Stealing the truth
WHEN YOU WERE RESPONDING TO THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THE WATCHER IS AMUSED, I FOUND I SLIPPED INTO THE SPACE OF A WITNESS WHILE LOOKING INTO YOUR EYES AND FELT A MEETING HAPPENED. IT WAS SUCH A CLEAR, COOL MEETING, AND IN COMPARISON I SAW HOW STICKY, CUMBERSOME AND CONFINING ARE ANY OF THE EMOTIONS I HAVE EVER FELT FOR YOU AND THROUGH WHICH I THOUGHT I COULD MEET YOU.
ONCE, IN THE POONA DAYS, YOU SAID TO US THAT YOU HAD TO BREAK OUR HEARTS.
I THOUGHT THEN THAT YOU MEANT WE AND YOU COULD ONLY MEET IF OUR HEARTS WERE TOTALLY AND IRREVOCABLY YOURS; WE COULD ONLY MEET IF WE FELL INTO THE DEEPEST LOVE POSSIBLE.
BUT IN THIS RECENT EXPERIENCE, LOVE - AND EVEN TRUST - SEEMED NOT TO BE THE BRIDGE AT ALL. YET THEY PLAY A VITAL PART IN THE MASTER-DISCIPLE RELATIONSHIP.
WOULD YOU SPEAK TO US ABOUT THIS?
Love and trust certainly play a significant part in the relationship between the disciple and the master.
But that is only a stepping stone. One has to go beyond it.
Love is beautiful, but not enough.
Trust is better, more grounded, more solid.
Love is emotional: trust is intuitive.
Emotions go on changing every moment - they are in a flux; you cannot rely upon them - but trust can become a great foundation. Love helps you to reach to the place where trust is possible. Without love, trust is not possible. Love is almost like a bridge which can collapse any moment but still it is a bridge. If you use it, it can take you to trust; without it, you cannot reach to trust directly. So love is a necessity, but love unto itself is not enough. Its use is as a means; the end is trust.
Just the way love functions as a means to trust, trust also functions as a means to something beyond - for which no word exists in any language. It is an experience. And this must have happened for a moment, looking into my eyes. It is not a question of love, not a question of trust, but something absolutely unknown to the mind. Love and trust help you to reach it. But remember, they are only means to an end for which no name exists. Suddenly, when trust is total, you may have a glimpse of it. It is overpowering. In it you simply disappear.
Love needs two persons. Trust also needs two persons. Love has more distance between the lovers because it is something biological; it is not a privilege to human beings. Trust is a privilege. The distance becomes smaller. Between the master and the disciple there is very little distance, but distance is distance, less or more. It divides; the duality remains.
The nameless phenomenon to which total trust leads is not a relationship. It is at-one-ment. The two disappear. Who is the disciple and who is the master is difficult to decide. It has become one circle, one pole. And it always comes without any pre-information, just suddenly, like a breeze. But once you have tasted it, love and trust all seem to be very poor; you have known richness. It may have been only for a few seconds, it does not matter.
There is an old story. A king loved his bodyguard very much. The bodyguard was such a beautiful man with so much love and trust for the king that he could have given his life at any moment, if it was needed. He was ready to serve the king in any way. They were always together - hunting, or going to war, or just going for a walk in the gardens. The bodyguard was always with the king, so there arose a certain kind of friendship.
One day the king said, "What do you think? - do you ever dream of being a king?"
The poor bodyguard said, "I am so poor, I cannot dream such costly dreams. I dream of small things, but I cannot dream of being a king."
The king said, "Then I would like to give you, for twenty-four hours, my position. For twenty-four hours you are the king and I am the bodyguard."
The bodyguard tried to persuade the king, "Don't do this. Don't do this to me. I cannot conceive of it.
I cannot comprehend it - you being my bodyguard." But the king was insistent, so it happened. The bodyguard became king for twenty-four hours, and the king became the bodyguard. And the story is tremendously significant because the first thing the bodyguard-king did was to order the crucifixion of the king!
The king could not believe it; nobody could believe it. He was such a trustworthy man, what happened to him? But the order of a king is an order, so the real king was crucified. And now there was no question of twenty-four hours; he was to remain the king forever.
This is a Sufi story. Sufis say that love and trust can both betray - just they need the opportunity.
Even trust can betray, just the opportunity is needed. There is only one thing that cannot betray and that is the nameless beyond - where the two are no more two, where a kind of one spirit in two bodies, one soul in two bodies, is experienced. In the beginning it will be only for moments, because the experience is so strange, so outlandish, that you need a little time to have it again. Slowly it will grow. There comes a moment when it becomes just your way of life.
