Bad Osho Quotes

Yes, Osho had armed guards with automatic weapons. No, he wasn’t a cult leader. Nooooo. Uh-uh.

Why do I detest India’s one time best-selling author with over 2,000 publications translated into 44 languages? Because he was an imposter, in a long list of imposters, pretending to be an enlightened guru. Many are reluctant to denounce him because if they do, they lose faith, hope, and may become despondent. If he is a sham, than so may be their cherished beliefs. In order to preserve their beliefs from being tarnished by yet another fake guru, they exonerate him for his crimes and corruption.

Osho was a corrupt and astute businessman who made himself fabulously wealthy by preying on the naive flood of Westerners seeking spirituality. He had a Master’s with a distinction in Philosophy, and taught Philosophy, therefore was perfectly capable of expounding classic Eastern and Western philosophy. The key was to use this knowledge to make a fortune off all of the gullible young Westerners flocking to India, after the example of the Beatles, in search of spirituality and an alternative to what they saw as a stultifying Western fixation on money and security. And who is easier to rip off than people investing everything in being trusting in an effort to become better and more evolved people? Osho (at that time “Bhagwan Rajneesh”) came up with the brilliant formula of releasing them of the bonds of money by having them give it to him.

He declared himself “enlightened” at the tender age of 21, which was a necessary condition he needed to have attained in order to secure naive customers from the West, who wouldn’t know that his better ideas were largely borrowed from classic Hindu texts, and he only tweaked them out to make them more palatable or attractive to young seekers. To timeless Hindu concepts he added an appealing mix of sex, psychotherapy, and materialism. He gave them what they wanted to hear so they’d give him what he wanted to put in the bank. It worked spectacularly for him and dreadfully for them.

There is a lot of apparently sorely needed information out there about how to identify a fake enlightened being, or even a real one. The latter is a much harder job, but for the former we CAN trust some of our fundamental understanding of what it means to be human and participate among our fellow humans. When it comes to moral questions, the defenses for corruption are complex and convoluted, but it’s pretty easy to determine if something is probably wrong. We can apply the simplest test, which is the “golden rule”, “Do onto others as you would have others do unto you.” This gets succinctly translated by parents, when they instruct their children, as, “How would you like it if someone did that to you?” I’ve always believed this and still do. Osho took advantage of the best intentions of people innocently seeking to improve themselves through embracing the good by pretending to be pure goodness himself. He harmed them, and treated them in ways he would not want to have been treated himself. He was an obvious scoundrel and parasite, who has sullied anything good we might find in Eastern philosophy, and helped cast serious doubt on the whole tradition.

Defenders of Osho point to the things he said that ring true for them, or inspired them, and ignore his fondling of his female students’ breasts and nether “chakras”, or his claim to have slept with hundreds of his female followers. They somehow excuse his 93 Rolls Royces – purchased largely with the life savings of his followers – as something different from Saddam Hussein’s palaces, even though they are the obvious accumulations of a megalomaniac. They ignore that when he was trying to start a city in Antelope, Oregon (after moving to the U.S. to evade over 4 million in taxes owed to the Indian government), his top people orchestrated a poisoning campaign that resulted in over 700 cases of acute food poisoning. They put liquid salmonella on salads in salad bars in order to keep people from voting! They also plotted to assassinate key local politicians who got in the way of their establishing a city in Oregon. And what of his armed guards with automatic weapons? If you think I’m making this information up, at least have a look at the Wikipedia page on Osho. It’s all there.

Osho, not surprisingly, went off his nut. Ostensibly because of dental and back pain he took maximal doses of Valium and had spigots installed around his bed for the convenient inhalation of nitrous oxide (laughing gas), which he customarily did in 2-3 sessions a day.

Osho is now a big business, even though he’s dead, and many people still worship him as a living Buddha without bothering to find out anything about him, or look at some of the ridiculous things he said.

Never mind for the moment the good things he said. Anyone who can understand philosophy can do the same. Look at the following beautiful Osho quote:

“You are a leaf on a tree trembling in perpetual fear of turning brown and falling to the ground. This is what you think. But your thinking this is the only problem. You are not the leaf that can be separated from the tree. You are the tree. But you cannot be cut down because you are the ground, the forest, and the sky. It is all one indivisible whole. Your dread is that when the leaf crumbles the light will go out, even though you have only known the light. You are the light. But you are also the leaf. Play your role as the leaf as best you can, but don’t forget that you are the light that animates all. Nothing can harm the light.”

Wow! I think he totally got it! He can’t be a bad person and see that simple truth. Yes he could because I just wrote that myself off the top of my head. The point is that any educated person who could pass a philosophy class, and is familiar with Eastern philosophy, can write this sort of thing.

Let’s make a graphic for it!

J. Sri Bhagovwid spiritual quote

But worse, Osho wrote a lot of garbage that could be rationally dismantled. People accept it as truth because it came from him. But his statements are mere assertions and not arguments. They rely for their authority on his status as a famous, superhuman, holy man, but there is nothing in his actions or any outward sign that he is actually enlightened and not just lying. His actions clearly show he is a clever and immoral manipulator of people for his own personal profit, even if he sometimes says the right thing beautifully. That is the skill of lying.

If you look up information on how to identify a fake guru, Osho deserves every red flag. The False Guru Test is a particularly good guide, though I probably think that because I agree with all 26 of it’s criteria. Just some of the signs Osho is a false guru include:

  1. States his or her own enlightenment
  2. Takes the credit for a particular meditative or healing technique
  3. Lives in total opulence
  4. Presents himself or herself overly fashionably and glamorously
  5. Takes sexual advantage of his or her followers
  6. Gives him or herself outrageous titles
  7. Makes false claims of lineage
  8. Collects a large band of angry ex-followers

Below I’ve compiled some of his offensive, stupid, or embarrassing quotes. Feel absolutely free to share them. I think if people were more aware of his actual actions and his more atrocious thinking, they’d stop praising him and see him for the fraud he really was. I changed the format of the quotes a little while improving it, but they basically all use the same template. Yes, I did make him look evil, and some of the quotes lack sufficient context to be understood completely accurately, but the same is true of most of his quotes shared by his admirers or those making money off of his name, including the ones that use flowers and pastel colors to make him look like a radiant being.

I may add more quotes later. I don’t know how much Osho I can take reading. There are much better sources for Eastern Philosophy, and without the lunacy.

~ Guest post by J. Sri Bhagovwid


57 replies on “Bad Osho Quotes

      1. One of many. There was a Sai Baba, who was revered as an “avatar” or “living God”, who had over 30,000,000 followers all over the world, but who also liked young boys and imposed himself upon them. He is also still highly regarded and quoted incessantly. Oh, and he used to “materialize” objects like rings, watches and necklaces out of thin air. People believed it even though magicians said it was simple sleight of hand, and other Indian gurus did the same tricks.


    1. So did Charles Manson like to disturb people. This is neither a good quality in a person, nor an excuse for selfish, immoral, and cruel actions.

      Your implied argument is that because Osho liked to disturb people, anything he did that appeared wrong was actually a sincere attempt to help people through disturbing and thus unsettling their conceptions that blocked their growth.

      The counterargument is that anyone who exploits people or harms them does so because he enjoys it. You cannot argue that someone didn’t do wrong because he enjoyed doing wrong.

      Osho argued that nature was amoral, and also that acting selfishly was to act naturally. When you combine “selfish” with “amoral” you will certainly get “immoral”, which is a selfish and amoral act, an act in one’s self interest that does not consider the well-being of others. In Osho’s case we can look to his amassing of fabulous wealth through impoverishing his followers. You could say he did this to disturb them, as if it were the mere telling of good-natured jokes. Or, he could have done it for purely selfish reasons, as would anyone else in the world who accrued wealth at the deliberate cost of others.

      It doesn’t help Osho’s case that he argued that wealth was necessary for spiritual development, and only the very wealthy could come to him. By taking so much money from his followers, he made his own path impossible for them to follow. He merely wanted wealthier followers because they could make larger donations, which would help him break the world record for Roll Royce ownership.

      If Osho was enlightened, or Sai Baba, so am I. I’m so sure that they were not enlightened that when I push the button that says post, I am willing to die if they were. If I live it doesn’t prove that they weren’t enlightened, or spiritual beings. However, if I do die it proves that they were, so, I am willing to sacrifice my life to prove that one or the other or both of them were enlightened.


      1. He never claimed that you needed to be very wealthy to come to him. This is also being taken out of context.

        His called himself a “rich man’s guru.” This makes perfect sense. He came from India, a country engulfed in poverty. He claimed that the poor man has to work, has to focus on finding his food, feeding his family. He constantly has to think about the daily problems of life. His mind is consumed by his poverty. The rich man doesn’t have this problem. He has tons of downtime. He is not concerned with these types of issues. In fact, he is never weighed down by these things at all. He has the mental freedom to reflect, take lots of time for meditation, and to seek enlightenment without worry about survival. This is what he means by being wealthy. And by the way, most Americans are wealthy by Indian standards. We have the freedom of time and boredom to allow us to seek for enlightenment or at least meditation.

        Whether or not he wanted more wealthy followers is something I can not comment on because I have never heard or read anything about that. But it could also be that he believed the rich man is also very much in lack spiritually. These people needed his help. It could also be that these people are more influential and therefore would help spread his word more effectively. There are a bunch of reasons for something like that, and these things can be easily taken out of context and viewed negatively. Perhaps he did just want more wealthy followers to help him purchase his RRs. If that’s the case – wouldn’t you? Who is going to act like they wouldn’t want more wealthy people donating money to their cause?


      2. Hello again, fellow seeker, lonelisa. Let’s see what wisdom you have to share with me now. First you corrected me, “He never claimed that you needed to be very wealthy to come to him. This is also being taken out of context.” Perhaps you missed his words. Please allow me to give them to you in context: “”In fact, only the very rich, educated, intelligent, cultured, can understand what I’m saying. Beggars cannot come to me. Poor people cannot come to me. The gap is too big.” Here you have the wonderful opportunity to see you made a mistake and admit you were wrong. Then you will no longer be wrong. I hope to find the same chance in your other comments. Here you just made a small mistake.

        You make an argument that the mind of the poor is “too consumed by his poverty” to be have time to seek enlightenment or spiritual understanding. How is this so? If you are doing physical labor in the field all day, is your mind so preoccupied that it can’t let go at all. And if you are rich, sitting in your office, planning and scheming, then do you think your mind is better able to escape itself? Do you believe sincerely that a bank executive or a politician has more free mental time than a farmer or beggar?

        And is lack of education an impediment to transcending what can be taught with learning and language? In other words, is the highly developed rational mind more capable of sidelining reason, and the reasoned, intellectual model of the universe, than is the less rationally developed mind? Does arrogance and avarice bring one closer to humility? None of this seems relevant. It is no more accurate than saying that only the rich, cultured person can be a Shaolin monk.

        You wrote your idea: “Perhaps he did just want more wealthy followers to help him purchase his RRs. If that’s the case – wouldn’t you? Who is going to act like they wouldn’t want more wealthy people donating money to their cause?” When it is meal time, do I want to eat not only the food on my plate, but on everyone else’s, while they go hungry? That is the mental disease of accumulating unnecessary wealth. It is morbid obesity of the mind, and mental addiction to physical things, as well as to abstract concepts of worth. How will you feel twenty minutes later if you eat your siblings food while they go hungry? This is not a desirable feeling. It is no better to gain excess wealth than to overstuff yourself on food. It ultimately makes you weaker.

