Three Krishnas

Who is Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita? 

He is Arjuna’s friend, his unarmed ally and charioteer; Balarama’s younger brother, the son of Vasudeva, cousin of the Pandavas, and a prince of the Yadavas. He is a great man, but still a man. 

He is something more; he reveals himself as the manifestation in human form of the supreme deity, Vishnu, and a messenger of God. 

And he is something extraordinary; he speaks of himself not merely as God’s emissary, but as God Himself. 

It is a riddle to ask the distinction of the arrow, the hand on the bow, the eye of the archer. It is a riddle to ask the source of the page, the ink, the hand on the pen, the mind of the author; and a riddle to ask the difference between the mirror, the sun in its reflection, and the sun it reflects. 

The counsel of a friend, a manifestation of God, and God Himself—how are these three fundamentally different Krishnas reconciled to one another? One of several major branches of Hinduism rooted in Vedic Brahmanism, Vaishnavism views Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu, or as Vishnu himself, or as a deity himself higher than Vishnu. 

Vaishnavites are typically monotheists. The many devas of Hindu mythology are considered either aspects of God Supreme, or are celestial creatures subordinate to God. The Vaishnavas also consider the Bhagavad Gita a key scripture, a revealed text. And within the context of the Bhagavad Gita, they assume that Krishna is all that he says he is. If taken literally, Krishna’s multiple self-revelations are impossible to reconcile. Figuratively, however, all three Krishnas may be the same. 

In Vaishnavism, as an avatar of Vishnu, Krishna is but one of several manifestations of God, which before Krishna include Matsya, Kurma, Varaha, Narsimha, Vamana, Parashurama, and Rama, who is the hero of that other great Indian epic, the Ramayana. According to some scholars, Buddhism itself, with its tales of past and promises of future Buddhas, may have influenced the concept of avatars—the idea that Vishnu appears in human form from time to time. Here, belief in literal reincarnation is irrelevant. Vishnu appears in human form by choice, not because of the bonds of action and desire. Karma does not attach to Vishnu, nor to any incarnation of Vishnu. Krishna explains in the Gita: “From age to age I manifest myself in the worlds of My creation. I arise among men when they have lost their way….” This explanation shares much in common with Buddhism, but not just with Buddhism. The appearance and reappearance of messengers of God is common to both Indo-Aryan and Semitic religious traditions, and to Zoroastrianism, which spans both. The Jews acknowledge Abraham and Moses, and the Christians add Jesus, and the Muslims further add Muhammad to their list of prophets who receive revelation from God. They are heroes, saviors, and redeemers, they are prophets to their people, messengers to the world, each speaking with God’s authority. The Quran makes explicit mention of past messengers. “God has sent messengers before you, some of them He has mentioned to you and some He did not mention to you.” (Quran 40:78). On this basis alone, Krishna’s station as a messenger of God can be asserted given that the appearance and reappearance of prophets and messengers is nearly a universal doctrine. 

However, in view of manifestation and incarnation, within Vaishnavism, there are divisions between those who view Krishna as a creation of Vishnu, and as subordinate to Vishnu, and those who view Krishna as God Himself. These differences are reflected above, and cannot easily be rectified if one views these hierarchical arrangements as literal. On a figurative level, however, these two views of Krishna are relatively easy to reconcile, and the Bhagavad Gita itself implies that reconciliation. It is the difference of speaking for God or as God. 

There is a way out of the labyrinth of these false choices: whether Krishna speaks for God or as God is a distinction without true difference. He does both. In the Quran, for example, God speaks in the first person. Muhammad does not claim to be God, but this revelation is the voice of God and as Muhammad reveals it, he acts as God with His complete authority. 

Whether one looks at the tip of the arrow, or the bow, or the hand on the bow, one is closest to understanding who sees the eye of the archer. Whether one looks at the page, or the ink, or the pen, or the hand on the pen, one is closest to understanding who sees the mind of the author. If the pen should write, “I am the author,” who would deny this evident truth? Whether in the heavens or in the mirror, there is the sun. 

Krishna is a man. He is a messenger of God. And when he speaks for God, he is God.