Truth as it is -- Naked

Second Question



Energy Enhancement          Enlightened Texts          Upanishads           Philosophia Ultima



The second question

Question 2




Ajai Krishn Lakhanpal,

IT IS A LONG STORY. The moment I became capable of seeing I started talking about truth as it is -- naked. But nobody was ready even to listen to it. I was puzzled: I had found the original face, I had seen it, I wanted to share with those who were searching for it, but they were not ready to listen to it.

For a few years I struggled hard, but then I saw that they were not wrong, I was wrong. They could not digest truth raw and naked; when you have been eating cooked food for many many lives you cannot digest raw food. I was wrong, they were not wrong.

Then I started cooking things! Then I started saying things which they could digest. I became less and less concerned about truth and more and more concerned about the people who were to digest it; I had to see how much they could digest. And I had to prepare the food in such a way that it was sweet, not bitter, that it tasted good, it looked good. Whether it was nutritious or not, that was secondary. Who bothers whether Deeksha's cakes are nutritious or not? whether the ice cream is going to make you healthy or ill? Who bothers about these things? It TASTES good. It may destroy you finally...

And I was amazed -- when I started serving cooked food people became very much interested and excited. That was a device: that's how I have been able to hook you all! Otherwise I was sitting on the riverbank day in, day out -- not a single fish! Once I started serving cooked food -- cooked according to your desires, not according to your needs.... I didn't need to think at all about the truth in the beginning days, I forgot all about it. I stopped going to the river -- the fish started coming to me on their own, walking long distances.

So don't be too bothered about what I have said in my earlier works. I have said many things which I don't mean! What I am saying today is closer to truth than what I said yesterday, and every day it will become closer and closer to the truth. Before I am gone I will again have told you the naked truth.

I had to take such a long route because there was no other way; I had to be very indirect. The moment I became enlightened I started telling people that there is no God -- and they were shocked! Then I cooked it. I said, "There is God, but God is not a person, only a presence." This is cooked food. I am simply saying there IS NO God. But now it tastes sweet -- no person, only a presence.

But what else can you do? If people are foolish you have to be careful with them. So I have certainly said, Ajai Krishn Lakhanpal, that no saint is against any other saint -- but that is absolutely wrong.

Buddha was as much against Mahavira as anybody can be, Mahavira was as much against Gosala as anybody can be. Krishna was against the Vedas, Buddha was against the Vedas, Mahavira was against the Vedas. Mahavira was against Krishna.... Do you think Jesus Christ was supporting the Old Testament? Of course, he was serving cooked food, but the Jews are very clever people: they found it out! He was saying: "It has been told to you before an eye for an eye. If somebody hits you with a brick you have to answer him with a rock, it has been told before. But I say to you that if somebody slaps you on the right cheek, give him the left too."

Now what is he saying? It is cooked food. He is saying that the old prophets, the old so-called prophets, were wrong. The Jewish God and the Christian God are totally opposite. The Jewish God says: I am a very jealous God. And Jesus says: God is love. Now love and jealousy never meet, there is no possibility. Jews immediately found out: "This man is destroying our past. Before he succeeds it is better to destroy him." They killed him; he was only thirty-three when he was killed. Jews found him out far more quickly than anybody else has ever been.

Lao Tzu lived long, Buddha lived long, Mahavira lived long. They went on saying things, but in such a way that you could not find them out -- it was impossible for you to find them out.

I wanted to say the naked truth from the very beginning, but to whom to say it? I had to drop that. For a few years I tried my hardest, but all the doors remained closed; nobody was even ready to listen. Then I changed the whole strategy, I became a little more diplomatic. Then whatsoever I wanted to say I started saying through Mahavira, through Buddha, through Zarathustra, through Lao Tzu, through Jesus.... I continued to say things but I was using other people's names. And Christians became very much interested when I said the same things in the name of Jesus! Whatsoever I said in the name of Jesus is simply my own; it has nothing to do with Jesus at all. And if I meet Jesus there is going to be a great argument. They all must be waiting for me -- let this guy come! -- because I have been telling things in the name of Buddha which he never meant... but Buddhists became very happy.

Fools are fools! The earth is so full of them.

I started saying things in the name of Mahavira which are absolutely the opposite of what he said -- because if I had to live with Mahavira in the same room, either I would leave or he would leave! We could not have tolerated each other. First, his smell... because he never used to take a bath. He was against taking baths because when you pour so much water on your body, so many small germs in the water die; that is violence. So he never took a bath.