        The billionaire who loses everything will have more freedom than the billionaire who doubles his fortune. Freedom is freedom from mental constraints, and amassing millions is building upon and reinforcing mental constraints as a bulwark against freedom. Most people do NOT want to be free, but fear it. They think it is death.

        But please, show me I am wrong.


      3. Yes, he did claim that you need to be wealthy, that only the wealthy could come to him. There’s no use denying it. Ask yourself if you support his stance.


      4. Lovely reply lonelisa you are right he was the only guru ro tell to the world thatall religion and priest and their god fake and fraud like this author writing bad about him were coz they never want to see his vision ie belong to the whole universe and never to a religion nation etc when whole is available and yes bad was theitlr in him but who is pure here all have some faults but being a spiritual guru he was only one who revealed the secrets of god religion love sex etc without hiding facts and people like him for that .thumbs up


      5. So, what you are trying to say is that while he did a lot of bad things he’s the only guru who was against organized religion and preached that people were part of a totality. That pretty much encompasses every corrupt guru out there. Seek and your will find many, many more Oshos.


      6. You belong to the high priest of prattle Osho religion; except that you don’t belong to it, you’re just attached to it – a limpet on a sunken hulk.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Hope we hear back from J. Sri Bhagovwid soon. I’m sure he believed there was no risk, but he did tempt fate in putting his life on the line to denounce the enlightenment of possibly the two more celebrated and controversial gurus of the 20th century.


  1. If you’re going to admit that you took those quotes out of context, you are basically admitting that you calling them stupid means nothing. I know many of the places from which you took those quotes, and they are dreadfully out of context. In fact, many of them don’t really stand on their own as “stupid” and evil quotes.

    For anyone who has listened to or read work by Osho, they likely understand that he did not sugarcoat anything. He did not need to say things that were politically or socially “correct.” I am sure that because of that, he has taken a lot of “out of context” heat from people. He was just straight-up with what he knew – controversial or not.

    I have been thinking a bit lately about whether or not he was really a “fraud.” But in the end, I always conclude that it doesn’t really matter at all, because his words have helped enlighten me in my daily life, bring me closer to myself and make me a generally happier and more clear-thinking person. If that is the result of me just listening to his talks, then fraud or not, he has some credibility to me. And also, I haven’t spent one dime for it.

    Even if he was just regurgitating a bunch of already established eastern philosophy, he did it in a way that was understandable and accessible for Westerner’s who were looking to change their thought patterns and spiritual understandings. Also, he was clearly tuned into something. He had a specific kind of energy which you can sense when you watch his videos. He definitely had some valuable information to share with the world.

    And by the way, the J. Sri Bhagovwid spiritual quote was not at all believable and sounded like a load of crap, which was basically what it was. Maybe some people are easily taken by mystical shit like that, but if you know a bit about what your looking for, its easy to separate BS from good information.


  2. Perhaps you can enlighten us, lonelisa, as to the context of the OSHO quotes that puts them in a proper perspective, and allows the light of their wisdom to shine through. I would love to hear it. I thought the more context that was given, the worse the quotes became. But if you can show otherwise, I am happy to find out I am wrong! I love to be wrong. It is like getting a joke that you didn’t understand at first. It is better to be wrong first and then right, in some ways, then never wrong.

    You say that OSHO had a kind of energy that you can see in his videos. The same has been said of Sai Baba, Adolph Hitler, or Charles Manson. This is the aura of celebrity, and it’s something people project onto them. I would say that the “energy” OSHO gives off is malignant. He hisses his “s”s, and doesn’t blink. He is calculating, manipulative, selfish, and greedy. I can’t stand to watch his videos because of the negative “energy” sump that they are. I feel spiritually depleted after watching them.

    Ah, lonelisa, you found fault with my own expression. Bless you. You said, “by the way, the J. Sri Bhagovwid spiritual quote was not at all believable and sounded like a load of crap”. A load of crap is a miracle! You can find everything in it. The birth of creation is in it’s decomposition. But, please, if you see where I have blundered, and where I am myopic, share your more clearer vision. Show where I have gone wrong. Please elucidate and enlighten.


    1. @jsribhagovwid: my poor son, first grow up and study OSHO. Unless you grow up, you can not understand what every word mean. Every single word of OSHO have soul within it. Unless you understand the soul within the words you can not even what “rich” means… for you rich means only the wealthy, isn’t it?
      Every word of yours I read, what a funny, stupid and cheap you are… Read any one book of OSHO, any one… but read with surrender, unconditional… Still then if you could not be positive and like a human being then I swear you are just a mule and just keep on typing whatever you like man!!

      I tried a lot, went through your different lines… I tried to pour some positive attitude…. But finally whatever came all is natural. You are just a shit and no thing can happen from you. I feel so sorry upon those poor people who go up to you to gain something.

      Not only me, everyone who is reading your page just knows that you are the reader of OSHO… no doubt, but you are just twisting to the negative meaning out of it and decepting those who are in real not getting the opportunity to read OSHO books.

      “I don’t teach religion, I teach religiousness” – OSHO
      Jai OSHO!!!


      1. I laughed out loud at “what a funny, stupid and cheap you are.” What a great guy, and so well-spoken!

        I was just reading an Oregonian newspaper’s article series about Osho’s group’s various dirty tricks, murder plots and bioterrorism and of course the comments section was full of broken English from cult members. Just unreal. The dude’s been dead for 25 years, and yet still this shit goes on. I started researching it because prominent youtube fitness “celebrities” like Elliot Hulse and Paul Chek drink the Osho kool-aid without an iota of critical thinking. I mean good lord, you can watch a video of the guy for 30 seconds and just sense the aura of pure narcissistic evil from the guy. You would think people would have a basic understanding of the psychology of cults and cult leaders. But I guess if they did, people wouldn’t end up becoming cult members. Anyway, cheers for writing this stuff. It’s always nice to see someone standing up for real ethics in the world. It’s certainly a thankless endeavor most of the time.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Thanks man, and I totally agree with you about watching his videos and sensing a quality of evil, er, so to speak. The way he hisses his “s”s and doesn’t blink. But people desperately want to put their faith in something or someone, so when someone comes along demanding their faith, they accept.


  3. Dude you seem hell bent on showing osho as a fraud, like your seriously putting a lot of effort and focus into something that doesn’t even matter. Even the shittest of ppl have wise words but they are still ppl and any person can lose their way. Honestly the trick is to not be to much for or against anyone, we are all changeable moment to moment in times of nothing and circumstances… I’ve read much of osho and many ppl really but ive still gotta be weary of myself each day, I don’t rely on anybody to much or go against ppl to much. I’m pretty free and happy caus of this, simply do and be what you need to do and be in the times its needed, apart from that don’t be greedy, be healthy, have fun relationships that also connect in healthy ways and do work that actually satasfies you…. Now fuck off Lol 🙂 enjoy


    1. I wouldn’t bother about OSHO at all if others weren’t hell bent on worshiping him, and if I didn’t come across his books in books stores and on shelves of restaurants and quoted on the walls of guesthouses.


    2. Can’t remember if I replied to this or not, but some historical figures needed to be opposed because of their destruction, or destructive influence. Nobody here is hell bent on denouncing Osho. There’re a few posts about him among hundreds about other things.


  4. Thanks for this great article (I left a comment on another one of yours a few weeks ago, but just saw this one). Some of it was as if you were reading my mind. Even before I knew anything about “Osho”, I had that impression of him just by reading his quotes. It’s easy to see he was just telling people what they wanted to hear, and just trying to make a name for himself.


  5. I support your cause. You are just continuing the media frenzy associated with him when he was in the USA. It’s good. Because of it a lot of people will get to know themselves and the peace that lies within. Please keep calling him fraud. Refer to old newspapers as well. Also talk about his meditation techniques. That will spread more word about him. May you be able to spread his aura to many more haters. Good wishes for you. 🙂

    If possible, try one of his meditation techniques through and through. You will then be able to authentically claim how much of a fraud he was.

    In peace. In peace.
    May the universe help you carry his name forward.


    1. The only real frenzy is the marketing of OSHO materials to naive people in search of comfort. Sadly, no matter how corrupt a guru, some are too invested in their own spiritual claims to admit either a fallen seeker, or a complete fraud. They fear that if OSHO is just a man with a PhD in Indian philosophy, who used that knowledge to hoodwink gullible Westerners into giving him money and power, than they themselves may be ordinary mortals without anything really transcendent about them. Better to ditch OSHO and look for a better paradigm, and if you need a guru, better gurus.


  6. I don’t think hero or “guru” worship is healthy for spiritual enlightenment in any sense. My guess is that the longer you seek out your guru, the less time you spend truly seeking inward. And when you finally “find” him, you are likely to put all your faith in that he will guide you toward the path you want to take. This is just placing the task of one’s own enlightenment into the hands of the enlightened being and taking it out of your own.

    Of course, we all need spiritual teachers and guides. This is why I really don’t care much about the controversy surrounding Osho. He has been a useful teacher at certain stages of my development and in other stages I can simply move on to other teachings or guides. I don’t have much invested in his controversy because I do not practice “worshiping” him as a guru. It just bears no significance with me.

    It would be difficult to argue that Osho wasn’t a man of high intelligence. The kinds of philosophical ideas he shared were worthy of deep contemplation. But no one man is perfect, and no one man will ever be a perfect guru. Perhaps his more controversial words were an additional effort to make one think, sort of like playing the devils advocate. If the words make people mad, it forces them to stop and contemplate their stance on the subject. This inadvertently urges one to look inward for their own voice, to form an opinion.


    1. You can get good ideas from Charles Manson and use him as a stepping stone along the way, and then praise him for his contribution. Osho, for me, castes doubt on the possibility of enlightenment at all, as he ranks among the pantheon of confirmed frauds. He’s the Indian equivalent of a pedophile priest (though not as literally as Sai Baba). He may be educated and spout words of wisdom, but that just serves to cast even more doubt on the religion and beliefs in question, because it proves that you CAN be educated, intelligent, and share words of wisdom while your true actions go against your expressed beliefs. Osho is like an athlete peddling his all natural exercise routine in videos and workshops, but in reality his success was based on steroids and other pharmaceutical enhancements. He does nothing for the cause of clean sports. Au contraire. Osh stands as strong evidence that there is no such thing as enlightenment. If you think that’s a good thing, you are entitled to your opinion.


  7. When a moment of awakening happens, it is a spontaneous shift in consciousness that reveals the underlying perfection and utter non-duality of reality. This awakening may come with an experience, usually one of great relief (or joy!), but that experience ends. What doesn’t end is the shift.

    The shift has no shape, size, or dimensions of any kind. It has nothing to do with the personality structure. If this awakening has not blown away all karma, the personality will reshape itself around this new perspective. This appears to be quite literally always the case. The only case I know about where that didn’t happen is the Buddha himself, who apparently went from ignorance to supreme enlightenment in one fell swoop. It’s very unlikely to have happened that way and is probably mythologized as such because it makes for a cleaner story.

    You can have an awakening, or multiple awakenings, without seeing through the whole imaginary self construct. You don’t have to be a particularly good person to awaken. In Osho’s case, there is undoubted wisdom – he has definitely seen – but you’re right in saying his ego appears to have calloused around that to some degree. Feelings of superiority are an unavoidable byproduct which repeated spiritual practice will eradicate, but the circumstances of his awakening prevented that.

    It’s a shame, but it doesn’t make him the devil incarnate. It’s not so unusual for this to happen. That’s why it’s important to work on yourself on an ethical level, stay sincere and warm hearted. There is no need to spend this much effort on calling him out. He’s not a charlatan. He’s a man with a loud and influential type of personality who should have extended his practice further before he started to teach.

    There are certainly dangers along the way, but enlightenment is real. Please don’t be discouraged.


  8. People gas Osho up to be more than what he was. He was a huMAN that was in touch with his spirituality and carnal instincts in the days when social etiquette was do or die. He had a way with words and a unique, insightful way of looking at life.
    Personally, I love his pdfs.
    If you’re not ready to have every single thought, feeling and belief you’ve built shattered in your life, his books will never appeal to you. You’ll regard them as hokem and throw em out. I’m open minded so i can see things from different sides here.

    Osho spoke about every single taboo that has been imposed upon us by tptb and gave no shits about it; even things that the world’s going through now can be linked to things he said back then, so i’ll give credit where credit due. The government were threatened by the influence he had and prisoned and poisoned him, so clearly there was something in his teachings they didn’t want the world to know. They pull the same stunts and silence celebrities that speak out on the shit they do, so he was ni different in that regard.

    Osho said one of the prison guards fell in love with him and cried when he had to transfer him elsewhere. Ironic, because i read the same thing about GHANDI’s prison officer 🤔
    He never had anything positive to say about Ghandi, but i feel it was to discredit his name so that his light could shine a little brighter. Ghandi was Indian too, so he probably wanted to be the ONLY Indian Guru.
    He was VERY competitive and egoistical. If someone left the commune he’d get pissed off with them and tell them they’ll be back because he’ll stalk their dreams until they realise he isn’t gonna go away 😕

    I agree with some things he said, and some things i shake my head in disbelief at.
    Sheila, his ex-secretary went on a tirade for her own personal reasons and carried out that bio-attack (with those who had turned against him) in the 3 years he went into silence and stopped communicating. He didn’t speak out when it was going on either, he let the storm pass, the commune go into shit, then changed his name after all the fiasco to Osho. Sheila said he would finesse millions out of wealthy people claiming he can take them to enlightment and ask the followers to bring him rolexes and fancy jewellery and clothes. If he lost/misplaced one of the items he’d literally sulk and throw a tantrum like a toddler, yet he spoke about the ego clinging on to possessions as a means to feel worthy by external things.
    Whats HILARIOUS about Sheila is that after all of her years of publicly throwing him under the bus and calling him a thief (even after she transferred $50million out of his account and ran with it), she admitted she was wildly in love with him and he didn’t feel the same way 😩

    When he came out of his 3 year silence, he told the commune that Sheila was raped by an Indian Uncle when she was 15, which lead to her Love-Hate obsession with Indian Men.
    Its all a fucking circus to me, (minus the rape) but if you don’t laugh at this shit you’ll get permanent frown lines trying to decipher it.
    His followers, even his dentist, spoke out about his childlike ways, and his strange obsession with laughing gas, yet those who knew him personally all say the same thing about him: He was an AMAZING man to know.

    Osho, like all of us, had good traits and bad traits that made him who he was. He encouranged freedom with responsibility, meditation, looking inside as opposed to out, and remembering your TRUE God-Like self. He didn’t claim he was perfect or without flaws and he never condemned anyone else for theirs either. One of his messages was to be a witness and aware of YOURSELF and your own shit before you try and integrate someone/something else into your own personal space.

    His father was a businessman as were he and he made a damn good job out of finessing people that wanted to be finessed! We’re all consumers and his philosophy was his product.

    Great blog ❤️

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for commenting. You have done some research and know things about the average, mortal, human who called himself OSHO that others don’t.

      You mentioned: “He was VERY competitive and egoistical.” This is a huge red flag. Those qualities are anything but the sign of a spiritually evolved person.

      I get the impression that those who defend OSHO and are willing to overlook his glaring flaws are not nearly as aware of other gurus who don’t have those same sorts of weaknesses.

      Nisardadatta Maharaj gave talks in his own humble home for free, and as far as I can tell didn’t give a hoot about money or luxury.

      OSHO, or Rajneesh, had a PhD in Indian philosophy. Stop and think about that for a moment. This means he was well equipped to spout the rhetoric, weather or not he had actually realized it. With a little brushing up, I can spout the rhetoric.

      OSHO, when he says something meaningful, isn’t really saying anything that different, no matter how he denies it, from classical Hinduism, and Buddhism. Of course he’s got his own spin, but when he gets things right it’s not a new message.

      You wrote: ” He encouranged freedom with responsibility, meditation, looking inside as opposed to out, and remembering your TRUE God-Like self.”
      Thanks for commenting. You have done some research and know things about the average, mortal, human who called himself OSHO that others don’t.

      You mentioned: “He was VERY competitive and egoistical.” This is a huge red flag. Those qualities are anything but the sign of a spiritually evolved person.

      I get the impression that those who defend OSHO and are willing to overlook his glaring flaws are not nearly as aware of other gurus who don’t have those same sorts of weaknesses.

      Nisardadatta Maharaj gave talks in his own humble home for free, and as far as I can tell didn’t give a hoot about money or luxury.

      OSHO, or Rajneesh, had a PhD in Indian philosophy. Stop and think about that for a moment. This means he was well equipped to spout the rhetoric, weather or not he had actually realized it. With a little brushing up, I can spout the rhetoric.

      OSHO, when he says something meaningful, isn’t really saying anything that different, no matter how he denies it, from classical Hinduism, and Buddhism. Of course he’s got his own spin, but when he gets things right it’s not a new message.

      You wrote: ” He encouranged freedom with responsibility, meditation, looking inside as opposed to out, and remembering your TRUE God-Like self.”

      You can find that in Advaita, Sufism, and Tibetan Buddhism. That’s standard stuff.

      What separates OSHO from, y’know, going to a Zen monastery, is the cult of celebrity, and an appeal to those who wish to worship a man as divine. Rajneesh rightly surmised that such people are suckers ripe to be fleeced, and exploited them as best as possible.

      If you want the spiritual message, undiluted, without having to worship anyone or anything, without having to spend a dime, you can read Nisargadatta Maharaj or perhaps Ramana Maharshi. No limos. No laughing gas. No having sex with their followers. I find Maharaj the most accessible with the least contradictions or red flags. OSHO is the most obtuse (because his arguments are overflowing with vitriol, arrogant posturing, and steaming bullshit), and has the most red flags.

      There are lots of spiritual teachers out there, most brimming over with utter bullshit, but I’m sure there are people and places where one can turn inward and cultivate spiritual awareness. The more intrepid may explore psychedelic shamanism. There are all sorts of paths leading to the top of the mountain, but the peak is the same, and isn’t it great that there’s more than one route, or so said Huston Smith, author of “The World’s Religions” and “Cleansing the Doors of Perception”.

      Finally, you wrote: “If you’re not ready to have every single thought, feeling and belief you’ve built shattered in your life, his books will never appeal to you.”

      However, if you have had every thought, feeling and belief shattered, you will see his writing as the mere “thoughts, feelings, and beliefs” that they are, and NOT the real deal. He is a fraud, and one of many. Well, that’s my strong impression. He seems a fraud who really, really pushed the limits of what he could get away with (like the Rolls Royce collection).

      I could be wrong, of course. But I don’t see anything, not a grain, that suggests I am wrong. The more I see of him the more I’m convinced he’s a megalomaniac, which is the exact opposite of being enlightened.



  9. I dont really care if Osho was a real guru or not (what is a real guru, anyway? one who gets YOUR stamp of approval?) His words vibrate with truth and are as enlightened as any I have ever read, leaving me refreshed and energized after reading them. Your words, on the other hand, reek of anger and ignorance and leave a reader confused and bored. Do you see the difference?

    Maybe you should ask yourself why Osho bothers you so much. What seeds inside of you are uncooked to the point of causing you discomfort when encountering his ideas? Osho is obviously helping you more than you know, hopefully you can thank him someday 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    1. No. I find his words and manner poisonous. On the other hand, I really like Nisargadatta Maharaj, and what he says strikes me as much more enlightened than OSHO’s justifications for selfishness, greed, and corruption. OSHO ain’t helping me with shit, unless his role is to show what NOT to be. follow, listen to, or admire. OSHO is a red flag, a stink beatle, and a pile of shit on the sidewalk. You go worship that crap and wallow in your own brand of megalomania. You can thank me for pissing you off and showing you the way out of OSHO’s meglomaniacal grip on your ego.


      1. Has it ever occured to you that the person interpreting Osho in the way that you are doing is YOU.
        He speaks of being selfish, yes. But he says you need to be selfish in the way that you need to first be able to love yourself to be able to truly love others. Otherwise you are only acting lovingly to others to feel good about yourself. If you do not understand this, then that is because you don’t yet see what he means by the words.

        There is so much negativity in the way you speak and in your personality (as far as I can see from what I read from you), that it really doesn’t surprise me that you are not able to see the love in Osho’s words.

        And besides that, you are very certain about YOUR beliefs that you would dismiss experiences of others just because you didn’t have them. That is very selfish and self centered.
        This makes it very plausible for me to assume that you are projecting onto Osho your own shortcomings.

        If i was Osho i’d tell you to lookin within yourself and see why you are filled with so much hate, instead of trying to change the outside world to fit your own beliefs 😉


      2. No. Typically, devotees of OSHO such as yourself, want to believe that anyone who criticizes him is somehow deficient, not in tune with their true nature, filled with the vile emotion of hatred, and so on…

        Yes, of course he said some good things. He had a PhD in eastern philosophy. It’s the bad things he said, and the bad things he did, on his own, with his own mind and will, that are concerning. Anyone can understand and regurgitate good ideas from eastern philosophy, including me.

        The thing I “hate” — I’d use the word “despise” — about OSHO is that he has soiled eastern philsophy, in the same way pedophile priests destroy faith in anything good about Christianity.

        So, no, it’s not that I don’t have enough “love”, and you do, and OSHO was just radicating it. He was a selfish, corrupt, megalomanica, and you — for whatever reason — need to believe in him.

        Find a better guru, if you want easter philosophy. I recommend Nisargadatta Mahajar. He didn’t have any Rolls Royces, didn’t examine the nether chakras of female devotees, and didn’t ask for money. Read “I AM THAT”.

        OSHO is so dishonest he shades into evil. If you want a selfish, evil, rich guru with 90 Rolls Royces, that might say something about YOU.

        Personally, I don’t follow any guru or any system of thought. I go my own way. I merely point out some of the frauds when I come across them. Dead ends. Trecherous trails leding to self-delusion.


  10. A young man lost his life a few days ago. He stopped taking his medication and started to listen to Osho. He got more and more sick and after som time he took his own life. Thank you for all the wize and educated words agaist this horrible man. Sorry about my english.


  11. People defending ohshit are the same that would defend Trump, Aung San Suu Kyi, Ehud Olmert, and any other terrorist, dictator or genocidal maniac. You folks that defend him aren’t getting an inch from me. Everything about his evil deeds is already out there. So who exactly are you going to fool? If you took something good away from his teachings, your suspect just like those who take good away from the names I mentioned above. the only thing you have as defense is trying to brush his evil under the mat by regurgitating his so called enlightened philosophy. But at the end of the day, you folks defending him will do so no matter what he did. A shame your brainwashing and deprivation tank time has you speaking like you know something. Great article

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ” the only thing you have as defense is trying to brush his evil under the mat by regurgitating his so called enlightened philosophy. ”

      Nailed it! I’ve noticed over time that a lot of people who are invested in Osho also like the idea that one can be rich, an asshole, a tyrant, AND their actions are justified as some sort of “wild enlightenment”. It’s not that someone is a bad person for acting selfishly and greedily, no sir, it’s because he’s enlightened! Riiiiiiight.


  12. Heres the issue. Most of you are looking at him with western glasses , and what he said in English. And you only have his English teachings to go by.

    I understand hindi and Sanskrit, and he has a lot of material in his own language. The Hindi video’s of his speech are very clear on what he was and achieved. It can be difficult to describe englightenment to westerners.
    Because some of you all have pre – conceived ideas.

    Did he osho gain a certain of level englightenment ? Yes he did.

    His Hindi speeches describe his experience and what he did, and how he taught people before coming to the USA.

    Does englightenment mean you become an angel or very good person ? No ! There are several stages of englightenment or awakening. A crook or corrupt person can achieve a certain level of awareness through meditation.

    So no matter what you say about osho it’s just boundless. The fact is you might i say might have , a spiritual bad boy who achieved a level of awakening. This happens.

    You can call him whatever you want , but you can’t say he didn’t reach a level of higher consciousness.

    Remember bad people can still do meditation and achieve something. To an extent.

    I stopped listening to osho in English , because his Hindi sermons were far detailed. I actually think he was controversial on purpose to mock westerners into spirituality, clever and effective because it worked lol.

    I don’t follow him either. I just analyse.

    But I refuse to believe any English or Western opinion of his englightenment , because it falls far short of describing it. Unfortunately your limited.


    1. Don’t confuse linguistics with reality. The language is irrelevant, and it’s only what it signals that matters, as you probably well know.

      And you probably also know that Osho had a doctorate in Hindu philosophy. Now, you might recognize that any asshole with a PhD in philosophy can expound it as well. So the real trick is knowing who is just mouthing the concepts, and who actually gets them internally. Osho didn’t need to get them, because he already understood them purely on the level of reason.

      You say YOU don’t trust Westerners to know what enlightenment is. Nice one. Nope. You don’t to disqualify people by region or language. How utterly superficial!

      The question comes to mind that if Osho, or YOU are enlightened, then what the hell is it worth? Why bother? Sure, sure, Donald Trump is enlightened a little. Whatever.

      Osho is a fraud. If he is enlightened a little, than enlightenment is worthless drivel.


      1. Look at the anger and butthurt you have about him? Then you go worshiping another guru lmao.
        Has the soy in your body has completely melted your brain?
        Westerners are perhaps too stupid for enlightenment , just npcs following in a line dogmas that cannot think for themselves.
        You just keep repeating same dogmas like an npc , thats not an argument just a poor adherent of spiritual egregores.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. U r spot on! Osho, like every half baked knowledge man led to the destruction and paradoxically peacelessness of many people and himself. ”Bhagwan was also a good businessman. He knew His products, their value, and their market. He wanted the ashram to work such that all costs were covered. An entrance fee hence began to be asked for His discourses. His group therapists also went into action. In the ashram therapies began to be offered as food is on a buffet. Visitors could pick and choose and pay for their choice. The ashram also started other fee-based services for the visitors and group participants. Money began to flow like water.During the early ‘70s, group therapies used to play a major role in the psychology of the Western people. To them, therapies seemed to be the answer to the dissatisfaction of modern man. Among educated people, it was the in thing to participate in group therapies. In some circles, it was even regarded as old-fashioned to have no experience with such therapies. People decorated themselves with them as though they were medals. Some even became really addicted to these therapies.Sexuality, which was seen as the cause of many sufferings, was one of the main topics in these therapies. The liberation of repression and sexual perversion was their focal point. Sexuality was accepted without judgement. There were no taboos, no moral issues attached with sexuality. Bhagwan wanted us to be free of jealousy and possessiveness. He wanted us to deal with our sexuality by acting it out with the consent of the partner. He wanted us to go beyond moral and guilt restraints. There was a lot going on in these groups. Some, in the excitement of the group and the enthusiasm to climb the ladder of enlightenment took part in violence and sexual encounters in groups. But always, the participation was absolutely voluntary.In India, these therapies were a complete unknown. People had no idea how they worked. The locals who feared the unknown were frightened of them. To prevent this fear from spreading everywhere, Indians were not allowed to participate in therapy groups in the ashram. This seemed like discrimination to the Indians. But some of the therapies were truly frightful. Occasional bone fractures and black eyes were normal.Not everyone understood why Bhagwan banned Indians from participation in these groups. Many questions were put to Him about this. Finally, He gave an official reason so that the negativity did not spread further. He said, “People from the West come from a very oppressive world. Their lifestyle is different from that of an Indian’s. Their mindset is different. They need active therapies. Indians need more passive, quiet meditations . . .” With this explanation the Indians thought they were more spiritually developed.With this feeling of spiritual superiority, some of the Indian sannyasins began to walk around with their noses in the air. But the real reason for Bhagwan’s statement was that He did not want the local Indian sentiment to turn against Him with accusations of discrimination. By excluding Indians from the whole exercise, He also made sure that no ugly gossip was spread. The ashram needed to prevent the Indian authorities from discontinuing the therapies. A ban on therapies would have been very bad for the business. The ashram depended on the continual cash flow generated by the therapies to support itself financially.Bhagwan was very conscious of the economic value of the group therapies and therapists. He started to publicly show preference for the therapy leaders in order to flatter their egos. Like a clever businessman, He always showed strong personal interest in people who had a high economic potential. He knew that much money was needed for His work and to keep up His luxurious lifestyle. So, He would always massage the ego of these people by calling them highly developed, conscious beings. But, like always, when they became a plague, He would turn the tables on them. He was a master at taking advantage of people for their money or their skills. Afterwards, when they no more supported His intentions in a productive way, He would throw many of them out of the ashram. Bhagwan was very different from typical Indians who continue to consider a cow sacred long after it has stopped giving milk. Bhagwan had no scruples in sending a cow He could no longer milk to the slaughterhouse.

