The Man who was God: Debunked.

Someone wrote of this documentary years ago as below. I think it is a good comment.

I dont like the movie, but it needs to be confronted and not hidden.

Swami D wrote: 

” Aside from its technical brilliance the film is a compilation of superstitions and malicious assumptions.

First of all Osho never stated that “I am God” and this makes the title of the film completely hilarious. Some infotainment workers were obviously more interested in fabricating a thrilling story than investigating what really happened.

Above all, it also requires some intelligence to understand an ancient eastern concept used by thousands of mystics throughout the centuries, that existence, including each human being, is one organic unity and called God by many religions.

With a little bit of investigation even the most stupid journalist would be able to understand Osho’s statement.

But obviously none of these journalists were available when this film was produced.

Again a strange character has a platform on which to spread his wired thoughts: Osho’s self-proclaimed former bodyguard, who has the chance to express exclusive and particularly secret insider knowledge.

It is enough to say that there was never a post of bodyguard in Poona and this might give us an insight into his mental condition and help to put his other statements into place.

Although the intention of this documentary is quite clear , many facts are very well investigated and if one reads between the lines one can find some amazing things.

For example, how a girl like Sheela from the starting time of the ranch during the years of intimate contact with the US authorities and media develops into a hardened woman. Is she now more a victim or more a criminal?

The insight remains that power corrupts, no matter under which circumstances. Even the proximity of a master makes no difference if one is not ready to face and understand oneself.

In the end the question emerges:

Isn’t “Sheela” a part of us all? ”

Scandal: The man who was God
https://vimeo.com/220796591

This entry was posted in Discussion. Bookmark the permalink.

162 Responses to The Man who was God: Debunked.

  1. simond says:

    I watched a little of the documentary, having seen it before some time ago. It wasn’t unlike others of its kind and media stories from that time, full of media slant, hype and misunderstanding of the man, as well as some insights from various commentators.

    Osho seemed to thrive on passing himself in all sorts of guises, and never cared much if the angle was positive or negative. All publicity is good publicity. And it didn’t stop people coming to see him. So where is the harm?

    On the other hand, his statements and his own hype also came back to bite him later, as authorities and governments made it more difficult for him. His travel plans after the Ranch all fell apart and only the only place left for him was to return to India.

    I often observe that Osho was learning and experimenting and a result the way he acted and spoke changed in later years. In other ways he remained stubborn, even stuck in his own mythology, and later still hardened somewhat to his way of doing things. But as I say, the journey goes on and learning never ends.

    He’s not alone in having his students reject him; from their own hurt. Indeed, it seems almost all of them face scrutiny and scandal of one sort or another.

    Interestingly, only Barry Long is unique, to my knowledge, in having few ex-students dissing him or going to the media with tales of scandals etc. He took great care not to put himself in positions where the guru game could turn to bite him.

    Osho was a pioneer and it was all part of the trial and error that is the ‘teacher, guru – disciple game’. Indeed, in the West at least, the interest in the guru phenomenon seems to have waned somewhat in these past few years, as the means in which people learn about consciousness has changed. There are still a few diehard eastern gurus plying their trade and a load of western teachers talking endlessly about “non-duality”. No one of the status of Osho, but that’s life.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      Hi Simond,
      May I ask you, what does it mean to you, and what do you get out of it, to be “an observer” (your word/self-description)?

      Madhu

      • satyadeva says:

        Hello Madhu, Simond,

        Maybe something along these lines?

        “We say things we regret, we feel things – anger, resentment, jealousy – that are toxic to ourselves and others, and we act on impulse – cookie anyone? – instead of with forethought.

        Well, I’ve discovered a very powerful tool that literally dissolves this phenomenon, and I’ll share it with you in the feature story below.

        I’ll also reveal a deceptively simple solution that will give you tremendous power over your choices and actions, and who and what you attract into your life.

        And, I’ll explain all this in a way that makes down-to-earth, practical sense. So please keep reading, and [hint]…“witness” your life change – for the better – right before your eyes.

        One of the main instructions we give is to “watch what is happening—watch with curiosity.” This is a deceptively simple instruction that nonetheless has tremendous power. What does it mean? And how do you do it?

        Being the witness, the watcher, the observer, has been a part of meditative practice for centuries, but what this really means is not often explained in a way that makes down-to-earth practical sense.

        You may be tired of hearing me harp on the subject of resistance, and how resistance creates any discomfort you may be experiencing in your life. I find myself saying or writing at least fifty times a week that if you are having any discomfort it’s because somewhere, on some level, there is resistance.

        To adopt a position of power, one in which you have control over your destiny, you must take full responsibility for whatever response you are creating to whatever is happening. If you cannot acknowledge that you are creating your response to everything that happens, you are helpless, a victim of your environment.

        Only when you take responsibility is there a possibility of doing something about your situation or creating something different. The main source, then, of both personal power and peace of mind is taking all responsibility for what happens.

        So, first, you must acknowledge that, whatever your experience it is your response. It comes from you, from some aspect of who you are.

        As I’ve said so many times, “Life may provide the stimulus, but you provide the response.” Sometimes this response comes from an unconscious part of you, one you have little or no control over (or so it seems), but, nonetheless, it comes from you (rather from some force outside of you, regardless of the appearance).

        Why would you create a negative response? Because a part of you is in resistance to whatever is happening. Why, then, would someone resist it?

        Because some part of you is trying to reorganise, to change…but you associate the old way with your safety and, at least unconsciously, don’t feel safe letting the change happen.

        Whatever the discomfort, whatever the upheaval, whatever the issue, some part of you — some inner strategy that you associate with safety is trying to grow and evolve, and another part of you is not willing to let go.

        Here is where the concept of watching, witnessing, of being the observer, comes to play. If resistance is the poison, witnessing is the antidote.

        Some very wise people, over many centuries of experience with the process of personal mental, emotional, and spiritual change, have discovered that if you can step back and watch whatever is happening, with no agenda for what does or does not happen, the resistance disappears.

        And, any changes that are trying to take place can happen without suffering.

        All personal change approaches that work involve the creation of a greater awareness of what is happening, based on the fundamental principle that you can only continue behaviours and feelings that are self-destructive if you do them unconsciously — without awareness. Most of us have very elaborate strategies designed to keep us unaware, but there is a very simple way to defeat them.

        If you step back the next time you are feeling any kind of discomfort, and say to yourself, “There I am, feeling angry” (or whatever it is you are feeling)…and then just notice yourself being angry, without trying to stop it or change it, without any agenda for what should happen.

        Any feeling you have will be a sensation in your body, so just notice where in your body you feel it. Notice if it stays the same or changes, if it stays in one place or moves around.

        Become genuinely curious about it. Pretend you are a scientist who has been searching the Amazon jungle for 20 years for a certain butterfly, and finally…here it is!

        How carefully and curiously would you watch? Bring that amount of curiosity to bear on whatever is happening for you in that moment.

        Whatever uncomfortable feelings you are having, you’ve probably been having them off and on for a long time. But I would be willing to bet that you have never really watched them with curiosity to find out what is really happening and how you create them. You’re so busy trying to make them stop, or blaming them on someone else, or analysing them, or in some other way becoming unconscious about them.

        Notice that you cannot be stuck in your suffering very effectively if a part of you is watching. If you are curious and watching, it becomes harder and harder to resist. Curiosity is on the opposite side of the fence from resistance…and without resistance you cannot create suffering. Once you are successfully watching, it becomes very obvious that you could make another choice of how to respond to whatever is happening.

        On the other hand, if you are watching with an agenda—to stop the feeling—you’re not really watching. To be the witness, you must have no agenda other than to watch and be curious.

        Some personal growth teachers will tell you to “love the feeling,” or “embrace the feeling,” or “surrender to the feeling.” What they really mean is to stop resisting it. And the way to do that is to become genuinely curious about it and watch.

        Stop fighting with yourself and, instead, notice what is happening. Distress and discomfort fall away when you do this, almost as if by magic.

        So, if resistance is your middle name, as it was mine…please take very seriously the simple instruction to “watch with curiosity.” It takes practice and willpower because the habit of resistance is a deeply ingrained automatic response. But after some practice…it will become effortless.

        In any situation where you are uncomfortable, no matter what it is, you are resisting people, things, or situations being the way they are. To the degree you do that, you suffer.

        If you can step aside and watch yourself have whatever reaction you are having, you will find that there are other choices of how to respond…at which point, you can pick the one you would like to have, rather than being an automatic response mechanism who suffers every time you are stimulated in a certain way.

        People with “higher consciousness” or “expanded awareness” are those who have mastered this principle of witnessing.

        You can do it, too. Start practising, and keep meditating.”

        (Bill Harris, founder of Centerpointe.com)

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          Hi Satyadeva,

          Only now I saw and read you long quote of Bill Harris. Invited to start practising practising, I´d respond:

          ´I stop fighting with myself, and instead notice what´s happening: The discomfort happening when I come to read a megalomanic ´know-it-all´ and ´avoid helplessness and reach to empowerment stances.´

          Like those kind of approaches being passed on in coaching seminars to a management troupe or (hopefully only) some of the advaita satsangs.

          When I read such (like this quote) I acknowledge my sick feeling in my belly and I very much honour that and am very grateful for it; as it indicates that this kind of ´nurture´ is not for me.

          Well, yes, it´s true, Satyadeva, the marketplace is overcrowded by these kind of ´facilitators´. I am looking for those who are able to embrace helplessness, failure etc. too and are not playing a power ´game of thrones´ with and in spiritual matters.

          I am looking for Lovers of THIS. Has always been rather rare to find, I guess.

          Madhu

          P.S:
          * my question to Simond was a very simple one btw, just referring to my experience of him as a contributor on our tiny little website like SN/UK. He, Simond, hasn´t answered or responded yet.

      • simond says:

        Hello Madhu,

        I’ve been away for a few days so haven’t been online.

        You ask what does it mean or what do I get out of being an observer?
        To observe is to watch and to see things as they are. So when I say I observe I’m just looking, I observe and look. I watch as any feelings arise. Sometimes I can see they are reactive or emotional. They are from a past hurt. So I endeavour to observe reactions and recognise that they are untrustworthy.

        This process of watching or observing has been a long process of discovery. Of discovering what is both true and real or present; and of discerning what is false about my feelings.
        I’ve learned to observe in order to clarify and understand what is real and what isn’t.

        The practice of observing myself has speeded up so much now that it is almost automatic, i.e. there is only a very short time, if any time at all, before I know what is real and what isn’t.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          No feeling is ´untrustworthy´, Simond, in my eyes, and no hurt, past – or present – either.
          That´s not the only reason why I´ve found Satyadeva´s long Bill Harris quote so sickening (and responded to that the way I did).

          It’s okay with me that you claim to know, pretty much instantly, what´s real and what´s not.

          I experienced you quite often with a ´Guru-Rating’ number here though, lots of opinions about Osho, sannyasins and so on, and sometimes have been asking myself why you don´t blog then with the friends of your favourite Australian Master as they have a blog to share too.

          Short or long versions similar to the quote of Bill Harris are simply sickening me and I trust my feelings.

          The inner work though, to investigate my dissociation tendencies here and there when I have to face ongoing criminal actions or violence against me as a woman, past and present, is in progress as well.

          If the ´observer´ (watcher) in you wanted to remind me of that, by claiming your knowledge, thank you for the reminder. That kind of inner work is never done, is it?

          Madhu

          • satyadeva says:

            Madhu, you say:
            “No feeling is ´untrustworthy´, Simond, in my eyes, and no hurt, past – or present – either.
            That´s not the only reason why I´ve found Satyadeva´s long Bill Harris quote so sickening (and responded to that the way I did)…

            Short or long versions similar to the quote of Bill Harris are simply sickening me and I trust my feelings.”

            Ok, Madhu, so that sort of self-observation doesn’t suit you. I trust, though, you are also able to stretch beyond your own personal feelings and realise that it’s a well established and pretty fundamental method of what one might perhaps term ‘meditative self-awareness therapy’, which many, apparently, find extremely useful.

            • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

              You don´t trust in vain here, Satyadeva, that I acknowledge “well established and fundamental methods”, which many find extremely useful. I´ve been part of it, using methods, alone and together and together-alone.

              What I did/do put into question is to mix power/empowerment issues with these methods and especially to claim what´s ´real´and what´s not (for others).

              And how healing or coming in peace with oneself as with others is concerned, one never really knows, when or how that is allowed to happen.

              My own experience has been so far that methods are not all there is in that matter. I’ve also experienced that sometimes methods’drop you’ instead of the opposite, and the longer you hold on to the method the staler becomes the effect: like routine…

              About Healing?:

              Sometimes I use the word ´Grace´ or ´Love´ as ingredienys or sometimes, I say ´Unknowable´…

              That´s as good as it gets just now with words from my side, Satyadeva.

              Madhu

              • Arpana says:

                Madhu said:
                “I’ve also experienced that sometimes methods ‘drop you’ instead of the opposite, and the longer you hold on to the method the staler becomes the effect: like routine.”

                Ain’t that a fact? Disconcerting sometimes as well. (^o^)/

          • Arpana says:

            Madhu.

            I dont understand why you feel so hostile to the Bill Harris quote; and I really am asking. Just that

            I just read the piece again. Seems pretty straightforward.

            Isn’t anything Osho hasnt said a thousand times.

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            I also know only one miracle, to let nature have its course, to allow it. Whatsoever is happening, don’t interfere, don’t come in the way, and suddenly you will disappear. You cannot be there without resistance, fight, aggression, violence; the ego exists through resistance. This has to be understood very deeply — the more you fight, the more you will be there.

            Osho
            A Bird on the Wing
            Chapter #6
            Chapter title: The Miracle of Ordinariness

            I FEEL SO MUCH RESISTANCE AGAINST MEDITATION AND I DON’T HAVE THIS DESIRE FOR GOD THAT YOU SPEAK ABOUT. IS THIS THE RIGHT PLACE FOR ME?

            If you feel much resistance against meditation it simply shows that deep down you are alert that something is going to happen which will change your total life. You are afraid of being reborn. You have invested too much in your old habits, in the old personality, in the old identity.
            Meditation is nothing but trying to clean your being. trying to become fresh and young, trying to become more alive and more alert. If you are afraid of meditation it means you are afraid of life, you are afraid of awareness, and the resistance comes because you know that if you move into meditation, something is bound to happen. If you are not resisting at all it may be because you don’t take meditation very seriously. you don’t take meditation very sincerely. Then you can play around. What is there to be afraid of?
            It is exactly because you are resisting that this is the right place for you. This is precisely the right place for you. The resistance shows that something is going to happen. One never resists without any cause.
            You must be living a very dead life. Now you are afraid that something is becoming alive, something is changing. You resist. Resistance is an indication, resistance is a very clear indication that you have suppressed much. Now in meditation that suppression will surface, it will be released. You would also like to be released of the burden but in that burden there are investments.
            For example, you may be carrying pebbles in your hands but you think they are diamonds. And then I tell you, ‘Clean yourself. Drop these pebbles. They have become a burden and you cannot move because of them.’ You would like to be unburdened but then you are afraid that your diamonds will be lost. And they are not diamonds. Look again at your diamonds. If they were really diamonds, you should be happy. If they were really diamonds, you would not have come to me at ail. There is no need. If you have come, it shows that you are seeking. You may say that you are not interested in God — I am also not interested in God — but you are interested in yourself. Are you interested in yourself? Forget all about God. If you are interested in yourself. then this is precisely the place for you. If you are interested in your own being, in your own wholeness and health; if you are interested in becoming a blossomed flower, then forget all about God — because in that blossoming you will know what God is. When your fragrance is released then you will know what God is. God is your ultimate flowering, your final flowering; your destiny fulfilled is what God is all about.

            Osho.

            Ancient Music in the Pines
            Chapter #4
            Chapter title: Be a light unto yourself

            • Tan says:

              Wow! Wow! Wow!
              Always good to be reminded!
              Thanks for that, Arps and Satyadeva! XX

            • Arpana says:

              On reflection I know why.

            • frank says:

              I remember walking through the Amsterdam red light area one evening some little time ago when I stumbled upon a fracas involving some burly drunken sailors who were attacking a guy who I immediately recognised as this fellow Bill Harris.

              The sailors were setting about the fellow quite nastily and he was obviously taking quite a beating.

              “Are you alright there?” I enquired. (Having a small group of off-duty SAS officers with me on a stag night I was quite well prepared to sort things out).

              It was quite noisy and chaotic , but then, as several dislodged teeth clattered over the cobbles and into the nearby canal, I managed to hear Bill`s unmistakable, if somewhat muffled voice:
              “In a situation where you are uncomfortable,no matter what it is, if you are resisting people things or situations being the way they are. To the degree you do that, you suffer,” he opined.

              “Oh, ok, mate, have a nice rest of your evening,” I said. Then we headed off to the Bulldog for a well-needed smoke and a pint of Heineken.

          • simond says:

            Well, Madhu, as to feelings being untrustworthy or not, ask yourself this:
            If all feelings are real and true, why are they so varying, why do they change like the wind?
            Why do you feel ‘good’ one moment and ‘bad’ in the next? How can you trust them when they are so inconsistent?

            It’s the nature of feelings to change. They aren’t trustworthy but they may be an indicator of something else. It’s the observation, witness, or whatever you might wish to call it, of the feelings that can show you something else.

            Quite why my writing or that of Bill Harris’s writing is so repellent to you is a question worth asking yourself.

            As to why I don’t blog with Barry Long’s mob is utterly irrelevant. I’m blogging here and now, and you often emphasise that it is the here and now or the present that you wish to live in.

            Why don’t I have as much right to blog here as I do anywhere else?

            As to your observation about guru rating…
            I’m guessing that you suppose that by exploring my opinions as forthrightly as sometimes I do, this also offends the sensibility in you that only bona fide, recognised gurus, like Osho, have the right to say they know something. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t agree.

            How’s that make you feel?

            • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

              “How’s that make you feel?”, you asked yesterday, Simond.
              It felt good, Simond, to experience you less pontificating and more ´flesh and bones´, so to say. Makes it more easy for me to relate; for example, to see where misunderstandings have popped up.

              Just one, when you say: “this also offends the sensibility in you that only bona fide, recognised gurus, like Osho, have the right to say they know something.”

              No, Simond, I wouldn´t say that and don´t mean that. I remember here the casual expression of Lokesh: “different strokes for different folks.” And it’s true in my ´case´ that Osho´s very holistic expressions mostly work the best for me and ´qua bona fide´ has nothing to do with it.

              Has more to do with the contentment, that I, as a receiver, feel seen ‘holistically’ as well. The quotes Arpana did contribute just now to the topic are (again) a good example of that.

              If I feel invited instead of pontificated at, fighting or resistant attitudes become simply obsolete.

              And a last one (for now), Simond:
              I remember clearly that when you came in here as a contributor I enjoyed that and also did express it. However, I´d say that ratings in general function mostly as a dead-end path of communication while relating.

              Sincerely,

              Madhu

        • satchit says:

          “You ask what does it mean or what do I get out of being an observer?
          To observe is to watch and to see things as they are. So when I say I observe I’m just looking, I observe and look. I watch as any feelings arise. Sometimes I can see they are reactive or emotional. They are from a past hurt. So I endeavour to observe reactions and recognise that they are untrustworthy.”

          Hi Simond,

          Is it not that you create a split between the observer and the observed? One part observing the other part.

          How is it then about being total?

          • simond says:

            Of course, Sachit, the observer watching the observer, watching the observer, watching the observer is endless. It’s a dead end.

            But why shouldn’t there be a split between the observer and the observed? Is that a problem?
            I’d say creating that distance between what is observed and any reactions/judgments to them is what creates the ability to be able to respond ‘totally’, i.e. without reaction.

