... not different. It is the same energy, the same violence. Turned on the other it becomes murder; turned on oneself it becomes suicide. Going extrovert it is murderous; going introvert it is suicidal. Devadatta failed to Kill Buddha; in that failure he thought of committing suicide. The same happened to Judas. Indians are thinkers not doers, so Devadatta really never committed suicide, he only thought...

... against Christ, he became an archenemy of God himself, because as he looked deeper into the phenomenon he found that Jesus is not the real foundation of the Christian Church - the real foundation rests on God, on the idea of God. Unless you remove that very foundation the Church cannot collapse. Hence his statement that God is dead. You may not have heard the whole statement; this is only a part, and...

... OF DEVADATTA, AND MANY PEOPLE SAY TO ME THAT HE WAS THE GUY WHO TRIED TO KILL GAUTAM THE BUDDHA MANY TIMES. THEN WHY HAVE YOU GIVEN ME SUCH A NAME? Devadatta, THE NAME in itself is very beautiful. It means: given by God, by the grace of God, a gift of God. It means exactly what the English name John means. John means: a gracious gift of God. Devadatta also means the same. It was just a coincidence...

... that this was also the name of the man who tried to kill Gautam Buddha many times. He was Gautam Buddha's cousin-brother, and he was very jealous. He became a disciple of Buddha, but because he was a cousin-brother, almost of the same age, and they had studied in the same school and they hid played together and they had hunted together, he felt that he was equal to Buddha. And Buddha told him many...

... an enlightened person - he could argue well, he could convince people intellectually, but that does not satisfy the deep longing of the heart to attain the truth. People slowly deserted him. Then he became very angry, enraged. Then there was only one possibility for him: to kill Buddha. He tried many times but failed, always failed. The story is told: Devadatta was despairing after his latest...

... will you charge to bump me off?" His Old associate looked at him for a moment and said, "Oh, Devadatta, for you I will do it free!" Remember one thing: the person who kills and the person who commits suicide are not different people. The person who wants to murder somebody is the same person who can murder himself. Psychologists have still to discover the fact that these two people are...

... of it. But Judas really committed suicide, the next day, the very next day. One day Jesus was crucified, the next day Judas committed suicide. He was the man responsible for Jesus' murder: he sold Jesus for only thirty silver coins. But once Jesus was killed the whole scene changed, the whole context changed. In fact, it is something worth understanding: if you lose your friend you don't lose much...

... question. The questioner is Emilio Ducoli. He says: "Osho, if someone said to you, 'Don't speak, don't be silent, but tell me who you are?' what would be your answer?" For that Sant is sitting by my side: he will hit him as hard as possible! In the old days, Zen Masters used to hit people themselves. I am a lazy person, and Sant is a good boxer. And you know boxing needs no intelligence! Sant...

...;I am coming at five," he may come at four, he may come at six; he may not come at all today; he may come tomorrow at five. And you cannot say that this is immoral. People are adulterating everything - not only milk, even medicines are adulterated. You cannot rely on Indian medicines. You may be hoping that the injection is going to save you; it may kill you, because it may be just ordinary...

... enemies, fighting each other tooth and nail, always at each others' necks, but very moral because the wife remains strictly faithful to the man - to the man she does not love. What kind of faith is this? And the man remains faithful to the woman whom he always wants to murder, or hopes that somebody else will do the thing, or hopes that some natural calamity . . . the house will collapse in the rain or...

... Babylonian Talmud: Nedarim 32         Previous Folio / Nedarim Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Nedarim Folio 32a Because he busied himself first with the inn,1  as it is written, And it came to pass by the way, in the inn.2  R. Simeon b. Gamaliel sand: Satan3  did not seek to slay Moses but the child, for it is written...

.... Thereupon immediately Zipporah 'took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son';7  straightway he let him alone.8  In that moment Moses desired to slay them, as it is written, Cease from Af and forsake Hemah.9  Some say that he did slay Hemah, as it is written, I have not Hemah.10  But is it not written, for I was afraid of Af and Hemah?11  — There were two [angels...

... Babylonian Talmud: Baba Kamma 41         Previous Folio / Baba Kamma Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Baba Kamma Folio 41a that the execution amounted to manslaughter on the part of the animal; we are therefore told [that this is not the case]. Raba on the other hand held that [we deal here with a case where] while copulating with a woman...

... the animal did kill her, and as for the objection what difference could be made between killing committed by means of horns and killing committed by means of copulating, [the answer would be that] in the case of Horn the animal purposes to do damage, whereas in this case [of copulating] the intention of the animal is merely for self-gratification. What is the point at issue [between these two...

... three human beings.14  R. Zebid [on the other hand] said: [The case is one] where, for instance, it killed three animals.15  But is an ox [which has been declared] Mu'ad to kill animals also Mu'ad to kill men?16  — R. Shimi therefore said: [The case is one] where for instance it killed three heathens.15  But is an ox [which has been declared] Mu'ad to gore persons who are...

... death? My exposition referred only to one who had been intending to kill a beast but [by accident] killed a man, [or where it had been intending to kill] an Egyptian and killed an Israelite, [or] a non-viable child and killed a viable child.15  Which of the answers, was given first? — R. Kahana in the name of Raba said that [the answer about] intention was given first, whereas R. Tabyomi in...

... absolutely non - violent. They have not created any wars; they have not created any crusades, any JIHADS. The people who are meat eaters are bound to have little sensitivity, they are more hard. Even in the name of love they will kill; even in the name of peace they will go to war. In the name of freedom, in the name of democracy, they will murder. There are cannibals also still in existence - not many: a...

..., that if somebody slaps you on one cheek, give him the other too. That is insulting - insulting to the other person. It makes him dehumanized. it reduces him below you. You become a god, by giving the other cheek. There cannot be a bigger insult to anybody. No, I would like you to hit the other man more strongly than he has slapped you, to make him feel that you are also human and we are brothers...

... - and arms that can be used from far away, because if you are too close to the lion, even with the arms, you may not be able to survive. Arrows were invented, so that from far away, sitting behind the trees, you can kill. Guns were created so that from far away, hiding, you can kill. But now you are not surrounded by wild animals; you have killed them. You have destroyed so much of nature and wildness...

... no love, he has no sensitivity. He is just a stone. But you don't think the same way when somebody kills a lion or a deer, because you don't think that the deer has as much life as you have. The deer may have a beloved; the deer may have children. You don't think of the lion, when you kill him, that he may have a family. His small cubs will be orphans. He is as alive as you are - in fact more alive...

... also begin - if it begins - in the west. In the East - particularly the people who have been vegetarian for centuries - they have never fought a war. I have researched in India whether any vegetarian has ever been caught committing suicide or murder or theft and I was surprised that not a single vegetarian has ever been put into jail for committing murder - it is impossible. I remember my childhood...

.... My grandmother would not allow poor tomatoes in the house, because they look like meat. I said, "You are mad. These poor tomatoes are not meat." But she said, "Even the look... As long as I am alive, please don't bring any tomatoes into the house." Do you think this woman can kill somebody? Can you imagine this woman can commit suicide? Yes, it is true, you are what you eat...

... we want a really human world, a world of loving people, respectful of each others' lives, then we will have to think about our food and about our other habits. They should be changed. They are not so valuable. And if you love the flavor of meat, that flavor can be given to any food. Now it is a simple matter. There is no need, just for that flavor, to kill a living, beautiful animal and destroy the...

... not be able to return because the farm is far away in the village, and I will stay there. Once I retire it will kill me - twenty-four hours with a woman I hate to see, and I know she hates me." I asked him, "How do you know? Have you ever heard her saying that she hates you? Have you ever said to her that you hate her?" He said, "Do you want me to have unnecessary trouble? I have...

.... A meditator cannot kill; a meditator cannot be destructive. So they are going to be surprised one day that their soldiers are no longer interested in fighting. War, violence, murder, massacre of millions of people - this is not possible if a man knows something of meditation. Then he also knows not only himself, he knows the other whom he is killing. He is his brother. They all belong to the same...

... simply hoo, hoo. They have found that the sound of hoo strikes exactly at the life source just below the navel. You were connected with your life, with your mother, from the navel. Just below the navel is the source of your own life. Just try: when you say hoo the hit is below the navel. That's what we are using in our Dynamic Meditation. It is a Sufi discovery, but it can also be done in the Tibetan...

... way. Rather than hoo - hoo seems to be a little harsh - hum seems to be a little softer. But the softer will take a longer time to wake up your energies. It is possible that in the particular climate of Tibet, the softer was perfectly good. They did not need such a harsh sound in order to hit the life source. But in the harsh desert of Arabia where Sufi mystics started using hoo.... I had a choice...

... when I was working on the Dynamic Meditation, whether to use hum or to choose hoo. I tried both and I found that perhaps in India, hoo is better than in the colder heights of Tibet where things are bound to be different. Just hum is perfectly right for them. Hum is the hit to create OM in you. If you hit the seed of your life it starts disappearing in the soil and green leaves, sprouts start growing...

... politicians everything becomes ugly - even meditation. Now the army camps in America are teaching meditation so that their soldiers can be more calm and quiet while killing people. But I want to warn America: you are playing with fire. You don't understand exactly what meditation will do. Your soldiers will become so calm and quiet that they will throw away their weapons and they will simply refuse to kill...

... oceanic existence. In the Soviet Union, also, they are interested in meditation. But the purpose is the same - not realization of yourself, but making you stronger so that you can kill and bomb and use nuclear weapons and missiles to kill whole nations. But they are both going on a dangerous path, unknowingly. It is good, they should be helped. Once meditation spreads among their soldiers, those...

... - it also gives them the experience that everybody is immortal. Death is a fiction. Why unnecessarily harass people? They will be living, you cannot kill them. Not even your nuclear weapons are going to kill them. Krishna, in the Gita, has a beautiful statement: Nainam chhindanti shastrani; naham dahati pavakahr. "Neither can any weapon destroy me nor can any fire burn me." Yes the body...

... their necks. Now if you say that a woman will not strangle herself, why not with fillets round their necks?24  — Said Rabina: To Part b Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files On the Sabbath. The general rule is that a woman may wear superfluous garments which are ornamental, save some which the Rabbis prohibited for fear that she might remove them for a friend's...

... with her husband, falls on the Sabbath. Chains or cords formed in network fashion. These cannot be tied very tightly; hence the question is whether they need be loosened before a ritual bath and by corollary, must not be worn on the Sabbath, or not. I.e., a network. In connection with Sabbath, since they need not be removed for immersion. To remove them before bathing. This shows that they know that...

... the water enters through the network. Consequently it is unnecessary to remove them before a ritual bath, and they may be worn on the Sabbath. And is particular to remove them. When one takes a ritual bath, nothing must interpose between the water and his body. If one of these is worn it does interpose, rendering the bath invalid. And reaches the skin. I.e., the wool and linen ribbons also mean...

... does not injure her. But the first Tanna says nothing about this! Lit., 'he said to them, "just as".' V. infra 64b. Rashi: to ward off the evil eye. Jast.: obsidian beads. For if she removes it, her hair is uncovered; hence she is unlikely to remove it. Or wig. The term Kabul bears both meanings. To keep the hair in order under the net or wig. Thus he refers to the kabul as something above the hair...

... it is reported that God says to Mohammed, "Whoever seeks me will find me. Whoever finds me will know me. Whoever knows me will have love for me. Whoever loves me I will love. Whomever I love I will kill. And whomever I will kill, his blood-money I will pay. I am myself his blood-money".. a tremendously important saying. God says to Mohammed, "Whomever I love I will kill." The...

... Master has to kill the disciple. The disciple has to allow the Master to kill him. The disciple has to be in a rejoicing when the Master kills him. Just the other day somebody who was not yet a sannyasin had asked, "It is said that if you meet the Buddha on the Way, kill him. Then why is it not said if you meet Rajneesh on the Way, kill him?" Exactly that has to be done: if you meet Rajneesh...

... on the Way, kill him! But that statement was made to the disciples; you are not yet a disciple. You will never meet me on the Way in the first place. The question of killing me will never arise. I can meet you on the Way only if you have first allowed me to kill you. That is the meaning of being a disciple: the Master first kills the disciple - that is the beginning of the journey - then finally...

... the disciple kills the Master - that is the end. Then the Master and the disciple have both disappeared. Then only God is. That tremendously pregnant statement by the Zen Masters, "If you meet the Buddha on the Way, kill him," is the last step of the journey, so whomsoever has asked it has not understood it at all. Yes, you have to kill me, but you will meet me only if you allow me first...

... to kill you. That is a pre-requirement. I will not come on just anybody's Way, Tom, Harry, or Dick, no. I will only come on the Way when you have allowed me to destroy you. And then, certainly, the Master has to be killed. The beginning is with the death of the disciple and the end with the death of the Master. Then the separation is gone; then there is no disciple, no Master. Then only pure energy...

... late; he can come. My doors are always open. But one has to remember it: don't come here to be supported in your ego and your expectations. Come here to die! If you love me, I am going to kill you. And only when you are killed, one day, will you have the opportunity to kill me. And that day is the greatest day: when the Master and disciple both are killed - then only that which is, is left. God is in...

... level of the ego. It almost always happens that people enjoy a few moments and then afterwards they feel very guilty. The guilt arises because of the ego. The ego starts torturing them, "What are you doing? Have you decided to kill me? And I am your only treasure. Killing me? You will be destroyed. Killing me is destroying yourself." We are so much identified with the ego that when the ego...

... says such things, they have a great appeal, attraction, conviction in them. The reality is just the opposite - we are not our egos. In fact because of the ego we are not growing, the ego is like a rock preventing your growth. Remove the rock and you will start growing, growing into a big tree - with great fulfillment, flowering. But in the beginning it will feel as if throwing the rock away is...

... hundred candles or more. In the morning he was dead tired. Freud asked him, "You look very tired. Couldn't you sleep?" He said, "Now there is no point in hiding, because I am going to stay three days - this bulb is going to kill me! Even to look at it a shiver goes up my spine. How to turn it off?" Freud said, "You fool! Why didn't you ask me?" He said, "I was just...

.... Why could they not accept Jesus? Maybe it was not really the Jews who killed him but the Roman emperor, Roman imperialism. Romans have always been cruel and they have not proved themselves very intelligent either. It may have been just that Jews were used as an excuse and the Romans wanted to kill Jesus. And the Jews were not independent people in those days, they were part of the Roman Empire. It...

... is possible that the Romans used the Jewish priests as a facade, because they would not have liked to kill Jesus directly - that may have created a revolution in the country, a rebellion. It is a simple diplomacy to use Jews themselves to kill Jesus; then there will be no rebellion, no revolution, no problems arising. In fact, they pretended on the surface that they were not interested in killing...

... Jesus, and from the back door they may have insisted. To the public they showed that "We are absolutely out of the game. If Jews want to kill him, they can kill him; if they don't want to kill him we are ready to forgive him." And from the back they may have been goading the Jews to kill Jesus. That's more possible, because Jews are not such unintelligent people that they would destroy their...

..., he quoted Jewish scriptures. He said again and again that "Whatsoever has been said before by other prophets I am saying to you" - giving it a more contemporary expression, of course, but he was not against Moses, Abraham, Ezekiel. He was not against the old prophets; he was fulfilling their prophecies, he was the very fulfillment. Why should Jews kill him? There is every possibility that...

.... I am not interested in politics, I am not interested in that stupid game at all, but they are very much afraid. And the best way to kill me will be to find a sannyasin, a Judas, to kill me; that will be the best way. Then there will be no problem. If a sannyasin kills me, then the whole responsibility falls on my own shoulders or on the shoulders of my sannyasins. The sannyasin may not be a true...

