The Third Sex: Gay Vaisnavas

[jijaji 0]

Originally posted by BDas:

I will try to make the same(deleted)point I made before in a more delicate manner.

 

Many devotees on these forums who are quick to condemn homosexuals for sexual deviancy are themselves practicing some type unaccepted sex as far as the scriptures are concerned. Along with that many drink and or take drugs.

 

** Even so the scriptures condone the GRIHASTA ASHRAM for man to satisfy his sexual urges with family, children etc. as being conducive to spiritual advancement and that is simply MAN & WOMEN.

Unaccepted sex...between man & women..? Maybe in an ashram or for those who want to attain higher than kanistha adhikari.

In the 1st place I don't accept that the 4 regs should be the standard for ALL humanity (no meat eating ..well yea)

 

Since I left ashram life in 1984 I have known few devotees living outside the ashram who claimed to be strictly following the rules and regulations.

 

** yea...

 

It is considered quite normal for devotees living outside to be sexually active and few chant regular rounds.

 

** Not everyone is meant to be a monk...but if you LOOK at Nature itself you will SEE OPPOSITES ATTRACTING EACH OTHER. Look at the BIRDS (watch out now darwin)look at Butterflies. In fact I recommend you to do a Butterfly meditation and see the yin-yang Shiva-shakti energy.

Which bring up another good point> How come ALL the Vedic deities are MALE with FEMALE Consorts? There are no GAY DEVATAS..!

 

Still they areregarded as devotees because they have some love for Krishna and Prabhupad. When asked about such devotees Prabhupad said they should still be considered Vaisnavas unless they begin to eat meat.

 

** Prabhupada would NEVER condone Gay relationships..sorry!

 

In the article on the third sex it said that living apart from the rest of society was a normal situation for Gays in Vedic culture. We also see this is true to a certain extent in todays culture. In many ways they are a world apart in the way they live and view life.

 

** True

 

But those who have appreciation for Krishna are still Vaisnavas regardless of their sexuality and should be given respect and encouragement to be Krishna conscious.

 

** There were many Gay's in iskcon and they really seem to have been the one's to have screwed up a lot of things.

They are not real popular with the Gurukulis that's for sure.

 

Just as we respect and try to help other devotees who do not follow the all the sexual rules and regulations. Hare Krishna,

 

** Well what can be said..people will do have they have done for centuries.

 

I declare;

GAYISM IS ONLY MANIFEST IN THE MATERIAL WORLD..

meaning it is only within the relm of maya that GAYISM is seen, not in the spiritual universes. It's not even a perverted reflection of an activity in the spiritual world... is against NATURE..the natural BALANCE God created!

 

 

jijaji

 

Bdas

 

 

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

PEACE OUT NOW

[Maitreya 0]

Originally posted by nine9:

 

PS Maitreya -- true, I am slightly uncomfortable with the name GALVA. As regards to what I am trying to accomplish with my partner:- spiritual advancement whilst living in a healthy loving and mutually advantageous (and guru-approved) relationship.

Mark, I am admittedly curious as to who this guru is that approved your homosexual relationship.

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

 

[atma 0]

I just don't get it why they have to make a gay vaisnava association? Gays and lesbians are already accepted in the devotee community. Inmediately come to my mind so many names and nice people that are gays and they are doing devotional service and everybody is quite happy with their service, just don't flaunt it because is nothing to be proud about.

I have personal devotee friends who are lesbians and gays and we have a very nice relationship. All of them have their partners and they are doing seva. I'm not criticizing the sex part because I always believe that the one that is free of sex desire should throw the first stone and in my condition I can't even throw a little pebble. Just don't make big waves about it because they are so many gays in this movement that it is not necessary to make a separate association.

[jijaji 0]

I am curious as well...who is this Guru..?

 

 

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

PEACE OUT NOW

[atma 0]

I don't know who's Mark's guru, but I know a big guru sannyasi that accept the relationship of his gays disciples and even when one of them came with his husband (they got legally married), he didn't have any problem in giving blessings to them.

[Maitreya 0]

Who is that 'guru' atma.

[atma 0]

Sorry, no names in public. He is very much in the public eye.

[Maitreya 0]

Torture!!!Is this revenge for my 'who is this person'thread?

 

You can say.Besides it's just you me and jijaji, and we won't tell.

[talasiga 0]

Maitreya: Who is that 'guru' atma.

 

Jijaji: I am curious as well...who is this Guru..?

 

 

Hey ! You guys !

Looking to have

Something blessed ?

