---
section: Library
booktitle: "From Death to Deathlessness"
booktype: "Discourses"
bookcode: "DLESS"
dategiven: "02 September 1985 am"
place: " in Rajneeshmandir"
chapternum: "Chapter #28"
chaptertitle: "Education is amoral"
acode: "8509020"
shorttitle: "DLESS28"
audio: "Yes"
video: "Yes"
esttime: "110mins"
displaytitle: "From Death to Deathlessness: Chapter #28"
---

```style
.sutra {
  font-style: italic;
  white-space: pre-wrap !important;
}
```
<!--This file is automatically generated. Do not edit!-->
<p class="question">BELOVED OSHO,
RECENTLY, IN A RADIO ADDRESS, PRESIDENT REAGAN URGED PARENTS TO GET INVOLVED IN THEIR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION BY INSISTING SCHOOLS TEACH ETHICS, MORALITY AND VALUES ALONG WITH THE THREE R'S. HE SAID, "TO ME, A VALUE-FREE EDUCATION IS A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS." ADDRESSING STUDENTS, REAGAN SAID, "YOU ARE NOT ONLY STUDYING FOR YOURSELF, BUT FOR YOUR FAMILY, YOUR COMMUNITY, YOUR COUNTRY, AND YOUR GOD."
OSHO, IS THIS WHAT EDUCATION IS ALL ABOUT? WOULD YOU KINDLY SHARE WITH US YOUR VISION OF EDUCATION?</p>


Ronald Reagan is not aware of what he is talking about. Education, to be authentic, must be value-free. It should not give you a certain kind of morality, ethics. It should not give you a belief in God and other similar lies.


Education's whole purpose is in the very word "education." The root meaning of the word "education" is: to draw out. Whatever is your potential, education is to help it come out of you, from the seed to the flowers. It is not the purpose of education to mold you into a certain pattern -- that's what Reagan is saying.


These words are vague. Let us start with "God", because everything else is dependent on the concept of God. If every educational system schools, colleges, universities teaches God, that means they don't teach you to think, they don't teach you to doubt, they don't teach you to experience. They teach you to believe in something you do not know.


If that is not hypocrisy, then what else can be hypocritical?


Education cannot be concerned with God, because God is the biggest lie invented by the priests. Moreover, almost half of the world does not believe in God. Communists don't believe in God, Atheists don't believe in God, Buddhists don't believe in God, Jainas don't believe in God. It is almost half the population of the world. What are you going to do with these people?


Are you going to deprive them of education, just the way the scout leaders have expelled their best scout because he refused to sign a paper in which he was to declare that he believes in God?
He said, "I do not know. How can I believe?"


Just a fourteen-year-old child has more sense than Ronald Reagan. What he says has sincerity, authenticity:"I do not know, so how can I believe? Give me experience and you will not need to ask me to believe."


Rather than respecting him, rather than respecting his independence and freedom of thought, he was expelled.


Now, half of the world does not believe in God. What are you going to do with these people in your education system? Expel them? Then better be finished with all educational systems and just teach in your churches!


Nobody has ever been able to prove the existence of God. For thousands of years hundreds of theologians have been trying to find some way to prove God, but no proof has been found.


Education is the search for truth. I cannot start with any belief. Its basis has to be doubt.


Doubt is a tremendously powerful instrument of your intelligence. Doubt everything until you come to a point where doubt is no longer possible. The moment you experience, doubt falls by itself. Before that, to start with belief is to remain retarded.


Reagan is retarded, and he wants the whole humanity to remain retarded. I don't think his mental age is more than thirteen. And if he has any suspicion, he can come here: our therapists and psychologists can give him an exact, accurate estimate of his mental age. Only a retarded person can talk in such a way.


So the first thing is, education has to free from any belief.


And what kind of belief are you going to give? There are so many gods: the Christian God, the Hindu God, the Mohammedan God-and there is no way to decide which one is the right God. In fact, they are all just imaginations.


When science comes to a truth, then all over the world the truth is the same. If water evaporates at a hundred degrees centigrade, it does not matter who is boiling it -- Hindu, Mohammedan, Christian; in England, in Germany, or Italy: it will evaporate exactly at a hundred degrees. That is something true.


But the Hindu God will look very strange to the Christians, the Christian God looks laughable to the Hindus, the Mohammedan God has his own uniqueness and the Jewish God is totally different. Which God are you going to teach?


But Reagan's whole effort is to change this country from freedom, democracy, and reduce it to a Christian country... against the communists, a Christian land. He is trying in every way to propagate Christianity, which is one of the most primitive religions. In comparison to Buddhism it stands nowhere: a third-class religion.


And what values? Just the word "value" is meaningless. What values are you going to teach?


The first of all the values is freedom, which you are denying. You are forcing students to believe in God. There is no value higher than freedom.


What values are you going to teach them? Love? But how can a man who believes in a Christian God love the Jewish God, love the Jews who crucified Jesus? For two thousand years Christians have been destroying Jews in every possible way., And the Mohammedan God has no similarity to the Christian God....
If you want to teach values, then teach freedom.


Teach how to think, how to think clearly, and how to come to your own decisions. Those decisions should not be imposed on you.


Reagan says, "A value-free education is almost a contradiction in terms. Education cannot be value-free."
Education itself is the ultimate value.
There is no need for other values to be taught.


To educate a person means to sharpen his intelligence, to make him more centered, to bring his potential to its flowering.


Remember, his potential has to be brought into flowering not Ronald Reagan's, not anybody else's. Every individual is so unique that you cannot mold all the individuals alike, make them similar. That will be the greatest destruction -- destruction of individuality.


Education itself is the value -- to give the person total freedom to inquire, to doubt; total freedom to grow according to his nature, not according to some pattern given by some prophet, messiah, savior.


Education means making an individual so strong that he does not need any God, that he does not need any church, that he does not need any prayer; he can stand on his own feet and he can find his own way.


Certainly education is devoted to the search for truth. And these are the real values: truth, freedom, authenticity, responsibility.


But politicians and priests go on changing the meanings of words. Reagan is saying, "They should be taught responsibility for the family, for the community, for the nation, for God." So that they are not to be responsible towards themselves; they have to be responsible towards everything else.


A person who is not responsible towards himself, how can he be responsible to anything else? He knows no art, no taste, no experience of responsibility. And to be responsible for oneself may not be necessarily to be responsible to the family. The family may be wrong. The family may be believing in all kinds of lies.


It does not mean necessarily to be responsible to the community, because the community is in a mess, almost insane.


It does not mean, it cannot mean to be responsible to the nation. This idiotic idea of responsibility to the nation has been the cause of dividing humanity. And the basic root of all the murders, wars, massacres in the whole of history: responsibility to your nation.


Responsibility has to be something bigger, not so small -- family, community, nation. Responsibility has to be towards yourself, and then it spreads towards the whole humanity. Then it goes on spreading and growing towards all life. Then still it goes on spreading, towards the whole existence. But first the basic seed has to be there.


They deny that. They don't talk about responsibility towards yourself, because that is dangerous. If Americans were responsible towards themselves they would have refused to kill innocent people in Vietnam. But they killed poor innocent people. They had done no harm to you -- but responsibility to your nation...!


It is a very tricky game. Where is the nation? In the name of the nation, it is responsibility towards the politicians. So whatsoever the politicians say you have to follow it, you cannot question it. And who are your politicians?


Adolf Hitler teaches Germans to be responsible to the nation. If all the Germans were responsible towards themselves there would have been no second world war. They would have simply refused to kill innocent people: "Why? Why invade, why destroy? -- just for the glory of this madman, Adolf Hitler?" But they were never taught responsibility. They were taught, in the name of responsibility, something false: responsibility to the nation.


And what is a nation? Just lines on the map. The earth remains undivided, humanity remains undivided. In fact the whole existence is an undivided, organic whole.


The sun is far away. It takes eight and a half minutes for the rays of the sun to reach to the earth. Light travels with a tremendous speed, so don't think eight and a half minutes is a small phenomenon. Light travels one hundred and eighty-six thousand miles per second. Multiply it by sixty -- that is one minute; Multiply it again by eight and a half, and you will know the distance.


But if the sun does not rise one day we will all be dead. Without the sun, neither man nor animals nor trees -- nothing can live. It is the sun that is the source of our life, warmth. We are not disconnected. And the sun makes no distinction, that he has to give more life to Christians and less life to the Jews.


