We have criticized this critique, but it is bad news even so for Osho fantasists, even if we discount half of it as requiring cross-examination. One cannot recommend it short of that careful review.
But the claim by the author(s) that Osho wasn’t enlightened forces itself into consideration. I have more or less accepted that Osho was enlightened, but after the critiques given we have no other choice than to put the question on the table as ‘still open to debate’…The world’s kids, encountering the path to enlightenment, are going to go haywire in this confusion, on the way to violent insanity.
So I withdraw any claims there. Who cares? Another dharma drunk walking down the pike. Shovel dirt over the grave and pass on. But the question actually is useful, and it is useful for critics to raise the doubt level.
I have suggested that the discovery that the Gautama outfit was involved in fascism up to nazism by early Rajneesh must have thrown him into a lifetime of ‘enlightened’ confusion and his path as a teacher never recovered. He’s right. Who gives a shit as to Indian windbag tradition chatter on ‘enlightenment’. The game has to die in search of rebirth or none.
To all the kids out there confronting the total wrong example set by a ‘buddha’ check out his Beyond Enlightenment (1986):
At some point Osho’s public enlightenment began to go cuckoo and it is an alarming confusion that voids out his public presentation as hopelessly muddled. This echoes the Advaita warning that experiences are transient, including those of enlightenment. Is this the same thing said in different ways? I doubt it, but the truth is hard to arrive at. I think the Advaita discussion is too limited.