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

CHAPTER 18. NON-ATTACHMENT IS NOT AVERSION
innermost depth. And the moment you arrive at your center, you are non attached, you are like a
lotus in water. The lotus is born in water, lives in water and yet remains untouched by it.
Question 2
QUESTIONER: YOU HAVE EXPLAINED TO US BEAUTIFULLY THE MEANING AND
SIGNIFICANCE OF NON-ATTACHMENT. BESIDES NON-ATTACHMENT, KRISHNA HAS TALKED
ABOUT TWO OTHER THINGS IN THE GEETA: ONE IS SANNYAS OR INACTION, AND
THE OTHER IS ACTION WITHOUT ATTACHMENT TO RESULTS. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NON-ATTACHMENT, SANNYAS, AND ACTION WITHOUT DESIRE
FOR RESULTS.
The yoga of non-attachment is foundational, and it is the third point of the triangle, the basic point of
life from which arise the two other points of the triangle.
The two other points are: first, action through inaction; and second, inaction through action. One
can be called sannyas – inaction, and the other can be called action without desire for results.
Desireless action means action through inaction. If you do something without any motive, without a
sense of compulsion to do it and without desire for successful results, it is desireless action. If what
you do is undone or it does not bear fruits and you accept it without regret or pain, it is desireless
action.
I would like to go into this question in depth. Desireless action is sannyas if the sannyasin has a
sense of involvement and responsibility even in inaction, when he is not doing a thing.
It will be a little difficult to understand: a sense of involvement in inaction, when one is not doing a
thing. For example, there is a sannyasin who does nothing to earn his living. So he comes to your
house for alms and you share with him your food, which you have stolen from somewhere. If he is
a true sannyasin he will say that he is party to theft; he is a thief too. If he is a pseudo sannyasin,
he will say that he has nothing to do with the theft of the food, he is not concerned with what you do
or don’t do. But an honest sannyasin will admit that although he did not steal food directly yet he is
responsible for your action of theft.
But suppose he does not even beg, he does nothing – what is his position in regard to action? I
think if there is a true sannyasin on this earth and if a war is going on in Vietnam – as it is in fact
happen ing, where people are being mercilessly slaughtered – he will share the responsibility for the
Vietnam War. Although he is thousands of miles away, he actually has nothing to do with what is
going on in Vietnam, still he will take the responsibility on himself.
A sannyasin, a true sannyasin is aware that wherever there is consciousness embodied on this wide
earth, he is inextricably linked with it. It cannot be without him, he is present everywhere. And there
fore he is responsible for everything – good or evil – that happens anywhere.
For example, I am now in this village as a visitor, and a Hindu-Muslim riot breaks out here. I am
neither a Hindu nor a Muslim; I am a sannyasin. So where do I stand in relation to the riot? If I am
really a sannyasin I will say, and say truly that, ”I am responsible for it; I must have done something
Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy 344 Osho