Krishna: 'Zorba the Buddha'

[niranjan]

Krishna,if you view his life in general, is a far cry from the other prophets like Buddha, Mahavira, Muhammad ,Jesus, Moses who lived an austere life of self-denial.

The charecterestic of Krishna's life is his many-sidedness. He was great as a musician, as a scholar,as a yogi, as a dancer, as a poet, as a soldier, as an administrator, as a philosopher and spiritual master, and as a gentleman.

Krishna , through out his life was known for his cheerfulness and his funloving nature and mischief . He stole the butter and ghee of the gopis, teased them and flirted with them, stole their clothes while they were bathing, sang songs in the moonlight(which he loved) and danced with them. He was also known for his sense of humour and cracked jokes spontaneously.


Can you imagine the Buddha dancing gaily with young women, or Jesus playing a flute or Muhammad singing songs in praise of nature and life or Moses cracking jokes?

And even though Krishna's life was a tragedy, he always faced life with non-attachment and equanimity, and a perpetual cheerful smile in his face to the very end.

As Osho says in his classic "Krishna :The man and his philosophy", Krishna represents a new order of humanity; Krishna combined in himself the spiritual charecterestics of Buddha, and the materialistic charecterestics of Zorba the Greek. He was himself steeped in non-attachment,yoga, equanimity of mind, spirituality and at the same time he enjoyed life to the maximum.He was in short Zorba the Buddha.

Krishna was the personification of his teaching,"The wise man is he who is intensely peaceful in the midst of intense action, and intensely active in the midst of intense peace."


Sri Dutta Gurumali, an Indian spiritual master, has stated that Krishna was the greatest yogi the world has ever known, and the greatest bhogi(enjoyer of life) too that the world has ever known, in the last 5000 years.

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, an Indian enlightened master, and who is the creator of the Art of Living Foundation , bases his institutions philosophy on this trait of Krishna, and has stated "God loves fun."

We all don't need to be staunch followers of Krishna, but let us assimilate this beautiful trait of Krishna, namely 'Zorba the Buddha.'

[Kain]

Interesting viewpoint niranjan. Still...I guess I'm not yet absolutely convineced about the extensiveness of the functionality of that way of life in terms of cultivating direct experiene of the transcendental aspect of things. I know my own personal tendencies were always towards austerity and the more time passed, the more I have realized and incorporated it in my life and practice.

Even though I certainly understand the truth that we often approach the same goal in different ways, this particular goal (that of the highest Realization) is one that always made me think as far as the spectrum of functional approaches goes. Can the two be really coupled (The Zorba lifestyle and the highest Realization)? Sure, one will hear (in Tantric circles usually) about the world being the Universal Play (Lila) of the World (or Supreme) Enjoyer...yet still, for the highest of Realizations to sink in and infuse one's being, discipline is certainly required. I really don't know much about Krishna's life to comment on that although admittedly he is famous for his yogic discipline as well.

But the lifestyle still boggles me to be honest...perhaps it is my own innability to perceive the pure aspect of such gestures and activities, thus making it an essentially disturbing engagement in my personal approach to Self-Realization, without having any reality concerning the activities in themselves.

Still, I have discussed this issue before and I do have a personal opinion as to why this should not be so, but it is still just my viewpoint. "Humor", as a principle, is I think ultimately caused (and thus defined) by the portrayance of a certain truth in a way that "shortcircuits" our current mental configuration and perception of things. It is a non-straightforwardness that we have to *maneuver around* in order to successfully receive, thus producing a release on our part, also evident by laughter. Perhaps it isn't clear as I describe it, but it is due to this essential mechanism that I think that in order to even conceive "funnyness" in the first place, we need to operate within a system that supports opposites. Now, as we work on Dissolution (Laya) through our Work, attempting Realization, multiplicity slowly dissolves in the 5 Tanmatras that constitute Matter and eventually reaches even the instruments of Mind itself (as we approach One-Pointedness). In the state of conscious One-Pointedness, Samprajnata Samadhi, no joke is possible. Realization of the World System can only be done in a straightforward *acknowledgement* of the processes at work, as they are completely visible by the Absolute Eye and there are no surprises or contradictions in any possible way (as nothing remains hidden in such a state). Since the states we achieve also colour our manifest existance, I think this straightforwardness essentially influences our behavior in daily life as well.

What I'm getting at is that, in a way, it would be assumed that the explosiveness of the amusement through joking, both as an active habbit and also as a received gesture, slowly wanes as One-Pointedness of Mind is all the more embodied. For instance, it is said that Jesus wasn't keen on laughing at all and this is often linked to his attainance of a state beyond the contradictions that essentially provoke it. I would also agree that such an observation has a good point in a sense, as through observing my own perception of the world around me after sufficient Sadhana, I notice a very characteristic tendency of dissolution of all non-straightforward mental habits. A steady, immutable movement is slowly established, the main characteristics of it being largely either complete silence, or direct action whenever that needs to occur. I also do not consider myself and my practice anything really special, but I am simply adding it as a personal experience of how emotional and mental habits change through Sadhana.

So, to conclude, I feel that the more one embodies the transcendental principle the more one's emotional and mental habits slowly become as straight-forward as those of the Universe itself, building a slow but steady momentum that may be described as Bliss (Ananda) but is not characterized by emotional states of short and particularized extremes of any sort. Such particularized extremes are the common bewilderment, anger, depression but I also think laughter is one of them. So, in the common sense, the way of life of a person deep in Realization would be by some people described as too simple/structured and/or even "boring" by their standards. It still has to do with attaining Universal continuum however, I think...as the stance (Asana) is steadied and extended, as the breath is also steadied, extended and even stopped (Kumbhaka), so the Mind extends from the short and spastic dilations and contractions of our daily existance to the smoothness of operation so characteristic of the assuming of a *complete* system of interractions rather than only a part of it .

That's my viewpoint at least, although I don't usually find a suitable chance to express or discuss it. I'd be interested to hear any views on this.

Kain

[Okazaki Castle]

Nice and neat reminder and summary there Niranjan :)



Even though I certainly understand the truth that we often approach the same goal in different ways, this particular goal (that of the highest Realization) is one that always made me think as far as the spectrum of functional approaches goes. Can the two be really coupled (The Zorba lifestyle and the highest Realization)? Sure, one will hear (in Tantric circles usually) about the world being the Universal Play (Lila) of the World (or Supreme) Enjoyer...yet still, for the highest of Realizations to sink in and infuse one's being, discipline is certainly required. I really don't know much about Krishna's life to comment on that although admittedly he is famous for his yogic discipline as well.



Well, I think it's a process where the austerity, focus and work come first... lots and lots of it. Sacrifices too, and pain, and sufferring, whichever way you go about it. Then some more cuts on top of that. And a few more. Then, when you're thru that, congratulations, you're hard, have nothing you are attached to anymore (for you've lost it all) and life can begin to be a game and a play for you. Completely stripped of all sense of self, one is free... to do what? Take things seriously? No, for you've been there, done that, and outstripped all the barriers holding you back, the limitations which make mortal man.

The Gods, they are all playful, and humourous, and tend to find most things funny. Likewise a lot of the taoist masters of old. Krishna, did he come here to teach this? And was he really big and blue? Maybe this connects to Dionysus?

all the best,
Oazaki.

[niranjan]

Interesting viewpoint niranjan. Still...I guess I'm not yet absolutely convineced about the extensiveness of the functionality of that way of life in terms of cultivating direct experiene of the transcendental aspect of things. I know my own personal tendencies were always towards austerity and the more time passed, the more I have realized and incorporated it in my life and practice.

Even though I certainly understand the truth that we often approach the same goal in different ways, this particular goal (that of the highest Realization) is one that always made me think as far as the spectrum of functional approaches goes. Can the two be really coupled (The Zorba lifestyle and the highest Realization)? Sure, one will hear (in Tantric circles usually) about the world being the Universal Play (Lila) of the World (or Supreme) Enjoyer...yet still, for the highest of Realizations to sink in and infuse one's being, discipline is certainly required. I really don't know much about Krishna's life to comment on that although admittedly he is famous for his yogic discipline as well.

But the lifestyle still boggles me to be honest...perhaps it is my own innability to perceive the pure aspect of such gestures and activities, thus making it an essentially disturbing engagement in my personal approach to Self-Realization, without having any reality concerning the activities in themselves.

Still, I have discussed this issue before and I do have a personal opinion as to why this should not be so, but it is still just my viewpoint. "Humor", as a principle, is I think ultimately caused (and thus defined) by the portrayance of a certain truth in a way that "shortcircuits" our current mental configuration and perception of things. It is a non-straightforwardness that we have to *maneuver around* in order to successfully receive, thus producing a release on our part, also evident by laughter. Perhaps it isn't clear as I describe it, but it is due to this essential mechanism that I think that in order to even conceive "funnyness" in the first place, we need to operate within a system that supports opposites. Now, as we work on Dissolution (Laya) through our Work, attempting Realization, multiplicity slowly dissolves in the 5 Tanmatras that constitute Matter and eventually reaches even the instruments of Mind itself (as we approach One-Pointedness). In the state of conscious One-Pointedness, Samprajnata Samadhi, no joke is possible. Realization of the World System can only be done in a straightforward *acknowledgement* of the processes at work, as they are completely visible by the Absolute Eye and there are no surprises or contradictions in any possible way (as nothing remains hidden in such a state). Since the states we achieve also colour our manifest existance, I think this straightforwardness essentially influences our behavior in daily life as well.

What I'm getting at is that, in a way, it would be assumed that the explosiveness of the amusement through joking, both as an active habbit and also as a received gesture, slowly wanes as One-Pointedness of Mind is all the more embodied. For instance, it is said that Jesus wasn't keen on laughing at all and this is often linked to his attainance of a state beyond the contradictions that essentially provoke it. I would also agree that such an observation has a good point in a sense, as through observing my own perception of the world around me after sufficient Sadhana, I notice a very characteristic tendency of dissolution of all non-straightforward mental habits. A steady, immutable movement is slowly established, the main characteristics of it being largely either complete silence, or direct action whenever that needs to occur. I also do not consider myself and my practice anything really special, but I am simply adding it as a personal experience of how emotional and mental habits change through Sadhana.

So, to conclude, I feel that the more one embodies the transcendental principle the more one's emotional and mental habits slowly become as straight-forward as those of the Universe itself, building a slow but steady momentum that may be described as Bliss (Ananda) but is not characterized by emotional states of short and particularized extremes of any sort. Such particularized extremes are the common bewilderment, anger, depression but I also think laughter is one of them. So, in the common sense, the way of life of a person deep in Realization would be by some people described as too simple/structured and/or even "boring" by their standards. It still has to do with attaining Universal continuum however, I think...as the stance (Asana) is steadied and extended, as the breath is also steadied, extended and even stopped (Kumbhaka), so the Mind extends from the short and spastic dilations and contractions of our daily existance to the smoothness of operation so characteristic of the assuming of a *complete* system of interractions rather than only a part of it .

That's my viewpoint at least, although I don't usually find a suitable chance to express or discuss it. I'd be interested to hear any views on this.

Kain

Yeah, I understand what you say. I am not criticizing or questioning the validity of other paths to the truth. They do have their value.

All I am saying is that the spiritual path doesn't need to be charecterised by dullness or lack of humour or graveness or complete seriousness.

My message through this thread is that just because you are a yogi or a spiritual seeker doesn't necessarily mean that you have to be a boring , dull and humourless person and abhor fun, like some hardcore ascetics or monks.:sad:

Here are some teachings by Christ himself in this matter....

"A happy heart is good medicine and a cheerful mind works healing, but a broken spirit dries up the bones." Prov. 17:22

"A merry heart makes a cheerful countenance, but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken. All the days of the afflicted are evil, but he who is of a merry heart has a continual feast." (Pr 15:13,15) :D


The zen masters too advocated a sense of humour.:laugh:

Fura indicates a way of life prescribed by Zen principles. It is a chaste enjoyment of life...identification of the self with the creative spirit, the spirit of the beauty of nature. Men and women of fura find their friends among flowers and animals, in rocks and water, in showers and the moon.


I have also read that the Buddha had a sense of humour. Angida , one of the original eighteen arhats of Buddhism was often seen to be laughing.Budai, the famous ancient Chinese Buddhist monk was also noted for his laughing demeanour.

According to Vivekananda there is nothing wrong in enjoying life.


The problem arises when we become inordinately attached to the sources of happiness or pleasures. This results in our becoming slaves to these sources of pleasures and their absence would result in our misery and pain.

As Vivekananda himself stated ,"All objective pleasures results in pain and misery in the long run."

As far as Vivekananda is concerned , the trick is to develop ones powers of concentration or attachment and detachment.

As Vivekananda said , " The true man is he who has developed his powers of concentration (attachment) and detachment. He will be able to attach to a thing with all his heart or soul and get the best out of it, and at the same he will be able to detach himself at will.
Such a man will be able to get the best out of nature."

Hence one will be able to enjoy life, and at the same time, due to his powers of detachment will be immune to the snares of maya and the material world and will be free of all addictions.

In fact according to Vivekananda , only such a person can live effectively and happily in this world.

I have also stated that Krishna , while he enjoyed life and had fun, at the same time was in a state of non-attachment.Though he enjoyed life and its pleasures, he was not at all attached to the sources of these pleasures. And it should be understood that uncontrolled attachment to sensory pleasures is what is detrimental to spirituality or the cultivation of a spiritual life.

As Guru Govind Singh of the Sikh religion himself said, " My Sikhs will enjoy the pleasures of the world, and at the same time they will be detached from it. " :)

[Kain]

My message through this thread is that just because you are a yogi or a spiritual seeker doesn't necessarily mean that you have to be a boring , dull and humourless person and abhor fun, like some hardcore ascetics or monks.:sad: I see your point niranjan, and in fact agree with you. Predetermining our behavior in such a way is hardly a good habit to engage in...as a rule of thumb, everyone should behave as one's inner nature's inclinations dictate, I think. Here are some teachings by Christ himself in this matter....

"A happy heart is good medicine and a cheerful mind works healing, but a broken spirit dries up the bones." Prov. 17:22

"A merry heart makes a cheerful countenance, but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken. All the days of the afflicted are evil, but he who is of a merry heart has a continual feast." (Pr 15:13,15) :D I should perhaps note that, from my perspective at least, happiness and merryment of heart are differentiated (even if the difference be slight) from the essence of humour in itself. My point was not directed to enjoyment of life but to the mechanics of humour and joking. Thank you for these quotes by the way, much appreciated. :)
As Vivekananda said , " The true man is he who has developed his powers of concentration (attachment) and detachment. He will be able to attach to a thing with all his heart or soul and get the best out of it, and at the same he will be able to detach himself at will.
Such a man will be able to get the best out of nature." So true a quote really...

Thank you for a well thought response niranjan :twub: ,

Kain

[niranjan]

The Gods, they are all playful, and humourous, and tend to find most things funny. Likewise a lot of the taoist masters of old. Krishna, did he come here to teach this? And was he really big and blue? Maybe this connects to Dionysus?




