I will never again dismiss my own impulse to move.
I remember feeling the impulse to leave, but Sibu said that we had tons of time and it was fine to start the descent after lunch. Then we hung out on the top of Champaign Castle, soaked up the morning sun and relaxed. We camped on top of the table mountain, rose to watch the sunrise, and I was completely blissed out, despite the fact that it was effing freezing. We got up fine within two days, though that was tough too (but it was not going to be the toughest part, I just didn't know that yet). well. what shall I say? I learned my lesson - never get on a trek without your own compass and your own map. For one because I was overwhelmed by the beauty, and the other thing. I thought I was going to die a couple of times. Andrew suggested Champaign Castle, the second highest peak in South Africa. He insisted that I couldn't go alone, too dangerous. So I asked him about a good trek on the 'Berg', and he got me onto Sibusisu, a local guide. The guy running it, Andrew, had been to all the major trekking destinations in the world (he had pictures on the wall everywhere). The 'Berg' was my first stop, and I picked the 'right' hostel to stay. The Drakensberg only consists of table mountains. And what did it discover? Tons of trekking, so different from what I had seen thus far. Osho himself never purported to do this during his lifetime.A friend had invited me to Cape Town, and as I always do, I got a couple of proper maps of the country. Registering „OSHO“ was simply about the attempt of a small group of would-be leaders to put themselves in the place of Osho and to get control over people connected to and inspired by Osho and their independent work by monopolizing the key descriptor that puts into one word an entire mysticism. Nevertheless, by monopolizing the name of Osho being the found of a new world-view / philosophy, the proprietor of the contested CTM is trying to get control over the content of meditations, therapies and teachings as well as the underlying world-view, vision and philosophy, allowing it to purport in its own discretion what may be referred to as the right interpretation of Osho’s vision and teachings. It was obvious that at that time, the name of Osho had broadly been used as a reference to his vision, teachings, meditations and lifework and goods and services inspired by him and his teachings in general, and that the latter goods and services had been produced independently by hundreds of individuals and meditation centers. Ten years after Osho had taken the name „Osho“, the proprietor of the contested CTM tried to usurp Osho’s name also across the European Union by registering it inter alia as the contested Community trade mark no. This attempt failed when the US trade marks were cancelled respectively rejected for genericness / descriptiveness. Soon after Osho’s death in 1990 attempts were made to monopolize the legacy of Osho: his art, his unique signatures and even meditation techniques were applied for trade marks in USA and other countries, while Osho’s name was used by people connected to him to refer to his vision, teachings, meditations and lifework and their work that had been inspired by him and his teachings in general ever since Osho had taken his name in 1989. It later changed its name to Neo-Sannyas Internation Foundation, and still later in 1990 to Osho International Foundation.
The proprietor of the contested Community trade mark, Osho International Foundation, is a Swiss nonprofit corporation, incorporated in 1984 as Rajneesh Foundation Europe. Who is responsible for creating the trade mark „OSHO“?
0 kommentar(er)
