Taking the words of Osho “literally” was always a problem, even in the early days of sannyas. I cant remember how many times fellow sannyasins prefaced their remarks with “Osho said” when one brought forward something they did not agree with!
“Surrender” was surely one of those confused areas, but arguably some things Osho said about surrender turned out to be dangerous, and led to the easy introduction of a dictatorship on the Ranch.
For example I remember Osho talking in Poona one about Deeksha who was an Italian dragon who ruled the kitchen where many served a sort of apprenticeship to ashram life:
“It is very easy to surrender to me, difficult to surrender to Deeksha. So I will insist that you surrender to Deeksha, that is the way to surrender to me. Deeksha will be much harder to surrender to.
To me it is easy to surrender because I dont come into your day to day , moment to moment work. This has to be learned by everyone”… . .
It was precisely this type of literal acquaitance with what Osho sometimes said, that made it so easy later to silence any critical thought.
And yet Osho said all sorts of things about surrender from the beginning of his Ministry that looked at, in strict logic, contradicted this view. He often said that if “you” surrender then I have failed. You have misunderstood that surrender to mean anything is, when you as an ego ceases, not through a method of forcing this, just a question of allowing it when the ego falls away. I like this latter take!
BUT, the version of what “Osho said”, that related to Deeksha certainly got an upper hand, and was very suitable for those who needed for whatever reason to “get their own way”. In the end there were only Queen Bees and worker bees. Okay for a hive, but not for a human society that claimed to have developed and improved on what had come before.