Sometime before Osho became a “guru”, and sometime after he left his teaching post in philosophy in Jabalpur circa 1967, he was called an Acharya – a teacher.
Osho showed liitle interest other than being an itinerant teacher and meditation camp leader in India, and in particular to his own Jain community, but not exclusively.
However it happened that Osho was leading a camp in Pahalgam in Kashmir circa 1968/9, and happenstance had it that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was having a camp there at the same time.
A good choice of venue by both men. See
Somehow some of the Maharishi’s disciples must have felt something was missing from his teaching, and Osho was invited to invade their camp which he did. (My own view was that the repeating a mantra teaching was boring and limited, and this is confirmed in my mind by the fact that later the Maharishi started claiming that his meditation would lead to people being able to fly. I did see once some of them trying to fly, it was simply some people bouncing around on their bums.)
This unusual happenstance would have been the first time Osho saw westerners in some numbers around an Indian guru. At first, as one understands it, The Maharishi was there, but initially stayed in his bungalow. Later he emerged and there was an exchange. I have read some of the answers that Maharishi was giving, plain inferior rubbish compared with Osho’s answers.
I do believe it was after this event that Osho saw the possibility of reaching western young people, and given them a better teaching than the Maharishi. And also that he entertained the possibility of being a guru. One of Osho’s answers to the disciples of Maharishi I found particularly good as it was about methods of meditation:
Osho answered:
“:Really, there can be no method as far as meditation is concerned. Meditation is not a method. Through technique, through method, you cannot go beyond mind. When you leave all methods, all techniques, you transcend mind. So meditation itself is not a method. Truth cannot be achieved through method. Method is our own invention. We, who are ignorant, have achieved knowledge through methods constructed, created, projected, in our ignorance. Through method you can achieve a sort of self-hypnosis, a sort of auto-hypnosis. Any method, whatsoever it’s name, can only give you an illusory kind of peace. Through method you cannot go beyond yourself, because the method is yours, and it will strengthen you, your ego, your state of mind. If you leave all methods and all paths, and all ways, and remain in a total vacuum, doing nothing, thinking nothing—only then what we call meditation can be achieved. But if you are following some method. some path, then you are going nowhere because it cannot lead you anywhere. It can only lead you into an illusory state of auto-hypnosis…. The mind, through old habits and through old patterns, needs constant occupation. The mind needs constant occupation. If you give it some occupation, then it is all right. You may be doing “jap” (chanting a mantra); that too is an occupation. If you don’t do anything, and even for a single moment can remain without doing anything—not even a single thought, not even doing any mantra, if you can remain for a single moment alone, not doing anything, that very moment leads through into inner depths…. The person who thinks is a man of non-understanding. A person who knows doesn’t think. It is not a question of thinking. He sees, he is aware, but not in thinking. Thoughts are not opening, thoughts are closing; they close your mind. The more you are in a thinking mood, the more you are closed and isolated from the whole. If you are not thinking, if you just are, if you are in a state of being, then something comes”
Parmartha
I am rather taken with the notion of him ‘making it up as he goes along’. Resonates with me, in a way that the notion of some overarching rigid game plan, from which he was constantly deflected and ultimately failed in pulling of, doesn’t.
It`s a wonderful image of the delusions which afflict so-called spiritual people:
Sitting cross-legged on their arses, bumping up and down on a padded floor and calling it “flying”.
Priceless.
From the time immortal, every follower wants to prove His one is the best one.
Gosh, that’s SO deep – and most disturbing too, Shantam. How can anyone’s Saturday night run smoothly after such a revelation? How did it happen – suddenly, or in stages?
Ah, I know…
You’ve been meditating again, haven’t you, eh, you cheeky little so’n'so?!
Shantam, YOU want to prove you are the best follower.
It is not a question of best follower but honest follower.
If I am following a brothel keeper I won´t pretend I am following Tony Blair!
You are one of his most self-deceiving followers.
No, that’s not true.
You are your own most self-deceiving follower.
You guys might like to look at a documentary named “David wants to fly”, which was done by a german Doc Filmier from Berlin documenting some of the utter rubbish in the Maharishi business (including the “Celebrity part”) of some Hollywood style but also how the money making part goes. (globally )
I remember how I was shocked in the Q&A after the doc movie and also filled up with deep sadness.
Its an interesting documentary, those who know better to use search machines can find easily under that title and may be load that down for yourself for watching.
Sad I ´ve been about the quite well documented facts , that the numerous ways to mislead people , rob them their dignity have such an easy ´go´ in precarious times ; it felt just so stupid and same time simply know meanwhile , we are all not sitting on some ´ ivory tower´ and by that I mean that any Sangha has corruption fields (mentally, spiritually, emotionally up to other rape issues – ), not the least also ´ours´.
The young german filmmaker has done a good job as an investigative ´agent on the one hand as also somehow (like always had (has?) to become part of the ´crab, sometimes had been even dangerous – as spiritual violence in defense modus not rarely swifts over to physical violence or other harassments as one know well about the Scientology Church , which does not be documented either with its crimes.
Look for yourself if you like.
I feel pretty much exhausted tonight; the last weeks and the foregoing weeks in Munic City have been/ are very challenging on ANY level.
Love to listen to the rain outside just now
Madhu
“repeating a mantra teaching was boring and limited”
Agreed, and furthermore, sterile and stupid I would say, if that is all you’ve got to offer!
One could look upon Satyadeva’s and Arpana’s reactions to Shantam’s post, in the same light I believe – “bouncing around on their bums”, after years of getting nowhere!
Could it be that both of those two gentlemen were originally with the Maharishi, and are still ‘trying to fly’?
I did do TM for a year, which prepared the ground.
Without that I doubt I would have been open to Bhagwan (as he was known then).
Similar for me, Arps. When I heard the Beatles & co. were in India with Maharishi I knew I was going to try that technique, which I did a few months later, and enjoyed it until, about 10 months later, ‘life caught up with me’ and it simply didn’t work, until I’d cleared out a lot of garbage, thanks to dynamic etc.
But, 8 or 9 years later, returning to TM during a very low period, it was responsible for restoring my health and relative sanity, for which I remain very grateful indeed, despite its limitations. And, for that purpose, at that time, I found nothing in Sannyas of comparable worth.
So, despite all the nonsense, I can say Maharishi helped me, as he helped so many all over the world.
P.S:
And ‘Bhagwan’ ok’d TM for me, btw. Which indicates where I was at over there…Still, he knew it had value, for some people.
Mine is a similar story, but I came back to mantra chanting, rather than the TM mantra, which sorted something out for me, big time.
You are so far beyond anything Shantam will ever manage (not that that would be difficult), so why do you treat Shantam being put in his place as an attack upon you? Hmm!!!
Here’s an interesting tale about a yogi named ‘Tat Wale Baba’, who used to live over the river from the Maharishi’s place in Rishikesh:
http://www.amazingabilities.com/amaze6a.html
http://www.yogiphotos.com/chap5c.html
Thanks, SS, for the links, especially the first one.
Never heard of the guy before.
