There is no God, and there is no question of his revelation. I don’t see any possibility of God’s existence.
Well...that is pretty blunt, don't you think? In the comments sections, baawra pointed out that my description of Osho as an agnostic was inaccurate. It caused me to take a second look. at all of this. Yesterday, when I typed something along the lines of "Does Osho believe in God" into google it led me to an article called "God, The Imaginary Puppeteer" which is from an online e-book by Osho called God Is Dead, Now Zen Is The Only Living Truth.
In the article, Osho talks about Friedrich Nietzsche and his theology/philosophy about God. Pretty simple theology...God is dead and man is free. Osho rightly ponders the question "free to do what?"
Man is free, but free for what? If there is no God and man is free, that will simply mean man is now capable of doing anything, good or bad; there is nobody to judge him, nobody to forgive him. This freedom will be simply licentiousness.
There comes the other side. You remove God and you leave man utterly empty. Of course, you declare his freedom, but to what purpose? How is he going to use his freedom creatively, responsibly? How is he going to avoid freedom being reduced to licentiousness?
His answer is Zen...meditation. Nietzsche went nearly insane because he did not know about/practice meditation.
Really? It's as simple as that? Meditate? I recently read (and plan to write about) a book called How God Changes Your Brain. It is a somewhat scholarly work written in a style that is easily understandable for those of us (like me) with a Joe Schmoe knowledge of brain chemistry etc. In a way, Osho is right. There ARE certain changes in brain chemistry that take place during meditation/contemplative prayer...changes that occur whether one is contemplating/communing with God....or an especially colorful rock or lovely flower. On Zen meditation he says:
But it has a tremendous science to transform your consciousness, to bring so much awareness to you that you cannot commit evil. It is not a commandment from outside, it comes from your innermost being. Once you know your center of being, once you know you are one with the cosmos -- and the cosmos has never been created, it has been there always and always, and will be there always and always, from eternity to eternity -- once you know your luminous being, your hidden Gautam Buddha, it is impossible to do anything wrong, it is impossible to do anything evil, it is impossible to do any sin.
To me, when Osho speaks of the cosmos that has never been created, that has always been, I think he is speaking of God. Perhaps, to Osho, God remained anonymous. God had not fully revealed himself (or Osho refused to see him) as something other than a mysterious no-thing. Osho's "god" does not have a "face." He saw the need for connection and the benefits of the connection. But connection to what? Existence.
And there is a tremendous need in man's being to be related to existence. He needs roots in existence, because only when the roots go deep into existence will he blossom into a Buddha, will he blossom into millions of flowers, will his life not be meaningless. Then his life will be tremendously overflowing with meaning, significance, blissfulness; his life will be simply a celebration.
Exactly what is existence? He doesn't really explain what it is but he claims he can teach you how to come in contact with it.
I am teaching you how to come in contact with existence, how to find out where you are connected, wired with existence. From where are you getting your life moment to moment? Where is your intelligence coming from? If existence is unintelligent, how can you be intelligent? Where will you get it from?
Which is a really good question. Where will you get it from? Does it come from some elusive, ethereal, mystical, nameless, faceless force labeled "existence?" No, that just doesn't cut it for me. I credit God as the source of my life...in whom we all live and move and have our being. I've "leafed" through this e-book today...and Osho's god is way too small.