Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Walking in Zen, Sitting in Zen by OSHO
From the PDF book found at....http://www.messagefrommasters.com/Beloved_Osho_Books/Zen/Walking_in_Zen_Sitting_in_Zen.pdf
I love the statement that the ”man of Zen walks in Zen and sits in Zen” for the simple reason that
meditation cannot be just a part of your life. You cannot make a fragment of your life meditative; it
is not possible to be meditative for one hour and then non-meditative for twenty-three hours. It is
absolutely impossible. If you are doing that, that means your meditation is false.
Meditation can either be a twenty-four-hour affair or it cannot be at all. It is like breathing: you cannot
breathe for one hour and then put it aside for twenty-three hours, otherwise you will be dead. You
have to go on breathing. Even while you are asleep you have to go on breathing. Even in a deep
coma you have to go on breathing.
Meditation is the breath of your soul. Just as breathing is the life of the body, meditation is the life of
the soul.
The people who are not aware of meditation are spiritually dead.
also.....
It is not a question of how much more, it is not a question of quantity; either you are asleep or you
are awake. No one is more asleep than anybody else. The people who are asleep are asleep in the
same way. It does not matter how deeply you are asleep – it is not a question of quantity – you are
asleep, that is enough. And the same is the case with awakening: if you are awake, you are simply
awake. Nobody is more awake or less awake.
also....
Zen is not interested in such compromises. It wants you to really wake up. And it is hard work,
a thankless job. A Zen Master has chosen something for which nobody is going to thank him.
Everybody will feel sabotaged by him and everybody will feel hurt by him. Everybody will feel he is
disturbing their sleep. Only very few people, who are real inquirers, who are ready to risk all, will be
able to understand, because Zen says your whole life has to be transformed, not just a part of your
I love the statement that the ”man of Zen walks in Zen and sits in Zen” for the simple reason that
meditation cannot be just a part of your life. You cannot make a fragment of your life meditative; it
is not possible to be meditative for one hour and then non-meditative for twenty-three hours. It is
absolutely impossible. If you are doing that, that means your meditation is false.
Meditation can either be a twenty-four-hour affair or it cannot be at all. It is like breathing: you cannot
breathe for one hour and then put it aside for twenty-three hours, otherwise you will be dead. You
have to go on breathing. Even while you are asleep you have to go on breathing. Even in a deep
coma you have to go on breathing.
Meditation is the breath of your soul. Just as breathing is the life of the body, meditation is the life of
the soul.
The people who are not aware of meditation are spiritually dead.
also.....
It is not a question of how much more, it is not a question of quantity; either you are asleep or you
are awake. No one is more asleep than anybody else. The people who are asleep are asleep in the
same way. It does not matter how deeply you are asleep – it is not a question of quantity – you are
asleep, that is enough. And the same is the case with awakening: if you are awake, you are simply
awake. Nobody is more awake or less awake.
also....
Zen is not interested in such compromises. It wants you to really wake up. And it is hard work,
a thankless job. A Zen Master has chosen something for which nobody is going to thank him.
Everybody will feel sabotaged by him and everybody will feel hurt by him. Everybody will feel he is
disturbing their sleep. Only very few people, who are real inquirers, who are ready to risk all, will be
able to understand, because Zen says your whole life has to be transformed, not just a part of your
0
Comments
1. I find many Buddhist practitioners think that meditation is something you do by sitting in a proper position, that lasts for a certain length of time. This is the formalized version of which i have no problem. We must remember that there are numerous methods to this type of meditation. What i also find is that what is gleaned in these formalized meditations is soon forgotten when the person stops meditating. I find this very disturbing. What is gleaned should carry on throughout the day. If true serenity is reached then it should be that way all the time. If thoughts are dropped then they should be dropped all throughout the rest of the day. IF detachment is reached it should continue throughout the rest of the day. But i find people think meditation is like taking a pill, or going to a sauna, or having a massage. Once it is over, back to ego driven pursuits. This just seems to defeat the reason, purpose, and effectiveness of meditation.
2. Many Buddhist's are not awake. They just practice the forms of Buddhism. What does it mean to be awake? I think it means that every waking minute is lived with an open non-egotistical mind and heart. So much of Buddhist conversation is about the description of the arrow that one has been shot with. An awake person pulls the arrow out without all the debate about what it is, where it came from, and what it is made of. That is being asleep. I think that one realizes this awakeness in a sudden manner. After that it is quite impossible to go back to sleep walking through life. Once one awakes their pursuit is that of understanding the spiritual nature of everything. The desires for wealth, and fame are left behind. They are consumed with living as a vessel for ultimate truth. In this there is no in between land. You either are awake or asleep. You can not be in both states of being at the same time.
3. Many Buddhist followers want peace and loving supportive peers, and teachers. That is like wanting to go back to ones' infant stage of life. A true spiritual friend will challenge you about the truth of your ego's domination in certain areas of your life. That is usually very uncomfortable. But they do not abandon you, they stay with you, and encourage you to drop your egotistical leanings and habits. If one just sits meditation and has no such spiritual friend/s, they are likely to just build on their egotistical tendencies. Like cutting through spiritual materialism, the knife is going to hurt some. The truth hurts until one drops the defensiveness and pride in the behavior. I wish for all that they have such spiritual friends.
Maybe next time i post something and want to discuss it, i'll leave out the author, so everyone will listen to the message not the messenger.
Unfortunately, that will not be possible. Sources and origin must be cited and links provided, particularly if there is a whole lot more text that the snippet quoted, to be seen.
While I take on board the things you say with regard to accepting the wisdom of the message without looking at the source, little of what you have presented is new. There is nothing ground-breaking or novel. Therefore, people have every right to scrutinise everything presented, including the so-called origin of the presented text.
Osho is held by many to be a charlatan, a fake, a evil doer, and mis-guided. The responses so far have been of that nature. Do not trust him or what he says. But, the ideas he presents are widely accepted, and even practiced by those who condemn him as a leader and person. How can a unfruitful/bad tree produce fruitful/good fruit? Maybe this ironic dialogue should be renamed "Who do you trust and how/why?" I thought the main message in Buddhism is to find out for yourself from within your own experience what is true and what is not. You can learn from a tree, or a walk in the woods, but beware of the evil bears and snakes that hide behind every rock, and unseen path. Life is filled with doubts, and insecurities. Again, I thought Buddhism deals directly with those "sufferings". No matter what is presented to a person, be it a little kids tantrum, or a wise sages speech, it still is interpreted from within, and the reactions we have to become responsible for. See, there is a lot to say about dull practice, that which is uninspired by new, ground-breaking, novel talk. But that is too boring to the western mind. That is one of the main reasons for posting these paragraphs. Every Buddhist would know the truth of them. But, we tend to focus on the disagreements and ego control of the present moment. It is more important to know if your posture in meditation is right or not. Or what kind of Buddhism do you follow, or how long and how many times you meditate per week. An acknowledgment of finding practice and truth in everyday common existence is boring to the western mind. So we must put the label new, ground breaking, and stimulating in it. That is not the way it comes down in real life. And those who seek these things are sure to be lead right of the path of practice. So though one is experienced in controlling the content of what is said, doesn't make their decisions to give wise counsel any more correct leadership than the blind leading the blind.
Thanks for setting me straight on how and what to post in the future. I will be sure to make it titillating enough in someway, maybe even put in the word "Sex" so that people who read it will be inspired to actually say something that has to do with the topic.
As I said, Osho had his followers deliberately try to poison an entire town in an attempt to get members elected to the city government. More than 750 people were sickened and 45 were hospitalized, one of which was a newborn infant (who was initially given a 5% chance of survival). All of this was done so Osho could gain political control of a small town. He was deported for his crimes. These are facts.
Is that the caliber of person that you want to learn from? Does it sound like their experience is something to base your practice upon? If so, then I feel very sorry for you, because that's the mentality that cult leaders prey on.
Peace and Love to you on your buddhist path.
As Rajneesh himself did not speak in public during this period and until October 1984 gave few interviews, his secretary and chief spokesperson Ma Anand Sheela became, for practical purposes, the leader of the commune.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-23" class="reference">[3]</sup> She did little to defuse the conflict, employing a crude, caustic and defensive speaking style that exacerbated hostilities and attracted media attention.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-24" class="reference">[3]</sup> On 14 September 1985, Sheela and 15 to 20 other top officials abruptly left Rajneeshpuram.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-25" class="reference">[3]</sup> The following week, Rajneesh convened press conferences and publicly accused Sheela and her team of having committed crimes within and outside the commune.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-26" class="reference">[3]</sup><sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">[8]</sup> The subsequent criminal investigation, the largest in Oregon history, confirmed that a secretive group had, unbeknownst to both government officials and nearly all Rajneeshpuram residents, engaged in a variety of criminal activities, including the attempted murder of Rajneesh's physician, wiretapping and bugging within the commune and within Rajneesh's home, poisonings of two public officials, and arson.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-27" class="reference">[3]</sup><sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference">[9]</sup> Sheela was extradited from Germany and imprisoned for these crimes, as well as for her role in infecting the salad bars of several restaurants in The Dalles (the county seat of Wasco County) with salmonella, sickening over 750 (including several Wasco County public officials) and sending 45 people to the hospital. Known as the 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack, the incident is regarded as the largest germ warfare attack in the history of the United States. These blatantly criminal activities had, according to the Office of the Attorney General, begun in the spring of 1984, three years after the establishment of the commune.<sup id="cite_ref-CL339341_2-28" class="reference">[3]</sup>
Rajneesh himself was accused of immigration violations, to which he entered an Alford plea. As part of his plea bargain, he agreed to leave the United States and eventually returned to Pune, India. His followers left Oregon shortly afterwards.
He spoke out against these actions. Not that i am trying to defend him, but you have your facts wrong. So can we return to the subject?
Couldn't have said it better myself.
You have got to be joking. If you think you can minimize and rationalize the fact that he and his followers poisoned hundreds of people, then I have serious doubts about your presence on the board. The fact that you go on to insult me and other people who have pointed out the huge problems with this teacher only further supports the idea that you're trolling.
I'm not going to bother giving you rational explanations anymore, since you don't seem interested in listening or grasping the severity of the situation. If you want to follow Osho's teachings, defend his methods, and criticize those who point out the seriousness of his crimes (and yes, you should research further - there's ample evidence that he financed, ordered, and fully supported the attack) then you've clearly made your choice. Either you're one of his followers or you're just looking to argue. There's no point in debating this anymore.
Still no discussion on the topics.....people would rather slay the messenger no matter who it is, than discuss the importance of the 3 topics. Forget who said it, are they real in your practice? I told you i do not care who said them. It could have been Charles Manson. Who cares. What is being said? Not who is saying them. Don't you have your own mind? What are you so afraid of?
Wow.
. .
That is true, he is refering to 84 thousand teachings of the buddhas This isn't true, Meditation actually doesn't leave us. It plants seeds to be ripened with the correct alignment of contitions. Isn't true
. See above point.
. Restating again what has already been said. This isn't really possible due to the mind being clear and knowing. Thoughts aren't the problem , Self Grasping is, I don't know what he is getting at?? This all sounds like a preframing of what he is about to teach by the refutation of general categories of buddhist teachings.
This isn't really wise to say It is neccessary to have an object of meditation Osho is not able to answer this question Probably true This is a wierd statement to me, I think its an infatuation with buddhism but whats the point of his constant devaluation of what he as an obvious outsider , with no real buddhist background Four noble truths is exactly this ( its suffering, it has an orgin, and cessation , and a way to practice cessation) ??? .
Some Dzogchen masters have realized this suddenly. Buddha actually took 500 lifetimes to plant the seeds for becoming "awake". So again OSHO is talking out of his neck. This is all pretty negative and critical of no real basis. What the hell is he refering to in general terms. Emptiness of self and phenonmena Samsara will always be samsara due to pervasive suffering What is consumed ??? This isn't true , its the reification of absolute and nothingness, which is duality Samsara is Nirvana .
Again??
Devotion to the Guru is very important in buddhism
. .
This is just a speculation from his non affiliation with a buddhist guru Patrul Rinpoche does admit this is true . Right on OSHO for one sentence of validity, Now lets get attacked Im sure he is preframing again for what he is going to do to your mind by his view. Did OSHO do this, and if he did then what in the world does he have to give by not being free of this fault himself. .
This is his warning to you about the thing hes' going to do .
In a valid teacher with a reputable reputation this is okay. but a cult leader exploits the vunerabilities of ones students and creates dependency Even OSHO reccommends a spiritual guide, so the topic is Spiritual Teacher.
His words are all said to get you to rely on him as a Teacher. This is cult like. because he isn't really teaching much but attacking views of mysterious orgins ( he doesn't cite the sources of the wrong view, like Who has this view, Who teaches it, etc ) Which is typical in narccistic grandiosity. A Narcissist doesn't cite sources and has no real ground for thier rantings. They just say stuff to sound great and make you believe in them. I think the information about a teacher is completely relevant to the overall statements just presented.
Hope this helps.
I would suggest you comply as requested, or maybe consider whether your continued participation is worth the effort.;)
Hope this helps.
This is the end, my only end, my friend!
treederwright,
Osho didn't say the things you responded to. OK, thanks for the effort, much appreciated!
frederica,
My frustration, boiled over, cooled down now.... I will try to keep a lid on it. Thanx.
No more for me on this topic...got off on the wrong foot, and it has slide into the abyss....cool.... thanx for at least putting up with it.
Sorry your arrogance and sarcasm is really getting to me, but i also realize its a smoke screen of fear. Please find someone that you can listen to, otherwise your precious human life with abundant opportunity and advantages will have been wasted in relation to lasting happiness.
Hope this helps, sorry to be firm.
Moving on from that, I think the 3 points being made are worthy of discussion on their own merit regardless of who said it. I think perhaps the frustration evident in Dennis' posts reflect an apparent unwillingness to move past the teacher and onto the 3 points as stand alone topics.
Just sayin. Perhaps we could all just take a step back for a moment, mindfully breathe with a smile on our face for a few moments and take another look?
Also the entire tense of OSHO's statement is to enable the person reading to find hope and conviction to rely on a teacher. so i disagree i think this topic is right on the money. and im not afraid of reproach because i firmly believe that those statements are the preframing of a cult like dependence. Period.
It's interesting because when I read this part:
"I love the statement that the ”man of Zen walks in Zen and sits in Zen” for the simple reason that meditation cannot be just a part of your life. You cannot make a fragment of your life meditative; it is not possible to be meditative for one hour and then non-meditative for twenty-three hours. It is absolutely impossible. If you are doing that, that means your meditation is false.
Meditation can either be a twenty-four-hour affair or it cannot be at all. It is like breathing: you cannot breathe for one hour and then put it aside for twenty-three hours, otherwise you will be dead."
I found myself agreeing with it. It's worded very strongly, but is saying the same thing I have heard/read from a number of well respected teachers.
The point as I took it (knowing nothing about Osho) was that a meditation practice that involves sitting on a mat 30 minutes per day developing mindfulness is shallow if the meditator doesn't attempt to remain mindful throughout the day to whatever extent one reasonably can.
Another point was made about a good spiritual teacher challenging the student's ego being painful, but valuable in helping them progress spiritually
So, that's where I was coming from. Seemed like valid points for conversation to me.
100% understood. You say Osho is a cult leader and from the evidence presented in this thread it seems clear he is. I appreciated the warning as I didn't know anything about him.
At this point in the thread though I think the fact he is a cult leader and dangerous has been made known very clearly.
So, is Dennis out of line to ask that the conversation now move on to the statements themselves with the understanding that the person who made the statements is not being endorsed and in fact is a dangerous cult leader?
If ethical conduct is off, then the compassion is absent and selfish mind is reified. This is why there is so much attention to the speaker rather than spoken.
I could be wrong and am always open to correction if this is disagreed with.
I think treeder attempted to do just that by providing his interpretation of the referenced text, and this is what he received in return:
How much more can it be analyzed? It seemed like treeder gave a thoughtful response, and that's all that the OP could say.
Thanks for your input. I think this is probably a thread I should just walk away from :winkc: Please don't interpret that as hard feelings on my part as there are none.
Now, just to be clear here, not to being defensive.... What treeder responded to was my own words ABOUT the OP. I was using that post as an example of how to discuss the topics. He did not respond to the OP but thought that he was responding to Osho's words but they were mine.
Treeder, Thanx for your concern....but let me assure you that i have no intent to follow a cult leader of any kind. I have listened very carefully to what you have said, and tend to agree that some leaders generalize there statements so that you get sucked in. Also thanx for taking the time to discuss your point of view on what I said. Though i disagree with much of what you said for instance... "It is necessary to have an object of meditation". I do not think this is true. I have been meditating for over twenty years and do not need any object upon which to meditate any more. Just my experience. Not saying you are wrong.
Then you make two statements (thinking its' Osho but it is me)...that go...
What does it mean to be awake?
you say ...Osho is not able to answer this question
Quote: from me
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset;"> I think it means that every waking minute is lived with an open non-egotistical mind and heart. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
You say : Probably true
so am i confused or did you just admit what being awake might mean, even if you were of the belief that Osho said it?
So this whole OP has been sidetracked, which is fine....I am not attached to it. Really. It was naive of me to post anything by Osho, I will never do it again. It confused the whole point of the OP, so that is my fault, and i apologize.
I will post something by Huang Po, who i really like soon, maybe we could discuss that. I think he is "kosher".
I seriously doubt this statement. But i believe you believe that.
To transcend object of meditation takes lifetime(s) of meditation. If you seriously had that kind of development your question would be answered by your own self. Therefore i don't believe you.
The fact that i was pulling apart your words shows exactly why you have disdain and contempt. and furthermore addresses your meditation as being pretty poor. If you've been at this for 20 years as you've said, why the clinging to a linear accomplishment, grandiose bolstering of pride and ego. Why the need to hold superiority over geninely helpful people on this forum. This being said i think that 20 years of meditation would show you some of these faults. Presupposing you believe that your faults too are to be attacked and laid bare.
Soyal Rinpoche says a great teaching of a lady who heard a famous yet very prideful lama
"as for the supreme enlightenment you talk about, when i listen to you, i think not just for you lama , but for me as well there is hope.
"as for the defilements and non virtues you talk about, when i listen to you, i think not just me lama, but for you as well there is danger.
I answered you specifically related to this post!
See what i was trying to say.
I want to lovingly remind everyone here (including myself) that being "awake" means being the master of your emotions: not the other way around! If someone says something that angers you, that anger has its origin in you, not the other person: you have given birth to that emotion, either consciously or (more often) unconsciously. Therefore look at yourself carefully, and understand what is going on in your mind, before you say or do something unskillful or unwholesome to a brother or sister.
This forum is practice for us all, just like "real life" is. Let's practice lovingkindness and understanding toward each other. We all have good things to contribute. Rather than turn on each other with sarcasm and defensiveness, let's rise above that and practice harmonious dialogue. Let's make this forum an example of what human interaction can be.
The OP is right that Osho's darker deeds do not necessarily invalidate his teachings; and others are right in cautioning against following dubious teachers. Everyone is right here. Everyone here has a valid point. Let's look for ways to come together, rather than ending threads feeling angry and isolated from each other.
Let's all wake up!
Shamata Vipashyana can be practiced as a formless meditation. The breath is used to stabilize. A device to remember to return to the present moment.
I agree with 1, 2, and 3. 2 strikes me as elitist nonetheless its probably true. My teacher is very careful to specifically state that meditation isn't a specific posture. Meditation is returning to awareness of the present moment. Awake, heart, present, open.
For 2 pema chodron likens this to going to the doctor and getting a prescription. And instead of taking the medicine you tell all your friends about the prescription you have. But you never take the medicine! Thats what I understood the point to be.
OP ignore anyone who is not on topic please!