You are here to be yourself

The first question:

Question 1:

It is natural. It is not strange. If they were not against me it would be absolutely strange. They have been against people like me forever. They HAVE to be, it is inevitable.

Whatsoever I am doing here is very shattering to their minds. It is cutting their very roots. It is offending them in many ways. It is shocking. It is scandalous. They react, they react just to defend themselves. And the greatest thing that offends them is something that has to be understood.

When Buddha declared that he was enlightened, people were very offended. They could believe that people had been enlightened in the past, but they could not believe that a contemporary, a man just like them, could be enlightened. They could believe that in future there would be enlightened people - but in the present? A contemporary? It hurts the ego that somebody has become enlightened:

"Then what have I been doing here?" It can't be accepted.

And these were the same people who had been reading the Upanishads, reading again and again the great declaration of the seers: AHAM BRAHMASMI - I am God! If Buddha had simply commented on it, if he had simply said that God is hidden in everybody, God is unmanifest in everybody, they would have loved him. But instead of commenting on it, he became a witness to it.

He declared, "I am God! I have attained, I have arrived! I have fulfilled the promise of the seers."

That was very offensive.

The same happened with Jesus. What was his crime? Why was he crucified? - for a very simple reason: he declared, "I have come. I am the one for whom you have been waiting." People were very happy waiting for him, but you should not come, you should leave them alone. They could go on waiting for you for eternity, but when you come, you destroy many things. First, you destroy their hope. Now that you have come they can't hope, they can't wait for something: you have taken away their future. That was their only joy of living: that the Messiah would be coming that soon he would come. They were thrilled with the future. Now suddenly the Messiah is here! And he said, "I have come... for whom you have been waiting!" They were offended. They didn't like this idea; you are destroying their whole future,, you are taking their hope away. Once this hope is gone they will be left simply in misery. They were hiding their misery behind this hope.

What was so outrageous in Jesus' statements that he had to be crucified?

Just the other day I was reading a passage. The Gospel describes the event: And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And he went to the synagogue and he stood up to read.

He opened the book of the prophet Isaiah and read: "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recover sight to the blind." In his commentary Jesus spoke one single sentence so explosive that his hearers did not allow him to continue but rushed him outside to kill him. And what did he say that was so outrageous? - simply, "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." That was his comment.

This passage has been commented on by thousands and thousands of rabbis down the ages.

Nobody had taken any offense. They were simply commenting on the prophet Isaiah's statement.

Jesus did not comment. He declared, "I am here! I have come! The spirit of the Lord is upon me! "

He is not a commentator. He himself is the commentary, an alive statement. He said, "The word has become flesh in me. The spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to preach good news!" The statement Jesus made is not in inverted commas. That is the only difference that he has made - he has removed the inverted commas. If those inverted commas had not been removed, people would not have been offended. If he had simply quoted Isaiah's saying, there would have been no problem. But he said, "The spirit of the Lord is upon me! " - without inverted commas - "because he has anointed me to preach good news. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recover sight to the blind." And a small comment at the end: "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." And people were so mad! They simply took him away. They took him on top of a cliff, they wanted to throw him to his death. They were immensely offended.

And Jesus belonged to that place. He was born there, he was brought up there - and that was the problem. People knew him perfectly well: "He is the son of that carpenter, Joseph, and his wife, Mary. And this carpenter's son... uneducated, unfamiliar with the scriptures, not a learned man at all, is either mad or a hypocrite, has gone insane or is egoistic, declaring that 'Today the scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing! I have come. Isaiah was talking about me. It has happened before your eyes. In your hearing the scripture is fulfilled.'"

It was on that day that Jesus made the famous statement: "No prophet is acceptable in his own country."

If he had said. "The day will arrive when this will come to pass", things would have been perfectly okay. But he had not said that. He was saying, "The day has come! I am standing before your eyes, fulfilled. All those prophets were declaring me!" Now this is too much.

In India the Upanishads declare: AHAM BRAHMASMI - I am God, I am absolute. Talk about it, discuss about it, philosophize about it, speculate about it, go into the metaphysics of the statement, but don't become a witness to it.

And that's why people are against me: I declare I am God, the Upanishads are fulfilled in me. And not only that, I declare you are Gods, and all the prophets and all the seers are waiting just to be fulfilled in you too! But you are so condemnatory about yourself, you are so deadly against yourself.

You reject yourself so deeply that you cannot believe that God is possible in you. And if He is not possible in you, how can He be possible in me? Maybe it was possible in Krishna - he had come from paradise. Maybe it was possible in Buddha - he was an incarnation of God. But you know I am just as much the body as you are, as fragile as you are, as prone to illness, disease and death as you are. I am human.

Once I am gone people will not be offended by me. Then you can fabricate mythologies around me, you can create fictions. And the same people who are offended will become worshippers. This has always been so. Now they say Buddha was an incarnation of God, but what were they saying in his time? Now they say Jesus was a Messiah, half the earth worships him as God. What were they saying when he was alive?

This has always been so. And it seems, unfortunately, that it is going to always be so.

Man does not trust himself. Man cannot trust this idea that God is possible on earth. Maybe He is there high in the heavens, far away, distant. The closer God comes to you, the more difficult it becomes to accept. And then naturally, there are a thousand and one things that I do and say which go against their prejudices, which go against their settled habits, which go against their concepts.

They are always happy with the priests, they are never happy with the prophet, because the priest simply goes on nourishing their prejudices, he helps them. The priest is a prop: whatsoever you believe in, he goes on watering it, he goes on strengthening it. Whenever you start feeling a little suspicion about your belief, you go to the priest and he again gives you support.

Here, I am taking all supports away from you. I am not here to renovate the old rotten house in which you are living. I am dead-set to demolish it - because only when the old is utterly demolished can the new be created. When you end as the old, as the past, only then will you be born as new.

The prophet, the Messiah, the Christ, the Buddha - they cannot be accepted by people while they are alive. People can only accept them when they are dead, when they cannot do any harm to them - harm in their eyes - because Buddha is not there to do any harm to you. It looks like harm to you.

It hurts, because he has to do an operation; it is surgical.

To be with me is to be constantly on the operation table. Only very few courageous ones can be with me. The cowards will be offended. But the cowards cannot accept that they are cowards, so they will react, they will argue, they will create a thousand and one stories just to protect themselves so that they can feel good that they are not wrong. To accept that one is wrong is the beginning of a great revolution. But very few people are that courageous to accept that they are wrong. And my presence makes them feel wrong. Either I'm right or they are right; there is no compromise.

Either/or is the question. If I am right they are wrong. If they want to be right, if they want to prove that they are right, then they have to be against me. They have to prove that I am wrong: that is easier. They don't listen to me, they don't come close to me. There is fear - if they come close, if they listen, there is fear they may be hypnotized by me. Slowly, slowly, they may be convinced, converted, so they don't come.

The people who are against me are absolutely unacquainted with me. Their unacquaintance is a cultivated phenomenon: they don't allow themselves to come here. If they come, it is very difficult not to see the truth, it is almost impossible. Howsoever blind you are, it is impossible not to see the truth. Truth has its own ways of penetrating your heart, of becoming your pulsation. Truth has its own seductive ways: unawares, it enters into you and suddenly you see. And in that seeing is understanding.

The second question:

Question 2:

Amrita, this is the state of prayer... when your body prays - not the mind but the body. The body is your truth, the mind is nothing but lies that you have accumulated down the ages. The mind is borrowed, the body is authentically yours. So when the mind prays the prayer is false. But when the body starts vibrating in a new rhythm, in a new joy, when the body starts pulsating with the divine, with a new song, it is real prayer.

The real prayer arises out of your body, not out of your mind. This is my basic insistence: that all that is real has to arise out of your body. I am tremendously in love with the body because the body is your nature. It is the body where you are grounded and rooted, and all the so-called religions, organized religions, have been destroying the bridge between you and the body. They have been telling you that you are not the body; not only that you are not the body, they have been telling you that the body is the enemy, that the body has to be destroyed, that you have to starve the body in the name of religion, that you have to torture the body in the name of religion, that only by torturing the body will you come closer to God. I say to you: only by living your body will you come closer to God. There is no other way. Torturing your body you are torturing God Himself, because it is God that has become the body in you. And the body is always beautiful, mind rarely so. And when mind is beautiful it is always when it follows the body. The body has its own wisdom. It knows how to dance, how to sing, how to pulsate with God. Matter knows how to dance with the unknown.

When the sun rises in the morning, millions and millions of trees start waking up. They know...

matter is thrilled with the sunrays. Birds start singing, the dawn has come, the night is over. Buds open, open to absorb the sun, open to dance with the wind. Matter knows how to go with the unknown in rhythm. Only the mind is a man-made phenomenon, the soul is in God, the body is in God. Only the mind is outside God.

The prayer that arises out of the mind is false prayer. It will be Christian, it will be Hindu, it will be Mohammedan, but it will not be prayer. It will come from the Koran or from the Gita or from the Bible, but it will not be a prayer. It will be an impotent gesture, movement without any soul in it. It will be like a gramophone record, it will just be mechanical. Millions of Christians go on praying and millions of Hindus and millions of Mohammedans, but you don't see prayer alive on the earth anywhere.

What has happened? So many people praying, so many churches, mosques, temples, gurudwaras, synagogues - so much prayer, but God doesn't seem to happen anywhere. So much prayer simply going down the drain? It is not creating any Buddhafield, is not creating any Christ-consciousness on the earth. If so much prayer were true, the earth would have been transformed. Matter would have become divine if so much prayer were true. Matter itself would have become divine. Matter has the capacity to become divine. If the divine has the capacity to become matter, naturally matter has the capacity to become divine. If God becomes the world, the world can become God. They are two phases of the same energy. But those prayers are false, sheer wastage of time, energy. They are mind prayers.

I teach you the prayer of the body. And if you learn the prayer of the body, if you allow it, then the prayer of the soul will arise on its own accord.When the body starts vibrating with the divine, suddenly you will see your soul is also vibrating. Your body and soul are one; it is the mind that is making them separate. Dissolve the mind and you are one, you are absolute unity, integration. Mind is the culprit.

So, Amrita, this is what I call prayer, "BODY CONSTANTLY VIBRATING - WORDS COME TO MIND - SCINTILLATING, OSCILLATING. EVEN THE VALLEYS HAVE A PASSION. SUCH A THIRST, BELOVED OSHO."

And prayer is thirst. And only through an intense thirst will you be able to become an arrow and thrust into the reality of that which is. Only through thirst will you become fire, aflame. And that fire will burn you as you and will reveal you as God. That thirst is the fire that burns all that is non-essential, and the essential comes bright, clear, loud. That essence is called God. God is not a person sitting somewhere in heaven, God is your essential being. But you have become too occupied with the non-essential: the money, the politics, the respectability. You have become too concerned with others' opinions about you, what they are saying about you. You are so afraid of their opinions, and you start living according to their opinions. You always follow in line with the mediocre, the stupid, the crowd.

Remember, you are not here to follow the crowd. You are not here to follow anybody, in fact. You are here to realize who you are. You are here to be yourself.

The non-essential has to be dropped. Just go on watching how many non-essential things you go on carrying with yourself, how much unnecessary luggage, junk, you go on carrying with yourself.

Drop all that. This thirst will help you to drop it. Allow it to become a fire.

Fear will come - because when your house is on fire it is very natural that fear arise. You will not know whether anything is going to be saved out of this fire or not. In fact, whatsoever you know about yourself will be gone, and something will surface which you have never known about yourself.

Your identity as it is now will be gone, but a new identity, a new vision of life will arise out of it.

Each person has to become the Parable of the Phoenix. Each person has to create his own inner fire - that's what prayer is.

Amrita, you say, "I AM IN SUCH A VORTEX."

It will be a chaos, because the old will start disappearing and the new will take time. And there will be a gap, and that gap requires courage. In fact a Master is needed just to help you in that gap.

When your whole mind says, "Go back, cling to the past. At least you used to know who you are.

Now you are losing all identity. You are becoming more and more vague. You are becoming a mist, a cloud. Where are you going? Slowly, slowly you may disappear completely. This may be a death, and not a spiritual birth. Go back! Cling to the past! At least it was familiar, known. You have lived it, you were very skillful about it. Yes, there were miseries and there were downs and there were darknesses - so what? But at least you were there. Now, searching for light, you are disappearing.

Even if there is light and you are gone, what is the point?"

All logic will be in favor of going back. That is the moment when a Master is needed, somebody in whom you trust so tremendously that you can distrust your logic and go with him. Just a little while, and the thing has happened. Once the new starts arising in your consciousness, then there is no problem. Then you know you are on sure ground, and great joy arises with it.

It is going to be a vortex to all those who have gathered around me. It is going to be a chaos. First you will become like nebulae, vaporous. First you will disappear as you are, only then....

Remember the story we started these talks with, 'The Wisdom of the Sands'? The river is afraid:

"How to cross the desert?" And the desert says, "Don't be afraid. The only way to cross me is to evaporate. Ride on the wings of the wind. Let the wind carry you beyond the desert." But the river is naturally afraid: "Who knows? Once you evaporate what is the guarantee that you will again be the same, that you will BE again?" And the river is logical, and she argues, and the desert says, "The argument is not going to help, and I cannot prove it. I cannot give you any guarantee, but this is so.

I have seen many rivers crossing me. This is the only way. You will have to take the risk."

That risk is sannyas. You have to take the risk to evaporate in me, with me; only then can you go through the desert. Otherwise you will become a mire in the desert, you will be lost.

"I'M IN SUCH A VORTEX. NEVER IN LIFE HAVE L BEEN SO RIPPED APART..."

True, because the whole life tries to keep you as you are - the parents, the school, the college, the university, the church. The structure of the society tries to keep you as you are. The whole structure is bent upon you remaining stagnant, that you should not become dynamic, because the people who are dynamic are dynamite. They are dangerous people. The people who are growing, the people who are evolving, are bound to be dangerous to the status quo, to the state, to the society, to the church - because the people who are growing can't remain with the old ideologies. Their growth will require new Gods, new Bibles, new Korans. Their growth will require new Visions of reality.

If a child grows, how long can you keep him satisfied with his toys? The only way to keep him satisfied with his toys is not to allow him growth. Force him to remain retarded; then he will go on playing with his toys, but you have made an imbecile. That's what the society is doing to millions of people: it keeps them imbeciles. It does not allow them to grow because once they start growing then nobody will be able to contain them. And once they have tasted growth they will not believe in any boundaries, they will go on growing till they become God.

And man can be a slave; God cannot be a slave. And the man can be forced to do stupid things:

the man can be forced to go to war, the man can be forced to fight, to kill, to murder. You cannot force God. If people go on growing you will not find Englishmen and Germans and Japanese and Indians in the world. If a person goes on growing soon he will have gone beyond being a German or an American or a Chinese or an Indian. Soon he will see the stupidity of it. Soon he will become a universal citizen. Then what will happen to your politicians? What will happen to your nations and your stupid flags? What will happen to all that nonsense that goes on and on and has become too important? That nonsense can remain important and your capitals can remain capitals and your politicians can remain great leaders only if man remains retarded. If man grows, who wants a leader? Everybody will have his own inner guide. Who bothers about listening to politicians? They will be simply out of date. If man grows there can't be any politics; politics is so juvenile. If man grows there can't be any poverty and any richness. If a man grows, he will see; not that communism comes, because that is again another politics. If man grows, a new vision comes: that we all belong to the same earth, that our happiness and our misery is together. If a single man is unhappy, then the whole humanity will have something stuck. That one unhappy man will function like a wound on the body of humanity.

