difference between eckhart tolle, osho, and sadhguru

[Shanmugam]

Just now, Toby said:

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.

You are right.... You cannot find that example mentioned anywhere else other than Osho's talks.. Osho was the only one who gave that example... But the truth is, Ramakrishna just had a habit of reminding himself to drink water (not to eat food) to come out of samadhi. He used water to come down from Samadhi. Osho just exaggerated this and made it to a story, IMO. Also, Ramakrishna was fond of sweets (but was not really obsessed). Osho just mixed these two to make an anecdote. He was a great story teller and he always used to do this when he talked about any historical incident. In his anecdotes you will find his own screenplay and dialogues.. 

[Garuda]

Was Osho even enlightened?

[Shanmugam]

31 minutes ago, Garuda said:

Was Osho even enlightened?

Let me ask you this first... how would you define enlightenment?

[Prabhaker]

5 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

You are right.... You cannot find that example mentioned anywhere else other than Osho's talks.. Osho was the only one who gave that example... But the truth is, Ramakrishna just had a habit of reminding himself to drink water (not to eat food) to come out of samadhi. He used water to come down from Samadhi. Osho just exaggerated this and made it to a story, IMO. Also, Ramakrishna was fond of sweets (but was not really obsessed). Osho just mixed these two to make an anecdote. He was a great story teller and he always used to do this when he talked about any historical incident. In his anecdotes you will find his own screenplay and dialogues..

5 hours ago, Toby said:

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.

I always post teaching of Osho on this forum. A master is not interested in teaching us true historical facts. What good it will do if we learn correct history or science? Earth is round or flat ? Life originated on earth 6000 years ago or billions of years ago ? For him our transformation is important.

I am providing you excerpts from department of tourism, government of West Bengal , website. 

The Master smoked tobacco a few times a day [as was the custom in those days], using a hubble-bubble that he kept in the southwest corner of his room. 

Whenever Ramakrishna went to Calcutta his attendant always carried his towel and spice bag, which contained fennel seeds, cloves, cubeb, caraway, and cardamom.

Sri Ramkrishna Paramahansa was very fond of Sandesh and Jilipi.

Ramakrishna loved all foods, not just sweets. Perhaps he experienced the divine through his sense of taste. Not strange. As food went past his taste buds and entered his stomach a sense of joy radiated and filled his entire body. Sometimes he would walk out of a gathering of disciples, run to the kitchen, smell or taste what was ready and dart back. His wife, Ma Sarada, at times felt embarrassed wondering what people would think. But Ramakrishna was oblivious, for he knew that some mysterious power was in control and he was doing its bidding. He never talked about his weakness for food because he said he did not wish to attract a following of gluttons.

Ramakrishna enjoyed food all his life, experienced great joy, and kept quiet about it. His followers reverently ignored his weakness.

http://www.bengalcuisine.in/ram-krishna

Edited May 11, 2017 by Prabhaker

[Prabhaker]

6 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

Just as example of how Osho was exposing a fake one.

Here Mataji Nirmala Devi is exposing a fake one.

Every religion tries to prove that other paths are wrong. Christians preach that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation. Mohammedans say that Islam is only true path. We can't judge what is write and what is wrong.

Osho's message was for the rich and educated. Every master's message is not appropriate for everyone. How can you judge who is fake and who is real master ? A Buddhist can find Krishna as fake , a Hindu can find Mohammad as fake. A lot of people find Eckhart tolle is very helpful, 'Power of Now' is the best book, Eckhart tolle doesn't resonates with me, I find Osho is the best teacher, it doesn't mean that others are wrong.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Prabhaker

[Prabhaker]

They can criticize each other. U.G. Krishnamurti on Osho Rajneesh and Jiddu Krishnamurti. 

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by Prabhaker

[Prabhaker]

Ramana Maharshi criticized Sri Aurobindo. 

Sri Aurobindo told that Ramana Maharshi was not fully enlightened as he was dominated by vitalic plane of consciousness, i.e. feelings and desires, so Ramana was evil, self-obsessed, emotional inside. 

Edited May 12, 2017 by Prabhaker

[Toby]

Osho was bashing Nisargadatta Maharaj big time.

[Prabhaker]

In the book "Bhagwan, the god that failed", Hugh Milne has mentioned something which  J Krishnmurthi has said about OSHO.

