Authority and subjugation in a hierarchical and patriarchal society Vis-à-vis the complementary sex in Christian perspective…

 

Authority and subjugation in a hierarchical and patriarchal society

Vis-à-vis the complementary sex in Christian perspective…

Of all the living beings, man claims to be standing out. Man (without an article) is a generic term referring to the species, say humanity (mankind), as a whole. Man is defined as ‘rational animal.’ ‘Homo sapiens’ is said to be the height of an evolutionary process.

Male and female is the way lives were made, especially the mammal world. The other sex is a must for procreation. Man and woman together form humanity. That is the message of the first account of creation in the Bible (Gen 1:26-27). The Hindu concept of godhead as ‘Ardhanarishwar’, half male and half female, ‘Shiva-Shakthi’, ‘Prakruthi-Purusha’ etc seems to corroborate this biblical account.

 

Hierarchy unknown so far is slowly and stealthily brought in when the Bible says, ‘God blessed them, and … said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and … the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” (1:28). This subjugation and dominion was conveniently applied against women. And this attempt was justified by yet another version of creation which says, ‘God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being… God planted a garden in Eden… and there he put the man… (2:7-8). Then ‘…God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him… God… took one of his (man’s) ribs …which he made into a woman… And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.’ (2:18, 21-22, 25).

 

Of all the living beings, man claims to be standing out. Man (without an article) is a generic term referring to the species, say humanity (mankind), as a whole. Man is defined as ‘rational animal.’ ‘Homo sapiens’ is said to be the height of an evolutionary process.

In order to explore the Christian perspective, let’s start with the Bible which is claimed to be ‘revealed’ by the Semitic religions, Jews as well as Christians, and to a certain extent the Moslems too. In the very first book of the Bible, it is stated, ‘God created man in his own image… male and female he created them. (Gen 1:27). Not only to man, but to the mammal world, male and female is the norm. The other sex is a must for procreation. Man and woman together form humanity. That is the message of the first account of creation in the Bible. The Hindu concept of godhead as ‘Ardhanarishwar’, half male and half female, ‘Shiva-Shakthi’, ‘Prakruthi-Purusha’ etc seems to corroborate this biblical account.

 

 

Hierarchy unknown so far is slowly and stealthily brought in when the Bible says, ‘God blessed them, and … said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and … the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” (1:28). This subjugation and dominion was conveniently applied against women. And this attempt was justified by yet another version of creation which says, ‘God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being… God planted a garden in Eden… and there he put the man… (2:7-8). Then ‘…God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him… God… took one of his (man’s) ribs …which he made into a woman… And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.’ (2:18, 21-22, 25).

The implications of this narrative could be self-defeating. In the creation order the last one appears to be the perfect one. Here, God seems to feel that man was not complete; rather he was in need of a helper fit for him. This and the order of creation would imply that woman was indeed the crown of creation and not man as widely considered!

It is said that, if dogs were to write a scripture, they would write that god created dogs in his own image and likeness! In the same way, if women were to write they would have ensured their superiority, in a hierarchical society. After all, ‘as much Bible is the word of God that much it is word of men too.’ Biblical authors were, even in the oral tradition, mostly men.

Now, to ensure this male domination they wanted some divine sanction. Here comes in the story of fall, original sin, punishment and so on. Here the woman is presented as the seducer and held responsible for the ouster from the Garden of Eden and the ensuing toil, sweat, pain and so on. As the command, not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, was given to man, the serpent came to the women who as if she had been briefed, she informs it of God’s command. Here the serpent looked concerned and convincing that they not only not die, but their eyes would be opened and they would be like God, knowing good and evil. This was enough for anyone to go for the fruit and share it naturally with one’s beloved who didn’t bother to question nor argue. Though God punished all involved, later commentators, theologians etc. put the blame squarely on woman to this day. Though there was a blame game, all ended up bearing responsibility and accepted the punishment, especially, losing of the paradise. Other than man every other creature is entitled for the paradise. It was an option, for the knowledge of good and evil, which differentiate man from the other mammals, the rationality, even at the cost of all possible consequences that was the fall or sin. 

In that sense, the so called ‘original’ sin was not the eating of the fruit, but opting for the knowledge which God prohibited!

 

The term man (from Proto-Germanic *mann- "person") and words derived from it can designate any or even the entire human race regardless of their sex or age. In traditional usage, man (without an article) itself refers to the species or to humanity (mankind) as a whole. The Germanic word developed into Old English mann. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)#:~:text=

The twist:

God commanded man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in that day that you eat of it you shall die.” (2:16-17). But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (3:4-5).

 

Mary’s Song of Praise

 

“My soul magnifies the Lord,

and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden.

For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed;

for he who is mighty has done great things for me,

and holy is his name.

And his mercy is on those who fear him

from generation to generation.

He has shown strength with his arm,

he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts,

he has put down the mighty from their thrones,

and exalted those of low degree;

he has filled the hungry with good things,

and the rich he has sent empty away. Lk 1:46-53

 

 

The term man (from Proto-Germanic *mann- "person") and words derived from it can designate any or even the entire human race regardless of their sex or age. In traditional usage, man (without an article) itself refers to the species or to humanity (mankind) as a whole. The Germanic word developed into Old English mann. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)#:~:text=

The twist:

God commanded man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in that day that you eat of it you shall die.” (2:16-17). But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (3:4-5).

 

The term man (from Proto-Germanic *mann- "person") and words derived from it can designate any or even the entire human race regardless of their sex or age. In traditional usage, man (without an article) itself refers to the species or to humanity (mankind) as a whole. The Germanic word developed into Old English mann. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)#:~:text=

The twist:

God commanded man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in that day that you eat of it you shall die.” (2:16-17). But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (3:4-5).

 

 

 

Hierarchy unknown so far is slowly and stealthily brought in when the Bible says, ‘God blessed them, and … said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and … the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” (1:28). This subjugation and dominion was conveniently applied against women. And this attempt was justified by yet another version of creation which says, ‘God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being… God planted a garden in Eden… and there he put the man… (2:7-8). Then ‘…God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him… God… took one of his (man’s) ribs …which he made into a woman… And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed.’ (2:18, 21-22, 25).

The implications of this narrative could be self-defeating. In the creation order the last one appears to be the perfect one. Here, God seems to feel that man was not complete; rather he was in need of a helper fit for him. This and the order of creation would imply that woman was indeed the crown of creation and not man as widely considered!

It is said that, if dogs were to write a scripture, they would write that god created dogs in his own image and likeness! In the same way, if women were to write they would have ensured their superiority, in a hierarchical society. After all, ‘as much Bible is the word of God that much it is word of men too.’ Biblical authors were, even in the oral tradition, mostly men.

Now, to ensure this male domination they wanted some divine sanction. Here comes in the story of fall, original sin, punishment and so on. Here the woman is presented as the seducer and held responsible for the ouster from the Garden of Eden and the ensuing toil, sweat, pain and so on. As the command, not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, was given to man, the serpent came to the women who as if she had been briefed, she informs it of God’s command. Here the serpent looked concerned and convincing that they not only not die, but their eyes would be opened and they would be like God, knowing good and evil. This was enough for anyone to go for the fruit and share it naturally with one’s beloved who didn’t bother to question nor argue. Though God punished all involved, later commentators, theologians etc. put the blame squarely on woman to this day. Though there was a blame game, all ended up bearing responsibility and accepted the punishment, especially, losing of the paradise. Other than man every other creature is entitled for the paradise. It was an option, for the knowledge of good and evil, which differentiate man from the other mammals, the rationality, even at the cost of all possible consequences that was the fall or sin. 

In that sense, the so called ‘original’ sin was not the eating of the fruit, but opting for the knowledge which God  prohibited!