Xena's "Krishna" - Why Glorify Or Condemn?

July 5, 2003

The essential problem with this article is right in the tittle "To Glorify or Condemn". Why do either? Why pretend that the world is black and white with no in-between?! "We are the white Krishna conscious saintly ones and they are all black Demons and must be condemned."

Aren't we forgetting the middle ground the "innocent" who need encouragement.

If we initiate our contact or conversation with condemnation towards the innocent that is not a very good footing to open dialogue where pure knowledge of Sri Krishna can transpire.

All such condemnation is only good for pampering our own false egos. "We are the holy ones who are following in the footsteps of Bhaktivinode Thakur" and condemning everyone who dose not conform to our understanding of pure devotional service. (except perhaps ourselves?) What's being missed here is a proper analysis of ourselves and of "time place and circumstance".

First of all with out having even seen the episode its quite unbecoming of magnanimous, fair minded, Vaishnavas (with common sense and decency) to whole heartedly condemn. It's safe to assume that this episode of the Xena production is not being directed by a Krishna devotee, but its not impossible that the writers have done some homework to try and capture some of Sri Krishna's character (we shall see) We are expecting there will be flaws in the portrayal of Lord Sri Krishna, and pouncing to condemn. Is this really the devotional spirit of Bhaktivinode and Prabhupada?

But who is the audience? From "Glorify or Condemn" one might almost conclude that Xena was being produced for "Devotees" (who are glued to the tube Sat afternoon?) Or for Indians many of whom are devotees and knowledgeable of Sri Krishna's qualities from Mahabharata & Ramayana. But this is obviously not the majority of the intended audience.

I hated the Mel Brooks production of Mahabharata, because I felt the characters were all improperly cast (having read the Ganguli edition, and seen the Hindi film version) But I met an elderly man who after seeing (Mel version) was absolutely fascinated with Krishna and was eager to learn all he could about Him. So what may be considered poison for devotees can be beneficial for non-devotees in helping inquire further into the absolute truth.

There are numerous examples of people turning towards Krishna with musicians who have incorporated devotional mantras etc.. One mata on VNN forum made some blanket statement that all the professional singers in India were useless, (due to not being devotees) and the mantra coming from their lips has no spiritual potency.

However this fanatical, tunnel vision ("of we are the holy chosen ones") is blind to the fact that if it were not for the thousands of singers, actors, writers, producers, Krishna temples, sadhus etc.. who choose to include the All attractive Sri Krishna in there lives and work, to different degrees, help keep Sri Krishna a topic of conversation in the minds of the Indian population. If they did not India would not be the wonderful ripe fertile ground for Nama Sankirtana. And many of those people are actual devotees of Krishna, some of whom have a far better track records (in terms of spiritual discipline/devotion) then many of us "western versions", whom tend to blow our own horns loudly. (and then watch Xena on Sat afternoon).

In regards to proper evaluating the right mood in which to communicate, (medicine and dose to administer) one has to consider the receptivity of the listener. The circumstances under which Bhaktivinode preached and our present situation are far different. At the time Srila Bhaktisdhanta & Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, there was a intentional effort by the Shakta worshipers to convert Vaishnavas who had become very degraded and a very powerful preacher was required to turn the tide. Those who have some idea what is right and wrong and choose the wrong path require a far heavier more powerful dose of medicine then those who are just foolish, ignorant or innocent.

The Vaishnava Acharyas were able to give this potent medicine (strong preaching) in such a way that people would listen (its important to open the ear of our willing listener (usually with words of appreciation) so the medicine can actual enter. Other wise what's the point of so-called "strong preaching " if its so fanatical no one will even take seriously and listen?! If administering "strong medicine" to an unwilling patient you will just get a reputation of being a poor (crazy) Doctor and will be ridiculed, loosing all your patients. The Vaishnava Acharyas were not masters at only condemnation but in inspiration in bring souls to Krishna's lotus feet. They used strong language but that was not the only facet of their personality, they were also very compassionate and very humble.

If we are unable to balance the criticism with the compassionate caring side we have no business condemning. Condemning will only drive more people away from Krishna. If we are to condemn the person on the top of the list should be ourselves for our hard heartedness and inability to melt the hearts of the suffering souls with genuine Vaishnava compassion.

Rather than sending letters of criticism and condemnation. Dose it not make a whole lot more sense to say something like this:

Dear Universal Studio Directors, Writers of the Xena show:

We are practicing Vaishnavas = worshipers of Vishnu/Krishna. We hear you are going to portray Krishna as a character in your Xena films, we are flattered being Vaishnavas and worshipers of Krishna = God, that you are thinking of Krishna and including Him in your program. However please appreciate we and thousands of Hindus are very sensitive as to how Sri Krishna is portrayed. We understand Xena is a program that uses a lot of creative and imagination for the entertainment of your audience.

However for Vaishnavas, Sri Krishna is not a mythical figure but actually God.

So we are writing to you to request you as far as possible to follow some guidelines in portraying Krishna's character in order not to overly offend any Vaishnavas or Hindus who may be watching your program, as well as to not overly misrepresent Krishna to those who have never heard of Him.

We really can not endorse such programs (we know your not asking) due to what is called "rasa basa" or a mixing of contrary moods that are inappropriate for properly understanding Krishna and His true transcendental nature. But we can give you some guidelines that could not only help make your program be more interesting but also better represent Krishna and the ancient Indian culture and religion. (even if that is not really your main intention)

For detailed information of the charicture and activieies of Sir Krishna please consult the Krishna books VOL 1-3 by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedant Swami Prabhupada.

And in your portrayial of Sri Krishna we kindly request that the words of Sri Krishna be taken from the Bhagavad Gita As It Is

Please keep in mind the following charaicturistics of Sri Krishna which are described in the holy Vedic literature, when including Him in your film.

Please portray Sri Krishna as: 1). Beautiful features on his entire body 2). marked with all auspicious characteristics 3). extremely pleasing 4). effulgent; 5). strong; 6) ever youthful; 7) a wonderful linguist; 8) truthful; 9) talks pleasingly; 10) can speak fluent in all languages; 11). highly learned; 12) highly intelligent; 13) a genius; 14) artistic; 15) extremely clever; 16) expert; 17) grateful; 18) firmly determined; 19) an expert judge of time and circumstance; 20) sees and speaks on the authority of the Vedas, or scriptures; 21) pure; 22) self controlled; 23) steadfast; 24) forbearing; 25) forgiving; 26) grave; 27) self satisfied; 28) possesses equilibrium; 29) magnanimous; 30) religious; 31) heroic; 32) compassionate; 33) respectful; 34)gentle; 35)liberal; 36) shy; 37) the protector of surrendered souls; 38) happy; 39) the well wisher of devotees; 40) controlled by love; 41) all-auspicious; 42) most powerful; 43) all famous; 44) popular; 45) partial to devotees; 46) very attractive to all women; 47)all-worshipable; 48) all opulent; 49) all-honorable; 50) the supreme controller; 51) changeless; 52) all-cognizant; 53) ever fresh; 54) possessing an eternal blissful body; 55) possessing all mystic perfection 56) He has inconceivable potency; 57) Uncountable universes generate from His body; 58) He is the original source of all incarnations; 59) He is the giver of salvation to the enemies He kills; 60) He is the attractor of liberated souls; 61) He is the performer of wonderful varieties of pastimes; 62) He can attract living entities all over the Universe by playing His flute; 63) He is surrounded by devotees endowed with wonderful love of Godhead; 64) He has a wonderful excellence of beauty which can not be rivaled anywhere in all creation.

Please do not portray Krishna as: Sad

Forgetful

Evil/Unkind

Selfish/self centered

Lusty

Partial (in favoring one group over another) except in helping good over evil and reciprocating with all love offered to Him. Angry

Dear TUSTA KRISHNA Prabhu, Humble dandavats to you, and all your seva. Jaya Srila Prabhupada! and all Vaishnavas!

I understand and respect your concern but I disagree with your analysis of the situation regarding ("praise or condemn") and therefore feel your mood and approach are not entirely appropriate, or maybe are not the only or best reaction for the positive transmission of Krishna consciousness.

Please kindly read the following points for your consideration before striking with your club of condemnation.

"EDITORIAL, Feb 26 (VNN) — Clearly some people do not understand the problem with Xena producers portraying Krishna as a fictional character. What they don't understand is that once Xena producers and Hollywood in general feel they have a green light to treat Krishna as a fictional character, putting words in His mouth, having him engage in fictional activities and so forth, then there is no limit to the words they'll be putting in His mouth and the activities they'll have Him engaging in."

What is the little red light going to do? Do you really believe they will cancel there script for you or your petition? Why assume the worst? What's next a Vaishnava "fatwa" on Hollywood fictional screen writers?! Usually its in the interest or a drama to portray the character semi accurately so if possibly if the writers have some guidelines. Would that not be more useful then just condemning and being ignored?

"The producers of Xena/Hercules and Universal Studios essentially want to do with Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva, that is the Supreme Lord and the demigods who are described in the Vedas, what they've done to the so-called "gods" of Greek mythology. For the past several years they've been having their heroes interact with the so-called Greek gods. Sometimes the Greek gods are being kind and good and are allies of the heroes, and sometimes the gods are portrayed as being envious, lustful, or whatever, and acting as the opponents of the heroes. It's all left up to the speculation and the whims of the writers and producers as to what they think will attract an audience."

Weren't the Greek Gods a bit like that though? Weren't they kind of personifications of man's good and bad qualities? Why not see if it is at all possible to assist in educating the writers by informing them of the true Divine all good nature of Sri Krishna.

"Some so-called devotees have claimed that there is no harm in having Krishna treated as a fictional character and having words put into His mouth and having Him engaged in fictional activities, because somehow this will be good for society. They think that this will somehow make people Krishna conscious.

Of course, just the opposite is true. People will "learn" through this mass media, through these TV shows, that Krishna is a mythical, fictional character on the level of Xena and Hercules."

This so-called devotee sees more harm in condemning those who are basically innocent and ignorant and have somehow or other become attracted to Sri Krishna even if on a superficial level. People have already learned all kinds of nonsense we can not stop them. Is not the best remedy is to politely educate as to the real nature of Sri Krishna.

"Therefore, instead of concluding that devotees of Krishna are sober, intelligent people, viewers will automatically conclude that devotees of Krishna are no more intelligent than those who would worship Xena, Zeus, Hercules, or for that matter, Star Trek characters. (Remember "Heaven's Gate," a cult that developed around the Star Trek television series and which ended up with its followers committing suicide.)"

That does not sound like such a sound argument. Why would sober intelligent people who have concluded that devotees are similarly gifted, conclude that a children's fictional TV show is the bona fide portrayal of Krishna or Krishna's devotees?

"It is essential that Hollywood get the message that devotees of Krishna will not accept the hijacking of Krishna's name and form and let them put whatever words they want into His mouth and have Him engage in whatever fictional activities they desire."

O really "hijacking of Krishna's name" do we have the copyrights on Krishna's name?! Can we really stop them from putting words in Krishna's mouth? I think we have to be more careful and concerned with the words that are coming out of our own mouths. If we get fanatical over children's programs there will be allot of comic's of devotees with all kinds of silly things appearing in those voice bubbles. That will not be very flattering for our Archaryas and Sri Krishna.

"They need to know that Krishna is real, and even if they do not realize or believe that Krishna is real, they have to at least know that devotees of Krishna are real and that we will not stand for their treating Him as a fictional character without standing up for the reality of Krishna's existence."

It's not the best way to prove that devotees of Krishna are real by attacking what are considered semi harmless children's programs. Most people will think devotees of Krishna "need to get real"!

"Those who want to fictionalize Krishna are as bad as the worst of impersonalists in that they are claiming that Krishna does not really exist.

To treat Krishna as a fictional character is to say that Krishna does not really exist. Therefore anyone who claims that it's no big deal for Krishna to be portrayed as a fictional character, with words being put into His mouth, is essentially rejecting the importance of preaching against impersonalism and atheism by our great Vaishnava acharyas. It is the duty of Vaishnava preachers to preach strongly against impersonalism and atheism, especially when those people directly claim that Krishna does not exist, i.e. that He is a fictional character."

Well my daughter spent a good part of her childhood reading Krishna books and then often "fictionaly portraying" Krishna according to her imagination, where Krishna would speak to her etc.. I do not see how this "fictional portrayal is worse than impersonalists and atheism". I do not know that Xena or anyone on her show is "directly claiming that Krishna dose not exist or that He is a fictional character" Caesar was also a Xena character but I do not think anyone is worried that he will loose his historical identity.

"Bhaktivinode dedicated decades of his life to challenging the sahajiya concept of Krishna as presented by low-class songsters, minstrels, dramatic performers, etc. And Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur continued to carry this torch, with which he scorched the mundane concepts of the Absolute Person Sri Krishna. And Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's criticisms of impersonalists are legendary. And while I was with him in India (1970-1972) he turned down invitations to watch dramatic performances of Krishna lila because he knew they were not accurate."

Sure and I doubt any real devotee is expecting much in shastric accuracy from Xena, or would feel heart broken having missed this episode. But reality check, Xena is not meant for devotees, so why should devotees complain?! (were not really meant to be watching this Prabhu's:-) Devotees should be engaged in something bigger and better then Xena, with all the facility Sri Krishna has provided. If we were doing our job properly presenting Sri Krishna there would be no time or worry to grumble about Xena.

"Can we really believe such stalwart devotees would be happy that Krishna is being portrayed fictionaly on public TV? Lord Chaitanya would not hear or read anything that even had rasabhasa or a mixture of conflicting rasas. He severely criticized Vallabhacharya, who wanted to present a wrong conception of Bhagwatam. Can we really accept that Lord Chaitanya would be thrilled that Krishna is being featured as a fictional character and that He gives His very easy darshan to scantily-clad persons who are not his devotees? That He is at their beck and call? Rubbish!"

Well Sri Krishna is all attractive no one is going to be able to stop Him from being portrayed on TV or anywhere else. Rather then condemn and sound all bent out of shape since we can not stop, would it not make allot more sense to devote our energy to try and encourage as much proper portrayal as possible?! Who's going to listen to us anyway if we sound like a fanatical Christian.

Prabhupada's books clearly establish what the standard of pure devotional service is. Are we afraid that Xena is going to become the new Shasta and replace Bhagavad Gita?!? What seems more likely is that after seeing/hearing of Krishna on Xena there will be some interest to find out more about Krishna, where do you think people are going to go to find out more about Krishna?! What has happened to those millions of Srila Prabhupada's books that have been distributed? Who is reading them?!

"No one who is sincerely engaged in the loving service of Krishna would feel comfortable with, or consider positive, the portrayal of Krishna, their Supreme Beloved, their Supreme Friend, the most real person in all of existence, as being fictional, i.e. nonexistent or a figment of the imagination of superstitious, backward people."

I don't agree, if our real "Supreme Beloved Friend Krishna" is able to enter "the imagination of the superstitious, backward people" even in a form that is not a perfect representation or with His name spoken with out pure love, if the portrayal is not overtly wrong, there is a good possibility that many people will want to learn more about Krishna and pick up one of those dusty Bhagavad Gita's off their shelves.

"And finally, devotees shouldn't see this as one isolated episode. We have to see this as a precedent. Essentially Xena and their crew are doing stories on India and yoga and so forth, and there is every indication that they plan to continue to do stories where they are treating Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva, Lord Brahma and Vedic philosophy, etc., as fictional as nothing more than fodder for fictional stories for the fictional characters Xena and Hercules to be proven as heroes.

If we endorse and praise this, Xena and Hercules will become part of so- called Vedic mythology. And Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva will be fictionalized. One will be no more real than the other (i.e., Xena and Krishna). Either Xena's Krishna and her exploits will be considered to portray the real Krishna, or Krishna will be considered to be as unreal as the fictional Xena. We sincerely hope devotees will not let this happen."

There is no need to endorse or praise, and also no need to condemn. But I think its unlikely scholars are going to rewrite history based upon Xena (aren't we being a little unrealistic and overly dramatic here?! This is after all, just a children's fantasy show).

PS. please take no offense just presenting another point of view, your method may be more realistic and bear more devotional fruit, but I think its important too act cautiously and not act too instinctively when it comes to condemning. (we could be hurting people who we could just as easily help)

RGarlandG@aol.com