Thank you: Gender Issues in relation to Shiva and Shakti

[Guest guest]

Thank you, I have looked at ArdhNareshwar and that is when they are

seen as ONE as they are One. But my investigation goes deeper than

that, it looks at the scriptures that shaped gender sterotyping and

that's where the confusion lies.

 

priya

 

> "The Force is Feminie in Nature"

>

> With that said..

> I would like you to think on "ArdhNareshwar". Perhaps that might

help... And

> Perhaps other members can comment..

>

> Thanks

> Dp

>

>

>

> On 3/14/06, NMadasamy <nmadasamy wrote:

> >

> > I would like to welcome our new member, Priya who have just join

us

> > yesterday. I think she is shy and not sure where to start. So I

shall

> > start the ball rolling. Priya is doing a thesis on gender issues

in

> > relation to Shakthi and Shiva. She requests for our help.

> >

> > This is her question :

> >

> >

> > Shiva was seen as supreme in the Svetasvatara Upanishads

> > while in the Markndeya Purana, Shakthi is glorified and

> > regains her status as the Supreme Mother Goddess. Then

again in

> > Devi Bhagavata Purana, it marks the ascendancy of Shakthi

into

> > the Puranic genre of Devi, the Goddess as the supreme

> > matrix."

> >

> >

> >

> > Which is it?

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Priya wrote : Thank you, I have looked at ArdhNareshwar and that is

when they are seen as ONE as they are One. But my investigation goes

deeper than that, it looks at the scriptures that shaped gender

sterotyping and that's where the confusion lies.

 

 

That is why it is said: one must eventually go beyond the scriptures.

I'm not saying the scriptures is wrong or that it's full of gender

stereotyping, but we must look at the whole issue on a different

perspective. When these scriptures emerged, and who translate them?

 

Personally I believe religions do not operate in a vacuum. There are a

lot of other factors such as political, social and economic have

direct impact on the evolution of religious practices and belief.

[Guest guest]

You are very welcome. Glad I could be of assistance.

 

Now if you are talking about scriptures then there will be a lot of

confusion.

 

Lets try to analyse it,

 

Q) Devi is worshipped in one place whlie Shiva is another.

A) But then I can say Vishnu at the third place, Krishna at yet another place.

The are just different form of the one divine power. Lets just say that if we

are kids who are trying to concentrate then in order to help us, a form to the

divine has been given so that we can concentrate. Once the stage is crossed its

all ONE and we dont need a form in order to concentrate or better yet we are

"sohum". Also Hinduism is very vast. Even if we spend our entire life we will

not be able to cover even half of it. It depends what kind of a person you are,

based on which you or you Guru can and does

initiate you in the right field or lets say the right Devine Form. If we take

out all the hipe about male vs female (which BTW exists more in society and none

in sprituality), and then try to analyse it, perhaps the answeres will be

simpler.

 

Q) In another post you have mentioned that all forms of Shakti has male

consorts.

A) Is that an issue? Well I can, for sake of argument, that all Male forms have

consort too..And BTW Dhoomavati is a widow form and does not have a consort. But

then so doesn't Lord Hanuman. While all the 3 primary forms "Kali, Bharmini, and

Lakshmi" are considered to be different forms of the same power, Lordess Durga,

so is not said about Shiva, Bharma and Vishnu at a lot of places.

 

Q) But my investigation goes deeper than that, it looks at the scriptures that

shaped gender sterotyping and that's where the confusion lies.

A) If are talking about thesis then perhaps there is. I might say that if it was

too easy, it wouldn't be fun. If you are talking about doing then, well then ...

then male / female doesn't matter.

 

I hope I was of some help...

 

Good luck in your hunt for truth...

 

Thanks

Dp

 

 

On 3/16/06, smallblessings2001 <smallblessings2001 wrote:

>

> Thank you, I have looked at ArdhNareshwar and that is when they are

> seen as ONE as they are One. But my investigation goes deeper than

> that, it looks at the scriptures that shaped gender sterotyping and

> that's where the confusion lies.

>

> priya

[Guest guest]

Priya, namaste, NMadasamy brings up a valid point, I think. Are you

asking "has the spirituality or the cultural matrix in which the

religion is embedded(or both)produced stereotypification, then if so

how?"

, "NMadasamy" <nmadasamy

wrote:

>

> Priya wrote : Thank you, I have looked at ArdhNareshwar and that is

> when they are seen as ONE as they are One. But my investigation goes

> deeper than that, it looks at the scriptures that shaped gender

> sterotyping and that's where the confusion lies.

>

>

> That is why it is said: one must eventually go beyond the scriptures.

> I'm not saying the scriptures is wrong or that it's full of gender

> stereotyping, but we must look at the whole issue on a different

> perspective. When these scriptures emerged, and who translate them?

>

> Personally I believe religions do not operate in a vacuum. There are

a

> lot of other factors such as political, social and economic have

> direct impact on the evolution of religious practices and belief.

>