Thank you, SS.
TWB does have physical resemblance to Mahavtar Babaji.
Thanks for the compliment, Arpana.
I don’t take an attack on Shantam as an attack on me, as it happens. I’ll let you ponder on the reasons why a little longer, methinks!
Talk about elliptical bollocks…
How many times have you really pondered the question should I hum to clear my mind or just copulate my own beingness? But, instead just how many times have you pondered the question I’d like to be fucked senseless tonight/ by the end of my useful sex life by my favourite partner?
Just exactly what is this column’s flirting techniques for chrissake? Mooching up to some bird or bloke and pondering over the state of your no-mind and vulnerability to the internal truth of existence?
Or perhaps a ‘checking out the talent’ look, an embarassed smile, some phatic conversation about a commune you once lived in, some dance moves that bear no resemblance to actually dancing with a partner, a gentle brush of the hair, a silly mutual laugh over a few well chosen words, a welcome hug, an dropping vocal intonation, the smell of their skin on a so-long lingering kiss on the cheek, then a second date and thereafter a confessional revelation of the number of former partners one has had?
Or is Sinners New about to go into actual human relating as she is, without the long pre-amble into not actually being here / being fully, whilst of course declaring That to be the true condition above all others because actually we are all psychically wandering nutters?
Or is loving someone else, closely, in the human realm just not talkaboutable online because it is already very spiritual, thank you very much and plenty worth it already ?
Maybe, if you really feel that way, Prem Martyn / 20 September, 2015 at 10:29 am/ maybe you may better choose a dating website (on Skype) to get what you need, before bullying everybody with your unfulfilled desires you are clear enough with.
What your contribution to the topic has been I couldn´t figure out so far, but your raging contempt, when happening, was clear as it mostly is.
Madhu
It works for me when needed. Just like your madness works for you, Nuthu.
Nuthu went on research. Found the following quote:
Prem Martyn says, 2 April, 2013 at 12:57 am,
“I am providing a user-friendly guide of handy tips for getting through the day.
Tip 1: Switch on the morning kettle as a caveman just getting up.
Tip 2: Drink tea as a creationist enjoying having just awoken into life.
Tip 3: Face the rest of the day as an alzheimerist looking at life without a who or a why.”
Me- Madhu – had an early coffee break just now; listening to the toilet operator of some neighbour and heard the first bus traffic going by in the street.
Then Silence again.
Another nap will do – ´two nights in one´, like often.
Dreamless…hopefully….
Actually I’ve just calculated that the amount of time I have ever spent humming in private or collectively and it is probably less than or equal to the time I have spent decorating the house, which is also on my ‘to do’ but never gets done list.
The time I spend in aching or aspiring to states of no-mind is equal to the time I spend polishing the silver cutlery. I am however closely surrounded by women all day and have a long-term relationship identity made from a long-term relationship within or apart from which I have other relationships.
I do not intend to change my behaviours but to pursue the same. Online is a bit wankery for me. The Majorcan views are aesthetic in many, many ways, for which I am grateful for the local DNA, meeting houses and excuses to meet. Just like communes really, but a bit more spread out around town, the beaches and budding communities of nutters.
“What your contribution to the topic has been I couldn’t figure out so far”
Yes, Madhu, agreed – it would seem that the ‘PM’ is being a bit elliptical himself on this occasion.
Yet, to be sincere, it often proves difficult to decipher his posts, even under the best of circumstances.
Thus, I would speculate that he was at one time also part of the Maharishi camp following (like SD & Arps), given his fondness for practising long-winded repetition of a mantra focussing on whatever his bonzo wildly and savagely latches onto in moments of triggering/blind reaction, namely:
“Bollocks this, bollocks that!”
(Aka ‘The Bollocks to All You Effin’ Twats Mantra!’).
Nevertheless, on balance, he would seem to be an Osho sanNyasin first and foremost these days if one takes into account his regular contributory practice of gibberish, and moreover, cathartic techniques, which you have referred to in your own post.
I sometimes wonder if any meditation practice, whether it be the Maharishi’s, Osho’s or anybody else’s for that matter, has ever really been of any use to him.
Perhaps, some kind of Buddhist practice is required so that he may be able to go forward on his path e.g. SENDING LOVING KINDNESS TO ALL!
Ashok, I have never needed or looked for anything remotely resembling meditative practice as a way of life. Only did stuff in the Arshram when it seemed the thing to do. Now and for many years it’s been utterly, utterly pointless. I can only imagine some crisis of the life forcing one to do something like that. No judgement, but it’s not a way of life nor does it contain or retain any wonder, mystery invocation, interest, stillness, ahas, oohhoos or how’s your fathers.
I loved Osho for my own previously explained story. Take that as you wish. Or not. I have never ever recommended any therapy or Osho quotes for living to anyone. But I do read and share poems/ thoughts/life with people, students, lovers, etc.
I have and do have close intimates who know what a bastard I am and love it. Others, including ex’s hate me. Gibberish is brilliant, so is Mystic Rose. I love Father Ted.
P.S:
Maharishi, my arse.
PPS:
Some good ex-lady friends are wacky magicians of the inward practice lark and I’d do stuff with them/will do…but only cos I love them as friends /ex-lovers. Couldn’t care less otherwise.
Had a bloody good laugh in a group for three days just a few weeks ago. Won’t say where or what. Old souls, maybe old farts soon or already. xxx
At Father T. Paddy’s confessional box in Blarneyland, ‘Pop’ Martini, has just spilt his guts – again! Lying prostrate at the Venerable Father’s feet, he is putting the final touches to a lengthy confession…
PM: ….and please forgive me, Father, for oi ‘ave sinned, and oi don’t care!
Father T.P: Dontcha tink I didn’t know dat already, Smarty Pops! Oi can see da devil stickin’ out youse, plain enuff!
No meditashun practice, eh? Wot about all dat gibberish bollocks yez always gettin’ up to, den? Wot might dat be? – youse bin meditatin’ fo’ years!
So fo’ tryin’ ta pull da wool over me own holy eyes, fo’ ya penance say one ‘Our Shantam in Ashram Heaven’ (ongoing – takes about 15 to 20 yrs min.) and 2500 ‘Hail Mary Madhus’, and be off wid yez ‘n’ all dat gobshoite!
Yer roight there, Dougal!
Father Martyn`s at it again…
With him, it`s all feck, arse, girls, feck, arse, girls, feck, arse, girls….
Sannyasnews can delegate its editorial team to do some internet research to find out whether, like Osho, has Mahesh Yogi also left some inscription; epitaphs for his tombstone/headstone.
Is our O the first one and the only one to take this route of ‘Never Born, Never Died’?
As to the question of mantras, I’ve been reading Osho in this early booklet, ‘The Perfect Way’, where he advocates using any word you like to act as a mantra for meditation purposes.
Of course, at some point I expect he will contradict such an assertion, and pooh pooh the Marharishi method.
If there is any conclusion I draw from this it is that any method has its place and time and may serve some purpose.
I too did TM back in the early days, but as with many sitting meditations, found eventually that it was relaxing but didn’t really change much at all.
