| |
Question: Beloved Osho, Is
it true that to be in Communion with the master is the
Initiation?
Osho: The word `initiation'
is very significant and profound. There are three
initiations: first, when a student becomes a disciple;
second, when a disciple becomes a devotee; and third,
when the devotee disappears in the master. To understand
the whole process, all three steps have to be
understood.
Everyone begins as a student, as an inquirer into what
this life is all about, with a curiosity to know the
mysteries that surround us. But the desire is for
knowledge; hence, superficial. Because the desire is for
knowledge, it is of the mind. And mind is the periphery
of our being, the most superficial part of our
individuality. The student has questions, but he has no
quest. His questions are easily answerable, he is easily
satisfied -- just borrowed knowledge is enough for him.
He does not yet need a master; he only needs a teacher.
He accumulates answers, becomes an intellectual, but
does not become intelligent. The accumulation of answers
happens in the memory part of the mind, and the part
that functions in accumulation is mechanical, it has
nothing to do with intelligence. It is possible to find
very educated, cultured, sophisticated intellectuals
behaving in life in a very unintelligent way. They are
very efficient whenever some question is asked for which
they are already prepared.
But if life raises a new question for which they are not
prepared, they are completely at a loss, they are as
ignorant as one can be. And the problem is, life goes on
posing new questions, new challenges. Memory is good in
the marketplace; memory is not good as a lifestyle. And
all your universities only teach you how to memorize. It
has been found that the people of very great memory are
generally unintelligent people. In the life of one of
the British viceroys, Curzon, there is mention of a very
significant incident -- and it is a historical fact.
Curzon had heard
that there was a man in Rajputana whose memory was just
unbelievable. The man knew only his local dialect,
Rajasthani, a dialect of Hindi; he did not know any
other language. But that did not prevent him from
memorizing any statement in any language, and in such a
way that it seemed almost superhuman. He was called to
the court of the Viceroy Curzon; a special meeting was
arranged. Thirty scholars, knowing thirty languages,
were to examine the man and his memory.
Among those thirty scholars, there was not a single one
who understood the man's mother tongue, and all those
thirty languages were foreign languages for him. And the
arrangement was so strange -- it had never been made
before and I don't think it will be ever made again. The
arrangement was such that each of those thirty scholars
was to deliver one sentence in his own language to the
poor villager from Rajasthan. But the sentence was not
to be delivered to him in one piece.
The villager would go to one person who would give him
the first word of his sentence. Then a bell would be
rung. Then the villager would move to the next person,
who would give him his first word. In this way he would
go round and round. After thirty persons, he would come
again to the first person to get the second word of his
sentence... and after each word a big bell would ring to
confuse him. The scholars were not certain that they
would be able to remember their whole sentence for the
whole time, because it was going to take so much time.
They all had their sentences written in front of them,
and they were marking off each word they had given. And
this man went on and on, round and round, taking their
words, and accumulating in his memory system the
sentences which were given to him in pieces. After all
the scholars had given their sentences, he repeated
thirty statements in thirty languages, of which he knew
nothing. He knew nothing about what they meant. He was
so correct that all the intellectuals were puzzled. They
could not remember their own sentences, they had had to
write them down.
They could not remember whether they had given the fifth
word or the sixth -- they had had to mark it. And this
man was uneducated -- he could not even write. Curzon
was amazed. He praised the man, and rewarded him. But it
was found by talking with his fellow villagers that he
was an idiot. Just as far as his memory was concerned,
he was simply great -- but any simple question in life,
any simple situation in life, and he was not able to
solve it, he was not able to answer it. They said, "He
is known in our village as `the great intellectual
idiot'."
It is a well-known
fact that a student is interested in collecting
knowledge. His questions are easily satisfied. His mind
functions like a computer. But once in a while, a
student falls into the trap of a master. He is not in
search of a master, he does not know any difference in
the words `master' and `teacher'. In the dictionaries
both words mean the same. But in actual life, a teacher
simply transfers knowledge from one generation to
another generation -- it is not his own experience.