We are together! If we really want to be happy, the everybody has to be happy. Only in a happy atmosphere can you be happy. Not that the proletariat comes and starts dominating the society - that is going from one polarity to another, it doesn't change anything. That's why all the revolutions in the past have failed - the French, the Russian, the Chinese, the Indian All the revolutions have failed because the pendulum simply moves to the opposite pole. Rich people were in domination - the czar was the dictator - now they are thrown; now the proletariat is in domination. In fact the same bourgeoisie, in the name of the proletariat, starts ruling. And in fact, the czar was never such a czar as Stalin proved to be. Stalin was a reincarnation of Peter, or Ivan the Terrible.

The oppressed become the oppressors, and the oppressors become the oppressed. But the story continues, the story is the same: A becomes B, B becomes A, and the problem remains where it was.

If people grow up, if people become more conscious, if people become more centered - not that they all will become public servants, but they will simply see that whatsoever they do helps humanity to be more happy. Whatsoever they do, they should see to it that it does not create more misery in the world. That will happen spontaneously. States will disappear, nations will disappear, religions will disappear. There will be a kind of religiousness, a milieu of spirituality around the earth, an atmosphere. That is totally different. But nobody is in favor that you should change, because with your change, so many people's investments will be at stake.

You say, "I'M IN SUCH A VORTEX. NEVER IN LIFE HAVE I BEEN SO RIPPED APART..."

You have never been with a Master. To be with a Master is to learn how to die. Yes, you will be ripped apart. And the paradox is that only in this death will you be born, only this cross will help you to resurrect.

You say, "... SO FLUID, SO BEAUTIFULLY INSECURE."

I am happy, Amrita, that you are feeling the beauty of insecurity, because there is only one security, and that is of insecurity. All other securities are false, make-believes. There is only one security which is not a make-believe, and that is to live and love insecurity, to live moment to moment, to live continuously available to the unknown. To live without a past is to live without security. Security comes from the past. Those who live afraid of insecurity are confined by their past. They live a dead life, they live in their graves. They don't live, they only pretend to live. The people who really want to live have to live in the present, and the present is insecure. Insecurity is built-in in life. It is its very lifeblood. Insecurity means things are changing, moving, that life is a pilgrimage, that we have to go on moving till we reach the ocean and disappear into it. That ocean is God.

"MY BEING LOVES YOU - BODY CONSTANTLY VIBRATING..."

Allow the body, let it vibrate and dance, let it pray. Listen to the body. Follow the body. Never in any way try to dominate the body. The body is your foundation. Once you have started understanding your body, ninety-nine percent of your miseries will simply disappear. But you don't listen.

The body says, "Stop! Don't eat!" You go on eating, you listen to the mind. The mind says, "It is very tasty, delicious. A little more." You don't listen to the body. The body is feeling nauseous, the stomach is saying, "Stop! Enough is enough! I am tired!" but the mind says, "Look at the taste... a little bit more." You go on listening to the mind. If you listen to the body; ninety-nine percent of problems will simply disappear, and the remaining one percent will be just accidents, not really problems.

But from the very childhood we have been distracted from the body, we have been taken away from the body. The child is crying, the child is hungry and the mother is looking at the clock because the doctor says that only after three hours is the child to be given milk. She is not looking at the child.

The child is the real clock to look at, but she goes on looking at the clock. She listens to the doctor, and the child is crying, and the child is asking for food, and the child needs food right now. If the child is not given food right now you have distracted him from the body. Instead of giving him food you give him a pacifier. Now you are cheating and you are deceiving. And you are giving something false, plastic, and you are trying to distract and destroy the sensitivity of the body. The wisdom of the body is not allowed to have its say, the mind is entering in. The child is pacified by the pacifier, he falls asleep. Now the clock says three hours are over and you have to give the milk to the child.

Now the child is fast asleep, now his body is sleeping; you wake him up, because the doctor says the milk has to be given. You again destroy his rhythm. Slowly, slowly you disturb his whole being.

A moment comes when he has lost all track of his body. He does not know what his body wants - whether the body wants to eat or not eat, he does not know; whether the body wants to make love or not, he does not know. Everything is manipulated by something from the outside. He looks at a Playboy magazine and feels like making love. Now this is stupid, this is mind. The love cannot be very great; it will be just a sneeze, nothing else, an unburdening. It is not love at all. How can love happen through the mind? Mind knows nothing of love. It becomes a duty. You have a wife, you have a husband, you have to make love - it becomes a duty. Dutifully, religiously, every night, you make love. Now the spontaneity is not there. And then you are worried because you start feeling it is not fulfilling you. Then you start looking for some other woman. You start thinking logically, "Maybe this woman is not the right woman for me. Maybe she is not my soulmate. Maybe she is not made for me. I am not made for her, because she's not turning me on."

The woman is not the problem, the man is not the problem: you are not in the body, she is not in the body. If people were in their bodies, nobody would miss that beauty called orgasm. If people were in their bodies, they would know God's first glimpses through their orgasmic experiences. You can't know God through the church, you can know God only through love, because only in a loving experience you dissolve, you melt, you become vast. In that vastness you have the taste of God, the taste of Tao. That is the foundation of a real, religious life.

Why are people so irreligious today? - not because churches are lacking or missionaries are lacking or people are not continuously sermonizing. Millions of books are written, and millions of sermons are given, but all fall flat because the real witness is not available. Nobody has witnessed God in his life in any way. How can you convince people that God is? It all remains just an argument. It does not convert, it does not convince. If people were in their bodies they would know God in love, and then they would start searching for God. They would search for that vastness, that hugeness, that has happened to them. They know it by their own experience; it is existential, it is not theological, it is not philosophical. They know God is, that something like God is.

Now God has to be searched for. Now one has to go on a great exploration.

Listen to your body, follow the body. Mind is foolish, body is wise. And if you have gone deep into the body, in those very depths you will find your soul. The soul is hidden in the depths of the body.

The soul is the innermost core of the body, and the body is the outermost circumference of the soul.

Mind is a social by-product. The less mind, the better. And all effort here is how to lessen your mind, how to lessen your burden.

That's why Sufis call that state of meditation FANA, a state of no-mind.

The third question:

Question 3:

Padma Sambhava, those are the only two things possible: either you are a schmuck or you are a Buddha. There are no stages in between. Either you know or you don't know. You will be surprised to know that in India, the word for schmuck is BUDDHU - it comes from Buddha. Either you are a BUDDHU, a schmuck, or you are a Buddha, awakened.

Both come from the same root. BUDDHU means the stupid, the foolish, the ignorant, fast asleep.

'Buddha' means one who has awakened, who has come out of his dreams, out of his desires, out of his ignorance, one who has come to know, one who is full of light within. The darkness has disappeared, the night is over, the sun has risen. And there are no stages in between. So never be befooled by the in-between stages.

People have created many stages. They say, "I am not a Buddha yet, but I am on the Way. I am a very, very religious person, spiritual, holy." But all your spirituality and all your holiness and all your saintlihood is nothing but a dream - UNLESS YOU have become a Buddha. One can dream about being a saint - there is no problem in it - and all your learnedness is just a dream. One can dream about being learned, but all the time you remain a schmuck, you don't change.

Your so-called scholars and priests and professors and great knowers, knowledgeable people, just remain in the first category. It is better to realize that these are the only two possibilities: either you are awake or you are asleep. Seeing things like that will be of great help.

You ask, "SOMETIMES I FEEL THAT ALL MY INNER JOURNEY IS ONLY IMAGINATION."

It is... because the inner and the outer both are created by the imagination. In reality there is nothing inner and nothing outer; it is all one. You can't say it is inner, you can't say it is outer. The distinction between the inner and the outer is created by the mind. It is not real, it does not correspond to reality.

What is inner and what is outer?

You take a breath in. It was outer just a moment before, then it becomes inner, then after a second it is outer again. So what is inner and what is outer? You take food, it was out; then you digest it - it becomes your blood, your bone, your marrow. So what is inner and what is outer? And you go to the haircutter and he cuts your hair; it was inner, now it is no more inner.

The inner is continuously becoming outer, the outer is continuously becoming inner. That's what life is, the dynamics of life: the yin goes on becoming yang, the yang goes on becoming yin. The man goes on becoming woman, the woman goes on becoming man.

You eat an apple from a tree - it was outer, then it becomes inner. Then one day you will die and you will fall into the earth and an apple tree will arise on you. And something of you will become the apple, and your grandchildren may eat it. We are all cannibals: we are eating each other. There is no other way to be here. When you eat an apple be respectful... you may be eating your grandfather or grandmother.

Nothing is outer, nothing is inner. Inner and outer are just ways of describing the same thing. To see it is to go beyond imagination.

You say, "SOMETIMES I FEEL THAT ALL MY INNER JOURNEY IS ONLY IMAGINATION."

It is, but right now all is imagination. In fact, journey, as such, is always outer. There can't be any inner journey. How can there be inner journey? Going anywhere is always going out. When the journey ends then the inner begins. You may be coming closer to the inner, but the journey remains outer. 'Journey' means you are trying to connect yourself with the distant. The inner is not distant, it is exactly what you are. You are already connected with it, there is no need to connect, there is no path to connect you to it. That's why Zen people say that truth is a pathless reality: you don't go anywhere, then you are in. When you don't go anywhere the inner has happened.

But I can understand Padma Sambhava's difficulty too. I myself go on saying to you "Start the inner journey". I have to use words, you have to use words, and all words are inadequate. And if you go on stretching a word to its extreme, logical end, it becomes absurd. They have to be used only in a hypothetical way. They have to be used in a utilitarian sense.

When I use the words 'inner journey', I simply mean that you have looked at one aspect of the journey in your life called 'outer', now try to look at another aspect of the journey called 'inner'. YoU have been running after money, now run after meditation. You have been running after power, now run after God. Both are running. Once you start running after meditation then one day I will tell you, "Now drop meditation too. Now stop running." And when you stop running then real meditation happens.

