The Book of Woman

Product Information

But the real differences are certainly there, and we have to search for them behind the pile of invented differences. One difference I see is that a woman is more capable of love than a man is. A man's love is more or less a physical necessity; a woman's love is not. It is something greater and higher, it is a spiritual experience. That's why the woman is monogamous and man is polygamous. The man would like to have all the world's women, and still he would not be satisfied. His discontent is infinite. Rajneesh emphasized the importance of meditation, mindfulness, love, celebration, courage, creativity and humor—qualities that he viewed as being suppressed by adherence to static belief systems, religious tradition and socialization.

Im on the second chapter of the book right now. This chapter is proving to be some kind of vendetta against Khalil Gibran's Prophet, against religion Note pg. 15, on Gautama Buddha's take on women and women themselves. I'm not religious but I'm a buddhist, a bad one, but all the same and im pretty sure Buddha is quoted out of context here. And anyways buddhism allows female monks too; close only to Christianity. So far, I am thoroughly at a crossword of gross disgust and immense farcical amazement. And I say that God was utterly stupid, because when you create a couple, you should at least create a double bed. The first night was the beginning of a struggle that continues even today. Lilith wanted to sleep on the bed, and Adam wanted to sleep on the bed, and the bed could not contain the two. So Adam threw Lilith down, then Lilith jumped on Adam and she threw Adam down -- just because of a stupid God, who could not think that a double bed was needed! All the societies of the world, all the cultures, all the religions in different ways have been doing the same: reducing the woman to a secondary category of humanity not equal to man. So inferior that in China, for thousands of years, to kill your own wife was not even considered a crime…. In India, the woman has been taught for centuries that she is a dasi, a slave, and the man, her husband, a swami, a master – an owner. I am reminded of a man who was purchasing in a toy shop a present for his son for Christmas. He was a well-known mathematician, so naturally the shopkeeper brought out a jigsaw puzzle. The mathematician tried … it was a beautiful puzzle. He tried and tried and tried and started perspiring. It was becoming awkward. The customers and the salesmen and the shopkeeper were all watching, and he was not able to bring the puzzle to a solution. Finally he dropped the idea and he shouted at the shopkeeper: "I am a mathematician and if I cannot solve this jigsaw puzzle, how do you think my small boy will be able to?" There is no need for man to feel inferior to woman. The whole idea arises because you take man and woman as two species. They belong to one humanity, and they have complementary qualities. They both need each other, and only when they are together are they whole. Life should be taken with ease. Differences are not contradictions. They can help each other and immensely enhance each other. The woman who loves you can enhance your creativity, can inspire you to heights you have never dreamed of. And she asks nothing. She simply wants your love, which is her basic right.Some of his idea about how life should be led by a common man, are very funny (like when he advises that if a child wants to play with his/her sex organ, don't stop him/her and bingo the child would grow up like a pervert) c. It seems to be that this statement is merely being used as an excuse for Osho (or whatever) to be non-monogamous and then use it against him or her (likely her, as I am about to explain in a moment) in an abusive method to do what he wants. This totally goes against everything he hates so much about men. Everything is mysterious: It is better to enjoy it rather than trying to understand it. Ultimately the man who goes on trying to understand life proves to be a fool, and the man who enjoys life becomes wise and goes on enjoying life, because he becomes more and more aware of the mysterious that surrounds us." Osho Most of the things that make men and women different are conditional. Differences should be maintained because they make men and women attractive to each other, but they should not be used as condemnation. I would like both to become an organic whole, remaining at the same time absolutely free, because love never creates bondage, it gives freedom. Then we can create a better world. Half of the world has been denied its contribution and that half, the women, had an immense capacity to contribute to the world. It would have made it a beautiful paradise. Pg 14. "he (Khalil Gibran) is supporting the idea that you must experience pain." Osho seems not to like the idea. Please tell us how it is humanely possible to live in a world where there in no pain. And pain is what makes us more humble, its a preventive tap that allows us to remain grounded.

He said Jews sought out the Holocaust because they felt guilty for killing Jesus. ("Just accept the situation in which you are," Rajneesh has stated that "living in poverty is far more dangerous, far more suffering than dying in a beautifully, scientifically managed gas chamber in Germany"; Hitler "killed people in the most up-to-date gas chambers, where you don’t take much time. Thousands of people can be put in a gas chamber, and just a switch is pressed ... Within a second, you evaporate. The chimneys of the factory start taking you, the smoke – you can call it holy smoke – and this seems to be a direct way towards God.") BUT by the way, he hates Christianity, AND there is no heaven, so I don't know how Jews have a "direct way towards God" if there is no God or Heaven to go to. Life is so mysterious that our hands cannot reach to its heights, our eyes cannot look into its deepest mystery. Understanding any expression of existence—men or women or trees or animals or birds—is the function of science, not of a mystic. I am not a scientist. To me, science itself is a mystery, and now scientists have started to recognize it. They are dropping their old, stubborn, superstitious attitude that one day they will know all that is to be known. And so is the case with woman – no woman is whole. She has been denied her male part. When she was a small child she could not fight with boys, she could not climb on the trees; she had to play with dolls, she had to play ‘house’. This is a very, very distorted vision.

The woman can be of immense help in creating an organic society. She is different from man, but not unequal. She is as equal to a man as any other man. She has talents of her own which are absolutely needed. It is not enough to earn money, it is not enough to become a success in the world; more necessary is a beautiful home, and the woman has the capacity to change any house into a home. She can fill it with love; she has that sensitivity. She can rejuvenate man, help him relax. When the woman is on top she has more mobility, the man has less mobility, and that will bring their orgasms closer to each other. And when both go into orgasmic experience, it is something of the other world. It is the first glimpse of samadhi; it is the first glimpse that one is not the body. One forgets the body, one forgets the world. Both the man and the woman move into a new dimension they have never explored. but then in between those unnecessary stuffs comes his talks on love,sex,womanhood,motherhood and stuffs like that. With Albert Einstein the whole history of science has taken a very different route because the more he went into the deepest core of matter, the more he became puzzled. All logic was left behind, all rationality was left behind. You cannot dictate to existence, because it does not follow your logic. Logic is man-made. There was a point in Albert Einstein's life when he remembers that he was wavering about whether to insist on being rational … but that would be foolish. It would be human, but not intelligent. Even if you insist on logic, on rationality, existence is not going to change according to your logic; your logic has to change according to existence. And the deeper you go, existence becomes more and more mysterious. A point comes when you have to leave logic and rationality and just listen to nature. I call it the ultimate understanding—but not in the ordinary sense of understanding. You know it, you feel it, but there is no way to say it.