Women and Vedic Mantra

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavatas:

Here is a quote from "HInduism Rediscovered" (pp306-307)

 

"Only menfolk had to perform lot of rituals and observance of penances

prescribed like 'Prajapatyam'. But, womenfolk derived half the puNya of their

husbands gained by such performances by merely assisting them. And, conversely,

their husbands shared the sins committed by their women. Thus, both ways women

benefit - without any effort on their part. A "win- win" situation either way

for them. [Vide Vyasa's statement "Kali Saadhu","Stree Saadhu", "SudrO Saadhu"]

 

Thus, from the Vedic period 'liberation of women was integrated with lifestyle

itself and there was no need for a separate 'womens' lib' movement. That women

were not 'allowed' to perform yagas is another way of saying, that they had 'no

need' to subject themselves to the rigours of penances, not that they were

'denied' the privelege as some of our psuedo- advocates of modern 'womens' lib'

movement would like to have us believe.

 

May be, this freedom from obligation was itself based on biological reasons of

their prpensity for pregnancy and other feminine disadvantages like menstrual

impurities.[And, Vedic mantras are required to be recited without any

interruption and the menstrual cycles would definitely break this cycle of

reciatation.]

 

The woman has a specific biological function because children are not showered

from high heavens but are reared in the mother's womb. Child bearing and child

rearing are very demanding. That is why women were relieved from the

breadwinning responsibilities in the family. The very fact of expectation of

stricter norms of morality in women is an acknowledgement of their natural

superiority. When the modern woman rebels against this, she is compromising her

own natural identity by ending up in aping men and becoming masculine, thereby

paying an unintended tribute to the very man she seeks to despise"

 

In fact, the wife in Hinduism is called "Saha Dharma chaariNi'- a partner in the

performance of duties dictated by Dharma including participation in rituals

besides her own natural child bearing responsibilities.

 

Anbil Ramaswamy

====================================================================

 

 

Dear members,

 

Many times on this List, as well as in other cyber-groups, this topic

has come up for rather vehement discussions.

 

I am reproducing below an old post of mine briefly summarizing the

orthodox position as enunciated by the Pontiff of the Kanchi Mutt,

Chandrasekhara Saraswati in his book "deivattin kural". Personally, I

found it had all the answers to this rather tricky if not

controversial issue. I found it to be very convincing.

 

Hope it will be useful to you all too.

 

Thanks and rgards,

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan

***************

 

The Vedic Masters say "dehO devAlayah: prOktO jeevah: prOktO

sanAtanah:" They say that "the human body is a temple. The life

enshrined in it is the eternal Spirit".

 

According to the Vedas the body which enshrines the Supreme Spirit is

a temple... 'devAlaya'. You do not enter the precincts of a temple if

you are unclean. Nothing impure like meat, tobbacco or alcohol should

be taken into a temple unless you want to defile the place.

 

According to the Vedas, the body of man must therefore be cared for

as if it were a temple. How is this done? It is said that the only

way to care for this "sareera-devAlaya" is to fill it with the sound

of Vedic 'mantra'.

 

"Gayatri" is one such 'mantra' that is said to keep the temple of

man's body well cared for. The Vedas clearly say that he who chants

the 'gAyantri' mantra is protected by it. .. "gAyantam trAyatE yasmAt

gAyatrI'tyabhi-dheeyatE" i.e he who chants the 'gayatri' mantra with

love and devotion ever remains protected by it. This is why the Vedas

refer to this mantra as "gAyatrim chandasAm mAtA"... the mother of

all mantrA-s... the mother who protects and protects absolutely.

 

Chanting of gayatri in the proper manner is central to the Vedic

faith. When one chants this mantra it is tantamount to chanting the 3

Vedas. Thus the manusmriti says, "tribhya eva tu vedEbhyah: pAdam

pAdamadUduham" i.e. Each of the three parts of the 'gayatri mantra is

taken from one of the 3 vedas.

 

Gayatri contains in itself the spirit and energy of all Vedic

mantras. It imparts power to other mantras. Without gayatri-japa the

chanting of all other Vedic mantras would be futile. Only by intense

repetition of the gayatri mantra are Vedic adherents able to master

the other mantras.

 

Three times in a day--- morn, mid-day and evening --- the gayatri is

therefore chanted without fail by all men of the Vedic faith.

 

One of the rituals enjoined while intoning the gayatri mantra is the

performance of "prAnAnAyamya"... the trained way of breath-control

exercises. This "prAnAnayamya" is another way in which the "temple of

man's body", the "devAlaya" is kept clean and fit for divine

inhabitation.

 

In the Vedic faith, every man, irrespective of his occupation or

station in life, is enjoined to perform 'sandhyAvandanam" -- the

daily rite in which the gayatri mantra is chanted.

 

What about women?

 

In Vedic faith a women does not need to chant the Vedas or the

gayatri mantra.Daily repetition of any mantra is not stipulated for

women. That is because a woman of Vedic tradition attains the supreme

goal of life even without having to utter a single Vedic mantra. A

woman is thus actually blessed in a certain sense in that she needs

to expend so much less effort than a man in order to attain spiritual

grace.

 

We may want to ask, Is a woman's body any less a temple of God than a

man's? Is it any less a "devAlaya"?

 

Certainly not! The Vedic faith does not denigrate the status of women

when it lays down that they are not fit for certain Vedic

'samskArA-s' in life like "upanayana", "gayatri-japa" etc. It is

wrong to say that the Vedas downgrade women just because it precludes

them from such rites because the same Vedas also enjoin them to

wholeheartedly perform and participate in other Vedic sacraments like

"aupasana".

 

The Vedas say that a man must not perform any Vedic sacraments or

rituals if he becomes a widower. A man can perform Vedic sacrifices

only if he has his wife by his side. Once he loses a wife he has no

right to perform even "agnihOtram", say the Vedas... "patni-vatasya

agnihOtram bhavati".... In the old days a husand would normally be

heard wailing beside his wife's dead body, "Oh you woman, you have

gone now and taken with you all my rights to vedic sacrifices!".

 

Now, by the same logic as is applied in the case of women, can we say

that the Vedas denigrate the status of widowers because it takes away

their right to continue performing Vedic rites after their spouses'

death?

 

It would be absurd, isn't it?

 

The Vedas are the source of eternal wisdom. They are revelations of

divine origin. They were not conceived or uttered by mere human

minds. So whatever they lay down definitely has a high purpose. The

Vedas were given to mankind for its upliftment and happiness. It is

said that the love and affection the Vedas have for all Creation is a

thousand times greater than the love that a thousand fathers and

mothers collectively have for their respective children. So it is

inconceivable that the Vedas would ever say anything to denigrate or

downgrade any creature on earth... least of all women.

 

The Vedas say that the rite of "upanayana" brings the man into

contact for the first time as a small boy with the "gAyatri" mantra.

'Upanayana' literally means "taking near". A male member of a family

who has his upanayana done is thus said to be "taken nearer" to his

"guru" under whose care and guidance he is expected to pursue the

Vedic curricula and discipline all his life and achieve spiritual

exaltation. The boy who has his upanayana performed and has learnt

the 'gayatri' mantra, first and foremost, is thus expected to have

"surrendered" at the feet of the Guru. And in the Vedic tradition

the 'guru' is "sAkshAt paramAtmA".... veritable God.... Thus,

Ramakrishna 'parama-hamsa' too was Swami Vivekananada's "guru"...

 

Laying down one's self at the feet of a guru --- 'surrender' --- is

in the Vedic faith one of the best and easiest means to liberating

oneself. The concept of surrender is proclaimed loud and clear in the

'charama-shlOka' of the Bhagavath-Gita: Surrender to Isvara... once

you surrender you no longer own anything: Isvara will grant you grace

through the very act of your surrender.

 

According to the Vedic sAstrA-s, whatever "upanayana" does to the boy

so does "vivAham" or marriage do to the girl member of a Vedic family.

 

Upanayana joins a boy with his guru. Marriage joins a woman with her

'guru'... who is her husband.

 

The boy is made to "surrender" to the Guru at the time of his

upanayana ceremony while the girl does the same too to her husband at

the time of her marriage. The Manusmriti says, "streenAm

upanayana-sthAnE vivAham manurabraveet" .... ie, for a woman marriage

is in the place of upanayana.

 

Now, this must not be immediately construed as another example of the

enslavement of the woman to man. It is modern disease to look at

man-woman relationship in terms of opposites .... as

inferior-superior, master-slave etc. In the Vedic tradition the boy

is asked to 'surrender' to the guru and the girl is asked to regard

her husband as her "guru" ... that's all. There is simply no question

of rights and status for women or for men here at all.

 

The Vedas prescribe appropriate duties for each and one of us ....

according to our capacities and innate natures. They lay down what is

good for men and women. There is no such thing as lower order or

higher order of Vedic duties.... there is only one order : the

appropriate order.

 

By prescribing that only men need to carry out certain duties like

"sandhyAvandanam" and by exempting women from such duties, the Vedas

do not denigrate womanhood or the woman's body. In the Vedic scheme

of things everything in life has its place and there is a proper

place for everything.

 

'Gayatri' is not meant for women. It is meant to be nurtured as holy

mantra by men only. But that does not mean a woman's body is in any

way inferior to a man's or unfit to utter the sacred mantra. As a

great Veidc AchArya of recent times once said, "Glassware to be sent

by railway parcel has to be given special care since it is fragile.

Much greater care is required when despatching kerosene or petrol.

The same precautions are not given to other classes of goods

transported. But does it mean that other goods are inferior than

glassware?" .

 

Similarly, the sacred "gayatri" mantra, the Vedas say, require to be

enshrined only in the body of a man who has been properly initiated

into the tradition because the most sacred mantra requires to be so

enshrined. A woman is not regarded as appropriate carrier of such

Vedic mantras, that's all. But that does not mean that a woman will

be deprived of the spiritual upliftment that the Vedas bestow.

 

A woman has a separate set of Vedic duties laid down for her which

if she carries out faithfully will undoubtedly fetch her all the

felicity and grace that the Vedas extend to men.

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan