Truth is a dance in the heart

Question 1:

Every time one realizes something of the truth, there is a dance in the heart.

The heart is the only testimony for the truth.

And it cannot testify through words. It can testify in its own way: trough love, through dance, through playing music: nonverbal - it speaks, but it does not speak in language and logic.

And this is a realization of a certain truth which many people go on missing. They think what I am saying is contradictory, because they are thinking - and thinking is a logical process. And logic can never see beyond contradictions; it has no way to bridge contradictions. Logic is a divider, not a joiner.

The whole of humanity is divided by the mind: the Christian from the Hindu, the Mohammedan from the Jew, the Indian from the American, the German from the Italian. Mind goes on dividing - divisions within divisions within divisions. Even Christianity is not one, it is divided - into Catholics and Protestants. And the Protestants are not one, they are divided.

Mind's whole function is to go on dividing.

The function of the heart is to see the joining link about which the mind is completely blind.

When someone finds contradictions in my statements, he has no understanding from the heart; otherwise things will be very simple.

I have been answering different people. When I answer somebody, I am answering him, his needs; and he is the focus of my whole effort. When I am answering somebody else, the question may be the same, but the questioner is not the same.

A philosopher remains consistent because he answers the question. The mystic cannot remain consistent because he answers the questioner - and the questioners are always different. Their qualities are different, their receptivities are different, their potentialities are different. Their past is different, their present is different, their future is different - although the question may be the same.

The problem is whether to answer the question or the questioner. If you answer the question and do not care at all about the questioner, your answer is going to be bookish; it has no spirit in it. It is not a personal communion.

This is one of the reasons that none of the enlightened masters of the world has ever written a book.

It cannot be just coincidence. They were immensely educated, cultured people, most of them from royal families - very rich, very talented. But what happened when they became enlightened was that they always chose the spoken word. And the reason is this: they didn't want to answer the questions - in a book you can answer only the questions - they wanted to answer the questioner.

In a book you cannot take care of the questioner. You don't know who is going to read it - it cannot have a personal intimacy. It is not addressed to anyone in particular; it is unaddressed - just to whomsoever it may concern.

None of the enlightened masters has ever written a single word. Consistently, in different parts of the world, in different times, they have always fallen upon the spoken word, because the spoken word has a warmth. The written word is cold, dead; the spoken word is breathing, it has a heartbeat.

Hence there are bound to be contradictions. But they are not contradictions: they are simply different people responded to in different ways with different words. They are given what they need. The question is just an excuse. Behind the question is a living being.

If the question is arising only out of the mind, then an enlightened master is not going to answer it, because that will be a futile effort. The mind cannot understand that which is beyond words; it can understand only that which is linguistically, logically right. It has no concern with existence, with life, with reality.

Mind itself is a fiction.

You can live without mind; you cannot live without heart. And the deeper you live, the more of your heart is involved. When your total heart is involved, then your questions have a totally different quality to them.

And I am answering people, not questions; naturally my answers will be different. You can go on asking the same question every day: my answer cannot be the same every day because you are not the same every day. It may be the same questioner; but life is flowing, it is a river, a constant flux. People think of themselves as static. Only things are static; only death is unchanging - life is constantly changing. More life - and more change. Abundant life - and there is tremendous change each moment.

So even if the same person goes on asking the same question, my answer cannot be the same, because in between his two questions so much water has flowed down the Ganges. Neither he is the same, nor I am the same, nor the existence is the same: everything has changed. The whole context is different.

When one lives moment to moment this is bound to happen.

Logic will think the answers are contradictions, and will miss the point. The heart will think they are different aspects, different colors of the rainbow - different viewpoints, different angles.

And it will have a dance, because that is its way of saying, "Yes, I understand."

Question 2:

It is more difficult than ever - but it is, at the same time, more challenging than ever, too. It is with more excitement, more ecstasy.

It is difficult for the simple reason that the earth has become very small. Gautam Buddha, twenty-five centuries back, never moved out of a small state, Bihar, in India. He never even went through the whole of India. Just walking, he could not manage; forty-two years he was speaking, but he could reach only a small portion of the earth.

The same is true about Mahavira, about Parshwanatha, and Socrates. Socrates never went out of Athens; there were different reasons. Athens was the only cultured city in the whole world, and if Athens was unable to understand Socrates, he knew it would be simply futile to go anywhere.

Whatever he said would just go above their heads.

When he was sentenced to death by the court, it was absolutely unjustified. The opponents had not been able to prove anything against him - and he had answered all the opponents so beautifully and so totally. But Athens was a city-state, a direct democracy: all the people had the right to vote, and all the people had the right to decide things of importance - and there could have never been a more important problem than whether to keep Socrates alive or kill him.

Socrates was the cream of the whole Athenian intelligence. But when you ask the mediocre people - who are in the majority... they had heard Socrates' arguments, but they could not understand.

They were absolutely deaf. The way he was speaking was the way he had always spoken in his school; and that school was meant for the highest qualities of mysticism. Those qualities were not in the audience.

It was a majority-decision that he should be sentenced to death. It seems the judge who had to declare the judgment of the majority did understand that something ugly was happening, because he could see Socrates had answered everything that had been asked and had satisfied the court completely; and that all condemnation about him was just false - it had no foundation in truth.

Seeing this... but the majority voted that he should be poisoned; that was the Athenian way of crucifying a person - more cultured, more human. Seeing this, the judge gave alternatives on his own authority.

He said to Socrates, "The majority has decided that you should be poisoned, but I want to give a few alternatives to you. You can leave Athens, never come back to Athens, so as far as Athenian people are concerned, you are dead - you will not be coming back. That will fulfill their desire. It is enough, more than enough, that you are not here. What harm can you do to the people?

"Second, if you choose to remain in Athens - because I understand you, you may not like to leave Athens - then stop speaking. That too will be perfectly fulfilling to the people, because they say whatsoever you are teaching is corrupting the youth. So if you are not teaching, you are as dead as one can be; their purpose is fulfilled."

But Socrates said, "You are putting me in a very difficult situation. I cannot choose not to speak, for the simple reason that truth has an intrinsic quality: it wants to be spoken. You cannot hold it in; it is not humanly possible.

"And I cannot go against truth just for a few years of life. I am already old - any moment death may come. So just for an uncertain, small period of life, I cannot go against truth, and I cannot do things just to save myself.

"I will continue to speak the truth to my last breath, while I am alive. You are kind enough to suggest to me that I can leave Athens. You know perfectly well I cannot do that either, because if Athens - which is the most cultured city in the whole world - has decided to kill me, where do you think I can survive? I will be killed anywhere, and in a far more primitive way.

"And I feel this time is perfectly suitable, because I have said everything that I wanted to say. This case against me has been of tremendous help to me: I have completed my work, I have used the court and given all the arguments that were incomplete. I have completed everything - now there is no need....

"And in a barbarous place they will not be able to tolerate me even for one day. I am grateful to Athens: it has allowed me a long life. It is simply unfortunate that, although it is the most cultured place, it is still not totally cultured. And that has been my whole effort. But I love this place, and I would like to die here."

Socrates could not move out of Athens for the simple reason: who was going to understand him?

A great discipline and training is needed to understand a man of the caliber of Socrates. He had a school where other teachers prepared people, and when they were ready, then finally they became students of Socrates. It was in the final stage, to give them the last touches, that Socrates was useful. He could not teach a person from scratch - that was simply impossible for that genius. So naturally he was confined.

Buddha was confined to Bihar. One thing was language. He used to speak a local language, Pali, which was not understood anywhere else. Sanskrit was understood by the scholars all over India.

Buddha could have used Sanskrit - he was perfectly trained, disciplined in Sanskrit - but he was against using a dead language.

He was against the monopoly of the priests and the scholars who were insisting that all the scriptures should remain in Sanskrit so the people could not read them. You will be surprised: Sanskrit has never been a living language - it has never been spoken by people - and it is the mother language of almost all the cultured languages of the world, of the East and of the West. They are all sister languages, born out of a language which was never spoken by any people, except a few chosen scholars in the universities.

Buddha was against speaking a language which had been used against the people, to keep them ignorant. He chose Pali, a language which people understood. It was a revolutionary step; before him, nobody had dared. It was thought that truth could be spoken only in Sanskrit. That's what the brahmins in India have been saying for thousands of years - that Sanskrit is a divine language.

Buddha made many revolutionary statements: one was that no language is divine - it is the experience of divineness.... Then you can use any language, and it becomes divine. And he proved it by making Pali a divine language, so all the Buddhist scriptures are in Pali. Language was a barrier.

Even in India today, there are thirty national languages. In Buddha's times there must have been more, because there were two thousand kingdoms in India. It was divided into two thousand small fragments. And he remained in one fragment.

Secondly, he was prevented from moving on a wider scale, because rather than passing the same cities dozens of times in his life, he had chosen to walk barefooted.

