands it. Now, why do you need to struggle against it? If you are satisfied with this expansion, then you have no conscious problem. Can satisfaction ever be complete, is it not ever in a state of constant flux, craving one gratification after another?

Thus thought becomes entangled in its own net of ignorance and sorrow. We see we are caught up in greed and also we perceive, at least intellectually, the effect of greed. How then is thought to extricate itself from its own self-created cravings? Only through constant alertness, through the understanding of the process of greed itself. Understanding is not brought about through the mere exertion of a one-sided will but through that experimental approach which has that peculiar quality of wholeness. This experimental approach lies in the actions of our daily life; in becoming keenly aware of the process of craving and gratification there comes into being that integral approach to life, that concentration which is not the result of choice but which is completeness. If you are alert you will observe keenly the process of craving; you will see that in this observation there is a desire for choice, a desire to rationalize, but this desire is still part of craving. You have to be sharply aware of the subtlety of craving, and through experiment there comes into being the wholeness of understanding which alone radically frees thought from craving. If you are so aware, there is a different type of will or understanding which is not the will of conflict or of renunciation, but of wholeness, of completeness that is holy. This understanding is the approach to reality which is not the product of the will to achieve, the will of craving and conflict. Peace is of this wholeness, of this understanding.

Questioner: Since it is as true that the individual is a product of society as that society is a product of the individual who composes it, and since the change in social organization affects large numbers of individuals, is it not as important to stress the need for changing society as it is to emphasize the need for changing individuals? And since the major causes of catastrophe in the world arise from malfunctioning social organization, is there not danger in overemphasizing the need for the individuals to change themselves, even though the change is ultimately necessary?

Krishnamurti: What is society? Is it not the relationship of one individual with another? If individuals in themselves are ignorant, cruel, ambitious, and so on, their society will reflect all that they are in themselves. The questioner seems to suggest that the conflicting relationship of individuals, which is society, with its many organizations, should be changed. We all see the necessity, the importance, of social change. Wars, starvation, ruthless pursuit of power, and so on - with these we are all familiar, and some earnestly desire to change these conditions. How are you going to change them? By destroying the many or the few who create the disharmony in the world? Who are the many or the few? You and I, aren't we? Each one is involved in it because we are greedy, we are possessive, we crave for power. We want to bring order within society, but how are we to do it? Do you seriously think there are only a few who are responsible for this social disorganization, these wars and hatreds? How are you going to get rid of them? If you destroy them, you use the very means they have employed and so make of yourself also an instrument of hatred and brutality. Hate cannot be destroyed by hate, however much you may like to hide your hate under pleasant sounding words. Methods determine the ends. You cannot kill in order to have peace and order; to have peace you must create peace within yourself and thereby in your relationship with others, which is society.

You say that more emphasis should be laid on changing the social organization. Superficial reforms can, perhaps, be made, but surely radical change or lasting peace can be brought about only when the individual himself changes. You may say that this will take a long time. Why are you concerned about time? In your eagerness you want immediate results, you are concerned with results and not with the ways and means; thus in your haste you become a plaything of empty promises. Do you think that the present human nature which has been the product of centuries of maltreatment, ignorance, fear can be altered overnight? A few individuals may be able to change themselves overnight, but not a crystallized society. This does not mean a postponing, but the man who thinks clearly, directly, is not concerned with time.

Social organization may be an independent mechanism, but it has to be run by us. We have created it and we are responsible for it, and we can be independent of it only when we, as individuals, do not contribute to the general hate, greed, ambition, and so on. In our desire to change the world, we always meet with opposition - groups are formed for and against, which only further engender antagonism, suspicion, and competition in conversion. Agreement is almost impossible except when there is common hate or fear; all actions born of fear and hate must further increase fear and hate. Lasting order and peace can be brought about only when the individual voluntarily and intelligently consents to think without hate, greed, ambition, and so on. Only in this way can there be creative peace within you and therefore in your relationship with another, which is called society.

This requires strenuous and directed attention without emotionalism but, as most of us are lazy, we hope that through some miraculous happenings, social organization will be changed. Thus, we yield to sentiment and not to clear thought. We consider self-assertion, aggressiveness as manly, for we have made of religion a thing of sentiment; we have denied critical, experimental thought in the most serious thing that matters, religion and reality, and then naturally we become brutal, destructive with regard to the things of this world.

Questioner: How is emotion to be controlled?

Krishnamurti: Let us understand this problem of control. What do we mean by control? What is involved in control? We see in our thinking process a dual force at work, the desire to hold, to grasp, and also the desire not to grasp, not to hold. Isn't that so? There is in thought that which is and also that which it wants to be - the pleasant, called the good, and the unpleasant, the evil. So there is continual conflict between these dual processes, the one trying to overcome the other, through discipline, assertion, denial, and so on. So in the idea of control there is always duality. Thought, having divided itself into two processes - that which is pleasurable and that which is not pleasurable - creates conflict in itself, and it tries to overcome this conflict through various means, ideals, denials, concentration, and so on. So the central point is not how to control but why do we create and cling to this dual process? What makes one angry first and later discover the pain of anger which induces one to learn to control oneself? What makes one brutal and then try to cultivate compassion? In becoming aware of the process of duality, we shall awaken that understanding, wholeness, completeness, which will eliminate the conflict of resistance. What makes our life, thought, so disjointed, so uncoordinated? Why have we, in our thought process, created this duality, not that there is not duality?

At the precise moment of anger there is no reaction of its opposite, we are merely angry. Then later on come all our reactions to it depending on our previous conditioning, and according to this, we control ourselves, training ourselves not to be angry, and by exerting will, we throw up resistances against anger, which is not the dissolution of anger; we cover it up and thus duality still exists. Now, why are we angry? For many reasons. It may be that our social or financial security is threatened, or it may be due to some physiological reason. Now, without understanding fully the physiological and psychological reasons for anger, and thereby intelligently and wholly becoming aware of them, we are only concerned deeply with the idea of getting rid of anger. Merely to get rid of anger is comparatively easy, but this does not completely dissolve its causes; but if you are fully aware of the causes, physiological as well as psychological, aware without the desire to be free from anger, then in this fullness of understanding not only the effect, anger, but also the causes fade away, giving place to a quality that only experience can reveal. All overcoming is a form of ignorance and violence; only understanding can free thought from bondage.

Questioner: Will you please explain more fully, ''The world is the extension of the individual, you are the world.''

Krishnamurti: Through experimental approach one discovers that man is the measure of all things; or, accepting authority, there is another measure beyond man, God or whatever you choose to call it. The world of the past is the world of today, of the 'I' and the future 'I' of tomorrow. The past is the world of our ancestors, the previous generations, with their ignorance, fears, and so on, which limit the present, the 'I' of today and gives birth to the 'I' of tomorrow, the future. Each one of us is this accumulated past, with which is incorporated the present with its reactions and experiences. Individuals are the result of varied forms of influence and limitation, and the relationship of one individual with another creates the world - the world of values. The world is the social, moral, spiritual structure based on values created by us, isn't it? The social world, as well as the so-called spiritual world, is created by us individuals through our fears, hopes, cravings, and so on. We see the world of hate taking its harvest at the present. This world of hate has been created by our fathers and their forefathers and by us. Thus ignorance stretches indefinitely into the past. It has not come into being by itself - it is the outcome of human ignorance, a historical process, isn't it? We as individuals have cooperated with our ancestors, who, with their forefathers, set going this process of hate, fear, greed, and so on. Now, as individuals, we partake of this world of hate so long as we, individually, indulge in it.

The world, then, is an extension of yourself. If you as an individual desire to destroy hate, then you as an individual must cease hating. To destroy hate, you must dissociate yourself from hate in all its gross and subtle forms, and so long as you are caught up in it, you are part of that world of ignorance and fear. Then the world is an extension of yourself - yourself duplicated and multiplied. The world does not exist apart from the individual. It may exist as an idea, as a state, as a social organization, but to carry out that idea, to make that social or religious organization function, there must be the individual. His ignorance, his greed, his fear maintain the structure of ignorance, greed, and hate. If the individual changes, can he affect the world - the world of hate, greed, and so on? First make sure, doubly sure, that you, the individual, do not hate. Those who hate have no time for thought - they are consumed with their own intense excitement and with its results. They won't listen to calm, deliberate thought; they are carried away by their own fear; and you cannot help these people, can you, unless you follow their method, which is to force them to listen, but such force is of no avail. Ignorance has its own sorrow. After all, you are listening to me because you are not immediately threatened, but if you were, probably you would not be; you would not be thoughtful. The world is an extension of yourself as long as you are thoughtless, caught up in ignorance, hate, greed; but when you are earnest, thoughtful, and aware, there is not only a dissociation from those ugly causes which create pain and sorrow, but also in that understanding there is a completeness, a wholeness.

June 2, 1940

A fool is one who goes on trusting; a fool is one who goes on trusting against all his experience. You deceive him, and he trusts you; and you deceive him again, and he trusts you; and you deceive him again, and he trusts you. Then you will say that he is a fool, he does not learn. His trust is tremendous; his trust is so pure that nobody can corrupt it.
Be a fool in the Taoist sense, in the Zen sense. Don't try to create a wall of knowledge around you. Whatsoever experience comes to you, let it happen, and then go on dropping it. Go on cleaning your mind continuously; go on dying to the past so you remain in the present, here-now, as if just born, just a babe.
In the beginning it is going to be very difficult. The world will start taking advantage of you...let them. They are poor fellows. Even if you are cheated and deceived and robbed, let it happen, because that which is really yours cannot be robbed from you, that which is really yours nobody can steal from you.
And each time you don't allow situations to corrupt you, that opportunity will become an integration inside. Your soul will become more crystallized.

Osho Dang Dang Doko Dang Chapter2

OSHO: INNOCENCE & BEAUTY

WISDOM OF IDIOTS

COLLECTION OF THE WORDS, AND THE WORDS ONLY.....WISDOM CANT BE COLLECTED, ONLY BE STOLEN!

OSHO: INNOCENCE & BEAUTY

Question – Beloved Osho, What is Innocence, What is Beauty?

