Review: Osho on Bhagavad Gita, by Neeraj Korde
“Rajneesh” Chandra Mohan Jain, aka Osho, was one of the most influential spiritual personalities of the 20th century. Some consider him to be enlightened and some a charlatan, but one thing is for sure, Osho was unique. He was undeniably a great orator and, with a background in teaching philosophy, a great scholar. His unconventional nuggets of wisdom may appeal or repel listeners but they sure do shake you up. I have been listening to his discourses on the Bhagavad Gita for a while and I want to share some of my thoughts with you.
There is a lot of Osho literature available on the internet. This includes writings, discourses, and videos. Osho’s lectures on the Bhagavad Gita constitute one of his more popular works. Osho speaks in chaste Hindi which in today’s world is a rare commodity in itself. His style of speaking is pregnant with pauses which lends it an air of gravity. The discourses are usually 45-60 minutes long, during which Osho digs deep into a few shlokas, coming up with his unique brand of wisdom.
Osho, the word dissector
He spends quite some time explaining the meaning of a single word and why Krishna chose to use that particular word. Often his insight is deep and extraordinary, bringing out a hidden meaning that is hard to guess yet feels sensible. The Gita seems to be full of esoteric and illogical statements, but Osho takes his time delineating each phrase word-by-word and creating the landscape of his perspective. An underlying current throughout his discourses is the assertion that words in our languages are just inadequate to express the divine. Osho believes this is because the languages have evolved to express the ego. He points out that the reason Gita sounds so esoteric is because of the way human languages have evolved and the subtle ways language effects our thinking and behavior.
Although born a Jain, Osho draws from all spiritual traditions while explaining the Gita. He extensively quotes anecdotes from the lives of Buddha, Mahavir, Christ, Vivekanand, Mansoor, Meera, Mohammed, etc., trying to highlight the unifying message underlying the different actions taken by these people. The list given above is a mere sampling; Osho draws from an eclectic bunch ranging from Zen monks to Sufi fakirs. Coming from a strong background in philosophy he does not shy away from comparing the works of modern philosophers like Sigmund Frued, Friedrich Neitzche, Carl Jung, Einstein, and so on with those of the ancient seers. The result is a very rounded, multifaceted interpretation of Geeta, a thorough comparison of Eastern and Western thought.
Throughout the discourses Osho rebukes organized religion. His dislike for the church, priest, dogma, and blind following of rituals is expressed in all his talks and writings. He encourages the listener to put it in proper perspective and concentrate on changing one’s actions instead of getting stuck with rituals. In one instance he compares them to signboards and goads the listener to read the signboard and move to the real destination rather than thinking of the signboard as the destination.
Osho’s interpretation of the Gita stands out for many qualities. He creates a multifaceted analysis of Gita, drawing from all sources—philosophy, scriptures, biographies and his own experience. The shlokas of the Gita are often abstract, mysterious and sometimes downright contradictory. In such cases the listener will definitely appreciate Osho’s deep and precise insight in explaining why Krishna said it this way. He has the skill of explaining apparently impossible shlokas in layman’s terms, using simple analogies. He often compares the subjects to modern social problems. This is where at times he digresses. Even though the digressions are interesting they sometimes get a bit too long. Though usually serious he is at times encouraging, soothing, poetic, mesmerizing and confrontational. But he is always soft-spoken, never too loud. There was an incidence when some people created trouble during his discourse. But Osho held his calm and the next day actually used that incident to bring in some humor. Osho’s discourses on the Gita are something every Osho fan or Gita fan will love listening to. You can find them at http://www.esnips.com/web/shikshaaurdharma
Neeraj Korde did his Masters from University of Michigan and now is a software engineer based in Seattle, Washington. His interests include practicing yoga. He can be reached at nkorde@gmail.com.
Email This Post
Loading ...
September 17th, 2008 22:21
Dear Mr. Korde,
Are you talking on Gita or praising Osho? Your article is highlighting a man who was more than the womanizer and a sort of person called in our language a PATH BHRASHT. I have seen him when he was a professor in Sagar University and in later years his works I had opportunity to go through but his thoughts about Krishna are more as if as a humanbeing is talking and he had praised the Astavakr Geeta than Shrimad Bhagwadgita. The Jains highlight the Shringar Shaily of Leela of the Lord than His practical philosophies on Karmayoga and Adhyatmagyan. If you happen to read Prabhupada’s Geeta as it is and then read Gita of other authors and compare you will yourself understand how wrongly some of the verses have been interpretted.
To have worldly knowledge and to practice it are two different poles. I would like to quote Swami Shivananda of Rishikesh who wrote in advance more than 60 years ago I happen to visit his ashram in Rishikesh ,about all those modern swamis and acharyas & Lady sanyasins…………….
“VEDANTA is today a much abused term. All sorts of vanity, hypocrisy and self-conceit have been masquerading in its name. It has become the fashion of the day to pass for a Vedantin as it is then convenient to give up all sorts of responsibilities, rituals and restrictions of the Varnashrama Dharma and enables one to lead a happy-go-lucky life of ease, lethargy and inertia. The Punjab is full of dry, lip-Vedantins. Punjabi women have also taken to Vedanta and they take great pride in calling themselves Vedantins, whether or not they understand the philosophy, whether or not they do any practice. All retired officers who have not done any selfless service or any Sadhana or worship or charity take to Vedanta as a sort of fancy.”
(Swami Shivananda was a Doctor in Burma during British Raj in India and became a Sanyasi. Did Tapasya at Muni ki Reti in Rishikesh and his Ashram produced Yogis like BKS Iyengar who has now 2000 yogic centers throughout the world and many other Sanyasis later all the” Chalantru Philntaru “sanyasis from the west had one or the other time come to visit Shivananda Ashram. Swami Shivananda further eulogizes:-
“Thus Vedanta has become a very comfortable philosophy, because one can do whatever he chooses and eat whatever he likes. Licentiousness is mistaken for a life of expansion. If a man can eat anything in any hotel in any part of the world, if he can move socially with any man or woman, that does not mean, he is a Vedantin. There is much tall talk of Vedanta nowadays. There is idle Vedantic gossiping. But there is no practical Vedanta. Nobody wants to do any real solid Vedantic Sadhana. Man feels ashamed to call himself a Bhakta, but he takes great pride in calling himself a Yogi or a Vedantin, because he foolishly imagines he will be respected by the public. Many ignorant Vedantins have mistaken the body for Brahman and hence there is corruption amongst the so-called loose Vedantins. This is not only lamentable but also highly deplorable.”
I wish to add in the thoughts of great Sanyasi that the commercialization has overtaken Adhyatma that is why we only see the bright side of the person and forget the Truth. It is just like the packaging industry has overtaken the real contents of the thing presented.
The list of various modern swamis, or so called Sanysis and saints is long….
One of them was Acharya Rajnish who declared himself as Bhagwan Rajnish and then a Japanese name as ‘OSHO’. I agree that he was very well read.But his views and sayings on contradictions in Geeta and depiction on Krishna is lamentable and deplorable. He confuses more than he explains.
Shrimadbhagvadgita is summarised form of Vedas that is why it is also known as Geetopnishada. The Upnishadas are that part of Vedas wich highlight the Sanatan Hindu philosophy of our Dharma ( please note that religion word is being wrongly used in place of the Dharma- a wrong translation because English has no substitute for Dharma) Every chapter of Geeta is focused on a Yoga. The entire philosophy revolves around a Central Figure that is the creator controller and ahhilator or recycler which makes Hinduism as Monotheistic inspite of the fact that the administration of JAGAT (the Universe) is controlled by Lord Vishnu and when the same cosmic energy works as the created we call him Lord Brahma and ultimate for a new cycle of the Universe we have the annihilator or recycler Lord Shiva. They all are one and the same. The Supreme is Krishna who has inifinte names, eternal, almighty loves the right doers Bhaktas that is why he is an apostle of love.
Time to time he incarnates to establish the natural laws.
Please excuse me if I had used some harsh words or hurted any body whose mind is brainwashed by reading one type of persons views only.
Pandit Vats at San Lorenzo California.
November 18th, 2008 03:48
I have read geeta darshan by osho.I read it accidently. He explain every verse in detail. I don’t know whether osho was fake gure or real guru but one thing is sure that he had brilliant mind. I attracted towards geeta when I read osho book on geeta . I have also read Geeta as it is after that. Both prabhupad and osho has explained geeta in a very unique way. But I have a great respect for osho because just because of him my interest to know krishna is increased.
