In a message dated 11/19/2000 9:40:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

>However one of the very basic points that Hinduism loses on is
>  the fact that a woman's salvation is through her husband. Also Hindu
>  scriptures are many and varied.

I find the recent discussion of Hinduism and Christianity fascinating.  And
before starting to comment I want to say that the wonderful differences in
cultures on this list, in religious heritages and in social structures, makes
it difficult to transfer our experience in our own culture to another
person's experience in another culture. So in commenting I hope I can be
sensitive to that, and if I am misunderstanding the situation in any
particular culture or country I hope those on the list in that culture or
country will explain things to me so I understand better.

Regarding the co-existence in India of a religion that contains both female
and male deities with a social system that represses women--there is much we
can learn from this.  Though, IMO, it is certain that religions in which
divinity is male-only disempowers women, it is apparent that the existence of
female deities in a society's (or group's) religion, does not necessarily
mean that women are empowered.  IMO, we have to look at the role of the
goddesses--and their relationships with the gods--in that religion and also
the role of women in the society (or group).  Perhaps the situation in India
with Hindu pantheon and the social situation today in India can be compared
to the Classical Greek and Roman pantheons in which goddesses had became
wives and daughters of the gods as a result of patriarchal social systems,
replacing earlier concepts of goddesses as deities in their own right in more
egalitarian social systems.

Another way to look at this is that it is unlikely any religion today(except
in areas totally cut off from the rest of the world), which has evolved from
antiquity has survived without its core belief system and characterization of
deity(ies) being changed by the patriarchal social system in which it dwells.
I believe this to be true of the major world religions as well as what is
known today in North America and parts of Europe as modern Paganism, forms of
which are also influenced by patriarchal prejudices.  ( I am NOT including
groups like Reclaiming and Dianic Witchcraft, which are consciously
feminist.)

This situation serves as a caution to those of us involved in Goddess
spirituality to be conscious of the contemporary status of deities we may
wish to adopt from other cultures, and to examine the ramifications of
various Goddess imagery.

I wonder if there have been any published studies of Hinduism, focusing on
the way the concepts of that religion, including the symbolism of its
deities, changed over thousands of years. Maybe someone on the list knows of
books, or websites on this?  I'm also wondering if books by Christian
feminists (e.g., Fiorenza, Ruether) are available in India.

Geeta also wrote:
>  In the Bible , I find that Christ asked husbands to love their wives and
>  wives to submit to their husbands. The problem with the church has been
that
>  it has emphasized the latter part of the sentence and glossed over the
>  former one. However Christ asked the husbands to love their wives and that
>  means for them to be "patient, kind,not jealous, not boastful, not
PROUD,not
>  rude, NOT SELF SEEKING,not easily angered, does not keep an account of the
>  wrong, delights in the right, always protects, ALWAYS TRUSTS, always hopes
>  and always perseveres" (1Cor 13). Frankly speaking , if I find a man who
>  does this I would have no problems submitting to him.

I personally have a big problem with any religious doctrine requiring one
person to  "submit" to another.  But there may be differences in cultural
understandings of this.

I looked up 1Cor 13 in my King James Version of the Bible. This is the well
known chapter that begins: "Though I speak with the tongues of men and
angels, and have not charity..." It includes such passages as "Charity
suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not
itself, is not puffed up."  In some later translations the word for charity
(charitas) is translated "love."   However, there is nothing in this that I
can see that relates it specifically to the relationship between a husband
and wife.

The oft-quoted passage about wives submitting to husbands is from Ephesians
5:22-29.  KJV renders it: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands,
as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is
head of the church; and he is the savior of the body.  Therefore, as the
church is subject unto Christ, so let wives be unto their own husbands in
every thing.  Husbands, love your wives, even  as Christ loved the chruch,
and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it. . . .So ought
men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth
himself.   For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth
it, even as the Lord of the church". Ephesians 5 ends with this statement in
verse 33: "let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as
himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband."

This passage is written by Paul, *not spoken by Jesus*.  I am not aware of
anything similar attributed to Jesus, but others on the list more familiar
with the Gospels may correct me.

Regarding Geeta's earlier comment that to her feminism means that women
become like men: My experience in the US was that in the 1970s, emerging from
a situation where the socially acceptable role of women was limited to
getting married, having children and staying home and taking care of them and
husband, women who wanted to have an equal chance at achievement in the
"men's" working world emphasized the lack of difference between women and men
and used this as an argument to try to obtain equal access to jobs and equal
pay in the workplace (I say "try" because this still hasn't been achieved).

Today, though it is always risky to generalize as to what the feminist stance
is (there is no "feminist stance" IMO, rather many feminists all with a
variety of different ideas of how to achieve equal rights), from what I
observe it seems that the emphasis has changed from "being like a man," which
I would state as "adopting traditionally male strategies in order to get
ahead," to an emphasis that says that traditionally female ways of
approaching things are equally (if not more) effective. In fact, there is a
great deal of emphasis in the workplace now on achieving through cooperation
rather than competition (though sometimes I've felt this is mainly lip
service--at least the recognition that oneupsmanship is not the best way to
achieve is being recognized.)

There is also a recognition among many feminists of the value of women (and
men) who stay home and take care of the kids, and a desire to see this
valuable activity compensated financially.

My recollection of when spiritual feminism first started to emerge in the mid
to late 1970's in the US, was that it was resented by many "political"
feminists because they perceived it as a nonpolitical diversion from pressing
issues.  OTOH, spiritual feminists like me feel that religion undergirds and
empowers political oppression.  Also, spiritual feminists, particularly those
in the then-emerging Goddess movement, tended to empower those traits that
were seen as negative or undervalued by society but which were associated
with being a woman, such as nurturing, intuition, and embodiment, including
biological cycles. At that time, this made many "political feminists"
uncomfortable.  I feel this division no longer exists as much as it did 20-30
years ago.  In fact, there is much overlap today between women active
spiritually and politically and, IMO, one complements the other.

In any case, I think it is becoming rarer and rarer in this country for women
to feel they have to adopt masculine approaches in order to achieve equality.
 In fact, the whole notion of what is masculine and what is feminine--and
what is appropriate male and female behavior--has undergone and continues to
undergo change, but that's another story ...

Judith Laura
[log in to unmask]
<A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Ashira">http://members.aol.com/Ashira</A>