Shakti « Magazine

Editor’s note:

The subject matter was initiated by Partha Sircar. Out of a few answers I picked up the one from Baidya Roy. Please make your judgment and share it with us in the comment area.

Why is Shakti Feminine?

I am no specialist in Vedic wisdom. I have barely nibbled at the fringes. And in my nibbling, two major concepts got implanted in my mind. The first is that of ‘Brahman‘, the all-pervading transcendent reality – the source of ‘everything that takes place in the universe‘. And yet, it is separate from them. Besides, as I learned, it is inactive – cannot act by itself. Needless to say, most of it was beyond my comprehension and thus, beyond my appreciation.

I also came to learn about Shakti – the energy or force that moves the universe. The functioning of the universe occurs with the combined action of the Brahman and Shakti. So far, so good.

Now, we find that Shakti is always expressed in feminine gender. In general parlance, it finds its expression in Durga, Kali, Annapurna, and other feminine deities. And this made me wonder. How can Force or Energy have a feminine gender? Force or energy, after all, could not be associated with any kind of sex in the biological sense.

I gathered up my courage and asked an elderly Swami visiting our Berkeley Vedanta Society. Initially, he was somewhat taken aback by my question. After a little thinking, he said that it is probably because Shakti is always expressed in the feminine gender in Sanskrit.

The answer satisfied me. I pulled out the little Sanskrit I remembered from over 60 years back. As I recall, a feminine noun in Sanskrit need not necessarily be associated with the female sex in the biological sense. Lata (creeper) and nadi (river) may be used as examples. There are many other examples.

But an issue of sorts still remained. How do we reconcile Durga and Kali as incarnations of Shakti, but not Shiva or Vishnu? For this, I defer to those who are way more qualified in this matter. It is way outside my comfort zone.

Badya Roy wrote:

Without claiming any special knowledge or understanding of the scriptures, I would say it’s mainly due to the classic gender classification rules of Sanskrit grammar, as the referred Swami said.

Per Vedanta, the Supreme Absolute Brahman, the one without a second, is omnipotent but inactive (Nishkriya) and formless (Nirakar), and gender neutral (no he or she). However, from His (Its?) desire for Creation, and at His (Its) will, Prakiti (aka Maya, Shakti) and Purusha (aka Ishwar)appeared, and then universe and life (Jagat and Jiva) emerged. Many Shastras treat Prakriti as Adi-Shakti, the primordial energy, the source of everything that exists. Purusha and Prakriti exist together and are inseparable (like the Sun and its brightness or milk and its whiteness, in Sri Ramakrishna’s words). They are the equivalent of the Absolute Brahman but with forms and attributes.

Swami Vivekananda once observed that all Sanatanis, Vaishnavas, Shaivas, Shaktas, and others have one thing in common. When worshipping their chosen God they think and believe they are offering their prayers to the Supreme Brahman in the “Form” of their God. All the mantras of all worships reflect that theme.

All primary Gods and Goddesses are manifestations of the same Purusha and Prakriti (who are eternally in perfect union and inseparable).

So we may not need to worry too much about the genders of gods.

These are just my thoughts (expressed imperfectly and probably in some way inaccurately also ) on this difficult topic and are based on my studies of past years of religious books and reviews, especially of Kathamrita and Swamiji’s published works.

So please take it with a few grains of salt and pepper, if you read, and surely no offense if you ignore it.

Keep the curiosity alive.