What is the form of the Supreme and what name can be given to it?

What is the form of the Supreme, the one to which you have given a name? What is it like, and which name do you wish to give it?

Certainly. If you try to understand the Divine, you will never be able to understand. It is not a matter of understanding.

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…

Osho, it is said, “bhaktya anuvritya.” Then devotion must be to a form. The sun is manifest with form in the sun realm; in the same way, why is God not with form?

Who said God is not with form? All forms are his. God has no form of his own. You are looking for God’s own form; that is why the question arises as to why God is not with form. In the tree, God is a tree; in the bird, a bird; in the waterfall, a waterfall; in a man, a man; in a stone, a stone; in a flower, a flower. If you look for God’s particular form, you will go on missing. The one to whom all forms belong cannot have a form of his own. Now this is quite a curious thing. It means: the one of whom all forms are, he himself can only be formless. It sounds a bit upside down: the one who has all forms is formless! How could the one of whom all names are, have a name of his own? The one…

And in rest is all, because when you are totally restful God is available to you. You enter into the kingdom of God only when you are totally relaxed -- no tension, no desire, no mind -- just like a small child, a nobody, and totally relaxed. Let that be your work on yourself. Arihant means one who has killed the real enemy. Self-ignorance is the real enemy, unconsciousness is the real enemy. To live like a somnambulist is to be one's own enemy. The enemy is not outside you, it is hidden in your own mind. It is your mind -- and one has to go beyond it. The only way to go beyond the enemy, to kill the enemy, is to be more and more alert, more and more conscious of your thoughts, of your acts, of your desires, of your feelings.

Osho, whenever the feeling of remembering God wells up within, some form or other also rises—mostly Sri Krishna or Sri Vishnu or Shiva. But I am assured by your saying that all forms lie within the limits of the mind and are imaginations. So please tell me: during the day, or at the time of meditation, whenever a strong urge for the remembrance of the Lord arises, what should be its form? They are—so in what form should I experience them?

“I had thought the ruins of love were all in vain; They turned out to be towns I had taken for desolations. I had taken every glance as too heavy for a tender nature; It was right before my eyes—yet how could I understand? Little did I know He himself would emerge as an equal partner; I had taken every heartbeat to be my own tale. Life turned out to be exam upon exam unending; I had thought life to be nothing but stories. The chronicle of my own being stood before me, Which till today I had taken for the tales of others.” What you have taken as “the other” is not other. But since you do not yet know yourself, the other appears as other. When you come to know yourself, the other is no longer other. “The chronicle of my own being stood before me, Which till…