Why do Krishna, Christ and Buddha differ so much? They differ! They differ as much as there is any possibility to differ, but still they are, in a very deep way, one. As far as individuation is concerned they are one; as far as individualities are concerned they are different. They have come to “the undivided.” They have realized the undivided, the basic unity of existence, but because of this basic unity and its realization, it does not mean that now they are not unique. Now they are really unique. That’s why I say this is one of the paradoxes.
Two ordinary persons can differ, but their difference can never be total, absolute – never! Even in their difference they have similarities. Really, their difference is always of degrees. Even if they are totally contrary to one another, their difference is of degrees. A person who is a communist and a person who is anti-communist – even they are different only in degrees. The person who is anti-communist is still communist to a lesser degree, and the person who is a communist is still a capitalist to a lesser degree. The difference is always of degrees. And they can change, they can change camps very easily; there is no problem. Ordinarily, they change. The difference is just like that of cold and heat – only of degrees. But a Buddha and Krishna, a Christ and Mohammed, and a Lao Tzu and Mahavira – their difference is not of degrees. They can never meet. This is the paradox: they have come to oneness, and yet they can never meet. The difference is not of degrees. The difference is of their uniqueness. What do I mean by this uniqueness?
We can conceive of “oneness” very easily. A drop of water drops into the ocean and becomes one with it. But that oneness is just dead – a dead oneness. The drop lost itself completely; now it is nowhere. A Buddha is not dropping in that way. His dropping is in a different way. If you put a flame before the sun the flame becomes one with the sun, but the individuality is not lost, it still remains itself. If we burn fifty flames in this room they will create one light, but every flame will be a flame unique in itself. So this dissolution into the cosmic is not a simple dissolution. It is very complex. The complexity is this: the one who dissolves, remains. Rather, on the contrary, for the first time he is.
This individuality echoes differently, and that is the beauty of it. It is beautiful! Otherwise it will be just ugly: just think, if Buddha responds in the same way as Jesus, the world will be poorer for it, very poor. A Buddha responds in his own way, a Jesus in his own way. The world is richer for it and there is beauty. The world is freer and you can be yourself.
But this distinction must be remembered: when I say that you can be yourself, I do not mean your ego. When I say you can be yourself, I mean your nature, your Tao, your existence. But it has an individuality. That individuality is not personality. So if I say they belong to the same existence, yet individually; they respond from the same depth, but individually; no sense of ego is there – but the uniqueness remains.