Is Krishna really an Avatar ?

Is Krishna an Avatar ?

In Srimad Bhagavad Gita, there is an extraordinary declaration by Krishna:

“Whenever Dharma declines and when irreligion flourishes, I will be born in each of such eras to reestablish dharma and to destroy the irreligious”

To some it is a sacred statement. But to many, it seems a far fetched one. The very idea of a God being born is a ridiculous one to them. Is there a significance to this statement ? What are its implications ? In searching for answers, I was spell bound by an explanation. Please read on.

Whenever Krishna as being born a human is discussed, Buddha and Mahavira are also discussed there. Is this comparison correct ?

Buddha and Mahavira were enlightened masters who reached that stage through rigorous sadhana (spiritual exercises). Their sadhana was to empty out whatever belonged to them- physical, mental and intellectual till they reached the empty stage.

On the other hand , we have not known Krishna to have done any Sadhana. But still his preaching on the battle field in the form of Srimad Bhagavad Gita remains the greatest gift to humankind for the last 5000 years. What differentiates Krishna from the other two ?

Osho, in his superb book, “ Krishna, the man and his Philosophy”, gives a beautiful explanation. Here are his words.

“If I empty out my inside, if I negate something in me, it will cease to be, and I will achieve a kind of emptiness. But this emptiness will be just the absence of something that I have negated.

But there is a different kind of emptiness which is not of our making: this emptiness is born out of our awareness of our being. We are empty; we are emptiness itself, so we don’t have to become it.

Emptiness is our very nature; we are it. And when we come to it, it is not the result of some sadhana, some discipline or effort. And this emptiness is multidimensional.

Krishna makes an extraordinary statement on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, one no other man of enlightenment has ever made. He tells Arjuna, ”I will continue to come whenever the world is in trouble. I will continue to come whenever religion declines and disintegrates.”

Buddha and Mahavira cannot say this. There is no statement of theirs on record that they will come back again when the earth is beset by darkness and disease, by irreligion and profanity.

Rather, they will say, ”How can we come again? We are now liberated, we have attained to mahanirvana.”

But Krishna says, ”Don’t worry, I can come back whenever this earth is in distress.” When Krishna says he can come again he only means he has no difficulty whatsoever in coming and going. It makes no difference for him. His emptiness is so total that nothing can affect it.

Mahavira and Buddha can take emptiness only in the sense of release, of liberation, moksha,

because they have longed for and labored all their lives for this liberation. So when they come

to this emptiness they feel free and relaxed. It is the point of no return for them; the question of going back does not arise.

For them, going back will mean going back to the same old world of greed and anger, of craving and attachment, of hate and hostility, of sorrow and suffering. Why go back to the rotten world of senseless strife and war and misery? Therefore when they come to emptiness they just become dissolved into it, they just disappear into the infinite. They will not talk of returning to the same corruption and horror they have left behind.

But going back to the world does not make any difference to Krishna: he can easily go back if it becomes necessary. He will remain himself in every situation – in love and attachment, in anger and hostility. Nothing will disturb his emptiness, his calm.

He will find no difficulty whatsoever is coming and going. His emptiness is positive and complete, alive and dynamic. But so far as experiencing it is concerned, it is the same whether you come to Buddha’s emptiness or Krishna’s.

Both will take you into bliss. But where Buddha’s emptiness will bring you relaxation and rest, maybe Krishna’s emptiness will lead you to immense action. If we can coin a phrase like ”active void”, it will appropriately describe Krishna’s emptiness. And the emptiness of Buddha and Mahavira should be called ”passive void”.

Bliss is common to both but with one difference: the bliss of the active void will be creative and the other kind of bliss will dissolve itself in the great void.” Thus concludes Osho.

Buddha and Mahavira strived for an empty state. But Krishna is that emptiness itself. It is this that separates a seer from an incarnate. Buddha was time bound. Krishna is timeless. Krishna is God incarnate, an avatar.

Why the Histories of Great Souls of Bharat are not available ?

Why the Histories of Great Souls of Bharat are not available ?

I often face this question. This question has been hurled at me in many discussion groups, emails, personal discussions and even from my own curious self. This history dimension took a huge proportion in the Rama Sethu episode when a bunch of mercenary like politicians challenged the entire Hindu community to prove the historicity of Lord Ram.

One of my friends says that we Hindus lack the art of history writing. But this is wrong. We have the Eighteen Puranas and their countless upa puranas which deal with histories of many great sons of Bharat. Now, what is missing ?

The single most glaring miss in our Puranas are the specific time of birth, year and millennia of our Avatars like Rama and Krishna and also our Rishis. This has made our Puranas an object of ridicule in the eyes of so called ‘indologists’.

The title ‘indologist’ is available to anyone who belongs to the anti Indian, anti Hindu, pro Christian, pro communist, and pro atheist groups. Curiously, a patriotic Indian is just a ‘historian’ whereas all the above persons are ‘indologists’. In short, anyone who wants to dishonour India will easily qualify for that title.

Dr Narahari Achar, recently declared that the Mahabharata war indeed took place and it happened in the year 3067 BCE . Read this link

This he did with the help of a software which could generate the almanacs for ten thousand successive years! He went back in time to calculate the astronomical data as provided by Sage Vyasa in ‘Mahabharatam’.

We also hear Buddha’s history is also in such darkness. Even the fixing of Kaladi, as the birthplace of Adi Sankara, was done in 1910 only.

On reading all this, we cry out ,why ? Why indeed our ancestors hid their histories to us ? In finding the answers I was struck by the beauty of an explanation. Please read on.

Osho, in his “Krishna, the man and his philosophy” says keeping time and recording it is the job of unenlightened people. To keep records of illuminated masters who have transcended time is an insult. May be this is why Krishna’s historical indications were allowed to fade away from memory. But, his life and teachings are told and retold in Bharat with such freshness, devotion and joy. Does it not sound paradoxical ?

Enlightenment happens when time ceases to be. Time is a product of the mind. When mind ceases in Samadhi, time does not exist. Krishna cannot be predicted in Samadhi , where there is no time.

In Bharatiya philosophy , the Atman (or the soul) has no beginning or end whereas in Islamic and Christian teachings, the soul has only one birth. This is the reason why immaculate records have been kept on their teachers. Once they know and realize that the soul goes on taking reincarnations in so many life forms, they would have realized the futility of keeping such records.

Rinzai, an illumined Zen master, once remarked to the amazement of his pupils , “: Buddha never happened”. They knew he was a fervent Buddha devotee. Rinzai explained, “ May be his shadow walked up on earth, but Buddha ? never !” . He asked, “ Can someone without beginning can be bracketed into a single life ?”

We know the Krishna, the mischievous boy, the naughty teenager, the enthralling flautist, the wrestler , the sweetheart of the Gopikas, the King, the husband of eight wives, the strategist, and finally the preacher who sang the eternal Bhagavad Gita. We even know he lived and ruled Dwaraka . But what we do not know is ‘when’. In the entire Srimad Bhagavatham, this piece of information is not clear.

Here is Osho again:

“Therefore it is not a failing on the part of this country if it does not have a sense of history. It is so not for lack of an awareness of history, but because of a still higher awareness that we have, an awareness of the eternal. A higher awareness, by its very nature, denies the lower.

We don’t attach so much value to an event as to the spirit running through the event, to the soul of the event. So we did not care to notice what Krishna ate and drank, but we did take every care to notice the witness inside Krishna who was simply aware when Krishna ate and drank.

We did not care to remember when Krishna was born, but we certainly remembered the spirit, the soul that came with his birth and departed with his death. We were much more concerned with the innermost spirit, with the soul, than with its material frame.”