Let not distress be yours, nor bewilderment, on seeing this dread form of Mine as it is।
With fear dispelled and heart made glad, behold again that very form of Mine।। 49।।
Sanjaya said
Thus speaking to Arjuna, Vasudeva once again revealed His own form।
And the great-souled One, becoming once more of gentle aspect, reassured this frightened man।। 50।।
Arjuna said
Seeing this human, gracious form of Yours, O Janardana,
I am now composed, recollected, restored to my own nature।। 51।।
Geeta Darshan #11
Chapter Summary
Main Teaching: Osho explains Jesus’ paradox by distinguishing being a child from being simple like a child: spiritual attainment requires mature body and mind that have returned to a conscious, earned innocence. The true childlikeness he describes is a reclaimed simplicity, not the surface ignorance of childhood which conceals latent passions. Childhood’s apparent purity is deceptive because hidden jealousy, anger, violence and sexual drives will later become adult complexity. Using Freudian insight, Osho insists spiritual simplicity must transcend and transform these inner conflicts rather than romanticize them. On simplicity: True simplicity is awareness-grown innocence, a deliberate capacity to drop learned masks, not ignorance. On childlikeness: One must move from naive childhood to a cultivated childlikeness that preserves wonder without unconscious drives dominating action. On inner complexity: The apparent purity of children conceals fierce emotions—anger, jealousy, destructiveness—that must be seen and healed, not idealized. On family dynamics: Early ties, especially the male child's rivalry with his father over the mother, reveal deep oedipal tensions that shape later conflicts unless consciously resolved.
Read this discourse in:
More languages:
Checking…
Sutra (Original)
मा ते व्यथा मा च विमूढभावो दृष्ट्वा रूपं घोरमीदृङ्ममेदम्।
व्यपेतभीः प्रीतमनाः पुनस्त्वं तदेव मे रूपमिदं प्रपश्य।। 49।।
संजय उवाच
इत्यर्जुनं वासुदेवस्तथोक्त्वा स्वकं रूपं दर्शयामास भूयः।
आश्वासयामास च भीतमेनं भूत्वा पुनः सौम्यवपुर्महात्मा।। 50।।
अर्जुन उवाच
दृष्ट्वेदं मानुषं रूपं तव सौम्यं जनार्दन।
इदानीमस्मि संवृत्तः सचेताः प्रकृतिं गतः।। 51।।
व्यपेतभीः प्रीतमनाः पुनस्त्वं तदेव मे रूपमिदं प्रपश्य।। 49।।
संजय उवाच
इत्यर्जुनं वासुदेवस्तथोक्त्वा स्वकं रूपं दर्शयामास भूयः।
आश्वासयामास च भीतमेनं भूत्वा पुनः सौम्यवपुर्महात्मा।। 50।।
अर्जुन उवाच
दृष्ट्वेदं मानुषं रूपं तव सौम्यं जनार्दन।
इदानीमस्मि संवृत्तः सचेताः प्रकृतिं गतः।। 51।।
Transliteration:
mā te vyathā mā ca vimūḍhabhāvo dṛṣṭvā rūpaṃ ghoramīdṛṅmamedam|
vyapetabhīḥ prītamanāḥ punastvaṃ tadeva me rūpamidaṃ prapaśya|| 49||
saṃjaya uvāca
ityarjunaṃ vāsudevastathoktvā svakaṃ rūpaṃ darśayāmāsa bhūyaḥ|
āśvāsayāmāsa ca bhītamenaṃ bhūtvā punaḥ saumyavapurmahātmā|| 50||
arjuna uvāca
dṛṣṭvedaṃ mānuṣaṃ rūpaṃ tava saumyaṃ janārdana|
idānīmasmi saṃvṛttaḥ sacetāḥ prakṛtiṃ gataḥ|| 51||
mā te vyathā mā ca vimūḍhabhāvo dṛṣṭvā rūpaṃ ghoramīdṛṅmamedam|
vyapetabhīḥ prītamanāḥ punastvaṃ tadeva me rūpamidaṃ prapaśya|| 49||
saṃjaya uvāca
ityarjunaṃ vāsudevastathoktvā svakaṃ rūpaṃ darśayāmāsa bhūyaḥ|
āśvāsayāmāsa ca bhītamenaṃ bhūtvā punaḥ saumyavapurmahātmā|| 50||
arjuna uvāca
dṛṣṭvedaṃ mānuṣaṃ rūpaṃ tava saumyaṃ janārdana|
idānīmasmi saṃvṛttaḥ sacetāḥ prakṛtiṃ gataḥ|| 51||
Translation (Meaning)
Questions in this Discourse
A friend has asked: Osho, can a person who is simple like a child, without any knowledge, attain God? If yes, how?
