Homosexuality in Hinduism??

[Odiyya]

Where do gay people fit into this religion?

 

Is hinduism a homophobic religion or a compassionate one. I read in an anthropology course that you guys consider Gays to be sacred with healing powers. Is this true?

 

I'm not asking to be mean. I was shocked when I read this, and i thought it was kinda cool that you people were so open-minded. It blew my mind away to learn of such an open religion.

 

I would appreciate your input.

[valaya]

Anyone want to jump on this?

[animesh]

First make sure that we are talking of homosexuals and not of eunuchs.

[darwin]

Gay Hare Krishna people Message group

 

LGBT Gaudiya Vaishnava Message group

 

Tritiya-prakriti: People of the Third Sex

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Here is an article in reply to one of the articles linked above. "The Tritiya-prakriti" article above is just a propaganda piece full of distortions and misrepresentations.

 

A reply to the Galva article

 

There are multiple long threads on this topic already from before, so I think I would rather just leave the discussion where it left off last time.

 

What is so great about being "open-minded" to any and everything? Why is a religion considered good if it doesn't state what is right and wrong. Gandhi said it was ok for Muslims to kill cows because it was their religion. So if I say my religion is to kill people like Gandhi, will he be ok with that? If I say my religion is to murder people, will Gandhi say it is fine because it is my religion?

 

Perhaps some will glorify Gandhi's being "open minded". Personally, I do not think it is a great thing to accept the killing of cows. It certainly is not the symptom of a mahatma, a great soul.

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-22-2001).]

[darwin]

Good point, jndas.

 

From the VOICE "Violation Of ISKCON Children Expossed" website:

 

...For instance there is a statement in which Chaitanya (the founder of the Hare Krishnas branch of Hinduism 500 years ago) says that there are no hard and fast rules. This statement however is quite contradictory to other more prominent statutes and if one were to prefer believing the above quote to the others they would invariably be accused of misinterpreting the books.

 

Suppose that you then inform your ‘accuser’ that by default they are assuming that they are qualified to tell you how to correctly interpret. The quoting battle then begins and the person who can out-quote the other, can claim philosophical rightness. Subsequently you feel even more confused because any choice of quotes requires the use of judgment and interpretation. As children, being forced to defend yourself on the basis of quotes from religious books, is very exhausting, discouraging, and impossible....

[valaya]

Lord Caitanya propagated raganuga bhakti in the form of harinam sankirtan. Building a religion out of vaidhi bhakti cannot possibly define, let alone confine, that One who is possessed by spontaneous Divine Love. Jai GAURANGA! Jai GAURANGI!

 

valaya RR

[Odiyya]

Jndas. i read your article and although you seemed somewhat logical there is something you said that makes me question the validity of your whole argument. You said or implied that homosexuality was a "choice." That leads me to believe that you're biased and really don't know much about this as you claim to know. As a gay man I can tell you that it's NOT a choice. If i had a choice of being gay or straight I would choose to be straight. The fact is I can't choose so I'm stuck with being gay.

 

You, yourself seem to be guilty of twisting and manipulating things to suit your own prejiduces also. I'll take what you say with a grain of salt.

 

I appreciate your input, but you obviously know nothing about homosexuality. Also, some of the phrases you quoted from the scriptures could be interpreted in different ways. Your interpretation doesn't seem to make logical sense at times...

 

Thanks for your response. It did more for me than you would think.

 

Odiyya

 

[Guest guest]

 

Odiyya: Where do gay people fit into this religion?

 

Satyaraj: Yes, they are! Why not?

 

This religion is called Gaudiya-vaisnavism and its founder was Krsna Caitanya, a saint from Medieval India who their followers believe to be an avatara of Krsna Himself. Most of the Hindu sects do consider Caitanya as a great master and as an empowered mukta or liberated soul (saint).

 

Caitanya’s main doctrine is the one of spontaneous love towards God, that is technically called raganuga-bhakti. No rules and regulations are to be considered as hindrances or aids to that path. No mundane vices and virtues can cause disruption or may cause any increase in that spontaneous love.

 

Unfortunately, after Caitanya’s departure many theologies were made employing some of his singular precepts and for certain many disciplinarian rules and regulations from Hindu’s religion were interpolated into these theologies.

 

If we consider Caitanya as a great mukta, what undoubtedly he was, we should be aware that muktas like him exist in a state of non-separation from the Lord (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.4) and they can create their own worlds into the samvyoma (spiritual ether) of their hearts to live there with their friends, relatives, and all the living entities that they love (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.8). A mukta like him is under the control of no one but the Lord, therefore he is the master of all and has no other master (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.9).

 

No matter if one is by now in a human body, as a man, woman, gay, robber, priest, or whatever designation he may have, or if he is now in a body of a beast, tree, insect, and so on. If one is invited by such a mukta to live into his heart, he forcibly will be there, as Hari (God) will always fulfil mukta’s wills.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

You said or implied that homosexuality was a "choice." That leads me to believe that you're biased and really don't know much about this as you claim to know. As a gay man I can tell you that it's NOT a choice. If i had a choice of being gay or straight I would choose to be straight. The fact is I can't choose so I'm stuck with being gay.

According to Vedic philosophy everything is by choice, though due to conditioning our nature is molded in a particular way. Our attachments are due to our karma-vasanas, the residual effects of past material activity and their associations.

 

Though these residues of attachment are very hard to become free from (and thus we strongly identify ourselves with those attachments), still we can purify ourselves of them through regulated sadhana and devotion to the Lord.

 

Thus homosexuality, and every attachment in existence, is in fact a choice, made both in this life and the previous (by association). Though it may be difficult to change our material conditioning on our own, with the empowerment of the Lord anything can be accomplished.

 

Regarding my article, it has nothing to do with interpretation of scripture. It is simply a direct analysis of words belonging to the sanskrit language. Words have particular definitions. The author of the article "Tritiya-prakriti: the third sex" ignored the true definitions of certain words and fabricated his own meanings. His entire article is based on these imaginary meanings (napumsaka means "homosexual", viyoni means "the womb of another man's wife", etc.) and thus his entire article is nothing but distortion.

 

It is something similar to people claiming cow slaughter used to be very prevelant in ancient India.

 

[Guest guest]

Satyaraj: That’s true, our previous attachments or karma-vasanas are the cause of our present option of life, what obviously includes sexual tendencies.

 

In spite of the possibility of purification through religious process (sadhana) and regulative principles of devotion, that kind of discipline wasn’t the way prescribed by Caitanya, Vallabha, Mirtabai and other Hindu saints from Medieval India. They were unanimous to prescribe the path of spontaneous devotion as the only path that may really cause prema-bhakti towards Hari, or the final aim of bhakti.

 

This spontaneous devotion is considered causeless (hetu). As causeless, it cannot have a cause such as regulated sadhana or vaidhi-bhakti. Hari’s free will and Grace, as well as mukta’s satya-sankalpa feelings can be placed as this ‘causeless’ source of spontaneous devotion. But such spontaneous devotion is not seen everywhere like Hari’s divine Grace. So, this spontaneous devotion is only caused by spontaneous devotion itself; in other words it is caused by ananya-bhakti as only bhakti may cause bhakti. And that bhakti is soul’s intrinsic nature, and it is not created by any sadhana or religious principle.

 

A hint on how only bhakti may cause bhakti can be taken in a book called “Madhurya-kadambhini, First Shower” by Visvanatha a very learned Gaudiya from the past.

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

I did not choose to be gay. Believe me, I would give my life to be straight.

According to Hinduism we have chosen to be what we are in this life by our actions in previous lives. There is no question of blaiming God for the results of our own activities. When a criminal decides to break a law, he is choosing to go to prison. It is his choice to make. We have all made our choices in previous lives which have resulted in each of our own personal prisons, known as shariras or kshetras. Your personal prison is no more (or less) binding then my personal prison. The point is to understand that we are in bondage, and to free ourselves from this bondage through sadhana, or spiritual practice - culminating in realization of the true self beyond the external coverings of matter. We should turn from matter towards spirit.

 

In the Gita it is said that ultimately every action performed, unless done as a sacrifice to the divine, is a cause of bondage. The laws of karma are so stringent and binding that even what we consider to be "good" actions are in fact part of our entanglement.

 

Thus Krishna advises us, "Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer or give away, do it, O Arjuna, as an offering to Me." In this way we can link with the Supreme through our actions (karma-yoga) and become free from the entanglement of binding reactions.

 

Anyone, from any background or situation can take to this process of purification. Our only objection to the article on "Tritiya-prakriti" is that it 1) distorts the Vedic teachings, 2) states that homosexuals are superior to others as they are "not attached to family life", 3) it says homosexuality is not sinful (whereas according to the Vedic teachings, sex for purposes other than procreation is considered sinful), 4) it tries to combine a vice with the spiritual tradition of "vaishnavism" (note the name 'Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association'). It is something like if I start the 'Cocaine Users Vaishnava Association', 'Cow Killers Vaishnava Association', 'Promiscuous Heteresexual Vaishnava Association', etc.

 

The Vaishnava path is not for identifying with our material faults. It is for trying to rise above our material attachments and become attached soley to the divine, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There isno need to advertise our material misidentifications. This body itself is a misidentification of the self, which is known as avidya, or ignorance. All the subsidiary bodily identifications (such as nationality, religion, caste, creed, sexuality, etc.) are all blocks on our path for spiritual realization. Those blocks will be there in our way, but we must step over them; not focus on them and become absorbed in them.

 

I've tried everything possible. I tried therapy, exorcism, hypnosis, pastlife regression, and nothing worked.

A separate endeavour is not necessary. Krishna says in the Gita that by becoming aborbed in the higher spiritual consciousness, one will automatically become free from the lower material consciousness. Absorb yourself in the divine through sadhana, daily spiritual practice and meditation. Only by knowing the higher self can the lower self be forgotten.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-23-2001).]

[M-dd]

Originally posted by Odiyya:

Jndas. i read your article and although you seemed somewhat logical there is something you said that makes me question the validity of your whole argument. You said or implied that homosexuality was a "choice." That leads me to believe that you're biased and really don't know much about this as you claim to know. As a gay man I can tell you that it's NOT a choice. ...

Dear Oddiya,

 

So you made the choice last lifetime, and this lifetime you are stuck with it. Cause and effect, action and reaction, the law of karma is intricate and exacting.

 

But don't despair because Krsna and His pure devotees will never reject you. The prescription is the same for your good self as it is for straight guys and gals. Chant Hare Krsna, and you will rise above your gross sexual bodily identification. All sincere aspirants have to rise above their bodily conditioning, and the first lesson is that you are not that body, gay or straight.

 

As you progress, you will want to follow rules and regulations to aid and abet your further advancement, and at that point you will have to come to the point of giving up illicit sex. Licit sex is sex within marriage and for the purpose of raising Krsna conscious children. However you interpret this, whatever rationalizations you want to make in this regard, how closely you want to follow it, all this is between yourself and Krsna. You have a conscience, and that is Supersoul, and He will guide you, so turn within yourself sincerely and reveal your mind and heart to Him.

 

When you are most serious about making spiritual advancement, then you must approach a bona-fide spiritual master, inquire from him submissively, and try to learn the truth, 'the self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the Truth'. I recommend you read Bhagavad-gita As It Is, thoroughly, and you will find a true connection to Supersoul.

 

You can find it at this site, you might have to key it in though, (no it works, I just tried it)---

http://www.asitis.com/

 

Chant Hare Krsna. And the rest will manifest automatically in your life as you endeavour more and more sincerely to elevate yourself to the transcendental platform, ultimately finding out that such elevation comes directly via the mercy of the pure devotee. Such mercy is already upon you! Accept it and chant Hare Krsna!

 

 

[This message has been edited by M-dd (edited 10-23-2001).]

[Odiyya]

I'm beginning to understand a bit more. Although, I'm beginning to see that Hinduism is not as open-minded as people say. It reminds me a bit of Christianity which I found spiritually repressive.

 

But anyhow, I'll pursue my path and see what comes of it.

 

One question though: Did I choose to be gay in my pastlife so that I could learn some type of lesson in this life??

 

thanks..

[Audarya lila]

Odiyya,

 

Hinduism is very broad and you will not find that broadness represented here. What is presented here, albeit differently as understood by different persons, is for the most part (there are a few exceptions) Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Trying to understand pastlives and why we are in the position we are currently in is speculative at best. What is important is that you begin to recognize that you are not that body that you inhabit and that your nature as spririt soul is to serve. To serve what and whom is the natural question. The Gaudiya Vaishnava answer is: To serve the divine couple, Radha Krishna. We can come to understand this by taking up the banner of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and his followers.

 

Ultimately who we associate with has the highest impact on our lives. The recommendation of the Vedic scripures is to find a saint and take up spiritual practices under his/her direction and supervision and associate with other souls who identify with divinity as you do so that your progress will be steady.

 

The Bhagavad Gita informs us that as we progress our material attachments and identifications will diminish in proportion with our progress.

