Book Serialization

• BHAGAVADGEETA III - Karmayoga
• From Lemurs to Lamas

Translated by Swami Satya Vedant

Discourses given by Osho at Cross Maidan, Bombay
28th December, 1970 - 7th January 1971

Question: Beloved Osho, I have a little question. You said a while ago that every individual is partly introvert and partly extrovert. Does this mean that one will have to follow the spiritual disciplines of both Sankhya and Yoga together?

OSHO: No, you cannot follow the spiritual discipline of both together. You cannot walk on two different paths at one and the same time. One who will try to do so will reach nowhere. He will not even be able to take a single step. You cannot take a ride on two boats together; one who will attempt to do so will simply drown oneself. He will reach nowhere. When I said there are differences of degrees in people that means, the part which is more predominant within him he should follow that path accordingly. Indeed only one path has to be chosen. If one is more extrovert, then Yoga is the path for him. If one is more introvert, then Sankhya is the path to follow. One will certainly have to choose a path; it is not possible to walk on both simultaneously.

Hence, let me tell you one thing more. Through whichever path an individual may reach, he will declare forcefully that his path alone is the only right path. And he is not wrong. He has made it through that path and so he will also say with equal force that the path led by others is not right -- knowing that the other path is right as well.

But why would he say such a thing? The reason is, if he says: that path is right and this path is right too, it goes on creating difficulty in making a choice for those who would like to be on a path. Hence, ever since eclectic religions have appeared in the world, such as Theosophy, which says all paths are good, no one could follow that kind of a path. Once people read in the book that all paths are good, the choice became difficult.     

Ever since people around the world began saying all paths are fine, it has been understood almost as if everything is useless, nothing is really good. This is how it has come to mean in the final analysis. When we say everything is fine, then it almost means that nothing is wrong. But, ultimately, one develops the idea that everything is wrong.  Hence Sankhya would invariably say action is no-good; that, only knowledge is right.

In my view, this is said out of compassion, there is no dogmatism involved in it. This needs to be understood very clearly. It is not a question of following a tradition; this is
GeetaIII...9

simply compassion. Because in this vast humanity every individual has to make a decision  -- which way to go ? If everything is okay, then man becomes indecisive. He just comes to a halt.  If you are standing on a crossroad and if you were to ask someone which way goes to the river and if he were to say all paths go to the river, there is a strong possibility that you would wait at the crossroad until someone else comes and shows you the only  way to reach the river.

Sankhya would say: knowledge is the right thing. Yoga would say: spiritual discipline, action, effort is just right. This is being said out of compassion. This is being said to individuals who need to be given a clear choice.

But one thing needs to be understood, and that is, only after having measured oneself should one choose a path. In one sense, the Geeta is an amazing book. Neither the Koran is so amazing, nor the Bible is. Neither the words of Mahavira and Buddha are so amazing in the sense the Geeta is. They are all marvelous in some other sense, but the Geeta is amazing in a particular sense, and that is, it contains a discussion of various paths which are followed by all different kinds of people. 

All sorts of possibilities have been discussed in the Geeta because Krishna has talked to Arjuna about all different kinds of alternatives. As each alternative became useless, he went on talking about another alternative. Thus, by means of Arjuna, Krishna opened the doors of possibilities for the entire humanity. But that has created confusion too. 

 The confusion is caused by the fact that, when Krishna talks about Sankhya he declares Sankhya as the ultimate. At that moment it looks as if he himself is Sankhya. He has to speak that way. When he is talking about Yoga it looks like Yoga is the ultimate. When he speaks of Bhakti it feels like Bhakti is supreme. This has caused one problem, and that is, those who followed the path of devotion, they carved out the part of Bhakti from the Geeta and tried to project it solely on the entire Geeta itself.

The commentaries of Ramanuja, Vallabha, Nimbarka, project Bhakti on the entire Geeta to explain its message. Mystics such as Shankara took the part of Knowledge out from the Geeta and tried to project the same on the whole of it. People devoted to action, such as Tilak, picked Karma and tried to project it on the entire Geeta.

No one could correctly understand the truth that all paths are considered in the Geeta. And when Krishna talks about the one path he becomes so absorbed in it, he becomes so one with it that he declares it to be the ultimate. When the discourse on it does not work on Arjuna he moves on to talk about another path. Then again he tells Arjuna that this is the ultimate. This way, since Arjuna is so indecisive, once again Krishna wants him to make a choice.

