QA with Christian students 4 – Is the Christian incarnation similar to Vedic avatar?

Podcast:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Question.
Is the Christian conception of incarnation similar to the bhakti conception of avatar? Answer. No, there are significant differences, although of course, there is the basic similarity. So, in Christianity, the conception of incarnation is used to describe Jesus, the way Jesus appears, comes in this world.
There are many prophets and saints who came before Jesus, who came after Jesus. But within Christian theology, Jesus is not just a great saint. He is God himself incarnate in this world.
So, the divinity of the Christ is manifest in the humanity of Jesus. That is the understanding from the Nicene Creed, one way of stating their understanding. And so, the idea is Jesus is both human and divine.
But within the Christian theology, it is understood that Jesus was human also. So, he, when he was crucified, he shed blood, his body bled. So, he went through the tribulation that human beings go through.
And he was in flesh and God descended in flesh. So, the word incarnation, karna, means flesh. That’s why we have the word carnal desire, that is desires of the flesh, sexual desires.
Or we have carnivorous animals, those which eat flesh. So, incarnation means to come in flesh. So, literally speaking, Jesus was God who came in flesh.
And he came once and he died for the sins of humanity. And all those who accept him with faith, they will be delivered hereafter. That is the broad understanding.
Now, if you look at the concept of avatar, although sometimes it is translated as incarnation in English, but avatar is a fairly different conception. It is stated that even when Krishna descends to this world, his body is not material. His body is still transcendental.
That I descend to this world by my eternal potency. Prakritin swam alashtavya, by my own nature. So, even when Krishna appears in this world, he still remains transcendental.
And with this understanding of God’s eternal transcendence, even when he is in this world, that conception is very different from God coming as human in Jesus or as Jesus, whatever. But Krishna, when he descends to this world, even then he is always transcendental. So, he does not become human.
In fact, to consider of him as human is to misunderstand his nature in a very significantly erroneous way. And further, Jesus’ one descent, the conception in Christian theology is that God descends only one as the incarnation, whereas the avatars are sambhavami yuge yuge. They come again and again and again.
Yuge yuge. In each millennia, they come. An avatar comes.
And the idea is that there is disorder in this world. And to restore the order, the divine descends again and again. So, beyond that, the divine also has many forms in the spiritual world.
And accordingly, the divine manifests in many forms in this world. But there is no such conception of avatar within, of the incarnation in the Christian theology. So, the idea of being descending from the spiritual level to the material level, for elevating people from material to the spiritual level, that is similar.
But what is the nature of the descended being, whether descended being is human or divine, there is significant difference between that and the exact mode by which the elevation happens. It is not just by faith in Krishna that one is elevated. It is by awakening of love for Krishna.
And that awakening of love is something which happens through the purificatory process of sadhana, bhakti, by the grace of the Lord, of course. But there is sadhana-bhakti that is important. So, there is a whole theology which is important to understand when we consider any comparative framework.
So, there is similarity, of course, of the spiritual descending to the material level to elevate people from the material level to the spiritual level. That similarity is definitely there. But apart from that, the fact that Krishna always remains transcendent and there are many, Krishna descends again and again because his love is inexhaustible.
So, he descends again and again wherever there is, whenever there is disorder to set things in order. These are some of the differences between the two conceptions. Thank you.