Destruction

Another friend has asked; he has asked that... Osho, what difference do you see between socialism and communism?

I see the same difference as between the first stage of tuberculosis and the third—no other difference. Socialism is a somewhat pale, diluted communism; it is the first stage of the disease. And in the first stage the disease is not clearly visible, so it is easier to be taken in by it. That is why, all over the world, communism has started using the word “socialism.” The word “communism” has become notorious. And because of what communism has done to the world in the last fifty years, its respect has withered. In these fifty years, communism’s prestige has been dragged into the dust. So now communism has begun to use the word “socialism.” Now it talks of socialism and may even try to say it is different from communism. But there is no fundamental difference between socialism and communism—only a difference of words. Yet by changing the word we…

A friend has asked: Why are you destructive, why are you a demolisher? Why aren’t you constructive?

Perhaps that friend does not even know that destruction and construction are not two different things; they are two sides of the same coin. We think in a language where building is one thing and demolition another, and we imagine that whoever destroys is the enemy of the builder. The truth is: no creation ever happens without destruction. Where there is destruction, there is creation. When something dies, something is born. When something is erased, something is made. And if you become afraid of erasing, afraid of letting things die, afraid of breaking, understand that your capacity to create has ended—you will never be able to create. Why do I talk about destruction? Because destruction comes first and creation after. Creation cannot come first. What is, has to be broken. Once it breaks, then I will speak of creation. If you become my companions in destruction and things are broken…

Osho, you said that creativity is of the divine nature and that destruction and annihilation are demonic. But in existence both processes go on together. And it isn’t only in war that destruction happens; so-called acts of God are no less destructive.

The divine quality is creative; this does not mean that the one who creates does not also efface. To make, one has to unmake. If you want to carve a statue, you have to cut away the stone. If you want a tree to be born, the seed has to disappear. If you want to find God, you have to let your self be erased. Creativity does not happen without some dissolving. Something goes so that something can come. Dissolution is the very experiment of becoming. Then what is the difference? Because the divine quality also erases, and the demonic quality also erases. What distinguishes them? The difference is in the goal. The divine quality always erases in order to create. The demonic quality erases in order to erase. Even when the demonic seems to build, it builds only to destroy. The difference is this: if the demonic quality appears…

It is a strange phenomenon that the uncreative people are the people who are lacking in energy, the destructive people are the people who are lacking in energy. They are impotent people. Because they cannot create they start destroying. Destruction is easy -- anybody can do it. How much energy is needed to destroy a painting? A painter may have worked on it for months, but to destroy it... just a child can destroy it. How much energy is needed to destroy a flower? The gardener may have worked for years... Destruction needs no energy; hence my observation is that Adolf Hitler and Mussolini and Josef Stalin are not really powerful people, they are people who are lacking in energy, they are impotent people. Because they cannot create they have to destroy, that seems to be the only way to prove themselves.