I have seen love betray. It is very simple. To find a love that does not betray is difficult. It is difficult to find trust that betrays, but not impossible. Just the opportunity... For example, I have loved so many people, I have given them my whole heart, unconditionally. But now that the whole world has turned against me - which was going to happen one day or the other - even those who thought they have attained to trust are betraying. And when trust betrays, it is so ugly.
Love can be forgiven because it is biological. It is bound to change. Trust is not biological; it is a higher phenomenon. But even the people who believed that they had trust in me - and they were not befooling themselves, they really believed they had trust in me - just they had not found the opportunity to betray. Now they have found the opportunity, now they have the opportunity.
It was paying to be intimate to me, to have trust in me; now it can be dangerous to have trust in me.
Now it is not paying.
Ananda Teertha wrote me a letter: "We have opened a meditation academy." Devageet was there - he worked hard to find a place, to arrange the money. Devageet helped tremendously to open the academy, and he insisted that my name should be there. But no therapist was willing that even a mention of me should be made. And Teertha wrote in explanation, "We have not put your name on the academy, we have not mentioned your name anywhere, for the simple reason that your name has become dangerous. People become afraid to join the therapy group if it is your therapy.
Governments won't allow..."
So now it is paying... they have all dropped their names, starting with "Swami" or "Ma"; they have kept just "Teertha," "Rajen." That too is cunning. Why not bring back your old name again? - because that old name has no prestige, and they want to ride on both horses. They want to exploit the sannyasins with their names, and they want to exploit the non-sannyasins by dropping my name and any concern with me completely from their therapy groups.
They had come to me as failures. Therapies were dying in America and Europe because people did them and found it is just a game. I made them world-famous therapists, changed the structures of their therapy, joined it with meditation, and they became the topmost therapists in the world. They had come to me as failures, bankrupt. But they have all forgotten that. Now they think that I am a danger. To be with me is no more paying; it is better to be on your own.
But they cannot leave the sannyasins either, because if you are totally on your own, no sannyasin is going to bother about you. So in advertising, they are using the red clothes; in their pictures they have malas. But in reality, they are not using red clothes, they are not using malas. What kind of cunningness...? It seems not only politicians... perhaps every human being has a certain hidden politician in him.
Devageet told me that he had to almost physically fight for at least putting a picture of me in the brochure because they were all putting their pictures in it. With great difficulty they agreed, and they put a very old picture so that nobody would recognize that it is my picture. And they have not put my name underneath the picture. Under their pictures, their names are there, but under my picture there is no name. And some amateur must have taken this picture; nobody can tell whose picture it is.
Just yesterday all the three political parties of Uruguay unanimously decided that they would like me to stay here and they welcome me and my people. The president, the minister for foreign affairs, the minister for interior affairs - these are the three persons who have to sign for my permanent residence here - they agreed totally that there is nothing against me. And all that has been sent to them from different countries - from England, from Spain, from America, from India, from Greece, from Italy, from Germany - not a single word is against me; it is against the people who may come if I stay here.
Now this is a strange statement! It is against the followers, because somebody has been found with drugs... But it is so simple logic: the person who has been found with drugs was also a Christian or a Jew, and he was a Christian or a Jew or a Hindu for his whole life, and for centuries, generation after generation. And he has been a sannyasin only for one year, but I am condemned! Christianity is not condemned, Jesus is not condemned, the pope is not condemned... not even mentioned.
In fact, all the criminals of the world belong to some religion. All the murderers, all the rapists, belong to some religion. If this is the way to decide, then all the religions should be condemned. They will not have any respectability, will not be allowed to make their temples, churches and synagogues, will not be allowed to spread their religion because their religion is dangerous. It creates murderers, rapists, thieves, robbers.
So this is a strange statement. When somebody does something, it is his individual responsibility.
And I don't have even a religion. I don't have anybody's responsibility on me. Seeing all the information from all the governments telling them that I should not be allowed to stay, they were clear that nothing is against me. If somebody else has done something then he should be punished; I should not be punished and persecuted.
They agreed, unanimously - and it is a very difficult situation here. It is a coalition government, it is not a single-party government; three parties together have made the government. To come to a unanimous decision is a very difficult thing, but they came to a unanimous decision. And the minister of the interior even informed the press that "Osho is welcome to stay here and do his work here."
But they were not aware of things, in what kind of world we are living. The American ambassador must have immediately informed Ronald Reagan, and Ronald Reagan must have phoned the president. "If you allow Osho to stay in Uruguay, then all the loans that we were going to give you, and that means billions of dollars, will be stopped. Second, all the loans that we have given you in the past - the interest rate should be raised or you have to pay them immediately: you can decide."
Now, a poor country, a small country ... and you call America democratic, a country of freedom.
And the president of the country, the government of the country, is doing simply blackmail. This is blackmail! They have nothing to say against me. Asked, "Why don't you want him to be here?" the reply was, "That is irrelevant. We simply do not want him in Uruguay; otherwise, you can understand what we can do." Now, the poor people see clearly it is blackmail, but are helpless.
But if only politicians were doing blackmail, it would be one thing - but everybody who gets a chance will do it too. 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.
Love is beautiful when it is there, but soon it becomes bitter.
Trust is beautiful when it is there. But its test comes when an opportunity arises such that if you still go on trusting you will be putting yourself in danger, and it no longer pays. At that time, trust can become just its opposite; it becomes a revenge. It becomes an argument to satisfy oneself that, "I am not betraying: in fact, I was wrong in trusting the man; the man was wrong." Now he has to prove to himself and to others that the man was wrong: "I have not betrayed, I have simply discovered that the man was wrong."
It is just to feel not guilty. It is an effort to whitewash, to wash your hands which are full of blood.
But no lies, no allegations, can make any difference to the fact that you have betrayed - and in betraying you cannot harm me. Nobody can harm me. You are simply harming yourself. Now you have destroyed your own capacity to trust, and if the bridge of trust is destroyed, you will never be able to go beyond it.
And it is strange: the people like Shiva, who lived almost six, seven years with me - if they could not discover all these facts then that they are "discovering" now when they are not with me, it only proves one thing: that they are retarded. It takes seven years to discover? - things which you are talking about now you must have "discovered" five years before. At that time you could not manage to expose them?... that was the right time.
It is a psychological thing to be understood. Many more books will be written, many more articles will be written by sannyasins - just because they have trusted and now they are betraying. Some reason has to be there for why they are leaving me. Without a reason, they will feel guilty, and if there is no reason, they have to invent it. They have to create lies.
Love is not very reliable, but useful.
Use it, and move to trust.
But trust is also not hundred percent proof.
Then you cannot fall; then there is no way of going back. Then it is something which partakes of eternity.
LAST NIGHT I WAS READING A RUBBISHY BOOK IN BED AND SUDDENLY THE THOUGHT CAME LIKE A FLASH OF LIGHT, "BUT THE MASTER CANNOT GIVE YOU THE TRUTH, YOU HAVE TO STEAL IT. AND NOT ONLY WILL HE NOT LOSE IT, HE WILL ENJOY YOUR STEALING IT MORE THAN YOU." AND THEN STRAIGHTAWAY I THOUGHT THAT PERHAPS THAT IS THE MEANING OF THE MAIN SUTRA OF THE ISHAVASYA UPANISHAD - THAT THE WHOLE COMES OUT OF THE WHOLE, AND STILL THE WHOLE REMAINS. AND I FELT A DEEP SILENCE FOR A FEW MOMENTS.
OSHO, PLEASE SAY SOMETHING MORE ABOUT THAT SUTRA.
The ISHAVASYA UPANISHAD sutra is one of the most significant statements ever made: the whole comes out of the whole, yet the whole remains behind. The whole loses itself into the whole, yet the whole remains the same.
This is really the quality of wholeness. It cannot be more, it cannot be less. You can either take something out of it or you can put something into it: it remains the same. It is the unchanging, eternal truth. Everything else is changing, and everything else - if you take something out of it - will lose something; if you put something into it, it will gain something.
Connecting the sutra with the master and the disciple, it becomes even more clear. Thousands of disciples can take the truth from the master, but his wholeness remains the same; it is not that he becomes a beggar because you all have taken his treasure.
In the ordinary world, the ordinary rules of economics are different. A beggar was asking a rich man, "Please give me something. I have been hungry for three days."
The rich man took out a hundred rupee note and gave it to the poor man. The poor man could not believe it. In the first place, he was lying. He was always telling everybody that he has been hungry for three days, but nobody has ever given him a hundred rupee note. So he hesitated a little. The rich man said, "Aren't you satisfied? Do you want more?"
He said, "No, that is not the thing."
The rich man said, "Then what is it? You don't seem satisfied."
He said, "No, the thing is, soon you will be in my position. Once I also used to be rich, and once I also used to give hundred rupee notes to beggars, so finally I landed in this situation where I have to lie and beg the whole day and with difficulty somehow manage my food, my clothes. I am feeling really sorry for you, that you are not going to last long if this is the way you are going to do - giving hundred rupee notes to beggars like me. Then soon you will be in my company!"
He was saying the truth. It is ordinary economics. Howsoever much money you have, if you go on giving soon you will be poor, soon you will be a beggar. But the richness of your inner life is a totally different phenomenon: the ordinary laws of economics don't apply. The more you give, the more you have. In this connection ISHAVASYA UPANISHAD Is significant.
