the doubt was on her part why the Supreme is male not female
I explained how Radha controls Krishna etc, but still she questioned why supreme has to be male.

This concept of male and female is interesting. In the material it exist for
the purpose of procreation. But for what purpose does it exist in the spiritual
world. And really why is Sri Krsna a male. Can't He not be both a male and
a female.

mishra:

the doubt was on her part why the Supreme is male not female
I explained how Radha controls Krishna etc, but still she questioned why supreme has to be male.

I would inquire of her if she thought there is something bad/wrong/off with Krishna being male, and ask her to provide some reasoning why she thinks so. I think that should clarify her position and make it easier to respond to.[br]

[br]Also, from the Introduction to the BG:[br][br]
What is material nature? This is also explained in Gītā as inferior prakṛti, inferior nature. The living entity is explained as the superior prakṛti. Prakṛti is always under control, whether inferior or superior. Prakṛti is female, and she is controlled by the Lord just as the activities of a wife are controlled by the husband. Prakṛti is always subordinate, predominated by the Lord, who is the predominator. The living entities and material nature are both predominated, controlled by the Supreme Lord. According to the Gītā, the living entities, although parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord, are to be considered prakṛti.[br][br]
And another passage from the Bhagavatam:[br][br]

There are many examples of a woman whose husband, being dependent on the result of his own fruitive actions, cannot maintain his wife, her children, her wealth or her duration of life. Therefore, factually the only real husband of all women is Kṛṣṇa, the supreme husband. Because the gopīs were liberated souls, they understood this fact. Therefore they rejected their material husbands and accepted Kṛṣṇa as their real husband. Kṛṣṇa is the real husband not only of the gopīs, but of every living entity. Everyone should perfectly understand that Kṛṣṇa is the real husband of all living entities, who are described in the Bhagavad-gītā as prakṛti (female), not puruṣa (male). [br]http://vedabase.net/sb/5/18/19/

mishra:

the doubt was on her part why the Supreme is male not female
I explained how Radha controls Krishna etc, but still she questioned why supreme has to be male.

It really goes into the definition of male and female energies. The male energy is the energy which takes the lead (initiative) in the creative process, and the female energy is the one which makes it happen. There is never one without another, just like there are always two poles of a magnet.

Actually Srila Bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura reffers to krishna as the supreme Autocratic male in his Brahma samhita!
Srila AC Bhaktivedanta swami comments that the ''success of a marriage'' is when the wife is enjoyed by the husband.Which might lead us to appreciate that one is enjoyed.....while the other is the enjoyed!
However the original ...adhi-purusa....krishna, is the supreme ''enjoyer''. Hence the initial enjoyer is naturally considered male or the purusa!While the prakriti.....is understood as female,that which is meant to be enjoyed by krishna. This is the natural spiritual rasa......hence there is spiritual enjoyment.We however are always to be enjoyed by krishna!

SGD, how many accounts will you open?

Recently I've been meditating on this verse (the meaning of klim bija):

ka-karah purusah krsnah
sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah
i-karah prakrti radha
nitya-vrndavanesvari

las canandatmakam prema-
sukham tayos ca kirtitam
cumbananda-madhuryam
nada-binduh samiritah

K is Krsna with His personal form of eternity, knowledge and bliss. I is His energy Radha, who is the eternal Queen of Vrndavana. L is celebrated as the blissful happiness of love. M is the sweetness of the bliss occurring when They kiss. (Brhad-gautamiya-tantra)

Lord Caitanya is not a combination of male and female. He is male (purusa) that came in his own form, male, in a mood of a prakṛti (Radha), this is how one should understand that he is non-different from Radha Krishna, not that he is just a mixup of the two, in his purport to CC Madhya 8.282 Prabhupada says that "Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa is Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa’s pleasure potency combined. When Kṛṣṇa exhibits His pleasure potency, He appears to be two—Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise, Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa are one. This oneness may be perceived by advanced devotees through the grace of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. This was the case with Rāmānanda Rāya. One may aspire to attain such a position, but one should not try to imitate the mahā-bhāgavata." However to think of God as 'just' male or female is application of material perverted conception on someone who is always above the duality.

Otherwise we should understand the fullness of purusa concept.

Srila Prabhupada:
"{T}he word puruṣam is very significant. The Lord is never female. He is always male (puruṣa). Therefore the impersonalist who imagines the Lord's form as that of a woman is mistaken. The Lord appears in female form if necessary, but His perpetual form is puruṣa because He is originally male." SB 4.8

Of course Krsna is not female. Srimata Radharani is though,Absolutely!

i think what he says is why krsna`s original form is male ... and that her thinking about God is that was neither male nor female ...

Bhakti aka so many - What about you. What is your feeling about women.