My over-stimulated mind needed greater surgery than trying (and failing) to ‘find’ silence, in order to be stilled.
Formal mediation was a good starting point to discover an awareness and appreciation of stillness; acting as an anchor and reminder.
Practical life, interactions with people and conquering my belief systems and dreams was the means to discovering a more lasting place, beyond the mind.
Pahalgam is where Jesus Christ was purportedly buried, according to the ‘Jesus went to India after escaping crucifixion’ story.
I imagine him getting off at the bus stand, proclaiming:
“I am going about my father’s business.”
“I am also doing father’s business and also uncles’ and cousins’, brothers’! You want cheap room? You want buy shawl? Carpet? I give you for less price than I buy! You want boom connection?”
Poor old JC, he survived the Jews but it was the Kashmiris that eventually did him in!
But what a beautiful place it was before it descended into civil war.
No wonder Osho liked hanging around up there.
Osho,Shiva, JC, Maharishi, Babaji…
Those enlightened guys know how to pick a cool ‘hood to hang out in….
To the mods…
I actually imagined JC proclaiming “I am going about my father’s business” and then being answered by a Kashmiri bus-stand hustler: “I am also doing…”, but you assumed I had made a mistake and then put it all into one paragraph.
See how easy it is for holy scriptures to get re-written by well-meaning but misguided disciples?!?!!
Let it be a lesson!
I sentence you to 2 hours of ‘flying’ and landing heavily on your undercarriage!
(MOD: And similarly easy for the original scriptures to be ambiguously recorded, sir! Anyway, mistake rectified now).
Here`s the “evidence”:
These effects were all confirmed both through the personal experiences of hundreds of thousands of TM practitioners, and through research of the highest quality (see TM research: reliable).
Health: Among long-term TM practitioners, there are least 50% to 70% fewer cases of hospitalisation in general, 55% less hospitalisations for cancer, and almost 90% less hospitalisations for cardiovascular diseases.
Chronic illnesses: Several chronic illnesses to which, after 2000 years of advancement in western medicine, still no answer exists, and for which medication at best can suppress the symptoms (at times with side effects worse than the symptoms), improve significantly or even disappear entirely with the frequent practice of the TM technique (see health).
Become younger: TM reverses the aging process. Short-term TM practitioners (3 years) on average are 5 years younger, whereas long-term practitioners (7 years) are on average 12 years younger (see become younger).
Addictions: TM is 2 to 10 times as effective as any other method ever researched against tobacco, alcohol or drug addictions.
Brain: The brain starts functioning holistically, and we even start developing more of our full brain potential, instead of the estimated 5% to 10% that most people use. This leads to an increase in intelligence and creativity, regardless of the age of the practitioners, something considered practically impossible.
********
I write largely about people who are, or were, deeply involved with the Movement: meditating for hours a day, practicing the TM-Sidhis, been on long “rounding” courses (with extra hours of meditation a day, for weeks or months at a stretch), becoming a TM Teacher or Governor. It’s a rare occurrence among the over 2,000 people that I’ve worked with in the last 13 years that someone practicing the original twice-a-day, 20-minutes-a-pop meditation has developed serious problems. (Although some have.)
For starters, let’s look at TM and the TM Org’s effects on the individual. A word about anecdotal reports: Most of these specific damages come from anecdotal reports in my counseling practice. There is some documentation in the “German Study” — although the “snowball sample” methodology used essentially renders those findings anecdotal, as well. To my knowledge, no researcher has ever used a truly random sample: Because the TM Org does not publish a list of its members, it isn’t possible for a researcher to poll them randomly. It’s my understanding that researchers approach the TM Movement for meditating participants. The Org is glad to oblige, offering meditators with only “good experiences” and positive results.
No one experiences all damages listed below. In fact, it’s not clear to me what percentage of TM meditators experience any of these effects. But having dealt with hundreds of cases myself — and compared notes with other critics and mental health providers — it’s clear to me that nearly everyone experiences at least one negative side effect. If Transcendental Meditation were a drug, it would long ago been taken off the market.
Physical Health Effects uncontrollable fatigue; insomnia and hypersomnia; stomach and bowel complaints; chronic neck and back pain (especially among “Yogic Flyers”); chronic headaches; difficulty with the menstrual cycle; involuntary body movements (twitching; spasms; head shaking; etc. in, and out, of meditation); serious health effects, including death, when TMers turn to Maharishi Ayurveda and ignore traditional medical treatment.
Emotional Health: states of anxiety or fear; obsessive ideas; pathological guilt; dissociation and pseudo-identity (similar to multiple personality disorder); suicidal ideation, gestures, or successful attempts; “nervous breakdowns;” psychosis; depression; avoidance; secondary narcissism; delusional thinking; auditory and visual hallucinations; divorce, frequently multiple.
Cognitive Health: difficulty with memory and/or concentration.
Perhaps the negative affects of TM or any religious/spiritual teaching are symptomatic of types of individuals attracted to them in the first place?
After all, it is these ‘types’ who, for one reason or another, aren’t happy with the status quo of family life, their jobs, and the isolation or alienation we feel as outsiders to the norm?
I’ve certainly seen some damaged people attracted to Sannyas and other so-called spiritual groups I’ve been involved in.
I certainly see anyone who believed in yogic flying as being already pretty out of touch with reality.
What was amazing about Sannyas was the very diverse range of people attracted to Osho and his writings. Some were, or are, very intelligent, but there were others very lost and confused.
And I definitely saw individuals ‘addicted’ to the dream of stillness amongst us, and in other groups I was involved with.
They had what I called ‘meditationitis’, a fixation on realising some misguided notion of stillness. Buddhists in particualr seem to suffer from it, badly.
I have a long-standing friend who’s practised TM for years and he has a groundedness about him, a steadiness; alternatively, I know another guy who’s done TM for years and he’s an incoherent dingbat.
Is there a cause-and-effect relationship at work? I have no idea.
Cause and effect generally needs narrative attached.
People have so many stories of how practices/religions/gurus/therapies “saved their life”, or even how getting away from them “saved their life”, but very few of these stories, if any, pack the clear consensus punch of them, say, being literally pulled out of a burning car just before it explodes.
Narratives are potentially infinitely variable, but we tend to stick to one.
To be stuck believing only one narrative instead of being able to entertain multiple possibilities is probably soul-poverty.
It`s like banging yourself up in a prison of psychic penury.
That is so poetic, lyric; however, methinks you became overcome by the verbosity of your own exuberance at the end.
Point taken.
Thinking is like drinking.
The trick is knowing when to stop!
That reads as if it was written by someone who hasn’t faced a prolonged life crisis where there was seemingly no way out. Or who’s forgotten what it was like (easily done, when things have been going ok for a longish time).
Multiple possibilities, many alternative narratives…Sure, on an intellectual level. Harsh reality invariably indicates otherwise.
I see what you mean, yet changing the narrative is not ‘just intellectual’ but also vital.
I am guessing that somewhere when you moved from “no way out” of “harsh reality” to “possibility of out”, it involved the appearance of an “alternative narrative” and “possibility” …
Like an open road of possibility appearing in a dead end alley…
Sometimes “it saved my life” is an accurate depiction, as in cases of potential suicide or substance abuse or other dangerous behaviour, but I notice it has become a stock testimonial and cliché for just about any activity you can think of.
Well, yes, Frank, in the sense that emerging from the ‘Darkness’ one, er, ‘sees the Light’, a significant aspect of which is that appreciation grows for things that ‘normally’ most tend to take for granted, eg sleeping ok, being healthy, relatively free of anxiety, fear and other previously tortuous negative emotions. That, plus significantly expanded possibilities, as you say.
The main inner theme is relief and gratitude for a sort of ‘rebirth’, which is like being “saved”, actually; saved from a sort of living death, reborn into life. Might sound somewhat melodramatic but that’s how it has been, more than once.
Now that’s just about ‘re-entry’ into so-called ‘normality’, nothing necessarily ‘spiritual’ – apart, of course, from the fact that dissolving problems and so consciously ‘feeling (the) good’ is surely a large part of ‘what It’s all about’. I think I might agree with the Dalai Lama when he said the greatest joy in life is “overcoming difficulties” (that and making a decent profit from the bookies – same principle really, of course…).
As it happens, I`m booked onto Oprah`s show next month.
I will be talking about how I tried everything: therapy, drugs, tantra, yoga, football hooliganism, gurus, chanting, meditation, but none of it really worked and how it was SannyasNews that finally saved my life.
What is the date, Frank?
Wow, you’ve done it all, Frank. Congratulations. And well done for finally finding your niche, your ‘spiritual home’ at last.
I’ve tried a few of them “narratives”, but only really fancied a couple of ‘em. Guess which one did the trick….
Football hooliganism?
It is a bona fide path.
Did you know that the recently mentioned Dalai Lama is a Bradford City director and huge fan?
My mate Dave saw him at a game, with a load of other portly shaven-headed blokes dressed in maroon and orange mindlessly chanting:
“Om mani padme hum…
Om mani padme hum…
You`re gonna get your fuckin` `eads kicked in!”
Bad karma if you`re from Leeds, tho`.
I heard that Arsenal were a feared force once, in the days when the self-confessed “lifelong Arsenal fan” and originator of the “Football, Not Psychiatry” movement, Michael Barnett*, used to do his “energy work” on the North Bank of a Saturday.
*(MOD: Michael Barnett, aka Swami Somendra)
.
All of which takes no account of what people brought to TM, how they were, psycho-physically. I imagine there was a fairly large proportion of people with significant mental/emotional and physical difficulties, who might well have needed far more than just 2 15 or 20 minute sessions a day of deep relaxation, and who didn’t manage to find effective help to complement their TM practice (and vice versa). Perhaps especially before ‘humanistic therapy’ etc. became mainstream.
Not to mention any resistance to change, which can prolong problematic conditions or even make them worse.
Satyedeva,
As a part-time young pastor for the Metropolitan Police in the early 1980s I remember seeing a fair bit of you on the cctv at various ‘football events’.
Frank, Satydeva and the rest of the hardcore ‘Sunny’s’ – isn’t that what you called yourself?
You lot gave us boys in blue a lot of work, but I didn’t see you working.
Simond, Frank…
It’s a fair cop. I threw me ‘Darshan Diary’ at the tv screen one night when my lot let in a silly goal…the screen exploded, so did my head – bingo!
Religion
Here is Jyoti’s account of that meeting. Thank God for her little cassette recorder!
http://www.oshoworld.com/tales/51.asp
“Maharishi Mahesh Yogi looks very disturbed. Osho can destroy his whole business”
If the disciples of Maharishi were arguing against Osho and supporting Maharishi as reported, then how was M`s business going to be destroyed?
Sounds like Jyoti`s fantasy.
Thinking of destroying someone’s (much bigger than yours) business whom you`ve only just met sounds a tad aggressive…
Playground stuff really
“My dad`s the heavyweight champion of the world….”
Here`s another account of the meeting:
http://o-meditation.com/osho/osho-meets-with-followers-of-maharishi-mahesh-yogi/
I scanned this dialogue between questioner and Osho, and then read more carefully the part where Maharishi speaks with Osho.
Fascinating stuff, in its way.
Osho is so transparent, clear in his analysis, whilst the Marharishi makes almost no sense at all.
Is it that I am so used to Osho’s style, that I understand? And that Maharishi’s language is less familiar? So I find it more difficult?
I conclude that it is simply that one knows what he’s talking about and the other doesn’t. One lives with no doubt and expresses his truth simply, and the other doesn’t.
Language used correctly should resonate with the truth, it shouldn’t be confusing…Unless you’re Gurdjieff – he doesn’t obey any rules at all!
Thank you, SS.
Oddly enough, only a couple of days before this thread came up, I was having a long conversation with a friend who was a TM teacher for donkeys years. Reading this thread, I realised a distant echo between our conversation and that one 50 years ago.
My friend thinks I am too negative, not having a clear enough system and method – just being and witness – it sounds not nearly spiritual enough for him, whereas I think he is just self-hypnotised or even brainwashed in his ideas of continually refining himself and endlessly moving closer to his `true self` through his efforts.
Thank bog I have still got an ego so as to know that I know better than him!
You never strike me as particularly ego-bound.
Not like the masters of the Universe who post here.
Mind blowingly bumptious at times, but definitely not ego-bound particularly.
Don’t we all have an ego, Arpana?
Of course, what the ego actually is and its purpose is a question that many are very confused about.
Spirtual types may be looking to get rid of theirs and the harder they try, the harder they seem to fall.
I’ve got a big fat ego, always on the lookout for itself, but I don’t deny it, I’m not afraid of it. It acts in my very best interests, keeps me alive, and does all it’s supposed to do.
Yes, but some people never drop out of it (I don’t mean you, by the way).
There is the egotism of thinking you are above all that, and it’s in everyone else; or fighting one’s own ego, treating it like a form of leprosy and various shades in between.
I came to Sannyas with the idea that to think or say a good word about myself was to be egotistical, but that self-negation and denigration was not, so I had a massive negative ego.
I recognise well the negative ego, as you call it.
I suffered as many older sanyassins seemed to; with an unloving childhood, with parents incapable of expressing much affection or support.
As a result, I created a negative view of my self-identity or ego.
In order to deal with this, I’ve had to examine this self-identify, and see the falseness of it. I’ve had to see it was partly self-imposed, but also that I now no longer need it, just as I now no longer need a positive self-identify or ego.
Any identity with the ego/self is ultimately false, be it positive or negative. And as I’m sure you know, the process was a difficult and painful process.
But as a result I feel deeply free of any self-identification, and free, therefore, to acknowledge where the ego is ‘required’.
Well, whatsoever the different teaching styles between Osho and Maharishi, they ended up looking pretty similar, both sporting the classic Indian enlightened “guru” style dome and beard:
Good point.
They were both trying to invoke the same archaic authorisation with their appearance.
