Thursday, October 18, 2012

A self-aware Creation


Krishna reveals himself in frightening depth in the seventh through twelfth teachings. In his recitations several interesting points stand out that provide a stark contrast between him and the other gods of whom we have read in earlier books, such as the Qur’an. Krishna is very clear in that the only requirement to becoming one with him through complete and utter devotion. This simplicity allows us to better understand this non-Western god, and to better assimilate the lack of absolute morals found in the Gita. This lack of absolutes can be attributed to the nature of Krishna – the creator of the universe, he is also “all the universe, animate and inanimate” (Gita 98) and as such all that happens happens according to his will.
 In the Qur’an, a definite path is spelled out, the path of righteousness. To please the God of the Qur’an, one must follow the whole of this path – one must be devoted to God, of course, but they must also wait four months and ten nights before remarrying” (Qur’an 2:234), “keep away from women during [menstruation]” (Qur’an 2:222), and in all regards follow a prescribed path to heaven. There is a wide ranging set of commandments and laws that one must follow to be good in God’s eyes. Krishna’s demand is singular, but no less absolute – utter and total devotion to Krishna. Krishna even outlines two different paths in which one may achieve this devotion. Though Krishna deems “most disciplined men […] who worship me with true faith” (Gita 109) and accepts them into himself, he also accepts those “who worship what is imperishable […] with equanimity towards everything” (Gita 109). In effect, Krishna is saying that though those who devoutly believe in him are assured a place with him, so too are those who worship the concept of everything. This is a large and rather sudden divergence from anything else found in the Gita, or indeed in any of the other books mentioned in this post. Krishna allows for people who do not directly worship him to earn a place by him, because he is, in effect, everything. Unlike in Genesis or in the Qur’an, Creation is not something apart from God, but rather it is the god (Krishna, in this case). This allows Krishna to be less choosy – anyone is accepted as long as they are devout.
Another difference is found in the willingness of the respective gods to tolerate evil in their creations. The God of Genesis has a particularly strong reaction, flooding the earth in sorrow at the evil of his creations. Krishna has no such scruples against accepting those who were not virtuous and good. As he says to Ajurna, “If he is devoted to me, even a violent criminal must be considered a man of virtue, for his resolve is right” (Gita 89). Krishna labels devout evil-doers as right, for they follow his will, while still recognizing them as criminals. In part, this can be attributed to the fact that Krishna cares only for discipline and devotion, but this is also due to Krishna’s being “the self-abiding in the heart of all creatures.” (Gita 94). He is both the creator of the universe and the only thing within it, and as such his own standards of good and justice are absolute. Thanks to this, Krishna achieves a much greater control over creation than either of the other two gods mentioned, giving everyone and anyone the chance at eternity.

5 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. While I think that Gabe points out some interesting differences between the requests of the God in the Qur'an and Krishna in The Bhagavad Gita, I came accross an interesting similarity. Both texts emphasize the act of "remember[ing]" (Qur'an 2:47-68, Gita 80-81). We discussed in class how the act of remembering establishes a specific understanding of God and through this, a shared identity. Even though the specfic tenents of each text is different, they both work to establish an identity in a similar way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The points made by Gabe on the seventh teaching is very interesting. Krishna unlike other gods only requires the complete devotion to him. As Gabe notes, Krishna does not lay out laws and commandments that men must follow by, but just to seek him and offer their devotion. Krishna says "... a man who reaches me suffers no rebirth..." (8:16). Krishna rewards those who offer their complete devotion and allow them to be with him and by "reaching [him,] men of great spirit do not undergo rebirth, the ephemeral realm of suffering they attain absolute perfection" (8:15). These points can be interpreted to see that Krishna's ideas of sacred duty make sense. Arjuna can fulfill his sacred duty of being a warrior, even though Arjuna could argue that the duty is bad. It does not matter whether the duty is defined as bad or good by society or even if Krishna recognizes as that. Krishna wants just the complete devotion to give men the ability to escape the cycle of death and rebirth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Although I agree with Gabe that the god Krishna is very accepting of humans, including devout evil doers, he does not simply accept everyone. "Vile, deluded sinners are those who fail to take refuge in me...they fall prey to demonic power" (7:15). Sinners who are not devout do not receive Krishna's mercy. Along with this Krishna mentions many times how everyone is in him, but he is not in everyone, and how the path to Krishna is through detached action. If a person does not do this, than they cannot be in Krishna.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with Anker, the path to Krishna isn't solely in the performance of "your" sacred duty but rather in its performance with detached action. One cannot be attached to the fruits or consequences of the action and still perform the sacred duty and reach Krishna. This is because the sacred duty is performed "imperfectly", while the performance of your own duty imperfectly is better than the performance of another's duty as described by Krishna it is stilled impossible to reach that full level of devotion as explicated by Krishna without the perfect performance of one's own duty which requires, as Anker said, detachment.

    ReplyDelete