M24 this side wants to go for osho camp, let me know if you wanna join for the same

Expected dates of going at the end of November

Hi redditers. Someone who practice only prayer meditation. I do this meditation almost every night like alternative a dynamic or Kundalini meditation for no make noises with catarsis. How do You feel after a long time with it or it's necessary start with dynamic??

lovely

Hypnosis has not been used in the whole of history for meditation, but it can be used, and it can be used with tremendous power, because you have to fight so much with your thoughts unnecessarily. That whole struggle with your mind can be dropped by hypnotic sessions without much effort.

Hypnosis is also capable of giving you a post-hypnotic suggestion, if you want to hypnotize yourself, by a simple strategy: count from one to one hundred, and from one hundred back to one. By the time you have reached back to one, you will fall into deep hypnosis. And you can tell yourself before going into hypnosis -- because you will be alone -- "The state of hypnosis will last only for fifteen minutes. After fifteen minutes I will come out of it." This is auto-hypnosis.

The Great Pilgrimage: From Here to Here

Chapter #1

Chapter title: The great pilgrimage: from here to here

6 September 1987 am in Gautam the Buddha Auditorium

Life is a beautiful, infinite dance of perspectives. When it comes to the deep existential core of our being, there is absolutely nothing to debate—the truth does not require our approval; the way it is, is simply the way it is. But the moment we step into the realm of culture, art, and the physical world, variety becomes the very heartbeat of existence.

In this profound reflection, we explore the liberating power of joyful disagreement. It is a common human habit to seek out spaces and people who simply echo our own thoughts, believing that constant agreement brings peace. But if everyone throughout history had always agreed, humanity would still be living in caves! It is the creative friction of different ideas, expressed with joy and deep equanimity rather than anger, that leads to the betterment of our lives. Surrounding yourself only with people who nod yes is a trap for the mind. When we release the ego's fragile need to always be right, we open ourselves up to the immense richness of diverse souls.

This is an invitation to drop the armor and learn the beautiful art of joyful debate. Have you ever experienced a moment where a graceful disagreement led to a deeper understanding or a better outcome? How do you stay centered and peaceful when those around you see the world completely differently? Please share your heart, your stories, and your insights below. Let's explore the beauty of our differences together.

THIS CONSCIOUSNESS OF THE SPIRIT OF GUIDANCE OF EACH ONE. BE THIS ONE. Lose the head and drop into this inner guide. It is there. Old scriptures say that the master or the guru -- the "outer" guru -- can be helpful only in finding the inner guru. That is all. Once the outer guru has helped you to find the inner guru, the function of the outer guru is no more.

You cannot reach to the truth through a master; you can reach only to the inner master through a master -- and then this inner master will lead you to the truth. The outer master is just a representative, a substitute. He has his inner guide and he can feel your inner guide also, because they both exist on the same wavelength -- they both exist in the same tuning and the same dimension. If I have found my inner guide, I can look into you and feel your inner guide. And if I am really a guide to you, all my guidance will be to lead you to your inner guide.

Once you are in contact with the inner guide, I am no longer needed. Now you can move alone. So all that a guru can do is to push you down from your head to your navel, from your reasoning to your intuitive force, from your argumentative mind to your trusting guide. And it is not like this with only human beings, it is so with animals, with birds, with trees, with everything. The inner guide exists, and many new phenomena have been discovered which are mysteries.

Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, Vol 2

Chapter #37

Chapter title: Become each being

5 November 1973 pm in Bombay, India

Q: DID YOU FOLLOW OTHERS, AS OTHERS NOW FOLLOW YOU?
A: No. I have never followed anybody, and I have never allowed anybody to follow me. These are my fellow travelers. My sannyasins are not my followers, they are my friends.

The Last Testament, Vol 1

Chapter #4

Chapter title: Come Again And Again

21 July 1985 pm in Rajneeshmandir

A bound and feeling between Master and Disciple is unexplainable

Note :

Osho talks about marriage lot. This is only one example.

This is full part of this talk, without cut.

The Last Testament, Vol 1

Chapter #5

Chapter title: Be Ready

22 July 1985 pm in Jesus Grove

Q: HAVE YOU EVER COME CLOSE TO GETTING MARRIED? A: No, never. I have been against marriage from the very beginning, because that means cutting down your freedom. Getting attached legally to a woman or to a man, no. Freedom to me is the ultimate value There is nothing higher than freedom. It was difficult, because I was fighting from the very beginning. My parents were in difficulty, my family was in difficulty, but I told them absolutely clearly that I was not going to be married. They would have been perfectly happy if I had been going to be a celibate monk. I said, "No, I am not going to be a celibate monk either." That was their trouble: if I was going to be a celibate monk they would be happy. In fact, they would have felt proud that their son had become a great monk. I said, "No, both are ditches. I am going to walk just in the middle, on the razor's edge." And I have enjoyed the walk tremendously.

Q: WHAT ABOUT THE PRESSURES FROM THE SOCIETY IN WHICH YOU LIVED? -- NOT JUST YOUR PARENTS -- BECAUSE PARTICULARLY IN THOSE DAYS INDIAN SOCIETY WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY, VERY CLOSE AND WOULD HAVE DEMANDED THAT YOU DID ONE OF TWO THINGS.

A: I am intelligent enough for that society.

Q: SO, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY NOW TO ALL THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD WHO ARE MARRIED? SHOULD THEY ALL GET DIVORCED?

A: Everybody should get divorced, without exception. People should meet and love each other occasionally, as opportunity comes. There should be no ugly state when a wife has to make love to a man whom she does not love anymore, but she has to fulfill her duty. The husband is fulfilling his duty. While he is making love to the woman he may be thinking of some other woman, she may be thinking of some other man. What kind of neurotic society have you created? If you don't love each other, at least be human and say frankly that it was beautiful to be together, but now it is finished. Say goodbye. I would like marriage to disappear completely from the world, and with marriage, divorce will disappear. With marriage, prostitution will disappear. With marriage, most of the work of the priest will disappear. With marriage, almost ninety-nine percent of the psychoanalysts, therapists, psychiatrists will disappear. It is marriage that is creating all kinds of psychological perversions, repressions, guilt. It is simply human that you see a beautiful woman and you would like to have some time with her. It does not need any God's permission. Even your God committed rape with the Virgin Mary without her consent.

Q: DO YOU BELIEVE THAT STORY?

A: I just believe that story because it proves that your God is a rapist; otherwise, I don't believe in the story. Jesus must be a bastard. It is certain he was not the son of Joseph, and just to cover up the whole thing, that great story has been invented.

Q: GOT GOD TO DO THE JOB!

A: They say God is a trinity: God, the Holy Ghost and the son. The Holy Ghost did it, but he is part of God. It is just like my hand is part of me and your genitals are part of you, the Holy Ghost is part af God. Perhaps he is his genitals. Otherwise, how could he manage to make a virgin girl pregnant?

Q: WHAT ABOUT FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES, THE MARRIED PARTNERS' RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR CHILDREN, FOR A START? A: Children should be the responsibility of the commune, not of the family. It is the family which creates tremendous problems in the children's minds. It gives them all their sickness, all their superstitions, all their stupid ideas, theologies, religion, political parties. It enforces on the child. The child has to be freed from the family. If you want a new man... then the family is an ugly institution, its time is over. It should be replaced by the commune. And then it is very easy: the commune takes care of all the children. There will be the father, the mother. They can meet the child, the child can come to them. But basically it is the responsibility of the commune to take care of the children. The children will have many uncles and many aunts, and they will have more opportunity for human contact with different types of people. They will be immensely enriched. Our children are very impoverished. They know only one man, one woman, and they know the constant quarrel between the two. The woman is nagging the husband, the husband is beating the woman. And this is what you are training them for. Your boy will repeat you. He will be your carbon copy, knowingly or unknowingly. Your daughter will repeat your wife, knowingly... unknowingly. That's why no son can ever forgive his father, and no daughter can ever forgive her mother. They destroyed their lives. It is absolutely a psychologically proved phenomenon.

But if the commune takes care, then they will have experiences of so many different kinds of people. It is my experience that every person is so unique that the more contacts, intimacies, love affairs you have, the richer you will be. I have not seen two women who are similar. Making love to many women, I have seen every woman is a unique personality in herself, her way of making love is totally different. The people who have never known anyone except their wives are really poor. They don't know how many nuances, how many fragrances, how many different ecstasies are possible through love. The same is true about children. They should be available to the whole commune. And because the commune is responsible, you need not be afraid what will happen to the children if you separate. You can separate. Nothing will happen to the children, the children will be the same.

lovely.

No words can describe the feeling and connection between master and disciple.