Sitting silently, doing nothing, the spring comes and the grass grows by itself.

So meditation has two meanings. That's why in India we have two words for it: DHYANA and SAMADHI. DHYANA means the temporary meditation, arbitrary meditation; SAMADHI means you have come home, now meditation is not needed. When even meditation is not needed, one is in meditation - never before it. When one simply lives in meditation, walks in meditation, sleeps in meditation, when meditation is just one's way of being, then one has arrived.

But you have been running too much after money, power, prestige. You have become so accustomed to running. Suddenly to say "Stop!" would be too much. You have to be slowed down slowly, slowly.

So we say, "Run after God." This will slow you down. Running after God, you ask "How?" and you are told. "Sit silently. close your eyes, watch your breathing. " Now what kind of running is this?

In the name of running you are persuaded not to run. Watching your breathing, slowly, slowly the breathing becomes slower and slower. Sitting silently, not moving, one day you suddenly recognize the fact that all journey has disappeared. You are not going anywhere, you are. In that moment when you see you are, you simply are, it has happened. It is neither outer nor inner.

So let me say it in a paradoxical way: the inner is realized only when the inner and outer both disappear. The inner is just a beginning, to balance the outer. When both come to an absolute balance, when both negate each other, emptiness is left in your hands - neither outer nor inner.

That is not imagination.

Right now, Padma Sambhava, it is imagination. And you have to be very, very alert, because imagination is one of the sources that go on creating new desires, new fantasies, new worlds for you. It is MAYA, it is illusion.

The fourth question:

Question 4:

I would like to tell you one story. Many centuries have passed, but that story has remained of tremendous significance for those who want to meditate.

Bodhidharma went to China. He was one of the most unique persons ever. The whole of China was waiting for Bodhidharma.

It took many years for him to cross the Himalayas. It was difficult, and he was walking.

The emperor had come to receive him on the border; the emperor's name was Wu. He had become a Buddhist - not only had he become a Buddhist, he had put all his treasures into the service of Buddhism. He had converted millions of people to Buddhism, he had created thousands of temples and thousands of Buddha-statues, and he had helped all of Buddha's scriptures to be translated into Chinese. Ten thousand monks used to receive their food from his palace every day. He was supporting in every way.

Bodhidharma was coming - another Buddha was coming - Wu had come to receive him. Naturally, this dialogue happened. This is one of the greatest dialogues, a small dialogue but of immense importance.

Wu asked, "What is the merit of all the good deeds that I have been doing in the service of Buddhism?" He must have hoped for a good pat on his head. He must have hoped, and naturally so, because all other Buddhist teachers and monks were saying, "You are simply great. You are the greatest emperor in history You have done such holy works. Your life is the life of true service and compassion." They may have been saying all these things; naturally, Wu expected some sanction from the greatest Master that has come to China. Do you know what Bodhidharma said?

He said, "No merit. Nothing special about it, absolutely nothing."

To translate it into modern jargon, he said, "All bullshit!"

Wu was offended, shocked. He could not believe his ears. And thousands of monks had gathered; they were also shocked. They were afraid really, they were fearing something like that because stories were coming about Bodhidharma - that he's a strange fellow. And when he came they were absolutely certain that he was a strange fellow, because he was carrying one of his shoes on his head. And he was a very dangerous-looking man. He was all eyes, fiery eyes, as if he would jump and kill you. And naturally, a Master has to do that. And he had long hair and beard, and his whole face was covered with his hair; only those eyes were there. Later on he came to be known in China as 'the barbarian Buddha', as the 'barbarian Brahmin from India'. He was a wild man. A shiver must have gone down the spine of Emperor Wu.

Bodhidharma said, "All bullshit!" There was no point in prolonging the conversation, but it was so abrupt. And Wu was a very sophisticated man, a cultured man, a Chinese emperor - the Chinese are very cultured people, very polite. It would not look good to stop so suddenly, so just to bring it to a point where it could be easily finished, he asked again, "Are they not holy? You must be joking,"

he said.

Bodhidharma said, "No! No holiness! All is just empty. There is nothing holy and nothing unholy. All is just empty." He was bent upon breaking this conversation abruptly.

Now even Wu forgot all his sophistication and cultured ways and courtly manners. This man was too much! He provoked him so much that he became angry. And he asked. "Then who are you, standing in front of me?"

And Bodhidharma had a beautiful laugh, and he said, "I don't know."

You ask me, "WHO ARE YOU?"

And I say, "I don't know."

What did Bodhidharma mean when he said, "I don't know"? He SHOULD know. Who else? But what does he mean by "I don't know"? He is saying a thousand and one things in that simple statement.

It has taken centuries for people to uncover the meaning of it, and still there are meanings upon meanings.

First, when you come to know, you disappear. There is no 'I'. While the 'I' exists you never come to know. When the 'I' disappears you come to know, but then you are not there.

So there are two kinds of ignorances: one, when you are and you don't know; and the second, a luminous ignorance, full of light - but you are not there, so who is there to say that "I know"? The 'I' is no longer there.

The second thing: whenever you know something, it has to be separate from you, it has to be an object of knowledge. How can you know the knower? You cannot reduce the knower to an object of knowledge. It remains the knower, it never becomes known. Whatsoever you know simply proves that it is not you. That is one of the basic meditations in the East.

Look at things, watch things, and whatsoever you become capable of knowing, you can be certain this is not you. So that is eliminated. This is called 'the process of elimination'. You watch, sitting silently - you can see your body, you can feel the legs are falling asleep, you can feel the hand is feeling tired, heavy, you can feel your head is having a headache. Then certainly one thing can be taken for granted: you are not your head, and you are not your legs, and you are not your hand. You are the knower who knows the head and the headache. So the body is eliminated. Then you start watching your mind. A thought arises, a thought of anger, passion, love, or whatever. You can see it arising in you. A cloud of anger comes and surrounds you; you can watch it. Or, you are possessed by a great desire for love, but you can watch that it is there. You can see that anger is there, or love is there, or greed is there, can't you? When you see that greed is there, one thing is certain - that you are not it. You are one who knows. So mind is eliminated.

When the body and mind are eliminated, then who remains? - just a pure witness. Now you cannot know this pure witness because you cannot reduce it to being an object. The mirror cannot reflect itself, it can only reflect something else. Your eyes cannot see themselves, they can only see something else. Your witness cannot witness itself. That is the second meaning when Bodhidharma says "I don't know".

And the third: when Bodhidharma says "I don't know", he is saying, "The ultimate is a mystery, and it remains a mystery. There is no way to demystify it."

You ask me, " WHO ARE YOU?"

You would like some traditional answer - that I am a reincarnation of Buddha. Bullshit! I am not.

You would like me to tell you that I am the Messiah you have been waiting for. I am not. I'm not interested in becoming a martyr, not at all. You would like a definitive statement, and no definitive is possible, by the very nature of things.

Let me tell you another story:

Moses went on the mountains and God appeared to him as fire in a bush. And the bush remained green, and the bush was not burning.

This is an indication, a metaphoric indication, of the paradox of God - that God is a paradox, that God is illogical, that God is absurd, CREDO QUIA ABSURDUM. This is Tertullian's famous statement: "I believe in God because He is absurd. I believe because He cannot be believed."

To put it in a metaphor, in a pictorial way, it is said that Moses saw the bush and the fire in it, and the bush was not burning. He must have felt very confused, puzzled. And then God gave him the Ten Commandments to take to his people. And naturally he asked, "They will ask me, 'Who has given these to you?' What should I say?" And God said, "Say to them: I am that I am."

In the whole Jewish tradition there is no other statement which is more significant than this: I am that I am. Even God cannot say who He is.

You can say who you are, I cannot say who I am - because you have some identities. I have no identity. You think you are your name. Somebody asks, "Who are you?" You say, "My name is swami this or swami that." "Who are you?" somebody asks, and you can say that you are a Christian or a Hindu or a Mohammedan. "Who are you?" somebody asks, and you can say, "I am a doctor or an engineer or a professor. " These are just identities, superficial. Deep down, are you German or English or Chinese, Hindu, Christian, Buddhist? In your consciousness, at the deepest core, who are you? - doctor, engineer, professor? No, all these identities disappear. Who are you? You are there. I am that I am - nothing more can be said about it.

And the last question:

Question 5:

Religion is eternal - religion as the ultimate law of life and existence, as Tao, is eternal. Not as Christianity; Christianity can't be eternal. One day it was born, one day it will have to die.

Many religions were born and they are gone, have disappeared. Many religions will be born and will disappear. The eternal religion - what in India we call SANATAN DHARMA, the eternal religion, is transcendental. That eternal religion is translated sometimes by a Buddha - it becomes Buddhism.

It is a translation of the eternal into time. It is bringing something of the beyond to the earth. But the moment it is translated into time it is no more the eternal religion. It has taken a body and a shape and a form. Now no shape is eternal, no form is eternal; it will have to die.

It is like a child is born to you. The soul is eternal, but this child will have to die. This child has two things in it - the soul, the eternal; and something temporal - the structure, the mechanism. The body cannot be eternal. It has arisen out of the earth, it will have to go down to earth - dust unto dust.

Exactly the same is the case with religion: when religion is understood by an enlightened soul, he brings it in your language, the way you can understand. And that's why there are so many differences and so many religions. Moses had to speak the language of his people, what they could understand. Buddha had to speak the language of his people, what they could understand - and they were different people.

Now Jews are very practical people and Hindus are very impractical people. Moses had to speak a pragmatic language. Religion became ethics, morality - hence the Ten Commandments.

You will not find those Ten Commandments in any Hindu scripture. When for the first time the Upanishads were translated into Western languages, people were puzzled; there was nothing like Ten Commandments. How can a religion exist without Ten Commandments? The Upanishads say nothing about your morality. They don't say: Don't steal. Don't lie. Don't do this. Do that. They don't talk that language, not at all: Hindus have always been philosophical, speculative people. They love abstraction, they love flying into the sky.

Jews have always been practical people. This difference Makes the difference. Moses has to speak to Jews, he has to be very particular - "Do this, don't do that". If somebody says to Hindus, "Do this, don't do that", it won't have much appeal. Not that there have not been people like that; there was Manu, who was exactly like Moses. But they are not the mainstream of Hindu consciousness.