It was part of his compassion not to use vehicles, because all vehicles were pulled by horses or bullocks, and this was against his compassionate heart. It was violent. These animals should not be tortured. This is sheer exploitation of innocent animals; and man has done everything ugly to exploit them.

Have you seen the difference between a bull and a bullock? The bull has a grandeur, a beauty, a wildness, tremendous strength; but castrated, he becomes a bullock. You cannot make a bull pull a vehicle - he is too strong and too wild. You will not be able to keep him on the road. He can run anywhere taking your whole vehicle and you, and you will not be able to do anything. He is one of the very powerful animals.

But castrated... castrating an animal is ugly. He becomes weak. He loses his sexual energy; that is the only energy all the animals, including man, have. It is something to be understood, that the bullock is a poor animal: you can do anything to the bullock. You have destroyed all his beauty and all his grandeur by destroying his sexual energy.

But that's what religions have been doing to the monks, to the nuns. In the name of celibacy - it is just another way of turning bulls into bullocks, turning beautiful human beings into slaves.

And you must be made aware of the fact that not a single impotent person has been creative in the whole history of man, in any direction. It is as if creativity is basically concerned with your sexuality.

If celibacy is something spiritual, then the impotent person is absolutely celibate; but not a single impotent person has ever become enlightened, and it is a long history.

The impotent person has never become a great poet or a musician or a painter or a dancer or a sculptor. He has not been creative because sexual energy is your creative energy. It creates life - that is only one natural way of using it. It creates everything else too, so it is not unnatural.

On that point, all the religions have been angry with me - that I say that all these enlightened people were more sexual than ordinary people. They have to be: they need more energy to reach to the highest peak of creativity, to explode into light, to give a new birth to themselves, to become a new man.

And we know perfectly well that all artists are more sexual, all creative painters are more sexual, all great novelists are more sexual. Poets, dancers, musicians - any dimension of creativity is bound to be connected with your sexual energy. Impotent people have not been able to contribute anything to life.

Religions have been trying to castrate man in the name of celibacy, and that is one of the reasons that religious people have not been creative; otherwise for thousands of years your monasteries have existed, but nothing has come out of them. We have given the best men to the monasteries. Our most intelligent people, our geniuses have moved to the monasteries, but the monastery reduces them to non-creative people. They simply lose all power to create.

Buddha was against using animals, who cannot speak, who are absolutely innocent. And it is a beautiful experience to see them in their wildness when they are totally themselves, untouched by man's cruelty. He decided that he would move on foot. Naturally, that limited his scope.

All these people had difficulties in moving what I have called the wheel of truth. But they were not having such great difficulty as it has become today.

They had chosen small pieces of the world. Their work was intensive in those small pieces of the world; they managed. Now the world has become very small because of technology. You can move around the world without any difficulty and without torturing anybody.

I think if Buddha was alive I would convince him to use a car or to use an airplane, because that is not using any living being. But man's stupidity is such that Jaina monks, Buddhist monks, still continue the twenty-five-century-old idea of walking barefooted; barefooted because, in those days, all shoes were made of leather.

Now it is not necessary. I am using shoes of synthetic leather - nobody needs to be killed. I have been telling Jaina monks, "You can start using synthetic leather." Mahavira was against shoes for the simple reason that the best leather is from calves - the younger they are the softer is their leather.

The older the animal... then you get leather which is not good. The best comes from the youngest animals, just born; you kill the child, then you get the best leather, the most comfortable and the most soft.

But now there is no need....

That's what I call stupidity: they won't listen to me; they don't have any argument. When synthetic leather is available - you can even make shoes of cloth; shoes of cloth are available, shoes of rubber are available. These are made absolutely nonviolently. In the same way, vehicles run by petrol are not torturing any animals.

But the old world was very big, and every enlightened master lived in a small corner. It was easy to move the wheel of dharma, or truth, in that small corner of the world. There were a few other things which helped to make it easy. One was that all these people came from royal families - which helped immensely: they were not opposed. Even by enemies they were respected - they were royal blood.

No blood is royal, all blood is the same. You can take "royal blood" and ordinary blood - blood from a beggar - and go to the lab and enquire which one is the royal blood; they will not be able to make any distinctions. Blood is blood. It has its own distinctions, but royalty does not enter into it.

But because all the Hindu incarnations, all the Jaina tirthankaras, Gautam Buddha - all came from royal families... they were heirs apparent. They were going to be kings and they renounced; and they remained in their own kingdoms or around there. Although they had renounced, people still respected them as kings. And they became even more respected because they had renounced:

they became almost gods.

Now royalty is disappearing, has almost disappeared. One of the heads of Egypt, Farouk, used to say that there are only five kings: one is of England and four are in the playing cards. That's all the royalty that has remained. And soon there will be only four - the queens, the kings, will be only in the playing cards. Even though there are a few, they have no power.

The new world is small. There is an international language which is understood by almost all the intellectuals of the world, the whole intelligentsia of the world.

So it is possible - and that's why I say it is a great challenge, because nobody has had this opportunity before - to move the wheel of truth throughout the whole world.

All those old enlightened people were very local, but their difficulties were less. Now the difficulties are bound to be more.

They can prevent me from being in America for no reason at all. Against their own constitution, against their own law, they can force me illegally, criminally, to leave the country. They can destroy the commune, cruelly, primitively.

I have never entered Germany, and even before I even asked them for an entry visa, they made a law that I should not be allowed. They have been very precautionary.

In my own country, India, they want to cut me off from the whole world, because I am not preaching Hinduism, I am not preaching any other Indian religion; otherwise they would have been very happy.

One of the richest men in India, Jugal Kisore Birala, who is dead now, offered me unlimited help, a blank check, if I was ready to spread Hinduism in the world. I told that old man, "You must be mad! You cannot purchase me with blank checks - I will go on doing what I am doing. And I am absolutely against all organized religions. I want religious people in the world but no religions. I want a religiousness - a flavor, a fragrance - but not Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism.

"There is no need for religion to be organized. Is there any need for love to be organized? Love is a personal affair. You don't have organizations for love.

"Religion is even more personal, because in love at least two persons are involved - it is interpersonal. Religion is absolutely personal. Only you are involved and it is simply your business.

Nobody has anything to say to you. Between you and existence nobody should stand as a mediator."

He was very angry. I said,"You can be angry - that is your problem - but you invited me for dinner; and then you insult me by telling me that you are going to give me as much money as I want but I should preach Hinduism. And that is the last thing that I can do, because Hinduism is one of the most rotten religions."

Because it is the most ancient, naturally it has got to be more rotten. Its very foundations are rotten, so it becomes difficult.

Hindu fanatics have made an attempt on my life. The same people who wanted me to be their ambassador-at-large, around the world, have tried to kill me. And now, when I came back to India, they informed all the Indian embassies around the world that nobody who is going to meet me or see me should be given an entry visa. No news media from the outside should be allowed to come to me. That's a way to stop me from spreading whatever I feel and experience to be the truth.

As the pope heard that I am coming to Italy, he immediately informed all news media that are Catholic and under his influence, that they must not even mention my name. They must not give me any publicity - positive or negative.

So there are going to be difficulties. Everywhere the politicians will not like me to be there, because I am constantly speaking against the politicians, who have driven humanity to a point of global suicide - and they are still doing it.

And all religions are agreed only on one point - they disagree on everything but on one point they are in absolute agreement - that I should be prevented, my work should be prevented, because it goes against their vested interests.

So it is more difficult to turn the wheel of truth today, but it is more exciting too, and more ecstatic too. And even though there are people trying to prevent my work, from five nations I have received an invitation: they would like me to be in their country as a permanent resident, and they are willing to give all the facilities that I need.

So it is not a state of hopelessness. If five countries can ask and invite me, that is enough to work with. Those five countries we can work with very easily and without any difficulty, because the governments themselves are welcoming me.

Secondly, I am going to choose one of those countries for my permanent residence. There will be all the facilities for sannyasins to come there, and we can use all the news media - which were not available for Buddha or Jesus or Mohammed, and which are available to us. We can have our own satellite - there is no need to go into every country. But the message they cannot prevent.

They will never allow me in the Soviet Union. They are persecuting my sannyasins there. I have never been there, but still I have hundreds of sannyasins in the Soviet Union, and they are going through great trouble with the KGB and other government agencies.

Their books have been taken away, their tapes have been taken away, their videos have been taken away, and they are continually interrogated. Those agencies found at least two hundred sannyasins; they are not aware of more. They are torturing these two hundred to give them more names, more addresses: "Who are the others who are interested?"

And they must be puzzled because I have never been there. But truth has its own way of working too. Now Russia is a very potential place, because they are tired of communism as no other country is tired of anything. For seventy years communism has been torturing them. And you cannot torture any country forever, for eternity; seventy years is more than enough. The time has almost come for the youth to rebel, and they are searching for something that can give them some indication of rebellion.

