I have some thoughts below but do not have time to organize them. Hence, a relatively unstructured post before I go to bed.

You overanalyze things: we are in agreement here. You also distrust yourself. You cited (1) love languages, (2) attachment styles, (3) setting boundaries, incl. emotional boundaries, (4) getting oxytocin and having oxytocin help with attachment, and I probably did not count them all. So you clearly read a lot, it is almost as if you have scanned through the pop psychology encyclopedia in its entirety. And then you encounter a unique manifestation of human emotion in yourself and another, cannot go with the flow, and the encyclopedia does nothing to help you process this encounter and act in congruence with your feelings. So how does everything you have read help you?

I have looked up when Oxytocin was discovered. In 1909. I have not looked up when it was linked to attachment but clearly later. Up until that point, humanity had created a formidable treasure trove of literature about love. The people who wrote the literature plus the people who inspired those authors beyond personal experiences of said authors, plus common folk passing down legends and tales from generation to generation before authored literature, knew absolutely nothing about oxytocin. Yet, we have the literary canon about love. So it was possible to experience feelings of attachment without knowing what physiologic processes underpin it. Speaking of the literary canon, have you read it? I am certain that if you switch from pop psychology to high quality literature, you would gain tremendous benefits, including in knowing yourself and even answering your "why?" questions. Story is vital to human development and to how we learn about the world and our psyche; following the story through the protagonist gives you emotional learning which is something you cannot get from pop psychology because it does not grab your emotions on the same level. Learning with your emotions engaged will be far better for you because it will help counterbalance this incredible tendency to overintellectualize. Plus, since you write well when you write about something you know well, such as what exactly was done when you cuddled, you must possess an appreciation of good literary style, too. Go to your public library or download audiobooks and simply take a break from pop psychology. You will feel better and you will go through emotional maturation.

***

While you wrote compellingly and eloquently about what exactly happened when you cuddled, you were not compelling or clear elsewhere in the OP.

"It was not to mix with those who don't follow god." How do you intend not to mix with non-Protestants while living in India? Do you intend to stay within a closed knit community of Protestants and not ever congregate with representatives of faiths with a large following in your country, or atheists for that matter? If so, this should have been written very clearly at the beginning of your post to set the stage. The post makes a lot of assumptions and attributes to the readers instant sharing of those assumptions without making explicit and clear assertions regarding your beliefs, plans, convictions, limitations and, to call a spade a spade, prejudices. Why did you think that we would share those assumptions? The point about not mixing with non-Protestants was buried inside the post. Now that you asked me a question regarding my reaction to the post and I read it many times (yes, many times), I found it and now, I think although am not sure, I see what you mean by repeatedly referring to not being able to be with this young Hindu gentleman. So, to summarize your OP in a more digestible form, is it the case that you did not intend to mix with a non-Protestant but cuddled with him anyway, and he cuddled with you so it was mutual and consensual, now you want to cuddle with him more, but are denying yourself that pleasure due to your intention not to mix with non-Protestants? Is that the crux of the issue? Or something else? Or that plus something else?

"how risky it is " What was risky? You did not have unprotected sex. There is nothing objectively risky, speaking about risk rationally, about cuddling. There was no risk to your health or safety. Well, maybe a higher risk to catch Covid or flu, but hopefully you are vaccinated... There was no risk as your weren't violating the law, weren't on hard drugs while cuddling. etc. etc. It is not clear what you mean by risky. Do you mean risky in terms of getting attached to a person to whom you believe you should not attach due to prejudices? Then you needed to spell it out. Otherwise it is not clear what you are referring to, and the opening post gives the impression of sheer confusion.

"But why?" is a theme that recurs again and again in your relatively short post. Let me turn it around and ask you: why do you need to know why? Why this drive to have every human emotion and act explained, dissected, looked at under the microscope? Why this excessive intellectualizing? Why can't you trust yourself with cuddling when you feel like cuddling and the young gentleman feels like cuddling, too? You describe the detailed acts of cuddling very well (here, your writing gift shines through) and from what you are describing, there was genuine emotion, there was poignancy, there was vulnerability and shared vulnerability, there was reciprocity, there was a certain cherished uniqueness in what exactly was done... there was a lot of good stuff. If you ask me, do it again sans talking about setting boundaries. Go with the flow. You are surprised with cuddling after a short tenure of knowing him? Sometimes we surprise ourselves. Keep exploring, keep surprising yourself, and stay clear of any rigidity, any prescriptions about how long you need to know someone before doing something. Sometimes it make take years before you cross into a certain space and this time it took you 2 weeks. Very interesting. So you have learned that you can develop a desire for a physical human bond very quickly. You have learned something about yourself. and maybe, if you absolutely must answer the why question, you were simply lonely as Muddy Boots has suggested. Maybe with a busy social life, lots of friends, a multitude of suitors, an optimistic outlook, a good self-care regimen, and a lack of suicidal tendencies, you would not have cared to cuddle with him. It is possible. We will never know for sure because we cannot rerun what happened with changed parameters, giving you a busy social life, lots of suitors, and a solid self-care regimen. So we cannot establish causality between your loneliness and the speed of the developments leading up to this encounter with certainty. We can only speculate that loneliness might have played a role.

If I seriously misread what you meant, please correct me.