I am unqualified to say whether P.D. Ouspensky’s book “Tertium Organon” is a great book. However Ouspensky, who later became the leading disciple for some years of Gurdjieff, was certainly not intellectually unambitious.
He saw his book as replacing and being the successor to Aristotle’s “Organon” and Bacon’s Novum Organon, the intellectual centrepieces of many centuries of human philosophy.
One commentator has said that just as Goethe’s Werther had provoked a whole raft of suicides, Tertium Organon had prompted a renascence of love and joy in equal numbers in human beings.
This must say something for a book originally written in Russian, and which only reached the wider world through an English translation.
As a book it had some major effects upon the philosophical and spiritual discourse of the 20th century. Ouspensky viewed it as not just an organizing and mathematical thesis, but a system of thought that gave the “key to the enigmas of the world”.
When the young Osho arrived around age 18 from his village in Jabalpur he stayed at first with an Aunt, but her husband got quickly fed up with the always arguing Osho. So he contrived to get a job as a reporter on the Navbharat daily newspaper, and then rented his own room, and at the same time registered as an MA student at Robertson College.
However Osho was also obsessed at that time in getting to read Ouspensky’s work. He did not find it in the Jawalpur thief’s market, and could not persuade the university or city library to stock it, due to its cost.
However the book was available in the one up market English bookshop in Jawalpur, at the then astronomic price of 70 rupees.
Osho received his first salary from his journalism at the end of the month, but seeing it matched the amount needed for the book immediately went and purchased it.
His landlord was street wise, and had arrived looking for his rent on the following day, knowing Osho had received his salary the day before. However seeing he had rented to someone not following normal logic, and had in fact spent all his salary, he emptied his flat of Osho’s possessions, changed the locks, and threw the possessions on to the street.
Hence began a night of homelessness. Osho made home under a lamp-post, made himself comfortable, and simply read his new book under the lamplight.
Osho’s self report from that night was that he felt no cold, hunger or thirst. His concentration was unbroken and he continued to read the book voraciously until falling into a deep sleep about 5am.
He later woke up at the home of another of his Aunt’s in some warm bed, presumably having been rescued by some gossip train.
I find such little known early stories of Osho reassuring. It makes my connection to Osho deeper, more human and more real. Like many of his sannyasins we spent many nights of temporary homelessness pursuing something of the beyond, even if it was not in the pursuit of a book that arguably makes the false promise of solving “all the enigmas of the world”!
Parmartha
Not heard this before.
Splendid.
+1
Thanks, Mr P.
I love this story, thanks. Osho had passion for what he was interested in. I also feel it’s a treasure if you can really go for what you want, no turning back.
Certainly is, Fresch. Mind you, it depends what level you’re addressing, what exactly you want (or think you want)…And in a radical sense, it’s far easier to do that on the ‘outside’ than on the ‘inside’.
For example, I hardly think Osho was merely “interested” in what he was reading – for him it was simply of supreme importance, ‘life and death’ itself, ie not really comparable to a mere slice of good fortune in one’s career, however ‘blessed’ by Fate one might feel as a result.
Oh, that one, true SD.
In which book Osho has mentioned this incident?
It is discussed in Swami Gyan Bhed’s book “The Rebellious Enlightened Master Osho”. Osho shared the experience with family members and early Jain friends.
Bhed’s book is 606 pages long. It is written in very poor English.
]Shantam, Bhed’s original work is in Hindi which I assume you read and is over 1000 pages long, and it would, I guess, be of good Hindi literacy, and also is said to contain much more material. The English edition has been much shortened.
Maybe there is a “task” for you in the name of service to your Master to have a look at it and give us some stories that don’t appear in the English edition. This would be of far more value than endless carping about who does or does not run the Resort/Ashram.
This story seems to be fabricated; as real as in cinematography.
Osho, during 35 years of His public speaking, has shared so many incidents, with all the salt and pepper, that it looks almost impossible he wouldn´t have told this incident, not one time but dozens of times.
It’s true Shantam. Take it from me!
That would be interesting. Go for it, Shantam.
Parmartha, I wish not to translate anything which is not from Osho´s mouth directly.
Translating hearsay: not my cup of tea.
How precious is that.
Kavita points out the below in another thread:
Now Shantam, EAT your words and give me an apology!
I suppose now you have chapter and verse from Osho himself you will be quoting it like a parroted devotee, having once rejected it as a figment of my and Swami Bhed’s imagination !!
From Kavita:
I just came across this while reading ‘Books I Have Loved ‘ & thought I could share this here in ref. to ‘Osho and his pursuit of the book Tertium Organon’.
Books I Have Loved 12, CHAPTER 3
‘TERTIUM ORGANUM’ was a costly book. In India, in those days, I was getting a salary of only seventy rupees each month, and by coincidence the book cost exactly seventy rupees – but I purchased it. The bookseller was amazed. He said, ”Even the richest man in our community cannot afford it. For five years I have been keeping it to sell, and nobody has purchased it. People come and look at it, then drop the idea of buying. How can you, a poor student, working the whole day and studying at night, working almost twenty-four hours each day, how can you afford it?” I said, ”This book I can purchase even if I have to pay for it with my life. Just reading the first line is enough. I have to have it whatsoever the cost.”
That first sentence I had read in the introduction was, ”This is the third canon of thought, and there are only three. The first is that of Aristotle; the second of Bacon, and the third, my own.” I was thrilled by Ouspensky’s daring, that he said, ”The third existed even before the first.” That was the sentence that caught fire in my heart.
I gave the bookseller my whole month’s salary. You cannot understand, because for that whole month I had to almost starve. But it was worth it. I can remember that beautiful month: no food, no clothes – not even shelter; because I could not pay the rent I was thrown out of my small room.
But I was happy with TERTIUM ORGANUM under the sky. I read that book under a street lamp – it is a confession – and I have lived that book. That book is so beautiful, and more so now that I know that the man did not know at all. How could he have managed it then? It must have been a conspiracy of the gods, something from the beyond. I cannot resist anymore from using the name the Sufis use; they call it khidr. Khidr is the agency that guides those who need guidance.”
I think Shantam may have a point, this story may well have been embellished by Bhed but it’s unlikely we will ever know to what extent. I have some vague memory that Osho has relayed this story, at least, in as far as he had to have this book and spent all his money on it, but as for the landlord changing the locks and throwing out Osho’s possessions, that’s new to me. It does seem like an over-the-top reaction.
Osho never baulked at telling a whopper to embellish a good story. He was a master storyteller who knew it did no harm to stray from the truth to make a tale more interesting. Glimpses of a Golden Childhood was a good example of this, where Osho painted himself as the rebellious hero who pretty soon the wise men were flocking to meet. A great read. What is noteworthy about this article is the book he was after. Recently, we had a vid with Osho fondly recalling how he found Mr O’s ‘In Search of the Miraculous’ in the thieves’ market. What is significant is the book in question. Those books left a strong impression on the young Osho’s mind and, as history was to show, the seeds that were sown by reading them bore fruits.
‘In Search of the Miraculous’ is quite a book, I read it when I was 21 or so. I read it, continually, for about 2 years. It became like a Bible, it had quite an effect on my young mind.
I have wondered if reading Osho to oneself has undertones of mantra chanting, reading the transcribed spoken words of someone who is enlightened, especially when you read and reread a book.
I read Rajneesh Upanishad, Sermons in Stones and Beyond Enlightenment, the three books from Bombay, just before Poona 2 started, over and over again for a similar amount of time, when I was at art school, which is when I first considered the mantra chanting possibility as well.
Arpana, you are where your mind is. By imbibing wisdom, you develop a different relationship with your mind.
I cannot say I can think like Nietzsche but I some days have a damn good go at it.
“Art is the proper task of life.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
Imbibe. Excellent word.
Ta muchly.
Lokesh says:
“Glimpses of a Golden Childhood was a good example of this, where Osho painted himself as the rebellious hero who pretty soon the wise men were flocking to meet.”
It was the truth and I cannot see how you choose to view it as embellished.
Osho and I share the same birthday. People born at that time of the year are prone to exagerration. BV, how do you know Osho’s stories were accurate and not embellished? I don’t have a problem with it, because when all is said and done it is the story that counts. Osho told whoppers.
I agree about ‘Golden Childhood’. He wasn’t telling us his life story. He was telling us what he wanted to.
The title is just a hook, just like books on zen. etc.
I am not saying that he did not embellish. All I am saying is that he did not embellish that one.
“He was a rebellious hero who pretty soon had the wise men flocking to meet him.”
Not only Osho told whoppers. Gurdjieff told even more! When he met Ouspensky, for example, he boasted of the enormous amounts of money he had spent setting up his “school” in expensive houses. But this was undone within the hour when he took Ouspensky around to where his students were gathered, and it turned out to be a flat on top of a schoolhouse rented by one of his schoolteacher students!
See Kavita’s quote from Osho’s ‘Books I Have Loved’.
A good, informative article and once more a case of synchronicity. I am working on an article about Osho and his relationship to Gurdjieff’s Work. Probably send it in the next few days when I am willing to let it go and time permits.
Will look forward to it!
There are people in the world who feel fascinated with ruins.
Through the stones of ruins, they feel the kick to imagine how strong the foundation must be.
Same people will pass by, ignoring the same buildings if they are not in the impoverished state.
Maybe it gives some satisfaction to their fragile egos. By dusting the greatness of the past, one also gets some feeling of self-worth. Religious-hearted people take this on daily basis.
No idea what this means. MOD, do you know?
MOD: NOT REALLY! PERHAPS SHANTAM CAN TELL US THE CONTEXT OF THESE REMARKS?
Shantam Prem says:
“There are people in the world who feel fascinated with ruins.
By dusting the greatness of the past, one also gets some feeling of self-worth.”
Great insights there, Shantam. But what you fail to see is that the complete contents of your head is a type of grave. In Greek the word Mnemosyne (memory) comes from word for grave (mnema)…and at the same time we stand on the shoulders of giants, and all the giants were standing on each other’s shoulders.
Knowledge might be a bondage, but where would you be without it?
Dear friends,
I arrive this April afternoon to the caravanserai by some “gossip train”,
responding this way to the
art of presenting issues.
Sometimes gossip trains may be of help
most of the time I bet they are not
but they are so deeply part of everyday life and ongoing businesses that one cannot even think about them – missing this way of sharing “information”
big financial affairs go on gossip transrapids for VIPs,
religious issues as well
and not to forget the wars of this time
being presented to the plebs on gossip trains of the information societies.
It’s quite an effort to stay as awake as possible and to balance “body-mind-soul”
that was – as far as I remember – the Gurdijeff world of inner (and outer) work
the strong ambition with lots of challenges for the disciples – the Gurdijeff school.
Much is mixed now – like the fight G had with one of his main disciples, Ouspensky – a mathematician in his own right
I know and also enjoyed every now and then the adaptation of the Gurdijeff dances which became one of the living branches of Osho’s heritage where individuals were inspired to found their own schools.
I felt attracted to the enneagramm training and can say
that dropped me after a while – better to say though, I didn’t t feel at home with the teacher practising it.
There are so many ways and invitations for a better and more human understanding of this life train to consciousness
this time when we google that up
we can see the enormous traces they left and are leaving in the big data “brain”.
The Gurdijeff work (as well as some other evolving out of this)
are giving a hand of getting rooted in the whole turmoil and not to loose the play of structure
(I even found some Osho lecture by googling the conflict between Ouspensky and Gurdijeff again – but the quote didn’t feel trustworthy).
From ashram times I remember Osho having referred to Vivek
(or maybe he had kind of mischievously taken it as her words):
“Osho” – she was quoted then by him – “you are far more dangerous than Gurdijeff.”
I remember the ripples of laughter in the silent audience
but I remember also that I could connect to these words of her
and so my laughter that time was a timid one………
I have to step out of the gossip train, friends, and I wave you a GOODbye -
Madhu
Osho also talked on Tertium Organum in “I Am That” #9
http://www.satrakshita.be/osho_on_tertium_organum.htm
“From the whole comes the whole, yet the whole remains behind, intact. From that comes this. That is whole, this is whole, but even though it has come from the whole, the whole is not reduced in any way. It remains the same, as if nothing has been taken out of it.”
We can see a manifestation of it in a hologram….
