Are all consciousnesses alike?

Osho, are the insentient and the conscious two separate things, or two forms of one and the same reality?

There is a mention in the life of Bhoj: an astrologer came, looked at Bhoj’s hand, and said, “You are most unfortunate. You will carry even your wife to the cremation ground, your sons too. You will have to take each member of your household to the cremation ground; after all of them, you will die.” Bhoj was furious. He had the astrologer handcuffed and said, “Lock him up. What a man—speaking such ill-omened words!” Kalidasa was sitting quietly, laughing. He said, “The astrologer speaks no ill omen; he simply lacks the art of saying it—his emphasis is wrong.” When Kalidasa said this, Bhoj asked, “What do you mean?” Kalidasa said, “Let me see your hand.” After looking, he said, “You are greatly blessed! Your life span is very long. Blessed—in the sense that neither your wife nor your sons will ever be saddened by your death. No one will…

Osho, are mind, intellect (buddhi), chitta, and ego (ahamkar) distinct things—separate entities—or one and the same? And is the soul different from these, or is their aggregate itself called the soul? Among these, which is inert and which is conscious? And where exactly are they located in the body?

It’s like asking: is the father different, the son different, the husband different? No—the person is one. But before some he is a father, before others a son, before others a husband; before some he is a friend, before others an enemy; to some he appears beautiful, to others not; to some he is master, to others servant. If we had never visited that house and someone told us, “Today I met the master,” another said, “Today I met the servant,” a third said, “I met the father,” and a fourth, “The husband was at home,” we might think many people live there—some master, some father, some husband. The person is one. Our mind behaves in many ways. When it stiffens and declares, “I am everything; no one else is anything,” it appears as ego—ahamkar. That is one mode of the mind’s functioning. When the mind thinks—reasons—it is buddhi, intellect.…

Osho, but in that knowing, Maharaj-ji, can there not be sameness—that as another has known, I may know the same? And may that sameness become available to me.

If you look very closely, such sameness is possible only if I am exactly as the other was. Otherwise it can never be. See the full implications: when I am knowing, my whole personality, my total being, is knowing. Only if your whole personality is exactly as mine, could the event of our knowing be one and the same. And no two persons are ever the same. In fact, forget persons—that is a far-off matter. Pick up a stone from a Delhi street; search the whole earth and you will not find another exactly like it. Pluck a flower from a garden; comb all the forests and you will not find another just like it. Here, each and every thing has its own uniqueness. And that very uniqueness is its soul. In my view, this uniqueness is its soul. A machine has no soul, because a machine is not unique.…

Feel the consciousness of each person as your own consciousness. So, leaving aside concern for self, become each being.

THIS CONSCIOUSNESS EXISTS AS EACH BEING, AND NOTHING ELSE EXISTS. THIS CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE SPIRIT OF GUIDANCE OF EACH ONE. BE THIS ONE. Zen masters have used the sword as a technique for meditation, and they say in Japan that if two Zen masters, two meditative persons, are fighting with those swords, there can be no conclusion. No one can be defeated and no one is going to win, because both are not thinking.. The swords are just not in their hands, they are in the hands of their inner guide, the non-thinking inner guide, and before the other attacks, the guide knows and defends. You cannot think about it because there is no time. The other is aiming at your heart. In a flash of a moment the sword will penetrate to the heart. There is no time to think about it, about what to do. When the thought,…

Osho, if consciousness is present in all matter, then is there only consciousness and no matter?

If we say there is no matter and that all is consciousness, then there remains no reason to call it “consciousness.” We call it consciousness only in contrast to matter. If there is only one thing in existence, we can call it neither matter nor consciousness—then any word becomes meaningless. We call it consciousness precisely because there is also something non-conscious in the world. Do you follow? If one insists on speaking that way, then we cannot call it consciousness. We cannot call it anything at all. In truth, the moment we say anything, duality arises. If we say there is consciousness in this world, we must accept that there is something non-conscious in which that consciousness is. And if we say this world is only unconscious, then we must also accept that there is something conscious; otherwise there would be no reason to call it non-conscious.