Even my mum got the message: she once referred to Bhagwan as “that Indian bloke who looks a bit like God.”
Would they have got so many followers if they had been clean-shaven with a comb-over and wearing tank tops and leisure suits?
I seriously doubt it.
Absolutely. Osho has regularly said he is not here to live up to our expectations, but this is one of the ways, up to a point, he does.
Bait. Catch fish. Hmm!!
Thanks for your donated creative link, Swamishanti, and then especially for your link to the link.
Got me a lot more balanced to let it be and let it pass what´s happening here just now. (Ended up so far with a remarkable ´Inner´-view (2001) with late George Harrison – and in Peace).
Madhu
What kind of tombstone Maharishi has left for his ashes?
I have heard that this epitaph is carved into the finest Italian marble:
“There was a man called the Maharishi
Who started to sell mantras very briskly
He went off the straight and narrow
When he tired to grope Mia Farrow
And how he got away with it all is a mystery.”
It is true, Frank boy, I have seen it and this guru was definitely a groper, even half-dead he was still trying…
To compare Osho with him…seriously….
Maharishi/Osho:
Two Indians who wanted to win gold medal for their motherland in the category: religion and spirituality.
Maharishi/Osho:
If they were born in America they would have developed google/facebook.
“Later he emerged and there was an exchange. I have read some of the answers that Maharishi was giving, plain inferior rubbish compared with Osho’s answers.”
My guru is better than your guru. What is the need to compare and why compare Osho to someone who is obviously a non-runner in the guru stakes? Nowhere have I seen more evidence of this absurd seeker characteristic than during my time with Poonjaji in Lucknow. One sannyasin bufoon actually addressed Poonjaji with his Osho comparisons. It was ridiculous and Poonjaji said as much. I suspect the sannyasin guy in question will spend a lifetime coming back to the bollocking he received at an Advaita master’s feet.
I have one friend who has practiced TM for 30 years. He is a very relaxed, energetic, intelligent, funny and well-balanced man and the girls just love him. I spent some intense times with him and I was left with a newfound respect for his TM practice although I have never been attracted to it myself. Different strokes for…
Round about the time that this article relates to, Osho was often to be seen with one or two disciples in Dipte’s shake bar in Bombay’s Colaba district. I have heard it from two reliable sources that Osho was asking dharma bums to bring him western disciples and in return he would make them rich for doing so. Osho may well have felt inspired by the Maharishi’s commercial success.
Today the TM corporation is worth an estimated 3:5 billion. So, while the Maharishi may have been kind of flakey on the spiritual level there were no flies on him when it came to marketing and making money. So if a comparison were drawn on that level Osho would come out looking like a poor relative.
It still surprises me that certain sannyasins cannot accept that Osho was business-minded. He was. In a way, that was part of his teaching; it is okay to make money out of commercialized supposed spirituality.
Today, I have mixed feelings about it. According to some respected gurus the moment money enters the spiritual game everything changes for the worse and goes downhill all the way to the bottom, because commerce and spirituality just do not work well together. I understand what they mean.
It sounds a bit like `open mic` night at your local where two longhair beardo rockers end up tussling for the mic.
It might not always be lonely at the top, but if you are a famous international guru it most certainly is. One would imagine that the enlightened ones would like to get together for a chin wag, cup of tea, listen to the eternal om, or maybe watch a Bollywood movie together. It rarely happens. Why? Because of the disciples watching their master’s every move and noting down every word said, like a presidential debate.
In Osho’s case, no master would have come visit, even if he sent over a stretch Roller round to their ashram to pick them up, because he would have definitely slagged them off at one point or another in the past.
Poor Osho, all alone in the twilight zone with only silence for company. Kind of like the beginning of the universe. God would not have made the creation had he been content with eternal silence. Naw, much better to have a few pals round, get a little high, turn up the music and have a wee shindig.
You are clearly well and truly on the highway to Hell, my son.
Rev!
Sprinkle him with holy water and read him the last rites….
The Rev notes, that all masters slag each other off to some degree or another, because each thinks ‘his’ way is the best.
Of course they occasionally reference that their competitor may be “enlightened”, but usually conclude they are more enlightened than them.
Was Osho lonely ‘at the top’?
He certainly enjoyed the trappings of power, nice clothes, watches, the best bathrooms outside Hollywood, and companions of one sort or another.
Why not? He was the boss. Bosses always like to live well, and why not? He’d put his hard graft into all he’d done. He worked hard, didn’t he?
Anyone who thinks he should live like an ascetic wasn’t getting his message…The message was live well, enjoy.
He seemed to do just that.
Good on him.
“The Rev notes, that all masters slag each other off to some degree or another, because each thinks ‘his’ way is the best.” (Simond)
I´d rather say, Simond, they go with the flow.
The thinking and rating behaviour, comparing etc., belongs, I feel, to another realm, what´s more than less (unfortunately) – ours.
The temptation to just deny that you just don´t know is so big, it seems. That´s why ´reliable sources´ for rumours are rarely named – it´s the same energy as with a bunch of women whispering the newest rumors while meeting when ´washing the laundry´ (tea party meetings as well). Best intrigues are invented there, while men prefer the pub to do the same, as it is well known too.
Not to speak of megalomaniac chatting about stuff we don´t really know anything about personally, like the meeting of two Masters meeting, which the thread issue topic is about.
I did like Swamishanti´s graphic compilation best and his then added link to that link even better, as it broadened my view on the quite different approaches.
Can also be just enjoyed as a ´Satyricon´.
Could also – other than Lokesh – relate gratefully to Dharm Jyoti´s little story without naming her a kind of ´groupie’, maybe because I have never been attracted to a mantra practice.
Madhu
Also, we’re told that masters deliberately criticise each other as a way of trying to ensure they attract the particular segment of humanity that can benefit from their teaching, to sort of ‘filter’ their potential clientele.
So it’s worth remembering that any single master can’t necessarily help everyone; likewise that each has his/her place and particular role in the ‘big picture’.
Madhu says:
“The thinking and rating behaviour, comparing etc., belongs, I feel, to another realm, what´s more than less (unfortunately) – ours.”
In the putting down of `our` thinking in favour of that of `the masters`,a question arises:
If you are really one of ‘us’, who is stuck in this unfortunate false state of “rating”? By what faculty or criterion could you possibly know what you are saying to be true?
“If you are really one of “us”, who is stuck in this unfortunate false state of `rating`?” (Frank)
Don’t you be worried, Frank; yes, I am! – is my answer.
Point is, being sometimes so repelled that responses come up (most of them, by the way, ending in a garbage section of my most private diary lines), some yet make the way into the Chat.
In one of these very last nights, sleepless in Munich, I looked for the song ‘You´re So Vain’ and listened to that in the city silent night. Day after, words came (into private diary) and another day after, other words came, and that was what I posted then.
Content? With my answer?
Sincerely,
Madhu
P.S:
Maybe ridiculously committed to communing on a virtual plane with appearing so-called ´others’, maybe Gamers…´my´ expression of a living organism I cannot name…calling that ´me´ sometimes – or better and unfortunately, most of the time.
