What is the purpose of using a mantra?

Osho, but the mantra-experts would say there is some other reason for its use?

Ask the mantra-scholars about that. What I am saying here is that the new arts are making uses that are absurd. Sculptures are being made of a kind you cannot call anyone’s statue. If you want to make a statue of “man,” it has to be made so that no one’s face appears in it—because if any face appears, it becomes someone’s; it is no longer of “man.” So if you want to make a statue of man, it must not have my face, not your face, not anyone’s face. The moment there is any particular face, it becomes some person’s and ceases to be “manhood.” So we make a statue in which there is no one’s face—such a statue can be made; we imagined it would be a statue of humanity, but it won’t remain even of a single human. What I am saying is: it will not become…

Osho, different religions have discovered different great mantras—like Om Namah Shivaya, Namo Arihantanam, Allahu Akbar, Om Mani Padme Hum. In what state did such great mantras descend, and how are they related to the inner centers? And how should a seeker choose the mantra suitable for himself?

It happened that when Vivekananda came to Ramakrishna, his household was in dire straits. His father had died—and, being a worldly, whimsical man, had left many debts. There was not even food enough. If somehow there was food, it was not enough for both mother and son. Vivekananda would tell his mother, “A friend has invited me today,” so that she would eat; otherwise she would feed him and remain hungry. Saying so, he would wander the lanes, then return home cheerful, belching, as if well-fed—no friend had invited him—but to make his mother feel at peace that he had eaten well so she could eat without worry. Ramakrishna came to know and said, “You are a great fool. You come daily to Mother Kali’s court—why don’t you ask? Such a small matter—why suffer needlessly?” At Ramakrishna’s insistence, Vivekananda said, “If you say so, I will ask.” Ramakrishna sat outside…

Beloved Osho, different religions have different mantras, such as: om namo shivaya namo, arihanta nam, allahu akbar, om mani padme hum. In what state of being were such great mantras born? How and in what way are they related to our various inner centers? How should a seeker select a mahamantra most appropriate to him?

The search for power brings religion into the confines of the world. And it makes no difference whether it is Jainism, Hinduism, Buddhism or Mohammedanism. As long as your interest is in the miracles, understand well that the quest for religion has not arisen in you yet. You are in awe when some sadhu, some baba, some holy man, creates ashes in the palm of his hand. What are you going to do with the ashes? There are plenty of ashes lying on the roads, or you can make ashes at home for little cost by burning coal. But if someone creates ashes in his palms, and this so impresses and delights you that you are moved to become his follower, then you are mad! It is worth understanding the nature of this fascination. That nothing is going to change from this creation of ashes is something that you also…

Osho, can we not attain liberation by repeating a mantra given by a saint—whether or not that saint is alive? If not liberation, will there at least be some greater spiritual growth? And is it true that one should never try to know the meaning of the words of a mantra, because knowing the meaning will only make the mind start taking part in thinking and imagination? I am asking this because I have heard that you are very much against mantras and that you say chanting mantras is only for idiots and fools.

And a saint will serve? Who would make a saint serve? Why make him commit sin with his own hands? Imagine meeting Mahavira, and he starts pressing your feet! Would you let him? You would jump up and run: “Lord, save me! What are you doing? You—and pressing my feet? Will you consign me to hell forever?” Or imagine Buddha starts massaging you! Even if he offered to do it free, you would say, “No, brother, not at all. We will massage your feet! You massage ours? Lord Buddha and a massage? Never. We will not allow it.” But the Christian definition of a saint is one who presses your feet, who serves you. According to Christians, Jesus is a saint because he gave his life for the salvation of man. What kind of saint is Mahavira—by Christian standards! What did he do for mankind? Yes, he meditated. That’s selfish—his…

Osho, what do you say about mantra-shakti, the power of mantras?

There is no power in any mantra. That is why a mantra of one religion does not work for another. That is why the people of one religion laugh at the mantras of another, calling them foolish; yet they have great faith in their own, even when they don’t know the meaning. When you understand something and it affects you, of course it can work. But how will you be affected by what you don’t understand? Almost everywhere the priests have arranged it so that dead languages are not allowed to die; at least in the temples they keep them on life support. The advantage of dead languages is this: since you don’t understand, you think, “It must be something extraordinary!” Open the Vedas and you will be astonished—ninety-nine percent rubbish! Stuff that has no business being in the Vedas; calling it “Veda” is utterly pointless. But who reads them?…