Of justice

ONE OF THE most significant sayings of Jesus is: "If someone slaps you on one side of your face, give him your other side too."

Zarathustra would not agree with this. And the reason he would not agree is immensely important:

If somebody slaps you and you give him the other side of your face also to be slapped, you are reducing his humanity. You are becoming a saint and turning him into a sinner; you are making him embarrassed; you are becoming "holier than thou." It is an insult; it is not respect towards humanity.

Zarathustra would like you to hit back and remain human - not become holy. That way you are not insulting the other. That way you are showing equality, "I belong to you; you belong to me. I am in no sense higher than you; you are in no sense inferior to me."

This is a strange way of looking at things. But certainly Zarathustra has a point to be remembered.

The point basically is that all so-called holy men are egoists, even in their humbleness, in their humility. They have nothing but contempt for human beings. Deep down they know you are all sinners; you are not even worthy of their anger - they don't value you in any way equal to themselves.

Zarathustra is very human and he does not want to fulfill your so-called spiritual egoism. Ninety-nine percent of your saints are saints, so that they can call you sinners; their whole joy is not in being a saint, but in being able to call you all sinners, to reduce everybody - to destroy everybody's dignity is their innermost joy.

Zarathustra's eyes certainly go deeper than anyone's into every human relationship. He says, WHEN YOU HAVE AN ENEMY, DO NOT REQUITE HIM GOOD FOR EVIL: FOR THAT WOULD MAKE HIM ASHAMED. Something evil has been done to you; you have an enemy - do not do good in response to his evil. That's what all the religions have been teaching you. And superficially, their teaching looks very profound: you are doing good even when the other person is doing evil to you.

But why are you doing good? What is the psychology behind it? Deep in your unconscious are you not enjoying the fact that you have made the other person embarrassed? And can this in any sense be called spiritual? Embarrassing the other... it would have been far better that you had done the same as had been done to you. That would not have embarrassed him and that would not have given you a nourishment to your ego.

BUT PROVE THAT HE HAS DONE SOMETHING GOOD TO YOU. Rather than answering his evil with good, Zarathustra advises, "Accept his evil and prove that he has done something good to you."

This is a totally different approach to life; certainly far more profound than any religion has ever reached.

If you can prove to the person that he has done something good to you, you have not only avoided doing evil to him, you have avoided him feeling embarrassed because you have done something good to him. On the contrary, by proving that he has done good to you, you have raised his status in his own eyes. Perhaps this may create the possibility that his enmity disappears.

It is very difficult to remain an enemy of a person who goes on proving your evil acts as good, as beneficial, as a blessing to him. He is very strange - his approach to life is strange, but his strangeness may change you. What the religions have been teaching does not seem to change anybody.

I have heard about a Christian missionary who was continually repeating this statement of Jesus in his sermons: "Give the other cheek, even if you have been slapped." One man stood up and slapped the missionary. This had never happened before, and he has been preaching his whole life.

A discussion followed, but this did not help; he was full of anger, enraged. But in front of the crowd he had to prove that he followed what he preached. So he gave his other cheek, reluctantly, hoping that this idiot did not hit him again. But that man was also not an ordinary man - he slapped him on the other cheek even harder!

Then, immediately there was a tremendous change in the missionary; he jumped on the man and started hitting him. The man said, "What are you doing? It is against your teaching!" The missionary said, "Forget all about teaching. because it was only about the other cheek. After the other cheek there is no teaching. I am free now! I follow Jesus Christ up to the point of his words - I don't have a third cheek!"

Gautam Buddha made a statement which shows the futility of such teachings. He said, "Forgive at least seven times." Seven times are more than enough, and a man who can forgive seven times would have gone through a transformation; otherwise how can one forgive seven times? But a man stood up and he asked, "What about the eighth time? I want to be sure. Seven times I will manage, but what about the eighth time? Am I free?"

Gautam Buddha could not believe his own ears, could not believe his own eyes. He said, "You have completely misunderstood me. Forgive me, I will make it seventy-seven times."

The man said, "It makes no difference. I'm a wrestler. I can even tolerate seventy-seven times.

What about after that? You can give me any number, but the question remains the same - what after that?"

If the question remains, then the man has not given forgiveness even at the first time. He is simply following a ritual, and collecting more and more anger, more and more rage for the moment when all the times that Buddha has said to be forgiving are finished - then he is going to see to this fellow.

Seeing the situation Buddha said, "I take my statement back. I will not say seven times, I will not say seventy-seven times. I simply say, 'Forgive.' I was wrong to give you numbers. I don't give you any numbers; just forgive."

But Zarathustra's approach is not to forgive, because if you forgive someone he is not going to forgive you - ever. If you hit him back you are equal; the thing is finished. But when you have forgiven, the experience remains incomplete. You have embarrassed the man; he cannot forgive you. You have created a greater enemy by your forgivingness. Nobody except Zarathustra has looked from this angle of vision - that the real point is to destroy enmity, not to create it. Neither Jesus nor Buddha were able to give you a key to transform enmity.

Zarathustra says, "If you really want an enemy to disappear - and instead of enmity a friendship - then prove to him that he has given you a great benefit, something valuable, and you are so greatful to him that you do not have words to express it." He will feel puzzled, because it was not his intention, but he will see one thing certainly: that the other side is not an egoist, a pious egoist, but a very simple and lovable man.

BETTER TO BE ANGRY THAN MAKE ASHAMED! Everybody has been teaching you not to be angry, but whenever you are not angry you are making the other ashamed. He has fallen below; you have risen above - you are so compassionate!

Friedrich Nietzsche who has written this book THUS SPOKE ZARATHUSTRA on the teachings of Zarathustra, says in one of his statements that Jesus, even at the last moment on the cross, was a great egoist, because his last prayer was, "Father, forgive all these people, because they know not what they are doing." In his last prayer too he was praying only one thing: "I know, and nobody else knows, all these are ignorant people, forgive them."

Zarathustra would say he is making them ashamed; what more can be... When they have crucified a man and at the last moment he is praying for them, "Forgive them, they know not what they are doing." Still he remains the knower and others remain ignorant - subhuman beings.

Zarathustra cannot forgive Jesus. He is behaving like all so-called holier-than-thou men. Even in his death he cannot forget that. His last words represent his whole life. And perhaps that is the reason why he was crucified. People could not forgive him; he was making them ashamed on every point - they had to destroy him. In his crucifixion he was also responsible, as much as the people who had crucified him.

BETTER TO BE ANGRY THAN MAKE ASHAMED! AND WHEN YOU ARE CURSED, I DO NOT LIKE IT THAT YOU THEN WANT TO BLESS. RATHER CURSE BACK A LITTLE! Remain human!

His insistence is very clear: you are human, remain human. He does not expect you to become a saint, a holy man, that when people are cursing you, you are expected to bless them.

AND SHOULD A GREAT INJUSTICE BE DONE TO YOU, THEN QUICKLY DO FIVE LITTLE INJUSTICES BESIDES. Remain the way humanity functions. Don't go against nature. AND SHOULD A GREAT INJUSTICE BE DONE TO YOU, THEN QUICKLY DO FIVE LITTLE INJUSTICES BESIDES. HE WHO BEARS INJUSTICE ALONE IS TERRIBLE TO BEHOLD.

Friedrich Nietzsche, a great follower of Zarathustra... when he became mad and was put into a madhouse, when he had forgotten everything, he could not even recognize his own sister who had been taking care of him his whole life. She had not married, just to take care of him, because he was alone and there was nobody else to take care of him. But one thing he never forgot, even in his madness: whenever he used to sign anything, first he would write: "AntiChrist Friedrich Nietzsche."

That "AntiChrist" he never forgot, so deep was his feeling against Jesus and his teachings.

Why was he so against Jesus? For the simple reason that this man said, "I am the only begotten son of God; I am the shepherd: you are my sheep. All that you need to do is to believe in me, and I will save you - deliver you from all your bondage, darkness, misery, hell." He was proving himself to be God. Nietzsche could not forgive that. That is the greatest ego a man can have; and so pious that nobody objects, and so beautiful that one never becomes aware of its ugliness.

HE WHO BEARS INJUSTICE ALONE IS TERRIBLE TO BEHOLD. That's what Jesus was doing.

He is reported to have said, "I am dying to save the whole of humanity. I am carrying this cross to deliver you from all your sufferings." Nobody seems to be delivered, nobody seems to be saved; in fact he himself could not save himself. Right is Zarathustra when he says: HE WHO BEARS INJUSTICE ALONE IS TERRIBLE TO BEHOLD.

DID YOU KNOW THIS ALREADY? SHARED INJUSTICE IS HALF JUSTICE. If injustice is done to you, do injustice in return. It is shared injustice; it is almost half justice. If the whole justice is not possible, let it be half at least. But unshared it is just pure injustice, one-sided.

But the great teachers of humanity are telling you, "You should be humble, you should be meek, you should not be angry, you should be forgiving." It is where Zarathustra stands alone - a totally unique individual with a unique approach.

AND HE WHO CAN BEAR IT SHOULD TAKE THE INJUSTICE UPON HIMSELF. If injustice happens to you and you don't want to return it, then rather than complaining that injustice has been done to you, if you are capable enough, you should take it on yourself that you have been "injusticed," - not that injustice has been done to you. You have done it; you are responsible. But don't in any way destroy the dignity of the other human being.

A LITTLE REVENGE IS MORE HUMAN THAN NO REVENGE AT ALL. AND IF THE PUNISHMENT BE NOT ALSO A RIGHT AND AN HONOUR FOR THE TRANSGRESSOR, THEN I DO NOT LIKE YOUR PUNISHMENT... IF YOUR PUNISHMENT BE NOT ALSO A RIGHT AND AN HONOUR FOR THE TRANSGRESSOR, THEN I DO NOT LIKE YOUR PUNISHMENT. Your punishment should be an honor to the punished; it should not be destructive to his self. It should make him stronger, it should be respectful, it should be an honor. He deserved it and it should be proportionate.

IT IS MORE NOBLE TO DECLARE YOURSELF WRONG THAN TO MAINTAIN YOU ARE RIGHT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU are RIGHT. That gives dignity to you. That does not take away anybody's dignity, and it gives honor to you. In your own eyes you start having a respect, a love for yourself.

ONLY YOU MUST BE RICH ENOUGH FOR IT. It needs really a very rich soul to punish somebody in such a way that the punished feels honored by you. It is a very rare phenomenon, but there are moments when it happens.

I have told you many times about a Zen monk. On a full moon night a thief enters into his house. It is a small cottage, far away from the village. The door is open, because in the house there is nothing for which the door has to be closed. The Zen master has nothing but a blanket that he uses in the day to cover his body and the same he used in the night to sleep. He was awake by the side of the window, lying down and looking at the full moon rising. It was a beautiful, very silent and quiet night.

As the thief entered tears came to the eyes of the master. Tears because there was nothing in the house. And the poor fellow had come from a faraway village. Something had to be done immediately and had to be done in such a way that the thief would not feel embarrassed, that he would not feel insulted. On the contrary, he should feel honored.

He lit a small candle, and covering himself in the blanket, he entered behind the thief. Inside the house, two, three rooms farther away was the thief. When the thief saw him coming he became very afraid. The master said, "Don't be afraid. In fact I have been living in this house for thirty years and I have looked into every nook and corner and there is nothing; I am immensely sorry. You have honored me, because thieves go to rich people's houses, to kings' houses, palaces - who comes to us poor people? You are the first thief - unprecedented. You are such an honor to me. In my life for the first time, I am feeling like a rich man."

The thief became even more afraid as this man seemed not to be in his senses - what was he saying? The master said, "Just one thing, you will have to make a contract. I have not found anything in this house; this is utterly rotten. But I can help you; you are new. You may not be able to go through all the house, the basement. I will take you everywhere. But remember: if anything is found, fifty:fifty."

The thief said, "My God, this man is the owner of the house." Even in that strange situation the thief started laughing. The master also laughed and he said, "Okay, if you want a little more you can have sixty - sixty:forty - because the real work is yours; I am just a guide. But the reality is, there is nothing - for thirty years I have been searching. It will be a real waste of time. My suggestion is that the night is not gone too far; you can still find some rich man's house, and I don't have any share in it, any commission on it. You just have to accept one condition."

The thief said, "A condition? What condition?" The master said, "You just take my blanket, because I don't have anything else to give to you. You may never come again. Who knows what happens tomorrow. But you cannot reject it; it is a present. You are not stealing it; I am giving it to you."

The master was standing naked. It was a cold night; he was shivering, and the thief could not figure out what to do. He could not reject it. The Zen Master had tears in his eyes and he said, "If you want to come again, just inform me two, three days ahead. I can beg, I can collect something for you. I am feeling so poor. You cannot reject the blanket, it is my whole possession. I am giving you my all."

The thief somehow wanted to get out; he had never encountered such a man. He took the blanket and ran out. And the master shouted, "Listen!" He had never heard such an authoritative voice:

"Close the door! And before you close the door learn a little manners. I have presented you a gift and you have not even thanked me. Say, 'Thank you' because it may help you later on." So the thief said, "Thank you, Sir," closed the door and ran away.

After two years he was caught in another robbery; and in that robbery the blanket was found with him. That blanket was famous. Everybody knew that it belonged to the master and for two years they had not seen it with him. So the judge said, "That will be a very decisive factor. If the master can say that this blanket is his and you have stolen it, then I don't need any other witnesses, I don't need any other evidence, no argument; I will just give my judgment."

The master was called into the court. The judge asked, "Do you know this thief?" The master said, "Thief? You must be in some misunderstanding, he is a man of great manners. When I presented him this blanket of mine he said to me, 'Thank you, Sir,' and closed the door. He is such a gentleman.

You should not call any gentleman a thief."

The judge could not think what to do. And the master said, "He cannot be a thief. I can be a witness for him. He is one of my old friends. For two years we have not been able to meet." Because of the Zen master - and he was respected so much - the thief was released. There had been no chance of his release. Outside the court, he fell at the feet of the master and said, "Now I am coming with you."

The master said, "I wanted you to stay over even that night, but you were in such a hurry you ran away; such a hurry that you had forgotten even to close the door; in such a hurry you had forgotten even to say, 'Thank you, Sir.' Now do you see? I told you it may help you some time later on. Learn manners! And as far as I am concerned, I'm immensely happy with you. You have honored me; otherwise who comes to a poor man's hut? If you are coming with me you are welcome."

The whole life of the thief changed. He became one of the master's most enlightened disciples. And the whole metamorphosis consisted of a simple thing: that the master honored him in a situation where everybody else would have insulted him; gave him the dignity that is due to every man - it does not matter what his profession is - whether he is a thief or a doctor or an engineer; those are just professions. It makes no difference to the dignity of humanity.

I DO NOT LIKE YOUR COLD JUSTICE; AND FROM THE EYE OF YOUR JUDGES THERE ALWAYS GAZES ONLY THE EXECUTIONER AND HIS COLD STEEL.

TELL ME, WHERE IS THE JUSTICE WHICH IS LOVE WITH SEEING EYES TO BE FOUND?

Unless justice is based and rooted in love it is already injustice. All our courts are so cold - there is no love, no compassion, no understanding. There is just the letter: dead; the law: dead; the judge:

dead; and everything dead is deciding about the living. And everything is being decided about the past.

A man may have stolen, but that is a past act, it does not mean that a thief cannot be a saint in the future. A man can change this very moment. His tomorrow is open; it is not encroached upon by his yesterdays. Our whole justice has taken it for granted for centuries that there is no tomorrow.

Yesterdays are enough to decide about a man, and all yesterdays are dead.

What does it mean? It means the dead part of your life is being decisive about your living future. It will not allow you freedom. It will become your chains and your imprisonment - it can become even your death.

A small act cannot define the whole man, but that's how it is being done, and done with such coldness. The judge reads the judgment about somebody being sentenced for his whole life, or being sent to the gallows. There is not even a tear in his eyes - no consideration that the man may have a wife, may have children, may have an old mother, old father. He may be the only earning member of the family; he may be the only hope.

Sending him to the gallows is not going to put anything that has gone wrong, back right; it is going to create more wrong. The children will become beggars, thieves; the wife may have to become a prostitute; in their old age the father and mother may have to work just to earn enough for their bread and butter.

A small act, perhaps done in a very momentary, sentimental, emotional state, perhaps without any intentions... it certainly happened, that the person killed somebody. But it happened in such rage and anger, that that rage and anger should not be decisive about his whole life; and not only his, but that of his children, his wife, his parents, his children's children.... Now that small act will be decisive for centuries.

As long as generation after generation live, that act will change their lives in a certain direction. This is very cold, unloving; it is not justice - it is really revenge of the society. The judge is nothing but the executioner in the service of society. Anybody who goes against the rules and regulations of society... the judge, the police, the army, and the law are all there to destroy that man. That man has been disobedient; that man has been rebellious; that man has done something which the herd has decided is unlawful.

You can look into the eyes of your judges and THERE ALWAYS GAZES ONLY THE EXECUTIONER AND HIS COLD STEEL.

TELL ME, WHERE IS THE JUSTICE WHICH IS LOVE WITH SEEING EYES TO BE FOUND?

Without love, without a heart, you cannot see the whole complexity of a person's life. A small act is going to be decisive about a long life. You are closing the doors of the future; you are not giving him an opportunity to change - you are not allowing him just one chance more. Love is always ready to give a chance, an opportunity.

But those cold eyes of your judges know only dead laws and they follow their laws without bothering at all that the law was not made so that man should be sacrificed for it. The law was made to serve man; not man to serve law. The law can be changed - the law was man-made.

Man was a creation of God and we are behaving with the creation of God with such stupidity and such blindness that it is amazing that there is no revolt against our laws, against our courts, against our constitutions. The crowd just goes on following them, perhaps afraid that if you say something you will fall apart from the crowd and your neck will be in danger.

I was in jail for twelve days. I had three attorneys, the best in America, and the government also had the best attorneys, because it was a case of a single individual against the whole government of America. But my attorneys were continually persuading me not to say a single word. I said, "But this is strange. You are here to help me."

They said, "We know that if you say anything, you will get into more trouble. You may be absolutely right, you are right, but those judges are dead, and they know only what is written in their law; they will not listen to you. In fact, their judgments are already made, and we are trying somehow to persuade them.

"If you start talking, then this fight can continue for years. We are afraid for your life, because in these twelve days we have become perfectly aware that if the government cannot win the case, they will kill you. If you are going to win the case you cannot come out of the jail alive. You can come out of the jail - that has been made clear to us - if you lose the case."

They said, "Just have mercy on us and have mercy on your lovers around the world; just for their sakes you simply remain silent. Whatever has to be said, we will say, and we will say only what they want to be said. We want to avoid conflict, because in the conflict we know, and they know, that you have every chance of winning. And they have no chance of winning, because they have no evidence of any crime against you - and that is their problem. Their problem is that they have arrested you illegally without any arrest warrant. They have not given you bail."

Without proving any reason why... even the attorney general of America accepted it in the court in his final statement: "We have not been able to give any reason why bail should not be provided." Yet bail was not provided.

They called my attorneys and they made it clear to them: "Things are very clear. The government in no case wants to be defeated because it is going to be an international defeat of the greatest power in the world by a single individual - the government cannot tolerate it. So it is up to you. We cannot talk to Osho because he would not understand how things happen behind the scenes.

"The judgment is already made and if you want to argue, if you want a trial, then you should be aware - you should not say to us later on, 'You did not make us aware of it' - that the case may go on for ten years, for fifteen years, for twenty years. It is in our hands how long to prolong it. And twenty years torture.... One thing you should remember is that Osho can leave jail alive only if you lose the case. The government is in no circumstances going to lose the case. If the government loses the case, then Osho loses his life."

So my attorneys were continually persuading me, "Don't speak a word. Just let us somehow manage. We want you to be quickly out of jail and from jail directly to the airport. So within fifteen minutes you are out of America. We don't even want you in America to rest for the night, because they may come in the middle of the night and arrest you for some other reason. They have arrested you without any reason; they can arrest you again."

I said, "This is very unjust, because I see their argument is so idiotic that I don't even need you - I can fight directly, without knowing your law. There is no need to know your law; I know my innocence and that's enough!"

But neither would they allow me to speak nor would they argue. They allowed the government attorneys to take up the whole day with unnecessary argument, just wasting time. But that's what they had agreed upon: "You will remain silent and you will not argue, so it appears as if they are winning the case."

They had not a single thing against me, and when I left America they themselves accepted in a public press conference, "We had no case against Osho. Our priority was to demolish the commune.

We did not want to keep Osho in jail, because that would have made him a martyr; so we wanted him somehow to get out of jail and to get out of America. Because if he was present it was difficult to destroy the commune."

The whole day the judge was sitting, I could see he was not listening to anything; half the time he was almost asleep. The judgment had already been given from the top; it had come from Washington.

He just had to read it; he just had to pass the right amount of time, so that it did not look too abrupt.

My attorney had seen the judgment before it was brought to the court. They had agreed upon it:

"We will not argue." There seems to be no justice in the world.

Going around the world has been a great experience for me. In the name of justice and government, anger, brutality, revengefulness, envy, jealousy... everything is hidden behind it; it is utterly cold. No respect for the individual, no respect for life. Only one thing is determinative, and that is society should be allowed to take revenge against the individual. And society, of course, knows no love - it has no heart.

HOW COULD I BE JUST FROM THE VERY HEART? HOW CAN I GIVE EVERYONE WHAT IS HIS? LET THIS SUFFICE ME: I GIVE EVERYONE WHAT IS MINE. To be just from the heart... this is the only way for each individual. I can give everyone what is mine; I cannot give what is his. This has to be understood.

I have told you many times: The master gives you that which is yours already; and the master takes away from you that which has never been yours. That which is false in you he takes away and that which is real he gives an opportunity to grow, to blossom. The master can give what is his - his ecstasy, his love, his joy, his abundance of life; but he can give only that which is his. That does not mean possessions; possessions are not ours. We have come into the world naked and we will leave this world naked again - possessions belong to the world.

But our spirit... when we are born we come with thousands of potentialities. They are only seeds; hence you cannot see them. Given the right opportunity, the right effort, the right soil, they can all blossom. And you can share your joy, your blissfulness, your benediction as much as you want, because the sources are infinite.

Unless a man has such love and such blissfulness he is not worthy of being a judge. We have still to wait for a humanity where, in the colleges of law, not only law is taught, but people are encouraged to be more silent, to be more loving, to be more peaceful, to be more understanding, to be more compassionate. To give people just dead letters of the law is dangerous. Into the hands of the blind you are giving so much power. Before you give power give them love, so that power can never be misused. It is only love that can prevent power from being misused. Love is the greatest value; law is the lowest.

But it is a misery and an utterly unfortunate state that law has become the highest thing, and love is completely ignored. There is no place for love as far as law is concerned, or as far as the temples of justice, or the courts are concerned.

A great revolution is needed which transforms every law according to the laws of love. Justice should be just a shadow of love, not revengeful but respectful. It is possible; it has been possible in the lives of individuals; it is possible one day in the life of the whole of society.

... THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA.

Okay Maneesha?

Yes, Osho.