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

CHAPTER 3. WHERE BUDDHA ENDS KRISHNA BEGINS
connected. The presence of that blooming flower in the garden and my presence here are two poles
of the same event.
Now if the sun becomes extinct tonight, all life on this earth will be extinct immediately. There will
be no morning tomorrow. So we are dependent for our life on the sun, which is a billion miles
away from us. And the sun is dependent on some bigger suns, and in their turn those bigger suns
are dependent on some still bigger suns that exist in the galaxy. Here everything is dependent on
everything else. All life is really inter-dependent. We are not separate from one another; we are not
islands. We are a vast continent, an endless continent. Here everything is united and one.
If you only see this fact with your eyes open then it will not be necessary to remind you that ”I” and
”thou” are mere inventions of man, and utterly wrong inventions at that. And when you perceive it,
you also know that which is – you know the truth. Unless you see it with clarity, you cannot know
who you are and what reality is. And as long as you don’t know it, you will continue to cling to the
concepts of ”I” and ”thou”, you will continue to live in a myth, a dream.
Krishna tells you to remember in the very first step, and do nothing else. And your whole journey is
complete with one single step. Remember who you are, what you are, where you are, because with
this remembering everything is revealed and known. This remembering is benediction.
Question 2
QUESTIONER. I HAVE A QUESTION IN REGARD TO WHOLENESS. YOU SAY THAT
EMPTINESS IS THE BASIC CHARACTERISTIC OF WHOLENESS. BUDDHA HAD ATTAINED TO
ABSOLUTE EMPTINESS. SHOULD HE NOT BE CALLED WHOLE? AND WHY IS EMPTINESS
NOT MULTIDIMENSIONAL IN ITSELF?
A few things have to be understood in this connection. As I was saying earlier, Buddha attained
to emptiness, so emptiness is his achievement. And the emptiness that is achieved has to be
necessarily one-dimensional, and it becomes dependent on the one who achieves it.
Try to understand it in another way. If I empty out my inside, if I negate something in me, it will
cease to be, and I will achieve a kind of emptiness. But this emptiness will be just the absence of
something that I have negated. But there is a different kind of emptiness which is not of our making:
this emptiness is born out of our awareness of our being. We are empty; we are emptiness itself, so
we don’t have to become it. Emptiness is our very nature; we are it. And when we come to it, it is
not the result of some sadhana, some discipline or effort. And this emptiness is multidimensional.
We have not emptied out something to become empty, we have only recollected that we are empty,
void; we are emptiness itself.
The emptiness of Buddha, which is seen by us, is one that has been achieved. And only that
emptiness which has been achieved can be seen. We never see any emptiness in Krishna; on the
contrary, one can say that he is fulfilled, that he is occupied and active. Krishna’s presence is felt,
not his absence. We can know that there is something tangible in Krishna, but we cannot know
that he is empty. We can, however, know that Buddha is empty. The reason is that we are all filled
with something that Buddha has negated. We are full of anger, and Buddha has thrown out his
anger. We are full of violence, and Buddha has dropped his violence. We are full of clinging and
Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy 57 Osho