Thanks for the reference.
The relationship between Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, Madhu, is very much worthy of study and reflection. And it would be interesting to see how it was mirrored in the relationship between Osho and his disciples. If true, Vivek’s comment that Osho was much more dangerous than Gurdjieff, is interesting indeed. Let’s see what Lokesh does with his string about Gurdjieff.
I would say that Gurdjieff gives, to my mind, one great accolade of Ouspensky, “He’s a good man to drink whisky with”.
One pre-thought about Ouspensky was his lack of interest in the body, and the bodymind. Like many intellectuals who seem to switch off to the idea that the body and mind are interdependent. Hence all the “movements” and dances and music of Gurdjieff he found boring and of no interest.
Hence my feeling is that Gurdjieff only wanted to ensnare him as an avenue to reach those intellectuals who would be open to that. It was a major flaw in Ouspensky, and Gurdjieff would have known that from the beginning.
>> Parmartha says:
The relationship between Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, Madhu, is very much worthy of study and reflection. And it would be interesting to see how it was mirrored in the relationship between Osho and his disciples. If true, Vivek’s comment that Osho was much more dangerous than Gurdjieff, is interesting indeed.”
For any not familiar…
The Three Dangerous Magi
http://www.ptmistlberger.com/the-three-dangerous-magi.php
What is dangerous? Would it be dangerous to the mind, or body, or both? I am not sure how dangerous Mr G was to his disciples but Crowley was totally ruthless to his. Any pretence to intelligence was constantly tested in reference to how much stupidity they would put up with.
I never considered Osho to have been dangerous per se, but many of his disciples certainly were…and the way he (Osho) was throwing everybody into the Sangha = Commune (Shangham Saranam Gacchami) – that was where the dangers lay.
Vartan, there is no Osho sangha any more. So, perhaps Osho story is over. No danger, no game, no gain?
Aleister Crowley bore little in common with Gurdjieff…Crowley as a historic figure I appreciate. He was right out there, very brave and often inhabiting somewhat dark spaces. Gurdjieff was a brilliant man. A true warrior of the Light.
Such Masters are dangerous to people’s egos, not to their real selves. However, as is the way of it, they often attract a whole range of people who are not “ready” and are not always the best judge of who is ready! Hence when casualties arise they are seen as “dangerous”.
Lokesh says:
“Gurdjieff was a brilliant man. A true warrior of the Light.”
In today’s Light, Mr G is a nonentity. His followers are the least in numbers, his methods a joke when applied (Osho’s 93 Rolls Royces were a Gurdjieffian device), and his writings impossible to fathom without commentary.
I know that Osho was impressed by Mr G but all I see is a modern Rabelais…and how many know about him these days?
To the casual observer Mr G borders on Theosophy with a Sufi overcoat.
Parmartha says:
“Such Masters are dangerous to people’s egos, not to their real selves.”
If that is the case then…so what? Isn’t dissolution of the ego an early part of the path?
Vartan, you say, “Isn’t dissolution of the ego an early part of the path?”
I’d have thought dissolution of the ego, the dissolving or giving up of the beliefs, values, reactively emotional modes of being etc. etc. that constitute what we think of as our ‘self’ is, for the vast majority, ie 99% (at least) a lifetime’s process rather than just an “early” stage.
Perhaps you understand “dissolution of the ego” in another way, Vartan?
Do you both mean the same thing when you use the word “ego”?
Probably not, I imagine, Arpana. I don’t like the term ‘ego’ anyway, ‘self’ seems a better one to me.
My own notion of ego is that it is all those unconscious ideas we have about ourselves that we are ‘special’, above all others.
For example, I came to understand that prior to sannyas, if you will, I had the unconscious idea there was something special about how much I read, which when I became aware of that seemed laughable, as everyone I mixed with in the pre-sannyas days was bookish. (Well, not everyone.
