Someone posting as “Chicklit” raises a regular question SN has had to deal with over the years
He was my hero. Osho,
the man who showed the way by conceiving life in simple terms; a little dance, a little music, a little playfulness, a little laughter and a little love. His ideas on individualism, life, reality as being of a single divine essence, sexual liberation, religion appealed to millions of people.
Traces of Freud, Gurdjieff, Nietzsche & Lawrence in his teachings made him more appealing. The core of it stressed on the idea of every individual thinking of himself/herself and living free!
So yes, I was in awe of him. Completely in love until recently when I read his views on same sex relationships. And now I am left hurt and cheated.
According to the man who taught us to follow fearlessly all that comes from within, says;
“Homosexuality has arisen because we have deprived people of heterosexuality. Homosexuality was born as a religious phenomenon in the monasteries because we forced monks to live together in one place and nuns to live in one place, and we separated them by great walls. Homosexuality is bound to happen. It happens only in monasteries and in the army, because these are the two places where we don’t allow men and women to mix. Or it happens in boys’ and girls’ hostels; there also we don’t allow them to mix. The whole phenomenon of homosexuality is a by-product of this whole stupid upbringing. Homosexuality will disappear from the world the day we allow men and women to meet naturally.”
Homosexuality a social disease!!!
You see for me there had been no other like him. Here was a man who understood the value of playfulness and wit. But pray tell me, wasn’t he the one preaching about breaking one’s conditionings and moving beyond them? Wasn’t he the one who asked us to look at sex as a natural phenomenon, a fun thing to happen and not as a means for procreation? Then why attach so much significance and seriousness to the sexuality of homosexuals? Why deprive us of this beautiful experience by calling it a disease?
He believed that two women in a relationship can’t have a very great love affair.
He says: ‘It will remain on plain ground; deprived of heights and depths. People who are afraid of heights and depths will find it very comfortable, convenient. Hence the homosexuals are called “gay.” They look gay; they look happier than heterosexuals. It is bound to be so, because two women can understand each other far better than a man and a woman. Two men can understand each other far better because they are of the same type, but the spark will be missing. Yes, certain gayness will be there, but not great poetry, not great romance — mild. It will not have adventure, surprises: rather safe, secure, more understanding, less conflict, less nagging.”
And here I am shaking my head in disbelief. Desperate to prove him wrong. Really are these two Oshos really the same guy? My experience tells me that the relationship he discredits is full of moons, and white lilies of a sunny morning. It is poetic, vibrant, romantic, deep, playful, breezy and crazy. It isn’t a relationship between me and my girlfriend but my way of relating to love. This is my playfulness. And God, it feels so right!
To accept myself as gay has been the greatest transformation to have happened to me. And like me, to many. So my dearest Osho, our love affair now ends.
“You forget about men. You are naturally a lesbian and it will be impossible for you to become heterosexual. Simply accept it and go into it. Drop the whole idea of men; your energy will not fit with them. You have been trying hard, that’s why it is creating a nightmare. Simply relax with yourself and never again raise the question, never again think about it.
There are very few people who are naturally homosexual, but you are. I knew that you were a natural lesbian, but I was trying to see if you could come out of it; it will not be possible.
And there is no need – if it is natural then there is no need. Only those who have fallen somehow and adopted it as a habit can come out of it. It is not a habit to you. It is not second nature, it is your nature. So simply accept it and forget all about men. Just drop the whole idea and the whole nightmare will disappear.
And be absolutely happy as things are, as you are. Even if sometimes I say something – because I am speaking to so many people, mm? – you need not worry. If sometimes I am saying something against homosexuality, remember: you are excluded! Or do I have to remind you again and again that [you are] excluded?
Just take it as understood = that Chandan is excluded. And when more natural homosexuals come, I will make a club of you. Just wait! A few natural ones will be coming. There are at least ten percent of people who can be natural homosexuals. It is not a big majority, but still a large number. Ten percent means that out of ten people one is a natural homosexual.
So soon you will have your own world here too. But from this moment I take away your nightmare – it is finished. Good?”
Osho.
‘Don’t Bite My Finger – Look Where I’m Pointing’
‘Darshan Diary’, Chapter 17
Wow…what a fitting quotation. I have read it first time. With common sense Osho makes every complex problem easy. This is maybe the Indian way…lols.
P.S:
Hats off to Arpana for having Osho encyclopaedia.
P.P.S:
Can someone tell to Resort authorities to create special facilities for LGBT community? Maybe they bring the spring back in Pune through their rainbow attitude.
Osho says same-sex relationships have:
“more understanding, less conflict, less nagging.”
There speaks a man who never spent much time with gay couples!!
Sounds like a Mahakashyapasyougoalong transmission, to me….
Osho meditation centre on Lesbos, near the beach. Also big gay scene every autumn for the fest by the sea. Enjoy.
I lived there for 4 years and nobody asked if I was a lesbian or not. I did have trouble meeting other wankers though.
Arpana, could you do the usual honours and see what Osho said about ‘from masturbation to meditation’? Cheers.
It’s my mission in life to prove that seeking is a result of endogenous tantric self-abandonment and that there is no-one-caring, in the end, however hard you try.
Have to agree with Frank on this one.
Osho was a ladies’ man, womaniser, player, charmer and on top of it all, a very sexy playboy.
He never, ever, experienced gayness. How could he say something about it?
I found this interesting because Osho does lie, and admits to it as well.
“Imagine that God has decided to include falsehoods throughout the Bible. How would we know what parts to believe and what parts to reject? With the best of intentions, we might unknowingly condemn ourselves to eternal damnation, accepting heresies as truths, rejecting truths as heresies.”
http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/how-science-made-an-honest-man-of-god/
Quite recently on SN there was mention of the possibility of a gay relationship between Osho and Veeresh. If I remember correctly it had to do with a photo that was going round some years back of Osho and Veeresh in tangas, taken one hot and sunny afternoon in the master’s back garden in Poona One.
One could speculate that Osho’s ridiculous comments about homosexuality being a social disease came after a failed homosexual relationship, and therefore best taken as Osho being a bit miffed and of course Vivek giving him a bit of stick about the whole sordid affair. Just another reminder that Osho was all too human.
A lot of chat junk is loading the website these last days and hours, so much so that one can imagine the website being highjacked by a sexually as mentally really distorted gang in some bulimic rage of spitting out indigestible, yet before spitting, stuffed in, mental junk food.
No Sannyas – no News – is recognizable. But a lot of manipulated and manipulative JUNK! (Even sometimes camouflaged by some intellectual gymnastics of unknown sources with nothing relating to any issue whatsoever).
If you want to piss on anything, why not use a rest room ( a toilet) or at least a private diary instead of a chat with other sentient beings? Every now and then, there comes a virtual chat wave of this kind, most of the time I am silent then, and wait till this wave is gone, but that´s not the right thing to do.
Some here play ´poker´ with wrong IT-and-identity ‘cards´ and I don´t like that, the least to say. And some seem to be proud of their destructiveness and cynicism that I can´t believe we ever met in the Sannyas realms.
I am not in wonder; I am pissed! At how the anonymity of the net is misused for sick and sickening stuff!
Madhu
Ho-hum.
“that Osho was all too human”
I wonder how many at Sannyasnews will endorse this opinion?
Chud Meister, can’t you find anything better to wonder about? You know like why am I here, what is it all about, do I really exist, who is it that does the wondering etc. etc?
Lokesh, in this post you are wearing the shoes bigger than your size.
Know the size of your ego, my dear. The state to repeat borrowed phrases as your own should be dropped.
Is that so?
This lesbian is, perhaps, leaving Osho prematurely. You can differ with Osho on the causes of homosexuality, yet regardless of homosexuality’s origin, Osho has defended homosexuals themselves in many different ways.
Osho’s emphasis has always been to respect freedom and to trust your own organism. Logically, this extends to homosexuals’ rights to live their lives on their own terms.
“The heterosexuals will not allow anybody to be homosexual. Why? Who are you to decide? Who has given you the right to decide? If two persons are feeling joyous in being homosexual, it is nobody else’s business to interfere. But every society interferes.”
Osho, ‘Ah, This!’ (1980) Chapter #4
“Now homosexuals have been one of the tortured minorities in the world, very much tortured. In some countries they are killed. In some countries, for example in Iran, if it is found that two persons are living as homosexuals or lesbians, then the only punishment is death. What nonsense! They have not committed any crime against anybody, they have not harmed anybody!
Two men living together, or two women living together, this should be nobody else’s business. But there is a great fear of homosexuality, and the reason is that homosexuality has been repressed down the ages.”
Osho, ‘Be Still and Know’ (1979) Chapter #2
They want us all to become wankers, it’s a government plot!
Victorian morality ensured in law that woman, by covering herself fully, then man would not have to be responsible for his own latent arousal.
Today that notion has been turned around in much of the west. Woman is now thought of as a sensual / sexual form for which man’s arousal, generally, has to be psychologically managed and covered internally. Which is why non-psychologically developed or edict and faith-based, conformist, socio-pathic, cultic societies cannot redeem that impulse publically because they do not have the mechanism for interpreting the range of libidinous possibilities or engagements, either internally or through social acceptance or both.
Indeed, the rise of the libido was formative in the declaration of the western ‘self’, which is, on the contrary, actually subsumed in collective or ‘edict’ culture for the notional stability of that society as only being a collectively formed ‘self’ and amorphous.
This deathism is only partly addressed in even secular society. Deathism is absolutely formative in all cultic major religious societies. The power of anality and death over life.
Darwinism and secularism has removed that mass to a mechanistic idea of lawfulness and sexual rights and ambivalence. It acquiesces or imposes tacit non-interference but it cannot mandate liberation despite the fascination for seeing rights as enshrined through law first and then dispensed through legal authority.
Conformist constructs exist in secular or humanist-evolved society, although (libido) generative responsibility is devolved and manipulated to abstract unaccountable forms of power such as capital and eternal war (human or environmental ) and the conforming civic-emotive range needed to produce regularization of those dependent economic interactions. Choice to participate or not is not given through any consent to be governed. Although having said that, Ireland does enshrine that idea of freely giving consent in its constitution.
Any use of the life-force for self -recognition is instead ‘civilized’ and rights are mandated by collective will through token legal representation. Rights being given by Law, or the god of Mammon. Furthermore, subsets of conformity at the level of war, covert or overt surveillance and codified national forms of emotive intelligence and its acceptable range become part of the educative system and corporative work.
Change is then given authority and reality over time-based social formula and monolith. Change is never produced as immediate or transforming, but only as far as it can be legally approved of. It is a form of religiosity stripped of the metaphors of power but appointing itself the same absolute range, both internally and externally. Both aspects are pernicious when their full strategies are not exhumed.
I believe Osho failed to address the society of the spectacle and the nature of western conditioning at a theoretical level, preferring to address the historical culpability of sexualised religious repression instead.
However, he did include those aspects of meditational and relational experimentation that elicited individual life affirmation beyond any notion of appointed or recognised rights or compromise or edict or social norm. Which is where a thorough investigation of sexuality, sensuality and erotic life affirmation begins.
In the book ‘The Age of Kali’, the author Willim Dalrymple mentions the old Sufi poetry masters of ancient Delhi, whose sensual poetry attracted lovers and sensualists to their courting through constant re-affirmation of the connection between destiny, transformation and entry of the soul through poetic entrancement.
That even Sapphic poetry was destroyed by her opponents and there exists no abundance of known sensual metaphoric literature from the feminine from aeons of history can only be the fault of the annals of his-story.
How liberating can this non-allegorical realism be!
Kavita,m you obviously have a beguiling, virtuous nature…
“Women, know your limits!
In thought be plain and simple,
and let your natural sweetness,
shine through.
!
———————–
P.S:
Text info:
The translation text should read, ‘Harridans’ – not ‘Haddodones’, which is a non-existent word.
harridan – noun (plural noun: harridans)
A strict, bossy, or belligerent old woman: “a bullying old harridan”
Synonyms: shrew, virago, harpy, termagant, vixen, nag, hag, crone, dragon, ogress.
Beguiling is fine, virtuous very far from it, Marty.
I would say to ‘Chicklit’ that validation and authorisation from anyone else about your sexual preferences is probably not something that can be ever counted on.
And least of all from any figure that has anything whatsoever to do with `religion` (even religionless religion), which always implies having definitive views about how everything needs be done.
