Now there’s a complete reversal in their policy, using the low birth rate of westerners as an excuse to open borders and bring in high breeding populations from the southern hemisphere. So in hindsight that self-involved idea, have lots of sex but no kids, was pretty shortsighted.

You make us a little bit more acquainted with your view “Times change” as a changing agent on a mission.

And your graphic designing texting stance on the ´Buddha Symbol´ (1 March, 2017 at 10:10 pm) like: “Forget your Present because I don´t get you one” was clear enough.

Same – with your introducing the other day the term “to grok” something or somebody, which I googled then in wiki – and that was quite amazing too:
Quite a wide range from the science fiction story offspring up to naming IT progamming skills in engineering some current key-logging systems of the NSA. They are also called “GROK”.

Amazing. Indeed.
No, you are not´”bovvered”, indeed.

What hasn’t changed up to now, I would say, are the barbarous actions and measures of humans to eliminate what is seen as “the old so-called hats of approaching reality” (showing up by eliminating other human beings as well). Those whom one wants to get rid of in the lust for power and space.

And what also didn´t change is the way agents of the so-called “new and more appropriate” are always claiming and praising themselves to just have better manners or even better ethics, like you claim to have.

“Emperor’s New Clothes”, I´d say. Hilarious!

And such a stance is not in the least inviting, Dominic. Because love, re-a-spect and compassion for your fellow beings is missing. At least in your performance as a UK SN chat-contributor (agent on mission).

Sure enough, understandable that way, that you don´t like simple question posed to you from other contributors in that role (pattern).

Madhu

I was speaking of the general tendency of 80s celebrity gurus to be hypocritical and that all gurus are ‘human, all too human’, not “just a vehicle for Source” and the idealised projections your rose-tinted spectacles would have you believe. I’m surprised you haven’t grown out of that.

Times have changed and the more modern interesting teachers cultivate less theatrics and more ‘normality’. You know the sites: conscioustv, batgap, youtube.

Osho with his hats is kind of old hat and dated, with all the hysterical fawning adulation and staginess for you to project on. I don’t recommend anyone, why should I? I don’t see why discussing contradictions, fakery, ethics etc in one guru requires me to promote another.

It would never have occurred to me to be a matter of particular interest except that you have put out a long string of names, and dump them in the flawed bag. And then refuse to tell us of someone who isn’t, though you hint at it…

You also seem to be very receptive to the ‘negative’. Is it something to look at?

Someone has already answered your question: a mistake; it seems that it was an Indian way, a choice made by Osho in cultivating relations with neighbouring families to his family of origin.

What to say? Sheela is not potentially a buddha like you or me? The neighbours are not too buddhas? If I think Sheela says bullshit? I would say, as perhaps you would say too, that to me she does not resonate in her authenticity, for the little that I know about her (videos, interviews), but I felt compassion for her when Osho started to talk again and her ego began to deflate; she preferred to escape before being deflated entirely.

It was for Osho to collect RR, like eating or smoking for some other Illuminated ones – a too much humane way to remain among the too much humans? Weird, but possible; I actually have no idea of ​​the loneliness of a Master, it is already too big a mystery, His stay among us.

Ciao,

VF

I will reply in a simple way: he achieved union with “God” through the efforts he made. He then became a nobody, and just a vehicle for Source.

What is the point of your question, Shantam?

“There is nothing wrong in being homosexual – you need not feel guilty about it. One certainly has to go beyond sex, but that is as applicable to heterosexuality as it is applicable to homosexuality.

Heterosexuality or homosexuality are just different styles of the same stupidity! You need not feel guilty. In fact, looking at the population of the world, homosexuality should be supported. At least you will not be increasing the population of the world, you will not be loading the earth more. It is already loaded too much.”

https://justpaste.it/14664

Sheela, deranged and punching above her weight, but in mentioning her, the follow-up question is inevitably, what lunatic put her in charge? Oh yeah….