RE: [world-vedic] Vedic Evidence: Aryan Culture Native to India

[Guest guest]

Krishna in the Bhagavad-gîtå

A Beginning Ontology

This is a paper originally presented to the Committe on Study of Religion,

at the University of California at Los Angeles by Hridayandanda Goswami MA

and Ph D. From Harvard and it is the first draft, the original was show in

the BGT of sep/oct , Nov/Dec 1994 and Jan/feb 1995.

 

Introduction

I attempt in this paper to clarify certain essential teachings of the

Bhagavad-gîtå which are traditionally "zones of puzzlement" among scholars.

These areas focus on a single point: the nature and status of God, Krishna,

according to the Gîtå. My strong conviction is that the Gîtå itself is a

lucid, self-explanatory work, and therefore the occasional practice of

commentators to force on it extraneous doctrines often renders the text

obscure where it is bright, esoteric where it is literal, and impersonal

where it is intensely personal. I am operating here on an ancient principle

which holds that certain Vedic literatures are svata--pråmåyam, literally

"evident in or by themselves". As stated in the Bhavibya-puråna:

rig-yajur-såmårtharvår ca bhåratam pañca-råtrakam

müla-råmåyanaµ caiva veda ity eva sabditåh

purånåni ca yånîha vaisvavåni vido viduh

svatah-pråmånyam etebåµ nåtra kiñcid vicåryate

“The rig Veda, Sama Veda, Atharva Veda, Mahåbhårata, Pañcaråtra and

original Råmåyana are all considered by authorities to be Veda. The knowers

also know that those Purånas dedicated to Lord Visnu enjoy the same status.

These literatures are self-evident, and there is nothing at all to speculate

about them.â€

It should be noted at once that the above exegetic principle does not do

away with intellectual response to the scriptures. Rather it is a call for

sober hermeneutical practices, in which we first struggle to comprehend a

scriptural message on its own terms, through careful study of its internal

structures of meaning.

We get some historical flavor of this methodology by turning to a

fascinating theological debate which took place almost 500 years ago in

Benares between Srî Caitanya Mahåprabhu, the founder of Gaudîya Vaisnavism,

and Prakåsånanda Sarasvatî, a leading ¸sankarite sannyåsî of the time.

After

hearing Prakåsånanda's interpretation of Vedånta-sütra, Srî Caitanya

Mahåprabhu replied: “The Veda is evident by itself. It is the crown-jewel of

all evidence. By interpreting it, the self-evident quality is lost.â€

[Caitanya-caritåm®ta, Ådi-lîlå, 7.132] The original text, in medieval

Bengali, is:

svatah-pramåna veda -- pramåma-siromani, laksarå karile

svatah-pramånatå-håni.

 

The quality of self-evidence mentioned above is especially apparent, in my

view, in the Bhagavad-gîtå, which is part of the Mahåbhårata. I have

therefore selected five specific areas, vital to the Bhagavad-gîtå's

message, which are especially prone to misinterpretation, and I have

attempted to demonstrate from the Bhagavad-gîtå itself the consistent, and

self-evident view of the speaker, Lord srî Krishna, especially as He

describes Himself.

The first topic is the Gîtå's strong montheism, in which the many gods of

the Hindu pantheon are sharply relegated to the status of subordinate

servitors to the Supreme Lord. The second topic is that of the separate

individuality of Krishna as God, distinct from, and transcendental to, the

individual entities, who are tiny expansions of the Lord. Third, I have

shown that within the Gîtå, Krishna is understood to be the supreme

controller. The fourth subject is the delicate issue of monism. I believe to

have clearly shown that despite certain statements in the Gîtå to the effect

that "Krishna is everything," there is nothing like a bald monistic doctrine

in the Gîtå. Finally, in the fifth section, I have argued from the

Bhagavad-gîtå itself that Krishna comes to this world in a spiritual,

eternal form, and not a material body, such as those we inhabit.

As mentioned above, these five topics ineluctably lead to a single

conclusion: that the real and final topic of the Bhagavad-gîtå is Krishna

Himself, who is inseparably related to, and yet eternally transcendental to

the individual souls, of whom we are specimens. This doctrine of

bhedåbheda-tattva, or the inconceivable, simultaneous difference and

non-difference of the Lord and the individual souls, is Srî Caitanya's

reading of the Bhagavad-gîtå, and Vedic literature in general.

I have included the topic that Krishna is the controller to drive home the

point that the Godhead being talked about in the Bhagavad-gîtå is not a

vague, wispy Deity, whose true ineffable status is but indirectly hinted at

by the hierarchical language of mortals. Completely to the contrary, we have

in the Gîtå a full-blown expression of an omnipotent, omniscient,

omnibenevolent Supreme Lord, commanding, and even poignantly entreating, the

individual souls enmeshed in måyå to return to Him in His divine abode.

I call this paper a "Beginning Ontology" because the constraints of time

and space have permitted only an introductory statement about the Godhead,

as He is conceived in the Bhagavad-gîtå. In fact, the points made herein are

amplified by the rest of the Bhagavad-gîtå. At the very least, I hope this

paper will stimulate the reader to investigate the Gîtå as far as possible

on its own terms. There are certainly esoteric passages in religious

scriptures, including the Vedic books. But the guiding Vedic principle is

that we should interpret that which is ambiguous, that which plainly calls

for explication of hidden meanings. There are many such statements in the

Sanskrit scriptures, but the fundamental message, the central theme is

generally clear.

The verses quoted here are all my own translations, unless otherwise

indicated, and I have given great stress on literal accuracy in their

rendering. I have endeavored to avoid, thereby, unfounded flights of poetic

inspiration, and dubious constructions devised to legitimate tentative

insights. My conclusions reflect what I have learned from the Bhagavad-gîtå

As It Is, [The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Los Angeles, 1989] whose

translation and purports are the the unique devotional scholarship of His

Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.

The point of view here is clearly in the tradition of ¸rîpåda Madhvåcårya,

¸rîpåd Råmånujåcårya, ¸rî Caitanya Mahåprabhu, and other illustrious

Vaisnava scholars, who opposed the monistic interpretation of srîpåda

¸Sankaråcårya, and those in his line. In a sense, one gets here a glimpse of

a millennial theological debate in action.

1. THERE IS ONE GOD

In the Bhagavad-gîtå, Lord Krishna declares Himself to be the Supreme

Godhead, and He specifically asserts His supremacy in relation to the

well-known gods or demigods of the Vedic and Hindu pantheon. Indeed,

Krishnaa is the source of all the other gods that inhabit the cosmos [aham

ådir hi devånåm 10.2], for He is the source of all that exists [aham

sarvasya prabhavah 10.8]. Thus those who worship other gods are ultimately

worshiping Krishna, the source and sustainer of those gods [ye 'py

anya-devatå-bhaktåh…yajanti måm avidhi-pürvakam 9.23]. Similarly, although

the gods may accept offerings from their worshipers, the gods themselves are

acting as mere agents of the Supreme God who is the ultimate enjoyer of all

types of sacrifice [ahaµ hi sarva-yajñånåm bhoktå ca prabhur eva ca 9.24].

An ignorant worshiper of the demigods who does not clearly recognize this

supremacy of the Godhead falls to a lower status of life. [na tu måm

abhijånånti tattvenåtas cyavanti te 9.24]; The demigods cannot award

ultimate liberation, since those who attain to their worlds again fall down

to the mortal earthly realm when their pious merit is exhausted [te tam

bhuktvå svarga-lokaµ viΩålaµ kßî∫e pu∫ye martya-lokaµ viΩanti

9.21]. This

impermanence holds true not only for the planet of Indra, surendra-loka

[9.20], or svarga-loka [9.21], but indeed for all the worlds within the

material cosmos, including that of the creator Brahmå [å-bhrahma-bhuvanål

lokå˙ punar-åvartino 'rjuna 8.16] It is only in the world of the Supreme God

Krishna that one finds the eternal abode, going to which one never returns

to take birth in the material world [yad gatvå na nivartante tad dhåma

paramam mama 15.6; yam pråpya na nivartante tad dhåma paramam mama 8.21; måm

upetya tu kaunteya punar janma na vidyate 8.16].

Further evidence of the temporary position of the gods is given in the

eleventh chapter of the Gîtå. The cosmic form, which the Lord therein

displays, is revealed to be Krishna's form and power of Time [kålo 'smi

11.32] and even the hosts of Gods are overwhelmed and astonished, and enter

within Time's destructive power [11.21-22].

Lord Krishna is also absolutely superior to the gods in cognitive powers.

In all respects, Krishna is the origin of the gods, and hence they cannot

understood Krishna's origin [na me vidu˙ sura-ga∫å˙ prabhavaµ na

maharßaya˙

aham ådir hi devånåm maharßî∫åµ ca sarvΩa˙ 10.2], for indeed He is

beginningless. Not only the gods, but the entire universe is bewildered by

the modes of nature and thus does not recognize or understand Krishnaa,

since Krishnaa is beyond those modes [tribhir gu∫a-mayair bhåvair ebhi˙

sarvam idaµ jagat mohitaµ nåbhijånåti måm ebhya˙ param avyayam 7.13]. It

is

only because of the bewildering influence of the material modes upon the

conditioned souls that they worship other gods at all [yajante såttvikå

devån yakßa-rakßåµsi råjaså˙ pretån bhüta-ga∫åµΩ cånye yajante

tåmaså janå˙

17.4].

The omniscience of Krishna is superlatively causal since Krishna is the

source of everyone's memory, knowledge, and forgetting [sarvasya cåhaµ h®di

sannivi߆o matta˙ sm®tir jñånam apohanaµ ca 15.15]. Indeed Krishna knows

the

past, present, and future of all beings, but no one, in the material world,

knows Him in truth [vedåhaµ samatîtåni vartamånåni cårjuna, bhavißyåni

ca

bhütåni måµ tu veda na kaΩcana 7.26]. In fact, so much are the living

beings

dependent on Krsihna, that even their faith in other gods must be supplied

by Krishna [yo yo yåµ yåµ tanum bhaktå˙ Ωraddhåyårcitum îhate, tasya

tasyåcalaµ Ωraddhåµ tåm eva vidadhåmy aham 7.21]. And the results

awarded by

those gods are actually given by Krishna alone, of whom the gods are but

agents. [labhate ca tata˙ kåmåm mayaiva vihitån hi tån 7.22]

As Krishna is ontologically and epistemically prior to the gods and

absolutely superior in powers of being and cognition, so too is the result

of worshiping Him, eternal life in the Lord's abode, clearly distinguished

from the temporary results derived from worshiping all other powerful

beings: “Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits

are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the

demigods, but My devotees come to Me.†[antavat tu phalaµ teßåµ tad

bhavaty

alpa-medhasåm, devån deva-yajo yånti mad-bhaktå yånti måm api 7.23]

Similarly: “Those sworn to the gods, go to the gods; those sworn to the

forefathers, go to the forefathers; worshipers of ghostly spirits go to such

spirits; but those who worship Me go to Me.†[yånti deva-vratå devån pitén

yånti pit®-vratå˙, bhütåni yånti bhütejyå yånti mad-yåjino 'pi måm

9.25] In

view of this fundamental distinction between Krishna and the gods, and their

respective powers to reward their worshipers, only those whose intelligence

is stolen by lust worship the gods, and neglect the Supreme Godhead. [kåmais

tais tair h®ta-jñånå˙ prapadyante anya-devatå˙ 7.20] And, as stated

above,

even the temporary fruits awarded by the gods are really provided by Krishna

alone [labhate ca tatah kåmån mayaiva vihitån hi tån 7.22].

Thus there is nothing at all beyond Krishna [matta˙ parataram nånyat kiñcid

asti dhanañjaya 7.7]; He is the great Lord of all the worlds

[sarva-loka-maheΩvaram 5.29]; and He is the creator and sustainer of

everything [sarvasya dhåtåram 8.9] Within the Gîtå, Arjuna glorifies

K®ß∫a

as the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Abode, the Supreme Purifier, the Supreme

Divine Person [param brahma paraµ dhåma pavitram paramam bhavån purußaµ

ΩåΩvataµ divyam…10.12]; the God of the gods [deva-deva 10.14]; and the

origin of the gods [ådi-deva 10.12. tvam ådi-deva˙ 11.38] and the primeval

Person [purußa˙ purå∫a˙ 11.38]. Arjuna further affirms that no one is

equal

to or greater than K®ß∫a. [na tvat-samo 'sty abhaydhika˙ kunto 'nya˙

11.43]

The Lord ends His teaching in the Gîtå by urging Arjuna to abandon all

other duties (dharmån) and take shelter of K®ß∫a alone: sarva-dharmån

parityajya måm ekaµ Ωara∫aµ vraja 18.66. Thus the monotheistic thrust of

the

Gîtå is neither vague nor occasional, and apparent asssertions of a monistic

ontology, as will be shown later in this paper, do not compromise the

overwhelming conclusion: the absolute supremacy of Krishna. Arjuna certainly

understands K®ß∫a to be the Supreme Lord. When asked if he has understood

the Lord's teachings, he replies: “My illusion is gone… I shall execute Your

instructions [na߆o moha˙…karißye vacanaµ tava 18.73]

 

2. Krishna and the individual souls are distinct entities.

As Lord Krishna is eternally the Supreme Person, so the individual souls

are, of logical necessity, eternally distinct from and subordinate to the

Lord: “Never did I not exist, nor you, nor all these kings. And it is

certainly not (the case) that we shall not exist, all of us, for ever after.

[na tv evåham jåtu nåsam na tvam na tvaµ neme janådhipå˙ na caiva na

bhavißyåma˙ sarve vayam ata˙ param 2.12]

Here Krishna clearly states that "all of us" [sarve vayam] will exist

forever, just as I (Krishna), you (Arjuna) and all these kings have always

existed at all times in the past. Indeed, never was there a time when we did

not exist. In the previous verse, Krishna chastized Arjuna for taking the

body to be the self. Similarly, in the verse immedaitely following, Krishna

will describe the soul as dehî, the owner of the body, different from deha,

the body. Indeed the entire first half of the second chapter of the

Bhagavad-gîtå makes it clear that our real identity is eternal soul and not

the body. Thus having said that a learned person (pa∫∂ita) sees the soul,

and not the body, as primary, it is certain that Krishna is speaking of the

real person, the soul, as He begins to explain to Arjuna the fundamental

ontology of the world. After all, how can the Lord be apa∫∂ita, or foolish?

Thus it is the real K®ß∫a, the eternal Krishna, and the real Arjuna, the

eternal Arjuna, who have always existed and always will exist. And all of

us, says Krishna, will continue to exist in the future.

Similarly, later in the Gîtå, we find the following:

“There are two [classes of] beings in this world, the perishable and the

imperishable. All created forms are perishable, but a soul who stands at the

summit is imperishable.

“The Supreme Person, however, is another, and He is declared to be the

Supersoul. It is that inexhaustible Lord who has entered the three worlds

and sustains them.

“Because I am beyond the perishable beings, and greater even than the

imperishable, I am thus celebrated in this world, and in the Vedas, as the

Supreme Person. One who knows Me in this way to be the Supreme Person is a

knower of everything, and he worships Me with all his heart.†[bg 15.16-19]

There are many significant lessons in these four Ωlokas of the Gîtå.

Krishna has defined the term purußottama as: the Supreme Person who stands

beyond both the conditioned souls entangled in the snare of måyå, and “even

beyond the highest soulâ€, e.g. a liberated soul who stands at the highest

point of spiritual perfection. Indeed Monier-Williams in his Oxford Sanskrit

dictionary describes kü†a-stha˙ as the pure soul standing on the unchanging,

spiritual platform. Since Krishna emphatically declares that the purußottma

is beyond even the liberated soul, we can hardly translate purußa here as

"man" or anything indicative of a material position, since this would not

even apply to the kü†a-stha or the liberated soul, and what to speak of the

Supreme Person who stands far beyond such a pure soul. Krishna uses the word

api, "even" to make explicit that "I am beyond even the liberated soul. In

other words, it is not the Gîtå's philosophy that one becomes Krishna, or

equal to Krishna, by spiritual liberation. A normal reader would not

question that Krishna is beyond the conditioned soul, but here the Lord

emphasizes by the world api that He is beyond even the liberated soul who

stands at the summit of spiritual perfection.

The finality of this understanding of the supreme personal individuality of

Krishna is confirmed at 15.19 wherein Krishna states that one who

understands Him in this way [evam] as the Supreme Person [purußottama] is

the knower of everything [sarva-vit] and worships the Lord with all his

heart. [bhajati måm sarva-bhåvena bhårata 15.19] In other words, Krishna

explicitly rejects the notion that realization of the personal feature of

the Lord is a mere prelude to an eventual impersonal understanding.

Earlier in the fifteenth chapter, Krishna states that the living being in

this world is eternally a fragmental part [aµΩa] of the Lord. [mamaivåµΩo

jîva-loke jîva-bhüta˙ sanåtana˙ 15.7] The soul is further said to be

indivisible [acchedyo 'yam 2.24], and so the fragmental status is not

effectuated in time, but is a pre-eternal, never-ending fact: [na tvevåhaµ

jåtu nåsaµ na tvam neme janådhipå˙ na caiva na bhavißyåmah sarve vayam

atah

param 2.12] As Lord K®ß∫a simply puts its, God is not one of the ordinary

living beings, nor even one of the liberated souls; rather: “the Supreme

Person is someone else…†[uttama˙ purußas tv anya˙ 15.17]

We have already demonstrated that Krishna claims to be absolutely cognizant

and the source of all other cognition. He makes the same claim in the

thirteenth chapter where Lord Krishna introduces the terms kßetra, “the

field (i.e. the body)†and kßetra-jña, “the knower of the field (i.e. the

soul who is conscious of the body).†The Lord concludes this discourse by

asserting that although each soul is the knower of his field, i.e. his

particular body, “I am the knower of all fields, meaning all bodies

[kßetra-jñaµ cåpi måµ viddhi sarva-kßetreßu bhårata 13.3].

In the same thirteenth chapter, Krishna describes both the individual soul

and the Lord as purußa, but the contrast is striking. The individual soul is

a purusa, but he is (a) “situated in material nature,†(b) “trying to

enjoy

the material qualitiesâ€, and thus © compelled by his attachments to those

qualities to take birth in high and low species of bodily encangement

[purußa˙ prak®ti-stho hi bhuõkte prak®ti-jån, kåra∫aµ gu∫a-saõgo

'sya

sad-asad-yoni-janmasu 13.22]. In the very next Ωloka, the Lord describes

Himself also as purußa, but the difference between the two purußas could not

be more clear, for Krishna is said to be the supreme or transcendental

purusaË™ [purusaË™ paraË™]. The use of the adjective parah to denote the

supreme purusa is sigificant, for this word not only entails the notion of

supremacy, but also a strong sense of "the other". Indeed, para is often

used in Sanskrit to indicate the opposite of åtma- or sva- 2 , both of which

indicate "self" or "one's own". In fact, åtma is the simple reflexive

pronoun in Sanskrit. In other words, para has the unenquivocal sense of here

of the wholly other who is supreme. In this same Ωloka, Lord Krishna also

uses the term paramåtmå, describing Himself thus as the "Supreme Soul".

It should be noted that the adjective parama [used with åtmå to form

paramåtmå], is almost identical to para, as regards the notion of supremacy,

but that parama does not convey the sense of being the "other" in contrast

to one's self. It is this wider term para that Krishna employs to

distinguish Himself, as purusa, from the ordinary purußa who is struggling

vainly to exploit the Lord's material creation. Thus the Gîtå's claim that

the indiviual soul is eternally distinct from the Supreme Soul is a strong

one, and not a vague or esoteric articulation.

The Lord is also said to be the maintainer of the living beings [sarva-bh®c

caiva 13.5]. It is natural that the Lord maintain the living beings, for

they are stated in the Gîtå to be the Lord's own energy: “Besides the

material nature, there is another superior energy of Mine. Know it to be the

living being…†[apareyam itas tv anyåm prak®tiµ viddhi me paråµ

jîva-bhütåm…] The living being trapped in the clutches of måyå, the

Lord's

illusory material energy, can only escape her control by surrendering to the

Lord. He cannot escape by his own autonomous decision or endeavor: [daivî hy

eßå gu∫a-mayî mama måyå duratyayå, måm eva ye prapadyante måyåm etåm

taranti

te 7.5].

3. God is the controller: Because God, Krishna, is one, and eternally

separate from the individual soul, it follows that He is the Lord and

controller of all that be. Lord Krishna delineates a bi-partite notion of

causality in which material nature is the cause of the physical workings of

the world, whereas the living being is the cause of his own enjoyment and

suffering. [kårya-kåra∫a-kart®tve hetur prak®tir ucyate, purußa˙

sukha-du˙khånåµ bhokt®tve hetur ucyate 13.21] Nature responds to the

attempts of the soul to exploit the illusory material world, and entangles

the soul in the web of måyå. Perhaps the greatest illusion is the soul's

false perception that he is performing those physical events, such as moving

of the body, that in fact are done by nature. [prak®te˙ kriyamånåni

gu∫ai˙

sarvaΩa˙ ahaõkåra-vimü∂håtmå kartåham iti manyate 3.27] Nature in

turn is

directly under the control of the Supreme Lord, and the entire cosmos turns

by His command [mayådhyakßena prak®ti˙…hetunånena kaunteya jagad

viparivartate 9.10]. Thus the causal chain originates in K®ß∫a, who states:

“I am the Lord of all beings, and I stay in their hearts, causing all

beings, who are mounted on the machine (of the body), to wander in this

world in illusion. [îΩvara˙ sarva-bhütånåµ h®d-deΩe 'rjuna

ti߆hati,

bhråmayan sarva-bhütåni yantrårü∂håni måyayå 18.62].

Krishna is a living God who orders, punishes, and reclaims the fallen souls

who are eternally part and parcel of Him. Thus Krishna declares that: “Those

who always faithfully abide by My injunction, without envy, are freed from

all karmic acts. However those who are envious and do not abide by My

injunction you should know to be mindless and lost, for they are confused

about all that is knowledge.†[ye me matam idaµ nityam anuti߆hanti

månavå˙,

Ωraddhåvanto 'nasüyanto mucyante te 'pi karmabhi˙. ye tv etad abhyasüyanto

nånuti߆hanti me matam, sarva-jñåna-vimü∂håµs tån viddhi na߆ån

acestasaË™

3.31-32]

This same point is dramatically driven home at the end of the Gîtå: “If

then because of false ego you will not hear, then you will perish.†[atha

cet tvam ahaõ-kårån na Ωroßyasi vinaõkßyasi 18.58] We will understand

K®ß∫a

without doubt and fully, K®ß∫a declares, by hearing from Him [asaµΩayaµ

samagram måm yathå jnåsyasi tac ch®∫u 7.1]

One achieves real peace by recognizing that Lord Krishnå is the great Lord

of all the worlds [sarva-loka-maheΩvaram…jñåtvå måµ Ωåntim ®cchati

5.29]

Similarly, one who knows K®ß∫a to be the great lord of the words, and that

He is unborn and beginningless, is himself unbewildered among mortal beings

and is freed of all sins [yo måm ajam anådiµ ca vetti loka-maheΩvaram,

asammü∂ha˙ sa martyeßu sarva-påpai˙ pramucyate 15.19]. Arjuna

acknowledges

Lord Krishna to be the “controller of all beingsâ€, and the “Lord of the

universe†[10.15 bhüteΩa…jagat-pate].

Finally, the entire eleventh chapter of the Bhagavad-gîtå demonstrates in

an unforgettable way that the entire universe can be devoured in an instant

by Lord K®ß∫a. His control is absolute for all beings exist within Him:

“When you have thus learned the truth you will never again fall into

illusion, for by that knowledge you will see that all living beings are in

the Soul, that is they are in Me.†[yaj jñåtvå na punar moham evam yåsyasi

på∫∂ava yena bhütåni aΩeßå∫i drakßyasi åtmani atho mayi].

4. Krishna is everything

Lord Krishna strongly and repeatedly declares in the Bhagavad-gîtå that He

is the source of all that be. It follows that God is not only distinct from

His creative energies, but He is also one with them since they are eternally

resting on Him. Srî Caitanya Mahåprabhu thus stated that the philosophy of

the Gîtå is acintya-bhedåbheda-tattva, which means that God is inconceivably

one with, and simultaneously different from, His creation. We shall survey

Krishna's statements that He is the source of everything, and then see how

this claim is logically linked to the claim that “all things are Krishna.â€

Sri Krishna declares in the Bhagavad-gîtå: “I am the source of everything,

from Me everything emanates.†[aham sarvasya prabhava˙ matta˙ sarvam

pravartate 10.8]. Similarly, He states: “I am the origin and the

annihilation of the entire cosmos.†[ahaµ k®tsnasya jagata˙ prabhava˙

pralayas tathå 7.6] Krishna goes on to say, “There is nothing else beyond

Me, O Dhanañjaya. All this world rests on me like pearls strung on a

thread.†[matta˙ parataraµ nånyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya, mayi sarvam

idaµ

protam sütre ma∫i-ga∫å iva 7.7] And as previously quoted, “Neither the

hosts of gods nor the great sages know my origin, for in all respects I am

the origin of the gods and great sages.†[10.2] Krishna is not only the

source of the living beings, but of their qualities as well: “Intelligence,

knowledge, freedom from confusion [and ten other qualities], in their

various types, are states of being of the living entities, and they all come

from Me.†[buddhir jñånam asammoha˙… bhavanti bhåvå bhütånåm matta

eva

p®thag-vidhå˙ 10.4-5] “The seven primordial sages, and the four Manus owe

their existence to me for they are born of My mind.†[maharßaya˙ sapta

pürve

catvåro manavas tathå mad-bhåvå månaså jåtå… 10.7]

Let us now examine the tenth chapter of the Bhagavad-gîtå, wherein Lord

K®ß∫a claims [10.20-38] to be the superlative examplar in seventy

categories. Here is a sample verse from that section: “Of the Ådityas I am

Viß∫u; of lights I am the radiant sun; of the Maruts I am Marîci; of stars I

am the moon.†[ådityånåm ahaµ viß∫ur jyotißåµ ravir aµΩumån,

marîcir marutåm

asmi nakßatrå∫åm ahaµ ΩaΩî] To read monism into all of this would be

a

transparent misreading of the text, for a serious look at the entire chapter

makes abundantly clear what K®ß∫a is actually saying.

First, we notice that most of Krishna's statements, cited above, to the

effect that He is the source of everything come from this same tenth

chapter, namely verses 10.2, 10.4-5, 10.7, and 10.8. Krishna precedes, then,

His identification of Himself with the greatest items of this world by

emphasizing that He is the source of all these things. Recall that in the

seventh chapter Krishna stated that all the things of this world are His

energy, or prak®ti [7.4-6] and that He is therefore the source of all that

be. That Krishna is referring to the same ontological state of affairs

becomes clear when we notice the repeated use here of the word vibhüti,

which indicates the following: expansion, manifestation of might, great

power, glory etc. Arjuna introduces this term when he says to Krishna: “You

should speak about your own divine glories, those by which you pervade these

worlds and abide in them.†[vaktum arhasy aΩeße∫a divyå hy

åtma-vibhütaya˙,

yåbhir vibhütibhir lokån imåµs tvaµ vyåpya ti߆hasi 10.16]. The word

for

"glories" here is vibhütaya˙, the plural form of vibhüti. But that is just

the beginning of this word's career in the tenth chapter of the Gîtå. Arjuna

then says, “O Janårdana (Krishna), please describe again, and extensively,

your mystic power and might for as I listen to this ambrosia, I find no

satiation.†[vistare∫åtmano yogaµ vibhütiµ ca janåradana, bhüya˙

kathaya

t®ptir hi Ω®∫vato nåßti me 'm®tam 10.18] Again, the word for "might" is

vibhütim. Lord Krishna then answers, agreeing to explain His own divine

opulences, and again the word vibhütaya˙, plural of vibhüti, is used 10.19].

In the very next Ωloka, the Lord begins His identification of Himself with

the 70 categories mentioned above. At the end of the narration, Krishna

says, “O burner of the foe, there is no end to my divine powers, and so I

have given some example of the extension of my glory.†[nånto 'sti mama

divyånåµ vibhütînåm parantapa, eßa tüddeΩatah prokto vibhüter vistaro

mayå

10.40] Predictably the word vibhüti is used twice in this vese, and it is

repeated in the following verse, wherein Lord Krishna says: “Whater

glorious, beautiful, or mighty being there may be, understand that it is

born of but a spark of my splendor. [yad yad vibhütimat sattvam Ωrîmad

ürjitam eva vå, tat tad evåvagaccha tvam mama tejo-'µΩa-sambhavam10.41].

Here the word vibhüti-mat means "that which possesses vibhüti, i.e. power,

glory etc.

By using the word vibhüti no less than six times, Lord K®ß∫a makes clear

that He is talking about His powers, His properties, His opulences etc. In

the seventh chapter, there are three "identification verses" [7.9-11] which

exactly resemble in meter, language, and content the "identification verses"

of the tenth chapter [10.20-38]. These three verses, as in the tenth

chapter, are preceded by an elaborate analysis of how Lord Krishna is the

source of all that be, matter and spirit being His superior and inferior

potencies. At the conclusion of 7.9-11, K®ß∫a declares that all of these

opulences that He has identified Himself with in fact come from Him, and are

resting in Him, but He is not in them. [matta eveti tån viddhi na tv ahaµ

teßu te mayi 7.12].

It also bears mentioning that one who rightly understands the sense in

which K®ß∫a is the source of everything does not then consider that all

beings are God, but rather worships the real God with wholehearted devotion:

“I am the source of all, from me all proceeds. Knowing this, the wise

worship Me with all their being.†[ahaµ sarvasya prabhavo mattah sarvam

pravartate, iti matvå bhajante måm budhå˙ bhåva-samanvitå˙ 10.8]

The purpose of the identification verses is to nourish the devoted

thesists, as K®ß∫a explains in the verse immediately following the above

Ωloka: “Their minds in Me, their lives dedicated to Me, the devotees

enlighten one another, always speaking about Me, and thus they are satisfied

and rejoice. [mac-cittå mad-gata-prå∫å bodhayanta˙ parasparam

kathayantaΩ ca

måµ nityaµ tußyanti ca ramanti ca 10.9]. Further, Arjuna explicitly states

that it is just to facilitate such meditation on the Lord, that he is

requesting Krishna to describe His glories: “Always thinking of You, O

Yogin, how can I know You? In which various forms, my Lord, am I to think

about You? Describe to me at length Your glories…etc.†[kathaµ vidyåm

ahaµ

yogin tvåµ sadå paricintayan, keßu keßu ca bhåveßu cintyo 'si bhagavan

mayå…

vistare∫åtmano yogaµ vibhütiµ ca janårdana bhüya˙ kathaya…10. 17-18].

There

is hardly a doctrine of pantheism in the Bhagavad-gîtå. The real message is

quite clear: surrender to Krishna.

There is one instance where Lord K®ß∫a says that after many births, one in

knowledge surrenders to the Lord, realizing that “Våsudeva (K®ß∫a) is

everything.†[bahünåµ janmanåm ante jñånavån måm prapadyate

våsudeva˙ sarvam

iti 7.19] Similarly, there is an instance where Arjuna tells Krishna, “You

cover everything and thus You are everything.†[sarvaµ samåpnoßi tato 'si

sarvam 11.40] In these cases also, there is devastating evidence against the

impersonal, monistic interpretation.

In the first instance, Lord Krishna's statement comes in the midst of a

discussion of four types of people who do not surrender to God, and four

types who do. Krishna's point in the verse we have cited [7.19] is that

surrender to Krishna is the symptom and proof that one is actually in

knowledge, after many lifetimes of seeking the truth. In fact, the learned

one who realizes that Krishna is everything is one of the four classes of

men who surrender to the Lord. We have already explained at length the many

verses in chapter seven, preceeding 7.19, which claim that K®ß∫a is the

source of everything, and that He is identical with the opulent features of

this world in the sense that such items, composed of the inferior modes of

nature (sattva, rajas, tamas) are but expansions of the Lord's power. And

the verses following 7.19 emphasize that it is Krishna alone who is to be

worshiped, and not other gods. In other words, the topic under discussion is

nothing but surrender to Krishna, and an elaborate ontological explanation

in this very chapter has clarified that Krishna is to be identified with the

wonderful things of this world only in the sense that such items rest on

Him. It was explicitly stated that Krishna is simultaneouly aloof, that He

is “not in them.†[na tv ahaµ teßu te mayi 7.12]

Similarly, Arjuna declares to Krishna: “You are everything because You

entirely possess everything.†[sarvam samåpnoßi tato 'si sarvam] Arjuna's

statement is in response to the cosmic vision of God, in which Krishna

devours all the universe, and all beings are subdued by the Lord's

omnipotent feature of time. That is, in the context of God's absolute

domination of the subordinate living beings, Arjuna utters His prayer, “You

are everything!â€

Still, it is worthwhile to take a closer look at the somewhat complex

ontology operating here, and Krishna Himself provides us such a focused

metaphysical analysis in the ninth chapter of the Gîtå [9.4-10] where He

intentionally speaks in apparently contradictory language: “By Me in My

unmanifested form, I pervade this whole universe. All beings are situated in

Me, but I am not situated in them. The beings are also not situated in me.

Behold My mystic power. I am the maintainer of all beings; I am not also

situated in them. My self is the source of the beings. Just as the great

wind, which goes everywhere, is situated in the sky, similarly understand

that all beings are situated in Me.†[9.4-6]3

Lord Krishna here makes several ontological distinctions between Himself,

God, and the many living beings like ourselves:

1. Krishna states that He individually pervades the entire universe. There

is no similar claim for any of the individual living beings. [9.4]

2. All beings are situated in Krishna, but He is not in them. [9.4]

3. Krishna is the maintainer of all beings, but not they of Him. [9.5]

4. Krishna is the source (bhåvana) of all beings, but not they of Him. [9.5]

5. Lord Krishna compares Himself to the sky, and the living beings to the

air which moves within the sky but does not mix with it. [9.6] This metaphor

is further developed at 13.3 wherein Krishna compares the sky to the soul

which does not mix with the body. Krishna states at 13.3 that although the

sky extends everywhere (sarva-gatam) because of its sublety (saukßmatvåt) it

does not mix with anything, and hence nothing can taint it (nopalipyate). At

9.6, then, Krishna means to state that although the great winds blow

throughout space or sky, the sky is never covered by the air, which is a

grosser element in the traditional cosmology. By analogy, then, although God

contains all living beings within His existence, because of His being

superior, He can not be affected by the inferior qualities of the beings

which He contains. Indeed, Krishna states that He pervades the universe in

an unmanifest form (avyakta-mürtinå), and the term avyakta here,

"unmanifest", is clearly related to the concept of subtlety in 13.33. This

sense of subtlety as a cause or condition of imperceptibility is explicity

given at 13.6, where it is said that “the Absolute is incomprehensible

because of its subtlety.†[sükßmatvåt tad avijñeyam]. This very word

sükßmatvåt, is given at 13.33, to mean "because of its subtlety".

Thus the analogy of the sky and the air [9.6] is meant to explicate the

same message given at 9.4-5: although Srî Krishna is all-pervading, and

although all beings live and exist within His existence, He is always

distinct and superior, and is never affected by the inferior qualities of

the living beings that He contains. Thus it is very difficult to mount

anything like a serious argument for monism from the statements of the

Bhagavad-gîtå.

5. Krishna has spiritual form

In the Bhagavad-gîtå, Lord Krishna stresses the personality of the Godhead

as the highest feature of the Absolute Truth and therefore the goal of the

yoga process. For example, at 8.8, Krishna states:

“One who is engaged in the practice of yoga, meditating with undeviating

consciousness on the Supreme Divine Person, goes to that Supreme Person. One

who constantly remembers Him as the primeval scholar, the steady ruler,

smaller than the smallest, the creator of everything, as He whose

inconceivable form is luminous like the sun and beyond darkness…one who

remembers Him thus attains to that Supreme Divine Person.â€4 [8.8-10]

Similarly, Arjuna declares Krishna to be the “eternal divine person,â€

[purußaµ ΩåΩvataµ divyam 10.12] and later he says “I consider You the

eternal Person.†[sanåtanas tvam purußo mato me 11.18] At this point it is

good to recall the strict ontological rule which Krishna enunciated at the

very beginning of His teaching, “Of the termporary there is no real

existence, and of the eternal there is no cessation.†[nåsatao vidyate bhåvo

nåbhåvo vidyate sata˙ 2.16] Thus when Arjuna declares Krishna to be the

eternal person, it is understand that Krishna's personality has no beginning

or end, and indeed Arjuna states that Krishna is ajam, "unborn" [10.12]. It

is signficant that Krishna states that not only He Himself, but in fact

individual souls in general are beginningless: “Know that both material

nature and the individual person [purußa] are beginningless. It is the

accidental qualities and transformations of prak®ti that come into being.â€

[prak®tim purußaµ caiva viddhy anådî ubhåv api, vikåråµΩ ca

gu∫åµΩ caiva

viddhi prak®ti-sambhavån]. So the sanåtana-purußa, the "eternal person", can

not refer to a material form.

As Krishna is an eternal, supreme, divine person, it is natural that He has

an abode, and that is also described within the Gîtå: “The sun does not

brighten it, nor the moon, nor fire, and going to it, they never

return ---that is My supreme abode.†[na tad bhåsayate süryo na

ΩaΩåõka na

påvakah yad gatvå na nivartante tad dhåma paramam mama 15.6] Similarly: “It

is said to be unmanifest and indestructible, and they call it the supreme

destination. Having achieved it, they never return from My supreme abode.â€

[avyakto 'kßara ity uktas tam åhu˙ paramaµ gatim, yam pråpya na nivartante

tad dhåma paramam mama 8.21]

According to the Bhagavad-gîtå, the supreme personality of the Godhead is

not merely myth, poetry or symbol, but rather spiritually tangible form and

being, which is avyakta, unmanifest, only to the materially conditioned

soul. Thus in the seventh chapter of the Gîtå, Lord Krishna says, “The

unintelligent think that I am unmanifest, but that I have become a manifest,

visible person, for they do not know My supreme nature which is

inexhaustible and of incomparable excellence. [avyaktaµ vyaktim åpannam

manyante måm abuddhaya˙, param bhåvam ajånanto mamåvyayam anuttamam 7.24]

So

important is this Ωloka that we shall examine its key terms in detail. Lord

K®ß∫a says that “the unintelligent (abuddhaya˙, plural of abuddhi,

literally

"those without intelligence") think (manyante) that I am avyaktam,

unmanifest, but that I have become vyaktim, a manifest person.†The term

avyaktam contrasts with the term vyaktim not only in the sense of the

invisibile versus the visible, but also in contrasting a type of impersonal

existence with a personal, individual reality. This sense of avyakta as

impersonal, in contrast to the personal, is clearly evident at 12.1, and

12.3, and is also strengthened by the fact that here at 7.24, Lord Krishna

contrasts avyaktam not with its immediate antonym vyaktam, "the manifest",

but with the cognate vyaktim which more specifically indicates a manifest,

individual person. Krishna says, then, “The unintelligent think that I am

impersonal and unmanifest, but that I have become a distinct, visible,

individual person. They think this because they do not know my supreme,

transcendental nature (param bhåvam)…†The param bhåvam, or "supreme

nature"

mentioned here is clearly the transcendental nature of the vyakti, or

visible personal identity of K®ß∫a. It is diffcult to find another

straightforward reading of this simple Sanskrit sentence.

Lord Krishna's statement at 7.24 contrasts in a curious way with another

use of the terms avyakta and vyakti at 8.18. There the Lord says, “On the

coming of the day (of Brahmå) all the individual beings come forth from the

unmanifest, and on the coming of the night (of Brahmå), they are merged into

the very place that is called the avyakta.†[avyaktåd vyaktaya˙ sarvå˙

prabhavanty ahar-ågame, råtry-ågame pralîyante tatraivåvyakta-sañjñake

8.18]

There are several significant features of this statement. Krishna uses the

term vyaktayaË™, the plural nominative form of vyaktiË™, and He says that all

these vyaktis (my translation: all the individual beings) come forth from

the unmanifest, avyakta, during the day of Brahmå. Since there is clearly a

plurality of living beings mentioned here (and everywhere else in the Gîtå),

and since the term vyakti is here used to describe the beings at their

specific stage of manifestation, coming forth on the coming of Brahmå's day,

it is clear in this context also that the term vyakti refers to an

individual, manifest person, active within the world. Because one might tend

to associate the term with the conditioned souls visible in this world,

Krishna takes care to emphasize, when using the word to refer to Himself,

that He does not, as do the conditioned souls, acquire a visible form upon

coming to this world. Indeed the entire argument at 7.24 is that Lord

Krishna does not assume His visible, personal form at all, but that His

personal form is His superior nature, param bhåvam. Indeed, Krishna explains

almost immediately after this, at 8.20, that the param bhåvam [inflected

here as paro bhåva˙ since it shifts to the nominative from the accusative]

is beyond the avyakta, the unmanifest from which the ordinary souls come

forth on the coming of Brahmå's day. Although Lord Krishna describes that

paro bhåva˙ as being a superior avyakta or unmanifest realm, we find at 8.21

that here the paro bhåva˙ actually refers to the Lord's supreme abode. In

other words, although His supreme abode is not manifest to ordinary persons,

Krishna descends from His abode so that we can see Him as He is. This is the

highest sense of avatåra.

The same term paro bhåva˙ has been used at 7.24 to indicate the spiritual

nature of Krishna's personality, and at 8.20, the term is used specifically

to describe the spiritual quality of the Lord's abode, but in either case,

it is clear that the paro bhåva˙ at 8.20, or indeed the param bhåvam

mentioned at 7.24, are beyond the avyakta mentioned at 8.18, as the status

from which conditioned souls, also called vyaktis, come forth to manifest in

this world. The conclusion is that the Gîta affirms the spiritual

personality of the Lord, which is not a mere symbol, incarnation, way of

getting at, etc. etc., an unmanifest impersonal Absolute Truth. But it is

not by mental speculation that the personal form of the Lord is to be known.

Thus the term vyaktim is used also at 10.14, when Arjuna says to Krishna,

“Neither the gods nor the demons, O blessed Lord, know Thy personality

(vyaktim). [na hi te bhagavan vyaktim vidur devå na dånavå˙ 10.14] Rather,

“It is by devotion that one knows Me in truth, as I actually am.†[bhaktyå

måm abhijånåti yåvån yaΩ cåsmi tattvata˙ 18.55]

The fact that Lord Krishna is ultimately to be known as the Supreme Person

is made even more explicit at the beginning of the twelfth chapter. Arjuna

asks the Lord,

“Who are the greatest knowers of yoga--- those who are Your devotees,

always engaged in worshiping You, or those who worship the unperishing

unmanifest? [evaµ satata-yuktå ye bhaktås tvåm paryupåsate, ye cåpy

akßåram

avyaktaµ teßåµ ke yoga-vittamå˙ 12.1] Here Arjuna places in direct

competition personal devotion to Krishna and worship of the avyakta, the

unmanifest feature of the Absolute. Krishna at once replies, “Always engaged

in fixing their minds on Me, those who worship Me with transcendental faith

I consider to be most intimately united with Me in yoga.†[mayy åveΩya mano

ye måµ nitya-yuktå upåsate, Ωraddhayå parayopetås te me yuktamatamå

matå˙

12.2] Both in Arjuna's original question [12.1], and in Lord Krishna's

reply, the personal pronoun indicating Krishna (Arjuna's tvåm, You, and

Krishna's måm, Me) are used to indicate the personal concept of God, in

contrast to the impersonal unmanifest.

The artificiality of the impersonal path for the eternal individual soul is

made clear at 12.5, wherein Lord Krishna says that in contrast to the path

of bhakti, which is susukham kartum, “very joyful to perform†[9.2], the

path of meditation on the unmanifest, the ineffable, all-pervading absolute

is just the opposite, it is du˙kham, or miserable to perform. Indeed,

Krishna calls the impersonal path kleΩo 'dhikataras, or “exceedingly

troublesome†[12.5].

Krishna also states: “Because I inhere in a human-like body, foolish people

disrespect Me, for they do not understand My transcendental nature.â€

[avajånanti måm mü∂hå˙ månußîµ tanum åΩritam, param bhåvam

ajånanto…9.11].

It is certainly noteworthy here that Lord K®ß∫a repeats the exact same words

as in 7.24, i.e. “not knowing My transcendental nature†[param bhåvam

ajånanto…7.24, 9.11]. Thus the unintelligent [abuddhaya˙] who think that

K®ß∫a has assumed His personal form, are compared to the foolish

[mü∂hå˙]

who disrespect K®ß∫a because He appears in a human-like body.

Krishna states at 9.11 that He inheres in a human-like body. The Sanskrit

phrase is månußîm (human-like) tanum (a body) åΩritam (I) have inhered in.

That which is inherent is essential and intrinsic, and this notion that the

Lord originally manfests in a spiritual form is also indicated elsewhere in

the Gîtå. Let us turn to chapter four of the Gîtå wherein Lord K®ß∫a

elaborately describes His descent into this world. Lord Krishna states:

“Although I am unborn and My Self never deteriorates, and although I am the

Lord of all beings, utilizing My own energy I appear by My own potency.

Whenever there is a decline of dharma, O Bhårata, and a prominent rise of

adharma (irreligion), at that time I manifest My Self. To deliver the pious,

and to destroy the evil-doers, and to establish dharma, I appear in every

age. [4.6-8]6 â€

Problems infecting Western indology

Some of the grave problems infecting Western indological studies can be

observed (like one example between many) by seeing how Dr. Thomas Hopkins

has paraphrased the above verses, and then translated the last of the three,

in his book The Hindu Religious Tradition:

“In reality he is apart from the world as the Lord of all beings, but

whenever worldly righteousness declines he creates a form for himself out of

Prak®ti by his myserious power (måyå) and manifests himself among men:

For the preservation of the righteous, the destruction of the wicked,

And the establishment of dharma, I come into being from age to age

(Bhagavad Gîtå 4.8)†[TH 92]

There are two grave problems with Dr. Hopkins' translation:

1. Hopkins inserts the foreign notion that “He creates a form for himself

out of Prak®ti by his mysterious power etc.†The view that Krishna is

different from His personal form, which is presumed here to be made of

matter, is not what Krishna says here. Indeed He says the opposite. At 4.6,

the Lord says that “Although I am unborn and My self never

deteriorates…etc.†The word for Self is the standard term åtmå, and

avyaya

means "unperishing, undecaying." It is hard to construe this avyaya-åtmå as

different from the personal form of Krishna, because in the very next Ωloka,

Krishna states that when He descends, He does so by manifesting that same

åtmå [tadå åtmånaµ s®jåmy aham7]. In other words, the form which Krishna

sends forth to this world is eternal. In English syntax, Krishna simply

says: tadå ahaµ s®jåmi åtmånam: “Then I manifest (My) Self.†The verb

here

is s®j: to let go, to release, discharge, send forth; also: to create,

procreate, beget etc. We cannot apply here the latter sense of creating,

begetting, etc., since Lord Krishna has just stated that His åtmå is avyaya,

and it has been clearly established from the outset that those things which

arise in time also end in time: “For that which is born, death is certain.

[jåtasya hi dhruvo mrityur 2.27]. Thus within the clear ontology of the

Gîtå, there is no scope for anything, much less a divine "Self", to come

into being and then last forever. There is no such entity in the

Bhagavad-gîtå. If we then accept the verb s®j in the alternative sense: “to

release, discharge, send forth etc.â€, we still do not have anything like

Hopkin's “He creates a form for Himself…†Krishna appears to be saying

something quite simple and straightforward: “I send Myself forth to this

world.†After all, who else could order the descent of Krishna, the supreme

authority by whose order all the universe turns [9.10]?

2. There is no sense to the translation “I come into being.†Lord Krishna

has elaborately explained that He has always existed (na tv evåham jåtu

nåsam 2.12), and indeed that all living beings are beginningless [2.12,

13.20]. The verb which Hopkins has translated as “I come into beingâ€, is

sambhavåmi, the present tense, first person, singular of sam-bhü, the first

meaning of which is “to be or come togetherâ€. Thus we should first

understand that Lord Krishna is simply stating that by His descent (avatåra)

into this world, He is coming together with the souls of this world for

their eternal benefit. After all, Krishna has stated twice in the Gîtå that

He is the father of all living beings [9.17, 14.4] and that He is thus the

well-wishing friend of all [5.29]

An additional sense of sam-bhü is “to be born or produced from†but this

sense of the word normally requires an ablative noun, for the subject of the

verb, in this case, must be born or produced from something, and such an

ablative word is conspicuously absent in our context, and it is

theologically impossible anyway, as explained above. A third sense of the

very is “to arise, spring up, developâ€, and it may be this inapplicable

sense of the verb which Hopkins has chosen. A fourth sense of the verb,

which like the first is clearly applicable here, is: “to prevail, be

effective.†There are yet other senses of the verb, but the first and the

fourth, for various contextual and grammatical reasons, are the likely

candidates.

Lord Krishna concludes this topic of His descent into this world at 4.9,

where He states: “One who thus understands, in truth, My divine birth and

activities does not, upon leaving the body, go to another birth. He goes to

Me, O På∫∂ava.†[janma karma ca me divyam evaµ yo vetti tattvata˙,

tyaktvå

deham punar janma naiti måm eti på∫∂ava] Krishna claims that His birth

and

activities are divine, divya, and of course this is the same adjective we

have seen used many times to describe Krishna as the divine person. Krishna

emphasizes that one must understand His birth and activities in truth,

[tattvataË™] and if Krishna's so-called assumption of a material form were as

patently clear as some scholars claim, why would this word of caution be

used? And how could Krishna claim that mere understanding of His birth is

sufficient to guarantee liberation from material birth in thsi world? It is

evident that a serious study of the text will force us to look more

seriously at the position of Krishna.

There is much more to say about the position of Krishna in the

Bhagavad-gîtå. We have covered but a few topics, albeit important ones. One

may or may not choose to believe the statements of Krishna, but before

examining the truth of His claims, one should first understand what Krishna

is saying.

 

-