Kabir For Hindu Temple Library?

[Samar Abbas]

On Fri, 19 May 1972, Tein Network wrote:
> 4. Do the Muslims consider Kabir one of their own or is he considered
> to be a "Hindu" by the Muslims of India despite his Muslim origins ?

Neither Orthodox Muslims (Wahhabis), nor Orthodox Hindus (Vaidiks and
Brahmanists) consider him as belonging to their faiths. It is for this
reason that Kabirpanthis are attacked and perseccuted by the Hindus :

http://www.secularindia.com/sangh_parivar_sena_target_secular1.htm

Likewise, Wahhabi polemics are full of diatribes against the likes of
Kabir. However, the Wahhabis comprise only 5-10 % of all Muslims (who are
predominantly Hanafi) as compared to the Orthodox Hindus, who comprise
more than 90 % of all Hindus. Thus, only a few `Hindus' (who are not
recognised as such by the mainstream Manuwadins) belonging to fringe sects
and certain lower castes consider him Hindus. But most Muslims would
consider him a `Sufi' Muslim.

> 1. Should life and work of the mystic poet Kabir belong in our Hindu
> Temple Library ? "Yes" or "No" with reasons please.

Kabir did not accept the caste system, opposed Manuwadi and did not accept
the Brahmins. Thus he is considered a nastik by Orthodox Hindus. Thus, if
the Hindu Temple Library is Orthodox Hindu, then including his works will
raise eyebrows. However, if it is `Neo-Hindu' or belongs to some fringe
`Vaishnava' sect, then Kabir should not cause any problems. Perhaps some
of the Vaishnava experts on thist list can elucidate as to which sub-sects
accept, and which do not accept Kabir.

> 2. What was the essence of Kabir's message ? Did Emperor Akbar take his
> ideas for combining religions he found in India into one from Kabir ?
> Is there any evidence that Akbar was influenced by Kabir ?

Both followed Sufism. There was a whole Sufi movement going on at the
time, and to attribute it to one single person is perhaps far-fetched.

Yours,
Samar.