While reading ‘The Da Vinci Code’ last night, I started wondering about the entire aspect of goddess worship. It is interesting to note how many people in India worship Shakti, the female aspect of the Supreme Lord. Purush and Prakriti have always been an integral part of the Indian spirituality and there are countless shrines built all over India that pay homage to both these aspects found in Nature. I believe that gender is an illusion and the Divine Spirit is neither male nor female. It is formless, shapeless, colourless and sexless. Each one of us carries within the beautiful balance between the male and the female. There are countless instances in everyone’s life when one aspect takes precedence over the other regardless of what sex one belongs to. At this point, it seems silly to say ‘Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus’. Both men and women are born out of the same element that pervades and makes up the entire Universe. A chromosome here or there does not change the essence of our being to male or female.
iswari says:
Gender may be an illusion, as may all qualities. However, there is something to be said for these (from my own experience, Devi or Krishna) as gateways to the pure, formless essence to which you refer.
November 8, 2005 — 11:08 am
Lakshmi says:
Not sure what exactly you mean. What I was talking about up there was strictly related to what I read in the book.
I agree with you on that the Divine manifests in multitudes of forms, male and female. My point is, each form leads to the same Source.
November 8, 2005 — 11:38 am
srusrid says:
i read that book during my flight here..the jetlag and all those concepts..i had a nice float 🙂
you are right, we have elements of both the male and the female, and there’s a balance..ardhanaarishwar….duality merging into one…
:)there’s so much beauty in that…sangamam….
November 8, 2005 — 11:57 am
arunshanbhag says:
promise, didn’t see your ref to ardhanaarishwar before I posted my comment below.
🙂
November 8, 2005 — 12:10 pm
srusrid says:
lol…thou art forgiven for reusing references :)))
November 8, 2005 — 12:13 pm
splitpeasoup says:
Tell me the story of Ardhanarishwar. I am not familiar with it.
November 8, 2005 — 12:35 pm
srusrid says:
i am not sure whether there is a story…somewhere there was a mention about brahma praying to shiva, and him appearing as ardhanaarishwar…and shakti being manifest.and then creation began…
it is a form of shiva..where half of him is shakti….ardha-naari…this form appeals a lot…a fusion, an equal, a one…there are so many interpretations…especially in dance, it is used a lot….
anyways..will ask around whether there is a story….
November 9, 2005 — 6:32 am
arunshanbhag says:
Agree completely re the Purush and Prakriti aspects of life. Like the earth and the sky. oceans and the shore. One is not complete without the other. Or, rather one ‘defines’ the other.
but why do you think ‘gender is an illusion.’ It is real! look around you. When Brahma created the universe, it could not propagate and was thus lifeless – thus the separation of the male and the female shakti, artistically represented by “ardhaNarieshwara.” Only then could purusha fertilise prakriti and thus create a vibrant and self propagating universe.
In supporting your discussion, humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes with only one switch betweeen males and females. Except for the tiny Y, 45 of 46 chromosomes are identical – and so are we. 🙂
… she is finally writing! phew!
November 8, 2005 — 12:08 pm
Lakshmi says:
By ‘gender is an illusion’, I meant that we possess both male as well as female qualities within. It is not uncommon to see men exhibiting *feminine* qualities (though I don’t think there is anything as a *feminine* or *masculine* quality) or women displaying *masculine* qualities.
November 8, 2005 — 12:49 pm
Anonymous says:
“I don’t think there is anything as a *feminine* or *masculine* quality”:
I am not so sure about this issue. It is not clear how much of our behavior is dictated by biochemical differences and how much by training and upbringing … so before there is careful study of these issues I won’t place any bets!
Niranjan
November 8, 2005 — 8:46 pm
arunshanbhag says:
“careful study” should not supersede commonsense.
There is a reason (and biochemical one at that) athletes take testosterone to improve performance, or post-menopausal women take estrogen?
A biochemistry or physiology book will yield more examples.
but I do agree that some qualities represented as either feminine or masculine may be transgender and/or adaptive.
November 9, 2005 — 7:07 am
Anonymous says:
The body is a complex system and the state of current biological understanding is piecemeal at best. So a lot of what we currently accept as facts are not irrevocable (as is always true in science, but more so in biology.) So the most we can say about this issue is vague statements like:
“… some qualities represented as either feminine or masculine may be transgender and/or adaptive.”
November 9, 2005 — 7:17 am
Lakshmi says:
🙂 Yes, I am trying to write again.
