Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy - Osho - Oshorajneesh.com

CHAPTER 12. DISCIPLINE, DEVOTION AND KRISHNA
It was the time of the mutiny when Indian soldiers of the British army had revolted against their alien
masters. The British officers were alarmed, so when they saw a naked sannyasin passing through
their military camp, they captured him on the suspicion he was a spy. When they interrogated him he
kept silent, and this strengthened their suspicion. The suspicion would perhaps have been cleared
if the sannyasin had responded to their queries, but he simply smiled when they asked him who he
was. So their suspicion of his being a spy was confirmed, and they stuck a bayonet in his chest.
This man, who had been silent for thirty years, broke into a loud laughter and uttered a great maxim
of the Upanishad: ”TATVAMASI SHVETKETU!” With this quote from the Upanishad he said to the
British soldier who struck him with a bayonet: ”You want to know who I am? What I am, you are.”
Truth cannot be said in words; at the most it can be indicated with indications and signs, with
gestures and hints. Or like Kabir one can say it with paradoxes, self-contradictory statements.
Kabir’s language has been described as sandhyabhasha, which literally means the twilight language.
Twilight is a space where it is neither day nor night, where one can neither say a clear yes nor a
clear no, where one can neither accept nor deny, where one is neither a theist nor an atheist, where
everything is fluid, vague and mystical. It is for this reason that up to now no one has been able
to discover a clear-cut meaning in Kabir’s sayings. Krishna’s sayings belong to this same category.
Whosoever has attempted to express the truth in words, his language has invariably turned into
the twilight language. They cannot be assertive, they have to say yes and no together. Or they
will accept or deny the opposites together. And that is what makes their statements illogical and
inconsistent.
It is for this reason that people who came to know the space where ”I” and ”thou” disappear, where
all opposites cease to be and duality disappears, have decided to remain silent.
Question 3
QUESTIONER: SARTRE SAYS, ”EXISTENCE PRECEDES ESSENCE,” AND YOU SAY,
”ESSENCE PRECEDES EXISTENCE.” PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ACTUAL RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE TWO STATEMENTS. PLEASE ALSO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE
CONFUSION IN WHICH WE FIND OURSELVES WITH REGARD TO THE DISTINCTION
BETWEEN DEVOTION AND DISCIPLINE, BECAUSE HERE IN MANALI WE ARE PARTICIPATING
IN A CAMP MEANT FOR SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINE.
It is part of my work to put you into confusion. You will know the meaning of this camp only when all
distinctions between devotion and discipline disappear.
Sartre and other existentialists believe that existence precedes essence, but it is a very odd state,
ment. Perhaps never before had such a concept been put forth. Down the ages the contrary belief
has been held. Almost every thought system, every philosophy believes that essence precedes
existence. So it is good to understand it in depth.
All schools of philosophy that were born be, fore Sartre and other existentialists believe that the
seed precedes the tree. And it seems natural and logical. But Sartre says the tree precedes the
seed. By and large, every thought-system says that essence pre. cedes existence; without essence
or soul, existence is not possible. But Sartre asserts that existence comes first and essence later.
He believes that in the absence of existence essence cannot be manifested.
Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy 227 Osho