Maa Parvati’s profound penance to win Lord Shiva’s heart is a cornerstone of Hindu spiritual lore, an inspiring saga of unwavering devotion and intense self-discipline. However, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev’s retelling of this sacred narrative misrepresents key aspects of the story, specifically Shiva’s alleged sexist dismissal of Parvati and the depiction of her final penance as being performed in nakedness. This article aims to analyze his retelling of Maa Parvati’s penance, comparing it with traditional Hindu spiritual lore to identify key discrepancies and potential misrepresentations.
Sadhguru’s version: Got the essence right but details wrong
To illustrate these points of contention, the following excerpt presents Sadhguru’s own account of Parvati’s penance for Shiva, as found in his article on Brahmacharya:
There is a story in the Yogic lore that illustrates this. Parvati was a princess, but she wanted to marry Shiva. Shiva dismissed her and said, “Get some man. All you need is a man.” She said, “No, I want to woo you.” She knew that dressing up and flaunting herself in front of him is not going to work. She understood that it needs the intensity of sadhana. So, she sat there. He looked at her and dismissed her, because her level of sadhana – “Aum Namah Shivaya” – does not mean a thing to him.
She realized, “He is laughing at me because I am concerned about my body, because I cover myself and eat food.” So, she gave up food. She only ate two leaves a day to sustain the body, and used another two eaves to cover herself. So, they call her “Dwiparna” – two leaves.
Shiva still looked unimpressed. Then Parvati dropped one leaf. She started eating only one leaf and, being a woman, used another one to cover herself. Then she was called “Ekaparna” – one leaf. He was still unimpressed. So, she stopped eating altogether and removed this one leaf she had covered herself with. She sat naked and without food, simply absorbed. Then she was called Aparna – without leaf. Nothing to cover, nothing to sustain, all cycles broken. This is brahmacharya.
Shiva’s Dismissal: A Question of Sexism and Scriptural Accuracy
Sadhguru’s account portrays Shiva dismissing Parvati’s initial efforts with the blunt and arguably offensive remark, “Get some man. All you need is a man.” This statement, presented by Sadhguru as the catalyst for Parvati’s arduous sadhana, casts Shiva in a light that many devotees find jarring and inconsistent with his revered status.
When we look at the traditional sources like Shiva Purana, a different picture emerges. While these scriptures describe Shiva’s initial unimpressed reaction to Parvati’s early penance and highlight his testing of her devotion through various means, this specific sexist remark is not substantiated within these texts. The Shiva Purana emphasizes Shiva testing Parvati’s resolve through sending sages and appearing in disguise, suggesting a divine scrutiny rather than a crude dismissal based on her gender. Attributing such a statement to Shiva risks undermining his compassionate and revered image and misrepresenting the nature of his interaction with Parvati as depicted in the primary scriptural sources available.
Parvati’s Penance and the Interpretation of “Aparna”
The second point of contention lies in Sadhguru’s assertion that Parvati, in the culminating stage of her penance, “sat naked and without food, simply absorbed”. This follows her gradual renunciation of food and clothing, moving from sustaining herself with two leaves (Dwiparna) to one (Ekaparna), ultimately reaching the state known as Aparna – “without leaf”. The Shiva Purana uses the name Aparna to signify Parvati’s complete renunciation of physical attachments, as Sadhguru also notes. Sadhguru presents this as a progression towards a state of complete absorption where physical coverings become irrelevant as all cycles are broken. He describes Parvati reaching a point where “Nothing to cover, nothing to sustain, all cycles broken. This is brahmacharya” .
However, while the concept of Aparna signifies a profound detachment from the physical, scriptures never spoke of Parvati abandoning her clothing at this stage. While she initially adopted ascetic attire, her transcendence to a state beyond needing even leaves suggests a deep internal detachment from bodily needs and comforts. The leap to a literal depiction of nakedness, lacking direct scriptural support, can inadvertently shift the focus from Parvati’s extraordinary inner strength and unwavering devotion to a potentially sensationalized detail. This risks obscuring the true depth of her spiritual endeavor, which centered on transcending physical limitations through intense austerity, not merely the absence of clothing.
Why These Distinctions Matter: The Potential for Disrespect
These distinctions are significant because they impact how a central figure in Hindu tradition is understood and revered:
- Attributing a sexist remark to Lord Shiva can be seen as a disrespectful mischaracterization of a deity revered for his wisdom and compassion. It introduces a discordant note into a sacred narrative and can be particularly hurtful to devotees who hold Shiva in high esteem.
- Emphasizing nakedness as the defining characteristic of Parvati’s ultimate renunciation, without any scriptural backing, risks sensationalizing a profound spiritual state. It can detract from the narrative’s core message of inner strength and unwavering devotion, potentially misinterpreting the deep symbolism inherent in her renunciation of all physical attachments, including sustenance.
Conclusion: Revering the Essence of Sacred Narratives
Spiritual teachers often offer fresh perspectives on ancient stories to connect with contemporary audiences. However, it remains crucial that these interpretations remain rooted in the spirit and essence of the original narratives and do not inadvertently misrepresent revered figures or introduce unsubstantiated details. When engaging with sacred stories, especially those concerning deities, a commitment to reverence and accuracy, drawing upon the rich tapestry of scriptural wisdom, is paramount . While Sadhguru’s retelling highlights Parvati’s resolve, the specific dialogue attributed to Shiva and the explicit claim of nakedness during her final penance diverge from the scriptures, raising valid concerns among devotees about the respectful and accurate portrayal of this revered narrative.
Concerns regarding the accuracy of Sadhguru’s scriptural interpretations are not limited to the narrative of Maa Parvati’s penance. Earlier, he got into trouble for his characterization of the love between Lord Krishna and his mother Yashoda. Even with Isha’s clarification that no sexual undertones were intended, these remarks were deemed inappropriate, further highlighting a pattern of potentially problematic retellings.
Adding to these concerns is Sadhguru’s own admission of limited scriptural knowledge. He famously stated, “I am almost hundred percent spiritually uneducated. I don’t know any scriptures, I have not read the Vedas and I didn’t bother to read the Bhagavad Gita”. This candid acknowledgment raises a fundamental question: if Sadhguru claims such a significant lack of familiarity with core Hindu scriptures, what is the basis and authority for his interpretations and lectures on these very texts? A dedicated study of the scriptures is necessary for accurate representation. Furthermore, given these instances, the emphasis on nakedness and sexuality in his retellings of sacred stories involving holy women becomes particularly noteworthy and, if indeed unintentional as Isha suggests, all the more unnecessary.
