Theologia Mystica 05

Fifth Discourse from the series of 15 discourses - Theologia Mystica by Osho.
You can listen, download or read all of these discourses on oshoworld.com.

The first question:
To what extent does life have relevance to logic?
Logic is a very small thing, life is vast. Logic is utilitarian, it is an invention of man. Life is nonutilitarian, it is not an invention of man; on the contrary, man is life’s invention. Logic is one-dimensional; life is multidimensional. But for thousands of years man has been conditioned as if logic and life are synonymous.
This has destroyed the whole joy of the human heart, it has destroyed the most precious thing in existence; it has poisoned man’s capacity to love because logic goes against love, logic goes against bliss, logic goes against meditativeness, logic goes against godliness. But logic is good in a marketplace – it is calculative, mathematical. Logic is good with things, but not good with persons.
If you want to live with things, logic is enough, but that is not going to be much of a life. When you live with persons, when you relate with persons, logic is not enough at all; in fact you have to put logic aside.
To relate to a person is to relate to infinity. Logic cannot contain infinities. To fall in love means you are moving into the world of the uncalculated, the incalculable, the immeasurable, the uncharted. Logic will tell you, “You are going mad, stop before it is too late!” Logic always creates a prison around you. Of course, it convinces you that it is for your own sake, it is for your safety, security, comfort. And in a certain sense it does give a certain security to you, but that security is the security of death not of life.
If you want to be absolutely secure the grave is the best place; then there is no insecurity, no discomfort, no illnesses, no problems, no anxieties, no calamities, no death even. Once you have died you have died; it is all finished. Now you can rest forever. That’s why on graves you will find these words: “Now Rest in Peace.” What else can you do in a grave?

A woman made a beautiful marble stone for her husband’s grave: “Rest in Peace,” was written on it in golden letters.
After three days the will was opened and the husband had not left anything for her. She was furious. She rushed to the grave and underneath the golden letters “Rest in Peace” she wrote in her own hand “Till I Come!”

Life is insecure. There are wives and there are husbands, and there are children and whatnot. Life is insecure but that’s the beauty of life, that’s its adventure, that is its exhilaration, ecstasy. Logic makes everything dull, boring – two plus two is always four.
In life it is not so. Two plus two is sometimes three, sometimes five – in fact, it is never four! In life it is never four. And now even mathematicians, geometricians, logicians have started becoming aware of the phenomenon. A new branch of geometry has happened, non-Euclidean geometry; it has changed the whole Euclidean static world. In non-Euclidean geometry nothing is logical. But you will be surprised to know that Albert Einstein found it far more helpful in discovering the Theory of Relativity than Euclidean geometry, which is logical.
Just two days before Albert Einstein died, he said, “When I started my adventure into the world of science I was very certain that two plus two is four. Now I cannot say that, I cannot say it with any certainty. All certainty is gone. As I have gone deeper into the mystery of existence, I have found that our logic is applicable only to the most superficial. The deeper you go, the more irrelevant it becomes.” His last words were, “To me life is a mystery now, and I feel that there is something in life which is absolutely unknowable.”
Logic believes in two categories: the known and the unknown. That which is unknown today will become known tomorrow. That which is known today was unknown yesterday. So there is not much difference between the known and the unknown, they belong to the same category. Logic does not believe in the unknowable – and the unknowable is the very heart of life, the very heartbeat of the universe.
I am not against logic. Use it, it is a beautiful strategy as far as things are concerned, the marketplace is concerned, the superficial world is concerned – but beware that you don’t go on carrying it into deeper layers of life and experience. There it is a hindrance.
Logic means the mind. The mind is helpful in understanding the objective world. The mind is a hindrance in understanding the subjective world because the subjective world is beyond the mind, behind the mind. You can use your eyes to see others, but you cannot use your eyes to see yourself. If you want to see yourself through your own eyes you have to use a mirror. To look in a mirror means you are creating a reflection of yourself – which is not you, certainly not you, but you can see the reflection. Logic can see only the reflected glory of existence; it cannot see existence itself because existence is far deeper than logical formulations.
Your question is significant, very significant. You ask, “To what extent does life have relevance to logic?” To a very small extent, just skin-deep. Deeper than that, logic loses all relevance; not only that, it becomes ridiculous.

A young officer’s extreme keenness in demanding strict adherence to official regulations was causing problems.
Eventually the genial general took him aside for a chat on “man management,” suggesting that the regulations should be taken as a guide and were not meant to be strictly applied.
“Where in the regulations,” the officer asked briskly, “is that stated?”