 

We have all been wandering in this material world since time immemorial (it beginning can't be traced) and we all have various levels of attachments and predispositions based on genetics and circumstances. Your real focus should be on how to dissolve these attachments and for that you need to find good company.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

[Odiyya]

Audarya lila,

 

Thanks for your kind words. Your explanation makes a lot more sense to me. The more I learn about Hinduism, the more convinced I am that this is the path I want to take.

 

I'm a beginner so i have a lot to learn and will most likely not understand many things along the way, but I'm glad that there are people like you who are able to guide me along the way.

 

I'll definitely take your advice and seek to surround myself with the right people who will help me in my spiritual growth. If it means giving up the possibility of sex, then so be it. I'm a virgin now and I have no problem staying a virgin forever. Sex has never been something I've looked forward to anyway. My spiritual development has always been my number one priority. But we'll see what the future will bring me.

 

Again, thanks for sharing your knowledge with me. I can't possibly tell you how much it's helping me understand this new road I've undertaken..

 

Thanks..

 

 

[This message has been edited by Odiyya (edited 10-23-2001).]

[Odiyya]

jndas,

 

How do you explain the discovery of the "Gay gene." You neglected to comment on that? How do you rationalize a scientific discovery that goes against your own personal belief. I know that science and religion rarely agree on anything, so this might be a logical explanation.

 

From what I've learned, religion requires faith, while science requires facts. Sometimes the two don't mix very well.

 

Just a thought......what do you think?

[Gauracandra]

From what I have read this "gay gene" is far from an established fact. A few people have asserted its truth but no one has "proven" that this gene causes homosexuality.

 

Second, our previous karmas give us the body in this life. Some people will be born as men, some as women, some as plants, some as dogs. Thus there need be no discrepancy as I see it.

 

Gauracandra

[Odiyya]

 

Gauracandra,

 

 

From what I have read this "gay gene" is far from an established fact. A few people have asserted its truth but no one has "proven" that this gene causes homosexuality.

Actually, the gene remains dormant in some people, but in about 10% of the population (rough estimate) it's active, thus making an individual be homosexual or bisexual....

 

The people who challenge the so called "gay gene" are usually the religous right who don't like anything that challenges their beliefs (I'm talking about the Christian right, but I suppose this can be true for any religion as well).

 

 

Second, our previous karmas give us the body in this life. Some people will be born as men, some as women, some as plants, some as dogs. Thus there need be no discrepancy as I see it.

That may be so, but does that mean that our previous karma gives us a genetically predisposed gay body to teach us a lesson (or to punish us for evil deed in the past?). If so, this can satisfy both the religous hindus who believe like you and also the scientifically inclined individuals who believe it's genetic.

 

 

[Gauracandra]

Sorry but the gay gene is not simply criticized by the "religious right". There are many in the scientific community, based on articles I have read in the past, who simply do not see the evidence for it.

 

10%??? Sorry, but this number (that 10% of the population is Gay) I have seen discredited in many places. This was based on a study by Kinsey (in the 1950s I believe) on how many people engaged in homosexuality. Problem was his sample was from the prison population. Not exactly an unbiased sample to extrapolate to the rest of society.

 

While you may say the Christian Right may be against the "gay gene" theory, it stands just as true that the homosexual lobby will work just as hard to fabricate the lie of a gay gene.

 

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

 

Gauracandra

[Odiyya]

I'm not asking you to buy anything. I'm simply stating facts. As for the 10% number. I think I wrote in parenthesis that it was a rough estimate. I've heard many ranges. Anywhere between 5% to 10%. And you're right about the Kinsey study being slightly skewed. But when Gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people are taken as a whole (and not just gays - which is what the Kinsey study looked at), then 10% is not that far off. If that number scares you, then I'm sorry. But you have no reason to fear us....

 

I don't doubt that there might be some in the scientific community who oppose the gay gene. But the vast majority of the opposition comes from the religious right, and those scientists who oppose it tend to lean towards the religous side of things, which lessens their credibility in many peoples' eyes. There are scientists who claim that humans were living along side the dinosaurs, does that mean that they are right. And it's no coincidence that those scientists are strong believers in the creation theory, so they are biased. I don't see a difference in this situation.

 

As for the gay lobby thing. The Gay gene was discovered and announced without any gays lobbying for some fabrication to be created. If anything, the gay lobby may be trying to prevent people from trying to destroy this TRUE evidence from becoming common knowledge.

 

I understand you have your point of view, and I have mine. Fortunately, I believe that my side is supported by science. Besides, I have nothing to prove. I don't care if science is on my side (although it's nice that it is). I know as a gay individual that it's not a personal choice I made (in this life anyway - if you take your argument). So, I don't have an agenda to promote. If you believe it fine, If you don't, then that's fine also.

 

 

[Odiyya]

Gauracandra,

 

If 10% scares you, then I'll just use the smaller number of 5% to make you feel better. But be aware that estimates go as high as 10%. The numbers vary from source to source, but the range is always between 5% to 10%.

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Odiyya (edited 10-23-2001).]

[Odiyya]

I'm sorry jndas, but unless you're gay you can't know how it is. I did not choose to be gay. Believe me, I would give my life to be straight. I've tried everything possible. I tried therapy, exorcism, hypnosis, pastlife regression, and nothing worked. There is no way on earth that you can say that I choose to be this way.....For the past 22 years of my life I hated myself for what I am....I've never been with a man so my sexuality/homosexuality is not a sexual thing. It's part of who I am inside. It's part of my identity.

 

I'm tired of the self-hatred. A year ago, during a bio-chemistry class, my teacher mentioned that the scientists working on the Human Genome project discovered what they called "The Gay Gene." At that point it proved "scientifically" what I had already known - That 99% of homosexuality is Genetic and not Choice.

 

I'm not asking for special rights within Hinduism. I'm just asking to be recognized for who I am and not be made less of a person for something I had no control over and for something which I had no choice in.

 

Jndas, you're obviously a very educated man, but in this area either you or Hinduism is severly flawed. I refuse to believe in a supreme god that picks and chooses which people are accepted and which are not.

 

This whole homosexuality issue is right up there with the caste system and women repression that is still prevelent in Hinduism. Most of these practices were created by men or changed to suit their own biases and issues - it's a practice which is common in ALL religions on earth.

 

I don't know what I was in my previous life, but I know for a fact that who I am in this life is not by choice, but rather, by genetics.

 

By the way, if you look at any Cultural Anthropology book, you'll see that your "point of view" is not the accepted one.

 

[This message has been edited by Odiyya (edited 10-25-2001).]

[Odiyya]

After reading Audarya lila's response, it prompted me to do more research both online and on a local religious bookstore. The following is based on general themes that kept popping up during my research yesterday.

 

My search revealed that There is no "one" Hindu tradition. Like Christianity, Hinduism has many denominations, or groups, who interpret the holy scriptures differently. However, no one group is right or wrong. If you wish to believe that being gay is a sin or a choice (which I still hold it's not) then you have the right to feel that way, but you don't have the right to impose that view on others and insist that it's the "only way and the right way."

 

Hinduism (theoretically) promotes that all paths will eventually lead to God, so differences in how one practices or interprets Hinduism is not very important (based on some sources) and should be respected as another path leading to the same place - God.

 

Therefore, those who insist on imposing their unique view of Hinduism are actually not practicing the "acceptance" that Hinduism promotes (at least in theory). Does this make some of you hypocrites? I'll let you answer that question for yourself.

 

Each person has to seek his own path within Hinduism that will best develop him spiritually, which is what I'm desperately trying to do. Therefore, I will no longer continue this "gay" issue on this forum. Hypocrisy is not what I'm looking for at this moment. I want answers, not agendas or personal prejudices or phobias.

 

As a person who seeks to become a loving and peaceful Hindu, I won't try and force my views on anyone - even if supported by credible sources.

 

Some people believe that The Christian British influence had a slightly corrupting effect on Hinduism (especially in the area of sexuality). Perhaps this might be the case, but I can't say this for sure until I know for sure. But even then, it won't give me the right to force that view on anyone else.

 

I still think I can learn a lot from this forum, but I'll just have to look at the info with a cautious eye and try to "weed out" the personal agendas that apparently this forum is so famous for around the Hindu-cyberspace (did you know this place has such a bad reputation in some circles many of which are not gay).

 

Anyhow, as far as I'm concerned this gay topic is over. I won't post another reply to this thread. Perhaps it should be left to die a natural death.

 

Once again. I want to thank "Audarya lila" for helping me open my eyes and to seek the answers on my own.

 

[This message has been edited by Odiyya (edited 10-24-2001).]

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

The general view of Hinduism you cited is a creation of recent times. Go deeper into the traditions and you may find something of substance. The term "Hindu" is itself foreign to our religion, and does not occur in any of our religious texts. Thus what you will generally find through research in popular books will be something foreign to the ancient religion of India, the sanatana-dharma. Most of the concepts you have listed above fall into this category. They are more or less popular modern conceptions, as opposed to the ancient tradition of the Vedas.