-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Vedic Scriptures and Tritiya-Prakriti...
- Thread starter krishnano
- Start date
Hema
Sweet n Spicy
No I haven't but Hindu scriptures say that we are all Spirit, not the body. Since we are all Spirit we are all equal. I see all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, as people just like myself. 
Come to think of it I've never heard this topic being discussed by Hindus. However, I think the Kamasutra might make reference to such relationships but I'm not sure.
Come to think of it I've never heard this topic being discussed by Hindus. However, I think the Kamasutra might make reference to such relationships but I'm not sure.
No I haven't but Hindu scriptures say that we are all Spirit, not the body. Since we are all Spirit we are all equal. I see all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, as people just like myself.
Come to think of it I've never heard this topic being discussed by Hindus. However, I think the Kamasutra might make reference to such relationships but I'm not sure.
Well, for starters, a great tool for comprehension would be at The Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association, Inc: Hinduism, Hare Krishna, Homosexuality which talks about how gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered, etc. all lived in Vedic society and were accepted. They all came under the label 'tritiya prakriti' or the third sex.
While in our Western conception, biological sex and sexual orientation are separate, the Vedic conception puts these two together, as well as physical and behavioural characteristics to judge one's psychophysical identity.
Thus in Vedic scriptures, there is pums-prakriti (men), striy-prakriti (women), and tritiya-prakriti (third sex/gendered) which included the napumsaka (homosexual men) and nastriya or svairini (homosexual women). The present-day hijras are a testament to the existence of the third sex in Vedic culture, although are today despised and prohibited from working decent jobs...
The Kama Sutra does talk about such peoples, and there is even mention of how two same-sexed individuals would pair up in a bonding union with one another, that is, like a marriage (parigraha). Many Vedic scientific texts speak of the different references to 'impotent men' who can not marry, some obviously connotating to one with third gendered inclinations.
Even many deities have a male, female and third sexed form, such as Vishnu, Mohini and Vallabhavardhana.
In any case, of course we are all spirit souls and that each one of us can come to God, no matter what material designation. However, many homosexual and bisexual peoples are still looked down upon, especially in the present Indian community despite the fact that Vedic culture was probably the very first advanced culture to have embraced the third sex. This attitude, coming from British influences, have harmed many individuals of who they are in terms of loving another.
Anyways, being part of this third sex community, as well as of the Gaudiya Vaishnava community, I feel it important that we air out this subject, for the good of Vaidika Dharma and the spiritual nurturing of all people's relationships with God, even those who may be gay or lesbian. After reading "Tritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex, Understanding Homosexuality, Transgender Identity, and Intersex Conditions Through Hinduism" by Amara das Wilhelm, I feel like my eyes have been opened.
Krishna loves everyone, and of this I have no doubt.
"I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend, is in Me, and I am also a friend to him."
BG 9:29
want to be hindu
Member
Medieval Hindu temples such as those at Khajuraho depict sexual acts in sculptures on the external walls. The meaning of the erotic images is disputed. Some of these scenes involve same-sex sexuality:
An orgiastic group of three women and one man, on the southern wall of the Kandariya Mahadeva temple in Khajuraho. One of the women is caressing another.
A similar group, also on the southern wall, shows a woman facing the viewer, standing on her head, apparently engaged in intercourse, although her partner is facing away from the viewer and their gender cannot be determined. She is held by two female attendants on either side and reaches out to touch one of them in her pubic area.
Also at Khajuraho, a relief of two women embracing one another.
At the Lakshmana temple in Khajuraho (954 CE), a man receives fellatio from a seated male as part of an orgiastic scene.
At the Shiva temple at Ambernath, constructed in 1060 CE, a badly weathered relief suggests an erotic interest between two women.
At the Rhajarani Temple in Bhuveshvar, Orissa, dating from the 10th or 11th century, a sculpture depicts two women engaged in oral sex.
A 12th century Shiva temple in Bagali, Karnataka depicts a scene of apparent oral sex between two males on a sculpture below the sikhara.
At Padhavli near Gwalior, a ruined temple from the 10th century shows a man within an orgiastic group receiving fellatio from another male.
An 11th century lifesize sandstone sculpture from Orissa, now in the Seattle Art Museum, shows Kama, god of love, shooting an arrow at two women who are embracing one another.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_an...
The Vedas do not refer explicitly to homosexuality.The People of a third gender tritiya-prakriti, not fully men nor women, are mentioned in the vedas and the Puranas but they are not defined. They are portrayed as effeminate men with no desire for women.
