Buddhafield Suppositions?

In the light of the previous discussion on the thread before, it seems worthy to examine what a Buddhafield is, and whether there are advantages and disadvantages to living in one.  I remember in Pune one,  many friends making big sacrifices, not to work as it were in the ashram, but to at least be around Osho, and within what they considered to be his field of force. I remember once a German girl friend of mine tearfully seeking me out early one morning, who lived in the poorer huts by the river. She was for someone who was a stable sort of person,  very, very distressed.  Someone had been murdered in the hut near her…..  she asked me “how could this happen in a Buddhafield”?

Also what went down in Rajneeshpuram was not on. And might have led to fatalities to sannyasins.  Yet some people gave an arm and a leg to live there.

We dont at SN  want endless Osho quotes, etc, people should think for themselves. But from time to time it is good to discuss things Osho said on such and such. So we put out his answer on a Buddhafield below.




Answer:  That is true. Not everybody. There you are wrong. Only a sannyasin. Not Oregonians.
Only a sannyasin dying within a twenty-five mile radius will become enlightened. And this is not something new. It has been known in the East for thousands of years. Gautam Buddha had said exactly the same. He said within twelve cosas radius, any bikkhu that is his sannyasin dying will become enlightened.

I was puzzled myself that how, what mechanism works? Twelve cosas are approximately twenty-five miles; but then I saw few sannyasins dying around me and becoming enlightened, their death was not death. I could see it.
When Vimalkirti died, we celebrated his death as it is celebrated for an enlightened man. You could have seen on his face the joy, the marks of that orgasmic experience through which he had gone. He was still radiant. The body was still somehow carrying the stamp of the experience. And then, many sannyasins in these fifteen years have died.
Then slowly, slowly I became aware why it happens. I am continuously in contact with my people. They love me so immensely that it is not a question of believing in me — it is a simple unconditional love. So whenever a sannyasin will be dying, these twenty-five miles are something like an existential law, like the law of gravitation or the law of water evaporating at 100 degrees. Nobody asks why.

And the scientist has no answer, he can say only that that’s how it is. Never at 99 degrees; never at 101 degrees. Exactly at 100 degrees the water evaporates. But why the water has chosen 100 degrees? It is simply a law.
These twenty-five miles, Buddha has recorded; these twenty-five miles, Mahavira has recorded, another founder of a great religion, Jainism, a contemporary of Buddha. And I have experienced it, and now I can feel that the energy of a commune if it is a single enlightened person, then the radius will be only five miles at the most. But if it is a commune of thousands of sannyasins, the radius becomes twenty-five miles. Why? Nothing can be said about it. That’s how it happens.

And I don’t know if the commune becomes bigger and still bigger, perhaps the radius will become greater. I hope one day here you will see 100,000 sannyasins, and then I want to see how big the radius can be. Can we cover the whole America? Our effort will be to cover the whole world. We have communes all over the world which will soon have the same effect. Just they need one enlightened person amongst them, and then all other sannyasins become kind of radiating, reflecting the energy field further and further away.

And when a sannyasin dies in this loving energy field, it is easier for him to be awake than otherwise. It is just like if you are sitting amongst a few people who are yawning and dozing, soon you will find yourself yawning and dozing. And you will be surprised — why you are doing it? Those people are creating a certain vibe. If you sit with people who are bored to death, soon you will feel a certain boredom entering in you. You may have experienced sometimes to be with someone, you feel as if you are nourished. And with someone else, you find as if you have been sucked.
These are very simple experiences everybody knows that with a certain person you gain energy, with a certain person you lose energy. People avoid these people because they are parasites. The enlightened person has an energy field of five miles, alone; but if he has a commune around him, then at least twenty-five miles radius is ready to wake any sannyasin dying within it.

Why it works, there is no way to say. It is just the same as other scientific laws — it is also a scientific law.

Osho – The Last Testament Vol 1- Ch 25

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

85 Responses to Buddhafield Suppositions?

  1. frank says:

    Religion/spirituality is like comedy.
    What works in one age/era quickly sounds like garbled nonsense in another.

    This happens quite quickly.

    It`s all about timing, and time flies.

  2. shantam prem says:

    Frank’s comments show the person who was called master of the masters by many has no idea about Britain’s lonely minds.

    Anyway, no one to blame. Leela, leela, life is just a circus, hahaha hahaha!

  3. swamishanti says:

    So any sannyasin that dies within a twenty-five mile radius of the buddhafield becomes enlightened. It is scientific, just like water evaporates at 100 degrees. Buddha discovered the secret with his bhikkus, and then Osho later realised it.

    So, one can just go down the pub and then come back to Poona commune to die and become enlightened. Just like Varanasi, where the Hindus believe they will attain Moksha if they die there.

    Once I chatted to a Hari Krishna fellow who told me he had had a greatly purifying experience, after drinking some of the water out of the Ganges in Varanasi at night, when he had woken up parched and without anything to drink. Apparently, some believe that the water of the river has the power to purify.

    Thing is, the guy died a couple of years later of kidney cancer. I don`t know if there was any connection between him drinking the Ganges water. It`s just that the river there at Varanasi is now amongst the most polluted in the world.

    But the question is, is Poona still a `buddhafield’?

    • Arpana says:

      Places where people meditate regularly have a definite vibe. Doesn’t matter under whose auspices they meditate, there is a definite atmosphere to such places.

      • satyadeva says:

        Yes, but the question remains: When is a buddhafield a buddhafield?

        When there’s a living buddha in the vicinity, surely?

        Again I go back to those words of Osho (as Bhagwan) back in the early 70s, which were, approximately:

        “The Gates of the Temple are wide open. Know well they won’t be open very long. Do not miss this opportunity.”

        That, by the way, is why any wish or plan to restore the Pune ashram to its former glory, is basically doomed, by the way of things impossible.

        Anyone who thinks otherwise is mistaking a sort of social club of “alternative spirituality” for the Real Deal. Might well be ‘ok’, but ‘enlightenment guaranteed when you die’? I don’t think so – and anyway, I’d be highly sceptical of such a claim, even in a genuine buddhafield.

  4. simond says:

    I’m sure this must be a joke on the editor’s part.

    Surely no one believes this stuff from Osho…even if he ever believed it.

    But if he did believe it, it only shows he was as human as the rest of us. He was a man of his time, occasionally glorifying the masters of old, caught up in the traditions of esoterica and the east…And occasionally talking a load of nonsense.

    Doesn’t make him any less loveable but it should show us not to take it all too seriously!

    As to places where people meditate…The temples and churches do have a vibe, as do places in Nature, stone circles etc. I’ve visited aboriginal sites and marvelled at their position in the landscape. Were they placed there because of the vibe, or did the drawings themselves create the vibe?

    It didn’t matter, the vibe was there, in Me.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      “I’m sure this must be a joke on the editor’s part.” (Simond).

      I wouldn´t say so, Simond; from the numerous possible quotes one could have chosen, Parmartha took that one (´Last Testament’, Ranch Series). Not so much on the joking line, also the chosen prefix of his Pune 1 storyboard Parmartha shared with us.

      There are many smaller ´deaths´or even major ones; one is about to die before ultimately leaving the body to the funeral fire or back to earth, so to say.

      AND there is this indescribable point of no return, while still being in the body, which Arpana shed some words about (very understandably, a bit reluctantly).

      You can call it Sannyas, as we did some time ago, or call it surrender into quite unfamiliar realms of consciousness, which are indeed oceanic and I don t mean that just now ‘romantic’, like in these singer/songwriters’ more lullaby way.

      Paradoxically unique that path of surrender – and yet beyond any personal flavour – and has to be adapted in order to stay capable, to cope with the so-called ´world’ while being in the body and stay howsoever in exchange and connection with other sentient beings. (U.J. Krishnamurti found words for these adaptation processes and I loved to read his reports, as far as I got to know about it).

      The ´Buddhafield´.

      When the Master spoke to us, “remember that you are all ´buddhas´”, He meant it!

      Alas, but to conceive what is spoken there and to adapt it is a short story long or a long story short. Although it is no story at all. More a happening.

      Sometimes also described as a magnetic field (where some of ´our´most beautiful songs have had been rooted in – as love songs).

      And in such circles, merry-go-rounds, even cynical clowns are included – with “But some unspoken twinkle remains.” ( Frank). Frank, who reminded us all on ´timing´, as he says, and on the accelerating changing parameters of commune-i-cating nowadays. In a way, Frank, seemingly more ´adapted – in other ways, not – in my eyes (as a reader).

      If a Buddhafield loses to be lived as a Big Love Affair it may lose all human-ness; and if it is necessary for a ´Buddhafield´ to be focused on a living Master in a Body, I simply don´t know any more. Although every now and again, my mind was busy with that issue.

      But sitting together in Stillness, every now and then, in temporary gatherings, I felt Presence there; whether somebody was sitting on a chair above. Or not. Or sitting in a circle. With an apparently empty space.

      Also a happening.

      And none of it is in our hands to make it happen, and yet anybody present is a part of it and wanted. Giving in.


      I avoided the ´supposition in the topic given. Deliberately.

      One reason may be that in a way die-ing became a daily companion. With all kinds of accompanying emotional pain, sometimes also physical uproars of denial, resistance. Or – other moments, giving up, giving in – into the processing: that – indeed – nothing of essential is in my hands/control.
      Another reason would be daring to say:
      “Buddhafield´ is all that is” – if we like to acknowledge that. Or not.

  5. swamishanti says:

    Like many things, there may a grain of truth in it, but a pile of cow dung too (and the grain of truth is debatable).

    (And cow poo is extremely holy stuff in Indian mysticism. Some yogis will literally mix cow dung with cow urine and create a special ash out of it and smear it over their bodies.

    Cow dung is mixed with cow urine and then made into kind of cakes, which are baked in a ceremonial fire, whilst chanting mantras. This produces a special ash, ‘vibhuti’.

    Sai Baba used to produce it and give it out to people).

    Here`s a picture of Osho with daddy…

    • Tan says:

      Lovely pic, SS, thanks!

      And don’t forget cow poo is a miracle on the growing vegetables and fruits! And for the roses, horse poo, not that I am diminishing the value of chicken poo, because it is another miraculous for the growing food. Cheers!

  6. samarpan says:

    “It didn’t matter, the vibe was there, in Me.”

    Well said, simond.


    Osho, ‘This Very Body the Buddha’ (chapter 6)

    Confirmed by life experience.

  7. Parmartha says:

    Some people get enlightened not at death, but before that, in so-called Buddhafields, and also outside them!

    I think all this is a part of myth…for a start, who is a sannyasin, surely not everyone who calls themselves one?

    When Osho was alive, I certainly felt an energy field around him, and felt connected to Osho and the sangha through it. There were moments of synchronicity that did not happen much elsewhere. But even then I didn’t take on this business of becoming enlightened at death – if HE was nearby. Seems nonsense to me.

    And you academics out there, do we have any reference to the Buddha actually saying this? I thought things about the Buddha came centuries after he died? Same with Mahavir?

    Nice pic, Swami Shanti. Thanks.

    • swamishanti says:

      The Tibetans discovered that they could achieve a state of liberation if they remained fully conscious at the time of death.

      The question is, how long did this liberation last, and did they believe that they would attain freedom from rebirth permanently?

      Osho once stated that in his previous life in Tibet he had been undertaking a twenty-one days fast after which he would give up his body, which was meant to guarantee full liberation and freedom from rebirth, but that this practice had been stopped by someone who killed him.

  8. Lokesh says:

    SS declares, “The question is, how long did this liberation last, and did they believe that they would attain freedom from rebirth permanently?”

    This is not a very clever question. In fact, it is a bit fuckin’ stupid. How long does this liberation last for whom exactly? Who or what is it that gets liberated, and from what exactly? What exactly does SS imagine that it is that attains freedom from rebirth permanently?

    • swamishanti says:

      Lokesh blurts : “This is not a very clever question. In fact, it is a bit fuckin’ stupid. How long does this liberation last for whom exactly? Who or what is it that gets liberated, and from what exactly? What exactly does SS imagine that it is that attains freedom from rebirth permanently?”

      Why, the soul, of course! The soul is liberated.

      • satyadeva says:

        “The soul” – what exactly do you mean by this, SS? What is “the soul”, in your experience?

        If ‘it’ gets liberated then presumably, normally ‘it’ must be ‘imprisoned’.

        But where do ‘you’ come into all this? What is ‘your’ relationship to “the soul”?

        • swamishanti says:

          “The soul” – what exactly do you mean by this, SS? What is “the soul”, in your experience?”

          I don`t know what it is, SD. I don`t know whether there are past lives, and cannot remember any.
          And I don`t know what the `gameplan` involves.

          But I do believe that there is life after physical death, and this physical plane is only a very small part of the cosmic `picture`, as it were.

          “If ‘it’ gets liberated then presumably, normally ‘it’ must be ‘imprisoned’.”

          Hence the eastern idea of `maya`, or illusion, or mis-identification with our small part in the earthly drama.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          Thanks, Satyadeva

          for that question-marking.

          It´s working (´deep tissue-issue(s)-work…).



      • Lokesh says:

        SS, I did not blurt anything. I contemplated your question and came to the conclusion that you are someone who does not have a very deep understanding of your subject matter. Now you come away with your soul number. It simply does not cut the mustard. You are avoiding going into the matter in any depth because you would be out of your depth.

        I leave you an opening and ask you to describe what a soul is.

        • swamishanti says:

          I stated that I don’t know how the grand scheme of things works and that I don’t know whether or not ‘we’ reincarnate.

          But of course, it could not be our present body-mind identification that reincarnates, so the presumption is that it is a soul that evolves in consciousness over several lifetimes.

          Many awakened people have said that they ‘remember’ their previous lives.

          This has given the idea that we have an individual soul that incarnates repeatedly until fully awakening or coming out of the dream of individuality to the reality of cosmic wholeness and thus no more rebirth is necessary.

          I am not enlightened and cannot remember previous lives, however this does not mean that others also cannot. I trust Osho and others when they say that they can remember these previous lives.

          Ok, these memories cannot be verified. But if fifty people climb a mountain and then tell others that there are certain things at the top of that mountain, a snow leopard for example, then even though people have not experienced climbing the top of the mountain or spotting the snow leopard, it doesn’t mean that the snow leopard doesn’t exist.

          In fact it is highly plausible that if many people describe the same phenomenon, then there is some truth to it.

          So there are several possibilties:

          One is that we have a soul that reincarnates over several lifetimes (and who knows whether this is limited to this earth plane) , and then awakens to its true nature, and that this happens to everyone sooner or later, or there could be a scenario that there is no soul, no past lives and no reincarnation.

          This is the idea that Satyam Nadeen had, do you remember the guy who went to prison for producing ‘Ecstasy’ and then had an ‘awakening’ – I have read his book, ‘From Onions to Pearls’.

          He also believes that Source is in control of the whole picture.

          • swamishanti says:

            Satyam Nadeen got his idea that everything was a play, a movie directed, and the parts acted out by Source from that Bombay guru, Ramesh Balsekar.

            He also had this theory of the “freedom/limitation equation”:

            Everything is balanced, ie his feeling of total limitation in prison, with his freedom with self-realisation.

            Everything that happens has been designed and is playing itself out, with the “equation” balancing everything, yet he believed that we only have one life.

            It’s like a lottery: only a few people ‘get it’ whilst embodied, whilst everyone else ‘gets it’ when they die.

            This may be easy to believe if you are relatively wealthy and you feel enlightened, and you believe that your limiting experience of incarceration has been balanced by your feeling of freedom and enlightenment.

            The problem with this theory of one life freedom/limitation equation is that it really doesn’t stack up. There are many who experience suffering, limitation and even torture in prison, and out of prison too, yet for them there is no ‘golden ticket’, no experience of total freedom to balance it.

            So it would make more sense, if there was such a ‘freedom/limitation equation’, if it was balanced out over many lifetimes.

          • Lokesh says:

            SS, were you to come away with all that you said in the above comment in a court of law it would be written off as hearsay. Unless something is in your realm of actual existential experience it is worth absolutely nothing.

            • samarpan says:

              Lokesh, you have a habit of disqualifying commentary which you believe is not based on experience. Why do you believe that something in your realm of “actual existential experience” is worth something? What makes “actual existential experience” so worthwhile?

              Do you remember all the “actual existential experience” you had during your time in the Buddhafield, say in 1979 on February 15? Whatever you were doing on February 15, 1979 was in your realm of experience…What was it worth? Can you even remember Feb. 15, 1979 to give details of that ‘worthy’ experience? Of course, whatever you say you experienced will be, as you pointed out to SS, just “hearsay”…not worth much.

              Just because something is actually experienced existentially does not make it worthy, does it?

              • satyadeva says:

                Samarpan, you ask:
                “Why do you believe that something in your realm of “actual existential experience” is worth something? What makes “actual existential experience” so worthwhile?”
                And you go on to suggest:
                “Just because something is actually experienced existentially does not make it worthy, does it?”

                Well, for one thing, it’s only “actual existential experience” that can verify mere beliefs, that can test whether they are true or not. As Osho himself indicates in the quote offered today by SS:
                ““I have meditated; I have come to a point where I can see my own past lives, and that’s proof enough. It is my knowing, my experiencing; it is nothing to do with Indian heritage, beliefs, or anything. I speak on my own authority.”

                As another 20th century master used to say, “Belief is for fools. You must test whatever I say in your own experience.”

                All of which is not to say that imagination and fantasies, together with things we hear about outside our own life experience might not be entertaining, the latter even perfectly valid and true, especially if they have what we intuit as ‘the ring of truth’. But still, they can not be truly ‘ours’, they can’t be part of our own existentially verifiable truth unless we actually experience them as such.

  9. shantam prem says:

    It is impossible a thought or can happen?
    One child of eight or nine
    Meditating before Buddha Statue
    Gets a lightening thought:
    “This face is not mine when
    I was born as Gautam Buddha!”

    One thing is clear, cosmic wisdom has not created a Public Notice Gazette to publish the notification: “So and Sos are no more in the life and death circle. They have achieved state of no existence. It is therefore recommended to the folks on Earth, don’t send prayers and requests to them.”

  10. samarpan says:

    That “advaita shuffle” is catching on. Pure consciousness launching so many sophis-ticated questions! Oh my! Calling Yogi…

    Who reincarnates? What reincarnates? Maharshi Ramana has done his programming well.

    • satyadeva says:

      Not necessarily so, Samarpan. I for one have little or no interest in Advaita teachings. Simply, if someone starts talking about “the soul” I want to know what he thinks he’s talking about, that’s all.

      Perhaps you don’t think clarity in such matters has any value. I would disagree.

      Now off you go and tell Osho all about it, ok?!

    • Lokesh says:

      Oh, now we have Sammy coming away with “the advaita shuffle” in order to pigeonhole something that might take him away from that cosy worldview keyhole reality he has created for himself, wherein he will remain comfortably numb, possibly for all eternity for all I know.

      Somewhat odd, seeing as how he sees Osho as his guru, a man who claimed that self-enquiry was what brought him to enlightenment. One would imagine a disciple of Osho would wish to look into self-enquiry in the hope of finding what his guru claimed he did. But, no, that might require real effort. Much more convenient to make a mockery of it and talk about how Maharshi Ramana has done his programming well.

      The truth is quite the opposite. Maharshi Ramana was one of recent history’s greatest deprogrammers. Complacency would appear to be an obstacle to Sammy gaining a broader perception of what is afloat.

      Not dissimilar to Swami Shanti, who is more of a romantic bird, prone to flights of fantasy in Osho Sky, a new entertainment arena created just for you, situated on Cloud 9 in your neighbourhood. Tweet, tweet.

      • samarpan says:

        Complacency, that’s the ticket! Take it easy. Don’t push the river…it gets to the ocean eventually, without our having to do “self-enquiry”…or anything else. Relax into being.

        What’s the hurry to end the game…what’s the hurry for so-called “enlightenment?”…Enjoy the carnival of lights and sounds…enjoy life!

        • frank says:

          Here`s another angle:


          The pictures don`t quite nail it altho not a bad effort. I like the words and music.

          Btw, check out Stellardrone if you like very space-out/space-in electro music – a bit reminiscent of some early Deuter.

          • satyadeva says:

            Thanks for the Alan Watts link, Frank. Haven’t come across him for decades until today and have enjoyed extracts from one or two talks just now. Great man indeed – but died an alcoholic in late ’73, aged 58. Shame – he just missed ‘Bhagwan’.

            • frank says:

              It`s unbelievable that he was so clear and yet such a drinker (and a bit of a puffer and a tripper, by all accounts, too).

              Love the voice tho`- he reminds me of the schoolmaster I never had!

              One thing`s for sure – if there`s an afterlife, with him, Osho, Gurdjieff and Trungpa around it`s either going to be an absolutely stonking party or the coolest AA/NA meeting ever!!

      • shantam prem says:

        Lokesh shows a typical situation faced by many who got attracted to Osho due to the impression created by high-pitched oratory.

        Sooner or later, many found out they were looking for someone else. It is good in a way, only problem is there exists no http://www.advaitanews.com or http://www.meerapeople.com

        I find it funny to communicate with people who think they have crossed the bridge, yet I see them standing near me.

        • satyadeva says:

          All of which, of course, is a neatly constructed means to avoid any tricky issues such people might bring up, is it not, Shantam?

