Temple seating

[Eastern Mind]

Why is it that in the north, women sit on right, and men on left, and in the south it is reversed. Perhaps I am wrong in my generalisations, as the number of temples I've actually been to is limited. Is there a Vedic/ dharmic reason to this? Just curious.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~


Namaste EM ( et.al)

I do not have an answer to your left-right question - as I have seen it both ways. Some look at it from the view of the mūrti - to His / Her left or right i.e. their vantage point vs. from the yajvan's ( worshipper) view.


I do know, as mentioned in the Aitareya Upaniṣad¹, that the devatā-s are fond of the 'indirect' way, not straight on i.e. staying to left-or-right is the application of this.

This stems from the application of their names. An Example: Indra is the indirect name of Idandram ( Idandro havai nama - he who is called Idandra). The key word in the śloka ( not completely written here ) is parokśa परोक्ष - beyond the range of sight, out of sight , secretly, etc. They are fond if this indirect means say the Upaniṣad-s.


And what of this Inandra? it means It-seeing. But seeing what? Idam इदम् - This. Indra saw Brahman as Idam - as 'this'.


And what do we do with various muni's and guru's ? We call them indirectly too, no? e.g. svāmī-ji , guru-ji, pita-ji, mata-ji.


pranams

reference
Aitareya Upaniṣad 3.14

[atanu]

Why is it that in the north, women sit on right, and men on left, and in the south it is reversed. Perhaps I am wrong in my generalisations, as the number of temples I've actually been to is limited. Is there a Vedic/ dharmic reason to this? Just curious.

Namaste EM,

In Ardhanarisvara representation, the right half is male. Similarly, it is said that Indra resides in the right eye and Indrani in the left. As far as I know, the life partner must occupy the left seat. About the reverse custom in North/South, I am not aware of. May be Saidevoji will be able to confirm it and throw some light.

Om

[Eastern Mind]

hmmmmmmmmm,, getting more curious.. Namaste Yajvan and Atanu...
Atanu: in the south it is definitely men on the right .. as the devotee faces the sanctum, not on the right side as the God or Goddess faces you.
Yajvan: I like the indirect worship part as being cool. We have a mirror here angled so as one can get darshan (sight) of Vinayaka via the mirror, and I've been told by several elders that that is an auspicious way to receive blessings. And everyone sort of peeks into sanctums, not standing directly in front.

I've also encountered some ethnocentrism regarding the left/right custom. I tried to find something on the net addressing the reasons, but alas.. twas all in vain.

Aum Namasivaya

Aum Namasivaya

[atanu]

hmmmmmmmmm,, getting more curious.. Namaste Yajvan and Atanu...
Atanu: in the south it is definitely men on the right .. as the devotee faces the sanctum, not on the right side as the God or Goddess faces you.
Yajvan: I like the indirect worship part as being cool. We have a mirror here angled so as one can get darshan (sight) of Vinayaka via the mirror, and I've been told by several elders that that is an auspicious way to receive blessings. And everyone sort of peeks into sanctums, not standing directly in front.

I've also encountered some ethnocentrism regarding the left/right custom. I tried to find something on the net addressing the reasons, but alas.. twas all in vain.

Aum Namasivaya

Aum Namasivaya

Namaste EM and yajvan,

We may have to wait for some input from saidevoji.

Yesterday, just after posting, an intuitive flash occured. Though, it may well be just the rational mind.

But, ardhanarisvara manifests to us as the coiling up blue and golden yellow agni. The blue is Shiva and the Golden Yellow is Devi. However, there is no right side and no left side to the arrangement. Neither there is blue inside yellow or yellow inside blue.

It is one Shiva.

Just thought of sharing.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Eastern Mind]

Atanu: Perhaps you're on to something. Ardhinarisvara sits as one of a few on my home shrine, and I've always liked the concept, reminding me that God is genderless. Similarly, I like the lingam (interpreted as a 'mark', not the western interpretation) as clearly there is no gender. Not that I dislike Shaktis beside Nataraja or shaktis beside Murugan, or Radha/Krishna, I just think that for some people it portrays a misconception that God has gender, and for some this leads to confusion regarding God's nature.

In fact, at an inner level (obviously?) neither does our soul, and certainly not the Self.

Going back to the temple seating, there is also less congregational style worship in the south than in the north. Other religions including some or all forms of early Christianity, Islam, and Judaism also practise(d) some sort of gender splitting, but I believe mostly it is front/back rather than left/right with the males being up front (obviously?) . This I believe was simply to decrease the likelihood of sexual thoughts occurring in the middle of worship, which certainly isn't a bad idea. Random early morning thoughts...
Aum Namasivaya

[reflections]

Eastern Mind,
I like Radha Krishna, I have in my home temple. For me Krishna is the absolute, beyond gender, name, time, space even beyond existence and non existence. And Radha is Krishna's potency, the creative energy, prakriti or Maya through which Purusha works and manifests.

Though being beyond all the attributes which I can think of, the absolute still allows us to worship him through beautiful, tender and loving Radha-krishna idol out of his infinite mercy.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~


In Ardhanarisvara representation, the right half is male. Similarly, it is said that Indra resides in the right eye and Indrani in the left.
Om

Namaste EM and atanu,
hope all is well with you both... As atanu mentions the the right half is male, and the left half is considered female.
That is, the body, when considered as halves, the right half is solar (sun) and therefore male, and the left half is lunar ( moon) and considered female.

Same with breathing via the nose. Prāṇa coming in via the nostrils change throughout the day i.e. is either left or right nostril dominant. It is suggested that the dominant time is a bit more ~ 2 hrs.

There are some specifics of the left and right brain also i.e. specific qualities of each, but no need to outline it as its beyond the scope of the discussion.

Yet this left-right concept continues, but at the end of the day Śiva is wholeness, without parts. We as humans try and comprehens this wholeness the best we can and thus try and break it down to comprehensiable parts.


pranams

[saidevo]

The 'seating' (actually 'standing') arrangements of men and women differ with temples in South India, I think, though I haven't inquired about any special reason for that. In Goddess Akhilandeshvari Sannidhi at Tiruvanaikka, Trichy--a temple my friends and I frequented during our college days--I remember the women standing on the left of the deity and men on her right. It was the same arrangement in our village temple in both the Visalakshi and Swamy Sannidhi. However, in temples like the Kapali temple, Mylapore, I have seen people standing in families with no strict separation between men and women. In large temples such as Tirupati, men and women move in the same queue, in families.

Subash Kak has written in detail about Hindu temple architecture, special about their connection to cosmology and astrology, but has not mentioned about the darshan arrangements.

[saidevo]

In Ardhanarisvara representation, the right half is male. Similarly, it is said that Indra resides in the right eye and Indrani in the left. As far as I know, the life partner must occupy the left seat.


In South Indian weddings and rituals, the female life partner takes the right side of the male.



Ardhinarisvara sits as one of a few on my home shrine, and I've always liked the concept, reminding me that God is genderless.
...
Not that I dislike Shaktis beside Nataraja or shaktis beside Murugan, or Radha/Krishna, I just think that for some people it portrays a misconception that God has gender, and for some this leads to confusion regarding God's nature.
...
In fact, at an inner level (obviously?) neither does our soul, and certainly not the Self.


1. Brahman is generally considered to be Brahmam, genderless, but I think the concept of ArdhanarIshvara indicates the merging of the polarities and forms of male and female rather than the genderless nature. It is the same with the Shivalinga and its base.

2. Every Hindu deity has a consort, representing His Shakti aspect. I don't think that worshipping God with a gender leads to confusion regarding God's nature: on the other hands, it makes the worshipper feel closer to God in an affectionate and familial relationship, which is the very basis of bhakti.

Male and female forms of our Hindu deities is a great concept that sustains the cycle of creation, thereby giving a chance for the souls waiting to be reborn.

3. It is said that at the inner level, that is, immediately after death and until the next birth, the soul retains the same gender and form it had when it separated from the body. The Self, however, is genderless.

[Eastern Mind]

2. Every Hindu deity has a consort, representing His Shakti aspect. I don't think that worshipping God with a gender leads to confusion regarding God's nature: on the other hands, it makes the worshipper feel closer to God in an affectionate and familial relationship, which is the very basis of bhakti.



3. It is said that at the inner level, that is, immediately after death and until the next birth, the soul retains the same gender and form it had when it separated from the body. The Self, however, is genderless.

Saidevo: Please understand that I do not come here to argue. Having said that, it has been my experience that some devotees are confused regarding shaktis. Personally, I find no confusion. Obviously, your experience has been different.

Regarding the soul's gender, which scripture are you quoting from by "it is said that" ?

Also, I have seen Muruga, Nataraja, both standing alone or with shaktis. I have never seen Venkateshwara or Ganesha with shakti, but as I mentioned before the niumber of temples I have been to is limited.

Nandri .. Aum Namasivaya

[atanu]

In South Indian weddings and rituals, the female life partner takes the right side of the male.

1. Brahman is generally considered to be Brahmam, genderless, but I think the concept of ArdhanarIshvara indicates the merging of the polarities and forms of male and female rather than the genderless nature.

Namaste saidevoji,

I think it is bothways, since Upanishads teach: two, three, and many from the infinite one. And also Upanishad teaches the reverse: all rivers merge in the ocean; sparks emerge from and merge in a great ball of fire. And many more.

Every Murti and every story, IMO, reminds us to see the ONE Brahman, in every situation of life -- in love (as in Radha Shyam) or in anger (Daksha Yagna) or in family (Shiva's family), in prosperity, in a mendicant, or in an outcaste.

Om

Note: As per Advaita, soul (Jiva) being nothing but Brahman, there is no gender to it. I have not seen any gender attribute to soul but mostly it is spoken of as him/he but also as a lady whom God loves. But going by the basics, Atman is Brahman.

[atanu]

Regarding the soul's gender, which scripture are you quoting from by "it is said that" ?

Nandri .. Aum Namasivaya

Namaste EM and saidevoji,

The following verses clear the doubt, if any:

Svet. Upanishad

8
Of the size of a thumb, but brilliant, like the sun, the jiva possesses both volition and egoism. It is endowed with the qualities of both buddhi and Atman. Therefore it is seen as another entity, inferior and small as the point of a goad.
9
Know the embodied soul to be a part of the hundredth part of the point of a hair divided a hundred times; and yet it is infinite.
10
It is not female, it is not male, nor is it neuter. whatever body it takes, with that it becomes united.

Om Namah Shivaya

[saidevo]

Namaste EM and Atanu.





3. It is said that at the inner level, that is, immediately after death and until the next birth, the soul retains the same gender and form it had when it separated from the body. The Self, however, is genderless.


Regarding the soul's gender, which scripture are you quoting from by "it is said that"?




It is not female, it is not male, nor is it neuter. whatever body it takes, with that it becomes united.


Atanu, thanks for your reference. Yes, I have read that jIva, the manifest soul is finger-sized. There is a reference in Katha Upanishad too:

angushTha mAtraH purushaH jyotirivAdhUmakaH |
IshAno bhutabhavyasya sa evAdya sa u shvaH

2-I-13. The Purusha of the size of a thumb is like a smokeless flame and is the Lord of the past and the future. He certainly exists now and shall certainly exist tomorrow. This verily is that (thou seekest).

However, since I used the terms 'soul' and 'Self' in my observation quoted above, I meant that jIva, the manifest soul, DOES have a form, so the gender of this soul is the gender of the form it lives in. It is in this context that I said souls to have a gender until they are liberated into the one Self.

The reference I had in mind for this observation is the following from the The Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramahansa Yogananda--the chapter wherein he narrates his experience with his resurrected guru, Sri Yukteswar:



"The astral body is an exact counterpart of the last physical form. Astral beings retain the same appearance which they possessed in youth in their previous earthly sojourn; occasionally an astral being chooses, like myself, to retain his old age appearance." Master, emanating the very essence of youth, chuckled merrily.


Sri Yukteswar gives a stunning description of the life of disembodied souls in the normal astral world and the work of the liberated souls like him in Hiranyaloka in chapter 43, 'The Resurrection of Sri Yukteswar'.

Even though, we the jIvas are tied to a gender in our form, everyone of us is essentially an woman-man combination in our mental and emotional makeup; this is why an author is able to give truthful accounts of his characters, going deep into their thought processes.

On the other hand, a jIva or soul is manifest into a form for the longest term of its cycle of life, thus having a form with a gender in the practical sense.