I understand. Egos don’t understand, they are blinded by their vanity. People who are on the spiritual journey (awakened, but not enlightened) don’t understand, they are blinded by ideas of immortality. But every enlightened being understands that. Osho understood that as well, very much so, and he spoke about it, too, many times.

But there’s a difference between understanding it and knowing it. When you understand it, it is depressing. When you know it, it’s liberating. The difference is in acceptance. The absolute acceptance is Buddhahood, that’s why Buddhas never suffer, it’s all the same for them, they are always happy. The road from understanding it to knowing it is paved with tears, don’t be afraid to cry! The eyes full of tears can see the truth.

One cannot appreciate the fragility of life before one knows its futility. It’s connected. The less futile one imagines life to be, the more meaning one assigns to it, the more callous disregard one will have for its fragility. Up to the point of sending their children to death for the ideas of family legacy, Game of Thrones style. Fragility of life cannot be truly appreciated for as long as its futility is not. That’s why the morality of a Buddha is the absolute morality, it’s the complete reversal of the morality of the ego. From egoic perspective, Buddhas are immoral, because they don’t care about all this “very important” stuff that ego cares about, such as honor, prestige, bravery, family values, or different forms of tribalism. But from the perspective of a Buddha, egos are immoral, because by caring about all this stuff they become cruel and callous. For a Buddha, life itself is the ultimate value, the highest value, the only value, no other values are even possible. The body is all there is, everything else is entertainment, a joke. But ego takes it all very seriously, and that’s what makes humans different from animals - our insane acts of cruelty, coming from the utter confusion about life.