And in a perfect world, the mother begins to care for her child by providing oxygenated blood and the best nutrients.
Then, in reality, children come into the world who are unloved from the beginning or soon after birth, from biological parents who don’t love themselves and who perhaps weren’t loved in return.

This is where the debate about the best alternative destiny for children begins. I don’t see Osho forcing mothers-fathers to separate from their children, just as he probably never forced mothers-fathers who didn’t feel they loved their children enough to stay in contact with them… see the depressed mother who threw herself from the third floor with her three children (recent news story).

Sannyasin principles stem from a vision; they cannot be isolated from it. They are not rules to be blindly followed to please the guru or conform to the behavior of a majority.

I don’t think Osho was a person who instilled fear, emphasizing principles, rules, or rituals that disciples had to respect or face bad consequences.

I think the rules of coexistence were understandable, as long as they were reasonably functional to the shared vision of life and coexistence.

The worst thing that could happen, which has also happened to me, painfully, is that could happen that there is no place to stay in a given community in a given moment.

What do you mean by “it was well known that there were three books dictated under the influence of laughing gas in the dental chair”?

Do you mean that Osho himself had these circumstances transcribed into books?

You use the verb “I believe” to locate the place where the transcription-recording of the three books supposedly took place, so you’re not sure?

The fact remains that your sources regarding the use of these two drugs are limited to two: Ma Sheela and Mr. Milne, two renegades.

You don’t even have a single source that claims Osho had become so addicted that the addiction interfered with his dissemination.

You yourself seem to be enough wary to say that at a certain point Osho lost connection with his inner light.

There was also a statement by Hugh Milne in his book ‘Bhagwan: The God that Failed’ that there were laughing gas canisters installed in Osho’s trailer next to his bed. So perhaps it is not only during his dental sessions that he was using the gas, but it was self- dministered. And there was a statement by Sheela on ‘60 Minutes’ in 1985 that Osho took sixty milligrams of Valium every day. An effective dose is 4 to 40 mg a day.

The thing is, heavy use of these kinds of substances does produce a wear on the body. Perhaps Osho was poisoned, and perhaps not, but it seems likely that substance overuse contributed to his death.

With fathers steeped in sannyasin principles and aware of what they are passing on to their children, the difficulty may be more that not enough gets taught, rather than too much. Anyway, that was my experience with my sannyasin father.

AI: “Spiritual quest (Osho Rajneesh): Ornella Vanoni often spoke of her inner turmoil and struggle with depression, which led her to explore various spiritual paths. Mystical experiences: In various interviews, the singer stated that she frequented the world of Osho Rajneesh and practised meditation. She described a search for an inner peace that went beyond artistic success, often citing the need to “entrust” herself to something greater.”

Her latest hit:

‘A smile inside the crying’

And now that I should pose for yet another photograph,
Can you tell me what the best shot is?
Now that with a selfie you show everything to everyone and let it be,
Shall we frame it?
Or shall I throw it away?
Words on notes have been my best companion.
To face stupidity, we still have joy.
If heaven granted a little grace to every soul down here,
I would be a saint.
A soul that sings.
That sings in balance over an emotion.
That turns people’s existence upside down.
That can’t be fully explained.
But that remains deep in the heart.
I am all the love I’ve given.
All the unconditional love.
The embarrassment behind the boasting.
A smile inside the crying.
I am all the love I’ve given.
Stormy sea and starry sky.
Just before a crash.
A smile inside the crying.
And now that you ask me to smile, I would like to Forget
Wounds to lick and great loves only to desire
If the universe disappeared in an instant and was no more
I would definitely
I would stay forever
Forever balanced above an emotion
That turns people’s existence upside down
That can’t be fully explained
But that remains deep in the heart
I am all the love I’ve given
All the unconditional love
The embarrassment behind the boast
A smile inside the tears
I am all the love I’ve given
Stormy sea and starry sky
Just before a crash
A smile inside the tears
And now that you ask me to smile, I’d like to forget.