There is a very famous saying of Jesus. Someone asked him, “Who will be worthy to enter your kingdom? Who will be able to enter the Kingdom of God?” And Jesus said, “Those who are simple and innocent like children.”
But there is much to understand in this.
First, Jesus did not say, “Those who are children.” He said, “Those who are simple like children.” Otherwise all children would enter the divine. Who, then, will be simple like a child? A child himself cannot. “Simple like a child” means one who is not a child yet has become childlike in simplicity—whose body has matured, whose mind has matured, who has known the world, and yet becomes simple like a child.
So there is one kind of childhood that comes from parents—that is the childhood of the body. That childhood is filled with ignorance. In that childhood there is no way to know the divine. A child is simple, but simple because of ignorance. That simplicity is false. The child’s simplicity is false—understand this well. Behind that simplicity lies all the poison that will tomorrow become complexity. It is only on the surface. Within the child, everything is present that will emerge in youth and old age. It is all there. This child is simple on the outside; within, he is complex. And even on the outside he is not as simple as we assume.
Freud’s findings have made it quite clear that children are very complex. You think a child does not get angry; the truth is, no adult can be as angry as a child. You think a child is not filled with jealousy; children are fiercely jealous. Seeing a toy in another’s hand, they become more restless than you do seeing someone else’s car. You think children have no hatred; you think they have no violence. Children can be intensely violent. Until they find a creeping insect and crush and twist it, they do not feel at ease.
A child takes great delight in breaking things, great delight in destruction. He is filled with jealousy and filled with violence. And you think a child has no sexual drive; that too is an illusion. The most modern research says that all the sexual energies are present in the child, which later begin to manifest.
Consider this—though our minds are unwilling to accept many such points because they hurt our cherished notions. If a boy is born in the house, a certain friction remains between the boy and the father. It is a conflict between two males. Psychology says the conflict revolves around one woman—the mother. The child and the child’s father are both claimants to the same woman. The child does not like the father’s excessive intrusion. And the father too does not like the child coming so much in between that he stands between husband and wife. The father’s friendship with the son happens only with difficulty. But the mother’s friendship with the son is almost always there.
But there is much to understand in this.
First, Jesus did not say, “Those who are children.” He said, “Those who are simple like children.” Otherwise all children would enter the divine. Who, then, will be simple like a child? A child himself cannot. “Simple like a child” means one who is not a child yet has become childlike in simplicity—whose body has matured, whose mind has matured, who has known the world, and yet becomes simple like a child.
So there is one kind of childhood that comes from parents—that is the childhood of the body. That childhood is filled with ignorance. In that childhood there is no way to know the divine. A child is simple, but simple because of ignorance. That simplicity is false. The child’s simplicity is false—understand this well. Behind that simplicity lies all the poison that will tomorrow become complexity. It is only on the surface. Within the child, everything is present that will emerge in youth and old age. It is all there. This child is simple on the outside; within, he is complex. And even on the outside he is not as simple as we assume.
Freud’s findings have made it quite clear that children are very complex. You think a child does not get angry; the truth is, no adult can be as angry as a child. You think a child is not filled with jealousy; children are fiercely jealous. Seeing a toy in another’s hand, they become more restless than you do seeing someone else’s car. You think children have no hatred; you think they have no violence. Children can be intensely violent. Until they find a creeping insect and crush and twist it, they do not feel at ease.
A child takes great delight in breaking things, great delight in destruction. He is filled with jealousy and filled with violence. And you think a child has no sexual drive; that too is an illusion. The most modern research says that all the sexual energies are present in the child, which later begin to manifest.
Consider this—though our minds are unwilling to accept many such points because they hurt our cherished notions. If a boy is born in the house, a certain friction remains between the boy and the father. It is a conflict between two males. Psychology says the conflict revolves around one woman—the mother. The child and the child’s father are both claimants to the same woman. The child does not like the father’s excessive intrusion. And the father too does not like the child coming so much in between that he stands between husband and wife. The father’s friendship with the son happens only with difficulty. But the mother’s friendship with the son is almost always there.