Sant Kabir and the Ambedkarite Political-Theoretical Framework: A Critical Reappraisal

 

Sant Kabir and the Ambedkarite Political-Theoretical Framework: A Critical Reappraisal

-    SR Darapuri I.P.S.(Retd)

 

 

Introduction

Sant Kabir (c. fifteenth century) occupies a crucial yet understudied position in the genealogy of anti-caste thought in South Asia. While Kabir is conventionally interpreted within the Bhakti devotional tradition, such readings often depoliticise his intellectual intervention by reducing it to mystical universalism. When examined through an Ambedkarite political-theoretical framework, Kabir emerges not merely as a spiritual dissenter but as an early critic of caste, religious authority, and epistemic hierarchy.

This framework does not seek to anachronistically transform Kabir into a modern constitutional thinker. Rather, it situates him as part of a long historical trajectory of Bahujan resistance that culminates in the modern anti-caste movement articulated most systematically by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.

1. Social Location and the Politics of Knowledge

Ambedkar consistently emphasised that systems of knowledge are shaped by social location. Kabir’s emergence from the Julaha (artisan-weaver) community is therefore politically significant. Unlike Brahminical intellectual traditions rooted in scriptural scholasticism, Kabir’s knowledge production arises from labouring experience.

From an Ambedkarite standpoint, caste operates not only as a social hierarchy but as an epistemic order, wherein Brahminical traditions monopolise the authority to define truth. Kabir’s rejection of Sanskritic scholasticism and his deliberate use of vernacular languages represent an early challenge to this epistemic monopoly. By articulating philosophical critique in popular idioms, Kabir democratises access to spiritual and moral knowledge.

In this sense, Kabir anticipates Ambedkar’s argument that social emancipation requires dismantling knowledge systems that legitimise hierarchy.

2. Kabir’s c and Ambedkar’s Theory of Graded Inequality

Kabir’s denunciation of caste parallels Ambedkar’s analysis of caste as a system of graded inequality. Kabir rejects Brahminical claims to ritual purity and spiritual superiority, repeatedly asserting that birth cannot determine moral or spiritual worth.

Ambedkar, in Annihilation of Caste, extends this critique by demonstrating that caste persists through religious sanction, endogamy, and social segregation. Kabir’s poetic interrogation of caste may be understood as a moral-philosophical precursor to Ambedkar’s structural analysis.

However, important distinctions remain. Kabir’s critique primarily targets the ethical illegitimacy of caste, whereas Ambedkar advances a programmatic demand for its institutional annihilation through law, political mobilisation, and constitutional reform.

Thus, Kabir represents a pre-modern moral insurgency, while Ambedkar develops a modern political strategy for social transformation.

3. Nirguna Theology as Anti-Hierarchical Politics

Kabir’s doctrine of nirguna bhakti—devotion to a formless divine—acquires new significance within an Ambedkarite framework. Nirguna theology undermines the theological foundations of caste by rejecting divine forms that can be monopolised by priestly authority.

Ambedkar similarly argued that religious systems that sacralise inequality must be fundamentally restructured or abandoned. His eventual embrace of Navayana Buddhism reflects this conviction. Kabir’s nirguna conception of the divine may therefore be interpreted as an early attempt to construct a non-hierarchical spiritual ontology, though without the institutional framework Ambedkar later provides.

4. Critique of Scriptural Authority and Ethical Rationalism

Kabir’s refusal to grant unquestioned authority to the Vedas, Puranas, Quran, or Hadith resonates strongly with Ambedkar’s critique of scriptural supremacy. Both thinkers challenge the notion that religious antiquity confers moral legitimacy.

Kabir privileges direct experience (anubhava) as the basis of truth. Ambedkar, while operating within modern constitutional and rationalist traditions, similarly insists that ethical and social equality must supersede scriptural authority. This shared emphasis situates both thinkers within a tradition of ethical rationalism, where human dignity becomes the primary criterion of truth.

5. Religion, Social Democracy, and Moral Community

Ambedkar argued that democracy is not merely a political system but a form of associated living grounded in liberty, equality, and fraternity. Kabir’s rejection of religious sectarianism and his insistence on the unity of humanity prefigure this conception of moral community.

Kabir’s refusal to privilege either Hindu or Muslim identity reveals his recognition that social oppression can be reproduced across religious boundaries. This insight aligns with Ambedkar’s warning that conversion alone cannot ensure liberation unless accompanied by social and ethical transformation.

6. Labour, Ethical Praxis, and the Rejection of Ascetic Hierarchy

Kabir’s insistence that spiritual realisation is attainable within labouring life challenges the hierarchical distinction between renunciatory asceticism and productive work. Ambedkar similarly emphasised the dignity of labour and criticised caste as a system that devalues productive occupations.

Kabir’s affirmation of householder spirituality may thus be read as an early articulation of a labour-centred moral philosophy, which Ambedkar later develops into a critique of caste-based occupational stratification.

7. Limits of Kabir from an Ambedkarite Perspective

While Kabir anticipates several elements of anti-caste critique, an Ambedkarite framework also highlights his limitations.

Kabir: does not formulate a political program, does not propose institutional mechanisms for dismantling caste, and remains largely within an ethical–spiritual register.

Ambedkar, by contrast, transforms anti-caste thought into a modern emancipatory project, grounded in constitutionalism, democratic mobilisation, and state intervention.

Thus, Kabir’s significance lies not in providing a complete political theory but in representing a historical stage in the evolution of anti-caste consciousness.

8. Kabir within the Genealogy of Bahujan Intellectual Tradition

From an Ambedkarite perspective, Kabir may be situated within a broader lineage of Bahujan resistance that includes figures such as Ravidas, Tukaram, Jyotirao Phule, Periyar, and Ambedkar himself. This genealogy reflects a continuous struggle against Brahminical social order through diverse intellectual and political strategies.

Kabir’s contribution to this tradition lies in his articulation of a subaltern moral critique that destabilises the cultural legitimacy of caste and religious authority.

Conclusion

Interpreting Sant Kabir through an Ambedkarite political-theoretical framework reveals him as a foundational figure in the historical evolution of anti-caste thought. Kabir’s poetic critique of religious hierarchy, caste inequality, and epistemic monopoly anticipates key elements of Ambedkar’s later political philosophy.

At the same time, the comparison underscores a critical transition from ethical rebellion to institutional transformation. Kabir’s legacy endures not as a complete emancipatory program but as an early articulation of the moral imagination that would later find systematic political expression in Ambedkarite thought.

Courtesy: ChatGpt