What is Ardh -Narishwar? Is it alike a gay or eunuch?

Let us see what is Ardh- Narishwar

‘शंकर: पुरुषा: सर्वे स्त्रिय: सर्वा महेश्वरी।’ (शिवपुराण)

अर्थात्–समस्त पुरुष भगवान सदाशिव के अंश और समस्त स्त्रियां भगवती शिवा की अंशभूता हैं, उन्हीं भगवान अर्धनारीश्वर से यह सम्पूर्ण चराचर जगत् व्याप्त है।

शक्ति के बिना शिव ‘शव’ हैं

शिव और शक्ति एक–दूसरे से उसी प्रकार अभिन्न हैं, जिस प्रकार सूर्य और उसका प्रकाश, अग्नि और उसका ताप तथा दूध और उसकी सफेदी। शिव में ‘इ’कार ही शक्ति है। ‘शिव’ से ‘इ’कार निकल जाने पर ‘शव’ ही रह जाता है। शास्त्रों के अनुसार बिना शक्ति की सहायता के शिव का साक्षात्कार नहीं होता। अत: आदिकाल से ही शिव–शक्ति की संयुक्त उपासना होती रही है।

भगवान शिव के अर्धनारीश्वररूप का आध्यात्मिक रहस्य

भगवान शिव का अर्धनारीश्वररूप जगत्पिता और जगन्माता के सम्बन्ध को दर्शाता है। सत्–चित् और आनन्द–ईश्वर के तीन रूप हैं। इनमें सत्स्वरूप उनका मातृस्वरूप है, चित्स्वरूप उनका पितृस्वरूप है और उनके आनन्दस्वरूप के दर्शन अर्धनारीश्वररूप में ही होते हैं, जब शिव और शक्ति दोनों मिलकर पूर्णतया एक हो जाते हैं।

सृष्टि के समय परम पुरुष अपने ही वामांग से प्रकृति को निकालकर उसमें समस्त सृष्टि की उत्पत्ति करते हैं। शिव गृहस्थों के ईश्वर और विवाहित दम्पत्तियों के उपास्य देव हैं क्योंकि अर्धनारीश्वर शिव स्त्री और पुरुष की पूर्ण एकता की अभिव्यक्ति हैं। संसार की सारी विषमताओं से घिरे रहने पर भी अपने मन को शान्त व स्थिर बनाये रखना ही योग है।

भगवान शिव अपने पारिवारिक सम्बन्धों से हमें इसी योग की शिक्षा देते हैं। अपनी धर्मपत्नी के साथ पूर्ण एकात्मकता अनुभव कर, उसकी आत्मा में आत्मा मिलाकर ही मनुष्य आनन्दरूप शिव को प्राप्त कर सकता है।

क्यों हुआ अर्धनारीश्वर अवतार?

भगवान शिव का अर्धनारीश्वरस्वरूप ब्रह्माजी की कामनाओं को पूर्ण करने वाला है। पुराणों के अनुसार लोकपितामह ब्रह्माजी ने सनक–सनन्दन आदि मानसपुत्रों का इस इच्छा से सृजन किया कि वे सृष्टि को आगे बढ़ायें परन्तु उनकी प्रजा की वृद्धि में कोई रुचि नहीं थी।

अत: ब्रह्माजी भगवान सदाशिव और उनकी परमाशक्ति का चिंतन करते हुए तप करने लगे। इस तप से प्रसन्न होकर भगवान सदाशिव अर्धनारीश्वर रूप में ब्रह्माजी के पास आए और प्रसन्न होकर अपने वामभाग से अपनी शक्ति रुद्राणी को प्रकट किया। वे ही भवानी, जगदम्बा व जगज्जननी हैं। ब्रह्माजी ने भगवती रुद्राणी की स्तुति करते हुए कहा–

’हे देवि! आपके पहले नारी कुल का प्रादुर्भाव नहीं हुआ था, इसलिए आप ही सृष्टि की प्रथम नारीरूप, मातृरूप और शक्तिरूप हैं। आप अपने एक अंश से इस चराचर जगत् की वृद्धि हेतु मेरे पुत्र दक्ष की कन्या बन जायें।’

ब्रह्माजी की प्रार्थना पर देवी रुद्राणी ने अपनी भौंहों के मध्य भाग से अपने ही समान एक दिव्य नारी–शक्ति उत्पन्न की, जो भगवान शिव की आज्ञा से दक्ष प्रजापति की पुत्री ‘सती’ के नाम से जानी गयीं। देवी रुद्राणी पुन: महादेवजी के शरीर में प्रविष्ट हो गयीं। अत: भगवान सदाशिव के अर्धनारीश्वररूप की उपासना में ही मनुष्य का कल्याण निहित है।

अर्धनारीनटेश्वर स्तोत्र (हिन्दी अनुवाद सहित)!!!!!!!!

English Translation:

That is, all men are part of Lord Sadashiv and all women are part of Lord Shiva, this entire living world is pervaded by the same Lord Ardhanarishwar.

Without Shakti, Shiva is a ‘dead body’

Shiva and Shakti are as inseparable from each other as the sun and its light, fire and its heat and milk and its whiteness. Lord Shiva has strength of denial. When ‘Ikar’ is removed from ‘Shiva’ only ‘dead body’ remains. According to the scriptures, Shiva cannot be realized without the help of Shakti. Hence, there has been joint worship of Shiva and Shakti since ancient times.

Spiritual mystery of Lord Shiva’s Ardhanarishwar form

The Ardhanarishwar form of Lord Shiva shows the relationship between the Father of the World and the Mother of the World. Sat – Chit and Anand – are the three forms of God. In these, Satswaroop is his motherly form, Chitswaroop is his paternal form and his Anandaswaroop is seen only in Ardhanarishwarup, when both Shiva and Shakti together become completely one.

At the time of creation, the Supreme Being takes out nature from its own desires and creates the entire creation in it. Shiva is the God of households and the worshipable deity of married couples because Ardhanarishvara Shiva is the expression of complete unity of man and woman. Yoga is to keep one’s mind calm and stable despite being surrounded by all the adversities of the world.

Lord Shiva teaches us this yoga through his family relations. Only by experiencing complete unity with his religious wife and by merging his soul with her, can a man attain Shiva in the form of bliss.

Why did Ardhanarishwar incarnation happen?

The half female form of Lord Shiva fulfills the wishes of Lord Brahma. According to the Puranas, Lokpitamah Brahmaji created Manasputras like Sanak, Sanandan etc. with the desire that they should take the creation forward but he had no interest in the progress of his people.

Therefore, Brahmaji started meditating while thinking about Lord Sadashiv and his supreme power. Pleased with this penance, Lord Sadashiv came to Lord Brahma in the form of Ardhanarishwar and being pleased, revealed his power to Rudrani from his left side. They are Bhavani, Jagadamba and Jagajjanani. Brahmaji while praising Bhagwati Rudrani said –

‘O Goddess! The female family had not emerged before you, hence you are the first female form, motherly form and power form of the universe. You, with a part of yourself, become the daughter of my son Daksh for the prosperity of this prosperous world.’

On the prayer of Brahmaji, Goddess Rudrani created a divine female power like herself from the middle part of her eyebrows, who with the permission of Lord Shiva came to be known as ‘Sati’, the daughter of Daksh Prajapati. Goddess Rudrani again entered the body of Mahadevji. Therefore, the welfare of man lies only in the worship of Lord Sadashiva in the half female form.

Ardhanarinateswara Stotra!!!

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

So above discussion while taking Shiv Puran a base Ardh-Narishwar was created to have more progeny and better society especially a quality women who will be future mothers. A nation’s future nurtures in the lap of women “The Mother”. This was argued even before Supreme Court of India that Ardh Narishwar is our culture. But the argument erred the purpose and concept. It is delusion and misconception to say that “Ardh-Narishwar” is synonym to gay or lesbian or LGBTQ+21. It was an avatar to have a highest quality of females and to keep the life on earth alive. There was serious crisis of progeny which could have wiped out humankind from earth.

This means LGBTQ+21  is organic or biological flow or blemish! Should  this biological malfunction be glorified?

WHAT SCIENCE SAY?

Bisexuality and heterosexuality, homosexuality is one of the three main categories of sexual orientation within the heterosexual–homosexual continuum. Scientists do not yet know the exact cause of sexual orientation, but they believe that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. Scientist, do not view such disorder as a choice. There is no consistent theory on the issue. But scientists favor biologically based theories of genetic disorder. There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males. There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role regarding sexual orientation.  While some people believe that homosexual activity is unnatural, scientific research shows that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation in human sexuality and is not in and of itself a source of negative psychological effects. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation.

Lawyer and others challenged the criminality of same sex relationships , and immediately after abrogation of Sec 377 of IPC same lawyer got engaged with her lesbian friend.

 

 Several Petitions were filed to give recognition to same sex marriages. It was prayed that Special Marriage Act be amended. Right to adopt was also prayed for. But #LGBTQ+21 is a foreign concept. Very much accepted in USA. There even adoption by such couples ,  child by way of surrogacy is also legal. However consequences of such unnatural acts destroys in long run healthy society. Child would ask at the age of 18 who is my real mother or father? This has increased cases of depression.

Here is the report

https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/pdf/YRBS_Data-Summary-Trends_Report2023_508.pdf

Ours is a systematic society and every glorified concept of west cannot be accepted because its from USA. We have our own independent culture and traditions,values. Abnormality cannot thrust upon society to accept en-mass the concept .

The majority bench in recent Judgment of 5 Judges Bench on gay right marriage held that ( Supriyo vs Union)  said that,         ” their desire, for social acceptability, in the manner that has been historically known – through the social recognition that marriage affords– and the lack of which causes them feeling of exclusion and hurt, is one that as individuals, especially those donning the robes of justice, we can certainly have deep empathy with. However, we are deeply conscious, that no matter how much we empathize with the outcome sought, the means to arriving at such a destination, must also be legally sound, and keep intact, the grand architecture of our Constitutional scheme. For if we throw caution to the wind, we stand the risk of paving the way (wherein each brick may feel justified) to untold consequences that we could not have contemplated. While moulding relief, as a court we must be cognizant that despite being empowered to see the capabilities of the law in its grand and majestic formulation, we must not be led aground because we are blinded, by its glow.”

Authors View :

There are two types of gay. 1. natural and 2 acquired.

In first case one can go for hormonal -sex change treatment In second case it’s due to trend. (acquired) sometimes parents, friends, relatives promote such surgery or living. There are rigid psychological study , counseling given and they are sent back home, because once there is surgery done there is no reversal. Laws are made but if subverted it creates depression and psychological turbulence. Youth need to be guided… #SameGenderMarriage

Can Same Sex Marriages be a Fundamental Right: Per majority it is rejected. 

Let us now turn to the Judgement of Supreme Court

Supriyo Chakraborty vs UOI -Five Judges Bench the Petitioners claimed Right to Marry is Fundamental Right and not permitting LGBTQ+21 marriage is violation of the fundamental rights.

The minority judgment supported the contention which includes CJI Chandrachud

 

Per Ravindra Bhat and Hima Kohli

“home” is not a physical structure; it is rather the space where the two individuals exist, caring, breathing and thinking, living for each other. This is how traditionally it has been understood

LGBTQ+21

  1. This court hereby summarizes its conclusions and directions as follows:
  2. There is no unqualified right to marriage except that recognised by statute including space left by custom.
  1. An entitlement to legal recognition of the right to union – akin to marriage or civil union, or conferring legal status upon the parties to the relationship can be only through enacted law. A sequitur of this is that the court cannot enjoin or direct the creation of such regulatory framework resulting in legal status.

iii. The finding in (i) and (ii) should not be read as to preclude queer persons from celebrating their commitment to each other, or relationship, in whichever way they wish, within the social realm.

  1. Previous judgments of this court have established that queer and LGBTQ+ couples too have the right to union or relationship (under Article 21) – “beit mental, emotional or sexual” flowing from the right to privacy, right to choice, and autonomy. This, however, does not extend to a right to claim entitlement to any legal status for the said union or relationship.
  2. The challenge to the SMA on the ground of under classification is not made out. Further, the petitioner’s prayer to read various provisions in a ‘gender neutral’ manner so as to enable same-sex marriage, is unsustainable.
  3. Equality and non-discrimination are basic foundational rights. The indirect discriminatory impacts in relation to earned or compensatory benefits, or social welfare entitlements for which marital status is a relevant eligibility factor, for queer couples who in their exercise of choice form relationships, have to be suitably redressed and removed by the State. These measures need to be taken with expedition because inaction will result in injustice and unfairness with regard to the enjoyment of such benefits, available to all citizens who are entitled and covered by such laws, regulations or schemes (for instance, those relating to employment benefits: provident fund, gratuity, family pension, employee state insurance; medical insurance; material entitlements unconnected with matrimonial matters, but resulting in adverse impact upon queer couples). As held earlier, this court cannot within the judicial framework engage in this complex task; the State has to study the impact of these policies, and entitlements.

vii. Consistent with the statement made before this Court during the course of proceedings on 03.05.2023, the Union shall set up a high-powered committee chaired by the Union Cabinet Secretary, to undertake a comprehensive examination of all relevant factors, especially including those outlined above. In the conduct of such exercise, the concerned representatives of all stakeholders, and views of all States and Union Territories shall be taken into account.

viii. The discussion on discriminatory impacts is in the context of the effects of the existing regimes on queer couples. While a heterosexual couple’s right to live together is not contested, the logic of the discriminatory impact [mentioned in conclusion (vi) above] faced by queer couples cohabiting together, would definitionally, however, not apply to them.

  1. Transgender persons in heterosexual relationships have the freedom and entitlement to marry under the existing statutory provisions.
  2. Regulation 5(3) of the CARA Regulations cannot be held void on the grounds urged. At the same time, this court is of the considered opinion that CARA and the Central Government should appropriately consider the realities of de facto families, where single individuals are permitted to adopt and thereafter start living in a non-matrimonial relationship. In an unforeseen eventuality, the adopted child in question, could face exclusion from the benefits otherwise available to adopted children of married couples. This aspect needs further consideration, for which the court is not the appropriate forum.
  3. Furthermore, the State shall ensure – consistent with the previous judgment of this Court in K.S. Puttaswamy (supra), Navtej Johar (supra), Shakti Vahini (supra) and Shafin Jahan (supra)- that the choice exercised by queer and LGBTQ couples to cohabit is not interfered with and they do no face any threat of violence or coercion. All necessary steps and measures in this regard shall be taken. The respondents shall take suitable steps to ensure that queer couples and transgender persons are not subjected to any involuntary medical or surgical treatment.

xii. The above directions in relation to transgender persons are to be read as part of and not in any manner whittling down the directions in NALSA (supra) so far as they apply to transgender persons.

xiii. This court is alive to the feelings of being left out, experienced by the queer community; however, addressing their concerns would require a comprehensive study of its implications involving a multidisciplinary approach and poly-centric resolution, for which the court is not an appropriate forum to provide suitable remedies.

Justice PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA Said

At the outset, I will set out my conclusions, which are also in complete consonance with that of Justice Bhat in his opinion.

The question of marriage equality of same sex/LGBTQ+ couples did not arise for consideration in any of the previous decisions of this Court, including the decision in Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v.Union of India1 and NALSA v. Union of India. Consequently, there cannot be a binding precedent on this count. The reasons for arriving at this conclusion are articulated in the opinion of Justice Bhat.

While dealing with minority Judgment of CJI Chandrachud he said The learned Chief Justice opines that “it is insufficient if persons have the ability and freedom to form relationships unregulated by the State. For the full enjoyment of such relationships, it is necessary that the State accord recognition to such relationships. Thus, the right to enter into a union includes the right to associate with a partner of one’s choice, according recognition to the association, and ensuring that there is no denial of access to basic goods and services is crucial to achieve the goal of self-development.” The opinion of the Chief Justice, thereafter, classifies that status of two persons in relationship:

(a) ‘relationships’ which do not have legal consequences, (b) ‘unions’ which have legal consequences and marriages. In my considered opinion, it is in positively mandating the State to grant recognition or legal status to ‘unions’ from which benefits will flow, that the doctrine of separation of powers is violated. The framing of a positive right and the positive entitlements which flow therefrom, essentially require the State to regulate such unions and benefits.

In my opinion, the direction in effect, is to amend existing statutory frameworks, if not to legislate afresh. Additionally, the opinion of the learned Chief Justice, situates the right to choice of a partner and right to legal recognition of an abiding cohabitational relationship within Article 25 of the Constitution of India. Emphasis is placed on the term “freedom of conscience” which is placed alongside the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion. The opinion situates in this freedom of conscience, the right not only to judge the moral quality of one’s own action but also to act upon it. If that were permissible under Article 25, then the textual enumeration of freedoms in Article 19 become redundant, since these freedoms can be claimed to be actions on the basis of one’s own moral judgment. I find it difficult to agree with such a reading of Article 25.

Per minority Judgment

https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/36593/36593_2022_1_1501_47792_Judgement_17-Oct-2023.pdf

gay couple Utkarsh Saxena, a lawyer and development economist, and Ananya Kotia, a PhD student at London School of Economics, ty exchanged rings in front of the Supreme Court building in Delhi a day after the verdict. They vowed to continue their fight for their rights.           ( Source Indian Express)

Conclusion:

Ardh Narishwar is not Gay or Lesbian. Ardh Narishwar was creation of Brahma as per Shiv Puran giving power to create progeny and in particular women. Purpose of such creation is discussed herein above.

While Ardh Narishwar was for betterment of society and living on earth, leasbian and gay is a biological abnormality.

Shruti Desai

19th October 2023