Sant Tradition

← Encyclopedia

A sant is not a saint. The word descends from the Sanskrit sat — the true, the real, that which is — and names a person who has arrived there: one who knows, and lives by the knowing, rather than one set apart by holiness or canonized by an institution. It has no kinship with the Latin sanctus. To render it “saint” in English is to import a category the tradition does not hold. The Sant tradition is the strand of North Indian devotion, taking shape from roughly the fifteenth century, whose poet-singers addressed a divine without form, name, or image — nirguna, “without qualities” — and held that the way to it ran through interior love, not through temple ritual, scripture, or the rank one was born to.

What the Sants shared was less a doctrine than a stance. The divine is one and formless; the heart, not the sanctuary, is where it is met; and the machinery of caste and rite is at best beside the point, at worst a screen between the soul and what it seeks. The reality they sang to had no avatar to gaze upon, no festival calendar, no fixed dwelling in stone. It was reached inwardly — through the divine name held and repeated, through attention to a teacher who had reached it first, through a turning of the senses back upon their source. Around this stance a body of vernacular song accumulated, mobile and itinerant, carried by mendicants and householders across a corridor that ran from the eastern Gangetic plain through Rajasthan into the Punjab. The detailed grammar of that interior devotion — the formless held against the formed, the inner sound, the satguru who wakes the disciple — belongs to the companion account of the nirguna devotional mode; the present concern is the movement itself, its singers, and what became of their verse.

The poet-saints

The figures best remembered came from outside the learned and priestly orders, and the fact is constitutive of the tradition rather than incidental to it.

Kabir, by the tradition’s account, was a weaver — a julaha, the caste of low-status Muslim-convert weavers — of Banaras in the fifteenth century. The two date-ranges that circulate, the traditional 1398–1448 and the now more widely accepted c. 1440–1518, both place him in the matrix from which this poetry grew; the later range makes him a senior contemporary of Nanak and fits internal references to the reign of Sikandar Lodi. He was raised in a Muslim household and steeped in Hindu speech, and his verse scorned Brahmin and mullah with equal contempt — mocking the sacred thread and the prayer-call alike, refusing the authority of qazi and pandit, turning the body itself into the only temple worth entering. His “Ram” is not the prince of Ayodhya but a placeholder for the unconditioned, a name pressed into service for what cannot be named. The minimal historical core that scholarship will defend is small: a julaha weaver of Banaras, in the fifteenth century, who died at Magahar. Everything else — the encounter with the teacher Ramananda, the birth legends, the dissolution of his body into flowers contested between Hindu and Muslim mourners — is the work the tradition did in remembering him.

Ravidas was a chamar, a leatherworker, a member of a caste treated as untouchable, traditionally a younger contemporary of Kabir in the same Banaras. His most enduring image is Begampura — a city without sorrow, where there is no tax and no rank, no second and no third, where all walk as equals and none is owned. Sung from inside a body the social order had placed at its very bottom, the vision is not utopian decoration but argument: before a formless God, the gradations that order society have no standing at all. His verse survives most securely in some forty hymns and a sloka preserved in the Sikh scripture, and his name is now carried by a distinct community, the Ravidassia, whose modern assertion of Dalit identity is its own history.

Nanak (1469–1539), remembered as the first Guru of the Sikhs, taught a single nameless creator — Ik Onkar, the One — beyond the divisions of Hindu and Muslim, reached through the inward discipline of the divine name and the word of the teacher. Scholarship has long argued his exact relation to the Sant milieu: whether he is best read as a Sant who founded a community, or as the founder of a tradition that drew on Sant soil but exceeded it in the lineage of Gurus, the common kitchen, and the eventual order of the Khalsa it produced. The settled accommodation holds both: Nanak emerges from Sant cultural, linguistic, and doctrinal ground and founds something institutionally his own. The fuller account belongs to Sikhism and to its scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib.

Dadu Dayal (1544–1603), a cotton-carder born in Ahmedabad who settled at Naraina near Jaipur, and Namdev, the Marathi calico-printer whose Hindi verse entered the northern recensions, are counted in the same company, along with later figures — Rajjab, Sundardas, the eighteenth-century Paltu Sahib. Dadu’s roughly five thousand verses, recorded by his disciple Rajjab, founded the Dadu-panth of Rajasthan; the anthologies that order Dadu-panthi memory, the Pancvani — the “words of five,” gathering Kabir, Namdev, Ravidas, Haridas, and Dadu — and Rajjab’s topical Sarvangi, became the chief reservoirs of Sant verse outside the Sikh canon. What binds these singers is not a creed signed in common but a recognizable family resemblance: the formless one, the interior name, the plain speech, the refusal of the sacred thread.

Mixed sources

The currents that fed the Sant tradition are genuinely mixed, and scholarship treats the mix with care rather than collapsing it into a slogan of “syncretism.” Three streams converge.

The first is older bhakti devotionalism, the loving turn toward the divine that had crystallized centuries earlier in the Tamil south — among the Vaishnava poets of Tamil devotion and the Shaiva Nayanars — and moved northward as a broad sensibility of vernacular, image-laden, caste-permeable love for God. The Sants inherited bhakti’s emotional grammar and its critique of priestly mediation, but bent both toward a God with no image to love. The second is the interior, yogic discipline of the Nath-Siddhas: a somatic vocabulary of inner channels, the unstruck sound (anahata-nada), emptiness (shunya), the spontaneous state (sahaja), the inverted (ulta) turning of attention away from outward forms. This Nath substrate, as much as anything, gives the Sant poetry its technical interior register — and the Sant verse repays it, when it chooses, with the same blunt mockery it spends on Brahmin and mullah. The third is the world of Sufi Islam, with its own poetry of longing for a Beloved past all description and its own doctrine of marifa, the experiential knowledge of God that exceeds the law’s letter; the early Persian handbook tradition behind it, the lineage of al-Hujwiri, had been present in North India for centuries.

The resemblances of language between Sant and Sufi are close enough that influence in both directions has long been argued, and the older scholarship sometimes settled the question by declaring Kabir a vernacular Sufi or a crypto-Muslim. The weight of recent work runs the other way: Sufi influence on the Sant emphasis on a single God is real and acknowledgeable, but the structural substrate of the poetry is Nath-yogic, and the Sants more often defined themselves against both Hindu and Muslim institutional orthodoxy than as their synthesis. The shared vocabulary may reflect a common North Indian religious world as much as one stream feeding another. Which way the borrowing ran, and how much, is a question the tradition’s own scholars hold open rather than force; the convergence is there to report, not a verdict to pronounce. The inward, image-refusing orientation it shares with the Sufi marifa and with the apophatic strain of mystics far from India is examined in the account of the nirguna devotional mode; the Sant means something exact by the formless that no single comparison quite carries.

The textual problem

Almost none of this verse survives in the hand of the poet who sang it. What survives are later collections, and the collections do not agree.

Kabir’s corpus comes down in three principal recensions, and they are not minor philological variants of one another but theologically curated portraits, each sustained by a different community. The Sikh recension in the Adi Granth — compiled by Guru Arjan at Amritsar in 1603–04, with antecedents in the Goindval manuscripts of the 1570s — is the oldest dated corpus and, because it stands institutionally apart from the Kabir sect itself, is generally treated as the most chronologically secure witness. The western recension, the Kabir-Granthavali of the Dadu-panthi manuscript tradition, edited by Shyam Sundar Das for the Nagari Pracharini Sabha of Banaras in 1928, presents a more tender and devotional Kabir — an image that suited the Hindi literary nationalism of its editors, while a manuscript colophon claiming a 1504 date was later shown to be spurious. The eastern recension, the Bijak, scripture of the Kabir Panth of eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, preserves the most abrasive and iconoclastic Kabir of the three, polemicizing against Hindu and Muslim — and Nath yogi — alike. The relation among the three is the central technical problem of Kabir studies, and there is no single critical text behind them. The historical Kabir and the Kabir his communities remember cannot always be told apart, and the more rigorous scholarship reads “Kabir” not as a stable author but as a poetic persona continuously sustained and reshaped by the communities who perform him.

The same instability governs the others. Ravidas survives in the Adi Granth and the Dadu-panthi Pancvani; his modern critical edition rests on twelve manuscripts spanning 1582 to 1698. The signature line that closes a verse — the bhanita, “Kabir says,” “Ravidas says” — functions as a performative marker, an invocation of the voice, not a fingerprint of authorship, and later poets took up the signatures freely. This caution the sources themselves invite; it is not a modern suspicion imposed on them but a condition of how the verse was made and carried. To read a Sant is always to read a recension with its own editorial sediment, and the honest course is to name which one.

The scholarship and the texts

The modern recovery of the Sant tradition runs through a small set of works that any account must lean on. Karine Schomer and W. H. McLeod’s edited collection The Sants: Studies in a Devotional Tradition of India (Berkeley / Motilal Banarsidass, 1987) gave the field its working definition of the Sant as a distinct nirguna formation. Charlotte Vaudeville’s A Weaver Named Kabir (Oxford, 1993), building on her 1974 Kabir, established the case that the Sant complex synthesizes Nath-yogic somatics, tantric anatomical imagery, and Sufi devotional idiom into a vernacular formation of its own. David Lorenzen’s Kabir Legends and Ananta-das’s Kabir Parachai (SUNY, 1991) treats the “facts” of Kabir’s life as hagiographical constructions and argues that the nirguna corpus represents a coherent religious community rather than a fluid syncretic mood; his Praises to a Formless God (SUNY, 1996) gathers the nirguni texts in translation. Winand Callewaert and Peter Friedlander’s The Life and Works of Raidas (Manohar, 1992) is the critical edition of Ravidas, drawn from twelve manuscript sources. For the historiography itself, John Stratton Hawley’s A Storm of Songs: India and the Idea of the Bhakti Movement (Harvard, 2015) argues that the unified, pan-Indian “movement” framing is substantially a twentieth-century construction, which is why the Sant current is best approached as a specific formation in its own right rather than dissolved into a general devotional tide.

Of the primary verse in English, the most widely circulated remains Rabindranath Tagore and Evelyn Underhill’s Songs of Kabir (Macmillan, 1915; Project Gutenberg #6519). It is also the least philologically secure: Tagore worked from Kshitimohan Sen’s Bengali transcripts of folk-Kabir, not from any of the three classical recensions, and Underhill’s introduction reads Kabir through the categories of Christian mystical theology, drawing him into a comparative typology of “world mysticism.” The hundred poems are closer to Tagore’s own devotional English than to the rough, polemical Kabir of the Bijak — a window onto the universalist reception of the Sants, to be read alongside, not in place of, the recension-based scholarship.

What the verse holds

The poetry is plain, vernacular, and often sharp. It was composed in a mobile mixed idiom — Sant Bhasha, the speech of wanderers, drawing on Khari Boli, Braj, Awadhi, Rajasthani, Punjabi, and Bhojpuri as the region of compilation dictated — precisely so that it could travel and be heard by those Sanskrit shut out. It mocks the idol and the sacred thread; it sets the divine name held inwardly above any pilgrimage; it makes the teacher, the guru or satguru, the one who wakes a person to that name; it turns the body into the temple and the breath into the offering. Against the ritual that requires a Brahmin to perform it and a clean caste to receive it, the Sant offers a devotion that needs neither — that a leatherworker may practice as fully as a king, in the speech of the loom and the lane. The refusal of caste’s religious relevance is not a reformer’s program grafted onto the songs; it is the songs’ own logic, following from a God who has no form to be approached by the pure and turned from the impure.

For a faith built on rejecting the durable forms of religion — the stone temple, the fixed scripture, the inherited rank — the tradition proved remarkably durable in exactly the medium it trusted. The Sikh scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib, gathered hymns of Kabir, Ravidas, Namdev, and others alongside the Gurus’ own, setting Sant verse into a living liturgy sung daily; the Dadu-panth carried its anthologies; the Kabir Panth and the Ravidassia each kept their founder’s voice. The verse that disowned the temple found its house in the singing throat, which was the house it had always claimed to want. Because a singer’s name on a verse was less a claim of authorship than an invocation of the formless one, the corpus was never any single poet’s to fix or to lose. A Sant is read, in the end, as a recension with a community behind it — the verse named for the tradition that carried it rather than the hand that first sang it.

→ In the library: Songs of Kabir (Tagore & Underhill, 1915)

→ Related: Ravidassia · Sikhism · Guru Granth Sahib · Sufism · Gnosis · Sant Tradition Nirguna Bhakti · Bhakti Movement · Kabir Panth · Apophatic Theology · Guru