(A discussion from 2015)
In Vedic and Upanishadic times, women had a lot of freedom. They moved around freely in public. They participated in intellectual and spiritual discussions. They studied the Vedas. Society gave woman the highest value, saying “matṛ dēvō bhāva”—first we worship the mother as God, and only then the father (pitṛ dēvō bhāva), the teacher (ācārya dēvō bhāva), and so on.
Women wore sacred threads, too, in the olden days; they were given upanayana. Upākarma was practiced by women. That’s why, if you look at the Lalitā Sahasranāma, it clearly states that she is savyāpasavya-mārgasthā sarvāpadvinivāriṇī—savya meaning left, and apasavya meaning right. This refers to a type of ancient ornament called the channavīra, which divides the body in two—thus, she wears the upanayana on both the left and right side.
Upanayana for males was just one branch, going right, but for females it was two branches. This means women had the right to perform Gāyatrī Mantra japa and Saṃdhyāvandana—she could do all these things back then. Thus, we have examples such as Maitreyī, Gārgī, and the other women sages who questioned Yājñavalkya about the authenticity of certain statements in the Vedas.
Over time, however, things changed. Nowadays, mainstream religious people say the Vedas are not supposed to be recited by women. Which is a shame, because all the Vedas came from the mouth of a woman—Saraswati herself. So while women used to participate in society and philosophy and religion at a much higher level, the unfortunate situation in modern times is that they have been brought down in status.
How did this transition come about? In the beginning, I think, it was in part a reaction to the early Mughal invasions. When women were moving around freely, it made them more vulnerable to rape and assault—so Hindu men wanted to protect them. I suspect that this gradually curtailed the freedom of women, and afterward there was no going back. It’s the typical fundamentalist narrative: “If women are allowed to learn and recite the Vedas, then they will gain their freedom and go out again!”
Again, it’s unfortunate, but that’s history. We can’t change it, but at least we can educate people about it. Women, especially, have a right to be informed about these things.
It was within this context that women were eventually prevented from entering temples during their menses. In ancient times, a menstruating woman was considered so pure that she was worshiped as a Goddess. What is pure we don’t touch, and what we don’t touch we call a taboo.
So the reason for the taboo of not allowing a woman to enter a temple is precisely the opposite of what we think: she is not impure. Quite the contrary, she is a living Goddess at that time. So when she enters the temple, the energy of the God or Goddess, which is there in the temple’s mūrti, will shift over to her and the idol will become lifeless—because a menstruating woman is life.
That is why one of the greatest sins against woman is telling her there is something impure about her menstrual cycle.
In Guwahati, Assam, we have the Kāmākhya Temple, where the Goddess menstruates. During her period, she is considered so holy that people are not allowed to go in and see her.
The thing is, Kali and Sundarī are the same Goddess. Kali is the dark one and Sundarī is the bright one. This same Sundarī becomes Kali when she menstruates; meaning dark, unknown fears are present at that time. Kali is worshiped as Rajaswalā when she is menstruating, and as Sundarī when she is not.
We also have a Kāmākhya Pīṭha at Devipuram. We have women priests reciting Devi’s hymns, doing pujas to Ganesh, Shyama, Vārāhī and Lalitā, and performing all of the hōmās. We do not prevent women from entering when they are menstruating. We have no taboos against that. They are not only allowed inside, they can receive worship there. Widows are also welcome.
Why? Because their purity or impurity does not depend upon these external conditions. The body is always impure; it consists of hair, skin, meat and bone. It is only because consciousness is there, because it is aware, that a body becomes pure.
This also explains why, when there is no life in the body, it becomes very inauspicious. We will not even drink water in the same room with a corpse. We take it away to the śmaśāna to burn or bury it, depending upon our individual customs.
That is why consciousness is called the Devi, or Lalitā. She is the one who makes this impure body pure.
Menstrual cycles are in rhythm with nature. Nature is full of such cyclical periods—inhaling and exhaling, morning and evening, light and darkness, as well as cycles in time.
Because we are in the northern hemisphere, dakṣiṇāyaṇa occurs when the sun is going south and the night grows shorter, and uttarāyaṇa occurs when the sun is going north and the day grows longer.
Of all these cycles, however, the one most important and visible for us is chandramāna—the lunar cycle. Every 28 days, 14 plus 14, a new cycle begins. In ancient times, before so-called civilization took hold, women used to menstruate in harmony with the lunar cycle. Women were associated with the moon.
The menstrual cycle takes place when the production of new life has failed to occur, and that which has not conceived has to be flushed out. It is this process of flushing out which produces the menstrual blood. So it is an act of purification, not “impurification.”
It is a preparation for conception, which is very sacred. In Hindu dharma there are four puruṣārthās: dharma, artha, kāma and moksha. Kāma is considered pure because it leads to conception. Life wants to sustain itself; it doesn’t want to give up. And how do you conceive? Through kāma.
The time of ovulation is most auspicious, and the process of flushing out is a preparation for that. Conception may or may not occur, but it is still associated with kāma.
This whole taboo against menstruating women indulging in sexual activity is also wrong. If you want to follow family planning, then there is good reason to indulge during this time.
Of course, if it makes the woman feel uncomfortable or if the man is turned off by the sight of the blood or fears he is hurting the woman, then it is counterproductive. But if they have no such inhibitions, then there is nothing wrong in it.
No comments:
Post a Comment