To: K-list
Recieved: 2002/10/23 00:18
Subject: [K-list] Re: Ego
From: M e
On 2002/10/23 00:18, M e posted thus to the K-list:
Hi all,
I'm new to the group. Just joined a few days ago.
And, since I'm a long time sannyasin of Osho Rajneesh, I did a search of
your archives on osho. I'm pleased to see that there are several
mentions of him, so he is not unknown here. Good. I didn't read all the
posts that came up in my search, primarily because I came upon one in
particular that I feel a need to respond to. Joe Miller's post of May 14
(Re: Ego), is rather dated. I hope he is still around. (An excerpt from
his post follows this one.)
I find it rather ironic that Joe claims to be investigating people's
fairness to osho. Joe himself obviously has no understanding whatsoever
of osho, so how can he make a reasonable determination of what is fair?
And if fairness means withholding judgment until something or someone is
adequately investigated, then Joe obviously needs some reeducation as to
the definition of 'fairness.' I personally don't think it is fair of Joe
to throw out a couple of simplistic one-liners out, present them as
quotes from Osho, and then make his case based on such skimpy and biased
evidence.
Osho's statements on morality are far from being so conveniently
simplistic. It is a complex subject. And I don't feel adequate to
explain his views on the subject myself, particularly with a minimum of
quotes from osho, but I'll do the best I can.
First off, when osho talks about morality, he is talking about two
different kinds of morality. There is the morality that society teaches
(imposes, really), and then there is the morality that develops as a
result of one's own understanding and awareness. There are problems with
the morality that society teaches. For one thing, it creates a split in
man's psyche. A person becomes divided against himself. The 'good' (as
determined by society) becomes a covering, a mask, a surface thing. The
'bad' gets thrown into the basement. And from then on, man is at war
with himself. Not only can he never really convince himself of his own
inherent value as a human being (because he knows perfectly well that
all kinds of bad lurks within him), but, worse still, his energy becomes
divided against itself. And it takes a lot of energy to keep one's
'badness' locked safely in the basement. This conflict leads to all
kinds of tensions and blockages in the body, and many subsequent health
problems. And the energy that could have been used for one's spiritual
growth is dissipated in a futile war with oneself. Even so, it might not
be so bad - if it worked. But the fact is, it doesn't work. The
'badness' still manages to seep up through the cracks in all sorts of
perverted ways.
So, these are a few of the problems with the society's so-called
'morality': guilt, hypocrisy, ill health, schizophrenia, joylessness,
and perversion. But I think the biggest problem of all, as far as osho
is concerned is: How are we supposed to grow in consciousness if we have
a vested interest in remaining unconscious? And, make no mistake about
it, we do have a vested interest in remaining unconscious. We don't want
to know about the stuff in the basement.. That's why it's down there.
And it will stay there as long as we remain unconscious of it. And we
will remain unconscious of it as long as it is condemned.
So, anyway, to make a long story short, it is not that osho is against
'morality.' (And he has certainly never said that it is okay to do
whatever you want to do to other people.) There's much more to it than
that. And there are other ways...
The following is a small osho quote I recently came across regarding the
Zen approach to morality:
"And the last fundamental: Zen is not morality, it is aesthetics. It
does not impose a code of morality, it does not give you any
commandments: do this, don't do that. It simply makes you more sensitive
towards the beautiful, and that very sensitivity becomes your morality.
But then it arises out of you, out of your consciousness, Zen does not
give you any conscience as against consciousness; it simply gives you
more consciousness and your More consciousness becomes your conscience.
Then it is not that Moses gives you a commandment, it is not that it
comes from the Bible or Koran or Vedas...it is not coming from outside.
It comes from your innermost core."
M e
ps. I'm really glad that Joe puts so much importance on the Rolls
Royces. Keeping people like him away from Osho made room for those who
could see past the Rolls Royces.From: "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamh...
<post?protectID=045233192213082153138038109248244063018152196241226130252055210>>
Date: Tue May 14, 2002 10:01 pm
Subject: Re: Ego
I'd heard a good bit about Osho, aka Bhagwan Shri Rashneesh. The things
from
people knowledgable and skilled in the spiritual and Kundalini fields I
knew
was universally negative. I thought I'd check out what has been talked
about
some on this list to see if they were being fair to him.
I got through a couple of paragraphs. The people I'd heard from were not
being fair, they were being far to kind. The, thankfully dead, clown was a
fATnospam&king moron. I submit the following quotes:
Morality means only that you should fit with the society.
Morality is a social politics
So having sex with a 5 year old would be OK except for society's small
mind.
(How awful those child molesters are so mistreated!) Murder is not wrong,
except that society says it is. So there is no morality, only social
convention.
Horseshit!!!!!!
--
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
http://www.domin8rex.com/serpent/spirit/kindex.htm
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.