The Beautiful Face of a Woman

[rideforever]

I wanted to share some opening words of my new Osho book, Tantra the Supreme Understanding.


"The First Thing is the Body

Tantra trusts in your body.  Tantra trusts in your senses.  Tantra trusts in your energy.  Tantra trusts in you - in toto.  Tantra does not deny anything but transforms everything.

How to attain to this Tantra vision ?  This is the map to turn you on, and to turn you in, and to turn you beyond.

The first thing is the body.  The body is your base, it is your ground, it is where you are grounded.  To make you antagonistic towards the body is to destroy you, is to make you schizophrenic, is to make you miserable, is to create hell.  You are the body.  Of course you are more than the body, but that 'more' will follow later on.  First, you are the body.  The body is your basic truth, so never be against the body.  Whenver you are against the body you are losing contact with reality, because your body is your contact, your body is your bridge.  Your body is your temple.

Tantra teaches reverence for the body, love, respect for the body, gratitude for the body.  The body is marvelous, it is the greatest of mysteries.

But you have been taught to be against the body.  So sometimes you are over-mystified by the tree, by the green tree; sometimes mystified by the moon and the sun, sometimes mystified by a flower - but you are never mystified by your own body.  And your body is the most complex phenomenon in existence.  No flower, no tree has such a beautiful body as you have; no moon, no sun, no star has such an evolved mechanism as you have.

You have been taught to appreciate the flower, which is a simple thing.  You have been taught to appreciate a tree, which is a simple thing.  You have even been taught to appreciate stones, rocks, mountains, rivers, but you have never been taught to respect your own body, to be mystified by it.  Yes, it is very close, so it is every easy to forget about.  it is very obvious, so it is easy to neglect.  But this is the most beautiful phenomenon.

If you look at a flower people will say, 'How aesthetic!'  And if you look at a woman's beautiful face or a man's beautiful face, people will say, 'This is lust.'  If you go to the tree and stand there, and look in a dazed state at the flower - your eyes wide open, your senses wide open to allow the beauty of the flower to enter you - people will think you are a poet or a painter or a mystic. 

But if you go to a woman or a man and just stand there with great reverence and respect, and look at the woman with your eyes wide open and your senses drinking in the beauty of the woman, the police will catch hold of you.  Nobody will say that you are a mystic, a poet; nobody will appreciate what you are doing.

Something has gone wrong.  If you go to a stranger on the street and you say, 'What beautiful eyes you have!' you will feel embarrassed, he wil feel embarrassed.  He will not be able to say thank you to you.  In fact, he will feel offended, because who are you to interfere in his private life ?  Who are you to dare?  If you go and touch the tree, the tree feels happy.  But if you go and touch a man, he feels offended.  What has gone wrong ?  Something has been damaged tremendously and very deeply.

The first thing is to learn respect for the body, to unlearn all the nonsense that has been taught to you about the body.  Otherwise you will never turn on, and you will never turn in, and you will never turn beyond."

[ivana]

Hi
I am back to the UK for short time so Hello to everybody. Next Friday I will go again to 10days Vipassana course at International Meditation Centre.
I would like to give my opinion. I am a girl. If I hear a man to tell me something nice about my body with feeling that he would like to have sex with me I hate it. If it is without a sexual meaning I appreciate it by thank you. Usually I tell something about that my body is still working what I appreciate more. If I am in contact with a girl which is beautiful, I tell her about it.
If I am in contact with a handsome boy, usually I do not tell him. I am not sure why I usually do not tell a boy that he is handsome maybe I do not want to make him confuse or maybe it is confusing for me.
Take care
Ivana

[Quardamon]

Hello Rideforever,
If I put aside my fantasies about tantra and Osho, and just read this as the intro of a book, this is my reaction:
It is powerful. It does an appeal. It has a bit of a fighter's mentality. And it uses beautiful images. Well done.
Greetz
Quardamon

P.S.: I would not regard myself as part of the public that this book would be written for. I did some kundalini-meditation in Osho style, but liked massage and dance in a gentle style far more.

[kidnovice]

Osho wrote beautifully. And there is a profound wisdom in this excerpt.

However, I also think it is important to balance our trust in the body with skepticism. There is nothing more beautiful than the interaction of mind and matter, but there is also nothing more dangerous. This is a complex truth that we have to understand before we can intelligently "trust" the body.

The physical body plays an integral role in the formation of clinging. If you don't really understand this truth, then absolute trust is tantamount to absolute attachment. I see no liberation there.

Similarly, if you don't have a strong basis of equanimity and right intention, reverence of the body will almost certainly lead you to hedonism and moral nihilism. [edited: not skillful speech]

With metta,
KN

[rideforever]

Truth is not complex.

If one feels uncertainy then developing deeper sensitivity is a good strategy to free yourself of it.

[kidnovice]

In my experience, some truths are quite simple. Some are not. The devil is always in the details. 

The Buddha described the interaction of mind and body in terms of  what he called, "dependent co-arising." I can't help but think of a sutta in which Ananda proclaimed the simplicity of the truth. You can read the entire sutta here.  Below is an excerpt:

"I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Kurus. Now, the Kurus have a town named Kammasadhamma. There Ven. Ananda approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "It's amazing, lord, it's astounding, how deep this dependent co-arising is, and how deep its appearance, and yet to me it seems as clear as clear can be."

[The Buddha:] "Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Deep is this dependent co-arising, and deep its appearance. It's because of not understanding and not penetrating this Dhamma that this generation is like a tangled skein, a knotted ball of string, like matted rushes and reeds, and does not go beyond transmigration, beyond the planes of deprivation, woe, and bad destinations."

With metta,
KN

[rideforever]

I can't help but think

This seems to be the case.

The entire discourse by Osho points to the primacy of experience, and you quote a scripture ?

[kidnovice]

Alright, this conversation is definitely veering away from skillful speech. Let's be mindful of how we speak  

I have clearly stated my reasons for seeing the body as something which shouldn't be trusted blindly.  Yes, it is an integral cause of our joy and well being. But it is also an integral cause of clinging, and thus suffering. This is a complex truth that I have seen for myself, as have many other meditators (including the Buddha)

I am sorry if my response was unpleasant to read. I agree that "trusting the body" can be a valuable strategy at different times for different practitioners, especially as an antidote for feelings of uncertainty. However, taken as an absolute truth-- as a teaching with no counterpoint--- it is dangerous.

I felt obliged to say so. The interactions between the body and mind ARE complex with complex results: both skillful and unskillful.  If you want a simple truth, revering the body isn't it. Here is a better one: the body is conditioned. The body "wants" what it has been conditioned to want (by awareness, by thoughts, by nutrition, by the environment, etc.).  Sometimes what the body wants is essential to our happiness, but other times, our misery. Thus, what we really need to do is listen to it, but intelligently.

My advice: Rather than revere the body, love it. Love it the way a parent loves a child.

Best wishes,
KN

[Andrew]

I might trust my body, but I don't trust OSHO. How about all the ugly people of the world? No compliments for them I guess..."Oh, what a lovely plainness you have, completely unremarkable, you are technically still human though so I guess you are wonderful, have a nice day "

The analogy of a tree is absurd. I've never been turned on by a tree. Call me weird, but that's how I roll...

love

andy

[dragoneye]

beau·ti·ful adj \ˈbyü-ti-fəl\
Definition of BEAUTIFUL

1
: having qualities of beauty : exciting aesthetic pleasure
2
: generally pleasing : excellent
— beau·ti·ful·ly  adverb
— beau·ti·ful·ness  noun
Respectfully, It seems that the judgments we associate with beauty, are causing a lack of understanding between us.
This very type of misunderstanding, would seem to be the source of much of the religious judgement and guidance (and strife,) for, at least, modern human experience.
Maybe, thats all Osho is bringing our attention to.
Warm blessings,
DE

[Namaste]

Be a you to fill.

