By Caitanya Caran Das
God is neither â and is both. Let’s see how.
Before we can understand whether God is male or female, we need to clearly understand that we ourselves are neither male nor female. We are at core spiritual beings, souls, whereas our gender refers only to our shell, our physical bodies. Our spiritual identity is eternal, our gender is transient. According to the law of last thought described in the Bhagavad-gita ( 8.5), we attain in our next life a body as per the thought that predominates our consciousness at the last moment of this life. So a male in this life may become a female in the next life, if the person dearest to him happens to be a female and vice versa. Hence both male chauvinism and feminism are two sides of the counterfeit coin of physical misidentification. Only when we distance ourselves from our temporary physical gender will be freed from the ideological preconceptions that are inevitably dragged into discussion on the gender of God. So in the conventional sense of the words ‘male’ and ‘female’ where these refer to bodily gender, God is neither.
Yet God is both too – as seen in the worship of Divine Couples in the Vedic tradition. The highly inclusivistic Vedic definition of God as the source of everything, the cause of all causes, leads naturally to an egalitarian understanding of God â as both male and female. Lets consider the divine couple Radha- Krishna. Here Radha personifies the primordial cosmological feminine principle and Krishna the primordial cosmological masculine principle. Sometimes personification is mistaken to be a mere literary device, but this misconception overlooks the omni-dimensional all-encompassing nature of divinity. So Radha and Krishna are not symbols denoting metaphysical principles. As divine embodiments, they are fully concrete, particular individuals, yet they are, so to say, universal individuals, being wholly identical with the ontological principles they personify.
Krishna is compared to the sun and Radha to the sunshine. Though the sunshine comes from the sun, to say that the sun is superior to or exists prior to the sunshine is incorrectâas soon as there is a sun, there is sunshine. More important, the sun has no meaning without sunshine, without heat and light. And heat and light would not exist without the sun. So the sun and the sunshine co-exist, each equally important for the existence of the other. It may be said that they are simultaneously inconceivably one and different (achintyabhedabheda tattva). Likewise, the singular Absolute Truth manifests as the plural Radha-Krishna for the sake of loving reciprocation. One person, two personalities; inconceivable identity in diversity. Hence the saint Bhaktivinoda Thakura sings, “Just as there is no sun without sunshine, I do not accept Krishna without Radha.”
The Gita explains that God is the source, the essence and the best of everything. So, of worshipers of God, God alone is the best. Therefore, as Radha, God is the supreme worshiper, and as Krishna, God is the supreme worshiped. both par excellence. In terms of tattva (philosophical truth), Krishna excels as the supreme controller and so the traditional reference to God as masculine. But in terms of lila (divine loving exchanges), Radha excels by controlling Krishna with her selfless spiritual love. Krishna is celebrated as Madan-Mohan, the mesmerizer of Cupid, who mesmerizes everyone, but Radha is glorified as Madan-Mohan-Mohini, the mesmerizer of the mesmerizer of Cupid. Moreover for spiritual aspirants, Radha acts as the divine mediatrix, without whom access to Krishna is not possible. So devotees always chant her name before Krishna’s, as is also seen with Sita-Rama and Lakshmi-Narayana.
Like the Biblical Bride-of-Christ concept and the Kabbalistic Jewish conception of the Feminine Divine, the truth behind Radha-Krishna is theologically profound and constitutes the zenith of spiritual awareness. This enlightened God consciousness resolves all confusion, contradiction and conflict caused by myopic conceptions of sexuality and spirituality.
Dear Chaitanya Charan Prabhu,
Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I liked very much your explanation, and immediately thought of the section of the CC I am reading right now. Please allow me to add some nice quotes to what you have written:
Radha and Krishna are one and the same, but They have assumed two bodies. Thus They enjoy each other, tasting the mellows of love.
PURPORT
The two transcendentalists Radha and Krishna are a puzzle to materialists. The above description of Radha and Krishna from the diary of Srila Svarupa Damodara Gosvami is a condensed explanation, but one needs great spiritual insight to understand the mystery of these two personalities. One is enjoying in two. Sri Krishna is the potent factor, and Srimati Radharani is the internal potency. According to Vedanta philosophy, there is no difference between the potent and the potency; they are identical. We cannot differentiate between one and the other, any more than we can separate fire from heat.
Everything in the Absolute is inconceivable in relative existence. Therefore in relative cognizance it is very difficult to assimilate this truth of the oneness between the potent and the potency. The philosophy of inconceivable oneness and difference propounded by Lord Caitanya is the only source of understanding for such intricacies of transcendence.
In fact, Radharani is the internal potency of Sri Krishna, and She eternally intensifies the pleasure of Sri Krishna. Impersonalists cannot understand this without the help of a maha-bhagavata devotee. The very name âRadhaâ suggests that Srimati Radharani is eternally the topmost mistress of the comforts of Sri Krishna. As such, She is the medium transmitting the living entitiesâ service to Sri Krishna. Devotees in Vrindavana therefore seek the mercy of Srimati Radharani in order to be recognized as loving servitors of Sri Krishna. – Adi-Lila 4.56
Srimati Radharani is as fully spiritual as Krishna. No one should consider Her to be material. She is definitely not like the conditioned souls, who have material bodies, gross and subtle, covered by material senses. She is all-spiritual, and both Her body and Her mind are of the same spiritual embodiment. Because Her body is spiritual, Her senses are also spiritual. Thus Her body, mind and senses fully shine in love of Krishna. She is the personified hladini-sakti (the pleasure-giving energy of the Lordâs internal potency), and therefore She is the only source of enjoyment for Sri Krishna.
Sri Krishna cannot enjoy anything that is internally different from Him. Therefore Radha and Sri Krishna are identical. The sandhini portion of Sri Krishnaâs internal potency has manifested the all-attractive form of Sri Krishna, and the same internal potency, in the hladini feature, has presented Srimati Radharani, who is the attraction for the all-attractive. No one can match Srimati Radharani in the transcendental pastimes of Sri Krishna. – Adi-lila 4.71 puport
God is neither â and is both. Letâs see how.
Your understanding concerning Krishna’s forms are incorrect. You have stated that krishna’s form is neither and is both but this is not the correct understanding. please read carfully the statement below.
SB 4.8. 47
Here in this verse the word purusam is very significant. The Lord is never female. He is always male (purusa). Therefore the impersonalist who imagines the Lordâs form as that of a woman is mistaken. The Lord appears in female form if necessary, but His perpetual form is purusa because He is originally male.
You have also stated: Before we can understand whether God is male or female, we need to clearly understand that we ourselves are neither male nor female.
I am afread that your understanding in this case is also of incorrect intellegence as stated in
SB 1.11.33
The living beings are by constitution feminine by nature. The male or enjoyer is the Lord, and all manifestations of His different potencies are feminine by nature.
Please forgive any offience your servant steve
Steve the purport to the Bhagavat verse 1.11.33 does not mean that all jivas are female. Simply think about the male jivas in the spiritual world e.g the gopas, the Pandavas, etc. Here is the full paragraph from that purport:
“The living beings are by constitution feminine by nature. The male or enjoyer is the Lord, and all manifestations of His different potencies are feminine by nature. In the Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ, the living beings are designated as parÄ-prakrÌŁti, or the superior potency. The material elements are aparÄ-prakrÌŁti, or inferior potency. Such potencies are always employed for the satisfaction of the employer, or the enjoyer. The supreme enjoyer is the Lord Himself, as stated in the Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ (5.29). The potencies, therefore, when engaged directly in the service of the Lord, revive the natural color, and thus there is no disparity in the relation of the potent and potency”
When it is stated that potencies of the Lord are feminine by nature Srila Prabhupada is not speaking on a gender principle. The idea being used is a gender metaphor for an ontological principle. The Lord is the controller and prakriti is being controlled, one is the dominator or masculine and the other is the dominated or the feminine. Using masculine and feminine metaphor has nothing to do with male or female gender it has everything to do with metaphoric symbolism.
As for the other purport from the Bhagavatam that is also misunderstood by you. These words were also written by Srila Prabhupada:
And also
And then again from the Bhagavatam
Also Baladeva Vidyabhusana write in Govinda Bhasya
What is visnu-tattva?
Visnu-tattva is another way of saying Svamsa.
Jiva Goswami also writes about Svamsa incarnations in Krsna Sandarbha
The misunderstanding you have of the Lord’s female forms is easy to make if you take that one purport as all there is on the topic. Here is that purport
As we have seen in other places we are told that there is no difference at all between Radha and Krishna, that they are identical, one soul in two bodies, one and the same.
Also from Raghava Goswami’s Sri Krsna-bhakti-ratna-prakasa:
So there seems to be some contradiction. But really what Srila Prabhupada was talking about in that purport you cited was the relative difference between Krsna and his female forms. On the absolute level they are identical, one person in two bodies, identical, as Srila Prabhupada writes in the above. To understand what I mean by relative difference here is Srila Prabhupada explaining the difference between Sri Panca Tattva
Even though the Panca Tattva are all visnu-tattva, they are the Lord, not different from the energetic or shaktiman, for the sake of relishing pastimes Srivasa and Gadadhara are manifested differently. In the same way Radha and Her expansions are Krishna, identical to Krishna, as Srila Prabhupada writes in an above purport, but they are manifested as Krishna’s servitors for the purpose of relishing pastimes. It is also important to not that in the purport you cited Srila Prabhupada mentions mayavadis who imagine the Lord as female as being mistaken. That is in reference to those who believe they can worship or meditate on any goddess and that there is no difference between that and worship of Krishna. They consider Krishna to be just another temporary manifestation of Brahman. So they say you can worship or meditate on Kali, Shiva, Krishna, etc, and you will get the same result because they are all the same Brahman. Srila Prabhupada was pointing out that Krishna is not a manifestation of Brahman, that he is the Adi Purusa, Parabrahman, the original Personality of Godhead. So we shouldn’t mistake what he said in that purport to cancel out everything else that we are taught by guru, sastra, and sadhu when it comes to the ontological position of Radha and Her expansions.
From the intro to Teachings of Lord Caitanya
From Jaiva Dharma by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura:
Here we see where Krsna’s svarupa-vaibhava (tad-rupa vaibhava) is described as his visnu-tattva associates and expansions (Balarama, Radha, etc), name, abode, and paraphernalia. They are compared to the surface of the sun and Krsna is compared to the interior of the sun. When you look at the sun you only see the surface, but underneath is the sun. So when you look at a personal expansion or visnu-tattva associate of the Lord they may display a great variety of forms, personas, pastimes, etc. But underneath they are the same Surpeme Lord.
Caitanya Caran Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obiesances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
You write
"One person two personalities inconceivable identity in diversity. Therefore, as Radha, God is the supreme worshiper, and as Krishna, God it the supreme worshiped. Both par excellence in term of tattva (philosophical truth)…… As we have seen in other places, we are told there is no difference all between Radha and Krishna, they are one soul in two bodies, one and the same".
You describe Radha and Krishna as âone personâ and âone soulâ. They are described in the scripture as identical, nondifferent, one, etc., but I have never seen them described with the phrase âone soulâ or âone personâ. At any rate, they are eternally individual persons.
The internal potency (prakriti) also known as Radha, is the supremely enjoyed aspect of the Absolute Truth. Krishna is the origin of all potencies. Thus, He can experience Himself as the supreme enjoyer, and He can also experience Himself as the supremely enjoyed- as Lord Caitanya. But Radha is always the supremely enjoyed. That is an important distinction between Radha and Krishna.
Krishnaâs marginal potency, the jivas are described as identical to Krishna and eternally individual persons.
SB 1.5 20
Thus the living being is also identical with the Lord. But he is never equal or superior to the Personality of Godhead. The Lord and the living beings are all individual persons
Like Radha, as prakriti, the purpose of the jivaâs is to please Krishna. But unlike Radha, they have a tendency to want to be purusa so the become controlled by the external energy of the absolute truth. These are important comparisons and contrasts of Radha and the jivas.
The effect of mayavadi philosophy pervasive, so it is important for Vaisnavas to stress the fact that there is no time when Krishna, Radha and the jivas do not exists as individual persons.
Prabhu,
I just read the purport of SB 6.19.13.
"O best of the brahmanas, Lakshmij is the constant companion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vishnu, and therefore she is called anapayinĂ©. She is the mother of all creation. As Lord Vishnu is all-pervading, His spiritual potency, Mother Lakshmi is also all-pervading. Lord Vishnu has three principal potenciesâinternal, external and marginal. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has accepted para shakti, the spiritual energy of the Lord, as being identical with the Lord. Thus she is also included in the independent Vishnu-tattva."
I had never heard Radha described as Vishnu Tattva. I thought your equating Krishna and Radha was inaccurate. Still, only Krishna is the original cause of all causes- the summum bonum. Krishna stu bhagavam svayam(SB 1.3.28).
" In another place in the Caitanya-caritÀmÄta (Adi 5.142) it is said, ekale éçvara kÄñëa, Àra saba bhÄtya: the only supreme master is Krishna, and all others, both Vishnu-tattva and jiva-tattva, engage in the service of the Lord.( Purport, CC Adi 7.14
Lord Caitanya taught the direct meaning of the scripture:
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur comments that mukhya-vĂ„tti (â the direct meaningâ) is abhidhĂ€-vĂ„tti, or the meaning that one can understand immediately from the statements of dictionaries, whereas gauĂ«a-vĂ„tti (âthe indirect meaningâ) is a meaning that one imagines without consulting the dictionary.( Purport,CC Adi 7.110)
"God :The one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universeâ (dictionary.com). We need to explain that Krishna, alone, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, origin of all, the cause of all causes. Then we can describe Radha as a full expansion of God. But if we do not explain properly, it will appear as philosophical imagination.