Guest guest Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 In a message dated 6/22/2004 12:13:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kochu1tz writes: > Patriarchy may be spread over a large part of the globe. But at least I > belong to a matriarchal lineage. > Kochu > Hi Kochu. What lineage is it you describe? * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * http://artconspiracy.com/artists/swastik.htm http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/lionserpent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 This is a great post, Eric. Thanks for your in-depth thinking, your willingness to look deeper, and to share. I am interested to know more about the yoginis you mentioned. What stories are you referring to? Mary Ann , "Eric Otto" <eottoe2001> wrote: > > This is a large issue and an incredibly large issue. Even divorced > from the reactionary parlances of Western feminism, its an important > issue to look at and examine both deeply and carefully, subjectively > and objectively, personally and impersonally. > > If you were going to college in the US in the 70's and 80's, you read > books like EARTH WALK or PURSUIT OF LONELINESS by Philip slater and > by other writers discussing that sense of alienation between the > individual and the world. At that time it was couched in Existential > and Marxist terms though what they were writing about was deeper > because the the culture itself is deeper. > > For the west, the culture can be very alien to who or what we are as > human. The one was describing his life in New Orleans and a friend > was telling me of his experiences in Calcutta. It has been alien for > a long time east and west, north and south. In America the great > hope was that everyone would be given a chance to become what he was > capible to becoming if he or she chose. Jefferson talked about a > natural aristocracy that would be made of men (and women) based upon > their talent, ability and knowledge only. Family placement or > wealth wasn't to be the issue. To be sure his big social experiment > is still in play, but the hierarchical structures are in play, too, > shaping and directing a world and world view that is becoming less > free and less kind. > > Men and women think differently. The science is showing this. > Twenty-five years ago newly out of college, the idea was that if you > changed the way women were raised so that the would somehow stop > being women. Whether it genetic, hormonal, energetic, karmic, or > simply how the brain comes in wired, it appears that women are > different and the idea of unlearning one's feminine aspects wasn't a > workable idea, and as I look at it, not a good idea. This is because > what was hoped for was apparently to take on the things hated. The > hierarchy doesn't care if it has male cog or a female cog in place as > long as either perform what the structure want them to perform. > > I've been reading John Taylor Gatto book THE UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF > AMERIAN EDUCATION which carries on the idea of how American public > education has had a big hand in undoing a lot of the big ideals of > Jefferson and the founding fathers and mothers. The educational > system set up all kind of structures that lead to a lot of our > unhappiness in terms of social class structure, economic and > educational class structures, creating person's sense of worth both > to himself and herself within the culture, developing people who are > conditioned immediate gratification and rewards, where independent > thinking is not appreciated, etc., that all serve the heirarchical > maze. > > The thing that has facinated me about tantra is that is really is an > attempt for people to discover what it means to be truly human. Of > the involvement that I have had, it seems to have the ability to peel > away the lies and the structure. I read the stories about the > Yoginis and how some of them were outcasts. No one seemed to > understand what they were up or misunderstood it. I think they were > renegades from a world system that they confronted. They were the > ones trying to be the uncarved blocks a world even then that has > wanted square blocks for a long time. Things have not changed. > > If this is your path, you are going to be speaking a different > language than the world - or more precisely - the ideas and structure > that make up the thinking of the world. That is a big task and a > difficult proposition. > > sincerely, > > Eric > > (Sorry for being so long winded here. Every once and awhile I need to > rant. I really think that world should be kinder.) > > > > > > , sankara menon <kochu1tz> > wrote: > > Patriarchy may be spread over a large part of the globe. But at > least I belong to a matriarchal lineage. > > Kochu > > > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > But patriarchy itself is also a surface. > > > > The modern human species has walked the earth for around 100,000 > > years. Geneticists and psychologists agree that every modern human > > carries the psychological evolution of the species (and all that > > preceded it) in their very DNA. "Patriarchy," as you have defined > it > > in previous posts, dates back 2,000 or 3,000 years. So, to grossly > > oversimplify, at most 2 or 3 percent of our psychological > > inheritance is patriarchal in nature. It has affected our social > > institutions to be certain. But I doubt it has affected our > > psychology as much as you give it credit for. > > > > An example: For probably 10,000 years of human history, the serpent > > was not a negative symbol -- for untold millennia it was a > positive, > > life-affirming symbol of the ancient Goddess cults. Then the Old > > Testament -- in its (patriarchal) zeal to wipe out these cults in > > Canaan -- essentially flipped the old symbolism on its head. > Ancient > > symbols were given new interpretations -- now the serpent was a > > symbol of evil. But humankind's genetic memory (i.e., > > Jung's "Collective Unconscious") is strong: Intellectual > > redefinitions of a symbol as old as humanity cannot that easily > > change our instinctive reactions to it. > > > > As Joseph Campbell observed: "There is an ambivalence inherent in > > many of the basic symbols of the Bible that no amount of rhetorical > > stress on the patriarchal interpretation can suppress. They address > > a pictorial message to the heart that exactly reverses the verbal > > message addressed to the brain -- and this nervous discord inhabits > > both Christianity and Islam as well as Judaism, since they too > share > > the legacy of the Old Testament." > > > > Shaktism, by contrast, does not share that legacy. The serpent -- > to > > keep to a single example -- remains identified with Goddess (Devi), > > and never became associated with evil in any form. That is true > > across the spectrum of Hindu religious systems, I believe. > > > > Has Indian society been tainted by patriarchy? Sure -- and in some > > ways, India remains behind the modern West in shedding that legacy. > > But its symbolic depth is extremely shallow -- thus the survival of > > Shaktism; thus the survival of Devi in even the most "patriarchal" > > schools of Hinduism; thus the survival of martriarchal systems in > > the South and East of modern India. > > > > My point remains the same: You must trust these systems rather than > > prejudging them. Once you are inside, the symbolism -- to the > extent > > that it remains such -- will be revealed, and the experience will > be > > unmistakeable. You will have broken the surface. > > > > There is no need to take my word for it; in fact I would encourage > > you not to take my word for it. Take your own word. Try it. > > > > *** I am seeking other ways and means of power with and within, > > that's all. *** > > > > It may be closer than you ever imagined. > > > > Aum Maatangyai Namahe > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I did not mean spiritual lineage but social lineage . I belong to the only (I think) matriarchal community in India. The Nairs. swastik108 wrote:In a message dated 6/22/2004 12:13:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kochu1tz writes: > Patriarchy may be spread over a large part of the globe. But at least I > belong to a matriarchal lineage. > Kochu > Hi Kochu. What lineage is it you describe? * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * http://artconspiracy.com/artists/swastik.htm http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/lionserpent / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.