There are people who live by the word and lose the spirit; we call them pundits, scholars, knowledgeable people. They live according to the literal meaning, they never think in terms of metaphors and poetry. And life is more metaphorical than anything else: it is poetry, it is pure poetry; it is music, it is sheer music.

A poor Englishman worked his whole life to educate his only daughter born from a birth that left him a widower. With a very meager salary he saved hard to give the girl a decent education and had her entered in one of the best schools in the country.
At the end of the year he went to pick his daughter up at the railway station.
“Tell me all your news, darling,” he asked his daughter.
“Dad,” said the girl, “you always trusted me so I want to tell you that during this last semester I lost my virginitude.”
“Nooo!” says the father desperately. “I can’t believe it. After all the sacrifices that I made to put you in the best school in the country, you can’t even tell me this news in proper English?”

“Am I mentioned in the will?” the nephew asked anxiously.
“You certainly are,” replied the lawyer. “Right here in the third paragraph your uncle says: ‘To my niece Sarah I bequeath a hundred thousand dollars, to my cousin Janice fifty thousand dollars and to my nephew Charles, who was always curious to know if he was mentioned in my will, I say ‘Hi, Charles.’”

One day a creditor knocks on the door of an impoverished English Lord. The butler opens the door and tells him that milord only receives at seven p.m. sharp.
That evening at the time appointed the creditor knocks again on the door, but he is told that the time for visits is over.
“What do you mean?” exclaims the creditor in anger. “It is seven o’clock!”
“Milord receives at seven sharp, sir,” answers the butler, “not one minute before nor a minute after!”

Logic can make you very stupid. Of course its stupidity is a very decorated stupidity, polished, cultured, so it is very difficult to see the foolishness of it. But life is far more because logic can only contain one polarity. For example, logic can think of darkness or light but not of both together; logic can think of life or death but never of both together. That becomes inconceivable, but that’s how it is. Life is death too. Light is darkness too.
Logic will not be able to comprehend Dionysius’ idea of luminous darkness; it will look simply mad. Luminous darkness? How can darkness be luminous? How can darkness be translucent? Darkness has to be dark, light has to be light. Logic believes in pigeonholes, in categories, and life is one organic unity. Everything penetrates everything else. There are no categories. Life goes on flowing. Light becomes darkness, darkness becomes light. Birth becomes death, death becomes birth. Love becomes hate, hate becomes love. Friendship becomes enmity, enmity becomes friendship.
And now we know that a man can become a woman, a woman can become a man. There is no intrinsic impossibility in it. Just as electricity consists of two poles, the negative and the positive, the whole existence consists of polarities. Logically they look opposite, but if you put logic aside then they are not opposites but complementaries. Without the negative the positive cannot exist. Then how can you call them opposites? If the negative is a necessity for the positive to exist, if the positive is a must for the negative to exist, they are not opposites; they are complementaries.
Now a totally different vision is slowly arising, the vision that takes opposites as complementaries. Aristotelian logic is dying, it is on its deathbed. In fact, it is dead; it is being kept alive by artificial ventilation. The Theory of Relativity has dealt it the final blow, the death blow. The Theory of Relativity has simply transcended all logic. And that is the beauty of Einsteinian physics – it is for the first time that a physicist has spoken the language of the mystic. It is one of the greatest events that has happened in our lifetime, that physics speaks the same language as mystics have always spoken.
Physics has come very close to mysticism; that is the beginning of a meeting, of a synthesis. And the synthesis is not very far away. Soon you will see – those who have clear eyes can see it right now – that logic has no more relevance because physics has gone deeper than the superficial objective world. Now, matter no longer exists. You see matter, it is very logically there; in fact logically you cannot disprove matter.

One of the great English philosophers, Berkeley, was going for a morning walk with his friend, Dr. Johnson.
In Western philosophy Berkeley is almost the equivalent of Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya has said that the world is an illusion, it is only a dream, it is a thought, it does not consist of things, it consists of thoughts. We have always accepted that mystics talk such nonsense. Berkeley also used to talk the same way: that the world is only a dream.
Dr. Johnson was a very pragmatic and practical man, and of course very superficial too. He could not argue with Berkeley, so he took a rock from the side of the road and hit Berkeley’s foot with the rock. Berkeley screamed, and the blood started oozing from his foot.
Dr. Johnson laughed and he said, “Now what do you say? Is this rock real or not? And what is this scream all about if the rock is only a thought? How can it hit you? And from where is the blood coming out and why? You are just being hit by a thought?”
Berkeley could not say anything.

The friendship ended because this is no way to argue. But Berkeley was unaware of the Indian mystics. Had he known anything of Indian mystics he would have answered Dr. Johnson perfectly well. Berkeley was bringing a new idea to Western philosophy. In India it has existed for centuries.

It is said about the great Buddhist monk, Nagarjuna, that he was caught hold of by the king of the country because he was saying that nothing exists, nothing at all. Existence is a pure dream.
He was far ahead of Berkeley and anybody else because he was saying the world is a dream, and because the dream is false how can the dreamer be true? The world is false, it is a dream, and because the dream is false the dreamer is false. So nothing exists, neither the dreamer nor the dream. Shankaracharya at least accepts that the dreamer is true, and Berkeley also accepts that the subjective is true, the objective is false. But Nagarjuna seems to be far clearer. If the objective is false, how can the subjective be true? If the seen is false, what is the proof of the seer? If the known is false, then how can the knower exist? On what grounds?
He was caught hold of by the king. The king was a very pragmatic man. He must have been like Dr. Johnson. Maybe Dr. Johnson was just another incarnation of the same king. He caught hold of Nagarjuna, he listened to his ideas. It was difficult to argue with him, almost impossible. How can you prove that life is true?
For example, we are sitting here. I may be just dreaming you, or you may be dreaming me, or we both may be dreaming simultaneously. But what proof is there that you are really there and I am really here, that I am talking to you and you are listening to me? It may be just mind stuff, nothing else. And many times in your dreams you have seen me. Of course, I don’t dream; so I don’t see you in my dreams. I am so fed up seeing you the whole day that it is natural I don’t see you in my dreams. Orange is such a dangerous color!
The king could not argue with Nagarjuna, but he had a mad elephant. So he asked for the mad elephant to be brought before the palace. The person who was ordered to bring the mad elephant asked why.
The king said, “We have to give proof to Nagarjuna. We have to see what happens when the mad elephant chases him, catches hold of him and throws him a hundred feet away. Then we will see whether it is a thought or a reality!”
When the mad elephant came Nagarjuna started running. The mad elephant was chasing him and Nagarjuna was shouting, “Save me! Save me! All that I was saying was nonsense. Forgive me!” And he was crying so desperately that the king had compassion for him. He stopped the mad elephant.
He called Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna was trembling, perspiring, breathing hard, could not speak for a few moments. Then the king asked, “What do you think about this elephant? Is this elephant real or just a thought?”
Nagarjuna said, “Sir, the elephant is just a dream.”
The king said, “What? Then why were you crying and screaming and shouting and asking me to stop the mad elephant?”
Nagarjuna said, “Sir, that too was part of the dream. Your stopping the elephant is also part of the dream. You can again put the elephant behind me and I assure you I will again scream and shout. But that doesn’t prove anything; it simply proves that one dream creates another dream. It does not prove the reality of the elephant. It simply proves that one dream can trigger another dream.”

That’s how the world continues – one dream triggering another dream.
This has always been the language of the mystics. But for the first time in the history of man, physics also is speaking the same language: matter no longer exists. If you ask them, “Then what exists?” they shrug their shoulders. They say, “Something – xyz. We call it ‘electrons, neurons, protons,’ but they are just xyz – names given to certain entities nobody has ever seen. Nobody is ever going to see them – we don’t know whether they exist or not. All that we know is that if we accept them our calculations come right. If we don’t accept them then it becomes difficult to make our calculations. So they are hypothetical realities.”
Buddha has said God is a hypothetical reality, the self is a hypothetical reality. Logically they are needed – I and thou are needed – but the need is logical, not existential. Those who have penetrated the subjective reality, they have come to know that all our words, all our logic, all our hypotheses, are only arbitrary. And now even physics agrees. The Theory of Relativity is the beginning of a totally new science, the beginning of the meeting of East and West.
You will be surprised to know that Mahavira, the twenty-fourth tirthankara of the Jainas was the first man in the whole world who talked about the Theory of Relativity, twenty-five centuries before Albert Einstein even thought about it. Of course, he was talking about the theory of relativity in relation to the subjective world and Einstein focuses the same vision on the objective world, but both have come to one conclusion: that life is more than logic – far more, immensely more.
But unless you are deeply meditative you will not be able to live that tremendously illogical life because it will drive you mad. If you are not meditative, then remain confined to the world of logic, otherwise you will go mad.
In English we have two words, very beautiful, of great significance: one is breakdown, the other is breakthrough. Breakdown is when you don’t know any meditation and your logic becomes irrelevant. You don’t know how to reach the heart and your head has become absolutely meaningless to you, then there is a breakdown, you go insane. But if you know meditativeness – meditativeness means the art of transforming the opposites into complementaries – then there is a breakthrough, you enter a new world, a new vision, a new perspective.
In a sense you are again mad. That’s why Jesus is known as mad. Francis used to call himself mad – and for all practical purposes he is mad. Buddha and Mahavira…they are all mad in a sense. They are not sane the way you are sane; either they are below you or above you, but one thing is certain, they are somewhere else. If they are below you, it is a breakdown. If they are above you, it is a breakthrough. Meditation is the art of transforming madness into buddhahood. Meditation is the art of taking you beyond logic and yet keeping your sanity intact. Meditation is the greatest discovery ever made, and I don’t think there is ever going to be another discovery which can surpass meditation.

The second question:
I have had lots of exhilarating moments of what seemed to me to be real consciousness, but then as soon as I have felt conscious I begin to feel unconscious. It seems more and more to me that being conscious is a state one has to just experience and not recognize.
Have you anything to say on this?
The state of real awareness is not exhilarating, it has no excitement in it. It is absolutely peaceful. It is neither hot nor cold. You live in a world of coldness, dullness, hence your mind is constantly seeking something exciting, exhilarating, elevating. You always live in dark valleys so you hanker for peaks, sunlit peaks. That is your desire, but that is not the nature of consciousness itself.
Consciousness is exactly in the middle. It is neither low nor high, it is neither a valley nor a peak, it is neither cold nor hot. Buddha has called it majjhim nikai – the middle way. It is exactly in the middle, and it is in the middle that transcendence happens. It is neither positive nor negative, neither good nor bad, neti-neti, neither this nor that. You have come to such a delicate point where everything is balanced. You are not leaning toward this or toward that.
It is like a tightrope walker who is exactly in the middle. If he leans toward the left he will fall, if he leans toward the right he will fall. He is neither a rightist nor a leftist; both are going to fall. He is exactly in the middle.
It is like the pendulum of a clock. The pendulum goes to the left, to the far left, then it goes to the far right. Through its movement between these two extremes it keeps the clock running. You may not have observed it, but it has to be contemplated – when the pendulum is moving toward the right it is gaining momentum to go to the left. Apparently it is going to the right; deep down, hidden inside, it is gaining momentum to go to the left. When it is going to the left it is gaining momentum to go to the right.
And this is so in your life. When you love a person you are gaining momentum to hate the person. That’s why it is the same person you both love and hate; they are not two different people. Modern researchers have found the love relationship to be far more complicated than it was ever thought before. They call marriage an “intimate enmity” – intimate enmity! Two persons are quarreling in a very intimate way.
If you watch lovers you will see this phenomenon continuously. Like the pendulum they go on moving away from each other – that’s what fight is. Every night the pillow fight! It does not exist so much in the East because Eastern women have not yet learned the art of how to throw pillows; they are still old fashioned. But in the West it is almost a routine scene. Before lovemaking, the pillow fight is a must – it creates energy, it releases energy. First the lovers have to fight. By fighting they go farther and farther away from each other. They go as far as possible, as they were when they met for the first time – it is a mini divorce – and once they are that far away, again the same attraction; a mini honeymoon follows. They start coming close.
And this remains a constant phenomenon: coming close, going farther away, again coming close; asking for one’s own space and then feeling lonely, then searching for the other, then being together and feeling bored with each other. The man cannot live without the woman, the woman cannot live without the man – and they cannot live together either. And this is so about all aspects of life.
Consciousness means stopping the pendulum in the middle. If you stop the pendulum of a clock in the middle, what will happen? The clock will stop. And it is very symbolic. If you can stop your consciousness in the middle, neither cold nor hot, neither dull nor excited, then your mind stops because the mind is time – the mind is your inner clock. And the moment the mind stops, who is there to recognize, who is there to say, “Now I am conscious.” If you say, “Now I am conscious,” the mind has come back.
That’s what has been happening.
You say, “I have had lots of exhilarating moments of what seemed to me to be real consciousness…” It is not real consciousness – they were exhilarating moments. But when you are exhilarated, soon you will slow down; you will have to go back to your original state.
You say, “…but then as soon as I have felt conscious I begin to feel unconscious…” This is a great revelation if you try to understand it. Why does it happen? The moment you feel conscious, why do you become unconscious? – because to feel conscious means the mind has come in. Otherwise there is nobody to feel, nobody to recognize, nobody to say, “This is this” – there is no labeling process. The mind is back, and the mind is always hankering to come back; any excuse is enough.
The moment you say, “Look! It seems this is real consciousness,” the mind is back. The mind is not going to miss this opportunity. The mind will pat you on the back and will say, “This is great! You have done it. You have arrived. You have become enlightened. This is what Dionysius calls agnosia. So now this is the thing, the real thing!” And then the mind goes on and on, and you know that you have become unconscious. All those peaks are lost, that sun has set, that light has disappeared. You are back in your valley, in those dark spaces.
When you are really conscious there is no recognition. You don’t label it – there is nobody to label. You are simply conscious and it is finished then and there – the full point. But the mind is not going to leave you so easily; it will come again and again. You have to become aware of the mind’s subtle strategies. You have to see and watch how the mind comes back. And it comes in such ways that unless you are very alert it will deceive you. It is a great politician.
The mind can live only when you are unconscious. To be conscious means the death of the mind – and nobody wants to die. The mind exists only when there is deep unconsciousness; the deeper unconsciousness there is, the more nourishment for the mind.

A man goes to a doctor. The doctor’s wife leads him into the office and explains that the doctor went out and will be back shortly. Sitting down with the man, the wife starts flirting with him. One thing leads to another, and in no time at all she is giving him a blow-job.
Suddenly there is the noise of a car and in great distress the woman exclaims, “Here’s my husband – let me go!”
“No, no, please!” pleads the man. “I am just coming – please continue a few seconds more!”
Just then they hear the key turning in the front door.
“Let me go! Let me go!” cries the woman.
“No, no, please! A few seconds more!”
But the woman violently tears herself away and manages to escape into the other room.
When the doctor enters, the man says, “Good morning, doctor. I heard you coming so I decided to undress in order to avoid wasting your time.”
“Good,” says the doctor, “but what are you doing with those two ears in your hands?”

Man lives in unconsciousness. He lives without knowing why, without knowing where, without knowing whence. He simply goes on like a robot. And if you watch yourself you will be surprised how you have lived up to now – almost in a dream.

Maria and Giovanni are having their breakfast. Giovanni says to Maria, “Amore, I can-a understand-a that you are nervous about having your driving-a examination, but last-a night-a it was-a too much! With your mouth-a you were making the noise-a of the engine and with your hand-a you were changing gears using my prick-a!”

But that’s how people are living their whole lives, day and night!
It is good that you have realized that “…being conscious is a state one has to just experience and not recognize.” But what will you do? Will you say, “I will not recognize it! No, it is not there. No, it is something else. No, I am not going to be deceived again.” But the mind has come in. Again it is there – from a different door, of course. Don’t try to recognize. Don’t try to not-recognize.
And you say it is, “…a state one has to just experience…” Who is going to experience? What is this “just experience”? If you try to experience it, even if you call it “just experience,” you have created a separation between the state and yourself. And any separation between the state and yourself is enough for the mind to come in.
Just understand it and forget all about recognizing it, not recognizing it, about just experiencing and not thinking about it. Forget all these things. When it comes, enjoy. When it goes, enjoy. When it comes, live it; when it is not there, live its absence. Don’t make much fuss about it, whether it is there or not. Remain calm and quiet, calm and collected, as if it does not make any difference at all.
Whether you are conscious or unconscious you are the same. If you evaluate consciousness, if you say consciousness is better than unconsciousness, then there is bound to be difficulty because whenever there is consciousness, your mind in a subtle way will start clinging to it – and the very clinging brings the mind in. The mind is a clinger.
You have to learn one thing, to live each moment as it comes, not asking for its opposite, neither clinging to it nor withdrawing away from it. When you are in a dark mood, live it in totality, don’t be worried about it. What is wrong with darkness? It has its own beauty – it is very velvety, it has its own depth. Live it, love it, enjoy it. Take as much nourishment from it as possible. Roots need darkness; without darkness roots cannot grow. So let your roots be nourished by it. And when you have sunlit peaks, let your flowers bloom. Enjoy that too. Flowers are yours as much as your roots are – both are yours.
My own experience is this: that life has to be used in its totality, in all its dimensions. Yes, even the darker ones, they have their own share to contribute to the richness of life.
Whenever you make a division, “This is good and this is bad, this should be and this should not be,” you are creating trouble for yourself. Life is one organic unity. When it is night, sleep; when it is day, wake up. Don’t hanker for the night in the day; don’t hanker for the day in the night.
Rinzai is right when he says, “Whenever I feel hungry I eat and whenever I feel sleepy I sleep. This is my whole sadhana, this is all that I do.”
And this is what I say to my sannyasins. When you are unconscious, nothing is wrong; when you are conscious, nothing is great. Bring them closer to each other to such a point where both weigh equally, then the mind will disappear. There is no need to recognize, there is no need to praise, there is no need to feel egoistic, elated; there is no need to brag about it.
And the moment the mind goes totally, all is God, all is godliness, all is bliss, all is benediction.

The third question:
I have only one dream in my life, and that is to attain physical immortality. Can you help me to realize my dream? I hate the momentariness of life.
Meditate over these three maxims of Murphy.

First: If life were a bed of roses, some people would not be happy until they developed an allergy.

Now, what is wrong with the momentariness of life? Just think of a kiss with a woman that is eternal – just think about it. Eternal! Now there is no way to escape. What is wrong with a kiss? A kiss has to be momentary, only then is it beautiful.

I have heard about a Mohammedan king whose wife fell in love with one of his slaves. The king was so angry that he wanted to punish him, and punish him in such a way no man has ever been punished. He asked his wise advisors…
One old man said, “Do this: bind them to a pole and let them make love to each other, and keep them chained to the pole in a state of lovemaking for twenty-four hours.”
The king said. “What? Is this a punishment?”
The wise man said, “Just do what I say and see what happens.”
And really there has never been such a punishment before. They were forced to be naked, they were forced to make love chained to a pillar with thousands of people watching. Then many things happened – twenty-four hours is a long time. They started smelling, they started pissing, they defecated; they had to. It became such an ugly affair, and thousands of people watching… When after twenty-four hours they were freed, it is said they escaped from each other and never saw each other again their whole lives. Enough is enough!

Now what is wrong with a momentary life? Your saints have been poisoning you. The flowers have to be momentary otherwise they will be plastic. Life is beautiful only because it is fragile. One moment it is there, the next moment it is gone. That’s its whole beauty.
Do you want beautiful men and women made of plastic? They will be immortals. Sooner or later that calamity can happen through science, your whole body can be exchanged slowly, slowly, part by part, with plastic things. You will be alive but in a plastic body – and plastic is the most immortal thing in the world. And then your parts can always be changed. If one of your hands goes wrong, you go to the workshop, you go to the garage, and they immediately change your hand. You want to change your head; you simply go to the market, you look for another head and you change it. It is only a question of taking out a few screws, that’s all, to fix a new head on you. Your heart can be plastic, there is no need for blood, we can have artificial blood. Everything can be artificial.
And in many ways it will be good: the bodies will not perspire because nobody has ever heard of plastic perspiring, and you will not need deodorants and soaps, etcetera. And you will never grow old – plastic never grows old. And if something goes wrong – you have a car accident or something – there will be no need to live with a crippled body; parts can always be changed, and they will be available everywhere.
Life will be immortal, but will it be beautiful? Will it be blissful? I don’t think so. I love life the way it is, so please don’t ask me such foolish questions. I don’t think there is any need for physical immortality.
Your soul is immortal. Search for that rather than trying to search for physical immortality. But there are fools who go on thinking in these ways.
Sri Aurobindo’s philosophy became world famous for the simple reason that he was saying to his disciples that physical immortality is possible. And the day he died, the disciples could not believe it. In fact, one of my friends who was in the ashram, told me later on that for three days it was kept secret that Sri Aurobindo had died because it was unbelievable. When the Mother was asked, she said, “He has gone into a deep samadhi, it is not death. How can he die? He is physically immortal.” But after three days when the body started stinking, they had to bury him.
Then they started believing that the Mother was immortal. Then one day the Mother died. Now those fools believe that they have both gone to the other world to bring back some more secrets and that they will come soon, they will be back. They are hoping that they will be back with the secrets of physical immortality!
The immortality of the soul is enough. There is no need for your body’s immortality. In fact seventy years is enough – enough to enjoy, enough to suffer, enough to understand, enough to misunderstand. In fact whatever you want to do, seventy years is enough. And if you really go on doing things totally, within seventy years you will be capable of seeing the whole absurdity of being in the body. You will not ask for an immortal body, you will ask how to get rid of this whole business of being born and dying again and again and again, how to get rid of the wheel of life and death.

The second maxim of Murphy: Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

And you ask me, “Osho, can you help me to realize my dream?”

The third saying of Murphy is: The best way to make your dreams come true is wake up.

The fourth question:
How was it possible for Dionysius, as an enlightened being, to carry out his duties as bishop in a guilt-promoting organization? How could he present a facade to the world without creating division within himself, without compromising himself – for instance when he had to follow stupid orders from his archbishop?
This is one of the most fundamental things to understand, that an enlightened person becomes a perfect actor. He is not a doer; he is only an actor. He does nothing, but he acts perfectly. For him the whole of life is nothing but a drama, so there is no question of compromise, there is no question of being divided, becoming schizophrenic. There is no question of being two – saying one thing, doing another thing. He remains undivided because life becomes playfulness, he is no longer serious.
You are taking it very seriously, hence the question. It comes out of your seriousness. You don’t know what playfulness is.
The enlightened person can be absolutely playful in any situation; no situation can disturb him. He can be in a guilt-promoting organization, but he will not promote guilt and he will not promote the organization; in fact, he will sabotage it from within. That’s what Dionysius did, and he did it well, he sabotaged the whole Christian stupidity from within.
There are two ways: either you fight from the outside or you fight from within. And my feeling is he chose the right course. If Jesus had also chosen the same way he would have destroyed the Jewish religion completely, but because he fought from the outside he could not change the Judaic tradition. Of course he convinced a few people, he helped a few people to come out of the organization.
Dionysius is not a serious man. No enlightened person is ever serious – cannot be.

It is said about Bodhidharma that the day he became enlightened he started laughing; for days together he laughed. Finally people asked him, “What is going on? Have you gone mad? Now stop laughing!”
He said, “It is very difficult to stop laughing because now I see the whole ridiculousness.”
People asked, “Ridiculousness of what?”
And you will be surprised to know his answer. He said “The ridiculousness of trying to become enlightened – because everyone is born enlightened. We have it already and still we are trying to achieve it. That is the ridiculousness.”

Trying to achieve something that you already have is the most absurd thing possible in the world. How can you achieve it? So if you fail to achieve it, it is not because enlightenment is difficult to achieve, but because it is already the case. You are bound to fail. Sooner or later, by failing many times, one day you understand the point. It depends how thick your skull is. If it is very thick it takes many lives; if it is not that thick then it is easier. Then one can see in a single moment that “I am already perfect” and drop the whole effort to become perfect.
One starts enjoying life wherever one is, whatever one is. If one is a cobbler one remains a cobbler. Jacob Boehme was a cobbler and he remained a cobbler. And Kabir was a weaver and he remained a weaver. Gora was a potter and he remained a potter. Raidas was a shoemaker and he remained a shoemaker.
It so happened that Diogenes was a bishop.

Murphy says: Never bow to authority but always tip your hat.

That’s what he did his whole life.

In Moscow, applicants were being interviewed for a government position. Each was asked, “How much is two and two?”
The answer was always: “Four!”
One candidate, however, replied, “How much do you want it to be?”
He was appointed.

Now, I will call this man enlightened! To be in Russia and say that two plus two is four is stupidity, sheer stupidity. The man must have been enlightened. I don’t know his name, but that doesn’t matter. He said, “How much do you want it to be? What does it matter? I am ready to play the game according to the rules. A game is a game. You decide the rules and I will play the game!”
You are asking me, “…he had to follow stupid orders from his archbishop?” Of course, he knew that they were stupid orders, but still he followed them.

A bunch of cowboys were sitting around a campfire about to eat dinner. The cook, a grimy, stubble-faced little man, was lecturing the boys, spoon in hand: “The first one of you guys to make a fuss about yer supper gits to do the cookin’ tomorra night!”
There was a careful silence as the slop was served and the eating began.
“God, this tastes like shit!” exclaimed one of the cowboys. Immediately remembering the punishment for his complaint, he added enthusiastically, “But good shit, real good shit!”

“Have you ever wavered from the party line?” a party member was asked by an official.
The man turned white with fear and protested vehemently, “No, no, no! I have always wavered with the party line!”

An enlightened person becomes an actor. I don’t think that Diogenes was in any difficulty, he must have enjoyed the whole show.

Two East German guards were standing near the Berlin wall.
“What do you think of our regime?” asked the first.
“The same as you!” the second replied.
“In that case,” said the first guard, “it is my duty to arrest you!”

It must have been a little difficult, that I can understand. It is easier to be free like me: free from all religions, free from all political ideologies, free from all philosophies. So I do not have to bother at all to adjust to any a priori idea, I need not be consistent with anybody. It is easier for me.
Why have I chosen this way? The reason is I don’t have a good memory, so I don’t know what I told you yesterday and I cannot be consistent – for that one needs a good memory. If you want to lie you need a good memory, and I don’t have a good memory; I go on forgetting things. But I don’t care about it because I am not at all interested in being consistent. In fact, to me, to be contradictory is part of my message because if you want the polarities, the opposites to be complementaries, you have to be contradictory.
Diogenius had chosen a difficult job. He had to remember continuously what the Christian ideology is, what the dogmatists say, what the Creed is, what is written in the Bible, what all other saints have said. He certainly chose a difficult line, but he must have liked it because there was nobody forcing him. He could have renounced his job; there was no need to remain a bishop.
But one thing is certain, that he was not divided inside, as you are afraid. You ask, “How was it possible for Dionysius, as an enlightened being, to carry out his duties as bishop in a guilt-promoting organization?” He managed well.
“How could he present a facade to the world without creating a division within himself…?”If you know you are acting then there is no problem. The moment you start becoming identified with your acting, then the problem arises. If you are acting you are acting – it is just a facade. You are not it; you are just a witness of it. Just as you observe other actors, you observe yourself also.
This is my suggestion for everyone: if you are in the world of acting – for example, Vinod is sitting here – if you are an actor, act as if it is real life, then you will be the best of actors. And if you are in life, live as if you are an actor and you will be the best of livers.
Once in a while Dionysius may have shouted, once in a while he may have rebelled, but he must have done it in private.

A man walks into a pet shop: “I want to buy a female parrot.”
“We only have that one over there,” says the owner, pointing to an ordinary looking parrot.
“How much does it cost?” asks the customer.
“Only fifty dollars, sir.”
“What! All the other birds here cost half that price. Why is that small parrot so expensive?”
“She is the only female parrot in captivity that lays square eggs,” announced the shop owner.
“Square eggs? Well, that really is an unusual phenomenon. But really I am more interested in a parrot that can talk,” says the man.
“Well,” ventures the owner, “she also talks – not much, but she does talk.”
“What can she say?”
“Once in a while,” replies the shop owner, “she says ‘Yowch!’”

Once in a while Dionysius must have said “Yowch!” – because he was laying square eggs! But he must have loved it. Nobody was forcing him to be a bishop; it was his choice.
So please, don’t be worried about him. He lived a perfectly beautiful life, he died a perfectly beautiful death, he has left a perfectly beautiful message behind. And I don’t think that he would have been any happier in any other situation. He was absolutely adjusted to the role he was playing. Don’t be worried about him, be worried about yourself.

A woman visited the psychiatrist with a problem. “You’ve got to help my husband,” she said. “He has delusions and thinks he is an elevator!”
“Send him in,” replied the psychiatrist, “and I’ll try to straighten him out.”
“Oh, I can’t do that,” said the wife. “He is an express elevator and doesn’t stop at your floor!”

Now, the wife needs treatment, not the husband, but she is worried about the husband!
Please, don’t be worried about anybody else. Your own worries are enough. But people try to worry about others; that is a way of distracting themselves from their own worries. It is a way of intoxicating themselves with great problems.
Now, what have you got to do with Dionysius? – nothing at all, you have no relationship with him. Or do you think that you have some blood relationship with the poor man? He was a Catholic bishop, never married – unless he left a few bastards! I don’t know… Don’t be worried about him, be worried about yourself. Take life easily, lovingly, playfully, nonseriously. Seriousness is a disease, the greatest disease of the soul, and playfulness the greatest health.

The last question, or a series of very serious questions from Devaraj:
What do you call an Indian with half a brain?
How do you keep an Indian busy all day?
Give him a piece of paper with PTO written on both sides!
Why do Indians hang around in groups of three?
One can usually read, one can usually write, and the third likes to hang around with the intellectuals.
What has an Indian got inside his skull?
A piece of paper with “brain” written on it.
What are the three things common to all government programs in India?
A beginning, a muddle, and no end.
How do you make an Indian laugh on Monday?
Tell him a joke on Friday.
Enough for today.

Spread the love