Hi Okazaki, Krishna, according to the scriptures was dark skinned, the colour of dark thunderclouds.


****The Gods, they are all playful, and humourous, and tend to find most things funny. Likewise a lot of the taoist masters of old.*****

Could you elaborate on this, especially about the taoist masters of old. :yes:

And if you are from Japan, you can also state the teachings of the Japanese Zen masters and Shintoism on this matter.

Thanking you,

Niranjan.

[Naomi]

Let’s drink : Like a lord : In the evening cool

- Shunso, 18th c.

cryptic, that one...

[Kain]

Let’s drink : Like a lord : In the evening cool

- Shunso, 18th c.

cryptic, that one...
Very Kundalini-esque, I like it...Is that a written sequence of 3 characters (hence the ':' diacretics)?

As the Kundalini-yoga axiom goes:"Having drunk, having drunk, having again drunk" (referring to the descent of Amrita, or Nectar of Immortality that drips from the Sahasrara lotus)

Kain

[Naomi]

Cool perspective, I like.

...

It's a poem written on a fan Shunso painted, of a tengu.

Somewhere on this site in images:

www.thetengu.com/tengu

[Okazaki Castle]

Hi Okazaki, Krishna, according to the scriptures was dark skinned, the colour of dark thunderclouds.


Ah, dark skinned then. Interesting. Does that connect to Kali in some way?


****The Gods, they are all playful, and humourous, and tend to find most things funny. Likewise a lot of the taoist masters of old.*****

Could you elaborate on this, especially about the taoist masters of old. :yes:


Well.... in Greek mythology, for example, the gods are portrayed as quite 'human-ish': warring, having divers affairs... and being quite intensely emotional at times: Zeus's wrath, Apollo's arrogance (Hubris, eg with the big snake at Delphi), Hades' moroseness. But generally, quite playful and not taking things as seriously as the mortal humans they involved with. Personally, well, I don't actually like socialising with most normal humans, finding them to be quite boring and limiting... so... (and I know I might get in trouble somewhere for saying this but, meh, take it for it's worth)... when hanging out in groups of people I usually simply take their own souls out for 'training', for instance sending them over to Khain Doshi in Japan for training, and instead have 'Divine Forms' moving thru them. The incarnacted personalities don't notice anything much really, other than perhaps that they're having a better, more fun and light-hearted time than usual and seem to have forgotten or become unconcered about their life's problems. Of course, I only do that with relative strangers or casual acquaintances. Those I'm close to, friends in Real Life (and some over the net) they tend to be Gods (or Goddesses) anyway already in terms of their inner nature; and after like 12 years or so of me telling them the same thing, and our all being sort of aligned anyway, most of them sort of see it that way as well, or at least can and are cool with it. It helps that a lot of them have been around my 'weirder' stuff for long enough to have degree of demonstration in their own lives and experience of what's involved. Also, women tend to take being a Goddes far more easily than men take being a God. Men like to earn what they have I think, but women are content to just be flattered, or giving shiny perspectives.

It's a bit like that when you're being a god and associating with others on that level socially: the humans are all like a cross between children and robots who move and do things according to which 'buttons' you push on their 'control panels'. As a rule, they all worship and value money, simply because that's what they devote most of their focus to, in practice, even if it's not what they value most as characters. Hence, you can play with that, and they respond, every time. Likewise: flatter them, they like it, insult them, they get offended. Be angry with them they either respond according to their assesment of relative power, or try to calm you down. Be gentle with them, vice versa. It is quite a complex set of control mechanisms at times, but still very predictable, almost universally applicable, and easy to use/apply.

So, when humans are all basically pre-programmed machines which you just push buttons on to get them to respond in the ways you want, yet they themselves take themselves, and especially their problems and trials so seriously... well how can you help but laugh and be playful with them? In doing so, they also enjoy themsleves more, they come closer to solutions to their own problems and they like that, and their worries, fears and trials on this mortal spehere are eased and soother. You just have fun doing... and why not?

The Taosit masters of old, well, again, there's the literature record there, and also you can find some of these people and, again, hang out and discuss things with them. Focusing on the gods, or planetary intelligences as they do, their style and approach 'rubs off' on them, or they 'learn from it' (as you wish to perceive it) and so behave fairly similarly - simply because as a rule it's the best and easiest way to move thru this system. You might want to ask Kuroyagi on that as he has more personal experience there than me really I think. Many of my associates there I mainly meet/met non-physically...


And if you are from Japan, you can also state the teachings of the Japanese Zen masters and Shintoism on this matter.


I'm not actually from Japan but 1/4 Greek, 1/4 Greek Cypriot and half German by descent. Grew up in Cyprus, Europe and UK and have never actually been to Japan physically yet in this lifetime. The whole Japanese thing I've got going on is because, as I remember it, back before the battle of Sekigahara, when I was in Japan, I took out my Spirit in a deal with a certain Dark (or Light, or Steel) power and sent it off abroad to go thru the incarnative cycles. In exchange, Japanese form maintained it's Soul whereas Abroad, Incarnating form (me) had a Spirit but no soul. Then I'd recreate a soul (and astral body also usually) in every incarnation since then (including this one). Japanese form in turn looks after the serious things, whilst I do what is necessary in order to approach the rest of the world in a way that they can understand and accept relatively easily. Japanese form is an utter hardcore ruthless bastard, I might add, which is why nobody can ever talk to him. He has no Spirit you see, I've got that, and it pisses him off. But he is utterly responsible, even if annoying, so I can't really criticise him personally (he knows my value structure too well for that, and adjusted/determined his motion accordingly); so I got someone to criticise him for me. Weird stuff, but it's sort of why I am connected to Japan, it's where my True Self is - in terms of soul at least.

That means I understand and can apply Japanese principles, approaches and access their karmic heritage, but I don't speak Japanese, don't know a lot of thier history, don't relate to some of the stuff that goes down there, and don't know a whole lot of specifics there. I just know what I need to to do what I intially sent myself abroad and into incarnative cycle in the first place. So I do it, and did it, and developed my own tastes in the meantime. Which tastes, however, definitely maintained a strong element of 'Japaneseness' to them over the centuries: simplicity, ruthlessness/efficiency, a form of compassion and a form of arrogance towards 'foreigners', or non-Japanese. It's weird, but there you go. So, I don't actually know many of the details on the current perspective of Japanese Zen and Shinto masters there. When I was in Japan in past lives, my main focus wasn't meditation anyway, and I didn't associate much with Shinto or Buddhist philosophers/philosophy, so no real memories to draw on. Ask me about Geishas or ninjas or Samurai, and I'm there, but not really up on their priesthood classes. Again, Kuroyagi is prbbly the man to ask there, he knows more about such things having lived there for a fair period and studied with a Yamabushi for a while


Thanking you,


Pleasure. Sorry it couldn't be more complete...

all the best,
Oazaki.

[Okazaki Castle]

Here's a picture of Anthony Quinn, playing Zorba the Greek in the film of the same name:

http://www.filmreference.com/images/sjff_03_img1291.jpg

And here's a picture of the author of that novel, Nikos Kazantzakis:

http://www.nndb.com/people/980/000107659/nikos-kazantzakis-1.jpg


And, dare I say it, here is a photo of Osho:

http://www.realization.org/art/osho.jpg


,the man who first popularized (and maybe even created) this composite egregore entity, viz Zorba the Buddha.

all the best,
Oazaki.

[m1thr0s]

Well, I think it's a process where the austerity, focus and work come first... lots and lots of it. Sacrifices too, and pain, and sufferring, whichever way you go about it. Then some more cuts on top of that. And a few more. Then, when you're thru that, congratulations, you're hard, have nothing you are attached to anymore (for you've lost it all) and life can begin to be a game and a play for you. Completely stripped of all sense of self, one is free... to do what? Take things seriously? No, for you've been there, done that, and outstripped all the barriers holding you back, the limitations which make mortal man.
that about nails it from my perspective. humor is pretty obviously a good thing but it needs to be rooted in real wisdom of some kind or it's just a cheap dodge against the realities of life...

nothing wrong with dodging bullets unless it isn't really working. what a lot of people call humor I think of as nervous laughter...like an idiot pretending to be an idiot to make other idiots laugh...

if they're all still idiots (in reality)...where exactly is the humor? so it's a great thing to be aware of and hang onto but it's a pisspoor trade against actually accomplishing anything.

many masters of many crafts are stern as nails on the outside while giddy as hell on the inside. In most cases you'll have to earn the right to see that side of their natures.

Osho was an entertainer (and a pretty good one, for that matter). Let's not confuse successful showmanship with actual attainment though. He didn't actually bring a single thing into this world that wasn't widely available already and a whole lot of people got left holding the bag to pay for his rock-and-roll-guru lifestyle...

you should see the spread this clown left behind...people love their clowns, boy, and that's a fact...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

Here's a picture of Anthony Quinn, playing Zorba the Greek in the film of the same name:



I have seen Zorba the Greek in a film festival a few years back, and I think this is one of the greatest films I have ever seen. ;)


There is something touchingly humane about this film , in the way Zorba enjoys and celebrates life, and also earnestly exhorts his friends to do the same as well. It is something beautiful and natural.

Also Zorba proves to be a man of compassion and moral courage as well, when he tries to rescue a widow accused of adultery from fanatics, though he was unsuccessful.

I would recommend everyone to see this film.

Also I hope a new version of this film will be made and released, in order to emphasize the values of Zorba in todays society, through out the world. :p

[niranjan]

I believe humour has great use physically, mentally, emotionally and socially. :laugh:



I have read about scientific research that humour and laughter is very good health wise as it tones up the lungs and other parts of the body.

There are yogic asanas in Hatha yoga( the yoga of physical exercises), which emphasize laughing .
There are laughter clubs , which too emphasize bouts of laughing, due to its healthy effect upon the body.

I am sure we all feel good after watching a good comedy and laughing to our hearts content.

I also feel that jokes and laughter are important for mental and emotional fitness.

As the saying goes, "All work and no play(which naturally includes humour and laughter ) makes Jack a very dull boy." :sad:


Also it has been found that laughing at jokes helps to strengthen social bonds between people , even if they were strangers to begin with. And I know this is true from my own personal experience.





Here's what Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has to state about humour.


You are endowed with a certain naughtiness as a child. Keep it alive. Humour will grease all tough situations. One who has humour can sail through any conflict. Humour is the buffer that saves you from humiliation. If you refuse to be humiliated, you become invincible. Humour brings everyone together, while humiliation tears them apart. In a society torn with humiliation and insult, humour is like a breath of fresh air.

Humour should be coupled with care and concern. Humour can keep the spirit high , yet if overdone it leaves a bad taste. Humour without wisdom is shallow. Humour without sensitivity is satire- it comes back to you with more problems.
The wise use humour to bring wisdom and to lighten situations. The intelligent use humour as a shield against humiliation. The cruel use humour as a sword to insult others. The irresponsible use humour to escape from responsibility. And fools take humour too seriously!

How does one cultivate a sense of humour?

Humour is not just words, it is the lightness of your being. You do not have to read and repeat jokes.

Taking life not too seriously(because you will never come out of it alive)!

Having a sense of belongingness with everybody, including those who are not friendly.

Practicing yoga and meditation.

Having unshakeable faith in the Divine and in the laws of karma.

Being in the company of those who live in knowledge and are humorous.

A willingness to be a clown

[niranjan]

Osho was an entertainer (and a pretty good one, for that matter). Let's not confuse successful showmanship with actual attainment though. He didn't actually bring a single thing into this world that wasn't widely available already and a whole lot of people got left holding the bag to pay for his rock-and-roll-guru lifestyle...

you should see the spread this clown left behind...people love their clowns, boy, and that's a fact...

m1thr0s


I am not surprised to hear your criticism of Osho. Many hindus and buddhists too criticize Osho as well.

I am not a strict follower of Osho's teachings, however I must say that he is a philosopher and intellectual and mystic of a very high order.

It is a fact that his books are very popular all around the world, and his books have been translated into many languages .

I have read books of Osho, and even though I don't completely agree with everything he says , I must say that there are many profound philosophical and psychological insights in them. And this has also been stated by qualified people who have studied his books and have made a critical review of them.

Also his meditation techniques are also quite unique and innovative and suited to the modern man, and many people all over the world practice them and enjoy doing it.

Like everything else, Osho too has his positives and negatives. Let us with a rational and detached mind, study his works, and assimilate what is pragmatic and good and reject the rest.

[m1thr0s]

I have read books of Osho, and even though I don't completely agree with everything he says , I must say that there are many profound philosophical and psychological insights in them.certainly, since he has borrowed heavily from all over the place and geared his teachings to the affluent, a strategy that has paid off in spades. There are reasons he has been called the "rich man's guru", the "sex-guru" and so on. I recommend people supplement that kind of reading with the classics and other important works by less hyped-out spiritual teachers just to have a more balanced perspective on things. Osho talked the talk but never really walked the walk. No one on this earth needs 90 Rolls Royces, just for starters...

I think there is a huge misunderstanding going on here with respect to the true nature of the work of higher consciousness in general. Osho's stuff is all a kind of self-help psychology...a kind of super-charged gestalt for the affluent in particular. So he takes all these pent-up people into his lush resort atmosphere and has them babbling profusely and trance-dancing and all this kind of thing and they come away feeling "changed"...sure...they have been temporarily liberated from their usual boring repressive routines but this kind of freedom is not nowhere near the kind of enlightenment the Vedas are discussing, nor the Bhudda, nor any of the great enlightened masters down through the ages. Osho very clearly teaches that it is...I have read his stuff as well and listened to the lectures and all the rest. He has people hoodwinked into thinking that all this feel-good crapola is the very essence of enlightenment itself...and it isn't. It may be one of various important steps in route but it is not the true nature of the work of enlightenment itself, which actually takes a lot of hard work and can be very stressful as a matter of fact. When the Qabbalists talk about raising the foundation of the Tree of Life, they aren't discussing how you feel about yourself or your job or any of that crap. Their target is a lot more ambitious than that. That is why very few people ever really take it up at any one point in time. It's a lot of very hard work and not hardly any "easy" answers, yet real succeses are possible. That doesn't mean it can't be fun because it can but fun is not what it's all about...whereas freedom is. Real freedom is not really all that much about feeling good...that's only a very small slice of the big picture. It is a kind of freedom, sure, but it isn't freedom itself.

