Women and Vaishnavism?

[Metempsychosis]

This topic seems off-topic.

But I have noticed a trend in forums,that there are more women choosing Vaishnavism among other sects within Hinduism (especially Advaita vedanta).Is there any reason for this behavior or am I totally off-base?

 

[Poeticus]

This topic seems off-topic.

How so? You posted in the correct DIR, and made a separate thread.

But I have noticed a trend in forums,that there are more women choosing Vaishnavism among other sects within Hinduism (especially Advaita vedanta).Is there any reason for this behavior or am I totally off-base?

It's all about that Krishna dude. Apparently, he makes them go ga-ga.

 

[Metempsychosis]

How so? You posted in the correct DIR, and made a separate thread.



It's all about that Krishna dude. Apparently, he makes them go ga-ga.

How about other dudes- Shiva,Ganesh and the lesser known Skanda(murugan)?

 

[Kalidas]

from what I understand Krishna was quit the hunk in his days. He was also a ladies man.

 

[Metempsychosis]

from what I understand Krishna was quit the hunk in his days. He was also a ladies man.

Ha!So,is it more about physical looks?Shiva looks much more macho in that case.

 

[Kalidas]

Ha!So,is it more about physical looks?Shiva looks much more macho in that case.

Oh no I don't know if that is the case at all! I was merely joining in with MV as part of the joke. To be honest I don't know, you would think Shaktism would be more popular among women because well they worship the goddess. And yet here I am a man and I worship a Goddess and many women on here worship krishna or Shiva etc etc etc. I don't think devotees choose, I think the divine shines on all in a different way.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Oh no I don't know if that is the case at all! I was merely joining in with MV as part of the joke. To be honest I don't know, you would think Shaktism would be more popular among women because well they worship the goddess. And yet here I am a man and I worship a Goddess and many women on here worship krishna or Shiva etc etc etc. I don't think devotees choose, I think the divine shines on all in a different way.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

It's all about that Krishna dude. Apparently, he makes them go ga-ga.

not everyone sees krsna that way , ...but true it attracts some in that way men and women ,....

this is my krsna :bow:

this is radhas krsna :namaste

this I find disturbing , it is someones fantasy idea .

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

Ha!So,is it more about physical looks?Shiva looks much more macho in that case.

it shouldnt be ......

but unfortunately to some it is all about looks and fantasys ,

I feel bad to say this but I realy wish some vaisnava would stop reducung radha krsna to the level of cute dolls ....it disturbs me at times .

Ok , ... krsna stories for children is one thing but krsna cartoons for adults ?....it worries me ...

no it should not be about looks . and also there is more to krsna lila than fantasy game playing .

 

[Metempsychosis]

namaskaram :namaste



it shouldnt be ......

but unfortunately to some it is all about looks and fantasys ,

I feel bad to say this but I realy wish some vaisnava would stop reducung radha krsna to the level of cute dolls ....it disturbs me at times .

Ok , ... krsna stories for children is one thing but krsna cartoons for adults ?....it worries me ...

no it should not be about looks . and also there is more to krsna lila than fantasy game playing .

Thanks a lot!I remember this:
Little Krishna - The Darling Of Vrindavan (Full) [English] - YouTube

 

[Poeticus]

Ha!So,is it more about physical looks?Shiva looks much more macho in that case.

It's all about physical looks, mi hermanito. Shiva is definitely macho. Mahadev ki sawghan, he's macho-macho.

not everyone sees krsna that way , ...but true it attracts some in that way men and women

Aren't there countless scriptures that go into great detail on the physical attributes of Krishna?

They definitely make it seem as if he's very attractive, second only to Rama in terms of physical beauty.

 

[Metempsychosis]

It's all about physical looks, mi hermanito. Shiva is definitely macho. Mahadev ki sawghan, he's macho-macho.

Jai Shiva!

 

[Poeticus]

Jai Shiva!

Apparently, in a few schools in India, when they teach about Ganesha loosing his original head, the teachers say that Parvati cried.

But, the scriptures say that Parvati didn't shed one tear - she became enraged and was about to go bonkers. This strength of Parvati, of the feminine, is something that you and I both would think would inspire female devotees to come to Shaivism, or even Shaktism. But, it's odd that they go to Vaishnavism.

Kisna, it seems, can be quite persuasive.

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

Vaishnavism of the day believes in the hierarchy of--
1) God(s)
2) Avatara-s
3) People (among men)
4) people (men vs. women)
5) food
6) guNa-s
7) in short, a worldview always colored by H word

So, should we say, Vaishnavism as practiced today is hardly simply Vishnu-worship; there are deep undercurrents- accumulated purely because of historical reasons- of various worldviews/ philosophies that one has to subscribe to before embracing Vaishnavism.

In short, Vaishnavism looks right now, not hard-core Hinduism, but a some kind of middle ground between Abrahmanic and Brahmanic religions.

So, I guess, Vaishnavism becomes the popular destination for westerners shifting towards Hinduism, and for Easterners shifting away from Hinduism.

I thus rest my case here.

 

[Poeticus]

So, should we say, Vaishnavism as practiced today is hardly simply Vishnu-worship

Mere priya bhai, you forgot to mention that the "Vishnu" of Vaishnavism is definitely not the Vishu-Surya Narayan of the Veda-s.

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

Mere priya bhai, you forgot to mention that the "Vishnu" of Vaishnavism is definitely not the Vishu-Surya Narayan of the Veda-s.

Surya Narayana is definitely a separate God, that is, Lord Surya. But we must understand here that Surya is the God controlling the destination "Narayana" (where nara and nAra, i.e., waters, meet) a place where Vishnu passes through in order to incarnate.

The another such place is that of "hari".

So we as Vedicists dont bother if Vishnu is given epithets "Narayana" and "Hari" by present days' bhakta-s of Vishnu, even if these belong to Surya and Asvins, respectively, proper.

 

[Poeticus]

Surya Narayana is definitely a separate God, that is, Lord Surya. But we must understand here that Surya is the God controlling the destination "Narayana" (where nara and nAra, i.e., waters, meet) a place where Vishnu passes through in order to incarnate.

Yes, this is theologically correct 100%. But, you misunderstood me...kinda.

The Vishnu that is worshipped today by modern Vaishnavites is no where close to the Vishnu eulogized and praised in the Mandalas.

So we as Vedicists dont bother if Vishnu is given epithets "Narayana" and "Hari" by present days' bhakta-s of Vishnu, even if these beong to Surya and Asvins, respectively, proper.

It gets irritating after a while, you gotta admit that.

 

[Vinayaka]

Are there not many different Vaishnava schools? Seems we're generalizing, if so.

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

But then Vishnu ji takes on all attributes in the dictionary, so no problems, but yes it gets irritating after a while sometimes.

As our friend Kalidas says, any short cut is most probably a wrong way.
It has become kind of short cut with some sects of the day it seems.

Are there not many different Vaishnava schools? Seems we're generalizing, if so.

Surely, there are, but under the influence of kaliyuga some virus kind have bludgeoned much more in contrast to others.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

In short, Vaishnavism looks right now, not hard-core Hinduism, but a some kind of middle ground between Abrahmanic and Brahmanic religions.

This is an interesting comment because as a female Shakta I have often thought "Why not Krishna/Vishnu?". As in, I recognized the tremendous popularity of Krishna here in the West, yet he was not really the form of God I was drawn too. However I do get it.

Krishna is very charismatic in his portrayals. He is a lover a warrior and a sage as various points. He seems like a fun guy to hang out with. If you think about the western mind-set as well as our tendency to be weened on Greek and Roman hero stories, Krishna is the closest to fitting the western "hero" ideal.

Shiva, on the other hand probably strikes most westerners as stoic, mysterious. And with every other non-Hindu I have met, the first (and sometimes only) thing they attribute to Shiva is Destruction. He is a "evil" god. Or at least a scary god. Unless they look further, Shiva is a no-go for a lot of people. Even in one adopts Hinduism, this kind of mindset about Shiva can be hard to overcome (speaking from experience here)

Shakti is viewed in a similarly negative light, even among many women whether they want to admit it or not. She is often thought of as temperamental, highly sexual, fierce, dominating - qualities that women are discouraged from exhibiting in the west all the while being told they should be demur, quiet, not make a fuss, and let others sexually exploit them as much as they want. Don't fight back. Again, on a deep psychological level, women (and men) in the west have trouble with Shakti for these reasons. Only with deeper reading and education does the shift change. For me, no such shift was needed really, because Devi called to me from the start.

However as a westerner, raised in the west, I get the appeal of Krishna - I just don't share it. There is a place for Vishnu and his incarnations in Shaktism for sure, and I respect any Hindu who is genuinely devoted, no matter who they are devoted to.

Sorry for the long rant!

:camp: