Osho on Path of Surrender and Will

OSHO, LAST NIGHT YOU SPOKE ABOUT WITNESSING AS A METHOD; OTHER TIMES I HAVE HEARD YOU SPEAK ABOUT BECOMING A THING TOTALLY, BEING TOTALLY INVOLVED IN ANY GIVEN SITUATION. USUALLY I AM AT A LOSS AS TO WHICH OF THESE TWO TO FOLLOW: WHETHER TO STAND BACK AND WITNESS IN A DETACHED WHY OR TO BECOME SOMETHING TOTALLY — FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THERE IS ANGER OR LOVE OR SADNESS.

ARE THESE NOT TWO OPPOSITE PATHS? ARE THEY BOTH FOR DIFFERENT KINDS OF SITUATIONS OR FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE? WHEN SHOULD ONE DO WHICH?

There are two basic paths — only two. One is of surrendering and another is of willing: the path of surrender and the path of will. They are diametrically opposite as far as going through them is concerned. But they reach to the same goal, they reach to the same realization. So we have to understand a little more in detail. The Path of Will starts with your Witnessing Self. It is not concerned with your Ego directly — only indirectly. To start Witnessing, to be aware of your acts, is directly concerned with awakening your inner Self. If the inner Self is awakened, the ego disappears as a consequence. You are not to do anything with the ego directly. They cannot both exist simultaneously. If your Self is awakened, the ego will disappear. The path of will tries to awaken the inner center directly. Many, many methods are used. How to awaken the Self? We will discuss that.

The path of surrender is directly concerned with the ego, not with the Self. When the ego disappears, the inner Self is awakened automatically. The path of surrender is concerned with the ego immediately, directly. You are not to do anything to awaken your inner Self. You are just to surrender your ego. The moment ego is surrendered, you are left with your inner Self awakened. Of  course, these both will work in opposite directions, because one will be concerned with ego and one will be concerned with Self. Their methods, their techniques, will be opposite — and no one can follow both. There is no need to and that is impossible also. Everyone has to choose.

If you choose the path of will, then you are left alone to work upon yourself. It is an arduous thing. One has to struggle — to fight — to fight with old habits which create sleep. Then the only fight is against sleep, and the only ambition is for a deep awakening inside. Those who follow will, they know only one sin, and that sin is spiritual sleepiness. Many are the techniques. I have discussed some. For example, Gurdjieff used a Sufi exercise. Sufis call it “halt”. For example, you are sitting here, and if you are practising the exercise of “halt” it means total halt. Whenever the teacher says “Stop!” or “Halt!” then you have to stop totally whatsoever you are doing. If your eyes are open, then stop them there and then. Now you cannot close them. If your hand is raised, let it be there. Whatsoever your position and gesture, just be frozen in it. No movements! Halt totally! Try this, and suddenly you will have an inner awakening — a feeling. Suddenly you will become aware of your own frozenness.

The whole body is frozen, you have become a solid stone, you are like a statue. But if you go on deceiving yourself, then you have fallen into sleep. You can deceive yourself. You can say, “Who is seeing me? I can close my eyes. They are becoming painful.” You can deceive yourself — then you have fallen into sleep. No — deception is sleep. Don’t deceive yourself, because no one else is concerned. It is up to you. If you can be frozen for a single moment you will begin to see yourself as different, and your center will become aware of your frozen body. There are other ways. For example, Mahavir and his tradition have used fasting as a method to awaken the Self. If you fast, the body begins to demand, the body begins to overpower you. Mahavir has said, “Just witness — don’t do anything. You feel hungry, so feel hungry. The body asks for food — be a witness to it, don’t do anything. Just be a witness to whatsoever is happening.” And it is a deep thing.

There are only two deep things in the body — sex and food. Nothing is more than these two, because food is needed for individual survival and sex is needed for race survival. Both are survival mechanisms. The individual cannot survive without food and the race cannot survive without sex. So sex is food for the race and food is sex for the individual. These are the deepest things because they are concerned with your survival — the most basic things. You will die without them. So if you are fasting and just witnessing, then you have touched the deepest sleep. And if you can witness without being identified or bothered — the body is suffering, the body is hungry, the body is demanding and you are just witnessing — suddenly the body will be different. There will be a discontinuity between you and the body; there will be a gap. Fasting has been used by Mahavir. Mohammedans have used vigilance in the night — no sleep! Don’t sleep for a week and then you will know how sleepy the whole being becomes, how difficult it is to maintain this vigilance. But if one persists, suddenly a moment comes when the body and you are apart. Then you can see that the body needs sleep — it is not your need.

Many are the methods to work directly to create more awareness in yourself, to bring yourself above your so-called sleepy existence. No surrender is needed. Rather, one has to fight against surrender. No surrender is needed, because this is a path of struggle not of surrender. Because of this path, Mahavir was given the name “Mahavir”. “Mahavir” means “the great warrior”. This was not his name. His name was Vardhaman. He was called Mahavir because he was a great warrior as far as this inner struggle is concerned. He had no Guru, no Master, because it is a lonely path. Even to take somebody’s help is not good — it may become your sleep…One has to be totally independent; only then can one be awake. This is one path, one basic attitude. All these methods of witnessing belong to this path. So when I say, “Be a witness.” it is meant for those who are travellers on the path of will.

Quite the opposite is the method of surrender. Surrender is concerned with your ego, not with your Self. In surrender you have to give up yourself. Of course, you cannot give the Self; that is impossible Whatsoever you can give is bound to be your ego. Only the ego can be given — because it is just incidental to you. It is not even a part of your being, just something added. It is a possession. Of course, the possessor has also become possessed by it. But it is a possession, it is a property — it is not you. The path of surrender says, “Surrender your ego to the Teacher, to the Divine, to a Buddha.” When someone comes to Buddha and says, “BUDDHAM SHARANAM GAUCHHAMI” — I take shelter at your feet. I surrender myself at Buddha’s feet,” what is he doing? The Self cannot be surrendered, so leave it out. Whatsoever you can surrender is your ego. That is your possession; you can surrender it. If you can surrender your ego to someone, it makes no difference to whom — X, Y or Z. The person to be surrendered to is irrelevant in a way. The real thing is surrendering. So you can surrender to a God in the sky. Whether He is there or not is irrelevant. If a concept of the Divine in the sky can help you to surrender your ego, then it is a good device.

The yoga sutras say that God is a just a device to be surrendered to. Whether God is or is not is not meaningful; you need not bother about it. If He is, you will come to know through surrender. You need not be bothered about it before surrender. If He is, then you will know; if He is not, then you will know. So no discussion, no argument, no proof is needed. And it is very beautiful: they say He is a device, just a hypothetical thing to which you can surrender yourself, to help you surrender. So a Teacher can become a god; a Teacher is a god. Unless you feel a Teacher as a god, you cannot surrender. Surrendering becomes possible if you feel that Mahavir is a god, Buddha is a god. Then you can surrender easily. Whether a Buddha is a god or not is irrelevant. Again, it is a device, it helps. Buddha is known to have said that every truth is a device to help, every truth is just a utility. If it works, it is true. And there is no other basis for calling it true or untrue — if it works, it is true!

On the path of surrender, surrendering is the only technique. There are many techniques on the path of will, because you can make many efforts to awaken yourself. But when one is just to surrender, there are no methods…Surrendering is throwing the ego. There is no counting and there are no methods. You just throw it. It itself is the technique. On the path of surrender, surrender is the path and surrender is the technique. On the path of will, will is the path and there are many techniques to work it out. One thing more to be understood, and that has been asked: whether to be aware or to be lost in something. Whenever I talk of surrender, I talk of being lost in something. A Meera dancing: she is not aware that she is dancing — she has become the dance. There is no gap. She has surrendered her ego completely. There is dancing — she is not aware; she is completely lost in it. When you are absorbed totally then you are in surrender — absorbed totally. But only the ego can be absorbed — only the ego! And when the ego is absorbed, the Self is there in its total purity.

But that is not the concern. On the path of surrender ! Meera is not concerned with awareness, with consciousness — no. She is concerned with being completely unconscious in the Divine dance or in the Divine song — with being lost totally in it. To lose oneself totally…. That which cannot be lost will be there, of course, but it is not the concern. On the path of will, ego is not the concern — the Self is. On the path of surrender, the Self is not the concern. Remember this difference of emphasis, this difference of focusing. That’s why there is so much controversy, so much controversy, between a devotee and a yogi, a bhakta and a yogi. The yogi is on the path of will and the bhakta is on the path of surrender, so they speak totally different languages. There is no bridge. The yogi is trying to be, and the bhakta is trying not to be. The yogi is trying to be aware and the bhakta is trying to be totally lost.

Of course, they are bound to speak diametrically opposite languages, and there is much controversy, much argument. But those arguments and those controversies do not really belong to a real devotee or to a real yogi: they belong to scholars to academicians. Those who think about devotion and about yoga, they go on discussing problems — and then there is no meeting point because that meeting point is reached only through experience. If you stick to the terms and the jargon used, then you will be confused. A Chaitanya, a bhakta, cannot speak the language of Mahavir. They don’t belong to the same path. They reach to the same point ultimately, but they never travel the same path. So their experiences of the path are bound to be different. The ultimate ecstasy will be the same, but that cannot be said; that is the problem. The ultimate experience will be the same, but that is inexpressible. And whatsoever is expressible is just experiences on the path, and they are found to be difficult and opposite.

A Mahavir will become more and more centered on the path, more and more one Self. and Chaitanya will be less and less oneself on the path. He will go on throwing himself unto the Divine feet. To Mahavir it will look like suicide, and to Chaitanya, Mahavir’s path will look a very egoistic thing. Mahavir says there is no God, so don’t surrender. Really, Mahavir denies God only to make surrender impossible. If yoga proposes God as a device, Mahavir proposes no God, again as a device — a device on the path of will. If there is God, then you cannot proceed on the path of will. It is difficult, because if there is a God then something is more potent than you, more powerful than you. Then something is more high than you, so how can you be authentically your Self?

Mahavir says, “If there is a God, then I am bound to be always in bondage, because something is always above me. And if you say God has created the world and God has created me, then what can I do? Then I am just a puppet in his hands. Then where is the will? Then there is no possibility of will. There is only a deep determinism. Then nothing can be done.” So Mahavir dethrones God just as a device on the path of will. “There is no God,” Mahavir says. “You are the God and no one else is the God, so there is no need to surrender.”

Chaitanya uses going to the Divine feet — sharanam — as the basic religious effort. But Mahavir says asharanam — never to go anybody’s feet. Of course, sharanam and asharanam — to go and surrender to the Divine feet, and never to go to anybody’s feet because no feet except your own are Divine — these are completely, diametrically opposite standpoints. But just in the beginning and while on the path — they reach to the same thing. Either surrender your ego — then you have not to do anything. You have to do only one thing: surrender your ego. Then you have not to do anything. Then everything will begin to happen. If you cannot surrender then you will have to do much, because then you are on your own to fight, struggle. Both paths are valid, and there is no question of which is better. It depends on the person who is following. It depends on your type. Every path is valid, and there are many subpaths, branches. Some branches belong to the path of will, some to the path of surrender. Paths, subpaths — everything is valid. But for you not everything can be valid; only one thing can be valid — mm? — for you individually. So don’t get into confusion that: “Everything is valid so I can follow everything.” You cannot follow! You have to follow one path. There is no Truth; there are truths. But for you, one truth has to be chosen.

So the first thing for the seeker is to determine to what type he belongs, what he is, what will be good for him, and what his inner inclination is. Can he surrender? Can you surrender? Can you efface your ego? If that is possible, then simple surrender can do. But it is not so simple — very difficult. To efface the ego is not so simple. To put someone higher than you, to put someone as a God and then surrender — very difficult! Nietzsche has said: “I would like to be in hell if I can be the first there. I would not like to be in heaven if I am put second to anyone there. To be in hell is good if one can be the first.”…

So don’t be deceived, and don’t think that if you combine both paths then it will be good for you — no. Every system is perfect in itself, and the moment you combine it with something else, you destroy the organic unity in it. If one is a Christian, one should be one hundred percent a Christian. And if one is a Hindu, one should be one hundred percent a Hindu. A fifty percent Hindu and a fifty percent Christian is just insane. It is just like fifty percent ayurvedic medicine and fifty percent allopathic medicine. The person will go insane. There is no synthesis between “pathies”, and every religion is like a “pathy”. It is a medicine. it is a science — every technique! Because I have mentioned medicine, it will be good to finish, to conclude, that the path of will is just like naturopathy — you have to depend upon yourself. No help! The path of surrender is more like allopathy — you can use medicines.

Think of it in this way: when someone is ill, he has two things — an inner, positive possibility of health and an accidental or incidental phenomenon of disease, illness. Naturopathy is not concerned with illness directly. Naturopathy is directly concerned with a positive growth of health. So grow in health! Naturopathy means growing in health positively. When you grow in health, the disease will disappear by itself. You need not be concerned with disease directly. Allopathy is not concerned with positive health at all. It is concerned with the illness: destroy the illness and you will be healthy automatically. The path of will is concerned with growing in positive awareness. If you grow, the ego will disappear — that is the disease. The path of surrender is concerned with the disease itself, not with positive growth in health. Destroy the disease — surrender the ego — and you will grow in health. The path of surrender is allopathic and the path of will is naturopathic.

But don’t mix both, otherwise you will be more ill. Then your effort to be healthy will create more problems for you. And everyone is just confused. One goes on thinking that if you use many, many “pathies”, of course, mathematically, you should gain health sooner. Mathematically, logically, it may seem so, but it is not so really. You may even become an impossible case.

Source:

Listen to complete discourse at mentioned below link.

Discourse Series: The Ultimate Alchemy, Vol 1 Chapter #16

Chapter title: Will or Surrender

6 June 1972 am in Bombay, India

References:

Osho has spoken on ‘surrender, devotion, witnessing, awareness’ in many of His discourses. More on the subject can be referred to in the following books/discourses:

1. The Book Of Wisdom
2. From Ignorance To Innocence
3. Guida Spirituale
4. I Am The Gate
5. The New Alchemy: To Turn You On
6. My Way: The Way of the White Clouds
7. Sufis: The People of the Path, Vol 1, 2
8. The Supreme Doctrine
9. Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, Vol 1, 2
10. Zen: The Path of Paradox