Bhakti Needs the “Another”: Questioning the Idea of Nirguṇa Bhakti

Introduction

Recently one person wrote to me saying that he now prefers to practice only nirguṇa bhakti—devotion to the formless, attribute-less divine. His remark made me pause and reflect. Hindu philosophy certainly speaks about nirguṇa brahman, the absolute beyond all attributes. But can there really be something called nirguṇa bhakti?

The question may appear simple, but it touches the very nature of devotion itself. The Sanskrit word bhakti derives from the root bhaj, meaning “to share,” “to partake,” or “to participate in.” Devotion therefore implies relationship. One shares oneself with another. Bhakti thus presupposes at least two: the devotee and the one to whom devotion is directed.

If this is so, can devotion exist toward something that is completely without attributes, form, or relational qualities? Can there be bhakti without “another”?

This reflection explores that question from a simple perspective grounded in the lived experience of devotion.

The Relational Meaning of Bhakti

The semantic field of bhaj itself points toward relational participation. Classical devotional traditions consistently understand bhakti as a loving relationship between the devotee and the divine.

The great devotional movements that flourished in South India through the hymns of the Āḻvārs and Nāyaṉmārs expressed precisely this relational character. God was addressed not merely as an abstract principle but as a beloved presence—sometimes master, sometimes friend, sometimes even lover.

As one scholar succinctly observes, “love requires two, because sweetness needs ‘another’ to taste it.”¹ Devotion therefore cannot be purely solitary; it becomes meaningful only within a relational context.

Devotion Even Toward the “Abstract”

Interestingly, this relational structure appears even in forms of devotion directed toward something that is not strictly a person.

People speak, for example, of deśa bhakti—devotion to one’s country. Yet the nation is rarely imagined merely as a geographical territory. It is emotionally described as the “motherland” or “fatherland.” The language itself creates a relational image.

Similarly there is rāja bhakti, loyalty toward kingship. The famous English proclamation, “The king is dead; long live the king,” refers not simply to an individual ruler but to the continuity of kingship itself.

Tamil culture offers another striking example. Devotion toward the Tamil language is expressed as love for Tamil Tāy—Mother Tamil. The celebrated hymn Tamil Tāy Vāḻthu, written by Manonmaniam Sundaram Pillai in his drama Manonmaniam, celebrates Tamil as a nurturing mother. The poet Subramania Bharati likewise speaks of the land as a mother who has given birth to her children. ²

Even hostile expressions reveal the same tendency. During the political agitations against Hindi in Tamil Nadu in the twentieth century, Hindi itself was sometimes personified as “Hindi arakki”—a demoness.

These examples suggest that human devotion instinctively creates relational images even when the object of devotion is abstract.

Bhakti and the Desire to Experience God

The bhakti traditions of India emerged partly in contrast to philosophical systems that emphasized impersonal realization of ultimate reality. According to the Sanskrit scholar Franklin Edgerton, bhakti thinkers articulated a desire “to experience God rather than to become God.” ³

The emphasis here is not merely on metaphysical realization but on relationship. The devotee longs to encounter and experience the divine rather than dissolve entirely into an impersonal absolute.

The Philosophical Idea of Nirguṇa

Within classical Hindu philosophy an important distinction is made between saguṇa brahman—the divine with attributes—and nirguṇa brahman—the absolute beyond all attributes. This distinction became especially influential within the Advaita Vedānta tradition associated with Adi Shankaracharya.

In such philosophical contexts the ultimate reality transcends all conceptual categories. Devotional worship of a personal deity may therefore be viewed as a provisional or preparatory stage.

Some modern scholars have suggested that devotion toward the formless absolute should also be possible. For example, Krishna Sharma argues that if bhakti is understood broadly as devotion to ultimate reality, then recognizing nirguṇa bhakti as a particular form of devotion removes any apparent contradiction between devotion and the impersonal concept of God.⁴

The Difficulty of Nirguṇa Bhakti

Yet the idea of nirguṇa bhakti raises a simple philosophical difficulty. Devotion normally involves three elements: a devotee, the beloved, and the relationship between them. If the divine is understood as completely without attributes or relational qualities, it becomes difficult to see how such a relationship can be sustained.

Even traditions that emphasize the formless divine often rely on personal language in devotional expression. The poetry of Kabir, for example, frequently speaks of nirguṇa Rām, the formless Lord. Yet the relationship between the devotee and this formless divine remains deeply personal. Kabir addresses the divine as beloved, master, or companion.

This suggests that even when the divine is described as beyond attributes, devotional experience still requires relational imagination.

A similar insight appears in Tamil bhakti literature. The great Shaiva saint Manikkavacakar acknowledges that the divine cannot be confined to any single form or description. Yet he also joyfully declares that to the One who has no single name or form, devotees sing a thousand sacred names. The paradox is clear: even when God is understood as beyond attributes, devotion continues to speak through relational language.⁵

When “Nirguṇa” Becomes Another Attribute

There is also a simple conceptual difficulty. When we say that something is nirguṇa—without qualities—we still describe it using a concept. In this sense the word itself becomes another attribute.

Consider the expression “tasteless water.” Pure water is described as tasteless, yet it still has a subtle taste. Likewise people often speak of the “blue sky,” even though the sky itself has no color. Our language creates descriptions based on experience and comparison.

In a similar way the word nirguṇa may simply indicate that the divine transcends ordinary categories. Yet once devotion begins, relational language inevitably reappears.

Love Beyond Philosophical Abstraction

Philosophical reasoning often attempts to describe ultimate reality through abstract categories or negative definitions such as the famous Upanishadic expression neti, neti—“not this, not that.” Yet devotion operates differently.

As the historian of Hinduism Klaus K. Klostermaier remarks, where intellect can only describe God in negative terms, love moves further: “love transcends all other categories, and to call God love is to go even higher than nirguṇa Brahman.”⁶

Devotion thus reaches beyond purely philosophical descriptions.

Saguna and Nirguna in Devotional Poetry

The tension between personal and impersonal understandings of the divine has long been recognized in devotional literature. As the scholar and poet A. K. Ramanujan notes:

“All devotional poetry plays on the tension between saguna and nirguna, the lord as person and the lord as principle. If he were entirely a person, he would not be divine, and if he were entirely a principle… one could not make poems about him.”⁷

Devotional poetry therefore lives precisely within this creative tension.

The Modern Classification of Nirguṇa and Saguṇa Bhakti

The clear-cut division between nirguṇa bhakti and saguṇa bhakti that appears in modern discussions of Hinduism is largely a scholarly classification that became prominent in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries through Orientalist and later academic studies of Indian religious traditions.

These classifications were helpful for organizing diverse devotional movements, particularly when interpreting the poetry of saints such as Kabir and the Vaiṣṇava devotional traditions. Yet the lived practice of devotion itself often moves fluidly between personal and transcendent conceptions of the divine.

The rigid distinction between two separate forms of bhakti may therefore reflect modern analytical categories more than the self-understanding of the devotional traditions themselves.

Conclusion

Bhakti, in its most fundamental sense, is relational. Devotion arises when the human heart reaches toward another. Even when directed toward abstract ideals such as nation, language, or kingship, devotion instinctively personifies its object and creates a relational counterpart.

Philosophical traditions may describe the ultimate reality as beyond form and beyond attributes. Yet the lived experience of devotion continues to address the divine as another—a presence with whom the devotee stands in relationship.

For this reason, the notion of a completely nirguṇa bhakti remains difficult to imagine in practice. Devotion without relationality would cease to be devotion at all.

Bhakti, in the end, always seems to require “another.”

Ashram, March 17, 2026

Footnotes

1. Donna Marie Wulff, “A Sanskrit Portrait: Rādhā in the Plays of Rūpa Gosvāmi,” in John Stratton Hawley and Donna Marie Wulff (eds.), The Divine Consort: Radha and the Goddesses of India (Boston: Beacon Press, 1982), 41.
2. தமிழ்த் திருநாடு தன்னைப் பெற்ற தாயென்று கும்பிடடி பாப்பா.

“Bow down, child, and worship the sacred Tamil land as the mother who gave birth to you.”

This line is from Subramania Bharati and appears in his famous poem “பாப்பா பாட்டு” (Pāppā Pāṭṭu).

3. Franklin Edgerton, The Bhagavad Gita: Translated and Interpreted (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996; first published Cambridge, 1944), 185.
4. Krishna Sharma, “Towards a New Perspective,” in David Lorenzen (ed.), Religious Movements in South Asia 600–1800 (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004), 301.
5. . Manikkavacakar, Tiruvacakam, often cited in Tamil devotional literature (quoted here from memory):

இந்நிறத்தான் இவ்வண்ணத்தான் இவன் இறைவன் என்று
எழுதிக் காட்ட வொண்ணானை…

“He cannot be described as ‘this color’ or ‘that form’;
he cannot be pointed out and written down as ‘this is the Lord.’”

ஒருருவம் ஒரு நாமம் ஒன்றும் இல்லார்க்கு
ஆயிரம் திருநாமம் சொல்லித் தெள்ளேனம் கொட்டோமோ

“To the One who has no single form and no single name,
shall we not joyfully proclaim a thousand sacred names?”

6. Klaus K. Klostermaier, Indian Theology in Dialogue (Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1986), 37.
7. A. K. Ramanujan, “Essays on Bhakti,” in Vinay Dharwadker (ed.), The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2014), 267.

Bibliography

Edgerton, Franklin. The Bhagavad Gita: Translated and Interpreted. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996.

Hawley, John Stratton, and Donna Marie Wulff, eds. The Divine Consort: Radha and the Goddesses of India. Boston: Beacon Press, 1982.

Klostermaier, Klaus K. Indian Theology in Dialogue. Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1986.

Lorenzen, David N., ed. Religious Movements in South Asia 600–1800. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Ramanujan, A. K. The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan. Edited by Vinay Dharwadker. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Sharma, Krishna. “Towards a New Perspective.” In David N. Lorenzen (ed.), Religious Movements in South Asia 600–1800. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Wulff, Donna Marie. “A Sanskrit Portrait: Rādhā in the Plays of Rūpa Gosvāmi.” In John Stratton Hawley and Donna Marie Wulff (eds.), The Divine Consort: Radha and the Goddesses of India. Boston: Beacon Press, 1982.