Madhu,
There was a bit of a mis-print there.
My question was actually:
“In the putting down of `our` thinking in favour of that of `the masters`, a question arises:
If you are really one of ‘us’, who is stuck in this unfortunate false state of “rating”, then by what faculty or criterion could you possibly know what you are saying to be true?”
Is this the “added link” that you mean`t, Madhu?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkbPBcC8r1c
“They do though, don`t they? Don`t they though.”
Yes, I did, Swamishanti, and I did happily go on a further surf in that direction then for a little while; so thank you again.
Madhu
P.S;
river of Life today quite somewhere else at my place…cold outside…brrrrr…
you seem to live at a warm place?
in Nature?
Yes, living in Engerland at the moment, Madhu, very close to Nature…
and it is warm enough for now.
“All masters slag each other off to some degree or another, because each thinks ‘his’ way is the best.”
That is untrue. Although it was certainly true of Osho.
“In Osho’s case, no master would have come visit”
Were any other masters/teachers/gurus ever given the chance?
So true !
Not true, Kavita,
Remembering Osho in the late 80s, flowering that old (late) ZEN mistress of Japan, with rose petals in abundance, showing more than respect and acknowledgement.
And I don´t know more to claim just now in the visible, but found in listening many hints of His acknowledging other expressions of Presence.
Madhu
Thank you, Madhu. Later, I too remembered that.
PS : One Japanese seeress did visit…
http://www.oshonews.com/tag/tamo-san/
Well, yes – an elderly, very likeable Japanese lady who, it seems, could not speak English! Furthermore, it doesn’t appear as if she and Osho, at some point, debated some weighty spiritual/philosophical issue with the bulk of the sanNyasin masses present, does it? Hardly constituted a major threat to the regime, did she? In fact, Osho probably scored a lot of PR points with his own following by inviting her in.
I guess that Osho and those around him were much too ‘savvy’ as marketeers and politicians to have invited in serious competition!
But why expect or even wish for any such inter-master dialogues? Isn’t any single master’s teaching enough unto itself for the people it’s meant for?
And it’s likely these individuals so rarely bother to meet because they’re too busy ‘mastering’ (if they’re lucky) their own ‘flocks’ – let alone wanting to risk confusing (or even ‘prejudicing’) their own and others’ clientele even more.
Very interesting, SD! What you say, to my mind, brings up the questions of:
What were the Maharishi’s motives when he invited Osho in then?
P’haps, very innocent and inexperienced in the ways of marketing, politics, and PR, he didn’t realise what was coming his way?
What were Osho’s motives? Shouldn’t he have been concentrating on tending to his own ‘flock’? Or was he unable to resist the temptation of being invited in by the competition to give a sales pitch on their own patch?
Well, yes, maybe Maharishi was being naïve (I don’t rate him as a ‘real’ master anyway, btw), and Osho, knowing this, simply fancied his chances among the westerners?
He definitely “fancied his chances”.
When he watched ‘Woodstock:The Movie’ and reportedly declared “these are my people” as he watched the sea of muddy longhairs, he will also have seen Swami Satchitananda coming onto the stage, all beard and robes, to rapturous applause and announcing the importance of the USA in world spirituality.
He must have thought.
“I can do that, and better than those guys”
and so it went…
Btw, to take the stage as a support act in front of a rival’s followers as in this Pahalgam story takes some bottle too, I would say, as those spiritual type chaps are liable to kick off when someone doesn`t go along with their version of reality!
So, would that mean in your opinion, that a ‘real’ master would not exhibit traits such as naivety?
It might be useful, SD, to define here what you mean exactly by a ‘real’ master.
Bearing in mind, of course, that what I have just asked you may constitute a long and arduous task, p’haps if you feel so inclined, you could just say a few things about why you think Osho is a ‘real’ master, and the Maharishi isn’t.
Having met Swami Satchitananda in London back in the seventies, while helping run a stand presenting Osho, I reckon Frank is correct in assuming Osho might have thought he could do a better job than Swami Satchitananda. He was not a particularly impressive guru, even though Swami Satchitananda looked the part.
The whole idea of `real` masters versus `not real` masters is fascinating.
Every single disciple I have ever met has ideas of real and false masters and who they think they are.
`Master` is clearly not a rank in the normal sense.
Can you have an unreal king or an unreal sub-post master?
You can have an impostor in these cases but the difference is: who authorises the whole show?
The possibility of the `unreal` master shows the tenuousness of the construction of masters per se.
It even undermines the solidity of language and meaning altogether.
Where can other humans be `real` or `unreal` except in your own imagination?.
The only way to deal with the real/unreal dichotomy is with humour. In the old sense of balancing as well as comic. Otherwise the contradiction can never be solved, it`s always an irritant.
I bet everyone here has changed their ideas over who is a true and a false master over time?
To believe literally, objectively, in the duality of true and false masters might be to be stuck in the dualistic thinking that masters are trying to get you beyond.
Strikes me that Osho, with all his shenanigans, did a pretty good job of rolling the true and false all into one for a turbo-charged jolt to literal thinking.
When you literalise the object, you literalise the observer – that`s our old friend/enemy the ego, who is like a guy trying to put up a signpost on quicksand.
First thought is that perhaps you over-complicate this, Frank. To start, I guess ‘true’, or ‘great’, meaning ‘of the highest quality’ would be a better term than ‘real’. It’s rather like comparing artists, eg writers or composers, where one might say that Shakespeare or Beethoven were ‘true’ or ‘great’ exponents of their calling, while, say, Jeffrey Archer (couldn’t think of any similar non-entity yet successful dramatists although there must be plenty) or Andrew Lloyd Webber are very much lesser lights (although enjoyed by many, of course).
Yes, it’s a subjective thing, hence all the arguments between the various camps of afficianadios, but I think that, as in literature or music there are also one or two more objective criteria, the first that comes to mind being that a ‘true’ master doesn’t give consolations, he tells it how it is in this life, whereas a ‘less true’ or ‘false’ master always makes it all appear easy, painless, eg just a simple matter of two 15 minutes sessions of deep relaxation (call it ‘meditation’ so that people’s spiritual egos are neatly boosted) every day (preferably before meals).
No time for any more profound reflections just now, my own meditation is calling me, it never lets me off its unrelenting hook, y’know….
SD,
How are your “objective criteria” different from just your opinion, if the presence of those “objective criteria” are not agreed upon by others?
But, although yes, as I said, it’s ultimately a subjective thing, depending upon the experience (and self-honesty) of the individual, just as there are also agreed objective criteria for literary and musical appreciation there are similar for spiritual teachers, one of which I’ve already cited.
Can’t think of any more…but I’m ‘working’ on it…Time for more meditation, I reckon….
SD,
What you are saying is that consensus reality
is objective reality.
Not necessarily, Frank.
I’m saying that both subjective and certain ‘consensus’ responses (including those gleaned from masters themselves – in whatever field) have their place when approaching such assessments – until we are (please excuse the next phrase) ‘beyond mind’. Really, this is just ‘common sense’ – isn’t it?
