What is the significance of Neminath in Jain history?

Osho, according to Jain history, the twenty-second Tirthankara, Neminath, was Krishna’s cousin. After intense austerities he became known among Hindus as the austere sage Ghora Angirasa. And in the lineage of spiritual wisdom, in the esoteric domain, he was Krishna’s link. What is your view on this? Does such a connection exist? Because you yourself have said that Krishna’s “being” depended on inner causes. What were those inner causes—in the context of esoteric knowledge?

Neminath is Krishna’s cousin. And this is from a time when Hindu and Jain had not yet become two separate streams. Hindu and Jain split clearly and became distinct streams after Mahavira. Neminath is Krishna’s cousin and the Jains’ twenty-second Tirthankara. But there is no esoteric connection of any kind between Neminath and Krishna—no connection of any hidden teaching. There is a reason: Neminath belongs to a very different kind of one-dimensional tradition. In the Jain tradition of twenty-four Tirthankaras—perhaps the most extensive experimentation on this earth in the dimension of renunciation—nowhere else on earth has there been such a long lineage and such a great chain of extraordinary individuals. The first Jain Tirthankara is contemporaneous with the Rig Veda, or a little earlier. Because in the Rig Veda there are such respectful words for the first Tirthankara that contemporaries rarely show such courtesy to one another. The words are…

Questioner: according to the history of jainism, the twenty-second jaina tirthankara, neminath, was krishna's cousin. After going through a spell of severe ascetic discipline neminath became renowned as a hindu seer by the name of ghor angiras, and he is said to have served as a link between krishna and esoteric knowledge. What do you say about it? Is such a relationship between neminath and krishna possible? You said that krishna's coming into being depended on very inner reasons. What are those inner reasons in the context of esoteric knowledge?

Scriptures say that Neminath is the twenty-second Jaina tirthankara and he is Krishna's cousin, Scriptures also mention Krishna's meetings with Neminath. Whenever Neminath happens to visit his town Krishna goes to pay his respects to him. It is significant that when Neminath comes, Krishna pays him a visit; Neminath never goes to visit Krishna. A renunciate is not expected to pay his respects to a non-renunciate; it is very difficult. A renunciate becomes harsh, he tears himself away from all relationships and attachments. So while Neminath remains Krishna's cousin from Krishna's side, Krishna is no one to Neminath. He never goes to Krishna to ask, "How are you?" He has renounced the world. In the dimension of vairagya or non-attachment, one has to drop all associations and their ensuing attachments and become absolutely alone. No one is his friend and no one is his enemy. So the question of Krishna…

Osho, before Mahavira there were twenty-three Tirthankaras. Then Mahavira’s family members must have been followers of someone—Mahavira himself was not a follower of anyone—so were they followers of Parshvanath or of someone else? How did it happen that Mahavira, who forged his own path and was not anyone’s disciple, ended up with a path that coincided with Parshvanath’s path, or with that tradition? Because that path already existed! And the name “Jain” for the sect is associated with Mahavira; before him, what were those people called?

There are two or three things to understand here. First, only with Mahavira did a stream of thought become a sect. Before Mahavira there was indeed a current of thought, but it had no separate existence from the Aryan tradition. It was a current that arose within the Aryan tradition. Its name was Shramana. It was not called “Jain” yet. And there was a reason for calling it “Shramana,” as I have said earlier. I have told you that the Brahmin current does not put faith in attaining the ultimate through effort, through sadhana, through tapas. The ultimate is to be attained in an attitude of extreme humility, in prayer, in utter meekness—where we are completely helpless, where we can do nothing; the doer is That alone. In this perfect poverty—what Jesus called “poverty of the spirit”—one who is so humble and indigent in spirit that he says, “What can…

Osho, how could the iconoclast Mahavira accept himself as the twenty-fourth Tirthankara of the most ancient Jina tradition? Please explain!

Within this revolutionary tradition, Mahavira is the most glorious, the most brilliant. Therefore his words are worth understanding and contemplating. He must have been uniquely revolutionary; for the Jainas have two sects—Digambara and Shvetambara. The Digambaras hold that not a single word of Mahavira remains, no scripture remains. That too is part of the revolution. They say, no scripture is Mahavira’s word. The words we have are from the Shvetambara compilations. The Digambaras have no compilations. It is astonishing that the Digambaras did not preserve! But that too belongs to their deep revolt: if you preserve words, today or tomorrow they become scripture; preserve them, and soon they become Veda. Hence the Digambaras did not preserve Mahavira’s words. It is an extraordinary rebellion against scripture. They revere Mahavira, but preserved no texts—only what was passed personally from master to disciple; they did not write it down. Therefore, for the Digambaras,…

There is a beloved Jain story: Neminath arrived—Krishna’s cousin, and a Tirthankara of the Jains. Neminath stayed across the Yamuna. Krishna said to Rukmini, “Go, prepare delicious food and attend on Neminath.” She said, “But the river is in flood; it is not possible to cross on foot. The flood is such that even the boatmen will not risk it. What shall we do? How can we cross?” Krishna said something wonderful: “Tell the river, ‘If Neminath has fasted from birth, O river, give way.’” Rukmini could scarcely believe it. But if Krishna says it—well, try and see. A modern wife would say, “Go to blazes! Whom are you trying to fool?” But it is an old story; Rukmini could not speak thus. If he says it, there must be some sense in it. Without trying, nothing can be said. I cooked the food and set out.