What are miracles, why are they downplayed in bhakti, can they be used in bhakti?
Podcast:
What is the role of miracles in bhakti? Why are they downplayed in the bhakti tradition? And can they be used in Bhakti? These are very important questions. Let’s consider miracles from the perspective of what they are, their negative ramifications, and their positive possibilities.
In general, the word “miracle” is used for anything that is unexplainable. For example, for a child who doesn’t know chemistry, mixing two chemicals that suddenly change color dramatically might seem like a miracle. Essentially, anything unexplainable by our current knowledge or understanding is often called a miracle. In today’s world, which is largely dominated by scientific ethos, there is a considerable level of skepticism about miracles. They are often seen as unlikely or improbable, and even evidence of miracles is frequently dismissed as bad data. The principle often quoted is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Of course, there is always the possibility of people being gullible or deceived. Belief in miracles today is often considered a sign of gullibility, and skepticism is very high. Science focuses on the physical domain — what it calls “natural.” But from the perspective of Vedic ontology, there are three levels of reality: the physical, the subtle (mental or subtle material), and the spiritual. Anything beyond the physical is not explainable within the worldview of science and is often dismissed as bad data.
That said, there is always the possibility that phenomena occur for which we do not have sufficient evidence, because we are not investing enough time, energy, and resources to study them. Even pioneering scientists have pointed out that science advances most dramatically at its extremities—that is, at the edges of current knowledge where the unknown lies. There is thus a tension within science: on one hand, to remain skeptical of questionable or miraculous claims; on the other, to question existing knowledge so science can progress. But because science generally presumes methodological naturalism, explaining natural (physical) phenomena in physical terms, anything associated with subtle matter or spirit is usually rejected. This is the challenge science poses for accepting miracles today.
From the Bhakti tradition’s perspective, miracles are accepted as a possibility because they can arise from two distinct sources: the subtle material domain (mind, mystic powers), and the spiritual domain (God). At the subtle material level, yogis with mystic powers can perform acts considered impossible by today’s standards. Beyond that, the supreme spirit—God—can perform miracles as well.
When miracles occur from the subtle domain, the Bhakti tradition’s overall attitude is not to highlight or get excited about them. The subtle domain is vast and complex, and one can get lost or consumed by its complexities. Yogic or mystic powers involve manipulating matter for one’s own self-centered purposes, which is an extension of the same mentality prevalent in society and science—controlling matter. Technology does this at a physical level; mystic powers do this at a subtler level.
For example, yogis are said to have “Prapti Sudhi,” the ability to manifest a delicious fruit from a distant land just by stretching out their hand, which might seem miraculous. Today, we can order such things online, and although not instantaneous, can receive them within hours or days. So what was inconceivable centuries ago is more accessible today through technology. This illustrates how controlling matter, whether through yogic powers or technology, satisfies self-centered desires but does not inherently lead to spiritual growth.
Because miracles—defined as phenomena unexplainable by normal means—can be very distracting, the Bhakti tradition generally downplays them. They can become titillating distractions from the spiritual path, similar to how modern technology and entertainment can hook people and distract them from higher pursuits.
On the other hand, miracles from the spiritual domain, such as Krishna’s lifting of Govardhan Hill, are definitely celebrated in the Bhakti tradition. However, especially in the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, the focus is more on relishing God’s sweetness than on establishing God’s greatness. Krishna’s miracles are thus downplayed as spectacular feats and emphasized more for the loving exchanges they inspire. For example, Krishna’s miraculous acts are embedded within intimate pastimes filled with sweetness and love, such as his dancing with the Gopis or liberating beings from bondage despite being tied himself.
The emphasis is not on the miraculous act alone, but on the loving relationships and sweetness that flow from those acts. Miracles are part of the narrative but not the central highlight. This approach prevents people from being attracted merely to miraculous power, which could lead to blind faith or sentimentalism, rather than a genuine philosophical conviction.
People attracted primarily by miracles may demand further miraculous displays to remain interested, thus being distracted from loving Krishna for his sweetness rather than for his powers. This is why miracles are downplayed even within Bhakti.
Still, miracles can be used in Bhakti if done wisely—by recognizing who can be helped by them. Often miracles are used to prove the divinity of a teacher or deity and inspire faith, but that faith can be sentimental or blind and not philosophical. If miracles or paranormal phenomena can be empirically documented and rationally explained, then they may be seen as supernatural phenomena that expand the boundaries of conventional knowledge (such as science). This empirical and rational approach can open minds to realities beyond the physical domain, encouraging a holistic worldview that includes subtle material and spiritual realities, including Krishna’s supreme divinity.
Examples include phenomena like out-of-body experiences, near-death experiences, past life memories, and extrasensory perceptions (psi). While many claims are dubious, some might be empirically demonstrable beyond reasonable doubt, warranting theoretical explanations aligned with a Vedic worldview. This can help people appreciate a broader reality in a philosophical, not sentimental, way.
To summarize: miracles are phenomena that cannot currently be explained. Science’s methodological naturalism leads it to seek physical explanations and to reject miracles with skepticism. From the Vedic perspective, phenomena from subtle and spiritual domains can occur beyond physical explanations.
Miracles involving manipulation of subtle matter (as yogis do) are accepted but downplayed because their purpose is often material control, not spiritual growth. Miracles performed by Krishna are celebrated but emphasized mainly for the loving exchanges they foster rather than as demonstrations of power.
Overemphasis on miracles risks attracting sentimentalism and blind faith, distracting from the core Bhakti principle of loving Krishna for his sweetness. However, scientifically rigorous investigation of paranormal phenomena may help expand knowledge and open minds to higher realities, supporting a holistic devotional worldview.
Thank you.