Bhagavad Gita

Osho, the Gita is a personal dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna. But in your Gita discourses you address a group. Please explain whether the Bhagavad Gita can be addressed to a group?

Who told you I’m addressing a group! Does a group have any life with which to understand? Any ears with which to hear? Any heart to beat, any wisdom that can be awakened? “Group” is only a word. A group is not a person. Whenever a dialogue happens, it happens between persons, one to one. A group never meets a person. Have you ever met a group? Wherever you look, you meet individuals. You are here, and others are here with you. But that is only a togetherness. A group is not present; you are present individually. And if people leave one by one, will a group be left behind? The moment persons depart, the group also departs. I am not speaking to your crowd; I am speaking to your person. This is one-to-one. It is direct. And remember: what you understand is what you understand; the person sitting beside…

Duryodhana can depend upon Bheema to have a war. There is a deep similarity between them. Both are of the same nature; deep down both have the same kind of thinking, both are the same type of person. Hence if Duryodhana saw Bheema as the central figure on the opposing side, he was absolutely right. Gita also proves later on that Arjuna is eager to desert. Arjuna appears as an escapist, which is highly possible with regard to a person like him. The war has proved tougher for Arjuna. For Arjuna, entering in war became possible only after he underwent a transformation. Only after attaining a new level of understanding could he agree to the war. Bheema was prepared to fight at whatever level of being he was. He accepted war as naturally as did Duryodhana; hence, it is not coincidental that Duryodhana should see Bheema as the central figure.

Osho, why did Mahavira call the soul “time”? Please tell us what relationship there is between time and the soul.

Albert Einstein considered two constituent elements of existence: time and space. And as his inquiry deepened, it seemed to him that calling them two was not quite right. So he chose a single term for both: spacetime. Space is outside; time is inside. If we understand life rightly, two things are needed for being. You need a place in which to be—you will occupy some room. You are sitting here; you have taken up a little space. That is kshetra, the sky, space. But that alone is not enough. If that were all, you would become an object. Then there would be no difference between you and a table or a chair. The table and the chair also occupy space, just as you do. The floor you are sitting on occupies space, just as you do. Then what is the difference between you and a stone? You have also occupied…

Osho, did Arjuna, while listening to the wisdom of the Gita, attain the supreme knowledge then and there, or did his devotion-practice, his disciple’s practice, begin only afterward? When and how did he attain God-realization?

Arjuna attained the supreme state just by listening; he had nothing to do. Doing itself is a delusion. The notion that something must be done to attain the Divine is a concept of the ego. The Divine is present; you have to awaken, not do. If there is anything to “do,” it is only to awaken—nothing else. Open your eyes: the Divine stands before you. Look within: He is present within. Touch a tree: He will come into your hand. Gaze into the eyes of animals. Listen to the humming of the winds passing through the trees: you will hear His resonance. The real question is not how to find Him—He is. You are lost; God is not lost. A fish asks, “Where is the ocean?” Born in the ocean, dissolving in the ocean, it asks, “Where is the ocean?” The fish has fallen asleep; it has become empty of…