They have translated my books. They are writing them by hand or cyclostyling them or typing them underground and spreading them on their own.

So if there is some truth, it will have its way. Hindrances may delay it, but they cannot stop it.

The wheel is going to move.

It is only a question of waiting patiently, working patiently.

All over the world there are sannyasins. There is not a single country where sannyasins are not - even in Mohammedan countries where they cannot wear red or the mala or the locket because they will be immediately killed. Mohammedans are the most primitive people. Those sannyasins will not only be tortured, they will be simply killed. They will not be asked, "Why are you doing this?" So I have told them that there is no need....

And they are spreading. They are getting tired of a very ordinary religion which cannot even be called religion. Just because of its numbers, Mohammedanism is second to Christianity, but it has nothing of religiousness in it.

The whole KORAN has been sent to me many times, that I should comment on it. And I have tried to look again and again, but I have not found anything in it that I can manage to comment on and say something good about. It is not even good literature. There is not a single statement which makes it spiritual, and there is so much rubbish and nonsense that should be eradicated - but then nothing will be left.

And all kinds of stupidities are suggested in it - that each Mohammedan can have four wives. In the first place religion has nothing to do with how many wives you should have or not. But prescribing four wives to every Mohammedan is such a stupid thing because women and men are equal in number; if Mohammedans start having four wives, then they will be depriving three men of having wives.

Those three men are not going to just sit silently and do nothing... and the grass grows by itself!

They will do something. There will be all kinds of perversions, there will be prostitution. And once you allow four - and Mohammed himself had nine wives - that gives license to other Mohammedans who can afford it.

The Nizam of Hyderabad in India... it was a big state, Hyderabad, and just in this century - when India became independent - the king, the nizam, had five hundred wives. He had five hundred wives because there is no limit: if Mohammed can have nine, and every Mohammedan is prescribed four....

And the nizam was a rich man - perhaps he was the richest man in the world.

He had in his state the most precious quarries for diamonds. The Kohinoor comes from there, the diamond "Hope" comes from there; all the best diamonds have come from Hyderabad, and each diamond that comes out of those quarries reached first to the nizam. If he chose it, then it remained in the treasure; otherwise it was sold.

He had so many diamonds. I have seen his palace, it is one of the biggest palaces in India. There was no question of counting the diamonds, the whole basement of the palace was full of diamonds.

Once each year they were brought out on the terrace of the palace, and spread out - just to have some light. They were weighed; there was no way of counting them.

And I have been shown the terraces - which were full when the diamonds were spread there. He had unestimated money in his hands. Of course, he could have five hundred wives - there was no problem in it. And Mohammedanism has nothing to say about this, that it is ugly, inhuman; that you are treating women like cattle.

You can kill somebody - according to Mohammedanism - if he resists conversion. Because this the basic belief, that only Mohammedans will be saved. All the religions have the same basic belief, that only their people are going to be saved. It is okay if you just have the idea; but Mohammedans have the idea that because only Mohammedans can be saved, everybody has to be converted to Mohammedanism.

Even if you have to cut off the head of the person, it is better to do that rather than let him live as a non-Mohammedan - because as a non-Mohammedan he will be doing things which will take him to hell. And strange promises - the person who cuts off the head will be rewarded because he is bringing people onto the right path. And the person whose head is cut off will also be rewarded, compensated: he is saved from hell. So in every way it is perfectly right to kill people for conversion.

You will be surprised to know that India is the biggest Mohammedan country, because they have forced.... In almost fourteen hundred years of Mohammedan invasions, rule and slavery over India, they have converted so many Hindus. And anybody would be willing - rather than dying it is better to live as a Mohammedan.

And when they were rulers, there was no question of finding any justice. They have destroyed India's greatest treasures of sculptures, because Mohammedanism is against all those sculptures.

Mohammedanism is against statues, so every statue has to be destroyed, because God cannot be represented in any form - and India had millions of temples with beautiful carvings and beautiful statues.

A few have remained because they were either far away in the forests, in the mountains, and Mohammedans never bothered to go there.... A few others have remained because people covered them with mud - the whole temple. A few beautiful statues have remained because people sunk those statues in the wells. In almost every well you will find statues.

I have been to a city which must have been the city of the craftsmen, the sculptors - only of sculptors and craftsmen, because it has thousands of statues, and not a single living human being. Out of fear of Mohammedans those craftsmen escaped, leaving their incomplete statues or completed statues because they were too heavy to carry.

