I suspect that many people would
feel very uncomfortable watching a religious person express devotional love to
that person’s chosen deity in a very emotional and effusive manner. The sheer emotional
intensity amid the dancing and chanting in a Hare Krishna temple can be
daunting to a visitor. The phenomenon of what in Hinduism is called bhukti is
hardly rare, and this begs the question of whether there is a human instinctual
urge to feel and express even lifelong loving devotion to an entity that is not
based in the created realm and thus cannot be realized and instantiated as
another human being can be and is. Whether there is a phenomenon that is human,
thus beyond the manifestations in various religions can go a long way in answering
the question of whether an innate instinctual urge exists, even if it is more pressing
in some people than in others. Some people, for instance, work their whole life
in business, while other business practitioners reach a certain point in years
when they “check out,” and head to a divinity school or seminary. Still other
people assume religious vocations as young adults and spend the rest of their
life ministering to people and officiating at religious rituals. Some people spend
their entire life without feeling devotional love directed to a deity, while
other people, such as the Hindu mystic, Ramakrishna, are utterly consumed by
the inward fire of religious devotion. Was Ramakrishna’s devotion different in
kind from a Christian’s intense love of Jesus, or is there what can be termed
a human bhakti phenomenon, and if so, is it capable of breaking down religious
barriers that can excite animosity and even hatred?
Jess Navarette, speaking at Harvard’s
Bhakti Yoga conference in March, 2025, discussed comparative Bhakti by looking
at Hindu and Christian parallels. Bhakti yoga is the practice of loving
devotion. There is a coherent thread back to the Vedas, and devotion to Krishna
is salient in several of the chapters of the Bhagavad-Gita. In chapter 7
alone, Krishna tells Arjuna, “Here (now), O son-of-Pritha, how, [with] the mind
attached to Me, engaged in Yoga, [with] Me as refuge, you may know Me fully, without
doubt.”[1]
Taking refuge is other than epistemological (i.e., knowing), as dependence is
involved. Furthermore, Krishna says that people who act meritoriously and for “whom
evil has come to an end” are those who “worship” Krishna rather than the other
deities.[2]
Because the early-medieval Hindu theologian and philosopher Shankara claims
that even in the Gita, achieving the realization that one’s self (atman)
is identical to brahman, which is being itself and is conscious
or aware, it is important to stress that Bhakti devotion to a deity
involves more than just knowing the deity’s higher nature; loving devotion,
such as is evinced in worshipping a deity, is the essence of bhakti.
Although it is problematic to
apply the Hindu term bhakti to other religions, such as Christianity,
just as applying the word “God” to brahman is also problematic, devotion
to a deity is in other religions besides Hinduism, and by looking at the similarities,
the phenomenon of religious devotion can be better understood because the
artifacts of particular religions can be distinguished from the trans-religious
phenomenon itself. This, by the way, is an excellent reason for studying
comparative religion or theology, though such an orientation comes with the opportunity
cost of the foregone benefits of specializing in one religion.
One such bhukti parallel pertains
to Jesus washing the disciples’ feet[3]
and Krishna washing Sudama’s feet.[4]
Both Lord Jesus and Lord Krishna commend service by leading by example. Also, both
highlight the closeness of God and the intimacy that is possible in loving
devotion. Finally, both passages imply the
personal care and attention that the Son of God and Lord Krishna give to humans,
who should thus be humble (and grateful) in return, for such care and attention
is voluntary.
Another parallel of devotion to
God pertains to Judaism and Christianity, and this similarity will lead us to back
to making Hindu-Christian comparisons. Deuteronomy 6:5 says, “Love the Lord
your God with all your heart, soul, and strength” and Matthew 22:37-40 says, “Love
the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your
mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it:
Love your neighbor as yourself.” Although the latter extends love to
interpersonal relations, both passages are very direct in issuing the
imperative that devotional love is to be directed to God. Of the thought of Gregory
of Nyssa (4th century), Navarette wrote, “The perfection of human
nature consists in being united with God by a kind of devotion which leads the
soul to love Him above all things.” Furthermore,
Francis of Assisi’s prayer includes “to be loved as to love.”
It may that in the Hindu Gita,
love itself is not so explicitly mentioned by Krishna, whereas taking
refuge in and worshiping Krishna are more explicitly demanded, yet this does
not mean that devotional love is not much desired by Krishna in the Gita
as by the Christian God. Rather, it may be the case that Christianity builds on
the passage in Deuteronomy to be known as the religion of love, hence both Paul
and Augustine wrote that God is love. Devotion is to be directed to pure
(agape) love itself. Is this the epitome of bhukti, or is the
Hindu articulation really all that different from being devoted to love
personified (or as an entity, rather than impersonal), especially considering
the example of Ramakrishna in the nineteenth century? After all, as a Hindu devotee of Kali the
goddess of death, Ramakrishna was so authentically and lovingly devoted to her
that a brahmin priest let Ramakrishna speak extemporaneously during a
ritual. His devotion to Kali was certainly no less than that of Thérèse of
Lisieux and that of Gertrud of Helfta to the Christian Lord Jesus. Both women
were cloistered Christian nuns; at the very least they had few distractions, so
they could devote themselves entirely to being devoted in love to Jesus.
Taking refuge in Krishna is not
so far off, and, as stated above, it is more emotional than knowing Krishna’s
higher nature epistemologically. It may be that the intimacy itself (e.g., high
trust) that is inherent in taking refuge in a deity is none other than love, as
in the old expression, where there’s smoke, there’s fire; or, taking refuge
could be in terms of ontological dependence that is a micro reflection of the
fact that creation is dependent on Krishna’s creative force. Perhaps in teasing
out the relationship between love and radical dependence, taking refuge in
Krishna can be compared with the bridal imagery that has been so often appropriated
by Christian mystics—nuns being known as brides of Christ. Certainly
historically, there has been much interpersonal and societally-structured dependence
in the marriage relationship between a husband and a wife; presumably love has
existed in at least some of those relationships in spite of the dependence of (especially
pregnant) wives on their respective “bread winners.”
Origen of Alexandria (185-254 CE)
wrote on the Song of Songs of the Old Testament, treating the religious poem as
an allegory of the relationship between the soul and God. According to Navarette,
for Origin “the bride symbolizes the soul, while the bridegroom represents
Christ”, and the objective is to “cultivate an intimate relationship with the
Divine.” In his presentation, Navarette
also cited Bernard of Clairvaux, who, in his book, On Loving God, advances
the idea that, according to Navarette, “besides reverence, there is the
intimacy such that a bride has with her bridegroom.” For Bonaventure too, “to attain God includes
the imagery of a bride and bridegroom.” Similarly, Ramakrishna thought of
himself as married to Kali, and to be married to the goddess of death is no
small commitment. Moreover, how could any loving devotion of a creature such as
Man not involve radical dependence, for neither in Hinduism nor in
Christianity does a divinity need to create a world out of some kind of lack
in the divine itself.
Even though Christianity’s core
is that God itself is (selfless) love, love devoted to Krishna is certainly
salient in the devotionalism. Even so, devotional love being directed to love
itself (agape) does seem to be a good candidate to be known as
the epitome of bhakti. This is not to say that Christian devotionalism
is superior to Hindu bhakti; rather, it is to raise the thought, what
if Krishna’s higher nature were exclusively love itself? Would that change
how devotion to Krishna is to be interpreted in the Gita and practiced
by bhukti practitioners?
In his presentation, Navarette discussed
the work the scholar, Francis Clooney, who pioneered the field of comparative
theology. Navarette cited Clooney’s contention that “even partial common ground
can strengthen our own religious convictions.” Perhaps Krishna’s description of
devotion to Him can be useful to a Christian who is trying to love Jesus
better. Moreover, in Hindu God, Christian God, Clooney, according to
Navarette, predicts that the “fixed boundaries separating religions become all
the less plausible . . . because the theological insights arising in
comparative study will push those boundaries.” For example, Clooney claims that
a Christian could accept the virtues of Narayana, who is the protector of all
who has supreme mercy.[5]
Sounds a lot like Jesus, doesn’t it? Preaching God’s mercy instead of drumming
divine wrath into everyone’s heads in the Gospel stories, Jesus can be seen as
a reformer in Judaism. To be sure, unrepentant sinners, such as “Christian”
clergy who rape children, deserve divine wrath, but this should not prevent
other people from realizing that divine mercy opens up the possibility of love,
which presumably includes that which a religious devotee directs to a deity. Given
the ontological chasm between deities and the created realm, which includes us,
mercy opening up a space for love can create the sort of intimacy that collapses
distance, and this can apply not only vertically, but also as benevolentia
universalis.
2. Gita 7.28 in Ibid., p. 177.
3. John 13:1-17 (in The New Testament).
4. Bhagavata Purana, tenth canto 80:20-26.
5. Vedanta Desika, Rahasya Traya Saram (14th century).
