Talk:Rajneesh/Archive 1

message: Whoever it is, you are dishonest.
This article is a joke - it is pure hagiography. I can sure see why the neutrality is disputed. It is obvioiusly written by some followers of Rajneesh. Even all the links are pro-Rajneesh and there is no mention in the bibliography of even a single one of the many critical books written by former disciples. I think the level of dishonesty here is the best example of whot sort of fellow Rajnesh was.
Chuck, Japan
chuck you´re wrong . one thing is to follow a leader blindly and the other to understand him .you are doing the same you complain about. understand first ,and after you´ll probably remain silent.
moreover ,the bibliography you mention is mostly against osho,was written by dissapointed sannyasins who followed him firth and became his enemies after when they couldn´t understand the
teachings.
guruyatri,world citizen.
Chuck -- just fix it then.Msalt 01:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who runs things around here? 

message: During my life my work was published under my name 'Rajneesh'. Rajneesh was a registered trademark since the 70's in the US and other countries around the world. Short before my death I changed my name to Osho and I requested that all my work should be published and made known under my new name. I also requested that my name and work should be protected. Osho is a registered trademark in the US and other countries since years. Where is the problem?  Friends can refer to me without problem simply as Osho - no need always to place the ® - Enough for today - Osho :)
:Are you dead? We've never had a ghost editor before, so far as I know. Though people may have different names before, during, and after their lives, on Wikipedia we tend towards using the names by which people are best known. For example, the former Emperor of Japan was known as Hirohito in life, but became Shōwa after death. Nonetheless, we still have his article under Hirohito because that is where people are most likely to look for him.  Likewise with your own name. "Osho" is the final name that you used, but "Rajneesh" is the name by which you are best known in english. They are both fine names, both are discussed, and redirects ensure that users looking for either will find their way. Best wishes for you in the spirit world. Please say hi to my friends and family up there, you'll know who they are. Cheers, -Willmcw 04:42, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
----
In OIF Trademarks there is a list of several trademarks of Osho International Foundation (OIF), including the name Osho and several of his meditations and therapies. By the way, the previous by Willmcw is funny, but I would say that Rajneesh is, indeed, the name most popular amongst Americans (not necesarily all English speakers) of a certain age ;-)   --DevaSatyam 15:40, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trademark OSHO 

message: In TFA it says: 'was the founder and leader of the Osho-Rajneesh movement, a controversial new religious movement'. He said (at least as far as I read in his books) that he was nobody's leader and didn't seek to lead anybody. You can say that a bunch of people following you around makes you their leader, but that makes it your own opinion. Also, he said (again from the books) that he was not a Rajneshee and had nothing to do with the Rajneshees, that he was only a guest of the Rajneshees (further clarification: for his part, no such hierarchy as leader-follower, just fellows). The term 'controversial' part may seem opinion but it is right, as osho repeatedly said (again from the books) that he wanted to be controversial and stir things up as much as possible. As for the religious movement thing, he bashed religions like no one else ('all religion is utter crap' or something to that effect) so I think that labeling him as a willfull starter of a religion is somewhat of a mistake... Maybe the 'rajneshee cult' separate page was actually a good idea, at least it would be a good place to put some osho book quotes about his stance towards the people that followed him around, about free will, etc.
:We can mention that he did not consider himself the leader, but that doesn't stop him from being the leader. By example, Deng Xiaoping "retired" and for five years his only title was "Chairman of the All-China Bridge Club". But he still ran the country. It would be incorrect for an encyclopedia to take Deng's official title at face value. Likewise, Osho was the leader, whether he liked it or not. Within the article there is ample evidence of the influence of others, and some description of how decisions were made. The egalitarian "followers" is a nice thought, but the followers didn't give the Rolls Royces to each other, they gave them to their leader. -Willmcw 20:57, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
: Your analogy proves nothing, since you are comparing someone who WAS the leader of China and became entrenched that way, with someone who taught, afaik, that you should think for yourself, and who rejected any role in making decisions for the people you call his followers. This is a semantic problem similar to many that you will encounter in trying to pin down real-world things to actual words. And Eastern philosophy is about as opposed to that process as any human-created or human-understood thing can be. Hahahaha! -- Crankhandle 07:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Osho: leader, controversial, religious movement 

message: This article uses the religioustolerance.org website as either a reference or a link. Please see the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org and Wikipedia:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org as to whether Wikipedia should cite the religioustolerance.org website, jguk 14:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religioustolerance.org 

message: See here Andries 18:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  May be some old useful info in Wikipedia 

message: Can someone add a photograph of him? --Acepectif 10:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Edits of mine were reverted (19 July: (→The U.S. chapter - rm copyvio) and (→Bibliography - ==Notes and references==) ).
I had deleted a large slab of text, which was the entire text of an article available on WBUR (safe assumption that it's copyright, and anyway Wikipedia isn't meant to just be a compilation of copied texts) and I added a reference as follows:
:Bioterrorism in History - 1984: Rajneesh Cult Attacks Local Salad Bar, WBUR 
It was reverted with the comment: (copyvio? you removed links to references...) - which I don't understand as I added references.
Sfacets, perhaps you misunderstood my edit? I believe my edit was correct. --Singkong2005 talk 01:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article copied in - please remove. 