    It was interesting to listen to how the sannyasins talked about their therapies. It sounded as if without therapies there was no possibility of enlightenment for them — and to them that sounded like a major catastrophe. They compared records of who had done which therapy groups. They tried to find spiritual explanations for the sequence in which Bhagwan had recommended therapies to them. They could not see it as a simple, practical marketing and moneymaking process.

    Bhagwan combined these therapies with meditation, so that they served His purpose. He had to sell them. He was the best salesman. After all, He had His customers secured. Nobody said no to Him. He could sell His people anything and everything. When He initiated a person as a sannyasin, He at the same time recommended the participation in a sequence of group therapies. His proposals were accepted unquestioningly and in totality. Sannyasins took them as commandments, as a very important and necessary step towards their enlightenment.

    Actually, to give His recommendations, Bhagwan always consulted a chart we would prepare for Him. On this chart, we highlighted the groups that were not sold out. He gave His recommendations according to the spaces available. Sannyasins would take this as a big spiritual theater and would measure the distance that still separated them from enlightenment by the number of completed groups. They calculated which level of spirituality they had already achieved.These therapy groups were expensive. For many sannyasins this was a problem. Many of us coming from the West had lived in India for years without any income. The savings had been used up long ago. So, many of us were very poor. To have money meant to be able to be in the ashram and with Bhagwan, and many of us were willing to become beggars rather than be separated from Him. Some even decided to work as prostitutes. To have money and be able to live with Bhagwan was more important than the method of accumulating money.Bhagwan’s teachings did not preach any morality. This made it easy to overcome guilt in these matters. The only valid guilt was related to Him. Bhagwan would often say that life as a prostitute can be important in the spiritual quest. Like many of the ancient Tantric teachers He would say, “…prostitution can serve as a kind of meditation. One can learn to observe how the body takes part in the sexual act when the consciousness of being exists separately. This is a good opportunity to be the watcher.” He told many stories on this subject. He taught us not to judge, but to use every situation in life to develop awareness.Bhagwan had described to His management the value of the groups very clearly. “Remember, the groups are a good source of income. Once someone is allowed to participate for free, others will also want that. You must understand human nature. If people do not have to pay for something, they do not believe that they will receive any value from it. If they pay and do not get what they expected, they will say nothing, because they do not want to look stupid. And if they pay, they make an effort, they work harder . . .”

    The sannyasins were all very enthusiastic about therapy groups, because Bhagwan had advised them to participate in them. His directives put a lot of pressure on Sannyasins who did not have money but who wanted to participate in the groups along with others. The group process made them more vulnerable. The environment, the language, and the expectations — all this made them more prone to exploitation. Everyone wanted to grow, to become meditative, to give up their ego.

    In the commune ego was a word to be avoided and detested. Nobody wanted to have anything to do with it, and yet everybody had it. We all tried to hide it. In my opinion all these big words — ego, meditation, and enlightenment — were used to camouflage serious emotions and mask exploitation. Everyone was so crazy for enlightenment and so zealously anxious to be without ego and to be meditative that they could do anything for it. The sannyasins participated in sexual activities, emptied their pockets, and proved their devotion by expensive gifts and the like. This exploitation was dirty, ugly, and repulsive, especially coming from Bhagwan. He totally exploited His people. But with Bhagwan, it was also possible to learn if one was willing and ready. This exploitation was a price that I gladly paid and paid to the fullest extent.Soon, the groups were running very well. The ashram became known worldwide for Bhagwan’s group therapies. He soon transferred the responsibility of booking the groups and recommending groups to the new comers to us. He gave us general guidelines for the distribution of the sannyasins. The groups for beginners were quite harmless. But the advanced groups were stricter and harder. The harder therapies such as primal groups and encounter groups were offered only to persons who had participated in at least ten other groups, or to people who knew Bhagwan’s working methods and trusted them.

    We only asked for Bhagwan’s advice when a participant had medical problems or when there were other difficulties. All therapists worked under His guidance, and He was always informed about what was happening in these groups. In the beginning, He gave Teertha complete freedom with his encounter groups until there were negative press reports everywhere about violence and rapes in his group. This publicity was a nightmare for us. After this no journalists were allowed to participate in encounter groups anymore. The therapists were encouraged to be cautious when cameras were nearby. They were encouraged to act more restrained and responsibly and offer no more reasons for any bad publicity. There was also no more violence in the groups. The therapies became more harmless, including the encounter groups.

    Bhagwan had the reputation of advocating frequent changes of sexual partners. His famous book From Sex to Superconsciousness was thought to be pornographic by many Indians. Their religious feelings were violated because a holy man had spoken so openly about sex in the book and had given sex a religious legitimacy. These ideas were not received well. He became the enemy of all sexually repressed saints and sadhus. On the other hand, this sympathetic attitude of Bhagwan toward sex served many sex-hungry men and women justification for promiscuous behaviour. The apparent freedom to express their feelings was seen as encouragement to frequently change sexual partners.

    Bhagwan was also accused of being sexually very free with women around Him in the ashram. According to the commonly accepted standards holy men must not deal with such sensual issues at “lower planes of existence.” I can still remember very well how one of my aunts warned me of Bhagwan. She told me, “Be careful when you visit him. Do not go alone into his room with him; you are a young girl.”

    Because of the press reports about therapy groups and Bhagwan’s discourses about sexual matters, He was threatened by violence. Average Indians soon avoided having anything to do with Him. They were very skeptical, afraid and conservative. The hostility against Bhagwan grew.(Excerpted with permissions of Fingerprint from Don’t Kill Him! by Ma Anand Sheela.)


  14. hello , i see some comments but only see cant read it, they write longer then the Osho Books length , love to see still people finding what is osho 🙂 thats he want i think , and Guru keep thinking about osho devote all of your life to proved Osho ( Was and Is ) WRONG !! I am With You Guru 😀

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s