)
Yes, well, Arpana, the process of life itself has a way of dispelling similarly absurd notions, doesn’t it?! Especially as we move through mid-life and later…
But this “special” thing has been a characteristic of many sannyasins for decades, so much so that it may almost be said to define them as a group. The irony of this, of course, is that they are – ostensibly anyway – apparently committed to dissolving the ‘self’, by definition including any such notion of being ‘special’! Which seems to indicate rather a profound contradiction somewhere…
Perhaps that’s what you get when so much other than the ‘ultimate nitty-gritty’ of spiritual life is contained in one movement, where so many levels are being explored, including, it would seem, pretty basic issues of achieving a relatively healthily functioning ‘self’ in the first instance (prior to its conscious dismantling!).
Which is one of the reasons why, I’ve felt for a long time, that in ‘collective sannyas’ the ‘spiritual wood’ can easily be obscured by the ‘therapeutic and perhaps (or is this just sheer heresy?) even the creative trees.’
Now, how about that for a ‘special’ remark, eh? Beat that, Arpana (or anyone else)!
For SD.
Not everyone moves at the same speed.
Good post.
Spot on, Arpana.
Why, only last week I was timed – internally, of course – at moving at slightly less than the speed of Light itself…
So fast was my ‘inside’ that, outwardly (and, strangely enough, even to ‘myself’ – note the inverted commas) I (note inverted commas again) seemed to have been standing absolutely still, where I’d been for very many years, even going backwards much of the time…
Strange, eh?!
Now, if you’ll kindly excuse me, it’s time for my local authority over-65′s pensioners’ support group and social circle, the, er, ‘high Light’ of my week.
SD.
I’m shocked.
I do believe you’re taking the piss.
satyadeva says:
“Perhaps you understand “dissolution of the ego” in another way, Vartan?”
For me, “dissolution of the ego” happens when I come across people or situations that are “more than me”. Osho (as an example) was “more than me”.
Fair enough, Vartan, but you must be a rare one if this remains as a permanent state, eliminating all the patterns and identifications that constitute the ‘unenlightened self’.
Especially in terms of Osho, whenever I have to consider his total output, I am in a constant state of speechlessness.
So beautiful, Bodhi Vartan,
that you found this gold nugget of Osho quote.
Thank you for posting.
Madhu
MOD: IT’S BODHI, NOT BODY, MADHU!!
Osho´s books have also left many fine impressions on readers’ minds. There are many readers who got inspired to be The Buddha in their own right.
If Buddhahood is our birthright, why not to have it and encash it?!
I am currently working on a book called ‘The Oregonian Ranchmums’, detailing the life of the new world order war hero G I. Joe Parmardieff.
It’s a coffee table book, with plenty of recipes and and a handy cut-out and paste section, for building your own mystery Ranch, out of a coffee table and some spare hedge strimmers. It’s based on the mysterious work of Sir Artha Palma D’Oil, and it details the long history of Doing it Yourself or Selfishing whilst surrounded by heckling mothers or ‘ mums ‘ on a ranch whilst looking for something that was never lost in the first place, in a place where you don’t remember putting it.
Some rave reviews :
”I couldn’t put it down… ”Swami D. NoHarmeninthatjieff
I couldn’t pick it up…Ma Sizedoesn’t-matterjieff.
It makes a great Easter present…Swami Jesus H Christjieff
Most amusing!
prem martyn is back
Hail to the king of prose!
Yesterday was an interesting Facebook evening. I read a story of a long-time sannyas painter about his starting painting again after many years. He told that he stopped painting when coming to Osho. Also, the next story I read was told by this internationals creative company founder (multinational billon dollar company in creative field), he told what a problematic teenage he had had, but then went for travelling, ended up in Kathmandu etc. and found photography, which he did for a couple of years all over the world. And then became successful.
Same age people took opposite paths. Me, like most of the people, also just throughout my career (like I refused a scholarship to one of the best universities in US), spent all my money in India etc., when meeting Osho…
I wonder, was I just stupid or was it Osho’s Gurdjieff device? It’s easy to say that all on the outside is ego, if you do not have anything to lose. New people coming to Osho do not do such things.
I wrote this in relation to the topic, Osho’s passion for his “career“, and so for the rest of us passion for our creativity.
There are similar stories in love relationships of course, people going to China after a one-week date in Pune etc. And still the “best outcome relationships” are the ones people meeting from the same country etc. etc.
To become a guru is a very, very long journey. Not many people come to that stage. In case someone becomes one, there are lots of privileges, one of them, immunity from any accountability.