Osho – Ram Fakeer, to live in the moment is innocence, to live without the past is innocence, to live without conclusions is innocence, to function out of the state of not knowing is innocence. And the moment you function out of such tremendous silence which is not burdened by any past, out of such tremendous stillness which knows nothing, the experience that happens is beauty.
Whenever you feel beauty — in the rising sun, in the stars, in the flowers, or in the face of a woman or a man — wherever and whenever you feel beauty, watch. And one thing will always be found: you had functioned without mind, you had functioned without any conclusion, you had simply functioned spontaneously.
The moment gripped you, and the moment gripped you so deeply that you were cut off from the past. And when you are cut off from the past you are cut off from the future automatically, because past and future are two aspects of the same coin; they are not separate, and they are not separable either. You can toss a coin: sometimes it is heads, sometimes it is tails, but the other part is always there, hiding behind.
Past and future are two aspects of the same coin. The name of the coin is mind. When the whole coin is dropped, that dropping is innocence. Then you don’t know who you are, then you don’t know what is; there is no knowledge. But you are, existence is, and the meeting of these two is-nesses — the small is-ness of you, meeting with the infinite is-ness of existence — that meeting, that merger, is the experience of beauty.
Innocence is the door; through innocence you enter into beauty. The more innocent you become, the more existence becomes beautiful. The more knowledgeable you are, the more and more existence is ugly, because you start functioning from conclusions, you start functioning from knowledge.
The moment you know, you destroy all poetry. The moment you know, and think that you know, you have created a barrier between yourself and that which is. Then everything is distorted. Then you don’t hear with your ears, you translate. Then you don’t see with your eyes, you interpret. Then you don’t experience with your heart, you think that you experience. Then all possibility of meeting with existence in immediacy, in intimacy, is lost. You have fallen apart.
This is the original sin. And this is the whole story, the biblical story of Adam and Eve eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Once they have eaten the fruit of knowledge they are driven out of paradise. Not that somebody drove them out, not that God ordered them to get out of paradise, they themselves fell. Knowing they were no more innocent, knowing they were separate from existence, knowing they were egos… knowing created such a barrier, an iron barrier.
You ask me, Ram Fakeer, “What is innocence?”
Vomit knowledge! The fruit of the tree of knowledge has to be vomited. That’s what meditation is all about. Throw it out of your system: it is poison, pure poison. Live without knowledge, knowing that “I don’t know.” Function out of this state of not knowing and you will know what beauty is.
Socrates knows what beauty is, because he functions out of this state of not knowing. There is a knowledge that does not know, and there is an ignorance that knows. Become ignorant like Socrates and then a totally different quality enters your being: you become a child again, it is a rebirth. Your eyes are full of wonder again, each and everything that surrounds surprises. The bird on the wing, and you are thrilled! The sheer joy of seeing the bird on the wing — and it is as if you are on the wing.
The dewdrop slipping from a lotus leaf and the morning sun shining on it and creating a small rainbow around it, and the moment is so overwhelming… the dewdrop slipping off the leaf, just on the verge of meeting with the infinite, disappearing into the lake — and it is as if you start slipping, as if your drop starts slipping into the ocean of God.
In the moment of innocence, not knowing, the difference between the observer and the observed evaporates. You are no more separate from that which you are seeing, you are no more separate from that which you are hearing.
Listening to me, right now, you can function in two ways. One is the way of knowledge: chattering inside yourself, judging, evaluating, constantly thinking whether what I am saying is right or wrong, whether it fits with your theories or not, whether it is logical or illogical, scientific or unscientific, Christian or Hindu, whether you can go with it or not, whether you can swallow it or not, a thousand and one thoughts clamoring inside your mind, the inner talk, the inner traffic — this is one way of listening. But then you are listening from so far away that I will not be able to reach you.
I go on trying but I will not be able to reach you. You are really on some other planet: you are not here, you are not now. You are a Hindu, you are a Christian, you are a Mohammedan, you are a communist, but you are not here now. The Bible is there between me and you, or the Koran or the Gita. And I grope for you but I come across the barrier of the Koran, I grope for you but there is a queue of priests between me and you. This is the way of knowledge, this is the way of remaining deaf, of remaining blind, of remaining heart-less.
There is another way of listening too: just listening, nothing between me and you. Then there is immediacy, contact, meeting, communion. Then you don’t interpret, because you are not worried whether it is right or wrong. Nothing is right, nothing is wrong. In that moment of innocence one does not evaluate. There is nothing to evaluate with, no criterion, no a priori knowledge, no already-arrived conclusion, nothing to compare with. You can only listen, just as one listens to the running sound of water in the hills, or a solo flute player in the forest, or somebody playing on the guitar. You listen.
But the person who has come to listen as a critic will not listen. The person who has come simply to listen, not as a critic but to enjoy the moment, will be able to listen to the music. What is there to understand in music? There is nothing to understand. There is something to taste, certainly; there is something to drink and be drunk with, certainly, but what is there to understand?
But the critic, he is not there to taste, he is not there to drink — he is there to understand. He is not listening to the music because he is so full of mathematics. He is continuously criticizing, thinking. He is not innocent; he knows too much, hence he will miss the beauty of it. He may arrive at some stupid conclusions, but he will miss the whole moment. And the moment is momentous!
If you can listen, just listen, if you can see, just see, then this very moment you will know what innocence is. And I am not here only to explain to you what innocence is, I am here to give a taste of it. Have a cup of tea! I offer it to you, each moment it is being offered. Sip it — feel the warmth of the moment and the music of it and the silence and the love that overflows.
Be encompassed with it. Disappear for a moment with your mind — watching, judging, criticizing, believing, disbelieving, for, against. For a moment be just an openness, and you will know what innocence is. And in that you will know what beauty is.
Beauty is an experience that happens in innocence, the flower that blooms in innocence. Jesus says, “Unless you are like small children you will not enter into my kingdom of God.”
Source – Osho Book “The Book of Wisdom”