In discourse, Osho speaks about the creation of Israel after WW2 and the implications to this day. He states, “I have always been against the creation of Israel.”

Just a few days ago I saw a film, a beautiful film on a Jewish family, a very orthodox Hassid family. The Jews don’t accept Hassids as really equal to them, they are outcasts. The Hassids even today don’t accept the nation of Israel, because they say, “Israel will be established when the messiah comes – but where is he?”

Osho 49

Their logic is perfect. This Israel is created by the politicians, not by the messiah. They don’t accept this nation – and I agree with them that this is just a creation, a forced creation. It is not a nation that grew naturally; hence the Jews in Israel are going to be in trouble forever.

The Jews think that the Americans have done them a great favor by creating Israel; it is not so. They have done something worse than Adolf Hitler did, because this is going to be a constant problem. Israel had not existed for centuries; it was a Mohammedan country, Palestine, surrounded by Mohammedan countries.

Now just because you won the second world war and you happened to be in control of the land of Palestine, you forced the creation of a nation. It is arbitrary. The people are Mohammedans, it is their country. Israel may have been, thousands of years before, the country of the Jews. But for thousands of years it has been a country of the Mohammedans, and suddenly you simply change the map… and surrounded by the whole Mohammedan world. In the Middle East all the countries are Mohammedan.

This small country, Israel, is going to continuously suffer; and how long can America help it? And how long are American Jews going to pour their money into Israel? Sooner or later the truth of history will have to be accepted. If America had been really compassionate towards Jews, they should have given them an Israel in America. Oregon would have been perfectly good! I propose it: Let Oregon be the Israel. But what kind of compassion is this? – putting Jews there. They will never be able to live at ease, never.

So when I saw in this film the rejection of Israel by the Hassids… of course their reason is different. I have always been against the creation of Israel. I was a child when it was created but even then my first reaction was that this was absolutely idiotic.

The country is populated by Mohammedans – all around there are Mohammedan countries, they are all together – and you put the poor Jews amongst this vast ocean of enemies. Previously they had somehow escaped from that Israel – history was more compassionate to them. And there was no need for a nation; they were living all over the world. The whole world had become their nation. When you lose your nation, the whole world becomes your nation – why bother about a nation?

My reasons were different: that this was a political strategy to keep a military base – because Israel will always need the help of America, so America will always keep its military base in Israel, which is very close to Russia. And the Jews are not going in any way to be against America because they are protected by America; they are almost slaves of America.

Without America Israel would be immediately finished, they would be slaughtered; so they depend on America, and their dependence is a guarantee that America has a base in the Middle East. Other Mohammedan countries will not give you a base – you are Christians, and Mohammedans and Christians have been fighting for fifteen hundred years, crusades upon crusades.

My reason is different, but the Hassidic reason is worth consideration. They say the scriptures are clear that the messiah will come and reestablish the kingdom of Israel. Where is the messiah? Franklin Roosevelt? Winston Churchill? Who is the messiah? Then this Israel is bogus!

I like the idea. But for me it is bogus for different reasons, but it is bogus; on that I agree with the Hassids. Without God you cannot have a messiah. I would not have argued with Jesus that “You are not the messiah,” because that is a secondary question. The primary question is that “You have to prove God exists.”

But because Jews accepted God, they never argued on the basic point. And on the secondary point you cannot argue because Jesus says, “God has sent me.” And the Jews had been accepting other prophets sent by God, so what was wrong with poor Jesus? – why should he not be accepted? But if God had been denied, then… “There is nobody to send you. First you prove the existence of God — then only the secondary question arises; then we will discuss it.” And Jesus would have been at a loss to answer and the crucifixion would have been easily avoided.

But Judaism is God-oriented, Mohammedanism is God-oriented, hence Mohammed becomes His messenger. And somebody has to be the messenger, otherwise how is there going to be any kind of communication between God and His creation? – a mediator is absolutely needed. It appears logical.

The people in the Arabian countries believed in God, so they could not raise the basic question. They only argued that “You are not the right messenger.” But how can you prove who is the right messenger and who is the wrong messenger? You are fighting on very secondary issues. The real fight has to be on the primary issue.

In Jainism there is no possibility of a messiah. Nobody can declare that “I am a messiah;” people will simply laugh and say that you have gone mad. Nobody can declare that “I am a messenger of God;” he will be just a laughingstock, people will just joke around. He cannot say, “I am an incarnation of God,” because God does not exist. From where are you getting this incarnation – an incarnation of nobody?

So in Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism, Confucianism, no problem arises about the messiahs, messengers. And then how can you have popes and bishops and priests? This is the whole ladder. If you accept the highest rung on the ladder you will have to accept the ladder. But if the ladder is going nowhere, if it is just standing on the ground and leading nowhere, reaching nowhere, all the rungs on the ladder will become meaningless.

I have denied the idea of God.

And with God disappears all messiahhood.

You cannot declare me a messiah even when I am dead.

You cannot declare me an incarnation, even when I am dead.

You cannot declare me a messenger.

Do you see the simple fact? That even when I am dead you cannot go against me. How can you create a cult? – because all the necessary ingredients for a cult I am denying. I am saying there is no messenger. I am saying there is no avatara.

Osho, From Ignorance to Innocence, Ch 19, Q 1 (excerpt)