Monday, September 20, 2010

Without Freedom Love Is Not Possible: An Interview of Ramateertha by Harideva

This past winter in Goa Harideva of the editorial board of the Viha Connection interviewed Ramateertha of the Osho Uta Institute in Cologne. A sannyasin for 34 years, Ramateerth has been an integral part of Osho Uta for all that time. We are happy to present to you here part of what Ramateertha shared.

HD: How and when did you decide to return to Germany to start a meditation center for Osho?

RT: When I was returning to Germany in ’76 I had a leaving darshan, and Osho asked me, “Where are you going?” I said, “Back to Cologne.” He said, “Go and help my people there.” I told Him there were no people there; I was the only one. [Laughter]

So He said, “Oh, you can open up a center there.” I said “No, no, no, I can’t do that.” He asked, “Why?” and I replied, “Well, I can’t do it, and I have no money.” He explained to me, and actually took some time to explain, why I should go back and open up a center. Even then it took four years before I started the Uta center in 1980. In the beginning I was the center leader, but I had no idea how the center should be. The only idea I had was that I wanted to live in the place where I worked, and out of that grew a center, which was always based simply on meditation and personal growth and on sharing love and energy.

HD: Do you have a position on the attempts to trademark the name Osho, and what are your insights about these controversies?

RT: It was a decisive point for me when I heard that the US Board ruled that the trademark in America had never existed. I was deeply touched and relieved, because I can see in how many places and in how many ways the fiction of a trademark was being used to try and control people. I have opposed the idea that “Osho” might be a trademark for a long time. In the very beginning, when the idea that “Osho” might be a trademark first came up, I think I was a bit na├»ve about this question. I didn’t know what a trademark was, and I didn’t see the implications of what this idea really meant.

I also think that the way Vatayana got the centers to sign a document called a Letter of Understanding was very, very misleading and manipulative. The paper was not presented as a legal document, but a year after some people had signed it Vatayana began to claim it was one. I was upset about this dishonesty, and I started seeing the strategy involved.

I knew that “Osho” had never been used as a trademark while Osho was in the body or in the years since then, but only to describe content that refers to Osho’s teachings. The reason is simply that it is, by its nature, not a trademark, but just a personal name of Osho that is also a description of the content of His teachings and vision. So when the idea that there was such a thing as an “Osho trademark” slowly, slowly started being put into the field, it was done in a very devious way, as I see it, very misleading. It was as if an outside enemy was being created that we needed a fictional trademark to defend against. Out of fear, people were encouraged to pretend that “Osho” could be, was, and had been used as a trademark. Eventually that kind of defense turns into a means to control those who are within the field. Every fascist regime has created outer enemies to control people inside. And when I started seeing the whole game and the lying and cheating that was connected to it, I saw how harmful to the community this pretense had become.

At a certain point Vatayana tried to take over center meetings in Germany and to become the one who organizes them. She made it clear that she wanted to invite only people who had signed the Letter of Understanding. At some point during a meeting she said, “This is not a democracy.” The person who was in charge of inviting for that meeting said, “Well, and it is not a dictatorship either.” And the whole room was silent. During the argument a young woman said, “I don’t understand what this argument is about. It’s just only about power, isn’t it?” A pin-drop silence occurred, and Vatayana dropped the project of taking control of that meeting.

Osho once said, “This is not a democracy,” but the Master makes certain decisions or confronts people in certain situations with certain ways of working; that’s one thing. When disciples are dealing with each other, you can’t adopt the same attitude that the Master had and then say, “That’s the way the Master works.” He comes from a completely different level of consciousness. As a disciple, to start imitating this way of working and pose as a successor is not only stupid but also harmful. I think in the world of sannyas we sometimes adopt attitudes that are not healthy. They don’t allow communication and respect to arise, and I saw a lot of that in Sheela’s time.

So in the 2009 German center meeting there was a confrontation about the trademark issue, and I made it a point that the reality of this situation is reflected in clear guidance from Osho that nobody disputes. Osho said the centers are all independent – not only by their legal structure but also in their use of Osho’s name as a reference to His teachings and vision. The centers are at the most “spiritually affiliated.” That has always been Osho’s relationship with individuals and centers, and the pretense of a trademark stands in direct opposition to the reality of this relationship. Vatayana argued that Osho wanted trademarks. She even went so far as to say that whenever someone received a center from Osho a license was given at that moment. This is bullshit and an appalling insult to the moments when Osho gave people the name for a center. Osho respected the centers’ complete freedom; there was no signature on a contract on any side. It was never a question of a legal relationship. And then Vatayana tried to say, “Well, maybe there is a way we can reconsider the whole thing, in the sense we will try to maintain the centers’ independence and still have a trademark.”

Of course, that is just deceptive. Independence means both that the centers have always been legally independent and that they’ve been independent in their use of Osho’s name as a reference to His teachings. “Osho” is not, and has never been, a trademark; it simply does not qualify to be a trademark, because, as I already said, it’s just the name of Osho as a person and is also a description of the content of His teachings and vision.

The cunning thing, though, was that while we were in that meeting in 2009 arguing about the trademark issue, Vatayana was sending “updated agreements” about this fictional trademark to all the centers that were not present in the meeting, without telling anyone at the meeting.

I also had a dispute with Yogendra about this in 2009, and he completely agreed that Osho had acknowledged that the centers were independent, but he said, “Well, you know, with certain situations, we asked the lawyers how we should handle them and what we should do, and they suggested to us that we should create a trademark.” How can they claim on the one hand that Osho wanted a trademark and on the other hand say something like this?

In December I wrote a letter to Global Connections that we would not sign any agreement with them and that we would do anything necessary to oppose any attempt to change legally independent centers into some kind of “franchise system.” If OIF insists that there is a trademark “Osho” in Europe, then we will bring a case to establish that there is no trademark in the European Union, just as it has been proven in the US. In this process I follow my heart, and I follow my own understanding. I know that without freedom love is not possible. It’s very simple. And it is not freedom if you force people or if you bind people with legal contracts. It’s just like marriage. It destroys freedom, and it destroys any possibility to really flower. This was Osho’s wisdom when He refused to create any kind of organization.

In my understanding nobody can give you the right to use the name Osho, as nobody can own Osho’s name, and, therefore, nobody needs to ask anybody for a “right” to use the Osho name. It describes content but does not mean that it originates from somebody who is entitled to or in the position to control content. Osho Himself asked everyone involved in His work to use His name, and we have all used it for 21 years. It’s just ridiculous to pretend it’s a trademark for anyone.

But I’m not a crusader; that much is certain. I don’t judge what others should do. For some person it may be right to say, “I don’t want to have anything to do with it.” I don’t know what their lives look like, but from my situation, from my own experience I can’t just stand by and do nothing. I am doing what I am doing because my heart tells me so. I don’t want to point my finger at anybody else and say, “You should do it also.”

For me this is exactly the same situation as we faced with Sheela. And I tell you I don’t know where I would be in all of this without the experience of the Ranch. Some say the Ranch was a failure, but to be honest, I don’t think it was a failure. I think it was the one of the most incredible experiences and teachings about organized religion that Osho has given. Without that experience – which was painful, very painful – I would not have the guts or the spine to say no. Osho was in silence, and Sheela was the only person seeing Him. That gave her an incredible influence over people who loved and respected Osho. I think Osho first kept quiet when the house was on fire, and He even put more fuel on it to make the house burn down completely – the house of organized religion and all that comes with it. But the basic message for me is that I have to trust and to risk everything within myself. I think of what happened on the Ranch as a vaccination against religion. The experience taught me about fascism in the name of religion and in the name of spirituality. He pulled the plug in time then. There is no one there to pull the plug now. It’s now the responsibility of each of us to speak up.

And, of course, it is a completely childish attitude to point the finger at Sheela. We are all Sheela; it is in every one of us. The same way she was or is blaming Osho for everything she has done, we give away responsibility to outer “authorities” and lose our freedom. This is especially strong for Germans who had the experience of Hitler in the last century to teach us that we all have this potential. Maybe it’s not by accident that opposition to the trademark registration in the EU is coming from Germany.
It’s so clear to me that the legal thing that’s happening is just a joke. The name Osho stands for this amazing Master and His teachings and His vision. It cannot be separated: here the person and there the teaching. And it is not possible to monopolize the name Osho. The ® some people would like to add to “Osho” is deceptive. For me, it really stands for “Religion” – a “Trademark Religion,” as that is what these people are trying to achieve. They want to establish a new authority and make a religion out of a vision. To pretend that Osho’s name is a trademark – the name of the man who has always been an advocate for total freedom without religion − is as intelligent as someone who does not want the death penalty saying, “I will shoot everybody who is for the death penalty!”

For me it is important not to get too serious about this. I’m German, you know; I can be very serious. Then I get almost righteous myself, and that is not the point.

People will certainly be confronted by the question, “Where do I stand in this?” as they are confronted with demands that they submit to outer control. And that will be beneficial, because they will have to look for themselves, or play the same game that has been played for millennia.

Sourced from our Osho magazine, the Viha Connection.


  1. Beloveds, I shudder how the political, very ugly head is raised and I certainly have no answer to this dilemma... lets not become political, too. Maybe every single Sannyasin could announce a Sannyas-Center and create a chain of consciousness and celebration. It is an impossible task to frame the vastness of expressions of all and everyones path to awakening and the attempt by unenlightened ones to do so, is very scary ... I have heard that the Osho resort might be sold to the richest man of India?The one whose name is on every thing: TaTa? Any one knows about this? All my love, Namaste, Shantam

  2. Excellently put Ramateertha!
    And I think I heard a roar of laughter somewhere far away and very near... love, jalal

  3. Great article - so pleased with your 'upfrontness'. I wish more people were brave enough to accurately describe their views.

  4. It would be helpful if someone could explain what a trademark means for those of us who do not know.
    One of the sannyasins running the Osho center where I live puts some Osho quotes up on the walls of the center. Sometimes some words of the Osho quotes are modified because the sannyasin feels the quote is more meaningful with some of Osho's words being replaced by some of his own words. Does changing Osho words have anything to do with trademark?

  5. Dear Friends,

    I am sorry to hear that some of you are having trouble posting here. I am trying to sort this out. Please be patient!

    Love, Avinasho (with egg on my face...)

  6. Atleast Somebody got some guts. Well done!

  7. A trademark means, that only the owner of it can use it. In our case the name Osho can be only used with the permission of some organisation. For centers it means, that they need the permission of that organisation, in order to call themseelves Osho centers. In the real world this means, that, whoever is in power in Poona, has the power to shut down any Osho center. Obviously somebody is trying to gain power over the center leaders.

    I am absolutely with Ramateertha. Stop the power hungry! Hopefully Sheela was a good enough lession for us, so we don't have to repeat it.
    I am very proud of Ramateertha. He is representing all of us who knew the master and his dislike for organized religion. Our movement shouldn't become a carbon copy of all other religions with high priests and other power-mongers. Let's proof that his vision of a free religion without organization is possible.
    Love to all of you, my fellow travelers!

  8. Pathik wrote:

    Dear Ramatheertha,

    I understand your concern. With those reported facts and statements you really seem to have a case there, and had I been exposed to anything like that I would feel the same urge to resist.

    And I am not arguing against you or intending to enter a quote battle with you. We know that to each quote from Osho for one aspect of an issue we can find another one for its opposite aspect.

    It's just that I can't follow you in your campaign because in the Osho Leela center in Munich I have not made those experiences.

    Vatayana has been working in, with and for our center for many years now, and she is much loved and respected here. We don't follow guidelines in all detail, and I never felt 'policed'. We did discuss issues like the Trade Mark, the Letter of Consent, the ®. I have never seen a 'Handbook' for the centers.

    So far I had also objected to the idea of making the name Osho a trade mark, it looked absurd to me. But then in many places now people offer Kundalini or Dynamic meditations or others created by Osho, and they make adjustments, maybe they shorten a little here or they extend a phase there, or whatever; not to speak of the growing number of bogus imitators.

    Considering the tremendous energy Osho has put into developing the Active Meditations, considering the transforming force they have for so many people - including myself - for more than 40 years now all over the world, and finding timeless beauty in the music that supports them, it seems to make sense to label the Original with a trade mark and thus make it discernible, also in the sense of tradition.

    The Meditation Facilitator Training which Vatayana conducted here a few times since last year and which I, Taru and quite a few others so far have done, transmits this passion and zest for meditation and for enabling the meditators to reach the utmost possible personal experience. And by the way, it also shows great respect for them in finding their own approach.

    Thus I have no problem anymore to use the ®, even if the officials at Osho Foundation had other interests with it, businesswise or political. There is a quality in their work at the Resort, and I see that also in the website, an intelligence in the new ways they find to present Osho and His understanding of meditation to the man and woman of today.

    Signing the Letter of Consent, by which Taru and I simply showed our willingness to use the trade mark in the center's announcements and to present nothing else than Osho there, was now easy for me. The latter is my sole interest anyway, apart from playing music. And I do not see the center as part of a strucuture in a way that makes me feel like participating in organised center meetings, but I do see it being 'spiritually affiliated' with other Osho places of different directions.

    Taru has read this letter and agrees to it.

    Love from Pathik

    Munich, September 2010

  9. I would love to thank Ramateertha for his relieving words of insight and understanding and his strength and clarity to oppose.
    Ramateertha is as I see it clearly following Osho's vision of freedom and independence to create or rather maintain in the centers an open space for human development without control.

    love, satyo

  10. Way to go, Ramateertha!
    Thanks Viha Connection for making this interview available.
    Sw Satyam Taruno

  11. "Well, I for one want to thank Ramateertha for the clarity and specificity of his response to the "trademark" question. It was concise, succinct, and dead on. Even for a relatively new sannyasin such as myself, there is a "sweet spot" in the center of my being that responds to what he has to say, and is in agreement. So, I stand squarely in support of this article, and in agreement. The very part of me that rebelled against organized religion for the last 40 years now understands the pitfalls of attempting to control the expression of the teacher the religion seeks to form around. As the young woman in the article voiced, "it's all about power, isn't it?" I'm grateful that someone is listening. Another way to phrase it would be to say "it is all about control, isn't it?" The purpose of law and lawyers is to create and sustain structure, and to assure the dominance of that structure, and that scares me, as there is definitely a part of me that wants that structure to exist, and is willing to surrender my individual authority to it. I want it to be neat and clear, order out of chaos, and after reading this article, I can see that hidden motivation in myself. But Ramateertha's argument that only someone with the level of consciousness of, in this case, OSHO, is qualified to decide what structure is appropriate regarding his teachings strikes home for me. Are we going to let people whose primary motivations are seeking to fit OSHO's spiritual teachings into a world that defends unconsciousness govern how those teachings are filtered into the world? How is that for structure? And how does that conform with what OSHO taught? For me, OSHO taught that it is in the messiness and the contradictions that we find all of ourselves, and liberation. As a sannyasin, I have a fundamental understanding that spirituality and religion are two different things. This trademark issue seeks to establish a gatekeeper who decides how OSHO's teachings are allowed to be expressed, and the manner of that expression. Sound familiar? You could be speaking of the teachings of Christ 2000 years ago, or the teachings of Mohammed today. Every religious crisis in the world has its roots in the same fundamental issue - who controls the interpreting? Let OSHO's teachings speak for themselves, without filters. Nothing should be hidden, or censored. Live with the contradictions, the fragility of misunderstandings, the risks of surrendering control. Live in the moment, as OSHO asked us to...
    Thank you Hari Deva, and thank you Ramateertha, for having the courage to shine the light. I am grateful.
    Swami Chaitanyo Rajan

  12. Just a quick response to Pathik: Osho had a lot to say about how meditations cannot be trademarked. Putting that aside for the moment, you should know that OIF has never filed any trademarks relating to Osho's meditations that apply in the EU. So the protection of meditations has absolutely nothing to do with the EU trademark case. The only issue is the independence of the centers. I'm curious. Did someone tell you the meditations were an issue? If so, someone is misleading you.
    Much love,

  13. My father, Sardarji Gurdayal Singh must be sharing a belly laugh with Osho over this ® fiasco! Come on people, we sanyasins are supposed to be REBELS against ANY organized religion and should be doubly concerned of letting the Preacher man and Priests come in through the back door and try to subvert or change the message subtly. Beauty of Osho has always been the contradictions as he would refuse to compromise but would include the opposites in the totality of his message. This of course can be interpreted any which way if taken out of context and his context was always in the present and directly relevant to the issue/person at present.
    I salute Harideva and Ramteertha in expressing their views with grace,love and respect and Viha to felicitate this. We are ALL seeds of the divine and deserve equal respect as well and should be true to our inner guide and should not be afraid to roar like a lion.
    I have tremendous respect for the inner circle as they are the chosen ones to carry the vision forward but they should not be infallible like the Pope and we sanyasins are innocent and compassionate enough (I hope) to tell the emperor when he is parading naked.
    There were meditation in India from the time of the seers and Osho took some of them and with his vision and clarity, refined them for the modern man. I hope there will be more updates happening in the future as mankind evolves.
    The idea of trademarking Osho or meditations are patently absurd as they belong to the whole humanity and I understand the politics of economy but somethings are better left alone or they lose all meaning. A fragrance,a cloud,a breeze or consciousness can not be captured and can only be shared.
    I believe in giving utmost respect to the inner circle as they have the mantle of caring on the work and hope that they pay heed to our concerns that all organized religions start out with control being vested in the central authority and than the sec becomes holy(or unholy as Osho would say). Osho predicted that this would happen and said that he was trying diligently to sabotage the possibility. I also believe that sanyasins are a different breed then anything seen on this earth and we may yet have a loving, thriving and vibrant community that leads the seekers by example of compassion and awareness.
    Much Love

    Anand Amrit

  14. After reading the interview with Ramateertha and also his letter to the Inner Circle, I am making the following public response:
    First of all I thank Ramateertha to come out and expose his point of view which I support all the way… actually, I think this letter shouldn´t be addressed only to the Inner Circle, but to the sannyas community at large!
    Also, I am not sure if this ´so-called´ Inner Circle exists anymore, at least as it was designed by Osho before leaving His body. Therefore let´s look at the Trademark and Copyright issues without depending on any sort of ´designed authorities´!!!
    I liked very much the part in Ramateertha´s letter when he says: ”The name Osho stands for this amazing Master and His teachings and His vision. It cannot be separated: here the person and there the teachings…”
    This part reminded me about what I was told by Jayesh a couple of years ago when I proposed a collaboration by OIF for my project ´Osho the Movie´. He replied that ”Osho said not to focus on His person, but on His vision….” This tells me that a movie about His life isn´t following His so-called guidelines!
    I responded saying:”What is the difference between the life of a Master and His vision?”
    If I read the story of Gurdjieff´s life, I may understand his vision even better! And if we wouldn´t know the story of Socrates´ trial, or Jesus´ crucifixion or all the Zen and Sufi anecdotes about the Masters of those traditions… maybe we would not be capable to imbibe the fragrance and the silence of such visions
    After my response there was no further answer by OIF but some time later I was threatened when I put an ad about my project on You Tube! After receiving a notification by OIF regarding the ownership of Osho´s material, Google, who is behind You Tube, took off my ad. I immediately sent Google a counter-notification through my lawyer and, as the legal process goes, Google had to ask OIF to prove the ownership of such material. Obviously OIF couldn´t prove anything and Google uploaded my ad again (the ad is still up until now).
    I make this story public not to emphasize my personal case, but just as an example of the way OIF has behaved with so many Osho´s lovers and disciples. I agree that some attention regarding bad use of Osho´s material and work should be there and I think also that Jayesh and all the other members of OIF are bona fide when they act the way they act. But most probably, even the Pope and the Ayatollahs, the mullahs and several cardinals are bona fide when they permit only four versions of the gospels, or/and interpret the Quran the way they do…
    The real issue here is: “How open are they are to re-visit such ´permits´ and ´interpretations´?”
    Maybe with all the turmoil around the Trademark issue (I know that soon the same legal opposition that Osho World made against OIF and won in the U.S.A. will also happen in Europe by a group of European sannyasins and Centers), the time is ripe for such re-consideration.
    If such re-consideration will happen and an honest, heartfelt and open confrontation between all parties will take place, it will be such a blessing and re-born phase for all Osho’s lovers and disciples in the world.
    I stand for that!!!
    SW. LAKSHEN (writer, director and producer of Osho The Movie)

  15. I am happy to read that Pathik feels so comfortable with Vatayana and the proceedings of the Inner Circle. That's great. However, we should also respect that there are some Sannyasins on this earth who don't. This is one of the aspects in Osho's work that I always used to love so much: That many different people were able to come to Him and we all experienced Him in our own unique individual way. Now, if everybody who uses Osho's meditations or His quotes first needs the permission of a few people of the Management Team, we will all be streamlined, and only this one version of Osho's work will prevail. Pathik, you mention the necessity of control: Who then is going to control the controllers? The trademark is a big tool of power. Is there anybody amongst us who can say for certain that they themselves would not be tempted to misuse such a power tool if they had it? We should not give such a powerful tool into the hands of fallible human beings.
    From Khabira

  16. Beloved Friends,

    For years I felt hurt because of the banning of so many beautiful Sannyasins from "the Resort" by the Management team.

    The only reason was we were sharing our concerns about the Trademark business, removing Osho's pictures from the place, demolishing Buddhahall etc.etc.
    Now I am aware this is a great opportunity to become conscious about the whole spiritual power game.

    Yesterday I came across Osho' s saying;

    "You remain retarded because of these people who go on telling you what is right and what is wrong. They keep you in dependence, in slavery, and the whole of humanity is living under spiritual slavery.
    I teach you rebellion!
    Come out of the masses. Stand alone like a lion and live your life according to your own light.
    Find the light and it will show you the path....."
    Osho / Yakusan: straight to the point of enlightenment #4

    love, Kalpa

  17. These musings radiate intelligence, both of heart and mind. Ramateertha has gathered all of himself to respond to the situation, giving his response an integrity I have not heard in this debate that has simmered for so long.

    His take on the drama we lived at the Ranch, that it was “a vaccination against religion,” especially rang true. I have said similar things myself, not so eloquently, but for me, too, the Ranch was a school that taught the cost of turning a blind eye to exploitation.

    Perhaps I have turned away from my own sickened immune response to what I’ve felt is being repeated in Pune… to protect myself, i.e. so I could continue to pass through the Gateless Gate. In fact, for that very reason, I was reluctant to respond here, in public, with my full enthusiasm for his words.

    He is right, “People will certainly be confronted by the question, ‘Where do I stand in this?’” And I am grateful to be pulled out of hiding. This is not a statement of blame, as I appreciate his reminder that a Sheela lives in us all. But he has inspired me to have the courage to say "amen."

  18. ramteertha says "we are all sheela"
    meaning,we are all responsible for the sheela episode..

    today,the newly elected leader of the labour party in uk made his first speech.
    "we are all to blame" (for losing the election)
    and like on this blog,he gets rapturous applause from his followers.

    basic standard politicking.

    no one asks
    what does such a statement really mean and imply?

    a story:
    a man raped a woman.
    during his rehabilitation,he spent a lot of money on many dfifferent psychotherapies.
    slowly and painfully,he learned that he was responsible for creating his reality,his life and the situations he had got himself into.
    one day,his victim called him,asking for money as reparations....
    he refused.
    "you were responsible for creating your own reality" he said...

  19. This bright and beautiful Ramateertha´s interview has provoked a series of insights and echoes that are very essential to all sannyasins, friends and Osho´s lovers. Many years ago, far away here in Brazil, I´ve already felt that there was something going on in Pune which was against the Master´s heart and vision. Time is proving, worldwide, that OIF has to reconsider its way of dealing with Osho´s true spiritual legacy. I thank you all for sharing your perceptions and testemonies through Osho Viha. Namaste, beloveds! And His Blessings. Anand Neerava

  20. Beloved Friends,
    This is a very interesting string of facts and how I suffered because of OIF
    It is about OSHO FAN PAGE on of which I am the creator.
    On 7th October 2009 I received a mail from facebook that I had violated the terms and uses of facebok….the letter say:
    You created a Page that has violated our Terms of Use. A Facebook Page is a distinct presence used solely for business or promotional purposes. Among other things, Pages that are hateful, threatening, or obscene are not allowed. We also take down Pages that attack an individual or group, or that are set up by an unauthorized individual. If your Page was removed for any of the above reasons, it will not be reinstated. Continued misuse of Facebook's features could result in the permanent loss of your account.

    If you have any questions or concerns, you can visit the Terms applicable to Facebook Pages at

    The Facebook Team”
    And further I got a notice on my profile
    Then on 9th October 2009, to my bewilderment I find that the page is back and I have been removed as the administrator and has become the administrator……very strange…I never received any show cause or information regarding it.
    On 7th October when allegedly the page was shut down due to “Violation of terms” it had 39750+ members.
    If we were violating the terms of facebook, how can they allow the same page back again with different administrator…..I am totally perplexed.
    In a second mail to me facebook also threatened me that if I do not stop doing, what I am doing my profile will be deleted…….I thought we were living in a civilized world but our Dear OIF does not want us to live in a civilized way……
    Well friends, that’s all I got to say.
    Much Regards and Love
    Anand Kamal Goel

  21. beloved friends,
    when i was reading Ramateertha´s courageous comment, i was crying in the end... i am not sure why, but probably because it is all so painful+sad what happens around Osho and his vision. if the ranch+sheela-experience was not enough to learn for us, what else needs to happen? if Osho's living example of rebelliousness and fearlessness was not enough to guide us... today the whole world is suffering from power-controll, fear and disinformation.
    lets roar like the lions and lets not allow anybody to control us out of fear and lets be guided alone by our hearts where Osho is always beaming! Beeing with Osho is a love affair and NOT A BUSINESS!!!!!!

    muchlove and joy to all
    sw. veet ateet


Just click on the pencil icon to post your comment to this article NOTE: All comments will be reviewed before being published to avoid spamming content