Does the true master ever test the disciple?

Question: Second question: Osho, does the true master ever test the disciple? The master said, “I did. But he had not practiced it. It was spontaneous. He did not know from where it came—call it from the unknown, from the divine, from nature. A wondrous flower bloomed in his being. It was not his; it was of the beyond, born of his own suchness. You have come with practice. This is a paper flower. And remember: if you open one eye of a corpse, the other does not open. If you practice again, remember this too: if you open one eye of a dead man, the other does not open. What kind of deadness is this that when I opened one eye, both of yours opened! With such a death you will not die—and if you do not die, you cannot be new.

Osho, the master sees the disciple directly, yet he still deliberately puts him through various tests. Does this make the disciple’s self-realization more intense and purer? Please explain.

You will often find that where such pure Vedanta talk is going on, you will see great sinners sitting there—and cheerful! Only there do they find a little joy; nowhere else can they. Anywhere else they go, someone says, ‘There goes a black-marketeer’; someone says, ‘He is a thief’; someone, ‘He is dishonest, a great sinner.’ Only where pure spirituality is flowing do they get a little peace. There they feel, ‘This is exactly right—sin and all that is false!’ You will see sinners gathered around saints. Their words gratify their ego immensely: ‘At least there is some place where we can sit elated—there is no sin and the like; it is all maya. Nothing was done, nothing can be done. We are not doers, nor enjoyers—we are merely witnesses!’ So the master has to watch that this notion of ‘witness’ does not become suicidal for you. Declarations come too…

Osho, you have often said that the true master calls the disciple close, and then also sends him away. How can one know whether the master has sent him away in displeasure, out of anger, or as a blessing, out of joy, for the disciple’s further growth?

First thing: a master who gets angry is no master. Second: a disciple who, when sent away, thinks it must have been out of displeasure is not of the right mettle for discipleship. The master does not get angry; the very possibility of anger has ended. If ever a master seems angry, know that he is acting—for sometimes there is no other way. Gurdjieff would often appear angry—so angry it seemed there would be bloodshed. Those who ran away were deprived. Those who still remained came to know how rare it is to find a heart as tender as his. But why would he behave so angrily? Perhaps that was exactly what was needed for the disciple. Such things happened—and only Gurdjieff could do them—that two people would come to see him, one seated on the left, one on the right. When he looked to the left, it was with…

Maneesha has asked a question: BELOVED OSHO, HAS ONE ONLY RECEIVED A HIT IF IT HURTS?

Maneesha, a master hits not to hurt but to heal. And a disciple receives the hit with tremendous gratitude, not with anger. Unless a hit is received with gratitude it cannot do its work of healing. You are all full of wounds, and they all need to be exposed to the sun, to the open sky. Unless you allow yourself to be exposed completely, you cannot get rid of those wounds. The normal way in the world is to hide the wounds so nobody knows about them -- go on hiding them deeper and deeper in the unconscious, so even you forget them. But to work on the consciousness, cleaning it from all the wounds is absolutely necessary. Those wounds have to be brought into the open. You are asking, "Has one only received a hit if it hurts?" No, Maneesha. If it hurts you have missed. If it does…

Osho, if two true masters criticize and condemn each other, what should the disciples understand?

If you are a disciple, you will choose what resonates with your heart and move on. You will not bother about who criticized whom. Nor will you oppose the one who criticized. Who are you to judge! A disciple, and he decides who is a true master and who is not? The very idea is foolishness. It is like a blind man deciding who can see and who cannot. How will the blind judge who sees? The blind need only know: “I cannot see.” Having found a friend, take his hand and walk. Then, through your own experience, see: walking with this person, do I fall into pits? Walking with him, do I keep bumping into things? Walking with him, do I end up breaking my hands and feet? If your experience shows otherwise, then to think, “This man must have eyes,” is at first only an inference. But that…