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

CHAPTER 4. RELIGION HAS NO HISTORY, IT IS ETERNAL
For men like Krishna, what we know as our life, what we know as our gross life, is nothing more than
a bundle of dreams. And when those who lived with him came to understand Krishna rightly, they
decided not to record the events of his outer life. And this decision was made with full awareness;
there was nothing accidental or unconscious about it. And it is significant. Besides, it has a message
for you completely avoid becoming involved with history. If you get involved with history you will miss
that which is beyond all records, all history. You will miss the truth.
Question 4
QUESTIONER: WE FULLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE NEED NOT CONCERN OURSELVES
WITH THE RECORDS OF KRISHNA’S GROSS LIFE, LIKE THE DATES OF HIS BIRTH AND
DEATH. BUT WE SHOULD CERTAINLY WANT TO KNOW THE WAY KRISHNA LIVED HIS LIFE,
THE MESSAGE HE HAD FOR US, THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HIS LIFE’S STORY. YOU SAID A
LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT RELIGION CANNOT HAVE A HISTORY BECAUSE IT IS ETERNAL.
BUT WHAT DOES KRISHNA MEAN BY DHARMA OR RELIGION WHEN HE SAYS IN THE GEETA
THAT ONE’S OWN DHARMA, EVEN IF IT IS QUALITATIVELY INFERIOR, IS PREFERABLE TO
AN ALIEN DHARMA, THAT IT IS BETTER TO DIE IN ONE’S OWN DHARMA THAN TO LIVE WITH
AN ALIEN DHARMA? HE SAYS THAT EVERY ALIEN DHARMA IS PERILOUS, AND SHOULD
BE SHUNNED AT ALL COSTS. IF DHARMA IS ONE AND ETERNAL, WHY SHOULD KRISHNA
THINK IT NECESSARY TO DIVIDE IT INTO GOOD AND BAD, INTO PERSONAL AND ALIEN?
It was very necessary for Krishna to say it. The Sanskrit text of his saying is, SWADHARME
NIDHANAM SHREYAH, PARDHARMO BHAYAWAHA. And we need to under stand it from various
angles.
Here Krishna does not use the word dharma to mean the traditional religions like those of the Hindus,
Christians and Mohammedans. The Sanskrit word dharma really means self-nature, one’s innate
nature, one’s essential nature, and it is in this sense that Krishna divides it into the primal nature
or the self-nature, and the alien nature, the nature other than one’s own. It is a question of one’s
own individuality, one’s own subjectivity being quite different from the individuality of others. It is a
question of your being truly yourself and not imitating another, not trying to be like another person,
whoever he may be. Krishna here says, ”Be immaculately yourself. Follow your own true nature and
don’t follow and imitate any other.” He says, ”Don’t follow a guru or guide. Be your own guide. Don’t
allow your individuality, your subjectivity to be dominated, dictated and smothered by anybody else.
In short, don’t follow, don’t imitate any other person.”
Maybe the other person is going somewhere wherein lies his own individual, subjective destiny –
which is his freedom – but it may turn out to be your bondage if you follow him. It is bound to turn
into a bondage for you.
Mahavira’s individuality is his own; it cannot be the individuality of any other person. The path of
Christ cannot be a path for another. Why?
Wherever I go I can only go as myself; I can go the way I am. It is true that on reaching the
destination my self, the ”I” will disappear. But the day the ”I” disappears, the other, the ”he”, will
also disappear. And the state of nature or being that I will then attain is everlasting, eternal. This
transcendent nature is impersonal and oceanic. But right now we are not like the ocean, we are like
Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy 72 Osho