Question 2:

Osho,

The mandukya upanishad says: above all, it should be known. and jesus also says: Seek ye first the kingdom of god.

Then how did the christian church right down to mother teresa change its meaning to: serve ye first the suffering humanity and the kingdom of god shall be yours?

A german gentleman, mr. rheiner, while speaking to me violently accused the rajneesh ashram of being a big money-making racket and said that it should care more for the poor and that it should serve the downtrodden. Osho, how is it that even people from the affluent west continue to misunderstand you?

 

 

I am not against money -- I am against money-mindedness! I am not against possessions, I am against possessiveness. And these are two totally different dimensions, diametrically opposite to each other.

 

To be against money is stupid. Money is a beautiful means -- a means of exchange. Without money there cannot be an evolved culture, society or civilization.

 

Just imagine that money has disappeared from the world. Then all that is comfortable, all that is giving you convenience will disappear with it. People will be reduced to utter poverty. Money has done a tremendous work; one has to appreciate it.

 

Hence I am not against money, but I am certainly against money-mindedness -- and people don't make the distinction. The whole human past has lived in confusion.

 

Renounce money-mindedness, but there is no need to renounce money. Money has to be created, wealth has to be created. Without wealth all science will disappear, all technology will disappear, all the great achievements of man will disappear. Man will not be able to reach the moon, man will not be able to fly. Without money life will become very dumb, just as without language all art, all literature, all poetry, all music will disappear. Just as language helps you to exchange thoughts, to communicate, so money helps you to exchange things; it is also a form of communication.

 

But money-minded people cling to money; they destroy its whole purpose. Its purpose is to go on moving from one hand to another hand. That's why it is called "currency": it has to remain like a current, moving. The more it moves the better, the richer the society becomes.

 

If I have only one rupee and it goes on moving and it moves to five thousand sannyasins, then one rupee becomes five thousand rupees. The more it moves, the more money is created. It has functioned as if there were five thousand rupees -- just one rupee! But the moneyminded person grabs it; he stops its being a currency. He holds it, he clings to it, he does not use it.

 

We certainly create wealth, and this is only a beginning; it is not yet a money-making racket. Just wait... it will be! We are going to make as much money as possible, because I am not against money. But we use it, that's the point; we are not hoarding it. And the more we have the more we will be using; it will become more of a currency.

 

One of the reasons India is poor is because people are hoarders. And they are hoarding with beautiful rationalizations: they call it "simplicity of living." Sheer nonsense! If you have to live simply then give the money to somebody else who wants to live richly! Why are you hoarding it? Live simply, perfectly okay. It is your life; if you want to live simply, live simply -- but why are you hoarding money? Then give it to people who can use it! But money should be used; it should be allowed to move as fast as possible.

 

Just wait a little! Tell Mr. Rheiner that once my commune is established you will see how wealth can be created and how wealth can be used, because I am not a one-sided person. I am neither for the inner nor for the outer, I am for both together. One has to be rich inside and one has to be rich outside too. Richness is beautiful; outer richness is beautiful just as inner richness is beautiful. Nothing is wrong in creating money.

 

We are not begging, we are creating, and we will never beg. When we can create, why beg for it? We have never asked anybody to give money to us.

 

Tell Mr. Rheiner he must be a greedy person, and a money-minded person. When the money-minded person comes here he sees only his own mind. This is a mirror! You will find it always: your face mirrored in thousands of ways.

 

But this has been the whole past. Mahavira renounced money, Buddha renounced money. I am against it -- I am far more in favor of a man like Janaka who lived like an emperor and yet became enlightened. I am far more in favor of Krishna who lived the life of an emperor and yet was enlightened. These people are far more balanced.

 

Renouncing money simply shows one thing: that there is some fear in you. You are afraid that if you don't renounce you will cling. I am not afraid! And if you ask me.... I don't have any money, not at all -- not a single paise. I am just a guest in the commune, and of course you treat me like a guest -- that's perfectly right: a guest should be treated as a guest -- you are my hosts. But I don't have anything. That does not mean that I have to live like a beggar -- that much intelligence I have! I need not live like a beggar; without having money I can live like an emperor. Is not that proof enough of enlightenment? I don't earn, I don't do a thing, I never leave my room. I can't even count money properly -- you know my counting. After the first question comes the third, after the third comes the second....

 

For years I have not seen money; I have not touched notes for at least twenty years. I have not touched any -- not that I am against touching them, but notes are so dirty, particularly Indian notes -- so dirty, that even when I used to travel I had somebody to accompany me, because who would touch those notes? So many hands have touched them and made them so dirty. They must be carrying all kinds of diseases!

 

And for ten years I have not even seen any, because no money comes into my room and I don't go anywhere. Unless the money walks into my room...but the guards are there, they won't allow!

 

But I am not against money. My commune has to be the richest commune that has ever existed on the earth. In fact, in the past many communes have come into existence and died because of this stupid idea that you should not create wealth. Then how can you exist?

 

Now, fifteen hundred sannyasins are working in the commune -- how can they exist? They need food, they need clothes, they need shelter, they need medicines, they need everything. From where is it going to come? We have to create wealth. And this is just on an experimental basis, so that I can prepare you before the new commune happens, because in the new commune there will be at least ten thousand sannyasins living together.

 

All communes in the past have died. The longest a commune has ever lived has a fixed limit, three years -- from three months to three years, that has been the minimum and the maximum life of a commune for the simple reason that if you insist on poverty, sooner or later you have to disperse.

 

This commune is going to live -- and the only way for it to live is by being rich.

 

But these people who talk about serving the poor, who is preventing them? Why don't they go and serve the poor? Tell Mr. Rheiner I am not preventing him. He can go with all my blessings and serve the poor!

 

I receive hundreds of letters asking: "Why don't you serve the poor?" If there were so many people serving the poor, then you would not miss me -- just one person not serving. But all these people want me to serve the poor! Follow your own idea, do your own thing -- I am doing my own thing. I am not telling you to do anything, I am not writing letters to anybody saying, "You should do this, you should not do that." Why are these people trying to impose their ideas upon anybody? I will not prevent them, that much is certain. You can go -- there are many poor people -- and serve them.

 

What was Mr. Rheiner doing here? Wasting time! There are so many poor people; even in Poona you can find beggars. Go and serve them! Massage their feet...do whatsoever you want to do. Enjoy it!

 

Why do people go on writing to me as if I have made all these people poor, as if I am responsible? They are responsible! And the same people who are responsible for making this world poor go on insisting that I should serve them. You make them poor and I should serve them -- a beautiful arrangement! I was poor, nobody came to serve me, so why should I bother?

 

I have my own approach to things: I am not here to serve the poor, I am here to destroy the poor completely. I have my own plans to do it, in my own way. I am not going to listen to such stupid Germans! In fact just to say "a German" is enough, but you may not understand -- that's why I am saying "stupid German." Otherwise who has ever heard of a German being anything else?

 

I have my own plans to do things in my way, but if the poor insist on being poor then I cannot do anything. For example, I would like compulsory birth control methods to be used. If they don't want to be poor they have to listen to it; if they want to be poor then that is their decision, then I am not responsible.

 

Poverty can be destroyed within fifteen years -- I am ready to take the challenge. Poverty can be destroyed within only fifteen years -- the poverty of this country can be completely destroyed. But there is a difficulty: then what will your Christian missionaries, Mother Theresa, etcetera, do? They need the poor -- the poor are absolutely needed -- otherwise what will happen to the Nobel Prize, to Mother Theresa? If there are no poor people, whom are you going to serve? They need orphans, they need poor people, they need sick people....

 

I can destroy this whole structure -- simple methods are needed. And these fools have been serving humanity for at least ten thousand years -- what is the result? Has poverty disappeared? Only the fruit shows what the life of the tree has been.

 

This idea of serving the poor is not new -- it is not Mr. Rheiner's invention. For ten thousand years at least religions have been saying, "Serve the poor," and they have been serving the poor, but what has happened out of it?

 

I want to cut the very root! The first thing is: the population of all poor countries has to be reduced. America will be as poor as India if the same population is allowed. Any country will be poor if so many people are there, because the earth has a limitation; all our capacities to exist on the earth are limited. You go on producing children and you don't listen at all.

 

People are against me because they say I am teaching birth control. Their morality is at risk -- because if people use birth control methods, then certainly their kind of morality will be at risk. Then their wife can have some love affair. Right now she cannot have any love affair out of the fear she may get pregnant; it is just fear that is preventing her. Their daughter may start having relationships before marriage. So these are the fears! But if these are the fears then you are responsible for your poverty, I am not responsible.

 

I am in favor of pre-marital relationships, I am in favor of all the latest methods of birth control, I am also in favor of extra-marital relationships. That will change the whole structure, but your poverty will go and with it will go your morality.

 

And I am continuously hammering on your morality for the simple reason that they are both joined together; it is a conspiracy of morality and poverty. Your morality has to be destroyed, only then will your poverty go.

 

It is very simple: bring more technology. Rather than opening orphanages bring more technology, bring more industry. That's what I am going to do -- and that is called a "money-making racket"!

 

In my commune everything of the latest has to be used so we can produce more! A machine can produce more than one thousand men or ten thousand men -- then why use men? Men can be freed from labor. For the first time in the history of man, man can be more playful, can enjoy life more as fun, because the machine can do the work. But these "workoholics," these people who are too much obsessed with the idea of work, won't allow machines to take their place. They are afraid. And they are far more dangerous than alcoholics -- workoholics are more dangerous -- because they are preventing machines and technology.

 

Mahatma Gandhi was a workoholic. He was against all technology, afraid that if man was free then life would become fun. And these so-called saints are against fun. Life should remain serious, it should not become fun. Life should be burdened with seriousness. If life becomes fun and people start enjoying it, who will bother about heaven? -- because in heaven this is the only thing available: you will not have to work, you will only be enjoying. Have you heard about any work being done in heaven? The angels just simply go on playing on their harps, "Alleluia! Alleluia!.." day in, day out.

 

But that can be done here, right now! We are doing it! This can happen on the earth -- but if this can happen on the earth, then who will bother about heaven and who will bother about the priests who show you the way to heaven? And who will bother about these so-called virtues through which you earn entry into heaven?

 

So all the religions need poverty. On the one hand they need poverty -- all the establishments, the church, the state, they need poverty -- and on the other hand they go on saying, "Serve the poor." Why do they say, "Serve the poor"? Just to keep the poor people consoled so they don't get rebellious, so they don't revolt against the whole structure. So go on throwing a few pieces to them, dregs, just a few pieces to keep them consoled. Go on giving them hope.

 

That's what Jesus did when he called the poor "the children of God," when he said, "The last will be the first in my kingdom of God." Consoling the poor! That is just poisoning their minds.

 

I am not at all in any conspiracy with the establishment so I am not going to serve the poor. The people who have made them poor, they should serve them! I am totally ready to destroy poverty. I have no respect for poverty, I don't see any spirituality in poverty. It is ugly, it is inhuman. It is like cancer: it has to be uprooted, root and all. It has to be burnt -- and it can be done.

 

I am ready to accept the challenge, but they don't even want me to have a commune because they are afraid that my commune will show the whole country the whole world, that people can live in richness herenow, in total richness, both inner and outer, and that there is no need to be poor. And once my commune is there it will be an example, a model, and then we can start having communes in other countries. Already seeds have started spreading. Then we can spread the communes to all kinds of people, all cultures, all societies, and slowly slowly the whole earth can be transformed.

 

And I can do it quickly too, but it is not going to happen through serving the poor. Then the government will have to listen to me -- I am ready to guide. I am not interested in politics so I don't want any power for myself. The government has to listen to me.

 

A fifteen-year plan...and I am ready to accept the challenge. All poverty can be destroyed, but with the poverty your Mother Theresa will go down the drain too!

 

- Osho, "Philosophia Ultima, #12, Q2"