Of course, if it was created by us, it has to be killed by us. The concept was created by man in his childhood. In his maturity the concept is dropped – as when you were children you played with toys, then you became mature, and you forgot all about those toys. Suddenly one day you come across in a corner of the house, in the rubbish. An old toy. Then you remember how much you had loved it, but now it is meaningless. It has to be thrown; you have changed.
Man created the personal God, then man destroyed it. This realization was too much for Nietzsche himself; he became insane. His insanity is an indication that he was not prepared for the insight that happened to him.
But, in the East, Patanjali is absolutely godless. You cannot find a greater atheist than Patanjali, but it does not disturb him because really he is a grown-up man, really grown-up in consciousness, mature, integrated. For Buddha God doesn’t exist….
If there is a personal God, he can forgive Friedrich Nietzsche because he will understand that this man still needed him. That man Nietzsche was still divided, confused – half of his being was saying yes and half was saying no. If there is a personal God, he can even forgive Gautam Buddha because at least he denied him. He said. “There is no God.” That too is paying attention. But he will not be able to forgive Patanjali. He used him. He not only not denied him, that he is not, he used the very concept as a device. He said, “For the ultimate growth of man, even the concept of God can be used as a hypothesis.” Patanjali is absolutely cold about God, colder than Gautam Buddha, because when you say no there is a certain passion, when you say yes there is a certain passion – in love, in hate, there is passion. Patanjali is absolutely indifferent. He says, “Yes, the concept of God can be used.” He is the greatest atheist the world has ever known.
But in the West the concept of atheist is totally different. It is not yet mature. It is on the same plane as the theist is. The theist goes on saying “there is a God” in childish terminology, as a father, and the atheist goes on denying, that there is no such God. They both exist on the same plane. Patanjali is the real atheist, but it does not mean that he is irreligious. He is the really religious man. A really religious man cannot believe in God. It will look like a paradox.
A really religious man cannot believe in God because to believe in God he has to divide existence in two – God and no God, the creator and the creation, this world and that, matter and mind. He has to divide, and how can a religious man divide? He does not believe in God; he comes to understand the very divinity of existence. Then the whole existence is divine; then all that is there is divine. Then every place is a temple, and wherever you move and whatsoever you do you are moving in God and you are doing to God. The total – you included – becomes divine. This has to be understood.