The chap in question.
Lokesh seems to have fascination for Indian gurus of various arts.
Surely, in this game, we Indians are light years ahead from others.
P.S:
Mouji is catching fast.
Maybe because of the fact he is few shades more dark than us.
Perfectly correct Shantambhai!
Lokesh is ‘en`light`ened’ in entirely the wrong sense of the word.
He should certainly avail himself of a tin of boot-polish and black up a bit if he is to have any hope of getting any sexy yoga chicks in their Om-design leotards hurling themselves at his feet (or other vital organs).
What about you, Shantam? After all those years in Deutschland your skin must be fading a bit? I bet you that by now you are no browner than the average Kraut on holiday in Ibiza?
You might have to visit a solarium to top up your siddhis.
Realistically tho`, your chances of ever becoming a guru and getting your hands on any white meat other than Lidls` pre-packed chicken slices must be about on the same level as anyone buying a VW diesel!
No,it`s not “common sense” at all.
How is a judgment whether a `master` is `real` or not `common sense`?
“Common sense” says that Jesus and Mohammed are the greatest masters.
I’m saying that it’s a matter of using one’s own powers of discrimination, based on experience and whatever other relevant faculties one has, plus information from whoever one trusts as an ‘authority’. Which means, of course, as you say, that ‘mistakes can happen’ – and how!
I agree that it’s basically down to individual intelligence, although that in itself is, hopefully, enhanced by contact with a master or any other helpful teacher or teaching. In which case, why not take on board what that teacher or teaching has to say about such matters? That’s what I’m getting at by calling it ‘common sense’.
Similar (but also very different to) evaluating works of art.
That`s the whole point!
You can`t say that someone is a real/true master or a not-real/true master in the same way as you can`t objectively state that something is real/true art or not real/true art.
There is just good art and bad art in your own personal valuation and taste.
Objectivity doesn`t come into it. Ever.
If someone says it does, what they are really trying to do objectify, solidify and validate their own position so as to give it extra validity.
Your logic might appear to be on the right lines – but I say there can be something else operating within us, something that informs us, apparently ‘instinctively’, a feeling for authenticity, whether of art or spirituality, or whatever, that some have called ‘the ring of truth’, an inner certainty that, yes, this is ‘real’ (and conversely, this is ‘less real’, ‘false’).
We all know this in our own experience, don’t we, operating at various levels, guiding us (if we’re so inclined) towards ‘the good’, the ‘true’, the ‘authentic’, ie towards ‘the real’?
Perhaps that’s simply – and maybe, as I first intimated in this brief discussion, it really is in fact a simple matter, despite there being every chance of ‘mistakes’ along the way – because we are ultimately made of the same stuff?
satyadeva says:@ 26 September, 2015 at 12:51 am
Sensibility.
I agree with you.
An art exhibition a few years ago.
Everything in that exhibition was painted from photographs, were copies of photographs,
and were not in my view particularly substantial,
and then I noticed one tiny little piece,
which once seen stood out,
which made everything else look amateurish.
The name tag had disappeared , and I then discovered, from the catalogue,
the piece was made by a guy I know, who in my view does quietly terrific work,
everything he does has substance.
However, has to be said, someone who watches ‘Coronation Street’ and thinks the programme is a documentary would probably not agree with me.
That`s right.
The `realness` of the master is probably a reflection of the “realness” of our own `tao`, path or guiding spirit on the principle succinctly expressed by Lokesh`s guru, Jimmy Somerville:
“You make me feel mighty real”.
Agreed – not forgetting a few guidelines from various masters themselves, eg beware of anyone peddling ‘consolations’. Still can’t think of any others – maybe there aren’t any?!!
Osho’s PR team was definitely savvy but they were totally in awe of Him to consider any kind of competition from any other Master .
Actually, as I see it now, the real problem is never between Masters, it’s between their disciples!
“Actually, as I see it now, the real problem is never between Masters, it’s between their disciples!”
Kavita,
When a juicy piece of ´truths´ comes along, like this one offered by you, ma heart starts bumping a little bit faster than usual.
Like now!
And even then, when this piece belongs to the inconvenient ones….
Madhu
Firstly, Madhu, I don’t find it juicy, it’s only plainly a truth to me. Well, if you consider it juicy, enjoy the juice.
“I didn´t and I don´t ´consider´ this” – Kavita, sorry that ´juicy´ is so misunaderstandable.
Fact is that you did and do really hit a point, like golfers catching the goal with one stroke.
And sometimes when that happens, I just know it and my heart (also physically) answered (is answering).
Otherwise, what you mentioned, expressed essentially, is really worth a thread-topic here, isn´t it?
Madhu
P.S:
Just look how it goes on and on and on…such a pity.
Madhu, I don’t know what to say to you; maybe enjoy is the only word I can come up with now!
“but they were totally in awe of him”
Was that healthy?
I do not know that; in any case, I can’t answer that for them.
I think it will be more humane to treat spiritual gurus of our age as entrepreneurs. Teachers, priests and facilitators as sale distributors.
Their ashrams as the factories and showrooms, their prayer and meditation techniques as products.
I don´t think this sector of life needs any kind of taxation immunity.
The successor of the gurus are like CEOs and poor disciples deserve the status of shareholders.
Are not Maharishi/Osho brands protected by trade marks?
@Frank
“takes some bottle too”
Certainly looks that way, doesn’t it? Osho waltzing in and playing the polemical ‘cat amongst the pigeons’, right in the heart of the competition’s camp! A risky venture in many ways.
In general, he didn’t seem to lack courage, nor confidence, did he?
Perhaps, it could be as you said, Frank, that ‘it took some bottle’, or maybe something similar?
Is there some site of Mahesh Yogi´s followers where they have ever discussed Osho?
After Osho/Maharishi article, the next deserving article must discuss the role of their respective work and organisations post-founders’ demise.
“After Osho/Maharishi article, the next deserving article must discuss the role of their respective work and organisations post-founders’ demise.”
That`s gonna sounds like an epic rap battle…
Tupak Chopra versus J-Zee Jayesh…
But wait, here comes 50 Paisa…
from the Jullundur `hood…
let that flow flow
gibberish from the village
idiot of guru cabbage
get some more mileage
from those that mismanage
your relig got irreversible damage
where you once ravaged cleavage
now your package got shrinkage
cos frottage and misusage did the damage
an` you got no one to blame in yo dotage…
so remember the old adage…
You gotta get a life unto yo`self
or die tryin`….
Frank boy, sometimes I feel like flicking your ears but have to give up because you really make me laugh. This post is hilarious…x
Osho slags off the Maharishi a bit here:
“I was talking about my visits to school. Yes, I call them visits because they were certainly not attendance. I was only there to create some mischief. In a strange way I have always loved to be involved in some mischievous act. Perhaps it was the beginning of how I was to be for my whole life.
