Hinduism losing vitality because of not embracing homosexual lifestyle?

[Guruvani]

In his recent sanga, Tripurari Swami says that Hinduism is losing it's relevance and vitality because it does not embrace the homosexual lifestyle and gay liberation movement.

He says that Hinduism is suffering from misconceptions that homosexual conduct is an abuse of personal volition and not a psychophysical condition inherited by birth.

 

Does anybody have any views to share on this subject? Here is his exact statement. It appeared today on VNN.

 

"Modern Hinduism for the most part condemns homosexuality yet misunderstands it to be an improper choice rather than psycho-physical reality that some people are born with, rendering them as attracted to the same sex as heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex. As modern society has come to better understand this phenomenon, it is also imperative that Hindu spiritual traditions do the same if they are to remain vital".

 

 

I would like to hear some of your views on this subject.

 

[Guruvani]

If I could just get one wealthy homo to become my disciple i would be set up financially to jet-set around the world continuosly, running from my sexual agitation that has been dogging me to no end!

[I_love_krishna_]

I am just a lowly creature who has no understanding of the higher knowledge of bliss of krishna, but I would like to say this.

 

If I know my Krishna, that I do, well I think he said that we shouldn't pay any sort of attention to the sexuality of the body.

 

We should ignore it. Also, if we ignore it, who is heterosexual? and who is homosexual? I think that is the main point.

 

The main point of the vedas is to keep materialism from overtaking our true spiritual nature of a life force.

 

Our true form could be compared to a light. We get our power from krishna, and we should not think of our selves as this material garb that we wear over us.

 

So, Sexual attraction of any kind should be kept at minimal, even if some one is attracted to the same sex.

_________

 

I have to say, this culture (American) has too much emphasis on what sex we are, and has made us over aware of gays and lesbians.

 

We should stop encouraging sexual attraction of the same sex in our movement, just like we are trying to not encourage heterosexuality.

 

[stonehearted]

Ksamabbuddhi: In his recent sanga, Tripurari Swami says that Hinduism is losing it's relevance and vitality because it does not embrace the homosexual lifestyle and gay liberation movement.

 

Actually that's not what he says. You have--deliberately, I suspect--changed the meaning of what he said. Here's what he actually said: "Modern Hinduism for the most part condemns homosexuality yet misunderstands it to be an improper choice rather than psycho-physical reality that some people are born with, rendering them as attracted to the same sex as heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex. As modern society has come to better understand this phenomenon, it is also imperative that Hindu spiritual traditions do the same if they are to remain vital." Perhaps the distinction requires a more nuanced or sophisticated reading, but I doubt it. There's a gulf of difference between "embrace" and "understand." I understand many Hindus' antipathy for anything Muslim and their desire to exhort devotees to kill all the "muzzies" for them, but I cannot embrace it.

 

He does not advocate "embrac[ing] the homosexual lifestyle and gay liberation movement"--not in this Sanga or anywhere else. It's better, if you insist on opening this sore again, to at least be honest. Better yet, if you have personal issues with Tripurari Maharaja, I suggest you deal with him directly, rather than running a campign agains thim in public. There's a reason the first offense against the holy name is vilifying or criticizing those who have dedicated their lives to spreading the holy name.

 

We have called each other names over this issue until we ourselves have asked for threads to be closed. Do we see any need to do so again? Those of us who have been around even for a few months know who stands where. Some of us are more conservative in our approach, and others are somewhat more liberal. None of us here with any experience of Krishna consciousness advocates injecting any kind of illicit sexual activity into the philosophy, or whatever the homophobes call it. The furthest anyone I know (including GALVA folks) goes is advocating treating those afflicted with this upadhi (as opposed to being afflicted with the heterosexual upadhi) with the same compassion we would anyone we encournter. That's really what all the fuss is about, as I read it.

[Guruvani]

His words speak the truth:

he says:

Hindusim MISUNDERSTANDS homosexuality to be a bad choice instead of something they have no control over because they were born with homosexual tendencies.

 

He says that if Hinduism does not come to understand that homosexuality is not a choice but an overpowering innate tendency acquired from birth, that it will not remain vital as a religion.

 

I am simply saying it in my own words according to the message I got from reading his opinions published on VNN today.

 

If he is not willing to get some feedback on controversial issues then he should not get involved in controversial issues.