The master does not transfer
knowledge from one generation to another generation;
what he gives out is his own realization. But if
the student is caught in the trap of a master, then it
is very difficult to get out of it because soon it
becomes clear that knowledge and knowing are two
different things. Questions and quest are two different
things. Questions are simply curiosities. Quest is a
risk, is a pilgrimage, is a search. A question is easily
satisfied by any logical, rational answer. The quest is
not satisfied by logical or rational answers; the quest
is like thirst.
You can go on
repeating that scientifically, H2O means water, but that
is not going to quench the thirst. It is an answer, and
a perfectly right answer. If somebody is asking what
water is, as a question, it is very simple to answer it.
But if somebody is asking about water because he is
thirsty, then H2O is not going to help. Then, only real
water will do. Quest means thirst, hunger. No borrowed
knowledge can satisfy it. And the master slowly makes
the student aware that if you are really a man, then
just to be curious is childish.
Maturity demands that you should go on a quest, that you
should not ask only for knowledge, you should ask for
ways and means and methods so that you can know -- not
knowledge that has come from generation to generation.
No one knows whether somebody invented it, whether it is
fiction, whether somebody realized it or not, how much
is lost in transferring it, how much is added, how much
is edited out. Knowing means "I want a personal
experience."
A genuine seeker has
no questions, but a tremendous thirst.
This is the first initiation --
when the master changes the student's focus from
knowledge towards knowing, from memory towards
intelligence. And it is not an ordinary phenomenon, it
happens to only a very few fortunate ones. Millions of
people simply remain curious, childish, immature for
their whole life. Once the emphasis has moved from
knowledge to knowing, your concern is no more with the
past, your concern is with the present.
Your concern is no more with the great philosophers,
wise people; your concern is about your own
consciousness. For the first time you become interested
not in objects but in your subjectivity, not about other
things but about the one who wants to know: Who is this
who wants to know? This is the first initiation: the
student dies, and the disciple is born.
The second initiation is when the
disciple also disappears, into a devotee.A
disciple is still interested in gaining methods,
disciplines, ways to know himself. The master has to be
used; hence, he is grateful. But he is the end, and the
master is the means; he is using the master for his own
ends. As he comes closer to the master, the master takes
him into the second initiation. And the second
initiation is that unless you drop this obsession with
yourself you will never know yourself. It appears
contradictory; it is not.
Your very obsession is preventing you; it is egoistic.
You drop the ego, surrender the ego; you forget
yourself, and in the very moment you forget yourself you
will find yourself. From knowledge to knowing, the
student was never interested in himself. He was
interested in things, objects, the whole world. The
first initiation brought him into a new world of
interest about himself. The second initiation takes away
the ego. The second initiation teaches him love. Because
knowing oneself is a byproduct -- if you can love, you
will know yourself without any difficulty.
Only in loving light
does the darkness within you disappear. Love is light,
and the flame of love has to be taught. The master
loves, his presence is love. His very presence is
magnetic. Without saying a word... just to be close to
him, you will feel a certain pull, a certain love, a
trust. And you don't know the man, you don't know
whether he is trustworthy or not. But you are ready to
risk. The presence of the master is so convincing that
there is no need of any argument to prove it.
I have been a
teacher in the university, and each year on Teacher's
Day the university professors used to have an intimate
meeting to discuss problems that they were facing. And
every year the basic and the most troublesome problem
was that the students don't respect them. When I joined
their meeting for the first time, it was my first year
in the university. They were all condemning the
students, they were condemning modern society, the
Western world, because they have taken away all respect.
One of the professors -- an old man, a very respected
professor, he was the dean of the faculty of arts --
said, "It is so shameful, particularly in a country
where there have been students like Ekalavya." I will
have to tell you the story so you can understand. It is
an ancient Indian story. There was a great master
archer, Dronacharya. Princes, rich people, high caste
Hindus, warriors used to come to him from faraway places
to learn archery. The Hindu society is divided into four
classes.
It is the ugliest division that exists in the whole
world, and it has existed for five thousand years. One
fourth of the Hindu society are not treated like human
beings; they are called sudras, untouchables. They are
not even worthy to be touched. If by accident you touch
a sudra, you have to immediately take a shower to clean
yourself. Not only the sudra, even the shadow of the
sudra is untouchable. If a sudra passes by and his
shadow touches you, you have to take a bath. This young
man, Ekalavya, was born a sudra.
But he wanted to become an archer, and he started
learning archery on his own. He knew perfectly well --
his elders told him, "No teacher is going to accept
you." He said, "Before I go to any teacher, I will learn
so much that it will be almost impossible for him to
reject me." And he disciplined himself, and when he
thought that now he knew enough, he went to the greatest
archer of those days, Dronacharya. Dronacharya was
amazed, seeing that the young man had learned on his own
tremendously well.
But still, Dronacharya was a brahmin, the highest Hindu
caste, and it was impossible to accept Ekalavya as a
disciple. He rejected him. But Ekalavya was made of a
different kind of mettle than ordinary human beings are
made of. He went into the forest and made a statue of
Dronacharya. And just in front of the statue, he
continued learning on his own. Soon the word started
spreading all over the country that Ekalavya had become
a master archer, just by the side of the statue of
Dronacharya.
Dronacharya had an
ambition, and that ambition was that one prince who was
his disciple, Arjuna -- and he was a great archer --
should become the greatest archer in the history of man.
But this Ekalavya was disturbing everything, he was
becoming more famous. Dronacharya went into the
forest.... And this is the point to be noted -- that's
why the dean of the faculty of arts had quoted the name
of Ekalavya. He had been rejected by Dronacharya. Any
ordinary human being would have felt insulted,
humiliated.
But on the contrary, he made a statue of Dronacharya --
because he has chosen him as his master. It does not
matter whether Dronacharya accepts him as his disciple
or not -- he will have to accept him. What matters is
how deep his acceptance is of Dronacharya as his master.
And when Dronacharya came, he fell at his feet. And
Dronacharya saw what he had learned. Certainly he was
far ahead of Arjuna, and Arjuna was not going to be the
greatest archer, which was the deep ambition of
Dronacharya.
This man had rejected Ekalavya, and now he said to him,
"You have been learning here in front of my statue. You
have accepted me as your master."
Ekalavya said, "I have always thought of you as my
master, even when you rejected me. I have not taken any
note of your rejection."
Dronacharya said, "I accept you as my disciple, but then
you will have to pay the fee. Every disciple has to pay
the fee to the master -- and you have not given even the
entrance fee, and you have already become such a great
archer."
Poor Ekalavya said,
"Whatever you ask, if I have it I will give it to you. I
can give my life. You are my master, you just say it.
But I am a poor man, so just ask for that which I have."
Dronacharya said, "Yes, I will ask only that which you
have. I want your right-hand thumb. You cut it, and give
it to me."
This is an ugly
story. The strategy is that once his right-hand thumb is
cut, his archery would be finished, he would no longer
be a competitor to Arjuna. Dronacharya accepted him as
his disciple just to get his thumb.
And Ekalavya, without saying a word, simply took his
sword and cut his thumb. He gave it to the master and
said, "If you want anything more, you just tell me."
This story, you have
to remember in the background. The dean was saying:
"This country, which has produced students like Ekalavya
-- who respected a master like Dronacharya who rejected
him, insulted him -- has fallen so low that students are
not respecting teachers at all. Something has to be
done." I was very new. It was my first meeting
with all the professors from all the departments.
I had to stand up, and I said to the old man, "You have
raised a few questions. One: this is certainly the
country of students like Ekalavya, but this is also the
country of teachers like Dronacharya -- ugly, cunning,
inhuman. This man has behaved in the most inhuman way
possible. Why do you go on forgetting about him?
