Did Ramachandraji, Krishnaji, and Ravana perform yajnas incorrectly?

A friend has also asked. He has asked that— Osho, Ramachandraji performed yajnas, Krishnaji performed yajnas, and Ravana performed yajnas—so did they all do wrong?

Now, whether they did wrong or right—first it is difficult even to find out whether they did them at all. It is also hard to know whether they ever existed or not. And it is equally hard to know whether their yajnas brought any benefit. But we ourselves are doing yajnas every day and seeing—nothing happens! At least make water fall out of a tap’s spout if no water is coming; to make it fall from the clouds is a much farther cry. If a tap has run dry, then perform a yajna-havan and make water pour from its spout! If a well has dried up, do a yajna and bring water into it! Clouds are a rather distant matter. But it is not that water cannot be made to fall from clouds. It will never fall because of yajna-havan, because the clouds have no idea of your yajnas, nor…

Osho, you called it useless—that was still all right. But then you also said that just as a man rubbing his shoe on the ground has nothing to do with making rain fall, in the same way a yajna has nothing to do with it. That was even more improper.

I wasn’t at leisure; I was in a hurry. The gentleman left, so I couldn’t ask whether he was a lover of yajnas or a lover of shoes—who exactly was wronged? Later, when I thought about it, it occurred to me that the injustice was to the shoe. I should not have given that example. Because a shoe at least has some use; a yajna not even that much. A shoe serves some purpose; a yajna not even that much. But our minds are occupied by emotions. We get flustered the moment we hear something—no readiness to think and understand. If you display this weakness of thoughtful understanding, the world is not going to take advantage of your tender heart; you will simply be taken as unintelligent. Demonstrate it through experiment! The laboratories of science are open; come along gladly and run the tests—make the rain fall and show us.…

Osho, in the world of sadhana there is much mention of yajnas and rituals. There are many methods of yajna; people speak of homa-type yajnas. But in the Gita, japa-yajna and jnana-yajna are given special importance. And while speaking on japa you also spoke of ajapa-japa. So please shed light on the Gita’s japa-yajna, jnana-yajna, and on ajapa-japa as well.

Third: we see the flames of fire rising; we can only see them a little way, then they vanish. Fire is visible only a short distance; beyond that it becomes invisible. Knowledge too is visible only a little—or say: for a short distance its relation remains with the visible; beyond that its relation is with the invisible. Then the visible is lost; only the invisible remains. For all these reasons fire became a potent symbol of knowledge, and Krishna could use the word jnana-yajna. If these symbols are in our awareness, jnana-yajna will continue forever. The other rituals and yajnas built around fire will disappear, because they arise from circumstances; but jnana-yajna will continue. Thus Krishna, for the first time, freed yajna from circumstance and gave it an eternal meaning. The yajna of the Vedas was bound to particular conditions, tied to an event. Krishna freed it from that event…

Osho, two kinds of yajnas are mentioned here. First: yogis properly worship through sacrificial rites in the form of the worship of the gods; but the wise offer the sacrifice itself into the fire of the Supreme. The yogis’ yajna and the knowers’ yajna—please clarify their meaning.

Do not think you get attracted because the face is beautiful; rather, the face seems beautiful because you are attracted. Attraction happens subtly, invisibly. Beauty is not subtle; it appears in thought. We speak in reverse: we say the face seems attractive because it is beautiful. The truth is the reverse: it seems beautiful because it has already attracted. The same face may not seem beautiful to another. If it did not attract them, it is not beautiful. “Beautiful” is our inference, not the cause. The senses experienced attraction; the intellect judged beauty. The senses have already arrived and touched. The movement of the senses is subtle. It isn’t only when you touch with your hand that the senses touch. Each sense has its own way of touching. Seeing is the eye’s way of touching. Hearing is the ear’s way. Smell is the nose’s way. The hand’s range is small;…

Verse (Sanskrit): अफलाकांक्षिभिर्यज्ञो विभिदृष्टो य इज्यते। यष्टव्यमेवेति मनः समाधाय स सात्त्विकः।। 11।। अभिसंधाय तु फलं दम्भार्थमपि चैव यत्‌। इज्यते भरतश्रेष्ठं तं यज्ञं विद्धि राजसम्‌।। 12।। विधिहीनमसृष्टान्नं मंत्रहीनमदक्षिणम्‌। श्रद्धाविरहितं यज्ञं तामसं परिच्रते।। 13।। Transliteration: aphalākāṃkṣibhiryajño vibhidṛṣṭo ya ijyate| yaṣṭavyameveti manaḥ samādhāya sa sāttvikaḥ|| 11|| abhisaṃdhāya tu phalaṃ dambhārthamapi caiva yat‌| ijyate bharataśreṣṭhaṃ taṃ yajñaṃ viddhi rājasam‌|| 12|| vidhihīnamasṛṣṭānnaṃ maṃtrahīnamadakṣiṇam‌| śraddhāvirahitaṃ yajñaṃ tāmasaṃ paricrate|| 13|| Translation: The sacrifice performed, as enjoined by scripture, by those who desire no fruit,। with the mind resolved: ‘it is to be offered’—that is sattvic।। 11।। But that which is performed with an eye to the fruit, and even for show,। O best of Bharatas, know that sacrifice to be rajasic।। 12।। Without rule, with food not duly shared, lacking mantra, without offering to the priests,। a sacrifice devoid of faith—they call that tamasic।। 13।। Now, the sutra: And, O Arjuna, that yajna which is fixed by…