message: Many years ago I heard an absolutely hilarious recording of Rajneesh talking about the various meanings of the word 'fuck.' He was deliberately being humourous....and I think he ripped the idea off George Carlin....however Rajneesh's version is a classic. Does anyone have the source material and can someone mention it in the article? Also a link to an mp3 file would be great so we can all hear it again :-) This is a must have. I hope someone out there can do this and knows what I'm talking about bunix 03:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rajneesh's Meaning of 'Fuck' 

message: The interview should not be removed. It is not defamatory to the subject of the Biographical article, and is a relevant interview that impacted on the lives of Australians and New Zealanders for many years. I am looking for a source for this...
Sfacets 17:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At best, this is MARGINALLY part of this article. Given the complete lack of a source, I've hidden the text until there is a source.  Mdbrownmsw 15:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oceania 

message: Let the truth be said. In this 21st century of ours, we have enough information on true masters and fake masters. It's amazing to see so many people still waste their time and follow these charlatains, such as Osho, Sai Baba, Sri Chinmoy. There is plenty of information on the wrongdoings of these fellows, including hundreds of lawsuits. It could be understandable in the past, with the lack of informations. But come on guys. It's more than time to wake up. It's been a long time now since the 60's and 70's. There is no easy path. Self knowledge is the hardest path of all. If you can't take it, go practice something else, but don't think you'll know yourself by taking drugs and having sex, self knowledge is not a party. I'm sorry. It just won't happened without self effort and sacrifice. The words of one charlatain compared with the words of all the real masters is like comparing a spark with the sun. This is not an opinion. Go ahead, study all the great spiritual classics of humanity, such as the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Upanishads, Puranas, Mahabharata, Yogasutras, The tibetan book of the dead, Buddha's gospel, not to mention the Bible and Coran, and these books will confirm what true masters state, such as Krishna, Buddha, Lao-Tse, Nanak, Patanjali, Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Abedananda, Ramana Maharishi, Trailanga swami, Nagendranath Baduri, Sri Yogananda, Sri Yukteswar, Morihei Ueshiba, not to mention western masters and saints. It's all there, the same truth, the same words, the same life-examples, in very similar practices. So please, give us all a break. Denying what is writen here is nonsense. "Only fools follow fools".
Yogi. December 5th 2006.
Mentioning law suits, that reminds me of this dubious jewish heretic, this Jesus from Nazareth, bless God authorities finally got him.Hirsch.im.wald 09:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Getting back to the topic at hand, it's not for us to judge who is a messiah and who's a fake. We just need to verifiably summarize reliable sources using the neutral point of view. -Will Beback • † • 09:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  True Masters and Charlatains 

message: I just reverted a huge edit to the page.
* The long list of books is not appropriate for wikipedia. Perhaps if there is a page that duplicates this info, it can fit in as a source (see below).
* The external link style is in keeping consistant with the rest of wikipedia.
* Some of the information in the following block of text may be worth returning, with significant changes:
:There are more than 650 published books in Hindi and English languages. His books were published in Hindi until early seventies. He spoke in Hindi then, as most of his audience were Indians. Later when listeners from outside India became the majority he regularly spoke in English. Henceforth, books were published in English. Many earlier books in Hindi were also translated into English. Many of these books are translated later into number of other languages of the world including Russian.
From this section, the number of books and the general transition between languages may be of interest, but needs to be sourced.
In this section: 
:Books in English language series can be studied in two ways. In chronological order and subjectwise study. It is interesting to note that Rajneesh hardly wrote anything himself except for the letters he wrote early in life. He spoke to his listeners who came to him with their questions. He answered their queries. He selectively spoke on the works by various mystics around the world, on selected portions of various scriptures as commentaries. His favorite means to give his own message through the above exercises. These talks were transcribed into written word and published as books. A list of all the books in English by Rajneesh is given hereunder.
That all of his books were "written" by someone else is of interest, but must be sourced, much of the rest of it is simply Original Research and cannot be included.
Mdbrownmsw 19:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert on 1 December 2006 

message: Hello friends. I made a correction regarding the meaning of the word 'osho' in Japanese and Chinese, pursuant to my correction of a similar error in the disambiguation page for 'osho.' I can't speak to whether 'osho' acquired the meaning of 'friend' or 'ocean' after it was adopted by Rajneesh, but it certainly has neither of these meanings in Chinese or Japanese. See the above disambiguation page for the correct Japanese meaning.
--Gunnermanz 09:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrected some language errors 

message: Substituted at 21:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment