Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: A.K.A. Osho

  1. #1

    A.K.A. Osho

    Another pov (edit:which I think most or all of it is quoted from Christopher Calder) about Osho:


    "Rajneesh ruled his desert empire as a warlord with his own private army and puppet government. His visions and ideas, faulty or not, were taken without question as the word of God. His disciples were judged by their ability to surrender to his will, and any opposing views were branded as an unspiritual lack of faith. As conditions at the ranch became progressively more unpleasant, a number of sannyasins escaped by hiding in the back of outgoing trucks. Their quest for freedom upset Rajneesh, who demanded that the disillusioned must now ask his permission to leave. Rajneesh then dramatically threatened suicide if others escaped by stealthful means...

    ...Rajneesh died addicted to Valium, and he experienced all of the negative symptoms of drug addiction, which included slurred speech, paranoia, poor judgment, and dramatically lowered intelligence. At one point his paranoia and confusion were so great that he thought a group of German cultists had cast an evil spell on him. His physical disabilities and drug abuse were simply more than his mortal brain could take. His biggest flaw, his disregard for the ordinary concept of truth, was his ultimate downfall and for that crime he must be held fully responsible.

    "Never give a sucker an even break." - W.C. Fields

    Rajneesh lied when he said he had enlightened disciples. He lied when he said he never made a mistake. Near the end of his life he was forced to admit that he was fallible, as his list of bungles had grown to monstrous proportions. He lied by pretending that his therapy groups were not mainly just a money making device. Rajneesh lied about breaking United States immigration laws, and he only admitted the truth after he was presented with overwhelming evidence against him. He lied by saying that he was adopted in a phony scheme to get permanent residence status. Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh was no bank robber, but he was quite literally a pathological liar. The ridiculous thing is that all of his lies were totally unnecessary and counterproductive. As conventional and square as it may sound, honesty really is the best policy!
    Rajneesh lied when he claimed that he was not responsible for the horrors of the Oregon commune. Rajneesh was responsible because he hand picked Ma Anand Sheela and the people who committed the major crimes of conspiracy to commit murder, poisoning, first-degree assault, burglary, arson, and wiretapping. Rajneesh himself gave direct verbal approval for Sheela's illegal bugging and wiretapping of his own disciples. The fact that Rajneesh did not order or have preknowledge (hopefully) of the most serious violent crimes does not mean that he was not ethically responsible for them. Rajneesh never turned against Ma Anand Sheela until he started to suspect that Sheela was stealing money from him.
    Just one month before Sheela fled the commune, Rajneesh spoke of her publicly, stating that "I have been preparing her like a sword. I told her to go out and cut as many heads as possible." Later, Rajneesh feigned innocence and claimed that Sheela was controlling him in spite of the obvious fact that Rajneesh was the singular reason the commune existed. Rajneesh was surrounded by thousands of adoring disciples who would have gladly expelled or even jailed Sheela any time he gave the order.
    Sheela did Rajneesh's dirty work, and the fact that she went farther in her crimes than Rajneesh had planned does not exonerate him of all guilt. Upon leaving the commune, Sheela stated that she was tired of "being his slave for 16, 17 or 20 hours a day," and tired of "taking food out of the mouths of people to buy him watches and Rolls Royces." Rajneesh then publicly claimed that Sheela had extorted millions of dollars from the commune. Sheela's response to his charge was that Rajneesh had spent all of the money himself on his own expensive toys, and that Rajneesh was bad at mathematics and "can't count." Clearly, Rajneesh's insane purchases of dozens of bejeweled ladies' watches and over 90 Rolls-Royce automobiles cost the commune many millions of dollars. After her release from prison, Ma Anand Sheela continued to work for a living, without obvious signs of enormous wealth. Sheela committed many crimes, but Rajneesh himself was never "innocent."
    If a teacher puts a drunken sailor in charge of driving a school bus, and the children end up dead, then the teacher is responsible for their deaths. Rajneesh knew what kind of a person Sheela was, and he chose her because of her corruption and arrogance, not in spite of it. Rajneesh personally tutored Sheela in how to control and manipulate his own disciples, and it was Rajneesh himself who encouraged Sheela's infamous outbursts on the ABC television show, Nightline. In a cowardly attempt to evade his own failings, Rajneesh changed his name to Osho, as if a change in name could wash away his sins.
    There is no publicly released evidence to suggest that Rajneesh ordered the germ warfare attack on the ten Oregon restaurants. There is also no publicly released evidence that implicates Rajneesh in the plot to have a sannyasin pilot fly an airplane full of explosives into an Oregon courthouse in order to intimidate the political opposition. Luckily, the sannyasin pilot who was asked to perform that insane task was not as dumb as the plotters, and he fled the commune without committing any crime.
    Rajneesh was directly responsible for the twisted mix of totalitarian slavery and libertine indulgence that the commune represented. According to highly credible published reports, Rajneesh allowed middle aged men to have sexual intercourse with prepubescent girls at the commune in the name of sexual freedom, yet his disciples were not allowed to have a mind of their own and had to totally surrender to the great Bhagwan's will. Disciples were often forced to work 12 hours a day in cold and difficult conditions, while Rajneesh himself experienced "groovy spaces" in his private heated indoor pool and watched countless movies on his big screen projection television, all the while enjoying his daily supply of drugs. Rajneesh showed his divine love for his disciples by squandering millions in hard earned commune assets on his car collection and expensive jewelry, and all in the name of egolessness and spiritual surrender. [see photo of the flagrantly narcissistic Osho wearing jewel encrusted watch]
    Why did Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh own over 90 Rolls-Royces? Why did Saddam Hussein own dozens of luxurious palaces? Those desires were products of the base animal mind of two men who grew up surrounded by poverty. Enlightenment does not care about symbols of power and potency. Looking for hidden esoteric explanations for obsessive behavior is pointless. Is there an occult reason that Elton John spends over $400,000. per month on flowers? Is there a secret spiritual reason that Rajneesh had a collection of dozens of expensive ladies' watches? The universal cosmic consciousness is completely neutral and without any need to possess, impress, or dominate. It also cannot drive or tell time. One of Rajneesh's most blatant lies was that "the enlightened one gains nothing from his disciples." Rajneesh wanted people to believe that everything he did was a free gift born of pure compassion, and that he gained nothing personally from the guru-disciple relationship. In obvious provable fact, Rajneesh gained much from his disciples: money, power, sex, and the titillation of constant adoration. Just as rock stars become energized by screaming fans at concerts, Rajneesh gained emotional energy and support from his army of sannyasins. The energy transfer was a two-way street, not a totally free one-way gift. Being a guru was his business, his only business. Without that income, at least on the material level, he was just a short, balding, physically disabled Indian man who could not hold a job. Rajneesh's very real enlightenment would not pay his bills or give him the material luxuries he craved..."
    Last edited by Bob G; 20 December 2007 at 06:13 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,706
    Rep Power
    294

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Namaste BobG,

    What's the source of this text? More importantly, what's the point of posting this here about Osho?

    Is this your opinion of Osho or someone else's?
    satay

  3. #3

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Satay,

    A great deal of information on certain aspects and eye-witness accounts related to one called "Osho" can be found through surfing the internet.
    (and or by his earlier name)

    Why did I post some of that information (here or anywhere) ? Well, for anyone that may want to do some new or further research into him and the present organization that is using his name.

    My personal opinion of not only Osho but of certain and varied so-called "gurus" is that if they don't follow and teach the yamas then I don't kid myself about them being a true guru. (regardless of how much or how well they co-opt spiritual teachings to sound wise and or holy)

    Om

  4. #4
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,706
    Rep Power
    294

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Namaskar Bob G,
    Thank you for the note.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob G View Post

    A great deal of information on certain aspects and eye-witness accounts related to one called "Osho" can be found through surfing the internet.
    (and or by his earlier name)
    Yes, negative as well as positive information can be found about Osho since he was a controversial master. No 'religious' people liked him including from hinduism. He spoke openly about the poison christianity and the bible has spread into humanity. This is why he was most disliked and there is all types of negative prapanganda one can find on the internet.

    The reason why I asked the question is that your post is 'out of place' or seems like a 'negative attack' on osho for no reason at all.

    Just dumping a lot of information (without any context) from other sites doesn't add any value to HDF, especially, when you didn't provide your opinion on the dumped text.

    Why did I post some of that information (here or anywhere) ? Well, for anyone that may want to do some new or further research into him and the present organization that is using his name.

    My personal opinion of not only Osho but of certain and varied so-called "gurus" is that if they don't follow and teach the yamas then I don't kid myself about them being a true guru. (regardless of how much or how well they co-opt spiritual teachings to sound wise and or holy)

    Om

    If you feel the urge to 'expose' a guru, please do your own research and present the facts instead of just cutting and pasting negative side of someone's propaganda.

    If you had done your research before posting this dump, you would have found the answers to all the objections of this propaganda maker about osho, yes, that includes why he "owned" rolls royce and why he wore expensive watches and why he declared himself Bhagwan!

    Read one of osho's books (any book) and decide for yourself instead of becoming part of someone's propaganda. He was not a traditional hindu "guru".

    Thanks!

    ps: Here a jewel. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK4aVB1uPOg
    It will take you less time to watch this than the time you spent on searching the net and dumping the negative propaganda about osho.
    I encourage you to spend the 6 or so minutes...
    Last edited by satay; 17 December 2007 at 02:59 PM.
    satay

  5. #5

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Satay,

    Right, and why dump false-positive propaganda or build up a non-Hindu, non-guru at a mostly Vedic based Hindu website?

    Also, if public information, via eye-witness accounts, newspaper reports and 1st hand testimony offends you that is your choice.

    (edit:And I did read a book of his over 20 years ago along with other material by him; why assume I hadn't?)

    Om
    Last edited by Bob G; 20 December 2007 at 06:14 PM.

  6. #6

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    P.S. & Btw., I see no practical need or point in re-quoting short sentences of mine (as reminders or whatever?) that are in plain sight only one post away from your following reply. (most of us have good enough memories to at least follow posts from one to the next...)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,706
    Rep Power
    294

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    namaste Bob G,

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob G View Post
    Satay,

    Right, and why dump false-positive propaganda or build up a non-Hindu, non-guru at a mostly Vedic based Hindu website?

    Also, if public information, via eye-witness accounts, newspaper reports and 1st hand testimony offends you that is your choice.

    Om
    No, the information you dumped from other websites without presenting your opinion does not offend me. However, I find it rather annoying that one would dump this information here on a Hindu forum in a manner as you did without any proper context.

    I don't know what drove you to cut and paste the information to begin with. That's what I am curious about.

    Has Osho offended you in some way? Or do Gurus (hindus or non-hindus) in general offend you?

    Also, I am still trying to find out what the reason is of cutting and pasting this info here when such negative propaganda is easily available elsewhere on the net. If I don't read about any good reasons, the thread will obviously have to be deleted...
    Last edited by satay; 17 December 2007 at 10:20 PM.
    satay

  8. #8
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,706
    Rep Power
    294

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob G View Post
    P.S. & Btw., I see no practical need or point in re-quoting short sentences of mine (as reminders or whatever?) that are in plain sight only one post away from your following reply. (most of us have good enough memories to at least follow posts from one to the next...)
    Using 'quotes' is just a forum etiquette.
    satay

  9. #9

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Quote Originally Posted by satay View Post
    Has Osho offended you in some way? Or do Gurus (hindus or non-hindus) in general offend you?
    Gurus who are after mass-following annoy me too. They do harm to their followers and society at large in an effort to become a celebrity. It is better to follow film stars instead.

    Why do I need to say it here ?. No need ... was just adding on to the thread

    However being aware of false gurus in Kali Yuga is an important thing and our scriptures have ample passages on whom to take on as a guru. Broad guideline is parampara and dharma nistha.
    What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    358

    Re: A.K.A. Osho

    Dear Friends Bob G, Satay, Singhi,

    It is best to mind one's welfare rather than pick holes in our own consciousness.

    It is true that Osho inspires many -- through his lucid writing and speeches. It is also true that a vicious attack, floating in the internet does not mean anything.

    On the other hand, it is also true that the unconventional methods used by Osho had to have repercussions. The left handed methods are always kept secret, to avoid backlash from society and also not to create too much of ripples. Osho was possibly not careful about that and as SM has indicated, a fascination for fame will mean downfall of any Guru.


    In this regard, once a guru was accused, in a stray publication, of indulging in sex with female devotees. The guru said gleefully "Now, people will know that I am bad and the popularity will go down, leaving me more time for meditation".
    ---------------

    It is good for us to take the good and ignore what does not suit us and good for us to remember that Shiva also is known as bahuninditaya -- reviled by many.

    Regards to all.

    Om Namah Shivaya
    Last edited by atanu; 18 December 2007 at 07:39 AM.
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •