What is the relationship between religion and scientific thinking?

Osho, is this also a science? Science—the supreme science! But ordinarily, in relation to religion, it is understood to be belief, faith. In my view, that is a misunderstanding. To me, religion too is another kind of knowing. And whatever principles religion has have issued from someone’s knowing, not from someone’s belief. Therefore my constant emphasis is: do not believe—try to know; and the day you know, believe that day. The acceptance that comes through knowing is called shraddha—trust; and the acceptance that comes without knowing is called belief. Shraddha is the ultimate state of knowi

Therefore, when I have said, “Do not believe in transmigration, do not believe in reincarnation,” it does not mean I am saying that transmigration does not exist. It also does not mean I am saying that reincarnation does not exist. I am saying only this: once you believe, the search stops. Try to know. And knowing happens only when right doubt is present. If you assume the opposite, even then doubt disappears. If I assume that there is no reincarnation, the search stops. If I assume that there is reincarnation, the search stops. Search is in suspension. I know neither that it is, nor that it is not. So I set out to find what is, so that I may know it. I take a religious person to be the deepest of inquirers; there is no search deeper than that. But those whom we ordinarily call religious, I do not…

Question: BELOVED OSHO, CAN SCIENCE ITSELF BE RELIGIOUS? And with God comes the priest; he becomes the mediator. He becomes more powerful than politicians. In religious countries like India, politicians go and touch the feet of Hindu priests -- of course, only before election time. Then for five years they don't bother about the priest, about the temples. But as the election comes near they start going on religious pilgrimages to temples far away in the Himalayas, touching the feet of any stupid priest, asking for blessings. The priest holds more power; the politician's power is mundane. The priest's power has entered in the very spirit of man. That's why religions did not allow science to move into their territory. First they did not allow science even to move into the objective world -- the subjective world was out of the question.

The search for bliss is as scientific as any objective science. The difference is only of direction. The science watches the objective world and enquires into the reality that surrounds us. Religion moves into the watcher, into the subject, into subjectivity itself. Science is concerned with the object; religion is concerned with subjectivity itself -- but the approach, the method, the attitude, is exactly the same. Religion is not superstition, it is not belief. It is not at all a dogma in which you can believe; it is something to be experienced. Just as science works through experimentation, religion works through experimentation. The experiment of religion is, of course, far deeper than that of science, far more individual, personal. Science and its enquiry is collective, objective; others can watch.

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…

Beloved Osho, the scientific vision of objective reality and the subjective experience of existence seem to be two completely separate and unbridgeable dimensions. Is this because of the nature of things, or is it only an illusion of our mind?

The scientific approach to existence and the religious approach have been in the past separate and unbridgeable. The reason was the insistence of old religions on superstitions, belief systems, denial of inquiry and doubt. In fact, there is nothing unbridgeable between science and religion, and there is no separation either. But religion insisted on belief -- science cannot accept that. Belief is covering up your ignorance. It never reveals to you the truth; it only gives you certain dogmas, creeds, and you can create an illusion of knowledge through them. But that knowledge is nothing but a delusion. Anything based on belief is bogus. Because religions insisted continuously on belief, and the basic method of science is doubt, the separation happened. And it became unbridgeable. It is unbridgeable if religion does not arise and face the challenge of doubt. The whole responsibility of the religions has been to keep these…