According to Osho, Krishna’s utterances arise from different levels of consciousness, later woven into the Gita as a dramatic compilation, not a single battlefield sermon. Therefore they contain contradictions. Osho evaluates each saying by experiential truth—accepting some, rejecting others—and explicitly opposes Krishna’s philosophical sanction of violence, which he deems more dangerous than violent acts without ideology. He rejects the dogma that Krishna was enlightened from birth.
Krishna spoke from different stages of growth, so some teachings are wise and some harmful; Osho keeps what truly helps and firmly rejects using spirituality to excuse violence.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Osho, yesterday you said that when anger is watched consciously, it dissolves. But why is it that when sexual desire arises, even in awareness its intensity persists? Why is it so?
There is no entanglement in the breath. If you try to practice on anger… Anger is not happening every moment; it happens sometimes. And when it happens, it happens with such intensity that you are already going deep into it; so much is at stake in those moments that you may think, “We will look into awareness later; first let’s settle this now.” Lust is very deep, because existence has made it so deep; life depends on it. If lust were so easy that you decided and were freed, perhaps you would not even have been born—because many before you would have become free, and the possibility of your being would have been almost nil. But your parents, and their parents, did not become free; therefore you are. You too will not get free so easily, because your children are also to be—they are waiting: “Do not run away midway.”…
Osho, Krishna is supremely enlightened and beyond the three gunas, yet he deceives, lies, and wages war. Buddha, Mahavira, Lao Tzu, etc., do nothing of the sort. Kindly shed light on Krishna’s personality described above, in the context of the qualities of sattva, rajas, and tamas.
First, it is essential to understand that no comparison is possible between two enlightened ones. All comparisons are false. Every great being is unique; there is no second like him. In truth, even an ordinary person is unique. There is no other like you. The great one within you appears when you bring your own nature, your own destiny, to its fullness. You too are incomparable. There is no other person on earth exactly like you—neither today, nor ever before, nor ever after. Search the whole earth and you won’t find two identical leaves on a tree; not even two identical pebbles. And when your polish deepens and the supreme flowering of your life manifests, then you become like the summit of a Mount Everest. Even now you are unmatched; then you will be utterly unmatched. Now, perhaps, some accord with others is still possible; then there will be none.…
Osho, what qualities in Krishna’s personality are relevant for today’s age, and what significance can his personality have today? Please shed some light.
Hence even those who worshipped Krishna have worshipped him in fragments. Surdas’s Krishna never grows beyond childhood. The adult Krishna is dangerous; Surdas could not endure him. If child Krishna teases the village women, we do not mind much; but if a young Krishna does so, we are troubled, because we can only understand on our own level. Lacking any other measure, we select a form we like and reject the rest. Those who love the Gita ignore the Bhagavata, because the Krishna of the Bhagavata is quite different; and those who love the Bhagavata avoid the Gita—where is music, color, rasa, and where the battlefield! Perhaps there is no personality greater than Krishna in swallowing such vast oppositions at once. So people have clung to one face of Krishna and denied the others. Gandhi called the Gita his mother, but he could not assimilate it. Where would Gandhi’s ahimsa…
A friend has asked: Osho, Gautam Buddha taught truth, nonviolence, not to lie, not to steal, not to do evil. But in Krishna’s Gita the path of violence is shown. Krishna teaches stealing, lying, and moving from sex to samadhi. So tell us: one who teaches the path of violence—can he be called God?
The teachings of Buddha and Mahavira are ethical and given with the ordinary person in mind. Krishna’s teachings are religious and addressed to a very extraordinary person. The teachings of Buddha and Mahavira can be understood even by a very ordinary intelligence; there is hardly any obstacle there. They consider the third-rate mind—the last rung of intelligence. Krishna’s teachings can be understood only by first-rate human beings. They are exceedingly subtle, and far higher than the teachings of Buddha and Mahavira. It will be a bit difficult to grasp them. We all understand that stealing is a sin; even a thief understands it. It is not only you who see it; the thief, too, knows stealing is wrong. But why is stealing wrong? Stealing can be wrong only if property is real; that’s the first premise. Money must be of great value, and personal ownership must be accepted; only then…
Osho, how and why did you feel inspired to speak on Shri Krishna? What is the fundamental basis of this long discourse?
If one wants to think, to speak, to understand, it is hard to find a figure more significant than Krishna. Not that there have not been other significant people, nor that there will not be more. Many have been, many will be. But Krishna’s significance is less for the past and much more for the future. In truth, Krishna was born at least five thousand years ahead of his time. All significant people are born before their time, and all insignificant people are born after their time. That, precisely, is the difference between the significant and the insignificant. And all ordinary people are born with their time. A significant person arrives far ahead of his age. Krishna arrived far ahead of his age. Perhaps in the coming future we shall become capable of understanding him. The past was not. And understand this too: whatever we are not yet capable of…