 

[Gauracandra 1]

Talasiga,

 

 

Gauracandra

[jijaji 0]

My totem pole needs no Gay Guru blessing, thank you!

 

 

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

PEACE OUT NOW

[Maitreya 0]

Originally posted by talasiga:

Hey ! You guys !

Looking to have

Something blessed ?

Sorry Talasiga,

I don't swing in that direction.You'll have to find someone else to "bless".

 

 

 

[Tarun 6]

Well, in Sept'85 when Bhav went down, to uplift quichy spirits at Schermerhorn we dovetailed (careful with this term), sang a few bars of "Gay Guru Blew his Soiree, Gay Guru Blew His Soiree" which seemed to calm the crusty crowd.

If the backdoor's open... try the window.

 

[Amara_dasa 0]

Yes, prabhuji, that was me. I was the head pujari in New Navadvipa for several years. I still continue to serve Their Lordships Sri Panca-tattva as much as I can. I'm glad you had a good experience at our temple, although I can't remember you specifically. Did you go by another name at the time? By the way, our Honolulu Ratha-yatra this year will be held on September 15th. Haribol!

-Amara

 

 

[atma 0]

I know that there is a reference in the Srimad Bhagavatam about the dancing transgenders because when I had my baby, I was peacefully feeding her in my bedroom when all of the sudden all this men? dressed in sarees, bangles, long hair, etc. bursted in the room, dancing and singing. I got the shock of my life, they scared me to death because it was so unexpected. I didn't even hear the doorbell ringing. At that time I used to have like 6 men working in the house making the outfits for the deities and one of them opened the door for the Hijras (I'm very sure that is the Hindi for them). They made me so angry because they caught me by surprise and they looked really big and scary and I was very vulnerable feeding on bed my newborn. I threw them out and I ordered some of the workers to send them away. The workers didn't listen because they were afraid of the courses of the Hijras. The Hijras swore at me left and right. The kind of language that they used was really bad. They were demanding hundreds of rupees and silk sarees for their blessing for the baby.

After that incident, a friend of mine sent me a quote from the Bhagavatam where it said how auspicious the Hijras are and how the grihasthas should give charity to them in auspicious ocassions. I can't remember the Canto in the Bhagavatam.

I don't think that in Kali yuga that apply too much because the Hijras that I saw in India innumerable times were really low class and I really mean it. They were nothing like Arjuna. I really think that low class behaviour from many of the homosexuals make the people reject them. Again I'll repeat that I have gay devotee friends that I love dearly and they are doing wonderful service for different temples but they are the minority.

My impression was that they were accepted without any problem in the vaisnava society but if Amara felt necesary to write something about it maybe is because he felt the discrimination. Still, I don't agree with GALVA.

[atma 0]

Originally posted by Amara_dasa:

Yes, prabhuji, that was me. I was the head pujari in New Navadvipa for several years. I still continue to serve Their Lordships Sri Panca-tattva as much as I can. I'm glad you had a good experience at our temple, although I can't remember you specifically. Did you go by another name at the time? By the way, our Honolulu Ratha-yatra this year will be held on September 15th. Haribol!

-Amara

 

 

Right, atma is my name here, it all started with a joke and I continue with the name but that is not my real name. I don't think you'll remember me because I was there for a couple of months but it was a great experience. The restaurant just opened and we ate great. Radhanath was temple president. Sometimes I used to go with Vicitra Vasini out in sankirtan. Devotees were few but nice. We celebrated Janmastami there and they had a nice play about Damodara. My 3 years old girl was Krishna in the play. At that time I had my 6 months old baby with me and I remember you always watching her when she was trying to crawl.

Very nice memories of Hawaii. It was a good break from India for a couple of months.

BTW, the name is Gauri.

 

[Amara_dasa 0]

Dear Atma- Please accept my humble obeisances. Thank you for the nice reply. I'm sorry that you had such a bad experience with the "hijra" class of India. The whole point is that people should be seen according to their personal qualities and not on the basis of their gender. Just as there are both good and bad men and women, similarly, there are both good and bad people of the third gender. We should not take one bad example of any gender and impose that upon the entire group.

 

The quotes that you mentioned can be found in the Caitanya-caritamrta (1.13.106, verse and purport), and the "nartaka" transgender dancers are also mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam (1.11.20-22) concerning Lord Krishna's entrance into Dvaraka. It is very interesting how kindly Lord Krishna welcomed all of these groups, including the prostitutes.

 

Concerning GALVA, perhaps you may understand it better in this way. As a woman, have you ever been in a situation where you only lived and associated with men? If so, you will know how much you missed and appreciated the association of other women when they arrived. They same is true for gays and lesbians, who often feel isolated and dejected from heterosexual society, especially within a minority spiritual group. I do not think it would be psychologically healthy for you to never be able to associate with other women. Even though this is on the bodily platform, it is an issue that has to be addressed. I know for myself I have felt great relief and support by connecting with other gay Vaishnavas all over the world through GALVA. This is true even though I am treated nicely at the temple and have many close heterosexual Vaishnava friends.

 

I hope this greets you in good spirits.

Haribol! -Amara

[BDas 0]

Dear Jijaji, You wrote:

 

Even so the scriptures condone the GRIHASTA ASHRAM for man to satisfy his sexual urges with family, children etc. as being conducive to spiritual advancement and that is simply MAN & WOMEN.

Unaccepted sex...between man & women..? Maybe in an ashram or for those who want to attain higher than kanistha adhikari.

 

Reply from BD: Prabhupad said many times that the Grihasta ashram is a concession for those who cannot control sex desire. To go beyond the kanistha platform one must control sexual desire and activity. That is possible for devotees who are either gay or straight if they apply themselves to KC in good association.

 

JIJAJI: In the 1st place I don't accept that the 4 regs should be the standard for ALL humanity (no meat eating ..well yea)

 

BD: Meat eating is allowed for some but again that is a concession.

 

JIJAJI: Not everyone is meant to be a monk...but if you LOOK at Nature itself you will SEE OPPOSITES ATTRACTING EACH OTHER. Look at the BIRDS (watch out now Darwin) look at Butterflies.

 

BD: True, but if we want to be fully KC we must begin by chanting and following the principals of vaiddhi bhakti. That of course means giving up sex for enjoyment. This must be done whether the devotee is Gay or straight. And there is some homosexuality in the animal world.

 

JIJAJI: Which bring up another good point> How come ALL the Vedic deities are MALE with FEMALE Consorts? There are no GAY DEVATAS..!

 

BD: Granted, the male and female model is the basic principal of existence. Still we find homosexuality sometimes in the world of the Devas. In the material world it is the result of a particular type of karma. BSST said the idea is to make the best use of a bad bargain. So regardless of our sexual attachments we must transcend our karma by becoming KC.

 

JIJAJI:** Prabhupada would NEVER condone Gay relationships..sorry!

 

BD: Prabhupad made many concessions that were previously unheard of in Gaudiya history. Ultimately he even accepted divorce and remarrying as well as made other innovations in relation to engaging women and we very fallen males in KC. Therefore I believe that Prabhupad would and did make concessions regarding homosexuality in the Krishna Consciousness Movement.

 

Had he come to SF today, a city that now boasts the largest Gay population in the world, I believe he would make adjustments that would enable Gay and lesbian devotees to feel comfortable in Krishna’s service.

 

JIJAJI: There were many Gay's in Iskcon and they really seem to have been the one's to have screwed up a lot of things.

 

BD: The vast majority of Iskcon leadership is straight. They must take the blame for what transpired over the years. Their duty was to protect the children and devotees in general from problems and predators regardless of whether those predators were Gay, BI, or straight.

 

At New Vrndavana in 1973 Prabhupad said the biggest problem in Iskcon was the fact that we were unable to keep the men and women apart. Does this mean that men and women were the problem or something else?

 

During his manifest presence Prabhupad never said homosexuality was the main problem for the movement. Actually Prabhupad said little on the subject of homosexuality compared to the volumns of discussions about the danger of illicit sex between men and women.

 

JIJAJI: I declare; GAYISM IS ONLY MANIFEST IN THE MATERIAL WORLD.

Meaning it is only within the realm of maya that GAYISM is seen, not in the spiritual universes. It's not even a perverted reflection of an activity in the spiritual world... is against NATURE..the natural BALANCE God created!

 

BD: Your declaration is not entirely true. In Krishna lila there are priya-narma-sakas. These gopas are effeminate cowherd boys who assist Krishna in his affairs with the gopis. With these cowherd boys Krishna discusses and plans his madurya pastimes with the Gopis. They also serve as emissaries between Krishna, Radha and her associates. A rasa of this type is considered in the conjugal mood. Otherwise the majority of cowherd boys are under Balaram and relate with Krishna as fun loving friends.

 

I don’t say that these priya-narma-gopas are Gay but their existence could be the reflection that you declare doesn’t exist.

 

Other than that the article talked about a Third Sex group that may have taken part in both Krishna and Chaitanya lila. I can’t vouch for all the details of the article in question. I can only say that most of the essay seemed reasonable to me.

