So which way are you moving

Question 1:

The question is from Premda.

His situation is different from those who were waiting for such an opportunity for their own ego-fulfillment. He is new. He has not known the phase of discipleship at all, so when friendship was offered it was not a nourishment to his ego; it went directly to his heart because he has no resentment, no anger at being a disciple.

This became a joyous intimacy and a loving growth for him. Now he is feeling more reverence, more love, more respect. This will bring in him the wonderful experience of discipleship. So the situation is so different that there is no question of contradiction.

The people who have been with me for ten years, twelve years, and were hankering deep down to become masters themselves were certainly feeling resentful towards me. And when I offered friendship, it was not a gratitude or reverence that grew in their heart but a deep and long-awaiting ego was fulfilled.

Now they could declare that they have the same status as I have, that their experience is the same as my experience. So my declaration of friendship was to them the end of their discipleship -- and not the beginning of friendship either; it was simply the end of the road.

But to Premda the situation is different. He has not been around me for many years, and he has not for a single moment thought of being a master. His whole desire has been to be closer to me, to be intimate with me. So when I declared that I am your friend, this desire was fulfilled, and it has created a loving intimacy and reverence. And you can see it from the question. I call myself your friend, but he says he started feeling a reverence towards the master.

To those who have been calling me "Master," the declaration of friendship ended their discipleship, and to one who was simply longing for intimacy the same declaration made him a disciple. And the people who were longing to be masters were not many; they belonged only in the category of therapists -- just a few therapists, not all. And those therapists got this longing because I was sending people to their therapies and they started thinking that they are some kind of masters, and they are helping people to grow.

The reality was, I was sending these people to their therapies because these people were so full of rubbish that they needed some dry cleaning, and those therapists were nothing but dry cleaners. But thousands of people passing through their therapies... it is very human and very natural to get the idea that, "We can be masters on our own." They were just waiting for the opportunity.

It is not true about all sannyasins; it is only true about a special small group of therapists.

Their work destroyed them. They may have helped many people come closer to me, but they themselves went on going farther and farther away.

Premda has no desire to be a master, and nobody who has a desire to be a master can ever be a master. Only those who are desireless happen to be masters. It is not something like a goal that you can achieve: it is something that happens by the way, unintentionally, without being sought for. You are doing something else, you are feeling more love, more intimacy, more reverence, and slowly, slowly, in this reverence and love and intimacy, your ego is disappearing. One day, when the ego is not there, you have become a master.

You were not seeking it -- it is just a by-product. And those poor therapists missed -- although they were with me for years -- because they remained achievers, climbers. In their mind they were always thinking how to become a master.

It is good, Premda, that my offering of friendship created discipleship in you. That's how it should have been to everyone who is sincerely here for the search of truth, for the search of oneself.

You are blessed.

Question 2:

Yes, everybody is missing every moment until they are enlightened.

Whatever you are doing can either bring you close to the point of explosion, or can take you away from the point and make you more closed. These are the two possibilities within you: exploding into a lightning experience, or being closed in a dark night of the soul.

So which way are you moving?

If you are moving towards the dark night of the soul you are missing -- and missing more every moment because you are going farther and farther away. And there is no end of going farther away. You can go away eternally; there is no time limit.

One can remain unenlightened forever -- that's the danger. And one can become enlightened this very moment. The question is, towards what are you moving? If you are coming closer to your center of explosion, then every moment you are nearer and nearer to enlightenment. It depends on your speed. If your understanding is intense enough, it can happen this very moment; you have not to wait even for a single moment more.

So you see these are the two possibilities: either now or never. Both are possible, and man's prerogative is that he has the freedom to go either way.

There is no harm in doing your own thing -- but you don't know who you are, how can you do your own thing? It is a dilemma. Those who know cannot do their own thing, because they know there is nobody inside as a self, as a separate entity from existence.

Those who do not know themselves cannot do their own thing because they don't know even their own self.

So either you are accidental... one possibility; that's what you call "doing your own thing." You are accidental, or you are existential: that's what I call "doing the thing existence wants you to do." It is not your own thing. I am not doing my own thing -- there is nobody to do such a thing. I am simply available to existence. So whatever and wherever it wants to lead me, I am available, because I am not.

Remember, these are the difficulties with language. I say I am available because I am not.

Only when I am not, there is availability. If I am, then there is always choice, not availability. Then I will judge whether to go that way or not, whether to go this way or not, whether to do this or not. So whenever you are doing your own thing, one thing is certain: you are not in tune with existence. So what can it be? It can only be accidental.

I know people who had come accidentally to me. They had come to meet one of their friends who was a sannyasin; they had not come to meet me or to see me. They were not even remotely interested in me, but then listening to me they became interested, they became curious, they became involved. This is accidental. If I send them away to do something I can be certain some accident is going to happen.

I have tried -- seeing some accidental people I have told them, "Go and open a center in your place," and they were very happy and they went there and fell in love with a woman, and forgot all about the center -- got married and got into the whole mess of marriage.

You cannot depend on these people; they are not reliable. It is not their fault. They are just driftwood -- any accident and they start doing things they have never thought about, doing things without ever thinking whether they really want to do them. Perhaps others are doing, so they start doing.

What you call "doing your own thing" is accidental, because you don't know yourself yet; you cannot do your own thing. And to be accidental is to remain in darkness -- being thrown by winds here and there like a dead leaf... having no roots, having no integrity, having no individuality, having no sense of being connected with existence.

Doing your own thing, you were wrong -- not that the things that you were doing were wrong, but that you were thinking that they were your own. They were only accidental.

The people, the therapists, who criticized you were thinking they were doing my things, not their own. And that was creating deep resentment in them, that they have to do my thing. They really wanted to do their thing.

They criticized you just to strengthen in themselves that the very idea of "doing your own thing" is wrong. To repress their own idea they judged you wrong; they were really judging themselves.

And once they got the opportunity... now they are all doing their own things, and thinking that this is freedom. They are telling people, "Osho has given freedom to us." Now, this is such a foolish idea. Nobody can give you freedom, and if somebody can give you freedom, he can take it back any moment. Freedom cannot be a gift. You have to grow and be free; freedom has to be something that happens to you -- it is not given.

Now they are saying, "Osho has given freedom to us, and now we are doing our own thing." And they are doing the same thing they were doing here... perhaps less efficiently, more superficially, because the people they will be getting will not be meditators.

I used to choose people for their groups; seeing the need of the person, I used to choose which group he should go to. Now they will be doing things to people who don't need them; or these things may even harm them. There is every possibility that the people, through their therapies, will be harmed -- because therapy is not anything spiritual.

Therapy is only preparing the ground. And if you don't have the seeds, the ground that you have prepared will simply grow weeds, wild grass. It cannot grow roses.

Here I was using their therapy to clean the ground so that seeds of meditation can be sown, and people can blossom.

But soon they will understand. Seeing the results, people will start disappearing from their therapy groups. I know perfectly well that people never wanted to do therapy groups; I had to persuade them to go to do therapy groups. They had come to listen to me and to meditate.

Therapy groups are already out of fashion. Esalen -- the original pioneer institution for therapy groups -- is dying. Nobody comes anymore. Only on weekends a few old people turn up. And when they saw that thousands of people are coming to me and going through me to the therapies, they could not believe it, because they were the original people who had started the movement of therapies. It was unbelievable for them why people were not coming there.

The reason was that people had been there and had seen their therapies and found that they were only games you can play with. It feels good while you are playing them, but after two days all is gone; you are the same person, nothing has changed. And what is the point of going again and again, giving money and playing the same kind of games?

These therapists who had been working here in the world of the sannyasins will soon feel frustrated, tremendously frustrated. One thing, sannyasins will stop going to them, knowing that it is no longer part of a spiritual movement. Secondly, those who go will see that it is pointless. Just again and again clearing the ground and letting the weeds grow makes no sense.

I was using therapy simply as a preparation -- it was not the end. And these therapists know nothing of meditation, because they felt that it was below them to go and meditate with the same people who are doing therapies with them; they are great therapists. So they never meditated; they missed meditation. They were so knowledgeable that they thought they knew everything. I don't think they have listened to me; otherwise the way they have betrayed me would not have been possible.

But they will have to come back; they cannot go on existing for long. Soon you will see those faces again, and this time they are not going to be therapists. This time I am going to work in a totally different way. Therapy will not be part of it; perhaps personal counseling may be there, but not therapy.

There is nothing wrong in doing your own thing -- just remember that it is accidental.

First know thyself, and then do anything that happens, that comes up out of your nothingness.

And out of nothingness always comes the lotus of nirvana.

Question 3:

Compared to Hinduism, all these religions -- Taoism, Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity, Mohammedanism, Judaism -- are very new. Hinduism is very old; hence it has some unique characteristics. Because it is the oldest religion in the world, a few things are in it which you will not find in other religions.

For example, you are asking that Hindu incarnations of God are always with a woman consort: Shiva is with Parvati, Krishna is with Radha. In India, Jainism and Buddhism flowered twenty-five centuries ago. They had to fight against Hinduism. Hinduism was the only religion.

You will be surprised: it was so alone that it had no name. A name is needed when there is more than one thing; if there is only one thing, what is the use of a name? Hinduism was the only religion, so it was simply called dharma -- religion. There was no need to put an adjective to it. Jainism and Buddhism were born out of Hinduism, offshoots of the old religion, but then they had to make some specialities to stand aloof; otherwise the oceanic Hinduism would have drowned them.

Hinduism was very natural, that's why the reincarnations are not celibate. The idea of celibacy had not entered in the mind of the Hindus because it is unnatural, so even their incarnations of God have their wives. They are just as natural as you are.

Jainism and Buddhism both made it a point that man has to go above nature, beyond nature, only then he is religious -- Hinduism is not religion. What kind of a religion is it if just to be natural is to be religious? Then there is no difference between you and animals, because all animals are natural. They had a point there, and they created great logical systems against Hinduism. One of the basic points was that you have to go beyond nature -- and that starts from celibacy, because that is the basic nature, sexuality.

So Buddha is alone, Mahavir is alone, and for these twenty-five centuries, all their monks and masters have been alone, celibate. You will be surprised to know that their celibacy was such a thing that the common masses became very impressed. Their ascetic attitude towards life... because Hindus were not ascetic -- I mean Hindus before Buddha and Mahavir -- were not ascetic. Even their seers lived in comfort and luxury. They had their communes in the mountains, in the forests, which their followers went on donating to.

The Kings, their sons, their daughters -- all had to go to be there in their monasteries to learn.

So they had immense power. One great Hindu wise man had many kings as his followers, and lived in luxury, comfort. His whole commune of disciples and teachers, they all lived beautifully. They were not other-worldly people.

Jainism and Buddhism are ascetic; they went on point by point against Hinduism, to make a distinct identity. Comfort is not even heard of; discomfort is the way. The more you can keep yourself in discomfort, the more spiritual you are -- because the body is the enemy of your soul, so torture the body so you can find your soul. This world is the hindrance for the other world, so renounce it.

Jainism and Buddhism did so many strange things that even the Hindu masses became impressed; even Hindu wisemen, brahmins, started thinking how to fight against the rebellious Jainas and Buddhists. The only way was that they also had to be ascetic -- more than they were. So after Gautam Buddha you will not find any Hindu master with a woman. Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Nimbarkha, Vallabha -- great masters, but you will not find them with a woman. What happened?

They all had to be celibate. They had to be to fight with the Buddhists and the Jainas; otherwise they were ordinary people, they were not spiritual. And they were all ascetic, just like Jainas and Buddhists were; they were ascetic in their own way. They renounced the world, they renounced all comforts -- just to counter-attack.

Hinduism got spoiled by Hindus themselves; otherwise it was a beautiful religion, very natural, very simple, very innocent. But it became more and more complicated. These three religions have been fighting for twenty-five centuries, arguing, writing treatises against each other. And those treatises have become more and more complicated -- to such a point that even to understand them has become a difficult expertise.

And there are treatises which scholars have been trying for years to translate into English but have not been able to. Because of the complexities of ideas, language, its nuances, it is difficult to be authentic to the original and to translate it; the translation looks very poor.

Judaism, Christianity, Mohammedanism, Sikhism, all are later additions to human consciousness -- after Buddha. In fact Buddha should be the demarcation line, not Jesus.

We say, "Before Jesus Christ, after Jesus Christ." Jesus has become the demarcation line dividing history, but that credit should go to Gautam Buddha, who came five centuries before Jesus and really divided human consciousness and its growth.

Jesus himself had traveled to India while he was young. THE BIBLE has no account of him between the age of thirteen to thirty; THE BIBLE has no account of where Jesus had been. This looks strange -- a small life -- he lived only thirty-three years -- and in those thirty-three years THE BIBLE has accounts of only three years, the last three years.

About his earlier life are only two incidents -- minor, meaningless. One was of his birth and the coming of the three wisemen from the East to pay tribute; and second, his getting lost in the temple of Jerusalem, arguing with rabbis. These are the only two incidents.

And then from the age of thirteen to thirty, seventeen years, nothing is mentioned -- what happened to this man, where he was.

These seventeen years he traveled to Egypt, to India, to Ladakh, to Tibet, and all these places were Buddhist at that time. Buddha had died only five centuries before, and his impact was still very alive. Jesus visited Buddhist monasteries. I have been to a Ladakh monastery which Jesus had visited, and I looked in their records of visitors, which they have kept for two thousand years. And I asked them if they had a record of all the visitors and their impressions about the monastery.

It is one of the most beautiful monasteries, and Jesus stayed there for almost six months, studying Buddhism from the monks. There are, in their official record, the impressions of Jesus, his signature, the date. He became immensely influenced by Buddhism, so his celibacy, his ascetic attitude, his praise for poverty, his condemnation for riches, were all borrowed ideas from Gautam Buddha.

Naturally these people followed a certain pattern that Buddha left behind him. They don't have a woman companion, which would be natural. Hinduism seems to be very natural -- even its gods are very natural. There is no desire to be beyond nature; there is only one desire:to be totally natural. But in a way all other religions are reactions, rebellions against Hinduism.

It had no name. It was known as the eternal religion because it had always been there.

Nobody can say when it was born, who was the founder of the Hindu religion. You can find founders of all other religions except Hinduism. Who was the original man? There seems to be no one. Hindus themselves used to call it sanatan dharma: the eternal religion. How did they become Hindus? Who started calling them Hindus? It was in a very strange way that they got the name, Hindus.

It was by the foreigners who were constantly invading India that the name was given, because every invader had to pass one of the greatest rivers of India, Sindhu. The first invaders, were the Hunas, who have disappeared from the world now -- a wild tribe. In their alphabet they had no sound for `sa', for `s'. The closest sound to `s' was `h', -- `ha'.

`Sa -- ha' -- that was the closest. They could not pronounce the river Sindhu; they pronounced it, the river Hindu, and because of their language, and because of their pronunciation, the people who lived beyond this river, they started calling Hindus, the people who live beyond the river Hindu.

It is beautiful sometimes to look at the history of how a word evolves, in what phases it moves, what turns it takes, what colors it takes.

Because of the word `Hindu' the land of the Hindus became Hindustan, and the religion became Hindudharma, Hindu religion. And from the Hunas, invaders used to be continually coming. The country was so rich that another group of invaders, Mongols from Mongolia... who were the most terrible invaders, who produced the Tamerlane, and Genghis Khan, the most terrible of men. In their language -- now it had become established because of the Hunas -- the name of the Sindhu became Hindu, the land became Hindustan, the people became Hindus. They did not have any sound in their alphabet for `h', for `ha' -- the closest for `h' was `i'. They could not pronounce Hindu, they could only pronounce, Indu.

It looks close: Hindu-Indu. And because of the Mongols, the river became Indu and the country became India -- from Indu -- and the people became Indians. But it all happened because of that river which has a name, accidentally. But Hindus themselves don't have a name, neither do they have a name for their country. They have been always there, their religion has been always there. They don't know any beginning of their religion.

So it seems it has grown very naturally with the natural man. Buddhism was the first effort on man's own part to create a religion. That's why I say Buddha should be the demarcating line; because what was natural up to then became something man-made, manufactured. And now religion is manufactured, so many religions are manufactured.

Nature is one, but once you start manufacturing then you can manufacture, as you like, different religions, different creeds, different cults, different philosophies. Buddha certainly stands just in the middle of this change.

If you understand me, my whole effort is to reverse the whole process. Man does not need man-made religions; man simply needs to be natural. Nature should be the only religion, and then there will not be divisions of Hindus and Mohammedans and Christians and Buddhists.

Nature does not make any divisions; it is undivided and it is one.

Question 4:

Love knows no distances in time or in space.

So wherever my people are, whatever they are doing, if their heart beats in tune with me, they are with me. Then all distances of time and space disappear.

The question is of the hearts beating in the same rhythm. That is the only closeness.

It was easy to miss in the commune because I was so close to you. It was easy to forget me. I was too obvious. It was easy to take me for granted. But now that you are scattered all over the world, by the courtesy of the American government, we have made the whole world our commune.

There are great distances in space, but this will help you; it will not be a loss. This will make you remember me more. This will remind you of me more. In your silent moments, in your loving moments, just playing on your guitar, you will find me sitting by your side. Just in moments when you are silent, peaceful, you will start hearing my heartbeat too.

Everything that happens is good, is for the better, because existence goes on evolving. If we remember that existence is continuously in evolution, then whatever is happening... at the time it may seem disastrous, but finally you will find that it was not so; it has brought new flowers, it has created new experiences.

I know there are continents between me and you, but those continents cannot separate; they only join. They are not walls, they are bridges. And a bridge, however long, is a bridge; and a wall, however short, is a wall.

My own experience has always been that everything that has happened has always proved to be good. If we can trust, then even at the time of its happening we will not be sad, we will be celebrating. And our sannyasins did well, even though the most powerful government was destroying a small commune of five thousand people -- which proves that they were afraid. Out of fear they were acting, but our people danced and sang and celebrated, knowing that out of this chaos some beautiful stars will be born.

The American government's fear has now become world a phobia. Now every government is afraid... not of a commune; the question of a commune does not arise.

They are afraid even of me landing at their airport... not a question of entering in their country! Fear seems to be unlimited. What can I do if I just land at their airport?

England would not allow me to rest overnight in the airport, and in the parliament they had to discuss it, my being in the country. And that was a lie because I was only asking to stay overnight in the lounge of the airport -- which it is meant for. I had my jet plane standing at the airport so that in the morning we could leave, thinking that they may say, "The lounge is only for first class passengers; now how can we decide about your jet, which class is it?" So we purchased tickets for first class traveling too, not giving them any chance. And that's actually what happened.

They said, "The jet is okay, that it is ready, but how can we be certain...? The lounge is only for first class passengers." So we produced our first class passenger tickets, saying that, "For your satisfaction we have tickets also."

Then they disappeared and came back about half an hour later and said, "There is some bylaw of the airport that we cannot allow you to stay the whole night -- a few hours is okay."

I asked the man, "What do you mean by a few hours? And how do you decide that three hours is enough, or four hours is enough, or twelve hours is enough? And where is that bylaw of your airport?" The man disappeared and never came back.

Another man came back, and he said, "You have to understand it, that if you want to wait the whole night you have to wait in the jail. We cannot take the risk of leaving you free in the airport lounge." And I had to stay in the jail. And in the parliament, the prime minister answered the questions and said that my being there was dangerous for the country, for the country's safety.

An American establishment for nuclear weapons in England to bomb Libya is not dangerous; my just staying overnight in the airport lounge, from where I cannot go into the country by any way, is dangerous. You can see these politicians are made of straw.

And the thing has gone around the world: now the whole European parliament, all the countries of Europe, are deciding together that I cannot land my jet at any airport; they will not refuel it. And then small countries are bound to follow.

Now the Bahamas have decided that I cannot enter; other countries -- Panama and two or three other countries near Panama -- afraid that I may come there, have decided. Strange, that they are afraid of a single man so much. Soon I think they will be deciding in the U.N. that this man should not be allowed to stand on earth anywhere.

But I take it as a good sign. It means they have recognized one fact; that what I am saying they cannot refute, that what I am saying is dangerous to their very roots. And if their roots are so weak, do you think they are going to survive? Even without me they will die; even without me they have to die.

Their fear shows death.

And all these governments are lying without any evidence of anything! Now they are spreading the rumor around the world that they have nothing against me, but the people who are with me, three of them, are criminals. They don't give the names, of the three people who are criminals and what crime they have committed. Some evidence should be proved. And even if they are criminals, I cannot be punished for their crimes. But just because they have traveled with me, I cannot be allowed to remain in a country.

In Spain, the government took one month to decide: the parliament discussed, the cabinet meetings went on for seven days, and finally they decided -- the president and the prime minister, all were involved in it -- that I should be allowed in. And then came a letter from the German government that three criminals are traveling with me. They called my secretary, Hasya, and told her,"We don't have anything against Osho, but from the German government there is tremendous pressure that three criminals are with you."

She asked, "Who are the three criminals, and what crimes have they committed?" By insistently asking, we have come to know only that one is German, one is Canadian, one is American. Strangely enough, there is no German in the group, so one third of the information is absolutely wrong. There are a few Americans, but none of them are criminals, and none of them remembers that he has committed any crime! One is a Canadian: he is shocked by hearing it -- that he is a criminal. There are no charges against him.

Just today I have received a letter from the U.S. Supreme Court in Oregon. They could not prove the case for which they were harassing me for twelve days in jail; they failed to prove the case in North Carolina. The U.S. attorney has had to accept in the court that, "We have not been able to prove anything; still, we want everybody else to be released on bail but Osho should not be released on bail."

This must be something unprecedented! They have not proved anything against me. Why should I not be granted bail? The reasoning was that I was capable of jumping the bail, whatever the bail would be -- ten million dollars or twenty million dollars. Does it mean nobody in America who has money will ever be allowed bail?

Strange! The people who don't have money cannot be allowed bail because from where will they get money for bail? And the people who have money cannot be allowed bail because they can jump. So bail is simply out of the question in America.

Simple logic can show the stupidities. Then finally they had to drop the case, but they had taken three persons on bail -- Jayesh, Devaraj, Vivek -- at twenty-five thousand dollars each. But you can see the cunningness! If governments are so cunning then I don't think criminals are doing anything bad. Governments are criminals.

The letter that I have received today says that because these three people have refused to appear as witnesses, we are dropping the case. These three people have never received any summons to appear. Now, this is simply strange! We were waiting that these people should be sent for any day; our attorneys were waiting there. They said, "You give us the time and the date, and we can call our people and they will be here." But because they had dropped the case, now they were afraid that they would have to return the seventy- five thousand dollars.

To keep that money, this letter has been sent: Because these three people have not appeared, their bail money is to be taken up by the U.S. government.

And they have confiscated my things, which they had said would be released when I am released -- they were not given back. Then they told my attorneys, "After three days we will be releasing them." They were not released; then seven days... months have passed and they go on postponing.

Now the case is dropped. Even the bail money has been transferred to the government account. What about my personal things? My attorneys are continually going to them, saying, "Decide something about his personal things." They want to divide them half and half -- half will taken by the government, and half will be given to me. Strange! For what should the government get half? And we were ready even for that.

I told the attorneys, "Let them have half. Half you take, and then we will fight for the other half." But they simply say -- they don't do anything. Perhaps some other day I may receive a letter in which all those things are confiscated and taken by the government -- for some reason they can find or invent, because my people did not appear in the court on the hearing day.

And there has never been a hearing, there has never been a hearing day; the case was dropped a few weeks ago. We have been informed by the attorneys that the case has been dropped, knowing that they have nothing to prove in it.

It seems on the surface, with all these things, that they are destroying my work, destroying my message. But they are wrong. This is the way -- not of destroying any truth -- this is the way the truth enters into people's minds, gets their sympathy, their heart.

So wherever you are, it does not matter. Just your heart has to beat with me. If it stops beating with me, then there is distance.

Now look at Chetana, sitting there in the corner: now she is almost sitting on the moon.

The reason is that she had asked a question. She herself had asked, "If I am wrong, please nudge me a little." I nudged her a little and said, "You are wrong," and that has hurt her so much that since that day she has become a miserable person. I have never seen her in any misery before. She has always been light, joyful. But since that day, because I said, "You are in a wrong space..." And she herself had asked, "Nudge me a little." And I really nudged her a little... just a little, and she has gone so far away; she is sitting on the moon.

Remember one thing, when you ask a question be ready for any answer. Don't expect a certain answer that you would like; otherwise there is not going to be any learning, there is not going to be any growth. If I say you are not right at a certain point, try to look at it.

I will not be saying it just to hurt you. If I am saying it, I mean it.

And if you start feeling hurt by small things, then it will become impossible for me to work. Then I have to see what you would like. Then I will not be a help, then I will not be a master to you.

So you can be here, but if your heart is not beating with me, you are far away. And vice versa.