            Reactions are always emotional and problematic; whereas responding is neutral and ultimately cleaner….

            • satyadeva says:

              Good post, Simond.

              • frank says:

                Yes, our `mind` works by making distinctions.
                Further intelligence is then noticing that the line or point of distinction is also the line or point of connection.
                Like a fence separates spaces but also joins them together.

            • satchit says:

              “Reactions are always emotional and problematic; whereas responding is neutral and ultimately cleaner….”

              I would say constant watching is not possible. In my opinion, watching is only half of the game. The other half is acting and nobody is watching.

              • Arpana says:

                Watching is always from a judging space, so we resist what is there, and as all those misery- making ideas about right and wrong shrink, just living takes over.

                • satchit says:

                  Now this is new to me that watching is from a judging space, Arpana. I always thought ego is judging: This is good for me – this is bad for me!

                  Maybe you should post that ol’ horse-story again!

              • Arpana says:

                Osho said watching is for cowards who are afraid to live.

                • satyadeva says:

                  But surely, watching doesn’t necessarily imply judging? Isn’t the whole point to suspend judgment, adopt a neutral stance, in order to see what’s real and true, and what isn’t, otherwise one’s likely to get stuck in more reactivity, creating more problems?

                  Re what Osho said, wasn’t he referring to ‘chronic spectatorship’ rather than the inner process of watching? (And you yourself, Arps, recently confirmed he recommended self-watching, did you not?!).

                • Arpana says:

                  SD said,
                  “But surely, watching doesn’t necessarily imply judging?”

                  What motivates you to watch then?

                  I’ve only come across Osho saying watching is for those who are afraid to live, once.The standard references are in their thousands.

                  I was motivated by mischief-making, which I don’t feel the need to watch because I don’t judge mischievous, in this instance, as wrong, although I might on another occasion. So then, if I remembered, I might attempt to watch – well, if I thought I was being really bad, which just doesn’t happen anymore. :)

                • satyadeva says:

                  I’d use the word ‘discrimination’ rather than ‘judgment’, Arps – perhaps a fine line, but I’ve got ‘Virgo Rising’ you see…

                  The basic motivation is to avoid suffering, which is pretty well inevitable if one believes and acts upon everything aberrant emotions and the thoughts and beliefs they fuel ‘want’ us to.

                  (Btw, I suspected you were playing devil’s advocate just now but challenged you anyway, just to make sure).

                • simond says:

                  I’d guess he meant that watching or observing from some judgemental place is for cowards. Like those who observe and do nothing, when action needs to be taken.

                  As you say, Arpana, that type of observation is for the religionists and the detached scientist who would coldly observe whilst others suffer.

                • Arpana says:

                  @SD: On reflection…

                  There is active watching, so that’s always about judging, but passive watching, which is just a long-established habit of being aware of what is going on inside and not reacting – but only because judging is shrinking. And then as soon as judging kicks in, I might and might not watch, but I generally know I’m reacting so I’m watching myself reacting. Hmm!!

                • Arpana says:

                  Do you recall that conversation, quite lengthy. Me, Frank, yourself particularly, and we talked about making a distinction between judging and exercising a bit of discernment.

                  I agree about discomfort, but isn’t that because at root we judged, repressed. Resisted.

                  Everything starts from fear of disapproval and a desire for approval. In childhood.

                • Tan says:

                  Arps, could you tell me where and when Osho said that?

                  I always try to watch anything that happens in me, like thinking, feelings, weird things, etc…I always can see the reactions of my body in response as well, year in, year out…and I am really fed up with my watcher. Nowadays, I don’t want to watch anything, I just want to feel and judge and swear and do exactly the opposite of watching.

                  To be honest, I want my watcher to fuck off.

                  Cheers! XX

                • satchit says:

                  @tan

                  “I always try to watch anything that happens in me, like thinking, feelings, weird things, etc…I always can see the reactions of my body in response as well, year in, year out…and I am really fed up with my watcher. Nowadays, I don’t want to watch anything, I just want to feel and judge and swear and do exactly the opposite of watching.

                  To be honest, I want my watcher to fuck off.

                  Cheers! XX”

                  Makes me smile tan :-)

                  Watching can create a burden. Forget it!
                  Just float with the river….

                • frank says:

                  ‘Watching’ is certainly a medicinal, remedial technique useful for dealing with addiction, painful compulsive feelings and actions.

                  How far that can be extended into the 24-hour life is a matter for experimentation by each individual. When you reach the limit you will not do or be able to do anymore.

                  Are you going to ‘watch’ your night-time dreams also?

                  Medicine has its limits before it becomes poison.

                • satchit says:

                  The first sutra:

                  GRASP THE PRINCIPLE OF TWO WITNESSES.

                  It is one of the most important sutras, one of the very fundamentals of inner alchemy. Let it sink deep in your heart. It can transform you, it can give you a new birth, a new vision, a new universe. It has two meanings; both meanings have to be understood.

                  The first meaning: there are two kinds of witnesses. One kind is the people that surround you. You are constantly aware that you are being watched, witnessed. It creates self- consciousness in you. Hence the fear when you are on a stage facing a big crowd. Actors feel it, poets feel it, orators feel it — and not only the beginners but even those who have wasted their whole life in acting. When they come on the stage a great trembling arises in them, a great fear, as to whether they will be able to make it or not.

                  With so many eyes watching you, you are reduced to an object. You are no more a subjectivity, you have become a thing. And you are afraid because they may not appreciate you. They may not feed your ego, they may not like you, they may reject you.

                  Now you are in their hands. You are reduced to a dependent slave. Now you have to work in such a way that you will be appreciated. You have to buttress their egos, so that in response you can hope they will buttress your ego.

                  Osho

              • Arpana says:

                Tan said,
                “Nowadays, I don’t want to watch anything, I just want to feel and judge and swear and do exactly the opposite of watching.”

                Go for it, I say.

                I’ve stopped beating myself up for being a cursing, feeling, not stereotypical meditative type. (P.S: I’m searching for the source of that remark. I’ll let you have it ASAP.) (๑˃̵ᴗ˂̵)و

                • Tan says:

                  @Arps
                  Thanks.
                  Yes, I am going for it, as you said. X

                  @ Frank
                  Thanks.
                  Very interesting point, my boy! I will reflect on it.

                  @Satchit
                  Thanks.
                  It is not a burden, I am just fed up. My watcher is still there, the bugger, and I am showing my middle finger to it. All this could lead to a mental problem, if I am not aware enough!

                • Arpana says:

                  @ Tan:

                  So let me get this right, Tan.

                  You’re watching yourself giving the finger to the watcher who is watching you give it the finger. Hmm!!! ɾ⚈▿⚈ɹ

                • frank says:

                  Big fleas have little fleas,
                  Upon their backs to bite ‘em,
                  And little fleas have lesser fleas,
                  and so, ad infinitum.

                • kusum says:

                  What is the point of rationalising everything? It is totally waste of time & energy. A ROSE IS A ROSE IS A ROSE IS A ROSE.

                • Tan says:

                  Arps, it is like this:
                  Me, Tan, and my watcher, I don’t speculate more than that. I don’t go ad infinitum and all this bla…bla…I am spiritually simple or simpleton and I am ok with it.

                  I will give you an example in real life for you to understand what I mean:
                  My neighbour has just one leg and he walks badly with a stick. We had a minor disagreement
                  about my fence and I flew into a rage and shouted to him: “If you don’t sort it out quickly, I will break your leg and you are going to need a wheelchair, motherfucker”.

                  I reacted badly and cowardly with judgment and I felt sooooo goooood!

                  My watcher is still there, but the very reason for his existence of no reaction, no judgement is gone. That is my finger to him!

                  Cheers! XX

                • Arpana says:

                  @Tan says, 21 July, 2017 at 1:09 pm:

                  Funny you should say that about neighbours, Tan.

                  Yep. Sometimes you just have to draw lines in the sand and bugger the watcher.

                • Arpana says:

                  @kusum 21 July, 2017 at 12:44 pm:

                  What’s your mum making you for dinner tonight, then?

                • Kavita says:

                  After reading all the comments & what frank says: 21 July, 2017 at 12:12 pm, I felt I am back in the classroom after a lil holiday from SN!

                  Cheers, all!!!

                • Arpana says:

                  @Kavita (21 July, 2017 at 3:08 pm):

                  Er!! It was a joke, a quip, in response to my joke/quip to Tan.

                • Kavita says:

                  Thanx, Arps :)

                • Arpana says:

                  (๑˃̵ᴗ˂̵)

                  MOD:
                  PLEASE TRANSLATE!

  2. frank says:

    I knew a bloke when I was young back in `Borough called Pikey Pete. He went off to India as a young man,forgetting to pay me back the money he owed me.

    I met him years later in a chai shop somewhere on the hippy trail. He was wearing flowing orange robes and had a couple of wild-looking chicks with him who hung on his every word. He still had the same old leather jacket, dyed orange, and had that kind of swagger about him that is so typical of enlightened ones.

    He had met some Godman on the trail, Baba Free Baksheesh, or something, who had given him a new name: Swami Pikananda.

    “I am God”, Pikey informed me in his unforgettable Teeside accent, as he sipped on his bhang lassi.
    “You are God, too,” he continued.
    “The only difference is that I know that I am God and you don`t know that you are God.
    That`s because you`re still attached to your ego. I`m well beyond that.
    If you accept me as God, then you accept the God in yourself.
    If you deny that I am God, then you are denying the God in yourself.
    I accept myself as I am, which is God
    You don’t accept yourself as you are, which is also God.
    So until you can drop your ego and become God yourself, you will have to accept me as God
    and surrender.
    I accept everything.
    Cash, travellers cheques, credit cards, drugs, your wife, your house, your sister…

    Love, Bom Shankar and Yahoo….”

  3. Kavita says:

    Enjoyed the video, thank you for the sharing, SN.

