Prabhaker

There is only God's Justice, a Jesus will not suffer even on a cross, a Socrates will not suffer even when poisoned, a Buddha will not suffer even when abused and stoned. We can suffer even when we are living in a palace, in all luxuries. Any act done unconsciously is a sin, we can punished for that by the court, law or we can suffer without intervention of legal system. A Buddha will not suffer even when jailed. Our life can be a celebration but we live an ordinary life, because we live less consciously, it is God's Justice.

It is difficult to get rid of pain, misery, and suffering for the simple reason that they have been your companions for your whole life. Except them, you don't have any friends in the world. It is easier to be in pain, misery, suffering, than to be utterly lonely, because there are ways you can have pain-killers, you can have drugs, as an escape from misery. You can get engaged in all kinds of stupidities to forget your suffering. But there is no way - no painkiller is going to help you out of your loneliness, no drug, no stupidity. Loneliness is so deep that all these superficial methods cannot reach to it, cannot touch it. That's why it is so difficult to get rid of these few friends that you have got. This is your world, your family. Your suffering makes you somebody special. Without all your suffering, you are nobody. Who are you? You will not even have something to talk about with anybody. You will be at a loss - what are you going to talk about? At least your suffering, your pain, your misery, makes you somebody special. It gives you a certain character, it gives you a certain identity. Moreover it is your misery, nobody else's. It is your possession, your prestige. If it is just taken away from you, you will be a beggar. Suffering also becomes a support to your ego. A man without suffering, without pain, without any misery - how can he manage his ego? He won't have any props for the ego. You cannot get rid of your miseries for the simple reason that you don't have anything else to cling to. You will be empty - and nobody wants to be empty. ~ OSHO

@Bastian

◄ Matthew 19:24 ► Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

I can't give you logical reply to subjective truths. Successful people are happier than unsuccessful people, but their happiness is not everlasting. Some of them even suicide, some of them are treated for depression. Unless you yourself become successful , you can't know what they miss in their life. If you can't grow into a meditator , it is better to be a successful person rather than a unsuccessful person but blessed are those who find inner richness.

Sadhguru is happy due to his inner richness, outer success can't give you everlasting happiness.

You are misinformed ! Why Do Gurus Have Beards?

Truth has to be total, truth has to be whole. And the whole truth is: bliss PLUS meditation. It is difficult of course, arduous, to manage both. Why? — because they seem to be polar opposites. Meditation means silence and bliss means dance. Meditation means stillness and bliss means a song. Meditation means escaping from the world and bliss means sharing with the world. Meditation you can do in a Himalayan cave, but to be blissful you will have to come back to the world. Bliss needs to be shared; it exists only in sharing. It can’t exist when you are alone, it disappears. It is a communion. Meditation can exist in aloneness and bliss can exist in togetherness. But when both exist then you have to learn a totally new way of life. Many people have tried to meditate without bliss because it is simple, less complex. You have to take only one work upon yourself: that you have to still your mind. And you can force your mind to be stilled, but you will become sad, you will have a long face. They have avoided the complexity of spiritual transformation. They have chosen meditation, they have forced their mind to be still. It is a negative state; their minds are only empty, not silent — forcibly made still. But it is not a natural growth of silence, it is not the flowering of silence. Their silence is like the cemetery, it is not the silence of a garden.

If you are unhappy, that simply means that you have learned tricks for being unhappy. Nothing else! Unhappiness depends on the frame of your mind. There are people who are unhappy in all kinds of situations. They have a certain program in their mind that transforms everything into unhappiness. If you tell them about the beauty of the rose, they immediately start counting the thorns. If you say to them, "What a beautiful morning, what a sunny day!" they will say, "Only one day between two dark nights, so why are you making so much fuss?" The same thing can be seen from a positive reference; then suddenly each night is surrounded by two days. And then suddenly it is a miracle that the rose is possible, that such a delicate flower is possible among so many thorns. All depends on what kind of frame you are carrying in your head. Millions of people are carrying crosses. Naturally, obviously, they are burdened; their life is a drag. Their frame is such that it immediately becomes focused on everything that is negative. It magnifies the negative. That is a morbid approach towards life, pathological. But they go on thinking, "What can we do? The world is such." No, the world is not such! The world is absolutely neutral. It has thorns, it has roses, it has nights, it has days. The world is utterly neutral, balanced - it has all. Now it depends on you as to what you choose. That´s how people create hell and heaven on the same earth. Osho, The Book of Wisdom, Talk #9

