Christianity as Bhakti Marga

Generally speaking, Bhakti’ is the deep, unselfish love of the whole man for God, finding its highest bliss. inunion with Him. The main thing to remember is that. Bhakti is love. Often the word Bhakti has been translated into English as ‘faith’. The word ‘ faith ° calls up in the minds of many the one-sided idea of intellectual assent to certain facts. Rendered ag faith, Bhakti seems to imply that the one following it has to believe in something. Such an understanding of Bhakti does not do justice to its rich and complex meaning. Certain facts and ideas may be accepted as true by a bhakta and may lie at the basis of his Bhakti. But the acceptance of them is not the whole of Bhakti nor even the essence of it. The heart of Bhakti is the strong love which such facts and ideas, accepted as true,, produce in the soul. More often the word Bhakti has been rendered by the English word ‘devotion.’ While this word is more satisfactory than faith in bringing

4 For detailed and careful accounts of Bhakti, see especially Sir George Grierson’s article on ‘ Bhakti Marga’ in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics and Sir R. G. Bhandarkar’s Vaisnavism. Saivism and Minor Religious Systenis, Strassburg, 1913.

out the whole-hearted character of Bhakti, it seems too cold and distant effectively to convey the warm and intimate character of Bhakti. The only English word which can adequately render Bhakti is love. It is significant that in the Tamil Bhakti hymns, the word love is often used as a synonym for Bhakti. Though the word Bhakti in itself has no trace of the sex element, it is not without interest that, like the English word, love, it has sometimes been used to indicate movements of the soul, though always towards God, in terms, or even in practices, in which the sex element has found an all too absorbing emphasis.

The doctrine of Bhakti has had along and varied history in India. Often its emotional and occasionally its intellectual aspect has received emphasis. In the Bhagavad-Gita, over the date of which there has been much controversy, but which according to the two eminent Hindu scholars, Mr. K. T. Telang* and Sir R.G. Bhandarkar,® was written about the fourth century B.c., we find the earliest extensive teaching of the doctrine. From the Bhagavad-Gita it appears as if Bhakti attained its importance, at least in philosophic circles, as a temperamental reaction to the severity and rigour of Yoga. ‘The Yogin had started out to suppress desire, love and all feeling in general, and though these had been strangled, they had not been killed. So inthe

Gita Bhakti is an outlet, though a calm and sober one, for pent-up emotions. Through such Bhakti, the devotee can attain God. ‘Those who worship me with Bhakti are in me and I also in them.’* In the Giéa, Bhakti is constantly associated with action and knowledge and these three are spoken of as paths leading to God, though the first is of prime importance. Such constant association tends to raise Bhakti from the emotional to the practical and intellectual spheres. Between the seventh and tenth centuries A.D., the poetsingers of the Tamil land, botH Saiva and Vaisnava, contributed their warmth and fervency—the result partly of their poetic temperament and partly of their devotion —to the development of Bhakti. The missionary zeal, accompanying their attempts to win triumphs for their particular creeds, lent additional stimulus to the further enrichment of Bhakti. The Bhagavata-Purana, written not later than a.p. 900 and abundant in its influence upon the Bhakti of later generations all over India, infuses still more passion into Bhakti. ‘ Bhakti in this work is a surging emvution which chokes the speech, makes the tears flow and the hair thrill with pleasurable excitement, and often leads to hysterical laughing and weeping by turns, to sudden fainting fits and to long trances of unconsciousness.’? In the eleventh century A.D. came Ramanuja, who called a halt to this movement and gave Bhakti the strength and virility that comes of restraint.

He made it more a type of intellectual meditation, accompanied by love, but deprived of the extravagance of rapture and ecstacy. To him itis like a ‘stream of flowing oil.’* A popular life of the great teacher written in Tamil makes him, however, subject to moods of ecstaticdevotion.” In the meanwhile saints had beconie aware of the incapacity of some souls for full and strong emotion. They desired to enjoy God in the same fervent way as the Bhaktas of the Bhagavata-Purana did, but they could not. That led to the open teaching of the doctrine of Prapatti, or complete surrender to God, without any feeling whatever, either of joy or of sorrow, a doctrine which had already been taught® but which had been kept secret because it came into conflict with the doctrine of works which was so prominent at the time. The movement was 4 spiral one, going around in a circle and yet finishing off at a higher point than where it began. The Yogin had sought to eliminate feeling, but the devotee who practised Prapatti surrendered himself completely to God, so completely that he ceased to expect in himself any change of feeling whatever, for better or for worse. It is clear then that Bhakti has been used in different senses by different schools of thought. The meaning of the word would then depend in each case upon its context.

A careful study of the Bhakti books convinces me

3 e.g. to Ramanuja by his Guru.

that while the heart of their teaching is spiritual and while a strong desire to love.God and to become one with Him, and often a real joy at this desire: being fulfilled, is found in the books, there is in. them a great deal of puerile mythology, cosmology and theology. I am aware of the fact that I belong to a. different religion, with different standards ot judgement and different ideals, and that these may affect my estimate of Bhakti literature in spite of all my desire to reach a scientific and unprejudiced view. Further, the Bhakti writings are old writings which naturally contain a good deal which strikes a modern mind as strange.. The same holds true of the writings of medieval Christian mystics, in which are found many exploded ideas of theology, eschatology, angelology and psychology. It is necessary to dwell here upon this. general character of Bhakti literature, for otherwise it would be necessary throughout the book to make: digressions to point out the strange frame-work into which the significant and valuable spiritual ideas. here discussed are set. These digressions would interfere with the main purpose of the book which is to show the affinity between the heart of the teaching of John and the heart of Bhakti.:

It has been suggested by competent scholars that leading exponents of Bhakti like the author of the- Bhagavad-Gita, Manikkavacakar, Ramanuja and Kabir were influenced by Christian thought. This book does. not proceed upon any such theory of the historical dependence of Hindu Bhakti on Christian teaching. The data at our disposal do not make clear such a dependence. Nor is it necessary for the purpose of this book, which attempts to see what theological relation the Fourth Gospel bears to the doctrines and ideals, the wistful longings and the assured results of Hindu thought, to. accept. or reject such a theory of historical connection. And, further I have not hesitated to emphasize, at what may seem disproportionate length, ideas which are not prominent in the Fourth Gospel or in Bhakti, each taken by itself but which attain great importance when the two are considered together. Such synthesis in the interests of living religion has, however, its imperfection as a scientific method as it sometimes leads to wrong proportions.

There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. The sume came for witness, that he might bear witness of the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came that he might bear witness of the light. There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not, But as many as received him, to them gave he the righi to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.

The subject of our study in this and in the following chapters is the pathway to union with God, which is the goal of mystic religion. To state such a purpose might seem to indicate that there is a distinction between the pathway and the goal, between the process of attaining and the attainment. This distinc- © tion, however necessary for the sake of clearness, is not quite reai. It is not possible to separate entirely the experience of seeking, from that of reaching, God. The two are so closely inter-related and so often occur together that there really seems to be no distinction between them. The illustration of the path is frequently used in this book to describe man’s experience of God because it seems so natural and expressive and because it has been so largely used in India for that purpose. But there is a grave defect init. A road suggests the idea that the end is distant. To reach the destiny may be a matter of several days or months, involving many difficulties. It might be long before even the spires and turrets of the city are seen at a distance. Not so mysiic experience. God’s revelation of himself and man’s response to this revelation proceed together. The path of the mystic quest does not wind through strange and unknown country at a distance from the city, but enters the city immediately and keeps going round it in daily sight of its wonders, though it may take some time before the heart of the city is reached. There would always be new regions of God’s love to be seen, and yet almost from the first, the soul would begin to experience God.

~ The pathway to God, whether taken by Hindu or Christian, I propose to describe as Bhakti. It is quite evident that the approach to God as set forth in the Johannine writings has a distinctive character of its own. By calling it Bhakti I do not imply that the Fourth Evangelist teaches exactly what thinkers in

India have meant by the term Bhakti. As already pointed out, the term Bhakti has not always meant the same thing in India. But an increasing use by Christians in India of this word and others like Antaryamin and Jivan-Mukti would show that, whatever ‘the differences in the exact content of these words may be, they seek to express certain experiences which cannot but be regarded as common to Hindus and Christians. Thereisno reason why, after realizing the subtle, and often important, differences in meaning, we should not allow ourselves to come under the spell -of these historic words which have become attractive after long usage. This may look like sentimental devotion, but it at once brings the discussion of Christian experience into an atmosphere with which we are familiar in India. Even if we seem to lose in accuracy of thought, we gain in strength and vigour of appeal, though we must safeguard ourselves against this loss by frequently remembering the fact that the terms do not always mean the same thing in Christian and Hindu theology.

