K: I have a question: do you know if in the Bhagavad Gita there is a text about man and woman? That a woman can only get free by a birth being a man. The Hari Krishna people believe this. Patriarchal system… thanks for answer…
Sundari: The Hari Krishna’s do not have a teaching, theirs is a dualistic ideology. There is no scripture in Vedanta that teaches such dualistic nonsense regarding freedom through birth as a ‘man’. Vedanta is about non-duality. First of all, there is no such thing as a ‘man’ or a ‘woman’, nor is it concerned with matriarchal or patriarchal systems. This is the most extreme form of duality because the Self is unborn and is not a person, so what does gender have to do with it? All gender issues are pure mithya.
It is the lack of Self-knowledge and the spiritual nature of life that creates the confused state of gender relations we are faced with today. Biologists tell us that a human embryo is generic until the fifth or sixth week of its development when the Y chromosome overrides the X chromosome, producing a male. Some argue that it is female for the first six weeks. But even if it is, femaleness is incidental, not innate, because it can be switched off with the appearance of the Y chromosome. Sex is an incidental attribute so why make an identity out of it?
Gender need not be an issue because no spiritual or material law requires us to identify with the body. As much as society insists on physical identities, we can choose to think of ourselves as human beings, which is a mostly non-dual gender-free identity. Quite apart from a formal investigation of relationships and gender, a reasonable solution is to view “man”, “woman” ‘homosexual’ or ‘transgender’ as temporary roles, as if they were parts in a movie. A role is something you do, a costume you wear, not who you are. When you are looking after your children you are not a man or a woman, you are a parent.
Gender identification and the expectations that arise from it have nothing to nothing with who we really are as our true identity subsumes our human identity. Knowing it, you can discriminate yourself from your human and gender overlays and avoid the suffering that comes from identifying with these roles. The idea of man, woman, Jew, Hindu, Moslem, Christian, or any other identity, melts like frost on a windowpane with the rising sun of Self-knowledge. When I know who I am, I see that I do not need a “unique” identity. I need a realationship with myself. Any identity/role is fine, and none ultimately matter, because they are apparently, not actually, real.
K: Thanks so much for your kind explanation. You teach it just to the point. For me, as a Vedanta student, it is clear, that this topic of Hare Krishna must be a dualistic view. But as I am not so familiar with all the Vedic scriptures, I wondered why these people, (I recently talked to a group of them), have such beliefs. My nondual point of view is clear. Freedom is not about a dual view or man-female concepts.
Sundari: I am sure you have no doubts about who you are, that as the Self, you are unborn and genderless. The Hari Krishna’s are bhaktas and generally not qualified for self-inquiry.
K: How come, that spiritual seekers in modern times, still believe in this old fashion dualistic concept? Even young people, coming from Russia and Ukraine, told me, that Hare Krishna Mission is widespread in these countries. In Bhagavad Geeta, where the Hare Krishnas are based, I never found a dualistic view, when Ramji was teaching it. So, I really wondered, what their teaching is based on. As you said, they have no teaching, that’s the point. They say that they believe in a dualistic, personal God. Well, to honor Krishna is fine, but who is Krishna? Its infinite consciousness.
Sundari: There are all kinds of strange beliefs in the spiritual world that make one scratch your head! Hari Krishna is not the only one, that is certain. Just like the Bible can be interpreted to fit anyone’s ideas, so can the scriptures of Vedanta, particularly the Bhagavad Gita. In fact, most Indians have not had the Gita unfolded to them according to the nondual teachings of Vedanta. We have encountered many Indians who heard the BG properly for the first time when they heard Ramji teach it, even though they grew up with it, they had no idea what it is really unfolding are the nondual scriptures of Vedanta.
As you say, Krishna is just another name for the Self, unborn infinite Consciousness. Though the bhaktas like the Hare Krishnas love Krishna, they worship ‘him’ like the Christians worship God, as something beyond or outside of them. They look down on the nondual teachings of Vedanta because they see them as cold and ‘unfeeling’. This is because bhaktas are generally not knowledge seekers, usually quite the opposite. They are good people but as stated, generally not qualified for self-inquiry.
Most often, their sadhanas are totally experience-based; they are after the ‘high’ that devotional practice and ritual brings. This is where bhaktas differ so much from inquirers. Spiritual or human love, no matter how pure, is dualistic, a transaction between a subject and an object; a feeling of love, for example. When I know I am Awareness, I am prema, limitless love. This love is knowledge because Awareness is intelligent. Prema is only known when the doer has been completely negated by Self-knowledge.
An inquirer is also someone who seeks peace of mind (sattva) but who is not after merely an experience because experience is always changing. An inquirer wants to understand the true nature of reality, that which never changes and is free of all experience. Unless the inquirer is qualified for self-inquiry, they will gravitate towards these kinds of teachings, and the spiritual world is full of them. That is why so few people come to Vedanta, they lack the qualifications, that is the answer to your question. It is not a question of ‘modern’ times; it has always been so, duality being what it is, beginningless ignorance.
Much love
Sundari
