How is it that all the past buddhas expressed themselves against money and sex, which are the sources of worldly pleasures? You are perhaps the first buddha to stand by all of them together – pleasure, happiness, and bliss – which is causing so much misunderstanding and opposition in your case.
Did the past buddhas try to compromise with tradition and to play for safety?
There are many things to be understood.
One: all the past buddhas came from royal families. They enjoyed money, they enjoyed sex, they lived in the most luxurious way possible; and still they found a deep emptiness inside themselves. They made from their own experience a fundamental principle for all human beings.
All human beings are not born in royal families. They don’t have the chance to experience money, sex, and other pleasures of the outside world. Because they were frustrated – the money was not fulfilling, the sex was superficial, all the pleasures were repetitive and became routine – they were utterly bored. They renounced the world.
Because of their renunciation of the world – going into the forests and the mountains – a fallacy arose that unless you renounce the world and worldly pleasure, you cannot become awakened, you cannot become enlightened. Their individual experience they made into a universal principle. It is a human tendency. It still persists.
For example, only psychologically sick people went to Sigmund Freud. Obviously, he who is healthy mentally has no need to go to Sigmund Freud. Freud came across only sick people, and he extended the principle to the whole of humanity, as if everybody is sick. He only knew the dreams of sick people, and he thought all dreams are repressive. In his experience that was so, but his experience is not universal.
It happens with you too, a very basic human fallacy: you come across a Mohammedan, and he cheats you, or a Hindu, and he deceives you – and immediately you jump to the conclusion that no Hindu is worth believing, that no Mohammedan should ever be trusted. A single instance becomes to you indicative of the universal.
In fact, all the past buddhas support my thesis. Of course, they were not aware of it. What I am saying is, unless you are deeply acquainted with the outer world, unless you have been a Zorba in totality and intensity, there is no possibility for you to become a buddha.
It was fortunate for Gautam Buddha that he was born as a prince. All the beautiful women of his kingdom were made available to him, and he most beautiful woman he married. But when he was just twenty-nine years old, he became so frustrated. He was intelligent enough to see that now his whole life was going to be just a routine: more women, more wine, more delicious food. But he was acquainted with it all.
It was his intelligence to see that all his tomorrows had already become yesterdays; there was no future, and he was utterly empty. He had to go in search of something which fulfilled his inner being.