It is clear that the old Hindu view of live and let live applied here.
Manusmrti is the only place that talks about punishing Gay people. Nobody I know believes that the Manusmrti is scripture.Many today believe the the Manusmriti was given its importence by the British.
An orgiastic group of three women and one man, on the southern wall of the Kandariya Mahadeva temple in Khajuraho. One of the women is caressing another.
A similar group, also on the southern wall, shows a woman facing the viewer, standing on her head, apparently engaged in intercourse, although her partner is facing away from the viewer and their gender cannot be determined. She is held by two female attendants on either side and reaches out to touch one of them in her pubic area.
Also at Khajuraho, a relief of two women embracing one another.
At the Lakshmana temple in Khajuraho (954 CE), a man receives fellatio from a seated male as part of an orgiastic scene.
At the Shiva temple at Ambernath, constructed in 1060 CE, a badly weathered relief suggests an erotic interest between two women.
At the Rhajarani Temple in Bhuveshvar, Orissa, dating from the 10th or 11th century, a sculpture depicts two women engaged in oral sex.
A 12th century Shiva temple in Bagali, Karnataka depicts a scene of apparent oral sex between two males on a sculpture below the sikhara.
At Padhavli near Gwalior, a ruined temple from the 10th century shows a man within an orgiastic group receiving fellatio from another male.
An 11th century lifesize sandstone sculpture from Orissa, now in the Seattle Art Museum, shows Kama, god of love, shooting an arrow at two women who are embracing one another.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_an...
The Vedas do not refer explicitly to homosexuality.The People of a third gender tritiya-prakriti, not fully men nor women, are mentioned in the vedas and the Puranas but they are not defined. They are portrayed as effeminate men with no desire for women.
It is clear that the old Hindu view of live and let live applied here.
Manusmrti is the only place that talks about punishing Gay people. Nobody I know believes that the Manusmrti is scripture.Many today believe the the Manusmriti was given its importence by the British.
According to GALVA's research, tritiya prakriti was attributed to a numerous type of peoples, many of whom would fit today's homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals and intersexuals. Furthermore, Kama Sutra states in one of its chapters, that there are two types of males who are napumsaka: those that were effeminate, and those who were more masculine. And it says as well that sometimes two would get together and form a bond (parigraha). Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association, Inc.
Also, the Manu Smrti is considerably shastra, at least according to Srila Prabhupada (in its context of time, place and circumstance). The mentionings of homosexual sex (not 'gay people' in general) and its punishment more or less applies contextually to brahmanas, whilst sexual practices of the lower ashramas (kshatriyas, vaishyas, shudras) were tolerated. Well, in my limited understanding anyways.
Of course, in Kali Yuga, everyone is shudric and there are no real brahmanas in this age like in the past yugas, and sexual promiscuity is a symptom of the Age... But of course, as followers of Vaidika Dharam, tolerance and respect for all spirit souls is a practice of the Absolute Truth.
I just find it rather unfortunate that many 'Hindus' and Vaishnavas disrespect non-heterosexuals, even to the attitude that they can never be religious, and I do believe that the spirit of Vedic culture and the archetype of tritiya prakriti in application to our modern day LGBT peoples can bring spiritual progress in such a degrated Age. I just want people to affirm that "Yes!" anyone can be Vaishnava (or Shaiva, Shakta, Shankarite, etc.) and have suxh romantic and/or sexual inclinations that are not the heteronorm.
Jaya Radhe!
Last edited:
want to be hindu
Member
Jaya Radhe Krishnano
If your teachers believe that the Manu Smrti is a shastra. Then I bow to them and I will not argue the point. I will say this that the Manu Smriti and the Bhagavad Gita have disagreements in some areas. I find the Gita to be a much more authoritative then manu so I will believe it every time.
Jai MAA:bow:
If your teachers believe that the Manu Smrti is a shastra. Then I bow to them and I will not argue the point. I will say this that the Manu Smriti and the Bhagavad Gita have disagreements in some areas. I find the Gita to be a much more authoritative then manu so I will believe it every time.
Jai MAA:bow:
Oh, I wouldn't worry, lol. Although Manu Smrti (as well as Kama Sutra) are considered Scriptures, they are also full of karma-kanda which we avoid, just as a personal diary is more memorable than a grocery list. The authoritative Truths for us Gaudiyas lie in Bhagavata Purana and Gita.
Srimad Bhagavatam is the ghee of Vedic literature and Gita is the cream of the Vedas. The Bhagavatam takes the teachings of the Gita and emphasises and refines them into nectarian, ambrosian, and elysian delight!"I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend, is in Me, and I am also a friend to him."
BG 9:29
Last edited:
Surya Deva
Well-Known Member
The Vedas neither condemn or condone homosexuality as far as I am aware. However, it is not wholly compatible with the Vedic philosophy of masculine and feminine duality(Purush Prakriti/Shiva Shaki) so I don't imagine it would been particularly endorsed or desirable.
But how about Ardhaneshvara, or Vallabhavardhana? And how about Arjuna, Arjuni and Brihannala? Or even Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who is both male and female (Radha-Krishna) in One Entity... Did you not read anything that I wrote? o__O
Surya Deva
Well-Known Member
Krishnano,
I am aware of the combined male and female aspects, this is what forms the non-duality, which is then androgenous. However, how does that relate to condoning homosexuality, which is the third gender which is neither non-dualitistic or androgenous, but rather the predominance of one aspect(male or female) over the other. This was explained very well in a talk I saw on the Aastha channel(Hindu/spiritual channel) the speaker(Swami) was giving a talk on effective parenting. He said that both male and female energies are present within both genders, only that in the same-sex gender, there is a predominance of the same-sex energy. So a male will have significantly more masculine energy and a female will have significantly more feminine energy. When there is an imbalance in those energies in the same sex, where the opposite sex energy is significantly more than normal this is when the characteristics of third gender become apparent. The stronger those characteristics the more closer they will be to the third gender.
I am not aware of this being condoned in Vedic scriptures(The Kamasutra is not a Vedic scripture) I think because it is considered an imbalance, it would not have been considered desirable in Vedic times. Although we have no records of sexual practices then, so nothing certain can be said on the matter.
I am aware of the combined male and female aspects, this is what forms the non-duality, which is then androgenous. However, how does that relate to condoning homosexuality, which is the third gender which is neither non-dualitistic or androgenous, but rather the predominance of one aspect(male or female) over the other. This was explained very well in a talk I saw on the Aastha channel(Hindu/spiritual channel) the speaker(Swami) was giving a talk on effective parenting. He said that both male and female energies are present within both genders, only that in the same-sex gender, there is a predominance of the same-sex energy. So a male will have significantly more masculine energy and a female will have significantly more feminine energy. When there is an imbalance in those energies in the same sex, where the opposite sex energy is significantly more than normal this is when the characteristics of third gender become apparent. The stronger those characteristics the more closer they will be to the third gender.
I am not aware of this being condoned in Vedic scriptures(The Kamasutra is not a Vedic scripture) I think because it is considered an imbalance, it would not have been considered desirable in Vedic times. Although we have no records of sexual practices then, so nothing certain can be said on the matter.
The problem is that by other writings (considered Scriptures, at least by Gaudiya Vaishnavas in a lesser level to those of sruti and smrti) such as those of Vedic sciences, see tritiya-prakriti not as an imbalance, but that the individual, biological sex aside, contains both male and female components or energies. If you observe many same-sex couples, especially those in serious parenting, they automatically and subconsciously begin following heteronormative behaviours.
I do believe that karmically, not only the gross body is transmigrated, but also the subtle elements of mind, intellect, and ego. Thus, it would not be surprising that males who have thought of their wives at the end of their lifetimes would become women with more masculine energy, or vice versa. I do often think also of this quote, since it pertains to the sexual union, and what happens when both the male and female energies are equal:
"A male child is produced by a greater quantity of male seed, a female child by the prevalence of the female; if both are equal, a third-sex child (napumsa) or boy and girl twins are produced; if either are weak or deficient in quantity, a failure of conception results."
(Manusmriti 3.49)
Also the Kama Sutra, perhaps not a Scripture for you (but it is a "scripture", albeit a lesser one in the sense that it teaches kama; it is kama shastra), but a text that does give a glimpse of Indian past, shows that third sex men were divided into two:
"Those with a feminine appearance show it by their dress, speech, laughter, behavior, gentleness, lack of courage, silliness, patience, and modesty."
(Kama Sutra 2.9.2)
"Those who like men but dissimulate the fact maintain a manly appearance and earn their living as barbers or masseurs."
(Kama Sutra 2.9.6)
In any case, I do believe that there was definitely a tolerance for such peoples in Vedic society, that is, society in India when their civilisation rose to transcendent, intellectual and aesthetic, cultural heights.
want to be hindu
Member
This is the most importent point. Hinduism use to be a faith of tolerance. We need to get back to this outstanding ideal.:yes:
