difference between eckhart tolle, osho, and sadhguru

[charlie cho]

Quote

 

I really believe in my heart.... that osho is the most enlightened out of these three. Eckhart tolle and sadhguru seems to just know who they are. OSHO has some kind of "knowing more" to him

Edited February 7, 2016 by charlie cho

[Leo Gura]

Not necessarily. All 3 of them are pretty damned enlightened. They have different personalities so it shines through differently.

[Ayla]

19 minutes ago, charlie cho said:

 the most enlightened 

Most...more than...less than, are just worldly perspectives. That is a believe you hold. Question it and see where it comes from and why you are holding on to it. It might bring some deep inner revelations  

[Guest]

N/A,,,,,

Edited February 8, 2016 by Na

[aze]

Hi I'm new here, so this is my first post.

Sooo, it appears to me that osho is kind of showing you the path in the most poetic, flowerful way and in different ways. He never clicks on the same button multiple times. Krishnamurti is the opposite, he talked about the same thing all his life. Eckhart tolle is somewhere between the two.

At the end, I had to find who touches my inner being the most. For me, Krishnamurti was the first one, then I felt more close to Osho.

[charlie cho]

But it seems eckhart tolle is a great spiritual teacher..... Makes it easier for us to conceptualize spirituality !

 

Edited February 7, 2016 by charlie cho

[charlie cho]

On February 7, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Guest said:

N/A,,,,,

Dude I liked your response

[Guivs]

My opinion/feeling is that they are less truly enlightened people than we think. I would say that Ramana Maharshi is one of the few persons I feel comfortable to call enlightened (in modern times). Also,a few high accomplished lamas or yogi masters such as drubwang konchok norbu rinpoche , for instance.

I also think that people such has Eckhart Tolle have attained a certain degree of realization, but not the endgame.

Then again, it is just an opinion and I am open for discussion.

 

[goodguy]

Sadhguru claims to know the human system from A to Z. Dont know if its true though. He says some logical stuff but he hasnt convinced of his claim.

[Guest]

Eckhart is a German, so he has a more practical and western way to approach daily life. He doesn't want you to go get rid of people and city life. He focuses on how to seperate yourself from the life while you're living like other people. He gives practical solutions to detailed problems. It's not abstract his approach as much as others.

Osho makes fun of everything and approaches human being as it's an animal but the highest form of animal. He teaches you how not to think about anything at all.

Sadhguru is also like Osho but he doesn't represent the free soul or human being while Osho does. He does what he does for people's sake and understanding.

I don't like when people judge these great philosophers or whatever you call them. They are not people whom you should judge, because they wouldn't care if they heard them. Don't judge and create hatred. Love and don't care.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Sarper

[so here we are]

they do not all carry a separate message

[Guest]

On 2016-02-07 at 4:26 AM, charlie cho said:

I really believe ...

Belief is assumption, a limited fixed (conditioned) way of thinking.  It does not allow for creative possibilities and prevents the revelation of truth.

"I believe" in general conversation is usually the equivalent of "I think", or "It is my opinion".   In any case it is thought in one form or another, and thought is always limited and always open to change and further clarification.

joy

 

Edited February 11, 2016 by walt

[charlie cho]

On February 7, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Leo Gura said:

Not necessarily. All 3 of them are pretty damned enlightened. They have different personalities so it shines through differently.

Hey Leo.... Isn't there a difference between, realizing truth, and being truth?

[Emerald]

On February 7, 2016 at 4:26 AM, charlie cho said:

I really believe in my heart.... that osho is the most enlightened out of these three. Eckhart tolle and sadhguru seems to just know who they are. OSHO has some kind of "knowing more" to him

Out of the three, I resonate more with Eckhart Tolle. I could probably chalk this up to him being a Westerner. But I've watched Sadhguru, and read a book by Osho about creativity. I enjoy Sadhguru from time to time, but I don't resonate with him a whole bunch. The Osho book, I really disliked because of his broad strokes about the art world, but not having the requisite knowledge to speak of it. So, his perspective on his perception of the art world from a lay-person's point of view could have some validity. But I have two degrees and a minor relating to fine art, so I thought it was a bit ignorant seeming to cast the judgements that he was casting, without knowing much about art history or the artists that he was talking about. However, this was six years ago, so I may resonate with him more now. Maybe I would be able to read more between the lines now. But they all are probably "equally enlightened," it just may be that you resonate more with the perspective of Osho. 

[Shanmugam]

When it comes to spiritual practice, Eckhart Tolle and Osho advocate the same thing: witnessing or mindfulness.. Osho talks about other paths as well, but his main emphasis was on mindfulness. But Sadhguru is all about Yoga. One can initiate himself into a spiritual sadhana just by reading the books of Osho and Eckhart Tolle. But to follow Sadhguru's path, one has to enroll in the courses offered by Isha and work their way up.

Personally for me, I found all three of them to be helpful, but Osho's guidance was the best. I have explained my journey in my post here with my review of Osho and Sadhguru in detail: https://nellaishanmugam.wordpress.com/2017/05/10/the-journey-of-a-seeker-my-story/

But it is obvious that Sadhguru was influenced by Osho even though he doesn't reveal that. As Leo said, they have different personalities, different genetics and different upbringing. So, their uniqueness is reflected in their teachings and behavior.

[Prabhaker]

8 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

Sadhguru was influenced by Osho even though he doesn't reveal that.

One of Osho's disciple Nirmala Srivastava has now become a great spiritual leader. Now her name is long: Her Holiness Jagatjanani - "The mother of the whole world" - Mataji Nirmalaji Srivastavaji. Instead of acknowledging , she criticizes Osho. 

Masters criticize each other. Buddha and Mahavira were contemporaries, but they criticized each other. Both were fully enlightened. Each master has to defend his path. They are not enemies, their fight is not of the ego. Their fight has a totally different context.

[Shin]

 

On 07/02/2016 at 10:26 AM, charlie cho said:

I really believe in my heart.... that osho is the most enlightened out of these three. Eckhart tolle and sadhguru seems to just know who they are. OSHO has some kind of "knowing more" to him

It's what they enlighten in you that matters, not which one is more deep into the rabbithole, it really doesn't matter.

After a while, teachers doesn't matter anyway, only you can find the way.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Shin

[pluto]

That one which can love the killer as equally as the victim is what i would call The Enlightened.

When you cannot tell the difference between a cell and a planet is the moment you see everything for as it truly is.

In the unknowing, everything is known.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by pluto

[Shanmugam]

12 hours ago, Sambodhi said:

@Shanmugam  Are you Sannyasin of Osho?

Not really a sannyasin.. I have never visited the ashram in Pune.. But his books were very helpful. You can read my whole story here.

Quote

One of Osho's disciple Nirmala Srivastava has now become a great spiritual leader. Now her name is long: Her Holiness Jagatjanani - "The mother of the whole world" - Mataji Nirmalaji Srivastavaji. Instead of acknowledging , she criticizes Osho. 

Masters criticize each other. Buddha and Mahavira were contemporaries, but they criticized each other. Both were fully enlightened. Each master has to defend his path. They are not enemies, their fight is not of the ego. Their fight has a totally different context.

Prabhakar.... You clearly seem to be answering from what you have read in a book of Osho. Am I right?  I am reminded of two of the Osho's talks from your reply. One was the talk in which he was criticizing Nirmala Srivastava.. But he clearly implied in that talk that she was not enlightened. I also read an interview article where Nirmala criticized Osho  I don't believe that she was enlightened either. One of the things which made me skeptical about her was her idea of 'en masse enlightenment' .Go through this page: http://www.rebelliousspirit.com/osho-webzine/1480/show/sharing . So, this example is not an example of two real masters criticizing each other. Just as example of how Osho was exposing a fake one.

I guess your second paragraph is coming from the memory of this Osho's talk you have read: http://oshosearch.net/Convert/Articles_Osho/Satyam_Shivam_Sundram/Osho-Satyam-Shivam-Sundram-00000006.html

But I don't really think that his criticism of other enlightened people was a devise. Also, it is not that all masters criticize other masters.  It was just his ego. From my observations, I see that enlightened people still have a subtle ego (which is actually needed when they interact with the society. But they no longer derive their identity from it. They just use it as a mask that they can put on when interacting with people). But ego, even after enlightenment, still retains its old defense mechanisms. His answer on why masters criticize each other is coming from his need to rationalize his behavior too. And of course, it is not only that a master has to defend his path, he also needs to defend himself as well. But mainly, Osho had a kind of personality that predisposed him to criticize people. It doesn't make him any less enlightened than other people. (Compare him with Ramana Mahirishi. He never criticized other masters because his personality was different.) .. To see  some obvious examples of what I mean, read my article here: https://nellaishanmugam.wordpress.com/2017/05/10/the-journey-of-a-seeker-my-story/

I don't take many of what Osho said seriously anymore.. Sometimes he just said things which came to his mind as he was talking, the same way a person talks when he is just gossiping. He often exaggerated things and made them more dramatic. He spoke more directly and said the truth in his talks after his silence period in the US.

When it comes to Sadhguru, I clearly noticed a trait in him. His tendency to imitate things. His attempt to speak in an American accent is an example. Another example is that he tries to imitate Osho. He uses the anecdotes of Osho. But he never talks about Osho. He doesn't criticize any enlightened master either.

 

Edited May 11, 2017 by Shanmugam

[Toby]

14 minutes ago, Shanmugam said:

He uses the anecdotes of Osho.

I don't watch Sadhguru but I remember a story that I thought was taken directly from Osho as well: he was talking about Ramakrishna and his food-addiction. He was telling it almost exactly the same and I was wondering if he took it from Osho.