Existence knows no divisions. We are continuously joined in invisible ways.


You are breathing -- just for a few minutes don't breathe, and you will know how difficult it is not to breathe. Breathing joins you with the atmosphere around you which is invisible. And breathing is needed by everybody -- it does not depend on your religion, on your nation.


In fact it depends on trees, because trees exhale oxygen and inhale carbon dioxide. You inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. That creates the balance. But foolish man has gone on cutting trees, not knowing that he is cutting his own life. Who is going to give him fresh oxygen? And who is going to take his carbon dioxide? -- because if the air around you is filled with carbon dioxide, you will be dead.
Everything is related to every other thing.


A man who is alert, aware, intelligent, responsible towards himself, will find a tremendous responsibility towards the whole of life, towards the whole existence, because it is all contributing to you. Without it you are not going to live.


But Reagan wants you to be responsible towards God who has not done anything. Even a tree is doing far more than your God.


Hindus are better because they worship trees. At least the trees go on giving you oxygen -- they deserve some respect from you -- and they take  carbon dioxide. That's why when you burn a tree you get coal; that coal contains carbon dioxide.


Hindus look far more responsible. They worship rivers, they worship trees, because without water you cannot exist, without air you cannot exist. The rivers and the trees are giving you more than any God. In fact nobody knows what His contribution is, what He has given to humanity. In fact He has always been against humanity -- if He is anywhere.


He prohibited Adam and Eve from having the two most important things: wisdom and eternal life.


And this fellow, Ronald Reagan, is telling you to believe in this God who is not in favor of man becoming wise, who is not in favor of his coming to know the secrets of eternal life. Is this God your friend or your enemy?


No, no true education system has anything to do with God.


And what values? What responsibility? There is only one responsibility -- that is towards ourselves. And out of that responsibility you will never act wrongly.


If your family is going to do something wrong, you will not be part of the family. You will tell them, "This is wrong, and I am going to fight against you." If your nation is going wrong, your responsibility will be that this should be stopped, immediately stopped.


Just two days ago, in Texas, they made homosexuality illegal, a crime. One million people in Texas are homosexual. Suddenly, within a day, one million people have become criminals. That law is not going to stop them, or change them. Law has never done anything like that. It has not been able to change any thief. It has not been able to change any criminal.


In fact, your jails are training grounds for criminals. When some amateur thief enters prison, there he finds master thieves, who ask him, "Why did you get caught?" He learns all the tricks, because the question is not of stealing, the question is of being caught. The crime is not that you stole, the crime is that you were caught. There are many thieves, many murderers free in the society, because they are clever and cunning enough not to be caught.


One of my teachers used to be always the head examiner. He used to arrange the whole examination system in the school. He was the oldest, most experienced teacher, and certainly wise. He would come into the class and he would say, "Remember one thing: if you are copying from somebody else, or if you are hiding some book in your clothes, I have nothing against you -- unless you are caught. Copying from others, copying from books, notes, is perfectly okay, but don't be caught. So I'll give you two minutes to think. Within two minutes -- I will keep my eyes closed -- you can bring all your notes that you are hiding in your clothes, put them on the table. After two minutes, if you are caught your life is ruined."


And he would close his eyes and people would start bringing their notes -- "This man is strange, because he is saying it is not a crime to copy, the crime is to be caught. And he is warning you beforehand, because you cannot escape."


He said, "My whole life I have been the head examiner in this school, and I know every trick that you can manage -- and I will find it out. Two minutes of total freedom for you: I will not say anything, just put everything on the table. And when you leave the examination hall you can take your notes back home. After two minutes you will be in danger, constant danger. Nobody has been able up to now to escape without being caught."


He was right. He was saying the truth about the whole world of criminals. Crime is not a problem; the problem is that you are an amateur, that you don't know how to do a certain crime, you get caught.


But in the prison there are experts who have been to prison many times, and each time they have learned more. There are master thieves who can teach you everything. The amateur, by the time he comes out of the prison, is no longer an amateur. Now he is perfectly educated and graduated from the jail, it will be difficult to catch him anymore.