The passage from the Gospel of John which stands ‘at the beginning of this chapter gives us some aspects of the Johannine teaching about Bhakti. The passage, it will be noted, occurs in the opening verses of the Gospel, known as its prologue. To understand the passage aright and to attach proper value to it will be possible only after we have attempted to estimate tthe significance of the prologue. What, then, is the meaning of the prologue and what is its relation to the rest of the Gospel? Is it more like a gateway leading to the beautiful gardens and splendid buildings of a palace or is it rather like a tower in the palace itself? A gateway, however fine and massive, is often a thing by itself, marking but the fringes of the gardens and in no adequate proportion to the magnificence of the palace. But it proclaims to the world that z/is the entrance to the palaee. A tower is more closely related to the palace and, in fact, forms a part of it. From it are seen the grounds and buildings of the palace in their exact relations. The prologue seems to be to the ‘Gospel more as its tower than as its gateway. It does not stand by itself, a magnificent piece of writing, having no real connection with the Gospel; but as from a tower, we see rapidly and yet clearly glimpses of the many truths in the Gospel. Thus understood the passage which forms the subject of our study in this chapter gains greatly in importance.

The prologue falls into two broad divisions, the first five verses describing the One who is to be loved and worshipped, and the next nine verses describing the way in which we should love and worship Hits” That is, the first part deals with the Objective Seurce of religious experience and the second with the religious experience which is the result of reaching that Source We consider here the latter part of the prologue first and not the earlier part, because at the present day we are tending—and rightly—to attach considerable importance to religious experiénce. We all have it to some degree and can seek, however inadequately, to understand it. By understanding it we hope—with good reason—to understand the ultimate objective facts which are the basis of Religion. But this method is not that of our Evangelist who opens his Gospel with certain profound theological statements which cannot be easily understood or accepted. Would it not have been better if he had simply described the life and teaching of Jesus and the impression He produced. on His contemporaries, leaving us to form our own conclusions about Him? We should then have been inevitably led to the conclusion that He was no ordinary man. But the Fourth Evangelist does not do this. In the course of meditation certain great truths had. become clear to him. Such is always the result of prolonged meditation on true lines: details and separate facts disappear and in their place certain broad truths stand out with compelling power. So when the Fourth Evangelist began to write his Gospel, these profound and significant truths naturally and spontaneously found expression at the very outset. It was only after they were set down that he could proceed to narrate the particular facts which fed his mind and were the source of these dominant convictions. This is confirmed by the fact that when he begins to write his First Epistle, he cannot help repeating, though in a different phraseology, the same great ideas which had become strong and clear in the course of long brooding.* It may not be good literary form for an author to begin two of his writings in almost the same way, but it is perhaps inevitable for a thinker to whom a few great truths count profoundly after prolonged meditation.

But did not the Evangelist anticipate the possible effect of such a prologue on his readers? Did he write like this because it was the most natural and spontaneous thing for him to do, or because, with an eagerness bordering on an almost impatient anxiety, he wanted his readers to be sure of the profound truths which were so important to his own mind? Of one thing we may be certain. He was not a dogmatist who sought to force his opinions on others regardless of their point of view. A man of such loving temperament could not have been so oblivious of the feelings of others. The dogmatist is primarily self-centred. His opinions count, not the opinions of others. If his opinions hurt others, itis all to their good; what he is concerned about is the correctness of his own creed, not itseffect on others. Wecannot imagine the Fourth Evangelist being so unconcerned about the effect of his words. If he had really anticipated it, he might have adopted a different method. He gave expression naturally to certain great truths which dominated his consciousness, anxious, but not witha blind, dogmatic, unfeeling anxiety, that his readers also should accept them, and perhaps not altogether aware of how his presentation of them would strike some of them.

« Jf there was any error in him, it was not the lack of sympathy which insisted on teaching unpleasant truths, whether others liked them or not, but rather an un- conscious lack of imagination which failed to make clear to itself all the possible consequences of his words.

Imagination John really had—the daring yet solid and constructive imagination, which realized clearly all the exaltation of the humble Jesus and which imparted this knowledge to others in words of immortal power. In this sense, imagination was rarely so vigorous or soaring in its flight as in the prologue. But it cannot be forgotten that the Fourth Gospel has been the cause of much heated controversy. For this, not a lack of spiritual genius—about the possession of which by the Evangelist there can be no doubt-—nor an absence of the generous sympathy and love which inspires the best literature—there is plenty of evidence in his writings that he had this too—but his strange method seems to be partly responsible. All through his writings, and particularly in the prologue, he has given expression to strong convictions with a boldness which cannot but challenge. Men who set out to write theological treatises generally begin with the known and the accepted and proceed from them to the less known and the debatable. But this writer guards his very entrance with flaming swords.