According to Osho, passivity is alert energy—vibrant, watchful, restful readiness that can become action in an instant—whereas laziness is dullness and inertia, a sickly state of no energy. True passivity needs no compulsive activity; it delights in simple presence—breath, breeze, birds—like a poised cat by a mouse hole. Laziness drags through life, unable to start or stop; passivity radiates health, availability, and effortless potency.
Passivity is like a cat resting but ready to jump; laziness is like being too tired to move.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
What is the difference between waiting for godot and waiting for god?
It is as if the sun has risen in the morning and you are sitting in your room with closed doors and windows, in darkness. Open the doors, you become available to the sun. The sun was already available -- just the meeting happens. You cannot wait for God. All waiting is for Godot. Godot means the one who never comes, who CANNOT come, whose arrival is impossible. And the only impossible thing is that which has already happened -- how can it happen again? You are alive, and you are waiting for life, Now, this is ridiculous. The real man of religion does not think in terms of God. He thinks in terms of life or, even better, of living -- because life can again become an abstract idea. Living, moment-to-moment living. In that very living, one knows what God is, because one knows who one is. Your idea…
Osho, on the first day you explained that “non-ability” is a precious word in Taoist vision and carries great spiritual value. In that context it seems that tamasic and lazy people already possess the quality of non-ability, yet their spiritual growth is not visible. What is your view on this?
What Lao Tzu calls “non-ability” is the name of the deepest ability. It is not laziness; it is the ultimate state of rest. Nor is it tamas; it is a most incandescent state of energy. Understand the difference clearly. The confusion is natural, because if someone is sitting inactive it appears to us that he is lazy. But all who sit inactive are not lazy. The one we call lazy does not truly sit empty; the work of the mind goes on. Perhaps the lazy man does nothing with his body, but with the mind he is fully busy. Where those who are bodily active are running, he too runs with his desires and cravings. In the mind there is no difference. He seems lazy to us because he is not running as we are. But he too is running. If laziness becomes absolute—what Lao Tzu calls non-doing—then laziness itself…
With the modern concept it is very difficult. In ancient times it was possible because the very economics of the society was such. In India just a hundred years ago it was possible to support thousands of sannyasins. In fact, in every family you could have found one or two people who were not doing anything. But nobody was against them, because even if one person was a working member in the family -- a family of thirty, forty people -- that was enough. So lazy people were not condemned. And if a lazy person became religious, he was worshipped. There was no problem about it. He was almost thought to, be a great holy man. Passivity is being completely at ease, with no goal, no effort, nothing to be done. If something happens, it happens. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. One has no choice about it.
Beloved Osho, what is the difference between the emptiness of the child before the formation of the ego and the awakened childlikeness of a buddha?
Whether you are for it or against it doesn't matter -- your concern shows where your ego is hanging. And I will include the capitalist in it also: his whole concern is how to gather money, hoard money -- because money has power over matter. You can purchase any material thing through money. You cannot purchase anything spiritual, you cannot purchase anything that has any intrinsic value; you can purchase only things. If you want to purchase love, you cannot purchase; but you can purchase sex. Sex is the material part of love. Through money, matter can be purchased, possessed. Now you will be surprised: I include the communist and the capitalist both in the same category, and they are enemies, just as I include Charvaka and Mahatma Gandhi in the same category, and they are enemies. They are enemies, but their concern is the same. The capitalist is trying…
Sometimes I feel in a state of non-doing, very passive, but may awareness of what is happening around me seems less. In fact, I feel detached from things around me. This somehow means false passivity, as I imagine on-doing should be synonymous with increased awareness. Can you please define this state?
Ordinarily we are in a feverish state -- active, but feverishly. If you become passive the fever will be lost. If you become passive, non-doing, if you relax within yourself, activity will be lost, fever will be lost, and the intensity that comes through fever will not be there. You will feel a little dull, you will feel as if your awareness is decreasing. It is not decreasing; only the feverish glow is decreasing. And it is good, so don't be afraid of it, and don't think that this passivity is not real. This is being said by your mind which needs and wants the feverish activity and the glow that comes through fever. Fever is not awareness, but in fever you can have a very unhealthy awareness, alertness. That is diseased; don't hanker for it. Allow it to go, fall into passivity. In the beginning it will look like…