    “Isn’t “Sheela” a part of us all?” No doubt about that, only can’t relate to her running away without confronting Osho before she did.
    -

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      ““Isn’t “Sheela” a part of us all?” No doubt about that, only can’t relate to her running away without confronting Osho before she did.” ( Kavita)

      Sheela, Kavita, played as an individual unfortunately in the course of time re the Sannyas community chronicle an important and fatal role; fatal for herself and fatal for others.

      I´ve been kind of reluctant to watch ´another one´ of these compilation doc-film offers after watching Sabine Giesiger´s Swiss doc: ‘The Guru, his Secretary and his Bodyguard’, which filled the cinemas here for weeks, years ago; but the Swiss one was admittedly not as manipulatively sensationalist as this ´oeuvre, which I came to know only today. (Pretty well many of the same protagonists though).

      Wait another few years, Kavita, and it could be then that only the last part of this thoroughly done investigation and trials part shown in the last 20 minutes or so of this compilation on Video will serve a majority to claim they “know it all” – like one of these twitter account ínfos and infotainments which are so fashionable nowadays.

      Arpana is quite right when he states that if we would have had the chance of discussion at the time of release (1987), there could have been some worth in it. Sheela and some of her buddhies had been still in a Californian jail at that time and others are fugitives up to nowadays, as one knows.

      If movie producers want – or maybe even claim – to be in service with a sustainable warning about deterioration processes up to growing criminal tendencies in human social movements or in spiritual movements, I´d say, the job in producing that video compilation is not well done.

      And I´ve been a participant and do say this not as an observer – and have been amongst many, many very lovable, intelligent people I came to know in all phases (besides the very last one enduring till now in Pune).

      And I simply know by that, Kavita, that the meditation and investigation about such issues or Quests: ´Are we corruptible by power the way Sheela and some other buddhies´(?) have proved to be, such have been daily on the meditation list, while being together, so to say. For many, I knew. And at almost any time, btw – not only in Oregon.

      The ´We` has been always a bunch of affiliated individuals, as it will always be and as unique have been and will be the responses to situations of great challenge or crises. If you have a deeper look.

      I saw that in my nightmares on the Ranch as elswhere as well as in my bliss states or when I´ve been and/or am simply silent and still. And I saw and see that while relating.

      A deeper look in such a video clip is not happening. That´s how I see it and I am sorry about that.

      Madhu

      -

      • Kavita says:

        Madhu, thank you for your response.

        Since I wasn’t physically present, probably it’s easier for me to be objective; as you say looking deeper is not happening I would watch that vid again when time permits, to look if I can find a more deeper meaning.

      • satchit says:

        “I´ve been kind of reluctant to watch ´another one´ of these compilation doc-film offers after watching Sabine Giesiger´s Swiss doc: ‘The Guru, his Secretary and his Bodyguard’,
        which filled the cinemas here for weeks, years ago; but the Swiss one was admittedly not as manipulatively sensationalist as this ´oeuvre, which I came to know only today. (Pretty well many of the same protagonists though).”

        Madhu, the documentary only tells a certain truth. To call it manipulative means you believe you know the better truth. Maybe you even think you have to defend ‘your’ truth.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          “Madhu, the documentary only tells a certain truth. To call it manipulative means you believe you know the better truth. Maybe you even think you have to defend ‘your’ truth.” (Satchit).

          I won´t fight your interpretation of my response, and if something like ‘defending ‘MY’ ‘truth’ did reach you (or others?) I can simply say: That is not the case.

          I´ve not been up to it, while taking the effort to watch Parmartha´s offer to the chat, and then taking the effort of responding.

          However, as far as the issue of manipulation goes, I´m going to stick to my words; that´s my freedom of speech here and also my dignity.

          And this instinct is trained by many decades and also trained by watching innumerable documentary features and quite often listening as well to as innumerable Q&As after the doc-feature watching, with the producers, scriptwriters etc.

          Truth in small letters is quite a living thing, not to speak about approaching here and there the unspeakable of a suchness in THIS, which deserves (maybe?) big letters.

          Just now this:
          Did you watch at the very end the long long list of credits happening?:
          Scriptwriters, production firms, locations of these, other sources, material addresses worldwide etc. etc?

          I did. And I did it after the screening, so to say, and also did a little research about this. Besides US and California, Oregon and UK ´sources´, Hamburg as well as Munich Media and Movie Production firms (and what not else) have been also busy and credited in this team.

          So many cooks for a mental meal.

          Just because you approached me the way you did, I´d like to remind you (if you don´t know it already?) about one of the really scandalous incidents of the Hamburg source for information:
          There – once upon a time in the eighties – they offered quite proudly a fraud´s material called: an ´original diary of Adolf Hitler´ and had spent a lot of money on a fraudulent ghost writer as it turned out, a short time later. Took a very long time for their business to recover afterwards.

          And nowadays, hilarious shit – often similar, I´d say, is happening day-in, day-out. Mostly for sensational reasons or for power and money.

          As an individual citizen of this world one surely has to practise to keep one´s own shit-detector alive: not taking in all that is offered. In order to stay human and as conscious, as well as as loving, as possible.

          Madhu

  4. Arpana says:

    If we had discussed this round about the time of release we would have been discussing a filmic representation, to a greater or lesser degree, of aspects of our lives; now a discussion is under way of a filmic representation of aspects of our history.

  5. frank says:

    “Isn`t Sheela a part of us all?”

    Oh yes, Father, a timely reminder that we are all sinners in the eyes of God!

  6. Jairamaia says:

    Satchit, Judas Hugh Milne said that Bhagwan said, “I’m so glad that I don’t have to pretend that I am enlightened any more.” If Bhagwan actually said that to Judas Hugh Milne, He was obviously fucking with him.

    • satchit says:

      Milne looks authentic to me in this movie.
      The question is only:
      Was it a personal message to him or was it a message to all that enlightenment is fake?

      • Tan says:

        Satchit, if you watch the interview of Hugh Milne (Conscious TV) he says totally different answers to the same question.

        Then, one wonders if he is suffering from dementia, or he is a liar, or like Osho said, he is retarded. Osho knew him very well, by the way.

        In my opinion, he is just a plain twat.

        Cheers!

      • swamishanti says:

        “I myself create so many situations. Those who are really authentic, who are ready to work, will have to pass through them. Otherwise they cannot work. The work is in the unknown. It is in that dimension which transcends reason, which transcends sense, which transcends all your understanding.

        If you come to me with your moral attitudes, your traditional-mind attitudes, your so-called knowledge, I will have to shatter it from somewhere. I will have to break it, I will have to make an opening. The opening is always difficult, painful. So I have to create many many situations…

        I create situations. I spread rumours about myself just to see what happens to you. Someone says something to you about me. What happens? You may simply drop me. And it is very good! Now you will not be wasting my time and I will not be wasting yours. If you drop me then it is not your path, you must find someone somewhere else. Then it is good that you have dropped me. But if you remain, if you persist in spite of many repulses, then only can something that is beyond, transcendental, be shown to you, indicated to you.”

        Osho, ‘The Eternal Quest’

  7. Lokesh says:

    Swami D declares, “Again a strange character has a platform on which to spread his wired thoughts: Osho’s self-proclaimed former bodyguard, who has the chance to express exclusive and particularly secret insider knowledge. It is enough to say that there was never a post of bodyguard in Poona and this might give us an insight into his mental condition and help to put his other statements into place.”

    This is utter nonsense, and to coin his own words, ‘This might give us an insight into Swami D’s mental condition and help to put his other statements into place.’

    Shiva was not (quote) “Osho’s self-proclaimed…bodyguard”. I watched Shiva in action for years and if I were asked for one word to describe his role it would be ‘bodyguard’, as in a person employed to guard an individual from bodily harm. Swami D’s need to make it look like Shiva needed to fabricate lies to back up his story sets the tone for much of his writing.

    The truth is that Shiva was in fact in a position to know much about Osho’s life that an outsider would not. Unlike Swami D, who quite obviously does not know anything much other than the assumptions he is making from a distance, on an outsider’s footing.

    I have not watched the video yet. I might get around to it, but really, I find myself wondering and asking myself do I really need to watch a rerun of the same old tired shite? Once again I question why there exists a need among certain sannyasins to constantly revisit the graveyard of the past and rake over the same old questions about what really happened back then. Meanwhile, the here and now, which Osho spoke so much about, seems to be neglected.

    Swami D poses the question, Isn’t “Sheela” a part of us all? ” That anyone has real space in their mind for such dumb questions surely signals that something is amiss. I ask you, what bearing does any of this have on your life today​?

    • satchit says:

      What bearing does it have?
      Some people like to collect stamps, some like to chat about old sannyas stuff. And you are also part of the game, in the here and now, Mr. Lokesh.

  8. shantam prem says:

    Living beings have their present as well as past; for example, man of interest of this thread, Hugh Milne.
    Here is his website:
    https://milneinstitute.com/hugh-milne/

  9. Lokesh says:

    Satchit says, “Some people like to collect stamps.” A fascinating observation, I am sure you will agree. As for chatting about old sannyas stuff, I have done my share of that, but in my heart I feel the saturation point was reached some time ago. Really, it does not do that much for me and for the most part it is actually quite boring.

    Satchit, on a more personal note, I see you as someone who does not have much to share. Your comments are usually short and display little that might give a hint as to what kind of a life you have led, contact with Osho etc. Are you a stamp collector?

    What exactly do you mean to convey, when you say, “And you are also part of the game, in the here and now, Mr. Lokesh.” I ask because that statement could be interpreted in any number of ways.

    • satchit says:

      Lokesh, you said one should not talk of the past because it is a “graveyard” and means not being in the “here and now”.

      You being part of the game is when you also share your experience of the past like: “I watched Shiva in action for years and if I were asked for one word to describe his role it would be ‘bodyguard’, as in a person employed to guard an individual from bodily harm.”

      To be honest, this idea that one is not in the Here and Now if one talks of the past felt always a bit stupid and naive for me. Basically, one is in the Here and Now – talking about the past.

      On a personal note, Lokesh, I share what I want to share and I guess you do the same.

      • Kavita says:

        ”To be honest, this idea that one is not in the Here and Now if one talks of the past felt always a bit stupid and naive for me. Basically, one is in the Here and Now – talking about the past.”

        Now, I am wondering if this mean there are two Here & Nows, one real and the other true, or maybe both are just mind games! So does it mean any which way it’s a game?!

      • Lokesh says:

        Satchit, you are missing my point. There is no ‘should’ in regards talking about the past. Of course, we all talk about the past, while being in the present.

        My point is that many of the topics on SN relate to events that happened long ago. I find something stale about that. It is as if life in the near present does not have anything worth discussing because all the goodies happened ages ago. I do not wish to contribute to such a backward-looking mindset.

        I live a life wherein each and every day there exists plenty to talk about and discuss. I just returned from my favourite spot on Ibiza, a remote peninsula, where people rarely visit. There is something about spending a few hours there that quiets my mind, leaving me completely at peace with myself, the cares and troubles of the world far away. Then I check into an article on SN, the conclusion of which is, “Isn’t “Sheela” a part of us all?” I can assure you such bunk is not something that inspires me in the slightest.

        • Arpana says:

          “I just returned from my favourite spot on Ibiza, a remote peninsula, where people rarely visit.”

          Just started raining here, and I am about to go out to a Cafe Nero on the canals, which because of the location will be empty, and on such occasions works for me the way the peninsula does for you.

          • Arpana says:

            And from inside…

            • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

              Thanks for sharing, Lokesh and Arpana.

              What I often do, when I need a break ´from it all´, I look in the city greenery in Munich for two friends with roots who allow to sling my fabulous hammock there. Best are the places where I can hear the river, a canal or the creek nearby. A beautiful shelter in any special kind of storm.

              Madhu

          • Lokesh says:

            Looks really cool as in, fresh temperatures. Would love to visit for 24 hours, any longer at this time of the year and I start to miss the big blue.

        • satchit says:

          I guess one could also have asked, “Isn’t the evil a part in all of us?” Sheela plays very much the devil role in the sannyas scene, who is responsible for the failure of the Ranch.

          But I can understand that you are bored coming back from your remote place to this virtual marketplace and then again these repetitive questions.

          About what else to talk? About politics?
          About the Tour de France?
          Still this other repetitive Pune-Now subject is available…

          The video was new to me and it is also interesting how many different perspectives of the same happening are possible.

          • Arpana says:

            “Just two, three days before it happened a sannyasin attacked Laxmi. You may not have observed that you all are responsible for it, because many of you have been feeling antagonism towards Laxmi. That sannyasin is just a victim, just the weakest link among you. He has expressed your antagonism, that’s all, and he was the weakest; he became the victim, and now you will feel that he is responsible. That’s not true. You participated. Subtle is the law!

            How you participated? Deep down, whenever somebody managing – and Laxmi is managing things around here – there are many situations in which you will feel antagonistic, in which she will have to say no to you, in which you will feel hurt, it cannot be avoided…in which you feel that enough attention is not being paid to you, in which you feel that you are treated as if you are nobody. Your ego feels hurt and you feel antagonism.

            If many people feel antagonism towards a person, then the weakest amongst them will become the victim; he will do something. He was the craziest amongst you, that’s right. But he alone is not responsible. If you have ever felt antagonism towards Laxmi, that is part and you have earned a karma, and unless you become so subtly aware you cannot become enlightened. Things are very complicated.”

            Osho.
            Yoga: The Alpha and the Omega, Vol 2
            Chapter 9
            Chapter title: Cultivating Right Attitudes

  10. kusum says:

    Good entertainment film – especially for TODAY. Thank you, Parmartha.

  11. frank says:

    I just remembered the first time I watched this documentary.
    I was briefly going out with a girl (not a sannyasin). Must have been early 90s. She invited me for dinner with her mum. They knew that I had been a long time in India and had some kind of spiritual connection and were quite impressed.

    The dinner went well and I, being very polite and charming, seemed to have more or less convinced the mum that her daughter was involved with some kind of fledgling saint or modern day Jesus.

    Then she mentioned that, by chance, there was a documentary about my spiritual master on the TV that very night and maybe we should watch it.

    Oh dear, I still remember the look on their faces and my cringing feeling when the people in the therapy bunker started knocking six sorts of shit out of each other and getting it on and then Hugh Milne started banging on about…er…banging…and Sheela doing her morally-outraged crystal meth freak number….

    That really fucked my ego, man.
    But I guess that was the point.

    • Arpana says:

      Recall being in a pub with friends, not sannyasins, when the brouhha was really taking off, and on the way back from the bar with my round, being engulfed by the most acute self- consciousness; self-consciousness so severe I had to stand still to pull myself together, because I quite literally was unable to walk for a moment; and then took what seemed like forever to be able to talk, I was so thrown for a loop.

    • simond says:

      Great story, frank. I’ve been there too.

      • Lokesh says:

        I am utterly shocked and outraged to hear that Frank had a girlfriend who was not a sannyasin and Arps was in the pub with friends who were not sannyasins. Surely such confessions are enough to have the pair of them banned from SN. They have obviously forgotten that Sheela is a part of us all.

  12. Lokesh says:

    Just watched the first seven minutes of the ‘Scandal’ video. As I sat I felt like I was wasting my time. The commentator repeats “based on sex” a few times. You know how it runs: make a lie, keep it simple, repeat it again and again and soon people will believe it. I will not return to the video and I agree with Osho when he says, “Do not waste your time. Life is too short.” Amen

    • shantam prem says:

      I have watched 28 minutes in first go. From the very first minute it was clear it is American television documentary and, as in the case of Saddam Hussein, they will find weapons of mass destruction and in the case of Donald Trump, Russian intervention in election.

      No wonder media becomes powerful through fake news and every Titanic sinks because of small accidents.

      Sins make soul projects sink!

    • kusum says:

      Shiva certainly looks very handsome in normal clothes & shaven. He also provided inside knowledge. Shiva (Hugh Milne) certainly is very sensitive human being with good vibes.

  13. swami anand anubodh says:

    Referencing Osho in terms of ‘God’ reminded me of a similarity between Rajneeshpuram and something called ‘Pascal’s Wager’.

    Briefly, in the seventeenth-century the French philosopher Blaise Pascal proposed a wager on the existence of God. (At that time in Europe, much of the natural workings of the world were attributed to God. Before science revealed how things really worked). But, did God really exist? Pascal reasoned that it was better to live a life (or wager) as though God existed, because when you died, if you were right, then the rewards were effectively infinite, whereas, if you were wrong, you would never know that your pious life had been unnecessary.

    Those who went to Rajneeshpuram effectively made a wager. If things had been a success, then they would still be prospering today and reaping the benefits. As it happened, the wager lost, so what was the takeaway for everyone involved? Those who went to prison, I presume, deserved to go, and everyone else gained valuable experience to put on their life CVs. A chance had been given to be part of something unique. A chance never given to most of the world’s population.

    The fate of the ordinary sannyasin is something you rarely hear about when the topic of Oregon pops up, as things usually move quickly towards the same old ‘smart with hindsight’ with accusations against Sheela and the usual suspects.

    • Arpana says:

      “and everyone else gained valuable experience to put on their life CVs.”

      Well said.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      “Those who went to Rajneeshpuram effectively made a wager.”

      That´s quite a claim, Anand Anubodh – similar to those who – up to very nowadays – claim to ´kmow´ who is an escapist and who not, or who stick to their prejudged habits about how life should be lived. Doesn´t meet my experience what you claim here.

      And yes – though your statement “smart with hindsight” does unfortunately hit the target of most commentary actions from insiders – as also outsiders. Mine as well. Ought to be that way, I guess, as long as we are not able to embody and verbalise sufficiently a non-dualistic perspective.

      Journeying this caravanserai chat website, I´d say we try our best, each and everyone, if it’s not inhabited by ´playmates’ of ´trolls’ or other kind of IT-rubbish.

      Today, I´ve been very grateful for Arpana´s efforts of research and sharing that, to spice up our sharings. The other day, Satchit claimed to know that I am kind of on a defending line. I denied that.

      But what I can say is, that I love to feel ´at home´ with friends – even and surprisingly on a website. That sometimes happens here.

      With Love,

      Madhu

  14. shantam prem says:

    Rajneesh junior´s project will not bump in Mexico as Senior Sir´s project bust in debris in America. Is it because two countries have different mind-set?

    It is good imagination exercise to presume Rajneeshpuram in Mexico, Portugal, or, let us say, Ibiza?

    In a fair and common sense way, United States of America was the worst choice possible to implant Bhagwan of that time. This is one psychological crime Sheela has committed to persuade her Bhagwan to close the hugely successful Ashram and restart in America.

    More than 50% times we become victim of ungrounded trusts. Religious-minded people who fly high without looking at the ground realities are even more prone to trust their gods with the intention that when they enter the sea it will become shallow and they will walk on the water.

    This is one reason for America being greatest country on the earth, that it never tolerates legal and constitutional fouls. It never hesitates to start impeachment proceedings against its own commander-in-chief for small, small lies.

  15. Arpana says:

    “For example, Shiva was never my bodyguard; it simply happened as a coincidence. An Indian sannyasin attacked Laxmi and almost destroyed her nose. Laxmi is a small woman, so when I came to know about it I told Shiva, “You should be a bodyguard to Laxmi; wherever Laxmi goes you have to follow her.” In evening initiation meetings Laxmi used to sit by my side to give me information about the person, and I had told Shiva, “Wherever Laxmi is, you have to be there,” so he started sitting on the other side. He was not my bodyguard.

    Now he is writing that he was my bodyguard and he knows every secret. He has never entered my room, not even once; there was no need. Someday he will repent what he has done, but then it will be too late; the people who are reading his book will be convinced of whatever he is saying. This can happen to anybody. And I don’t want it to happen to anybody.”

    Osho
    The Razor’s Edge
    Chapter 6
    Chapter title: Laughter is the essential religion

    • kusum says:

      Osho outsmarts everybody. Lol….

    • satchit says:

      Lokesh says: ” I watched Shiva in action for years and if I were asked for one word to describe his role it would be ‘bodyguard’, as in a person employed to guard an individual from bodily harm.”

      Now, who is the liar? Lokesh or Osho?

      Have Fun!

      • shantam prem says:

        “Your honour, I never lie. Lie detector machine is compromised.”
        “How come you are so sure?”
        “SURE? You can ask any of my followers.”

        Suddenly there was silence in the court. Judge could see tears in the eyes of present disciples in the court.

        P.S:
        Right now two successful Indian gurus are long time behind prison bars. Their followers bow down before prison gates as well as police vans taking them for court hearing.

      • Arpana says:

        Q: A LOT OF EX-SANNYASINS LEFT YOU DISAPPOINTED — MAYBE IN THAT PROCESS WHEN YOU DECIDED NOT TO TALK ANY MORE — AND SOME FELT AND VOICED THEIR CONCERN PUBLICLY THAT YOU EXPLOIT YOUR FOLLOWERS TO SUSTAIN AN EXTRAVAGANT LIFESTYLE. YOUR FORMER ITALIAN COOK, DEEKSHA, CALLED YOU A LIAR IN THE OREGONIAN; YOUR FORMER BODY GUARD SHIVAMURTI SAID YOU ARE DISHONEST — I THINK IT WAS IN THE OREGONIAN, AS WELL. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THESE PEOPLE PERSONALLY? WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO THEM?

        A: “I love them still, the same as I have always loved them; and what they are saying is not wrong. I have never said that I never lie. If a lie is helpful, I am the first person to lie immediately.

        Truth is not a value to me. Helping those people who have come to me in every possible way – and they are all asleep, they cannot understand the language of the one who is awake.
        So every enlightened person has lied and, of course, they did not have the guts to say so. I don’t have any problem in accepting the truth that I lie.

        The whole question is: What helps to wake you up? For example, if you are not waking up, I can lie and shout in your ears that your house is on fire. It is not on fire, but what to do? Hearing that your house is on fire you jump out of the bed and you wake up, and then I can say I am sorry that I had to lie, but there was no other way to wake you up.”

        Osho.
        The Last Testament, Vol 1
        Chapter 25

        • satchit says:

          Good quote, Arpana.

          “…and then I can say I am sorry that I had to lie, but there was no other way to wake you up.”

          So sorry that I had to tell you that I’m enlightened :-)

          • Arpana says:

            Satchit,

            I no longer care if Osho is ‘enlightened’ or ‘not enlightened’.

            My inner landscape has changed dramatically for the better, because of the work Osho and I have carried out. ⃛(❛ั◡˜๑)

            MOD:
            PLEASE TRANSLATE THE SYMBOLS, Arpana!

      • swami anand anubodh says:

        Satchit,

        You pose a question, so let’s see if you can answer one.

        If Osho was suddenly attacked and Shiva was nearby, who do you suppose Osho would expect to see rush to his aid?

      • Lokesh says:

        Well, Satchit, how would you describe what Shiva was doing?

        Osho had a strong tendency to contradict himself in such matters. You think Shiva was sitting around Osho for so many years because Osho was so compassionate that he saw Shiva required his special attention?

        Osho said this, Osho said that, you can read about what Osho said in hundreds of books and find thousands of contradictions and if you look hard enough you will probably find a statement that says Shiva was his bodyguard, unless it has been moderated to keep things politically correct.

        Who really cares? I do not really give a shit one way or another. I did not lie, I shared my opinion. Yes, I know opinions are two a penny. You can have mine for free.

  16. Parmartha says:

    Osho often decried “history”, and when I lived and worked in the Medina commune as a teacher of children I was told I could not teach the subject. When I asked about this I was told it was an instruction from Bhagwan (Osho)!

    I found that odd then, and odd now, basically because I knew that Osho himself was actually very well read in history…and made good use of that in his brilliant free-ranging lectures.
    There are those around me who say that in other places Osho did praise the study of history, …well, if he did, what was happening in Medina?!

    I myself rate the study of the history of the Sannyas movement partly because my general feeling is that the ‘lessons’ of history therein have not been learned; so how to make sure there is a chance that they will? By contouring the history of the movement through the many lenses in which that history appears.

    • Lokesh says:

      Good post, PM.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      “I found that odd then, and odd now, basically because I knew that Osho himself was actually very well read in history…and made good use of that in his brilliant free-ranging lectures.
      There are those around me who say that in other places Osho did praise the study of history, …well, if he did, what was happening in Medina?!”
      (Parmartha)

      Yes, Parmartha, good that you came in yesterday (also as the editor of this thread topic), sharing about your Medina experience while being a teacher there, being blocked and stopped in teaching history to the most vulnerable Beings in a most vulnerable time, mental as emotional, and a space we have all been passing through: Childhood.

      I´m reminded of only two of the numerous documentary features* having been done in ongoing war zones cold as hot as terror-stricken for ages and ages in the Near East, and childhood in general in these zones.

      The very engaged efforts of a few courageous people to bring the most vulnerable their childhood ´back’, so to say.

      One is titled ‘The Promises’** (edited 2001) and narrates about the 4 to 5 years work with Israeli and Palestinian small kids to bring them together and make it possible that they play with each other, like children do when they are NOT programmed to throw stones or programmed to act out other hate-games already at a very early age.

      The other is titled ‘Dancing in Jaffa’** (edited 2013) and narrates about the teenage time of Jewish and Arab teenagers, and the arduous work to try to teach them to dance with each other – also that was/is a year-long arduous effort of all the protagonists to face AND to surpass all kinds of life-hostile deep programming to “THE” enemy/ies of one´s own ´culture´, if we can the least talk of culture that way.

      How to teach history, that is indeed a question (Quest).

      And I have been in such awe to see how those daring people amongst some others I came to know (and some even lost their lives during or after such processes and enterprises) – how those have been creative in their Peace-Work, inviting children to become messengers of Peace instead of playing the roles of ‘High Court Members of Vengeance’ or playing any of the innumerable roles of ‘Self-Righteousness’ which History, collective and individual unconsciousness has offered/is offering us in abundance, isn´t it?

      Due to your post (at 5.51 pm) and especially then also Jairamaia`s post (at 11.53 pm) yesterday, the child AND the grown-up in me (!) felt drawn to my writing place (again
      sorry…inescapable), to respond.

      Remembering the (inconvenient) fact in my eyes and Soul that some (or even most) of the history teaching of children are prolonging all kinds of wars with other measures, making scapegoats endlessly, or even worse.

      To come to know exceptions to that, going for Peace, is such a strong invitation. And The Living Invitation of the Master was/is of that kind for me. ´From Ignorance to Innocence´ (an ´oldie´ lecture series too), wasn´t it?

      A long way short and a short way long: to step out of a repetitive and unfortunately big and common path.

      What is the next step (towards this Peace) and what is the next step here at this place, is yet unknowable.

      Sincerely, and with thanks to the ´trigger’ you chose, Parmartha.

      Madhu

      * really deserving that classification
      ** very easy to ´google contents

    • simond says:

      Parmartha,
      Good writing.

      I’ve always loved history too. Often examined to see if it can show me how to behave differently or to see if, in the wider world, we have ever learned much from the study.

      Discovering the patterns of history do provide examples of how we may learn something but I’ve certainly noticed how difficult it is to learn much from the study.

      As in the wider world I’ve observed how many times I made the same mistake, in different guises, and therefore how slow my learning has been.

      And if I look out I notice how it seems mankind has learned very little from history – one massacre is followed by another, one dictator by another through the millennia. Do we ever learn?

      The world goes on repeating time after time the same mistakes. I guess because only the individual can every truly learn. And we, readers of this small club, exemplify how slow our own growth has been.

      I don’t despair. Somehow it’s enough that I learn, and that some around me are learning too.
      And the contribution you have made to the history of Sannyas with the contributors here does make a difference, at least to me. Thanks.

      • kusum says:

        That is because most humans are robots & they have robotic behaviour. Deep implanted conditionings & deep mechanical habits play parts throughout life. Only meditation helps to be aware of these issues. That is how I see it. Just to be aware of one’s own patterns of behaviour is enough to wake up.

        • shantam prem says:

          Kusum Devi,
          What you have written gives the impression as if you are not one of those most humans.

          It is very typical Sannyas Ego bag style, full with Osho books I will say.

          MOD:
          one of those most humans – PLEASE EXPLAIN, Shantam!

          • shantam prem says:

            Mine was reply to Kusum where she writes, “Most humans are robots & they have robotic behaviour. Deep implanted conditionings & deep mechanical habits play parts throughout life….”

            My contention is we the meditation oath-taking Swamis and Mas are also not different.

            • satyadeva says:

              Perhaps you find such a perception/belief convenient, Shantam, as it implies you needn’t bother doing anything about it as it’s all ‘obviously’ such a complete waste of time?

              • shantam prem says:

                Welcome, SD, with your judgemental puritan mind.

                Scientific approach is not to hide any defect and limitations under the carpet. Evolution of spirituality lies in the hearts of honest seekers.

                • satyadeva says:

                  I suspect your professed ‘scientific’ honesty is just a mask for laziness, Shantam. It suits you to drag everyone else into the same category as it’s a convenient excuse for you to do absolutely nothing about your own condition.

                  Btw, since when have you demonstrated, in any shape or form, anything resembling a “scientific approach”?! For a start, you’d have to know a very large number of your sannyasin peer group to even begin to form general conclusions about them.

                  No, Shantam, please be honest, this claim of a “scientific approach”, is just something you’ve lifted out of an Osho book, isn’t it?! Sounds good, of course, that’s why you’ve used the term, but it collapses under the merest (scientific) scrutiny. Really, it’s another instance of your ‘sophistry’ habit: reaching a conclusion that supports your personal preference, giving reasons for it that don’t don’t stand up to closer examination.

                  To me, any such professions of aspiration towards ‘objectivity’ on your part are invariably false, at best the result of self-delusion, as your mind is, to a considerable degree, saturated by frustration, anger, resentment, a ‘victim of injustice’ mentality (no need to specify about what!), all of which serves to colour your conclusions in an essentially self-serving manner. You’re the would-be Donald Trump of Sannyas!

                  Now, go ahead, resist, fight, deny, reject. Have a good one, Mr would-be President!

          • kusum says:

            Shantam, all human bodies are like a clock, like a machine, with mechanical habits.

      • Parmartha says:

        Thanks, Simond.

        I was outlining a Medina commune experience from 1983/4, but of course now I have researched the histories of Sannyas, and by sannyasins, and got first-hand reports, which at the time I was not aware of…

        I now know that often commune leaders were authorised to say that “It’s an instruction from Osho”…so I doubt my own instruction actually came from Osho himself.

        Also, to contextualise it:
        Osho did appear to give some good directives (again, if he was actually giving the directives!), like to make learning as experiential as possible, etc. and not classroom-based, or minimally so.

        My own educational view, for what it is worth, is to sort of follow the pupil somewhat. If a child asks questions and seems drawn to something or other, and that includes, for example, history, I have always seen my job when in such situations to give energy to helping that direction.

        I guess that history as taught in many places is just a collection of nationalistic dates and events, etc., so Osho would have been right about that.

        But, for example, personal accounts of the first world war and how it affected ordinary people, and the madness of such warfare, and the great lives needlessly lost, and the vast numbers who were lost, that sort of thing, and the poetry written from the trenches, etc. I would never discourage if a teenager, for example, was interested in that.

        Also, for example, the history of medicine: very important to allow us to see how grateful we should be to be born now, in that regard.

        I read even just today a history of how the Thames was in 1858…and how people just lived and died in shit and multiple diseases thereby. A good side-effect of well studied history is gratefulness….

        • frank says:

          “A good side-effect of well studied history is gratefulness.”
          That`s a good point. Reflecting on the highly improbable good fortune of being here now!

    • satchit says:

      “Osho often decried “history”, and when I lived and worked in the Medina commune as a teacher of children I was told I could not teach the subject. When I asked about this I was told it was an instruction from Bhagwan (Osho)!”

      Maybe they were more interested in killing your ego than in teaching children.

      Sannyas history: What lesson to learn out of history if they say it was all perfect and a success?

      • satyadeva says:

        “Maybe they were more interested in killing your ego than in teaching children.”

        You can not be serious, Satchit? They were surely not quite as stupid as that?!

        • satchit says:

          “You can not be serious, Satchit? They were surely not quite as stupid as that?!”

          They were more than stupid. Banning history from school though there was even one who was capable and ready to teach.

          Just following robot rules.

          • satyadeva says:

            Maybe, but I doubt very much they were focusing on the teacher’s “ego”, more on the foolish notion that learning History was necessarily bad for children, however and by whoever it was taught.

            While on the History topic, I count myself most fortunate to have been influenced by a school teacher who, from the age of 15, constantly reiterated that “you must think!”, ie not take anything as absolutely true unless thoroughly examined and compared to others’ versions, the idea being to strive towards an objectively balanced view as possible. Essential to this was becoming aware of personal bias, not only of historians but also, crucially, of one’s own:

            “The vast majority of people rely on purely or largely emotional responses to public issues, but there have to be some who are able to see through that, see through the sound and fury, the vested interests, look at all sides of the problem and strive to see things more clearly, to think more objectively. You people are being trained to do that.”

            I recall he also advised to bear in mind that “in the long run we’re all dead!” in order to keep an appropriate perspective on things. Advice that’s becoming more relevant almost daily…

            No one, enlightened or not, can persuade me that History taught in the light of such values is harmful or a waste of time.

            • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

              Whom you are quoting here, Satyadeva: “the vast majority”?

              Are you a teacher too? I´m curious.

              Madhu

            • satchit says:

              “Maybe, but I doubt very much they were focusing on the teacher’s “ego”, more on the foolish notion that learning History was necessarily bad for children, however and by whoever it was taught.”

              Why is it bad for children?
              Because talking of the past is not good for being in the Here and Now?

              I was always thinking that the
              Sannyas cult is blessed with intelligent people.

              Maybe I was wrong, maybe it has more the quality of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

              • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

                You seem to be in a bit of a bitchy mood today, Satchit; but alas, it’s understandable. However, you can ´nag-nag´ your way to wheresoever in that virtual open space and probably won´t find even those points again you essentially made up yourself. And believe me, I speak out of (self-)experience in such matters.

                And it IS essential what someone declaring to be a teacher in the world, or taking that role without having been even asked for it, is passing over to small kids or teenagers or their crowds.

                And some teaching to cope with the gamification of everyday realities up to the amount as it is happening today is indeed a new challenge. It is asking for new teachings, if we do want to use this word.

                We could just give it a start right away here, participating on this website, playing with issues which moved us/move us and practise a sharing.

                Where else could we go here?

                Tell me, Satchit, what moves you?

                Madhu

                • satchit says:

                  What moves me?

                  The bull under my arse.

                  Cheers!

                • frank says:

                  Satchit says:
                  “I was always thinking the sannyas cult was blessed with intelligent people.
                  Maybe I was wrong, maybe it has the quality of Jehovah`s witnesses.”

                  You`re a slow learner, mate.
                  After 40-odd years at the bottom of the no-mind class…now in just a few months at SN College, and you are beginning to actually learn something!

                  Big up to the headmaster, Mr Parmartha, and Head of Discipline, Mr “Slasher” Deva!

              • Parmartha says:

                IF BAD FOR CHILDREN, WHY DID OSHO STAY UP HALF THE NIGHT READING IT FOR A WHILE?

      • Parmartha says:

        Don’t worry, Satchit,
        if they wanted to kill the ego those guys just moved you out of the job at a moment’s notice, and that was done to tremble the ego at that time, many times, as I noticed.

        The then Medina hierarchy actually liked how I was with the children and how I taught them. I was not particularly qualified in history. I had a philosophy degree and was trained in teaching ‘Liberal Studies’, actually to adults…

        The instruction was not just aimed at me, but anyone who was teaching within the communes at the time (1983). I did ask about it, but was encouraged by my immediate co-ordinator not to make a fuss, and just carried on. However, when teaching ‘science’, for example, I brought in the history of science, etc. as context, and in a sense was quietly subversive.

        • Arpana says:

          Something cringe-making about those monstrous egotists taking a mallet to the egos of others.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          Yes, Parmartha,

          It’s quite an art of living to be quietly subversive, or I would say, to build up resilience, when confronted by more or less totalitarian circumstances. And to accomplish that in a non-violent way and as well not evoking violence as well needs quite some of the intelligence we can call an Intelligence of the Heart.

          At any time btw…

          Thank you for sharing a bit more about your time at Medina.

          Madhu

          • Parmartha says:

            Thanks, Madhu.

            Yes, it is an art, but sadly it is not lost on many totalitarians that people like me are around…one has to be very careful….

        • kusum says:

          Parmartha, did you receive any salary while working at Medina or was it just a charity work?? Who made the profit?? Just curious.

          • Parmartha says:

            No, Kusum,
            technically we had a sort of volunteer status. We got our board and lodging, and food, and clothes allowances, and in my case I got my fare paid to the Ranch for the summer festival every year. Also the commune did pay our National Insurance contributions. Oh, and yes, we got, or I did, £5 A WEEK POCKET MONEY EACH WEEK!

            It was a good place, though I could have done without the dormitory-style bedrooms.

            Any profits from the commune work went to Oregon to help with Osho’s wider work. But it was never that clear to me whether we made much real financial profit….

  17. Jairamaia says:

    Swamishanti, your post from the’ Eterrnal Quest’, beginning with, “I myself create so many situations, is exactly correct. Kudos.

    • satchit says:

      “I myself create so many situations, is exactly correct. Kudos.”

      How does he create situations?
      From his cloud number 9 ?

      • swamishanti says:

        Osho created tricks and tests, and set up hoops for his sannyasins to jump through. One had to get through all the hoops to get the gold.

        Stopping speaking was one hoop.
        Putting on a serious, sad face when Shivamurti carried the big tv into his trailer was another.

        Then inviting Shivamurti into his dental room to take photos of him in the dental chair. Collections of Rolls Royces followed and then changing from a simple robe to a glitzy, glam-rock style complete with diamond encrusted hats was another, and then blasting Jesus Christ and speaking against all religious leaders and masters when he started speaking again was another.

        High up in the snow-capped hills of Tibet, there was an ancient Buddhist practice where monks would jump through hoops of fire.

        The lama who managed to jump through all the hoops successfully in the fastest time 750 years ago was Osho in his last incarnation, and thus he was chosen to come back as the World Teacher in this era.

        • satchit says:

          Another historian.

          I did write “does” create – not ‘did’.

        • Tan says:

          I don’t really care if Osho was the incarnation of any ancient loser. What I know is that he was impossible, naughty and sometimes I felt like hitting him, even from a distance. He should be in silence, that way was less trouble.

          If anybody cares, just research in what Osho said about Shiva. If I am not mistaken, he mentioned Shiva two or three times in some talks. It was like he knew what was going to happen with him.

          Anyway, I am still here, meaning I still care about all of this.

          Cheers!

          • Arpana says:

            “Somebody was asking me in a letter…because just a few days ago Shiva has written a letter: “Please forgive me. I have done everything wrong. I have said lies against you, and the burden of it all is so much it is killing me.”

            The other person was asking, “If Shiva comes back” — because this letter may be just the beginning of the camel coming back from Santa Fe — “would you give him the same position that he used to have, your bodyguard?”

            I said, “Certainly. I trust him.” ”

            Osho
            From Death to Deathlessness
            Chapter 6

            • swamishanti says:

              “Shiva has written a book against me, full of lies. I have told the English sannyasins to sue him in court, because what he is saying is utter nonsense. And you can see the cunningness. In Poona, every evening I used to have a meeting for people who were taking sannyas. It was an open meeting — almost sixty, seventy, sometimes a hundred people would be present. One dozen people or maybe more would be initiated. And ten sannyasins were dancing as mediums to create a vibrant energy.