And he used to live naked -- you know the Indian roads -- he was walking because he was not using any vehicle, he could not according to his ideology. To ride on a horse is violence, to ride in a bullock-cart is violence. He had to walk, and without shoes, because shoes were made out of leather -- that is violence. And twenty-five hundred years ago... even NOW Indian roads are not contemporary, at least one thousand years behind. Twenty-five centuries ago, walking in Bihar -- which is still very dusty -- he must have been gathering dust in the hot summer, perspiring and gathering dust, layers upon layers of dust.

He was not even ready to clean his teeth, he was against washing his mouth, rinsing his mouth. Always that violence -- if you rinse your mouth you are killing germs in the water, and there are millions of germs in the water. His breath must have been smelling really foul!

One thing is certain: I could not have tolerated him in the same room. And he would not tolerate me either. He would simply go mad seeing my air-conditioned room, my Rolls-Royce -- he would simply go mad!

He was an ascetic. According to me he was a masochist -- now this is raw food! -- he was torturing himself, he enjoyed torturing himself. And I am not a masochist or a sadist; neither do I want to torture myself nor do I want to torture anybody else. He was both, a sadomasochist: he was torturing himself and teaching people to torture themselves.

But I have spoken on Mahavira. I had to play with words to manage my meaning in his words. It was a difficult task but I DID it, and the Jainas were very happy.

The same I have done with Krishna. I think my commentary on Krishna is the biggest in the whole of history. Lokman Tilak's commentary on Krishna, his Gita, was thought to be the biggest -- it must be more than one thousand pages. But my commentary is twelve times bigger. And I DON'T agree with Krishna really! Whatsoever I have said -- the words are his, the meanings are mine.

But this can be done very easily with the saints who are dead. What can they do? And when we meet later on somewhere -- if that meeting ever happens -- then I can simply apologize; there is no problem in it. And I hope they will understand -- because they themselves had done the same thing, and I am doing the same thing. There is no problem in it.

So one thing, Ajai Krishn: whenever you want to try to understand me, don't bring in what I have said in the past; that is not going to help. The LATEST has to be taken into account. And when tomorrow I say something, that will be even better. Before I enter into my grave, my last statement will be just the naked truth.

But I had to take this long route for the simple reason that -- whom to get hold of, with whom to share your experience? With whom? There are Hindus, there are Mohammedans, there are Christians, there are Buddhists, there are Sikhs, there are Parsis... not a single human being is available, all are already divided. The only way is to catch the Christians through Jesus and the Jews through Moses and the Hindus through Krishna. Once they are with me then they will be able to understand.

And now I have found my people so I don't care much. Now I can start giving you my original experience.

You ask me:


I really mean it!


You say 'possible saints'? These are impossible saints!

Muktananda is a very ordinary person; I have met him. I was passing by his ashram and his disciples invited me, just for a few minutes' stay, to take a cup of tea. So I said, "Okay."

The man was so flat, just like a flat tire, nothing in him, nothing of any worth, not even junk. And it was not only apparent to me: one of my disciples, a woman follower, Nirmala Srivastava, was with me -- even she could see, even she proved to be far more intelligent than Muktananda. We stayed only fifteen minutes; it was a sheer wastage of time. And the moment our car moved away, Nirmala told me, "This man is absolutely common, very ordinary. Why did you waste your time? -- even fifteen minutes is an unnecessary wastage!"

I looked at her, and immediately I knew that some idea had entered into her head -- and it had entered. The idea was: "If such a fool like Muktananda can become a saint, then why can't I become a saint?" And the idea worked out well. Now Nirmala Srivastava is a great saint, is traveling around the world, having many devotees. That day it transpired, looking at Muktananda. Now she is 'Her Holiness, the World Mother -- LAGAJJANANI -- Mataji, Nirmalaji Deviji Srivastavaji.' Now she has many followers, doing the same thing that Muktananda is doing -- raising people's kundalini. Once she could see that this fool can raise people's kundalini, then "Why can't I raise it?" And she is certainly far more intelligent than Muktananda, far more capable, far more skillful, far more intellectual. Muktananda is not a saint.

But this has not happened only once.

You must have heard of the name Yogi Bhajan. In America he has many followers; he has turned many American fools into SARDARS. He preaches the Sikh religion; he is the head of the Sikh religion for the Western hemisphere. And do you know what he was? He was just a porter at the Delhi airport.

But what happened to Nirmala Srivastava happened to him too. His name was Sardar Haribhajan Singh. Muktananda came to Delhi airport with his followers, and this porter was simply carrying his luggage. He looked at this man; he said, "If this fool can lead, then what is wrong with me?" And of course Sardar Haribhajan Singh is a taller man, healthier, more robust, and far more intelligent. He immediately escaped to America, became Yogi Bhajan, and gathered a big following.

