Untitled

6 Introduction
These objections fade on closer inspection even if they do not entirely
disappear. The passion of Krishna and Radha may be extramarital
or even adulterous in some versions, but one line strongly
represented in Hindu theology is that they were in reality married.
The other passionate cowgirls can be understood as di·erent forms
of Radha herself. Anyway, one must not be too literal-minded
with this sort of religious language. The Western image of God
as the bridegroom of enormous numbers of soul-brides could be
understood as polygamy, but this would be clumsy. Medieval Western
marriage sermons sometimes built their symbolism around an
Old Testament story: Esther’s triumphant displacement of Vashti
as wife of the Persian king. In context this is clearly not an endorsement
of divorce. With any symbol the analogy breaks down
somewhere, and the trick is to know when to stop pressing the
comparison (a principle very relevant to gendered imagery).
The union of the the male god Siva with his wife Parvati can also
symbolize the union of human and divine. As a standard reference
work puts it, ‘Their marriage is a model of male dominance with
Parvati docilely serving her husband, though this is also a model
of the way a mortal should serve the god.’ It is true that Parvati
is also a goddess, but a goddess close to humanity. Thus humans,
women at least, can assimilate their religious experience to Parvati’s
loving devotion to her husband. ‘Parvati, the daughter of the
mountain Himalaya, is an ambiguous semi-divinity . . . Although
poetic metaphors accorded her divine status, she is the quintessence
of the lowly mortal woman worshipping the lofty male god.’
It is true that this description cannot be simply applied to Christian
marriage symbolism. There may indeed be a tendency in Christian
mysticism towards gender specialization—human woman as
Hawley, ‘A Vernacular Portrait’, 53; D. M. Wul·, ‘Radha: Consort and Conqueror
of Krishna’, in J. S. Hawley and D. M. Wul· (eds.), Devi: Goddesses of India
(Berkeley etc., 1996), 109–34 at 133 n. 30.
S. Goswami, ‘Radha: The Play; and Perfection of Rasa’, in Hawley and Wul·,
The Divine Consort, 72–88 at 81: ‘the many gopis are but manifestations of the body
of Radha’. (This represents the point of view of a modern devotee.).
D. L. d’Avray, Medieval Marriage Sermons: Mass Communication in a Culture
without Print (Oxford, 2001), index, s.v. ‘Assuerus’.
Article on ‘P»arvat»§’, in J. Bowker (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of World Religion
(Oxford, 1997), 737.
W. D. O’Flaherty, ‘The Shifting Balance of Power in the Marriage of Siva and
Parvati’, in Hawley and Wul·, The Divine Consort, 129–43 at 135. (The comment
relates to a specific set of sources.).