In fact, thieves and other criminals by and by start feeling at home in the prison, more at ease. They really want to be caught for a few months; otherwise they are busy continuously no rest period, no holidays, no weekends. They want once in a while to be caught, sent to jail for one year or eight months. There they can rest, there they can refresh their education. It is a refresher course, they can meet masters.


I have heard: A man entered a prison cell in the darkness. He saw another figure sitting in the far corner. The man in the cell asked him, "How many years?"


He said, "They have really been tough with me. I have been imprisoned for twelve years."


That man from the corner said, "Then you keep your bed near the door, because I am here for my whole life. You will be going earlier than me, so why bother coming deep into the room? You just keep your bed by the door. Twelve years? I have been here for twenty years already! And you think they have been tough with you -- you are foolish. Rest for twelve years, learn more techniques. And I am here, I can tell you everything that is needed for a thief not to be caught."


What values are you going to give to your children in the schools? Are you going to make them murderers in the name of responsibility for the nation? Are you going to make them murderers as part of their duty towards their religion? No, these are not values to be taught. And politicians should not poke their noses in the educational system. Education has to be completely free from the state, from the government.


Education has to be devoted to freedom, to individuality.


Education is the time when a person should learn silence, serenity, peace. These are the values. These are his responsibilities: he should learn sensitivity, aesthetics, the beauty of the sunrise and the sunset and the stars, the flowers, the people. He should learn how to be natural and not be diverted by any vested interest, from his nature -- that is his responsibility.


No priest should be allowed inside any educational institution, because whatever the priest says is going to be against you.


He will tell you that celibacy is great, that unless you are celibate you will not enter into the kingdom of God. And celibacy is absolutely unnatural. Through celibacy, they have turned the whole humanity into a perverted crowd.


If one million homosexuals are confirmed in a very, very orthodox and traditional state, Texas, what about the advanced states, more educated, more progressive, more contemporary?


Now, who are the politicians to decide? And this is a dangerous step, because the homosexuals will remain homosexuals, it is just that they will go underground. And whenever anything goes underground, it goes beyond your control. Then those homosexuals are not going to be tested as to whether they have AIDS or not, and they will go on spreading AIDS.


But the politicians think they are fulfilling their duty and responsibility towards the country. This is not responsibility; it is an absolutely irresponsible act on the part of the politicians, the courts, the appeal courts. Whatever they have done in Texas is an indication of what is going to happen in every state. And that will endanger everybody's life.


You will never know who is a homosexual because nobody will admit that he is a homosexual. You will never know who is carrying AIDS -- and AIDS can be spread so easily: by kissing, by tears... perhaps they will discover even by perspiration. You shake hands with somebody who is perspiring and you get it. Any liquid flowing out of the body can carry the virus of AIDS.


This is not responsibility. This idea of making homosexuality illegal is a great irresponsible act.


And the most strange thing is that all this homosexuality is produced by Christians and other religions themselves.


Just the other day I was informed that one very well-known bishop is going to be arrested because so many parents have reported that he has been having sexual relationships with small children. In fact it is very difficult for poor bishops, popes, not to be homosexual. You don't allow them to come closer to women.


And sending these priests to teach about God, about responsibilities towards religion, nation, family, is dangerous. These people may be carrying AIDS. All your priests have to be very carefully tested because most probably they are all homosexuals -- they have no other way. They should be kept away from children as much as possible. But parents are taking their children to the priests, priests are going to the schools to teach religion; and these are dangerous people.


My idea of education is that it should help you get rid of all beliefs, because all beliefs are hindrances in your journey towards truth. You should be freed from Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Mohammedanism. By the time you come out of the university you should be simply a human being, responsible to yourself and to the whole universe.


But Ronald Reagan would not like that, that you are responsible towards the whole universe, because the universe includes the Soviet Union too. The universe includes Hindus, Buddhists, Mohammedans.


No, to him the fundamentalist Christians are the only people who know the truth; everybody else is wrong. So when he talks about values, hidden behind the beautiful word "values" he wants every educational system to teach you the values that fundamentalist Christians think are right.


Certainly I don't think Ronald Reagan will teach vegetarianism. In his values, vegetarianism cannot be included. I don't think he will teach everybody that the cow is your mother and of course, the bull is your father. But if a Hindu priest teaches values, the cow is the mother. Then he will teach totally different things -- that cow dung is holy.... That's why I said yesterday, "All bullshit is spiritual." If cow dung is holy, then what about your father, the bull? Bullshit is holier. He is not going to teach the values that Mohammedans think are values. Mohammedans say that each man has the right to have four wives. And the duty of the wife and the responsibility for the woman is simple: to go on producing children and keep your husband happy, satisfied sexually.


That is the whole religion for the woman... in a way simple. No other discipline, no other ritual -- just keep your husband sexually fulfilled and go on producing children, because God wants the whole world to become Mohammedan. And obviously a man with four wives will create more children than a man with only one wife. Mohammedans say that she can do these two things, then the woman automatically enters into paradise; nothing else has to be bothered about. But your husband is your master and you are a slave -- this is a Mohammedan value.


So what values is Ronald Reagan going to teach? -- because in America there are Mohammedans, there are Hindus, there are Jews, there are Christians, there are Buddhists. And there are my red people who don't believe in any religion, who don't believe in any God, who don't believe in any responsibility to any nation -- the Soviet Union included. Towards whom are they going to be responsible?


No, all these responsibilities are arbitrary. The only authentic responsibility is towards your own potential, your own intelligence and awareness -- and to act accordingly.
Values have not to be imposed on you.
They should grow with your awareness, in you.


Education at least should be kept free from all kinds of criminals. And politicians are the worst criminals in the world. A man murders somebody, he is a criminal. And Adolf Hitler kills almost ten million people and he is not a criminal. Alexander -- nobody knows how many people he killed, but he is "Alexander the Great." He is not a criminal.


Your whole history is the history of great criminals! Small criminals -- somebody stealing a few dollars, somebody stealing your clothes, somebody stealing your car -- these are criminals. They will suffer indignities in the court, by the police, then in the jail. And your greatest criminals? -- their names will be remembered in history as great men.


My people cannot be responsible to any nation. We claim the whole earth as ours! And we claim nature as part of us, and we are part of nature. Our responsibility is to remain organically whole with nature.


And what are our values? Freedom is a value; doubt is a value; skepticism is a value; agnosticism is a value. I don't think Reagan will agree with any of these values. Who is going to decide the values?


To me there is nothing greater than doubt, because it can lead you to everything that is true. There is nothing more criminal than belief, because it is going to lead you into more and more lies. It will make you blind. All beliefs are blind. And to make people blind cannot be called a value; cannot be called education.


Education is tremendously valuable. It has to teach you respect for yourself -- which all the religions have destroyed. It has to teach you acceptance of yourself -- which all the religions have denied. It has to teach you love for yourself -- because a man who cannot love himself cannot love anybody else in the world. You have to start with yourself. If you are full of love for yourself, you can share it.


But all the religions are against self-love; they call it selfishness. They want you to love everybody else except yourself. To me, just the opposite is a value, because I know that a man who is not full of light within himself cannot share his light with others. He has none to share. This is the problem around the world.


Every partner in a couple is expecting the other to love him. The husband wants the wife to love him; the wife wants the husband to love her -- and both are unaware that they don't know the art of love, because they never loved themselves. They are going to quarrel, fight and destroy each other's life. I teach you clearly to be selfish.


It is natural to be selfish. And the miracle is, if you are really selfish, out of your selfishness there will be so much abundance of intelligence, love, respect, that you are bound to share it with others. Because the economics of the inner world is: the more you share, the more you have. Naturally, you want to share it more and more. Why only to Americans? Why not to the Canadians? Why not to the Brazilians? Why not to the whole world?


A small human heart is capable of filling the whole universe with love. But first it has to learn the art; and you have to begin with yourself.


Ronald Reagan is trying, in every way, somehow to impose Christianity on America. First, he wanted prayers to be introduced in the schools. The Supreme Court refused ; they ruled that prayer cannot be introduced because there are Jews, there are Mohammedans, there are different sects of Christians. What prayer? And on what grounds?


In fact, the Supreme Court itself is committing a crime by keeping the Bible inside the court for people to take the oath. And the Bible is so ugly and so pornographic and so full of lies, that to take the oath on the Bible.... Then what is wrong with taking an oath on the magazine PLAYBOY? At least it is colorful, more sensitive to beauty. Before taking the oath you can at least look into it, and whatever is there that is true, you can take the oath on it. To keep the Bible in the court is against democracy, against freedom, against truth.


But even the Supreme Court could not manage to accept prayer for all educational institutions. Reagan was very much hoping that it would for the simple reason that a strange coincidence has happened.... The American Constitution functions in a different way than the constitution in any other country. In India, the Supreme Court judge reaches to the Supreme Court by seniority, by experience. From high courts to the Supreme Court, a very few people are able to reach. But in America, the constitution is such that the president appoints the Supreme Court judges.


The idea in the mind of those people who made the constitution was that there are nine Supreme Court judges. Once in a while one person will retire and the president can appoint one new person. And the appointment is for his whole life, till he retires, nobody will be able to pressurize him -- even the president cannot pressurize him. Once he is appointed, he is appointed. Until his resignation, retirement, nobody can put any pressure on him. This was a good idea, because in seniority there are possibilities of pressure.


In the Indian constitution, the prime minister or the president is to choose, because sometimes a few people are equally senior. And they have also the power to choose someone who is not senior, but is more intelligent, more fair, more capable of being a Supreme Court judge. But that way you can pressurize people.


To avoid pressure from politicians, the American idea was good. But they had never conceived that there would be a time when five judges would retire at the same time. This could happen now, Reagan might appoint five judges of his own choice. Out of nine, five could be his people. That's why he was absolutely certain that whatever he wants now can be done; the Supreme Court will not disturb anything. But he forgot completely that those judges, once appointed, are no longer in any way indebted to him. And the Supreme Court proved its freedom; the Court rejected the president's idea of prayer.


Then he tried another thing -- that all Christian schools, colleges, universities, should be given the same financial support as is given to public institutions. The Supreme Court refused that too. But politicians are very cunning. He has found a way to bypass the Supreme Court.


The Supreme Court has decided that the government cannot give financial support to religious institutions, so now what is he doing? He is now proposing, "We will not give support to religious institutions, we will give money to the parents. And now it is their freedom to send their children to any school." You see the cunningness? The parent gets the money and he is free to send his children to a Catholic school. Finally the money reaches the Catholic school.


He has insulted the Supreme Court. He has found a way to do what he was not able to do directly; now he will do it indirectly. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to prevent this. Financial support has to be given to the institutions, not to the parents, because who knows what the parents are going to do with that financial support?


There are so many Christian schools, colleges, universities... all the parents of those students will be getting support and the money will go to the religious institutions.


The Supreme Court has to see the point, that the president has betrayed the law of the country, has betrayed the constitution of the country.


And these people go on talking about God, values, responsibilities. They are the most irresponsible people. They are the most godless people -- because just to believe in God does not make you divine, holy.


I am reminded of a very beautiful statement of H.G. Wells. He was writing the history of the world, and during that writing he came upon Gautam Buddha, and he was in a difficulty. Gautam Buddha says there is no God. But H.G. Wells was a very sensitive, intelligent person; he could not call Gautam Buddha an atheist. So what did he say? He said, "Gautam Buddha is the most godless person, yet the most godly." That is true. If any man on this earth can be said to be godly, then that man has to be Gautam Buddha. But he never believed in God. You can be divine, you can have the quality of godliness, without having any God. And you can believe in God and you can do everything that is supposed to be done by the devil.


Politicians go on following the devil, and go on praying to God. Perhaps they need God to forgive them, because whatever they are doing is criminal. They need a God absolutely; otherwise, who is going to forgive them? They follow the devil, and they pray to God -- a simple strategy.


My idea of education is very clear. All institutions should be free from politics, from religion. And religion should be allowed to have educational institutions, because they are destroying people's minds. Educational systems should be free from any pressure -- either from politics or from religion. They should have an autonomous, independent existence. They should decide themselves what has to be done so that every child who enters the world of education blossoms to his full potential. He is not to be molded, he is not to be ordered. He has to be awakened.


Prayer is not needed, but meditation is certainly needed. And meditation has nothing to do with religion. Meditation is simply a scientific method, exactly the same as science -- their areas are just different.


