Osho Rajneesh, Studies in Contemporary Religions By Judith M. Fox

Osho Rajneesh, Studies in Contemporary Religions By Judith M. Fox

7

A Master of Provocation

......Another ex-sannyasin (in Franklin, The Promise of Paradise, 353) hy- pothesized that Osho was complicit in the death of Sheela's first husband, thus ensuring that she would devote herself full-time to his work. 

Other allegations report that before he moved to America, the Indian police were planning to place him under house arrest and that he deliberately left debts unpaid when he departed (Milne, The God Who Failed, 182- 83). 

Once at Rajneeshpuram, it has been claimed, Osho was at least aware of some of Sheela's illegal activities such as the fraudulent marriages and drug dealing and that he con- doned them: "Bhagwan was perfectly capable of talking openly in lectures about his knowledge of commune illegal- ities as well, 'pointing the finger' in feigned ignorance" (Franklin, The Promise of Paradise, 356).

Even if he was not aware of all the activities surrounding him, his critics say, his behavior was not that of a spiritually advanced individual. They allege that he was vain, self- absorbed, and at least in later years, addicted to nitrous ox- ide. One account describes how he would "swallow valium and quaaludes by the handful, close his eyes and babble away to himself," and alleges that he hit Vivek (Franklin, The Promise of Paradise, 324). 

Others characterize him as greedy and sexually promiscuous and claim that he encour- aged his followers to have sex with each other while he watched. Feuerstein, author of a book on "crazy-wisdom masters," has commented on this accusation: "When prac- ticed by a spiritual teacher on his trusting disciples, (voy- eurism) is not holy madness but an unforgivable transgres- sion" (Feuerstein, Holy Madness, 69). 

He concluded that Osho was probably guilty of hubris, citing what he says are Osho's own words against him: "I am such a con-man ... If there is a God, and I have to face Him, He will have to an- swer to me, not me answer to Him" (ibid., 250). Even if Osho did not know about Sheela's unsavory ac- tivities at the ranch, critics say, he should not have failed to notice the machine guns, the helicopter, and two reconnaissance airplanes which she introduced, nor the fact that the ranch was being run like a concentration camp. He should have taken action to stop her reign of abuse: "If ranch sannyasins were guilty of abdicating responsibility for what happened in Oregon, so was Bhagwan ... 

He could have acted out of courage and conviction, regardless of the per- sonal risks involved, and things might have been different" (Franklin, The Promise of Paradise, 361). How then did he manage to attract and retain so many followers? 

The answer critics give is that he used a powerful hypnotic technique to induce extraordinary experiences and trance states in devotees, thus ensuring his complete sway over them. Sannyasins were encouraged to attribute every positive aspect of their lives to his beneficence. By dis- couraging parenting and permanent relationships, he made sure that the only longstanding commitment was to him. Some suggest that he had psychic abilities that helped him maintain control. 

According to his critics, he therefore stands condemned of being complicit in a range of criminal and anti-spiritual activities. By making sure that others were blamed when- ever such activities were exposed, he managed to accrue a luxurious lifestyle including his fleet of Rolls Royces, pri- vate jets, and speedboats. 

He had a supply of naive female followers who misinterpreted his sexual advances as the spiritual activity of a Tantric master, and he enjoyed the adulation of thousands. 

It has been said that the consequences of such narcissism were traumatic for many-that a num- ber of sannyasins ended up at the local psychiatric hospital in Poona, that others were injured during therapy groups and by having to work long hours at the ranch. Some landed in jail, others were left penniless. Others, like Vivek, may have been pushed so far that they committed suicide. To his critics and disaffected followers, Osho conformed to the worst images of the unscrupulous cult leader. (See Frank- lin, The Promise of Paradise; Milne, The God Who Failed.) 

There is no hard evidence to support any of these accu- sations. The only proof we have that Osho knew what Sheela was up to may or may not be on the tapes Sheela re- portedly made of private conversations with him. These are presumed to be in the hands of U.S. authorities and are not available to the public. Without them, many of the charges against him cannot be substantiated. 

But the only charge ever filed against him concerned immigration fraud. More- over, as we have seen, Osho always insisted that his "ex- travagant" lifestyle and provocative pronouncements and structures were either "jokes" or "techniques of transfor- mation," designed to challenge unconscious, reactive atti- tudes. However, the charge that he stood by while things went badly is less easy to dismiss. Some sannyasins and ex-members suggest that much of his inaction at the ranch was deliberate. In answer to why he appeared to degenerate into a parody of a spiritual master while in Oregon, Sam has asserted that his aim was to be transparently bogus in order to sabotage Sheela. Bharti has similarly argued that he co- vertly wanted to destroy the ranch and see it shut down or disbanded. Other sannyasins who remained with Osho have presented another view of these events (see, for in- stance, Valcarenghi, Operazione Socrate, 41-54, esp. 46-53).

One of Osho's most outspoken defenders, Amrito, has tried to demolish claims made by disaffected sannyasins by offering evidence that their reports are unreliable and that they actually tell far more about the detractors than they do of Osho. He makes the case that Osho exemplified his teachings throughout his life by letting existence lead him instead of trying to control events. Thus, argues Amrito, he cannot be held responsible for the failings of others. For example, on the question of why Osho chose Sheela, he says: "The answer paradoxically is that he didn't. It was not a question of choice: he simply accepted circumstances choicelessly ... To just select his choice against the flow of events was not his way" (Meredith, Bhagwan: The Most Godless Yet the Most Godly Man, 291-92). Instead, Amrito says, Osho trusted those around him unconditionally, whether they were trustworthy or not, in keeping with his stance as an enlightened master. In conclusion, it is entirely possible for one person to in- terpret Osho's behavior as having been unscrupulous and for another to experience a positive transformation in his or her life as a result of the same example. 

Some have argued that if Osho had been truly enlightened, he would have op- erated in a less confrontational manner and taken responsi- bility for caring for others. Yet, there is always a response- that this would have been at odds with his aim of inducing a transformation in consciousness rather than providing con- solation or conforming to the expectations and needs of others. The answer to whether Osho was a manipulator, ad- dicted to power, etc., or a radically enlightened spiritual master who continues to offer a joyful, authentic, and en- riching-if at times turbulent-path to those who open their hearts to him, seems to rest with the one asking the question, and with posterity.