"I have received thousands of letters from all over the world asking why I do not speak out in public against this man (Osho) . But I will not, as it is not my way. The man (Osho) is a criminal. You have to understand this very clearly. What he is doing to people in the name of spirituality is criminal. One must never give to another human being – and he is simply a human being – your ultimate manifestation of consciousness, which is your ability to make decisions for yourself. You have made a great mistake in giving him that power for twelve years, but understand this: no man has power except the power his followers give him. That is why he needs people around him all the time, and the more the better.”

[Prabhaker]

10 minutes ago, Snick said:

Somehow it seems he wasn't! 

No, Ramana Maharshi was enlightened , but masters criticize each other, Sri Aurobindo was criticizing him, criticism is a devise .

14 minutes ago, Snick said:

Anyone more that is known to us? That was either fully enlightened when he lived in the past (other then buddha and Mahavira), or is fully enlightened today? 

We can't judge who is enlightened or not, only other enlightened person can know. Every enlightened person is not a teacher. Only few are teachers still hundreds of persons are recognized as enlightened by mystics. 

[Toby]

Sadhguru on Ramakrishna

Osho on Ramakrishna

Quote

There is a very strange and puzzling incident that occurred in the life of Shree Ramakrishna Paramahansa. Those who knew him well, who knew him as a man who had attained to the highest pinnacle of samadhi, were astonished by his great love for good food. He would often get very excited and become quite anxious about his food and many a time he walked straight into the kitchen and asked his wife, Sharada, "What's the matter? It's getting very late. Are you cooking any special delicacy today?"

Sharada Devi would only look at him in consternation, in her innermost heart she did not approve of this habit of his at all. He even went to the extreme of walking out of the middle of spiritual discussions to go to the kitchen to find out what was being prepared especially for him and to see what kind of snacks he could lay his hands on. Sharada would ask, "What are you doing here? What will people think? You have left a serious conversation about brahman to come down to the kitchen to ask about something as mundane as food!"

Ramakrishna would just smile and say nothing.

At times even his disciples would point out that people were saying all sorts of things about him because of this particular idiosyncrasy of his. They said people would lose faith in him, that they would wonder how a man who was so attached to a worldly thing like food and so devoted to eating could impart knowledge, could show the path to light.

One day, Sharada lost her temper and told him off. She said the way she saw it, his love for food was such a compulsion that it was beyond his power to control it. In a very calm and quiet tone he explained, "Sharada, you don't understand. One day I will lose interest in food. Remember that day and mark it well. I will die exactly three days after."

Totally puzzled, Sharada asked, "What do you mean?"

Ramakrishna answered,"All my desires are gone. All my longings, all my cravings have vanished. All my thoughts have been destroyed. But I wish to remain in this world a little longer, for the good of humanity. And that is why I am consciously holding on to one straw, to desire. When all the chains that moor a boat have been broken loose but one - the one that keeps the boat attached to the dock - the ship will sail off into the limitless ocean towards its ultimate destination if ever that last chain breaks. I am holding on purposely. That is the main reason I take so much interest in food."

No one grasped the full significance of his explanation. But three days before his death Sharada entered his room with a plate of food in her hand. When he saw the plate he closed his eyes and turned his back on his wife. That very moment Sharada remembered what he had said to her several days before. The plate dropped from her hands and she began to weep loudly at her husband's impending death, the death he had predicted would take place exactly three days after he lost interest in food. Ramakrishna Paramahansa stayed alive by holding on to one very small desire, and as soon as that desire also vanished no chain remained to hold him in the world. When that small desire vanished, the insignificant support which caused his physical body to survive also vanished.

 

[Ricksta]

I would say all three are fairly enlightened by the looks of it. But regarding your question of which one is the most, it won't matter. Because at different times in your life you will be facing different challenges and at one time one teacher might resonate with you and at another time you will find a different teacher speaks to you more deeply.

Perhaps more importantly is to notice that when a person finds one teacher resonating very deeply, not to go about criticizing or looking down on other teachers because at that moment other teachings might not sit well with you, but tomorrow, who knows lol.

[Harikrishnan]

Playing with disciples ego thats why this masters bash each other. When Osho bashed Maharaj he was not making fun of maharaj but his disciple same when maharaj made fun of Osho. See this post itself some resonates with some, and believe the masters they resonates with are more enlightened than other. (Maybe iam judging ) I dont know i resonate with everyone ?

[Shanmugam]

@Prabhaker  Thanks for all the examples.. This discussion is getting interesting.. I am familiar with most of them and I once had the exact same view that you have now... However, After my transformation (I am reluctant to call it enlightenment though), I started seeing things in a different way.

It is very clear that most of these people criticized each other. I also remember U.G.Krishnamurti criticizing Ramana as egoistic.

But the question is, is this type of criticism really a devise or just a fundamental attribution error? You seem to have completely accepted it when Osho said that criticism is really a devise.. Even I did the same thing years ago.. But now i don't think that is the case.. Criticism can be used as a devise in stopping people from jumping to different paths and some of the criticisms might have been devices.. But not all of them and not always.. I think most of these criticisms are just an attribution error that human beings are prone to, even after enlightenment...

I will give you an example of this attribution error made by Osho.. Here is an excerpt from his book 'Theologia Mystica':

"Somebody in Vishnu Devananda's own organization has been deceiving him for years.... It is good that Vishnu Devananda has confessed that somebody in his own organization was deceiving him, but what does it show? It shows one thing: that Vishnu Devananda is a fool. If somebody in his own organization, his own disciple can deceive him, then what integrity has he got and what consciousness? He should drop being a Master, he should stop initiating people. He has lost all right to."

But if you are familiar with happenings in Rajneeshpuram, Osho talked about Sheela deceiving him all those days without his knowledge. His own personal secretary was deceiving him.. Sheela left Rajneeshpuram on 14 Sep 1985, in the whole new series that Osho started called 'From Bondage to Freedom', Osho talked mostly about how Sheela had been deceiving her all the time. This is an obvious example of a fallacy that all human beings have, whether enlightened or not...

Here are some more examples of Osho's cognitively biased criticisms (Note: I always have respect on Osho and the work he has done.. I am familiar with both his extraordinary talent, charisma and his imperfections.. So, this is not to put him in a bad light.. But to show you the reality of enlightenment and point out some of the misconceptions that people have developed overtime)

1. In the initial years, Osho regarded Nostradamus as simply a crazy man. This is what he said about his predictions:

“Nostradamus can be interpreted in any way you want. The sentences are not clear, the grammar is not correct. The words are such that you can fit them into any context you want”.

But just read what he said about the same man later, when it seemed like Nostrademus predictions about a great future teacher fit with Osho:

“Just a few days ago, I was seeing one of the most significant books to be published in this century, ‘Millenium’. It is a deep research into Nostradamus and his predictions. Eighty thousand copies were published – which is very rare – and they were sold within weeks. Now a second publication, a second edition, is happening in America, another is happening in England, and the book is being translated into many other languages – Dutch, German….

Nostradamus was a great mystic with an insight into the future. And you will be surprised to know that in his predictions, I am included. Describing the teacher of the last days of the twentieth century, he gives eight indications. Krishnamurti fulfills five, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi fulfills three, Da Free John fulfills four – and I was amazed that I fulfill all eight.

In this book ‘Millenium’, they have made a chart of the teacher about whom Nostradamus is predicting – that his people will wear red clothes, that he will come from the East, that he will be arrested, that his commune will be destroyed, that flying birds will be his symbol, that his name will mean moon…. Three hundred years ago that man was seeing something that fits perfectly with me – my name means “the moon.” And in their chart they have declared me the teacher of the last part of the twentieth century.”

Obviously, when Osho found this as boosting his superiority, he regarded the same man as mystic.

2. Initially Osho didn’t criticize S.N Goenka and even asked his disciples to attend a Vipassana retreat by Goenka. But once Osho heard that Goenka in an interview had said that Osho was his student before, Osho started criticizing S.N Goenka so harshly.

3. Osho always considered J.Krishnamurti as enlightened. When he heard that J.K had criticized him recently, Osho immediately reacted to it in his next discourse. He said that J.K was just in the border of enlightenment and is not enlightened yet. He also made the same statement in his last book Zen Manifesto.

 

Also, from the link you sent me regarding Ramakrishna (http://www.bengalcuisine.in/ram-krishna), it is obvious that the incident that Osho quotes is fabricated (I don't think it is wrong... But I wanted to show how Sadhguru used Osho's examples but didn't endorse him or talk about him at all)..

1. Ramakrishna fasted for 8 days before dying.. So, it is obvious that Ramakrishna did not stop eating just three days before, as it is narrated by Sadhguru and Osho.

2. Ramakrishna did not die in spite of not being able to eat when he had cancer... So it is not true that he has to rely on the food or desire for the food to keep his body alive..

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by Shanmugam

[Garuda]

On 2017-5-11 at 8:49 PM, Shanmugam said:

Let me ask you this first... how would you define enlightenment?

