Christianity as Bhakti Marga

Suppose we are travelling to a city which we have never seen, we begin to make inferences about its soil, its climate, its vegetation and so forth from what we see on the way. Even before we actually get into the city, we come to have some knowledge of what it will be like from an observation of what its immediate neighbourhood is. An exact knowledge of the city can be obtained only within its limits, but even from data collected on the way we may come to know some teliable facts about it. So from the nature of Bhakti we can make inferences about the final bliss to which it will lead us, though they can be tested and confirmed only by experience.

Bhakti, as we have seen, is the offering of our whole personality to God. It is not a cult of personality. We do not follow it in order to develop our thought, enrich our feeling or strengthen our will. But in practising Bhakti we are enriched and strengthened along all these lines. This development and enrichment is not a momentary experience but is continuous with every act of Bhakti. Now we ask: Will this development suddenly stop? Is it possible that this personality, which has been developing so gradually and steadily, will cease to be ina moment? Is it not rather possible that so long as Bhakti continues, | the development of the personality will also continue? And every devotee is convinced that the movement of his soul towards God in love and service implied in Bhakti will always continue. With characteristic fervour Hindu saints have prayed that their Bhakti should continue in all the births and deaths through which their souls may pass. And Christian saints pray that they may love God and continue to be in communion with Him through all eternity.

But it may be said: We know that the body develops day by day. Stores of inexhaustible strength seem to be laid up in it; we sometimes almost marvel at the vitality which it contains. But there comes a day when the strongest man begins to fail and the stores of his energy disappear. Something similar may happen to personality. Though it is true that with every act of Bhakti, our personality becomes richer and stronger, yet after reaching a certain stage it may disappear. The answer to this is that it is not reasonable to apply to the soul all that we know of the body. In several matters, which are within the range of our immediate and definite knowledge, the soul differs widely from the body. We need not, then, suppose that after a certain stage personality will rather mysteriously cease to be, as physical strength does.

Even if this argument may appear to some to be of doubtful value, the question remains: What is the object of following God with all that we have? As has been just pointed out, we do not aim at the sheer exercise of our personality. The supreme concern of the mystical life is the realization of God. Itis in order that this realization may be complete that we offer all we have. There is no merit attached to such wholesale surrender of ourselves. It is only when we bring to God all we have that we can possibly experience Him to the full and not when we lose our personality or anything attached to it. If it is true that here and now our enjoyment of God is possible only after a full devotion of our personality, can it possibly be that there will come a stage when such experience will be possible with anything less? Day by day we experience the living Christ, this experience determining all the manifold activities of our being. Our thoughts are continually enriched and purified with the vision which He unfolds of God’s unutterable glory. This vision changes all life for us and teaches us its: real meaning. And we are provided with the moral energy which we need to overcome sin and to live a life of purity and service. The world loses its charm and we are constantly being led away from its strange deceits to the realm of character. And such a life fills us with joy and love and peace that are unspeak- ‘ably beautiful. Beginning to serve God and man,. our hearts are lifted up and our souls are garrisoned with the peace that comes from on high. It cannot. therefore be that the personality which is necessary even in the initial stages of our experience can ever cease to be. Even in final bliss we shall continue to be separate from God and to depend upon Him for all that we need in humility and helplessness and_ whatsoever we ask of him in his name he will give it us.’

Beloved, let us love one another: tor love ts of God; and every one that loveth ts begoiten of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God zs love. Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, tf God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No man hath beheld God al any time; tf we love one another, God abideth in us, and his love ts pertected in us + hereby know we that we abide in him, and hein us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father hath sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus ts the Son of God, God abideth in him, and hein God. And we know and have believed the love which God hathin us. God is love: and he that abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him. Herein is love made pertect with us, that we may have boldness in the day of judgement; because as he ts, even so ave we tn this world. There ts no fear in love: but pertect love casteth out fear, because fear hath punishment: and he that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love, because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and hateih his brother, he ts a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen. And this commandment have we trom him, that he who loveth God love his brother also.

We have already seen two important characteristics of Bhakti as taught by John. Bhakti is primarily man’s response to God, who out of His abundant love awakens the longing for Himself, and it consists in loving Him and enjoying His fellowship with our whole personality. In this chapter we shall proceed to study another characteristic of Johannine Bhakti. The man who has Bhakti should love not only God but also man. The love of man is the only way in which the love of God can really and adequately find expression. Without the love of man, the love of God is nothing but a meaningless expression. While the love for God is like a mountain stream, flowing through lonely heights, beautiful to behold but for the time useless, love for man is like the same stream when it has come down to the plains, broad and large and peaceful, furnishing men with the water which is the very essence of life, patiently allowing boats with their cargo to ply to and fro on its ample bosom and calling out magic green in the fields.

But how can our love of man ever become the means through which we may love God? Are not love of God and love of man entirely separate, the former belonging to the realm of religion and the latter to that of philanthropy? John answers this question with striking insight and power in the passage which we study in this chapter. The first answer which he gives is that there is an intimate connexion between love and life. “ Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and everyone that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God. ‘These words seem to point to the fact that much of John’s thought on the relation between love and life is based on an experience which is familiar to every one. Love begets life and life responds with love. It is through love that life is born and the life which thus comes into being naturally responds with love. It is not necessary to point out here the wisdom of this close connexion between love and life except to say that it is -the foundation of all life. Not only does the child love his father and mother but he loves also his brothers and sisters. Of all human relationships those of the family circle are the strongest. It may be said that the strength and character of these relationships depend partly on environment. A chiid who has never seen his father and mother does not love them. While this is true, itis also true that as his knowledge of his father and mother grows, he loves them with a passion which no strange child can possess. There seems to be in him closely connected with his inmost life some hidden instinct, which responds to love, though it needs the help of environment to bring it out.

Now, some such intimate connexion exists in John’s hind as to the relation between God and His children. The line of John’s argument seems to be this.. Out of great love God sent Christ into the world that men may attain life through Him. ‘ Herein was the love of God manifested in us that God sent his only begotten son into the world that we might live through him.’ * And when men attain life through God’s love, they love not merely the God who has given them life but love the brethren who likewise have received life through His love. This idea finds clear expression in the words: ‘We know that we have passed out of death into life because we love the brethren. He that loveth not abideth in death, Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. Hereby know we love, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.’ ”

John’s conviction that love is related to man’s very being makes us understand why he so often speaks of men as being begotten of God. The relation between man and God is no temporary, outward or superficial one. It is founded on life itself. Men are not merely created by God, they are begotten by Him. The expression ‘created’ does not, apparently, convey all the intimacy and fulness of the relation between man and God and is therefore replaced by the stronger expression ‘begotten.’ It is not by chance that the Fourth Gospel which speaks so much of love speaks also of life. How different is the attitude of a painter towards his painting from that towards his child! However close the connexion between him and his. painting, it can never be as close as that between him and his chiid. The painting expresses his mind and is a part of his being and yet it cannot hold that vital relation to him which his child holds.

In the Saiva-Siddhanta the thought that love is fundamentally related to life is expressed, though in a different way. The grace of Siva orders that the human soul should take embodiment in order that it may get rid ofits bonds. Thus all life springs from the abounding love of Siva.

‘Born in love, growing up in love,.

Merging and resting and hiding in love,

Fed with the precious ambrosia of the love which is bliss,

My lord has entered my heart in love.’ *

The great Tamil Bhakta of the nineteenth century, Ramalinga Swami, has written a beautiful essay on the love of man which might well be regarded as a Hindu paraphrase of the Johannine teaching about love. The thoughts are given such an entirely different setting from Christian teaching and fit in so closely with the Saiva-Siddhanta doctrine that, even if he made use of any ideas fron: Christian sources, as well he might have, his essay appears as quite a natural and logical exposition of the teaching already inherent in Saiva-Siddhanta. In this essay he says with his usual vigour:

“As the love of man is the natural light of the soul, the light of God, whether internal or external, can never shine in those individuals who do not possess this natural light. What is the chief characteristic of the love of man? All souls are not only finite beings existing in the absolute Reality, but they are also intimately related to divine and _ self-luminous love, which manifests itself in them as the intellect of their intellect. Bodies evolved from the elements are necessary in order that these souls may develop into individuals. If these souls do not develop into individuals in such bodies, the light of these souls will be hidden and there will be no illumination of love; then there will be ignorance and that will lead to the bondage of souls. For this reason bodies evolved from the elements are necessary. And as matter is the original cause of physical bodies, the varied phenomena connected with matter such as hunger, thirst, sickness, lust, poverty, fear and murder frequently tend to ruin these bodies. But love has endowed individuals with the gift of self-existing power which, with the knowledge which they have received from the internal and external senses, will enable them to ward off most carefully and diligently these attacks.’ *

All the passages in John’s writings on the intimate connexion between love and life do not, however, refer to the physical analogy. In some of the verses in which such a connexion is implied, the reason in John’s mind for the connexion is not at all clear.? Is it too much to suggest that having once connected the two in his mind as a result of observing well-known physical facts, he went on to speak of them together in a much wider sense, not always keeping the original reason in mind? Another set of facts seems also to have provided John with the idea that life and love are fundamentally connected. The good shepherd who loves his sheep has sometimes to lay down his life in order to protect them from the fury of wild beasts and to save their life.* A man may out of great love—greater love does not exist—lay down his life to save the life of his friend.” Thus does Christ out of His abundant love lay down His life for us.

The second answer which John gives is this. ‘No man hath beheld God at any time: If we love one another, God abideth in us.’ ‘If a man say, I love God and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen. And this commandment have we from him, that he who loveth God love his brother also.’ Here John emphasizes a motive which has played a great part in the history of Mysticism. To see God has been the greatest longing of the mystics and some systems of mystical philosophy like that of Plotinus have made the vision of God the climax of all experience.

Nammalvar, for instance, sings:

‘As thou dost not come to see me, my eyes and

mouth are dry.

And thy servant is ashamed. I pine with this good desire.

Will you not take pity on me and come and see me just once?’ +

In the Bhagavad-Gita, Arjana listens with eager heart to the teaching of Krsna but there comes a moment when he longs to see Krsna in his exalted form. It is not enough for Arjuna to hear; he must also see. Arjuna wants teaching to proceed to -its supreme climax, the beatific vision.” Thus have several other devout souls longed and prayed.

In laying the emphasis on this motive John awakens a quick response in many an eager soul. He seems to say: You want to see God. You think it is the greatest experience you can have. For this you are earnestly striving. Now let me tell you that you cannot see God. But you caz see your fellowmen and it is your duty to love them. What is the use of saying that you love God whom you have not seen when you continue in not loving the men whom you have seen? This teaching, coming from a lover of God like John, gains immensely in significance. It would sound more natural if it had come from someone who believed in man more than in God. But such a strong believer in the reality of God as John is driven to teach that there is no means of reaching God as effective as the love of man.

It should be noted that this is only the heightening of an idea which has already found expression more than once in our passage. ‘Everyone that loveth is begotten of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God.’ The motive for loving man is stated here with double emphasis, first from the positive point of view and then from the negative. He only knows God who loves but he does not know Him who does not love. -

This argument would only appeal to those who want to know God and to see Him. ‘Then what about the millions who are neither anxious to know Him nor to see. him? And yet many of them love men truly and with great intensity. If they are exhorted to serve men from humanitarian motives, they may respond ‘quickly and effectively.

It may again be asked: Is there not something of intrinsic worth in human nature which calls for human love? Man as man deserves sympathy and love. Should he be loved only for spiritual motives?

Yet again, is not suffering deep enough and intense enough by itself to call for sympathy without our being influenced in any way by religious motives? The agony and intense suffering which disease causes in men tend to arouse the strongest of human emotions even in hearts which are normally barred against the entrance of feeling. The suffering caused by poverty and showing itself in rags, care-worn faces and withered limbs does not fail to strike a chord of sympathy in men’s hearts. It is not merely physical suffering of this kind which stirs sympathy but also mental and spiritual suffering. There are men who are forced to “pass every moment of their lives in sorrow because of the vicissitudes of fortune for which they are in no way responsible, or because of the treachery, falsehood and deceit of their friends and neighbours, or because of some weakness in their own character. Separation or misfortune or death has sent the iron into their souls and their lives are embittered to the end of their days. Do not these men deserve to be loved for no other reason than that their suffering is great?

Let us answer these questions in the light of the life of Jesus. Inthe Synoptic Gospels we often read that Jesus was moved with compassion. Sometimes this compassion was aroused by the sight of hungry multitudes who in their eagerness to hear His teaching thronged around Him in lonely places forgetting their food.* On other occasions His heart was moved by the sight of leprosy” or blindness.» When the only son* of the widow of Nain was carried on his bier to his last resting place, the mother bewailing her loss with anguish, Jesus was touched with compassion.” On one occasion He was moved deeply by the spiritual needs of the multitudes who were scattered like sheep without a shepherd and began to minister to them.® On another occasion He was moved by the sight of multitudes who were without any spiritual guidance, and He exhorted His disciples to pray for them.’

There is in the Gospel of John a curious absence of any reference to Jesus being moved by such campassion.® There are at least three occasions on which such a reference might well have been made. In the records of the healing of the palsied man and of the man born blind, there is no statement that Jesus was deeply moved. This may not mean much, but the fact that there is no record of emotion in Jesus in the account of the feeding of the five thousand calls for an explanation. The Synoptic writers have in this matter probably got nearer the heart of Jesus than John. There is no reason to suppose that they were simply writing from imagination. From all that we know of Jesus we are sure He was deeply moved by suffering. When John fails to notice the fact it must be due to some special characteristic of his thought. We may perceive what it is from the Johannine term ‘signs’ which is often used to describe the miracles of Jesus. In the mind of John the miracles of Jesus were first and foremost signs of His divine glory. They were indications to men of His exaltation and greatness. Through them His glory was revealed. When this point of view is so prominent in the mind of John, it is not at all surprising that he neglects the human emotions which such suffering is sure to have aroused in the tender heart of our Lord. As we read the accounts of the miracles in the Fourth Gospel we do not feel, as we do in the Synoptic Gospels, that the sight of suffering, physical or spiritual, led Jesus instinctively to perform them. We feel that He is more concerned to insist on His high mission than to relieve the suffering of men. The story of the raising of Lazarus needs to be carefully considered in this connexion. As we shall see later, the deep love which Jesus had for Lazarus and his sisters came into conflict with His normal sense of His own mission and work. When He heard of the sickness of Lazarus, He at once thought of it as an opportunity for a manifestation of His glory. But when He went to Bethany and was besieged by the tears of the sisters of Lazarus, His generally calm awareness of His mission was overwhelmed with the floods of human emotion which rushed into His soul inatorrent. In that story we do not find a tranquil seer, undisturbed by the sight of sorrow and concerned only with God and His work. We have rather someone in whom this exalted sense of devotion to God is increased and, intensified by the stress of the deepest of human emotions,

After accepting the teaching that the love of God should be expressed through the love of man, we are led to ask: Who are the people whom we should love? To this John replies: ‘Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the son of God, God abideth in him and he in God’. Inthe Synoptic Gospels Jesus commands us to love all men, Samaritan schismatics, the military officers of an alien government, publicans and sinners. In the Fourth Gospel this love is strictly confined to the brethren, the members of the Christian Church.* John’s devotion to Christ is so exclusive that his love naturally extends only to those who like him are devoted to Christ and not to others. While his deepest love is spontaneously given to fellow Christians he is ready to show kindness to others. Yet there is in the Johannine writings a strain of universal love as well. as a strain of particular love. Apart from the statement, “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not. perish but have eternal life’ and other verses already quoted ', we read that Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman and generously taught her some of the profoundest truths which He has revealed tomen. The Greeks came to Him and He explained to them His Gospel. The conclusion we come to then is that John loves others. also but reserves his best and most devoted love for his. fellow believers.

Do the Hindu Bhaktas love those who do not worship: their God? They are quite anxious that they also should enter into their joy by worshipping their God. Many are the fervent hymns addressed to outsiders, begging them to leave other gods or the absorbing and deceitful cares of the world and to worship the true God. The early Tamil hymns were sung in the midst of conflicts,. often bitter, between different religions in South India —Jainism, Buddhism, Saivism and Vaisnavism—and betray many traces of the hatred generated during such conflicts. Saiva saints, for instance, often ridicule the Jains and Buddhists.:

But the Bhaktas loved deeply their fellow devotees, indeed so deeply that they oiten did away with the restrictions of caste in dealing with them. The story of the noble fight which the Bhaktas, inspired with love, fought in order to level down the distinctions of caste among their fellow devotees is an impressive chapter in India’s religious history. Though the privileges they fought for were only the giving of the same teaching to all, and not removal of the other caste restrictions, they showed a manly courage and a bold faith, We quote here a striking verse from Appar:

“Some may give me boundless treasures.

They may grant me dominion over earth and heaven.

And yet if they are not absolutely devoted to the great Lord, we shall regard not their wealth; they will be ruined.

But they may be lepers with all their limbs decaying and rotting.

Or wretches who strip cows and meanly eat their flesh.

If they only love Siva, who hid the Ganges in his long-braided hair, know ye, they are the gods whom we worship.’ *

‘ Be he a Brahman, be he a hermit, be he even a Sidra—if he knows Krsna’s mysteries, he is a guru.”

Tukaram, himself a Sidra, sings: ‘Our Lord knows nothing of high or low birth: He stops wherever he sees devotion and faith.’

“A Vaisnava is one who loves God alone, his caste may be anything at all.’ *

The love for fellow devotees becomes strongest between teachers and diciples. Many and touching are the stories told of the love with which the Hindu Bhaktas loved their gurus or their disciples. Ramachandra, the Bengali Bhakta, left his wife and became a disciple of Narottama. His wife wrote several letters begging him to come back to her, but they produced no effect upon him. Then she wrote to Narottama who after much trouble persuaded him to go home. With reluctance he set off home and travelled for about half a day. But the vision of the evening service and the figure of his guru joining in it rose before his mind so impressively that he retraced his steps to his guru. ”