Mohammed speaks another language, and then time goes on changing - Krishna, five thousand years before, then Buddha, twenty-five centuries before. Twenty-five centuries passed between Krishna and Buddha. People had changed, people had learned many things, unlearned many things. Body structure, social structure, mind structure, everything is in a flux. Buddha speaks totally differently. Then Kabir speaks again differently.

I am speaking a totally different language. I am speaking to those who are alive today. Again and again religion will have to change, but the essential core remains the same. The shape changes, the form changes, the name changes, but the essential core remains the same, the essential taste remains the same.

And the second thing to be remembered: this is the change that is brought by enlightened people, but there are other changes also which go on parallel to it. Many changes are brought by the priests not because they know what truth is, but they have to adjust to people's needs. When an enlightened person like Jesus or Buddha makes any change, he has to look at two things: he has to look at truth and he has to look at people's minds. He has to create a bridge. But when a priest looks at the people he is only looking at the people - the politics, the society, the economics. He has no idea of truth. He goes on making compromises, he goes on changing the religion. He has to change because he has to adjust. A thousand and one changes are brought by the priests, but the changes that are brought by the priests destroy religion. And the changes that are brought by seers make religion again and again alive. These are two different processes, so remember it.

If you are around a man like Buddha or Kabir or Nanak, it is totally different. He brings a fresh message from God, from the source. He will speak your language but he will not compromise with you. He will be absolutely uncompromising. That's why those people look very hard.

Somebody has just asked "Sometimes Osho, you are very hard". I have to be. I cannot compromise with you. I speak your language so that you can understand, but I cannot compromise with you.

Otherwise there is no need: if I compromise with you, I am no more your Master. But the priest goes on compromising.

A story will be helpful.

It was the day before the Holy Day of Atonement. A young Jewish chap in a small town had something on his conscience. He went to his synagogue to see the rabbi. In privacy, he confessed to the rabbi that he had a sexual adventure that troubled him.

"Well," said the rabbi, "what happened?"

"Ah," answered the young chap, "I'm really ashamed to tell you. I thought you could gain me forgiveness before Yom Kippur. Of course, I'm ready to make a sizeable contribution to the synagogue."

"Well," said the rabbi, "what actually happened?"

"I had sexual intercourse with a gentile female."

"That is pretty bad."

"Worse, I kissed her."

"You kissed her?"

"Yes, I kissed her in a very intimate place."

The rabbi threw up his hands in horror and said, "Sorry! There is nothing I can do for you. The transgression is outrageous. You have shamed yourself beyond repair." And the rabbi angrily dismissed him.

The young man was distraught, and drove to a larger town. He sought out the rabbi of the Conservative congregation and told him his story. But the rabbi reproved him; though in milder tones, and advised that he could not accept a contribution because the sin committed was really beyond sanctioning.

The young man was crestfallen. But still determined to seek absolution; he drove to Detroit. There he sought out the largest Reform congregation, met the rabbi and told his story.

The rabbi listened patiently and then replied, "Well, it is an indiscretion, but not a fatal error. I believe that a proper contribution to the synagogue fund, and your attendance here tomorrow at services, will clear up the matter."

The young sinner turned to the rabbi and declared, "I will be delighted to comply with everything you mentioned. Yet, I can't understand. How is it that Rabbi Finkelstein and Rabbi Tannebaum gave little heed to my plea and turned me out?"

"Well," answered the Reform rabbi, "do you expect such smalltown rabbis to know anything about fancy fucking?"

The priest goes on compromising. He is not interested in the eternal, he is interested in something else. He is ready to compromise with you. These people go on destroying religion.

But in the natural course, every religion has to die. The changes that are brought by the rabbis and priests and the ministers are political changes, social changes. They are not religious. They only look at how they can go on holding their flock together. They are afraid to lose numbers, they go on compromising with the crowd. So if Adolf Hitler is in power, the minister blesses him.

Now this is strange... that a man who believes in Christ and his message blesses Adolf Hitler, or blesses some other country. He has to look for other things which have nothing to do with religion.

These people bring many changes; those changes go on killing and poisoning the body of religion.

But real changes also are needed. And whenever a real change happens a new religion is born.

Whenever these unreal compromises go on happening the old religion continues, dead, a corpse phenomenon - but it continues. It goes on stinking, but they go on putting patches on it. It is a dead body but they go on painting it. They go on pretending that everything is alive. Whenever real changes happen, whenever another message comes from the original source, a new religion is born.

Jesus brings a new message; Christianity is born. The Vatican goes on compromising. It is a dead Christianity now. It is good that it should go. If we are finished with dead religions on the earth it will be a great blessing to humanity, because when dead religions are finished, people start looking for new sources.

And I am happy that the new generation, all over the world, is finished with the dead stinking corpses, and is searching for new sources, new, alive sources. This search is one of the greatest phenomena of this century, and this search is becoming stronger every day.

Something great is going to happen. This search simply heralds a great future. Religion is going to happen to humanity again - as it had happened in Jesus' time or as it had happened in Buddha's time. Again man is getting ready to have a new religious consciousness, a new quantum leap.