Tagged: rajneesh

Duality, Life, Krishnamurti and Osho Rajneesh.

The experience of Life is typically seen as duality: Going up means to go down.
There is day and there is night. Can we select one without the experience of the other?
Those selecting or being attached to only day or only night haven’t understood this.
Do you look for success? There must be failure. Do you look for truth? There must be the experience of falsehood. Do you want good? There must be the experience of evil.
Thus, how insane is to place high regard, high value on one side of a duality and reject the other, when both are complementary. Both come together as a “package.” Therefore, it is ONE.

Our society is suffocated by the experience of a misunderstood duality. There is no “two” opposites but “one” complementary experience.
Life is not concerned with human morality. It merely presents the whole range of experiences. That is a strong reason to observe that most religions do not fit the way of Life itself, but will support the conditioning of human morality, that is; one side of a duality. Life constantly will show us the whole experience.

If the above needs further clarification, I will add this example.
Are you familiar with the teachings of J. Krishnamurti and Osho Rajneesh ?
Most “spiritual seekers” are. Both are like day and night. “Dawn” (between day and night) is the rebellious attitude which they have in common.
Krishnamurti says that there is no method to reach the “truth.” Osho will give plenty of methods for that. Krishnamurti did not follow any books. Osho gave some of his teachings using some books that he had read. Krishnamurti did not want followers. He did not choose someone to replace him. Osho had followers. It is said that he picked before his death, someone to continue with his “dream.”

Both observed that we live in a sick society. That is “dawn” again for both. Krishnamurti, supported to look deep within and inquire within to freed yourself through a new consciousness. He believed in the change of the individual. Osho wanted to build a “Noah’s ark” with followers who would be living outside society in a new paradigm, with a new consciousness. That is collective change.

Since their teachings were opposite of each other, who is “right” and who is “wrong”? Isn’t that the typical conditioned question which we cleverly ask to side with something and be “right”?
Because they are opposite, it doesn’t mean that one of them has to be “wrong”. That is the old conditioning. Rather; because they are opposite, they are complementary of each other. They are ONE.

Both teachings will show us the complete Life experience.

Do you want a “method” to reach “truth”? Osho is the man for you. Once you have gone through that, you’ll be ready for Krishnamurti and you will have no more methods. If you start with Krishnamurti without going through Osho; you will not be ready. Do you want to know the extent of love? Start with Krishnamurti to end up with Osho.

What is my point?

Embrace both opposites in Life. This is not a question of morality. It is a matter of knowing Life. Not from the conditioned “intellectual” perspective of society, but without the parameters which are holding us back to be open to the uncertainty of Life.
Life is not interested on who is “right” or “wrong”. Why should we? IT IS as IT IS. It is not a matter of “choosing one” over the other. It is a matter of accepting both and OBSERVING honestly, where you fit within that range, and go from there.
There are more “teachers” than Osho and Krishnamurti. A person may go through many of those teachers. Some may even embrace religions which will be necessary for a particular path. The “Yes” and the “No” will need to be experienced for a complete experience. This cannot be only intellectual information. There must be experience.
We need to go through it. That is when there is true change. That is your unique path.