November 8, 2005 — 12:52 pm
Anonymous says:
Minor changes (in terms of the number of nucleotides, as little as 1) in our DNA have been shown to cause substantial observed differences. I guess its not fair therefore to consider the X-Y difference as inconsequential 🙂
November 9, 2005 — 7:22 am
savyasachi says:
> A chromosome here or there does not change the essence of our being to male or female.
PRECISELY the point I have been trying to get across!
Just to point out, Shakti is NOT the female aspect of power or God, it IS the all-powerful God in itself…..Shakti CAN NEVER be represented by anything male…..
November 8, 2005 — 12:20 pm
Lakshmi says:
Maybe you can tell me more about Shakti.
November 8, 2005 — 12:49 pm
gotjanx says:
We all know Alanis Morissette is God.
If clueless, give a movie called ‘Dogma’ a shot.
November 8, 2005 — 3:02 pm
arunshanbhag says:
good one!
great movie!
November 9, 2005 — 7:07 am
Lakshmi says:
Bingo!
November 9, 2005 — 10:49 am
splitpeasoup says:
Mohini
Speaking of divine androgyny, what better example than Mohini, the transgendered form of Vishnu:
-from IndiaYogi. Read the whole article, it’s pretty interesting.
November 8, 2005 — 12:25 pm
Lakshmi says:
Re: Mohini
That explains why Ayyappan is also called Hariharasuthan meaning child of Hari and Haran i.e. Vishnu and Shiva.
Thanks for sharing the link, Apu.
November 8, 2005 — 12:51 pm
gotjanx says:
Re: Mohini
Also the demon he slew had been granted a boon that she could be killed only by the son of hari and haran.
November 8, 2005 — 2:58 pm
arucard2 says:
have you read Ka: of Indian Gods and Minds by Roberto Calasso? A nice read. A change from the regular Amar Chitra Katha, and makes you think a lot.
The title of your LJ, “I dance at the feet…” is it from a poem? They are the opening lines of a Shakti (band) song, and read out by John McLaughlin.
November 8, 2005 — 6:56 pm
Lakshmi says:
Yes, I picked it from Shakti’s song. Love the song, love the band, love the lines…:-)
Thanks for the book reco.
November 9, 2005 — 10:49 am
Anonymous says:
Purush & Sthree
Purush & Sthree are the two sides or two aspects of the same being. Purush for strengrh and Sthree for beauty, each attracts the other for one of the urges of Nature namely Propogation. This is visible even in other forms of life. A flower is either beautiful or has good aroma or contain sweet honey, all to attract an agent for pollination to facilitate propogation. Even an ugly person will be beautiful or handsome at younger age to attract other sex. This is natural law.
November 9, 2005 — 2:14 am
savyasachi says:
Re: Purush & Sthree
I don’t believe this is quite right. Purush and Prakriti are the two parts; stree is a made-up word. Also, the word ‘Purush’ DOES NOT really mean male; it is just an irreducible representation of a concept (if you like a mathematical language).
November 9, 2005 — 3:29 pm
suddenlynita says:
err..I have nothing useful to add.So i thought of saying something from a different perspective:)
It is noticeable that in all the discussion about feminity of god,the masculinity of the devil goes unchalleged.This is unfair and revealing
…Christopher Russel
November 9, 2005 — 8:38 am
Lakshmi says:
err..I have nothing useful to add.
🙂 Me neither!
November 9, 2005 — 10:50 am
fugney says:
the Divine Spirit is neither male nor female. It is formless, shapeless, colourless and sexless.
I once used that argument to show how people always cannot help but give human attributes to their conceptions of divinity. A friend thought I was calling god a hijra.
November 10, 2005 — 6:47 am
Lakshmi says:
🙂
Too bad!
November 10, 2005 — 12:19 pm
megaswami says:
er, what’s a genderfucked hindu to do?
November 10, 2005 — 2:05 pm
Lakshmi says:
🙂
Why should anything be done?
November 10, 2005 — 2:20 pm
trycatchdenz says:
That said and with due respect to your post – most gals are from a different planet – Venus yeah 🙂
Cheerz,
Denz
November 11, 2005 — 5:43 pm
kookygoblin says:
Hey, is your icon from that Hindu Gods and Godesses for kids site? That chap is amazing!!
PS: If it’s from the site, could you please link me to it?
November 13, 2005 — 9:37 pm
Lakshmi says:
gheehappy.com, that’s the site.
November 14, 2005 — 9:15 am