Question: If Buddha and Krishna are the same Person then why is there a contradiction in Their teachings? While Buddha preached non-violence, why does Krishna justify anger and violence?
Answer by Romapada Swami: I have seen that over time, some of the teachings of Buddha have been modified to suit the times. Could the same have happened to Krishna’s teachings also?
[The questioner is a Buddhist in London who recently discovered Krishna in ISKCON, has started chanting and developed a lot of faith in Krishna]
[Please also refer to the question on the purpose of Lord Buddha’s advent, Digest 22C] Lord Buddha is described as an empowered incarnation of the Original Personality of Godhead, meaning that Lord Buddha manifested the specific potency to curb unnecessary violence and misuse of scriptures during His advent. His teachings were not the absolute conclusions of transcendental knowledge; rather, they were ‘upadharma’, or sub-religious principles meant to elevate the consciousness of the people for that time, place and circumstance.
As far as Bhagavad-gita is concerned, these teachings describe the ultimate conclusions of spiritual knowledge. By careful study, one can understand that what Krishna is calling for is the highest degree of surrender to His will. Krishna does encourage Arjuna’s fighting and killing. But He is not encouraging mundane anger and violence. In fact, throughout the Bhagavad-gita in many places, He describes the divine qualities of a saintly person or His devotee as being non-violent, equal and kind to all, not causing agony to anyone etc. Yet, finally He urges Arjuna to fight and to kill the miscreants ‘as His instrument’. The apparent contradiction is resolved in the understanding that even anger or violence can be used in surrender to the plan of the Lord, and such surrender is superior to so-called non-violence independent of the Lord’s plans. Lord Krishna appeared to protect religious principles, and when all other measures to do so were not yielded to by the Kauravas, only then was protecting religious principles by military strength deployed.
Thus the differences in teaching between Lord Krsna and Buddha are due to the difference in the time, place, circumstance and the audience for whom the teachings were intended.
When the teachings of the Supreme Lord or great saintly teachers are received through the system of parampara, or disciplic succession, the teachings are passed on AS IT IS by the members of the disciplic succession faithfully, without any modification, addition, deletion or interpretation. An empowered acarya, (who is authorized by his spiritual master, who is in turn authorized by his guru and so on) may sometimes make some adjustments according to time, place and circumstance, but such adjustments are made in details of application, never in the fundamental principles.
Surely the teachings of Lord Krishna have been badly misinterpreted and misrepresented over the ages, but if one takes care to approach a bona-fide member of the disciplic succession, such as Srila Prabhupada, the founder acarya of ISKCON, one can receive the exact teachings of Krishna intact, as He spoke them 5000 years ago.
