I'm disappointed that AntonR doesn't feel he can expand on this BB on the thoughts of the Indian follower of Advaita Vedanta.
I have a book called 'Vedantic Meditation' by David Frawley. In there it says,
'Vedanta is a simple philosophy. It says that our true Self, what it calls the Atman, is God. "I am God" is the supreme truth. The same consciousness that resides at the core of our being pervades the entire universe'.
It goes on to say
'Vedanta is the oldest and most enduring spiritual teaching in India. It is fully emergent in the Upanishads and synthesized in the Bhagavad Gita'.
There is no mention whatsoever in the whole book of any distinction or difference between men and women.
However, in the Upanishads, there are statements like,
'Lord! On what does the unlimited depend? said Narada. 'On his own greatness, said Sanatkumar, or not even that. The possession of cattle, horses, elephants; farms, mansions, servants, women, gold; are greatness in this world.' (Chandogya Upanishad)
'In the beginning there was the Self, one and sole. He thought: 'Let me have a wife that I may have children'. (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad)
In other words it seems that, according to the Upanishads, the woman is nothing more than the possession/chattel of the man, the companion, the producer of children. She is nothing in her own right. Similar in a way to the Adam and Eve story in the Bible. So is it true? And if it is true, why don't I feel it? Why do I feel completely a person in my own right, and always have done even from being very young. Have the Upanishads become distorted by a patriarchal society? Does David Frawley deliberately not make reference to men and women so as not to antagonise half his potential market?
What does it all mean???!!!