I have never taken anything seriously. I cannot, even now. Even at my own death I will, if allowed, still have a good laugh. But in India for the last twenty-five years I have had to play the role of a serious man. It has been my most difficult role, and the longest drawn. But I did it in such a way that although I have remained serious, I have never allowed anybody around me to be serious. That has kept me above water, otherwise those serious people are far more poisonous than snakes.
You can catch snakes, but serious people catch you. You have to run away from them as fast as possible. But I am fortunate that no serious person will even try to approach me. I quickly made myself notorious enough, and it all began when I was not even thinking where it was going to land me.
Whenever they saw me coming, everybody was alerted, as if I was going to create some danger. At least to them it must have looked dangerous. For me it was just fun – and that word summarizes my whole life.
For example, another incident from my primary school. I must have been in the last class, the fourth.
They never failed me, for the simple reason that no teacher wanted me in his class again. Naturally, the only way to get rid of me was to pass me on to somebody else. At least for one whole year let him have the trouble too. That’s how they called me, “the trouble.” On my part I could not see what trouble I created for anybody.
I was going to give you an example. The station was two miles from my town and divides it from another small village called Cheechli, six miles away.
By the way, Cheechli was the birthplace of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. He never mentions it. There are reasons why he does not mention where he was born, because he belongs to the sudra class in India. Just to mention that you come from a certain village, certain caste, or profession – and Indians are very uncultured about that. They may just stop you on the road and ask you, “What is your caste?” Nobody thinks that this is an interference.
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was born on the other side of the station, but because he is a sudra, he can neither mention the village – because it is a village of only sudras, the lowest caste in the Indian hierarchy – nor can he use his surname. That too will immediately reveal who he is.
His full name is Mahesh Kumar Shrivastava, but “Shrivastava” would put a stop to all his pretensions, at least in India, and that would affect others too. He is not an initiated sannyasin in any of the old orders, because again, there are only ten sannyasin orders in India. I have been trying to destroy them, that is why they are all angry with me.
These orders are again castes, but of sannyasins. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi cannot be a sannyasin because no sudra can become an initiate. That’s why he does not write “Swami” before his name. He cannot, nobody has given him that name. He does not write behind his name, as Hindu sannyasins do, Bharti, Saraswati, Giri et cetera; they have their ten names.
He has created his own name – “Yogi.” It does not mean anything. Anybody trying to stand on his head, and of course falling again and again, can call himself a yogi, there is no restriction on it.
A sudra can be a yogi, and the name Maharishi is something to replace “Swami,” because in India things are such that if the name “Swami” is missing, then people would suspect something is wrong.
You have to put something else there just to cover up the gap.
He invented “Maharishi.” He is not even a rishi; rishi means “seer,” and maharishi means “great seer.”
He can’t even see beyond his nose. All he can do when you ask him relevant questions is giggle.
In fact, I will call him “Swami Gigglananda,” that will fit him perfectly. That giggling is not something respectable, it is really a strategy to avoid questions. He cannot answer any question.
I have met him, just by chance, and in a strange place – Pahalgam. He was leading a meditation camp there, and so was I. Naturally my people and his were meeting each other. They first tried to bring him to my camp, but he made so many excuses: that he had not time, he wanted to but it would not be possible.
But he said, “One thing can be done: you can bring Bhagwan here so that my time and my scheduled work is not disturbed. He can speak with me from my stage.” And they agreed.
When they told me I said, “This is stupid of you; now I will be in unnecessary trouble. I will be in front of his crowd. I don’t have to worry about the questions; the only problem is that it will not be right for the guest to hit his host, especially before his own crowd. And once I see him I cannot refrain from hitting him; any decision I make not to hit him will be gone.”
But they said, “We have promised.”
I said, “Okay. I’m not bothered, and I am ready to come.” It was not very far, just a two-minutes’ walk away. You just had to get in the car, and then get out again, that was the distance. So I said, “Okay, I will come.”
I went there, and as I had expected he was not there. But I don’t care about anything; I started the camp – and it was his camp! He was not there, he was just trying to avoid me as much as he could.
Somebody must have told him because he was staying in the hotel just nearby. He must have heard what I was saying from his room. I started hitting him hard, because when I saw that he was not there, I could hit him as much as I wanted to, and enjoy doing it. Perhaps I hit him too hard and he could not stay away. He came out giggling.
I said, “Stop giggling! That is okay on American television, it won’t do here with me!” And his smile disappeared. I have never seen such anger. It was as if that giggling was a curtain, hiding behind it all that was not supposed to be there.
Naturally it was too much for him, and he said, “I have other things to do, please excuse me.”
I said, “There is no need. As far as I am concerned you never came here. You came for the wrong reasons, and I don’t come into it at all. But remember, I have got plenty of time.”
Then I really hit him because I knew he had gone back into his hotel room. I could even see his face watching from the window. I even told his people: “Look! This man says he has much work to do. Is this his work? Watching somebody else work from his window. He should at least hide himself, just as he hides behind his giggle.”
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is the most cunning of all the so-called spiritual gurus. But cunningness succeeds; nothing succeeds like cunningness. If you fail, it simply means you have come across somebody who is more cunning than you – but cunningness still succeeds.”
Osho – ‘Glimpses of a Golden Childhood’
Uh oh! Slagging off the competition!
For some years I worked in S&M (Sales &,Marketing), and we were always told to never talk the opposition down directly, as this often backfired! Just talk positively about what you’ve got to sell was the watch-phrase!
A self-congratulatory piece from Osho – one of several in which he builds himself up. What was the motive behind that, I wonder? Desperation to get hold of some rich disciples who would supply him with the dosh he needed for his avarice e.g. shiny, sparkly watches and limousine cars? Or was there some deep-seated insecurity below it all e.g. low self-esteem? People who feel bad about themselves are often prone to boasting and a little bit of exaggeration, aren’t they?
I also have some experience with sales and marketing, Ashok.
You sound more like a tabloid journalist than a sannyasin, Ashok!
Why is it so surprising that Osho should take the opportunity to publicly criticise Maharishi, an obviously inferior teacher, to make certain things crystal clear to present and future ‘seekers’, or at least to get people ‘thinking’, giving them a new, more profound perspective? I’d be more surprised if he’d remained silent in those circumstances.
I don’t think Osho was “selling himself” in that piece either, more like just being a bit stoned in his dentist’s chair and rambling on, merrily recounting his former life, whilst his dentist occasionally chanted the magic words, “Yes, Bhagwan”.
Yes, he is not a sannyasin, SD. I think, like you, everybody knows what he is. Spot on! XXX
@SD,SS & Tan:
Interesting reactions! They all look like ‘More Glimpses from a Golden Childhood’, to me!
Oh, the innocence of it all, but then silly me, I was forgetting, ‘real’ masters need flocks to survive, don’t they?
When trying to weigh up the merits of various ‘Masters’ it’s worth bearing in mind what Zen says about them selling water by the river.
So the question really is: ‘Who is the best salesman?’
For me anyway, Bhagwan wins hands down.
my guru your guru
my book your book
my meditation your meditation
Tell me honesty
which one is better?
.
.
Should i tell honestly?
Yes honestly…
.
.
.
Your girl is hotter!