Do We Need To Be Politically Correct And Say That All Paths Are The Same When Addressing Devotees?

Question: Isn’t it true that among all the world’s religions, only the Vedic scriptures are paramount? Shouldn’t we emphasize this, at least when speaking with devotees? While speaking with outsiders for philosophical correctness, we might say “all paths are equal, and the bhakti path is my preference,” but why maintain philosophical correctness with those already committed to bhakti?

Answer: This isn’t merely a matter of political correctness; it’s fundamentally a matter of philosophical correctness.

Firstly, Krishna states in Bhagavad-gita 4.11, “As all people surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly.” He places no qualification on this verse, meaning He doesn’t limit His reciprocation only to followers of the Vedic scriptures. This implies that God actively engages in the lives of everyone. When we study the lives of great saints from other religious traditions, such as Saint Francis of Assisi, we observe profound devotion to God and significant, non-generic spiritual experiences of the divine.

Is God accessible through various traditions and paths? Yes. Bhaktivinoda Thakur, a pioneer in interacting with modernity and the Western world, affirmed this. In his commentary on Bhagavad-gita 4.7-8, where Krishna discusses His periodic descents, Bhaktivinoda Thakur mentions that God sometimes sends His sons or messengers, a point also quoted by Srila Prabhupada. Thus, through guru, sadhu, shastra, and anubhava (the experience of saintly people across various traditions), we gain the understanding that God reaches out to people in all traditions, and people, in turn, can reach out to Him through various traditions.

Consider a scenario where a Christian teacher and Srila Prabhupada were both asked about attaining God. The Christian teacher stated, “The path to God is narrow, very narrow.” When Prabhupada was asked, “Can people go to God by following the Bible?” he replied, “Yes, any bona fide path. If people genuinely follow any bona fide path and develop love of God, they can go back [to Godhead].” Our own guru, sadhu, and shastra clearly state that God reaches out to people, and people can reach Him and experience Him through different paths.

However, this doesn’t imply a simplistic “all paths are the same” or “all paths are entirely equal.” Instead, we can say that many paths can pursue one ultimate purpose. Imagine climbing a mountain: some might claim there’s only one way up (exclusivism); others might say all paths lead to the summit (pluralism, which is often simplistic, as some paths actually lead down the mountain). An inclusivist view is more accurate: there is one ultimate purpose, and many, but not necessarily all, paths can lead to it. Bhagavad-gita’s seventeenth chapter, for instance, discusses how people’s actions reflect their spiritual heading.

Now, we must also consider certain references that nuance this point. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, in His discussions, occasionally points out that other scriptures are of “recent origin” and contain “many mistakes.” For instance, in the context of cow killing, Lord Chaitanya uses the argument: “You drink cow’s milk, so how can you kill her?” Here, He is not denying the spiritual importance of their scriptures, nor is He implying that one cannot attain God through them. Rather, He is challenging the claim of absolute infallibility or literal accuracy of every single thing within those scriptures, especially regarding material information that may be erroneous. Even within Christian and Islamic traditions, sophisticated hermeneutical traditions exist to discern which parts of scripture are poetry, literal, or metaphorical. When Lord Chaitanya says these texts are “defective,” “defective” doesn’t equate to “unimportant” or “spiritually useless.” It simply means some material information within them might not be accurate and needs proper understanding.

Again, Lord Chaitanya does not state that these scriptures lack spiritual importance or that one cannot attain God through them. If we draw such logical implications, we are putting words into His mouth that He did not speak, and we are also implying that our acharyas were not intelligent enough to draw these conclusions themselves. Our acharyas, including Srila Prabhupada, have consistently stated that God reaches out to people, and people can reach God through various traditions and ways. Therefore, Lord Chaitanya’s conversation must be carefully nuanced in its context and implications.

Within the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, and indeed the broader Vaishnava tradition, there are both universal and confidential aspects of divinity and divine love. On one level, Srila Prabhupada confirms that one can attain God even by following the Bible. On another level, he emphasizes the confidential aspect of bhakti in Bhagavad-gita, where one should focus exclusively on worshipping Krishna.

Attaining the spiritual world, connecting with specific manifestations of the Lord, or reaching particular domains or planets in the spiritual realm, requires a specific understanding of those divine manifestations. Unless we know Krishna, we will not attain Krishna’s planet (Goloka Vrindavan).

So, where do followers of Jesus or other traditions go? There are various possibilities. They might attain higher destinations from which, through divine arrangement or by the grace of figures like Jesus, they could be elevated further into the spiritual world if they have developed love of God. Or, they might receive further knowledge during their spiritual journey. While they may not attain Krishna in Vrindavan, the spiritual world is vast beyond our comprehension, far exceeding even our understanding of the material universe.

Returning to the mountain metaphor: climbing by certain paths allows us to see particular aspects of the peak that might not be visible from other routes. Thus, there are both universal and confidential aspects of the devotional path, of our journey to the divine, and of divinity itself.

In summary, God is accessible through various paths. Simultaneously, specific and confidential aspects of God are accessible through particular paths.