On basic levels, especially within one’s own culture (or sub-culture), much of our life is similar to everyone else’s and we can probably pretty accurately more or less ‘know’ (or think we know) what others are going through by reading the signs of their speech and body language, and even on other levels by how they express themselves in more sophisticated ways like writing, music or art, although this becomes increasingly less so when we consider those who move beyond the familar that’s common to all of us.

That’s why we’re fascinated by tales of ‘experiential outliers’, the more extreme the better, eg ‘miracles’, enormous wealth and/or power, fame, war, murder, imprisonment – and, of course, ‘spiritual heroism’.

Even on basic levels, although very often we can draw parallels and make assumptions based on our own subjectivity and conditioning, can we ever actually 100% know exactly what is going on inside the other? Even when they say they love us? The answer has to be no, doesn’t it? Which is a pretty radical truth to consider. The implication being that fundamentally, behind everyday appearances, we are alone in the universe.

Perhaps when it comes to claimed ‘enlightenment’ we simply have nothing to fall back upon, except the sense of ‘rightness’ we may feel in the presence of such a person. And whether being with them and following their teaching is helpful.

The word ‘enlightenment’ does not belong to our Western cultural field.

SD, nobody knows if it exists or not. Maybe it is just a device to help people.

At the most you can say if it smells of something, like it smells of spaghetti.

We all know that you react immediately.
And your reaction is very much the same old same.
Not very creative.

He can become whatever it happens to him:
a carpenter, a taxidriver, a Che Guevara, a professor of philosophy.

Satchit, I feel you are just looking for a reaction. I do not have the impression that there is anything much behind your words. It is the reaction that counts, no matter what form it takes.

I feel like I am wasting my time responding to your shallow comments. I do not enjoy wasting my time. I think you are bored.

In my view the term ‘Satgurus’ will not live on forever as it leaves so much space for interpretation as well as categorizing of ‘paths and methods’. Which may not fit the reality of such a person.

Just saying.

Therefore, more active meditations and catharsis were the methods emphasised by Osho.

Still, there are modern times meditation teachers specialising in the “jhanas”:
Shaila Catherine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBXx4M4Bea0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhy%C4%81na_in_Buddhism