References to Woman and Womanliness in the scriptures - Part 1

[Guest guest]

This article is motivated by the discussion on Vivekachoodamani Sloka 1,

particularly on the word ‘pumstvam’ and Kathiresan’s observation that it points

to the quality rather than the category. I agree with Kathiresan.

References to ‘women’ in Hindu scriptures can be very controversial. The

scriptures would appear to be very ambivalent on the concept of what a woman

is. On the one side they refer to her as a lustful temptress, the occasion of

sin for men while at another level, as a respectful wife, mother and goddess

she is praised to the skies. Here is a sloka from the gita with very great

potential for being misunderstood. Sloka 32 of the ninth chapter. It says:

Those who take refuge in Me Oh Arjuna, though born from a womb of sin, women,

Vaisyas, even Sudras, they attain to the highest goal.

Here the reference to women makes it appoear as if they are classified in a

derogatory way. The first thing to note is the context. The Lord is talking

about the efficacy of a constant awareness of the omnipresence of God. If even

a man of very evil conduct turns to God with a sole and entire love, he must be

regarded as a saint, for he has taken a resolute step to come to God, says the

30th sloka. Very soon he becomes a soul of righteousness and obtains eternal

peace, says the next sloka. Any one who takes refuge in Me, continues the Lord

in the next verse, even if they be of very low evolution, they also attain Me.

It is in this context, he talks of women. Whenever women are referred to in

this strain , it is the womanly qualities of fickleness, proneness to material

desires, and attachment to kith and kin, that is referred to rather than women

as a class or category. In any person, for the matter of that, such qualities

would make it difficult, for that person, whether it be man or woman, whether

it be a lowly birth or a highly evolved environment, to rise on the ladder of

evolution by conquering the monkeyish mind. It is in this context that the

purAnAs and the scriptures refer to a woman and they say that even in such

circumstance, the thought, awareness and propitiation of the Divine would take

them upwards.

Spiritual aspirants are taught to look upon women as the embodiment of Sakti.

The symbol of woman (and those of gold and wine) were employed to teach freedom

from lustful passions by trying to see the Divine Mother everywhere. It is in

this strain that Adi Sankara himself refers to women in the fifth sloka of

dakshiNAmUrti stotra. It says: -- The body, the vital force, the senses, the

fickle intellect, the void, these are not the ‘I’ in us; only deluded people,

such as those who are like women, children, the blind, or total duds would

consider them as the ‘I’ –. Here again the reference is not to women in

general, but to the womanish qualities. That is why the word ‘upamAh’ is used

by Sankara. ‘upamA’ means an example, an analogy. So the words, woman,

children, the blind, total dud, are all there to indicate a quality of mind and

evolution rather than the thing itself. The very occurrence of a long and

profound conversation between Yajna-valkya and his wife Maitreyi in

Brihad-AraNyaka-upanishad indicates the (later) subjection of women and their

exclusion from Vedic studies was not valid in the times of the Upanishads.

(To be continued).

 

praNAms to all advaitins

profvk

 

 

=====

Prof. V. Krishnamurthy

My website on Science and Spirituality is http://www.geocities.com/profvk/

You can access my book on Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought Vision and

Practice, and my father R. Visvanatha Sastri's manuscripts from the site.

 

 

 

Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax

http://taxes./