Talking out of my ass.

[joy]

I wanted to share some opening words of my new Osho book, Tantra the Supreme Understanding.

I am not wise enough to express my understanding about Osho or his book, 'Tantra the Supreme Understanding' just by  reading 'some opening words'.

[Andrew]

  What has gone wrong ?  Something has been damaged tremendously and very deeply.

If this book helps you see the world in a new light, then more power to you brother. I mean that. What do I know anyway? though after rereading, I'm guessing this is his central point; not a very profound thing to say. It is our default opinion as humans it would seem. Maybe he is right, which of course makes us all right  .

The opposite point of view is to stop judging the 'world' with 'this is broken and that needs fixing' type statements, and just start to re frame our perspective. Is it broken? Or is it going along just as planned?.  Perhaps that's what he means...let us know please, if only for the sake of the all sexually repressed trees...


love

andy

[Vivek]

Loved this excerpt, RF. Even though I don't agree with everything Osho has said/written, some of his concepts do make a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing.

[rideforever]

Hi KN, sorry if I was grating yesterday.

I am not sure to what extent you are wanting to engage with me.  Here is my instant reaction to the points you make in your post.

Alright, this conversation is definitely veering away from skillful speech. Let's be mindful of how we speak  

You seem defensive after my last post.  Is this a good or bad thing ?  Does it lead to further understanding ?  Not sure, but if you are defensive it is opening up a vista for exploration.

I have clearly stated my reasons for seeing the body as something which shouldn't be trusted blindly.  Yes, it is an integral cause of our joy and well being. But it is also an integral cause of clinging, and thus suffering. This is a complex truth that I have seen for myself, as have many other meditators (including the Buddha)

No matter that you have stated your reasons in the past, it is only your current experience that is existing, else you are living in the past.

Trusting the body blindly.  Can you trust yourself blindly ?  This is exactly Osho's point - thousands of years of 'culture' (becoming unreal) have lead man to not trust their experience, which begins with not trusting their body.  

Yes there are complex reasons for tricking you into distrust.  They lead you away from yourself.  The reasons can be called sin, scripture, complexity, skillfullness ... any concept you like ... but it is all the same in result, it leads you away from your experience.


"To make you antagonistic towards the body is to destroy you, is to make you schizophrenic, is to make you miserable, is to create hell. "

I am sorry if my response was unpleasant to read. I agree that "trusting the body" can be a valuable strategy at different times for different practitioners, especially as an antidote for feelings of uncertainty. However, taken as an absolute truth-- as a teaching with no counterpoint--- it is dangerous.

It wasn't unpleasant to read.

'a valuable strategy at different times' ... oh how complicated.  Truth is not complex.  And if you seek truth I would recommend a simple strategy else your mind will twist you.

skillful and unskillful.

This again seems like a creation of the mind, judging things to be skillful or unskillful ... this is spiritual materialism ... i.e. moving your attachments into the spiritual realm.  The mind is very tricky.

I would say drop all concepts and begin at the beginning, with your experience.

If you want a simple truth, revering the body isn't it. Here is a better one: the body is conditioned. The body "wants" what it has been conditioned to want (by awareness, by thoughts, by nutrition, by the environment, etc.).  Sometimes what the body wants is essential to our happiness, but other times, our misery. Thus, what we really need to do is listen to it, but intelligently.

Who is there to listen intelligently ?  This is all mind, and the mind is deeply disturbed.  The mind is the home to the many concepts you talk of.

The body much less disturbed.  Hence starting with the body is a good strategy.  It can lead you home.

If your body can lead you home and you make war with it ...

Love it the way a parent loves a child.

If you split your experience into (1) parent and (2) child, you are generating a new problem for yourself.  You have made 2 people within you.  

