Question : Is Krishna Consciousness the only one and superior way to go back home to God? I ask this for various reasons. One is that in many instances I have read or heard that Christians don’t really believe in God properly. They show up for church on Sundays and turn the switch off Monday through Saturday. I used to think that this saying was so great and that it made complete sense as I grew up in one of those “Christian” families. As I grow and become more aware of the world around me, I find that there are Christians that are very much in love of God and who do live their lives and all aspects of it for God.
Another movement sprung from Christianity that comes to mind is the Mormons. Their whole life revolves around their temples and God. Sometimes when I watch TV, I watch this show called 20/20. You’ve seen this right? With Pat Robertson? This guy strikes me as a man that has huge faith and believes in God. He could be a great Hare Krishna if he were to swing that way! I feel that the strength and conviction of his beliefs are just as strong and good as a seriously practicing vaishnava. Is it wrong that I think about things like this?
One of the things that turned me off about Christianity, and still does, is that they for the most part (I’m sure there are a few that don’t) condemn all other religions. Even good old Pat from 20/20 does so regularly on his TV show. Sometimes I feel that this same thing happens in Krishna Consciousness. Maybe I’ve misunderstood something, but the conclusion that I’ve come to is that this is the superior way to get back to God and that all other ways will perhaps get you into more elevated situations in coming reincarnations but still at some point, if one is to make it all the way back home, they are going to have to turn to Krishna Consciousness. Can you please help me to understand this if I’m not getting it at all?
Answer by Romapada Swami:
You have inquired: “Is Krishna Consciousness the only one and superior way?” A similar question is raised within the Bhagavatam itself — how do we ascertain the best and most effective path among so many other (even within the Vedic fold)? Bhagavatam’s answer: That way is superior which factually awakens unmotivated, uninterrupted pure loving service to God in the hearts of a serious follower. (SB 1.2.6)
[The above message of Srimad Bhagavatam is not advocating a particular ‘ism’ or faith, or religious denomination; it is addressing a principle — unmixed devotion to the Supreme Person — however that is attained.]In other words, if a process helps the follower to actually become deeply inquisitive about their relationship with God, if it helps them to practically give up bad habits and develop godly qualities, if it removes their material ignorance and awakens in them genuine loving service attitude free from selfish attachments — *that* is the superior process, regardless of its designations or the particular “ism” by which the religious process may be known. Conversely, if in spite of much religious fervor and devout following, a person does not progressively develop transcendental qualities and harbors spiritual misconceptions, then it is to be concluded that there is some flaw or lacking in that process. That, I think you would agree, is a fair test for evaluation.
After evaluating discussions which Srila Prabhupada had with other religious organizations’ leaders, I invite you to make your own evaluation whether or notwas he was completely non-sectarian and non-dogmatic. From my experience he never ever claimed that ‘My way is superior to yours.’ Yet by looking at his life, it is evident to me that his realizations and the teachings he was imparting was indeed far superior and deeper — in the clarity of its logic and reasoning, in the quality of its broad-mindedness and compassionate outlook, and in the obvious intensity and purity of his own practical devotion and surrender to God — than anything or anyone else I have encountered.
As described in his meeting with the Fransiscan monks in Australia: “Prabhupäda had as much, or even more, appreciation for St Francis than the Franciscans had themselves… he was giving an insight into St Francis that perhaps many had never understood before.”
Prabhupada never claimed exclusivity in the eyes of God, nor did he ever criticize the ‘beliefs’ or the ‘form’ of other practices; nonetheless he showed a superior degree of understanding of the *science of God*. He factually showed us how almost all of our popular conceptions of religion as well as their corresponding faith and practices are largely flawed or lacking — based on common sense logic and reasoning, as well as by his own towering personal example of what unmixed devotion to God is. In fact, he showed how a true Christian can practice his faith better; that was my personal experience, that much I can share for certain, and how I felt my life to be benefited by his example. Moreover, his presentation made it evident that the teachings of Vaishnava-siddhanta constitute a far deeper and more advanced conception of God-consciousness than any other process or teachings available to us, by comparison.
Let me highlight 3 instances where Prabhupada did compare Krishna consciousness to other processes, and I invite you to objectively consider each of these.
1. Srila Prabhupada often questioned the Christian follower’s condoning of animal slaughter. In doing so, he was not merely biased or dogmatic about his “belief system” over that of another. Rather he objectively demonstrated the glaring neglect of compassion in a religion that is supposed to bring us closer to love of God and yet promotes open cruelty to other creations of God. He further pointed out how in doing so, the Christians are deviating from the original, compassionate teachings of Christ. He did NOT encourage those who encountered from other faiths to accept his teachings, but to follow their own: Thou Shalt Not Kill, for example.
2. Another principle he taught was how designations based on body indicates ignorance of spiritual truth. Those who place undue emphasis on designations based on birth, nationality or religious denominations (such as Christian, Muslim, Hindu etc), all of which are temporary and without reference to the eternal soul, are displaying their lack of spiritual knowledge. Prabhupada saw Krishna consciousness not a sectarian religion, but as innate to every soul. He personally showed great regard for true symptoms of Krishna consciousness in anyone from any background (as in the above example of St. Francis or his great appreciation for Lord Jesus Christ.)
3. He also showed how, while most so-called religions give but a very vague and nebulous idea of God and of spiritual life, the Vaishnava teachings give very exacting and detailed descriptions of the kingdom of God, the actual nature of the pure soul and his loving exchanges with God, and very detailed teachings of the process of purification — how to practically live every aspect of our life in God-consciousness.
In such instances, when he did compare Krishna-conscious teachings to other processes, it was not for self-aggrandizement or bashing other religions; rather it was only to broaden our minds to appreciate a deeper conception of God-consciousness. Whenever he saw that other processes offered such intimate personal knowledge and access to the Lord and genuine love of God, he was eager to welcome and embrace it.
An implicit question within your inquiry is how should you regard those who are devoted to God but following some other process with deep conviction, and how would they compare to a sincere follower of Krishna consciousness? The answer would depend on two factors: the process they are following, and the person’s own level of realization.
It is possible for one to exhibit a lot of sincerity and belief in an unauthorized path. Arjuna clarifies this position in BG (17.1). There is a difference between having strong faith in something, versus actual scientific realization of God and knowing how to properly serve Him.
The propensity for reposing love and faith is intrinsic to every soul. But when not properly directed, this propensity for love and faith can be misplaced — sometimes even in sentimental or pseudo-religions. There are many who may have some faith or attachment even for Krishna, but they do not take proper direction by the teachings of bona fide, realized souls, and therefore do not really have a clear understanding of Krishna’s transcendental nature. According to Vedic teachings, such sentimental faith not based on authorized scriptural knowledge is not very beneficial for spiritual progress; it could even take one away from the Truth! Therefore, great stress is placed in the Vedic process on the importance of following revealed scriptures and acharyas (perfected, self-realized teachers).
One of the most glaring drawbacks of most existing religions / spiritual processes today is the lack of such a bonafide disciplic line, and consequently the many confusing interpretations of their scriptures themselves. Krishna describes in Bhagavad-gita that when the disciplic succession is broken, the perfect system of transcendental knowledge is lost (yoga-nasta) (BG 4.2). This is an important reason why the teachings of Krishna consciousness has a rare and unique position, because it is not a man-made religion or a recent invention, but has been passed down in an unbroken disciplic succession starting from a perfect source, the Supreme Lord Himself. In conclusion, a person may be very devout, but if they are following an unauthorized or tampered process, such a process will not take them far.
As far as the individual’s own faith in God is concerned, according to the teachings of Bhagavad-gita, there are different gradations of faith among those who approach God — beginning from those who are completely atheistic and materialistic, and then those that approach God albeit with materialistic motivations, then those who have some form of inquisitveness and/or religious fervor… and finally one who has proper, realized knowledge of God. Krishna accepts all of these devotees as broad-minded and as dear to Him, but a devotee in “full knowledge” of God and devoted to Him as being “most dear” to Him. (BG 7.16-18)
We can understand this easily: a father loves all his children equally; one child may show some attachment to the father but is often selfish or quarrels with his brothers, whereas another son fully understands the heart of the father (or is taking the trouble to understand), always strives to abide by and please the father, and without pride or envy tries to co-operate and assist all his siblings who are equally dear to the father. Although the father’s love is equal and he is also pleased with the affection of the first child, he is naturally more pleased by the deeper love and devotion of this other son. It is not partiality, rather it gives an impetus for the younger child to emulate this superior example and deepen his own love.
You have stated it quite accurately: “At some point, if one is to make it all the way back home, they are going to have to turn to Krishna Consciousness.” In other words, all these different seekers after the Absolute Truth at different levels of faith and realization will go through phases of gradual elevation. If their faith is sincere and they are seriously ‘searching’ for the Absolute Truth, rather than being dogmatically attached to their own belief system, then that faith is beneficial — Krishna is in their heart, and He will guide them closer to deeper understanding of Himself.
When asked “What would a sincere Christian do?”, Srila Prabhupada swiftly replied, “He would read the Bhagavatam!” In other words, when an honest seeker of Absolute Truth comes across the pure devotional conceptions presented in the Bhagavatam, they would readily embrace it, notwithstanding that it is coming from a different tradition/denomination. Even if they may not yet be ready, they would minimally respect and not reject or minimize its truth out of prejudice. This would be the test of one’s sincere faith.
