Kabir: Towards a Culture of Religious Pluralism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
198 Dr.ISSN Dharam 0972-1169 Singh Oct., 2003–Jan. 2003, Vol. 3/II-III KABIR: TOWARDS A CULTURE OF RELIGIOUS PLURALISM Dr. Dharam Singh Though globalization of religion and pluralistic culture are more recent terms, the human desire for an inter-faith culture of co- existence and the phenomenon of inter-faith encounters and dialogues are not entirely new. In the medieval Indian scenario we come across many such encounters taking place between holy men of different and sometimes mutually opposite religious traditions. Man being a social creature by nature cannot remain aloof from or indifferent to what others around him believe in, think and do. In fact, to bring about mutual understanding among people of diverse faiths, it becomes necessary that we learn to develop appreciation and sympathy for the faith of the others. The medieval Indian socio-religious scene was dominated by Hinduism and Islam. Hinduism has been one of the oldest religions of Indian origin and its adherents in India then, as even today, constituted the largest majority. On the other hand, Islam being of Semitic origin was alien to India until the first half of the 7th century when the “first contacts between India and the Muslim world were established in the South because of the age- old trade between Arabia and India.”1 However, soon these traders tuned invaders when Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni led a long chain of invasions on India and molestation of Indian populace. To begin with, they came as invaders, plundered the country-side and went back, but soon they settled as rulers. Muhammad Gauri who came a century and a half after Sultan Mahmud began to occupy territory and after his death in 1206 one of his former Oct., 2002–Jan. 2003 Kabir: Towards a Culture of Religious Pluralism 199 slaves Qutb-ud-din Aibak founder of the Muslim kingdom of Delhi. Thus, it was the time when Islam and Hinduism happened to be the two dominant religious traditions in India. Doctrinally, there was not much affinity between the two, rather they stood diagonally opposed to each other at certain points. Socially, they had little interaction and sympathy with each other. Hinduism was polytheistic and idolatrous, believed in Divine Incarnation and transmigration of soul. It considered the manifest world maya or unreal, worldly life a hindrance on the way to spiritual enlightenment, recommended sannyas or renunciation as the final goal of secular life. It was this other-worldly attitude adopted by Hinduism and the Indian sramanic traditions which resulted in moral degeneration in society and ultimate political subjugation of India. It tried to provide divine sanction to the idea of inherent inequality of mankind. Only the Brahmins could perform certain religious duties. Womankind was not given equal status with man. The Vedas were given the scriptural status and in stead of adherence to the teachings therein mere belief in them and/or observance of certain rites and rituals had come to be considered enough for one’s spiritual sanctification. On the other hand, Islam was strictly monotheistic: ‘Allah had no co-equal or co-eternal.’ It outrightly rejected the idea of Divine incarnation and idolatry. Although it retained duality between Creator and the creation in the sense that He creates but does not permeate the creation, still this manifest world was not considered maya and it did not recommend the other-worldly attitude. It did not accept any inherent inequality among humans on the basis of one’s birth in a particular family. The Quran has been its scripture and every Muslim’s total commitment and adherence to it is expected. The Muslim rulers in India, however, were not true to their faith as it can be in the case of any other ruler. They had to act many a time expediently to safeguard the interests of the Throne. Certain sects among the Muslims also supported fanaticism and to them all those who did not believe Global Religious Vision, Vol. 3/II-III 200 Dr. Dharam Singh in the Quran were infidels. The latter were required to be converted to Islam, even with force. This attitude of religious intolerance was not conducive to the proper growth of society. However, around the 14th century, we perceive the desire for religious co-existence trying to assert itself as against the prevailing culture of distrust and disharmony, of religious intolerance and socio-political oppression. On the one hand, certain Hindu Bhaktas like Ramananda and Kabir raised their banner of revolt against the orthodoxy of religion. It is difficult to say whether the Muslim presence, the presence of a religion different from and at certain points opposite to Hinduism encouraged this trend or it was a natural reaction to a given historical situation or it was part of a world-wide phenomenon of upward social status of the son. However, this protest especially Kabir’s satires against both Islam and Hinduism go beyond attacks on the hypocrisy of their external rites and suggest that he was attempting to stake out an ideological position basically different from both. The new religious weltanschauung they tried to evolve had a universal appeal, was more a way of life than being a set of some arid and lifeless ritual. On the other hand, the Muslim missionaries and Sufis who preached in the Indian countryside presented to masses a somewhat liberal view of Islam. Unlike some of the Muslim rulers who tried forcible conversion these holy men gave out the message of love. A positive outcome of both these currents was the implicit stepping down by Hinduism and Islam from their respective citedals of orthodoxy to find out a few meeting points, notwithstanding the doctrinal differences between the two traditions they represented. The ensuing interaction between the two gave a new dimension to the religious life of the country, taking religion as something above the sectarian level. Consequently, the holy men coming from both the Hindu and Muslim traditions attracted mixed following coming from both the traditions. Thus Kabir’s age “was ripening for a great spiritual movement through the approach of the higher thought and practice Oct., 2002–Jan. 2003 Kabir: Towards a Culture of Religious Pluralism 201 of Hinduism and Islam.... The first serious effort towards mutual appreciation and sympathy was made by the greatest of Indian mysties, Kabir,” says Carpenter.2 All this helped in the creation of an environment in which one could think of the universality of the essential values of religion, religious pluralism, spiritual unity and ethnical equality of mankind, universal Fatherhood of God and universal brotherhood of man. Kabir was born probably to Hindu parents and brought up by a Muslim couple. There are however a few scholars who consider him Muslim by birth and also associate him with the Sufi order. According to this school, he later on “joined Ramananda’s followers to break down the barriers between Moslems and Hindus.”3 Whatever be the truth about his birth, he kept himself throughout his life above denominations: he refused to call himself either a Hindu or a Muslim. Of course, he identifies himself with his profession as well as with what he thinks and believes in. At several places in his verses he makes reference to his profession of weaving.4 In the Indian (Hindu) caste hierarchy, weaver’s is a low caste; Kabir is not shy of this, and he refuses to consider himself inferior or lower than a Brahmin because mere birth in a particular family or caste does not raise or lower one’s status. He makes himself clear when addressing a Brahmin in one of his hymns he says that the Brahmin cannot claim equality with him because the like of him depend on the Vedas and suffer in the process of transmigration whereas the like of Kabir swim across the world- ocean as they recite the Name Divine.5 Kabir consciously avoids denominating his religion. He calls himself the child of Allah and Ram: the same Real One is his Guru and Pir. He makes an unequivocal statement disowning both the pandit and the mulla’h as well as whatever they have written.6 In fact, he does not denounce either Hinduism or Islam or their scriptures, rather his complaint is that neither a Hindu nor a Muslim tries to comprehend and follow what is written in Global Religious Vision, Vol. 3/II-III 202 Dr. Dharam Singh their respective scriptures.7 The Hindus believe in Rama and the Muslims in Allah whereas Kabir believes in the Real One who permeates through all places and beings. To him, no religious garb or denomination is important: what matters to him is man’s inner purity and his constant mystical oneness with God. His Lord is neither in mosque nor in temple but in one’s heart. Idol- worship and wearing of janeu among Hindus are as futile as the Muslim practice of mere bowing to the West or circumcision unless they make their hearts pure of all duality and formalism. Kabir’s decision not to identify himself with any particular creed was a conscious decision. On the one hand, he wanted to proclaim the spiritual unity of man, and all denominations of religion as of little consequence. On the other hand, he tried to pave way which both Hindus and Muslims could tread together. No doubt, he was influenced by two socio-religious currents yet he was far from being jumbled between the two, rather he tried to carve out his own way, a universal path above all sectarian levels. He was unlike the Hindu holy men who generally lived in forests or monasteries, went out naked, besmeared their bodies with ashes or matted their hair, and practised celibacy.