You will be surprised to know that in India we have one statue of Bahubali - one of the Jaina masters - fifty-two feet high. The whole mountain has been carved, because where can you find fifty-two feet in one piece of stone? So the statue has been carved in the mountain. It is still standing, rooted in the mountain.

It is so big that, from wherever you see it, you cannot see it proportionately. They have made a staircase going around the statue, so you can move and look at the statue from all sides. Even the smallest toe of the foot is the length of your whole body - six feet. So when you are looking from below, you can't imagine how big the head is. You can see it but you cannot imagine how big the head is - it is too far away from you.

But the people who did the work must have been of immense genius. Everything is absolutely proportionate. From the toes of the feet to the head, everything is in exact proportion. They must have been very perceptive and it must have taken hundreds of years for hundreds of artists to make it. Because it is standing in a faraway mountain it has survived, but there must have been others.

Thousands of statues are distorted, because once a statue is distorted then it is of no use for the Hindus or the Jainas or the Buddhists to worship it. It has to be perfect. Just cut off the nose or an ear and that's enough - it is spoiled. Then they cannot worship it.

Mohammedanism is still in a very primitive stage. It knows no argument. Its argument is the sword.

I wanted to have a residence and a commune in Kashmir, because it is one of the most beautiful places in the world. But Indira Gandhi, who was immensely interested in me, suggested, "It is not right, you should not go to Kashmir. You will be killed. It is ninety percent Mohammedan." And she was a Kashmiri. She said, "I will not suggest it and I will not help you, because I know they cannot tolerate you for a single day."

They know only one thing, and that is the sword. They know no argument, they know no discussion.

They have not come to that human stage where you can discuss problems and come to conclusions openheartedly - discuss, not to prove anything but to discover the truth.

I have been informed from Catholic countries that they will be unable to receive me, even for a tour, because the pope is against me and they don't want to disturb the pope.

For almost twenty years I have not been in any Hindu conference in India because Hindus became very much afraid - and that seems to be strange, particularly in Hinduism; a religion which has always been ready to discuss, which has a philosophical tradition.

But now it seems, because Christianity and Mohammedanism and communism - which should be included in the religions, because it is just an atheist religion.... It has a trinity of Karl Marx, Engels, and Lenin, and it has a holy bible, DAS KAPITAL, and it believes as faithfully in the words of Marx as any Christian believes in the words of Jesus.

Marx is outdated as much as anybody else, although he is not very old. But in these hundred years there has been so much development in science and technology that Marx is absolutely out of date.

For example, Marx proposes materialism as the base of communism and modern physics says there is no matter. Matter simply does not exist, it only appears to. That comes very close to the ancient Upanishadic approach to reality which says the world is just a dream. It is an appearance but not a reality.

Modern physics comes very close to the UPANISHADS - it does not support Karl Marx, it goes absolutely against Karl Marx. But in Russia they go on teaching people - from the kindergarten to the university - materialism, materialistic communism. It is almost a religion.

And these three religions - communism, Christianity and Islam - are covering almost the whole earth. You cannot enter Russia, you cannot enter China, you cannot enter other communist countries; you cannot enter Mohammedan countries....

While I was coming back to India, I had to stay the whole night in Cyprus because Saudi Arabia would not allow me to fly over the country because it was some religious day. I said, "My flying over the sky has nothing to do with your religious day. You can celebrate, you can.... You must not be celebrating in the sky, you must be celebrating on the earth."

But no, nobody can pass over the country. And lately I have been informed, particularly because I was there in a chartered plane.... If somebody else had been there, they may have allowed them. I would have been flying thousands of feet above, but I had to wait for twelve hours in Cyprus till their religious festival was over, and then they let me move.

So the world is full of crude, unintelligent, idiotic ideologies. It is difficult to turn the wheel of truth.

But on the other hand, for the first time, the youth of the world is no longer interested in the past. It has lost its roots in the past. It has no respect for the past because it can see clearly that the past has been ugly, barbarous; and what man has done to man is intolerable.

And tomorrow this new mind, the new generation, is going to be powerful everywhere. This generation is open to the future, and there is every possibility that the new generation will be able to understand what I am saying without any difficulty.

So there is no need to be worried about the old generation. One of its legs is almost in the grave - I just have to wait in Cyprus for twelve hours more and the whole old generation will have gone into the grave!

But the wheel is going to move.