 

In fact Tripuari Maharaja jumps on every controversial issue that comes up, like "sannyasa for women" and accepting homosexual behaviour as civilized. If he does not like feedback and opposition on these issues then he should not be publishing his opinions about them on international web sites.

[gHari]

Sanga is driven by questions from the outside.

 

 

[I_love_krishna_]

i am sorry , but thats how i feel, when we are trying to elevate ourselves, why degrade our true nature by letting the thoughts of these poor misguided souls into our thought processes.

 

 

[Guruvani]

Even this young lady has spoken with more wisdom. Why? How? Because she has no agenda to push. She has no image to promote. She has no desire for followers or prestige. She only wants the truth. She only wants Krishna consciousness. She has no ulterior motive that has slinked into her heart because of the corruption of prestige and authority. The more we want to become an authority the more we become unqualified to be an authority.

 

Let the simple, the humble and the powerless lead. Power corrupts. Prestige is the final obstacle. Institutional authority is the playground of desire.

 

Let the children lead!

[stonehearted]

but listen to yourself, too. You're the one who keeps bringing this topic up. You're the one obsessed with homos--who wants a rich homo disciple. You're the one with the agenda here.

 

And I have to question the sincerity of your exhortation, since you very recently put her in her place for being a silly, young girl.

 

And, by the way--she's right.

[Guruvani]

I am the voice in the wilderness holding the leaders of the movement to the highest standard. I am not a guru, a leader, a Swami or a GBC. I am a bruised and battered soul who has lived a hard life that none of you will ever know. I demand the utmost from those who come forward to lead and guide the Krishna consciousness movement. I don't hold myself to that standard because I am not a leader, a guru or a GBC. I live a very secluded and private life away from it all.

To all you leaders, gurus and GBC.......... you are under the microscope and your every word, your every movement and your every deed is up for severe scrutiny.

 

Don't advertise yourself as guru and guide of Prabhupada's movement unless you are ready to be in the spotlight.

 

Tripurari Maharaja once asked me if I was his friend or enemey because I was praising him too much. He was remembering the Pandit who said "One who praises you is your enemy, one who criticizes you is your friend".

 

I have decided to become his friend instead of his enemy. I hope you can all understand our peculiar relationship.

I love Tripurari Maharaja. I am trying to save him from himself and I am willing to be the fall guy for his gain.

 

Tripurari Maharaja is close to perfection. I am trying to help him get there. However, the confortable life in the temple will never get him where he wants to go. I am giving him some of the hardship he needs to compensate for his cushy temple lifestyle that is blocking his advancement.

 

I knew you wouldn't understand. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[stonehearted]

Not only did I read it myself, but I posted a direct quotation. I don't have any objection to paraphrasing, as long as it's accurate. Yours was so (willfully?) inaccurate that it mischaracterized what he said. You did a much better job this time. Your revision gets an A.

 

Still, like gHari, I urge caution. It's okay to discuss why a devotee may present himself or herself in a particular way. I'm not sure it's a good idea to campaign against someone. BTW, Tripurari Maharaj clearly isn't afraid of criticism, as you well know. You know what was involved in associating with Srila Sridhar Maharaj back then--a sort of public self-immolation in ISKCON's eyes. Nor are those who respect him afraid for him. However, I have a particular interest in the way we discuss these things, partly due to my academic training, partly due to my reading of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, which, together with Srimad-Bhagavatam and Sri Chaitanya-bhagavat, seems to leave no room for criticizing devotees personally. Oh, yeah--and our experience over the last couple of decades.

 

I don't know you personally, and I have nothing against you personally. I hope that if we were to meet face to face we would appreciate each other's good fortune above all.

[Guest guest]

but it is being forced on people by the gay activists themselves. On chakra there is a recent article by Amara das criticizing the BBT for some picture in a certain Bhagavatam volumn for depicting homo's in a less than flattering light and he hopes future issues will correct the *problem*. I didn't read the whole article, nor do i intend to, but really except among friends shouldn't we keep our pathologies to ourselves and not disturb the larger devotional body with them?

[DayalGovinda]

I am a disciple of Srila BV Tripurari Maharaj and therefore I think it would be worth my while addressing the main point here.

