The Gita as a Compass, not a Catalogue

The Bhagavad Gita offers us timeless principles, but not exhaustive prescriptions for every modern situation. It functions more like a compass than a catalogue. A catalogue would provide detailed entries for every choice and circumstance, but the Gita instead points us in the right direction, encouraging us to adapt its principles according to our time, place, and circumstance. This flexibility is not a deficiency but a strength. A compass doesn’t give you step-by-step instructions—it helps you find direction. In a world where technologies like IVF raise new ethical questions, we need this kind of guiding philosophy more than ever. It respects our intelligence and invites us to be thoughtful stewards of both technology and tradition.

Dharma and the Pursuit of Progeny

Traditionally, in Vedic culture, it is considered the dharma of householders to have children. This is not merely a personal or social duty but also a spiritual obligation: a debt to one’s ancestors that is repaid by continuing the lineage. In ancient times, kings would go to great lengths, even undertaking elaborate and expensive yajnas, to beget children. These yajnas were conducted with meticulous care and a spirit of solemnity, often involving large-scale participation and support from the priestly community. Yajnas were not only religious ceremonies—they were also a kind of sacred technology. Even demons used yajnas to gain power, which shows that yajnas were not inherently moral or immoral; their ethical status depended on the intention behind their use. That is to say, the process might be the same, but the consciousness behind it makes a vast difference in determining its spiritual legitimacy.

In that sense, modern technology, including IVF, can be likened to yajnas. If the purpose behind using it is dharmic—such as fulfilling one’s duties as a householder and offering opportunities for souls to take birth in a devotional family—it may not contradict dharmic principles. Like yajnas, IVF can be a tool. Whether it is used with integrity, humility, and a sense of service is what matters. It’s also worth noting that many couples pursuing IVF are doing so after prolonged efforts, emotional exhaustion, and sincere prayer. Their choice is rarely casual. In such a context, IVF can become more than a medical procedure—it can become a sadhana in itself, a heartfelt offering aligned with one’s calling.

 

Bhakti and the Desire to serve Krishna

In addition to dharma, the path of bhakti offers another dimension of understanding. Bhakti involves the desire to serve Krishna, and one way to do this is to provide a suitable environment for devotionally inclined souls to take birth and grow spiritually. If IVF enables a couple to bring such souls into the world, and if their intent is to raise those children in Krishna consciousness, then the use of technology becomes a tool for spiritual service.

Srila Prabhupada often emphasized the importance of raising Krishna conscious children. The Gita (6.41–42) mentions that those who do not complete their spiritual journey may take birth in righteous families or spiritually advanced households. If we see parenting as a sacred opportunity to assist souls in resuming their spiritual progress, then the means of facilitating that opportunity—whether through natural or assisted methods—can be considered spiritually motivated. Of course, the attitude with which a couple approaches conception matters greatly. Are they seeking a child for prestige, possession, or emotional fulfilment? Or are they aspiring to serve Krishna by nurturing a soul who can contribute spiritually to the world? The former mindset risks entangling us further in material attachments; the latter elevates parenting into an act of seva.

 

Dharma as boundaries: Concerns About Embryo Handling

While dharma involves fulfilling duties, it also includes adhering to certain boundaries. The difference between devatas and danavas lies in how they handle their material desires. Devatas act within dharmic limits, whereas daanavas transgress them. One concern with IVF is the issue of embryos—multiple embryos are created, and not all are used. Some may be destroyed or discarded, others preserved for future use, and still others might be donated to other individuals or couples. This raises significant ethical concerns. If we accept that growth is a sign of the presence of a soul, then embryos that begin developing should be treated with care. Destroying or freezing them indefinitely could be seen as causing harm, potentially interfering with the soul’s journey into a body.

 There are debates even within medical ethics on the rights of embryos. For a devotee, the concern isn’t only rights but also karma, ahimsa, and responsibility. This brings us to a deeper point: does every embryo carry a soul, or only those that begin development? Different schools within the dharmic tradition may answer differently. In practice, devotees often err on the side of caution, preferring to avoid anything that might involve unintentional harm to embodied souls.

 

Natural Reproduction and ‘Natural’ Waste?

However, even natural reproduction is not free of what might be called waste. Millions of sperm are released, yet only one reaches the egg. Are all sperm carrying souls? We don’t know definitively. Some traditions say the soul enters at conception, others suggest it may be present earlier. Even in the natural process, many souls with the potential to gain a body do not succeed. Similarly, nature itself has its own wastage mechanisms: miscarriages, stillbirths, and other forms of prenatal loss. So when we say IVF is unnatural or wasteful, we must reflect on what we mean by “natural.” Is using a fan in hot weather interfering with nature? Is taking medicine, even if Ayurvedic, a disruption of natural balance?

 If intelligence is given to us to improve life, should using it in reproductive challenges be considered interference? Human intelligence has always modified natural environments. The Pandavas converting Khandavaprastha into Indraprastha involved clearing a forest and building a city. Though this caused environmental damage, it was celebrated as dharmic and beneficial for society. Krishna Himself helped them in this endeavor. If dharmic goals justify transformation of nature, we must consider whether technological interventions like IVF fall in the same category.

When Does Interference in Nature’s Way Become Objectionable?

Interference becomes objectionable when it causes unjustifiable harm. Yet even in the case of the Pandavas, forest beings were harmed. While some were demons, not all may have been. So, was there collateral damage? Yes. Was it justified? That depends on the larger purpose. Similarly, with IVF, we must ask: what kind of interference is this, and what are its consequences? Is the collateral damage acceptable in the pursuit of dharmic or devotional service? Are there ways to reduce that damage—by using fewer embryos, donating unused embryos, or supporting alternatives like adoption?

In some cases, IVF might be used even when other options haven’t been fully exhausted. Couples must prayerfully reflect: are they using this technology out of fear and anxiety, or from a place of inner alignment with their values and faith?

Krishna Consciousness vs Karma Consciousness

It is more helpful to be Krishna conscious than merely karma conscious. Krishna consciousness is a broader circle that includes karma consciousness but doesn’t stop at it. If we become so focused on karmic calculations that we forget our service to Krishna, we lose sight of the goal. Sometimes, an action may bring negative karma, but if it helps someone serve Krishna better, it may still be worth undertaking. Of course, if there are simpler, less intrusive treatments available—like hormonal therapies—they should be considered first. IVF should not be the first resort but also not the last forbidden frontier.

Donation and Delayed Embodiment: Moral Questions

Donating embryos may be seen in two ways. On one hand, it might seem like abandoning one’s duty to care for one’s offspring. On the other hand, it could be viewed as an act of compassion: giving a child to a family that earnestly desires to love and care for it. The very fact that people go to great lengths for IVF suggests they are deeply committed to parenting. Delaying embodiment by freezing embryos could be seen as delaying a soul’s journey. But where do we draw the line? If a man does not unite with a woman, are the souls in his semen being denied bodies? If someone chooses celibacy, are they obstructing souls’ entry into the material world?

 Such thinking leads to paralysis by analysis. Celibacy has its own dharma. While it may not provide bodies to souls, it can offer guidance and inspiration for souls already embodied. Thus, different dharmas serve different purposes. Bhakti never insists that everyone must fulfill one type of dharma; it recognizes that each person has a unique offering to make.

Adoption: A Spiritual Perspective

Adoption is a noble alternative, especially for those who cannot conceive. Concerns may arise about karmic inheritance—what if the child has challenging samskaras? However, Buddhist traditions (which also believe in karma but not the atma) consider adoption an act of great compassion, neutralizing negative karma. In Vaishnava traditions too, service to others—regardless of their karmic history—is encouraged. Spiritual mentors take responsibility for guiding others without knowing their karmic baggage. Similarly, adoptive parents can take responsibility for raising a child in a devotional environment.

Moreover, if we look at how adoption is viewed across faith traditions, we find that Christianity has a far higher rate of adoption than Hinduism. Hindus often prefer adopting within the extended family to preserve lineage. Yet, devotion is not bound by genetics. Krishna accepted the service of all—from the cowherd boys to forest-dwelling sages—without concern for lineage.

Cultural barriers to Adoption

In India, adoption among Hindus is relatively less common compared to Christians. Often, Hindus prefer to adopt from within the family to maintain genealogical continuity. However, if we see adoption as a service to Krishna and to society, it aligns with the spirit of bhakti. The rigid emphasis on lineage may not be as relevant in a devotional context. Our real family is not determined by shared DNA but by shared seva. If the aim is to help souls progress toward Krishna, whether they come through birth or adoption, the service is equally meaningful.

Applicational Decentralization in ISKCON

Our movement is moving toward what can be called applicational decentralization. This means that how devotees apply Krishna conscious principles in their personal lives varies. Not everyone follows the same standards in areas like food preparation, preaching approach, or family life. Some prioritize purity in cooking, others in outreach. Some prefer a confrontational preaching style to attract the serious; others choose a gentle approach to create curiosity and goodwill. 

Similarly, decisions about IVF cannot be standardized. Different devotees will weigh factors differently. What is most important to one may not be so for another. Until our movement reaches a theological consensus—which may take years—individuals must reflect, consult, and decide. This doesn’t mean moral relativism. Rather, it acknowledges the complexity of life and the range of sincere expressions of bhakti. The same devotion can be expressed through different dharmas, roles, and life choices.

A Compass for Nuanced Decisions

In summary, issues like IVF are not black-and-white. They involve weighing multiple values: dharma, bhakti, karmic implications, compassion, and practicality. Each couple or individual must evaluate which factors matter most in their situation. The Gita doesn’t give us ready-made answers—it gives us a compass. And with prayer, reflection, and consultation, we can use that compass to navigate life’s complex moral terrain. What weighs more in one’s heart—duty to family, longing to nurture, reverence for life, or fear of karmic consequences—will differ from person to person.

Such moral navigation is not a sign of weakness or confusion; it is the hallmark of maturity and responsibility. When approached with sincerity and surrender, even uncertain paths can lead us closer to Krishna.