Human Life

Question: Second question: Osho, why have the saints sung such glory of human life? Chaitanya Prem! First thing: life itself is glorious. Life is the unique gift of the divine. Life is benediction. You did not earn it. You may be squandering it, but you did not earn it. It has descended; it has rained upon you from some unknown realm. No one asked you whether you wanted to be or not—how could anyone ask? When you were not, how could you be asked? Life in itself is glorious. From life, all doors open—the doors of meditation, of love, of liberation, of nirvana. Life is an opportunity, a great opportunity! You can make it, or you can destroy it. You can sing a song, or you can break the flute. Life is a vast opportunity. So first, life is in itself incomparable. And then human life is even more incomparable.

A friend has asked: Osho, human life is rare—why are we not aware of that rarity? What is the art of listening? Are Kali Yuga and Satya Yuga names for mental states? Should we take Buddhahood also to be just a mental state?

Jesus’ name is Jesus; Christ is not his personal name. “Christ” is the name for going beyond the mind. Buddha’s name is Gautama Siddhartha; “Buddha” is not his personal name. Buddhahood is the consciousness going beyond mind. Mahavira’s name is Vardhamana; “Jina” is not his personal name. Jina means one who has gone beyond mind. There is a delightful point in the name “Christ.” Those who research history say that “Christ” is a corruption of “Krishna.” Jesus is his personal name—“Jesus the Krishna,” Jesus who became Krishna. In Bengali even now, Krishna is called “Kristo.” If Krishna can be “Kristo” in Bengali, why not “Christ” in Hebrew or Aramaic? There is no obstacle. These are the names of that state in which a person steps beyond both body and mind. Buddhahood is not a state of mind; it is a state of no-mind, where the mind is not. Buddha has…

Osho, why have the saints always portrayed life as sorrow? Is this pessimism justified?

The saints have not portrayed life as sorrow. The saints looked into life and found it to be sorrow. That is not a “portrayal.” They never tried to prove that life is sorrow; they saw it—and it was sorrow. Now, if a thorn pierces your foot and you say, “I feel pain,” will anyone object, “Why are you depicting it like that? This is pessimism”? Someone has a festering ulcer, is in excruciating pain, and says, “I am suffering.” And you say, “Don’t describe it like that; that’s pessimism. One ought to be an optimist—say the ulcer gives you great joy!” What will change by saying so? The saints looked at life and described it as it is. That is not a philosophy of the saints—that life is sorrow; it is their experience that life is of the nature of suffering. Leave the saints aside—what is your experience? Just examine…

Yesterday Dhabbu-ji was saying, Osho, I finished my worship and then saw my little niece, a while later, sitting on the same seat with eyes closed, hands folded, swaying and singing: “Do bechaare, bina sahaare, phirte maare-maare!” (Two poor fellows, without support, roam around hounded!)

Dhabbu-ji told me this, and I burst out laughing. I asked, “Ninu, what’s this?” She said, “Please be quiet, I’m doing puja, Uncle!” Dhabbu-ji said, “Puja? But that’s a film song, not a hymn!” She quickly shot back, “In puja you and Grandma also sing ‘Om Jai Jagdish Hare’—that’s a song from the pictures too.” What difference does it make what you’re singing? Whether it’s a bhajan or a film song—within your sleep, all is equal. Even if you dream of heaven, it makes no difference. Even if gods appear in your dream, nothing changes. When you wake up, you’ll find all dreams were false. Some people are lost in worldly dreams; others are lost in dreams of renunciation. And these renouncers you’ve kept calling “great souls.” Their sleep is just like yours—no real difference at all. Even their dreams are like yours, because a dream is a dream; what…