Quantcast

Read Book

 
 
OSHO Online Library   »   The Books   »   The New Dawn
« < 2 3 4 5 6 > »
 

Chapter 3: A Feeling of Coming Home

So you can hide your anguish, your misery, your suffering - there is no problem about it. Anyway somebody else will be asking about those problems. But when it comes to your blissfulness, which is very rare, it is unforgivable to keep it a secret because it is going to become a proof for everybody of the goal they are searching.

Osho,
What is the criterion of the truth?

Truth is not an experience of the mind; hence no logic can prove it or disprove it. No argument can convince you about it or unconvince you about it. Truth is an experience beyond mind, so there is no objective criterion possible. That’s why science never talks about it, because science can only talk about things which can be objectively proved.

Truth is a subjective experience, just like love. What is the criterion of love? Can you prove when you fall in love? Can you prove that really you have fallen in love? Is there a way to prove it? Is there any argument, any logic that will support you - any eyewitnesses? All that you can say is, “I know for certain that my heart is beating differently” - but that is something inner to you. You can say, “I am feeling so blissful,” but that is something subjective. You cannot bring some part of your blissfulness and show it to people as a criterion.

Love, or truth, or bliss, or God - they don’t have any criterion; they are experiences of the inner. Criteria are always of the outer. Don’t impose outer criteria for the inner - that is the fallacy of the atheist.

Why does the atheist deny the existence of God, the existence of soul, the existence of truth, the existence of a life beyond life? For the simple reason that there is no criterion, and no proof, and no evidence. No atheist has ever been defeated by any theist in argumentation - still the atheist is wrong. He is wrong because he is asking for an objective criterion for a subjective experience.

It is just like somebody asks you - you have been listening to classical music, and somebody asks - “What was the taste of it?” or “What was the color of it?” or “How did it feel when you touched it?”

You will say, “Are you mad?” Music is not an experience of the eyes, it is not an experience of the nose; music has no smell. It is not an experience of the tongue; it has no taste. It is not something tangible that you can touch. It is an experience of the ears - and for an experience of the ears, eyes cannot give any proof.

Neither is the opposite possible. For an experience of the eyes - for example, light or colors - ears cannot give any proof. And if you want proofs that are understandable by the ears, then there is no light; you have to deny it. Then there are no colors, no rainbows. You have to deny everything that belongs to the world of eyes, and almost eighty percent of your experience belongs to the eyes. Eighty percent of your life will have to be denied if you insist for some criterion that belongs, not to the eyes, but to the ears, nose, mouth, hands..

« < 2 3 4 5 6 > »