Osho used the word politics far more widely than elections and parties. For him every race for more, for wealth, for position, even for renunciation, is political, and the longing for power is the ego's longing. Religion, in his sense, begins where that race ends.
The passages below come from his Hindi talks, in Osho Live's own English translations.
Politics in Osho's Words
The threads that run through his talks on politics. The short notes are Osho Live's; the quoted passages are his own words, checked against the talk.
Power Does Not Corrupt
Osho turned the familiar saying around.
A famous saying of Bacon’s is: “Power corrupts.” It is incomplete. Power corrupts because only the corrupt seek power. Power does not corrupt; the corrupted seek power. If there is corruption within you, it cannot manifest without power; when power comes, corruption appears.
Politics across the years
When Osho spoke about politics: talks where it comes up at least 5 times, counted from 6,627 dated talks on Osho Live.
Where he speaks of it most: The Last Testament, Vol 1 · Tao Upanishad · From Bondage to Freedom
| Year | Talks about it | In Hindi | In English | Dated talks that year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1964 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| 1965 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 19 |
| 1966 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 1967 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 33 |
| 1968 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 30 |
| 1969 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 110 |
| 1970 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 131 |
| 1971 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 111 |
| 1972 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 223 |
| 1973 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 205 |
| 1974 | 16 | 5 | 11 | 271 |
| 1975 | 40 | 14 | 26 | 303 |
| 1976 | 56 | 18 | 38 | 700 |
| 1977 | 67 | 22 | 45 | 679 |
| 1978 | 75 | 25 | 50 | 702 |
| 1979 | 85 | 39 | 46 | 683 |
| 1980 | 75 | 39 | 36 | 674 |
| 1981 | 18 | 4 | 14 | 122 |
| 1984 | 21 | 0 | 21 | 63 |
| 1985 | 157 | 0 | 157 | 356 |
| 1986 | 63 | 6 | 57 | 369 |
| 1987 | 54 | 0 | 54 | 486 |
| 1988 | 18 | 0 | 18 | 276 |
| 1989 | 11 | 0 | 11 | 61 |
More in his words
Every Race for More
Politics, in his sense, reaches well beyond government.
And when I use the word “politics,” be aware: the race for money is also politics—not only the race for posts. Every race is politics. The race for “more” is politics. Politics has many faces—but wherever the demand for “more” is, there is politics.
Power Feeds the Ego
Wealth, office and austerity can all serve the same hunger.
Why power? The longing for power is the longing of ego. What will you do with power? ... Power is nourishment for the ego. One runs after wealth—seeking power; another after politics—seeking office, which gives power; another after tapas—but the intent is the same. There is no difference in intent.
The Fearless Do Not Seek Power
The wish for power, he said, is a sign of fear.
Take this as a criterion: whoever seeks power is timid. Otherwise, why seek power? One who is free of fear—abhay—loses the very desire for power. He seeks no power—in wealth, in position, in prestige. The very desire for power drops.
Religion Belongs to the Individual
Organised religions, in his reading, are politics under another name.
And therefore your so-called religions are not religion; they are politics. Hindu politics, Muslim politics, Christian politics—all politics. They have nothing to do with religion. Religion belongs to the individual; politics to the crowd. The crowd has no soul—only noise, slogans, and uproar. The individual has a soul.
Seek Peace, Not Power
What the seeker of power misses.
Understand the difference: if you seek power, you are of wrong view. If you seek peace, you are of right view. And the wonder is—he who seeks peace receives power unasked. He who seeks power—he gets neither peace, nor true power; only the illusion of power.
From the discourses
Passages where Osho speaks on politics, each linked to the exact place in the talk.
Osho, what is the most astonishing law in this world?
A Sufi story. A thief, at night, began to climb into a house through a window. The window frame gave way, he fell, and broke his leg. The next day he went to court and blamed the householder for his broken leg. The owner was summoned and said in his defense: The one responsible is the carpenter who made the window. The carpenter was called; he said the contractor who built the wall hadn’t made the windowed section strong enough. In his defense the contractor said: My mistake happened because of a woman who was passing by—she drew my attention away. When the woman was presented in court, she said: At that time I was wearing a very fine dress. Normally no one even looks at me. So the fault lies with the dress, which was so exquisitely sewn. The judge said: Then summon the tailor who sewed it; he…
पांचवां प्रश्न: ओशो, इस जगत में सर्वाधिक आश्चर्यजनक नियम कौन-सा है?
एक सूफी कहानी। एक चोर रात के समय किसी मकान की खिड़की में से भीतर जाने लगा, कि खिड़की की चौखट टूट जाने से गिर पड़ा और उसकी टांग टूट गयी। अगले दिन उसने अदालत में जाकर अपनी टांग के टूटने का दोष उस मकान के मालिक पर लगाया। मकान-मालिक को बुलाकर पूछा गया, तो उसने अपनी सफाई में कहा: इसका जिम्मेदार वह बढ़ई है, जिसने कि खिड़की बनायी। बढ़ई को बुलाया गया, तो उसने कहा कि मकान बनाने वाले ठेकेदार ने दीवार का खिड़की वाला हिस्सा मजबूती से नहीं बनाया था। ठेकेदार ने अपनी सफाई में कहा: मुझसे यह गलती एक औरत की वजह से हुई, जो वहां से गुजर रही थी। उसने मेरा ध्यान अपनी तरफ खींच लिया था। जब उस औरत को अदालत में पेश किया गया, तो उसने कहा: उस समय मैंने बहुत बढ़िया लिबास पहन रखा था। आमतौर पर मेरी तरफ किसी की नजर उठती नहीं है। सो, कसूर उस लिबास का है जो इतना बढ़िया सिला हुआ था। न्यायाधीश ने कहा: तब तो उसे सीने वाले दर्जी को बुलाया जाये, वही मुजरिम है। उसे अदालत में हाजिर किया जाये। …
In your opinion, which is the ideal political regime and which is the worst?
Fascism is the worst, and meritocracy is the best. The criterion is anarchism. Whichever regime is closer to anarchism is better -- the closest to anarchism is the best -- whichever is farther away from anarchism is worse. Fascism is the farthest, dictatorship the farthest; they are the worst. Anarchism is my criterion. The best regime can only be meritocracy, which will be very close to anarchism. Just one step more and all regimes disappear. Anarchism... No government means absolute freedom, and freedom is the ultimate value of life.
Osho, why are you so opposed to politics?
I am not against politics. Politics is only a symptom. I am against the inferiority complex in man; that inner sense of smallness. And politics is a symptom of that very disease. The more a person suffers from an inferiority complex, the more he hankers after position. The more he is filled with inferiority, the more he hankers after wealth. Understand this. An inferiority complex means: inside you feel, “I am nothing, a nobody, a two-bit fellow.” But this rankles. “I—and two-bit!” The mind cannot swallow it. “I will show the world that I am somebody. I’ll become a prime minister, a president. I’ll amass the world’s wealth and prove to the world that I am somebody.” Politics is the device to fill that inner sense of two-bit-ness, meaninglessness, emptiness. Politics means ambition—whether for money or for office, it makes no difference. Sometimes it is even the ambition for renunciation;…
चौथा प्रश्न: ओशो, आप राजनीति के इतने विरोध में क्यों हैं?
… और राजनीति उसी रोग का लक्षण है। जो व्यक्ति जितनी हीनता की ग्रंथि से पीड़ित होता है, उतने ही पद का आकांक्षी होता है। जो व्यक्ति जितनी हीनता की ग्रंथि से भरा होता है, उतना ही धन का आकांक्षी होता है। समझना। हीनता की ग्रंथि का अर्थ होता है: भीतर तो तुम्हें लगता है--मैं कुछ भी नहीं हूं, ना-कुछ, दो कौड़ी का। मगर यह बात अखरती है। यह खटकती है--मैं और दो कौड़ी का! यह बात मानने का मन नहीं होता। दिखा दूंगा दुनिया को कि मैं भी कुछ हूं। हो जाऊंगा प्रधानमंत्री, कि राष्ट्रपति। कि कमा लूंगा दुनिया की संपत्ति और दिखा दूंगा दुनिया को कि मैं कुछ हूं। तुम्हारे भीतर जो तुम्हें लगता है: दो-कौड़ीपन, अर्थहीनता, रिक्तता, उसको भरने का उपाय है राजनीति। …
Osho, you make statements on politics; then why shouldn’t you be considered a politician?
Then just now, when Indira won, Vinoba remained silent; when he was informed that Indira had won, he clapped in happiness. The newspapers reported: Vinoba clapped in joy, became ecstatic! Two days later came the statement: I did not clap because of Indira’s victory; it just so happened that at that moment I was in a playful mood. At that very moment you were in ecstasy—neither a moment before, nor a moment after! What a coincidence that precisely then the mood to clap arose! Two days later he must have done the accounting that this clapping could prove costly. Politics is always calculation, arithmetic, maneuvering and cleverness. I tell you: by speaking on politics I am not a politician, and Vinoba, remaining silent, without giving statements, is a politician. Politics is a style of life; statements or non-statements make no difference. If there were even a little politics in me,…
दूसरा प्रश्न: ओशो, आप राजनीति पर वक्तव्य देते हैं, तो फिर आपको राजनीतिज्ञ क्यों न माना जाये?
फिर अभी इंदिरा जीती, तो विनोबा मौन हैं; जब उनको खबर दी गयी कि इंदिरा जीत गयी, तो खुशी में उन्होंने ताली बजाई। अखबारों में खबर छप गई कि विनोबा ने खुशी में ताली बजाई, मस्त हो गये! फिर दो दिन बाद वक्तव्य, कि वह मैंने ताली इंदिरा की जीत के कारण नहीं बजाई थी, वह तो उस क्षण संयोगवशात मैं मौज में था। उसी क्षण मौज में थे, क्षण भर पहले नहीं, क्षण-भर बाद नहीं! एकदम खूब संयोग बैठा कि उसी क्षण मस्ती आयी ताली बजाने की! दो दिन बाद फिर हिसाब-किताब बिठाया होगा कि यह ताली बजाना महंगा पड़ सकता है। राजनीति हमेशा हिसाब-किताब है, गणित है, चालबाजी है चालाकी है। मैं तुमसे कहता हूं: मैं राजनीति पर वक्तव्य देकर भी राजनीतिज्ञ नहीं हूं और विनोबा चुप रहकर, मौन रहकर, बिना वक्तव्य दिये भी राजनीतिज्ञ हैं। राजनीति जीवन की एक शैली है, वक्तव्य और गैर-वक्तव्य से कुछ भी नहीं होता। अगर मुझ में थोड़ी भी राजनीति होती तो यह कोई समय था कि मोरारजी का मैं विरोध करूं और इंदिरा का समर्थन करूं? चौंकी तो इंदिरा भी। …
Osho, are the politicians really as stupid as you say they are?
Govind, THEY ARE MORE STUPID THAN I SAY. In fact, unless a person is stupid he cannot be a politician. It is not that the politicians are stupid -- in fact, only stupid people are attracted towards politics. What is politics basically? The desire to dominate others -- and that is the most stupid thing in life. The intelligent person tries to be a master of himself, and the stupid person tries to be master of others. And how can you be a master of others if you are not a master of yourself? If you are not a master of yourself, then trying to be a master of others is just a substitute to befool yourself, to deceive yourself, and that is what the stupidity consists of. Two politicians were sitting on a park bench in New Delhi. "I will tell you the truth," said one. "I am afraid…
Beloved master, you were talking about one world and one world government. Recently president reagan refused to accept the authority of the world court on political issues. Can politicians ever become contemporary?
No. Politicians can never become contemporary; politics itself is out of date. Politicians no longer have any function; they are unnecessarily bothering the whole humanity. It is time for them to disappear as politicians. They are acceptable as plumbers, as electricians, as pilots, as truckdrivers. But as politicians they are no longer needed. And if President Reagan refuses to accept the World Court's decisions about political matters, he is showing his real face. His mask has slipped. The World Court has the right to decide about every issue that concerns humanity. Politics cannot be above law. His refusal to accept it simply means that he is not ready to create, on this planet, a beautiful global village. Nations are no longer needed; they are absolutely unnecessary and harmful. But the politicians will lose all their egos if nations disappear. Then what is President Reagan going to do? Go back to…
Another friend has asked; he has asked that... Osho, what difference do you see between socialism and communism?
I see the same difference as between the first stage of tuberculosis and the third—no other difference. Socialism is a somewhat pale, diluted communism; it is the first stage of the disease. And in the first stage the disease is not clearly visible, so it is easier to be taken in by it. That is why, all over the world, communism has started using the word “socialism.” The word “communism” has become notorious. And because of what communism has done to the world in the last fifty years, its respect has withered. In these fifty years, communism’s prestige has been dragged into the dust. So now communism has begun to use the word “socialism.” Now it talks of socialism and may even try to say it is different from communism. But there is no fundamental difference between socialism and communism—only a difference of words. Yet by changing the word we…
एक दूसरे मित्र ने पूछा है, उन्होंने पूछा है कि ओशो, आप समाजवाद और साम्यवाद--सोशलिज्म और कम्युनिज्म--में क्या फर्क करते हैं?
