Home Curiosity This Is Why Osho Called Mother Teresa A Deceiver, Charlatan And Hypocrite

This Is Why Osho Called Mother Teresa A Deceiver, Charlatan And Hypocrite


Osho for decades have criticized Mother Teresa’s work and the ideology behind her work. He said that under the cover of “serving the poor” there is an agenda of religious conversion and child indoctrination through religious conversion and teaching that is socially unacceptable.

Osho believes that there is a deep conspiracy between politicians and priests. Politicians rule us from the outside, priests rule us from the inside. There is no escape from the influence they have on us although this might be totally unconscious.

Osho received a letter from Mother Teresa as a response to his commentaries against her work. In the letter she wrote: 

Osho says that he does not doubt the sincerity in her letter. However, he feels that whatever she wrote is mechanical and unconscious; almost robot-like. She does not know what she is writing, nor does she understand the adjectives he had called her: the adjectives being deceiver, charlatan, and hypocrite.

On deception…

Osho believes that deception is a double-edged sword because the deceiver by deceiving other is also deceiving himself. He says that Mother Teresa is a deceiver on both sides. Yes, she has been serving with good intentions those in need, but the final results are not based just on good intentions. You may plant seeds for flowers but wind up with thorns no matter how much effort you put on planting them.

“She feeds seven thousand poor people every day. From where does this money come? Who donates this money?”

This is indeed something to think about. The poor have been served for centuries, but there is still poverty in the world. There will always be poverty because the whole society functions by helping the poor. It is society’s way of controlling the masses. Otherwise, they may become murderous and revengeful. By this logic, the same people who donate money to help the poor are the ones exploiting them on the first place. It is a vicious cycle.

So, from where does Mother Teresa get the money?

In 1974, the Pope himself gave her a Cadillac which she sold right away and donated the money to the poor. But the question remains: from where does the Pope got the money to buy the Cadillac in the first place? We all know that the Pope is one of the richest men in the world, and yet not even one percent of this fortune goes to these missionaries of Charity.

This capitalistic machinery exists only for serving the rich by masking this fact so that it looks like they are serving the poor. They make the poor feel that they help them, so they are not revolting against the society. These missions of charity exist only to deceive the poor, to give them hope. If they abandoned them there would be revolution and rebellion out of hopelessness.

“On the surface they serve the poor – but fundamentally, basically, indirectly they serve the rich.”

Osho said that Mother Teresa shouldn’t have won the Nobel Prize, and she felt offended by it.

Nobel, the founder of the Nobel Prize, was one of the greatest criminals in the world; he manufactured weapons resulting with the death of millions of people during the First World War. He accumulated his money from the blood of people. Each year there are dozens of Nobel Prizes given by his money filled with blood.

And now, this money that comes from wars and murder is given to the Missionaries of Charity for serving the poor. By this logic it takes millions of dead people to feed seven thousand people, and to raise a few orphans by making millions of orphans. What a strange world!

Mother Teresa accepted the Nobel Prize out of vanity. She wanted to be admired and respected. On the other hand, Jean Paul Sartre refused the Nobel Prize. He didn’t want money that comes from wrong sources, nor could he accept any respect from an insane society. This man is far more religious than Mother Teresa on this matter.

On charlatanism…

Osho calls these people charlatans because in his belief, a truly religious person could not get a Nobel Prize. Just try to imagine Jesus getting a Nobel Prize, or Socrates. Unbelievable! And these are people who were truly religious by heart.

However, these religious people are often condemned by society because of their rebellious nature. Think about this for a moment: Mother Teresa is praised and considered a saint, while Jesus was condemned like the worst criminal.

If you can’t agree that Mother Teresa is right and Jesus is a criminal, then it must be the other way around – that Jesus is right and Mother Teresa is a charlatan.

On hypocrisy…

Osho calls Mother Teresa a hypocrite because she says one thing and does another. For example, she has rejected a Protestant family that wanted a child with the excuse that they have run out of orphans.

Osho argues how she suddenly ran out of orphans when there are thousands of orphans in the houses she helps and thousands more on the streets of Calcutta.

Moreover, if there weren’t any orphans there, then what was she doing with seven hundred nuns? To whom are these seven hundred nuns mothering?

However, the family was not refused immediately. At first, they were told that they would get an orphan. They just needed to fill a form. So, when they came to the point where they said they are Protestants… Mother Teresa ran out of orphans! If this is not hypocrisy then what is?

“Had they written ‘Catholic’ they would have immediately been given the child.”

This family had even chosen the child, but Mother Teresa rejected them on the premise that they were raised Catholics and it would be bad for the psychological well-being of the child if a Protestant family were to raise it.

On conversion…

The main thing is that these children are all Hindu. If Mother Teresa is so worried about their psychological state then why would she raise them as Catholics? How can their psychology not be disturbed if they were raised as Catholics, but when there is another religion in question there is a problem? If she so believes in her theory then she shouldn’t have converted any child into Catholic religion.

“She is very enthusiastic about converting people. If people were not converted, then who would the Christians in the world have been?”

The fact that Christianity has existed only two thousand years and has the biggest number of believers speaks for itself. And it all comes from conversion. They bribed people by giving them food, military and hospital services.

However, they could never convert a rich Hindu – they can’t bribe the rich, only the poor beggars.

On anger and forgiveness…

In her letter she writes, “For the adjectives you add to my name I forgive you with great love.”

To this Osho says that if you forgive somebody then you must have been angry first. Love does not need forgiveness.

“I don’t forgive Mother Teresa, because I am not angry at all. Why should I forgive her? She must have been angry.”

This is why he said that she was not aware what she was writing.

On choice…

Osho adds yet more attributes to her name: stupid, mediocre, idiotic! He says that she is the one that needs to be forgiven because she writes in her letter that she is “fighting through adoption the sin of abortion”.

“Abortion is not a sin – in this overpopulated world, abortion is virtue.”

If abortion is indeed a sin, then she herself along with the Pope are responsible for it because they were against all birth controlling methods.

It is unforgivable to be against the pill in this time. This pill could make the Earth a paradise if all of us used it wisely when planning our families. But what would Mother Teresa and the Pope do if there were no orphans? This type of paradise most certainly didn’t appeal to them.

In conclusion…

We are not condemning Mother Teresa’s work. She most certainly did a great job helping the poor, but we had the need to present to you a new perspective on her work. I am not sure you agree with this critic, but I am sure that he raises a lot of questions to think about.

Source: www.huffingtonpost.in