Life is closer to Mahavira's 'perhaps' than to Aristotle's 'either or'‏

THE EAST NEVER FELL VICTIM TO ANY KIND OF ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC. In the East, not a single person ever proposed a logic which simply divides existence into black and white.

    GAUTAM BUDDHA PROPOSES A LOGIC WHICH DIVIDES LIFE IN FOUR. The alternatives become more, the choices become more. If somebody is not your friend, it does not mean he has to be your enemy. He may be simply INDIFFERENT or he may be simply IGNORANT. He may NOT KNOW anything about you and your enmity at all. Or he may know, but he has NO INTEREST in your enmity. Hence, he does not take any participation.

    MAHAVIRA'S LOGIC is perhaps the most perfect in the whole world. HE ACCEPTS SEVEN ALTERNATIVES, THE WHOLE RAINBOW. Naturally HIS LOGIC BECOMES AS COMPLICATED AS LIFE ITSELF. If you ask Mahavira any question, you cannot hope to get an answer in yes or no. If you ask the same question to Aristotle, he will be ready absolutely, either yes or no -- because those are the only two alternatives.

    In the whole history of mankind, Mahavira used a different word. He never used yes or no, because that creates the fallacy that life is divided in two -- it is too simplistic. MAHAVIRA ALWAYS ANSWERS EVERYTHING WITH A 'PERHAPS' -- he keeps open other alternatives.

    THAT'S WHY HE COULD NOT GATHER A GREAT FOLLOWING. The greatest teacher -- the most logical man -- could not get a great following. Even today, his followers are not more than three and a half million. After twenty-five centuries, even if he had converted thirty-five couples, they would have produced that many children by this time. Three and a half million... For the Indians it is not a big job!

    BUT HE COULD NOT ATTRACT THE ORDINARY MIND. The ordinary mind found that whatever Mahavira says simply goes above his head. You ask him about God and he says, "perhaps". You want some solid answer, whether God exists or not, and he says, "perhaps". Perhaps what? What should we understand by "perhaps"? It does not mean God exists, it does not mean God does not exist. It simply means: it depends on you, from what aspect you look at it.

    There is an aspect from where it is significant to say God exists; there is another aspect from which to say, significantly, God does not exist. And there is also a third possibility: to say that God exists and does not exist, together.

    There is also a fourth possibility... just to remain silent; not to answer, because the question is unanswerable. And in this way he goes on. By the time he has finished his discourse about the seven aspects of God, you return home more confused than you had ever been before. WHO IS GOING TO FOLLOW THIS MAN? About everything he begins with "perhaps." But he was the most logical man.

    TWENTY-FIVE CENTURIES BEFORE, HE TALKED ABOUT THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY. It took twenty-five centuries for the West to understand -- when Albert Einstein brought the theory of relativity into the field of science. THIS MAN, MAHAVIRA, MUST HAVE HAD A TREMENDOUS INSIGHT INTO EXISTENCE. He had no lab, nothing to experiment with except his logical correctness.

    So, Mukta, you should not think that it is a misfortune. IT IS A BLESSING THAT YOU NEVER GOT TRAPPED INTO THE ARISTOTELIAN THINKING. That has destroyed half of the humanity's whole mind. It has made everybody look at life in terms of either/or, and life is much more mysterious. It is closer to Mahavira's 'perhaps', than a simple yes and no.

OSHO
The Rebel
Ch #22: Laughter is divine
pm in Chuang Tzu Auditorium
[part 2 of 4]