One of them (the mind) thinks it is a good parent - it has sucked you in to its madness, and given you a nice rationalisation (you are superior to the body).  The mind has gained power, and the path home is distrusted.

Catholic priests also think they are superior to their body... 

This tactic has been used for millenia, because taking your 'base' (body) away from you makes you so empty that you become dependant on others ... and so others (priests/politicians) gain power.

What a mess.
----------------------------------

Surrender to undivided experiencing.

[rideforever]

The opposite point of view is to stop judging the 'world' with 'this is broken and that needs fixing' type statements, and just start to re frame our perspective. Is it broken? Or is it going along just as planned?.

Hey.  What you are suggesting is not opposite, it is just making different judgements.

Opposite would be to be with your experience and drop the mind (drop the source of judgements).

[Quardamon]

When I was nineteen, I danced at a party at school. It was a wonderful experience for me to enjoy that and realise, that no-one else could move my body, and sense my body. It helped me to see how strongly concepts and ideas had framed reality for me. Since then,  throughout the years, sensing into my body, trusting my body has helped me to connect to reality in a neutral and trusting way.
Somehow I had been aware in my childhood, that I could not trust the mind - that ideas, a world view and fanaticism could crush an individual. This contact with my body gave me a platform on which to feel safe. (And yes, it turned out that I had good reason to mistrust messages like "The ultimate truth this" and "The purpose of if is that" .)

My mistrust with Osho is, that a lot of his followers mistake the body to mean sex, and then to mistake sex to mean the suppressed ideas and fantasies about sexual activities. So that in the end it would again not be about sensing and about contact and about adjusting to what really is there.
I should stress this is a prejudice, and that there is a fear behind this prejudice.

Be well,

Quardamon

[rideforever]

When I was nineteen, I danced at a party at school. It was a wonderful experience for me to enjoy that and realise, that no-one else could move my body, and sense my body. It helped me to see how strongly concepts and ideas had framed reality for me. Since then,  throughout the years, sensing into my body, trusting my body has helped me to connect to reality in a neutral and trusting way.
Somehow I had been aware in my childhood, that I could not trust the mind - that ideas, a world view and fanaticism could crush an individual. This contact with my body gave me a platform on which to feel safe. (And yes, it turned out that I had good reason to mistrust messages like "The ultimate truth this" and "The purpose of if is that" .)

My mistrust with Osho is, that a lot of his followers mistake the body to mean sex, and then to mistake sex to mean the suppressed ideas and fantasies about sexual activities. So that in the end it would again not be about sensing and about contact and about adjusting to what really is there.
I should stress this is a prejudice, and that there is a fear behind this prejudice.

Be well,

Quardamon

Amen to that.

I was badly abused for years when I was young, humiliated, destroyed ... the message was kill yourself.  And my mind was saying kill me, kill me, kill me.

But somehow my body and heart were ever free of this mind, and longed to live and live free.

[Andrew]

Hey Rideforever,

I can see now how this is liberating for you, sort of a 'told you so' by your body, and you are celebrating that. That's cool. I really like the way you put it.

But somehow my body and heart were ever free of this mind, and longed to live and live free.

I understand now that you heart and body had a wisdom that kept you going, this is a very profound insight that you posted. It's funny, every time we interact, I come away learning something from the reaction I have. If I didn't come out and post, I wouldn't find out what was there for me to learn!!!

My prejudice, as Quardamon puts it, would be that I'm not in the situation in which I can explore extremely 'liberal' ideas. Married, three kids, saving for their therapy bills (that's a joke ), college money, mortgage etc,  it easy for me to be extremely pragmatic and particular about the use of reason. Re reading again, I can follow the excerpt up until the whole 'let's all stare at the beautiful people and touch men randomly' bit. He really doesn't do himself justice with that type of talk. But you post makes sense to me now, rideforever, thanks for being so open. _/\_

love

andy

[Quardamon]

  ... the message was kill yourself.  And my mind was saying kill me, kill me, kill me.
But somehow my body and heart were ever free of this mind, and longed to live and live free.

Amen.
Thank you for telling, Rideforever.
In my case it was not about killing. But there was madness in the air, at that time.

[Matthew]

...
I was badly abused for years when I was young, humiliated, destroyed ... the message was kill yourself.  And my mind was saying kill me, kill me, kill me.

But somehow my body and heart were ever free of this mind, and longed to live and live free.

Dear rideforever,

It makes us stronger. I too was abused and humiliated for years. The Dhamma did for me in about five years what would have taken twenty years in therapy.

Be well, be strong, be gentle,

Matthew

Not everyone knows this song is about abuse:

Christina Aguilera - Fighter (With Lyrics)

[Jeeprs]

I have to say, I am very suspicious about tantra, as explained by the likes of Rajneesh.

Over the years, I have had many people say, when I tell them I am interested in Buddhist meditation, 'Oh yes, I like the idea of tantra. That way you can have sex while getting enlightened.' There are actually 'Tantric Sex Workshops' advertised here in Australia. Shudder to think what goes on.

Of course, that is a very vulgar understanding of what Tantra actually is. I am aware that in the tradition itself, it is nothing like that. It is much more like Osho is indicating - a way to make use of the emotions and the feelings without suppressing them or denying them. I am sure that tantra is an extremely profound practice when understood and taught correctly. But it seems to me that nowadays it is just handed out to all and sundry. I went to an empowerment ceremony about a year ago. I was astonished to see that the local teachers were handing out complex visual aids to these very esoteric Tantra visualization rituals, to a very casual audience. 'Turn up Thursday, there's a transmission ceremony'. The kinds of remarks and questions that were being asked led me to think that very few of the participants had any idea of the fundamentals. So there is just an amazingly wide scope for delusion in this. As I understand it, the tantra is like the culmination of a progressive path, starting with monastic seclusion and many years of dedicated meditation. You work through the curriculum, and then start learning about Tantra. I think that is the way it is done in Tibet.

The Theravadins think that Tantra is delusion from the outset. They don't regard any of it as part of Buddhism, but as sorcery and magic that has been grafted on to it.  I don't necessarily agree with them. But it is a much harder path than Vipassana. You are working with what could be understood as very deep psychological forces and symbols. You never know where you could end up playing around with these ideas unless you have a firm foundation in the basics.

I also will comment that despite Osho's excellent explanations of all things mystical, he was a pretty poor exemplar during his life. I don't know if anyone around here remembers the Oregon ashram fiasco, the Rolls Royces, the armed guards, and Ma Sheela going to prison, but I do. Call me cynical if you like, but I will stick with the various modest, quiet, non-pretentious Theravada and Zen teachers.

Sorry to sound like the grinch who stole Christmas and please feel free to correct any misunderstandings I might have about Tantra and Osho. Maybe I am just a cynic.

[Andrew]

Maybe I am just a cynic.

You are a Regular Diogenes, Jonathon!!!. I can see you in your rough itchy cloak with your pouch and bowl sitting at your desk now just waiting for the lunch bell so you can go and lie in the sun!. chuckle,grin.

love

andy

[kidnovice]

Thank you for your honesty, RF. It is truly inspiring to read how your practice has transformed your relationship to your past trauma. I certainly would not want to minimize that, and that was not my intention when I critiqued Osho's teaching on the body.

In the end, I can only speak from my own experience. And my own experience has led me to see the body as conditioned. This is my simple truth. What arises in my body is not a fixed reality. It is not in itself good or bad, painful or pleasant, wise or unwise. 

I neither venerate nor disparage sensations. They simply arise because of certain conditions: my nutrition, my sleep, my past experiences, and yes, my thoughts and awareness (etc.). 

All of those factors determine which sensations I experience. By understanding (and practicing) this simple truth, I have found alot of freedom and happiness.

