According to Osho, having one’s own opinion carries no real significance—there is no need for it at all. An opinion is a substitute for seeing directly; it fixes the mind and blocks fresh understanding. He invites dropping the urge to take positions and, instead, meeting life from awareness and immediacy. From openness, clarity and right action arise naturally, without borrowed conclusions.
You don’t need to have an opinion; stay open, see for yourself, and act from clear awareness.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Why am I always afraid of others' opinion?
Because you are not, because you are not yet. You are nothing but a piled-up phenomenon of others' opinion. Who are you? Somebody says you are beautiful, so you are beautiful. And somebody says you are ugly, so you are ugly. And somebody says you are wonderful, so you are wonderful. And somebody says 'I have never seen such a nasty person', so you are a nasty person. And people go on saying, and you go on collecting all these things. And that is your image. That's why your image is very contradictory, ambiguous. One person says you are beautiful, another says you are ugly. You want to forget this person's idea that you are ugly, but you cannot forget it; it will be there. If you keep the opinion that you are beautiful you will have to keep the opinion that you are ugly too. Your image is very…
Osho: No, there are no thoughts then. QUESTION: YOU DO NOT HAVE THOUGHTS? Osho: There are no thoughts then. QUESTION: I SEE, I SEE. Osho: When I am talking to you, I am using thoughts as means. QUESTION: YES, THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THOSE THOUGHTS? Osho: As a means of expression, not as a means of achievement. QUESTION: ARE YOU THE THOUGHT, OR DO YOU WATCH THE THOUGHT? Osho: No, there is no thought, so there is no question of watching the thought. QUESTION: I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU JUST USE THOUGHTS AS A VEHICLE, AS A MEANS OF EXPRESSION. Osho: Of course. QUESTION: SO THERE ARE THOUGHTS. ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE THOUGHTS? Osho: No, there is no question of relationship. The relationship comes if there are two -- then the question of relationship comes.
Osho, why is it that the moment we cling to some belief—whether theism or atheism—the mind feels so reassured? Why does it seem almost impossible for it to stand in the middle, dropping both?
There is no greater courage than to stand in existence without conclusions. By “without conclusions” I mean: no belief, no superstition. It means: we will see existence as it is, without bringing our notions in between. We will neither say “God is” nor “God is not.” We will neither say “the soul is” nor “the soul is not.” We will inquire. But inquiry is hard. Inquiry means you must pay a price. Who wants that bother? So we borrow beliefs on credit. We say, Mahavira knew, Buddha knew, Krishna knew—why should we get into the mess? We’ll cling to them, hold their feet, and pass through. That is not faith; it is only weakness. And the weak do not move. It is not trust to think we can walk to freedom by holding Buddha’s feet. If you have no trust in yourself, how will you trust Buddha? No real trust…
Osho, what is the most significant thing about enlightenment?
People want definite answers to believe in: this way or that. Either be a Catholic or be a communist, but be clear. People want clarity because they are so confused, and this man brings all these seven categories; now their confusion is worse, they are even more confounded. First you were at least aware that you were confused. Now you will not be aware to which category you belong: yes, no, yes -- no both, neither yes nor no, or indescribable. Mahavira could not create a world religion for the simple reason that perhaps he had the deepest penetration into reality. If you ask about his enlightenment, he will answer in seven sentences. You will not be able to come to any conclusion -- and I feel this is something tremendously valuable. Why this urge to come to a conclusion? If existence is a continuum, an ongoing process -- never…
Osho, I too have begun to feel that it is not valuable.
If you decide to do social service—uplift the “Harijan,” redistribute land, do this and that—and you think self-realization will result, you are mistaken. Self-realization will not come from that. You may become a good and popular person; you will taste a subtle pleasure of ego—and nothing more. You will enjoy the pleasure of being “a servant,” but you will not taste the joy of service. The pleasure of the role of “servant” is one thing; the joy of service is entirely another. But if you enter religious practice, which is utterly personal, then a day will come when that sadhana will transform your life into service. Now life is self-interest; then life will be service. In self-ignorance, life is self-centered; whatever you do, some form of self-interest is present. In self-knowledge, life is service; whatever you do, self-interest cannot remain. For me, religion is fundamental; its result will surely come.…