I wouldn't care what Osho did or didn't do if he wasn't lying to people about what they were actually getting for their money. He's an entertainer, just like I said. People pay him money and he makes them feel good. But at least with most entertainers you don't come away thinking you must be a realized being because you just laughed your ass off for a couple of hours. A good time is a good time and a good thing in itself...that doesn't amount to the Great Liberation by a long shot.

m1thr0s

[Kuroyagi]

I dont know about Hinduism or Osho but I damn well agree with the last post. There are simply two kinds of people: those who relentlessly study nature by experience and use others works as reference- refute some and become inspired by others. Such men take nothing for granted (I eg remember the part in Jungs autobio where he describes that he never understood mathematics, or look at Witgenstein and many others if you want), and then there are such that are epigones, those who re-live or retell others experiences...I think some are great and others are vulgar, and most as the word says are mediocre (and: the deeper a truth is the simpler it tries to express itself :laugh: [often one has to resist such simplicity for the sake of ones integrity] )

To me always smiling like an imbecile doesnt necessarily denounce enlightenment or development. What is meant by "happiness and fun loving" in various texts is (yes, based on my own experience), is "undying" enthusiasm "for life". the expression of it can be happiness but also ALL else (as Oazaki said: why not do whatever one feels like?)

hey and I even agree with m1thr0s on "freedom as an aim": for me its certainly no social or political aim. This would be too small minded by far. (If you like to know; I even think that egalitarian systems are the place where freedom will perish, only hierarchic structures even give a chance to freedom- but this only as an aside.)

But true freedom, or part thereof is for me: to make oneself independent and autonomous of entropic systems. Systems like solar systems or galaxies, I mean. And thereby my definition of realism is: the creation of reality.

So my opinion in short is: Eternity is only accessible via immediacy.

[niranjan]

Osho talked the talk but never really walked the walk. No one on this earth needs 90 Rolls Royces, just for starters...



Here's what Osho has to say about his Rolls royces......

Why do you like your Rolls Royces so much?
I have tried all kinds of cars; and even Rolls Royce has many types and I have tried them too. Their best is the Corniche, but it doesn't suit me. It is a question of my back. I need a certain kind of chair—I use only this chair. It has been made by my sannyasins exactly to give support to my back, because doctors have said that they cannot do anything more.
Experts from England were called to India. They tried hard, and they said, "It is impossible. You will have to live with it." It was just a coincidence that one of the models of Rolls Royce, Silver Spur, suited me. The driver's seat in that car fits perfectly, gives me no trouble. Naturally, my people love….
They don't belong to me, those cars—nothing belongs to me. I am the poorest man in the whole world, living the richest life possible. My people love me; they want to do something for me. All those cars belong to the commune. They have made them available to me for one hour each day. I don't know which car they are bringing, but one thing is certain, that I can be comfortable only in a Silver Spur. And they love me so much that they are trying to have three hundred and sixty-five Rolls Royces, one for every day. And I say, "Why not? A great idea!"…
They have arranged ninety Rolls Royces, and I know they will be able to manage three hundred and sixty-five.

People are very much interested in your Rolls Royces. What do You want to prove with this, so many cars and so much luxury around You?
Why are people concerned? Then certainly they need it; then more Rolls Royces will be here. Until they stop asking me, more and more Rolls Royces are going to be here. Now it has to be seen that it is a challenge: the day nobody asks me about Rolls Royces, they will not be coming.
People's interest in Rolls Royces shows their mind. They are not interested what is happening here. They don't ask about meditation, they don't ask about sannyas, they don't ask about people's life, love, the laughter that happens in this desert. They only ask about Rolls Royces. That means I have touched some painful nerve. And I will go on pressing it till they stop asking.
I am not a worshipper of poverty. That's what those Rolls Royces prove. I respect wealth. Nobody before me had the guts to say it. The pope cannot say that he respects wealth, although he is the wealthiest man on the earth.
I am not a hypocrite. I am the poorest man on the earth. I don't have a single cent with me. But I want to show these people what attracts their mind. If there were no Rolls Royces here, perhaps there would be nothing for the whole world ask about me, about you, about meditation, about initiation into sannyas, about love, about anything. It is for those idiots that I am keeping all those Rolls Royces, because they cannot move their eyes away from those Rolls Royces. And meanwhile I will go on pouring other things in their minds. Without those Rolls Royces they would not have asked a single question.
Those Rolls Royces are doing their work. Every idiot around the world is interested in them. And I want them to be somehow interested—in anything in Rajneeshpuram. Then we will manage about other things.
So tell those people—when anybody asks, tell them that "These Rolls Royces are for you idiots. Otherwise you are not interested in anything." Once they stop asking about Rolls Royces, then I will have to think of something else, whether to have rockets which are going to the moon…. I will have to think of something else.

I received a letter from a bishop of Wasco County, who had been for almost five years condemning my Rolls Royces. In every Sunday sermon he was not preaching Jesus Christ, he was preaching me and my Rolls Royces. The day I was leaving he wrote a letter to me, "Now you are leaving, it will be great kindness on your part if you can donate one Rolls Royce to this church." Now, this shows the man….
I informed him, "Would you like all ninety-three, or only one?"
And a letter came, "If you can give all ninety-three, that is just the right thing. You are really great. I'm very sorry that I condemned you for five years. You are a man to be worshiped."
It is a very strange world if you understand people: whatever they are saying shows more about them than it shows about the person they are talking about. pilgr12

Just the other day Anando was showing me one book published against me in Australia by a couple who have been sannyasins for three years and have been in the commune. But just looking at their ideas, it seems they have never seen me. They are saying that they were working, working hard, and with their work I was purchasing Rolls Royces. You can see the absurdity: their work was not bringing any money. Their work was making their own houses to live in, the roads—which were needing money, not producing money. But in their mind—and for all those three years also—they must have been resentful.
Those Rolls Royces were not produced by the commune. They were presents from outside, from all over the world. And I was not their owner—I had given them to the commune. They were commune property, and I have not brought any of them with me; I have left them with the commune. Everything that I had has been left with the commune. I never owned anything. But there must have been the idea that they are earning money, and I am wasting money. That is their resentment.
What money were you earning? In fact you needed money to make houses, to make roads, to make a dam—a dam needed two and a half million dollars to make. You were contributing your labor, but we were not creating money out of it so that I could purchase Rolls Royces, so that I could purchase anything. I have not purchased anything from the money produced by the commune because the commune never produced any money. The commune was absorbing money.
In fact all my royalties, all my books, all their profits were going to the commune. The situation is just the opposite—that I had given everything to the commune. Now, four hundred books in different languages were bringing millions of dollars in royalties, and those royalties were going to the commune.
If I had wanted to purchase Roll Royces, I could have purchased my own Rolls Royces, as many as I wanted, just out of my royalties.
But the resentment, the anger, is blind. In the commune we invested two hundred million dollars. Those sannyasins perhaps think they had brought two hundred million dollars there! Without me and the people who love me around the world, those two hundred million dollars would not have been possible.


Through this statement of Osho , I do not have the least intention of offending anyone or hurting anyones feelings. I am only just stating Osho' s perspective and views on the 365 Rolls royces.

Thanking you,

Niranjan.

[Okazaki Castle]

Eternity is only accessible via immediacy.

This is very similar to what Parmenides and Empedocles hold on the subject. If you're striving towards freedom, then you aren't there yet. And if you are there already, what do you do with it? Do you need to arrive, or are you there already, in a way, and just need to realize and live it?

As for Osho, he certainly seemed to have mastered the material realm in many ways and was having a good time doing it, and broke many people's assumptions and limitations. Did he hold any sort of ultimate truth and what was with those Rolls Royces? I tend to wait on a decision myself till I've found his soul and analyzed it, which process I am still in the middle of somewhat. Personally, I always feel with mystics, you gotta be careful how you assess them, as often they don't tell you a lot of the picture, eg the reasons for their actions...

And Osho did claim to have reached enlightenment at 22, then went round India debating various precepts pertaining to it with other self-claimed (or appointed by their guru) enlightened masters... and, according to his own record (and maybe others, dunno) always came off the best in those debates. So... not deciding yet myself, is all...

all the best,
Oazaki.

[Okazaki Castle]

oic, got the answer as i was posting...

[Kuroyagi]

This is very similar to what Parmenides and Empedocles hold on the subject. If you're striving towards freedom, then you aren't there yet. And if you are there already, what do you do with it?

no no thats not what I meant by "eternity can be accessed via immediacy". I wrote this in relation to the technique, the general approach of research/development that I mentioned: namely direct experience.

On freedom: I rather think that the urge for freedom can be endless or open ended...no one can have enough freedom so to speak, but that its easier to discern freedom when living in a clearly structured system very much unlike today. today theres too much fuzziness and complication in the political systems, they are frustrating rather than invigorating. also Im a bit of different opinion concerning slaves: in general slaves will understand the value of freedom better than psychologically suppressed neurotics that have to do jobs they hate and often dont even know WHO to hate cause they dont know who is boss- the share holders? the mangers, the politicians?...but I think you meant todays system anyway- and spoke of todays participants i western society as "slaves" right?. (sorry off topic)

Otherwise I cant comment further on this thread since I dont know Osho, and all I read of him was parts of the quote above that was strange cause judging from it he seemed to have loved gossip and unimportant things like others opinions of him and his group etc...anyway, if hes as entertaining as you all say I'll check out his works, then. (yeah and why not? luxury is cool if one stands to it and doesnt take it seriously.)

[Naomi]

Ha that was a very elucidating read Niranjan! There was a man on another forum who took something out of one of my posts, it was an ancient Greek quote on how if you do not display your wealth the gods will see you are squandering the luck they bestowed upon you and will take it away. So he said then "Ah now I understand why OSHO had so many Rolls Royces!" Yet that does not appear to be the explanation he gave!

So that is when I found out about Osho and his Rolls Royces, but I never really made much of it. for I cannot judge someone I have never met or looked into. After all, nobody needs a smallish collection of world coins, but I have them, it must mean I am not enlightened! Right? Even Osho had a use for his Rolls Royces for his back, so he must be more enlightened than I!

Not to mention my smallish collection of Chinese antiques, lily bulbs and candle wax....

[m1thr0s]

that's the lamest damn thing I ever read by him actually...my back made me do it...that's grand. I have a doctor's excuse...rofl...93 of them...

and I imagine the reason he had several hundred custom rolodex watches was due to persistent wrist problems...:o_O:

the man was an entertainer of the new-age, self-help, feel-good spirituality genre...he knew it...his managers most certainly knew it, I know it...anybody who really understands his subject knows it...yet many people do not seem able to see it. There's only just so much can be done about that...

I find it telling that when pushed he finds it useful to report a ridiculous little anecdote about a greedy christian pastor (quite obviously invented). We have a saying in the west: two wrongs don't make a right.

I am only really opposed to the extremes to which he goes to slather himself in the most ludicrous trappings of wealth this world has to offer all in the name of an "enlightenment" he never once produced...neither in himself nor in his followers. I am not going to try to say he never did any good...they all do some good...even Adolph Hitler did some good...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

and I imagine the reason he had several hundred custom rolodex watches was due to persistent wrist problems...:o_O:

I believe he flaunted them as well. In fact he used expensive dresses and a collection of sun glasses as well , of different styles.




I am not going to try to say he never did any good...they all do some good...even Adolph Hitler did some good...



This reminded me about what Osho stated about Hitler.

Hitler , when he was a youth was interested in art. And he enrolled for studying art in an institute for art. However he was rejected in the entrance exams , much to his dissapointment.

Osho states that creativity , if it is stifled , becomes destructive .

And he says that if Hitler had got admission in that institute and was able to learn art and pursue it, he would have been an average artist or a good artist at the maximum (we never know) but he surely would not have been Hitler the tyrant, and killed millions of people.

Considering recent scientific research that in places where there is no sports clubs or any clubs for that matter, the youth in those places , tend to be violent and chaotic and law breakers, I must say that Osho is not off the mark when he stated his opinion of Hitler.

[Kuroyagi]

But what if Hitler was simply a crappy artist and they told him: hey buddy sorry youre not apt try something else. So Osho is blaming the academy of applied arts of Vienna for Hitler murdering several million people: now thats wise! lol!!!Putting the blame on society on an institution, on his psyche (oh its not his fault that hes a murderer etc.) on everything but on the person itself is soo modern. "Take away all their self respect all their responsibilty for their actions"...
Even I had to make an exam about visual aptidude when studying history of art, and some failed so what?...this is no stiffling of creativity, its simply a fact that different ppl are differently gifted for various things...besides, other artists became good or at least known while yet being autoditactic etc...anyway got some other quotes? (theyre fun, like little vulgar jokes).

[niranjan]

But what if Hitler was simply a crappy artist and they told him: hey buddy sorry youre not apt try something else. So Osho is blaming the academy of applied arts of Vienna for Hitler murdering several million people: now thats wise!

Well , Osho did criticize entrance exams and other competitive exams, in fact competition itself , to many of the woes in society. He was highly critical of entrance exams and the pressure which parents put on children in order to carve out respectable careers, and not what the children wanted for themselves. And it is a fact that many of these kids lead frustrated and unsatisfied lives, and some even commit suicide.

Osho is not blaming the academy of applied arts of Vienna, but only their system of taking in students with greater talent than others, and pushing others out, even if they had more interest than the so called talented ones. Also their passion and consequent work ethics would have helped to compensate for their relative lack of talent.


Also Hitler was not that untalented an artist.


According to Dr. August Priesack's 1958 notes in the NSDAP Central Archives, Dr. Bloch, his mother's personal physician, reported that Frau Hitler's son, "the young student, was clearly a talented artist." Dr. Bloch had carefully kept two landscapes done from postcards which Hitler had given him in gratitude after Bloch helped his mother.

[m1thr0s]

yeah...I was going to let that slide since it seems like I'm all about slamming the crap out of this guy and I'm actually more annoyed at a general trend than I am with any one individual cashing in on it...

But again...many artists have to battle their way in to becoming recognized by the rest of society as bona fide artists. They don't all go to art school and come out *certified* artists... and those that do not also do not all go on to become genocidal maniacs...(though it's true that many would claim that without their art they might have...)

So it's another one of those calculated what-if scenarios Osho was always coming up with to reinforce his general doctrine of institutional evil...somehow suggesting that if only Hitler had managed to go through the Osho program he would have been free to think for himself...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

So it's another one of those calculated what-if scenarios Osho was always coming up with to reinforce his general doctrine of institutional evil...somehow suggesting that if only Hitler had managed to go through the Osho program he would have been free to think for himself...



Osho has never suggested that if Hitler had gone through his program, he would have been free to think for himself.

He is only suggesting that if Hitler as a youth, was not exposed to competition at the art school, and had been admitted there, he could have channeled his creativity to art , which he clearly loved, and consequently Hitler the tyrant would not have been created.

I think this is highly probable and logical, considering the research on crime which I have mentioned above.

[m1thr0s]

what I am saying niranjan is that this argument is a red herring. If Hitler had really loved his art so much he would been an artist with or without the sanction of art school...just as many fine artists have done...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

what I am saying niranjan is that this argument is a red herring. If Hitler had really loved his art so much he would been an artist with or without the sanction of art school...just as many fine artists have done...

m1thr0s


And I know of people , who though they loved a certain field, they were compelled by circumstances, and parental pressure, to opt for other fields.

They lead unsatisfied and frustrated lives, manifesting in depression, social violence and suicide.

Hitler , though he definetely loved art, perhaps did not love it that much, as the other fine artists you mention.

You cannot expect everyone to be idealistic lovers of art or their field, who is singlemindedly determined to pursue their love at any cost.

However, if he had gained admission to the art school, he could have , through his professors and company, loved art more, and become a greater lover of art and an artist himself.

I wish to emphasize the term "company" . As the saying goes, " Tell me your company , and I will tell you the kind of man you are."

In the company of fellow art lovers and professors, he would have become , as I said before, a greater lover of art, and would have channeled his creativity into art himself. And in the process , he could have given secondary or no importance to politics, and would not have been corrupted by racist ideologues and literature, because he would not have been in their company, or sphere of influence.

[m1thr0s]

all of this presupposes that people are *made* by their environments alone...or if not entirely alone...very largely. I do not agree with this assertion and I have seen no evidence to support the idea that people are quite that *plastic*. Rather there is always a blend of nature and nurture going on with people and in many instances one will tend to weigh out more heavily than the other...this I freely accept. But we are given to understand that Hitler was a fairly strong individual, for better or for worse. As such he made certain choices and his life took shape around those choices. Those choices were not made by society...they were made by him. No one forced him to become a murderous tyrant, and indeed, his own generals cautioned time and again against it until it finally became too dangerous to say anything at all.

People are ultimately responsible for their own actions in life, even though one's conditioning and pressures certainly play a part in things. They do not make us who we are however and they do not dictate our actions. People deal with a lot worse rejection than Hitler ever dealt with every single day and come through it all without resorting to megalithic violence against others.

m1thr0s

[Naomi]

Indeed good point, who's to say Hitler wasn't playing some role. I myself don't believe the artist role was ever open to him...perhaps Osho's teachings would have just made him say "Oh I'm supposed to invade Poland now and kill all of the non-Germans in Germany. Namaste!"

:D

:cackles:

[Anibis]

Well, Goebels (Propaganda Minister of Nazi Germany) as far as I know did actually go to school for Theatre... In a sense these guys were not 'repressed artists' so much as people who figured that ethics could be replaced with aesthetics, and thus went about 'painting' a glorious history for themselves in the blood and souls of the people... Just my off the cuff assesment of it...

As for funny Guru people.. check THIS (http://www.psychics.co.uk/saibaba/saibaba.html) one out... From what I can tell he's seriously suspected of pedophilia but still enjoys a major following amongst high up politicians and such... The thing that gets me is that He 'materializes' fancy watches and such by pulling them out of his AFRO. He convinces his disciples that he has divine powers by pulling gifts for them from his hairdo! Now at least that is funny. Not hard to do, either, I can assure you... If only i had an Afro...
-Anibis

[m1thr0s]

Sai Babba's a hoot! I have a soft spot for his kind of Guru...

who's to say Hitler wasn't playing some role...oh hell yes...demigods on parade...him and mussolini and...his various demigod buddies...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

all of this presupposes that people are *made* by their environments alone...or if not entirely alone...very largely. I do not agree with this assertion and I have seen no evidence to support the idea that people are quite that *plastic*.

Well , I have read research on serial killers and other criminals, which stated that they had a abusive childhood and other negative psychological experiences.

You cannot expect everyone to be highly self-disciplined, restrained, and self-aware, to forget their traumatic experiences. All these pain and dissapointments stored in the subconscious mind is bound to erupt sooner or later.


According to the Wikipedia......


As a boy, Hitler says he was whipped almost daily by his father. Years later he told his secretary, "I then resolved never again to cry when my father whipped me. A few days later I had the opportunity of putting my will to the test. My mother, frightened, took refuge in the front of the door. As for me, I counted silently the blows of the stick which lashed my rear end."

Hitler explained his educational slump as a rebellion against his father, who wanted the boy to follow him in a career as a customs official, although Adolf wanted to become a painter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Painter). This explanation is further supported by Hitler's later description of himself as a misunderstood artist


At the age of 16, Hitler left school with no qualifications (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_certification).


He was rejected twice by the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_Fine_Arts_Vienna) (1907 – 1908) due to "unfitness for painting", and was told his abilities lay in the field of architecture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture). His memoirs reflect a fascination with the subject:
"The purpose of my trip was to study the picture gallery in the Court Museum, but I had eyes for scarcely anything but the Museum itself. From morning until late at night, I ran from one object of interest to another, but it was always the buildings which held my primary interest." (Mein Kampf, Chapter II, paragraph 3).
Following the school rector's recommendation, he too became convinced this was the path to pursue, yet he lacked the proper academic preparation for architecture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture) school:
"In a few days I myself knew that I should some day become an architect. To be sure, it was an incredibly hard road; for the studies I had neglected out of spite at the Realschule were sorely needed. One could not attend the Academy's architectural school without having attended the building school at the Technic, and the latter required a high-school degree. I had none of all this. The fulfillment of my artistic dream seemed physically impossible.''"(Mein Kampf, Chapter II, paragraph 5 & 6).




But we are given to understand that Hitler was a fairly strong individual, for better or for worse. As such he made certain choices and his life took shape around those choices. Those choices were not made by society...they were made by him.

Well, it was his choice to study art and enroll himself at an art institute,including the architecture school as well, and it was society that denied him this choice of his. So society did play a major role in his development.









People are ultimately responsible for their own actions in life, even though one's conditioning and pressures certainly play a part in things. They do not make us who we are however and they do not dictate our actions. People deal with a lot worse rejection than Hitler ever dealt with every single day and come through it all without resorting to megalithic violence against others.

m1thr0s


As I stated before, you cannot expect everyone to be highly self-disciplined and restrained and self-aware. If that were so , we would not have any crime or criminals or war for that matter.

And environment does change people drastically . The story of Angulimala, who was a serial killer in ancient India , and who was transformed from a ruthless killer to a moral ,pious and gentle monk by the Buddha, is very famous in India.

[m1thr0s]

I'm not really interested in discussing Hitler's background...I am quite confident he was one disturbed monkey. :mconfused:

I am simply asserting that Osho's arguments are essentially ridiculous and completely unsubstantiated by an real supporting evidence. For all we know he might have done very well in art school and still gone on to become the despot that he did. The whole argument exists in a vacuum since we will never really know what "might" have happened either way. Any speculation on it at this point is a fool's errand, but there is no good reason to think that had he done better with his art he would not have become the person he did become.

There were a great many other factors playing out in his life that would have inclined him towards patriotic fanaticism no matter what. I accept that those pressures were very real and had a lot to do with who he finally became. I do not accept that things might have gone any differently just because his art took off. There is simply no way to really justify that argument...it's an idle speculation and nothing more.

psychotics who happen to snap are not always failures in other walks of life. If you have studied serial killers and such you would know that. They are often very successful lawyers, business people and, yes, even artists. shit happens and just having a creative outlet is no guarantee you might not succumb to some overwhelming destructive force in your life.

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

I'm not really interested in dicussing Hitler's background...I am quite confident he was one disturbed monkey.


Well , I believe that a study of Hitlers background is important to understand why he became a disturbed 'monkey' in the first place, so that we can prevent further Hitlers or disturbed 'monkeys ' from arising.






I am simply asserting that Osha's arguments are essentially ridiculous and completely unsubstantiated by an real supporting evidence.



And I believe Osho's arguments are logical, considering the evidence and facts I have shown in my previous posts.

[m1thr0s]

you haven't shown any evidence of anything niranjan. you have asserted an opinion which of course you have a perfect right to.

the argument itself just doesn't wash...there is no "evidence" supporting it...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

you haven't shown any evidence of anything niranjan. you have asserted an opinion which of course you have a perfect right to.

the argument itself just doesn't wash...there is no "evidence" supporting it...

m1thr0s


I cannot place my sources as I have read them in newspapers and magazines, and do not have them at the present moment.

However it is a fact that French scientists and sociologists, found out that the abnormal levels of criminal violence in some parts of France, could be attributed to the lack of clubs in arts or sports or other fields, and I have clearly read the details of this research in the newspaper.

Also it is a fact that generally speaking, most serial killers and criminals had a abusive childhood, and other psychologically disturbing experiences.

Recently , we captured a serial killer of children in India, and upon studying his past by experts, it was found that he had an abusive childhood (which didn't surprise me at all).


You only have to google 'childhood abuse crime', to see the numerous articles and scientific research in this regard.

[m1thr0s]

sure...I had an abusive childhood too...lots of people have. The first rule of psychology statistics is "correlation does not equal causation". We can certainly demonstrate abuse as a contributing factor but it is not the exact cause of psychosis itself. Furthermore, this abusive background only reinforces my premise that Hitler's success or failure with art school would have affected nothing....that he was already predisposed to political fanaticism given the right set of circumstances which Germany, at that time, provided...

these are entirely separate issues...Osho's assertion simply has no legitimate foundation. It's a "prop" example, signifying nothing, as many of his off-the-cuff assertions are...

m1thr0s

[niranjan]

sure...I had an abusive childhood too...lots of people have.


As I stated before , I don't think you can expect everyone to be highly self-disciplined, self-restrained and self-aware as you are.



The first rule of psychology statistics is "correlation does not equal causation". We can certainly demonstrate abuse as a contributing factor but it is not the exact cause of psychosis itself.



And I must state that Hitler, is not psychotic . His works and political career , are not symptomatic of a psychopath.



<<<<<<Furthermore, this abusive background only reinforces my premise that Hitler's success or failure with art school would have affected nothing...>>>>>>>>


I don't think we can say anything for sure. He may be , or he may not be. However I can definetely say that if he had got admission to the art school in vienna, considering his passion for art or architecture, he would have definetely spent more time and energy in pursuing his passion, in the company of fellow art lovers, and would have greatly enjoyed his life , which was a bit tragic till then. Also he would have run less chance of being corrupted by racist ideologues and literature , as he would not be in their sphere of influence.







these are entirely separate issues...Osho's assertion simply has no legitimate foundation. It's a "prop" example, signifying nothing, as many of his off-the-cuff assertions are...

m1thr0s


Well , I did state about research in France, which showed that extraordinary violence in some parts of France, among the youth, was attributed to the lack of sports clubs or any other club for that matter, for channeling their creative energies.

[niranjan]

Here's another teaching of Osho , which I highly admire.......


My approach is non-political. I have no vested interest in anything -- in any language, in any province, in any religion, in any tradition. My approach is that the whole past of humanity is ours. Thats why I have chosen to speak on Chinese masters, Japanese masters, Greek masters, Hebrew masters. I am going to speak on all the masters of the world so that, listening to all these different songs, you can become universal.


My approach is absolutely non-political, hence it is absolutely individual. And that is the religious approach as such. Religion will remain individual, it will never become a collective phenomenon; it cannot. Politics will always be collective, it will never become individual.

Politics is collective, religion is individual, spirituality is universal. Remember it.

[niranjan]

perhaps Osho's teachings would have just made him say "Oh I'm supposed to invade Poland now and kill all of the non-Germans in Germany. Namaste!"

:D




Well, I know for a fact that Osho emphasized inter-racial breeding, as he stated that the children born of such couples , are more healthy physically, and less prone to hereditary diseases.

So, if Hitler were to come under Osho's influence, you can say that he would have renounced his racist beliefs and attitudes, and would have got himself a Jewish female lover, or a lover of an another race, and brought forth 'mixed' children.


Also , he would have given no attention at all to politics, and instead would devote time to art or architecture, and even other artistic fields as music, sculpture, theatre, dance etc.

Also he would have been a profoundly religious person, practicing Zen and meditation, which would successfully eradicate the pain and dissapointments of his childhood abuse.

He would also have got rid of his ridiculous moustache, and instead would have grown long locks and a majestic beard like Osho or Jesus Christ.


I can also visualize him with flowers around his head and neck, singing and dancing.


And he would also have got rid of his absurd notion that poverty is a virtue, and instead would have stated that earning wealth is a virtue. He would have worked hard to acquire wealth , to enjoy his life.

And instead of an autobiography titled Mein Kampf ( my struggle), he would have released an autobiography stating " My great joy", which would be highly influential in turning German ,Austrian and European youth to spirituality, zen and meditation,
instead of racism and gross violence and other nonsense.


I think at the most , Hitler would have become a Zorba or a Don Juan , a notorious lover of women .


I apologize if anyone finds this to be outrageous.


But you must admit, the sin of being a Zorba or a Don Juan , is much negligible compared to the sin of killing 50 milion people, not to mention the injuries, the psychological trauma, the destruction of property, and the damage to the environment.

[m1thr0s]

As I stated before , I don't think you can expect everyone to be highly self-disciplined, self-restrained and self-aware as you are.yes, you keep saying that and I keep ignoring it because it's distortional nonsense. We aren't talking about me or how disciplined I might be or what my expectations might be...we are talking about the simple coherence or lack of coherence of an assertion made by Osho...that had Hitler been admitted to whatever art institute he applied to, history would have taken a completely different turn. Your attempt to turn this into something about me and my "high expectations" of others is disingenuous and is becoming tedious. Stick to your arguments here niranjan or I will simply shut this topic down.

And I must state that Hitler, is not psychotic . His works and political career , are not symptomatic of a psychopath.His behavior would seem to suggest otherwise since mass-genocyde against any group of people for no legitimate reason would ordinarily be considered insane and not simply a "political" decision per se. Nevertheless, I will grant that neither you or I may be qualified to make that kind of clinical diagnosis...

So, if Hitler were to come under Osho's influence, you can say that he would have renounced his racist beliefs and attitudes, and would have got himself a Jewish female lover, or a lover of an another race, and brought forth 'mixed' children.


Also , he would have given no attention at all to politics, and instead would devote time to art or architecture, and even other artistic fields as music, sculpture, theatre, dance etc.

Also he would have been a profoundly religious person, practicing Zen and meditation, which would successfully eradicate the pain and dissapointments of his childhood abuse.

He would also have got rid of his ridiculous moustache, and instead would have grown long locks and a majestic beard like Osho or Jesus Christ.


I can also visualize him with flowers around his head and neck, singing and dancing.


And he would also have got rid of his absurd notion that poverty is a virtue, and instead would have stated that earning wealth is a virtue. He would have worked hard to acquire wealth , to enjoy his life.

And instead of an autobiography titled Mein Kampf ( my struggle), he would have released an autobiography stating " My great joy", which would be highly influential in turning German ,Austrian and European youth to spirituality, zen and meditation,
instead of racism and gross violence and other nonsense.


I think at the most , Hitler would have become a Zorba or a Don Juan , a notorious lover of women .


I apologize if anyone finds this to be outrageous.
This I think has been the point of your ranting all along...to paint this ridiculous la-la-land scenario of how Hitler's life would have turned out if he had been exposed to Osho's teachings...something you are not only completely unqualified to speculate upon but have no rational basis for assuming or asserting whatsoever.

"outrageous"? try "ridiculous", "deluded", "laughable"...

and really...this nonsense has gone far enough...this topic isn't about anything real...it's been a fantasy journey through never-never land from the start...

topic closed.

m1thr0s