Message under the article
Ma Satya Priya: Reporting From The Osho Resort
|
loslarvati: RE: THANKS TO MR.CARVER Email:  hotmail.comDate: Oct 17, 2005, 16:04 |
|
THANKS TO CHRISTOPHER CALVER I am not a sannyasin. I m living in the osho way of life, some kind of. Anyway I like this site. It can approach me to osho people and give me the flavour of the man. I would like to say something about CC affair. Christopher is a present for me, and I think Osho would enjoy him very much. What CC is saying is a mixture of his experience with osho, his experience with himself, with interesting personal thoughts, theories, and kind of jealousy and paranoia. He says so many differents things that is difficult for me to speak about without making parts. 1. EPITHETS: He says he is a follower of Rajneesh early years. He says he feels disgusted about what became the man later: A farce. But CC forget osho is completely agree with him: “All what I say is not the true, is only a poem: a poem that wants to help you to grown.” So, why to become angry with Christopher when he repeats and “proves” what osho himself have said yet. All that he can say about osho, osho has said it yet: “I m an ignorant”, “I never say the true”, “I have the most luxurious life any man had never”… 2.PERSONAL HISTORY: About what CC says about personals accusations against Osho, well, that surprise me, but I didn t meet the man. Is hard to believe, for sure, but… Anyway, I think the point is that Osho is not an idol for me, and I think he didn’t want to become one for nobody. This is important, because an idol has to be investigated, cause he is what he sell. But osho didnt sell to me nothing: he offer to me tools to find my true inside of me. He helped me, and I cannot be upset if somebody who help me was not perfect. I don’t care! I don’t idolatrise him! That doesn t mean I don t care about the true history of the man. Is just that the history is not very important for me: I cannot be upset with Osho if he did something against his own way of life. So Christopher is accusing the manr far far away where I am. I see him exiting himself down down in the earth. My impression is that CC has enough problem yet. That s why I m not going to become angry with him, even if his mind would enjoy my angriness. I remember osho words when he was asked about people who were against him: “I just don t care. They are free to think what they want and to refuse my way of life. I also refuse their. But there is a little diference between us: I am not worry about them, but they are worry about me. That’s interesting.” 3.THE OSHO’ S DIDACTIC WAY: "What you tell them is true, but what I tell them (the useful lies) is good for them." Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh 1975. Rajneesh calculated that the majority of the earth's population was on such a low level of consciousness that they could not understand nor tolerate the real truths. CC. This words prove that CC didn t understand the osho way of teaching. How can osho calculated such thing if he repeats all the time that there is no true to say. There is a true that cannot be transfer, that there is. So, why to speak if the true cannot be transfer? This is a question osho answered many times for us: “I speak not to transfer the true, I speak only to transfer the thirsty of true”. That was his way: he never answered to a question (there is not solutions because there is not problems!) he answer to who asked this question, saying what he think was better for him. This was his way: “don t think about me like a guru or a spiritual guide; think of me more like a psychologue”. 4.THE WAY OF THE SCIENTIST. CC have said that Osho don t know himself, because all osho’experiences have a scientist explanation. The meditation is a biologic affaire, he assures, and the satory experience can be translate to chemistry and physic. CC see there a problem. Is strange because I m not able to see any problem. If to enjoy meditation you need a scientific explanation that calm your rationalism down, go ahead and find it. There is no problem at all. Science can help people like CC to understand themselves. Intelectuals always need a reason to enjoy life. I know that because I am an intellectual. But Science shouldn’t be used to destroy individuality, to destroy other ways of self-knowledge, because Science in itself (like Osho in himself) doesn t have any value. The only value is the personal experience. The experience is sacred. Nobody should come and say: “look, your experience is not right, look, I have proves! Your happiness is a farce: stop it right now!” But there is people like that. There is people who think Science is more important than any individual. People who think like that are not necessarily scientists, but for sure egocentric intellectuals. Charles Darwin, one of the great scientists in the history, said in his autobiography: “I understood early that Science was not an objective matter. Behind ciensce there was always the scientist.” Osho resumed: “Mathematics cannot explain the mathematician”. 5. EGO WAR. Intellectual people have big problems to feel ourselves. And most of us would die before to admit the possibility of the existence of something like enlightment, something they never experimented. I know it well: I had a lot of problem to approach meditation. I had to go in the middle of a cleaning process. It was hard to empty my mind: I was overcrowd of ideas, and this is not the best way to enter in the dancing way of life. “What s up with CC? Why all this energy against Osho?”, ask somebody in the site. He must know. I cannot know, I can only guess. Cristopher must have tried, with osho or in his own way, but he could not enter in meditation. I guess this, because is the only explanation I can imagine. He could feel it maybe, and leave intellectuality to try this new way. But he could not enter in deeply. He fail. And his mind was, for sure, upset about it. Then he start the battle against his spiritual father. The intelectual warrior came back to destroy what he could not enjoy. CC has started a war of ego against his master. Because his ego could not become a sannyasin, because a sannyasin cannot be “the best sannyasin”. Each sannyasin is “perfect” in his individuality, and the ego need to fight, to fight to get anything but to fight. Reading CC I see clearly this fight. A completely chaotic fight. His arguments were sometimes very intelligent, sometimes very childish. There are a lot of non interesting things in Cris article (he has in a way some strangely conventional fears: “osho had sex with many young women the half aged than him”… So, what s the problem with this?). There are otherwise others that are very interesting: what he says, per example, about dynamic meditation seems to me very reasonable. 6. DINAMIC MEDITATION: I m agree with CC: is too hard! I m myself 30 years old and in very good health condition, but ten minutes jumping holding the arms (phase 3) is too much, and for sure could be dangerous for some people. Cris says it wasn t like this in the beginning, that osho change it in the last years. Cris says osho did it with a sadist motivation. Maybe somebody can tell me about that. 6. THANKS TO CC: But anyway, I have to thank Christopher to bring me the possibility of checking myself. Because, in fact, what s the point? CC is touching my doubt. This is the present he brings to me. Because sometimes is difficult to say if I still doubting. Do I doubt, or do I not doubt? Sometimes the doubt is so deep that is very difficult to see, and more if we are sourunded by positive condition, people who think like us, etc. But here he comes: Cristopher is here, helping me in order I improve myself. Thanks a lot. I want you to be sure I am not ironic: Cristopher, thanks a lot. I love you. J.L.Larvati. |
