INTRODUCTION The Yatiswari's text - profound, unbound by context

This work "Sister Nivedita - The Flower of Worship at theFeet of Mother India" by Yatiswari Krishnapriya Amba on SisterNivedita is a profound text. It is profound because it is a textthat proceeds from before, and transcends, the current context ofits writing, with all potential to remain valid for future. It isnot a literature that will be exhausted by the current context.The Yatiswari's text recalls and rediscovers the Sister Niveditaphenomenon of the past for inspiration and guidance of thepresent and the future seekers of higher religious truth, higherspiritual culture, higher life purpose and higher human values -all transcending the current and contextual drift and distortions- and is, therefore, valid as much for the present as forposterity. This is because the timeless higher philosophy ofSanatana Dharma, which subsumed Sister Nivedita and made herexemplify its core in her life, transcends all currently-held andcontextually-bound theories. Again it is a text by a celibate,who has given up worldly attachments for the larger good ofhumanity, on a celibate and a sage who, over a century ago, wasborn abroad but gave up her all for the cause of the Hindu nationwhich she adopted and, through that, for the cause of humanity asa whole. The Yatishwari, being an inheritor of the greatRamakrishna-Vivekananda tradition through her Guru SwamiChidbhavananda, undoubtedly has the intellectual and spiritualcredentials to write an authentic work on Sister Nivedita.

Text by a celibate on a SageThe Yatiswari's text is unlike a book by a celebrity or on a

celebrity. Books by and on celebrities sell in millions.Over centuries, thousands of such books have flooded the bookshops around the world and have, like how floods recede, foundtheir way to oblivion. But, in contrast, texts like the Gospel ofSri Ramakrishna and the Collected Works of Swami Vivekananda havebeen like a perennial stream, ever flowing, ever enlightening,ever fresh and never stale. The texts of, and on, saints andsages retain their relevance regardless of, and beyond, thecontext in which they were written, just like the sagesthemselves, who have been relevant beyond their context and ever.

But the books of or on celebrities invariably become stale oncethe context - read, the relevance - of the celebrities is over.

A celebrity and sage are a world apart. Celebrities are notSages. Sages are invariably not celebrities, certainly not intheir life time. A celebrity speaks for the context in which helives and so his relevance, and that of his text, ceases with thecontext. A sage defies the contextual compulsions and speaks whatmay be objectionable in the context but valid beyond it. He orshe is even willing to, and invariably does, court unpopularity,but, is inevitably proved right after his or her life time. Asage is invariably unpopular in his times, for saying thingswhich may not be comforting in the context. It is preciselybecause the sayings of the sages are not bound by the contextthat the texts, by and on them, remain valid ever, and neverbecome stale. That is why analysis of the life and work of sagesafter their life-time is important as they invariably prove rightafter they are no more. Such texts obviously add no value to thesage who is no more. It only familiarises the sages to theseekers of truth at present and in future and makes them benefitby their life, mission and work as guiding force and drivingenergy in the seekers' life and endeavours.

This is not merely a book on a Hindu sage, but, in a sense,it is a book by a Hindu sage-in-the-making. A sage is normallynever seen as a sage while living. All sages are invariablydiscovered after their life-time. In fact, some sages arediscovered long after only through their sayings which becomerelevant after them. This is because sages never declarethemselves as sages. It is time that uncovers them as sages,because of the quality of their thoughts and words which are notbound to the context in which they lived. While sages arediscovered after their lifetime, celebrities are creation oftheir times. The celebrity syndrome is a deceptive and disturbingfeature of Kali Yuga. Most celebrities of the contemporary worldare products of action-reaction driven, competitive, evenabusive, discourse. While prognosticating on Kali Yuga, SrimadBhagavatam says that "a master of [abusive] vocabulary will beconsidered a scholar" in Kali Yuga. And we have witnessed in theIndian context how the writings of men and women of the West,who, having never visited India, never read any quality Hindu

literature, and never interacted with any Hindu who had theknowledge and experience of India, and of their surrogates inthis country, have greatly undermined the Indian civilisationand damaged the sense of the Indian past, India's future missionand also the Indian pride - all through abuse.The text - an anti-dote to Western efforts to demean

IndiaThis work of the Yatiswari falls in the category of

literature that reverses this ignoble trend of colonial Westernauthors who have largely demeaned and devalued the Hindu nation,Hindu society and Hindu spirituality. The Yatiswari recalls thelife and work of Sister Nivedita which came as an anti-dote tothe work of the colonial West that largely demeaned Hindu India.The Yatiswari has described how the values and the mission ofthis ancient nation transformed a Margaret Elizabeth Noble intoSister Nivedita. The Yatiswari's text is an acute presentation ona Hindu sage, Nivedita, who was born in the West, grew up in theWest, came in contact with her electrifying Guru SwamiVivekananda, became his disciple, studied, understood, admiredand became addicted to Hindu spirituality, Hindu nation andsociety and finally dedicated herself to all of it for life.Before I go into the contents of the Yatishwari's text, here is abrief picture of Nivedita which the Yatiswari has brilliantlycaptured in all its dimensions.

Nivedita - a brief accountNivedita was not born in India. But she was born for India.

And she lived for and in India. She was a not born as a Hindu,but she lived and died as one and in the cause of Hindu India.Her epitaph in Darjeeling reads: "Here reposes Sister Nivedita,who gave her all to India. "That great Patriotic Monk of Indiainitiated her into Brahmacharya Ashrama and named her as Nivedita[dedicated to God]. A teacher and social worker when she metSwami Vivekananda in 1895, Margaret -just 28 then- forthwithbecame his disciple, travelled to India, became a missionary inthe cause of Mother India and worked for the Hindu nation andsociety till her last breath. Even though she was electrified bythe personality of Vivekananda and attended many of his lecturesin London, she was not fully satisfied about his thoughts till

after all her queries were answered to her satisfaction byVivekananda. She accepted him as her master only after he clearedall her doubts and convinced her about the Mission of HinduIndia.

But the test for Nivedita's character as a disciple of SwamiVivekananda and her commitment to the Hindu nation cameimmediately after the Mahasamadhi of Vivekananda. In this testshe proved that she was committed to the cause of SwamiVivekananda and not swayed by his personality. She had to choosebetween the Ramakrishna Mission founded by Swami Vivekanandawhich was devoted to spiritual and service activities only andthe nationalist agenda of Swami Vivekananda. And despite all hercloseness and intimacy with Holy Mother Sharada Devi andmaintaining her personal relationship with her and with the monksof the Ramakrishna Order, she decided to publicly disassociatewith RK Mission and began making active contribution in the fieldof Indian nationalism. Therefore, she was not only a spiritualistin the ancient Hindu tradition, but was also a nationalist in thecontemporary Hindu tradition. She pursued the mission of Hinduspiritual nationalism expounded by Swami Vivekananda, whichbecame the founding philosophy of the Indian freedom movementthat took shape in the early part of the 20th century in Bengal.

Nivedita chosen by Vivekananda to work among and for Indianwomen. Swami Vivekananda saw in Nivedita an ideal person to workamong Indian women. Vivekananda narrated to her the pitiablecondition of the women in India prevailing at that time and wroteto her in a letter, "Let me tell you frankly that I am nowconvinced that you have a great future in the work for India.What was wanted was not a man, but a woman - a real lioness - towork for Indians, women especially......Your education,sincerity, purity, immense love, determination and above all, theCeltic blood make you just the woman wanted." While SwamiVivekananda was clear about what he had in mind for Nivedita -namely that she must work among and for Indian women - what itmeant for Margaret Noble reincarnated as Nivedita will need amore acute examination. The Yatiswari has comprehensivelycaptured the views of Nivedita on Indian women's higher valuesystems in the subtitles "Motherhood Is The Ideal Womanhood" "TheSignificance Of Householders' Duties" "The Life Of Reunuciation

Of The Hindu Widow" "The Heroic Daughters Of Mother Bharat".While the Yastiswari has focussed on all aspects of Nivedita'slife and also on Nivedita's admiration and reverence for Indianwomanhood, I would like to add to her text the paradigmdifference between the monotheistic Christianity and the Hinduphilosophy in their respective approach to women, which Niveditamust have experienced as Margaret Noble first and as Niveditalater. This interesting contrast and comparison is necessary tocapture more comprehensively Nivedita's transformation from beinga Christian woman into a Hindu woman.

Christian Margret Noble Vs Hindu Nivedita - theparadigm difference between the Geo-Christian West and

Hindu IndiaMargaret Noble was born into and was part of the paradigm of

Christian monotheism. It is necessary to compare the place ofwomen in monotheistic faiths, particularly Christianity, in whichMargaret Noble was born, and the position of women in Hinduphilosophy and in the society into which Margaret Noble wasadopted. Margaret's metamorphosis into Nivedita brings out theparadigm difference between the Geo-Christian West and HinduIndia in many respects, but the most important aspect of thatparadigm difference is the way the Christian and contemporaryWest then had positioned women and how did Hindu India perceivedthe role of women. Nivedita's familiarisation with the ancientIndian womanhood perhaps commenced with her increasing intimacywith Holy Mother Sharada Devi. She wrote in a letter to NellHammond about the Holy Mother after her first few meetings withher, "She really is, under the simplest, most unassuming guise,one of the strongest and greatest of women." The point to benoted here is that by the standards of Margaret Noble before shere-incarnated as Nivedita, the Holy Mother must be regarded asweak and "illiterate", as "illiterate" as Sri Ramakrishna was!But Nivedita discovered in the Holy Mother one of the strongestand greatest women which the Holy Mother could never have been onthe scales and standards which Margaret Noble must have been usedto in measuring the worth of a woman in her civilisation of birthand in her contemporary times.

Since the Yatiswari's book is being written almost a centuryafter Nivedita's times, and at a time when western ideas ongender rights have invaded Indian discourse in a big way and havebegun influencing Indian women, it is necessary to bring forththe transformation amounting to paradigm shift that must havetaken place in the value judgement of Nivedita on womanhood aftershe came in contact with the Hindu philosophic and practicalapproach to women. It would need some elaboration. Christian theological origins of gender issues in the

WestThe contemporary West has, in the last two centuries

particularly, witnessed serious discourses, debates, differences,struggles and even violence, over the status, role and rights ofwomen and on the equality of man and woman. There is a historicalbackground, which is specific to the West, for this struggle,without which it would be difficult to understand what led to thedebate. The purpose of this exercise is not academic. But a briefaccount of the historical developments on the women's rightsissue is needed because the West has successfully exported itsdebate to the Rest of the world which have had no similarhistorical background like in the West. Yet the experience of theWest is being experimented on the Rest of the world, particularlyIndia, which has a very different philosophy, history andexperience in this respect.

The Western society first rebelled against the brutaldominance by oppressive Church first and by the dictatorial Statelater. The struggle against the Dark Age oppression had made thesociety in the West increasingly and acutely rights conscious;later the West became almost obsessive about individual rightsover even normal duties and obligations to the family, to thenear and dear and the larger society. The reaction to theoppressive Church and the dictatorial State had made the rightsof individuals non-negotiable in the West, which almost definesthe contemporary Western civilisation - which is broadly, butincorrectly, termed as "modern civilisation" - today. Theobsession of the West with individual rights was directlyproportionate to the hatred of the West for the Dark Ageoppression. But the rights thus won by the society in the battle

against the dictatorial institutions were monopolised by men anddenied to women, consistent with the basics of monotheisticreligions loaded against women. With the result, even after thecontemporary West overcame the dictatorial Church and the State,women continued to be subjected to the same disabilities, whichthe monotheistic faiths had subjected the women to in the DarkAges. This led the women of the West fiercely to rebel againstthe indignities and violence that continued against them and toget their share of the rights in the increasingly rights-conscious Western society. Now see the timelines of the struggle.

Even in the contemporary world - prided as modern - and asrecently as in the 20th century, the age old indignities mandatedby the Christian theology had continued. The faith-induced socialoppression had so chained the Western women that even ordinaryissues like the women's suffrage became the subject matter forintense struggle for women in the West. They were denied theirminimum due only because they were women. The American women gotFederal voting rights only in 1920, after several decades ofstruggle; the British women got equal voting rights with men onlyin 1928, after over a century of tussle; the Swiss women gottheir Federal voting rights not until and as late as 1971 - yes1971! Thus, in these countries, women could achieve theirsuffrage only after centuries of debate and struggle, arrests,and violence.

Why did the women of the West have to struggle for suchnormal right? The answer in one word: Theology. Here is a livingtestimony to this. Even today, in the Roman Christian VaticanState, there is no suffrage for women. No one need to suffer aheart attack. The Vatican State, which was regarded as the mirrorversion of the Kingdom of God, incorporated the Christiantheological rules for the society and polity which forbid womenany role in public life. The difference between Vatican, whichcontinues to be loyal to theology, and the Rest of theChristendom today is because the Rest of the Christendom has,under the pressure of revolt by women, repudiated the theologicalinjunctions against women.

The Hindu Paradigm Vs the ChristianBut, as compared to the contemporary Western approach to

women and issues related to them, the traditional Indian attitude

to women was a difference in contrast. Take the very issue ofwomen's suffrage, which tormented the Christendom for centuries.Once India attained freedom, and it had opted for democracy basedon universal franchise, women's suffrage was never an issue.Women did not have to struggle for securing suffrage nor was anywoman arrested for demanding suffrage. Not a single man in Indiaobjected to women's suffrage. Because, unlike Christian theology,Hindu philosophy did not chain the Hindu women to any suchdisability. In contrast, as mentioned earlier, as late as in 1959majority of Swiss men voted against women's suffrage in anational referendum. Why did Indian men not object to women'ssuffrage in India? The reason is not difficult to seek. While thetheological traditions of Christendom virtually outlawed women'ssuffrage, there were no religious or theological or socialinjunctions in India against women's suffrage. This is sufficientto demonstrate how bias against women inhered in the theologicalfoundations of Christendom's sociology, while no such inherentbias existed in Indian philosophic traditions. Yet, the Indiandiscourse today looks to the West to position the Indian women onthe model of the West. This certainly calls for a deeperreflection in India as to whether the West, with its history,sociology and traditions rooted in a theological foundation thatis entirely different from the Indian philosophic view, couldshow lead to India on women issues.

Otherwise also, the emerging global situation calls for adispassionate debate in India. India is now seen as a risingpower and is therefore becoming capable of joining the globaldiscourse and presenting its experience and understanding aboutthe status and the role of women as a model for the world. AnIndia that was written off for the last couple of centuries asincapable of making any contribution to the contemporary worldwas understandably importing ideas from the West, whose successhad persuaded the Rest to tend to import everything of the Westas the best. But now the situation is different. Here is an Indiathat is seen to be on the rise; the rising India has the prospectand even the duty to export its model of life and the place andthe position of women in it, to the rest of the world. In anyevent, the feminist philosophy and practices of the contemporaryWest concerning women and the man-woman conflict inherent in it

seem to be reaching a dead-end and threatening to cease to be auniversal model code for the women, particularly the women ofAsia and India, which are intensely and even increasinglybecoming family-oriented. It is necessary at this stage, and fromthe vantage point of the rise of India and the East generally, tocompare and contrast the theological, sociological and culturaldifferentials between India and the Western world on issuesconcerning women. Once this difference between the West and Indiais understood it is easier to grasp Nivedita's admiration andreverence of Indian womanhood, including the much-maligned Hinduwidowhood. The analysis of Indian womanhood, or for that matterany analysis about the filial and social norms of India, wouldremain incomplete unless the unique yardstick of Indianbehavioural model, the idea of Dharma, is captured in its mostunderstandable form.The unique Indian idea - the Dharma; even Gods had to

obey DharmaThe Hindu India's philosophic traditions could integrate

even atheism into Godliness because of the presence of a uniquethird element in Indian spiritual life - the concept of Dharma.The word 'Dharma', which is unique to Hindu-Buddhist tradition,though difficult to define, was understood easily and practisedby even the ordinary people in ancient India and continues to bepractised in contemporary India. Dharma, which means 'that whichsustains the world', was in part religious and in part ittranscended religion. It is timeless value system [SanatanaDharma], which is considered equal to, and even above God. Dharmabound the King. And even God. Here is an interesting insight intothis phenomenon.

In traditional Hindu Statecraft [Raja Dharma] when thecoronation of a king used to take place, there used to be asignificant ritual where the King would declare thrice afterascending the throne: "Adandosmi, Adandosmi, Adandosmi" ["No onecan punish me; No one can punish me; No one can punish me"];immediately the Raja Rishi [Guru of the Kingdom], would repudiatehis declaration and gently hit him on the head with Dharma danda[a small rod that symbolizes Dharma] saying thrice"Dharmadandosi, Dharmadandosi, Dharmadandosi" ["Dharma can punish

you, Dharma can punish you, Dharma can punish you"]. Thissignificant ritual was deliberately prescribed to demonstratethat Dharma was superior to the Ruler. This is totallycontradictory to the ancient Greco-Roman and later Anglo-Europeanjurisprudence that 'the King is infallible', which virtuallyfollowed the Roman Catholic Church's canonical law, whichbelieved in the infallibility of the Pope. But in India Dharmaprevailed over not only Kings and the Saints, but also Gods!

Dharma being supreme, even Gods and their actions weretested and measured by their adherence to, or deviation from,Dharma. Dharma was thus the norm for measuring even Gods. Ramawas both a King and God in the Hindu belief system. The Hinduepic Ramayana declares: "Ramo vigrahavan Dharma:" - that is, SriRama is the embodiment of Dharma. Yet, when Rama ascended thethrone, the same ritual, which signified the superiority ofDharma over Rama, despite him being the very incarnation of Godand embodiment of Dharma, was performed, with Rama saying thrice'no one can punish me', and Vasishta, the Raja Rishi, gentlyrepudiating Rama and touching his head with Dharma Danda,replying thrice, 'Dharma will punish you'. This meant thatdespite being a King, embodiment of Dharma and even God, Rama wasalso subject to the rule of Dharma. This is also evident fromwhat Sri Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita. Sri Krishna says that hetoo is bound by the dharma of karma [duty] and he has to engagein work like ordinary mortals for their very sake, even thoughthere is nothing which the three worlds can offer him. [BhagavadGita Ch III. 23&24]. Dharma being the rules for sustaining theworld, even Gods cannot violate them. Even thousands of yearslater now and knowing, accepting and revering Rama and Krishna asGod, it is still being debated all over the country by piousHindu believers whether Rama was right in making Sita to undergofire test; whether he was right sending her to forest; whether hewas right in killing Vali the way he did. In the same wayKrishna's many actions are being debated as to theirrighteousness. So even Gods and their actions could not, even nowdo not, escape being measured and judged on the principles ofDharma.The conclusion is clear: there could be Godless Dharma but not

Dharma-free God.

Harmonizing the contradictions - the function of DharmaDharma was not only the yardstick to measure the conduct of

humans and even Gods, it was also interpreted to harmonize andmanage the contradictions in human life. Contradictions arisebecause of the duality inherent in creation. The Indian view oflife always recognized contradicting duality [Dwandva] ineverything connected to the world. The world, in the Hindu view,does not function on the principle of "like either this or that;also there is nothing in between". The Hindu view recognized avast area of gray between black and white extremes. It is thecontext for application of a rule more than the text of the rulethat is decisive. That is why Rama was regarded as great becausehe, as a dutiful son, obeyed his father unquestioningly; andPrahlada too was regarded as great because, despite beingotherwise obedient as a son, he defied his father because of hisdevotion to God. Likewise, Sita was great because she obeyed herhusband Rama unreservedly; and Mira too was great because she,despite being a loyal wife, defied her husband, like Prahlada didwith his father, because of her devotion to God. Thesecontradictions are harmonized by the rule of Dharma. This is theextent of the bandwidth of intellectual and spiritual traditionsof ancient India. This understanding is necessary to know thedifferent the Hindu Indian approaches to women.Women highly regarded in pre-Christian religions in the

WestIt is monotheistic belief systems which brought down the

status of women in the West and forced them to react and rebeland that reaction and rebellion, which have no commonality withHinduism or other ancient thought systems, have been made thecommon approach for women all of the world. In all ancientreligions of the world that pre-dated the monotheistic Abrahamicfaiths - including in the Greco-Roman religious, but not itssocio-political, tradition - women were either highly regarded orthey definitely had their own spiritual and temporal space. Itwas only with the advent of the monotheistic faiths that thestatus and the position of women in the religious and spiritualdomain declined which led to their subservience based onreligious texts. This view is asserted in a neo-Pagan literature,

which cites Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess Worshippers, and OtherPagans in America Today by Margot Adler [Penguin Compass, 1986. 121-25.Print] and says:

"It is common knowledge that women have been cast down by the dominantreligions of our time. Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all contain passages within theirsacred texts that either show women as property, as less than men, or portray them asvile creatures that tempt men to the ways of evil. Because of this, women's spiritualityhas suffered under these monotheistic religions. Women are not given equal status interms of religious hierarchy, they are not allowed to study religion at all, and/or theyare forced into subservience based only on religious texts.

But there was a time before Christianity, before monotheism, that women hadother divine role models to look to. [Adler] Goddess worship was prevalent in much ofEurope and in many other Pagan cultures of ancient times. Though these Goddesseswere not the sole deities worshipped, they did provide women a divine source of power,a chance to see into their own divinity and be proud of who they were. These deitieswere strong, often without relying on men, as in the case of Diana of the Romanpantheon. [Adler] There were Goddesses of childbirth, which gave women anopportunity to see this human act as something anointed (a viewpoint that wouldgreatly change upon the adoption of Abrahamic faiths), along with Goddesses of hearthand home as in Brigid of the Celts, who gave women a chance to see their daily routinesand duties as vital to the community, and many more.[Adler]" http://www.wiccantogether.com/profiles/blogs/true-womens-spirituality

In ancient times, when religion was the most legitimateaspect of life, the positioning of women by the religioustraditions determined their social and personal status. There isenough evidence to indicate that pre-Christian West hadpositioned women well enough to make them enjoy much highersocial status than monotheistic Christianity did later. It waswith the advent of Abrahamic-Christian West that the position ofthe women of the West declined. Here is the story of how in theAbrahamic-Christian West the position of women declined.

Women in Abrahamic traditionIn Abrahamic tradition, while man was made in the image of God,the prevailing view under Judaism, Christianity, and Islam isthat woman was made in the image of man - implying that womanlacked direct, umbilical nexus with God. The beliefs in theAbrahamic faiths, which create and sustain the religious biasagainst women, are contained in their unalterable texts. InAbrahamic belief system, a woman's humanity, therefore, is not

primal, but derived and contingent (Gen: 2-21-22 Koran 4:1; 39.6;7.189). Of all the animals, woman was the last to be made but thefirst to sin (Gen 3:12). The Old Testament puts the monetaryvalue of a woman's life at one-half to two-thirds of that of aman's (Leviticus 27). The Koran elaborates: it requires thetestimony of two women to offset that of one man (2:282). Thesebeliefs are no accident. These beliefs were integral tomonotheistic theologies and to the Greco-Roman model of life.

Greco-Roman sociological mix in Abrahamic faithThe Western views on woman are not just products of

Christian theology. It is as much a product of Greco-Roman socialand political thought. The Greco-Roman social prejudices againstwomen matched with the Christian belief systems on women as thefollowing analysis brings out.

"But it wasn't just the Catholic Church in Western culture keeping women fromentering the mainstream; it started with the Greeks, and with the great "scientist"Aristotle. Aristotle, the Greek philosopher who lived from 384-324 BC, had beenconsidered a great scientist. For about fifteen hundred years his "scientific" opinionswere accepted, among them that the female is a defective male, and that, in humanreproduction the woman is merely the vessel, holding the embryo, which is totally themale's. Also because the female is passive, he asserted, and the male is active, thefemale is not fit for freedom or political action." p. 175, as quoted from H.G. Well's TheOutline of History, p. 309, Macmillian Publishing, 1921, New York.

This scientific "fact" spread and influenced the Romans, and then spreadthroughout the Middle Ages into Europe. In particular, the "teachings" of ThomasAquinas, a monk who later became a saint and wrote 21 volumes of a treatisedefending the Christian doctrine and relied on Aristotle's "science" to argue and provehis positions on God, society, and the subordination of women. "The defeat of the GreekCatholic Church at Constantinople had dashed the hopes of united church power. Inaddition, Protestantism was gaining ground. Church leaders believed that at least partof the blame must be put on Satan and Satan was believed to do his work throughwitches. Most witches, it was also believed, were women.

"The Inquisitors explained at length why witchcraft was far more commonamong women than among men. Basically, woman is a weak, inferior creature;moreover, she is afflicted with insatiable carnal lust. This makes her easy prey to theadvances of the Devil who offers to satisfy her desires. P. 219, from Morton Hunt's TheNatural History of Love, 1967, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, pp. 195-7.

And once again concerning the female's bad "reputation" spread by maledomination: "The thrust of the Adam and Eve myth that came from the Hebrew Old

Testament put new burdens on women. True, women had been consideredcontaminators and polluters in primitive times, but Judaism emphasized the need toavoid sin and for man to protect himself from his "inborn evil tendencies inherited fromAdam…Man's greatest weakness was the lure of sexual pleasures. The urge for sexualsatisfaction made man almost a helpless victim in the eyes of Satan. Woman after all tothe male mind is often equated with sex. She keeps reminding him of his sexual natureand, therefore she must be evil." pp. 70 & 71. From Vern L. Bullough's The SubordinateSex: A History of Attitudes Toward Women, pp. 40-2, Penguin Books, 1974, Maryland.[http://www.evoyage.com/Book%20Reviews/Women%27sRoots.htm]

Thus, the bias against women seems implicit in the mix ofthe Abrahamic-Christian theology and the Greco-Roman sociology.The Western civilization's attitude to women, like the Westerncivilisation itself, is a product of the Greco-Roman andChrisitan mix.

Contrast: Women in Hindu Indian traditionThe Hindu tradition, on the other hand, presents a clear

contrast and a diametrically opposite view. The word 'Stri' inSanskrit means woman. This word 'Stri' consists of 'Sa', whichstands for Satva guna (purity); 'Ta', which stands for Tamoguna(inertia) and 'Ra', which stands for Rajoguna (activity). Theessence of femininity, thus, is the undifferentiated amalgamationof the three gunas: the Satvic, the Rajasic and the Tamasic. Astri or woman is the complete repository of all that what, in theHindu understanding, constitutes and completes a human being.This is Shakti, the kinetic energy; Shiva the potential energy isaction-less. All actions emanate from feminine Shakti.

Here is an important exposition on the spiritual social andcultural position of Stri, that is, women, in Hindu tradition.

"In ancient India, women occupied a very important position; in fact superior tomen. The only words in Sanskrit for strength and power are feminine -"Shakti'' means"power'' and "strength.'' All male power comes from the feminine. Literary evidencesuggests that kings and towns were destroyed because a single woman was wrongedby the state. For example, Valmiki's Ramayana teaches us that Ravana and his entireclan was wiped out because he abducted Sita. Veda Vyasa's Mahabharatha teaches usthat all the Kauravas were killed because they humiliated Draupadi in public. ElangoAdigal's Sillapathigaram teaches us that Madurai, the capital of the Pandyas, was burntbecause Pandyan Nedunchezhiyan mistakenly killed her [Kannagi's] husband on theftcharges.

In Vedic times women and men were equal as far as education and religion wasconcerned. Women participated in the public sacrifices alongside men. One textmentions a female rishi Visvara. Some Vedic hymns are attributed to women such asApala, the daughter of Atri, Ghosa, the daughter of Kaksivant or Indrani, the wife ofIndra. Apparently in early Vedic times women also received the sacred thread and couldstudy the Vedas. The Haritasmrti mentions a class of women called brahmavadinis whoremained unmarried and spent their lives in study and ritual. Panini's distinctionbetween acarya (a lady teacher) and acaryani (a teacher's wife), and upadhyaya (awoman preceptor) and upadhyayani (a preceptor's wife) indicates that women at thattime could not only be students but also teachers of sacred lore. He mentions the namesof several noteworthy women scholars of the past such as Kathi, Kalapi, and Bahvici.The Upanishads refer to several women philosophers, who disputed with their malecolleagues such as Vacaknavi, who challenged Yajnavalkya. The Rig Veda also refers towomen engaged in warfare. One queen Bispala is mentioned, and even as late awitness as Megasthenes (fifth century B.C. CE.) mentions heavily armed women guardsprotecting Chandragupta's palace.

Louis Jaccoliot, the celebrated French author of the Bible in India: Hindoo Originof Hebrew and Christian Revelation said: "India of the Vedas entertained a respect forwomen amounting to worship; a fact which we seem little to suspect in Europe when weaccuse the extreme East of having denied the dignity of woman, and of having onlymade her an instrument of pleasure and of passive obedience." He also said: "What!here is a civilization, which you cannot deny to be older than your own, which places thewoman on a level with the man and gives her an equal place in the family and insociety"http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Women_in_Hinduism.htm - Introduction.

So, the Abrahamic theology and the Hindu philosophy presenta total contrast to each other. The divide is not just abouttheir respective approach to woman, but is about their respectiveapproach to the cosmic relation between man and woman. Theirrespective approach to man-woman relation is integral to thelarger philosophic divide between them.

"Stri Dharma" and reverence for "Stri"In the Hindu-Buddhist tradition, every one, man or woman, is

bound by the idea of mutual and reciprocal duties andobligations. "Stri", the women in India, are also bound by theidea of mutual and reciprocal duties and obligations. Striundertakes the most onerous responsibilities of the family andthe society, besides following the cultural and religiousdiscipline of the highest order. Reciprocally, "Stri" is treated

as almost God. In the Indian tradition, woman is worshippedphysically - like in Kanya puja [worship of young girls],Sumangali puja [worship of married ladies]. Nowhere in the Hindutradition is a man worshipped as man ever, even though a man maybe worshipped along with his wife [like in Uma Maheshwara puja].Otherwise, there is no puja for man prescribed in the Hindutradition. So "Stri" is revered in the Indian tradition. It isthe absence of such reverence or respect, and on the contrary itis the oppression of women in contemporary West, which compelledthe women to rebel.

The Hindu reverence for woman implies that the Hinduphilosophy and sociology considers her as precious. Anyone oranything precious needs protection and is invariably protected.Therefore all humans and things precious inherently facerestrictions on freedom. Take the case of a national leader whois under police protection 24x7. Once placed under protection, heis under serious restrictions as to his private life andmovements. He cannot go where he wants to without informing thepolice; and without being accompanied by them. He cannot doanything, which the protecting police will not know. This kind ofrestrictions became natural to a girl, who is regarded asprecious by her family and the near and dear; therefore, thefamily, parents and the kith and kin became her protectors. Soprotection of women is a very important part of the social valuesof all societies. But the form of protection given to womenvaried according to the state of evolution of the societies.Where societies had not evolved deep value systems the protectionhad been brutal. But the Hindu society had evolved to such anextent that, at the time of Harshavardhana's rule, on thetestimony of the Chinese traveller Hieun Tsang, it is statedthat:

"The position of women was good in the society. There was no purdah system.Women of respectable families received education. ……… However, the system of satiexisted. For example, queen Yashomati burnt herself after the death of her husbandPrabhakar vardhan. Rajyasri had also made an attempt to burn herself after Sasankahad freed him. However, her life was saved by the persuasion of Harshavardhan whoreached at the scene quite on time."[http://www.indianetzone.com/25/social_condition_during_harshavardhan_s_reign.htm]

It is also stated that :The Chinese traveller, Hiuen-Tsang, refers to prohibition, widow-remarriage and

the custom of sati. Yet, women were not regarded as inferior to men. Some of the royalladies were skilled in music and dancing. Rajyasri sat along with Harsha and listened tothe discourses on Buddhism.[http://www.civilserviceindia.com/subject/History/prelims/harshavardhana.html]

This was in the 7th Century CE, till when Christian churchhad not decided whether women were human beings at all. It isevident that at the time when the women of the West werevirtually confined to their home, the women of India enjoyed nodisabilities; they had good standing in the society. This wasindeed unthinkable in the Western societies at that time and evena millennia later. Again, as evident from Huang Tsang's account,contrary to the popular understanding now, Sati was never forced,but voluntary; it prevailed not among the masses but among theelites and there existed legitimate persons to prevent it also,indicating the confluence of the contradictions in India. Satiappears to have been revered but not mandated. It was preventableby intervention and was also prevented. So, to say that thesociety was forcing Sati was to malign the society. What is self-evident is that there was no need for the women of India to fightfor any rights sans the duties; they were conferred the respect,honour and the dignity which is the goal of all rights. Rightsare the means to something; not an end in themselves. In thatsense, the women of India had higher standing than the rights,which the women of the West fought and got in contemporary times.

The paradigm differenceThere is thus a paradigm difference between the Geo-

Christian and Hindu approaches to human relations that includesgender interface, family bond, and kinship among individual,neighbourhood and community and also relation between God and Manand man and nature. The Geo-Christian world-view is based on thecentral idea of man as core of God's creation. So much so eventhe formless and shapeless God is, in Geo-Christian theology,only Man, because HE, the God, made the HE-man in HIS own Image.In contrast, in the Hindu tradition, God manifests as, and in,all - the animate and the inanimate - and the universe itself isthe manifestation of God. In Hindu world-view, man and woman are

not separate entities, but, an undifferentiated amalgam of eachother and constitute two dimensions of the same phenomenon. Theytogether constitute a human being, neither being complete withoutthe other. Ardhanareeswara, the half man-half woman depiction ofthe divinity, emphasises this very point. Consequently these twocontrasting philosophies - the Hindu and the Abrahamic - producedtwo different and conflicting paradigms, namely, that whichrevered woman as Goddess and the other that virtually demonisedher as Evil. The contemporary struggles and consequenttheoretical developments in the West about understanding andpositioning women have to be assessed and interpreted in thecontext of the Abrahamic tradition and Greco-Roman origin. Theunique experience based on such struggles and developments in theWest cannot be applied to societies like the Indian society,which had theorised, experienced and practised a totallydifferent paradigm concerning women and understanding about them.It is this larger and profound understanding that ought to haveinfluenced Margaret Noble-turned-Nivedita to view Indianwomanhood, including the concept of Indian widowhood, positively.Colonial, Abrahamic West became as the reference point

for the colonised, Hindu IndiaThe battle of the Western women for religious, social and

political space in the contemporary West can be understood asspecific to Geo-Christian West, only if seen against the backdropand experiences of the West with Geo-Christian theology andGreco-Roman sociology, which are again specific to the religiousand social history of the West. Yet this battle of Western womenfor freedom and liberty, which was specific to the West,interestingly, did not stop with the West. Thanks to the lead,which the West gained over the Rest by religious, political andeconomic colonialism, the contemporary theories of the Geo-Christian West began invading the non-Western societies wherethey had very little ground for application at all. The non-Western societies did not experience, nor experiment with, eitherthe Greco-Roman sociology or the Geo-Christian theology that hadan anti-women bias, and not only was such theology or sociologyalien to the spiritual, religious, social or political life ofnon-Western societies but also antithetic to their own indigenous

philosophy on which their own gender relations were founded. Yet,because the colonial West had emerged as the compulsive modelsuggested for the colonised Rest, the contemporary Western viewbegan influencing the Rest of the world even though thetheological and historical causes and conditions, which propelledthe West to re-evolve its philosophy and policy on women, did notexist in many non-Western societies. This is particularly true ofHindu India. This will need some elucidation.

The fall out of Geo-Christian theology, philosophy andpractices concerning women was the gradual emergence of a seriousconflict between man and woman in the West in contemporary times.Not only was such conflict or the causes that led to it non-existent in the Hindu Buddhist tradition at all, women occupiedexalted position in the Hindu-Buddhist spiritualism. This isparticularly significant because at that time religion andspiritualism were all that mattered for recognition of anindividual in the society then. So unless religion recognisedwomen, there would be no due recognition for them. The Westerntheories based on man-woman conflict developed autogenously andthe alternative understanding about women in the Hindu-Buddhistphilosophy was totally alien to the Abrahamic traditions. Thereis thus a wide difference between the position and status ofwomen in Hindu-Buddhist tradition and their position and statusin the Geo-Christian West.

The Western ideas of man-woman conflict were thus thelinear-extension of the Abrahamic theology and Greco-Romansociology biased against women. This linear developmentcompelled, as a reaction, the rise of contemporary Westernfeminism, gender equality and gender rights, each of which, andall of them together, eroded the integrity of the family andextended to recognise and cover even gay and lesbian rights,which threaten to overturn the very basis of the functionalsociety. And thanks to the colonial lead that the West acquiredover the Rest in the last two centuries, the notions of feminismand equality evolved by the West are being universalised andmarketed to societies and countries that have no Geo-Christianbackground or experience. In the process, the West has become thereference point for non-Western societies, for evolving auniversal theory and practice of positioning women in private

life and public domain, despite the fact that the position andstatus of women in the their religious philosophy, spiritualprinciples and social norms are vastly different from that of theWest and therefore the principles of gender relations developedin the laboratories of the West are totally inapplicable.

This distortion of the application of the principles ofgender relations developed in Western religious and sociallaboratories to the non-Western societies, particularly the HinduBuddhist society, needs to be addressed and corrected. Works likethat of the Yatishwari on Sister Nivedita, who was born out ofGeo-Christian socio-religious laboratory but cured and evolved inthe Hindu-Buddhist incubatory will go a long way to achieve theneeded course-correction among Hindu women and for reinstating,in public discourse, the Hindu-Buddhist traditional principlescomplimenting men and women without making them competitors.

The "empowered" women of the WestThe women of the West had thus to fight for their rights -

religious, social and political. The West had become a rights-conscious and rights-maniac society as it was mounting strugglesagainst the church first on the principles of secularism and thestate next on principles of democracy. The rights for which thewomen of the West fought, most men of the West did not have, asonly a class was ruling over all. Now, the fight for rights hastransformed into a process and programme of dismantling thesociety, community and family through the idea of feminist rightsand human rights at large, which pits the individual against allcollectives. This struggle for rights in the West is entirelybecause in the West, institutional dominance made it compulsoryfor the individual to fight for his/her rights. This struggle hasnow extended to cover concept of rights like gender rights,elders rights, children's rights, gay rights, animal rights andthe evolution of such rights groups seems endless. The idea ofrights has transformed into empowerment of women. The women ofthe West are presented as empowered. This has won them equalitywith men, as being as powerful as men."Hard power" masculine West vs "Soft power" of feminine

India

Consequently, the measuring rod of the worth of women forthe West is whether they are as powerful as men. This is in tunewith the language and the grammar of the West, which is foundedon "hard power", which is basically masculine. It is the idea ofunbridled coercive "masculine power" which has been the foundingprinciple of contemporary - read modern - Western civilisation.But this has led to enormous violence and destruction. In recenttimes, the West, particularly the US, is struggling to evolve andinternalise persuasive "soft power", which is the "femininepower", in the place of the coercive "hard power." Joseph Nye, aHarvard Professor, who articulated the idea of "soft power" inearly 1980s, premised his suggestion that the US, which wasperceived as a coercive hard power, should develop a persuasiveand attractive soft power through its brands like Hollywood,Disneyland, Mickey Mouse and McDonalds, as he counselled. Later,he even cited how India was demonstrating its soft power byreferring to how the Indian Foreign Affairs Minister JaswantSingh went to Afghanistan after the War was over with hundreds ofthousands of CDs of Hindi films and songs to present the "softer"side of the Indian civilisation.

But the idea of "soft power" is not a subject of mere brandor symbolism as Joseph Nye had limited it to be. Whether anation's power is hard or soft depends on its soul. The Indiansoul is basically soft, because Hindu India is basically themirror reflection of feminity - that of Ma Durga as MaharishiAurobindo would say or of Bharat Mata as Swami Vivekananda wouldsay. Therefore the internalised power of Hindu India is feminine.That is why, in spite of all its political, economic andintellectual hard power, Hindu India was never aggressive. Thisis manifest in the history of India. A study paper [Paper No 5]of the Indian Council for Research on International EconomicRelation titled "Tri-polar Century: India, US and China"concluded that India 'will become global power' and others exceptUS and China will be regional in status' and raised the questionwhether India has 'the will to power' as its past forays into theworld has been through 'commerce and culture'. It cited thehistoric fact of the Indian kingdoms in South East Asiaunconnected to India - not colonies - that neither paid tribute

nor owed allegiance to Indian rulers, saying that India lacks'strategic thoughts and experience'.

In simple terms the study raised the fundamental questionwhether India is capable of exercising "hard power". That is notthe nature and soul of the Indian society, which is basicallyfeminine and therefore "soft" and non-aggressive. This isrepeatedly manifest in the behaviour of the Indian civilisationfrom time immemorial till now. That is why Hindu India, afterexploding the Atom Bomb, unilaterally declared its commitment of"No First Use", when both Pakistan and China have atomic weaponsand have hostile relations with India. Only a "soft" state raisedon the foundations of a "soft" society believing in a philosophyfounded on "soft power", could give a 'no first use' commitmentthus - something which no country believing in hard masculinepower will ever do; or has ever done. Similarly no other countryin the history of the world ever fought and obtained freedomlargely through 'Ahimsa', which is one of the basic tenets of"soft power", as Mahatma Gandhi said that only the confident andthe courageous can be non-violent, even though that could beeasily misunderstood for timidity.

"Rights" as means to get "Respect"The main concern for soft power nations like India is that

the ideas of false equality and competitive empowerment of womenon the model and experience of the hard power West areincreasingly seen as the guiding principles for modernisation -as Westernisation has come to be stealthily known - of the non-Abrahamic and non-Western societies. The women of the West beganto fight for their rights because the people of the West foughtfor winning back their rights from religion and church first andmonarchy and state next. As men who got the rights refused toshare them with women, the women followed suit and fought men toget a fair share of their rights. In the West, for centuries, menwere fighting for the very rights that women began to fight for;the only difference was that men fought against institutions andwomen had to fight against both men and the institutions. So theidea of rights became central to the Western idea of progress andwhat is branded and marketed as modernisation.

But even in the West the rights are insisted only to getdignity and respect. In fact, it is only when dignity and respect

are denied are rights insisted. If one commands respect, one doesnot need rights, which are demanded. Respect, which isvoluntarily given, is superior to the institution of rights,which is coercively obtained. Rights and Respect arealternatives, subject to the caveat that the Rights are a poorand inferior substitute for Respect. Respect at the family levelflows most times from rights willingly surrendered at the altarof duties. The greatest and the best example is the mother. Sheis only conscious of her duties to the children and family. Shecommands respect by being only conscious of her duties and not byinsisting on her rights. Not insisting on one's rights in afamily is a giveaway that enhances and secures the moral statureof the person, be it the father or the mother or the others. Andduties are sourced in morals but rights are sourced in law.

Rights at the cost of respectThere is a certain amount of conflict also between rights

and duties. Insistence on rights in the family invariablyconstitutes abandonment of duties to the family. While rights addto the power of women, that is, empower them in public life, itrobs them of moral authority at the relationship level. Soassertion of one's rights robs a person of his moral authorityand respect among his near and dear. It only satisfies his or herego within and outside. But not insisting on rights makes aperson respectable and even revere-able in their private life,and gets them dignity in public life. Even now a dutiful personwith good family values is preferred in public life than someonewho lacks both. This rule of respect applies for families andcommunities more than to the individual. The family is the mostfundamental institution of human society; not the state or thelaws or the courts. This is what Confucius consistentlycounselled the Chinese. And that had become internalised in thesoul of China. Francis Fukuyama, a well-known author on modernsociology and economics, said that one value which the brutalcommunist dictatorship could not destroy and which survivedunscathed the communist rise and fall in China is the Confucianfamily values of China. That is what makes China different fromthe West. If the Confucian character of China is lost it wouldlose its soul, and would exist only as a living dead. The soul ofChina is duty-based, not rights-centric.

Unbridled assertion of their rights by women in disregard ofthe time-tested institution of family particularly has not onlyled to ruining families, but also had unintended negative impacton women themselves. Most heads of single parent families arewomen - thus establishing the fundamental fact that mother is atthe core of the family. The advent of unwed motherhood, singleparent families and live-in relations, which are the directconsequence of the assertion of rights over families and near anddear, has adversely affected women more than men, as, in mostinstances, those who lead the single parent families are women.So the decline of families and the society have affected the verycause of women which the idea of empowerment is supposed toserve. The unbridled rights insisted by feminists have actuallydamaged the respect for women and trivialised womanhood, ratherthan raising their dignity.

Rights or Respect, but not bothThe family is the Kinder Garten for training to shape and

evolve individuals into giving up their rights for others, whichis the very foundation for creating the habit of sharing withothers. If a person insists on his rights, he becomes atomisedand selfish, without any natural urge to share. This will reversethe progress of humans as sharers and contributors throughinstitutions natural to human life and turn them into selfishanimals.

The family and society respect only those who have given upor not insisted on their personal rights but performed theirduties. One cannot perform one's duties to the family and thenear and the dear if one is obsessed by rights. The goal ofrights movement or empowerment through rights is to win respectand dignity in the public domain. But it results in loss ofrespect in private and family domain in a relationship-basedsociety. The rule that right secures respect is limited to thepublic domain. In the private domain, the rule that applies is inthe reverse, namely, it is the performance of one's duties thatwins respect - like a dutiful mother or wife and a dutiful fatheror husband or a dutiful son or daughter. The issue of rights is aproduct of women's participation in public life and the echo ofit is in private life. This issue concerns only a small fractionof the society - the elites. It is the elite value system. But,

to gather support for their own elite concepts, they use thegender issues to bring the issue of rights into families. Theconsequence is what we see in the decay of the Western familiesand societies today. Unfortunately many gullible and innocentwomen in India, aided by men who have internalised the Westernmale qualities, are taken in by such failed western conceptsborrowed as fashionable by a few Page Three elite personalitiesof the Indian media. In a relation-based society like India,which has not legitimised unbridled individualism, insistence onrights, particularly within a family, does not win, be it a manor a woman who insists on rights, any respect; in fact, he or sheloses respect by insisting on rights. This principle is appliedeven outside families, like for instance in a political party; itis in the name of party discipline. The rights of individuals aregiven up for the cause of party discipline. If a transientreality like a political party deserves that kind of deference,is an eternal institution like a family not entitled to greaterlegitimacy? One can get either rights without respect or respectby foregoing the rights. The Indian discourse on womenempowerment must factor this critical variable into account.Under Indian conditions at least one who insists on his or herrights cannot ask to be respected. He or she may insist and gethis or her rights or he or she may deserve and be respected bynot insisting on rights. One may get either rights or respect,but not both, in a relation-based society.

"Respect" transforms into "Reverence"Men or women, who had not insisted on, but given up their

rights in the cause of the family or the society or the nation,are the ones revered in private and in public. Why is MahatmaGandhi or Subhash Bose or Bhagat Singh or Chandrasekhar Azad isrevered today? Why is Swami Vivekananda or Maharishi Aurobindoworshipped? Why are many saints and seers sacrosanct? The reasonis simple; it is because they gave up their private rights inorder to serve millions of others. Why are millions of mothers orfathers in millions of homes revered? It is because they havegiven up their rights for the sake of their family and for theirchildren. So the respect for them gradually transforms intoreverence for them in their later life and after their lifetime.Crores and crores of Indian family women not only command

respect, they are also revered. That is why the concept ofancestral worship is so strong and so widely prevalent. Insocieties like the Hindu-Buddhist society where ancestral worshipis integral to the society, the reverential relationship lastsfor generations, as the concept of Pitr [ancestor] transcendsseveral generations. The emphasis on ancestral worship is anothergreat dividing point between the Abrahamic West, which hasdestroyed the pre-Abrahamic reverence for ancestors, and Hindu-Buddhist India.

It is only because most of them would not trade off theirrespect for rights or give up the ancestral worship that theWestern ideas of rights over respect are not able to invade Indiain a big way, even though thanks to the media, a section of theelites are talking in the language of the West.

"Liberated" Vs "Revered"The empowered women of the West fought to be like the

empowered men of the West, equal to them, and not inferior tothem. This is the philosophy and theory that has begun drivingthe contemporary feminist thought in the non-Western societies,even though it is a small fraction of the society. The globaldebate is centred round the Western idiom of empowered women. Anempowered woman, says the theory, alone becomes a liberatedwomen. Liberated from what? Liberated from men, religion,society, traditions, morals and restraints that go with normalhumans? There is no clear definition of who a liberated woman is.The icons of liberated women today are not educationists,academics, civil servants, artists, musicians, spiritualists,warriors and the rest. It is the half-clad and still less cladmedia Page Three personalities who are perceived, presented,projected and understood as liberated women. Beauty pageants,models, cine stars and the like are emerging as the vehicles toliberate women. This perverts the idea of dignified women. Thiskind of liberation is at the very cost of respect and reverencefor women that inheres in a traditional but contemporary-friendlysociety like the Indian society. The Indian social moorings willstill not ban or use violence against such icons as, forinstance, an Islamic society will, but it will not accept them aslegitimate portrayals of women or women's icons. The only way the

Indian society handles this kind of erosion of eternal livingvalues is to deny it legitimacy. This is because the idea ofreverence for women will not allow such liberated women to beaccepted as the legitimate personality of a woman. So the icon ofIndian women is the Revered woman, not a Liberated woman.Rights obsession has destroyed the economy of the West

The family is not just a biological unit, but a culturalunit that shapes restrains, acculturates and trains individuals.Unbridled rights consciousness of parents will undermine thiscultural institution, which shapes the character of the futurecitizens. This is what the West is experiencing today but it hasturned incapable of learning and course-correcting it because ofits public commitment to the ever-expanding institution of rightswhich has undermined family consciousness. The West, even if itever was earlier an example to other nations for this distortion,has ceased to be one after the economic crisis that hit the West,because one of the important reasons why the economic crisisoriginated in the West was that the irresponsible consumerbehaviour led to the undermining of the traditional familysystem. The rise in individualism and feminism seems directlyrelated to the decline of the US as an exporter of goods andcapital into an importer of both since 1976. The seemingprosperity that the US enjoyed in the last couple of decades wasat the cost of its cultural assets, which included theinstitution of family. The family household savings fell.Consumption beyond regular income became normal affair. If thiskind of development were to be hedged against in India, it isnecessary to preserve the respect for women, and make themrealise that respect is more important and secure for them thanrights, which is a poor safety net. The Western civilisationfailed to realise the true worth of women because of theologicalmisdirection. But that is not the case in India. The Indiancivilisation has positioned women with respect and reverence. Ifunder the influence of the West, the men and women of Indiabecome rights-conscious and forget their duty-driven life model,there is every risk of a considerable section of Indian womenfalling a prey to the Western view of life, which can be thebiggest risk to Indian culture, society and economy.

Nivedita's reverence for Indian women - implies itsabsence in Geo-Christianity

This theological, sociological and contemporary backgroundof how the man-woman relations and the role and respect for womenhave been perverted in the West and are being distorted in HinduIndia, in the name of "modernity" emphasises the importance ofthe work of the Yatiswari on Nivedita. Nivedita, the Westernwoman who evolved as a Hindu woman icon, is a great antidote tothe distortions in the discourse on women in our country. Thereis a need to study more acutely and deeply and explain to thewomen of India how Margaret Noble, who was born into Christianmonotheism and brought up in the rising revolt of the women ofthe West against the Church and Christianity, began admiring andrevering Indian womanhood after she reincarnated as Nivedita. Theabsence of reverence for womanhood in the Christian West and thereverence for womanhood which is the very essence of Hindubelief system ought to have made Nivedita an unwavering votary ofHindu Indian womanhood. Nivedita's love of Indian womanhood hasbeen captured extensively, with anecdotal references, by theYatiswari. But Nivedita's view of Indian womanhood can beunderstood only on a comparison of monotheistic Christianity'sattitude to women with the Hindu religious and social approach towomen. This aspect of Nivedita would need a further and deeperstudy. That may be a separate and distinct topic on which theYatiswari can work for a more complete presentation of Nivedita.

A text for contemporary Indian womenYatiswari Krishnapriya Amba's text on Nivedita is

undoubtedly an invaluable contribution to course-correct the distorted attitudes of a section of the contemporary Indian women, whose world view is being perverted by the Western notion of gender rights. This book should be translated into all languages and made available to women at all levels. Nivedita's life and mission have the potential to course-correct the distortions and disorientation among the Indian women, particularly the upper strata of the society and the English educated Indian women. I am sure that this invaluable work will have a far-reaching and positive impact on the readers,

particularly the women of India, on whose shoulders the survival of the Hindu culture, traditions and society rests.