Teachings of Krishna Archives

Krishna and Jesus: Are They God, or Teachers, or What?

Q: Is Krishna the Supreme Personality of Godhead or just a teacher like Jesus?

Krishna is not Parabrahman, the Absolute Being, and Jesus is not the Godhead, either. Nor are they “just teachers,” either.

Both Krishna and Jesus were perfect siddhas, thoroughly deified persons, truly god, having evolved through all the worlds of relative existence and transcended them in total union with the Absolute. Though finite, their consciousness and power is infinite. And this is true of all incarnations of God (avatars) such as Rama and Buddha. (See the book Robe of Light.)

A totally liberated being, a siddha, is far beyond the concept of God held by human beings, for being finite humans cannot at all even begin to correctly conceive of God. This is why the truly God-realized never attempt to describe or explain the nature of God.

Words from a Master

As Sri Ramakrishna said,

“What Brahman is cannot be described. All things in the world–the Vedas, the Puranas, the Tantras, the six systems of philosophy–have been defiled, like food that has been touched by the tongue, for they have been read or uttered by the tongue. Only one thing has not been defiled in this way, and that is Brahman. No one has ever been able to say what Brahman is.

“A man had two sons. The father sent them to a preceptor to learn the Knowledge of Brahman. After a few years they returned from their preceptor’s house and bowed low before their father. Wanting to measure the depth of their knowledge of Brahman, he first questioned the older of the two boys. ‘My child,’ he said, ‘You have studied all the scriptures. Now tell me, what is the nature of Brahman?’ The boy began to explain Brahman by reciting various texts from the Vedas. The father did not say anything. Then he asked the younger son the same question. But the boy remained silent and stood with eyes cast down. No word escaped his lips. The father was pleased and said to him: ‘My child, you have understood a little of Brahman. What It is cannot be expressed in words.’

How and Why You Should Transcend Raga and Dwesha (Attraction and Aversion)

This article on Raga and Dwesha is an excerpt from The Bhagavad Gita for Awakening, by Abbot George Burke (now available here).

However, with attraction and aversion eliminated, even though moving amongst objects of sense, by self-restraint, the self-controlled attains tranquility (Bhagavad Gita 2:64).

The words translated “desire” and “hatred” are raga and dwesha. Raga is both emotional (instinctual) and intellectual desire. It may range from simple liking or preference to intense desire and attraction. Dwesha is the opposite. It is aversion/avoidance in relation to an object, implying dislike. This, too, can be emotional (instinctual) or intellectual, ranging from simple non-preference to intense repulsion, antipathy and even hatred.

We must keep in mind that anything can grow and change. Therefore simple liking can develop into intense craving, and mild dislike can turn into intense aversion or hatred. And since opposites are intrinsically linked to one another and can even turn into one another, the philosophical and yogic texts frequently speak of raga-dwesha, the continual cycling back and forth between desire/aversion and like/dislike.

Obviously, this makes for a confused and fragmented life and mind, something from which any sensible person would wish to extricate himself.

Finding the right cure

There are a multitude of supposed cures for what ails us. The vast majority do not work because they are not really aimed at what truly ails us. The rest usually do not work because they are based on a miscomprehension of the nature of the problem, or because they are simply nonsensical and time-wasters. This is true of most religion and of a great deal that is called yoga [see the article What is Yoga?].

Yajna (Sacrifice): The Many Meanings and Practical Applications in the Bhagavad Gita

Yajna - fire sacrifice

Q: May I ask for your explanation of the true sense of yajna [sacrifice] and Adiyajna [Primal Sacrifice] as used by Lord Krishna, and is it found in the sacred teachings of The Christ?

Although we naturally equate yajna with the fire sacrifice, agnihotra, yajna basically means any kind of offering.

Those who publish and distribute books of spiritual and scriptural knowledge are said to be engaging in Jnana Yajna. It is very common to call akhanda kirtan (especially of the Mahamantra) Nama Yajna.

As in virtually all spiritual matters, the supreme authority is the Bhagavad Gita. There we find the subject explained thoroughly and perfectly. No commentary is needed because Sri Veda Vyasa has expressed everything so clearly.

1. “The world is bound by the actions not done for sake of sacrifice. Hence for sacrifice you should act without attachment. In the beginning along with mankind Prajapati created sacrifice and said: ‘By this shall you increase: this shall be the granter of desires. May you foster the gods by this, and may the gods then foster you.

Then, each the others fostering, you shall attain the highest welfare. The gods, fostered by sacrifice, will give you desired enjoyments. But he who enjoys the gods’ gifts without offering to them is a thief.’ The good who eat the sacrificial remains are freed from all evils. The wicked eat their own evil who cook food only for themselves.

From food all beings are produced, and from rain all food is produced. From sacrifice there comes down rain. From action is born sacrifice. Understand that action arises from Brahma, Brahma arises from the Imperishable. Hence the all-pervading Brahma is eternally established in sacrifice” (Bhagavad Gita 3:9-15).

2. “The karma of one who is free from attachment, whose thought is established in knowledge, undertaking action for sacrifice, is wholly dissolved.

Brahman is the offering, Brahman is the oblation poured out by Brahman into the fire of Brahman. Brahman is to be attained by him who always sees Brahman in action.

Paramatma, Prakriti and Jivatma: Three Concepts You Need to Understand to Pursue God-Knowledge

Paramatma, Prakriti, and Jivatma

Q: I am wondering about the concept of Paramatma, Prakriti and jivatma: Why have a construct of Paramatma, Prakriti and atma/jivatma? Why not simply have Paramatma, without the need for any existence, any Universe, creatures or beings, given that Paramatma is eternal, unmanifest, not of Prakriti, and does not require Prakriti or jivatma to “be,” whilst the latter two require Paramatmna to “be”… etc?

I do understand that with this hypothesis, there would be no beings, universe etc. which is a false statement in itself, but from a Vedanta standpoint, what is the “tarka” or logical reasoning for the construct of Paramatma, Prakriti, and jivatma?

You see yourself into what absurdity it all falls when a person subscribes to Advaita Vedanta rather than Sankhya, the original philosophy (darshana) of Sanatana Dharma, especially the Bhagavad Gita, and of the Yoga Darshana itself. When we realize that these three concepts are necessary for an intelligent pursuit of Brahmajnana and moksha, it is really an absurdity to deny their value.

Any concept is fundamentally merely an image in the mind, but the entire universe is being held as a concept in the consciousness of Brahman. It is a dream, but a dream that is real like any other dream of the mind. To say that something is not real because it is not material reveals the mind of a materialist, of Charvaka, not Dharma.

Divine Incarnation: Which is Your View of Avatars?

Q: Would you explain the incarnations of the Hindu faith and how we should reconcile Krishna and Jesus? There are two views about divine incarnations in India. The most common is the idea that God incarnates and lives in a physical body. Some say, however, … Continue reading

Real Spiritual Teachers vs. Super-Gurus

An excerpt from The Bhagavad Gita for Awakening

“The Holy Lord said: When he leaves behind all desires emerging from the mind, and is contented in the Self by the Self, then he is said to be one whose wisdom is steady” (Bhagavad Gita 2:55).

Nothing could be easier to understand: an enlightened person wants nothing, finding total fulfillment in the Self–both individual and Universal.

Therefore when we see people with even “spiritual goals” such as “serving God in others” or exhibiting a veritable passion about a “world mission” or “saving” or “enlightening” others, we can know they are not illumined, and therefore incapable of doing any of those things in a real manner, however fine the exterior machinery might appear.

Qualities of a true spiritual teacher

A true spiritual teacher has no expectation of others whatsoever, much less foisting demands on them. Knowing that all growth comes from within, never from an outer factor–including him–the worthy teacher knows that it is his duty to teach, and that is the absolute end of the matter. From then on it is up to the student to either follow the teaching or not.

If he asks for help or advice from the teacher, it is the teacher’s duty to give the requested assistance and then leave the matter alone. (Swami Sri Yukteswar was a perfect example of this, as was Paramhansa Yogananda. They loved and cared deeply, but they also respected the freedom of those they taught.)

In spiritual life as well as material life there is a division of labor that should be adhered to. Under the guise of “love” or “devotion” there should be no violation of spiritual law. And no authentic teacher will ever break any law.

In contrast

It is virtually impossible to find any popular “guru” that does not live like “the jewel in the lotus”–both materially and socially. Although there is a pretense that their disciples are insistent upon it, it is really the guru that demands continual adulation and material accouterments that would have been considered extreme even for a Di Medici monarch.