Osho on American Haiku Poet Paul Reps An admirer and devotee of Zen Buddhism, Paul Reps was an American poet, artist, and author. He is considered one of the first haiku poets of America. His unorthodox poetry stemmed from his travels to the East, where he assimilated the spirit of Zen in the brevity of his poems. His first publication of haiku poetry was in 1939 - ‘More Power to You - Poems Everyone Can Make’. He traveled across the globe and found love, peace, and acceptance wherever he went. Paul Reps was also an artist. Many of his publications had artwork related to his writings and were influenced by Zen Buddhism. He started to conduct exhibitions in Japan of his artwork and went on doing road shows and exhibition tours from there. He displayed his art in the perfect aestheticism of creativity, love, and Buddhism - impeccably characterizing his life.&nbsp; Osho while talking about one incidence in Paul Reps life says, “Paul Reps was invited to give a lecture at the University of B.C. He was advertised as a well-known mystic and philosopher and author of the famous ZEN FLESH, ZEN BONES. The occasion attracted a number of noted intellectuals. Paul Reps sat very relaxed in a simple wooden chair telling his little Zen stories. Many people in the audience enjoyed the stories, but some of the great intellects got bored. Finally one of the more knowing ones stood up and said, "Sir, could you please speak on a somewhat higher level?" Without pausing, Paul Reps placed his chair on the table and continued with his beautiful Zen stories.”<div class="raw-html-embed"><div style="width:100%;height:1px;background:#00000036;margin:10px 0;"></div></div>Energy moving in is the whole of religion, is what is meant by the religious search. How to move the energy, how to create a total about turn? These methods help. So remember, centering is not samadhi, centering is not the experience. Centering is the door to the experience, and when there is the experience there is no centering. So centering is just a passage. You are not centered now: you are multi-centered really. That is why I say you are not centered now. When you become centered, there is only one center. Then the energy that has been moving to multi-centers has come back; it is a homecoming. Then you are at your center; then... explosion. Again the center is no more, but then you are not multi-centered. Then there is no center at all. You have become one with the cosmos. Then existence and you mean one and the same thing.&nbsp; For example, an iceberg is floating in the sea. The iceberg has a center of its own. It has a separate individuality; it is separate from the ocean. Deep down it is not separate, because it is nothing but water at a particular degree of temperature. The difference between the ocean water and the iceberg is not in their nature -- naturally, they are the same. The difference is only of temperature. And then the sun rises, and the atmosphere becomes hot, and the iceberg begins to melt. Then there is no iceberg: it has melted. Now you cannot find it because there is no individuality, no center in it. It has become one with the ocean. In you and in Buddha, in those who were crucifying Jesus and in Jesus, in Krishna and in Arjuna, there is no difference in nature. Arjuna is like an iceberg and Krishna is like an ocean. There is no difference in nature. They both are one and the same, but Arjuna has a form, a name -- an individual, isolated existence. He feels, "I am."&nbsp; Through these methods of centering, the temperature will change, the iceberg will melt, and then there will be no difference. That oceanic feeling is samadhi; that being an iceberg is mind. And to feel oceanic is to be a no-mind. Centering is just the passage, the point of transformation from which the iceberg will be no more. Before it there was no ocean -- only an iceberg. After it there will be no iceberg -- only ocean. The oceanic feeling is samadhi: it is to feel oneself one with the whole. But I am not saying to think oneself one with the whole. You can think, but thinking is before centering; that is not realization. You do not know -- you have only heard; you have read. You wish that someday this may happen to you also, but you have not realized. Before centering you can go on thinking, but that thinking is of no use. After centering there is no thinker. You know! It has happened! You are no more; only the ocean is. Centering is the method. Samadhi is the end. Nothing has been said about what happens in samadhi because nothing can be said. And Shiva is very scientific. He is not interested at all in telling. He is telegraphic; he will not use a single extra word. So he simply hints: "The experience, the blessing, the happening." Not only this, sometimes he will simply say, "Then." He will say, "Be centered between two breaths and THEN." And then he will stop. Then sometimes he will simply say, "Be in the middle, just in the middle between two extremes, and THAT." These are indications -- "That, then, the experience, the blessing, the happening, the explosion." But then he stops completely. Why? We would like him to say something more. Two reasons. One: THAT cannot be explained. Why can it not be explained? There are thinkers -- for example, modern positivists, language analysts and others in Europe -- who say that which can be experienced, can be explained. And they have a point to make. They say if you can experience it, then why cannot you tell of it. After all, what is an experience? You have understood it, so why can you not make it understood for others? So they say that if there is any experience, then it can be expressed. And if you cannot express it, it shows simply that there is no experience. Then you are a muddlehead -- confused, blurred. And if you cannot even express it, then there is no possibility that you will be able to experience. Because of this standpoint, they say religion is all hokum. Why