Science begins with doubt; meditation also begins with doubt. The method of science is observation of objects, the objective world; and the method of meditation is to observe the inside world. Science experiments with objects; meditation is the experience of your interiority, your subjectivity.


In fact science has two wings: one, moving into the outside universe; the other, moving into the inside consciousness.


Meditation should be absolutely necessary in every educational system, because meditation is not Hindu, not Christian, not Buddhist. Meditation has nothing to do with any religion. It has nothing to do with any belief. Meditation does not require you to believe in God first, heaven and hell, Jesus Christ as the only begotten son. It needs no belief of any kind.


Meditation is an inquiry, a search, a pilgrimage towards your own center. And the person who knows himself cannot do anything wrong. That is an impossibility. The person who realizes himself needs no morality. Morality is needed by blind people.


Meditation gives you eyes to see. With your eyes, you cannot do anything immoral. It is just impossible. There is no question of choice -- to be moral or to be immoral. There is no question of choice.


My definition of morality is different than any definition that has ever been given. Christians have a certain morality which may not be acceptable to Buddhists. In Christian morality alcohol is not prohibited. In fact particularly on Christian holy days, you have to drink alcohol -- even Jesus Christ was doing that. Not only that, he was committing such a crime by turning water into alcohol. And you call it a miracle!


If somebody turns water into marijuana , will it be a miracle? And alcohol is far worse than any LSD or marijuana. I would have called it a miracle if Jesus had turned alcohol into water. That would be something moral. But he was drinking, his people were drinking. No Buddhist can accept alcohol as moral.


Jainas cannot eat in the night -- that is immoral. The whole world is immoral according to them. The most orthodox Jainas do not even drink water in the night. In a hot country like India, in the long nights of summer, it is torture: you feel so thirsty, but you have to wait for sunrise. What is morality? And who is going to decide it?


Jainas, Buddhists, brahmins -- all are vegetarian. To be a non-vegetarian is the worst crime that one can commit. You are eating meat, destroying life?


Who is going to decide morality? No, these definitions have not in any way come to a conclusion. But my definition is totally different.


My definition is: whatever you do out of your meditation is moral. And whatever you do in your spiritual sleep, unaware, is immoral. It may look moral to other people. You may be donating to a church, to a synagogue, and everybody will say it is moral. But I will not say it is moral unless your action comes out of awareness -- and awareness is a by-product of meditation.


Every student coming out of the university should be able to meditate. And that's enough; he needs no commandments, he needs no moralities. He will be free to act, and he will always act rightly. It is impossible for a meditative person to act wrongly.


It is as impossible as a man with eyes trying to get out through the wall. A man with eyes will get out through the door.  And it is not even a question that he will stand and think, "Should I go through the door or through the wall?" But a man without eyes may try to go through the wall. And he is not committing a crime, he is simply blind. He need not be punished, he needs compassion.


Teach meditation to every student; teach meditation to every prisoner; teach meditation to every senator.


Make it a point that unless a man is fully aware, you are not going to choose him as your president or your prime minister. That should be his qualification. Only then can this world become a beautiful garden of human values, can it become full of the fragrance of life. And to me, that is godliness.
<p class="question">BELOVED OSHO,
MY MOTHER COMPARES YOU TO A ROCK STAR, AND ALSO WANTS TO KNOW WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU RAISING YOUR HANDS AND ALL OF US GOING BANANAS, AND THE POLACK POPE RAISING HIS HANDS AND MILLIONS OF CATHOLICS RESPONDING IN SIMILAR FASHION.</p>


This is really great!
I am a poor, ordinary man, and you are calling me a rock star. Thank you for the compliment!


As far as Catholics are concerned and the polack pope, the Catholics don't go bananas, because they are already. They are born bananas.


Yes, my people go bananas. They can, because they are not bananas. And once in a while to go bananas is beautiful, relaxing, rejoicing.


Nothing is wrong in going bananas, but to be born a banana -- that is ugly. Then you don't have even the freedom once in a while to go bananas; you are just a slave.


So please remember, when the polack pope raises his hands, those bananas are not going bananas: they are bananas!
When I raise my hands, my people go bananas. And until they go bananas I don't leave the stage!
Okay?
			

> [!info]
> Copyright 1964-1990 Osho (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh)
>