Ask Osho!
Osho on Are techniques and shortcuts against the nature of Tao?

Are techniques and shortcuts against the nature of Tao?

Techniques are mere crutches for the seeker; true liberation lies in the effortless surrender to the natural flow of Tao.

— Osho
According to Osho, techniques and shortcuts are against Tao because Tao is swabhav—effortless naturalness—and any method brings effort, goal, time and future. The real 'method' is surrender: a total let-go, immediate and non-temporal, a no-technique. Still, for those who cannot simply surrender and keep asking 'how,' techniques are temporary crutches to exhaust the seeking and eventually drop into surrender.

Let go and float with life; if you can do that now, no tricks are needed—if you can’t, use practices only until you’re ready to drop them.

In His Own Words

From the Discourses

Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.

Techniques are shortcuts, revolutions, but are not these against tao, swabhav, the nature?

Remember, you can go on in this vicious circle continuously for ever and ever. You will have to break it somewhere and come out of it. Be decisive, because only with decision is your humanity born. Only with decision do you become human. Be decisive. If you can surrender, surrender. If you cannot surrender, then don't create philosophical problems; then use some technique. In both the ways the surrender will happen to you. If you can surrender right now, it is okay. If you cannot surrender, then pass through techniques -- that training is needed. It is needed because of you, not because of swabhav, not because of tao. Tao needs no training. It is needed because of you. And the techniques will destroy you. You will die through the techniques, and the innermost nature will evolve. You have to be shattered completely. If you can shatter it in a…
Tao Upanishad · Discourse 8Question 1 1971-06-26 Bombay Hindi

Osho, in Lao Tzu’s vision of life, what place is there for sadhana (spiritual practice)? And one who relies only on drifting, not on swimming—how can he reach his goal? Is effort not necessary to reach the goal? Lao Tzu’s “doing nothing,” being inactive, also seems like a kind of goal. To abandon oneself to unknowing, unknown currents—is that wisdom, a mark of the wise, or is it ignorance and the mark of the ignorant?

No: for those who do not understand and can only understand doing, something must be made for them to do. And they must be made to do so much that by doing and doing they become exhausted and drop it. But the event happens only when they drop. Remember this: the event will not happen before that point of letting go which Lao Tzu speaks of. They must be tired out by doing. They must be made to do so much that they come to such a pitch of tension that there remains no way to maintain it, and the tension falls away. Tension has its laws. Either you drop tension right now—through understanding. One way is to drop tension through understanding. My fist is clenched. One way is that you tell me: “Clenched is not the fist’s nature; therefore you will get tired. Clenched is not the fist’s nature;…
Tao Upanishad · Discourse 3Question 1 1971-06-21 Bombay Hindi

Osho, please tell us: are not all of Lao Tzu’s teachings the teachings of a defeated, beaten man? At their root, isn’t there a negative attitude, a kind of escapism? Won’t this policy of tathata—of acceptance—end up encouraging exploitative systems? And finally, can we not call these teachings mere theoretical idealism? They are not practical, nor do they show any way to be free of doing or to be de-hypnotized.

No. If we understand life rightly, Lao Tzu is not running away from life; he is only stepping away from stupidity—from the fire, from the disease. He is going deeper into life. And we, thinking we are advancing in life, go on advancing into sheer stupidity and are deprived of life. What is the final criterion? Compare Lao Tzu’s face with ours. Lao Tzu, untroubled even while dying; we, anxious even while living. Lao Tzu joyously embraces death; we have never embraced life with joy. Lao Tzu laughs even in illness; we keep weeping even in health. What is the measure? Put thorns in Lao Tzu’s hands and he is grateful; put a flower in our hands and no gratitude arises. By what path shall we recognize? What standard? Lao Tzu is no escapist. And if he is, then everyone should be an escapist—then escapism is religion. Because by escaping…

Where does educating the subconsciousness conflict or harmonise with tao, as it implies discipline with self-effort from an external expression?

Once upon a time, the Duke of Lu went forward to meet a sea bird that had made its appearance in the confines of that country, and escorted it to his ancestral hall. This is a Taoist parable. There, an ox, a sheep and a pig were slaughtered, and a feast was spread before the sea bird, while the band was playing the celebrated music composed under the supervision of the Emperor Shuen. The bird, however, merely looked on, sad and doleful, refusing to relish a morsel of meat or drink a single cup. Thus it died of hunger after three days. The duke fed the bird as he would feed himself, and he failed to see that it should have been treated as a bird and not as a king. The music is meaningless to the bird, and the ox and the sheep and the pig are not his…

Will you please tell us why krishnamurti is against techniques, whereas shiva is for so many techniques.

The basic point has been missed; the basic point is that for this no-technique technique to work you must destroy all support, you must not cling to anything. And it is very arduous. It is almost impossible. That is why so many people for these last forty years have been listening to Krishnamurti but nothing has happened to them. It is so arduous and difficult, almost impossible to remain unsupported, to remain totally alone and to be alert that the mind is not allowed to create any support. Because mind is very cunning, it can create subtle supports again and again. You may throw away Gita, but then you fill the space with Krishnamurti's books. You may laugh at Mohammed, you may laugh at Mahavir, but if someone laughs at Krishnamurti you get angry. Again in a roundabout way you have created a support, you are clinging. Non-clinging is the…
Keep Exploring

Related Questions on Tao