वही फर्क करता हूं मैं जो टी.बी. की पहली स्टेज में और तीसरी स्टेज में होता है, और कोई फर्क नहीं करता हूं। समाजवाद थोड़ा सा फीका साम्यवाद है, वह पहली स्टेज है बीमारी की। और पहली स्टेज पर बीमारी साफ दिखाई नहीं पड़ती इसलिए पकड़ने में आसानी होती है। इसलिए सारी दुनिया में कम्युनिज्म ने सोशलिज्म शब्द का उपयोग करना शुरू कर दिया है। कम्युनिज्म शब्द बदनाम हो गया है। और कम्युनिज्म ने पिछले पचास सालों में दुनिया में जो किया है, उसके कारण उसका आदर क्षीण हुआ है। पचास वर्षों में कम्युनिज्म की प्रतिष्ठा मिट्टी में मिल गई है। इसलिए अब कम्युनिज्म सोशलिज्म शब्द का उपयोग करना शुरू किया है। अब वह समाजवाद की बात करता है और यह भी कोशिश कर सकता है कि हम समाजवाद से भिन्न हैं। …
Why do you think that the politicians are stupid?
People ask me why Indians are not here. They cannot be here because we are REALLY interested in meditation. They go to Satya Sai Baba because meditation is not the question there -- miracles are happening. They can hope. They are ill: maybe Satya Sai Baba, by his miracle, can take their illness away. Maybe they are unemployed: by his blessing they will be employed. They are poor: by his blessing they will become rich. They go to Satya Sai Baba -- he deals in things which they need. And they are really surprised when Swiss-made watches appear out of nowhere. That is their real object -- they want Swiss-made watches. Stupid people, and stupid are their saints. Now a saint playing games, magic games, ordinary magic games! We have sannyasins -- Avinash can do it, Sarvesh can do it -- just small games, of no value at all, of…
One sannyasin has asked: what is the difference between communism and socialism?
The next day, nearabout fifteen minutes before eleven, he became fidgety -- not knowing why. I asked, "What is the problem? Why do you look so tense?" He said, "I don't know, but something seems to be happening inside me." I said, "Nothing is happening." I took his pillow -- he watched -- and I put the pillow in my suitcase and locked it. He became more and more troubled. Exactly as it was coming to be eleven, he looked at the clock and he asked me, "Please give me the key." I said, "Why?" He said, "I want my pillow back." I said, "What are you going to do with it at eleven o'clock? In the night I will give it to you." He said, "No! Just give me the key!" I gave him the key, he opened the suitcase. It was exactly eleven; the clock was striking the…
Osho, do you think that it is not possible to be honest, intelligent, religious, and yet be in politics?
IT IS impossible. It is ABSOLUTELY impossible, CATEGORICALLY impossible. If you are intelligent, why should you be in politics? It is for the stupid, for the mediocre. The intelligent person will have much more important things to do. The intelligent person will not be interested in dominating others. His whole interest will be in knowing himself To dominate the other is a way of escaping from one's own inner meaninglessness, inner emptiness, inner hollowness. It is an escape from oneself. The intelligent person iS not an escapist. Politics is an escape, a GREAT escape. It keeps you so occupied, day in, day out, that you cannot find even a few minutes for yourself. Even when you sleep you think politics; it continues in your dreams. To be a politician is a twenty-four hour job. You cannot relax because if you relax you will be left behind. It is a tooth-and-nail…
Osho, what is the first experience of samadhi like?
You will know only when it happens. It cannot be said; at most a few hints can be given. It is as if, in the dark, a lamp is suddenly lit. Or as if a dying patient, right at the edge of death, suddenly finds a medicine that works; life’s wave, life’s thrill spreads again—so it is. As if a corpse becomes alive—such is the first experience of samadhi. It is the taste of nectar. The experience of the ultimate music. But it will be only when it happens; and only then will you understand. You will not understand by my saying it. It is as with love. How can anyone explain it? To someone who has never loved, never known love, no matter how many explanations you offer—he will hear it all and still ask, “I haven’t understood; please explain a little more.” It is like explaining light to…
तीसरा प्रश्न: ओशो, समाधि का पहला अनुभव कैसा होता है?
होगा तो ही जानोगे। कहा जा सके, ऐसा नहीं है। कुछ-कुछ इशारे किये जा सकते हैं। जैसे अंधेरे में अचानक दीया जल जाये, ऐसा होता है। या जैसे बीमार मरता हो और अचानक कोई दवा लग जाये...मरते-मरते कोई दवा लग जाये; और जीवन की लहर, जीवन की पुलक फिर फैल जाये--ऐसा होता है। जैसे कोई मुर्दा जिंदा हो जाये--ऐसा होता है समाधि का पहला अनुभव। अमृत का अनुभव है। परम संगीत का अनुभव है। पर होगा तो ही होगा। और होगा तो ही तुम समझ पाओगे; मेरे कहने से समझ में न आ सकेगा। प्रेम में जैसा होता है। अब कोई किसी को कैसे समझाये? …
Osho, as long as the mind is there, do we inevitably get entangled in some form of politics? Is there no way to rise above politics without going beyond the mind? Please explain.
Mind itself is politics. All the impulses of the mind are exploitative. All its arrangements are attempts to own others. The mind is filled with the poison of ambition. Mind itself is politics. That is why I say it is impossible for a truly religious person to move toward politics—because a religious person is born only when he rises beyond the mind, rises through meditation, enters the state of no-mind, becomes unman—only then does religion arise. Politics means: let me seize others; let me become bigger than others; more important than others; push others behind; let others be proved to be nothing and let me become everything; let my rights be greater, my power greater; let my ego be enthroned—on a golden throne. And remember, where so many people are busy with politics, not everyone can sit on golden thrones. Those who succeed in sitting there become egoistic; those who…
चौथा प्रश्न: ओशो, क्या जब तक मन है, तब तक हम किसी न किसी तरह की राजनीति में उलझे ही रहते हैं? क्या मन से पार हुए बिना राजनीति से ऊपर उठने का कोई उपाय नहीं है? कृपा करके समझाएं।
मन ही राजनीति है। मन की सारी चेष्टाएं शोषण की हैं। मन के सारे आयोजन दूसरों पर मालकियत करने के हैं। मन महत्वाकांक्षा के जहर से भरा है। मन ही राजनीति है। इसीलिए तो मैं कहता हूं कि धार्मिक व्यक्ति को राजनीति की दिशा में जाना असंभव है। क्योंकि धार्मिक व्यक्ति पैदा ही तब होता है जब वह मन के पार उठता है, ध्यान में उठता है, अ-मन की दशा में जाता है, उन्मन होता है, तब तो धर्म पैदा होता है। राजनीति का अर्थ होता है: दूसरों पर कब्जा कर लूं, दूसरों से बड़ा हो जाऊं, दूसरों से महत्वपूर्ण हो जाऊं, दूसरों को पीछे डाल दूं, दूसरे न-कुछ सिद्ध हो जाएं और मैं सब कुछ हो जाऊं, मेरा अधिकार बड़ा हो, मेरी सत्ता बड़ी हो, मेरा अहंकार बड़ा हो, मेरा अहंकार सिंहासन पर बैठे, स्वर्ण-सिंहासन पर बैठे।
Questions put to Osho about politics
Each opens the talk at the moment the question was asked.
- Osho, what is the most astonishing law in this world? Sahaj Yog · Discourse 20 · 1978-12-10
- In your opinion, which is the ideal political regime and which is the worst? Socrates Poisoned Again After 25 Centuries · Discourse 15 · 1986-02-26
- Osho, why are you so opposed to politics? Es Dhammo Sanantano · Discourse 116 · 1977-12-06
- Osho, you make statements on politics; then why shouldn’t you be considered a politician? Sahaj Yog · Discourse 3 · 1978-11-23
- Osho, are the politicians really as stupid as you say they are? The Fish In The Sea Is Not Thirsty · Discourse 15 · 1979-04-25
- Beloved master, you were talking about one world and one world government. Recently president reagan refused to accept the authority of the world court on political issues. Can... From Bondage To Freedom · Discourse 36 · 1985-10-20
- Another friend has asked; he has asked that... Osho, what difference do you see between socialism and communism? Naye Samaj Ki Khoj · Discourse 9 · 1970-08-22
- Why do you think that the politicians are stupid? Philosophia Perennis Vol 2 · Discourse 10 · 1979-01-09
- One sannyasin has asked: what is the difference between communism and socialism? Communism And Zen Fire Zen Wind · Discourse 4 · 1989-02-02
- Osho, do you think that it is not possible to be honest, intelligent, religious, and yet be in politics? The Guest · Discourse 11 · 1979-05-06
- Osho, what is the first experience of samadhi like? Mare He Jogi Maro · Discourse 2 · 1979-11-12
- Osho, as long as the mind is there, do we inevitably get entangled in some form of politics? Is there no way to rise above politics without going beyond the mind? Please explain. Es Dhammo Sanantano · Discourse 85 · 1977-05-25
Frequently asked
Short answers by Osho Live, based on the passages above.
Did Osho say power corrupts?
He called that saying incomplete. In his view power does not create corruption; it reveals it, because the people who are drawn to power are those who already carry it within.
What did Osho mean by politics?
Any race for more: for money, position, prestige, even for renunciation. Party politics is only one face of it.
Did Osho think religion and politics should mix?
No. He saw religion as a matter of the individual and politics as a matter of the crowd, and he called the organised religions forms of politics.