"First, you are
rejecting a poor young man because he is condemned by
you as an untouchable. Secondly, when he achieves on his
own, you are willing to accept him as your disciple --
in the forest, where nobody knows what is happening. And
that too for a certain reason, so that you can cripple
his right hand to destroy his archery, so that your
ambition of making Arjuna the greatest archer in the
world can be fulfilled."
I said, "You should
not forget that it is because of teachers like
Dronacharya that teachers in India have lost their
respect. You represent Dronacharya -- on what grounds do
you want students to respect you? And you are not even
conscious of the fact you are mentioning Ekalavya. As
far as I am concerned, I don't see... I also have
students, and I am a new professor. I have not seen a
single student being disrespectful towards me. I love
them, I respect them. Love resonates love in the other,
respect creates respect in the other -- these are
resonances. If I had been in the place of Ekalavya, I
would have cut off the head of Dronacharya! That's
exactly what he deserved."
The old man was in
such a shock and so shattered, he was almost trembling.
I said, "You sit down because you are trembling, and if
some heart attack or something happens I will be
responsible for it. Please sit down. I am not going to
cut your head -- although you also need to be treated in
the same way. You want students to be Ekalavya's -- what
about the teachers?"
The master is not a
teacher. He loves; it will be better to say he is love.
He respects; it will be better to say he is
respectfulness. Naturally he creates a gravitational
field of love, respect, gratitude. In this
gravitational field, the second initiation happens. The
disciple is no longer interested in knowing about
himself. His only interest is in how to be dissolved
into the master, how to be in harmony with the master.
And the day the harmony comes to its peak, the disciple
disappears; the devotee is born.
The devotee is miles
away from the student. The whole journey has taken such
revolutionary changes. The devotee is on the verge...
the life of the devotee is not long. The longest life is
that of the student. In the middle is the disciple. And
the life span of the devotee is very small. It is
something like a dewdrop on a lotus petal in the early
morning sun, slipping slowly, slowly towards the sun
into the ocean. The dewdrop is just that small fragment
of time that it takes to slip from the lotus leaf into
the ocean.
The devotee's life
is not long, it is very short -- because once you have
tasted the harmony, you cannot wait to taste oneness. It
is impossible to wait. The dewdrop runs fast, drops into
the ocean, becomes one with the ocean. There are two
ways to say it. Kabir, one of the great mystics of
India, is the only one who has used both ways. When for
the first time he slipped into the ocean, he wrote a
small statement in which he said, "I had been searching
for myself, but, my friend, instead of finding myself, I
have disappeared into the ocean. The dewdrop has
disappeared into the ocean."
After almost twenty
years, when he was on his deathbed, he asked his son,
Kamal, "Bring the notes you have been taking of my
statements. Before I die, I have to correct one thing."
He said, "I have said at one place that the dewdrop has
disappeared into the ocean. Change it. Write down, `The
ocean has disappeared into the dewdrop.'"
His own words are
tremendously beautiful. The first words are, HERAT HERAT
HEY SAKHI RAHYA KABIR HERAYI; BUNDA SAMANI SAMUNDA MEN
SO KAT HERI JAYI. And the second: HERAT HERAT HEY SAKHI
RAHYA KABIR HERAYI; SAMUNDA SAMANA BUNDA MEN SO KAT HERI
JAYI. In the first, the dewdrop has disappeared in the
ocean. In the second, the ocean has disappeared into the
dewdrop. Perhaps two sides of the same coin....
This is the third initiation, and
only after the third initiation is there communion
-- because there is union, there is no more separation,
there is at-oneness. The path of a mystic begins as a
student, ends as a master... begins as a dewdrop, ends
as an ocean.
Source: from book
"Beyond enlightenment" by Osho
Related Article:
"Jiddu
krishnamurti on Need of Guru"
"Classes of Seekers and Points
for Searching for Guru"
"Fear on coming
close to a Living Master"
"Whenever
you are able to surrender, the teacher will come"
^Top
Back to
FAQ on Masters |
|