Why do people steal ideas and then oppose the original source, even after forgiveness?

Osho, you said... then you will find that the devotee is God. The question arises: if one devotee prefers to be God and another wants to remain only a devotee, then which of the two is superior?

The one who wants to be God will not be able to be. And the one who wants to remain a devotee will become God. The question of superior or inferior does not arise, because only one of the two will happen. The one who does not want to be will be. The one who wants to be will be deprived. That very wanting is of the ego. But the matter is a little delicate. Sometimes humility too belongs to the ego. Beware that your humility may not be of the ego. Perhaps you are saying, “No, I don’t want to be,” because you know that those who refuse are the ones who attain. Then you are clever. Then your humility is adulterous. Your humility is not pure, not sacred, not virginal—it is like a prostitute. The one who wants to be God, whose ego says, “I must become God,”…

Osho, I heard in your discourse that a Jain monk tries to speak in your style, like a parrot. But it isn’t only this monk; we see many so-called great men doing the same. Secretly they read your books, then publicly oppose you vehemently. And what feels worst is when they present your ideas as their own, get them published—and then strut about. We can’t bear the hypocrisy of such so‑called geniuses. What should we do?

But this will go on. There is only one way to stop it: get my books to as many people as possible. There is only one way to stop it: let people become more and more acquainted with me. Then it will stop on its own. Either it will stop—or those who find this acceptable will have to muster the courage to acknowledge it openly. People come to me. They say: Such-and-such monk speaks only your words. I ask: Does he ever take my name? They say: He never takes your name! But he speaks your words. He reads your books. Then I say: Until he takes my name, consider him dishonest. To read my books and speak my words, and yet create the illusion that these words are his... I have no difficulty with it; but they themselves are deceiving themselves. Even the benefit they could have gotten, they…

Osho, today the questions are on “achourya” (non-stealing). To understand achourya, I would like to understand “theft” very closely. So for now let us talk only about theft. You have said that at the level of body, feeling, or mind, imitation or following another is theft. But life is a web of inter-relationships; everything here is interconnected. Then how can a person distinguish his purest originality from the subtle waves coming from outside—their influence or imposition? How does one avoid that?

Religion is concerned with the theft of influences, the theft of personalities, the theft of faces. And we are all living as the stolen. We are all living as if we were someone else. We are not ourselves. I am not I; I am living like someone else. In this sense I have said that “achourya” is the path to the attainment of individuality in the human soul, and “theft” is the method of losing the soul. This can happen at the level of feeling, at the level of thought, or at the level of the body. We do not even walk in our own way; we even learn our walk from others! We do not think in our own way; we learn thoughts from others! We do not feel in our own way; we learn feelings from others! A man reads the newspaper in the morning and then all…

Osho, many mahatmas, sadhus and monks steal your words and speak as if they were their own. Isn’t it necessary to stop them in time?

But in my ashram, if one is not creative, there is no place for him. And your so-called mahatmas and munis—what creativity do they have? I tell them: surely a place can be made here, but here you will have to do something. Here you cannot sit and take service. Some sannyasins make clothes, some make furniture, some make shoes, some make other things. What can you do? They say, “We can’t do anything—because we have been sannyasins for thirty or forty years; we have done nothing. We know only one thing—taking service.” What will I do with them here? They say, “We will sit, meditate, do bhajan-kirtan.” Just sitting and bhajan-kirtan will not do anything. Here you have to live life. Jain munis write, news comes that they can come, leaving everything—and not a few but in large numbers—because they are fed up, bored. But then, “Where shall we…

Osho, it is all right when you say everything is auspicious and beautiful; but what will happen to us—those of us who are attached to your physical body?

Yog Vidya! Attachment is not inauspicious. Attachment is not ugly. Attachment is like freshly mined gold—yet impure. It will pass through fire, be refined, become pure. Attachment is love in its impure form. Attachment needs to be transformed, refined. I am not against attachment. I am not against anything. But every phenomenon has higher possibilities—more auspicious, more beautiful forms. The seers of the Upanishads prayed: O Lord, lead us from darkness to light. Tamaso ma jyotir gamaya! If I were to say it, I would say: O Lord, lead us from light to more light. Because darkness too is only a form of light. Light is hidden even in darkness. Morning is born out of the night; the sun rises from it. In the womb of night the sun is nurtured and grows. The whole beauty of the dawn is impossible without the night. The Upanishadic seers say: O Lord,…