According to Osho, Lao Tzu’s Tao is the supreme law of existence (Rta/Dharma), Ashtavakra’s witness is the method—pure, uncovered awareness—by which it is known, and tathata (suchness) is the realization: dissolving into that law. Their difference is functional—principle, path, attainment—while their commonality is total: three faces of one reality, a distinction without division.
Tao is the ocean, witnessing is waking up and walking to it, and tathata is the river losing itself in the ocean—same water, different moments.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Osho, what is the definition of God?
Words are very small. If you say God is light, then what of darkness? The scriptures have said that God is light. Suppose we accept this as a definition—then what about darkness? Where will darkness go? Darkness is too; in fact it is far more than light. Light sometimes is and sometimes is not; darkness is always, eternal. Where will you place darkness? If you say God is light, darkness is left out. If you say God is darkness, then light is left out. If you say God is both darkness and light, a contradiction arises: they cannot be together. Try to have both darkness and light in the same room. If you bring in light, darkness disappears; if you preserve darkness, you cannot have light. Then how can both be together? That becomes an impossibility. So you cannot say “both” either. Then the fourth device is to say: it…
Please explain the difference between witnessing and tathata.
One who stops with attaining firmness of resolve would of course become very powerful, but he won't be able to attain wisdom. And therefore, the ability to make a resolve can be misused, because wisdom is not required to attain it. One will surely gain a lot of power, but that is precisely why he can abuse it. The entire black magic is a product of willpower. One who practices it gains a lot of power, but he lacks wisdom totally. He can end up using that power without any discrimination. A man of will becomes filled with power. It is difficult to predict right away what use he will make of it. He can obviously put it to bad use. Power in itself is neutral. Nevertheless, it is necessary -- whether one intends to use it for good or for evil. And as I see it, rather than remaining…
Osho, in the context of the practice of heedfulness (apramad), please explain the similarities and differences among the practices of witnessing, awareness, and tathata.
One more thought on tathata. A Zen fakir wrote a small song: “The geese fly across the sky. They have no desire that their reflections be formed in the still lake below. Yet the reflections form. The blue lake has no desire to catch the reflections of the geese. Yet the reflections are caught. Then the geese fly on and the reflections also fly away. The geese do not know they were caught in the lake; the lake does not know that the reflections aroused any curiosity, any stir, any disturbance in its bosom.” Tathata means such a being. Things happen. He is ready for all—wants to do nothing and has no complaint. That is why one of Buddha’s names is Tathagata. He loved that name. Even speaking of himself he would say, “The Tathagata passed through a certain village.” Tathagata means one who has attained tathata—thus come, thus gone.…
Osho, please explain the difference between sakshi (witnessing) and tathata (suchness).
So, better to be powerful than to be nerveless and powerless. Even among the powerful, there are journeys of the auspicious and the inauspicious. Better to be powerful and be on the auspicious journey. If the auspicious journey of power proceeds rightly, it will bring you to witnessing. If the inauspicious journey proceeds, you will not reach witnessing; you will remain lost in the power of resolve. Then there will be mesmerism, hypnotism, tantra, mantra, sorcery and witchcraft of all kinds. But there will be no journey of the soul. That is a derailment—power, but gone astray. If power takes the auspicious path, witnessing is born. For ultimately, when power arises, a man can use it to know and attain himself—that is its auspicious journey. To use it to subdue another, to possess another, to tighten one’s grip on another—that is the inauspicious journey, black magic. To use power to…
Do they simply have to be endured? They do have to be endured. So his freedom is not license. There is a deep check upon it. He is free in that he can act contrary to nature. But whatever consequences arise from acting contrary—painful ones—he will have to endure them.
This kind of man is not what we ordinarily call a “seeker.” The seeker we speak of is usually a reaction to the householder. If the householder runs a shop, the seeker does not; if the householder earns wealth, the seeker renounces it; if the householder marries, the seeker does not. But his rules are derived from the householder—he is only a reaction. Lao Tzu says, “I am no one’s reaction. It does not matter what others do. I neither follow anyone to do as he does, nor go against anyone to do the opposite. I let happen what arises from within.” Allowing nature to happen means not imitating anyone, not copying anyone, not building one’s personality in opposition to anyone. Whatever can happen from within, whatever wants to happen—we allow it. No obstruction, no condemnation, no opposition, no struggle, no conflict. Let what happens, happen. This means dropping notions…