in the figure of the Ardhanarı ̄s ́vara (“the God who is half female”) worshiped
by the followers of the god S ́iva. In this image, popular in icons and in calendar
art, the right half of the figure is the male god S ́iva and the left half is Parvatı ̄.
Vis.n.u is seen to be “the highest man” as incarnate as a woman. He is called
“mother,” but in later centuries he is better known as inseparable from the
Goddess Laks ́mı ̄. But the same being is also beyond gender; listen to Namma ̄l
̄
va ̄r:Neither male nor female, nor is he neuter.
He cannot be seen, he’s not one who is,
nor one who’s not.
When you desire him, he takes the form
of your desire,
but he’s not that either:
it’s very hard indeed to speak about my Lord.
(Tiruva ̄ymoli 2.5.10)Although later commentators stress the pronoun “he” in this verse and say it
refers to the “highest of men,” the verse itself pushes the limits of our under-
standing of gender and clearly says that the supreme being is neither male nor
female. In saying so, Namma ̄l
̄
va ̄r is following that strand of the Upanis.ads which
speaks of the ineffable nature of the supreme Brahman: “before it is reached,
words turn back, along with the mind” (Taittirı ̄ya Upanis.ad, 2.9.1). The soul
and the supreme being, then, are in the devotional universe; gendered, but in
philosophical discourses, beyond gender.
Reflections
Are the rituals, the dances, the songs, constructed and performed by men and
women in the Hindu tradition important in our understanding of gender? Ann
Gold (2000) distinguishes between two approaches in the study of gender con-
figurations in south Asia and the closely related subject of women’s roles in
south Asian society. There are scholars, she says, who highlight the endemic and
systemic devaluation and consequent disempowerment of women at every level,
from social and economic to cosmological and psychological. These scholars
do not take the words of the women or their rituals as empowering them in
any way, and conclude that “any moves women do make against their gender-
determined fates are fairly futile and ultimately insignificant, given the over-
weening structural circumstances by which women’s lives are circumscribed”
(Gold 2000: 204). The second group tend to write from situated experiences and
portray the different ways in which women live, negotiate, and imagine their
gender identities. This group recognizes and acknowledges women’s numerous
disadvantages but also takes their speech and rituals as “possessing the actual
acute potency in particular situations, and further potentiality to alter existing
gender in a devotional universe 585