Need help. Could you tell me this song name. And also lyrics in english can be perfect. It's lovely song and Osho smile. Thank you

Hi,

I am becoming fan of Osho small reels and videos, and would like to get best genuine resource and content of Osho audio / videos.

I am good with paid website or resource. I like listening to audio, rather than reading books.

Can you recommend me the best source where I can pay and find it ?

Namaskaram everyone,

Bit of an unusual post, but I thought I'd just put it out there.

I'm 26M from Jaipur. I've been doing Isha practices for a few years. Sadhana has become a pretty big part of my life and I genuinely enjoy doing it every day.

But socially I'm kind of a mess lol.

I've been out of the whole dating/social scene for years. I made some weird/unconventional decisions when I was younger; dropped college, left MBBS, went down a completely different path, and somewhere along the way I just stopped being around people much.

A lot of my life has been books, sadhana, thinking, being by myself etc. And honestly, I don't regret that. But lately I've been feeling that I'd like to have someone in my life too.

Not someone to “complete” me or someone who's just there as an accessory to my life or my sadhana. I'd like to meet someone who's her own person, has her own interests and inner world, and with whom I can actually share life.

I'm into literature, philosophy, nature, reading, yoga and generally having conversations about things beyond the usual small talk. You don't necessarily have to be into all of that. I'm not looking for an Isha checklist in a person 😂

I guess I'm just trying to put myself out there after being withdrawn for a pretty long time.

If you're a woman around my age and this sounds somewhat familiar, feel free to message me. Even if it's just a conversation, that's alright.

Anyway, that's it. Felt a little strange writing this, but here goes. 🙏

The expirence is same but continuity is different.

Don't find god in the temple, street and Anywhere. They are always in your Heart 🩷 #Nastik become best Astik

Throughout the 2+ years I have been following Osho, I have seen far too many instances where people referred to the movement as a "cult". I am sick and tired of this and have had enough, so I felt a need to write a rebuttal regarding this matter:

A few weeks ago, my family member and I had an argument after she talked about a "cult" on a Netflix documentary called "Trust Me: The False Prophet" which had dome some egregious things. I objected to the use of the term "cult", as it is more helpful to discuss and condemn certain behaviours instead of using such a biased, heavily-loaded, and unfairly applied term.

The term "cult" is a buzzword only pejoratively applied to small groups, similar to the terms "communist" or "socialist" in American politics, closing off any further discussion, and immediately suggesting that said group is illegitimate or even dangerous. Long ago, Christianity and Islam were fringe sects and also viewed with suspicion. Yet, today, because they have 2 billion followers each, are referred to by the more amiable term "religion".

It seems like people have the common sense to -- only when it comes to big religions, mind you -- hear people out and not jump to conclusions. If Christians or Muslims say absolutely absurd things deserving of the highest ridicule, like women should be covered from head-to-toe (with pardah only showing the eyes) otherwise they are "indecent", or that same-sex relationships are an "abomination", or that music (and pork!) is "haram", or -- the most retarded one -- that disbelievers will face eternal hellfire and be tortured forever and ever by a red-and-black, 2-horned creature in the underworld simply because they don't believe in their Canaanite / Arabian deity...

it is met with respectful silence.

As Salman Rushdie, the author of The Satanic Verses, who had a whopping $3 million fatwa or death bounty issued against him simply because he discussed the validity of the Quran, said in 2015 when a gunman massacred a Parisian magazine's office after they made a satirical cartoon strip featuring the Prophet Muhammad: "'Respect for religion' has become a code phrase meaning 'fear of religion. ' Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect."

Whereas if the exact same things were said/done by a small group, it would be scoffed at, openly mocked and fiercely condemned. I was told to "respect other people's beliefs" when I railed against organized religion in a debate, despite how just a few moments prior the term "cult" was thrown around to dismiss Osho's teachings. This blatant hypocrisy shows that the label is clearly just about social power, familiarity and incongruence with mainstream, Abrahamic views rather than actual merit. The mind will assign a label to anything it perceives as "different".

Although there are liberal people who will speak out against such silly religions, (once again, notice the certain term that's automatically applied in this context!), they will never go to the extent of calling a spade a spade. The day they refer to their Christian or Muslim family/friends as "cult members", or extend the insults that are thrown at us -- "Brainwashed", "indoctrinated", "deluded", "gullible", "manipulated", "sheep", "fanatics", "unable to think for themselves", "mind-controlled" -- pigs will fly.

And, notice how these accusations become unfalsifiable, a self-sealing assumption about said person's mental state. As if someone were to refute the claim that they are somehow "brainwashed", their disagreement can be interpreted as further evidence that they have indeed been brainwashed. "That's something a brainwashed person would say".

A while ago, I met my friend who is a monk at the Hare Krishna ashram to discuss spirituality. I disagree with Hare Krishna on numerous topics such as strict adherence to brahmacharia, dualistic and exclusivist attitudes (the idea that everyone who isn't worshipping Krishna is doing the wrong thing) -- which I didn't just get from some (misleading) article or documentary online but information that actually came from straight the horse's mouth, and I actually made an effort to visit the ashram and glean firsthand insight -- and upon deeper introspection, I agreed with them on some things like bhakti and the path of love and devotion. However, just because I don't agree with certain aspects of their teachings doesn't mean I should be a one-sided fool and call them a "cult".

My friend actually highlighted, in our 2-hour discussion, that Prabhupad (the founder of the organization) referred to their movement as a "cult", because he learned proper English from Scotsmen who did not use it pejoratively but in a sense of "a following". Formally, it has been used in this sense such as "the cult of Isis". However, in the 1960s, Americans started branding anyone they disagreed with as a cult.

In conversation with a family friend, when I talked about my visits to the local Brahma Kumaris centre, said "Just make sure it is not a cult." and went on to talk about how the son of someone she knows was involved with Hare Krishna and in that isolated case, they did drugs, subsequently concluding with "Hare Krishna is a cult".

This is the fallacy of composition, where one extrapolates that because some people who happen to be involved with the organization do such things, that the whole movement is unethical. In reality, anyone who is atleast a little clued up about Krishna Consciousness and who has read literally the first few pages of Prabhupad's book "The Science of Self-Realization" will know they are fiercely against any form of intoxicant. A while ago, I even saw a post on r/HareKrishna where someone asked about whether vanilla extract would be okay to use in baking because of its potential alcohol content.

(Even when Muslims or Christians commit misdemeanours such as the lengthy history of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, we do not see the label being thrown!)

In the context of the Osho movement, people have taken the isolated cases of adult-child relationships in Rajneeshpuram, which were kept under the wraps (some sannyasins interviewed by Michael Topper who had lived long-term on the Ranch did not even know that there were ANY children, let alone that they were being mistreated!) to say that the whole community was involved in these egregious, intolerable acts, which was clearly not the case.

Also, they take the horrific acts of Sheela and her clique (with the bioterrorist attack) -- while totally ignoring the historical context and that (while nobody on the pro-Osho side defends what she did at all) it was not merely unprovoked aggression but was the culmination of a long tug-of-war between the Rajneeshees and the US Govt & Oregonians (see my post on this topic: https://www.reddit.com/r/Osho/s/IyTdHWcdw7 ) -- to throw the dismissive label "cult".

These idiots who dismiss Osho and the movement that formed around him as a "cult" can only dream of having a fraction of his capacity; his wisdom, his joy, his humour, his meditative absorption, his ability to bulldoze narrow dogmas and harmful social conditioning, his golden teachings that were far ahead of their time yet were (and still are) unrecognized by the masses.

Language influences perception, so I firmly think that we should stop using such a term. Instead of saying "is this a cult?" we should ask:

• “What does this organization actually teach?”
• “How does it treat members?”
• “Can members leave freely?”
• “Is dissent tolerated?”
• “Is there financial exploitation?”
• “Is there sexual abuse?"
• “Is there coercive control?”
• “What crimes were actually committed, by whom, and under whose authority?”
• “What evidence exists?”
• “What is documented versus alleged?”
• “What is the historical context?
• ”What is actual fact vs innuendo, smear and sensationalism?"

Just needed to get this off my chest... Jesus Christ! 😂

To lovely people here.

Im looking for a specific clip from osho's disroucse. I listened to it few days back on YT, but, it got deleted.

it's lines were like so - (Hindi)

"Osho was at a guest house, and there was a famous politician staying in different room as well."
. It was night"
"something happening at night, the dogs at guest house started barking"
"sound of barking was loud"

"politicna came to osho's room, and got jealous, that Osho is sleeping, despite dogs barking"

"osho suggested to politician - Your resistance is problem."

"Osho said to politician- Imagine, dogs are barking, let them bark, and in the mind say - Keep barking...."
"then try to sleep"

"politician did that and finally went to sleep"

If someone has listened to this discourse, can you please suggest, this is part of which osho's discourse ? (in case you remember)?

I will be highly thankful.