Even if the master gives his whole heart to you, still the whole remains behind. Even if the disciple, in gratitude, gives his whole heart to the master, neither the master gains anything nor the disciple loses anything; the wholeness is beyond profit and loss. And you are asking about stealing the truth from the master...
That's what Gurdjieff used to say to his disciples, "Unless you are ready to steal it, you will never get it."
And it is true that in your stealing the truth, the master will be more happy than you are; in fact, he is making every effort so that you can steal it. It cannot be given. Look at it from another aspect: truth cannot be given but it can be taken. I cannot say it to you, but you can hear it. I cannot show it to you, but you can see it. That's the meaning of "stealing." It is not the way you understand stealing.
What Gurdjieff is saying is that the master is available. You have to be courageous enough to take it.
He has left all the doors open. You have to be courageous enough to enter in and take the treasure.
And the master is watching and enjoying. If you don't enter the house, that will be the situation in which he will be sad - because what more can be done? The doors are open; you have been invited in thousands of times. The treasures are not locked, but you don't get courage enough to enter the master's house and take them. There is no question of stealing.
Truth is nobody's possession.
It is as much yours as anybody else's.
The master does not own it; it is a realization, not an ownership. But he cannot force you to take it, because that will lose all meaning.
There are things which you have to take some initiative to get. In your very initiative is your capacity to get them. The master can create the initiative in you, encourage you, but he cannot give it to you, because even if he gives it to you, you will lose it; you will forget it somewhere.
There is an old story. A poor man with his donkey is coming back home from the market. He is a potter, and in India only potters use donkeys to carry pots from one place to another place. He has sold all the pots, but on the way he found a great diamond, uncut, unpolished. He knows nothing about diamonds; he just thought it would be good for children to play with. "It looks beautiful, shiny.
Or it may look good if I hang it round the neck of the donkey."
So he managed to hang it around the neck of the donkey. A jeweler was passing by on his beautiful horse. He suddenly stopped. He could not believe... he had never seen such a big diamond. And around a donkey's neck! He asked the poor man, "What you will take for that stone?" Naturally he understood that he did not know that it is a diamond. "What will you take for that stone?"
The poor man thought very hard. Finally he said, "One rupee will do, but I was thinking my children would like it or my donkey might like it."
The jeweler said, "One rupee for a stone? Are you mad!" He became greedy: "This man knows nothing. For one rupee he is selling a diamond worth one million rupees! He can be negotiated." So he said, "No, I will give only four annas," and he went on slowly, on his horse.
But by chance another jeweler came behind him, and he was a far richer jeweler, on his chariot. He also stopped, and he asked, "How much is the price of that diamond?"
The man said, "It used to be one rupee, but now it is two rupees. There seem to be too many buyers of the product; the price has gone high!" The jeweler gave him two rupees, took the diamond and went away.
And the man on the horse came back because he thought, "It is foolish negotiating about one rupee.
Just give him one rupee and take the diamond."
He told him, "Don't be worried, I will give you one rupee."
The potter said, "But the diamond is sold."
The jeweler said, "DIAMOND?"
The man said, "I am a poor man but I can understand - who is interested in a stone? And I have got double the price: two rupees cash."
The jeweler said, "You are mad. I could have given you ten rupees!"
The man said, "But you are late. Never be too greedy. I was giving it to you for one rupee. And when the other man on the chariot stopped I knew that it must be worth thousands of rupees, but what am I to do with thousands of rupees? Two rupees is enough. I am a poor potter: two rupees will give a great boost to my business. I don't want anything more."
The jeweler was very angry. He said, "You are stupid. You are an idiot! You sold a diamond worth one million rupees for two rupees!"
The poor potter said, "Don't be angry. In fact you are an idiot because you knew it is a diamond and you would not purchase it for one rupee. I am a poor man. I had no idea what it is; I have never seen a diamond. I asked you the highest price I could calculate; more than one rupee I have never seen.
So who do you think is an idiot? Now go home and cry over the spilled milk as much as you want.
As far as I am concerned, two rupees is enough - diamond or no diamond. For me, two rupees are too much."
People live with greed. Their greed is for worldly things, so when Gurdjieff said to his disciples, "You will have to steal the truth," they thought he was telling them they have to be thieves. Gurdjieff was very much misunderstood. Gurdjieff was really saying that the master cannot give it to you because you will not understand that it is a diamond. You will think it is a stone - unless you make an effort to steal it. In that very effort of stealing it, you will attain to the recognition that you have found something valuable.
You know the famous proverb: "Stolen kisses are sweet." Why should stolen kisses be sweet? - because in stealing you are making an effort. That very effort makes it valuable. The more arduous is the effort, the more valuable is the thing you are going to get.
Gurdjieff is right: you should be able to steal the truth. And nobody will be more happy than your master, because he is not losing anything and you are gaining the whole world.