Buddhism in India

The Bhakti Movements 197

and inexorable effect (ibid.: 155), Kabir can be said to be searching

for a form of action which will not lead to rebirth. This is a

Buddhist search, not a Brahmanical one, which simply interprets

action as unreal, or a Jain renunciation of action altogether (see

also Bronkhorst 2000: 112–28) and Kabir searches for it with a stress

on mindfulness (another Buddhist virtue) and uses his paradoxical

language to express it:

A tree stands without root,

without flowers bears fruit;

no leaf, no branch, and eight

sky-mouths thundering.

Dance done without feet,

tune played without hands,

praises sung without tongue,

singer without shape or form–

the true teacher reveals.

Seek the bird’s, the fish’s path (#24).^3

While Kabir is often taken as a sant who represents the reconciliation

of Hinduism and Islam, in fact he is, as Hawley and Juergensmeier

have stressed (1988: 40–41), scathingly critical of both religions, of

their rituals and of their priesthood. Further, out of all the sants,

he is perhaps the only one who does not express what is called

‘devotionalism’, humbling oneself before or throwing oneself on

the mercy of a divine being. Instead, he requires, if not exactly

‘thinking’ from his listeners/disciples, some kind of ultimate atten-

tion or mindfulness, and does not hesitate to proclaim the greatness

of the devotee himself:

This is the big fight, Raja Ram.

He who settles it is free from bonds

Is Brahma bigger or where he came from?

Is the Veda bigger or where it was born from?

Is the mind bigger or what it believes in?

Is Ram bigger or the knower of Ram?

Kabir turns round, it’s hard to see,

Is the holy place bigger or the devotee? (#112).

there is an attempt to incite a mob of untouchables against him, by
calling them for a feast without providing food; however in another
miracle the god comes in the guise of Kabir with enough food for
all (Hawley and Juergensmeier 1988: 38–39).
Kabir, as noted, was a nirguna bhakta,that is, a follower of ‘god
without qualities’, as opposed to the saguna bhaktas, or devotees
of one of the named gods of the Brahmanic tradition, usually
Krishna, Ram, or Shiva. This is evident in his poetry. Kabir knew
of the Buddha only as one of the avatars of Vishnu, and as such
was not attracted to the idea: ‘the ten avatars are divine malarkey
for those who really know. Kabir says, pay attention saints: only
second things bloom and blow’ (Kabir 1986: 46). However, much
in his description of the mystic experience seems almost an invoca-
tion of sunyata.The impermanence of things, another Buddhist
principle, is a major concern: ‘Pandit, do some research and let me
know how to destroy transiency’ (ibid.: 35).
His mysticism is impressive and often pointedly directed against
Brahmanism:

Pandit, you’ve got it wrong.

There’s no creator or creation there,

no gross or fine, no wind or fire,

no sun, moon, earth or water, no radiant form,

no time there, no word, no flesh, no faith,

no cause and effect, nor any thought

of the Veda. No Hari or Brahma,

no Siva or Sakti, no pilgrimage

and no rituals. No mother, father

or guru there. Is it two or one?

Kabir says, if you understand now,

you’re guru, I’m disciple (#43).

As Hess notes, Kabir very often used ‘ultabhasha’ or ‘upside-down’
language, paradoxical language, almost designed to shock listeners
into awareness. There are endless images of ‘sprout without seed,
branch without trunk, fruit without flower, son born of a sterile
womb, climbing a tree without legs....’ (ibid.: 135). This is similar
to the songs of sahajiya(‘natural’ or ‘spontaneous’) Buddhists, one
of the last forms of Vajrayana.
If karma, as Hess argues, is seen in the popular notion as a kind
of bank account cause-and-effect where every action has a logical

196 Buddhism in India

(^3) While the paradoxes appear sahajiya, as Hess has noted, we can also find an echo
in Dhammapada(#92–93) of the ‘bird’s path.’