              And Shiva has written in his book that every night I need ten women, without making any reference to the fact that those ten women are mediums and they dance in an open place with one hundred people watching, a dozen people present to be initiated. He does not mention that; he simply mentions every night I need ten women.

              Can you see — can a person be more ugly? And he used to trust in me so much that he used to say that he can give his life — and this is what he is giving! And there are thousands of things which are absolutely wrong, fabrication, fiction, from his own mind.”

              “The people who know me, who have come into deep inner communion with me, who have experienced me, remain silent.

              It is not new. It is part of a strange human psychology. The positive person is humble; even to say something he feels embarrassed, because he knows that whatever he is going to say is not going to be up to the experience that he had. It is going to fall very short; hence the embarrassment.

              But the negative person has no fear, no embarrassment. He has not experienced anything. And to deny or to lie, or to create a fiction, is sensational. The people who have been writing against me…all the publishers are eager to publish their books—without knowing what they are writing, all kinds of rubbish.

              And a few of my sannyasins who have been with me from the very beginning have written books just to answer those lies and allegations, with facts and figures, with solid arguments.
              The publishers are not willing to publish them. They say there is no sensation in it. Lies have sensation; the truth is non-sensational. And the masses are interested in sensationalism, they are not interested in knowing the truth. Truth is simple and plain.

              But this situation has to be reversed; there is a limit to everything. The positive people have to come out in the light, and tell with emphasis their own experiences and what they understand about me and my relationship to my people. Unless they come out and do it, they are in an indirect way helping the negative people. Because if those negative people are not contradicted, it becomes an argument in their favour — why are they not contradicted?”

          • Arpana says:

            “Trust can only be unconditional, and its source is within me. It does not depend on you or your behaviour or action.

            Even if you killed me, my trust in you would remain the same. You betrayed, really, yourself; you fell, really, in your own eyes. But for me you remain the same person.

            Shiva had been my bodyguard for years. Then he dropped sannyas. Then he started speaking — against me. He wrote articles in German magazines — STERN and other magazines — against me. But if he comes back and wants to be my bodyguard he will be again by my side. And I know perfectly well what he has done. That does not matter at all, it is his doing; he should be worried and concerned about it. As far as I am concerned, I have remained exactly the same. He can come again and be my bodyguard. Nobody else will accept him as a bodyguard, because that is the easiest place from which to kill a man.

            Just now Indira Gandhi has been assassinated by her own bodyguards. Three bodyguards shot her — eight bullets, creating sixteen wounds, because all the bullets passed through her chest, belly, from the back to the other side. And if the bodyguards want to kill, that is the easiest and the safest place from which to kill a person.

            But if Shiva comes back and wants to be my bodyguard, I will be immensely happy to have him. It does not matter. He has to take responsibility for whatsoever he is doing, whatsoever he has done; he has to take the whole responsibility for it. But it is none of my business to interfere in his doings. If he feels it right to write against me, perfectly good; if he feels happy to write against me, perfectly good. But for ten years he was sitting by my side. He must have a tremendously idiotic mind — in ten years he could not see anything wrong. It took ten years for him, and now, after dropping sannyas, he becomes suddenly articulate. So what was he doing for ten years — sleeping?

            No, it is not against me that he is writing those articles. It is just to console himself that what he has done by dropping sannyas is right, because the man was wrong. He has to prove it to himself that “the man was wrong, that’s why I have dropped sannyas.” Otherwise it will continuously be a wound — that I loved him so much, trusted him so much, so unconditionally, and this is what he has done to me. I can understand his difficult situation. So writing against me, he is simply trying to cover up the wound that he has inflicted upon himself.”

            Osho
            From Unconsciousness to Consciousness
            Chapter 6

          • Arpana says:

            @Tan:

            “A young mother says that after putting her two children to bed one night she changed into a floppy blouse and an old pair of slacks and proceeded to wash her hair. All during the shampoo she could hear the children growing wilder and noisier. Finishing as hurriedly as possible she wrapped a large towel around her head, stormed into their room and put them back to bed with a stern warning to stay there.

            As she left she heard the two-year-old say to his sister in a trembling voice, “Who was that?” ”

            Osho
            Guida Spirituale
            Chapter 12

          • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

            So beautiful, Tan, that you offered some lines yesterday, like: “Anyway, I am still here, meaning I still care about all of this.”

            I subscribe to that.

            With Love.

            Madhu

          • Tan says:

            @Swamishanti, Arps and Madhu,

            Many thanks and I never forget that we are all in this together. XXX

  18. Lokesh says:

    The worst kind of robot is the kind of robot that believes they are not a robot, but is certain everyone else is a robot. That kind of robot may well be on the road to the mighty incinerator.

    Suggested educational listening…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFkf9TqbC-c

  19. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    @ Satchit (17 July, 2017 at 4:45 pm)

    Satchit,
    You reminded me of a time (1987) I was befriended by one of the fabulous graphic calligraphers and artists in Pune. His Ashram project was to create calligraphic story telling of the 10 Zen Bull Story-Parable – you know of it? Otherwise, if you don´t know it it’s very worthwhile to become acquainted with it.

    As a little cloud-memory to watch, it came by ´on´ the inner sky after reading your response and so: thank you for this.

    Cheers,

    Madhu

    • satchit says:

      Yes, Madhu,

      I know the 10 Zen Bull story and my words were related to this.

      Good that your Heart remembers your friend from those days.

      Today the bull is not so bitchy as yesterday. He is more silently eating grass that grows by itself.

      Cheers!

      • frank says:

        Hello, Madhu and Satchit talking bull…no surprises on SN today then…

        The old ten zen bulls thing got blown away and Osho transcended the 10th bull – the one where the guy staggers into the off-licence in the town square with his shirt off, saying hello to everybody – when Osho turned the zen bull up to 11 (for that extra push off the cliff)…
        blasting through inner and outer space, in and out of this planet`s stratosphere on a flying visit on his mirror-plated dental chair with poor old Buddha riding pillion and hanging on for dear life and wishing he`d stayed in Nirvana….

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          What an outrageous, cheeky (tongue-in-cheek) secretly-compassionate, witty response of yours is that, Frank (18 July, 2017 at 3:36 pm)!

          I´m only able to take it in now, together with the hot water bag on my stomach and both does me well for the moment.

          But the day is not finished yet and it´s in one or the other way (anyway) quite a hot weather summer day, and what the sky is about to offer then, we don´t know yet – in spite of one or the other seemingly accurate forecasts.

          Thanks, Frank.

          Madhu

          • Tan says:

            Hi Madhu,
            “Secretly compassionate”, that’s is Frank, indeed! On the spot, madam! XX

  20. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    To the Thursday caravanserai late afternoon ´Debunkers´, getting lost in a racing-play late afternoon, debunking either each other and/or any fantasised (otherwise) hidden topics in the topics (like social politic power – or money games with a sort of ‘spiritual’ claim).

    When I did my short bike ‘walkabout’ outside this afternoon I remembered a story which did really happen in the Indian countryside (in a very remote place and village), last century.

    There once weretwo farmers, utterly poor people and formerly very good friends, being brought to Court by the villagers before they could kill each other. Those, both severely injured, told their story:

    It had all begun with a nice little fantasy play, sitting in the mud and sand and drawing their dreams of possessions in the sand with little sticks.

    “I ´m going to have a fat juicy meadow”, had said the one, marking his territory with the stick. “And I am going to have a bull on it, which then I can sell.”

    “And I am going to have a big acre of land for the fruits of crops I am growing”, said the other, “and will become rich by harvest time.”

    A little while all was going fine and the dreaming let them forget their hunger.

    Then the change:
    “What if your bull will destroy my crops by entering my land?” was a concern of the crops farmer…
    So they both marked fences too.

    “But what if the fences are destroyed”…and on and on it went and the good dreaming merged into a nightmare as the imagined plots thickened.

    And soon, as it pretty much often happens, not only in India, both lost all their senses and started beating each other up, to “defend” their imagined property.

    There and then the Indian village people came into the story, what really happened, believe it or not. Whatever the former Indian Judge decided, I don´t know, it either wasn’t story-wise delivered or I forgot it.

    It’s a good story for a SN virtual caravanserai, I feel, a caravanserai as meant to be a meeting, sharing and recreation place for friends to have a break during their (our) often arduous everyday-ways and inner and outer pilgrimages.

    Sure, one can do the one or the other ´STOP´exercise of Mister G. also.

    Whatever works, I´d say, to meet and to meet fresh.

    With Love,

    Madhu

  21. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    @ Frank:

    “Big fleas have little fleas,
    Upon their backs to bite ‘em,
    And little fleas have lesser fleas,
    and so, ad infinitum.” (Frank at 12.12 pm).

    You really show up as a (´wanted´) expert, Frank, no doubt about it.

    But there is a ´world´ outside flea-market-businesses, I´d say – no matter how many experts are buzzing around.

    Good news (or (?) promises (?), insights (?), delusions (?) ), and what would you ´expertise´ about this?

    Madhu

    • frank says:

      Madhu,
      `Expertise` collected from nursery rhymes.
      That seems to be the level we are at!

      From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

      ‘The Siphonaptera’ is a nursery rhyme, sometimes referred to as ‘Fleas’:

      Big fleas have little fleas,
      Upon their backs to bite ‘em,
      And little fleas have lesser fleas,
      and so, ad infinitum.

      Sometimes a second verse appears, with lines such as:

      And the great fleas, themselves, in turn
      Have greater fleas to go on;
      While these again have greater still,
      And greater still, and so on.

      • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

        Aah, yes, Frank, no use and no need to oppose British Nursery and its ‘wisdom’. Good to come to know, though, what is the source of these (your ) rhyme(s).

        And thank you for making that clear for me.

        Madhu

  22. shantam prem says:

    If Osho was God or Bhagwan during his lifetime what status he has now?