What's wrong with homosexualtiy?

[leyh]

Originally posted by rand0M aXiS:

If you would put your bong down for a few days and sober up BV, then perhaps you could read this thread properly.

 

No one is stopping anyone from receiving Mahaprabhu's mercy. The criticism is about those who want to change the siddhanta to justify their anarthas. Kinda like your boyfriend who lost his head.

Dear Random Axis:

Why do you have to sound so sarcastic? I don't get it...Does it cause you immense agony to even attempt to be humble?

 

 

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by leyh:

Dear Random Axis:

Why do you have to sound so sarcastic? I don't get it...Does it cause you immense agony to even attempt to be humble?

 

 

 

You mistake sarcasm for truth.

 

You also have no clue to history.

[Maitreya]

leyh,

 

Please reread the post from Bhaktavasya.There is the mean spirited energy.

 

Anyone else I would challenge to back it up but I have learned it is useless to get into it with her.

 

Hare Krishna

MC

[amanpeter]

Sarcasm is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as a `bitter, wounding remark; taunt, esp. one ironically worded`.

 

Many, if not all of the `older` devotees here have bitter wounds and there certainly is an unfortunate tendency to snipe at each other now and then. It seems infectious and even epidemic at times, nor can I claim to be above taking the odd shot myself...

 

Still, I am reminded of a somewhat dysfunctional family with the kids constantly poking one another, possibly as the only way they can share intimacy. Understandably difficult for outsiders or newcomers to accept, let alone appreciate.

 

I tried after first arriving on these forums, and still do occasionally, to be `helpful` in resolving relationships here between devotees, to little avail. Unable to take sides, I end up alienating everyone when really it's not my role to play at all. Much better, I think, to learn how to roll with the punches and not take it all too seriously.

 

Love does work in mostly mysterious ways, prabhus. JAI JAI SRI RADHE! valaya

 

------------------

amanpeter@hotmail.com

[Bhaktavasya]

Originally posted by rand0M aXiS:

If you would put your bong down for a few days and sober up BV, then perhaps you could read this thread properly.

 

For starters, I do not smoke from a bong, preferring small hand-rolled joints that can be extinguished after 2 or 3 tokes, for medicinal purposes of course. Secondly, the highest siddhanta is found in Lord Chaitanya's sikshastakam, which supersedes all other vedic conclusions, what to speak of your personal conclusions.

 

 

No one is stopping anyone from receiving Mahaprabhu's mercy. The criticism is about those who want to change the siddhanta to justify their anarthas. Kinda like your boyfriend who lost his head.

 

[Bhaktavasya]

 

Must be my mistake, the previous post combines my reply to BB with his comments.

 

reply to BB in regards to the boyfriend with the lost head:

 

You have obsessed about Jayatirtha's murder and my ingesting into my body whatever I please, since the Chakra forums, in vnn, dharma mela and now here. Be careful, "Whatever and wherever the mind is at the time of death, that state he/she will attain without fail."

 

Just some friendly advise, not meant to sound mean-spirited at all. Peace in our time is my motto these days.

 

 

[Guest guest]

for medicinal purposes of course

 

LOL! Just like fifteen years ago -- you are a drug addict lady. Get help.

[JRdd]

Kinda interested to see what anyone has to say about the post below, which I lifted off the Mela. The first part is a quote by jndas from here, which I posted there days ago. The response to that quote follows, by Madhusudani, who posted there today.

 

> In modern usage Eunuch refers to one who was castrated (according to my dictionary - maybe there are different meanings in other areas). The Eunuchs described in the Puranas were born castrated so to speak. >

 

 

There are eunuchs (or hijras as they're often called in India), who were born with ambiguous genitals, like the people we call "hemaphrodites" here. There are also eunuchs/hijras who have been castrated in their teens, or as adults. The first type are very rare and definitely seen as having special powers (being able to provide both blessings and curses).

 

Both types (as well as pre-op "hijras" who still have their genitals) typically live in communal households with a "guru". They used to make a living attending weddings and other ceremonies, but these days those opportunities are fewer. So instead, many have turned to sex work, putting them at great risk for HIV and other STIs.

 

The ones I have spoken with are quite proud of the description in the Mahabharata where Arjuna pretends to be a eunuch for a year (while in exile). They feel this justifies their existence and even makes it spiritual.

 

It is true that "eunuch" does not typically equal "homosexual". However, many eunuchs do have sex with other men, sometimes acting out the role of a wife.

 

In general, India and Indians have a much more fluid concept of both gender and sexuality than we are used to here in the West and our attempts to put everyone into neat little boxes doesn't really work there. I think that's one of the reasons for "the third sex". Madhu

 

 

 

[Maitreya]

[The ones I have spoken with are quite proud of the description in the Mahabharata where Arjuna pretends to be a eunuch for a year (while in exile). They feel this justifies their existence and even makes it spiritual.

I hope she told them that their existence is justified because they are part of Krishna and that is what makes their existence spiritual.The state of their sex organs or lack thereof is irrelevant to their inherent spiritual constitution.That is true self esteem.

It is true that "eunuch" does not typically equal "homosexual". However, many eunuchs do have sex with other men, sometimes acting out the role of a wife.

In other words anal sex and cleaning the house.

In general, India and Indians have a much more fluid concept of both gender and sexuality than we are used to here in the West and our attempts to put everyone into neat little boxes doesn't really work there. I think that's one of the reasons for "the third sex". Madhu

"Fluidthird sex",give me a break.Is there a translator for Madhu speak in the house?

 

If you want to be compassionate and accept people for what they are, then accept them as part and parcel of the Supreme Lord.

 

Anything less is an insult to any living being.

 

Hare Krishna

MC

 

edited for proper quotation

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Maitreya (edited 09-06-2001).]

[Maitreya]

duplication of above.It's not my fault.I am a victim of BBS,bad brain syndrome.

 

[This message has been edited by Maitreya (edited 09-06-2001).]

[talasiga]

Originally posted by Maitreya:

Anyone else I would challenge to back it up but I have learned it is useless to get into it with her.

 

 

Well Darling

Just get into it with the boys then !

 

 

 

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

[atma]

MC wrote:

 

"If you want to be compassionate and accept people for what they are, then accept them as part and parcel of the Supreme Lord.

Anything less is an insult to any living being".

 

 

So true. To identify ourselves as men, women, homosex, etc, is so much in the bodily conciousness.

MC, isn't there a letter from Srila Prabhupada to one mataji where he tells her that her problem was that she was identifying herself as a woman?

[talasiga]

By the way

what is the word for "homosexual/lesbian"

in Sanskrit

and if there isn't a word

what word/s or term/s

may have been used metaphorically

to indicate this ?

[talasiga]

Originally posted by atma:

MC, isn't there a letter from Srila Prabhupada to one mataji where he tells her that her problem was that she was identifying herself as a woman?

Atma is attempting to IDENTIFY a letter !

[JRdd]

No, no, GOOD brain syndrome! Thank you for this amazingly simple but beautiful response, Maitreya. To see ourselves spiritual in relation to the Lord--and DESPITE those bodily things--not BECAUSE of them!?

 

That is what really bugges me the most when I heard about these discussions, here and over at the Mela: that some were attaching a mundane (and topsy turvy!) PRESTIGE to their third-gender (more renounced) claims.

 

And about "true self-esteem", as you mentioned, it is true that I never feel more confident that when I am engaging in devotional service, in the association of the devotees. I just realized that about my self-esteem. Seems that in this lifetime I can not get away with enjoying much, not even confidence, unless it is in relation to bhakti, or developing bhakti.

 

I guess that's what is troubling the ones who call themselves "third gender", too. We are all so anxious to find a way to disengage ourselves from our material attachments so that we can be done with this ridiculous business once and for all, that we often fall into justifying those things we do that are contrary to our real aim (of loving Krsna), in hopes of fooling ourselves into believing ourselves in a higher degree of attachment for Krsna than we actually have.

 

I can not wait for the mundane attachments to drain out and leave more room for devotional attachments. I feel attachments to the devotees, fairly strongly--have no interest to be with anyone else--and after all any Vaisnava is very very special, whatever the mundane tricks they can get up to. (That doesn't mean the rest of us might not want to take them and bash them over the head with the truth, or send them to the corner to think.)

 

JR

[Maitreya]

atma,

Not sure what letter but mis-identification is the problem.

 

Eternal servants of Krishna is our proper ID.

 

We sure are in a strange predicament here.A dual life kinda.Trying to keep an outer life together while cultivating a proper understanding of who we are.Ain't easy.

 

[This message has been edited by Maitreya (edited 09-06-2001).]

[JRdd]

MC wrote:

 

"If you want to be compassionate and accept people for what they are, then accept them as part and parcel of the Supreme Lord.

Anything less is an insult to any living being".

 

This is a classic. Really. Needs to go in my book of quotes anyway. Can I use it on my website MC?

 

Atma wrote:

"So true. To identify ourselves as men, women, homosex, etc, is so much in the bodily conciousness.

MC, isn't there a letter from Srila Prabhupada to one mataji where he tells her that her problem was that she was identifying herself as a woman?"

 

(gulp) I don't know if I am ready to hear that.

 

Just give me service and I'll forget my bodily id better.

 

But wait a minute. Aren't we supposed to be aware of everything in our surroundings, and use it in Krsna's service? That would include not only our actions, and words, and thoughts, but also the mentality and particular feelings that come with our genders. I really think that there is no point in pep talking ourselves out of identifying with our bodies. All attachments, all anarthas, fall away automatically, or naturally, as we gain more and more attachment to Radha and Krsna and serving Them.

I think this is an EXTREMELY important point, simple as it sounds, because when we get into endeavouring in artificial or showy (even showy to ourselves) attempts to behave as if we are detached we simply degrade into impersonalism, because this detachment is not linked with the Supreme Person, but more with our own efforts and motives--our desires to be free from miseries, or to appear as renounced for the sake of prestige, or for what ever reasons that are not connected with Krsna.

 

If we keep ourselves busy, both when alone and with each other, in engaging in activities related with Krsna consciousness, then isn't that far more conducive for spiritual growth than straining separately (and thus always meditating on) to avoid that which draws us mundanely?

 

JR

[Maitreya]

JRdd, sure, no need to ask.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

There are eunuchs (or hijras as they're often called in India), who were born with ambiguous genitals, like the people we call "hemaphrodites" here. There are also eunuchs/hijras who have been castrated in their teens, or as adults.

The problem is that some people want to identify todays India with the India described in the Puranas. Thus they take their useless sex studies of Bombay's ghettos and try to apply it to the Dvapara-yuga descriptions of Mahabharata. Castration was not a practice of ancient India. It is a modern practice.

The ones I have spoken with are quite proud of the description in the Mahabharata where Arjuna pretends to be a eunuch for a year (while in exile).

I would suggest this person re-read Mahabharata. Arjuna never pretends to be a eunuch. He physically was transformed into a eunuch by a divine curse.

It is true that "eunuch" does not typically equal "homosexual". However, many eunuchs do have sex with other men, sometimes acting out the role of a wife.

The Puranic eunuch never equals homosexual. Whether or not todays false eunuchs (who are castrated by operation) are homosexual or not is irrelevant. Today's India has nothing to do with the Puranic India of Dvapara-yuga. To draw a comparison between the two is foolish. It is like saying the Puritans who came to America supported homosex, drug use, abortion and many other things since these things are today supported in America. Such logic is a great distortion, and unfortunately many such distortions are purposely being made to "educate" the devotees to accept homosexuality as natural and sanctioned by the scriptures.

 

[BDas]

Dear Friends,

 

I have to say that I was amazed at the response I received from the majority on this thread. So much so that I went back and took a look at my previous posts. In doing so I found that in all the posts:

 

No one advocated any kind of formal gay marriage be adopted in Iskcon or said homosexuality was not sinful.

 

And to the best of my knowledge (It was a long thread) no one said Prabhupad advocated homosexuality or any other type of sex outside of religious principals.

 

What others and I said is that there is room for all kinds of people in the Krishna consciousness movement. Even those devotees who can not follow all the sexual rules and regulations. Those persons who cannot be celibate are advised to avoid promiscuity and make a commitment with a single partner. This applies whether the devotee is gay or straight. And being gay or straight is not the qualification of a devotee.

 

A devotee is a person who has faith in Krishna and even a sinful person can have faith and chant Hare Krishna.

 

First comes sukriti and from that faith arises. From faith comes bhajana kriya or devotional practice, which if properly performed in good association can lead to anartha nivritti. Anartha nivritti means that one looses interest in sinful life. From there taste for the Name increases and that taste will take the devotee to Love of God.

 

Sinful people are advised to practice Krishna Consciousness in there own homes if they cannot live up to the standard of devotional life in the ashram. Whatever their lifestyle they are advised to have faith in the Name and do the best they can.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that most persons cannot swallow the whole pill of Krishna Consciousness all at once so it has to be broken up and fed to them over time.

 

And that the Krishna Consciousness movement is not confined to any organization or location.

 

The Krishna Consciousness movement is found where devotees are chanting with faith and trying to serve Krishna.

 

Mahaprabhu wanted everyone to become part of the Krishna Consciousness movement. He approached Haridas in great anxiety as to how even non-moving beings like the trees could be included.

 

Haridas comforted Mahaprabhu when he said that the Name would save everyone even non-moving beings like the trees. And that the echo heard when chanting in the forest was actually the sound of the trees chanting in reply.

 

If the trees can chant in reply than certainly all types of people who have faith in Mahaprabhu can chant along with them.

 

And we would do well to encourage everyone to chant along with Mahaprabhu and the trees regardless of their lifestyle or sinful activities. Hare Krishna, BDas

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Thank you for your nice post, but a couple points I need to mention:

 

No one advocated any kind of formal gay marriage be adopted in Iskcon or said homosexuality was not sinful.

The discussion revolves around the Galva article, which makes such claims that Homosexuals are actually superior to othes because they are free from attachments. And the article also says homosexuality is not sinful, that it was very common, and that it was accepted in Vedic culture as natural. We object to all of this.

 

And to the best of my knowledge (It was a long thread) no one said Prabhupad advocated homosexuality or any other type of sex outside of religious principals.

Your memory is a little short. This thread started here:

 

http://www.indiadivine.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000588.html

 

Please go back and have a look. I will give you a hint. One person claimed there was a secret unrecorded conversation where Prabhupada said it was alright for his disciples to have homosexual relationships.

 

A few of us objected to this nonsense, as it is very offensive to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Then they went on to say their guru's had sanctioned their homosexual relationship. To which we replied, such a guru is bogus.

 

Sinful people are advised to practice Krishna Consciousness in there own homes if they cannot live up to the standard of devotional life in the ashram.

We agree, yet the Galva article tries to justify their weaknesses and claim their vices are actually virtues! Go back and reread the thread. Your memory is too short.

 

And in the attempt to justify their vices, they distort the teachings of the shastras and spread intentional lies to mislead the devotee community.

 

Now are you remembering things a little better?

 

[Maitreya]

Originally posted by BDas:

 

What others and I said is that there is room for all kinds of people in the Krishna consciousness movement. Even those devotees who can not follow all the sexual rules and regulations. Those persons who cannot be celibate are advised to avoid promiscuity and make a commitment with a single partner. This applies whether the devotee is gay or straight. And being gay or straight is not the qualification of a devotee.

 

This is a point of contention.Advised by whom?

 

Commitment means marriage.

 

Please give an example of a bona fide guru advising homos to become commited to each other as 'man and wife' till death due you part, in sickness and in health etc.That is what commitment entails.

 

It is your use of the word commitment that bothers me.A back door approach to gain acceptance of homo marriage.

 

Do you see what you are saying BDas.I think you do.I think this is a well thought out campaign.

 

Actual guru would advise someone in that position to wind down his involvment with homosexuality as soon as possible,not commit to it.

 

Nice try though.

 

 

[BDas]

JN: Thank you for your nice post, but a couple points I need to mention:

 

The discussion revolves around the Galva article, which makes such claims that Homosexuals are actually superior to others because they are free from attachments. And the article also says homosexuality is not sinful, that it was very common, and that it was accepted in Vedic culture as natural. We object to all of this.

 

BD: When I posted the link I said I could not attest to the accuracy of everything on the Galva or Third Sex pages. What I do accept is the spirit of trying to include everyone in the KC movement. And what I do not accept is the spirit of narrow-minded fanaticism that forced the vast majority of Prabhupads disciples out of Iskcon.

 

And to think that Homosexuality was not found in Vedic culture is beyond common sense. How do you think great kings like Yudhisthira would have treated homosexuals? Do you think he would have killed them or made a place for them?

 

BD: And to the best of my knowledge (It was a long thread) no one said Prabhupad advocated homosexuality or any other type of sex outside of religious principals.

 

JN: Your memory is a little short.

Please go back and have a look. I will give you a hint. One person claimed there was a secret unrecorded conversation where Prabhupada said it was all right for his disciples to have homosexual relationships.

 

BD: There are many unrecorded conversations with Prabhupad and I was party to a few.

Prabhupad was both compassionate and pragmatic. He said to preach what is ideal even if everyone cannot follow perfectly.

 

Ideally Prabhupad encouraged celibate devotion. In one place he said those who do not understand KC are permitted to get married and that marriage was a concession for those who could not control their senses.

 

I can accommodate that Prabhupad may have given advice to this particular devotee as a concession while at the same time preaching the ideal.

 

JN: A few of us objected to this nonsense, as it is very offensive to Srila Prabhupada.

 

BD: You have your conception of what is offensive to Prabhupad and I have mine. I think it is most offensive to think that Prabhupad would have completely rejected or not made room for those who could not follow perfectly. Prabhupad said many times Krishna consciousness does not require a change of lifestyle but rather a change of heart. Chanting Hare Krishna in good association brings about this change.

 

JN: Then they went on to say their guru's had sanctioned their homosexual relationship. To which we replied, such a guru is bogus.

 

BD: In my opinion you have a very narrow conception of Guru. Guru Tattva means Krishna is the Guru who appears in a variety of forms. (Read Sri Guru and His Grace.)

The Gaudiya conception of Guru and is beyond the narrow Iskcon conception where Guru is promoted as a particular body.(vapu)

 

And if a Gaudiya Guru tries to help and encourage people in the homosexual community to chant Hare Krishna regardless of their lifestyle what is the harm?

 

BD: Sinful people are advised to practice Krishna Consciousness in there own homes if they cannot live up to the standard of devotional life in the ashram.

 

JN: We agree, yet the Galva article tries to justify their weaknesses and claim their vices are actually virtues! Go back and reread the thread. Your memory is too short.

 

BD: Practically everyone on these discussion boards will make propaganda of some kind to try and promote a favorable impression of their choices.

Iskcon devotees will overlook the faults of the society and those who left will point them out. Followers of Narayana M will promote their conception and followers of other Gaudiya gurus will do the same. If you think you are the almighty arbitrator who is going to set the record straight with his own conception of KC than I beg to differ.

Krishna consciousness is unlimited and not confined to only one viewpoint. And that includes my own.

 

JN: And in the attempt to justify their vices, they distort the teachings of the shastras and spread intentional lies to mislead the devotee community.

 

BD: Again you have your practical view of the shastras and I have mine. I could go on here about how you promote books contrary to the principals of Gaudiya vedanta on the website you named after Bhaktivedanta. I suppose this is your way of being inclusive. OK, fine but I have ways of being inclusive also. Inclusion means getting people to chant Hare Krishna and perform devotional service.

 

When possible I am sure you try to include Christians, Muslems, Shaktas, Shivites, Aryas, and whoever in your work there in Mysore.

 

I live and preach in SF and I try to be inclusive as well. I believe this is in the spirit of Prabhupad and Mahaprabhu. If you disagee well so be it.

 

JN: Now are you remembering things a little better?

 

BD: Yes, I remember things very well. I remember 1981 we approached the GBC and said all that we want is to remain in Iskcon and be able to have Sridhar Maharaja as our siksa guru. Their reply was a familiar rant about our being against Prabhupad that they ended with a resolution that said no one in Iskcon can go to Sridhar M for siksa.

 

"And that the San Jose Temple is not a part of Iskcon."

 

My associates and I have adjusted very well to life outside the jurisdiction of the GBC and Iskcon. Still it is always to my regret that the GBC chose not to be inclusive because I would have preferred to remain in Iskcon where I served faithfully for so many years.

 

Anyway I have a program here in SF and I chose to be inclusive rather than exclusive.

And the gay or straight devotees who come I simply ask them to chant Hare Krishna and do their best. Everyone is welcome.

 

Hare Krishna, BDas

 

[nine9]

Originally posted by jndas:

We only object when they come out and say, "Homosexuals are superior than others, their more detached, and their lifestyle is perfectly in accordance to religious principles."

Prabhu,

 

Who ever said this? We are not superior. Everyone is fallen, in his or her own way. And, yes, we have our way and will be condemned for it...just as people condemn any form of attachment via a relationship.

 

Originally posted by jndas:

[A promiscuous heterosexual devotee lifestyle or a committed relationship between two homosexual devotees] They are both equally bad. The difference is the homosexuals want to claim the scriptures sanction their nonsense, and they even want gurus to sanction it; whereas the promiscuous heterosexuals understand they have a vice, and aren't proud about it.

 

No we don't want any sciptural sanction. We just want to be left alone to overcome this "vice" just like heterosexual couples must. We're not necessarily proud of it either. Did you ever think to ask?

 

Rama Kesava dasa

(Mark)

 

 

[This message has been edited by nine9 (edited 09-26-2001).]

[Maitreya]

Originally posted by JRdd:

Mc, you mean "sure, no need to ask", about "If we keep ourselves busy, both when alone and with each other, in engaging in activities related with Krsna consciousness, then isn't that far more conducive for spiritual growth than straining separately (and thus always meditating on) to avoid that which draws us mundanely?"?

 

 

No JRdd, about the quote.