December 14th, 2008 15:52
Mr.Ravinder Nath Watts I think ur an fanatic u don’t want to understand the right geeta. Osho is not an brainwasher. Yes u can explain an ancient texts as per your experience. Prabhupada explain geeta as like a Hindu who want to interpret Krishna in an Hindu way of thinking. On the other hand OSHO is not trying to give an ultimatum on geeta, he’s just explaining his own experience. He uses geeta as tool. Its not an philosophical sermon. His speeches on geeta will transform your inner being which is far more important than the outer circles…
January 28th, 2009 09:37
Vatts ji, Velmurugan ji,Sanjeev ji,
Osho’s Gita Dharshan is a masterpiece. I have been doing Gita Parayana for nine years and only lately found Gita Dharshan. I believe it was Osho who has brought out the totality of Krishna out of the Gita than anyone else- even Swamy Ramsukhdasji Maharaj, whose commentary ‘Sadhak Sanjeevani” I rever. Though comparisons are not suitable, I see Osho fill some critical areas in my mind about the import of Gita.
1. Osho calls Krishna as Bhagavan (at least in that work. But later he was saying God did not matter to him)
2. Osho’s understanding of sloka 2/16
nasato vidyate bhaavo , naabhaavo vidyate sata:|
ubhayorapi drushto(a)antha: tvanayos tattva darshibhi:||
is perhaps unique and rare. His definitions of sat and asat are gems.
Personally, To me, Krishna is everything. But, a Gnana Yogi like Osho did great service to a Bhakta like me. I have just gone through ch 1 and part of Ch 2 (in Tamil) and every page stuns me.
But, I can understand vatts ji’s aversion. Osho has a habit of shocking others. As he says ” My job is not consoling people but to disturb them. For, they have lost the ability to think for centuries. My disturbing will wake them up”
I think that every Hindu must read or hear Osho’s Gita.
Pranams
Venkat
March 6th, 2009 14:23
Mr.Watts only a man who has experienced truth can explain Geeta or any religious text in the right way. The others can explain but it will like 6 blind explaining about the elephant their explanation is right according to their experience but they will never know th elephant. And as far as Prabupada is concerned i read his book Bhagwad gita as it is and i clearly know he has totally destroyed the beauty of Gita by explaining Gita in a fanactic way. If Krishna would have listened to his explanation he would have laughed at him. Today there are so many interpretations on Gita but i think Osho has really touch the cord of heart in his explanation. I am listening to his discourse daily and i feel as though really being transported to 5000 years back in between Krishna and Arjun.
Venu
April 4th, 2009 12:53
Sri Krishnaya Namah!
I have read both commentaries on Gita - by Prabhupad and Osho. I agree with Venugopal that:
1. Osho’s is prefereable;
2. Lord Krishna would not approve this commentary;
3. Osho’s commentary is so powerful and soul enagaging that one can easily
listen to it in discourse form for hours and hours everyday and feel Krisna
on mental and spiritual level;and
4. We are fortunate indeed to be contempreneous of Osho to avail this rare
opportunity of genuine Krishna consciousness through his interpretation.
May Lord Krishna bless his soul heavens.
April 10th, 2009 13:29
Hi All,
I am a nutral reader, I wanted to read Gita as how it is given by Krishna, so I bought the book call Gita as it is by Prabhubatha and finally find out that it is not more than boring book wasted by the writers who tries to force his thinking on a subject to every body who reads it. I got a chance to read Bhagavat Gita Ek Dharshan by Osho in tamil, that is the books which explains, the things what a common man can understand, again Osho is not forcing to accept any of his idea, that is good part from him.
I hope in his comments Mr. Ravindra also tried to do the same thing what Prabhubahda did to Gita. I respect Prabhubadha, but I Cannot accept what he is trying to force. Mr. Ravindra try see things from a nutral point.
Cheers.
Hakkim
April 12th, 2009 19:54
Well..
This problem of interpretation makes for the doom of wisdom of Vednta or the other religion texts from around the world. So two schools/sects are trying to corner for who have the better of the explanation through the followers making a point or two. A text written thousands of years back in a language that is only understood by few and a context that comes to only the enlightened to explain. So whether Prabhupada wrote the better one or it was osho who interpreted nicely is not the question. The question is what you make of it by reading and understanding it. None( the readers) I am sure are any authority or else would have translated the book themselves and understood. Moreover any author would have looked at the previous interpretations and then with some higher understanding put his own thoughts. Perhaps we try to find the interpretation we best like but would also be open to respect what someone else thinks of it.
Better not miss the essence of Gita which is about reaching to God through inquiry and knowledge.
Best