Studio recording version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88pVkYtuaEU&list=RD88pVkYtuaEU&start_radio=1

Concert 2024, at 90 y.o., with some hesitation in reading the digital text.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Hw78p0tGo&list=RD9_Hw78p0tGo&start_radio=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornella_Vanoni

This has resulted in two traditions of thought, metaphysics and existentialist thought: the objective supremacy of a rational, eternal, and immutable being that gives meaning to reality versus the supremacy of human subjectivity in interpreting reality.

The two fields of research are not separate and incommunicable; far from it; they are merely theoretical starting points, where it is not uncommon for a metaphysical philosopher at 20 to become an existentialist at 50, and vice versa.

The limitations and intrinsic weaknesses that these approaches have demonstrated over the years, sometimes centuries, regarding the applicability of principles organized into a system of thought, useful for understanding and meaningfully experiencing reality, have been highlighted in both fields:

In the metaphysical field (AI):
The metaphysical approach, traditionally understood as the study of ”being qua being” and the search for first causes and supersensible reality, has encountered considerable criticism and limitations throughout the history of philosophy.

The main limitations of the metaphysical approach can be summarized as follows:

Kantian Critique (Impossibility of knowing the noumenon);

Lack of empirical verifiability;

Problems of language and meaning: since it is not possible to verify the correctness of the analysis of abstract constructs, what is stated loses its cognitive meaning;

Necessity of limits for definition (Aristotle): Paradoxically, the Aristotelian approach itself, while founding metaphysics, emphasizes that being is defined through its limit (πέρας), form (εἶδος) or end (τέλος), and that perfection lies in the finite and the delimited, not in the infinite or the unlimited (imv, therefore the idea of ​​an eternal truth always valid for understanding a changing reality, confined within the limits of its forms, contains within itself a contradiction: it is not possible to know a part if the form of perfect knowledge of the whole is not first defined, which, being infinite, would at least take longer than the average lifespan of a philosopher);

Replacement by the human sciences: In post-Hegelian thought, the collapse of classical metaphysics paved the way for the ”human sciences” (sociology, psychology, history) and the social sciences, which seek to offer a more objective and nuanced reflection on humanity than metaphysical generalizations.

In short, the metaphysical approach is often criticized for its claim to transcend the limits of human knowledge and for the difficulty of integrating its claims into a framework of empirically verifiable knowledge.

And in the existentialist field (AI):

Existentialism, which developed primarily in the 20th century amidst wars and crises, emphasizes human finitude, precariousness, and the lack of absolute meaning.

Main critical points, both internal and external to existentialist philosophy, include:

Extreme freedom and responsibility (Condemnation of Freedom): Sartre argues that ”existence precedes essence,” meaning that humans have no predefined nature and create themselves through their own choices. This leads to radical anguish, as the individual is entirely responsible for their actions and their own meaning in a world devoid of divine guidance or objective values;

Anguish and despair: Existentialism emphasizes the inevitability of death, suffering, and despair, focusing intensely on the ”human condition” understood as precariousness;

The absence of objective meaning: The idea that the world has no intrinsic meaning or preordained purpose often leads to a pessimistic or nihilistic vision, where humans are left to construct their own meanin;

Criticisms of determinism and naturalism: Many existentialists reject determinism, arguing for free will, but this is strongly criticized by determinists, who believe the individual is conditioned by biological or social factors. Furthermore, the idea that human relationships are merely social constructs is contested by those, such as naturalists, who believe they are part of our biology;

Conflict with idealism: Existentialism rejects nineteenth-century idealism (particularly Hegel), denying the resolution of internal and social conflicts in a higher synthesis or in the Spirit;

Internal philosophical critiques (Heidegger vs. Sartre): Martin Heidegger criticized Sartre’s interpretation, arguing that Sartre’s existentialism misinterpreted the idealism of the existential world.

Now, it’s not insignificant to me that the humanity that comes to Osho is the same one that for millennia has been practicing, more or less consciously, the exercise of critical thinking, preferably logically correct, with a thirst for knowledge that assuages ​​the anguish over the dangers to which the world exposes us.

Seeking answers in ethical, social, and political matters, for choices that often paralyze us between guilt and shame, between fear and the exhilaration of overcoming certain limitations.

The fact that in this small community, which gather us around the things said and done by Osho, there is almost never a shared perspective on reality makes me wonder whether the misunderstanding about the tantric guru’s teachings occurred at the height of his success and popularity in the 1970s, when many of today’s critics kissed his feet, or today, where, especially those who kissed his feet yesterday, are the most ferocious critics.

Was Osho a philosopher who provided the right answers at the right time to a segment of a youth protest movement that had strayed between politics and recreational disengagement?

Or was he a mystic who also used philosophy, with its paradoxes, to encourage an ecological use of the mind, suspending its judgment, observing its voracious intention to achieve truth-objectives that comfort the ego?

It would seem that a forum discussing the representation of reality, not just the vast and philosophically contradictory one proposed by Osho, fosters the same polarizations that have occurred in the world of professional thinkers, afflicted by the same horizontal malady.

I was watching Osho in a 1984 talk, paying more attention to the tone of his voice, his facial expression, and the subtle movements of his hands. I wonder if friends who were close to Osho before the Ranch are seeing signs of a change in him due to any medications or dental anesthetics.

When I first arrived on this forum, about 10 years ago, a fact that was taken for granted, mostly in an allusive and ironic tone, was that Osho had become addicted to Valium and laughing gas, drugs prescribed to quell pain and anxiety, if not for recreational use, where everyone decides what is fun or not for them.

The sources supporting the hypothesis that Osho had become addicted to these substances were the dentist and the person who took notes during the sessions for what would later become a book (or perhaps more than one book?).

It seems a bit underwhelming to me to establish drug addiction from the cursory observation of a standard dentist appointment (30-60 minutes). I believe there are different tolerances for exposure to the same intoxicating substance, depending on physical constitution, frequency and quantity of the drug consumed.

Then one should evaluate the symptoms of that type of addiction, such as chronic drowsiness, fatigue, irritability, muscle weakness, dizziness, neurological damage, hallucinations, loss of consciousness…

From Sunyo’s book (My Days of Light with Osho), I don’t recall any indication in Osho’s behaviour that could be linked to an addiction, other than his obsession with Coca-Cola.

I’m not saying I rule out the possibility that Osho used those drugs, but the smoking gun found by those who claim the drugs created an addiction in Osho cannot be reduced to smug sarcasm based on hearsay. Rather, it should indicate, with all the available documents from Osho’s public life, where to draw the line between a before and an after, and how these two phases, if any, should be exclusively related to drug addiction.

Why shouldn’t this Osho be part of the “before”?
https://rumble.com/v50kukq-osho-video-from-ignorance-to-innocence-21-personality-the-carbon-cop-out.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp_v

The important thing is to place abstract values ​​within the correct ideological perspective, that is, to dig a little deeper to understand the real values ​​behind those instrumentally declared.

Differently, it’s when the question of the best environment for educating young people is posed from an existential perspective, setting the necessary limits within which to encourage the development of critical thinking, starting with the function and scope of those limits themselves.

One of the limits that I think is necessary to place on children today is to prohibit premature exposure to virtual reality, to allow them to encounter and savor the sweetness-roughness of the limits of material reality (like playing football or climbing trees), possibly, when necessary, even that of a spanking, when it warns you-prepares you for the possibility of much more violent impacts, those that only happen in non-virtual reality.

Those who have seen the horrific rituals contained in the Epstein Files say that if they were published, it would be a collective shock to discover the monsters who govern us. The risk would be that the entire system of institutional bodies, guarantors of the productive, financial, and media systems, would collapse, with private sector leaders themselves implicated in the same bloody orgies of power.

Some errors in the YouTube machine translation, especially in the proper names of people, places, etc., but what the author of the journalistic investigation (Minetti-Cipriani affair) says is fairly clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVtasLfMSFY