This work explores the possible integration of Gaudiya Vaishnava theology to fortify the case of a compatibilist understanding of free will and determinism. As the debate surrounding moral responsibility persists, the compatibilist approach stands as a promising and popular position among philosophers, yet has not been able to successfully overcome its shortcomings concerning the ability to provide a satisfactory account of sourcehood that is required for the possession of moral responsibility for our actions. In response to the limitations of modern compatibilist theories, this work illuminates how adopting a few relevant Gaudiya Vaishnava metaphysical concepts – particularly, the beliefs of an eternal soul capable of reincarnation – enhances the compatibilist stance by offering a compelling account of sourcehood that preserves both our intuitions and rationality. Specifically, this work offers both a soft-line and hard-line reply to Derk Pereboom’s Four-Case Manipulation Argument, and a response to Galen Strawson’s Basic Argument. By tapping into the insights of Indian philosophy that is rooted in the Ancient Vedas, this study also demonstrates the significant value that non-Eurocentric philosophy can provide for our contemporary philosophical discourse.