 

Hare Krishna, Brahma

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Of course, the study of gender and sexuality is a material subject, like astrology or ayur-veda...

I disagree with this statement. The vedangas (limbs of Vedic knowledge such as Jyotisha, etc.) and corollary knowledge of the Vedas is apara-vidya, or material knowledge. Whereas material knowledge in general, such as what is being discussed above, is classified as avidya, or ignorance. In contrast to this, only the Vedanta-sutras and like-minded scriptures such as Srimad Bhagavatam are para-vidya, or transcendental knowledge.

 

A second point is that what is described in the Puranic texts is not homosexuality, as is conceived of today. They are people born with physical defects that make them neither male nor female (or both).

 

To compare them to the homosexuals of today, such as found in a place like San Francisco is way off.

 

And the reference from Srimad Bhagavatam refers to "nartakas", which simply means dancers. It has no connection with homosexuals. Nartaka is a name of Krishna, "nartaka-gopala", and he is found in Udupi. It refers to Gopala the dancer, not to Gopala the homosexual. We have two related words, one is "nartana" which means dancing, and the other is "nartaka", which means "one who dances". It is very clear and direct.

 

The Bhagavatam verse states:

 

nata-nartaka-gandharvah

suta-magadha-vandinah

gayanti cottamashloka-

caritany adbhutani ca

 

"Expert dramatists, artists, dancers, singers, historians, genealogists and learned speakers all gave their respective contributions, being inspired by the superhuman pastimes of the Lord. Thus they proceeded on and on."

 

The listing of dramatists, dancers, singers, puranic reciters, historians, and learned speakers together in a list make it quite clear that "nartaka" is refering to nothing except plain old dancers.

 

To misuse such statements to propogate our own speculations is certainly an injustice, and is not a work of scholarship. To put our own teachings into what we read and hear is sravanam and kirtanam influenced by the rajo-guna. This is described by Lord Kapila in the third canto.

 

We even find that the soul is referred to as "nartaka" in the Shiva sutras (9):

 

nartaka aatmaa

 

"The self is a dancing actor."

 

It does not mean the soul (atma) is a homosexual.

 

Nartana is the art of dancing, and those that follow it are nartakas. Generally those who are born as eunuchs (physically lacking either male or female sex), take to feminine arts such as dance. We even find this in todays reflection of homosexuals. Thus Prabhupada mentions in the Chaitanya Charitamrita purport that eunuchs took to dancing as a livelyhood, they didn't get "married" to other eunichs for maintenance.

 

Having said that, hardly 0.1% of nartakas (dancers) are eunuchs. Most nartakas are actually traditional brahmanas.

 

The true third sex is to be free from attachment to either men or women and to be situated on the paramahamsa platform of pure devotional service. Anything else is just a confusion over the two sexes.

 

As far as a separate "Gay and Lesbian Gaudiya Vaishnava Society", is that religion?

 

Acyutananda: Yes. Two homosexuals were married by a priest.

 

Prabhupada: Yes.

 

Tamala Krsna: Now they have a church where the priests are homosexuals and the attending people are homosexual.

 

Prabhupada: Hm?

 

Tamala Krsna: Now they have churches for homosex. That means the priest is a homosexual, and the persons who come are homosexuals. A special church for homosexuals.

 

Prabhupada: Just see. Is that religion?

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 08-30-2001).]

[Amara_dasa 0]

Dear friends,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada and all Vaishnavas!

 

Certainly the word "nartaka" can refer to any dancer, but as a specific class they are documented in all texts as members of the sudra class, as transgendered (homosexual) and they still exist even today. This is not even debatable, you can go to India right now and talk with these people, or you can read the book "The Hijra Class: The Eunuchs of India." These dancers are considered to be both male and female. A few of them are physically male and female (intersexed), but the vast majority are homosexual. This class of "nartaka" dancers is nicely described by Srila Prabhupada in a conversation on tape #67-002 recorded in San Francisco, although he himself admits in the talk that he does not know the exact nature of these people.

 

Another point is that "eunuch" is just an old-fashioned word for homosexual. (Did you guys actually read the paper or not?) The behavior of the "eunuchs" is described in full detail within the eighth and ninth chapters of the second part of the Kama Shastra, and it is purely homosexual. To deny this would mean you would have to deny the entire text, and then I would beg to ask where are you going to get your own references from as to the "actual" sexual nature of the "eunuchs?" Why not accept the ancient texts and the "eunuchs" themselves? Do you understand their own nature better than them?

 

The combination of the male and female natures occurs to varying degrees, but on the physical platform (intersexed) it is extremely rare and occurs in about 0.02% of the population, or one out of every 20,000 births. Even then, a disproportionate number of these intersexed persons exhibit "homosexual" behavior. (www.isna.org, the Intersex Society of North America). This hardly would have made up a social class in ancient India. Homosexuality, on the other hand, occurs much more commonly, which most estimates place at about 5% of the population, or one out of every twenty people, and these people make up the majority of what is known in the Vedas as "tritiya-prakriti: people of the third sex." We should not try to deny their existence, or pretend that they are all simply "asexual," because that isn't going to address the issue or solve anything.

 

Hoping this letter greets you all in good Krishna consciousness. Gaura premanande!

 

-Amara dasa

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Certainly the word "nartaka" can refer to any dancer, but as a specific class they are documented in all texts as members of the sudra class, as transgendered (homosexual) and they still exist even today.

In the two texts you have noted, the word "nartaka" refers to a "dancer", and not to a homosexual. In Puranic usage, this word also refers particularly to a dancer, not to a caste. The dancing occupation is that of a shudra, and it has no connection to the sexual nature of the individual. The fact that it is a caste is proof that it is an occupation, and not a nature.

 

You are trying too hard to interpret everything in view of your desired conclusion.

 

Again I will state one point:

 

Certainly the word "nartaka" can refer to any dancer...

Not "can", but "does". This is language, the word nartaka means dancer. Please check the roots of the word and it will confirm this.

 

The combination of the male and female natures occurs to varying degrees, but on the physical platform (intersexed) it is extremely rare and occurs in about 0.02% of the population, or one out of every 20,000 births. Even then, a disproportionate number of these intersexed persons exhibit "homosexual" behavior.

The exhibition of homosexual tendencies is due to the influence of adharma (which is especially prominent in Kali-yuga). In previous ages, which the scriptures are describing, such irreligious tendencies were not common, and as such the eunuchs were asexual.

 

Today in Bengal every eunuch is a homosexual, and every swami is a beedi swami. So what? That is the influence of Kali-yuga.

 

To take Kama-sutra and keep it on the platform of a revealed scripture is foolish. Simply because a text is written in sanskrit does not mean anything in regards to the authenticity and value of the text. It is a recent text and has no spiritual value.

 

[Gauracandra 1]

Homosexuality, on the other hand, occurs much more commonly, which most estimates place at about 5% of the population

I didn't want to get back into this discussion, but wanted to suggest people take these sorts of statistics with a grain of salt. Many gay groups try to appear much larger than they actually are by creating fake numbers of people. The usual statistic is 10% that is thrown out.

 

You want to know where that number came from? It was based on a survey by Kinsey (a so-called sexologist) from the 1950s or so, who claimed that 10% of all people at one point in their lives are homosexual. He also made all sorts of other outrageous statements many of which I can't print here. Guess where his "scientific" study occured? Well he couldn't very well just ask people on the street, so he decided to conduct his survey in the prisons of America. Surprise, surprise, so many prisoners engaged in homosexuality. Since then this number has continued to be spread around, but it is totally false. San Francisco may have a 10% gay population, but the population as a whole is no where near that level.

 

Gauracandra

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by Maitreya:

1. Who is that 'guru' atma.

 

2. I don't swing in that direction.You'll have to find someone else to "bless".

 

 

Darling! I am not offering to bless anything.

It is YOU who are inquiring after "that 'guru'"

- remember?

 

I have read that zinc supplements are good

for the memory and

the prostate.

 

Get well soon !

Ta taa aa .....

 

 

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

talasiga@hotmail.com

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Homosexuality, on the other hand, occurs much more commonly, which most estimates place at about 5% of the population, or one out of every twenty people, and these people make up the majority of what is known in the Vedas as "tritiya-prakriti: people of the third sex."

This is your speculation. And as a side note, the word tritiya-prakriti will not be found in the Vedas. It occurs in the kama-sutra. Your article is not one of scholarship, but of distortion. To take a reference from the Kama-sutra, and claim it is found in "the Vedas" is in very poor taste.

 

I think the real disease is in not accepting the Vedic texts as they are, and instead trying to interpolate our own thoughts into them. Better spend more time reading Taittiriya Upanishad and less time reading Kama sutra.

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 08-30-2001).]

[Gauracandra 1]

Simply because a text is written in sanskrit does not mean anything in regards to the authenticity and value of the text.

I think it is important to remember that Sanskrit is just a language. There are curse words in Sanskrit and people have written many things of hardly a spiritual nature in this language.

 

Gauracandra