You can receive new articles directly in your inbox. Subscription is free; donations are welcome.
Are there bad devotees? Indeed, we can find some very critical, judgmental, and sometimes even dishonest people among us. Are there good atheists? Surely some are nice and good-natured, some are open and nonjudgmental, and many can actually be quite supportive and loyal friends. Are all devotees bad? Surely not. Many devotees are saints. Are all atheists good? Of course not. Many criminals, dictators, etc. are atheists.
The main point is not to compare extremes but to identify the general tendency. A better question would be: separated from other factors, does being an atheist make a person better or worse?
Kṛṣṇa gives a few quite categorical answers in the Gītā (16.6-12):
“O son of Pṛthā, in this world there are two kinds of created beings. One is called divine and the other demoniac. I have already explained to you at length the divine qualities. Now hear from Me of the demoniac.
Those who are demoniac do not know what is to be done and what is not to be done. Neither cleanliness nor proper behavior nor truth is found in them. They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in control. They say it is produced of sex desire and has no cause other than lust.
Following such conclusions, the demoniac, who are lost to themselves and who have no intelligence, engage in unbeneficial, horrible works meant to destroy the world.”
At first, this may appear to be unfair. Not all atheists are bad persons. The point, however, is that Kṛṣṇa identifies where a certain nature or form of thinking leads. Just as one does not become a saint immediately by starting in the spiritual process, one does not create horns and a tail by saying that there is no God. However, this belief leads to other choices that progressively move his consciousness downwards. The symptoms Kṛṣṇa describes appear gradually, often in a sequence of many lives, but they all sprout from this original trajectory.
This leads us to another point: one who is attracted to atheism in this life is probably continuing a path from previous lives, while one who is attracted to a genuine spiritual process is generally continuing a trajectory from previous lives. From this perspective, we should expect to find a greater proportion of good-natured people among sincere devotees than among atheists, although there will naturally be exceptions.
Some atheists are quite pious and good-natured, but they represent the top of the pyramid. If we go similarly higher on the pyramid of devotees and religionists, we will find true saints, like our previous ācāryas, persons like Saint Francis, and so on. In other words, the top atheist can be quite a nice and pious person, but the best devotee is a true saint. If we could choose between living with the pious atheist or with the saint, it would surely be more beneficial to live with the saint.
Similarly, many neophyte devotees can be quite hard, heavy, critical, and judgmental. Some are even dishonest or violent. These are people one can have serious problems with. However, if we go to the lower end among atheists, we will also find some quite toxic people. Depending on how low we go, we will eventually start dealing with human sex traffickers, serial killers, violent rapists, etc. One can just study the extent of torture and other human rights abuses in the Soviet gulags, during the communist revolution in China, in the concentration camps in North Korea, etc. Without even mentioning the Holocaust in WW2 and atrocities committed by different groups in the many wars we saw in the past and current centuries. We can’t say any of these happened due to love of Godhead.
If a person believes in God and follows some kind of religious process, this will automatically impose some restriction on what he may do, curbing his most dangerous instincts, since he knows he will have to answer for his acts. He may commit mistakes, but as he advances in his spiritual path, he gradually becomes more enlightened. On the other hand, if a person believes there is no God, no life after death, and no system of karma or divine justice, he can act to the fullest extent of his instincts. This is a path that gradually leads to hedonism, which creates further problems.
These two paths are connected with the material modes. The mode of goodness is connected with good qualities, like compassion, tolerance, charity, etc. One can only show such qualities when the mode of goodness is predominant in one's personality. The question is that the mode of goodness is a package, so together with such good qualities come knowledge, detachment, etc. Such characteristics automatically make such a person prone to follow a spiritual path, which, in turn, helps him to progress further. A person may be an atheist and still possess good qualities. This does not contradict the principle we have been discussing. The question is not whether every atheist is currently vicious, but where these different forms of consciousness lead.
The modes of passion and ignorance, on the other hand, are connected with lower qualities, like lust, anger, violence, etc. They are also connected with lack of knowledge, lack of self-control, lack of compassion, etc. Just as a person influenced by the mode of goodness tends to gradually start practicing a spiritual process, persons more strongly influenced by the modes of passion and ignorance are more inclined to believe there is no God, and gradually also show the negative qualities connected with these two modes. This influence gradually covers one’s good qualities and makes him more prone to immoral and violent acts.
Kṛṣṇa also describes this path vividly in the Gītā (16.13-21):
“The demoniac person thinks: “So much wealth do I have today, and I will gain more according to my schemes. So much is mine now, and it will increase in the future, more and more. He is my enemy, and I have killed him, and my other enemies will also be killed. I am the lord of everything. I am the enjoyer. I am perfect, powerful and happy. I am the richest man, surrounded by aristocratic relatives. There is none so powerful and happy as I am. I shall perform sacrifices, I shall give some charity, and thus I shall rejoice.” In this way, such persons are deluded by ignorance.
Thus perplexed by various anxieties and bound by a network of illusions, they become too strongly attached to sense enjoyment and fall down into hell.
Self-complacent and always impudent, deluded by wealth and false prestige, they sometimes proudly perform sacrifices in name only, without following any rules or regulations.
Bewildered by false ego, strength, pride, lust and anger, the demons become envious of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is situated in their own bodies and in the bodies of others, and blaspheme against the real religion.
Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I perpetually cast into the ocean of material existence, into various demoniac species of life. Attaining repeated birth amongst the species of demoniac life, O son of Kuntī, such persons can never approach Me. Gradually they sink down to the most abominable type of existence. There are three gates leading to this hell – lust, anger and greed. Every sane man should give these up, for they lead to the degradation of the soul.”
If we examine people who are influenced by the mode of goodness, we will find a higher incidence of devotees and religionists among them. Conversely, if we statistically study people more strongly influenced by the mode of ignorance, we will find more atheists and pseudo-religionists among them. There are exceptions in both camps, but the point ot observe is the general tendency.
Similarly, if we examine people who are seriously following any spiritual process, we will find a lower incidence of theft, murder, rape, etc. among them than among groups who are predominantly atheistic. Religion doesn’t make people bad; on the contrary, religion makes people better than they would be without it. A bad person can follow a religion or spiritual process and still be quite toxic; the point is that the same person would be worse without it.
The main problem is that frequently we tend to classify people according to labels instead of understanding who is who. The world is full of people who try to use religion to control, dominate, and cause harm to others. Such persons are not spiritual; they don’t try to understand and respect the laws of God, but on the contrary, they try to use God to fulfill their own egoistic process. Such pseudo-religionists are actually more dangerous than an atheist, just like a hidden trap is more dangerous than a trap that can be clearly seen.
We can see that in the Vedic universe, there is a division between the suras (devotees) and asuras (atheists). Among the lower planets, where the asuras live, there is a gradation going from pious atheists down to cruel and violent ones. Similarly, on this planet, we can find a mixture of both groups. That’s why we can find both nice and pious atheists, but also very violent and cruel people.
Yet another point we may consider is how ideologies are marketed. One example is the myth of the good atheist and the bad religionist.
One way it can be presented is to ask if one would prefer to spend the rest of his life on a deserted island with a critical and judgmental devotee or with a pious and good-natured atheist, for example. This is one example of misleading construction that compares the best atheist against the worst devotee, and uses the idea to create an unconscious image of atheists being good and devotees being bad.
A correct formulation of this question would compare two equivalents: “Would you prefer to spend the rest of your days on a deserted island with a pious atheist, or with a pure devotee?” or: “Would you prefer to spend the rest of your days on a deserted island with a critical, judgmental and inconsiderate devotee, or with a violent criminal?” If we compare the good with the good and the bad with the bad, the difference becomes clearer.
Another way to see this point, now seeing from the bright side, is that even a critical and judgmental devotee can tell you about Krsna, while even the most pious atheist will not be capable of doing so. Therefore, although the association of the atheist may be more pleasant, the association with the devotee can be more spiritually conducive (at least if the proper fences are maintained).
Once a very saintly and wise devotee commented that at the beginning of his spiritual life, he had a great deal of difficulty living in the temple because many of the devotees there were uncultured and inconsiderate, while his family members were relatively pious persons, although not devotees. One day he decided to leave and go back to his village to continue practicing Krsna consciousness by himself among his family members. His mentor, however, argued that it would be better for his spiritual life to live with people who are 20% Krsna conscious (the devotees from the temple) than with people who are 0% Krsna conscious. He understood the point and decided to stay. Today he says it was a wise piece of advice.
Read more:
This is a publication for thoughtful readers who want to go deeper into Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I publish daily, trying to offer high-quality spiritual content, and all posts are available to free subscribers. If you wish, you can support this work with a monthly contribution. When you subscribe, you can choose between a free subscription and a monthly contribution, and you can switch from a free subscriber to a supporter at any time.
You can also receive updates on WhatsApp or Telegram.
If you would like to contribute further, you can find the donation links here.