Consideration is for love.

[Guest guest]

Love should be accepted as one of the most fundamental human rights, and all

societies have destroyed it. They have destroyed it by creating marriage.

Marriage is a false substitute for love.

 

In the past, small children were married. They had no idea what love is, what

marriage is. And why were small children married? For a simple reason: before

they become young adults, before love arises in their hearts, the doors have to

be closed. Because once love takes possession of their hearts then it will

become very difficult....

 

No child marriage is human. A man or a woman should be allowed to choose their

partners and to change their partners whenever they feel. The government has no

business in it, the society has nothing to do with it. It is two individuals'

personal affair. The privacy of it is sacred.

 

If two people want to live together, they don't need any permission from any

priest or any government. They need the permission of their hearts. And the day

they feel that the time has come to part, again they don't need anybody's

permission. They can part as friends, with beautiful memories of their loving

days.

 

Love should be the only way for men and women to live together. No other ritual

is needed.

 

The only problem in the past was what would happen to the children; that was the

argument for marriage. There are other alternatives, far better. Children should

be accepted not as their parents' property -- they belong to the whole humanity.

>From the very beginning it should be made clear to them, "The whole humanity is

going to protect you, is your shelter. We may be together -- we will look after

you. We may not be together; still we look after you. You are our blood, our

bones, our souls."

 

In fact, this possession by the parents of the children is one of the most

dangerous things that humanity goes on carrying. This is the root of the idea of

possessiveness. You should not possess your children. You can love them, you can

bless them, but you cannot possess. They belong to the whole humanity. They come

from beyond; you have been just a passage. Don't think more than that about

yourself. Whatever you can do, do.

 

Every commune, every village should take care of the children. Once the commune

starts taking care of the children, marriage becomes absolutely obsolete. And

marriage is destroying your basic right to love.

 

If man's love is free, there will not be blacks and whites, and there will not

be these ugly discriminations, because love knows no boundaries.

 

You can fall in love with a black man, you can fall in love with a white man.

Love knows no religious scriptures. It knows only the heartbeat, and it knows it

with absolute certainty. Once love is free, it will prepare the ground for other

fundamental rights.

 

In fact, if you ask the scientists, people falling in love should be as

different as possible. Then they will give birth to better children, more

intelligent, stronger. We know it now; we are trying it all over the world as

far as animals are concerned. Crossbreeding has given us better cows, better

horses, better dogs. But man is strange. You know the secret, but you are not

bettering yourself.

 

All the royal families are suffering. They create the greatest number of idiots,

because they go on marrying amongst themselves. Royal blood cannot mix with a

commoner's blood -- even in the twentieth century we think in terms of royal

blood. Blood is simply blood. But if just a dozen families go on marrying

amongst themselves continually, they create many kinds of diseases.

 

Retardedness is one. Just have a look again at the picture of the Prince of

Wales and you will see what I mean by a retarded person. They are fed up, but

they cannot go out of their small circle. I have never come across any person

belonging to a royal family who has intelligence, and in India I have been

acquainted with almost all the royal families. It is not only that their minds

remain retarded, their bodies lose many things.

 

Osho: On Basic Human Rights

[Guest guest]

93

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law

 

about Love - true exactly

Osho's words are crystal pure and simple... That is the reason why so

many ppl hated him. Not everyone dares to accept truth as it is.

What i may add, that Tantras are on the same position as Shri

Rajneesh...

 

Love is the law, love under will

 

, supraath <supraath> wrote:

> Love should be accepted as one of the most fundamental human rights,

and all societies have destroyed it. They have destroyed it by

creating marriage. Marriage is a false substitute for love.

>

> In the past, small children were married. They had no idea what love

is, what marriage is. And why were small children married? For a

simple reason: before they become young adults, before love arises in

their hearts, the doors have to be closed. Because once love takes

possession of their hearts then it will become very difficult....

>

> No child marriage is human. A man or a woman should be allowed to

choose their partners and to change their partners whenever they feel.

The government has no business in it, the society has nothing to do

with it. It is two individuals' personal affair. The privacy of it is

sacred.

>

> If two people want to live together, they don't need any permission

from any priest or any government. They need the permission of their

hearts. And the day they feel that the time has come to part, again

they don't need anybody's permission. They can part as friends, with

beautiful memories of their loving days.

>

> Love should be the only way for men and women to live together. No

other ritual is needed.

>

> The only problem in the past was what would happen to the children;

that was the argument for marriage. There are other alternatives, far

better. Children should be accepted not as their parents' property --

they belong to the whole humanity. From the very beginning it should

be made clear to them, "The whole humanity is going to protect you, is

your shelter. We may be together -- we will look after you. We may not

be together; still we look after you. You are our blood, our bones,

our souls."

>

> In fact, this possession by the parents of the children is one of

the most dangerous things that humanity goes on carrying. This is the

root of the idea of possessiveness. You should not possess your

children. You can love them, you can bless them, but you cannot

possess. They belong to the whole humanity. They come from beyond; you

have been just a passage. Don't think more than that about yourself.

Whatever you can do, do.

>

> Every commune, every village should take care of the children. Once

the commune starts taking care of the children, marriage becomes

absolutely obsolete. And marriage is destroying your basic right to

love.

>

> If man's love is free, there will not be blacks and whites, and

there will not be these ugly discriminations, because love knows no

boundaries.

>

> You can fall in love with a black man, you can fall in love with a

white man. Love knows no religious scriptures. It knows only the

heartbeat, and it knows it with absolute certainty. Once love is free,

it will prepare the ground for other fundamental rights.

>

> In fact, if you ask the scientists, people falling in love should be

as different as possible. Then they will give birth to better

children, more intelligent, stronger. We know it now; we are trying it

all over the world as far as animals are concerned. Crossbreeding has

given us better cows, better horses, better dogs. But man is strange.

You know the secret, but you are not bettering yourself.

>

> All the royal families are suffering. They create the greatest

number of idiots, because they go on marrying amongst themselves.

Royal blood cannot mix with a commoner's blood -- even in the

twentieth century we think in terms of royal blood. Blood is simply

blood. But if just a dozen families go on marrying amongst themselves

continually, they create many kinds of diseases.

>

> Retardedness is one. Just have a look again at the picture of the

Prince of Wales and you will see what I mean by a retarded person.

They are fed up, but they cannot go out of their small circle. I have

never come across any person belonging to a royal family who has

intelligence, and in India I have been acquainted with almost all the

royal families. It is not only that their minds remain retarded, their

bodies lose many things.

>

> Osho: On Basic Human Rights

[Guest guest]

Namaste Arjuna Taradasa:

 

Interestingly enough, while the marriage laws can be

oppressive, and especially have been in the past, there is no

other system in place for children to be taken care of by

everyone, and that gets left up to the women, who are usually not

well set up economically. The entire structure of society would

have to be changed to value children as whole people, and to

value women and men as whole people apart from each other,

too. Osho was not a visionary in that area, unfortunately.

 

I agree that marriage is not the answer the church / government

deems it to be. I like "love is the law," however, don't quite

understand "love under will" because that sounds oppressive,

and marriage itself could be considered to be "love under will." I

think love requires not just will, but emotional, intellectual, and

physical intelligence, in order to allow the spirit to flourish.

Meanwhile, we are all in various stages of development

regarding these elements.

 

When you say the Tantras are in the same position as

Osho/Rajneesh, what do you mean?

 

-- Mary Ann

 

 

 

 

, "Arjuna Taradasa"

<bhagatirtha@m...> wrote:

> 93

> Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law

>

> about Love - true exactly

> Osho's words are crystal pure and simple... That is the reason

why so

> many ppl hated him. Not everyone dares to accept truth as it is.

> What i may add, that Tantras are on the same position as Shri

> Rajneesh...

>

> Love is the law, love under will

>

> , supraath

<supraath> wrote:

> > Love should be accepted as one of the most fundamental

human rights,

> and all societies have destroyed it. They have destroyed it by

> creating marriage. Marriage is a false substitute for love.

> >

> > In the past, small children were married. They had no idea

what love

> is, what marriage is. And why were small children married?

For a

> simple reason: before they become young adults, before love

arises in

> their hearts, the doors have to be closed. Because once love

takes

> possession of their hearts then it will become very difficult....

> >

> > No child marriage is human. A man or a woman should be

allowed to

> choose their partners and to change their partners whenever

they feel.

> The government has no business in it, the society has nothing

to do

> with it. It is two individuals' personal affair. The privacy of it is

> sacred.

> >

> > If two people want to live together, they don't need any

permission

> from any priest or any government. They need the permission

of their

> hearts. And the day they feel that the time has come to part,

again

> they don't need anybody's permission. They can part as

friends, with

> beautiful memories of their loving days.

> >

> > Love should be the only way for men and women to live

together. No

> other ritual is needed.

> >

> > The only problem in the past was what would happen to the

children;

> that was the argument for marriage. There are other

alternatives, far

> better. Children should be accepted not as their parents'

property --

> they belong to the whole humanity. From the very beginning it

should

> be made clear to them, "The whole humanity is going to protect

you, is

> your shelter. We may be together -- we will look after you. We

may not

> be together; still we look after you. You are our blood, our

bones,

> our souls."

> >

> > In fact, this possession by the parents of the children is one

of

> the most dangerous things that humanity goes on carrying.

This is the

> root of the idea of possessiveness. You should not possess

your

> children. You can love them, you can bless them, but you

cannot

> possess. They belong to the whole humanity. They come from

beyond; you

> have been just a passage. Don't think more than that about

yourself.

> Whatever you can do, do.

> >

> > Every commune, every village should take care of the

children. Once

> the commune starts taking care of the children, marriage

becomes

> absolutely obsolete. And marriage is destroying your basic

right to

> love.

> >

> > If man's love is free, there will not be blacks and whites, and

> there will not be these ugly discriminations, because love

knows no

> boundaries.

> >

> > You can fall in love with a black man, you can fall in love with

a

> white man. Love knows no religious scriptures. It knows only

the

> heartbeat, and it knows it with absolute certainty. Once love is

free,

> it will prepare the ground for other fundamental rights.

> >

> > In fact, if you ask the scientists, people falling in love should

be

> as different as possible. Then they will give birth to better

> children, more intelligent, stronger. We know it now; we are

trying it

> all over the world as far as animals are concerned.

Crossbreeding has

> given us better cows, better horses, better dogs. But man is

strange.

> You know the secret, but you are not bettering yourself.

> >

> > All the royal families are suffering. They create the greatest

> number of idiots, because they go on marrying amongst

themselves.

> Royal blood cannot mix with a commoner's blood -- even in the

> twentieth century we think in terms of royal blood. Blood is

simply

> blood. But if just a dozen families go on marrying amongst

themselves

> continually, they create many kinds of diseases.

> >

> > Retardedness is one. Just have a look again at the picture of

the

> Prince of Wales and you will see what I mean by a retarded

person.

> They are fed up, but they cannot go out of their small circle. I

have

> never come across any person belonging to a royal family who

has

> intelligence, and in India I have been acquainted with almost

all the

> royal families. It is not only that their minds remain retarded,

their

> bodies lose many things.

> >

> > Osho: On Basic Human Rights