The people are retarded

 

Apollyon is coming! This content-creator isn´t entirely wrong, you know...

Is God a psychotic break?

 

The old joker Osho comes across as U G Krishnamurti here. Or does he? It turns out that the content is AI-generated! Still, it *does* have a family resemblance to the real man. I wonder what the Osho Foundation will do when they discover this channel? Can they request that it be removed? Maybe you can´t copyright a dead guru. Besides, an artificially generated "Osho" speaking from beyond the grave is very much in the spirit of both UG and Osho himself!

The message (regardless of who wrote the script) reads like a psychotic break. I don´t doubt that spiritual experiences can sometimes feel like described in the video, but what exactly is being "experienced" here? God? His backside? Or something else entirely?

Maybe it´s just the ramblings of a Large Language Model...  

We´ve been played

 

The diagnosis may be correct, even if the proposed solution isn´t. Let´s be honest. Western spiritual seekers have been played.  

Save my ass

 

Osho has no problems with C S Lewis´ Trilemma. Apparently, Jesus was both mad and bad! 

Don´t curse the darkness

 

I posted this in 2021, but in Swedish. Here is an English translation. With one word added! (Yes, "ableism". Couldn´t help myself.)  

I´m not exactly a fanboy of Osho, but in his door stopper volume "The Book of Secrets" (the madman´s commentary on the Tantric meditation manual Vighyan Bhairav Tantra) he actually says something interesting. 

Namely that God isn´t light. Rather, God is darkness. Or more precisely put: darkness is a better metaphor for the divine than light is.

Why do we think that God is light? Because we *fear* the darkness. But actually it´s the darkness that is divine. Light is temporary, it comes and goes. The darkness is eternal. The darkness is what is always left when the light disappears. The darkness existed before the light. The light "creates" our personalities and our entire (visible) world, while the darkness is primordial, that which existed before "creation". It dissolves our personalities and that´s why we fear it, but if we could just meditate in darkness we would realize that everything is alright... 

Or so Osho says (insert emphatic disavowal here!) 

It struck me that the metaphor "God is light" can only be used by humans with unimpaired vision. A person who is blind since birth can´t use it. We could also imagine an intelligent species who lives on a darkened planet and therefore never evolves normal vision (maybe it´s telepathic instead or whatever). Yet, many claim that God is light not just metaphorically but that the statement should actually be interpreted literally! Anthropocentrism, ableism, or what? 

The mystics of the Orthodox Church describe God as "the dazzling darkness". Perhaps this comes closer to the truth...  

Don´t curse the darkness. And do NOT light a candle!

Try this in Auschwitz, dude

 

Sorry, couldn´t help myself. Clearly, this isn´t my kind of spirituality...

Besides, I originally wanted to link to a better video with better captions featuring the same Osho talk, but it seems to have mysteriously disappeared from YouTube during the day. 

Karma? 

A buddha will always be misunderstood

 

Both profundity and frivolity in this one. Of course. It´s Osho. Whatever you do, don´t become *his* disciple or devotee, LOL. 

The people are retarded

 

The first clip is the classic in which crazy quilt cult commander Osho calls democracy "rule by the people, for the people, of the people...but the people are retarded". 

The second clip is supposedly an AI-generated commercial for orange juice narrated by a deep fake "Donald Trump"...

Not sure what these clips have in common, and if so why I´m posting them here, but there you go.

PS. The AI account also posted a fake commercial for ice cream featuring Joe Biden!

The ultimate YouTube atheist?

 

So I´ve checked some atheist YouTube channels...

It seems YouTube atheists are obsessed with claiming that atheism is "merely" about "a lack of belief", and they define the term so broadly that even "religious atheists" can exist. 

By this redefinition of the word, the crazy cult leader Osho, linked to above, is an atheist. Indeed, he seems to be the ultimate YouTube atheist! Or "would have been", since the man is...I don´t know...atheistically undead somehow?

But of course, nobody IRL would use the term "atheist" in this manner. Osho is universally seen as a *religious* cultist wackjob. You can of course define words any way you like, but something tells me New, New New or Double Plus New New atheists don´t want to be associated with the man previosuly known as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh...

