Wouldn't it be more convenient for seekers if there were only one single method of sadhana?

Osho, if there were only one single method of sadhana in your ashram, wouldn’t it be more convenient for seekers?

These are two styles: either you support yourself—and then there is no need of another. Fine; the matter is finished. Support was the whole issue, and you supported yourself. Have you noticed: a mother’s love is strongest for the child who is the weakest. This is exactly the opposite of economics. But economics and the scripture of love are opposite. According to economics, love should be for the strongest, the most intelligent, the most skilled. No—mother knows the strong, the intelligent, the skilled will manage for themselves. They have no need. It is the weak who are less intelligent, who are more likely to stray, who may fall—the mother takes care of them. It often happens that the sick child becomes dearest to the mother—more than the healthy ones. The experience of God comes to those who stagger in helplessness. That is why in the religions of Buddha and Mahavira…

Osho, you have said that there are many mutually opposite paths that lead to the One Divine. In the past it used to be that seekers of a single path would gather around one master: yogis separate, devotees separate, tantrikas separate, meditators separate. That made it easy for everyone to walk their own path. But with you, in your ashram, there is a whole fair of opposing paths—yogis and bhaktas, tantrikas and Sufis, karma-yogis and meditators—all together. How is this so? It also creates obstacles. Kindly say something about this.

It is true. In the past it was like that. A master would be the advocate of one narrow path. That had its benefits, and its harms. The benefit was that no dilemma arose in your mind. The same thing—the same thing, the same thing—you heard. The same thing—the same thing, the same thing—you did. Doubt did not arise. You quietly held your path and walked. But there was a danger: narrowness set in. Sectarianism set in—the feeling that only I am right and everyone else is wrong; only this path is right and all others are wrong. So there was a benefit, and there was a harm. And the harm proved greater than the benefit. The benefit reached very few; the harm reached millions. The whole world became sectarian. The whole world became dogmatic: we are right and everyone else is wrong. Ask a Jain—he says, our guru is…

A friend has asked, Osho, is it not possible to develop intelligence and feeling together? Can a healthy person not practice meditation and devotion at the same time? A person is whole—intelligence, feeling, and action—then why should the path of practice be one-sided?

A person is indeed whole—but that person is an ideal. That is not you who are already whole. When a person’s wholeness is revealed, attained, then everything in them becomes complete. Their intelligence is as sharp as their feeling is deep. Their action, their intelligence, their heart, all come together—like a threefold confluence. But that is the final goal. You are not yet like that. You have a journey to make. So you will only be able to travel from the side toward which you lean more, the dimension for which you have greater interest and inclination. Right now you are fragmented, incomplete. One person has abundant feeling but little intelligence. Another is skilled and attached to action, with little intelligence or feeling by comparison. Another has deep intelligence but a barren heart and no bent for action. In this way we are incomplete, each in our own way. Wholeness…

Osho, the twenty-one-day ritual you have hinted at—was that practice or elemental realization in any way traditional? Because from your mode of expression it continually seems that you surely represent some teacher’s or Tirthankara’s method. Within this I also want to dare to ask: do you want to add a link to some established spiritual lineage, or, like Buddha, are you attempting to cut a new path through the mountains?

Nor is the issue one of tolerance. It is a matter of sky-like spaciousness, not tolerance. Not mere forbearance. Not that a Hindu “puts up with” a Muslim or a Christian “puts up with” a Jain. Forbearance already holds violence within it. I do not say the Quran and the Gita say the same thing. The Quran says something quite different; it has its own individual voice—that is its greatness. If it only repeated what the Gita says, it would be worth two pennies. The Bible says something else again, which neither the Gita nor the Quran says. Each has its own voice. Mahavira does not say what Buddha says; they say very different things. And yet from these differing statements one ultimately arrives at the same place. My emphasis is on the oneness of the destination, not on the oneness of the paths. My emphasis is that in the…

Osho, does the ritual of twenty-one days which you indicated you were doing in your previous birth belong to any particular tradition of meditation and self-experience? Because from your speeches, it appears that you are definitely representing the methods of some great teacher or teerthanker. In view of this, may I also dare to ask whether you wish to connect a spiritual link to some traditional chain, or like buddha are you attempting to cut a new path on some mountain?

The overall perspective which I have before me is this: that I would like to help every person to move according to his capacity, his stage of evolution, his culture -- according to what has already been assimilated in his blood. Then it will be much easier for him to achieve. Therefore, I have neither any religion of my own, nor any path of my own, because now one exclusive path or religion will not work for the future, and a religious sect means a path. Nowadays, such a religion is required which doesn't insist on a particular path, which can become the crossroads for all the paths, which can say that all paths belong to it and which can ask everyone to follow the path of his liking. Such a religion would emphasize that you will reach the same place from wherever you walk, that all roads lead to…