Ask Madhuri a Question about Hinduism

[Madhuri]

Is there anything you are confused about, think is weird, are unsure of or are just plain curious about Hinduism? How do Hindu concepts compare with the other main world religions?

I find that people are generally clueless about Hinduism.

Most importantly, I'm bored. So please ask me questions about Hinduism. It may even challenge me!

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Namaste

Why does Hinduism speak of cosmic principles in terms of gender? What is the significance of this?

 

[Madhuri]

Namaste

Why does Hinduism speak of cosmic principles in terms of gender? What is the significance of this?

What have I got myself into

Haha.

My understanding is that God has male and female aspects. Everything in existence represents one or the other aspect. But 'male' and 'female' is not biological in this context, although the bodies in existence are also representations of these aspects.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

What have I got myself into

Haha.

My understanding is that God has male and female aspects. Everything in existence represents one or the other aspect. But 'male' and 'female' is not biological in this context, although the bodies in existence are also representations of these aspects.

Namaste

Can you elaborate on this? Why are the biological attributes of maleness and femaleness assigned to god's duality-in-unity?

 

[Madhuri]

Namaste

Can you elaborate on this? Why are the biological attributes of maleness and femaleness assigned to god's duality-in-unity?

Do you mean, why do people assign these attributes to God or why does God have these attributes?

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Either or both, as you see it ought be answered

 

[Polarbear]

Hey Mahuri I am wondering what Hinduism's views on gender roles is. Also is the world just an illusion?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I have a couple:

1. Why do you believe in it?

2. (If you accept questions for Atheistic Hinduism) What exactly is the difference between Atheistic Hinduism and Buddhism?

 

[Shuddhasattva]

"atheistic hinduism" is not hinduism.

 

[Madhuri]

Either or both, as you see it ought be answered

Generally speaking, I would say the position in Hinduism is that God actually does have male and female aspects (as well as neutral). Some believe that the personifications of these aspects exist eternally and naturally and some believe that the personifications come from Brahman, which is formless; that is that they become manifest rather than exist independently.

One thing stands out for me, if we take the scriptures even a little literally, is that everything has a personification. All of the 'gods' personify some energy or aspect of God.

The ultimate personifications are the divine Father and the divine Mother. They are one but also distinct. The Father is the Self, the Being, the Life, the Mind etc. The Mother is the creative power of the Father. Without Her, nothing can happen, nothing can be manifest.

Everything then that exists is a reflection of God in some way. Gender is only one reflection of these aspects of God. And this applies even if we conclude that these divine aspects do not literally have male and female form.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

So the Mother is not the Self, or Pure Consciousness, but its energy and effect, then? Why is that?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

"atheistic hinduism" is not hinduism.

I was asking Madhuri, not you.

 

[Madhuri]

Hey Mahuri I am wondering what Hinduism's views on gender roles is.

Hinduism doesn't have a clear stance on gender roles. I would say that Hinduism does express that 'male' has particular qualities and 'female' has particular qualities.
We find exceptions in scripture such as the Manusmriti, which is a 'Hindu' law book. But the Manusmriti is not the same as Veda. I think it is highly contextual and don't particularly trust the source or authenticity of it.

However, Hinduism has been traditionally very steeped in gender roles.

What I perceive in India is that many traditions have arisen over time, like Sati and Caste, which are not philosophically compatible, and the rule books like Manusmriti do not always seem consistent with Vedic philosophy.

So we have different versions of Hinduism. The versions that focus on rules and regulations create great gender roles which are comparable with the likes of Islam, for example, and we have versions that focus on deep philosophy.

My personal opinion is that rules and roles were created to guide society based on philosophical principles. But these are greatly contextual and often not even consistent. In other words, not of divine origin.

Also is the world just an illusion?

That depends on which Hindu tradition we ask. There are Hindu religions that do view the world as an illusion, believing that nothing is actually real.

However many Hindus support the view that the world is in fact real but our perception of it and of reality is illusory. The world is only illusory because of our own ignorance. So for example, all things are part of God and God exists within all things. An enlightened person is completely aware of this, and aware of our nature as a soul rather than a body. But the ignorant person (basically everyone) identifies completely with this body and sees separation everywhere. This perception of dualism causes us to strive for power and position. We act selfishly and do harm. We think petty things are important. We struggle to see the big picture.

I hope that makes some sense!

 

[Madhuri]

I have a couple:

1. Why do you believe in it?

I believe in aspects of it. The thing about Hinduism is it is difficult to define. Hinduism is so many different things. What makes me identify with Hinduism is the main principles taught in the Gita and Upanishads, which perfectly match my life experiences, as well as the specific spiritual methods taughts that have what seems to me to be fairly 'scientific' results. What I mean by that is, there is a method to follow and expected results (quite specific) that are actually achieved.

I identify with Hinduism because it's the closest thing to 'real' that I can perceive and relate to.

2. (If you accept questions for Atheistic Hinduism) What exactly is the difference between Atheistic Hinduism and Buddhism?

I'm not really aware of specific traditions that are atheistic and Hindu, although that could be debatable. One could argue that pantheism is atheistic, for example. Other than that, I think being an atheist Hindu comes down more to an individual interpretation rather than an actual religion or tradition.

 

[Madhuri]

So the Mother is not the Self, or Pure Consciousness, but its energy and effect, then? Why is that?

That's like asking why does God exist. Not sure there is an answer to why except that it 'just is'. I do not know if any scripture within Hinduism answers this question

EDIT: Sorry, I misread you question.
The only variation to my answer I can make now though is that these aspects are natural to God and they embody different qualities. These qualities are then represented in all areas of existence as everything is a reflection of the Divine in some way.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

A Hindu is one who accepts the primacy of the Vedas.

The Vedas are theistic.

Hinduism is theistic.


It may have variations thereof; pan(en!)theism, transtheism, rotational henotheism for lack of a better term, monotheism, monism - whatever. But it is theistic.

This syllogism brought to you by the foundation for mildly hijacking threads to drive home the truth. How you unpack it is up to you.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

That's like asking why does God exist. Not sure there is an answer to why except that it 'just is'. I do not know if any scripture within Hinduism answers this question

Hm, I suppose that's one view: to me it comes down to cultural attitudes which make the male the subject through the magic of the male gaze; that which is gazed upon becomes the object.

In my opinion this cultural programming led to the ascription of male as consciousness, and female as that which is perceived and ultimately illusory.

But this is not the sole view taken in the scriptures, or the paramparas, as regards the male/female duality... don't want to hijack your thread though so I'll stop here, if this is of interest to you perhaps we can take it up in the DIR?

 

[Madhuri]

Hm, I suppose that's one view: to me it comes down to cultural attitudes which make the male the subject through the magic of the male gaze; that which is gazed upon becomes the object.

In my opinion this cultural programming led to the ascription of male as consciousness, and female as that which is perceived and ultimately illusory.

But this is not the sole view taken in the scriptures, or the paramparas, as regards the male/female duality... don't want to hijack your thread though so I'll stop here, if this is of interest to you perhaps we can take it up in the DIR?

Absolutely, would be interesting to see other ideas and what the others know about the subject.

I am aware that the idea of Shakti/Prakriti being an illusion is only one Hindu view. I certainly did not grow up with this belief and of course there are the Shaktas who do not believe that either. As a Vaishnava, I was not even exposed to the idea of Shakti being illusion. I was actually taught that all souls are female! And also that the world is not 'unreal'. That which is manifest is real, we simply are blind to its divinity.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I believe in aspects of it. The thing about Hinduism is it is difficult to define. Hinduism is so many different things. What makes me identify with Hinduism is the main principles taught in the Gita and Upanishads, which perfectly match my life experiences, as well as the specific spiritual methods taughts that have what seems to me to be fairly 'scientific' results. What I mean by that is, there is a method to follow and expected results (quite specific) that are actually achieved.

I identify with Hinduism because it's the closest thing to 'real' that I can perceive and relate to.



I'm not really aware of specific traditions that are atheistic and Hindu, although that could be debatable. One could argue that pantheism is atheistic, for example. Other than that, I think being an atheist Hindu comes down more to an individual interpretation rather than an actual religion or tradition.

Thanks for the answers

 

[Shuddhasattva]

In my opinion this cultural programming led to the ascription of male as consciousness, and female as that which is perceived and ultimately illusory.

I am aware that the idea of Shakti/Prakriti being an illusion is only one Hindu view. I certainly did not grow up with this belief and of course there are the Shaktas who do not believe that either. As a Vaishnava, I was not even exposed to the idea of Shakti being illusion. I was actually taught that all souls are female! And also that the world is not 'unreal'. That which is manifest is real, we simply are blind to its divinity.

Yes, perhaps I shouldn't have said "and is ultimately illusory;" I think that may have been my advaitin bias leaking through - although I think the "real or illusory" thing is largely a matter of semantics than any real philosophical difference.

Maya is illusion, whether the embodiment of it, or the force which inflicts it upon jivas shrouded by ahamkar/avidya.