One of the biggest traps

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby DavidB » Mon Feb 20, 2017 3:35 am

Ultimately we put faith in nobody and nothing, while recognizing the divine in everybody and everything.
“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
User avatar
DavidB
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 7:55 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby meetjoeblack » Mon Feb 20, 2017 6:36 am

dijmart wrote:I think one of the biggest traps is thinking that you have gone off course or whatever, just because you're feeling pain. Pain is what the "apparent" person experiences as the opposite of pleasure. That is "not" going to change. You can only change your reaction to it, somewhat...because, damn it, pain is painful!

I've been riddled with illness lately, bank accounts were hacked, my duckie died yesterday in her water bucket and this is just in the past 2 weeks! You just have to let the movie play out..do what you can and move forward, knowing you are watching the movie...you aren't what you can see. Meaning, this is all playing out within me, awareness, but since I'm associated with the "apparent" person...it's still painful.


I watched a mma documentary. A woman said her car rolled and her fiancé was killed. She was talking about the beauty in life but, the flipside of that coin is the sad things in life like the children they will never have or the dates they will never go on. It is pretty dark. One of the good things is that, we aren't alone on this journey, and we have ecky as well as each other :D
meetjoeblack
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:49 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:23 pm

Whether he was Self-Realized or not, nobody knows. I heard Ramji saying a few times that it takes a Jnani to know a Jnani. But what that statement really means is that it takes a Liberated person to know another.


Thats right... No matter what, only an enlightened person can recognize another enlightened person. And many people who was with him for many years have misunderstood him and looks like this Vedanta teacher is one such example.. Ma Anand Sheela was another example.. If one is receptive and open enough, Osho's teaching can be very helpful. This teacher is just throwing out his opinions. Anybody can throw such opinions with conclusions they derive based on their own ideas of how an enlightened person must behave. I have read many such negative comments about him from various people, which clearly shows that those people (even if they were with him for years), didnt really listen to all his discourses or read all his books. His collection of discourses is like encyclopedia of spirituality.

Oshos’ teachings were entry level, kindergarten, mostly based on meditations and psychological and sociological insights. His spiritual teachings were a soup made of very little knowledge diluted by much of his own experiential notions of enlightenment, i.e. ignorance. He was a rebel by nature and against everything… opposed to all traditions, including the one that could have brought true liberation into his life.


That is definitely not correct... I have read many books of Osho's talks and his teaching has covered almost everything and he has spoken about almost all the traditions in the world.When he was in India, he spoke about Upanishads and Yoga and elaborated each and everything in detail. Anybody who has read his books on these subjects would never agree his statement 'Oshos’ teachings were entry level, kindergarten, mostly based on meditations and psychological and sociological insights'... That is a joke. To my knowledge, no other teacher has gone this deep in explaining everything in detail as Osho did. I don't know which ten years he spent with Osho, but he spoke and gave discourses for nearly 40 years. He did that everyday except the 3 years of period of silence. In the last years of his life, his talks were very casual and didn't really explore the teachings so much because he had already covered all those teachings in the first 25-30 years. And yes, it was true that his health was very bad during the last few years and he couldnt speak as much as he could in the early periods of his life.

He did not oppose all traditions. But he opposed the ignorant part of them. He brought out the truth of all religions. He has spoken positively about the core of all traditions which this Vedanta teacher obviously did not read. If he had read those, he wouldnt not have said that his spiritual teachings were a soup made of very little knowledge. That is both funny and sad.. Anybody who has read his books covering the topics of Yoga, Upanishads, Vedanta, Zen, Sufism, Christian mysticism, Hasidism, Tantra etc would know how huge and deep his knowledge was. He was a world bank of knowledge and wisdom.
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:38 pm

Hi Dijmart,

I understand why you are saying things against Osho now.. I looked up and read a few articles by James Swartz and see that he is portraying Osho as one of the fallen gurus. I also saw that shiningworld.com forum post about Osho from which you quoted that critique about him. Obviously, your opinion of Osho mostly comes from your teachers opinion. But I see a lot of misunderstanding by him about Osho. Let me clear up those misunderstandings.

James says "Rajneesh, the ‘horse’s mouth’ concerning the topic of enlightenment for Westerners for many years, was a particularly clever man who created a very large following of Westerners by wedding two largely incompatible concepts, sense enjoyment and enlightenment."..

I am not surprised because this is the most common misunderstanding about Osho. Osho didn't give a license for people to go for sense enjoyment and that is not what he focused on. He just taught everybody to live a normal day to day life and get transformed, without having to run away from the society.He was against suppression. He focused on bringing awareness into our unconscious part of our mind rather than denying the unconscious part. He was against hypocrisy and faking renunciation. He made a very clear distinction between true renunciation and false renunciation. He was against the conflict inside human minds. He taught us how to be a witness. Witnessing is the essential part of his teaching.

I think he must have heard about Osho by hearing the misunderstood version of his teachings. May be, some of the Osho's sannyasins misunderstood his teachings. He never taught that seeking for sensual pleasures is a way to enlightenment. He said not to fight against our desires and negative emotions. But he said that bringing awareness to our actions makes our desires to disappear rather than fighting against them.

James says "Rajneesh was not a Hindu and seemed to have had a certain contempt for the great spiritual tradition that surrounded him"... No, Osho didn't have any contempt for the Indian spiritual tradition. But he was against hypocrites, false gurus and belief systems which are based on blind beliefs. He encouraged people not to blindly believe in things and rather find the truth for themselves.. He has given a complete commentary on Bhagwad Gita, word by word, which has been published in huge volumes in Hindi called Gita Darshan. He talked about all the major Upanishads and has given complete commentary on them. He has also talked about Brahmasutras as one of the books that he has loved, even though he didn't give a commentary on that.And Brahmasutras, Upanishads and Bhagwad gita are the three main sources of Vedanta.

Let me tell you how his teachings were helpful in my own life.. I once thought that to know the ultimate truth, I have to suppress my desires and suppress my negative emotions like anger. But the more I suppressed them, the more stronger they became. It was like 'me' fighting with myself. I tried to be humble by suppressing the urges of my ego. When I began to read Osho, he clearly pointed out how this approach doesn't work. Instead, he taught me how we can make most of these things go away by acceptance and awareness. This doesn't mean that one should give in to all the cravings of mind and go behind them. That is not what Osho taught, but I think some people have misunderstood it that way. In fact, most of what Osho taught is just the same as what Eckhart Tolle teaches.

Dijmart, I have read about hundreds of books by Osho and I know what I am talking about. I am not a blind believer of anybody. I use my own intellect and common sense. I trust Osho because his books brought a really profound change in my life. I have an enormous trust on him and I know how Osho has been portrayed in James Swartz articles is completely wrong. I don't blame him, it is just the misunderstanding in the society that has been created by people who have not read Osho or who have interpreted it the wrong way.

I am a born Hindu, and I had read Bhagwad Gita and Vedanta even before I started reading Osho. After reading Osho, everything I had read before made sense.. So, I would appreciate if you stop posting things that says against Osho. If you can't understand about Osho, just forget that he existed.. It is so unfair to reduce him into a fallen guru who advises people to go behind their sensual pleasures.. He is a wonderful Guru and a great gift to humanity...The wisdom that he has left behind is so vast and the work that he did was incredible..
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:53 am

meetjoeblack wrote:I watched a mma documentary. A woman said her car rolled and her fiancé was killed. She was talking about the beauty in life but, the flipside of that coin is the sad things in life like the children they will never have or the dates they will never go on. It is pretty dark. One of the good things is that, we aren't alone on this journey, and we have ecky as well as each other :D


Still cracks me up you call E.T.....Ecky :lol:

Anyways, yeah, there's an upside and a downside to everything. Upside was that she found love with her fiance, downside she could and did lose that love. Sad.
Last edited by dijmart on Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:30 am

So, I would appreciate if you stop posting things that says against Osho.