... sannyasin, he may be just a detective, a spy, a government man, who has taken sannyas just to kill me. That will be the easiest and the most diplomatic way. And there are many spies here: German spies and Italian spies and Indian spies. One Indian spy took sannyas. I gave him sannyas - not only that I gave him sannyas, but I told him, "You become part of the ashram. Why live outside?" He was a...

... that. Once the power came to Indian hands, they started neglecting Mahatma Gandhi. His last words were, "Nobody listens to me. I am the most useless person." And the people who were in power were in power because of him, but nobody listened to him. There is every suspicion that the people he had put into power were involved in his murder, directly or indirectly. Maybe they were not involved...

... out of freedom - and this is the life of a revolutionary. And remember also: So in the light of their past service, do not blame any program for being counter- productive as you remove it. Housecleaning should be guiltless. You will remove a program as it no longer fits your developing gestalt, but avoid the temptation to be harsh with the program you remove, because they were necessary stepping...

... allow you to go into the unscheduled, unmapped, unmeasured. So whenever you remove a habit don't feel guilty - 'Housecleaning should be guiltless'; and it should not be harsh either. When you remove a habit, howsoever good it has been, when you remove it don't feel guilty. Don't think, "My mother taught me this. If I am removing it I am betraying her." People write letters to me: "How...

... grateful to it. No need to feel guilty, no need to feel harsh. Whenever you remove a program, remove it - just like you remove your clothes. When your body grows, your clothes become small. You don't feel guilty because you are removing pyjamas your mother had given you that don't fit you anymore. You have to remove them! And you don't feel angry either. You need not first beat them and throw petrol on...

... remove an old program and never feel harsh when you remove an old program - you will be moving towards the revolution I am intending you to understand. A revolutionary is not really angry. Why should he be? There is no reason. Whatsoever your parents could do, they did, and they did it with all good wishes. It is another matter that whatsoever they were doing was not useful, was not making you free...

..., goodbye grandma." Then grandma was hit while crossing the street. Sometime later in his prayers, he said, "God bless mommy, goodbye daddy." The father was really upset. He had himself driven to the office, but he could not work there at all. Finally he decided to come home early, but he was afraid to drive back so he took a taxi home and rushed in. He was greeted by his wife, who said...

..., "What do you mean by that?" Birbal said, "Don't waste time: you hit somebody else!" He said, "What in the world is going on?" Birbal said, "You cannot hit the source back. You just go ahead and hit somebody else and let it pass; otherwise you will be stuck. And the world is round...." You will be surprised that Galileo discovered only three hundred years ago...

... is round, don't be worried; sooner or later the hit will come back to the emperor!" And as it happened it came back that very night. It must have gone round many people; and everybody was dumbstruck, and each said, "What is the point of it? - I have not done anything." The other said, "Nor have I done anything, but this is how it has started from the palace. And they say simply...

... wife, because her lover - she had a lover, and that lover hit her. She said, "What do you mean by that?" He said, "I don't mean anything, this is just going on all around the capital. Everybody is being hit, and they say it has started from the emperor himself. And Birbal says,'Don't be worried, the world is round; it will reach sooner or later to the emperor.' " But she was the...

... person to hit the emperor; who else could have hit him? She hit him really hard! He said, "What do you mean by that? What are you doing? Who told you...? Has Birbal been here?" She said, "No, nobody has been here but the hit has reached me. It has been going round the capital, how can I be out of it? It came to me with the message that you have started it and until it reaches back to you...

... generation invents a few of its own, so it goes on becoming accumulative. It is just like a river. New rivulets go on meeting it, and the river goes on becoming bigger, and bigger, and bigger. That's where it has reached now. For millions of years people have been pouring all their miseries and problems into their children. Now it has come to a point where the burden is too much. It can kill the whole of...

... judge is yet a psychoanalyst. This is such a mad world - that a murderer is being judged by a man who has studied law. Now what has law to do with murder? Is there any connection between law and murder? Do you think by learning law you become a murderer, or by learning law you become able to understand how murder happens, why a man kills somebody? Law has nothing to do with it. That's why I say this...