As I am not much of a mechanic, my neighbour helps me to fix my car. We get along fine, can have a bit of a laugh, and I am grateful for the help. I`m pretty sure that he`s a racist and a homophobe but that`s the way it goes…
Take the best and leave the rest
What a rock-solid, down-to-earth individual you can be, Frank.
Good on yah.
Great post.
（ ^_^）o自自o（^_^ ）
(MOD: TRANSLATION OF ABOVE SYMBOLS WOULD BE USEFUL, PLEASE!)
Cheers!
（^_^ ）
“No more heroes any more”
–The Stranglers.
One of my all-time favourite songs.
Saw them live
Mr F,
That’s the last time I wipe your sparks and gimmle your fluve valves before kimpling the exhaust manifold.
And not so much of those hugs next time, Mr F, just a handshake will do.
1966, marvellous year.
With time, old problems are solved, new get birth.
In Osho´s main seat, from where he gave most of his talks, it is no problem if someone enjoys 69, 66 or 99. The Ayatollahs of liberal world get constipation if someone plays Deva Premal kind of music.
The liberal mind-fuckers will lick the dust of Lamas in exile but get some kind of acid attack if someone bows down on the cold marble in Pune.
It makes a lot of sense.
“It’s my mission in life to prove that seeking is a result of endogenous tantric self-abandonment and that there is no-one-caring, in the end, however hard you try.” (Prem Martyn).
And did you find out who, or what did send you off for that “mission in life” you described ?
A mission, which at least in my eyes, looks quite depressing.
Madhu
Madhu, ask for a phonetic interpretation with British double-entendre – the answer you seek may not be literal.
I never had a German girlfirend mainly because they already are over=familiar with ‘ Liebe-ing dich’.
1966.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
text :
http://www.vidqt.com/id/tzSCq3wtFlI?lang=en
translation.
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=de&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vidqt.com%2Fid%2FtzSCq3wtFlI%3Flang%3Den&sandbox=1
“One could speculate that Osho’s ridiculous comments about homosexuality being a social disease came after a failed homosexual relationship, and therefore best taken as Osho being a bit miffed and of course Vivek giving him a bit of stick about the whole sordid affair. Just another reminder that Osho was all too human.”
I don´t mind if my gods have feet of clay, I don´t mind posthumously their socks are pulled down to exhibit the clay feet, but there must be some substantial proof to validate this.
In case Veeresh was still alive, I would have passed on the above words of Lokesh for verification. Now, it seems very tasteless and highly egocentric nonsense. I think after the pat of his wife, Lokesh starts writing with foot in the mouth.
Aha, finally I caught someone with what is pretty obvious bait. That it is El Chudo is hardly surprising, another boring day in Freiburg perhaps.
Chud Meister declares, “In case Veeresh was still alive, I would have passed on the above words of Lokesh for verification.”
Come on, surely Chuddy could not in reality be so absolutely stupid as to believe my patent nonsense is anything other than that. Then again, when it comes to brains, Chuddy has…you guessed it…chud matter for brains.
My point is that for years I sat watching and listening to Osho heaping scorn and ridicule on the heads of Mother Theresa, Gandhi and the likes, and for the most part really enjoying it and laughing along with everyone else. I think it is okay to have a laugh on Osho, although I must admit in this case I was not at my most inspired, as if you could not guess.
Perhaps Madhu went for it also: “I am pissed! At how the anonymity of the net is misused for sick and sickening stuff!” I have no idea about who, what or where she is referring to – which, come to think of it, is hardly exceptional.
So, this is my response to ‘Lesbian Disillusioned with Osho’. Bit of a joke, whatever way you look at it. It has been interesting, in this case, to read some of the quotes on this matter, dragged up from the Osho archives. Lesson learned: think for yourself and on matters such as this Osho completely contradicted himself once again, and if you count on him for guidance on such matters you will not get very far.
Well, who cares, we are all running on the spot, the smarter ones sitting.
What on earth is Deathism?
McLoke, I had guessed you were chicklit.
Anyway, enjoyed it and agree with your post. X
(MOD: PARTLY EDITED)
Cool.
It was a popular word amongst those people around Leonard Orr and the rebirthers… I think it’s what you get when pushism comes to shoveism and you run out of breathism. But I could be wrongist.
Thanks for the update, Martyn.