@Nahm Take an example, a person is preparing to steal. Stealing is not predetermined; it can’t be claimed that stealing is inevitable or unavoidable, there is complete freedom whether to steal or not. But once stealing has been committed, it is as if one foot has been lifted and the other foot remains on the earth: after doing it, you cannot undo the act. And the total effect of the act of stealing will spread over the personality of the person who did it. But as long as stealing is not done, the other alternative is present and available. The mind of a person swings between yes and no. If he says yes, he will be thrown towards the periphery; if he says no, he will move towards the center. Thus, in the middle, there is a choice. If he makes a wrong choice he is thrown towards the periphery; if he makes a right choice he moves towards the center. If a person lives in the peripheral and middle areas in such a way that he begins to move towards the center, he will become religious. But if he lives in such a way that he is never able to move towards the center, his life will remain irreligious. An unconscious man cannot be free, cannot have any freedom. Freedom comes as a consequence of consciousness, freedom is the function of consciousness. An unconscious man exists like a machine, like a robot. You may not know, but you are continuously functioning as a robot. Somebody abuses you and anger arises. It is almost like when you push the button and the fan starts moving. Somebody pushes the button and you become angry. What kind of freedom is this? You don't have any choice, to be angry or not to be angry. If the choice is not there there is no freedom. Freedom means freedom to choose -- you can decide whether to be angry or not, then you are free. But can you decide? At the most you can decide to show your anger or not -- that is another thing. But to be angry or not to be angry, have you got any decision about it, any choice about it?

@Josh2 WHAT AM I DOING AFTER ENLIGHTENMENT? I eat when I am hungry, and I sleep when I feel sleepy. I am doing exactly the same thing that you are doing, but the quality has changed, the significance has changed, my approach has changed. You also drink tea, I also drink tea; but your drinking of tea is just drinking of tea. When I am drinking tea I am drinking God -- God in the form of tea. I am sipping God. From the outside it is the same; from the inside it is totally different. A Zen Master is reported to have said... somebody had asked the same question: "What did you use to do when you were not enlightened?" He said, "I used to chop wood and carry water from the well." And the man asked, "Now what do you do since you have become enlightened?" He said, "I chop wood! and I carry water from the well." Naturally, the questioner was puzzled. He said, "What is the difference? I don't see any difference. Chopping wood, carrying water from the well, you were doing before, you are doing now. And the Master laughed. He said, "Yes, before I was doing it -- now it is simply happening. Now there is no doer. I am no more. Wood is chopped, water is carried -- I am no more." Zen people don't use the word 'God'. If it was asked of a Sufi he would say, "Now God chops the wood, God carries the water." Zen people say, "It chops the wood, it carries the water." That is their name for God; they don't personify God. Everything remains the SAME! and yet nothing is the same. Philosophia Perennis, Vol 1~ Osho

@harisankartj Mohammed had a disciple named Ali. Ali once asked Mohammed’s opinion about whether a man is independent and free to do what he wants, or whether he is bound by his destiny in everything he does. Ali asked, ”Can one do as one wants or not?” – and man has been asking this question for a long, long time. ”If a man is not able to do as he desires,” Ali said, ”then it is useless and foolish to preach to him not to steal, not to tell lies, not to be dishonest. Or is it destiny that one man should always be there to preach to others not to steal or not to do this or that, knowing full well that it is also destiny for a dishonest man to remain dishonest, for a thief to remain a thief, for a murderer to remain a murderer? All this appears absurd. If everything is predestined, all education is useless – all prophets, all saints and all teachers are useless.” People have asked such questions to Mahavira and to Buddha also. If what is going to happen is predestined, why should Mahavira or Buddha take so much trouble to explain what is right and what is wrong? So, Ali asked Mohammed what he thought about this controversial matter. If such a question was asked to Mahavira or Buddha, they would have given a very complicated and deep reply, but Mohammed gave a reply which Ali could understand. Many of Mohammed’s replies were direct and straightforward. Ordinarily, answers given by people who are uneducated or less educated, or who are simple villagers, are direct and frank. Mohammed did not give any metaphysical reply. He asked Ali to lift one leg and stand on it. Ali had asked a question about whether a man is free to do what he wants. Why should Ali stand on one leg? Mohammed said, ”First lift one leg.” Poor Ali lifted his left leg and stood there on one leg. Mohammed then asked him, ”Now lift the right leg also.” Ali was puzzled and asked how it was possible. Then Mohammed said, ”If you had wanted to, you could have lifted the right leg first, but now you cannot.... A man is always free to lift the first leg – it can be whichever he wants – but no sooner has the first been lifted when the other becomes bound to the earth.” With regard to the nonessential part of life, we are always free to lift the first leg. But once that is done it becomes a bondage for the essential part. We take steps that are nonessential, become entangled, and then we are not able to do the essential. So Mohammed said to Ali that he had all the freedom to lift the right or the left leg first. But once he exercised that freedom and lifted one left leg, he was incapable of lifting the other leg. So freedom is there within certain limits, but beyond those limits there is bondage. There are three areas of life. In one area, that which is the essential core, everything is predetermined. In another area, that which is peripheral, everything is uncertain. Between these two conditions – the essential and the peripheral – there is ample room for changes through the exercise of choice. Hidden Mysteries ~ Osho

There is a great difference between living, being healthy and being an exhibitionist. A very wrong concept has pervaded in the world. According to this, the chest should be well developed and large, and the abdomen should be flat, almost against the back. This mad tendency has created a terrible disturbance within the human body. In order to inflate the chest, the breath has to fill the chest and not be allowed to go down further. There is a stupid idea popular in the whole world that belly should be pulled in and chest should look larger, it hinders natural breathing. Breath is literally the bridge connecting all of these aspects of our being and our existence. When you are relaxed ,as the breath goes in, your belly starts rising up, and as the breath goes out, your belly starts settling down again. Try to see children, very small children, taking their breaths. They take them in a different way. Look at a child sleeping. His belly comes up and down, not the chest. That is the right way to breathe; remember not to use your chest too much. Sometimes it can be used – in emergency periods. You are running to save your life; then the chest can be used.

"Love is a by-product of a meditative mind. It is not related to sex; it is related to meditation. The more silent you become, the more at ease with yourself you will be, the more fulfilled you will feel, and the more a new expression of your being will be there. You will begin to love. Not anyone in particular. It may happen with someone in particular, but that is another thing. You begin to love. This loving becomes your way of existing. It can never turn into repulsion because it is not an attraction.You must understand the distinction clearly. Ordinarily when you fall in love with someone, the real feeling is how to get love from him. It is not that love is going from you to him. Rather it is an expectation that love will come to you from him. That is why love becomes possessive. You possess someone so that you can get something out of him. But the love I am talking about is neither possessive nor does it have any expectations. It is just how you behave. You have become so silent, so loving, that your silence goes to others now.When you are angry, your anger goes to others. When you hate, your hate goes to others. When you are in love, you feel that your love is going out to others, but you are not dependable. One moment there is love, and the next moment there will be hate. Hate is not opposite to love; it is part and parcel of it, a continuity.If you have loved someone, then you will hate him. You may not be courageous enough to admit it, but you will hate him. Lovers are always in conflict when they are together. When they are not together they may sing songs of love to each other, but when they are together they are always fighting. They cannot live alone, and they cannot live together. When the other is not there, infatuation is created; the two again feel love for one another. But when the other is present, infatuation goes and hatred is felt again.The love I am talking about means that you have become so silent that now there is neither anger nor attraction nor repulsion. Really, now there is no love and no hate. You are not other-oriented at all. " To ask for love from the other is always ugly. To depend on the other, to ask for something from the other, always creates bondage, suffering, conflict. A person should be sufficient unto himself. What I mean by meditation is a state of being where a person is sufficient unto himself. You have become a circle, alone." The Psychology of the Esoteric ~ Osho

When you become attracted to the opposite sex you are losing energy, you are young and you can transform your energy. Live meditatively, do something creative. Learn yoga. What is known as love is not love, but infatuation, a state of intoxication, exists in all the animals: there is nothing special about it.

Go on loudly repeating the mantra hoo. This is just to hit your sex center from within, because the sex center is the source of all energies. If the source is not hit, nothing great is possible; no transformation is possible. Your sex center is hit by the mantra HOO. Sex is the most vital energy, the source of all energies. With that hitting, the sex center opens within. The sex center can open in two ways. When you become attracted to the opposite sex, it opens outward and your energy starts flowing outward. Even if the attraction is just in your imagination, and the other is not even aware of it, you are losing energy. Don't be confused and think that semen is sex energy. Semen is just the vehicle. It is not exactly sex energy, just the vehicle for it. It is just the material part of it, not the real psychic energy. When you become attracted to the opposite sex you are not losing semen, but you are losing energy. Energy is dissipated. Whenever you think about sex you are dissipating energy. It may only be through the imagination, but energy is still moving outward. HOO goes directly to the sex center and hits it. If you say HOO loudly, you will feel that your sex center has been hit from within. When your whole body is jumping and alive and in deep contact with the cosmic forces -- if you hit your sex center at the right moment, at this moment, the energy rushes up. And when sex energy rushes up.... It is not semen, remember. Sex energy: the spiritual part of semen. Just like you have a body and a soul, the semen's body is material and its soul is sex energy. The energy rushes upward and passes through your spine, you become a different person. The New Alchemy - Osho

Energy has been going downward through the sex center continuously for many births, so when any energy is created it will first try to move downward. That is why meditation sometimes will create more sexuality in you than you have ever felt before. You will feel more sexual because you have generated more energy than you previously had. When you have conserved something, the old, habitual passage is ready to release it. The mechanism is ready, the old passage is ready. Your mind only knows one passage - the lower one, the sexual passage - so when you are meditating the first movement of your life energy will be downward. Just be aware of it. Do not struggle with it; just be aware of it. Be aware of the habitual passage, be aware of sexual images; let them come. Be aware of them, but do not do anything about the situation; just be aware of it. The sexual passage cannot operate without your cooperation, but if you cooperate with it even for a single moment, it can start functioning. So do not cooperate with it: just be aware of it. The mechanism of sex is so much a momentary phenomenon that it only functions momentarily; if you do not cooperate at the right moment, it stops. At the right moment your cooperation is needed, otherwise it cannot work. It is only a momentary mechanism, and if you do not cooperate with it, it will stop by itself. Time and time again, energy is created through meditation. It continues to move downward, but now you are aware of it. The old passage is cut - not suppressed. Energy is there and it needs to be released, but the lower door is closed: not suppressed - closed. You have not cooperated with it, that's all. You have not positively suppressed it, you have only negatively not cooperated with it. You have just been aware of what is happening to your mind, to your body. You are just aware; then energy is conserved. Then the quantity of the energy becomes more and more intense and an upward thrust becomes necessary. Now the energy will go upward; by its very force, a new passage will be thrown open. Osho ~ Meditation The Art of Ecstasy @John Iverson Next time any girl attracts you , remember General Luna !

