IMAGE OF WOMAN IN HINDU RELIGION.
Hinduism doesnot automatically mean negative attitude towards women. Certainly women within the Hindu fold had been exploited and ill-treated with religious sanction. Yet negative portrayals of women by a few misogynist religious leaders are easily counterbalanced by more positive descriptions and of course by the tradition of Goddess-worship. That is why even in this age of Woman's emancipation and demand to be delivered from tradition, it is possible for a woman to be both a feminist and a proud Hindu. A hindu woman should be proud that her religion has accorded such an exalted status and use that to change her social oppression.
(1). Creation of woman. (2) Women as religious leaders. (3) What the Sacred Texts say. (4) Woman as worshippers.
It is important to note that the religious perspective in Hinduism of woman is not the same as it is in Semitic religions. This is due to utterly different creation myths. Western feminists would therefore be mistaken if they imagine that the causes for Hindu woman's inferiority are exactly the same as it is in their culture.
"[At first there was only the Universal Soul]. He received no delight. That is why none receive delight in living alone. He desired to gain a second [companion]. He was the same extent as when male and female embrace. He divided his Self into two parts. Thus husband and wife were created. (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1/4/3)."
Brahman or Supreme God/Soul is thus both male and female, though in reality the Brahman possesses no gender. Therefore, he/she/it can be worshipped as as a purely neutral principle, the Male Principle, (it is not quiet the same as God the Father or God the Son) or as the Mother or as Half-man and Half-woman (Ardhanarishwar). Thus there is no discrimination in the myths.
Hinduism has no organized church. Though the Vedas are held to be the source of dharma, and many think them to be divine revelations, they were authored by various different sages. Therefore there are no ordained clerics. However individuals become religious leaders when society recognizes them as such. In the Vedas we find many verses composed by women sages, thus proving that gender was no bar originally to religious leadership, or having one's verses made a part of sacred text. Again, we find that religious education was open to all. Religious education in Hinduism means study of the Vedas after the student is properly intitiated through the 'sacred thread' ceremony, while secular education consisted of all kinds of arts and sciences. There is naturally no treatise on the extent and nature of female education; however there are scattered references in the literatures of the period which gives us some idea.
The wives were also expected to perform sacrifical rites along with their husbands uttering the sacred mantras and some portions of the ceremonies had to be conducted by the wife alone. In fact the very term 'patni' [wife] means someone who conducts religious rites with her husband. Since wifehood was the lot of the general run of women, this meant that girls were given education on par with the boys. Atharva Veda speaks of education of girls. In one place in the Upanishads there are directions of magical rites to be performed so that a man might gain a learned daughter. They were also eligible for the sacred thread ceremony along with the males, since they had to learn the same religious rituals. The medieval commentator Madhavacharya in particular explains that "Brahman boys of eight years are to be inititated and taught and the same right also belongs to girls". In the ancient texts we also come across the term 'Brahma-vadini', meaning women learned in knowledge of Bramhan. However there is some confusion about what it exactly refers to. In the Upanishads they are described as female teachers who discoursed on sacred texts, but we get no hint about their marital status or whether they themselves wrote any sacred texts. Some of the later books divide women into two classes: (i) the Brahmavadini is an unmarried woman who is eligible for the sacred thread ceremony, Fire sacrifices and study of Vedas. She is an woman who had forgone marriage and family life to devote herself to study and become a scholar. (ii) The Sadyo-badhu is an ordinary girl who only performs some form of sacred thread ceremony before she gets married. That many women gained proficiency in scholarship is evident from some of the definitions we find in Sanskrit dictionaries. A woman learned in the Kkatha branch of vedas is called Kathi and one learned in Bahwaricha branch is called Bahwarichii. Those skilled in Kashkritsni Mimansa skilled were called Kashkritsna. Women were also teachers and a careful distinction is drawn between someone who is merely the wife of a teacher and a woman who is a teacher herself. Upadhya means teacher: upadhyani is the wife of the teacher; but upadhaya is a female teacher, of equivalent status to upadhya. Similarly gurbi is a woman who is a guru herself. Female teachers were naturally preferred for girl students, but from references it is obvious that these female teachers also taught boys and mixed classes. However we do not know whether these women were married or not.
