Tracing the roots back to the ancient scriptures of Vedic literature, if not older, bhakti, a religio-psychological phenomenon, has always been an important core of the social and spiritual life of India. The etymological root of the word is bhaj which means ‘to partake’, ‘to participate’, and ‘to share’. Rig Veda differentiates between bhaktam and a-bhkatam. Yaska, in his Nirukta with reference to the verse, uses the term ‘bhaktini’as the share of agni. Traditional Vedic commentator Sayana interprets the terms bhaktam and a-bhkatam, as sevamana and a-sevanamana (those who serve and those who do not). Serving and sharing are related in Vedic verses and are thus traditionally associated with bhakti. Hence, often the Western and colonised.
Indologists who approached bhakti as a kind of monotheistic evolution from a polytheistic natural religion considered the term differently than the meaning in which the term is understood in Vedic literature. Nevertheless, the etymological root bhaj is used in Rig Veda by Rsi Dirghatama in the context of partaking and sharing the results of collective praising of the Divine (in this case, Vishnu): ‘Hymners, propitiate that ancient Visnu the indweller of Rta (rtasya garbham); realising His greatness we celebrate His name; Visnu, may we share the receiving of Your blessings (sumatim bhajamahe).’
Here Vishnu as indweller of Rta is also associated with the phrase in Aitareya Brahmana, which speaks of Vishnu as being born with Yajña (yajño vai visnuh:). Bhakti, as derived from bhaj, has not only a linguistic connection but also a deeper conceptual connection. It is the sharing of benevolent blessings (sumatim). If Yajña is co-creation, then when the Divine punishes those who hoard, He shares the auspicious wealth (bhajati sunaram vasu) with those who give through Yajña (dasuse). The later term Dasa associated with bhakti, also shows a conceptual connection, even if not an etymological link, with dasuse, which is an act of giving to the Divine.
However, Indological scholars, who continue to see bhakti through the still lingering colonial lens of Christian monotheism, regard it as a later development that was absent in what they perceived as the primitive conception of the Divine in the Vedic literature. This colonial scholarly perception has been around for two centuries now. For instance, Max Muller considered ‘the idea of prayer as swelling or exalted thought may be true with us’, there was ‘little, if any, trace of such thoughts in the Veda’.
Similarly, Austrian Indologist Moriz Winternitz (1863-1937) stated that there was ‘nowhere [in the Vedas] any thought of devotion or exaltation of the divine’. Moreover, Sir George Abraham Grierson, a British colonialist linguist, considered any semblance of bhakti in Vedas as ‘incipient monotheism … still-born’ in Vedic poets. According to him, the source of bhakti should be seen elsewhere than from the ‘Brahmans of Northern India’, and that would be Nestorian Christianity.
However, later scholarship completely rejected this Nestorian or Christian influence on the Hindu bhakti movement that emerged in later centuries. Still, Vedas are considered as not having bhakti—either as a concept or as a religio-poetic expression.
The reason is more the deep monotheistic bias in the colonial and still colonised academia than the actual nature of the literature.
Sanskritist and author Jeanine Miller ,(1930-2013) argues that bhakti as a literary mystic expression is definitely present throughout Vedic literature because for the Vedic hymns ‘the inspiration was felt by the poets to be dependent on the graciousness and benevolence of the particular visiting deity’ and ‘therein lies plenty of room for the expression of a devotional attitude: the poets refer frequently to their heart, their yearning for the deity’s favour and their exaltation in their vision’.
***
She points to the deeper meaning of the first two keywords, which are closely linked in the Rig Veda: ‘vrdh’ (to swell, increase, expand) and ‘Brahman’, where the Brahman (not the Varna) is made responsible for invigoration (vardhana) and probably better translated as ‘exalting’. She envisions a technique for arousing the power, which is the ‘Vedic Brahman’. It is ‘the evocative power of the word or sound (vac) which the seers found ‘residing in their hearts’ (10.71.3).
According to Miller, the later form of bhakti as such may not be related to the etymological root bhaj and its derivatives, such as ‘bhajkamahe’ or ‘bhajati’. However, in the same paper, she points out how the same state of bhakti is an inalienable part of Vedic ‘sacrifice’ (Yajña).
This Vedic-involuted bhakti unfolded itself throughout the historical time of Indian society. It challenged the social stagnation and status quo by questioning repeatedly the act of social exclusion. The Vedic episode of Kavasa Ailusa is a prime example of this. Here the famous Apnotriya hymn of Kavasa Ailusa speaks of ‘speeding for the brähmana’, while Aitareya Brahmana speaks of ‘how Saraswati flowed around him’, i.e., the sacred waters of River Sarasvati went to him, surrounded him, and embraced him (enam kavasam parisasâra) demonstrating the motherly love of the Goddess. This entire sequence of events formed a prototype for later bhakti movement instances where a devotee-mystic would be insulted on account of their birth and then they would burst into a hymn. The Divine would then reveal the greatness of the human irrespective of their birth or social status, thus challenging the social status quo.
Excerpted with permission from A Dharmic Social History of India by Aravindan Neelakandan, published by Occam (BluOne Ink)