The Bhagavad-Gita and the Bible: An Observer’s Comments
I like studying other religions. In the past I have found that I have grown in my understanding of the grace of Christ and the relevance of Biblical ethics when comparing them to other religions. I also find it is a great way of learning to love your neighbour, especially when your neighbour might not be a part of the mainstream British culture.
It’s also very interesting to discover the points of tension between other religions and our own. The tensions are often very different to the ones we are used to arguing with our secular humanist friends.
Last year I was invited to a Hare Krishna (Hindu) meeting by a friend. I decided to go, explaining to the leader of the temple that I was a Christian, and would he be happy if I just observed? Over the months I met with the leader of the temple to dialogue about our respective faiths. I bought a Bhagavad-Gita and read it in order to facilitate discussion. As the leader of the temple said he had formerly been a Christian missionary, he didn’t need to acquaint himself with the Bible!
I thought I would share some of my thoughts. Here is an extract of the Bhagavad-Gita. The context: Arjuna is a mighty warrior who is travelling in a chariot with Krishna. On both sides of the battle Arjuna can recognise friends and family. Arjuna turns to Krishna in turmoil that friends and family are lining up to fight to the death.
1: Seeing Arjuna full of compassion, his mind depressed, his eyes full of tears, Krishna spoke the following words. 2: Krishna said: My dear Arjuna, how have these impurities come upon you? They are not at all befitting a man who knows the value of life. They lead not to higher planets but to infamy. 3: O son of Pritha, do not yield to this degrading impotence. It does not become you. Give up such petty weakness of heart and arise, O chastiser of the enemy 4:; Arjuna said: O killer of enemies, O killer of Madhu, how can I counterattack with arrows in battle men like Bhishma and Drona, who are worthy of my worship? 8: I can find no means to drive away this grief which is drying up my senses. I will not be able to dispel it even if I win a prosperous, unrivaled kingdom on earth with sovereignty like the demigods in heaven. 7: Having spoken thus, Arjuna, chastiser of enemies, told Krishna, “Govinda, I shall not fight,” and fell silent 11/12: Krishna said: While speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief. Those who are wise lament neither for the living nor for the dead. Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. 33: (Krishna cont …) If, however, you do not perform your religious duty of fighting, then you will certainly incur sins for neglecting your duties and thus lose your reputation as a fighter. 37: O son of Kunti, either you will be killed on the battlefield and attain the heavenly planets, or you will conquer and enjoy the earthly kingdom. Therefore get up and fight with determination. 38: Do thou fight for the sake of fighting, without considering happiness or distress, loss or gain, victory or defeat—and by so doing you shall never incur sin.
I think the advice of Krishna can be quite shocking to Westerners, both Christian and non-Christians, as we highly value physical life. But, logically, if one believes in reincarnation, what Krishna says does make sense. Therefore, it seems, not all religions can neatly fit into the traditional ethical codes of the West.
Here are some of the points I discussed with the leader of the temple, which you might find interesting:
1. The last verse quoted above, 38, alludes to an important doctrine for the Krishna Consciousness: detachment. Detachment from the material world, the consequences of your actions and ego. We discussed the concept of God, because for the Temple leader detachment drew him closer to God. I explained that the Bible did not cause us to see the material world as evil, and therefore attachment to it was in fact healthy as ‘the heavens declare the glory of God’. This discussion also could be applied to the value, or non-value, of physical life. Jesus cried when Lazarus died. Very different to what Krishna is suggesting.
2. Personality. Was the Hindu God personal or impersonal? If Hare Krishna worshipers are asked to detach from the physical world and from ‘happiness or distress, loss or gain, victory or defeat’ then does this also include human relationships? Or even relationship with God? The Temple Leader confirmed that relationship with God was very important to the followers of Krishna, but this was not true of a great many Hindus. On the other hand, Jesus is very personal. He came to earth once as one man, a personality that can be known and relied upon.
3. Morality. What effect do these forms of detachment have on morality? Does it mean that it is ok to kill? That is what the Bhagavad-Gita seems to say; or at least that there is no room for sentimentality. However, the Temple leader assured me that they would never teach that such a crime was permissible. This is also confirmed in Ranchor Prime’s commentary: ‘Killing brings its reaction for the perpetrator’1. However, I still have questions about whether these conclusions can be drawn from the text. Admittedly they are from a time of war. But to ‘fight for the sake of fighting’ cannot be reconciled with any form of Just War theory, in my opinion. This would be in stark contradiction to Jesus’ command “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matt 26:52)
I’m sure that Krishna worshipers have other answers to these questions than those I have recorded here. The above is only the result of a few conversations with one man. But isn’t it interesting!? The tensions between Christianity and Krishna Consciousness are vastly different to the ones we face in the main stream British culture. It helps me see Christ’s teaching from another angle, and makes me appreciate it even more.
Footnotes
1 Prime, Ranchor. Bhagavad Gita: Talks Between the Soul and God, p. 19
Comments
By Peggy on 04/03/2012 at 22:36
Having been a member of that sect of Hinduism for approximately 10 years before returning to Christ I can say 1) It is a highly seductive delusion that is extremely hard to break away from. It can only be done by the grace of God 2) I have seen many Christians drawn into it thinking that they are worshipping the same god, only to soon stop worshipping Jesus altogether because you cannot serve two masters 3) While the religion is considered on of Bhakti - reaching god through love, there is little love for others but focuses instead on one’s love for god. 4) The idea of karma causes one not to take pity on the less fortunate but consider it is their just due for past behaviour 5) the idea of reincarnation completely denies what the Bible says that we have one life and after that the judgment 6) it is a religion of works 7) the way it deals with sin is purification by chanting and by works with the idea that one will gradually purify oneself over hundreds or thousands of lifetimes. It misses the point that while one is purifying oneself (if that were even possible) one is also committing more sins so there will never be an end to it. 8) While giving lip-service to Jesus by saying that He is A son of god and that Krishna is His father, they neither worship nor honour Jesus but put him rather on the same level as their own founding guru or at most other incarnations such as Buddha. This is total blasphemy for Jesus is not a son of god but THE ONLY begotten Son of God. 9) They try to reach god (I am using lowercase because they are not talking about the true and living God) without the shed blood of Jesus Christ but instead through the teachings of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, a 5th century Hindu “saint” they consider to be the incarnation of Krishna. 10) If you compare the attributes and teachings of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita to the attributes and teachings of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob there is no correlation. Krishna is depicted as a thief, an adulterer, and Krishna is depicted as having a female consort.
By Ruth Preston on 05/03/2012 at 17:35
Hi Peggy.
Thanks for your comment. Most enlightening. I haven’t yet been able to log on to my profile, so apologies that my picture does not appear to the left!
A lot of what you have said came up in my discussions with the leader of the Temple. Especially the fact that he thought he was serving Christ too, as an incarnation of Krishna. I initially tried to argue from scripture that Jesus said he was the only way (Ie it didn’t make sense that Jesus was an incarnation of Krishna as he, by this comment, doesn’t allow for previous incarnations of Krishna), and that Jesus said no-one would come after him (‘people will say there is the messiah, but do not believe them’). But this didn’t seem to help because the temple leader insisted that Jesus was sent to one time, place and context only, and would say what meant sense to them at that time.
At that point it because a little more philosophical because I questioned whether God could be inconsistent like that ...
By Peggy on 05/03/2012 at 18:32
Ruth, they twist the sciptures. They say that when Jesus says no one can go to the Father except through Him, that He meant only at that time and that it really meant no one could go to the Father except through the guru. They believe that Jesus is dead and make fun of people who believe they have a living relationship with Him. I asked my guru once if it were possible to go back to God in one life. He said it was not possible. In initiation the guru is said to take on the past sins of the disciple ( when actually, the guru cannot even clear his own sins), but yet the disciple must engage in sadhana (religious practices) in order to clear his own sins. They believe that by chanting alone one clears all his sins, but then still not in one lifetime. In addition, many Hare Krishna gurus are known to have done very sinful things, whereas our Lord was perfect. The incarnation of Krishna that they follow Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is believed by their own religion to have drowned himself. How can an intelligent, college-educated person believe such contradictory and fantastical things? As I said it is a strong delusion, wherein you suspend your doubts. It appeals because it is exotic, there’s singing and dancing and tasty food, Krishna is very easy to please, you get credit for your “good works” and as many chances as you need and ultimately everyone goes back to God according to their teachings. Except they are lies that take one from the real saving truth of Jesus Christ which is the most wonderful thing there is.
By Ruth Preston on 06/03/2012 at 12:25
Hi Peggy
You clearly have a lot of experience. Do you know any good books or websites I could look at? I’d be interested to take my research a little further.
By steven on 08/03/2012 at 19:05
Experience being a keyword here for statements made above. It should be said that everyone has a personal relationship with God. If we draw our conclusions from the understanding of others no one would understand anything. We could only sympathize, and choose what we want to believe. The best way to avoid that is to simply surrender to God. Taking knowledge from the all knowing you’ll have a better chance of realizing your real nature. The soul is eternal, blissful and full of knowledge. Our nature as spirit soul is to be eternally in the service of God. Salvation can free you from hellish conditions, but its useless if you continue the abusive relationship religious people have with God.
By Peggy on 10/03/2012 at 04:45
Ruth, I’m sorry but I’m not familiar with any books or websites to recommend to you. As for Steven’s comments, I can readily tell they are from a devotee of the Bhagavad Gita. By using “God” he hopes to obscure that he worships quite a different god than YAHWEH. This is exactly the language that drew me into the Hare Krishna movement because as I told my guru, I wanted to learn how to love God with all my heart, mind and soul. Whereas there is only one God, there are, as the Bible points out, many so-called gods that are not God. Steven says everyone has a personal relationship with God, but actually that relationship is as God’s enemies who have rejected Him. Reconciliation is only possible through the blood of Christ. It is not that God hates us, but that we have hated Him and wanted to create a god of ourselves or of our own preference and so we have rejected the true God and worshipped false gods. I have not asked anyone to draw conclusions from my experience but rather draw conclusions from the Word of God, the Holy Bible. Steven speaks of the soul as eternal, blissful and full of knowledge, and as our nature as spirit soul. Our souls are actually fallen and incurved in upon themselves and full of darkness because of our alienation from God. Actually, furthermore, God has created us to be creatures of united body and soul. It is gnosticism that the spirit is good and the body is bad, and our goal is to be shed of the body. This is untrue. Jesus came to redeem us completely that in the resurrection we will experience blessed life in our bodies. Indeed, He Himself took on in the incarnation our flesh, and His divinity is united with it in such a way that He retains our human nature united with His divinity eternally. Steven says that our purpose is to be servants of God. This is not only the Hindu view but also the Muslim view. But God has not desired to have us as servants, but as sons and heirs with Christ. But as Jesus, Himself, made Himself a servant of all, we, too are to become servants of others . God does not need our service - He says so, but our brothers and sisters do, and this service is given in love towards them not to obtain merit before God or reward or to pay for our sins, but as a free gift of ourselves as Christ has given Himself freely to us. The Hare Krishnas sneer at salvation as though it was a goal of the unenlightened. They do not understand the fullness of the salvation of Christ. It is not a get-out-of-hell cheap ticket. It encompasses our whole being as well as the whole creation. Steven refers to it as “useless”. But it is glorious. It restores our relationship with God making us His own. It means we shall never be separated from Him, (without Him there is no love, no joy, no hope, no kindness, no mercy—I could go on). It means that not only are our sins forgiven but our very fallen nature is changed so that we desire to do the will of God. He comes and dwells within us as a fountain of living water, teaching us, comforting us, strengthening us, purifying us. All that they aspire to do by their practices, He does within us as His gift of grace. Steven speaks of the abusive relationship “religious” people have with God. What about the irreligious, the atheists, the idolaters and all those who have rejected His only Son He sent into the world by choosing to try to bypass Him and reach God apart from Him, who sin by choosing their own path, their own god. The only thing that pleases the Father is honouring His Son. For this purpose, He has set Him above all powers and authorities and given all dominion to Christ over all things in heaven and on earth. All things were created for Him,by Him and through Him and to Him alone every knee will bow, every tongue confess Him as Lord to the glory of God the Father. He is the ONLY Way, the ONLY Truth and the ONLY life. I do not ask that anyone come to a conclusion based on my experience but on the Holy Word of Jesus Christ. Simply surrender to God, Steven says.He neither defines surrender nor what he means by God. Satan offered Jesus the world if He would surrender to him and worship Him. It matters to whom we surrender. The gods of other religions do not forgive and forget sin, they weigh it. You must work your way. But to them Jesus is scandalous because He gives unmerited grace. While we were yet sinners He died for us that by trusting and believing in Him, apart from any works, we would receive forgiveness, eternal life, and all the riches of His grace.
By Steven on 12/03/2012 at 18:41
The only reason I posted is because there is a very dangerous trend of people changing their sectarian views to other sectarian views and then posting about it on the internet to convince others(and themselves) that they are now corrected and now on the “right” path. These kinds of people in 1 year, 5 years or even 10 years will eventually be posting on spiritual blogs about how again they corrected their views and now their old views are obsolete. My hope isn’t to end this cycle, because it is simply the truth of the matter that people are looking for god in many ways so what you say is directly influencing someone’s spiritual life. People fall for charisma, and that is why they join movements, churches, cults, etc… eventually leaving behind these things to again pursue their relationship because none of these things will ever satisfy our separation anxiety from god. Radhanath Swami said “We can not force our way into the spiritual world. We can not force realization. God bestows his mercy and reveals himself according to the devotional love that we have.” So it is evident from this no one is teaching works or works salvation in their movement. Stop looking at what others are doing and focus on your relationship with god is the only message I am trying to put out there.
Religions are for people who identify with the body. Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Vaisnava, Zoroastrian, etc.. The soul is none of these things. The soul is simply in love with god. Don’t take the word of apostates about anything. Christians who speak on the gita, vaisnavas who speak on the bible…all of this is a spiritual contradiction which is not beneficial to nurturing the love you have for god.
By Peggy on 13/03/2012 at 17:47
Steven has decided that I am one of “these kinds of people,” although he has never met me. I, however, am not in the beginning or middle of a spiritual quest. I am at its end. I’ve already been there and done that in my “looking for god.” And it is true that nothing else satisfied that separation anxiety - especially my 25 years in the Hare Krishna movement, which by the way I did not join for reasons of charisma but because I was lied to that it would lead me to pure love of God. One thing he says is true “We cannot force our way into the spiritual world,” but it is not because “God bestows mercy and reveals himself according to the devotional love we have.” God bestows mercy because that is His nature to be merciful and He reveals Himself, not out of some tit-for-tat for our actions, but out of His own sovereign choice to do so. None of us are deserving of His mercy, love or revelation, yet He gives it as His gift without our meriting it, despite our not meriting it. We can claim no credit. I did not, in the end, find God. He truly found me. He gave me the realization that neither I (or anyone) was capable of reaching Him or becoming holy. Rather than having a soul, as Steven says, that just naturally loves God, we cannot love Him at all. We only love ourselves and others to the extent they benefit us—even our charity is contaminated with self-interest. We are sinners and cannot save ourselves. I saw by the grace of His Holy Spirit how much I had offended Him every moment of my life—and above all by my turning from the worship of the only true God to the worship of idols and fantasies and those who denied His Son. Then He showed me that He had already forgiven me, He had, in order that I might be reconciled with Him, taken all my sins upon Himself that He could, in turn, give me what I could never earn—His own righteousness, adoption as His child. This understanding did not come from some charismatic preacher, but from the Word of God and the grace of the Holy Spirit. I did not first have to reform myself or come to love Him. He knows that we are incapable of these. Instead He gives us faith to trust Him, to hope in Him and He works love in us. He changes us. He reconciles us. He removes the separation of our soul from Him. It is all His work. Ephesians 2:8,9 “For by grace (unmerited favour) you have been saved through faith (which is His gift). And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” I have no separation anxiety to keep me wandering. I know that I am His, just as Jesus promised: “In that day you will know that I am in my Father; and you in me, and I in you.” We do not know God, not because He has not revealed Himself, but because we have rejected what He has revealed and sought another way, another god or to rely on ourselves apart from God. We have justified ourselves as “spirit souls who naturally love God” and refused to acknowledge our sin. We have despised the salvation He has offered as simplistic and looked for another path more worthy of our intelligence. We have despised the way of the Cross, the blood of Christ, our suffering together with Him, and preferred a way of Glory - bloodless, an ever-uphill route of self-improvement, choosing our own gods. But for all who despairing of themselves, ask for His mercy and hope in His Son as our Redeemer, He gives mercy, He fills with faith and love, He gives peace, adoption, righteousness, eternal life and Himself completely and utterly without withholding anything. After all, what would He withhold who already took on our own flesh (not a temporary incarnation as is depicted of Krishna), and for us accepted death in ignominious and shameful fashion, taking on Himself every sin of every human from the beginning of time to its end, pouring out every drop of His innocent blood to cleanse us, and resurrected and given all authority in heaven and earth constantly makes intercession for us? It is our creator’s desire to be united with us and He has provided a means and one means only—and we can accept or reject, but we cannot deserve it, for it is His pure gift. The issue isn’t do we love God. The whole point is that He loves us and has given us this love in His Son. Like any love, we can accept it with gratitude or reject it thinking we’ve got something better. He does not force Himself upon us.
By Peggy on 13/03/2012 at 18:04
By the way, I’m not talking about some sort of “happy clappy” variety of Christianity which just seeks God for His blessings. I am talking about the real thing including daily dying to self in repentance, picking up our cross, sharing His suffering and self-giving and following Him even if it requires loss and death—not to earn salvation but because we are united with Him in it. It is a far lighter burden than that carried by those without Him and we count it all joy for the sake of knowing Him.
By Ruth Preston on 26/03/2012 at 10:40
Hi Steven, apologies that this response has taken a while! Thank you for your comments, they are interesting, and remind me of some of the things that the Temple leader told me.
May I ask you a question? I have not yet had the opportunity to get an answer on this: Why are all the incarnations of Krishna so different? Jesus said that he was the only way, truth and life, and no-one would know God without knowing him. So how could he be an incarnation of Krishna if he was exclusive in his understanding of himself, God the Father and reality?
Do the Hare Krishna’s have an books dealing with the differences between Christianity and Krishna consciousness?
Thanks again
Ruth
By Mitchell on 27/04/2012 at 05:23
Hmm Last time I checked there was more to that passage in regards to death and killing and Sin,
Krishna gave good reasons as to why there isnt any “Sin” in killing in warfare if the person is wicked etc slaying that person in Warfare to protect others and for the Greater Good of others etc.
It dosent mean you wont gain “Sin” if you just go to any war and kill people Khrishna was talking about the bigger picture on Arujnas responsibility of leading his Warriors against the Enemy who where deludid with there desires and had to be defeated for the Greater good of others so those others dont have to suffer.
And if Arujuna did not fight than his own men would consider him a coward and his enemeis would win that is the meaning of the Sin he would incur on him self as Swami Chinmayananda said “Sin isnt against God it is Against your self”
Destructive Behaviour and other delusions all come from the Mind understand your self and others Psychologicaly rather than leave it to Primal Primitve view of calling it Evil and Sin etc I guess it is much easier to say it those but I recommend reading the Vedanta from Swami Chinmayananda and Swami Dayananda Saraswati a good first book is Introduction to Vedanta from Swami Dayananda Saraswati
By Peggy on 27/04/2012 at 16:02
Mitchell quotes Swami Chinmayananda as saying “Sin’s isn’t against God; it is against yourself.” This goes to the heart of a major difference in theology. The Bible understands that all sin is against God (for even that which we do that harms our neighbour is against His command to love them).
“Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against You, You only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that You may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.” Ps. 51:2-4
Ultimately, Christianity sees all sin as being sin against God. Saying that one sins against oneself is to make oneself God. And note how Mitchell puts the word “sin” in quotation marks. That is because the whole issue of sin is not truly dealt with in their philosophy. There is not the recognition that we are, at root, alienated from God because we have made ourselves God and arbitrors of what is good and evil and we have turned from worshipping God to that which is not God. Depending on the branch of Hinduism, one either is taught that you are God, or there are many gods, or as in the Hare Krishna movement, that Vishnu is the Supreme God among many gods. But there is in none of these a true dealing with man’s primary problem: Sin. Why? Because you are described as an eternal being who is either going to be reborn many times or progress to higher and higher levels of heaven, but the true result of Sin—the death of the body and the death of the soul—is denied. The body is meaningless—- just something to be cast off—according to them (which is Gnosticism), rather than Christianity’s teaching that we were created to be beings of a united body and soul and that death (the wrenching apart of these two) is unnatural and a disaster. Christianity teaches that God’s purpose is to reunite our souls in eternal resurrected and glorious bodies as we were originally intended to live.
Ruth, you ask why Krishna would have so many different incarnations. To begin with, these are not true incarnations, as is the incarnation of Jesus who truly took on human flesh and human nature and retains that eternally. No, these are temporary “apparitions” if you will. They are what they call “appearances.” The word “incarnation” is twisted from it’s true meaning of being actually made flesh and body. You rightly point out that Jesus is not an “incarnation of Krishna,” for Krishna is NOT Jesus’s Father, despite what they will say to mollify Christians. As I pointed out earlier, those who say that God has many names but He is the same do not recognize that a “name” is more than a word. A “name” is the whole character of what it names. The character of Krishna is entirely different from the character of Yahweh as revealed by Jesus Christ, and their teachings are entirely different. Jesus is the one and ONLY true incarnation of God. He, too, is the one and ONLY solution and atonement for Sin.
As for a book by the Hare Krishnas dealing with differences between Christianity and their religion, the key problem with such a book is that they truly do not understand Christianity.