A Matter of Semantics

July 10, 2005

A Matter of Semantics There is a strange being described within early British translations of Vedic literature. These beings are comic, mythical creatures that appear to have lost their relevance in modern times. They are described as neither man nor woman, or sometimes as both man and woman. They are compared to the "gandharva" or fairy, and they are believed to be asexual or without sex desire. Even Arjuna, the eternal companion of Lord Krsna and the hero of the Mahabharata, became one of these beings while hiding during his last year of exile,9 according to the Lords plan. There, dressed as a woman, he wore his hair in braids, behaved in a feminine manner, and taught dancing and singing to young girls with no attraction for them. Welcome to the world of the so-called "Vedic eunuch", a term so archaic and disingenuous that it provides a good lesson both in semantics and social denial. First of all, there is no recorded evidence of any system of male castration

in ancient Vedic India.10 The English word "eunuch", or castrated male, is Greek in origin 11 and was used to refer to homosexuals during the Middle Ages. When the term homosexual was coined with the advent of modern psychiatry in the late nineteenth century, British writers continued to cling to the word eunuch, which was considered more polite by Victorian standards. Thus they used the word to describe transgender people all over the world in regions ranging from Greece, Persia, India, China, Polynesia, etc. During the nineteenth century, when Great Britain was the major world power and had subjugated India, homosexuality was considered a sin so horrific that it was not even to be mentioned, let alone discussed. The result was the use of vague, inappropriate terms to describe transgender people such as eunuch, neuter, impotent, asexual, hermaphrodite, etc. While these types of people did exist to some degree and are included within the third gender category, they hardly would have

made up its mass. Rather, by behavior and as described in the Kama Shastra, members of the tritiya-prakriti engage almost exclusively in homosexuality.12 The avoidance of this fact has lead to an incomplete understanding as to who the Vedic eunuchs actually were and what their role continues to be today. Words used to describe transgender citizens in Sanskrit were inaccurately translated in order to skirt homosexual issues and to impose puritan ethics upon Vedic literatures where they did not otherwise exist. There are many examples of this, the most common of which is the Sanskrit word "napumsaka" or literally "not male," which is used to refer to a man who has no taste for women and thus does not procreate. While this may technically include diseased, old or castrated men, it most commonly refers to the gay or transgender male, depending of course upon the context and behavior of the character being described. Other Sanskrit words for the gay male include "sandha" or "half

man, half woman" and "kliba" or "effeminate male". It is highly unlikely that so many words would be coined to describe and classify castrated men in a society where castration was not practiced. Another good example of inaccurate translating can be found in the Sanskrit word referring to lesbians or "svairini". Literally meaning "independent woman," this word was commonly mistranslated by early British scholars as "corrupt woman."13 And when mentioning "maithunam pumsi," or simply "sexual union between men," the so-called scholars have chosen as their translation "the unnatural crime or offense between men."14 Mistranslations such as these have only served to confuse and cover the acknowledgement of transgender roles in Vedic literature, roles that were nonetheless clearly defined and outlined in the Kama Shastra. We hope that future scholars and translators will be more accurate and forthright in their work.

Sell on Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.