1 Sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi This is the state of the jnani who has finally and irrevocably eliminated his ego. Sahaja
means ‘natural’ and nirvikalpa means ‘no differences’. A jnani in this state is able to function naturally in the world,
just as any ordinary person does. Knowing that he is the Self, the sahaja jnani sees no difference between himself and
others and no difference between himself and the world. For such a person, everything is a manifestation of the
indivisible Self.

[Shanmugam]

@Garuda  This definition by Ramana states how a jnani sees the reality...

By looking at someone or his behavior, you can never say if they see the reality this way.. So obviously, you can never say if someone is enlightened or not.. So, why do you think that Osho was not enlightened? How would you know?

[Prabhaker]

8 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

Osho quotes is fabricated

I think you are missing something, what difference will it make if quote is fabricated or true ? We have even used mythical creatures to give the message. 

Osho's spoke many contradictory things, many lies, many illogical things. Do you want to learn correct history or science from Osho ? 

There are more than 8000 thousand hours of discourses of Osho, do you think he was interested in stuffing you with great knowledge?

People are memorizing Gita, Quran , Bible claiming that these are the words of God, people are interpenetrating Quran , analyzing it, claiming that everything written in the book is correct. Let us assume everything spoken by a master is historically or scientifically correct, will it transform you ?

 Osho said that

“I don't speak to teach something; I speak to create something. These are not lectures; these are simply a device for you to become silent, because if you are told to become silent without making any effort you will find great difficulty.”

" My words keep you awake, and just between the words I give you gaps. And those are the real, essential things. Waiting for another word, you have to listen to silence.

I use Osho's audio and video to enter into meditation, not that I learn something from them. His discourses are meant to confuse you and give you the taste of meditation, if you know how to listen, you can use them a tool. 

[Prabhaker]

10 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

"Somebody in Vishnu Devananda's own organization has been deceiving him for years.... It is good that Vishnu Devananda has confessed that somebody in his own organization was deceiving him, but what does it show? It shows one thing: that Vishnu Devananda is a fool.

We can't understand the ways of enlightened masters.

Judas betrayed Jesus, what does it show ? Jesus is a fool ? 

It is only through the crucifixion that Jesus’ message has lived in the world.

[Shanmugam]

9 hours ago, Prabhaker said:

I think you are missing something, what difference will it make if quote is fabricated or true ? We have even used mythical creatures to give the message. 

Ha ha.. please stop getting preachy and just parroting Osho for everything.... I am familiar with almost everything that Osho said and I made it very clear that I also went through a transformation... Now I can kind of predict all the replies you would ever give me because you are just going to repeat Osho's words.. And I know what Osho would usually respond with for many questions...

When I said Osho fabricated the story, i didn't mean to say that he was doing something wrong. I already made it very clear in my post.. In fact, Osho fabricated things by  adding more spice and color and also making those stories in such a way which will enable him to convey what he intended to say.. That was his way... He himself said that many times..

You are asking me what difference it would make if it is fabricated or true... Nothing! I don't do things just because it is going to  make a difference.. I do things if I enjoy doing it, period... I enjoy this discussion and hence I am sharing my views... It is not that I have a problem with it and trying to solve it.

And you seem to be doing something that Osho would never approve of.. You are simply parroting Osho. Osho was against any kind of parroting..

Do you remember something that Osho always used to say?.. "“It is said that if you meet the Buddha on the Way, kill him".. He said that to make sure that we don't make concepts out of Osho's words... Osho's guidance helped me to get rid of my preconceived notions and see the reality the way it is but I actually ended up getting stuck with Osho's words at one point. Then I had to make a huge effort to get rid of them.. In other words, I 'killed' Osho... (said in the context of the quote 'if you meet the Buddha on the Way, kill him' ).. You will have to eventually do it at some point.. Because you seem to have got stuck with the words of Osho and literally trying to imitate him...

You are asking me '"you think he was interested in stuffing you with great knowledge?....".. What made you to think that is what I thought? I know very well that he was not interested in feeding people with knowledge and make them into scholars.. I am familiar with all his contradictions.. So, I would appreciate if you stop preaching..I don't derive my identity from knowledge and I don't depend on the knowledge or anything else to define me... I don't even have to rely on an identity for fulfillment. I have crossed the boundaries of things which kept me in imprisonment..

[Prabhaker]

1 minute ago, Shanmugam said:

Osho was against any kind of parroting..

I am not Osho, I love parroting !