Ironically, the way most people use the term "atheism" fits the YouTube atheists themselves pretty damn well: actively anti-religious/anti-spiritual nerds who base their active non-belief in anything supernatural or paranormal on science and/or naturalism (materialism). Did I mention the nerd aspect? They are a kind of identitarian atheists. 

So what on earth is the prob?

Savior of the World

 

Weapons found by Indian police in 2014 at
Rampal´s ashram
(Credit: Times of India)

"Savior of the World" is a very, very bizarre YouTube video introducing a certain Sant Rampal Ji Maharaj, who styles himself the leader of Kabir Panth within the Sant Mat tradition. (I´m sure there are a myriad of factions within this heterodox Sikh movement.) Rampal claims to be "the only true satguru in the entire universe" (!). Unfortunately, he is currently serving a lifetime sentence for murder after violent clashes between his supporters and those of another religious group, Arya Samaj, ended with the death of one samaj supporter. How the infidel powers-that-be (Kal Niranjan?) managed to arrest and jail an incarnation of God is, alas, less clear. 

The video promoting Rampal is so bad that I almost suspect he is trolling us. Or maybe somebody trolled his supporters with egregiously wrong information? The video claims that there are innumerable prophecies and astrological predictions that point to Rampal being the Great Man (Mahapurusha) and Great Power (Mahashakti). The prophecies are obviously bogus and frequently make no sense whatsoever. Thus, a certain "Florence" from New Jersey supposedly published a book in 1960 called "The New Golden Era of Light: COMPLETION NOW!" in which she predicted Rampal. The pictures of "Florence" clearly show Florence Nightingale, the famous British nurse who died in 1910, while the book wrongly attributed to her was published in 2014 by Lisa Manfrede Smith, an otherwise unknown New Age channeler! And so it goes on. 

Jules Verne, the French novelist, is called a "French astrologer". Nostradamus supposedly predicted that the Great Man would come from Punjab in India. Which he didn´t (his quatrains are clearly Christian in nature). The most original character mentioned is Sri Ananda Acharya of Norway, apparently a real Indian mystic who lived for decades in that country (he was wrongly assumed to be a Buddhist by the bewildered natives). If he really predicted the coming of the chosen one is, alas, less clear. 

After all this fakery, the second half of the video turns out to be untranslated. Since my Hindi (or is it Punjabi) is a little bit rusty (not to mention my Sanskrit), I couldn´t really follow the splendid teachings of the Jagatguru, as Rampal also calls himself. I did notice a curious detail, though. The video mentions the old joker Osho several times, pretending to wonder whether all the prophecies could perhaps point to *him*, only to discard the possibility. I always assumed Osho mostly had Western followers. Perhaps there is a flock of Indian faithful which Rampal´s faction of the Kabir Panth wants to recruit into their fold? Not sure if I would want to have unruly oshoites as part of my Great Man cult, but there you go... 

Godly atheism?

 

Osho tries to explain pantheism to the pseudo-Christian American audience 40 years ago, or something like that. Today, this is probably not as controversial anymore. OK, maybe in Poland. Or in Vaikuntha...

Solving the Trilemma

 

Osho solves the C S Lewis´ Trilemma by essentially declaring that Jesus was both mad, bad *and* God. Of course, this man constantly contradicted himself. In other contexts, he attempted to claim Jesus instead, quoting "The Gospel of Thomas" and arguing that the Christ is buried in Kashmir! Trigger warning as usual... 

"Yorba" the Buddha

This is a two-hour interview with an otherwise unknown Hindu teacher, a certain Swami Ganga in Khajuraho, the Indian temple-complex notorious for its erotic sculptures. The interview comes across as rather boring, but I found it fascinating if listen to carefully. 

Ganga´s "Tantrism" seems to be an anarchistic and hedonistic form of materialism. Indeed, he positively references the Charvakas, an ancient Indian sect with ideas similar to the Epicureans. Ganga also mentions Gorakhnath, an 11th century heterodox Shaiva and Tantrika associated with Hatha Yoga. It turns out that Ganga used to be one of Osho´s devotees, even following him to Oregon.

It was actually funny to listen to some of his musings, for instance when he describes "Buddhahood" in terms of Krishna´s erotic dance with the gopis, or when he mispronounces "Zorba the Buddha". At one point, Ganga went to a Kumbha Mela festival and "took initiation" from both Maharishi Mahesh Yogi of Transcendental Meditation (TM) and Shrila Prabhupada of the Hare Krishna movement (ISKCON). That would be like joining both Catholics and Lutherans on the same day, or something to that effect. 

The cosmic energy or prana is everywhere and really doesn´t discriminate, being available alike for both saint and sinner. That´s unconditional divine love for you, right there. Ganga also reveals the solution to the Zen koan "what is the sound of one hand clapping". At one point, he suddenly starts talking in some Indian language with another guy present! They discuss "astral traveling", apparently. 

Since Osho pretty much destroyed the rep of anarcho-Tantra, it seems that being "Yorba" is just as difficult as being Buddha...

And yes, Ganga implies that Osho was murdered. 

Förbanna inte mörkret

Jag är ju inte någon varm anhängare av Osho, men i hans maffiga tegelsten "The Book of Secrets" (tokgubbens kommentar till den tantriska meditationsmanualen Vighyan Bhairav Tantra) säger han faktiskt något intressant. 

Nämligen att Gud inte är ljus. Gud är snarast mörker. Eller rättare sagt: mörker är en bättre metafor för det gudomliga än ljuset. 

Varför tror vi att Gud är ljus? För att vi är *rädda* för mörkret. Men egentligen är det mörkret som är gudomligt. Ljuset är tillfälligt, det kommer och går. Mörkret är evigt. Mörkret är vad som alltid finns kvar sedan ljuset försvunnit. Mörkret existerade innan ljuset. Ljuset "skapar" våra personligheter och hela vår (synliga) värld, medan mörkret är det ursprungliga, det som fanns innan "skapelsen". Det upplöser våra personligheter, och det är därför vi är rädda för det, men om vi bara kunde meditera i mörker skulle vi inse att allt är OK...

Så långt Osho. (Infoga kraftigt avståndstagande här!) 

Det slog mig förresten att metaforen "Gud är ljus" bara kan användas av fullt seende människor. En person som är blind sedan födseln kan inte använda det. Vi skulle också kunna tänka oss en intelligent art som lever på en mörklagd planet och därför aldrig utvecklat normalt seende (kanske är den istället telepatisk eller vad som helst). Ändå hävdar många inte bara att Gud är ljus rent metaforiskt, utan att uttalandet faktiskt ska tolkas bokstavligt! Antropocentrism, eller vad? 

Ortodoxa kyrkans mystiker beskriver Gud som "det bländande (eller lysande) mörkret". Kanske kommer detta närmare sanningen...  

Förbanna inte mörkret. Och tänd INTE ett ljus. 

The man was kreizi

An Osho classic. Apart from attacking Nostradamus, the crazy wisdom guru explains how the Hindu clerics hoax the people of India with their phony divination techniques. Absolute must see!

Interviewer: But you do have some faith in the prophecies of Nostradamus, though? Is that correct?

Osho: I don´t have any faith in him, the fact is, that the man was kreizi…

A meaningless life?

I've only read about half this book, but will risk (Osho-like) a review of it. I've somehow got the impression that if you've read one book by Osho, you've read them all. Of course, that's not *entirely* true, but the seemingly endless stream of Osho books does contain many titles that are very repetitive.

So what is the meaning of life, then? Osho explicitly says that there is no answer to the question. Instead, the task is to make the question go away. This is accomplished by meditation. If you meditate hard and long enough, the question will dissolve. Indeed, you will eventually realize that it was a ridiculous question to begin with. Meditation gets us in touch with reality as it actually looks like. Once this stage is reached, there will be no need for silly questions about the ultimate meaning of life.

Osho's metaphysics (if that's the right word for it) are based on Buddhism. Humans have no soul, yet reincarnation happen. Like the Buddhists, Osho compares human life to a candle flame. If you lit a candle in the morning, is it still the same flame in the evening? Both yes and no. If you take the candle and lit another candle with its flame, is *that* the same candle, or another one? Again, both yes and no. This is how reincarnation works: a never ending process in which we die and are reborn at every moment.

Within Buddhism, this process is often taken to mean that humans must "liberate" themselves from the cycle of reincarnation, instead entering the state (or non-state?) known as nirvana, of which nothing positive can be said. Here, Osho parts with Buddhism - at least Theravada Buddhism - and instead suggests that our liberation consists in being able to live fully in the here and now. Judging by some of Osho's other books, his vision is one of hedonistic ribaldry. He reminds me of a relic of the hippie age. There is also a strong, anti-establishmentarian undertone in his message. Religious leaders, politicians and educators are all part of the enemy.

Osho was an antinomian sage, perhaps very loosely inspired by certain antinomian tendencies within Hinduism and Buddhism, but above all with a message geared towards Westerners fed up with the grey status quo. Indeed, most of his followers have always been Western, not Indian.

Osho himself (then known as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh) ended up rather badly, turning into a cult leader in Oregon, where he surrounded himself with some really unsavoury characters. However, the hedonistic-meditative message is problematic even as it stands. Sure, I don't deny that it "works": if you meditate like crazy, all those annoying questions will indeed go away.

But then what?

Somehow, I don't think joining a hippie commune or artists' collective sounds like a credible solution to anything. Even apart from feeling hopelessly anachronistic...

Osho: From sex to superconsciousness

Osho is the same person as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh. I don't think Bhagwan needs a closer introduction. He was a quite notorious cult leader about thirty years ago - in Oregon, of all places. In contrast to most other cult leaders, Bhagwan managed to salvage *some* of his reputation by exposing the murderous machinations of his closest aides, even inviting the proper authorities to investigate. Later, Bhagwan returned to his native India, where he changed his name to the incomprehensible Osho, probably because the old name was too tainted. "Osho" is also the name inscribed on his tombstone. (He died in 1990.)

Although I can't really relate to his philosophy, it's nevertheless a pity that Osho screwed up and became a cult leader. In some strange kind of way, I like the man - or at least his public image. Osho never called himself a guru or claimed to be divine, and he was often deliberately frivolous or provocative. Please look him up on Youtube, if you don't know what I'm talking about! Osho's message sounds like a curious blend of very low church Hinduism, Western self-help techniques, Nietzsche, libertarianism and hedonism. He wanted people to combine the traits of Zorba with those of the Buddha. Would the world really be a better place if we would all be Neo-Sannyasins? No idea. But perhaps it would be more fun! If only Osho hadn't screwed up in Oregon...

"Sex Matters" is a book containing talks by Osho on the subject of sex. No dates are given, but as far as I understand, the talks in part I were held in India, already before Osho moved to the United States. The talks in section III seems to be more recent, perhaps from the Oregon period? Osho became controversial in deeply conservative and patriarchal India because of his outspoken attitude towards sex, and his constant criticism of mainline Hinduism, especially the ascetic holy men. Indeed, most of his followers have always been Westerners.

However, if you are looking for some kind of steaming exegesis of the Kama Sutra, you will be disappointed. In fact, most of "Sex Matters" deals with Osho's views on the relationship between spirituality, sexuality and celibacy. Interesting, to be sure, but hardly sexy. Osho believes that sex has to be transcended, so humans can reach a state he calls superconsciousness. However, the only way to transcend sex is to go through sex. Thus, sex shouldn't be repudiated or repressed. Indeed, Osho believes that by repressing sex, society has become sick to the bones. Why are humans constantly obsessed and preoccupied with sex? According to Osho, it's because we long for timelessness, egolessness and bliss. In sex, this is temporarily reached in orgasm. However, in meditation, we can experience a more perfect kind of bliss. Therefore, the sexual orgasm must be transformed into meditation and superconsciousness. Osho claims to know a meditation technique by which the orgasm can be prolongued for several hours. After this, the individual will no longer be interested in sex. He will become truly celibate the rest of his life. The ascetic "holy men" of India are hypocrites. They may be technically celibate, but in reality they are constantly preoccupied with sexual thoughts and desires. Only by releasing the sexual energies, can these be transformed into something higher.

To a critical outsider, Osho's advice seems contradictory. On the one hand, he has no problems with divorce, premarital sex, nudity, homosexuality or bisexuality. He wants people to be life affirming instead of life denying, and often comes close to sounding like a hedonist. (This is why his talks became controversial in India.) On the other hand, he wants sex to be spiritualized, turned into "real love", and hence turned off, with people essentially becoming asexual. It's not clear how these two traits can be combined. How do you combine "Zorba" with "Buddha"? Perhaps Osho counts on some kind of catharsis effect? If people indulge in sex, they will eventually loose interest in it. Or so Osho believes. In the third part of the book, it turns out that Osho isn't particularly interested in giving concrete advice about sexual problems. Indeed, he believes that Westerners are too obsessed with having orgasms! Just relax, experiment and go with the flow, is the rather anticlimactic advice. But then, who knows? It may just be working... More murky is Osho's ultimate goal: a society of supermen, apparently an idiosyncratic version of Nietzsche. (Some have accused Osho of incipient fascism.)

"Sex Matters" is a relatively easy read. If the book feels difficult, it's probably because it takes some time to get accustomed to Osho's strange philosophy. As such, Osho's talks aren't superintellectual or overly theoretical. They are often lightened up by funny anecdotes or frivolous jokes. (Including a joke about the Pope and a gay man!) If the book is the best introduction to Osho's worldwiew, I don't know, since I haven't read all his books. Has anyone? Personally, however, I found "Sex Matters" to be an interesting gate into the strange land of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh...

What a pity this man was a fraud

Written during my skeptical period, before I discovered, say, Vladimir Solovyev... 

Osho is one of the few spiritual teachers I feel a certain instinctive sympathy with (although I don't really support his philosophy). The reason, of course, is his iconoclastic, near-frivolous and yes, anti-religious attitude. It's a dish best served at Youtube, where Osho says that "thank God, God does not exist", "It's time for Mother Theresa to jump into a lake", "I don't allow meat at my ashram, but I allow alcohol, because that is vegetarian"... It's a real pity that Osho turned out so badly, creating what was just another cult, at "Rajneeshpuram" in Oregon. Does the name Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh ring a bell? Yes, that was Osho's name as a cult leader! I suspect Osho (who died in 1990) adopted his new name when the old one became too tainted.

Osho's books are less provocative than his speeches on the web. At least the ones I read so far. They are also difficult to pin down. The message sounds trivial, nebulous and yet, in some strange way, profound. "Freedom" combines Eastern meditation with Western self-help and positive attitude. However, the self-help and attitude-building isn't connected to a New Age prosperity gospel (as in "The Secret"). Rather, Osho sounds like a sixties hippie. He calls on people to become drop outs, to sing and dance, practice free love, and die with a smile on their face. The message is both life affirming and yet somehow anti-social. What Osho is really getting at, I think, is fear of "not belonging". His main enemy is conformism, in matters both big and small. Going with the crowd, what Osho calls "being a camel", is the greatest sin, but so is being a negative rebel, "being a lion". The positive rebel is innocent like a child and quite simply floats where the stream takes him.

All gurus are surrounded by tales about their childhood, when they supposedly did miraculous deeds, and Osho also tells such stories about himself, but in his case they are not about miracles but about anti-conformism. The book contains a story about how as a young child, Osho refused to get a haircut, although long hair was associated with effeminacy in patriarchal India. When his father forcibly cut his hair, Osho responded by shaving his head completely bald, which in India means that one's father has died! Somehow, I get the feeling that Osho loathed the strong conformism in a traditional society like India, and began preaching a message that sounds like a hedonist and individualist version of Buddhism.

In "Freedom", Osho also makes political, or rather anti-political, statements. He doesn't believe in changing society by political means. All revolutions are purely negative and are doomed to failure. He exemplifies this both with the Russian revolution, and with India's struggle for independence. Real change has to come from within. Only if people change on an individual basis, and then drop out and form communes, can society be changed in the bye and bye. Being a political activist or leader is pointless. Rather, be a nobody, be invisible, but practice love on an individual basis.

"Freedom" is part of a series of eight books, called "Insights for a new way of living". If you are looking for concrete self-help techniques, be they secular or spiritual, you will probably be disappointed. At least if the other seven books are anything like this one! Rather, the books attempt to ground a certain attitude, an attitude very different from dogmatic theology, hard-and-fast rules, and life denying asceticism. I'm not sure who the main beneficiaries may be. Perhaps people dissatisfied with traditional religion, crowd mentality and even "The Secret"!

It's a shame that Osho blew it in Oregon, but hopefully he will be reborn as a more positive and life affirming creature. A bonobo, perhaps? :-)

Osho is the man

"Courage" is a difficult book to pin down. The subtitles sound like those of self-help books. Strictly speaking, however, "Courage" is not a self-help book. The courage Osho talks about is spiritual. This is not a book for athletes, explorers or business executives. Rather, it's a book for seekers.

Osho's main message is: Break out of the crowd! Forget about religious dogmas! Life is a mystery, start living it! The book sounds very "hippie". It contains constant attacks on the hypocrisy of established religions, the utter boredom of science, and the lack of love and joy in the world. Osho calls on the reader to sing, dance and live spontaneously by letting go of the self. Every human should become a "Zorba the Buddha". Indeed, his message is a kind of hedonistic, individualist form of Buddhism. He even talks about the need for sexual pleasure!

This is about as far as you can get from "The Secret" and other such books. Osho (who died in 1990) wasn't against money or possessions. Indeed, on several Youtube clips he spouts very expensive wrist watches. However, "Courage" doesn't contain any particular insights on how to get rich. Rather, it's a book about breaking free. I don't think Osho and Rhonda Byrne could have been featured on the same TV show...

My main problem with Osho, apart from his message sounding a bit utopian, is that he didn't always live as he learned. Under the name Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, Osho founded a religious commune in Oregon, which quickly developed into a cult. When his secretary Sheela absconded with the money, Osho turned her in to the authorities, revealing other compromising things as well. He then blamed Sheela for creating the cult, and returned home to India. I'm not entirely sure if I buy that explanation...

Still, if you are interested in New Religious Movements, it's difficult to pass by Osho. To many people, Osho is still "the man".

Osho in a surprisingly somber mood

Osho was a spiritual teacher active in both India and the United States. He died in 1990.

Osho (also known as Bhagwan) became controversial due to his provocative and frivolous behaviour. On Youtube, there are several clips showing Osho spouting expensive wrist watches (probably quite deliberately), cracking lewd jokes, or claiming that alcohol is allowed at his ashram, since alcohol is vegetarian! His message sounds very "hippie", almost libertarian or libertine.

This book, by contrast, shows Osho in a surprisingly somber and intellectual mood. He does crack jokes from time to time, usually featuring the Muslim satirical character Mulla Nasruddin, but overall, he sounds more serious in "The Mustard Seed" than he does on Youtube. He also sounds less libertine than in some of his other written works.

"The Mustard Seed" is a collection of talks, recorded and later written down by Osho's followers. Since the Osho International Foundation wants to put forward Osho's message as timeless, none of the speeches are dated. This is a problem, since the Osho movement did change over the years. Periodically, it was more closed and cultish, and at other times, more open. At least critical readers would want to know the context of Osho's remarks.

The contents of the book are far-reaching. Frankly, the man speaks about everything! The main theme is how to reach spiritual enlightenment, that "God" is within each of us, that we can find "God" if only we let go of worldly desires and seek fulfilment through meditation. Osho claims that this was the original message of Jesus, and attempts to prove this by quoting and interpreting the Gospel of Thomas, a Gnostic apocryphon not included in the official Christian Bible. While a few scholars consider the Gospel of Thomas to be based on early material, most are of the opinion that this text was written much later than the Biblical Gospels, and thus cannot contain the real message of Christ. Of course, this is of little consequence to Osho and *his* message, which stands on its own, even without the Gospel of Thomas. Still, it's not a co-incidence that Osho has choosen this particular document for comment. The Gospel of Thomas may not have been the true message of Jesus Christ, but the work does fit admirably well with "Eastern" forms of spirituality.

The most annoying statement in "The Mustard Seed" is Osho's claim that the Jews suffer because of their crucifixion of Jesus. Anti-Semitism? Perhaps, but Osho sounds equally anti-Christian and anti-Hindu. He says that Jews should claim Jesus, since Jesus, after all, was a Jew, not a Christian! His statement that the Hindus are better than the Jews since the Hindus never killed the Buddha, is surely intended as sarcasm. In reality, Osho and his fellow Hindus had very cold feelings towards each other, apparently one of the reasons why Osho later moved to the US.

The main problem with "The Mustard Seed" (apart from the weird typeface, making the book somewhat difficult to read) is that it doesn't sound very Oshoite. If you want vintage Osho, read "Freedom", "Courage" or "Sex Matters". Or listen to his Youtube appearances!