SOURCE: Saraswati, Baidyanath. “Notes on Kabir: A Non-literate Intellectual.” In Dissent, Protest and Reform in Indian Civilization, edited by S. C. Malik, pp. 167-84. Simla, India: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 1977.

[In the following essay, Saraswati explores Kabīr's poetry and describes the poet as a non-literate genius who criticized institutional religion and religious and intellectual elitism, while making spirituality accessible to common people. The critic goes on to point out the irony of the attempt by scholars and some of Kabīr's followers to make his ideas acceptable and in line with orthodox philosophy and religion.]

The first historical event of protest in Indian civilization occurred in the sixth century bc when Jainism and Buddhism repudiated the authority of an elitist culture called Brahminism.

THE TRADITION OF NON-CONFORMITY

In denying the authority of the Vedas, Jainism is perhaps the oldest form of non-conformity in India. It revolted against the Vedic sacrifices—excited pity for the protection of dumb animals—and in doing so, for the first time in the history of religion, called social forces to its aid. It also socialized the notion that ‘man's religious consciousness must be the result of his own private realization of truth.’ This gave impetus to the evolution of the idea of sect, and Jainism became the first organized sect in India. Jainism was followed immediately by Buddhism; in fact, both flourished contemporaneously. Gautama, the Buddha, accepted from Jainism its denunciation of Vedic sacrifices and its compassion for dumb animals; he, of course, extended this compassion to man himself suffering from the bondage of birth, old age, sickness and death. But in all essential respects his teachings were identical with those of the Upanishads; he acted at best as a bridge between the Vedic Brahminism and the non-Vedic Jainism. However, in socializing religious ideas both Jainism and Buddhism followed the same path—both took up the cause of the common people wandering in ignorance, asserted a common spiritual right for all men, sought compassion and love for all life, preached in the language of the common people, and rejected the authority of the arrogant brahmans dividing the society into high and low. As a consequence of this challenge, the unorganized non-Jains and non-Buddhists now held themselves in some sort of unity round the brahman priesthood which allowed religion to be cultivated by a special class of people using a special language, performing expensive rites, sacrificing dumb animals for transient desires, and enforcing its superiority over the rest of mankind. In sociological terms, the dharmayuddha—the righteous war—which Jainism and Buddhism waged against Brahminism was a struggle between the forces of egalitarianism and elitism.

In course of time the organization of Jainism and Buddhism got weakened, but what came out as a result of their struggle with Brahminism proved itself a more effective leaven to the growth of egalitarianism in Indian society. This was Hinduism. Though Buddhism died out in India, we believe that the memory of the compassionate Buddha was scrupulously preserved in the cult of Shiva. The Shiva and the dhyani Buddha share many elements in common in their form and character—their compassion and love for all, their renunciation and purity of life, and their involvement in the conception of death as the giver of moksha or nirvana. The influence of Buddhism on the early Saivism cannot possibly be ruled out. Perhaps the image of Shiva evolved in the stupa, and it is not without significance that Varanasi which was the principal seat of Buddhism subsequently became the most important centre of Saivism for the whole of India. The egalitarianism of the Buddha must have prevailed upon the Saivite saints of South India, who like the Buddha, preached in the language of the common people, gave up the distinction of high and low, and waged a war against elitism. Later on the Vaishnava saints of North India joined them in their struggle and intensified it greatly. Indeed, it is this ‘santa tradition’ which has made Hinduism richer and progressive by waging a righteous war for the redemption of the common man.

The outstanding characteristics of the ‘santa tradition’ which emerged as a protest against the orthodox traditional theology promoting elitism and religious exclusivism are as follows:

(i) rejection of intense intellectualism in favour of the religion of the heart, i.e., the religion of love;

(ii) taking recourse to a guru for spiritual guidance—considering words of the guru more valuable and authentic than the cannons of traditional scriptures;

(iii) treating all men as children of God and hence equal in social life;

(iv) using the language of the common man in place of Sanskrit—the language of the elite; and

(v) preaching righteous way of life instead of complex ritualism, and hence emphasis on satya, ahimsa and kshama. In brief, ‘santa tradition’ is the harbinger of egalitarianism in Hindu society and civilisation.

THE ENVIRONMENT OF KABIR

Among the luminaries who built up the ‘santa tradition’, Kabir (ad 1440-1518) occupies a distinct position as a ruthless critic of the weaknesses of institutional religions, a religious teacher whose feet were firmly planted upon the earth, and a non-literate genius who instead of philosophising religion made it easily accessable to the common man. His task was, of course, more difficult than that of his predecessors in the ‘santa tradition’. For, he was almost like a rudderless ship in his personal life and social environment; he had to open war on several fronts against two mighty forces—orthodox Brahminism and Islam. Kabir was disowned both by the Hindus and the Muslims. He was believed to be born of a Hindu mother who deserted him in infancy and was brought up by a Muslim weaver Niru and his wife Nima who lived in abject poverty. In his age Brahminism was invigorated by its triumph over Buddhism, and Islam was enjoying the patronage of bigotted Muslim rulers who were hostile to Hinduism. He lived and preached in Banaras—the citadel of orthodox Brahminism. There are various legends about his persecution, and it is said that on receiving complaints from brahmans and maulavis the Emperor Sikander Lodi banished him from Banaras late in his life. But Kabir was not a person to be shaken by such external forces.

According to tradition, Kabir somehow managed to become the disciple of Ramananda—a Vaishnava ascetic who was at that time at the height of his fame as the propounder of absolute loving faith in a personal god who could be approached through personal devotion by all, regardless of one's status in social life. It is said that Ramananda had admitted among his disciples persons belonging to the so-called low-caste, such as Sena, the barber, Dhana, the Jat, and Rai Das, the cobbler. He regarded Kabir, the Muslim weaver, as foremost among his disciples. Ramananda was undoubtedly a large-hearted saint, a liberal in social behaviour, but in his personal life he could perhaps never completely free himself from Brahminic influences; he did not give up his belief in the old mythology of the Hindu pantheon and in no way minimized the privileges granted to brahmans. After all he was a brahman by birth, and a disciple of an orthodox Ramanuji ascetic. With this background he could not have done more than what he did. But Kabir had the advantage of being brought up in a Muslim family and having been initiated by a liberal guru like Ramananda. As the legend has it, he also received instructions from Shaikh Taqqi who belonged to the Suhrwardi order of Sufis. He was thus connected with both Hinduism and Islam, and yet he was not firmly rooted in the orthodox cult of any of these religions. It is because of his unusual personal situation that Kabir could point out with considerable boldness and independence the weaknesses of Hindus and Muslims alike.

KABIR AS A CRITIC OF TRADITION

From the point of view of orthodox Hinduism and Islam, Kabir was a heretic. He rejected the authority of the traditional scriptures and ruthlessly criticized the injurious beliefs and practices of both Hindus and Muslims. While deprecating idol worship he said:

If by worshipping stone one can find God,
          I shall worship the mountain;
Better than these stones are the stones
          of the flour mill which grind men's corn.

He denounced all external observance:

Hindus keep fast on Ekadasi,
          they eat only singhara and milk.
They abstain from grain,
          but do not control the mind's desire.
Next day they eat the flesh of beasts.
Turks keep fast and hours of prayer;
          they cry aloud in the name of God.
How will they find paradise?
          When evening comes they slaughter fowls.
Devotion, sacrifice, and rosary, piety,
          pilgrimage, fasting and alms.
Nine bhaktis, Vedas, the Book (the Quran),
          all these are the cloaks of falsehood.
If by immersion in the water salvation be obtained,
          the frogs bathe continually.
As the frogs so are these men,
          again and again they fall into the womb.
O mind, you make your gods and goddesses,
          and kill living creatures to make offerings to them;
But if your gods are true,
          why do they not take them when grazing in the fields.
If it is God that makes thee to be circumcised,
          why came not this cutting of itself?
If by circumcision one becomes Turk,
          what then will be said of your woman?
‘Half the body’, so the wife is styled;
          then you will remain Hindu!
By putting on the sacred thread,
          does one become a brahman?
What hast thou given to women to wear?
She from birth is but a Sudra!
          Why dost thou eat the food she brings, O Pande?

Kabir condemned the display of siddhis by yogi ascetics and ridiculed some of their practices:

Some shave men's locks,
          and hang the black cord on their necks;
And pride themselves on the practice of yoga.
What credit is there in causing your seat to fly?
          crow and kite also circle in the air.
O Brother, never have I seen yogi like this!
          Puffed up with pride he walks, caring for nothing;
He teaches the religion of Mahadeva,
          and therefore is called a ‘great mahant’.
In market and street he sits in the posture of a yogi;
          He is an imperfect siddha, a lover of maya.
When did Dattatreya attack his enemies?
When did Sukdeva lay a cannon?
          Or Vasudeva wind a horn?
They who fight are of little wisdom.
          Shall I call such ascetics or bowmen?
They have renounced the world,
          Yet covetousness rules their minds;
They wear gold and disgrace their order,
          They gather horses and mares.
They acquire villages and go like millionaires,
          A beautiful maiden is not fitting in the company of
Sanak and his kind.
He who carries a blackened vessel,
          will one day be fouled.

His outright rejection of the Brahminic caste system came out in strongest words:

If birth from a brahman mother makes you a brahman,
          why did you not come by another way?
If birth from a Turk makes you Turk,
          why were you not circumcised in the womb?
If you milk black and yellow cows together
          will you be able to distinguish their milk?

He dismissed the artificial division of men by caste and sect by saying:

I and you are of one blood,
          and one life animates us both.
From one mother is the world born.
          What knowledge is this which makes us separate?
All have come from the same country
          and have landed at one ghat;
But the evil influence of this world
          has divided us into innumerable sects.

It is said that once a brahman drank water from the hands of a young woman named Kamali and was later horrified to learn that she was the daughter of a Muslim weaver, Kabir. He went to Kabir to express his sorrow at losing caste. To him Kabir gave the following answer:

O Pandit, think, when thou drinkest water in the mud-dwelling,
          wherein thou sittest the universe is contained;
Where fifty six kotis of Yadavas perished,
          eighty eight thousand men and munis;
At every step prophets are buried,
          they decayed to dust therein.
Fish, tortoise, and crocodile there gave birth,
          the water is filled with blood.
The water of the river flows in through its channels;
          men and cattle dissolve in it.
The bones are dissolved and the marrow melted;
          how else comes the milk?
Thou O Pandit, thou didst sit down to drink;
          yet the earthen pot thou accountest defiled.
Renounce the Vedas and the Book (the Quran),
O Pandit: all these are fictions of the mind.
Kabir says, hear, O Pandit,
          these are your pious deeds.

Kabir vehemently denounced untouchability and despised the brahmans for perpetuating such an unjust and evil practice:

By the touch of others you brahmans
          consider yourselves polluted.
Great pride never produces any good.
How will he, who is called the vanquisher
          of the proud
bear with your pride?
Do not oppress the weak;
          their sighs have great power,
By the puffs of the bellows
          iron is converted to flames (or is utterly consumed).

Here Kabir speaks as a rebel. He warns the oppressors of dire consequences, for if puffs from the skin of the dead animal can do so much, how much more the sighs of the living effect. When he announces, ‘Kabir is standing in a market place with a burning stick in his hand’, he obviously appears as an anarchist threatening bloody revolution.

Kabir not only preached non-conformity but actually lived up to it. When he knew that his death was nearing, he left Banaras and went to Maghar. According to Brahminic tradition one who dies at Banaras gets salvation but the death at Maghar makes one to be born again as an ass. When his disciples urged him not to go to Maghar in the last stage of his life he told them:

One who dies at Maghar becomes an ass!
          A fine thing, you have lost your confidence in Rama!
What is Banaras, what the waste land of Maghar,
          If Rama dwells in my heart?
If Kabir leaves his body in Banaras,
          what credit will it be to Rama?

Kabir did pass away at Maghar in perfect peace.

While Kabir was highly critical of the outward form and superstitions of age-old tradition, he himself did not create a new system. He preached and emphasized on the unity of god, but his doctrine cannot be accurately placed in any of the six recognized Hindu systems of philosophy. For, he was not a philosopher, he was a practical teacher who wanted to make people realize the futility of institutional religion and sectarian and social differences. Philosophers and scholars of religion may find him logically inconsistent in his conception of God and the divine reality; but in the social context his views were unmistakenly consistent, bold and original; he systematically denounced everything that seemed to him unreal and meaningless. And it is this aspect of Kabir's life and teaching that can help us understand the tradition of non-conformity in Indian civilization.

KABIR AS A NON-LITERATE INTELLECTUAL

In my opinion the egalitarianism of the ‘santa tradition’ finds its fullest fruition in Kabir, for Kabir had struck at the very root of elitism—the booklore which the pandits and the maulavis had monopolized.

As is clear from the following verse, Kabir was a non-literate:

I touch not ink nor paper,
          nor take pen in my hand;
Of the greatness of the four ages
          Kabir has given instructions with his lips.

Or again,

I am not skilled in book knowledge,
          nor do I understand controversy.

Kabir spoke in the dialect of the non-literate masses, and considered Sanskrit as a dead language:

Sanskrit is like the water of a well;
          Bhasa (the vernacular) is like the
flowing waters of the river.

He taunted the pandits and the mullas for their pride in booklore:

The pandits are in error by reading the Vedas.
          They have no commonsense.
O Qazi, what book is expounded by thee?
          All such as are pondering on the book are killed;
No one has obtained true knowledge;
          Give up the book, adore Ram, O foolish one.
O maulavi, what books are you explaining?
          Although day and night you remain babbling and jabbering
you have not found the one (true religion).

According to Kabir,

A man may read many books
          before he dies and yet not be a pandit;
He is a pandit who understands the two-and-a-half letters
          (prema) which form the word love.
He is a mulla who struggleth with his heart,
          who by the instruction of the guru contendeth with Death,
And crusheth Death's pride.

In emphasizing the importance of personal experience he reproached the pandits by saying:

You say what is written on paper;
          I describe what my eyes have seen.

For, he believed that

Should all the earth be turned into paper
          and all the trees into pens;
Should the seven seas be turned into ink,
          yet could not an account of God be written.

Kabir wanted to impress upon the common people that booklore is not at all necessary for experiencing true knowledge or for establishing fellowship with God. In support of this he cites his own example:

When the pandits and the mullas prescribed for me,
          I have received no (advantage) from, and have abandoned.
My heart being pure, I have seen the Lord;
          Kabir having searched and searched himself,
hath found God within him.

Scholars of Hindi literature have laboriously unravelled the mysticism contained in the poems of Kabir. But my personal opinion is that most of them have failed to appreciate the real character of Kabir's poetry. Kabir did not compose poems for the elite—the professionals in theology; he addressed his poems to common non-literate people, and accordingly employed simplest imagery and metaphors which could be understood by all men. Being himself a weaver he employed the language of his trade frequently in the description of God:

Weaver, weave the name of Hari,
          On which Gods, men and munis (sages) are meditating.
He stretched the warp and took the shuttle.
          The four Vedas are the wheel.
One beam is Rama Narayana,
          fulfilling the proposed work.
He made the ocean of the world a trough;
          therein he kneads the starch.
The body of that starch is stiffened;
          Few know that it is starch.
Moon and sun, they are two treadles;
          in mid-ocean the warp is made.
As the lord of the tribhuvan (three worlds)
          brushed on the starch, Syama joined the broken ends.
He set the pegs, and when he took the reed,
          then was Rama bound.
As the reed beat up the warp,
          the three lokas were bound: none he left free.
The three lokas were made one loom;
          the warp worked up and down.
The Eternal Purusha bade me to sit beside him;
          Kabir entered into Light.

Or again,

No one knew the mystery of that weaver,
          who came into the world and spread the warp.
The earth and the sky are two beams;
          the sun and the moon are two filled shuttles.
Taking a thousand threads,
          he spreads them lengthwise.
today he weaveth still,
          but hard to reach the far-off end.
Says Kabir, joining karma with karma,
          woven with unwoven threads,
Splendidly the weaver weaves.

In explaining the nature of truth Kabir used the incidents of common experience:

Upside down the pitcher does not fill with water;
          But upright the vessel fills.
For one object, men have tried this way and that;
          Only by the Guru's gift will they cross safely.

To drive home the idea of the nature of relationship between man and god he drew his imagery from day-to-day life using kinship terms—the bridegroom and the bride, the guru and the shishya, the father and the son and all relationships involving deep personal emotions. When he was about to die, it is said, he sang the following verse:

Sing, O Bride, the bridal song of blessing,
          to my house has come Raja Ram my husband.
My body, my soul, are transported with delight.
          The five elements form his bridal canopy.
Ram Deva has come to be my guest;
I am inebriated with the joy of youth.

From the foregoing illustrations there remains no doubt that Kabir did not intend to pronounce mysticism; he wanted to speak the language of the divine in simplest words understandable to illiterate farmers, craftsmen, and shopkeepers. He belonged to the common folk and lived a simple life:

Kabir says, I have neither
          a thatched roof, nor hut;
Neither have I a village nor a house.

Kabir earned his livelihood at the loom, and he had hard days all his life. (Even today the weavers of Banaras live in abject poverty). He asked God to provide him with the necessities of life:

A hungry man cannot perform service,
          take back this rosary of thine.
I ask only for the dust of the saint's feet;
          since I owe not any man.
O God, how shall I fare
          if I am shamed before thee?
If thou give me not (of thine own accord),
          I will beg for it.
I beg for two seers of flour,
          a quarter of a seer of clarified butter with salt;
I beg for half a seer of dal,
          which will feed me twice a day.
I beg for a bed with four legs to it,
          a pillow and a mattress;
I beg for a quilt over me;
          and then thy slave will cheerfully serve thee.
I have never been covetous;
          thy name alone becometh me.
Saith Kabir, my soul is happy;
          and when my soul is happy then I recognize God.

These verses illustrate Kabir's practical approach to life. Unlike ascetics of the orthodox tradition, he did not give up the work of his livelihood to devote himself to the exclusive pursuit of religion. As Underhill (1945: XIII-XIV) has rightly pointed out:

… he (Kabir) knew how to combine vision and industry; the work of his hands helped rather than hindred the impassioned meditation of his heart. Observing mere bodily austerities, he was no ascetic, but a married man, the father of a family—a circumstance which Hindu legends of the monastic type vainly attempt to conceal or explain—and it was from out of the heart of the common life that he sang his rapturous lyrics of divine love. Here his works corroborate the traditional story of his life. Again and again he extols the life of home, the value and reality of diurnal existence, with its opportunities for love and renunciation; pouring contempt upon the professional sanctity of the yogi who ‘has a great beard and matted locks, and looks like a goat’, and on all who think it necessary to flee a world pervaded by love, joy, and beauty—the proper theatre of man's quest—in order to find that One Reality who has spread His form of love throughout all the world.

Kabir lived in an age and at a place where the Hindu logicians (Naiyayikas) were engaged in hair-splitting interpretations of the shastras. The shastrarthas of the pandits did not impress him, but if he were to establish his radical ideas he could not have possibly avoided the language of logic in answering the complex theological questions put to him by his opponents. In his condemnation of the prevailing customs supported by brahmans he used the weapon of satire, plain logic, and traditional explanations which could easily attract the unsophisticated. Sometimes he seems to have no restraint on his language while asserting his point of view:

If birth from a brahman mother makes you a brahman,
          why did you not come by another way?

Or again,

The brahmans of this age are objects of ridicule;
          give not to them alms;
They with their families will go to hell,
          and take with them their employers (those who give them fees or alms).
If union with God be obtained by going about naked
          All beasts of the forest shall be saved!
What mattereth it whether man goeth naked or weareth a deer skin,
          If he recognizes not God in his heart.
If perfection be obtained by shaving his head,
          Why should not sheep obtain salvation?
If, O brethren, the continent man is shaved,
          why should not a eunuch obtain the supreme reward?

Both in perception and presentation Kabir emphasized on the wisdom gained through personal experience—the oral tradition; he used the incidents of common life to explain his ideas. Knowing well the consequences of the indrajal of the textual knowledge which the pandits and the maulavis used in bewitching the masses, he denounced booklore and exalted the importance of the guru with whom one may communicate intimately through the words of the mouth. Describing the importance of the guru he says:

The guru is the potter and the disciple the vessel;
          he removes all defects.
He first places the support (sahara) within,
          then with blows he fashions the vessel into shape.
Regard your guru as a knife grinder,
          let him grind your heart;
Cleansing the heart from all impurity,
          let him make it bright as a mirror.

As a poet of the non-literates Kabir composed such songs as may easily be remembered and sung by the folk surrounding him. To those who are fond of grammatical accuracy or what is called literary style, the colloquial and unpolished poetry of Kabir may not be impressive. But in every village, in every home and, on all such occasions when abstract logic fails, the words of Kabir are on the lips of the non-literates all over North-India. For, Kabir was after all a people's poet.

THE MATCHLESS KABIR

To sum up, Kabir's contribution to the tradition of non-conformity in Indian civilization we may list as follows:

(1) Outright rejection of the caste system, the practice of untouchability and all social distinctions;

(2) denial of brahmans and the mullas as the ones having special religious functions or as being specially holy;

(3) refusal to recognize the authority of the six Hindu schools of philosophy;

(4) denunciation of booklore that promotes pride;

(5) disapproval of sectarian distinctions between the Hindus and the Muslims—no preference for either religion; and

(6) condemnation of such beliefs and practices as idolatory, polytheism, mythology of divine incarnation, fasting, ceremonial purification, pilgrimage, asceticism and severe austerities, circumcision, prayer in a mosque, and all externals of religion.

In his positive approach to tradition Kabir emphasized the unity of men, truth, non-violence, tolerance, love, compassion, and belief in one God.

But these negative and positive approaches to tradition were no speciality of Kabir. Many of his predecessors and successors have said the same thing again and again. What makes Kabir different from all others is his mode of protest—the language and the logic of condemnation. Our image of Kabir is not the same as that of Mahavir, or the Buddha, or Chaitanya, or Jnaneshwara, or Gandhi. Kabir preached tolerance, when he says:

For him who sows thorns for thee,
          do thou sow flowers;
For thee the harvest will be flowers;
          but for him sharp pains.

From these verses we do not however get the same feeling as we get from Christ's saying:

That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and prosecute you.

(Matthew: V. 39, 44)

In the lines of Kabir the idea of vengeance is implicit, for the offender will be punished. Indeed, such saintly traits as a compassion, tenderness, and fervent love are not generally attributed to Kabir's intrinsic character. Kabir appears as a rugged poet, earnest and vigorous in his message, exposing with merciless severity the weaknesses of both the Hindus and the Muslims. As has been quoted earlier, he even used invectives in his denunciation of brahmans and mullas. But must we not forget that Kabir was after all a non-literate poet who used the language of his heart which may sometimes appear rugged and unsophisticated, particularly to those who are not used to hearing plain truth. Kabir's attack on tradition was direct and frontal; he spoke fearlessly and he never said anything in a roundabout way merely to please his hearers. In the cultural language of Banaras he was akkhara and phakkar.

Looking at Kabir's personal life as that of one who is disowned both by the Hindus and by the Muslims and lives in abject poverty, we are not surprised at the ruggedness of his expressions. His voice was that of a downtrodden who rebels openly against social inequalities and injustices, and seeks social reordering. His was the insider's view of the commoners' expectations of social change, and hence he spoke differently from the soft clamourings of literate intellectuals, and saints coming from the privileged class and caste. It is in this context of the non-literate movement in Indian tradition that Kabir is matchless. We believe he occupies the highest place among the non-conformists in Indian tradition. And from the fact that amongst his more than one million followers, the Sudras are most numerous we can easily say that his influence on the non-literates was not only great in his life-time but has continued to the present day.

THE PANTH OF KABIR

It has already been pointed out that Kabir did not try to build up a new system, did not give up the life of a householder in favour of asceticism, and did not approve the authority of the scriptural booklore. But, from what I have so far gathered, it appears to me that the followers of Kabir have undone everything which Kabir did in building up a non-literate cultural tradition.

One does not know how many disciples Kabir made during his life-time; many persons must have been influenced by his message, but there is no evidence that Kabir organized a sect or formally initiated disciples. The sect which is now known as Kabirpanth seems to have come much later. Nevertheless it is true that a large number of sects owe their origin to the ideas which Kabir promulgated. Of these sects, the most important ones are the Sikhs whose founder Nanak (1469-1538) was greatly influenced by Kabir, a large number of verses of Kabir are included in the Adi-Grantha; the Dadupanth whose founder Dadu (1544-1603), a cotton carder by caste, followed the teachings of Kabir; the Laldasi whose founder was Lal Das (—1648) a member of the Meo tribe of Rajasthan, was greatly influenced by Kabir; the Baba Lalis whose founder was one Baba Lal(—1649) and which survives in parts of Gujarat; the Sadhs whose founder Birbhan(—1543) drew most of his ideas from Kabir; the Dharnidasi whose founder was one Dharni Das (—1656), a Kayastha of Chhapara in Bihar; the Charandasi whose founder Charan Das (1703-1782) was a Baniya by caste and whose teachings are very much the same as that of Kabir; the Shiva-Narayanis which was founded in 1734 by a Rajput named Shiva Narayana; the Garibdasis whose founder was Garib Das (1717-1782), and whose scripture Guru Grantha Sahib contains twenty-four thousand verses out of which seven thousands are taken from Kabir; the Ramsanehis whose founder Ramcharan (1718) lived in Rajasthan; the Paltupanthis whose founder Paltu Sahib lived sometime in the eighteenth century in the Azamgarh district in Uttar Pradesh; the Satnamis which was founded before the middle of the seventeenth century by Jagjivan Das and subsequently reorganized by Ghazi Das; the Prannathis whose founder lived in Panna in Madhya Pradesh during the early eighteenth century; and the Radhaswami Satsanga which was founded by Tulsi Ram (1818-1878) of Agra in U.P. All these sects owe to Kabir; in some cases the influence is direct, in others indirect. Though they differ in many important details they all have something in common—the need of a Guru, denunciation of idolatrous practices, and preachings in the vernacular.

The modern Kabirpanthis recognize two main divisions (there are also several minor sections) of their panth—one with its headquarters at the Kabir Chaura matha in Banaras, and the second founded by Dharam Das in the Chhatisgarh districts in Madhya Pradesh. The Kabirchaura matha, called mulagaddi, is headed by an ascetic bairagi. The Dharmadasi section is called banshagaddi. The mahantha of this section has to marry, and ideally live with his wife till a son is born; after the son is born the wife should become a bairagi. Traditionally, the mahantha should also hold the office for 25 years and 20 days and is then succeeded by his son. But these ideal situations are not always followed now in actual practice.

From what has so far been gathered the historical Kabir has been mythicized by his followers and numerous legends are now in existence with regard to his birth, life, and death:

Kabir was born of a virgin brahman widow whom the great saint Ramananda without knowing that she was a widow wished her the blessing of a son.

Kabir descended on a lotus flower, and was picked up by Niru and Nima, the Muslim weavers, who in previous birth had been brahmans and whom Kabir had then promised to be born in their house to deliver them from transmigration.

At the instance of the Qazi, Niru tried to destroy the child Kabir, but he was terrified to see that though he plunged a knife into him there was not a drop of blood and the child was unharmed.

One day a cow was sacrificed; Kabir reproached the Qazi for his sin in killing a cow and having raised it to life again disappeared.

Sikander Lodi gave orders for Kabir to be bound with chains and put into a boat full of stones which was then pushed out into the river Ganges and sunk, but a moment later Kabir was seen seated on a deerskin on the water and floating up against stream.

Kabir was then bound in a basket and the fire heaped round him, then he was brought to be trodden under foot by an infuriated elephant and a lion. But all these failed, and then the Emperor prostrated himself at the feet of Kabir and asked pardon for his fault.

When Kabir was dying a dispute occurred between his Hindu and Muslim followers as to whether he should be cremated or buried. Kabir asked them not to quarrel and wait for the event to follow. He laid down and spread the sheets over himself and told the disciples to close the door and leave him inside, which they did. After a few minutes a sound came from the room, and when the room was opened nothing was to be seen except two sheets and some flowers in them. One sheet and half the flowers the Hindus took, and the other sheet and the remainder of the flowers were taken by Muslims; and both performed the ceremony of disposal according to their respective custom.

These myths and legends are transmitted orally among the non-literate followers of Kabir. Some of these have now been published by the Kabirpanthi scholars.

Although Kabir transmitted his message orally and denounced booklore, his followers could not help writing down his poems soon after his death. A collection of his poems, called Bijak (which means, essence or seed), has come down in various editions which differ considerably one from the other; it is difficult to say what the true text of the Bijak is. Perhaps, the first edition of the Bijak was printed at Banaras in 1868. Besides the Bijak, which is the sacred scripture of all the Kabirpanthis, there is a vast sectarian literature on Kabir—both published and unpublished. To give the idea of what Kabirpanthi literature is like, the book Kabir Mansoor may be referred to by way of example. This book was written by Sadhu Parmananda, a Kabirpanthi of Ferozepur and published in Urdu in 1857. It was subsequently translated into Hindi by Makanji Kuber of Bombay, a painter by profession and a Kabirpanthi by religion, and published in 1903 by the Venkateshwar Steam Press, Bombay. The book contains 1493 pages (texts) and a large number of line drawings of the various Hindu gods and goddesses. It is a sort of anthology of the Brahminic, Christian, and Islamic scriptures. The major portion of the book is however devoted to the description of Hindu mythology, and is written in the style of the Puranas. The book describes Kabir as having appeared in all the four yugas—in the Satyayuga Kabir was known as Satya Sukritajee, in the Tretayuga he was famous as Munindrajee, in the Dwapara he was called Karunamaya, and in the Kaliyuga he appeared no less than fourteen times as Musa, Daud, Suleman, Issa, Mohammad and several others. Similarly, in the Tretayuga he is described as having taught Ramachandra the techniques of yoga and preached to Ravana of Lanka; in the Dwapara, Krishna requested Kabir to come to his rescue in the Kaliyuga when he will take the form of Jagannath, and the god of the sea will threaten to destroy his temple at the sea-shore in Puri. Kabir is described also as the author of the Svasamveda from which, according to the Kabir Mansoor, the four Vedas have originated. The book describes the various leelas or the miracle-plays of Kabir and extols him as the Parabrahman.

Thus in the processes of myth-making the men of letters have tried to link Kabir with the Pauranic Hindu gods and goddesses and have made him an avatar—a thing which Kabir himself denounced all his life. The manner in which the book Kabir Mansoor shows the affinity of Kabir with Islam and Christianity is also the vulgarization of the Kabir's doctrine of making no distinction between Hindus and Muslims, Rama and Raheem. The mythologists may have good reasons for making Kabir a mythical figure and such myths might also easily catch the imagination of the non-literate masses, but thereby the historicity of Kabir is destroyed and the social aims with which Kabir began his movement obviously get distorted and wavered.

Perhaps the Kabirpanthi men of letters have now realized that the kind of mythomania which books like Kabir Mansoor want to perpetuate no longer appeals to the masses, much less to the literate devotees. Hence, the recent trend to systematize and philosophize the doctrines of Kabir and to establish him as equal in position to the Vaishnava acharyas. In Varanasi (Banaras) practically all the Kabirpanthi students in Sanskrit panthasalas and at the Varanaseya Sanskrit University are studying Vedanta. It is their hope that ‘if they could prove that the doctrines of Kabir in its pristine purity are the essence of the Vedantic system, then their pantha will spread rapidly among the orthodox Hindus.’ Some of them hold that the teachings of Kabir have close parallels in the Vedas and the Upanishads.

To make the doctrines of Kabir acceptable to the orthodox Brahman philosophers the modern Kabirpanthis are publishing their works also in Sanskrit, such as the Dasmatra, the Kabirsatakam, and the Brahmanirupana. The Bijak has also been translated into Sanskrit.

In their religious observance, rites and ceremonies (particularly the Chauka-rites), modern Kabirpanthis do not seem to be different from the orthodox Vaishnavites. They are guided by the Brahminic paddhaties: they worship the idol of Kabir, and wear sacred-thread, sandalwood paste and a rosary made from the tulsi plant or Bela-wood. In the Kabirchaura matha in Varanasi there is a regular discourse on the Gita and the Puranas. A brahman Kathabachaha from Bihar is appointed for this purpose. In some of the Kabirpanth-maths the devotees visiting during the day receive three spoonfuls of charnamrita together with three leaves of the tulsi plant which is sacred to Vishnu. When Kabir spoke of Rama, he did not mean the incarnation of Vishnu; his Rama was the Supreme Being. The Kabirpanthis have not given up the caste system. Even among their ascetics the influence of caste is easily noticeable; the concept of purity and pollution is also deeply rooted in their social interaction. At the time of bhandara (community feast) the ascetics from the so-called untouchable castes announce on their own that they will sit in a separate row (or what they call hamari panghati alag lagi).

We have not yet met any Muslim Kabirpanthi anywhere in Bihar and eastern U P, not even in Banaras, the hometown of Kabir. The Hindu Kabirpanthis do not feel happy on the question whether Kabir was a Muslim weaver. Several pamphlets published from Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh make Kabir the legitimate son of a brahman couple. Although today among the followers of Kabir the Sudras—Ahirs, Kunbis, Dhanukas, Manjhis, Dusadhas, Suris, and Telis—are most numerous, the brahmans are given great importance in the pantha. Some of the Kabirpanthi-mathas in eastern U P are headed by brahmans.

These illustrations clearly show that the modern Kabirpanthis are becoming brahman-minded, a phenomenon which might be called virprachitti.

Although, we wish to avoid generalization at this stage of this work which has yet to be completed, in conclusion we may observe that in the course of five hundred years the message of Kabir has been thoroughly and systematically distorted by men of letters. What has been presented in this essay is a case history of how a non-literate movement deviates from its cultural goal as soon as it changes its mode of transmission. In other words, when a non-literate group concedes to the Brahminic scriptural lore the virprachitti syndrome becomes operative. In brief, it seems the Kabir movement is no longer a movement, it has become pravaha patita—fallen into the mainstream of Brahminism. In other words, it has turned into a system against which Kabir had fought all his life.

Select Bibliography

Underhill, Evelyn (1945); “Introduction,” in One Hundred Poems of Kabir by Rabindranath Tagore; Calcutta, Macmillan & Co. Ltd.

The English rendering of the poems of Kabir is based on the following books:

Keay, F. E. (1931); Kabir and His Followers; Calcutta, Association Press (YMCA).

Westcott, G. H. (1907); Kabir and the Kabir Panth; Cawnpore, Christ Church Mission Press.