I used to be a hindu

[Vrindavana Das]

you analogy immidiately shows the depth of your incoherence.

Night and day cannot cohexist, but love and lust can (you said one does not reduce the other).

Then love and lust cannot be compared to night and day.

I will make it simple.

Love is selfless.

Lust is selfish.

I love a girl selflessly with all my heart and yet I have a selfish interest in her, is not possible simultaneously. I can either be selfless OR selfish. Both cannot happen simultaneously.

Similarly, love and lust cannot happen simultaneously.

 

[Me Myself]

I will make it simple.

Love is selfless.

Lust is selfish.

I love a girl selflessly with all my heart and yet I have a selfish interest in her, is not possible simultaneously. I can either be selfless OR selfish. Both cannot happen simultaneously.

Similarly, love and lust cannot happen simultaneously.

You already said that love and lust can be felt at the same time.

Now you are saying they cannot.

Yes, your problem is that you want to make it "simple" but you are just making it wrong.

It is a reality that one can feel lust and love simultaneously.

It is also posible to have selfless interest for a woman´s well being while at the same time feel sexual atraction for her.

I remember I turned down sex with a very atractive female friend because I knew she had a boyfriend. I had a bonner in that moment . If I couldn´t love her and feel lust for her at the same time, I wouldn´t have been able to take her hands off of me when I felt them. It would have been imposible.

It was not the case though. She was the sexiest in the room and at the same time the one I showed more love, because I was willing to turn down her sexyness because I loved her and didn´t wanted to make her do something wrong and have bad karma, I wouldn´t participate on that.

It´s just two different things and they don´t take space from one another. They only do when you make it "simple", but when you make it real, it doesn´t work the way you say it.

 

[Breathe]

Lord Brahmā then gave birth to the demons from his buttocks, and they were very fond of sex. Because they were too lustful, they approached him for copulation. [B.G. 30.20.23]

To me, it looks more like this:

Lord Brahmā gave birth to the asuras from his buttocks (they are unclean)
They were fond of sex (attached to casual sex)
They approached him (their father) for copulation

So if anything, this looks, to me, less about being a prohibition on homosexuality as evil, but equating the asuras' sinful actions with the actions of casual sex and incest.


This fool's $0.02.

 

[willy1590]

Is there a zen type hinduism with no scripture?

 

[Me Myself]

I would say dont get attached to the label. If you like worshipping Shiva, do.

It´s not important wheter you are or are not a "hindu". It´s wheter you feel or do not feel you are taking the best choice for your spirituality.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

You already said that love and lust can be felt at the same time.

Now you are saying they cannot.

Yes, your problem is that you want to make it "simple" but you are just making it wrong.

It is a reality that one can feel lust and love simultaneously.

It is also posible to have selfless interest for a woman´s well being while at the same time feel sexual atraction for her.

I remember I turned down sex with a very atractive female friend because I knew she had a boyfriend. I had a bonner in that moment . If I couldn´t love her and feel lust for her at the same time, I wouldn´t have been able to take her hands off of me when I felt them. It would have been imposible.

It was not the case though. She was the sexiest in the room and at the same time the one I showed more love, because I was willing to turn down her sexyness because I loved her and didn´t wanted to make her do something wrong and have bad karma, I wouldn´t participate on that.

It´s just two different things and they don´t take space from one another. They only do when you make it "simple", but when you make it real, it doesn´t work the way you say it.

Please quote where I said that love and lust can be felt at the same time.

I said that love and lust both exist. However, they are diametrically opposite, so, they cannot exist at the same time.

You said: Lust and love are not incompatible.

If you say that there are eight things about a woman that I love, and there are two things about her I lust for, it still is not pure love. Nature of those 8 things (selfless giving) is incompatible with the nature of those two things (selfish desire).

About this sexy woman you turned down, it was your conscience and fear of bad karma (for yourself) that restrained you. To me, it does not seem to have anything to do with love or lust...just conscience and karma.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

So if anything, this looks, to me, less about being a prohibition on homosexuality as evil, but equating the asuras' sinful actions with the actions of casual sex and incest.

Quite honestly, I do not see why religion has to be used to justify acts like homosexuality.

Religion teaches giving up mundane sensual pleasures for attainment of higher spiritual bliss and homosexuality/heterosexuality, both are on a mundane material platform.

Still, if someone wants to know, scriptures say that homosexuality is demonic. Scriptures promote divinity to attain the Supreme. So, it is to be understood that homosexuality is not encouraged by the scriptures. My only submission is that religion should not be twisted to justify things which it does not support, because it has got the consensus of the masses on ... personal, humanitarian or whatever grounds.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

It's almost like you posted in reverse order.

Here's some nice mental speculation taking scripture out of context, distorting its meaning:

What the scriptures say about homosexuality is as under:

devo 'devāñ jaghanataḥ
sṛjati smātilolupān
ta enaḿ lolupatayā
maithunāyābhipedire​

Lord Brahmā then gave birth to the demons from his buttocks, and they were very fond of sex. Because they were too lustful, they approached him for copulation. [B.G. 30.20.23]

Homosexuality is accepted in Hinduism, to the extent a person afflicted with lust, envy, anger, pride etc. is to be considered liberated and situated in nīrvīkalpa samādhi.

Homosexuality is a demonic tendency and should be avoided. Hinduism is about purifying one's existence to achieve the divine.

And then the condemnation of mental speculation:

At the expense of sounding rude, I want to point out that a lot of mental speculation is going on here, in the name of Hinduism. Abrahamic faiths do not lend convenience of such mental speculation (due to comparative lack of richness & depth), so, an attempt to exploit Hinduism to suit one's belief & convenience is seen here. Unfortunately, persons with a poor fund of knowledge about Hinduism propagate such incorrect information as facts of scriptures, quoting one's mind as authoritative scriptures. That, however is only as correct, as these person's being a Hindu.

If we put them in this order, I actually agree with your post.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Gunas are mixed, such is the material reality, such is the nature of emotions within a relationship. Period.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

It's almost like you posted in reverse order.

Here's some nice mental speculation taking scripture out of context, distorting its meaning:



And then the condemnation of mental speculation:




If we put them in this order, I actually agree with your post.

I don't intend to go over the whole thing with you again. If there is a confusion, please go through the post (in chronological order), keeping the context of what is being said in mind.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Gunas are mixed, such is the material reality, such is the nature of emotions within a relationship. Period.

Although what you said is out of context. Thanks anyways for enlightening me.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Although what you said is out of context. Thanks anyways for enlightening me.

Perhaps you would like to without copy pasta, as I have noted you doing in the past, or without taking recourse to books and websites first, explain the gaudiya theory of rasas felt as a course of one's relationship with Krishna?

It would not behoove you to be ... circuitous in your explanation, by the way.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Perhaps you would like to without copy pasta, as I have noted you doing in the past, or without taking recourse to books and websites first, explain the gaudiya theory of rasas felt as a course of one's relationship with Krishna?

It would not behoove you to be ... circuitous in your explanation, by the way.

If you insist.

 

[Madhuri]

Vrindavan Das, even the Srimad Bhagavatam verses are not clear of what exactly it is that is demonic. Prabhupada says that:
"It appears here that the homosexual appetite of males for each other is created in this episode of the creation of the demons by Brahmā."

He is basically admitting that he doesn't know for sure. One could easily interpret the verses to indicate that the sinfulness lies in the outrageous degree of lust that drives one to not only try and force someone into having sex with you, but doing it with a family member! In the very next verse, the demons are allured by the illusion of a beautiful woman. So obviously they are not homosexual. It seems most likely to me that they were overwhelmed with sex desire and this is what is considered 'demonic'.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

The given verse is:

Lord Brahmā then gave birth to the demons from his buttocks, and they were very fond of sex. Because they were too lustful, they approached him for copulation.

Srila Prabhupada has clearly mentioned there:

Sex life is the background of material existence. Here also it is repeated that demons are very fond of sex life. The more one is free from the desires for sex, the more he is promoted to the level of the demigods; the more one is inclined to enjoy sex, the more he is degraded to the level of demoniac life.

So, it is to be understood that when the inclination to enjoy sex increases beyond proportion, it gives rise to homosexual tendencies between men and women.

What you have quoted is the purport of a different verse:

"It appears here that the homosexual appetite of males for each other is created in this episode of the creation of the demons by Brahmā."

The continuing line here is:
In other words, the homosexual appetite of a man for another man is demoniac and is not for any sane male in the ordinary course of life.

As for having sex with a family member; put simply, Adam & Eve, being creations of Brahmā, would be brother and sister.

As for demons being allured by the illusion of a beautiful woman, it is clearly stated:

When the inclination to enjoy sex increases beyond proportion, it gives rise to homosexual tendencies. Therefore, a male whose lust crosses beyond the normal attraction for woman, he reaches the homosexual tendency. So, he can also be attracted towards a woman, in a different position, to put it mildly.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

"It appears here that the homosexual appetite of males for each other is created in this episode of the creation of the demons by Brahmā."

The line is not saying that that homosexuality is not demoniac. It is saying that it appears that origin of homosexual appetite of males for each other lies in this episode of creation of demons by Brahmā.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Still waiting for that explanation... you've had plenty of time to google the talking points.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

You're not worth it!

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Does it contradict your point that badly? Or do you have distaste for speaking of the wondrous rasas? Or have you let this be about me?

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Discussing scriptures with someone who has no knowledge to impart, nothing to share, and has no willingness to learn; is a waste of time.

But then you can choose to believe what you must!