Chapter 6 - The Irrational Rationalist | Osho

‌Chapter 6 - The Irrational Rationalist‌

It is absurd. It cannot be so according to ordinary logic. But if you ask the physicist he says, "What can we do? We are helpless. It is so. We cannot change the reality. Just to adjust to your logic, we cannot change the reality. And the reality does not believe in your Aristotles.

It does not suffer from Aristotle-itis. It does not bother about what your logic says; it goes on its own way." So the physicists say, "What can we do? Change your logic. If it looks mad, maybe the universe is mad."

It looks mad, but the mystics have always said so. In the Upanishads it is said, "Take the whole out of the whole, and the whole remains behind." Now, Dr. Abraham Kovoor will call this man mad. If you take the whole out of the whole, nothing remains behind! This is ordinary mathematics and logic. But the Upanishads say, "You take the whole out of the whole, and the whole still remains behind. You go on taking as many wholes as you want, and still the whole remains behind." The mystics have also stumbled upon the illogicalness of reality.

Now, what do you say about this "quark"? It fits absolutely with the Upanishadic idea. It does not fit with Aristotle. Bad for poor Aristotle! And bad for poor Dr. Abraham Kovoor!

I am crazy. I have seen the reality which does not fit with the mind. In fact, the mind is the only barrier to reality. It does not allow you to see the reality. The more you are confined in the mind, the less is the possibility of knowing. And if you insist that you will know only through the mind, then you will never know.

The mind is very ordinary. It is good for day-to-day use, but to penetrate the infinite, to penetrate the eternal, to penetrate that which is -- the ultimate mystery

-- the mind is just as futile as if you are trying to empty the ocean with a teaspoon. It is just irrelevant.

The reality is irrational, the reality is nonsensical, the reality is absurd.

Now, Abraham Kovoor can be against the mystics, but what will he do against the physicist? And why have they both come to the same conclusion? Science

has penetrated into reality from a different door, but the reality is the same. So have done the mystics: they have entered from a different door, but they have entered into the same space.

Now scientists say the universe is expanding. Into what? Because when we say "the universe," we include everything that is. When we say "universe" we mean the whole, the total. Now you say the universe is expanding. Into what? There cannot be anything outside the universe. We have included, by the very definition of the word "universe," that all is in it. So nothing is outside it. Into what is the universe expanding? Even if you say "into nothingness,"

then the nothingness is outside the universe. Then the nothingness is very real into which the universe can expand. Then the nothingness is not just nothingness. Then you have not decided rightly what the universe is.

This concept of an expanding universe is crazy, but that is what mystics have been saying down the ages. Hindus have chosen the word "Brahman"; Brahman means "that which goes on expanding".

Now, Abraham Kovoor says that he believes only in something which is proved objectively. God is not proved objectively. What is proved objectively? The electron is proved? The neutron is proved? The proton is proved? What is proved objectively? Nobody has yet seen electrons, nobody has yet seen neutrons, nobody has yet seen protons, but the scientists say they are. If nobody has seen them, nobody has looked at them, nobody has observed them as objects, then why do you say they are? Scientists say, "Because we can see Osho - The First Principle

< Previous | Contents | Next >