Controversies Made Osho Rajneesh More Colorful
I recently went through these excerpts about Osho Rajneesh, which claim to cover a wide range of opinions about him. Although none of the controversies, Osho was known for, has been listed there, the Indian born guru was a controversial figure in the eyes of many without any doubt. I would say though as a keen listener and a reader of his discourses, that the controversies only made him sound more colorful and easier to comprehend.
Wasn’t Osho Himself The Face Behind Mulla Nasruddin?!
There is a gentleman called Christopher Calder, who claims to have witnessed – to what he terms as – Osho’s fall from grace. Those visiting his site should remember, he is among the strongest of Osho’s critics, and therefore should not be taken seriously by the beginners. The best way to know about Osho Rajneesh would be to listen him and follow up with some Dhyan (meditation), before reexamining what Calder suggests to start picking up the missing links about the master.
It is but obvious that Osho’s followers were not among the next door usual human beings. How could they be? Why would any normal human being be eager to visit him, anyway? Only those with major issues in life would have consulted him. I say this based on my own experience – the circumstances in which I started experimenting with Osho, as well as the general observations I’ve made about his Sanyasins.
So, what do you think Osho was like to have been able to manage this circus? He couldn’t afford being a simpleton contrary to what many of us might believe of him. He could have been amazingly good and enlightened on one hand, and highly dubious and controversial on the other. While Calder and the hardcore Oshoites might completely differ about him, many like this author do not see it either way, thus allowing a more colorful and rational opinion to emerge about him.
And if you ever wondered whose fallacies were being told by the Mulla Nasruddin tales that he always spoke of, then who could else but of himself be that gentleman? A more actual depiction of his persona could be seen emerging the moment you brought the two characters together. It is much easier to comprehend and be connected with more than any other opinion about him.
Btw, I have had a brief conversation with Calder in the recent past, and the image I developed of him is that of a bitter ex-Oshoite. He said, “call me whatever, but there is a no better manner to describe Osho.” Calder could be seen arguing with other Oshoites here, just for the record. In the end, the anti-Osho brigade has not been doing anything revolutionary by debating the master. They too have been spending time brainstorming about him just like his other disciples!
——————–
UPDATE
Check out my latest post on Osho Rajneesh here:
Mr. Casler probably thinks that an enlightened person should be a sort of Superman – All knowing and “omnipowerful” – That it’s a very childish viewpoint.
Wasn’t Osho Himself The Face Behind Mulla Nasruddin?!
LOL – yes – As said Osho, also behind Jesus there was an “idiot” … in fact it has not been a very *intelligent* move to enter in Jerusalem riding a donkey and saying “I’m the son of God”,
Regards.
… sorry, I meant Calder not “Casler”.
One of this days I will give up with the valium, I promise.
… ops … one of “these days” … as you can see I’m a very “fallible” man.
Perhaps, the fact that I’m writing from Italy may help to rehabilitate my image … or to worsen it.
Ciao.
Welcome to my blog Nemo, and thanks for letting us know your views on Osho and his controversies. LOl….your English is (at least) better than mine, so I’ve no qualms about it!
“Mr. Casler probably thinks that an enlightened person should be a sort of Superman – All knowing and “omnipowerful” – That it’s a very childish viewpoint.”
You are spot on Nemo!
Ciao
Osho’s spirit still lives today in the hearts of many who are still inspired by him. The controversy about him does not influence his enlightenment spirit at all.
I am confused about the whole thing. If you have heard osho’s discourses, you couldn’t imagine stuff like that could have happened in rajneeshpuram in his command. But then I have read 3 testimonials and they say the same things. But then, I see Pankaj’s point, and say accept both the sides of him. As Sheela says, don’t confine osho in a small image, he was bigger than what you can imagine.
Hello Devkant, check out my latest post on Osho Rajneesh for a more insightful debate.
I just dont understand why people ever think to waste their time and money on such imposters?
@ Josh,
Imposter who? Calder? Who cares about him. This thread is about Osho’s colorful legacy. Calder is a small pawn in the larger game. And for those who think it was Osho, who deceived the world – of course Calder and his ilk will do – they should know, this thread is meant for serious minded people, not for your time-pass.
osho is a loser from broken family!!! trouble child…. necer expericenced love in life….. he wants the whole world to suffer like him!
What made you arrive to such a lopsided vision? Even his strongest critics do not say all that. They only say he misused power. Btw, I’ll not be approving anymore new comments, if it does not make any sense to do so. The battle ground for you – the anti-Oshoites – lies here.
http://www.rebelliousspirit.com/osho-webzine/103/sharing
One Mr Anthony Thompson will answer you, if you desired so. He has silenced many by this date. Kindly, spare my blog of your extreme vision.
pl read a marathi book – rajneesh – the naughty bhagwan… pl publish ur comments on it..
prince
hello pankaj I wan to give to you the new address of my article. the old one is no longer available
http://truthaboutosho.blogspot.com/
greetings
anthony
Thanks Anthony. I have added it.
Now I can understand why he insists the same thing again and again….Nowadays people are really insane….They don’t even try to understand the Ultimate truth….Don’t just comment about OSHO without readin’ all his sayings………you people think that you’re brilliant and talkin’ ill of OSHO… You won’t get that type of master again….If you don’t listen to him just stay back…who’s askin’ you to EDITED with him?…….
Osho is similar to Lord Krishna…If you read his book ‘Krishna and his philosophy’ you will know it…He contradicts and he loves to contradict…After all if there is no contradiction today we will all believe that the world is flat..I don’t know whether he is an enlightened soul or not but what i know is he stood for transforming people or i would say he stood for his own individuality…Individuality here means ‘Doing what you want to do’ or he just wanted to live his life spontaneously..
Was osho like mulla nasruddin?then the question which arise is who is mulla nasruddin?. can u live ur life like a joker….a joker who makes fun of everything even himself….loves the play that underlies everything and laughs and laughs and laughs.The only thing he takes seriously is his jokes..nothing else.
I think it is downright impossible to be happy being that way…especially when you see the whole world full of serious people…with their serious notions and values…living a serious life and going through its frustrations.you will be an irritating,dangerous oddball for them.the question is not whether they are right or you are right….no body is right in this relative world.the question is that u r making an idiot of urself.osho was never at peace……..he was never happy.and all his followers more or less suffer from the same curse.if u rebel against the whole….u make urself an asshole.to be happy you have to be political………coz this world was…. is and will always remain political.spirituality is bogus…..its like masturbation.
sumit,
Your comment has been disallowed (and allowed since then just for the record) for the obvious incivility and outright stupidity it has had. But, would like to remind you that there can not be a bigger a*hole than you who spends time reading through Osho threads and typing down lengthy observations, despite the obvious dislikeness you have about the whole issue.
To others,
(This part has been edited) Used strong language to ward off unnecessary observations in my weblog. Kindly maintain a minimum-needed decorum for these threads.
When did an osho bhakt became so mindful of STRONG language?I dont remember osho himself refraining from making fun of mother teresa..gandhi and dalailama….in strong language.I remember osho laying great stress on being outright..straight forward and brash.He hated all the political..diplomatic airs our mind gives off.He hated to compromise with his or others views…..yaa toh mit jayiye…yaa mitaa dijiye/kijiye jab bhi sauda..khada kijiye.
That was osho a ‘khada’ man.He loved to infuriate people….he wanted people to hate him or love him but never be indifferent.
You have done a very unfortunate thing….u have actually done disservice to the spirit of osho by not publishing my views. Osho was all for openness.If u thought my language was incivil…u could as well have edited and made it tame.Atleast the basic thrust of my opinion deserved to be communicated.This supression is fascist.
I hate osho very very much because i love him very very much.Thats why I read him…so that i can fight with him.The beauty lies in the fight….not in proclaiming that osho was right.
osho always wanted to create a debate….a disillusion…..a dissatisfaction.
sumit,
You are assuming several things here. Like I’m an “Osho Bhakt” (a vast difference between an appreciator and a Bhakt) …. that I should not mind any language …. that your verbal diarrhea is akin to Osho’s denouncement of so many stalwarts of the Indian life …. that a threat of calling the counter opinions fascists gives you the right to speak anything, anywhere …. that Mulla Nasruddin was a joker, and jokers are what you believe they should be …. that the world is full of serious people …. buddy, you are a wholly confused soul!
I’d only say, there are practical issues managing a weblog, and I’ve learnt it the hard way by wasting my time on people, who go on littering the message boards and blogs, including mine, with their own frustrations. Allowing them would simply mean inviting sharp counter-reactions, and witnessing a cascading effect. This takes place more so in my song threads though, where the KK vs Rafi debates take place, which is why I’ve started taking a very strong line about the language of the comments being posted here. No more editing them, simply delete if they started sounding provocative, is how I treat them. Allowing both of your comments without any alteration now, just for the record, but please don’t start abusing each other.
Your first point:
yes i m confused.I would quote a man who was the epitome of confusion..he says..
yahi jaana ki kuch na jaana hai
so bhi ek umr mein hua maalum
sometimes try to question ur lack of confusion and all the clarity it brings….
do aur do ka zor hamesha chaar kaha hota hai
soch samajh waalon ko thori…naadani de maula
Your second point:
Yes…u shud not mind any language..because freedom to speak without the freedom to criticize is no freedom.If osho can give a whole discourse on a word like fuck…..I wonder what ur issues are in incorporating a few abusive words.All the nice sounding civilized words we usually use with the complacency of a clear mind….If u deconstruct them and go slightly deeper into the subconsious motivations from which they spring will turn out to be nothing but a repetitive..confused..rigmarole of abuses…constantly running in our brain.Perhaps that was what osho’s discourse about the universality of the word fuck trying to bring home.
Your third point:
What I meant about mulla nasruddin or osho being a joker is in the sense derrida talks about the essential playfulness that underlies all our stress on meaning and purpose.Derrida explains this by the use of an ambigram.An ambigram is a picture which is open to two interpretations…you look at it one way and it appears like a flame…but if u look at it more deeply it will look like the representation of two faces facing eachother. And constantly the two interpretations keep shifting….playing with our minds.
Derrida applied this to all the ideas and concepts which are there in the world.He says there is a dominant and a mariginal meaning to every thing…and both keep exchanging places….playing. Therefore nothing is what it is…..and all the meaning we ascribe to a thing is just a pose….just a play.This is what osho and nasruddin have been doing…..deconstructing all the dominant narratives and making us look at the mariginal ones..which underlie them.A joke is a joke only because it performs precisely this function.
What i meant to say in my first mail is that one cannot base our life on this premise…..society cannot function as an oragination if we turn into nasruddins.
Even ur body is an oraganization of innumerable cells….joined together as tissues and organs constantly serious and functioning their assigned duty.What will happen if one cell decides and convinces others to become individualistic…..become a joker…laugh at all the serious minded cells going about their duties……and like a mulla nasruddin deconstruct all their silly aspirations and ideals by the means of jokes?The whole body…..will disintegrate.
similarly if u listen and allow ppl like osho to preach ….the whole society with all its values will collapse.
Osho was like a virus.
sumit,
Seriously …. do you really expect me to be reading that epic? (I did quickly scan through, though) Think, disallowing your first comment would have saved you (more than me, since I won’t be taking you seriously anymore) from the agony you seem to have been through.
To hell with Osho and Derrida! Think of cooling down …. giving a rest to your mind first. The rest will take care of itself.
thank you my friend
you made the point i was trying to convey very clear.
to hell with osho and derrida…this should be the attitude of the society…thats what i always wanted to say.
party hard and work harder.
learn all the fashonalble fads….make friends……….the search for truth is a megalomania.
grow up from all this romance and poetry..and learn the politics of life…becoz thats real life…the rest is just a joke.
Ok sumit, if that makes you happy.