Sadhguru argues that the framing of International Women's Day may not align with the deeper spiritual and social goal of creating balance between masculine and feminine energies in society. Rather than focusing narrowly on women as a separate category requiring recognition, he suggests that true progress requires acknowledging the historical power of the feminine principle in ancient Bharat and reimagining how we think about gender balance in contemporary culture. The video raises a fundamental question: Is naming a day "women's day" the most effective way to advance a world where both energies thrive equally?
What Was the Feminine's Role in Ancient Bharat?
Sadhguru emphasizes that the feminine principle held extraordinary power and influence in ancient Indian civilization. Rather than being marginalized or subordinate, women and feminine wisdom occupied central roles in spiritual, philosophical, and social life. This historical reality forms the foundation of his argument about how we should approach gender balance today.
In ancient Bharat, the feminine was not merely respected—it was revered as a source of creative, nurturing, and transformative power. Goddesses like Durga, Kali, and Saraswati embodied different aspects of feminine strength: protection, transformation, and knowledge. These were not symbolic figures but representations of actual principles that shaped how society functioned. The emphasis on these feminine archetypes reveals that ancient Indian thought understood the feminine not as something needing defense or special recognition, but as an equal and indispensable force in the cosmos.
Sadhguru's point appears to be that when the feminine was truly integrated and honored—as it was in ancient Bharat—there was no need for a separate day to recognize it. The power and presence of feminine energy permeated daily spiritual practice, governance, and culture. This suggests that genuine gender balance is not achieved through awareness campaigns or designated days, but through deep, systemic integration of feminine principles into how society operates.
Why Might Renaming the Day Serve a Larger Purpose?
Sadhguru's implicit argument is that "International Women's Day," as currently framed, may reinforce the very separation it aims to correct. By designating a specific day for women, the framing suggests that women—and by extension, the feminine principle—are somehow exceptional or in need of periodic recognition rather than being woven into the fabric of everyday existence.
If the goal is true balance between masculine and feminine energies, renaming the day to reflect that balance would be more accurate and spiritually aligned. A name that emphasizes complementarity rather than separation—something that honors both the historic power of the feminine and the need for ongoing integration—would better serve the actual objective. The current naming suggests that women need advocacy; what Sadhguru seems to argue is that society needs rebalancing.
This reframing also acknowledges a subtle but important distinction: the problem is not that women lack power or deserve less recognition, but that modern society has lost touch with the feminine principle—both as lived by women and as an energetic force that exists in all beings. Men, in this view, also suffer from a world that has become too heavily weighted toward masculine-coded values like aggression, competition, and domination at the expense of receptivity, collaboration, and nurturing.
What Does Masculine-Feminine Balance Actually Mean?
Sadhguru's framework appears to operate from a spiritual understanding of masculine and feminine as complementary energies rather than as social categories tied to gender. In this view, both men and women contain both masculine and feminine qualities. A balanced human being—and a balanced society—requires both.
The masculine principle, in this understanding, is associated with directed action, logic, will, and assertion. The feminine principle encompasses receptivity, intuition, flow, and integration. Neither is superior; both are necessary. A civilization that overemphasizes one at the expense of the other becomes distorted. The argument suggests that modern industrial societies have become too masculine in character—hierarchical, competitive, extractive, focused on conquest—and have therefore lost touch with the feminine principles that create stability, sustainability, and genuine well-being.
From this perspective, International Women's Day could be reframed as a day celebrating the return to balance—the restoration of feminine wisdom and values in all domains of society, from business to governance to environmentalism. This would shift the conversation from women's rights (important as those are) to the more fundamental question of how a civilization reorganizes itself around both masculine and feminine principles.
How Does This Connect to Modern Social Issues?
When we look at contemporary crises—environmental degradation, endless competition, mental health epidemics, the breakdown of community—Sadhguru's argument suggests these stem partly from a masculine-dominant paradigm. The drive to extract, exploit, and dominate nature without regard for sustainability reflects a worldview missing the feminine principle of interconnection and respect for cycles.
Similarly, modern workplaces and political systems often reward aggression and cutthroat competition, qualities coded as masculine, while undervaluing collaboration, empathy, and long-term thinking, often coded as feminine. Women in these spaces frequently succeed by adopting masculine-coded behaviors, which means the system as a whole does not benefit from the full spectrum of feminine wisdom.
Renaming International Women's Day to reflect a deeper commitment to balance would acknowledge that this is not merely a women's issue but a human and civilizational issue. It would signal that the goal is not to give women a seat at a fundamentally flawed table, but to remake the table itself.
What's the Practical Difference Between Recognition and Integration?
A key distinction Sadhguru seems to be drawing is between recognition (which a designated day provides) and integration (which requires systemic change). Celebrating women once a year on International Women's Day may make society feel it has addressed gender imbalance, when in fact the underlying structures remain masculine-dominant.
True integration would mean that feminine values—care, sustainability, collaboration, emotional intelligence—are not just acknowledged but actively prioritized in policy, business, education, and governance year-round. It would mean that workplaces are designed around human well-being, not just productivity. It would mean environmental policy is guided by respect for ecological cycles rather than extraction for profit. It would mean leadership models value listening and adaptation, not just decisiveness and control.
By renaming the day to emphasize balance, Sadhguru appears to suggest that we would clarify what we are actually trying to achieve—not a day for women to be celebrated, but a commitment to a civilization organized around both masculine and feminine principles operating in harmony.
How Does Ancient Wisdom Inform This Vision?
Sadhguru's reference to ancient Bharat is not romantic nostalgia but rather evidence that civilizations have functioned well—arguably better—when the feminine was honored and integrated. The Vedic period, despite its complexities, recognized the feminine as sacred. Yogic philosophy includes sophisticated understandings of masculine and feminine energies (Shiva and Shakti) operating in every person and in the universe itself.
This tradition offers a counternarrative to the modern assumption that masculine-dominant culture is natural, inevitable, or optimal. It shows that other possibilities have existed and functioned effectively. Drawing on this wisdom suggests that moving toward balance is not creating something entirely new, but recovering something that was lost during periods of colonization and modernization that imposed masculine-dominant frameworks.
The implication is that renaming the day would be a first step toward recovering this more integrated understanding—using language that reflects not just the recognition of women but the restoration of balance itself.
Where to go from here
If Sadhguru's argument resonates, the next steps might include: examining how you personally carry both masculine and feminine energies, and whether you allow both to express fully or favor one; observing where in your life, work, and community masculine values are overemphasized at the expense of feminine ones; considering what it would look like to redesign key institutions (workplaces, schools, governance) around balance rather than dominance; and exploring yogic and contemplative practices that help develop sensitivity to both energies within yourself. More broadly, engaging in conversations about what we actually want to achieve—not just women's equality, but civilizational balance—and whether our current language and frameworks are serving that goal.