If you come under the bus it is your fault, if you reach your destination it is their grace.
Osho took poison in his veins, paid very heavy price for his adventures. What disciples learned from this? Raise your arms and say, “OSo Oso”.
OSHO, WHO ARE YOU AND WHAT TYPE OF PLAY ARE YOU PLAYING WITH US?
AND HOW LONG WILL YOU PLAY? PLEASE EXPLAIN.
TO be frank with you — which usually I am not
– I don’t know who I am. Knowledge is not possible
here where I am. Only the knower is left, the known has disappeared; only the container is left, the content is no more.
Osho
The Art of Dying
Chapter #8
Chapter title: A Child on the Seashore of Time
Osho used a technique with Devageet, that was very similar to Gurdjieff’s with Ouspensky.
As students of “In search of the Miraculous” know, many of the chapters were a result of Gurdjieff’s admonishment to Ouspensky never to take notes during his talks. However, as a special dispensation he was allowed to make notes when he got home, which Ouspensky religiously did. The compiled notes were in fact first published after he died in 1949, with the famous title.
Osho also debarred Devageet from taking Notes in the dental session talks, but he was allowed to write them up within a short time period, and then the tape was destroyed. The results as far as I know constituted the so-clled ‘nitrous’ books, or at least one of them. So an echo of Gurdjieff there, to two people who were to say the least, somewhat academic!
I have been reminded that a number of the “Tales” that occupy the pages of Dharm Joyti’s book which, remembering offhand I think is called “100 Tales for 10,000 Buddhas”, are not recorded by Osho himself. So Shantam, why do you believe those. I know, it is because Joyti is regarded as part of the sannyas elite. But the tales from an ordinary Indian and sannyasin, Swami Bhed, whose English is virtually equivalent to Shantam’s own, and who is someone who is probably a Jain, is dismissed by a Sikh as a gossip!
I think it is as well that people like Shantam and other doubters who treat Osho’s words as some kind of “gospel” (as opposed to anyone else who they dismiss as gossips) are strongly reminded that Osho himself referred to his own talks as “gossips”.
Especially the ‘Golden Childhood’ book, as Lokesh points out, needs to be treated with caution as it was “delivered” on nitrous oxide.
Osho and Gurdjieff, to say the least, did “exaggerate” and embellish many of their stories. People who doubt this are clearly not that streetwise and suffering from some kind of covert devotionalism. Why they did this, well, stories are stories and they do need to appeal.
Parmartha,
Thank you for the subject…and all the amazing responses!
I read some of Ouspensky’s books (cant remember which!) before I met Osho and at the time gave up the knowledge of books to bathe in the presence of Heart communion around a Master…
Teachings passed on from Heart to Heart seemed to be deeper and resonating to a higher vibration in the inner workings of the soul/psyche.
A Sufi Teacher once said, after you wake up, books are useful to make sense of what is happening to you…
Perhaps that’s what is happening in these discussions…here is some quotes!
This is what the Sufi master, Abu Sa’id, has to say on the topic of Guru and disciple:
Abu Sa’id was asked, “Who is the spiritual guide who has attained to Truth, and who is the sincere disciple?”
The Sheikh replied, “The spiritual guide who has attained to Truth is he in whom at least ten characteristics are found, as proof of his authenticity:
First, he must have become a goal, to be able to have a disciple.
Second, he must have travelled the mystic path himself, to be able to show the way.
Third, he must have become refined and educated, to be able to be an educator.
Fourth, he must be generous and devoid of self-importance, so that he can sacrifice wealth on behalf of the disciple.
Fifth, he must have no hand in the disciple’s wealth, so that he is not tempted to use it for himself.
Sixth, whenever he can give advice through a sign, he will not use direct expression.
Seventh, whenever, he can educate through kindness, he will not use violence and harshness.
Eight, whatever he orders, he has first accomplished himself.
Nine, whatever he forbids the disciple, he has abstained from himself.
Ten, he will not abandon for the world’s sake the disciple he accepts for the sake of God.
If the spiritual guide is like this and is adorned with these character traits, the disciple is bound to be sincere and a good traveller, for what appears in the disciple are the qualities of the spiritual guide made manifest in the disciple.
As for the sincere disciple, the sheikh has said, “No less than ten characteristics which I mention must be present in the sincere disciple, if he is to be worthy of discipleship.
First, he must be intelligent enough to understand the spiritual guide’s indications.
Second, he must be obedient in order to carry out the spiritual guide’s command.
Third, he must be sharp of hearing to perceive what the spiritual guide says.
Four, he must have an enlightened heart in order to see the spiritual guide’s greatness.
Five, he must be truthful, so that whatever he reorts, he reports truthfully.
Six, he must be true to his word, so that whatever he says, he keeps his promise.
Seven, he must be generous, so that whatever he has, he is able to give away.
Eight, he must be discreet, so that he can keep a secret.
Nine, he must be receptive to advice, so that he will accept the guide’s admonition.
Ten, he must be chivalrous in order to sacrifice his own dear life on the mystic path.
Having these character traits, the disciple will more easily accomplish his journey and more quickly reach the goal set for him on the mystic path by the spiritual guide.”
Art : Khidr
Upnita says:
“A Sufi Teacher once said, after you wake up, books are useful to make sense of what is happening to you”
The same is said about Zen.
…
Thanks, Upnita.
I met sannyasins who I rated in Pune one who said they had never read an Osho book! And some who had “given up reading” altogether after having met “yer man”. So yes, books are not, in the final analysis important.
However I was struck by this early (pre-enlightenment) Osho story and his pursuit of this particular book. He, as they now say, “just went for it”! So I was interested in what stuff he was made of, his determination – his not worrying about sleeping rough one night in a city where his family was known – and the subject of the book he had much sought out. I liked it because it reminded me that Osho was a guy in some ways just like us, and there were things in the story with which I myself could identify from my own life.
Invariably, the type of ppl who frequent SN would be the type of ppl who read (or read – past tense) books. Osho, apart from being a lot of other things, was also a bibliophile.
Those who went to him through other paths will not be found here because only those who read can write.
Parmartha, it is not me who is treating Osho´s words as gospels.
It is in fact you who is creating a Messiah out of the gone one.
Anyway, you will become a good Osho priest in comparison with other faiths. How many stories from Jesus´s life a priest can dig out? You have much more stories about your Jesus!
Past which has no future has no present also.
For the general record, I treat everything written by and about all teachers, including Osho and Jesus, with my own brand of streetwise wisdom and counter-intuitive logic.
I can testify to having been in Osho’s presence and knowing it was about something beyond words. Those Pune one sannyasins I met who seemed so disinterested in the books, etc. were exactly those who I felt in touch with on that level, and still do.
The pre-enlightened Osho made great efforts to read Ouspensky’s book. His motivation was no doubt to fill in gaps in his hithertoo young knowledge.
It is more than interesting to note the view of Gurdjieff himself about Tertium Organon.
As earl;y as page 20 of Ouspensky’s work “In search of the Miraculous” he describes how Gurdjieff makes fun of the book by frothing the pronunciation and then goes on to say that Ouspensky does not understand either what he reads or what he writes! He also adds that “No book can give real preparation”.
He further adds, “but if a man knows how to make coffee really WELL then it becomes possible to work with him.”
For me, the much greater contribution of Ouspensky was his faithful and fastidious recording of Gurdjieff’s teaching in “In Search of the Miraculous”, not his “Tertium Organon”.
[A sannyasin says: Sometimes I realise that I think my relationship with you is not...that it is just imagination.]
Osho.
But have you known any relationship which was not imagination?
[The sannyasin answers: I guess not.]
Osho.
That’s a very good realisation. All relationship is imagination because whenever you are going out of yourself, you go only through the door of imagination. There is no other door. The friend, the enemy, both are your imagination. When you stop imagination completely, you are alone, absolutely alone.
That’s my whole effort here – to make you so alone and so contented with yourself that there is no need to relate, and if you want to relate you enjoy it just like a game. It is a game of imagination – nothing is wrong in it. There is no need to be afraid of it. You can enjoy it. You can be very creative
about it.
Once you understand that life and all of its relationships are imagination you don’t go against life, but your understanding helps you to make your life relationship more rich. Now you know that relationships are imagination, why not put more imagination into them? Why not enjoy them as deeply as possible? When the flower is nothing but your imagination, why not create a beautiful flower? Why settle for an ordinary flower? Let the flower be of emeralds and diamonds.
Whatsoever you imagine, let it be that. Imagination is not a sin, it is a capacity. It is a bridge. Just as you cross a river and you make a bridge between this shore and that, so imagination functions between two persons.
Two beings project a bridge – call it love, call it trust – but it is imagination. Imagination is the only creative faculty in man, so whatsoever is creative is going to be imagination. Enjoy it and make it more and more beautiful. By and by you will come to a point where you don’t depend on
relationships. You share. If you have something, you share with people, but you are contended as you are.
All love is imagination, But remember, when I use the word imagination, I don’t use it in the condemnatory sense that it is ordinarily used. Imagination is the divine faculty of man. In fact in India, we say that the world is God’s imagination. Right! God is dreaming you sitting there. God is dreaming me talking to you. We are part in the divine mind of the whole. He is imagining.
Hindus say that God has a twenty-four hour day, like us, but his hours are very, very long…millions of years. He is awake for twelve hours and then the world disappears. The day of God is the end of the world. For twelve hours He sleeps and then the world appears because He starts dreaming,
and dreaming fantastic dreams of stars and sun and moon and people and heaven and hell.
When He is asleep He projects His dreams – and this is the creation. When in the morning He awakes, the dream disappears. This is de-creation. In English there is no word for it. When He wakes up, we disappear. Hindus call it pralaya. Everything disappears and He goes to sleep again and starts dreaming and the whole world appears.
So imagination is the divine faculty – enjoy it. You have come to a good insight.
Osho.
Beloved of My Heart.
CHAPTER 6.
SELF-IMPROVEMENT IS A WAY TO HELL
Thank you, Parmartha, for this article, very interesting! I don’t think I have ever heard Osho refer to Mr O in the hundreds of hours I have listened to him speak.
I coincidentally happened to look at the back of this same book on my bookshelf earlier this morning. It’s been there for some years now but I haven’t read it yet, as I decided that I should read Mr G’s books first. Well, having finished the ‘Beelzebub Tales…’ earlier this year there’s two more to go.
Nice to see Mr G mentioned in the recent articles here. I like to come to check this site every now and then for the nice informative articles and…often entertaining commentary.
Mr C
Chinmayo,
You are, I think, right, the only real reference is from ‘Books I have Loved’ (Pages 23/24), which were not initially public talks but given in 1981/2 to four disciples around the dental chair, but which Osho later insisted were published. Swami Bhed mentions the story in his book in some detail, retelling it, as I understood it, from Jain friends or relatives of Osho.
Chinmayo, I have a feeling we may have known each other – was it in the Hamburg commune in the mid- eighties? Anyway, thanks for your positive comments.
Mr P
Osho mentions Ouspensky over 300 hundred times
in his discourses.
Okay, Arps. You must have a database that shows that?
I must admit, like Chinmayo I can’t remember him talking about Ouspensky directly. Maybe when he was talking about Gurdjieff?
Maybe give us a reference? Thanks.
Appears to be mostly small references, but I’ll post a few eventually. (I’m watching a very long film on Blu Ray at the moment
)
http://txs.io/btR
Thanks, Arps, for the extracts. We were a little wrong on that one.
One likes the way Osho tells the story of Ouspensky’s acceptance by Gurdjieff as a disciple, in the second extract. very much. It has the ring of truth about it.
I’ve looked more closely at the quotes, and I reckon there is an entire compilation book on Gurdjieff and Ouspensky available, if someones got the patience to go through everything.
I stand corrected then, Arpana!
Parmartha, unfortunately I have never been to Hamburg, nor have I lived in any of the Osho communes, so it has to have been someone else!
Osho has said so much, and I am convinced we only notice what interests us in his discourses, strikes a chord at any given time. (Which is why we can have such a personal message, for want of a better phrase, from him).
I’ve no particular memory of him mentioning either of them, and he has, in discourses I have read over the years, but my interest in Gurdjieff has only developed since you mentioned that book by Fritz Peters, which I found very rewarding.