Mahavir Vani Lecture 21 Satya Sada Sarvabhaum Hai

Here's a comprehensive summary of Osho Rajnish's lecture "Satya Sada Sarvabhaum Hai" (Truth is Always Universal), Lecture 21 of Mahavir Vani, based on the provided text:

The lecture, "Truth is Always Universal," by Osho Rajnish, delves into the principles of truthfulness as taught by Mahavir, contrasting them with other philosophical and religious viewpoints, particularly Hinduism. Osho uses this lecture to dissect the nuances of speaking truth, the challenges involved, and the motivations behind our words.

The Core Principle: Truthfulness with Caution and Compassion

Osho begins by highlighting the Jain principle, "Nittakalam appamatenam, musavivajanam / Bhashitavyam hiyam sachcham, nittauttena dukkaram." This translates to: "Always being vigilant and careful, one should abandon falsehood and speak truthful words that are beneficial. Speaking this kind of truth is always very difficult." He further elaborates that noble ascetics should avoid speech that is sinful, definitive/absolute, or causes pain to others. Even in anger, greed, fear, or jest, one should not utter falsehood.

Challenging Traditional Structures: Jainism vs. Hinduism on Renunciation

A significant portion of the lecture addresses the perceived rigidity of the Hindu system, which traditionally views renunciation (sannyas) as the final stage of life, to be embraced only in old age after experiencing all worldly pleasures and fulfilling societal duties. Osho explains the Hindu concept of four ashramas (stages of life) and four varnas (social divisions) as a mathematical, orderly system.

However, Mahavir and Buddha are presented as revolutionaries who challenged this order. They introduced the concept that "the flower of renunciation can bloom at any time," not necessarily in old age. Osho emphasizes Mahavir's revolutionary idea: when the mind is young and the body is full of energy, the very energy that flows towards sensual pleasures can be redirected towards spiritual practices, allowing the "flower of renunciation" to blossom.

The Kshatriya Mindset and Rebellion Against Brahmanical Dominance

Osho attributes this revolutionary perspective to the "Kshatriya (warrior) mindset." He contrasts the Brahmanical intellect, focused on mathematics, logic, rules, and systems, with the Kshatriya intellect, characterized by revolution, energy, and even a degree of chaos. He notes that all 24 Jain Tirthankaras and Buddha were Kshatriyas. Their thinking is rooted in energy and action, whereas Brahmins rely on experience, calculation, and contemplation.

This Kshatriya impulse, Osho argues, naturally leads to rebellion. Historically, in India's caste system, the Kshatriyas, being second in hierarchy, were in the prime position to rebel against the Brahmins, who were at the top. They had the proximity and the aspiration to challenge the established order. Later, the Vaishyas rebelled against the Kshatriyas, and the Shudras would, in turn, rebel against the Vaishyas.

The Nature of Truth and the Dangers of Certainty

Osho then transitions to the nature of truth itself and the difficulties in speaking it. He points out that Mahavir didn't simply say "speak the truth." He added crucial conditions: "always vigilant" and "beneficial."

• Vigilance (Aparamad/Savdhani): Speaking truth without vigilance can be worse than falsehood. Truth spoken carelessly can be used to hurt others. Osho uses examples of calling someone a thief or a sinner. While factually true, the intention (hetu) behind such statements is crucial. If the intention is to humiliate or derive pleasure from another's downfall, it's not true truth. The motive, not just the act, determines the purity of speech.
• Beneficial (Hitkari): Even if the motive is good, if the truth harms others, it is not the truth Mahavir advocated. Osho emphasizes that "truth that causes harm to others is also not to be spoken." This leads to the possibility of silence.

The Complexity of Truth: Beyond Absolutes

Osho explains Mahavir's concept of "Saptabhangi" (the seven-fold logic) as a way to express the nuanced and incomplete nature of truth. When asked a question, Mahavir would offer seven answers, acknowledging that any statement is partial and context-dependent. For example, regarding death, Mahavir would say, "Perhaps he is dead, perhaps he is alive, perhaps both, perhaps neither." This approach, while intellectually rigorous, makes Mahavir's teachings difficult to "believe" or "follow" in the conventional sense, as people often seek definitive answers.

This is contrasted with thinkers like Shankaracharya, who presented more absolute philosophical statements. Osho suggests that Mahavir's emphasis on uncertainty and relativity, his "Syadvada" (the doctrine of perhaps/maybe), is akin to Einstein's scientific theory of relativity. Both acknowledge that complete, absolute truth is elusive.

The Role of Intention (Hetu)

Osho dedicates a significant part of the lecture to the concept of "hetu" (motive or intention). He asserts that "sin and merit are not in the deed, but in the motive." He uses the example of a mother slapping her child versus an enemy slapping an enemy. Physically, the act might be the same, but the intention differs. He also critically examines the mother's slap, suggesting that often the "motive" is not for the child's well-being but due to the mother's ego, disobedience, or anger from other situations.

Everyday Untruths and Habitual Falsehoods

Osho then addresses the everyday, seemingly harmless untruths we tell:

• Conventional Untruths: Like saying "I'm fine" when you're not. While seemingly useful for social interaction, they still create a disconnect.
• Habitual Falsehoods: Osho shares an anecdote about a professor who habitually claimed to have read books, even non-existent ones. This highlights how falsehoods can become ingrained habits, often without conscious malice.
• Uncertainty and Subjectivity: Many statements we consider factual are actually personal truths. The beauty of the sunrise is subjective; for someone grieving, it may not be beautiful. Osho states, "Truth is never private; untruths are private. Truth is public, universal." Therefore, Mahavir would often qualify statements with "perhaps" or "maybe."

The Challenge of Disbelief and the Need for a Guru

Osho concludes by explaining why Mahavir's teachings, despite their depth, haven't attracted a massive following like other religious figures. The reason lies in their demand for deep inner work and the lack of definitive pronouncements. People seeking assurance and certainty from a guru are unlikely to connect with Mahavir's relativistic and conditional approach.

He acknowledges the danger in spiritual practice, as it's easy to mistake a puffed-up ego for spiritual progress. This is why a guru's guidance is invaluable. A guru can help discern the path and prevent self-deception. Without a guru, one must rely on trial and error, learning from mistakes.

Key Takeaways:

• Truth is not just speaking facts, but speaking them with vigilance, intention, and compassion.
• Mahavir revolutionized the concept of renunciation, making it accessible at any age, particularly in youth when energy is at its peak.
• The Kshatriya mindset, characterized by energy and rebellion, influenced Mahavir's teachings, challenging established structures.
• Certainty is often a sign of ignorance; true wisdom lies in acknowledging the relativity and multifaceted nature of truth.
• Our words are deeply tied to our intentions (hetu), and it's the motive that defines the ethical quality of speech.
• Everyday untruths, habitual falsehoods, and subjective statements all fall short of Mahavir's ideal of universal truth.
• Mahavir's teachings require profound introspection and a willingness to embrace uncertainty, making them challenging but ultimately liberating.

In essence, Osho's lecture unpacks Mahavir's profound message that speaking the truth is a lifelong, vigilant practice requiring deep awareness of oneself, others, and the complex, often contradictory nature of reality.