If Krishna too were to provide options in the sense that: perhaps this is right or perhaps that is right, it will be impossible for Arjuna to make a choice. If Krishna were to say: this is ok and that is ok too; in some cases this is right and in other something else is fine, then
GeetaIII...10

he will not be able to show the path to Arjuna who is in the state of indecision, who is worried and confused. So when Krishna says: this is the ultimate, he is doing so by looking into Arjuna’s eyes and hoping that he may find it to be the right one, that it may turn out to be the ultimate path for him. 

The Geeta is exceptional in the sense that, Krishna has talked about all the possible doors, which lead to the truth. But it is not attempting to bring about a synthesis similar to what Gandhiji tried to do. It is not like one may say: this is fine, and that is fine too. Krishna says: the path which is good for one, it is good in the ultimate sense. Then all other paths are absolutely of no use to him. Another path may be good for someone else, and that would also be good in the ultimate sense. It would be good in the absolute sense; then rest of the paths are meaningless.

The Geeta is a very daring book. And such courageous people are rare who can dismiss what they had said moments before and assert that what they are saying now is the only truth. And then moments later can totally disclaim this assertion also and say that now what I am saying is the right thing. Only those who have attained to the inner supreme harmony can show the courage of being so inconsistent -- not others.

Again and again you will come to notice that whenever Krishna says something it is always in absolute terms, whatever he says he says it with totality. Only when he says something with such totality can he make it possible for Arjuna to choose, not otherwise.

Hence, ever since people of mercy, but of very little courage, have appeared who say: this is fine, and that is fine, and everything is fine and have thus been creating a hodge-podge, they have neither allowed a Hindu to be truly a Hindu nor have they allowed a Muslim to be truly a Muslim. Neither has there been any force in calling Allah, nor has there been any spirit in calling Rama. Saying, therefore, that, “Allah and Ishwara are all your names” becomes absolutely impotent, dead. It carries no weight.

So when a person makes a determination it is always in the ultimate sense. It is something like if I fall in love with a woman and in an intimate moment I tell her: no one is as beautiful as you are in the whole world. It is not that I am befooling her by saying these words -- that is exactly how I see her in that moment! It is possible I may change my statement the next day and you may say:  you have made an about-face, were you not then bluffing her the other day?  But at that moment that is exactly how I had felt. When I said: there is no one as beautiful as you are, it came from my whole being. For that moment that is how my entire being was calling!

People, such as Krishna, live moment to moment. While talking about Sankhya he falls so much in love with Sankhya that he says: “ Arjuna ! There is nothing greater than Sankhya”. And moments later when he falls in love with Bhakti, he says: “ Oh Arjuna ! Bhakti is the only path, there is no other path than Bhakti”. This we will have to keep in mind. There is no comparison involved in here.

GeetaIII...11

When Krishna says: Sankhya is supreme, or when I say to a woman: no one is as beautiful as you are, I am not comparing her with other women of the world. The fact is, she has become incomparable for me; hence there is no woman in the world who can match her. So I am not comparing. I don’t have before me photographs of lots of women to look at and say whether there is any other woman beautiful than her. Neither I have seen all the women of the world nor is any likelihood of my seeing them. At this moment my whole being is saying: no one is as beautiful as you are! What I am saying simply is that, ‘I love you’. And when one is in love, the absolute manifests!

So, when Krishna talks about Sankhya, his love for it is of the same kind as that of a lover. Had he not been so much loving there would not have been such vitality in the Geeta. Then the book would not have been called ‘Bhagavadgeeta’ -- a song delivered by the Lord. Then it would not have been word of the Lord. It was recognized as word of the Lord, it became a song of Krishna simply because each moment he became so much one with whatever he said that there was not an iota of space between him and the word.

While speaking about Sankhya he becomes Sankhya; when he is talking about Bhakti he becomes a bhakta, talking about Yoga, he becomes a Mahayogi. The past drops and the future disappears. Whatever is before him he becomes totally one with it. If you keep this in mind then his statements will not look comparative. What was said in the first chapter is not compared with what is being said in the second chapter. One chain of thought, one belief is not weighed against the other. Each belief is ultimate in itself. Indeed when one reaches through a particular belief, then for him there is no other belief greater than that.

To Continue...

Confessions of a Bodhisattva
Prem Purushottama Goodnight

This book is dedicated to this oceanic presence which we call Osho.

The Tale of a Ring-Tail

When I returned to Madagascar from Mauritius, I encouraged Andre, a Malagasy guy who had run the reception at the Center, to leave Madagascar. He was a very fine musician and I was encouraging him to go to La Reunion and join up with the jazz family. I knew it was very difficult for someone to leave their native land, especially the first time, so I encouraged him as much as I could. In fact eventually he did make the jump. The only thing I ever heard about him was from Ginger, the guy I left Madagascar with. I received a letter from him telling me that he had run into Andre in Bombay. I don’t know anything more about what happened to him. I wish you the best Andre.

I had made plans to teach one more term at the Center after returning to Madagascar and making a trip to Tulear in the southwest of the country. This was a solo trip for me and on this trip I met one of my best friends in Madagascar. I traveled to the south by my usual means of transport, hitchhiking. While waiting for the next ride out of a small village I was offered a ringtail lemur for sale. He was a young male that they had on a rope leash. I paid not more than a couple of dollars, if that. Still that didn’t make me any less annoyed when, shortly after buying him, he got away and went up a tree. Eventually he was retrieved. I was sure that his fate with me was better than his fate would be otherwise around that village. When the next truck came through town, Maki, which is what I decided to call him because that’s the Malagasy word for this kind of lemur, actually it is the sound that they make when they make their call (makii – makii), and I headed out. I kept hold of his leash and he kept hold of my hair perched on my shoulders, his back feet on my shoulders and his chin resting on the top of my head with his little primate hands holding my hair.

Ringtail lemurs also like to sit in their own yoga posture. They sit up straight with their arms outstretched and palms facing outwards, as if they are warming their hands. I saw Maki do this in front of a fire that was made to keep us warm while traveling with the trucks and I also saw him do it many times as the sun was setting.

Lemurs are unique to Madagascar. This is because they developed before Madagascar split off from the African coast but before predators developed. This left them in relative safety on the island of Madagascar, whereas on the African continent they were wiped out. I always describe them as part dog, part cat and of course part monkey. The monkey part is obvious; the tail, climbing in trees, jumping from tree to tree. Their fur is soft like a cat, not at all coarse and they can make a sound that is quite similar to purring. As to the dog similarity; they can make a kind of dog bark and their heads are more dog like. Ringtails have an elongated nose/mouth much more like a dog.

We made friends right away, well not right away, first we had a crisis. We were walking down a dusty trail and he kept holding onto my hair. This was a habit that I was trying to break. In a moment of unawareness and annoyance I pulled on the leash and almost threw Mackey to the ground. The entire world came to a halt. I was shocked and he was shocked. He remained still and I prayed that he was okay. After what seemed like a few minutes, but was probably no more than a few seconds, he revived. After that, I never lost my temper with Maki again and he never pulled on my hair.

When it was time to return to Tana, I took a train from Fianarantsoa. I had to hide Maki under my clothes because one was not allowed to travel with a lemur. He was very accommodating. He just snuggled up and no one knew about the secret passenger. At the house in Tana he was not on a leash and was free to roam the neighborhood, much to the dismay of some of our neighbors. He did like to go in through their windows and help himself to fruit. But mostly the neighbors were quite fond of Maki. In general the Malagasy respect their forest friends. The endangering of the lemur population is not due to a direct threat from the humans but the indirect threat of loss of habitat. At night Macki slept with me, lying above my head on the pillow.

One day Maki went missing. Voahangy and I walked the neighborhood with her asking everyone if they had seen him. We could follow his path with one person pointing us on to the next that had seen him. We eventually found him. Some Malagasy had become too fond of him and had tied him up. He was happy to be liberated. When I left Madagascar, I entrusted Maki to the lady who shopped and cooked lunch for us. She had grown very fond of him. Unfortunately Maki used to like to tease the dogs. They would charge him and he would jump straight up in the air about four feet high and they would run through where he had just been. When he landed the dog would turn around for another go. Apparently he did this once too many times and a dog got hold of him by the back and gave him a pretty good bite. He died from the wound. Rest in peace, Maki.