You seem defensive after my last post.  Is this a good or bad thing ? 

I wasn't really bothered by your post. I swear. When I said our conversation was becoming "unskillful,"  I was just calling it like it is. In my view, speech is skillful when it respectfully explores our "truths." Speech tends to become unskillful when it focuses on the speaker rather than what they are saying.

Unfortunately, that's what we did. You ignored my main point (The body plays a fundamental role in the arising of clinging/attachment) and instead focused on a turn of phrase ("I can't help but think...") to imply that I was not speaking from experience. Similarly, I spoke unskillfully when I stopped talking about Osho's teachings, and started attacking his character. That's why I deleted it. When I say this, I'm not trying to put us down. But I think by being aware of this tendecy, our conversations can be more fruitful. 

skillful and unskillful.This again seems like a creation of the mind, judging things to be skillful or unskillful ... this is spiritual materialism ... i.e. moving your attachments into the spiritual realm.  The mind is very tricky.

I would say drop all concepts and begin at the beginning, with your experience.

I use the terms in their typical Buddhist sense: 
Skillful = conducive to long-term happiness
Unskillful= not conducive to long-term happiness

If you're interested in being happy, I wouldn't suggest dropping these concepts. Not yet, anyway.  

Love it the way a parent loves a child.

If you split your experience into (1) parent and (2) child, you are generating a new problem for yourself.  You have made 2 people within you. 

One of them (the mind) thinks it is a good parent - it has sucked you in to its madness, and given you a nice rationalisation (you are superior to the body).  The mind has gained power, and the path home is distrusted.

This is just the nature of language to "split experience." We can't speak without doing so. Indeed, Osho's examples fall prey to the same problem if we analyze them like this.  (i.e., The mind is trusting while the body is being trusted. Or the mind is revering, while the body is revered).

The truth is that as awareness is brought to the body, the distinction between mind/body falls away. It doesn't matter what you believe or how you try to relate to it. Keep you awareness there  long enough, and the division disappears. However, in my experience, real happiness isn't about simply having that non-dual moment.

Rather, real happiness lies in learning how to relate to your experience in a way that is skillful.

Thus, my concern is that "trusting" and "revering" the body can easily be construed to mean, "Do what your body tells you." And where does that lead? The person filled with anger will hear their body say, "Fight!" The person filled with lust will hear their body say, "Do it!"  You can try surrendering to these impulses, but that doesn't bring real freedom. The choices that you make plants seeds in the body/mind, leading you to make the same choices again and again, even if those choices make you suffer.  Sometimes, your choices might make you happy, but that's still bondage. That's what I call misery.

For me, real freedom comes not from simply loving the body, but from lovingly paying attention to it, and understanding how the choices you make will determine which impulses arise in the body, and how long they will remain. Then, you can make the choices that lead to real happiness.

With metta,
KN

[rideforever]

..

Yup ... well the self-delusions of the mind are legion.  I am very suspicious of ... anything ... everything.

So, cutting it down to the roots ... Osho appeals to me because he unceasingly lampoons every effort ... except pure awareness (and that sometimes too, just to be sure). 

Continuously shakes things up so that nothing can get fixed.

I am doing mostly straight Vipassana, not Osho meditations ... but his refusal to settle into anything speaks to me.  And Vipassana seems like tantra to me ... what is the experience of the breath and body ?

On the question of chosing from the 2 paths Yoga (the path of skill and effort) and Tantra (surrender), Osho says that the first is far easier to be self-deluded in ... because making an effort appeals to the ego.  The 2nd might be coarse and ugly, but it's a question of what will keep you loose so you don't get stuck.  Also he said that the mind in this era is far too individualistic (the ego is too formed) for the first path to be used ... in centuries past people felt identity with community / land / spirit and destroying the ego was a small part of your identity ... but today the ego is all there is so it's harder to with effort remove it.