What is this world and what is maya?

Osho, what is the fundamental anguish of human life?

There is only one anguish: that a human being cannot become what he was born to be. There is only one anguish: that the seed remains a seed and does not bloom like a flower; that it cannot scatter its fragrance to the infinite winds; cannot converse with the moon and stars; cannot offer its colors to the sky; cannot be expressed. If the poem within the poet cannot be revealed—anguish. If the painter cannot paint—anguish. If the dancer cannot dance—if chains lie on his feet—anguish. Anguish means only this: that what we are meant to be—our innate nature and destiny—does not come to fruition, and we are forced to be something else. Then anguish is born. Then melancholy gathers over life. And all those countless people you see burdened with sorrow, living in a kind of hell—the reason is only this: each has come carrying the seed of becoming…

Osho, this world is maya. Here everything is false. Save me from drowning in it.

A cat was sitting on a tree branch, swaying, in a great devotional mood. A dog passing below saw the cat—his mouth watered—but she was up on the branch, beyond his reach. And she was swaying as if on a journey to heaven, eyes closed, tears of ecstasy flowing. The dog stood awhile hoping she might sway too much and fall. But she did not sway that much; she held the branch tight. Finally the dog said, “What’s the matter? What’s giving you such bliss?” The cat opened her eyes: “You spoiled it all! I was dreaming that from the sky it was raining mice—a torrential downpour! Mice upon mice were falling!” The dog said, “Fool, do you know scripture? It is clearly written that sometimes miracles happen, and when they do, bones rain from the sky, not mice. There is no mention of mice in the scriptures. Idiot! You…

That which is beginningless and yet which ends, which is neither being nor non-being and which in itself is seen as the purest of energies is called maya or the magical world. It cannot be described in any other way except this.

THIS MAYA IS IGNORANCE-LIKE, PETTY AND UNREAL, BUT IS SEEN BY THE DELUDED PERSONS AS REAL AT ALL TIMES -- PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE. THEREFORE TO SAY THAT IT IS SUCH CANNOT EXPLAIN ITS REAL CHARACTER. Now, the enquiry goes into MAYA. After brahman, it must be discussed. By maya is meant something which IS and yet IS NOT, which appears to be -- the appearance. Things as they appear to us are not as they are. Immanuel Kant says somewhere that we cannot know the thing in itself; a thing cannot be known in itself. Whatsoever we know about a thing is a projection; it is a contribution, we have contributed something to it. When you fall in love with someone, it is your projection. You contribute to your beloved, to your lover, something -- you give something, and then you are impressed by your own contribution. This is…

Osho, what is the difference between surrender and blind imitation?

So be careful: the freedom you allow yourself, allow the other too. You have no right to judge another as blindly credulous or as a surrendered being. Drop that concern. You cannot judge anyway—how will you enter another’s heart? How will you know? Think only about yourself. See within whether, up to now, you have lived by blind belief or by surrender. Decide only there; leave worrying about others. Otherwise, all your judgments will be wrong. Jesus said: Judge not; do not set yourself up as a judge in relation to another. To the friend who has asked: if you are asking for yourself, good. Drop worrying about others. Look within and see: whatever I have been clinging to till now—have I ever staked my life to hold it? Have I meditated for it? Have I loved for it? Or am I just clutching what culture, society, civilization handed me?…

Verse (Sanskrit): माया नाम अनादिरन्तवती प्रमाणाऽप्रमाण सा धारणा न सती नासती न सदसती स्वयमधिका विकाररहिता निरूप्यमाणा सतीतरलक्षणशून्या सा मायेत्युच्यते। अज्ञानं तुच्छाऽप्यसती कालत्रयेऽपि पामराणां वास्तवी च सत्वबुद्धिलौकिका- नामिदमित्यनिर्वचनीया वक्तुं न शक्यते।।15।। Transliteration: māyā nāma anādirantavatī pramāṇā'pramāṇa sā dhāraṇā na satī nāsatī na sadasatī svayamadhikā vikārarahitā nirūpyamāṇā satītaralakṣaṇaśūnyā sā māyetyucyate| ajñānaṃ tucchā'pyasatī kālatraye'pi pāmarāṇāṃ vāstavī ca satvabuddhilaukikā- nāmidamityanirvacanīyā vaktuṃ na śakyate||15|| Translation: Māyā, so named, is beginningless, without end; neither a means of knowledge nor its negation—such a conception holds not. Neither non-being, nor a blend of being and non-being; surpassing them herself, unmodified, even as one seeks to define her, devoid of the marks of being and non-being—she is called “Māyā.” Ignorance—though trifling and unreal— yet, for the common folk through all three times, is held as real; to worldly minds that judge by “this-ness”— it is ineffable, indeterminable as “this”; it cannot be uttered.