What makes a woman a woman? ( A repost )

[Guest guest]

devi_bhakta

 

" a phrase like "this lady (not that she is worth being called

one)

has no shame" -- which would seem to directly contradict a very basic

tenet of Shakta Dharma, that: "Every woman or maiden is Shakti ...

One should never speak harshly to or about maidens and women." (from

the Kaulajnananiryaya of Matsyendranath). Actually, there is a

wonderful lesson in this passage for all of us: Women who realize

that they truly *are* Shakti may be inspired to rise above actions

that are unworthy of their precious birthright. And men who truly

realize this may be inspired to reflect that it is always easiest to

be a saint when there exists no temptation."

 

 

 

Shyamjagota

 

How true ! but you must remember a woman is respected when she

behaves like a woman, not like Asura. Rama did not take pity on

Shurpanakha and cut her nose, Krishna did not speak politely with

Putana but killed her.

 

To get respect a woman must behave like a woman otherwise she will

not only be insulted but destroyed.

 

Leaving aside personal egos we can discuss good things to please

shakthi.

 

"What makes a woman, a woman?" What behaviour a woman should show to

prove herself a manifestation of Shakthi ? How will I determine if I

am dealing with durga or shurpanakhaa?

 

Good topic ? isn't it?

 

 

devi_bhakta

 

In my opinion, we're sailing into very dangerous waters when we begin

presuming to ask or answer this sort of question in this sort of a

forum. If members wish to comment, it may make for a "good topic," as

you say, but I doubt it will further our sadhna.

 

So rather than offer an answer, I will act like a lawyer, and state

my concerns about the viewpoint you bring to the question, which is

quite clear from your assertion that, "to get respect a woman must

behave like a woman"

 

What on earth does this mean, shyam? The position of Tantric Shaktism

is very clear: a woman merits respect and reverence precisely because

she is a woman and is therefore a manifestation of Shakti.

 

Your statement, however, adds an additional "condition" for respect

and reverence -- you say it is not enough for her to merely BE a

woman; she must also "behave like" one. And here we run into a

problem that leaves the realm of the spiritual and enters the realm

of the social.

 

Every society and culture prescribes certain expected roles and

behavior for the sexes; so do religions -- Vedic Hinduism, Islam and

Christianity all tell us something about how a woman should "behave."

But these scriptural guidelines are always interpreted very much in

accordance with a culture's prevailing societal values.

 

For example, the traditional Hindu wife models herself on Sita or

Parvati. But these are but benign avatars of the One Shakti; they are

the role models recommended by patriarchal Vedic Hinduism. Tantric

Hinduism, on the other hand, is more likely to look to Kali or

Tripura-Sundari -- uncontrolled Shakti, upon whom Shiva, Vishnu and

Brahma depend for their very existence. A similar dynamic exists in

Islam; perhaps PenKatali wil share his wisdom on that topic.

 

But for the broad idea, take a look at my post "Shakta Heritage –

Part 2," (#104), which cites a scholarly work on the subject:

 

Briefly, as patriarchal, urban societies began to form -- in India

and elsewhere -- man began to "turn away from the Mother Goddess. He

sought refuge in a wise, almighty Father God, a divine warrior who

would restrain the wildness of Nature and domesticate it for the

benefit of mankind.

 

"And so the Mother Goddess, until then free, was given a lord, a

master, a husband. Marriage and maternity became tools to tame

her. ... Myths emerged of how powerful warrior gods forced wild

goddesses into submission. ..."

 

Shyam, you offer two good examples of these patriarchal myths when

you state: "Rama did not take pity on Shurpanakha and cut off her

nose, Krishna did not speak politely with Putana but killed her."

 

Pattnaik explains: "As the consort of a male god, the Mother

Goddess's ... powers were checked and put to good use. But

unattached, she was feared. Her powers were considered untamable,

hence dangerous. ...

 

"The wild goddess ... was associated with disease, death and

misfortune. She was warded away as a demoness or transformed into an

ogress, to be despised by all. This psychological shift was reflected

in human society. Woman, worshipped for her ability to create new

life, became a wife. Her freedom was curtailed. Her faithfulness was

touted as the hallmark of all feminine virtue. She because

subservient to her husband's will. Like the Earth, she became man's

property. "

 

Shyam, you ask: "How will I determine if I am dealing with durga or

shurpanakhaa?"

 

 

The answer is simple: You are always dealing with Shakti. There is no

such thing as good shakti and bad shakti, there is only Shakti. Peace.

 

 

Shyamjagota

 

So you mean to say woman should be allowed to torment in the name of

shaktism ?

 

I dont agree sorry

 

there has to be a spiritual discipline which makes a woman --a shakti

and lack of which makes a woman,--a demoness.

 

 

PenKatali

 

In various traditions, there is an exoteric side founded on an

orderly social structure (including placid, domesticated womanhood).

Then there is the esoteric side where the unrestrained Feminine power

holds sway. In China, for example, compare Confucianism with Taoism.

 

In Islam if you look from the outside, all you will see is the

exoteric side. To find the feminine Shakti of Islam, you have to look

from within. Here too She is usually experienced in Her benign

form ... but then there is Rabi`ah.

 

Rabi`ah of Basrah was one of the earliest women Sufis, a freed

slave

whose whole life was an expression of extremely pure spiritual love.

She refused to get married because no men existed who could live up

to her standards. There are many stories of the holiest, most

revered male Sufis who came to Rabi`ah, and she rebuked them with

some remark of cutting sarcasm. Her intent was not to injure anyone,

but to shatter the illusion of the false self.

 

One man asked her about the remission of sins. She answered: "Thy

very existence is a sin with which no other sin may be compared." She

meant the illusion of separative existence apart from God's

existence. Any man who dared to propose marriage to her was sure to

have his ego shattered immediately.

 

In Shaktism the theme of unrestrained Feminine Power is more full

expanded and elaborated, which is one reason I like to share in it.

But I think the same universal themes can be found throughout the

different traditions, presented variously according to the differing

styles that characterize each one. In Islam you find hardly anything

mythological; everything is expressed in the human dimension, in

historical time. So instead of fierce warrior goddesses slaying

horrible demons, you find a fierce Sufi lady shattering the false

egos of men with some pithy cutting criticisms. A much more modest

style. But the inner meaning of the themes is similar.

 

 

 

rajnimaus

 

Female asuras have been plenty. Mahishi's story is popular with

those

who are aware of Ayappa and how He killed Mahishi. Putana was killed

by Krishna, and while Laskshmana cut off Surpanakha's nose and

ears,

Rama killed Tataka.

 

There have female asuras like Hidimba again, who though were born

female asuras repented, left their ways and are known not good deeds.

Hidimba married Bhima and was the mother of Ghatotkocha.

 

In Noth India, people talk about Holika who tried to burn Prahlad,

but burnt herself to death.

 

Who is an asura? Tataka was supposed to be an apsara who was cursed

because she displayed asuric tendencies.

 

Now who is shakti? The Sanskrit word Shakti can be translated as

meaning "power" or "energy." This power is witnessed in all the

various phenomena of life. It is the force responsible for the growth

of vegetation, animals and human beings. It is what is responsible

for the movement of all things. The planets revolve around the sun as

a result of Shakti. It is Shakti that makes the winds blow and the

oceans churn. Shakti is manifest as the very affective ability of all

the forces of nature. She is the heat of fire, the brilliance of the

sun, the very life force of all living beings. Now, when we refer to

Shakti do we not mean the pure Shakti and not the asuras?

 

 

shyamjagota

 

So Devi bhakta here one woman herself is agreeing to what I said.

 

I do not want to offend anyone but wanted a serious discussion on

this and Rajnimaus has put my point right.

 

I agree all is shakti, but we have to put somewhere a line for

worshipping and avoiding. Atomic power can be used to make Bomb and

also to generate electricity, but we do not wish Bombs and avoid

them.

 

So your assertion that all is shakti no good or bad shakti, stands

nullified ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

PenKatali

 

Devi Bhakta is right. There has been too much patriarchal

demonization of women for too long. The Vaishnava culture along with

other religions has been contributing to that by showing 1) male gods

vanquishing female demonesses, and 2) all goddesses like Sita as

subservient to their male consorts instead of being powerful in their

own right like Durga Ma.

 

In the case of Christianity and Islam, something went wrong. Jesus

and Muhammad were very kind to women and tried hard to remove

patriarchal oppression of them. But after them, their followers

reinstated patriarchal misogyny full force. However, spiritual

feminists like me can still retrieve the original feminist spirit

from the source of the religion and bring it back to the forefront.

In the case of Judaism and Buddhism, I'm afraid the misogyny was

there from the beginning.

 

Lilith must have been originally an ancient Middle Eastern goddess

who was demonized by Judaism. The usual pattern when a new religion

takes over is to turn the previous religion's deities into demons as

that side of their psyche becomes repressed. Psychologically,

Lilith's archetype of the Dark Feminine (so lovingly celebrated by

Shaktas as Kali Ma) became a sewer where the patriarchal religion

dumped all their repressed negativity against the Feminine.

 

The good news is that Sufism has recovered and reintegrated the Dark

Feminine side in the person of Layla, whose name comes from the same

Semitic root as Lilith meaning 'night'. Layla is the name for God as

a beloved Woman in Sufi poetry, and Her name shows the embrace of the

positive side of the night as the Dark Mother, the love that

overwhelms and heals the fear of the darkness. Kali means 'black' and

Lilith/Layla refers to the blackness of night, the power of the

ultimate Divine Feminine to dissolve all forms.

 

I completely agree with Devi Bhakta that we must adore the Goddess in

all women and must never give into the temptation to demonize women.

We have to recognize very clearly how stories of demonesses have been

used to oppress the status of women instead of exalting their Shakti.

We have to look very deeply within ourselves to make sure we are not

repressing the Dark Feminine to where it turns into attacks on women.

The resurgence of the Feminine is coming back these days, people!

Patriarchy is rapidly crumbling. Religions will no longer be able to

keep women down. There is no force on earth more powerful than

awakened women.