Controversy about Communism



Controversy about Communism

A Russian TV crew are visiting, who are very positive; their film later receives wide popularity in the Soviet Union. On 30th January, Osho begins a new discourse series, Communism and Zen Fire, Zen Wind

You have seen the Soviet crew which was here from Soviet television. There have been all kinds of television crews, all kinds of journalists from all over the world, but it is only the Soviet crew who went with tears in their eyes. They loved you; they loved your commune so much, so deeply. They have gone with the promise that when they have their holidays for ten days in June, they are not going anywhere else. They are going to come here for ten days to live in the commune as sannyasins, meditating, doing groups.
You can see the difference. When the American journalist comes, he starts looking immediately to find something sensational. If he cannot find it, he creates and invents it, because America is interested only in sensationalism. These people behaved in a totally different way. This was for the first time that a Russian crew has come. When you were doing your meditations, dancing, they forgot all about photographing. They dropped their cameras and started dancing! They loved the sannyasins.
Their questions were absolutely non-sensational. Significant, meaningful, but not sensational--utterly concerned with human welfare. And Anando told me that they had tears in their eyes when they left the gate; they did not want to go. They wanted to stay for the whole series, but their office from Delhi called them, saying, "You come back, there are other assignments."
They will be back in June for ten days, to have more experience of what you have. They want to taste it. They want to be insiders, not outsiders.
And this is the state of the whole Soviet Union: the people have become like children. No church, no programming, no God, no prayer--they have become so innocent that meditation will go deep down in them, faster than in any other country. fire04

My concern is absolutely impartial. I have been interested in communism from my very childhood. The Soviet crew has been to my library, and they were amazed to see the communist literature there--perhaps there is no book that is missing from my library. And they were amazed to see that I have signed and dated each book before 1950. I was absolutely concerned to know about communism, everything. For three years, 1948, 1949, and 1950, I had collected all the literature possible. And I stopped at 1950. I have not read anything after 1950 about communism, for or against.
It is very strange...I go on forgetting small things. I cannot count up to five--after the third finger I start hesitating, whether it is fourth or third. But in these forty years I have not forgotten a single name of the communist revolutionaries. Small details are so vivid before me, because that was my first entry into the intellectual world. It got deeply rooted in me. But I never became a member of a communist party, because I could see something was missing.
It is a grand plan for humanity, but something central is missing: it has no soul, it is a corpse.
Because nothing new was happening, I stopped reading. And nothing new has happened since then, except Gorbachev. So I am talking about Gorbachev.
First I was deeply interested in communism, but finding that it is a corpse I became interested in anarchism--that was also a Russian phenomenon--Prince Kropotkin, Bakunin, Leo Tolstoy. All three were anarchists: no state, no government in the world. But I saw the point that they have a beautiful dream but with this criminal humanity, with this stupid mass, if there is no government and no court and no police there will be simply chaos, not anarchism.
I have been always very scientific in my approach, either outside or inside. Communism can be the base. Then spiritualism has to be its growth, to provide what is missing. Once a society is given equal opportunity--to be unequal, to be unique--and once that society becomes interested in meditation and spiritual growth, then there is a possibility of anarchism. That will be the very final stage, when there is nobody who is interested in committing crime. Only then can the state be removed, not before it. Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Leo Tolstoy are perfectly right, but not relevant now. First communism has to be aided by spirituality. fire04

What would you do if you went to the Soviet Union?
A revolution!
It has been too long since the Soviet Union has seen revolution. Of course, my revolution will be of spirituality. I want the Soviet Union to add something more to its dignity: meditation. Just economic equality is not enough--a spiritual equality is needed.
Just being a body is so poor. I want the Soviet Union to become richer--not only richer in objects but richer in consciousness, in enlightenment. I want the Soviet Union also to have awakened people like Gautam Buddha, or Lao Tzu, or Chuang Tzu.
I would like to introduce Zen to the Soviet Union. That is my revolution. fire01

I am a spiritual communist, and Comrade Gorbachev is a socialist.
Socialism is a compromise, a compromise with capitalism. Communism is a totally revolutionary step. The closer I have been looking at Gorbachev and his statements, the sadder I am feeling. He is not a revolutionary; he is a reactionary, he is going backwards.
Just today Anando has given me a small summary of his books. Just a few sentences I heard, and I told her, "Close it"--because he is talking about bringing private property back into the Soviet Union, and with private property capitalism comes in. He is saying that the communist motto was, "Each according to his need"--and what is his motto? "Each according to his work."
But that's exactly the motto of capitalism: each according to his work....
I am in absolute favor of communism because I think it is the foundation for spiritual growth. But I am against socialism. It is a compromise with capitalism, and when you compromise with capitalism, capitalism will drown you....
Gorbachev is calling what he is doing a revolution. I say, absolutely no! If you want to be really a revolutionary, the only way is bring spiritualism to your country, not capitalism. That is going backwards in time, and destroying the whole effort of seventy years, and destroying the whole sacrifice of millions of people who died.
I am a spiritual communist--a spiritual terrorist! And I don't care either for George Bush or Comrade Gorbachev. His books have come into my hand just today--they are ugly. He is sabotaging his own people! And he has taken all the power into his hands, so there is no possibility.... fire04

Friends, First, a little bit of news.
The first failure of Comrade Gorbachev: The central committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has declared that Gorbachev's first act of reform, to eradicate alcoholism, has failed. The party declared that Gorbachev's radical changes have not yet been achieved; on the contrary, the sale of illicit liquor has grown, state liquor revenues have fallen, and the masses have been constantly complaining about long queues to buy vodka.
Second: Over the past year Comrade Gorbachev has allowed the following symbols of capitalism to do business in Russia: Coca-Cola, MacDonald's, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and Fast Food Pizza.
This is all junk that America wants to pour on the very innocent people of the Soviet Union.
Third: Just today he has allowed the world's largest advertising agency, Saachi and Saachi, to begin advertising campaigns in Russia for western goods. Saachi's, who are advertising agents for Margaret Thatcher, said they would also like a contract "to polish Gorbachev's image, although he does not really need it at the moment."
On the one hand, he is saying that Russia's economy is failing, and on the other hand, he is giving contracts to advertising companies to advertise western goods in Russia. Do you see the contradiction? fire07

Osho explains why he supports Stalin for consolidating the Soviet Union under communism, although he used violence as a means to this end. Many people are shocked, including Italian radical, Majid. Osho inspires him to start a real revolutionary party.

I cannot help feeling shocked at the idea that since people have to die anyway, there is no harm in them dying by the thousands to preserve communism. What is it that horrifies me about this?
It is not only you, there may be a few more who have been shocked. Majid is sitting there--he must be shocked, and other Italians, because they have a political prejudice in their mind. They think they are radicals, and they don't understand even the ABC of radicalism....
It was worth it. And when I said anyway you have to die, I could immediately feel that you became very shocked. But still I repeat: Anyway you have to die. Don't die against revolution. If you have to die, die for revolution. Don't die for the status quo; if you have to die, die for rebellion....
My effort here is to bring you to a space of no-mind. And from no-mind, function--then you function directly, looking at the situation. Whatever is right immediately arises in you, and you do it. Neither is it a question of morality nor is it a question of religion; it is a question of immediate response to a situation. And immediate response comes only through meditation.
I shock your mind on purpose, and I go on finding ways. I will not leave anyone!...
But when I talk about Stalin, don't get worried. I have nothing to be concerned with Stalin. He is not my disciple, you are! And you are on your own--in spite of me. I am trying every possible way to throw you out, but you still go on coming.
You know perfectly well that my words should not be taken at face value. They are strategies and devices. The whole problem is how to shock you and shatter your mind completely so you can enter into the inner room and see with your own eyes your vast sky. fire05

Majid belongs to a radical party in Italy. The head of that radical party wanted to come to me and discuss with me how things should to be done. Of course Majid was the mediator; he had persuaded the man to come to me. But I saw an interview he had given to a journalist, in which the journalist asks, "We hear that you are going to Poona. Are you interested in the philosophy, in the ideology of Osho?"
And he said, "I have nothing to do with his philosophy or with his meditations or with his ideology. My sole concern is that if he can give me ten thousand sannyasins in Italy to become members of the Radical Party, I will go and kiss his feet."
When I saw that interview, I could see that the man is bogus. And I informed Majid that "I don't want to see that man. His whole interest is that I should tell sannyasins in Italy to join the party."
It is not a radical party, Majid; it is not revolutionary. And you can see it, even though you are not so clear about things....
I refused. I said, "Don't bring him here because he is not a revolutionary. He simply wants to have a great ego, become more powerful." Perhaps he hopes to become the prime minister of Italy.
I don't prevent my sannyasins. They are free to join anything, but I would always remind them: join something out of your meditativeness, out of your clarity. I am not in any way preventing anybody. Your freedom is absolutely sacred to me. I will not interfere--even if you are going wrong, I will not interfere. I will tell you that you are going wrong, but you are free to go.
Now I could not tell my people to belong to the Radical Party. It is not a radical party. Majid, I would like you to create a real, authentic revolutionary party....*
And I would like you to create a revolutionary party on your own. Why be a second-hand man in that Radical Party? Be the leader of a revolutionary party and I will support you! And more and more Italians are going to come; just all that we need is more spaghetti! fire06
*Note: in March The International Scientific Revolutionary Party is instigated by Sw Majid, in Italy 

Next
Return to Menu