Everybody wants consolations, to escape the pain of transformation. Masters who behave according to your expectations appear to be genuine. Who wants to beak his sleep.

May be he is a false guru, most of them are, but even false guru is helpful in a way because experiencing them you become aware of that is false. If you are a true seeker even false guru can help.

Without long and arduous spiritual journey , without infinite patience, without putting yourself at stake you can't know the mysteries of life. Most of the people dropout from this path. This journey needs tremendous courage and commitment.

Man is very clever, he has created scriptures even around vedanta - that state which is beyond knowledge. He has created knowledge even out of the state which is beyond knowledge. Pundits go on propagating that vedanta is not the end of the scriptures called the Vedas, the knowledge, but the very essence of these scriptures. They go on insisting that vedanta is a physical part of these scriptures. This is an absolute lie, it is absolutely wrong. The Way Beyond Any Way ~ Osho First, THE UPANISHADS are not religious scriptures. They are poetic expressions of those who have known. They are not Hindu, they are not Buddhist, they are not Jaina; they don’t belong to any religion. They are the experiences of individuals sitting at the feet of their master – and when the experience overwhelmed them they danced, they sang, they uttered strange statements. And these were not made by their minds; it was almost as if they were just hollow bamboos. Existence has made them flutes; it was existence itself singing a song. That’s why no upanishad carries the name of its writer. The KORAN belongs to Mohammed, the NEW TESTAMENT belongs to Jesus Christ, the GITA belongs to Krishna, the DHAMMAPADA belongs to Gautam Buddha; ISAVASYA UPANISHAD belongs to no one. Tremendously courageous people... they have not even signed their names. In fact, it would have been ugly to sign because they were not the writers, they were not the composers, they were not the poets. The poetry was coming from above, from beyond. They were simply vehicles. The_Osho_Upanishad ~ Osho

FAMILIES ARE OUT OF DATE NEW FORMS OF collectivities will have to come into being. I would not like to call them a "society," just to avoid the confusion between the words. I call the new collectivity a "commune." The word is significant. It means: where people are not only living together, but where people are in deep communion. To live together is one thing – we are doing it. Every city, every town, thousands of people are living together – but what togetherness is there? People don't know even their neighbors. They live in the same skyscraper, thousands of people, and they never come to know that they are living in the same house. It is not togetherness, because there is no communion. It is simply a crowd, not a community. So I would like to replace the word "society" with the word "commune." Society has existed on certain basic principles. You will have to remove them; otherwise the society will not disappear. The first and the most important unit of the society has been the family. If the family remains the way it is, then the society cannot disappear, then religions cannot disappear. Then we cannot create one world, one humanity. The family is the root cause of millions of diseases; it is the basic brick that nations are made of, races are made of, religious organizations are made of. And the family has destroyed the blissfulness of men and women of the whole of mankind. Today in the West every third marriage ends in divorce with all the horrible legal battles over kids and possessions. A majority of all violent crimes and murders in the world happen within the family between family members. The basic structure of the family is of possessiveness: the husband possesses the wife and they both possess the children; and the moment you possess a human being you have taken away his dignity, his freedom, his very humanity. You have taken away all that is beautiful and you have given him only handcuffs; perhaps made of gold – beautiful cages in place of his wings – but those golden cages cannot give him the sky and the freedom of the sky. The family tries to disconnect you from the whole society, just as the nation divides you from other nations; it is the same strategy of division. Once the family is gone, much of psychological disease will be gone; much of political insanity will be gone. So the first thing is, a model commune will not have families. The implication is clear: it will not have marriages. Love, for the first time, should be given the respect that has been its due for centuries. Love should be the only law between two human beings. If they decide to live together, only joy should be their binding force. And remember, like everything real, love also changes. Only unreal things, plastic things, remain permanent. Marriage is permanent, but it gains permanence by killing love. It is on the grave of love that marriage makes its house. Naturally it brings only agony, anguish, suffering, slavery and a total destruction of man's spirituality. A model commune will be a communion, a gathering of free spirits. Children should belong to the commune, not to the parents. Parents have done enough harm; they cannot be allowed to corrupt their children anymore – although their intentions are all good. But what to do with their good intentions? The results are all ugly. They teach their children to be competitive, and competition brings jealousy. They teach their children to become somebody in the world, to "make a name" for themselves. That makes life a struggle, not a rejoicing but a continuous fight – so destructive that it takes away all your joy, all your juice, all your flowers, leaving behind only skeletons fighting for power, for money, for position. Life becomes a battlefield. The whole blame goes to the parents. They have lived as ambitious beings, they have destroyed themselves. Now they go on giving to their children as a heritage, their unfulfilled desires, their incomplete ambitions. This way diseases go on from one generation to another. We have to protect children from the past. The only way is for them to belong to a commune. Children should not live with their parents but in communal hostels so the parents cannot poison their minds. Parents can meet them and spend weekends with them, but basically they will grow independently. And the commune should take care that there is no question of any religious or political ideology or nationality, race, caste – all these things which divide. This is the only way to create a break with the past. It will help tremendously if children can see things in a different light. And having one father and one mother is psychologically dangerous because if the child is a boy, he starts imitating the father; if the child is a girl, she starts imitating the mother – and great psychological problems arise. Father and mother should recede, and uncles and aunts should take their place. There should be so many uncles and so many aunts...perhaps the mother should be the chief aunt and the father should be the chief uncle, but not more than that. It is good that the family is disappearing. If the children are in the hands of the commune – I have experimented with it and found it immensely successful – the children are far more happy, because they are far more free. No conditioning is stamped on them. They mature earlier, because nobody is trying to make them dependent, so they become independent. Nobody is trying to go out of their way to help them, so they have to learn how to help themselves. This brings maturity, clarity, a certain strength. And with the family disappearing, nations will disappear, because the family is the unit of the nation. So I am tremendously happy whenever I see the family disappearing, because I know behind it will go the nation. With it will go the so-called religions, because it is the family which imposes religion, nationality, and all kinds of things on you. Once the family is gone, who is going to force Christianity on you, Hinduism on you? Right now everybody is forced to be according to the ideas of others. That causes misery and great anguish, and takes all joy and gladness from life. Everybody should be himself and contribute to life according to his way, by creating music, or by creating paintings, or by writing poetry, or by producing better fruit, better crops, making better roads. Everyone should be allowed to have his own potential fulfilled. A model commune will give dignity to every individual. A model commune will create as much intelligence as possible, and will allow people to grow intelligently, to search and seek for their truth, because that is how one becomes more intelligent. By searching and seeking, intelligence is sharpened like a sword. Man has lived in unintelligence because all the religions of the world have emphasized only one thing: belief. And belief is poison to intelligence. They have emphasized only one thing: faith. And faith is against all growth. The new man I conceive will not have any belief system and will not have any faith. He will be a seeker, a searcher, an enquirer; his life will be a life of tremendous discovery, discoveries in the outside world and discoveries in the inside too. I want every human being to be a discoverer: a Galileo, a Copernicus, a Columbus in the outside world; and a Gautam Buddha, a Zarathustra, a Chuang Tzu in the inside world. My whole effort is concentrated on one thing: to create the new man as "Zorba the Buddha." In a model commune everybody will have both qualities, the qualities of the Zorba and the qualities of the Buddha – tremendously interested in the outside world, and in the same way in love with the inner search. The day you are both together you have become the new man, and the new man is going to be the savior of humanity. A commune should be a gathering of seekers, of lovers, of friends, of creative people in all dimensions of life. We can produce a paradise here, on the earth. The Golden Future ~ Osho

REVENGE OR UNDERSTANDING: THE RULE OF LAW OR OF LOVE ALL LEGAL SYSTEMS are nothing but the revenge of society – revenge against those who don't fit in with the system. According to me, law is not for protection of the just, it is for protection of the crowd mind – whether it is just or unjust does not matter. Law is against the individual and for the crowd. It is an effort to reduce the individual and his freedom, and his possibility of being himself. The latest scientific researches are very revealing – perhaps ten percent of the people who are termed criminals are not responsible for their crimes; their crimes are genetic, they inherit them. Just as a blind man is not responsible for his blindness, a murderer is not responsible for his murderousness. Both inherit the tendency – one of blindness, another of committing murder. Now it is an established scientific fact that punishing anybody for any crime is simply idiotic. It is almost like punishing somebody because he has tuberculosis – sending him to jail because he is suffering from cancer. All criminals are sick, psychologically and spiritually both. In my vision of a commune, the courts will not consist of law experts, they will consist of people who understand genetics and how crimes are inherited from generation to generation. They have to decide not for any punishment, because every punishment is wrong – not only wrong, every punishment is criminal. The man who has committed anything wrong has to be sent to the right institution – a psychiatric institution, or a psychoanalytic school, or maybe a hospital, to be operated on. He needs our sympathy, our love, our help. Instead of giving him our sympathy and love, for centuries we have been giving him punishment. Man has committed so much cruelty behind such beautiful names as order, law, justice. The new man will not have any jails and will not have any judges and will not have any legal experts. These are absolutely unnecessary, cancerous growths on the body of society. There will certainly have to be sympathetic scientists, meditative, compassionate beings to work out why it happened that a certain man committed rape: is he really responsible? According to me, on no account is he responsible. Either he has committed rape because of the priests and the religions teaching celibacy, repression for thousands of years – this is the outcome of a repressive morality – or biologically he has hormones which compel him to commit rape. Although you are living in a modern society, most of you are not contemporaries because you are not aware of the reality that science goes on discovering. Your educational system prevents you from knowing it, your religions prevent you from knowing it, your governments prevent you from knowing it. The man who is committing rape perhaps has more hormones than those moral people who manage to live with one woman for their whole life, thinking that they are moral. A man with more hormones will need more women; so will be the case with a woman. It is not a question of morality, it is a question of biology. A man who commits rape needs all our sympathy, needs a certain operation in which his extra hormones are removed, and he will cool down, calm down. To punish him is simply an exercise in stupidity. By punishing, you cannot change his hormones. Throwing him in jail, you will create a homosexual, some kind of pervert. In American jails they have done a survey: thirty percent of the inmates are homosexuals. That is according to their confession; we don't know how many have not confessed. Thirty percent is not a small number. In monasteries the number is bigger – fifty percent, sixty percent. But the responsibility lies with our idiotic clinging to religions which are out of date, which are not supported and nourished by scientific research. The new commune of man will be based on science, not on superstition. If somebody does something which is harmful to the commune as such, then his body has to be looked into; perhaps he needs some physiological change or biological change. His mind has to be looked into – perhaps he needs some psychoanalysis. The deepest possibility is that neither the body nor the mind are of much help; that means he needs a deep spiritual regeneration, a deep meditative cleansing. Instead of courts, we should have meditative centers of different kinds, so every unique individual can find his own way. Instead of law experts, who are simply irrelevant – they are parasites sucking our blood – we will have scientific people of different persuasions, because somebody may have a chemical defect, somebody may have a biological defect, somebody may have a physiological defect. We need all these kinds of experts, of all persuasions and schools of psychology, all types of meditators, and we can transform the poor people who have been victims of unknown forces – and have been punished by us. They have suffered in a double sense. First, they are suffering from an unknown biological force. Secondly, they are suffering at the hands of your judges – who are nothing but butchers, henchmen – your advocates, all kinds of your law experts, your jailers. It is simply so insane that future human beings will not be able to believe it. It is almost the same as in the past: mad people were beaten to cure their madness; people who were schizophrenic, who were thought to be possessed by ghosts, were beaten almost to death – this was thought to be the treatment. Millions of people have died because of your great treatments. Now we can simply say that those people were barbarous, ignorant, primitive. The same will be said about us. I am already saying it: that your courts are barbarous, your laws are barbarous. The very idea of punishment is unscientific. There is nobody in the world who is a criminal; everybody is sick, and needs sympathy and a scientific cure, and most of your crimes will disappear. But first private property has to disappear: private property creates thieves, dacoits, pickpockets, priests, politicians. Politics is a disease. Man has suffered from many diseases and he has not even been aware that they are diseases. He has been punishing small criminals and he has been worshipping great criminals. Who is Alexander the Great? A great criminal; he murdered people on a mass scale. Adolf Hitler alone killed millions of people, but he will be remembered in history as a great leader of men. Napoleon Bonaparte, Ivan the Terrible, Nadirshah, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane are all mass-scale criminals. But their crimes are so big, that perhaps you cannot conceive.... They have killed millions of people, burned millions of people alive, but they are not thought of as criminals. And a small pickpocket, who takes away a one-dollar note from your pocket will be punished by the court. Once private property disappears.... And in a commune there is going to be no private property, everything belongs to all; naturally, stealing will disappear. You don't steal water and accumulate it, you don't steal air. A commune has to create everything in such abundance that even a retarded person cannot think of accumulating it. What is the point? It is always available, fresh. Money has to disappear from society. A commune does not need money. Your needs should be fulfilled by the commune. All have to produce, and all have to make the commune richer, affluent, accepting the fact that a few people will be lazy. But there is no harm in it. In every family you will find somebody lazy. Somebody is a poet, somebody is a painter, somebody simply goes on playing on his flute – but you love the person. A certain percentage of lazy people will be respectfully allowed. In fact a commune that does not have lazy people will be a little less rich than other communes which have a few lazy people who do nothing but meditate, who do nothing but go on playing on their guitar while others are toiling in the fields. A little more human outlook is needed; these people are not useless. They may not seem to be productive of commodities, but they are producing a certain joyful, cheerful atmosphere. Their contribution is meaningful and significant. With the disappearance of money as a means of exchange, many crimes will disappear. As religions disappear, with their repressive superstitions and moralities, crimes like rape, perversions like homosexuality, diseases like AIDS will become unheard of. And when from the very beginning every child is brought up with a reverence for life – reverence for the trees because they are alive, reverence for animals, reverence for birds – do you think such a child one day can be a murderer? It will be almost inconceivable. And if life is joyous, full of songs and dances, do you think somebody will desire to commit suicide? Ninety percent of crimes will disappear automatically; only ten percent of crimes may remain, which are genetic, which need hospitalization – but not jails, prisons, not people to be sentenced to death. This is all so ugly, so inhuman, so insane. The new commune, the new man, can live without any law, without any order. Love will be his law, understanding will be his order. Science will be, in every difficult situation, his last resort. The Golden Future ~ Osho

MERITOCRACY - POWER IN THE HANDS OF THE INTELLIGENTSIA ONE THING IS absolutely certain: The days of the politicians are over. They have done too well their job of being destructive, violent. Nothing is favorable to the politician; and as each day passes his death comes closer. He himself is responsible. He improved the weapons, which can bring death to the whole world, to such a point that there is no way of going back. Either there will be an ultimate war – which means death to all and everything – or a total change of the whole structure in the human society. I am calling that change "meritocracy." One thing – we have to drop the idea that every man, just because he is twenty-one, is capable of choosing who is the right person to decide the fate of nations. Age cannot be a decisive factor. We have to change the decisive factor; that is changing the very foundation. My suggestion is that only a person who is at least a matriculate, a high school graduate, will be able to vote. His age does not matter. For the local government, matriculation will be the qualification for the voters. And graduation from a university, at least a bachelor's degree, should be a necessary qualification for anybody running for election, for the candidates. A master's degree should be a minimum qualification for the one who is running for mayor. For the state elections, graduation with a bachelor's degree should be the minimum qualification for the voters. A master's degree in science, the arts, commerce, should be the necessary degree for the candidates. For the cabinet ministers an M.A. with highest honors should be the minimum necessary qualification; more will be, of course, more appreciated. And anybody trying to become a cabinet minister will have to know something about the subject. His qualification should correspond to the subject matter that he is going to deal with in his term of office. So if somebody is going to be an education minister, then his qualifications should make him capable of being an education minister. He should have at least a master's degree in education with highest honors; with less than highest honors nobody should be a minister on the state level. Yes, if he has better degrees – doctor of education, Ph.D. in education – that is good, that will make him more qualified. The attorney general should have at least a doctorate in law, an LL.D.– not less than that, because he is going to defend the law of the state, the rights of the citizens. He should have the best degree possible so he knows everything about it. The governor should have the best of all the degrees possible for him: M.A. with highest honors, Ph.D. – his Ph.D. should be in political science – and at least one honorary degree, a D.Litt. or LL.D. For the federal government, a master's degree will be the voter's minimum qualification. A master's degree with highest honors and a Ph.D. should be the minimum for the candidates running for election. And the ministers should all have the highest degrees in the subjects for which they are going to be ministers. If it is education then the highest degrees in education available in the country; if it is going to be health, then the highest degrees in health available in the country. The president should have at least two Ph.D.s and one honorary D.Litt. or LL.D.; and the same for the vice-president because he can become president any day. In this way mobocracy is destroyed. Then just because you are twenty-one it does not mean you are capable of choosing the government. Choosing the government should be a very skillful, intelligent job. Just by being twenty-one you may be able to reproduce children – it needs no skill, no education, biology sends you well prepared. But to choose the government, to choose people who are going to have all the powers over you and everybody, and who are going to decide the destiny of the country and the world, just to be twenty-one is certainly not enough...the way we have been choosing them is simply idiotic. I would like all the universities – within each state – to call a convention of all the vice-chancellors and the eminent professors; of the eminent intelligentsia who may not be part of the university: painters, artists, poets, writers, novelists, dancers, actors, musicians. It would include all dimensions of talents, all kinds of people who have shown their caliber – excluding politicians completely. All the Nobel Prize winners should be invited – excluding the politicians again, because within these past few years a few politicians have been given Nobel Prizes, and this has degraded the value of the Nobel Prize. So from each state a delegation should be chosen for the national convention, which goes into details of how the meritocracy can work. From the national candidates there should be an international convention of all the universities of the world and the intelligentsia. This would be the first of its kind because never has the whole intelligentsia of the world come together to decide the fate of humanity. They should write the first constitution of the world. It will not be American, it will not be Indian, it will not be Chinese – it is going to be simply the constitution of the whole of humanity. There is no need for different kinds of laws. There is no need – all human beings need the same kind of laws. And a world constitution will be a declaration that nations are no longer significant. They can exist as functional units but they are no longer independent powers. And if the whole intelligentsia of the world is behind this convention it will not be very difficult to convince the generals of the world to move away from the politicians. And what power do politicians have? All the power that they have we have given to them. We can take it back. It is not their power, it is our power. We just have to find a way to take it back – because giving is very easy, taking is a little difficult. They will not be so simple and innocent when you take the power back as they were when they were asking it from you. It is our power, but they will go on having it if the mob remains there to give it to them; the mob can be convinced about anything. It is the function of the intelligentsia.... I would like to say that now, if anything happens to humanity, the whole condemnation will go to the intelligentsia: "What were you doing? If those idiots were ready to kill humanity, what were you doing? You simply went on grumbling, being grumpy, but you did nothing else." And the time is running short. Once we decide that the voting power is not the birthright of every human being but is a right which you will have to earn by your intelligence.... You have to see the distinction: Everybody is given the opportunity to earn it, there is equal opportunity for all to earn it, but it is nothing birth-given; you have to prove it. Once we move the power from the mob into the hands of intelligent people, people who know what they are doing, we can create something beautiful. If a man who has devoted his whole life to thinking about education and its problems, has done all that was possible to do to find out every detail, every fundamental of education, all the possible philosophies of education – if he becomes an education minister, there is a possibility that he will do something. I suggest to shift completely from the mob to the chosen few. I am not against the people. In fact, in the hands of these politicians, the people are against themselves. I am all for the people, and what I am saying can be said to be exactly what has been said about democracy: for the people, by the people, of the people – just "by the people" I will have to change. This intelligentsia will be for the people, of the people. It will be serving the masses. It is so simple a thing. You don't elect a doctor, and just anybody can stand, because it is a birthright and people can vote...two persons fighting to be the doctor or to be the surgeon. What is wrong in it? The people choose for themselves: for the people, by the people, of the people. They choose one person – to be the surgeon – because he speaks better, he looks good on the television and he makes great promises. But he is not even a butcher, and he is going to become a surgeon! A butcher would have been better; at least he would have known how to cut – but you don't choose a surgeon by election. How can you choose a president by election? How can you choose a governor by election? For one post so many people are hankering, desiring. Those who are most sick with ambitiousness will fight the most, they will kill – they will do anything. You are giving so much power to power-hungry people; with your own hands you are helping them to hang you! This is not democracy. In the name of democracy these people have been exploiting the masses. So politicians and priests both have to be dropped out of their long, long-standing establishment, and a totally new kind of management has to be developed. Just to make a distinction I am calling my system "meritocracy." But merit for what? The merit is to serve and share. And once you have decided to shift the power from the politicians to the intelligentsia, everything is possible – everything becomes simple. Meritocracy is a whole program of transforming the structure of society, the structure of the government, the structure of education. It is a difficult job, arduous but not impossible – particularly in such a situation when death is the only alternative. The Golden Future ~ Osho

Trees Can Read Your Thoughts Shower on these trees all your love. They cannot speak, but they are very sensitive. The latest experiments about trees are so revealing – they can even read your thoughts. Their sensitivity is far greater than man’s sensitivity. Scientists have developed certain instruments like the cardiogram. They put the cardiogram on a certain tree and the cardiogram starts making a graph of how the tree is feeling. The graph is symmetrical, and then suddenly they bring a woodcutter with an axe, and the moment the tree sees the woodcutter the graph changes. It goes berserk, the symmetry is lost. Nothing has been done to the tree, it is just that the woodcutter has come with the idea to cut it. That idea is being caught by the sensitiveness of the tree, and now, there are scientific ways to find it out. The strangest thing is that if the woodcutter is just passing without any idea of cutting the tree, the graph does not change. It depends on his idea – his thought creates a certain wave. Every thought is being broadcasted from your mind, creating waves around you, and those waves are picked up by the sensitiveness of the tree. They are very much alive. Osho, The Hidden Splendour There is a well known story about Hakeem Lukman (was a wise man for whom Surah Luqman , the thirty-first sura (chapter) of the Qur'an, was named. Luqman (c. 1100 BC) is believed to be from Yemen) which tells that he would go up to each plant and ask what were its uses. Now, this story has become meaningless in the world of today. It seems to be a failure of logic to expect plants to talk. It is also a fact that until the last fifty years plants were not supposed to have life. But now science admits there is life in plants. Thirty years ago we did not believe that plants also breathe; now we admit that they do. Fifteen years ago we did not believe that plants could feel, but in the last fifteen years we have had to admit that they do. When you approach a plant in anger its psychic state changes, and when you approach it in love then again it changes. So it will not be out of place if we discover in the next fifty years that we can talk to plants also -- but this will be a gradual development. However, Lukman proved it long ago. But this mode of conversation could not have been the same as ours. To become one with plants is a quality of the fourth body. Then they can be questioned. I believe this story, because there is no mention of any laboratory huge enough in those days where Lukman could have carried out his research on the millions of varieties of herbs he brought into use. It is improbable, because each herb would require a lifetime to reveal its secret if done scientifically, whereas this man talked of unlimited herbs. Now science admits the efficiency of many of these herbal cures in illness and they are still used. All of the research of the past is the research of the men of the fourth plane. (The fourth plane is the mental body or the psyche, and the fourth chakra, the anahat, is connected with the fourth body.) Osho ~ In the search of miraculous Vol 2