According to Osho, the ultimate experience is one, but its expressions vary with the mystic’s temperament. Beyond the poetic Satyam–Shivam–Sundram (Truth–Godliness–Beauty), another central formulation is Sat–Chit–Anand (Truth–Consciousness–Bliss). Poets intuit beauty; meditators report a peak of consciousness flanked by truth and bliss. In every expression, truth remains essential; definitions reflect the vessel, not the reality.
Yes—the same ultimate is felt by all, but some describe its beauty and others its clear, blissful awareness; both point to truth.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Beloved Osho, is there any definition of the ultimate experience other than satyam-shivam-sundram -- "truth, godliness and beauty"?
But in the first definition the word sundram, beauty, gives a sense that your eyes are capable of seeing it; perhaps your hands can feel it, perhaps your ears can hear the beautiful music in it. The word 'beauty' functions almost as a bridge. In the second definition there is no bridge, but a quantum leap. You simply jump from the mind to no-mind. Only no-mind can be aware of truth; only no-mind can be filled with consciousness; only no-mind can be showered with thousands of flowers of bliss. Nothing relates to your ordinary world. In this way it is purer. Both have their own pros and cons, and I want you to be aware of them. But remember: don't choose the definition. First choose the experience, then the definition will come on its own accord. If you choose the definition first, it may not fit your individuality and the…
Question: BELOVED OSHO, WHAT IS THE MYSTIC CONCEPTION OF ULTIMATE REALITY? Maneesha, the mystic's conception of the ultimate reality is the only authentic, real experience. It is not a thought or a concept, but an existential experience. But the mystic does not deal with the mind. His whole effort is to get rid of the prison of the mind. The mystic is not a philosopher; his world is beyond all philosophies. Philosophies are simply by-products of mental processes. They do not reflect the reality, they only reflect you. That's why there are so many philosophies in the world, contradicting each other. The reality is one. How can there be so many philosophies? -- there are not so many mystical experiences. There is only one experience; neither time changes it, nor space. Since millennia, the mystic in every country, in every race, in every age has experienced the same reality.
The experience of bliss will give you for the first time, a beauty that is indestructible. Not only that, it will give you for the first time, an insight into the very phenomenon of beauty. Not only does it make you beautiful, it suddenly transforms the whole world. The whole world becomes beautiful because the world reflects you, it is a mirror. If you are carrying ugly things inside you those ugly things are bound to be reflected. From the trees, from the mountains, from the rivers, you cannot get more than that which you put in. And you don't have anything beautiful to put in. That's why people live such monotonous, bored lives.
In indian philosophy, the nature of ultimate truth has been described as truth, satyam, beauty, sundram and goodness, shivam. Are these the characteristics of god?
We do not know if animals perceive the divine, we do not know how they perceive things at all, but one thing is certain: they will not perceive the divine in human terms. If they perceive the divine at all, they will feel and perceive it in quite a different way from us. The qualities they perceive will not be the same as they are for us. When a person is predominantly intellectual, he cannot conceive of how you can say God is beautiful. The very concept is absolutely foreign to his mind. And a poet cannot conceive that truth can mean anything except beauty. It cannot mean anything else to him. Truth is beauty; all else is simply intellectual. For a poet, for a painter, for a man who perceives the world in terms of the heart, truth is a naked thing without beauty. It is just an intellectual…
Osho, is the experience of the Divine different for each person?
Think of it like this: you go home from this garden, and your children say, “Tell us—what was the garden like?” A painter might tell you by making a painting: “It was like this.” A poet will write a poem—of the trees, of the winds passing through them, of the sun filtering between their leaves. Now a poem and a painting differ greatly. Or perhaps someone is a musician; he will not even write a poem—he will lift his vina. Why write? The winds passed through the trees and there was sound and resonance—he will reproduce that resonance on the vina. The colors in the trees he will translate into tones. The sun and shade he will pour into music. He will play the garden on his vina. Another will write a poem; another will render it on paper. The three expressions will differ. And if you look only at…