can you not express it if you can say you have experienced? Their point appeals to many, but their argument is baseless. Leave aside religious experiences, ordinary experiences also cannot be explained and expressed -- very simple experiences. I have a pain in my head, and if you have never experienced a headache, I cannot explain to you what a headache means. That doesn't mean that I am muddleheaded; that doesn't mean that I am only thinking and I am not experiencing. The headache is there. I experience it in its totality, in its full painfulness. But if you have not experienced a headache, it cannot be explained, it cannot be expressed to you. If you also have experienced it, then of course there is no problem, it can be expressed. Buddha's difficulty is that he has to talk with non-buddhas -- not non-Buddhists, because non-Buddhists can also be buddhas. Jesus is a non-Buddhist, but he is a buddha. Because Buddha is to communicate with those who have not experienced, there is a difficulty. You do not know what a headache is. There are many who have not known headaches. They have only heard the word; it means nothing to them. You can talk with a blind man about light, but nothing is conveyed. He hears the word `light', he hears the explanation. He can understand the whole theory of light, but still the word `light' conveys nothing to him. Unless he can experience, communication is impossible. So note it: communication is possible only if two persons are communicating who have had the same experience. We are able to communicate in ordinary life because our experiences are similar. But even then, if one is going to split hairs then there will be difficulties. I say the sky is blue and you also say the sky is blue, but how are we to decide that my experience of blue and your experience of blue is the same? There is no possible way to decide…Moreover, there are experiences which are of the beyond. For example, someone has fallen in love. He experiences something. His whole life is at stake, but he cannot explain what has happened to him, what is happening to him. He can weep, he can sing, he can dance; these are indications that something is happening in him. But what is happening in him? When love happens to someone, what is happening really? And love is not very uncommon. It happens to everyone in some way or other. But still, we have not been able to express yet what happens inside. There are persons who feel love as a fever, as a sort of disease. Rousseau says that youth is not the peak of human life, because youth is prone to the disease called love. Unless one becomes so old that love loses all meaning, mind remains muddled and puzzled. So wisdom is possible only in very, very old age. Love will not allow you to be wise -- that is his feeling. There are others who may feel differently. Those who are really wise will become silent about love. They will not say anything -- because the feeling is so infinite, so deep, that language is bound to betray it. And if it is expressed then one feels guilty, because one can never do justice to the feeling of the infinite. So one remains silent: the deeper the experience, the less the possibility of expression.&nbsp; Buddha remained silent about God not because there is no God. And those who are very much vocal about God really show they have no experience. Buddha remained silent. Whenever he would go to any town, he would declare, "Please, do not ask anything about God. You can ask anything, but not about God." Scholars, pundits, who had no experience really but only knowledge, started talking about Buddha and creating rumors, saying, "He is silent because he doesn't know. If he knows then why will he not say?" And Buddha would laugh. That laughter could be understood only by very few. If love cannot be expressed, then how can God be expressed? Then any expression is harmful -- that is one thing. That is why Shiva is silent about the experience. He goes to the point from where a finger can be used as an indication -- "Then, that, the experience" -- and then he becomes silent. The second reason is: even if it can be expressed in a certain way, even if it can be expressed only partially... Even if it cannot be expressed, really, then too some parallels can be created to help. But those too Shiva is not using, and there is a reason. It is because our minds are so greedy that whenever something is said about that experience the mind clings to it. And then the mind forgets the method and remembers only the experience, because method needs effort -- a long effort which is sometimes tedious, sometimes dangerous. A long sustained effort is needed. So we forget about the method. We remember the result and we go on imagining, wishing, desiring the result. And one can fool oneself very easily. One can imagine that the result has been achieved… It is difficult to remember what is knowledge and what is experience. They get confused; they get mingled and mixed. And it is very easy to feel that your knowledge has become your experience. The human mind is so deceptive, so cunning, that that is possible. That is another reason why Shiva has remained silent about the experience. He will not say anything about it. He goes on talking about methods, remaining completely silent about the result. You cannot be deceived by him. That is one of the reasons why this book, one of the most significant of books, has remained altogether unknown. This VIGYANA BHAIRAVA TANTRA is one of the most significant books in the world. No Bible, no Veda, no Gita is so significant, but it has remained completely unknown. The reason? It contains only simple methods without any possibility for your greed to cling to the result. The mind wants to cling to the result. The mind is not interested in the method; it is interested in the end result. And if you can bypass the method and reach the result, the mind will be extremely happy. Someone was asking me, "Why so many methods? Kabir has said, 'SAHAJ SAMADHI BHALI -- be spontaneous.' Spontaneous ecstasy is good, so there is no need of methods." I told him, "If you have achieved SAHAJ SAMADHI -- spontaneous ecstasy -- then of course no method is useful; there is no need. Why have you come here?" He said, "I have not achieved yet, but I feel that SAHAJ -- the spontaneous -- is better." "But why do you feel that the spontaneous is better?" I said. Because no method is suggested, the mind feels good that you have nothing to do -- and without doing, you can have EVERYTHING ! Because of this Zen has become a craze in the West -- because Zen says, achieve it effortlessly; there is no need of effort. Zen is right; there is no need for an effort. But remember, to achieve this point of no-effort you will need a long, long effort. To achieve a point where no effort is needed, to achieve a point where you can remain in non-doing, a long effort will be needed. But the superficial conclusion that Zen says no effort is needed has become very appealing in the West. If no effort is needed then the mind says: this is the right thing, because you can do it without doing anything. But no one can do it.&nbsp; Suzuki, who made Zen known in the West, has done a service and also a disservice. And the disservice will remain for a longer period. He was a very authentic man, one of the most authentic men of this century, and for his whole life he struggled to carry the message of Zen to the West. And alone, with his own effort, he made it known in the West. And now there is a craze; there are Zen friends all over the West. Nothing appeals like Zen now. But the point is missed. The appeal has come only because Zen says no method is needed, no effort is needed. You do not have to do anything; spontaneously it flowers. This is right -- but you are not spontaneous, so it will never flower in you. To be spontaneous... It looks absurd and contradictory, because for you to be spontaneous many methods are needed to purify you, to make you innocent so that you can be spontaneous. Otherwise you cannot be spontaneous in anything.&nbsp; This VIGYANA BHAIRAVA TANTRA was translated into English by Paul Reps. He has written a very beautiful book, ZEN FLESH, ZEN BONES, and just in the appendix he included this book VIGYANA BHAIRAVA TANTRA. The whole book is concerned with Zen; just in the appendix he added this book also, the one hundred and twelve methods, and he called it a pre-Zen writing. Many Zen followers didn't like this because they said, "Zen says no effort is needed, and this book is concerned only with effort. This book is concerned only with methods, and Zen says no method, no effort is needed. So it is anti-Zen, not pre-Zen." Superficially they are right, but deep down they are not, because to achieve a spontaneous being one has to travel a long way.&nbsp; One of Gurdjieff's disciples, Ouspensky, used to say, whenever someone would come to him to ask about the path, "We don't know anything about the path. We only teach about some footpaths which lead to the path. The path is not known to us." Do not think that you are already on the path. Even the path is far away. From where you are, from that point, even the path is far away. So first you have to reach to the path. Ouspensky was a very humble man, and it is very difficult to be religious and to be humble -- very, very difficult, because once you begin to feel that you know, the head goes mad. He would always say, "We don't know anything about the path. It is very far away, and there is no need just now to discuss it." Wherever you are, first you have to create a link, a small bridge, a footpath which will lead you to the path.&nbsp; Spontaneity -- SAHAJ YOGA -- is very far away from you. In the place where you are, you are totally artificial, cultivated and cultured. Nothing is spontaneous -- NOTHING, I say, is spontaneous. When nothing is spontaneous in your life, how can religion be spontaneous? When nothing is spontaneous, even love is not spontaneous. Even love is a bargain, even love is a calculation, even love is an effort. Then nothing can be spontaneous. And then to explode spontaneously into the cosmos is impossible. From the situation you are in, from that situation it is impossible. First you will have to throw away all your artificiality, all your false attitudes, all your cultivated conventions, all your prejudices. Only then will a spontaneous happening be possible. These methods will help you to come to a point from where nothing is needed to be done -- just your being is enough. But mind can deceive. And mind easily deceives, because then it can get consolation. Shiva never talks about any result, just methods. Remember this emphasis. Do something, so that a moment may be possible when nothing is needed, when your central being can just dissolve into the cosmos.&nbsp; Source: Listen to complete discourse at mentioned below link. Discourse Series: <a href="vigyan-bhairav-tantra-vol-1-14">Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, Vol 1, Chapter #14</a> Chapter title: Changing the direction of energy 17 November 1972 pm in Woodlands, Bombay References: Osho has spoken on distinguished poets like Byron, Coleridge, D.H. Lawrence, Ghalib, Heinrich Heine, John Ruskin, Kahlil Gibran, Kalidas, Keats, Leo Tolstoy, Mark Twain, Milton, Oscar Wilde, Rabindranath Tagore, Ramdhari Singh Dinkar, Rumi, Rudyard Kipling, Shakespeare, Shelley, William Blake, Wordsworth, Gertrude Stein and many more in His discourses. Some of these can be referred to in the following books/discourses: 1. The Book of Wisdom 2. The Sword and The Lotus 3. Returning to the Source&nbsp; 4. Light on the Path 5. The Secret 6. The Hidden Splendour 7. The New Dawn 8. Beyond Enlightenment 9. From Bondage to Freedom 10. The Golden Future 11. Take It Easy, Vol 1 12. The Dhammapada: The Way of the Buddha, Vol 4, 5 13. Theologia Mystica &nbsp;