 

The quote that Ksamabuddhi has posted from the sanga is, in my opinion, unquestionable. What is being said is that modern society recognises that Homosexuality is something that a person is born into and not an improper or deviant choice. In order for a tradition to stay vital and relevant it must embrace that notion and thus view modern issues with compassion and tolerance.

 

This is all that is being said and no more. We are not being asked to 'embrace' homosexuality or the gay liberation movement.

 

The sanga newsletter is often misread, misquoted and misunderstood. People would do well to take the time to read carefully what is actually writen rather than project onto it what they would have the author say.

 

Dayal Govinda dasa

[theist]

Dayal Govinda das,

 

I read those sanga newsletters when they come out and find both knowledge and inspiration in them. This issues remains a contentious point for me. Be that as it may.

 

 

 

What is being said is that modern society recognises that Homosexuality is something that a person is born into and not an improper or deviant choice.

 

 

I see a great danger in this approach. For one thing it doesn't seem to address our past involvment in our present birth and circumstances. That past involvment was one of improper or deviant choices. We are all *here* as a result of our past choices and desires. there is that saying that we must lay down in the bed that we ourselves previously made.

 

Another thing, there are limits on how far what modern society recognizes should be allowed to form the Krsna consciousness teachings.

 

Example: Modern society may come to recognize pedophilia in the same way it is now accepting homosexuality. Afterall pedophiles say they were born that way. The desire for children as sex objects seems very natural to them, inherent in their nature even.

 

How would you preach to them in order to "stay vital and relevant" then?

[stonehearted]

Ksamabuddhi, don't feel as though you're the only one who has had a hard life. I'm pretty bruised myself, as are many of us here. And I think you're mistaken to think that living in the temple or ashram is "cushy." My brahmachari life in Hawaii was anything but cushy. And that was only the beginning. And I know that devotees elsewhere had it worse in many ways than we did (at least a freezing cold morning--in our eyes--was 62 degrees, not 26).

 

As for your "peculiar" relationship with Tripurari Maharaj, I probably understand at least as well as you. However, I'm not sure you're actually creating any hardship for him. I haven't seen any indication you've succeeded in this. The hardships he endures these days can no doubt be traced to his accepting responsibilities on Krishna's and Prabhupada's behalf that you and I may find hard to imagine.

 

More importantly, though, is that we hold ourselves to higher standards, that we be at least as critical of ourselves as we are of others. This is the standard set by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. Rather than making excuses for our failure to do so, or implying that we are above criticism, as you have, we should look within and see where we can improve our own practice. Those who have actually attained spontaneous love for Krishna are, according to our acharyas, are very careful about setting a good example for others, at least by not going back on the agreement they made with their spiritual master.

[stonehearted]

theist:I see a great danger in this approach. For one thing it doesn't seem to address our past involvment in our present birth and circumstances. That past involvment was one of improper or deviant choices. We are all *here* as a result of our past choices and desires. there is that saying that we must lay down in the bed that we ourselves previously made.

 

In fact, his remarks take exactly that past into account. That's what it means, from our perspective, to say that a characteristic is innate. I'd add one thing to one of your sentences above: We are all here as a result of our past *improper* choices and desires. We lie in the bed previously made, then work from where we are in figuring out how to get up. You seem to think that accommodating this past conditioning is to condone any act born of it; I don't agree. All that's being suggested in Maharaja's remarks is that we treat these fallen souls with the same respect and compassion we show other fallen souls. Rupa Goswami describes pure devotional service as engaging our senses in Krishna's service in a state of freedom from all mistaken self-concepts (sarvopadhi vinirmuktam). That includes the mistaken self-concept of being a gay man, straight, man, mother, teacher, or whatever. These all arise from past misdeeds and poor choices. the real question is whether we so stigmatize a particular group of innocent souls (except for those acually inimical to Krishna, Srila Prabhupada says all are innocent) that we make it harder than necessary for them to get access to Lord Nityananda's and Lord Chaitanya's mercy.

 

No one here is suggesting amending the teachings of the acharyas to suggest that it's just fine for men--or women--to have sex with each other, or that it's fine for men and women to have sex with each other outside the commitment required in marriage. I heard once that Srila Prabhupada said this business is all disgusting, like wet stool and dry stool. It's just silly that we who aspire to associating with Krishna and His neighbors are so proud of our attachment to dry stool that we curl our lips in disgust to find someone attached to wet stool.

 

[theist]

 

I'd add one thing to one of your sentences above: We are all here as a result of our past *improper* choices and desires.

[stonehearted]

theist: You misunderstand my position somewhat. But we have been through before with no resolution so we needn't do it again. There is a certain tacit approval that I object to.

 

The tacit approval you claim I reject categorically and unequivocally reject. We repeatedly reach an impasses largely because you refuse to acknowledge any sincerity in my convictions.

 

I didn't address the pedophilia issue because it looks like a slippery-slope fallacy. If the issue of our misusing our free will since a time out of memory is beyond the scope of this discussion, then so must be a different issue, a different upadhi.

[Bhaktavasya]

Theist said:

 

Example: Modern society may come to recognize pedophilia in the same way it is now accepting homosexuality. Afterall pedophiles say they were born that way. The desire for children as sex objects seems very natural to them, inherent in their nature even.

 

First of all, you are equating peophilia with homosexuality which are two very different issues. To say that 'modern society may come to recognize' the two issues is absurd, as pedophilia is a crime against innocent children whereas homosexuality is between two consenting adults and although illicit sex is strongly discourged in Vaisnavism it is not the same degree of offense as abusing a child. Many adult practising devotees have been guilty of illicit sex, which is in the same catagory as intoxication and meat-eating. BVT once was a meat-eater, even after he met his guru, but the parallel could never be made with sexual abuse of children.

 

The modern law prosecuting and condemning pedophiles, even if they were born so sick and demented, will never change as the protection of innocent children is of crucial importance. Society even 'understands' pedophilia and accepts that such a person must be locked away or more recently registered as a sex offender if they are to be released into the public again.

 

We all have anarthas we need to work on. I believe Tripurari's point is acceptance and compassion for the person who happens to be born gay and not condemnation.

 

 

 

 

[theist]

 

First of all, you are equating peophilia with homosexuality which are two very different issues. To say that 'modern society may come to recognize' the two issues is absurd,

 

 

 

Absurd? I don't think so. Even at this moment the ACLU is representing nambla in the courts on some issue. Nambla (North American Man Boy Love Association)advocates doing away with laws restricting sex with children.

 

Not long ago homosex was offically classified as a mental disorder. That has changed. Now we hear talk from the *progressives* about homophobia. If you are opposed to homosex now its assumed you have a disease.

 

Actually Babhru is correct. I am presenting a slippery slope argument. He is wrong however in dismissing it. Actually Tripurai has made a slippery slope argument himself. It's the response to that slip that is in question. Kali-yuga is one big series of slippery slope issues.

 

 

 

... as pedophilia is a crime against innocent children whereas homosexuality is between two consenting adults and although illicit sex is strongly discourged in Vaisnavism it is not the same degree of offense as abusing a child.

[stonehearted]

theist: Actually Babhru is correct. I am presenting a slippery slope argument. He is wrong however in dismissing it.

 

That's what those who rely on such fallacious argument almost always say: "Yeah, but I'm right anyway!" That's just evidence that they don't understand what that fallacy is and how it works (or, more to the point, undermines the logic of good argument).

[I_love_krishna_]

Stupid discussions , I can't even comprehend why there is a follow up on such a base thing as this.

 

Homosexuals have some sort of a disorder, yes, it is like a phobia of some kind.

 

It should be stopped, and this whole society is obsessed with sexuality so much that the whole population is enslaved.

 

Enslaved , we are to the mass media that extols the sexuality.

 

I think these homosexual people are nothing but the people who were stressed with the enslavement of this sexual culture.

 

This whole thread is useless, no matter how hard we try to elevate ourselves, we are force fed by this disgusting materialistic ideals.

 

Even a spirituality forum is infected with the thoughts which are of such a base nature as this.

 

This is completely idiotic, The follow up on this post here is idiotic, the only place that is not inflicted with the thoughts and disgust of this material world is the heart.

 

This forum has lost its spiritual nature, it is nothing but a pretend thing that seems to deceive the eye of an unsuspecting devotee.

 

This post is nothing but maya, maya of the material world.

 

we need to first clean ourselves, but chanting bunch of names with out giving up the thoughts is useless.

 

Everything is useless, this computer, this forum , this life, if there is no purity, then what are we trying to achieve.