Community Forums

13 responses to “Continuing With The Debate On Osho’s Controversies”

  1. Osho’s healing discourses and words are more significant for a majority of his well-wishers, and it is this treasure, which needs being preserved for the future generations. Let Osho’s communes and his stagnant followers dilute into the air…who cares. But, the guru’s discourses must be digitalized and made available to each and all who might need to go through his healing experience.

    I absolutely agree with the above. Very well said.

  2. new link to my article
    http://truthaboutosho.blogspot.com/

  3. Thanks Anthony. I have updated the concerned link.

  4. As many others preachers, words from Oshos must be taken with certain caution. In what concern to meditation first steps, no problem, for this is a universal teaching. But when Osho talks about history, in many instances, he makes many deep and wrong interpretations. In this case, he steals the beauty of the hsytory and gathers beautyful things just in one basket. Unfortunatley he wants to put his authority on this. History has its reasons and causes, good or bad and it evolves as the time goes. Buddha is more than he talks, Krishna and Jesus-Christ too. The reason for their existence in “our” world is not only our “nirvana” or to awaken us. Many things run parelled to this. But Osho´s refusal to history has made him incomplete. The issue is more deep than he could aprehend. Regards

  5. I think it also depends on how you look at what Osho professed and from which intellectual position you do this. I distinctly divide Osho’s well-wishers and critics into two groups. The first one consists of those who might have personally known Osho or had been to his communes. They had and do still have a deeper understanding about all things Osho, and in many cases a little far more than what they should have known about him.

    The other side consists of a distant listener like this blogger, who has no idea of what transpired in and around Osho. This group also consists of a large number of his critics who have funny reasons to look down at him. One of my friends who did not pursue Osho’s transitional ways when at home in India, once told me the reason of hating him as a preacher. She had listened to his sound track on her way to the USA, while awaiting in a lounge for her connecting flight, and within two minutes of listening to his arguments, she came to the conclusion, this man was a complete jerk.

    I believe a large number of Osho’s well-wishers, including myself, never bother about how he describes the history or its figures. For them, Osho’s ability to read through their minds is a miracle, a reassuring act and a bigger aspect than any other thing. The rest becomes insignificant in the later journey (though it may vary from individual to individual). I could connect with Budhdha, Krishna and Meera more deeply than ever before, after listening to Osho’s discourses on them and the effort he made to de-condition you from popular beliefs surrounding them. De-conditioning was the key in my case and not exactly how Osho does it. I could find myself an enhanced human being after having listened to his ideas. Whether this was complete or not in someone’s opinion doesn’t matter in my case. The fact that Osho ceased to be my guiding force and later became a companion in my inner journey, is impressive in itself. However, I can not generalize and enforce my own views onto others. They should make their own judgment regarding Osho’s preaching caliber, and all opinions count in this context – however diverse they may be.

  6. That message was only intended to test you. Due to the answer, it will not be fruitful, for both sides, continuing. I deeply apoligise for giving you work on answering that. I do not have this right.

  7. Ricardo, from what I’ve seen, people often indulge in fruitless chatters about Osho. This includes some very serious debaters. I’ve spent enough time observing this in the real and cyber domains, both. And this was also the reason for starting to write about him in my own blog. I’ve a very specific opinion about him, which seeks taking the good and leaving the bad out of him. Those who spent years following him until the point of his demise – and my criticism, if any, is directed more towards them – before beginning to complain, do not make any sense to this blogger. They still have had my sympathy and it only helped me better understand the Osho phenomenon by listening to their side of the story. The official stand is somewhat Utopian and unrealistic beyond a certain degree.

    The rational of examining “good Osho”, is what my whole blogging means to be, specially to help those who might be in two minds about his legacy, also the reason why I answer any critical opinion about him to keep my blog targeted upon my own perceived goal. In any case, it is futile IMHO to try measuring people through an odd comment such as my previous one. My previous reference “from which intellectual position you opine” had its own inherent meaning in this regard.

    Finally, I hope to give my visitors a separate area for debating Osho and all sundry stuff here soon. I do not intend to intervene in those arguments, whenever I can do it.

  8. Once the master departs, there is nothing left but the business. I am not surprised that the Koregaon park one does not share bliss vibes. It is more like a resort now.

  9. Here you can fine so many Osho’s audio, videos and e-books

    http://www/oshoworld.com and http://www.messagefrommasters.com

  10. Lol.. Trying Osho meditations will certainly provide some clues to what he is “really” trying to convey. But, if people are only interested in research and analysis meditations are not necessary; still they can make beautiful castles off of his words. Frankly, understanding Osho through logic is not a wise thing to do. Because, Osho himself will soon blew those castles away (without notice). Hey, but it is fun!

  11. What must happen so that people acknowledge that Osho did indeed use more N2O and Valium for his own good? Osho was fun to be around, but he was not “holy”, nor does his claim to “enlightenment” make much sense either. Whatever he meant by moving “beyond enlightenment” (no man has been there before, he claimed!), whatever he meant when he really seemed to have believed that he was “Buddha’s vehicle”, when he advised us to wear “radioactive belts” because they keep you young, his idea that he was poisoned (on the Ranch he claimed Sheela poisoned him, then it was the US Gouvernment) … I think it is pretty obvious, if a bit sad, that Osho was somewhat deluded towards the end, i.e. after the Rancho experiment.
    Still, he was charming, creative … and mad as hatter. What I don’t get, however, is why had to play the Guru game when in the end all of his teachings boil down to … vipassana. Some people claim that he ended the Guru game – but then, one brief look into the “Rajneesh Times”, or a cursory listening to the many Osho songs out there will tell you that he was so totally into it … Maybe he needed us to finance his life. That’s okay for me, we had much fun along the way with him. But why people defend him today? And why people like Anthony who have never met Osho … that’s quite beyond me. But then, every Christ needs a St. Paul, and Osho seems to have many of that. And as Osho was fond of pointing out, Jesus was mad. Well, Osho must have known …

  12. A better question would be why people who have never met Osho (and I’m not necessarily speaking about Anthony) should even listen to the allegations made by his past disciples? The younger generations have Osho’s discourses and personal wisdom, apart from their own meditative experiences, to rely on, then why should they even listen to the anti-Osho drum beaters?

    There seems to be a struggle going on for controlling Osho’s vast physical empire post his demise, which comes out through the phrases like “Maybe he needed us to finance his life,” and those unable to make any dent in that fight (read Calder et al) have had the strongest of the opinions against him. The newer entrants will do better without both these two warring groups – the haves and the have-nots both.

  13. It was deja vu all the way for me as i started reading your blog forwarded to me by a friend. I read osho for two months before i visited one his most respected communes in north india in 2001. And i looked all of the sannyasins awestruck all the time, thinking and expecting so much of what osho had said from them. What followed was a complete catastrophe!! Poor them and poor me. My mistake ! I completely admit. Eventually i stopped going to these communes gradually just as gradually as osho’s words seeped into me and made me feel closer to him every passing day . Osho said once that he just wants to leave each one of us independent of everybody and in direct communion with the existence. From where i see it , his discourses and meditation techniques accomplish just that. At least for me it does. So the “only need ” highlighted in the article above i.e. that of preserving his discourses is enough to preserve whatever can be preserved of the remains of the greatest man who walked this planet ever. ( yeah i might be going overboard in saying that for many of the rationals , but please understand thats a disciple talking…and nothing to him / her is greater or more beautiful than his master …)

Leave a Reply

Archives

Recent Posts