          You know, if you can somehow ‘demote’ them (at least in your mind and invariably, as in this case, with some thoroughly specious argument) then whatever they have to say automatically appears to lose value and is therefore not worthy of consideration.

          Btw, your first paragraph is sheer nonsense.

          • shantam prem says:

            Satyadeva, please tell how people came to Osho, if it was not the oratory or oratory published after grammatical editing. Recorded oratory is still USP of Oshoji.

            For my English teacher, Parmartha: Can sermons and discourses can be termed as oratory?

            • satyadeva says:

              The word ‘oratory’ refers more to the skill, technique and power of live presentation, that can impress by sheer force and magnetic charisma as much as by the content of the speech. Thus it can be used for many purposes, ‘good’, ‘bad’, or even downright ‘evil’ (eg Hitler & co.).

              Osho was certainly a great orator, but there were other factors that also contributed equally or more to bringing people to him, eg in my (I’d say, fairly typical) case, the extraordinary power of dynamic (especially) and other meditations, and reading a few of his early books, advocating ‘freedom’ from repressive conditioning while also going into profoundly esoteric matters.

              Plus, very important, and probably the ‘clincher’ for me, meeting people who had already met him and had stayed around him for a while, who spoke of his extraordinary way of being and how he had helped them; being impressed by their vibe and hearing their stories was more than enough to pull me in to having a similar adventure myself.

              • shantam prem says:

                This is Satyadeva in the best, quite an eloquent answer. I feel vast number of Osho disciples of all times will agree with this answer.

                Now the second question, why you left such atmosphere so early and did not try your best to be with Osho, meditation and the inspiring people?

                Maybe after spending many years you would also have seen the reality in other shades.

        • Arpana says:

          Shantam shows a typical situation faced by many who got attracted to Osho due to the impression created by high-pitched oratory.

          Sooner or later, he will find out he has no place among Osho’s people, and that he is not entitled to an endless supply of beautiful young western women to have sex with.

  11. shantam prem says:

    Can consumers of Starbucks create another worldwide coffee chain through crowd funding?

    My little suggestion for Sunday posts is, those who have tasted commune should contemplate over the sentence and then write.

    • shantam prem says:

      If someone cannot understand metaphors of Shantam, it will be a bit too much to presume high school drop-outs from Queen´s land will get the sacred and secret passwords of any Indian mystic.

      It is only my presumption that not just we the Indian masses but western intelligentsia too has communication gap understanding mystics, though I wish because of the effort taken, all the seekers get rooms in holy kingdom* up in the sky. When mass enlightenment takes place, one can expect only rooms and not apartments and villas!

      *Holy kingdom is a generic term to describe different versions created by different mystics.

      When mass enlightenment takes place, one can expect only rooms and not apartments and villas!

  12. swami anand anubodh says:


    I always remember Bhagwan emphasising the need to listen to the inner voice.

    You say that you cannot remember any past lives, then that is a truth your inner voice is telling you. A voice which you totally ignore by conceding priority to the ‘inner voice’ of others who claim to be awakened.

    They may have a vague memory of something they like to believe is from a past life, and from this small seed can grow embellishment and exaggeration. They speak with a convincing and clear conscience as they believe they are not deceiving anyone.

    And as you say, these claims cannot be proven, but what is evident is the winning formula they have found that attracts the superstitious and the gullible.

    I always get suspicious when a person’s beliefs are also good for their egos.

    SS, you say that if many people describe the same phenomena, then there is some truth in it. Which means that if there is an unusual cloud formation in the sky and many report seeing a UFO, then by weight of testimony and your reasoning, we have compelling evidence for the existence of UFOs.

    Osho saying that those dying near to him automatically become enlightened, however much he dresses it up, to me, sounds like a ploy to encourage people to stay.

    • swamishanti says:

      I cannot remember any past lives, although I do know that there is life after physical death, without elaborating here.

      So it is not really a question of belief.

      I also have had mysterious `recognitions` of things that I cannot explain, although I cannot know if they are linked to previous lives.

      • Lokesh says:

        Good post from Anubodh.

        SS is hanging in there by saying, “So it is not really a question of belief.”
        Yes it is. Belief and doubt being two aspects of the same coin, as Osho repeatedly said. SS gathers info that suggests reincarnation and thus believes he is in the know. Others do the opposite. Why not embrace not knowing? Then at least there would be no reason to defend one’s beliefs, or doubts for that matter.

        • swamishanti says:

          Lokesh chirps:
          “Belief and doubt being two aspects of the same coin.”

          I wonder which wee Indian guru Lokesh got that one from. Ah yes, it was ‘the Bhagwan’.

          But experience is not the same as belief.

          Here’s another thing that Osho stated:
          “I have meditated; I have come to a point where I can see my own past lives, and that’s proof enough. It is my knowing, my experiencing; it is nothing to do with Indian heritage, beliefs, or anything. I speak on my own authority.”

          • Lokesh says:

            SS tries to be smart and does not pull it off…or maybe he did one night…easy to imagine.

            Take the following:
            SS says, ” “Belief and doubt being two aspects of the same coin.”
            I wonder which wee Indian guru Lokesh got that one from. Ah yes, it was ‘the Bhagwan’.”
            Below a comment where I just said, “Belief and doubt being two aspects of the same coin, as Osho repeatedly said.”

            I guess he was not Sherlock Holmes in a past life.

            SS concludes with an Osho quote that the old boy contradicted dozens of times. Once more trying to prop up a belief that really has no substance, or why else look for a limp Osho quote that has nothing to do with his own experience? Which, by the sounds of it, does not amount to very much. Ho hum.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      “They may have a vague memory of something they like to believe is from a past life, and from this small seed can grow embellishment and exaggeration. They speak with a convincing and clear conscience as they believe they are not deceiving anyone.

      And as you say, these claims cannot be proven, but what is evident is the winning formula they have found that attracts the superstitious and the gullible.” (Anand Anubodh)

      Could not be repeated often enough, Anand Anubodh. And thank you for this.


  13. Prem martyn says:

    Of course there are past lives. Try figuring out how we got from sludge to linking bacteria to electricity to neurons…Then how we got from Koko to us…And back again…

    Seeing this gorilla is an experience in humility.

    Of course something incarnates…something utterly incredible…and miraculous…Just like Koko.

    ‘A Conversation With Koko The Gorilla: Full Documentary’ – YouTube:

  14. shantam prem says:

    “Osho saying that those dying near to him automatically become enlightened, however much he dresses it up, to me, sounds like a ploy to encourage people to stay.”

    Anubodh, if it is a ploy adopted by Osho, why other masters and even trustees of Osho´s work don´t use this ploy?

    Look around the world and one sees bed and breakfast kind of spiritual transmission taking place. There is not a single guru of the gurus who has the willingness and capabilities to create a village around him.

    So I don´t think it was a ploy but part of Osho´s vision of creating Enlightenment Factory.

    Naturally, everything is not for everybody. Those who think they can dive into the depth of wisdom through books must remain with their books.

    • Arpana says:

      Baby Shantam shares another jealous, spiteful moment.

    • satyadeva says:

      ” “Osho saying that those dying near to him automatically become enlightened, however much he dresses it up, to me, sounds like a ploy to encourage people to stay.”

      Anubodh, if it is a ploy adopted by Osho, why other masters and even trustees of Osho´s work don´t use this ploy?”

      Elementary, my dear Shantam:
      In the case of Osho’s trustees, such a statement would be a totally irrelevant, even greater sham than the original because the master is not there!

      As for other masters and teachers, well, I can’t stand the guy but there’s our old ‘friend’ Swami Osho Rajneesh (or whatever he calls himself now), over there in Mexico. And one or two other sannyasin communities, each headed up by a ‘main man’, eg the one in Costa Rica. Why not try one or more of these for a while if you’re so desperate for a community?

      But it may be that many teachers understand that living in the world, however difficult it might be, is essential for ‘spiritual people’ as ‘out there’, whatever their students/devotees/friends/followers have gained from teachings and/or communities will be tested, at times very severely, thus tending to either confirm their ‘progress’ and/or sharpen their awareness – or undermine or even destroy any illusions they might have regarding how ‘spiritual’ they are. One master described this process as living in “the monastery of the world.”

      • Arpana says:

        “If you understand that this place is not a home and you are a homeless wanderer here, a stranger in an unknown land; you have to leave, you have to go…if you have penetrated that point, if you have understood it, then you don’t make a home anywhere. You become a homeless wanderer, a parivrajaka. You may even literally become so; it depends on you. You may really become a wanderer, or spiritually you may become a wanderer.”


        The Discipline of Transcendence, Vol 1
        Chapter #3
        Chapter title: Only Nothing Is
        23 August 1976 am in Buddha Hall


      • swamishanti says:

        Actually, SD, I think it could make an excellent advert for the Resort:
        “Come and fuck, dance, meditate and do White Robe Brotherhood together…
        And if you die here, you’re guaranteed to get enlightened…
        Our master said so…
        “Take the time.”
        Only Rs 10,000 entry fee, take our workers programme and get two free chapattis per day.

      • shantam prem says:

        Satyadeva, it is not the first time that you have written something like, “Why not try one or more of these for a while if you’re so desperate for a community?”

        I wonder why your psychological understanding has not developed during all these years on basic human understanding about commune and monasteries? Think and contemplate to find out the answer yourself.

        In between, I try to pinpoint in an independent string why revival of ‘Osho Commune International’ is vital. It will be based on your tease but must be independent article as issue must be discussed in a broader perspective.

        • satyadeva says:

          Shantam, don’t worry, it’s obvious that you’re attached to your memories of the old-style Pune ashram, where you spent the best years of your youth, felt all your, er, ‘Christmases’ and birthdays had come at once, surrounded as you were by hordes of possibly ‘more available than most’ young women from all over the world, and even felt a degree of over-inflated self-importance in your role as ‘Hindi typist’! So for you it would feel like a return to your (imagined) ‘former glory’.

          Based as it is on a typically Indian excess of self-indulgent, pseudo-religious sentimentalism, your sense that the Pune ashram is somehow ultra-precious, the most ultra-sacred component of whatever you think Sannyas is supposed to be, together with your wish to create a collective religion out of what was essentially a call to each individual to seek the truth of his/her being, your insistence upon re-creating a replica of the past (albeit without that past’s essential ingredient – guess what that is/was!) is essentially as deeply flawed as you are, Shantam.

          • shantam prem says:

            Shooting the words like bullets does not mean even a single one has hit the target. Killing is easy, hitting the target needs mastery.

            Sorry to say, Satyadeva, there is not even average insights in your above post. It is a common insight about human nature, when we get blinded by the fixed opinions, reality gets distorted.

            • satyadeva says:

              Predictable defensive cliches, Shantam. I note, however, that you haven’t bothered to deal with any of my points. I wonder why…

              Your last few lines are useful though…

              “It is a common insight about human nature, when we get blinded by the fixed opinions, reality gets distorted.”

              …especially when rigorously applied to yourself, Shantam! Because if there’s one person here who can’t see straight it’s you, swami-ji.

              • satyadeva says:

                In your own words, Shantam, “Killing is easy, hitting the target needs mastery.” I’ve given you plenty of targets – you’ve chosen to ignore them all. Because you know you can’t hit them – all that self-deluding hot air clouding your vision as you’re under too much depressive pressure in your life (see below) – or you’re just too lazy to try.

                Here’s another ‘target’ for you:

                Isn’t your obsession with the fate of the Pune ashram largely (or even wholly) driven by the rather grim reality that for you it seems to be the only place in the world where you feel you might potentially ‘belong’? Here’s your situation (as my private investigators have researched over the last 8 or 10 years):

                You say you’ve been condemned and disinherited by your family in India.
                You’re no longer a Sikh so can’t find ‘refuge’ or ‘community’ in that communal religion of your homeland.
                As a ‘failed’ (in their eyes) middle-class graduate you wouldn’t be readily accepted into any ‘professional’ circles in stuffy, caste and status-conscious India.
                You’re a foreigner in Germany and Switzerland, a migrant (often these days a bit of a ‘dirty word’ over there), unemployed and living on State hand-outs, with few, if any, friends in the vicinity.
                Your re-marriage prospects are not that good, certainly in Europe, but also in India, as you have few, if any resources and, calamitously for one from your background, no ‘profession’. So hardly to be considered ‘a good catch’ for anyone who might otherwise be ‘eligible’.

                That adds up to some plight. So, naturally – to your mind, anyway – you yearn for that ‘golden time’ when it seemed the world (or at least, the tiny fragment of it around Koregaon Park, Pune) was ‘your oyster’, or potentially so, when all seemed possible (not least those sexual encounters you craved and now and again ‘achieved’).

                It seems to me that you’ve suffered such a downturn in your fortunes that you cling on to this dream of resuscitating that ‘golden past’, almost for ‘dear life’. That fearfully intense drive is powering this obsession of yours, because you can not envisage any viable alternative other than the circumstances you’ve already experienced. Typical middle-age/old man syndrome.

                All of which is a very good reason for distrusting almost everything you say about the ashram situation and about Sannyas in general, because your motives are based on multiple levels of unhappiness, which, singly or together, are a blindingly potent recipe for not seeing straight.

                And also, by the way, setting aside your views and how obsessively you promote them, it’s a very good reason for fellow feeling (compassion if you like).

    • swami anand anubodh says:

      Disgruntled Sikh,

      I have no recollection of Osho ever saying that those dying within a twenty-four mile radius of Poona will automatically become enlightened. Do You?

      So why was this privilege reserved only for Rajneeshpuram?

      The only difference between the two locations was that one needed to be populated by thousands of Sannyasins and the other did not. Therefore a ploy (and not a very sophisticated one).

  15. shantam prem says:

    Satyadeva kind can ask Osho post-demise:
    “Beloved Osho,
    Don´t you think Buddhafield exists as long as Buddha is alive?

    In this context, why you are spending so much money and manpower over your commune, which is being dubbed as Buddhafield?”

  16. Prem martyn says:

    Reincarnation ? 18.00 mins on…


    • satyadeva says:

      Good one, Martyn, thanks. That’s the clearest, the best exposition on the topic I’ve come across since Barry Long.

      • swamishanti says:

        So Martyn has been going into the Mumbai balls, the beautiful transcendalism of Ramesh Balsekar and his body-mind organisms.

        Satyam Nadeem, who felt he had become awakened in prison after reading one of Ramesh’s books, wrote a great book, ‘From Onions To Pearls’. Satyam also felt that there was no doer, that God or “Source” was running the whole show as a movie, whilst giving people the illusion of realistic memories and feelings of past lives.

        Everything was Consciousness but it was only a few of the body-minds that realised this in their lifetimes and woke up. The rest of them had to wait till death to realise the whole picture.

        Personally, I prefer the style of Ranjit Maharaj, also from the same tradition and lineage, and another disciple of Siddhamareshwar Maharaj (master of Nisargatta).

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      Yes, a very clear “exposition”, to take Satyadeva´s word. Very Brahmin too.

      If it is an exposition on the topic ´Buddhafield, I would question.

      I´d rather feel inspired to go for a ‘Soul-Hunting’ (aborigene Indian style) like pretty much always when I’ve met western fellow-travellers who have been into Ramesh Balsekar elite corps.

      The fifth element is missing. And in your verbal treatment of Shantam, Satyadeva, the fifth element is missing thoroughly as well.

      A ´Buddhafield´, if we use this word at all, maybe we use it here and in the virtual realms while feeling something missing – like the fifth element. I suppose it is not an elite debating club.

      *Maybe I cleaned too many toilets and bathrooms of western ´Brahmins for quite a long while…or took care of their garbage…sometimes getting a tip…or even a smile. Or was invited for a coffee after cleaning and to listen to their very important life stories.


      • satyadeva says:

        “And in your verbal treatment of Shantam, Satyadeva, the fifth element is missing thoroughly as well.”

        I suggest you re-read the last paragraph of that post, Madhu.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          No need to remind me of your last ´paragraph here, Satyadeva, I did read it.

          And it reminded me of people who are into torture businesses and then add, when they are finished (for the moment):
          “It s all for your good”.

          I simply know, it is not.


          • satyadeva says:

            And I suggest, Madhu, that you too are at times unable to see straight due to your difficult life circumstances. Which is why you tend to empathise with Shantam and have reacted so strongly, calling me a ‘torturer’!

            But who exactly is ‘the torturer’ here? Frankly, Shantam’s repetitiously bone-headed variations on a single theme, together with almost daily instances of utter stupidity, have represented a kind of regular ‘torture’ to all SN readers over many years. I think he’s very fortunate indeed that SN has allowed him to contribute so much tortuous rubbish.

            By the way, both you and Shantam appear to have conveniently forgotten what I said to and about him a couple or so weeks ago, where I was pretty complimentary. Not that he noticed, of course, as he either didn’t bother to read it (a habit of his, it seems) or he’s too self-defensively thick to have got the point.

      • shantam prem says:

        Well written post, Madhu. Those who walk the walk can distinguish when talk is just a talk.

        Last paragraph is simply hammer on the rock.

  17. samarpan says:

    “They can’t be part of our own existentially verifiable truth unless we actually experience them as such.” (Satyadeva)

    This seems to be solipsistic. It appears to be a tautological argument. You believe you are an experiencer having experiences and you believe your experience is true because you “actually experience them as such.”

    You seem to be claiming the existence of an individual self that is so intrinsic to your life that you do not doubt its veracity. But does it really exist in is own right? Scientific research suggests not.

    Neuroscientists find no evidence of an individual self located somewhere in the brain. Instead, they propose that what we call ‘I’ is but a mental construct, one which you, Satyadeva, apparently believe is real and has experiences which are true because you “actually experience them as such.” If you look into the nature of the actual experience of self you may discover that upon closer examination this sense of ‘I’ dissolves. Could it be that what you “experience” to be an independent self is a construct in the mind and your experiences have no intrinsic substance?

    Do you, Satyadeva, believe in an ‘experiencing self’ which chooses to experience and decide which experiences are “verifiable truths”? Neuroscience suggests that what Satyadeva appears to experience as his “own existentially verifiable truth” is a consequence of processes in his brain over which Satyadeva does not even have free will. That is why I questioned Lokesh’s challenge to SS about “worth” re one’s own existential experience (and got no answer about the “worth” of Lokesh’s authentic existential experience on Feb. 15, 1979).

    Dividing experiences into categories and judging them to be entertainment, imagination, fantasy, truth, etc. may be your attempt at ‘clarification’ but it is sophisticated obfuscation. It is complicating, not clarifying. Cut to the root:
    Is there a Satyadeva capable of freely choosing to discover his “own existentially verifiable truth” through his own experiences? Or do we continue reciting solipsistic tautologies? To turn the philosopher’s question on its head: “Why is there nothing rather than something?”

    “Let it become a continuous remembrance. You will be surprised at how this simple idea, ‘I am nothing,’ can relax you.

    Ramana Maharshi used to give the mantra ‘Who am I?’ Generally, I don’t insist upon it much…very rarely, mm, because in that, again, the ego can assert itself. You ask ‘who am I?’, but that ‘I am-ness’ remains there – it can be dangerous; it cannot help everybody – very few people will be helped. But this mantra can become a universal mantra: ‘I am nothing.’

    There is no need to ask ‘Who am I?’ ‘I am simply nothing – nothingness is my nature.’ And this nothingness will be a death to you and a resurrection too….”

    Osho, ‘What Is, Is, What Ain’t, Ain’t’ (Chapter 8)

    • satyadeva says:

      You’re being too clever by half, Samarpan. As far as the ordinary, day-to-day reality in which I and 99.99999999% of people live, what you say has little or no practical value. The simple point I’m making is that to blindly accept what others say and hold it as a belief or set of beliefs is foolish unless you can look into your own life experience and verify it as true.

      Saying that there’s no such entity as ‘me’ or ‘you’ might sound profoundly spiritual and, as far as you’re concerned, might be true in your experience. But how would I know? Just as how would anyone really know that somebody who says they love you actually does? Isn’t it true that only the one who says that knows if they’re lying or not?

      ‘Consulting’ one’s storehouse of experience has to be a prerequisite, a basic protection against being led astray by anyone and any ‘authority’, whether parents, schoolteachers, politicians, academics, philosophers, journalists, therapists, media pundits, football forecasters and perhaps particularly, spiritual teachers (and even bloggers on online websites)…

      Sure, what you’re saying is not new to me (or, I expect, to anyone else reading this) and ultimately, behind all the ‘sound and fury’ might well lie ‘no-thing’ and who am I (to coin a phrase) to deny the findings of neuroscience or the teachings of various masters?

      But until that becomes a genuine ongoing, ie ‘real-ised’ reality rather than an extremely occasional, extremely brief ‘flash’ of in-sight IN MY OWN EXPERIENCE it’s of no real immediate practical relevance to me when confronted with pressing psychological, emotional or material issues, or when making my way through the minefield of conflicting beliefs, standards and values in the world.

      You might be operating on a far deeper level than me and the vast majority of ‘seekers’, or for all I know you may perhaps be a bit of a ‘space-case’, enjoying playing around with rarified ideas in a ‘spiritualised’ imagination, but I’m afraid I don’t find your comments at all useful for my life, however seductively stimulating they might be.

Leave a Reply