Just a few days ago he was in Delhi, and one of the highest authorities of the airport told Laxmi, "I was passing through the Taj Mahal Hotel in New Delhi -- I had gone to see some friend -- and I saw on the lawn there a very saintly man surrounded by many Americans. I asked, 'Who is this man?' and I was told that he is a great guru, Yogi Bhajan. I thought he must be a great yogi, otherwise how can you get such a gathering?" This man felt happy because he is also a SARDAR, and Yogi Bhajan has made all these people SARDARS; they were all sitting around him with turbans and KIRPANS. He was very happy.

When he was passing by this crowd of Yogi Bhajan's people -- Yogi Bhajan seems to be really a good man, a simple man -- he said, "Hey boss!" This officer could not believe that he was calling him, so he thought he must be calling somebody else: "How can such a great mahatma say, 'Hey boss!' to me?" So he went on.

He again shouted, "Hey boss!" so he turned back. Yogi Bhajan took him inside his suite in the Taj Mahal, closed the doors and said, "Have you forgotten your poor porter, Sardar Haribhajan Singh? I am Sardar Haribhajan Singh and nobody else. Have your forgotten your poor servant?"

Then he remembered. But he said, "How did this happen? How did you become such a great mahatma?"

He said, "It is due to Muktananda. When I saw Muktananda I said, 'If this fool can get a following, then what is wrong with me? Why should I go on wasting my time being a porter at Delhi airport?' Now I am the head of the Sikh religion in the Western hemisphere. I have thousands of followers. But," he said, "to you, I say that I am simply the same man -- I know nothing. But these people are greater fools than I am."

And you can always find greater fools than you are. The world abounds in them.

Muktananda is not a saint or anything. Nityananda, Muktananda's guru, was simply a traditional, conventional person. He fulfilled the expectations of the Hindus, hence he was a saint. Anybody can manage it; all that you need is a lack of intelligence. You can do it. You have to be stupid -- only a stupid person can be traditional, conventional, only a stupid person can fulfill other people's expectations. A real saint cannot be traditional.

Listen to these words of Meher Baba, a real saint, an authentic sage. He says: "Not only is the perfect Master not necessarily bound to any particular technique in giving spiritual help to others, but also he is not bound to the conventional standard of good. He is beyond the distinction of good and evil. But although what he does may appear lawless in the eyes of the world, it is always meant for the ultimate good of others. He has no personal motive."

These people all have personal motives. If you want to be worshipped as a saint, then you have to fulfill the expectations of the people you are living with. If you are living with Hindus, fulfill their expectations of what a saint is supposed to be; if you are living with Mohammedans, fulfill their expectations -- and you will be a saint. It needs no intelligence, no art, no diligence, nothing at all -- just fulfill their expectations. If they think that you should eat only once a day, eat once a day. And it can be managed, it is not much of a problem; it is just a question of creating a habit. If they want you to fast for three days and then eat only once after three days, you can do that. Nityananda must have been doing such things -- his big belly is enough proof.

Have you seen a picture of Nityananda? If you have not seen one you have missed something really worth seeing. There are people who have bellies, but here the case is just the opposite: the belly has the person! The belly is all, just a little head on top of it, two hands by the side, two legs -- but the belly is the real thing. It is a belly with a head, hands and legs. This is bound to happen. If you have to eat only once after three days then you have to take the whole quota for three days, you have to accumulate it. Nityananda looks permanently pregnant. Just look at his picture and you will see it. He is not a saint, just a conventional Hindu, a traditional Hindu.

A saint is always revolutionary, a saint is basically a rebellion.

And Maharishi Mahesh Yogi... I know him well, because we come from the same part of India. The distance between my village and his village is only six miles. I used to go to his village every morning just for a morning walk. He is absolutely phony. There is nothing in him. What he is teaching is just an ancient, simple method of chanting a mantra. You can use any word repetitively; it creates a kind of auto-hypnosis. It gives you a good sleep, but a good sleep is not enlightening; a good sleep is good for your physical health so nothing is wrong in it, but there is nothing valuable either.

And Swami Prabhupada... if Muktananda is a very ordinary person, Prabhupada is extra-ordinary. He is an extra-ordinary idiot! Muktananda can be helped, Prabhupada cannot be helped at all.

But you can judge by the people they attract. You can just see the people who are part of the Hare Krishna movement. You will find the most idiotic people of the world gathered together. Here you will find just the opposite -- the most intelligent people of the world are coming here. They are BOUND to come, they HAVE to come -- it is inevitable. You will find your polar opposites in the Hare Krishna people. I have never come across such idiots! But they also need a saint. Of course, their need should be fulfilled -- Prabhupada did that.

And you ask me:


I am absolutely earnest, but serious I cannot be -- that is impossible. I am always non-serious. Even when I am utterly honest, sincere, I am non-serious. Serious I cannot be; that is not my nature.

And why should I be serious just because there are a few fools in the world? Why should I be serious? I enjoy! In fact, a few fools are always needed in the world. They serve a certain purpose: they keep the world laughing. They are so ridiculous -- without them we would be missing something. They are so absurd -- they are needed. They keep your sense of humor alive; that is their purpose. God -- and you know what I mean by God: just a presence, no person -- God always creates whatsoever is absolutely needed, he never creates anything unnecessary. So these people ARE needed.

And, Ajai Krishn, you say that you are disturbed because I talk against Mother Teresa every other day. Do you want me to talk about her EVERY day? I can do that too -- for your peace of mind. Don't get upset! You seem to be a devotee of Mother Teresa, saying that I only mention her every other day. She is not a saint, she's just an agent of the Catholic Church; she is just trying to convert people to Roman Catholicism.

A few days ago I mentioned a Protestant couple who wanted to adopt a child; the couple is childless. The organization was ready to give them a child but when the husband filled out the form they came to know that he is not a Roman Catholic; he is a Protestant Christian. Both are Christians -- the Catholics and the Protestants -- there is not much difference between them -- but he was refused. And when I said this, I have seen angry letters against me in the newspapers saying that there must be some reason why Mother Teresa and her organization refused the couple; that couple must have been a hippie couple -- just because of her compassion she refused them.

That is utter nonsense! -- because they were willing to give a child, they had accepted to give, they were absolutely ready to give. Only when the form was filled out and he mentioned that he was not a Catholic but a Protestant Christian was he refused. And he is not a hippie -- the couple is a well-established, well-to-do, well-educated couple. The husband is a professor in a big university in Europe.

So when people write these letters against me, they should check what they are saying.

The husband's letter was published in THE TIMES OF INDIA. He was shocked because he had believed that Mother Teresa believes in universal brotherhood. What to say about UNIVERSAL brotherhood? -- even Protestants and Catholics are not brothers.

Then a follower of Mother Teresa replied: "Mother Teresa and her organization refused to give the child, not because of your religion but because the orphan child has been raised according to the Roman Catholic discipline. It is out of compassion for the child because if he goes to a Protestant family there will be a disturbance. His lifestyle with Mother Teresa will have to be radically changed, and that will be a shattering experience for the child. That's why they have been refused."

Now so many questions arise. First, the child basically is Hindu. Mother Teresa has disturbed the child in the first place by giving him a Catholic training and discipline. And now, giving the child to a Protestant family... which is not very different from a Catholic family. Both believe in Christ, both believe in the Bible -- what differences are there? Just very nonessential differences: that a Protestant priest is allowed to get married and a Catholic priest is not allowed to get married. How is this going to disturb the child? What nonsense!

There are certainly great differences between Hinduism and Christianity, and the child would have had to go through a drastic change. That is perfectly okay -- compassionate towards the child. And if Mother Teresa thinks that changing religion is disturbing a person, then why are millions of Hindus, poor Hindus, being converted to Christianity? They should be stopped. And they are not children -- they are grown-up people; their conditioning is bigger. In fact, they will have to go through a deeper crisis. If compassion is there, then converting anybody from one religion to another is inhuman. But that is perfectly okay.

The whole Catholic Church is after people, how to make more Catholics. She is simply an agent of the Catholic Church, of the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic organization. She's not a saint at all -- far more clever than Muktananda, not as idiotic as Prabhupada, more cunning, more clever; so clever and so cunning that she goes on doing this conversion business behind a facade of serving the poor. Even Hindus are befooled, Mohammedans are befooled, and nobody can see the trick and the politics -- the politics of numbers.

I am going to say whatsoever I feel is the truth, and every day I will go on sharpening the truth. I have spoken so much for all kinds of people -- three hundred books are there. Now I have to create three hundred more books to get rid of all that I have said! But I am capable of doing it -- I have planned it already. For seven years I have been speaking non-stop, just seven years more speaking non-stop and I can put you in a real jam!


Next: Chapter 15, Truth as it is -- Naked, Third Question


Energy Enhancement          Enlightened Texts         Upanishads           Philosophia Ultima



Chapter 15






Search Search web