In previous parts we discussed Hinduism's Philosophy, Relationship with Modern Science, and Societal Structure.
Below I have taken some well-known examples from Hindu scriptures to explore the truth of women's status in stories. Remember, religions are never LITERAL.
1. ADI SHAKTI
Already mentioned is the Hindu belief that all begins, exists and ends because of Shakti or Adi Shakti (Energy). Adi Shakti is the first atom and also its propulsion. Adi Shakti never Begins; Adi Shakti never Ceases. Adi Shakti is Absolute Energy. This Adi Shakti in Hinduism is personified as The Goddess.
Adi Shakti’s 9 Incarnations are worshipped with supreme devotion during Navratras twice every year.
Adi Shakti incarnates as Maya (illusion) to make us espy the world as it is. You will hear a devout Hindu always say, “everything is Maya”. They are referring to Adi Shakti.
For easier comprehension, the masses believe that The Energy manifests as the Trinity- Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva; their Consorts; their Incarnations. And as all Natural Resources, and everything else existent.
The Female consorts of Trinity and their Incarnations are inseparable from their Male corporeal entities- so much so that Ardhanarishwar (Shiva-Shakti), Vaikuntha-Kamalaja (Vishnu-Lakshmi) etc. imply that the Male and Female are halves completing a whole.
This description is very basic. Adi Shakti and existence require in-depth analyses. But you get the idea of portrayal of the female manifestations.
Then again, questions are raised on the status of the Female Powers as mortals i.e. when they incarnate as Sita, Radha, Draupadi, et cetera.
II. SITA (Please read Ramayana in case of unfamiliarity with the story)
A predictable question is from Ramayana- the unfairness of Rama (Vishnu incarnate) in disowning Sita (Lakshmi incarnate) because men in His kingdom thought She was ‘impure’ after Ravana abducted her.
1. Firstly, the events of Ram disowning Sita and Luv-Kush being born were not mentioned in the original ‘Ramayana’ by Valmiki; these were appendments as Uttara Kand. Some Hindus reject these events entirely.
2. Some Hindus take it literally- and think women need to be ‘pure?’ otherwise the men should abandon them. These men replicate it in their lives.
What they forget are the remaining parts- Rama had vowed to be a One-Woman Man forever in honour of His Wife. He considered polygamy dishonourable to women. He maintained the vow on Sita’s exile, too. He lived like a hermit without luxuries, despite being a King, to live Sita’s life. When a Yajna required He be re-married to perform it, He got Sita’s idol made, but did not see another woman. In His younger days, He freed Ahilya from an unjust curse of Sage Gautam, Her husband, who had suspected Her character. Rama considered Ahilya innocent. This devotion and acceptance those men forget to replicate.
3. On the other hand, some Hindus grant it a deeper meaning. Below are my analyses on such theories-
(a). Rama being separated from Sita was like Dashrath (Rama’s father) being separated from Rama. Both let their dearest walk away for Dharma-- Dashrath, to avert the Adharma (an ethical/unlawful/immoral deed) of breaking a vow; Rama, to avert the Adharma of being a despotic King.
Unfortunately for our times, the state of women is so frightfully painful that in our eyes this Dharma-Sankat (dilemma of Dharma) becomes a violation of women.
(b). Sita disowned Rama when She felt Him questioning the next action. She made a decision to reform the society from its roots.
She left, but did not accept dishonour. She left Her mortal body by calling upon Her own manifestation of Goddess Bhoomi (earth), but not before She castigated Ayodhya subjects and Rama for their sin of assassinating a woman’s character and punishing her for something not her fault. She disowned Rama once again and made Him live with that pain. That right there is a lesson from a strong woman.
(c). I do not wish to glorify it, but Ravana was unable to touch Sita as She held onto a hay straw symbolic of Her Inner Energy, Her Shakti, threatening to scorch Him.
But He could have touched Her, as He does millions of women every day across the world, women like you and me who are yet to awaken that Inner Energy- and it would not be Sita’s fault.
Still this does speak for Her Divine, Heavenly, Absolute Strength, instead of being a submissive woman that She is made out to be.
III. RADHA, GOPIS AND 16, 108 WIVES OF KRISHNA
The most misunderstood characters of Hinduism, so much so that you have people calling Krishna a serious ‘womaniser’. I will get straight into the answer.
1. None of them are mortal humans! They are the Forms of the same Absolute Energy, who people believe appeared to teach us humans crucial lessons.
2. Whilst Rama teaches Justice, Devotion & Patience aspects of Dharma, Krishna also teaches Love & Knowledge besides the above three, and resolution of Dharma-Sankat (dilemma between Dharma).
Rama respected traditions and did not directly rind those that were stale. He took the path of personal pain to explain the sorrow of following orthodox traditions. Krishna broke all boundaries and chains that did not serve the society anymore.
Rama was Puroshottam (an ideal man). Krishna, the sagacious maverick. Bhagwad Gita is His Voice.
Rama lived the life of a human. Krishna let everyone be aware of Him being an incarnation of Vishnu.
HENCE,
3. All the ‘women’ characters in Krishna leela symbolise Bhav or Emotions.
The ‘Gopis’ were not women who Krishna frolicked with and then abandoned. They are the Guides for us to reach Absolute Awareness with those Emotions.
The Rasleelas (dance of Radha, Krishna and Gopis) are not carnal. They are beyond bodies.
First, Rasleela was done when Krishna and Gopis were about 11 years old in the story.
Second, they teach us relinquishing all attachments with the mortal world, and conquering the bad attributes of human psyche.
Rasleela is the celebration and joy of being in Love with Existence (Purush-Prakriti analogy)
4. Radha is Krishna. She is the Highest Form of Love bereft of conditions, expectations, physical pleasures and societal judgements.
In fact, some Hindus do not even believe Radha existed. Those who do, consider Her to be Krishna.
Either way through Radha and Krishna, lessons are aimed at us.
Radha and Krishna teach Love and Fighting for Love despite everything. Love is letting who you love achieve their Purpose. That is what Radha does. Love is also to unite souls so none can tell apart- as Krishna does. ‘Out of Sight means Out of Mind’ attachment and infatuation is what they show segregated from Love.
And Gopis are the Emotions that Love thrives on.
5. About the 16,100 wives, they were abducted by a demon. Krishna married them because the society banished them considering them ‘impure’. Vishnu as Krishna challenged the society that forgot its Dharma.
4. DRAUPADI/PANCHALI (Please research the story of Mahabharata in case of unfamiliarity with it)
Oh this Goddess! The hardest hit by patriarchy, but also the fiercest, strongest and most resilient in challenging it. So humiliated, so misunderstood, so misinterpreted, Her story has nothing that shows a woman less or weak.
1. There are people who bandy about that Mahabharata happened because of a woman- Draupadi. They could not be more wrong. Mahabharata happened because the men in the story could not be better humans; most were nauseatingly, shockingly, immorally vicious and malevolent.
Mahabharata is the greatest example of twisted social, cultural and political prejudices and perspectives contorting Religion, not the other way around.
2. She had 5 husbands
Despite being compelled into a polyandrous relationship, Draupadi transformed Her life into an awe-inspiring penance of keeping Her soul pure (being chaste).
She was humiliated countless times for Her ostensibly impious self. Contrarily, Hinduism includes Draupadi as one of the Panchkanyas (5 women with Purest Soul/Conviction). Other four being Ahlya, Tara, Mandodari and Kunti.
3. Mahabharata was a result of Her Revenge, they say
If Draupadi wanted revenge, She was Powerful to do it in the Sabha where Dusshasana and Duryodhan tried to disrobe Her publicly. Her Devotion and Shakti shielded Her from the Kauravas’ evil intentions.
She was born of Fire, a SYMBOL of Her being an Awakened Soul. She could have scalded Her perpetrators alive. But She was the possessor of Knowledge and Dharma. She wanted to fight for every woman who does not know of her Inner Fire yet.
She suppressed Her revenge that would be borne out of personal hurt. She set Her intent on Justice for Collective Good of society. The war that was hence fought was Dharma. For personal revenge, gain or ego, it would be Adharma.
4. “She brought it upon herself”
‘Draupadi laughed at Duryodhan’ or ‘humiliated Karna’ are exactly how people project their warped misogynistic and sexist perspectives on holy scriptures.
Many people savour making this about casteism by lambasting Draupadi for debasing Karna’s Varn in Her Swayamvar (event of a Princess marrying the suitor of her choice). This in spite of Swayamvars being guarded by rules on who could contend to win a princess' hand. It is unfair, but we all follow such rules and set boundaries all the time.
Either way- Would you willingly marry someone who aided the unprincipled and unscrupulous; someone who spent their life letting somebody else make decisions for them; someone who needed external validations to feel complete; someone who could never tell reverence from quid pro quo; someone who seethed in revenge day and night; someone who made slaying a person the sole purpose of their life, especially when the latter had done no harm unto them?
No? Thought so.
I see Karna as a man insecure and unhealthy in competition, who merely envied Arjuna for being a better warrior and person. He used His Varn to enshroud His faults.
5. Draupadi, hence is disgraced and dishonoured because She is a woman who Speaks, Chooses, Decides, and Questions.
She disputed the valour and misconstrued Dharma of warriors of the likes of Bhishma, Dronacharya etc. and Her 5 husbands who sat mute in the Sabha.
Similar to a “tree that does not taste its fruit”- She lived Her life in utter despair, strife and pain, only to rid the society of Adharma. She made Dharma her Purpose, and sacrificed everything to Triumph it.
It is for this reason that despite doing something that would be Adharma otherwise (marrying 5 brothers when she willingly chose 1), She remained the Absolute Awareness/Consciousness/Knowledge.
And if you demean or demonise Her, you support toxic masculinity and patriarchy; nay you are The Problem.
V. MENSTRUATION
Aah! The taboo. Are you aware there is a temple in Devipuram, Andhra Pradesh- Kamakhya Peetham- that worships the Goddess on Her menstruation? The Peetham is vagina-shaped.
You would be delighted to learn that Ayurveda does not talk about any ‘impurity’ of menstruating women. The Ayurvedic principles got contorted, and all that was inherited were illogical superstitions.
You may read the detailed answer on resources like Mythri Speaks. But I will give you the keyword behind it- ENERGY. (you may get in touch with me for a summarised answer).
BOTTOM-LINE: All restrictions in old days were practised to manage a possible energy imbalance. Other practices were maintained for hygiene purposes.
VI. OTHER EXAMPLES
i. For instance, while performing a Yajna (ritual when offering is made to Fire), Swaha is spoken. Swaha is another manifestation of the Energy as God Agni’s (Fire) consort. If offering is not made to Her, the Yajna remains undone.
ii. Women sages and philosophers- like Gargi, Maitreyi, Sikta, Ghosha, Lopamudra, Vak Ambhrini, Pratitheyi etc.- have been crucial to Hindu concepts of Existence, Brahman (Ultimate Reality), Elements etc.
iii. Prajapati Daksh, Brahma's Son, whom Hinduism considers the founder of society and civilisation had anywhere between 24-89 daughters (as per various Puranas). Society was built upon by His Daughters.
Now Here's the Thing
I cannot vouch for all scriptures- because Deductions, Appendments, Interpretations, Adaptations and Translations (revise here). You are bound to come across some text or some adaptation you would fiercely object to.
(i). Examples- Some Jain versions of Mahabharata portray Draupadi as a promiscuous woman for the fear of courting polyandry.
The Javanese version of Mahabharata shows Draupadi only wed to Yudhisthira. The transgender character (Shikhandini) in the epic is made a woman in this version.
(ii). Or Manusmriti- which people claim demeans women and promotes casteism.
This script was used by the British Colonial Government to formulate Hindu Law. From what I read about this particular scripture is that Manu considered women to be owned by male heads of the family or something. But then at other places it mentions how women should be honoured and ‘adorned’. Somewhere else it mentions healthy eating, doing what you love, vegetarianism versus meat-eating from a liberal viewpoint et cetera.
Scholars debate it to be a work of multiple authors instead of one, and that might just be it.
There are over 50 scripts of Manusmriti, and it is difficult to assess which in actual was the original text.
" [Manusmriti is]- a lofty, contradictory text with lots of inconsistencies…that must be read critically, rejecting parts of it that do not meet non-violence and truth… Nobody is in possession of the original text”.
- Mahatma Gandhi
Such misshapen social and cultural perspectives modify the later versions to be quite different from how women were portrayed originally.
CONCLUSION
We explored different aspects of Hinduism- Philosophy and Logic; Science; Principles of Society; and now Status of Women. I did not find elements of violence, sexism, hogwash, discrimination or supremacy in this institution.
Interestingly, this does not resonate with what keeps happening frequently in India in its name.
In the final PART, I make conclusive statements on this study and define 'being religious' once and for all. And conclude on if we should let 'Religion' be discussed in society at all.
“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts” - Aristotle
