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

CHAPTER 14. ACTION, INACTION AND NON-ACTION
The moment something transcends reason it turns into a GEETA, not a commentary on it.
Question 7
QUESTIONER: WHAT IS IT THAT YOU ARE SAYING RIGHT NOW?
One thing is certain, it is not a commentary.
Question 8
QUESTIONER: AND WHAT IS THE OTHER THING?
I leave that to you. Should not something be left to you?
Question 9
QUESTIONER: A PART OF MY QUESTION REMAINS UNANSWERED. DO YOU THINK THE
GEETA WILL BE COMPLETE IF SHANKARA’S SUPRA-MORALISM AND TILAK’S ACTIVISM ARE
MADE INTO ONE PIECE? BECAUSE THE SUPRA-RATIONALITY THAT YOU SPEAK ABOUT
IS ECHOED BY SHANKARA, NOT TILAK; THE LATTER IS OUT AND OUT A MORALIST. ON
THE OTHER HAND TILAK, NOT SHANKARA ECHOES YOUR POSITIVISM, YOUR DYNAMISM.
SHANKARA IS FOR RENUNCIATION.
It is true. Shankara is a supra-moralist.
A moralist is action-oriented; he says do this and don’t do that. Shankara says every action is
illusory; whether you practice asceticism or indulge in stealing makes no difference. In sleep now you
dream you are a robber, and then you dream you are a saint; it does not make any difference in your
waking state. On waking you say both robber and saint are dream stuff, they are meaningless. For
this reason nothing is moral or immoral for Shankara. There is no way to choose between morality
and immorality, just as there is no way to choose between two dreams. Choice is possible only
between two realities. Because the world is an illusion to Shankara there is no place for morality in
his philosophy. Shankara’s vision is supra-moralistic; it transcends morality. The principle of inaction
is bound to go beyond morality.
When Shankara’s commentaries on Indian philosophy were translated into the languages of the
West, they were thought to be supporting immorality. Thinkers of the West said that Shankara’s
vision upheld immorality. If such a view that nothing is right or wrong – that all actions, like dreams,
are the same – gains ground, then people will go off the track; they will simply sink into the mire
of sin and degradation. And it is not surprising if the West reacts in this manner. Western people
have lived down the centuries, have been brought up on the food of Judaic philosophy, which has
ceaselessly harangued them to ”Do this and don’t do that.” Their whole religion and culture are
based on the Ten Commandments, which clearly enunciate what one should do and should not do.
So it is no wonder that they reacted sharply to shankara’s thinking and called it immoral.
Certainly Shankara’s thinking is not IMmoralist, because immorality is a choice against morality.
Shankara stands for choicelessness and for this reason he is supra-moralistic. He does not ask you
Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy 275 Osho