[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
difference how old you are, fifty-six or sixteen? The sixteen-year-old has to enter right now and the
fifty-six-year-old has to enter right now; both have to enter right now. And the sixteen years are not
helpful, neither are fifty-six years helpful. There are different problems for both, that I know. When
a
sixteen-year-old young man wants to enter into meditation or into God his problem is different from
that of a man who is fifty-six. What is the difference? - if you weigh them finally, the difference is
quantitative, not qualitative.
The sixteen-year-old has only sixteen years of past; in that way he is in a better situation than the
man
who is fifty-six; he has a fifty-six years past. He has a big load to drop, many attachments: fifty-six
years of life, many experiences, much knowledge. The sixteen-year-old has not that much to drop.
He has a little load, less luggage, a small suitcase - just a small boy's suitcase. The fifty-six-year-old
has much luggage. This way the younger is in a better situation.
But there is another thing: the old man has no more future. A fifty-six-year-old, if he is going to be
alive seventy years on the earth, has only fourteen years left - no more future, no more imagination,
no more dreaming. There is not much space. Death is coming. The sixteen-year-old has a long
future, much imagination, many dreams.
The past is small but the future is big for the young; for the old the past is big, the future is small.
On
the whole it is the same: it is seventy years, both have to drop seventy years. For the young, sixteen
years in the past, the remaining years in the future: the future has also to be dropped as much as the
past. So finally, in the final reckoning, there is no difference.
There is every hope for you, Anand Tejas. And because you have asked the question, the work has
already started. You have become alert about your priest, politician, scholar - that's good. To
become aware of a disease, to know what it is, is half the treatment.
And you have become a sannyasin, you have taken a step into the unknown already. If you are
going
to be with me, you will have to say goodbye to your priest, your politician, your scholar. But I feel
confident that you can do it, otherwise you would not have even asked. You have felt that it is
meaningless, all that you have been doing up to now is meaningless - you have felt it. That feeling
is
of tremendous value.
So I will not say just be patient and wait for the next life, no. I am never in favor of postponement;
all
postponement is dangerous and is very tricky. If you say, "I will postpone - in this life nothing can
be
done," you are avoiding a situation. Everything can be done! You are simply pretending. And this is
a
trick to save yourself: "Now what can be done? I am so old."
Even on the deathbed, at the last moment, the change can happen. Even when the person is dying,
he
can open his eye for a single moment...and the change can happen. He can drop the whole past
before death comes in and he can die utterly fresh. And he is dying in a new way: he is dying as a
sannyasin, he is dying in deep meditation. And to die in deep meditation is not to die at all, because
he will be dying with full awareness of the deathless.
It can happen in a single moment! So please don't postpone, don't say: "Had I best just live out the
rest of this life in patience...?'" No, you drop it right now. It is worthless! - why carry it, why wait?
And if you wait, the next life is not going to be any different. That's why I say there is no hope for
the
priest and the politician and the scholar. The next life will start from where you end this life. Again
the
priest, again the politician, again the scholar. You will have the next life in continuity with this life.
How is it going to be different? It will be the same wheel turning again.
And this time I am available to you. Who knows? - next time I may not be available. This time,
somehow, groping in the dark, you have stumbled upon me. Next time, one never knows.... This
time you took fifty-six years to come to a man through whom revolution is possible. Who knows,
next time you may become more burdened, certainly you will become more burdened - the past
life's
burden, and the next life's burden.... You may take seventy years to come, or to find a master.
That's why I say there is no hope for the politician and the priest and the scholar in the future either.
But for you there is every hope, because you are not a priest and you are not a scholar and you are
not a politician. How can you be? These are things that gather around, but the innermost core
remains always free. Don't think of yourself in terms of being a frog, be a bee!
The third question:
Osho, What role should charity play in the life of a sannyasin?
The question is not from a sannyasin, it is from Philip Martin. The first thing, Philip Martin:
become a
sannyasin. You should not ask questions about others, that is not gentlemanly; you should ask
questions about yourself.
Be a sannyasin and then ask. But the question is meaningful, so anyway I am going to answer it.
And
I have the feeling that sooner or later Philip Martin will be a sannyasin; even the question shows
some
leaning.
First thing: all the religions of the world have emphasized charity, dhan, too much. And the reason
is
that man has always felt guilty with money. Charity has been preached so much to help man feel a
little less guilty. You will be surprised: in old English there is a word 'gilt' which means money. In
German there is a word geld which means money, and 'gold' is very close by! Guilt, gilt, geld,
gold...somehow deep down a great guilt is involved in money.
Whenever you have money you feel guilty. And it is natural because so many people don't have
money - how can you avoid guilt? Whenever you have money, you know somebody has become
poorer because of you. Whenever you have money, you know somewhere somebody will be
starving, and your bank balance goes on becoming bigger and bigger. Some child will not get the
medicine needed to survive, some woman will not get the medicine; some poor man will die
because
he will not have food. How can you avoid these things? They will be there. The more you have
money, the more these things will be there erupting in your consciousness; you will feel guilty.
Charity is to unburden you from your guilt, so you say, "I am doing something: I am going to open
a
hospital, going to open a college. I give money to this charity fund, to that trust...." You feel a little
happier. The world has lived in poverty, the world has lived in scarcity. Ninety-nine percent of
people have lived a poor life, almost starving and dying, and only one percent of people have lived
with richness, with money: they have always felt guilty. To help them the religions developed the
idea
of charity. It is to rid them of their guilt.
So the first thing I would like to say is: Charity is not a virtue, it is just a help to keep your sanity
intact; otherwise you will go insane. Charity is not a virtue, it is not a punya; it is not that you have
done something good when you do charity. It is only that you repent for all the bad that you have
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]