Gender relationships during our times are passing through a severe zone of appropriations and contestations. This post is not so much about our times, but a small note on the Brahmanical tradition and the stories of dominance encoded. Written in a note form, this write explores some gaps by looking at iconography.
- Shiva and Parvati when depicted in painting or sculpture are physically much more proportionate, as compared to in the case of Vishnu and Laxmi. Till the coming of Radha and Krishna (Radha was never Krishna's wife), vaishnavite iconography has shown the goddess to be proportionally a lot smaller than the god. In religious/political iconography proportionate size is directed connected to power and prestige.
closeup of the famous Varaha panel at the Udaigiri caves. Note the proportion of the goddess (Bhu Devi) to the figure of the Varaha Devta
- The nature of (power) relationship between the 'god' and the 'goddess' is betrayed by some other elements apart from size. It is well known that the left part of shiva (Bamadevata) is considered the feminin side and this culminates in the Ardhanarishwara icon
- Shiva in his lifestyle and appearance, in no way, fits into an ideal husband mode; yet he is the Lord worshipped every Monday in the quest for an ideal husband. Most likely a rich settled husband like Vishnu whose feet the girl can press all her life in utter submissiveness...
- Am i making a point that in a way Shaivism is less oppressive in terms of gender relationships? no...but less oppressive in the message of its visual culture yes...but the role of the feminine principle seems to have a chronological message. The first wave of Hinduism(Brahmanism) sweeping across India was Shaivite, and Vaishnavism was later layering (from Mathura to Srirangam through puri we have evidence of Vaishnavism taking over from Shaivism). In almost all subcontinental societies we find this trend being a parallel of shifts from hunting-pastoral to agrarian-trade based economies. Also barring some exceptions, we see that all the medieval expansionist kingdoms adopted to Vaishnavism. It could be that Vishnu with wives like Bhudevi and Laxmi (land and wealth) is a more effective metaphor for material progress.
Before i wind up this chain of thoughts it will be nice to stop by and admire the Madurai Meenakshi temple. For not only it is beautiful a vibrant it may carry lessons in appropriation and resistance. The temple (in all probabilities) belonged to the local tribal goddess Meenakshi. with the spread of brahmanical culture in tamil land contestation and appropriation definitely seems to have taken place.This is encoded in the story of how shiva came from the himalayas and fell in love with meenakshi and married her...(at one stroke putting an independent tribal goddess into a subservient relationship with an alien male god). The religious texts declared the temple to be the abode of shiva. However, even today because of local support and patronage it is the meenakshi shrine which is the larger structure in the complex, the central axis is still aligned to it and in the temple ritual practices...meenakshi still remains central [even though the holy tank is built in front of the sundereshwara (shiva) shrine]. This meenakshi is capable of raising her hands to hit shiva if he cheats and is not just a marker of land and wealth.