Stories of two women scholars are very popular in legend. One is Maitreyi, wife of sage Yajnabalka. Yajnabalka in old age declared that since all his children have grown up he wished to retire and would divide his property among his two wives. The younger wife Maitreyi however refused and instead asked for knowledge of Eternity. Then follows a lenghty discourse between the two. (Similarly in myth we see Shiva educating Parvati and Parvati educating Shiva in turn about women). This shows that women were allowed to be students and it was not thought reprehensible if a woman showed eagerness for education. Another scholar is Gargi. She was well-known for her accomplishment and participated in competitions among scholars (the equivalent of today's seminar-circuit). She is depicted as a teacher. In the stories she fearlessly challenges male scholars and most importantly, no one questioned her right to do so or was shocked by her 'unfeminine' conduct.
Girls thus more or less received the same education as boys. However female scholarship and teachers were not as common as the male. It was felt that a woman's major duty is to be a wife and mother and extensive education and teaching interfers with her executing household tasks. As time passed, this attitude became more and more rigid. Many of the later lawmakers declared that for a woman her sacred thread ceremony (and therefore initiation to formal education) is marriage alone. One very late book declares that "In previous ages, girls recieved the sacred thread, studied the Vedas, and had the right to perform Savitri mantra". The operative prhase here is "in previous ages" --- obviously woman's right to education kept on deterioriating. Finally, the priestly class, anxious to accumulate all prestige declared that lower castes and women cannot study the Vedas; women were even barred from learning Sanskrit, since it was the dev-bhasha or language of the gods. Manusamhita, a sacred lawbook, declared that because women has no right to learn the holy language, is not allowed to study Vedas and cannot perform any religious ceremonies, they are entirely worthless creatures. Females from noble and royal families continued to have a good education. Sometimes, a Brahmin father might also educate his daughter. However, in general, women as clerics and teachers of the sacred texts disappeared.
Even 500 years before the birth of Christ, Hinduism had become spiritually stagnant. The Brahmins enjoyed complete monopoly over religious rituals and they were the interpreters of sacred texts. As a result religion become overly ritualistic and ceremonies too expensive. Ordinary people could no longer feel any connection with their gods. Also, society became stratified, with the lower castes considered inferior and polluting to the Brahmins. However such a state of affairs cannot last indefinitely. So there arose what is known as the Bhakti movements. The term bhakti means devotion. The movements had two aspects --- religious and social, though as is common in Hinduism, the two are too deeply entwined to be separated. There were several such movements all over India. Each sect worshipped a particular god (like Vishnu, Shiva, Kali) as the manifestation of the Brahman to men. These new movements declared that one does not need the priests to mediate between men and God and that one does not need to study the sacred texts to know Him/Her. Love alone is enough. All devotees are equal in God's eyes. This meant that on earth too all human beings are equal. There is no highcaste or lowcaste and women are equal with men. Naturally enough these movements produced women religious leaders like Mirabai and Akka Mahadevi. It also produced texts like Mollah Ramayanam, written by a low caste woman. However even in these movements prejudices lingered so we do not find as many women leaders as men. Such movements and tradition of women spiritual leaders continued through the middle ages to the twentyfirst century. During this time Buddhism and Jainsiam also established themselves and many women became nuns in their orders.
The number of sacred texts in Hinduism is vast, since there is no one single book. The Vedas themselves are a collection. Dharmashastras [sacred lawbooks], Puranas [mythological anthologies] and the epics Ramayana and Mahabharata which form the basis of day to day life of ordinary hindus have been edited repeatedly throughout the centuries, with new materials added again and again to conform to the changing social codes. The special difficulty with Shastras was that usage and decisions of the community elders in disputes overrode their prescriptions, since these laws were not regarded as immutable Word of God. It is therefore difficult to say how much people actually followed them in real life, whether it is about ill-treatment or good treatment of women. Also, even though the various shastras go by the name of a particular author, they too are actually compilations by a number of writers, so that what one individual says conflicts with other portions of the text. However all these sources taken together can present a general picture of the woman's ritual status.
Women were generally held to be under the authority of men. Though the Vedas and Uapnishads are silent regarding this matter, perhaps it was because in simpler pastoral societies the distinction between 'man's work' and 'woman's work' was not so clear cut and heirarchy not developed. However as society progressed becoming more complex with establishments of large communities with various types of occupations, a great many treatises were written about a woman's dharma and position.
Even in the Vedas we find a few sages complaining about the character of women, that they are deceitful as wolves and their love can never be permamant. (However these plaints seem to me more to laments of disappointed lovers, rather than authorirative judgements). However many also give judgements that women have naturally loose morals. Women naturally tempt men, and even the wise fall prey to their wiles. As soon as a woman sees a man she becomes anxious for sex. Rage, meanness, fickleness, neglect of her duties and religion are the natural instincts of women. They have no wisdom or judgement. They are forbidden to study sacred texts or chant mantras which prove that they are worthless. However this misogyny is not actually as widespread as it seems. Nor is their sexuality regarded with horror as among Christian theologies. The emphasis was of course always there, that a woman should not be independant except under certain circumstances and that motherhood was her highest goal.
On the other hand, many sages lauded women to the skies holding that they are naturally loving, dutiful and never swerves from the path of truth. therefore it is the duty of a father to tenderly care for his daughter, for the husuband to keep his wife happy, and the son to honour his mother and maintian her always. Those who do not do these things, go to hell and is censured in this world by society. ---
"Even after marriage, women must be honoured and adorned with food, clothings and ornaments by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law, who desire their own welfare. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards. Where the female relations live in grief , the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are happy certainly prospers forever. The houses against which female relations, not being duly honoured, pronounce a curse, perish completely, as if destroyed by black magic. Hence men who seek their own welfare, should always honour the women of their households on holidays and festivals with gifts of ornaments, clothes, and (dainty) food. In that family, where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, propserity and goodness will assuredly be lasting".
"If a woman does not guard herself, then she confined in the house under trustworthy and obedient servants by wise men, are not well guarded; but those who of their own accord keep guard over themselves, are well guarded". (Obviously here women are felt to be capable of moral control).
A wife is called the greatest friend a householder can have. Pragmatic explanations are provided as to why men should regard their wives as partners, since conjugal relationships are seen as social contracts rather than purely romantic ones. "Between wives who are responsible for bearing children, who secure many blessings, who are worthy of worship and irradiate their dwellings, and between the goddess of fortune there is no difference whatsoever. The production of children, the nurture of children, and the conduct of the daily life of men, --- [of these matters] woman is alone is the cause. Offspring, the due performance on religious rites, faithful service to the family, highest sexual satisfaction and heavenly bliss for the ancestors and oneself, these are under the control of the wife alone." In order to gain these things, a husband should always satisfy his wife in every way. Evidently these strictures were meant only for those whose marriages were arranged. In love marriages such injunctions are not necessary.
Startlingly, women enjoyed an important ritual superiority over men: they are by their very nature always pure. It is true that a woman can become impure, because of her bodily functions like childbirth or immoral actions, but the impurity is only temporary. The comparisons were with earth and fire. The earth can never be polluted for all times and its purity always returns; even though fire burns up impure substances, it itself remains untouched by pollution and is always pure. So too, unlike men who have to purify themselves, women are ritually pure. Yet the reason for their purity is one biological process that men cannot ever hope to have --- menstruation! It was thought that with menstrual blood each month, the impurities and sins committed during that month, unknowingly or knowingly is washed away. As long the cycle lasted for four days, the woman was impure; but once it was over, with the impure blood being ddischarged, she becomes pristine again. This is true of both virgins and mothers. Even the sins of bearing illegitimate children are thus cleansed: "the woman becomes as pure as refined gold". Thus, when came to pollution, women's status was higher: they did not have to do anything, by their very nature they were pure. Needless to say, such an attitude had died out during the first century AD.
Obviously then in Hinduism, the body as such and its physical processes are not held abhorrent. This is demonstrated in the way sexual gratification is treated. It is accepted as a matter of course that men and women do feel sexual desire and therefore steps must be taken to see that it does not destabilize society. Kama [desire] is held to be one of the three duties of a householder. While this desire includes all kinds of desires, a high premium is put on rati or seuxual satisfaction. But while some criticize women for being temptresses, the temptress-tradition is not basic to Hinduism. In the myths, gods send down beautiful demigoddesses to make powerful ascetics fall, so that their power wouldnot outsrip the gods'. But the females are not blamed; the men are held to be responsible for their fall and in consequence they lose the mystic powers they had accumulated. On a less exalted plane, women were not considered sinful if they felt sexual desire. The Vedas contain some fairly graphic descriptions by women sages. The texts delicately warn that if the husband fails to satisfy his wife in this regard, then the wife will stray. It was also believed that women derive greater pleasure from sexual encounter than men. A myth about this with some variations is told in many places. A king once drank from a magic pool and was transformed into a woman. She then bore a 100 children. When finally the king of the gods told her that she can get her masculinity back, she told him that she wished to remain a woman. A woman knows greater sexual satisfaction and so it is better for the sake of pleasure to be a female.
(However, my personal favourite is this long rant: "the wife who is sweet-spoken, does not go against her husband's wishes and is devoted to her husband is not a human but a goddess ... The husband whose wife is under his control enjoys heaven on this earth only, but the husband whose wife does not listen to him suffers hell in this world. Even in heaven affection between husband and wife is rare (?!). ... The wife is like a bloodsucking insect ... The insect only sucks blood of man, but the wife sucks away man's blood, wealth, willpower, peace of mind and everything else... when [the husband and wife] young, she turns away from her husband. In old age, she treats the husband scornfully like a servant." Whew! Obviously this writer is a poor henpecked husband!)
Goddess-worship also influenced images of women. A warrior-woman was not regarded as anything unnatural, though unusual. One example is Adbhuta Ramayana: here Sita overshadows Ram. After Ram had killed Ravana it was revealed that this was only a practice run, so to speak. He was required actually to to kill elder Ravana with a 100 heads and arms. However on the battlefield this Ravana strikes Ram unconscious. Then Sita comes to the battlefield. She duels with Ravana and kills him herself.
God in Hinduism can be worshipped in many forms and obviously Goddess-worship can be a source of strength. There are various ways of worshipping the deities as well. There is no discrimination against women in this regard. Though it was insisted that women cannot be allowed to chant the sacred formulas, they were allowed to worship equally with men. Also, among the lower castes, such prohibitions meant less, since there the men too were forbidden from knowing Sanskrit. so a host of folk-rituals grew up where women took the leading role. Today there are a growing number of Hindu priestesses all over India trained in various rituals and the Vedas, who manage to earn support themselves by their activities. However there is still prejudice against them in many parts.
Two modes of worship in Vaisnava tradition is particularly interesting. One is the Radha-Krishna relationship. In classical mythology Radha is the older lover of Krishna when he was still an adolescent. Their love story was transformed into an allegory of the relationship between god and devotee. All worshippers, male and female, are said to be women in Krishna's presence. Just as Radha blindly loved him and pined away for him, so too the human individual pines away for God. Naturally this allegory attracted many women worshippers, many of whom left their homes declaring they are married to Krishna alone. This is also not a simple matter of the traditional hierarchy of male/female dominance/submission. In many stories and songs it is Krishna who is anxious to win Radha's favour: God is anxious to know his devotees. The most notable example is where Krishna declares to Radha "Give me [to hold] your feet" --- it turns the traditional relationship between God and devotee topsy-turvey, through the mode of a lover pleading with his beloved. However most women prefer the Krishna-Yasoda mode. Yasoda is Krishna's fostermother. In this kind of worship, God is pictured as a little boy and the worshipper as his mother. As human boys do, he gets into mischief , steals butter (equivalent of stealing cookies), breaks pots, plays with other boys etc. The mother scolds him, ties him up with a long rope and tries to beat him. The boy excuses himself by saying he is a good boy and has done nothing. Ultimately the mother forgives him. Similarly, the worshipper addresses God in scolding tones asking why he behaves in this way, calling forth all the tenderness a mother feels for her child. God here allows himself to be berated and punished, enjoying a mother's love. Obviously, in this mode of worship it is the worshipper who is in control : though God remains God with all his powers that he displays on occasion to his mother, yet he willingly humbles himself and puts himself under the worshipper's authority because of love. In such case, it is nonsense to speak of hierarchal relationship or sexual politics.
So what went wrong?
There are of course many cultural factors behind woman's social inferiority, stemming basically from the fact that men are physically stronger than women and established dominance. In Hinduism the religious root of women's oppression stems from the belief that the son and daughter are not inherently equal. Though many sages argued that since both come from the father's body, there is no difference between the two, ritual status of the son is higher. Perhaps this belief that "if a man's vitality is greater then a son would be produced, but if a woman's vitality is greater then a daughter would be produced" is also responsible. Men looked upon their sons "as mirrors of the father". A son therefore conducts the funeral ceremony of the parents. Though in absence of a son, a daughter can also perform them, it is only in absence of a brother. A daughter is seen as belonging ultimately not to her father's family, but to her husband's. So the first thing that must be done is to remove this idea that a son is more value and that duaghters are born to go to another's house. After all we women are supposed to be a part of Shakti.