Homosexuality Raises Ethical and Practical Questions – Part II

In Part I I discussed some ethical and practical issues concerning the subject of homosexuality, which I believe ISKCON, sooner rather than later, must deal with so that our Society can have clear, rational, moral guidelines. Here I’d like to add another, purely practical issue.

If we conclude, with the help of empirical science, that homosexuality is a result of the way one is born, and not merely a matter of whimsically deciding to be sexually attracted to people of the same sex, then how should we deal with homosexual sannyasis?

All the current, traditional rules governing proper sannyasa behavior in regards to him never being alone with a woman, never being served too closely by women, etc. render the very opposite result if the sannyasi is naturally NOT attracted to women but to men instead.

In such a case, imagine the situation of that sincere soul – to find himself alone only with the objects of his sexual desires, subdued though they may be. This is, of course, rendered more troublesome if we take into consideration all the personal service a sannyasi may naturally receive from brahmacaris or, if he is a guru, his young brahmacari disciples.

Imagine a heterosexual sannyasi being massaged, in his little gamsha, by young brahmacarini disciples! Scandalous! And what hope would that sannyasi have of keeping his lifelong vow? Yet, that is the exact equivalent of what a homosexual sannyasi may go through with his male servants.

And yet, imagine how even more scandalous it would be if a sannyasi not only openly declared to being gay, but chose to have female personal servants so as to not be sexually tempted.

How is ISKCON to deal with all this?

4 Comments

Filed under Realizations on Krishna Consciousness

4 responses to “Homosexuality Raises Ethical and Practical Questions – Part II

  1. satyakidasa

    I agree with you that homosexuality is a step forward on our social development that we must take as soon as possible. It is useless to try to imagine how many and many situations are involved on sexual behaviour. Sexuality crosses every human action and activity, that´s why none aspect of it can be left aside. Regarding to sannyasis, sexual tempations are present on every corner, and sannyasis had chosen not to attend thoose temptations, no matter if they are gay or straight, and how do they manage their own sexual desire and how do they control it is not a thing others can make a politic about. Sexual tendences must not be chased and no person should feel excluded due to their sexual orientation.
    As a society, we must adapt to reality instead of trying to adapt reality to us.
    I´m glad that we devotees are making essays on this issue, because achieving a higher understanding of human sexuality is what will separate us from kali yuga´s religions. Even when i am not gay i can realize the importance of develop an including mentality, so thank you for your work.

  2. Bhrgu Das

    Hare Krishna

    It would seem that there is quite a simple answer……
    re. gay sannyasis
    1. Don’t be “massaged, in his little gamsha, by young brahmacari disciples”
    2. Don’t “find himself alone only with the objects of his sexual desires”
    Heterosexual sannyasis manage it, why not gay ones. It is not difficult.
    Bhrgu Das.

  3. “If we conclude, with the help of empirical science, that homosexuality is a result
    of the way one is born, and not merely a matter of whimsically deciding to be sexually
    attracted to people of the same sex, then how should we deal with homosexual sannyasis?”

    this supposition, as it is framed, assumes itself to be the correct understanding of the
    facts and it commences from there. if we assume that it is, in fact, inaccurate, and we
    do not accept that ones own sexual behavior is not their own responsibility, then we cannot
    accept such a bogus proposal. at one level, it is true that “we are not The Doer!”, but
    as the orderer that harbored the desires that brought us to these sets of circumstances,
    everything we face is “based on our own desires”. were we to accept the “it’s my
    condition, like diabetes or something” when talking about individual actions that are
    based on the thinking, feeling, willing, and acting, of any individual, then no one would
    ever be responsible for anything. there would be no need for rewards, or punishment, or
    payment of debts or anything else implying responsibility. in light of the reality of the
    situation, there must be a common understanding that there are no such things as “homosexual
    sanyassis”, since a sanyassi is celibate by definition. once the person delves back into
    the former BAD habits, they are, by definition, no longer a “celibate monk”, which is the
    definition of a sanyassi. most of these arguments over “sexually active renunciants” are
    the result of equivocation over the word used to describe a class of behavior that is not
    traditionally defined by these same set of terms.

  4. satyakidasa

    “a sanyassi is celibate by definition”. Exactly. Absollutely right. We need no more words.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s