Hinduism and Homosexuality
March 3, 2008I just came across a post [1] by a lady imagining what her life might have been like had she been gay. She also speaks of a friend whom she calls Stella saying:
“Stella, at least, had to have really believed that was who she was meant to be.
She still believes in God, the last I heard. She just has a lot of questions. It’s just too bad that there aren’t very many churches where they’d let her in long enough to ask them.”
It made me wonder what Hinduism says about homosexuality –- I’ve never heard anything at all being quoted against it from any Hindu scripture. However, a quick search reveals:
There is a lone verse in the Manusmriti that reads: “A twice-born man [from an upper caste] who commits an unnatural offence with a male, or has intercourse with a female in a cart drawn by oxen, in water, or in the day-time, shall bathe, dressed in his clothes.” [2]
The Arthashastra too apparently imposes a minor fine on a man who has ayoni [non-vaginal] sex (4.13.236). [3]
The medical text, Sushruta Samhita mentions two different types of homsexual men: kumbhika and asekya.
And the Naradsmriti apparently says that a homosexual man is unfit for marriage to a woman. [4] Well, obviously!
Although the Kama Sutra states that homosexual sex is to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts. [5]
In addition to this, Hindu religious art and mythology have several depictions of and references to homosexuality right from in the temples of Khajuraho to the tale of Bhagiratha Maharaja, an Indian king born of two women.
That being said, most Hindus I know are deeply homophobic; it’s not a subject I can claim to have any knowledge worth speaking of on but I suspect that that’s one of the effects having had the British make homosexuality a criminal offence during the Raj and never having had the law changed (even though the Brits changed a similar law in their own country in 1967 [6]).
The law in question, Section 377 of the IPC says:
Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
After all, Hinduism in itself doesn’t seem to deeply disapprove of homosexuality: the religion may not be particularly enthusiastic about it but it doesn’t unequivocally prohibit it either. And this is not the only instance where British laws have left a legacy in India of misgivings such as these in what are essentially personal matters …think of the restitution of conjugal rights, a concept alien to India which was introduced by the British and which has caused much hardship over the years.
Links:
[1] http://shushnow.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/what-if-i-were-gay/
[2] http://www.slate.com/id/2102443/
[3] http://www.galva108.org/hinduism.html
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Hinduism
[5] http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/hinduism.htm
[6] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=187403
[...] homosexuality, and quotes verses from the Manusmriti and other books to make the argument that Hinduism does not really seem to disapprove of [...]
[...] Searching for Crabshells on the perspectives on homosexuality in Hinduism. Share This [...]
good job done….now why dont u go ahead and search for similar feet in other religions????
I cannot contest your finding that ancient texts on Hinduism do not have anything substantial to say against homosexuality. But neither do they have anything to say against the Indian Premier League. That does not make the IPL sacrosanct, or within the bounds of life as prescribed in the scriptures. Non-mentions or mere passing mentions need not constitute acceptance.
It is possible that, with the probable exception of the third sex, homosexuality was unheard of in ancient times; so the topic was not given airtime. Moreover, the texts and the verses can be interpreted in many ways; unnatural intercourse, for example, could refer to many things.
The Bhagavad Gita, which I consider the definitive Hindu scripture, looks down upon sexual activity if carried out for the mere pleasure aspect of it.
I don’t believe that Hindu texts or art are oblivious to homosexuality or that homosexuality was unheard of in ancient times considering that many ancient texts and sculptures have graphic descriptions of it.
The comparison with the IPL doesn’t make any sense to me partly because the IPL is an entity which has just been created while homosexuality has been and has been known to be in existence since ancient times.
Also, while the Gita may look down on sexual activity merely for pleasure, it’s worth noting that does so as far as all forms of such activity are concerned without singling out homosexual activity.
Further, while the Gita is sacred to me, I’m not sure I would call it or any other text ‘the definitive Hindu scripture’.