No, I can not guarantee this for you, but I will say my posts against him, were only in response to your posting excessive excerpts from him. There may be readers who have never heard of him and they should know he's controversial and imo, should be wary of his teachings.

just forget that he existed..


I only ever think of him to begin with when you post about him.

It is so unfair to reduce him into a fallen guru


Whether it's "fair" or not, isn't for me to say. However, if one of his 10 year devotees is talking out about what he thinks of him. I think its more then valid. I don't recall reading what you say James Swartz has said about Osho. I've known of Osho for awhile and haven't been impressed.

If he's helped you and you think he's wonderful, then why do you care what I say? You are posting all these excerpts of Osho trying to make him an authority on what your talking about, but I personally don't think he's all that and I especially thought he sounded like an ass talking about Nisargadatta Maharaj the way he did.

As always, just my 2 cents.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:17 pm

Dijmart,

One of the things that I observed about you in this thread is, you keep dismissing or ignoring the valid points that I make against some of the things you post. You seem to remain close and have a desperate need to be right all the time. You seem to insist you are always right and you only pick up a few statements in my replies that you can argue against.

I explained very clearly why the critique from that Vedanta teacher (who was with Osho) is wrong.. (But you ignored my explanations) Anybody who has read Osho's works can say that he is wrong because he is saying that Osho's teachings are not deep and at the kindergarten level. That is complete nonsense and the most idiotic statement that one can make about Osho. There is a Osho online library available for free in Osho.com and you can find out for yourself. You will see how many
topics he has touched and how deep he went into many famous scriptures. If he talked about Dhammapada, for example, he would give talks for 4 -5 months at a stretch explaining each and every line in detail.I think you will still ignore and this and keep saying what you say is right.

Let me repeat what I said in my previous post as well, this time in bold: Osho has given a complete commentary on Bhagwad Gita, word by word, which has been published in huge volumes in Hindi called Gita Darshan. He talked about all the major Upanishads and has given complete commentary on them. He has also talked about Brahmasutras as one of the books that he has loved, even though he didn't give a commentary on that.And Brahmasutras, Upanishads and Bhagwad gita are the three main sources of Vedanta.

No, I can not guarantee this for you, but I will say my posts against him, were only in response to your posting excessive excerpts from him. There may be readers who have never heard of him and they should know he's controversial and imo, should be wary of his teachings.


No problem.. I will continue to post excerpts from Osho wherever it is necessary because he says things more clearly. I don't care about the people who read those controversies and turn away from Osho. Because I still believe that there will be some who are more open enough to see the extraordinary wisdom in Osho's talks.

Whether it's "fair" or not, isn't for me to say. However, if one of his 10 year devotees is talking out about what he thinks of him. I think its more then valid


It is very natural for any master to have a few disciples turned against him or misunderstood him. Also, mind has a tendency to forget many valuable things and tries to distort the memories in the long run, when new inputs are added to the mind.I have no doubt that meditations that he did in Osho's place would have prepared him to a great extent. But his comment about Osho is very unfair and utter nonsense. Also, it is clear that he was not really listening to Osho's teachings there or read Osho's books because what he would not have said what he said about Osho if he was really aware of his complete teachings. If you think his careless comments about Osho is valid, then why don't you consider my comments as valid too, I told you my experience about Osho and how it transformed me.. Without Osho, I don't know where I would be now. His detailed explanations of ego and mind pointed out very clearly what my mind was doing and how my ego was playing tricks. His words have a great power to still your mind and all you have to do for that is to be open minded.

I don't recall reading what you say James Swartz has said about Osho


It is all over his website and also in his book "How to attain enlightenment". I read some excerpts in Google books. James seems to have an insane prejudice against Osho and he spills it out wherever he finds a chance. Not only Osho, he seems to be spending a lot of his energy to point out how unenlightened other teachers are.. Actually, I agree what he says about Neo Advaita because I myself can't think of a neo advaita teacher saying anything except asking "Who is asking this question?'..But he and his authorized teachers on the website even seem to say J.Krishnamurti and Jesus were not proper teachers.It takes an enlightened person to recognize another enlightened person, but a person who has enough maturity can spot somebody who is not enlightened. Based on James's careless attitude, I can definitely say he is not enlightened. If he seems to be wise, then I would say that all that wisdom comes from his old age, his experience in India with many teachers and his knowledge in Vedanta, not because he is enlightened. And an unenlightened teacher helping other people is always like a blind man helping other blind men.

I've known of Osho for awhile and haven't been impressed.


How did you come to know about Osho and what is that you are not impressed with? If you give me more details, then I can give you more explanation on that.

Osho actually created a revolution to shatter much of the ignorance which was in the society. He chose a conscious personality to show to the people outside and that actually created a lot of attention to his messages. To an enlightened person, whatever personality he takes is just like a part in a drama, because for them whatever happens in the world is just a game. For example, Gurdjeiff, another great enlightened master is known to show different faces to each person he meets, so that every person who met Gurdjieff ended up having a different opinion about him. Gurdjieff did that on purpose because he needed to do it to do his work. Same way, Osho put up a certain personality consciously which allowed him to do his work that he intended to do in the society.

If he's helped you and you think he's wonderful, then why do you care what I say?


I think it is my responsibility to show my gratitude to my Guru and clear up the confusions. No matter how many times you talk against Osho, I will try as much as I could to defend him. It is very sad to see how some people are so closed to an ocean of wisdom that they can take advantage of. You think that you are helping other people by posting these things and I know that Iam also helping other people to understand his teachings.

I especially thought he sounded like an ass talking about Nisargadatta Maharaj the way he did


Osho has a lot of humor sense. I have watched his videos and he doesn't sound serious at all but when you read it in pure text, it might sound like he is ranting. The point he was trying to make is that spirituality is a routine thing in India. It is very true. I have seen many people who live as ascetics, have a sound knowledge of scriptures and they can impress westerners very easily. Vedanta might sound very new and impressive to you, but here you can find people parroting the lines from Vedanta in every nook and corner, especially in the rural areas. But the way Osho talks can be a great blow to people's egos. If Osho has said that, there could be only two reasons: Either Nisargadatta's is not completely realized or he was just using it as a device. I am only suggesting the possibilities.. Osho has praised Ramana Maharishi in all his talks but he has made such a comment about Nisargadatta, which sometimes makes me to suspect "What if Nisargadatta was just repeating his Guru's words?".. Nobody would have known the difference. But that didn't stop me from reading Nisargadatta's books. Also, I know about Osho and sometimes the only intention of saying things like that is to force the people's mind to come out of their conditioning.

I kind of lived with Osho by reading his books. Reading every book that has been published under his name was, for me, like an experience to be in his presence. I don't know Osho personally but I know Osho experientially.

You say that Osho is not an authority. But I think you might agree if I make Nisargadatta Maharaj an authority.You might be surprised to know that he had a great opinion about Osho.

Here is what Maharaj said about Osho (apparently in response to a question about him), from " Consciousness and the Absolute: "
Chapter Sixty One. June Nine, 1981.

Nisargadatta Maharaj: Rajneesh is not a small personality or small principal.
He is tremendous.
He is very big.
He is a great sage.

When you already have a guru,
why do you visit other sages?
Since you already have a great sage as your guru,
you should not sit here or come here.
I do not like those shiftings from gurus to gurus.
I do not like wanderers.

Questioner: What is the difference between Maharaj and Rajneesh?

Nisargadatta Maharaj: Once you remove the letters, the names,
what is the difference?
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:12 pm

Borris,
Just because I don't comment doesn't mean I didn't read what you wrote. I don't see in my post where I needed to be "right" at all. I stated my opinion.

I don't have the time, nor the energy to make a comment on everything you say, especially about Osho. If your bothered by how I choose to reply then don't address posts to me or just ignore them.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 6:16 pm

If your bothered by how I choose to reply then don't address posts to me or just ignore them.


I am not bothered by it..I am simply stating whatever I have observed.

You have still left one of the main questions I raised unanswered.... You say that you believe there is a validity in Arlindo Nagar says when he said "Oshos’ teachings were entry level, kindergarten, mostly based on meditations and psychological and sociological insights. His spiritual teachings were a soup made of very little knowledge diluted by much of his own experiential notions of enlightenment, i.e. ignorance."...

I told you that is not correct because his knowledge was huge. I have said many times in this thread about the topics Osho talked about and how deep he went in all those subjects.Without a vast knowledge he couldn't have commented on Bhagwad Gita, Upanishads, Bible, Dhammapada, Patanjali Yoga sutras, Zen stories and more...

Now you are not able to admit that Arlindo Nagar was wrong on that because you don't want to be wrong.. Your silence simply proves you don't have any answer for that...

And you don't have any comment for Nisargadatta's statement about Osho either... Since you don't know what to say, you simply didn't reply. When you had the time and energy to search and post what Arlindo Nagar said against Osho, how come you didn't have time and energy to post regarding the valid points I made?

Anyway, if you don't want to answer to all those, that is fine. I just want to make certain things about Osho clear, so that any reader who reads this thread in the future may find it helpful. I will continue to post excerpts from Osho wherever applicable. I won't be surprised if you suddenly get time and energy to say something against those excerpts.. :lol:
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:04 pm

You have still left one of the main questions I raised unanswered.... You say that you believe there is a validity in Arlindo Nagar says .......


Yes, because he spent and I'll say it again...10 years with him! He's allowed to have an opinion! In America it's called "freedom of speech".

Now you are not able to admit that Arlindo Nagar was wrong on that because you don't want to be wrong.. Your silence simply proves you don't have any answer for that...


You haven't and aren't going to change my mind on Osho. So, theres nothing to discuss, hence the silence.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:43 pm

Yes, because he spent and I'll say it again...10 years with him! He's allowed to have an opinion! In America it's called "freedom of speech".


You don't have to spend the same 10 years to know what Arlindo Nagar says is incorrect. You only need 10 minutes.. If you go to Osho.com online library, you can see how many books of Osho's talks have been published and what topics they are about..

I am not saying he is not allowed to have an opinion. I am pointing out how that opinion of his is wrong... I can't believe how you keep missing what I say.. He says Osho had very little knowledge and I am saying that is not correct.. You can find out for yourself whether I am right or wrong..
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:54 pm

Time for a joke, because this thread has reached 100 replies and this is 101st reply :lol:

It was Grandpa Jones’ 100th birthday and he was still in perfect health. At his birthday party he was asked how he managed to live so long and stay so fit.

He explained, “I put my long life down to spending so much time out of doors. I’ve been in the open air, day after day, rain or shine, for the last 75th years.”

“How do you manage to keep up such a rigorous fitness regime?” we asked.

“It’s simple” he said. “When I married my wife 75 years ago, we both made solemn pledge on our wedding night. We agreed that whenever we ever had a fight, whoever was proved wrong would go outside and take long walk.”
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:26 pm

I am pointing out how that opinion of his is wrong... I can't believe how you keep missing what I say..


I'm not missing what you're saying Borris. It's just that it is your opinion that Arlindo's critique is wrong. I haven't judged it as right or wrong, on this forum, but I think overall he probably hit the nail on the head, but perhaps over simplified some things too, to make a point.

So, let's recap what Ive said about Osho. I posted an opinion of Osho by Arlindo, which I clearly stated was a critique, therefore an opinion-not facts. I also, said he was in a sex scandal- which I later admitted I was "wrong", the scandal involvement was the poisoning of 710 people and murder plot of a US attorney that I was remembering.

You said Osho was in "silence" at the time and that his personal assistant Sheela did it all. However, he did speak to Sheela daily, that info is on the internet. He was "not" in total silence, he was in silence to the "public", so did no public talks. So, ok, she did his dirty work for him or that's how I see it. Yes, that's my opinion and the opinion of others I've read.

I also said he had 93 Rolls Royce's and was deported from the US, because he plead guilty to immigration fraud.

So, other then Arlindo's and my own opinion, everything else are facts someone can find on the internet. There are even more charges and accusations that I read and didn't post. So, again, if you want to follow him, then do so. I felt the need to warn people about him and to let you know I don't consider him a spiritual authority what so ever.

I think you've made it very clear that he's your guru, so be it!
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:16 pm

Dijimart, People are usually looking for sensational news everywhere.. The press all over the world knows that if they can portray a very famous person in negative way, it sells. And whatever media and press says makes a big influence on public.. Take any good person in the world, at least 20% of people will be there in the world to say something negative about him and probably another 30% of people who are interested in such negative news and believe it.

The closest disciples of Osho have said that he actually lived a very simple life, and the only luxury he permitted to himself was air conditioning.He didn't really care about those Rolls Royces at all and didnt have any desire for them. The sannyasins would just send a car to pick up Osho everyday. Those Rolls Royces actually belonged to the commune as they were gifted by various people. And, Sheela was not in contact with Osho in the last year of his silence when these scandals you are mentioning happened. Yes, he was not in total silence and but there was not much contact between Osho and Sheela. As soon as Osho became aware of what was happening, Sheela actually escaped from the commune with few sannyasins. In fact, she also placed devices for recording the sounds in many rooms including Osho's room. If Osho himself was involved in it, why would Sheela put those devices in Osho's room? Osho was only in touch with his physicians when these things happened.

There is a documentary on Rajneeshpuram which discusses the truth about Osho and what Sheela did. It explains many things very clearly. I will post the link if I find it.

Osho also gave many interviews to the press about all these happenings. They have been published in many volumes called 'The Last Testament'. It would be better to watch the videos of those interviews rather than reading them because Osho was very funny and he turned those serious interviews into laughing sessions. The press is asking so many questions in those videos and any guilty person would feel very uncomfortable during such sessions, but Osho was simply cracking jokes and making people laugh.

You are judging Osho based on just public opinions and some distorted facts on the internet. I have read so many of them as well. I know Osho through his books,books from many closest disciples like Chetana (the name of the book is "My diamond days with Osho') and the complete story of his life. I have done my own research for many years, because whenever I come across any critique about Osho, I always take the time to read it to find if there is really any truth in it. As I said, I am a very skeptical person and I don't trust people very easily. Osho was very intelligent. If his interest was in getting more money or power, he could have used many different ways to do it.

I have done enough research about Osho's life, looked at both sides of criticism, and so far nothing has convinced me that Osho was guilty when it comes to those scandals.
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:43 pm

Borris,

In case your interested-

Criminal trial testimony: Ava Avalos

Two of the Rajneesh commune’s top leaders went to trial in U.S. District Court in Portland, accused of conspiring to kill the U.S. attorney. Here are transcripts of the testimony of key insiders, describing life at the ranch and the plot to kill Charles Turner.

Here are the court transcripts-

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... imony.html

Here is the transcript section specific to Bhagwan (Osho) where they talk about Sheela tape recording Bhagwan.

Ma Ava stated under oath that "She (Ma Anand Sheela) came back to the meeting and ... began to play the tape. It was a little hard to hear what he was saying ... And the gist of Bhagwan's response, yes, it was going to be necessary to kill people to stay in Oregon. And that actually killing people wasn't such a bad thing. And actually Hitler was a great man, although he could not say that publicly because nobody would understand that. Hitler had great vision."

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... normal.gif

I'm not posting this to continue the debate, no, I'm tired of it! Just wondered if you've seen these court documents when you say, " nothing has convinced me that Osho was guilty when it comes to those scandals."
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests