True principles of Sanatana Dharma

[Riverwolf]

Also Gītā upholds Vedic way of life. Scriptures on Vedic way of life condemn homosexuality. Can you try and understand this simple thing?

This "simple" thing is not so simple. After all, it's, by and large, uncertain when Dharmasastras were composed, and thus, if they were actually written in reflection of the Vedic life or of someone's individual idea of what Vedic life was like, or what it's supposed to be.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Answer my questions. Don't spin it. Answer them. I'll repeat the questions:

Is rape a violent act? Yes or no.
Is himsa violence? Yes or no.
Do scriptures, specifically the Bhagavad Gita, condemn violence? Yes or no.

There are only 3 questions that have a 1 word answer. Can you answer them or will you ignore them again?

You answer these question first:

Gītā uphold Vedic way of life - yes/no.
Scriptures like Manusamhita, that delineate laws for Vedic life condemn homosexuality with punishments - yes/no.
Does Bhagavad Gītā accept homosexuality - yes/no

 

[Vrindavana Das]

This "simple" thing is not so simple. After all, it's, by and large, uncertain when Dharmasastras were composed, and thus, if they were actually written in reflection of the Vedic life or of someone's individual idea of what Vedic life was like, or what it's supposed to be.

Let us take the scriptures for what they are and base our discussion on what the scriptures say.

Taking the other way, all religious scripts the world over Bible, Quran etc. can be treated as imaginary works. So, let us not take it there.

 

[Jainarayan]

You answer these question first:

Gītā uphold Vedic way of life - yes/no.
Scriptures like Manusamhita, that delineate laws for Vedic life condemn homosexuality with punishments - yes/no.
Does Bhagavad Gītā accept homosexuality - yes/no

No.
Yes.
Yes.

 

[Riverwolf]

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami taught:

Hinduism neither condones nor condemns birth control, sterilization, masturbation, homosexuality, petting, polygamy or pornography.

 

[Pleroma]

Nonsense. Like I told you many times already you lack historical context. The esoteric traditions all come hundreds of years after the orthodox traditions. The earliest gospel is the gospel of Matthew, and this is widely agreed by theologians, and the Gnostic Gospels appear much later. Similarly, Kabbalh appears almost a thousand year later after the OT.

I am not buying what you are selling.

The work of Elaine Pagels says it all,
The Gnostic Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jainarayan]

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami taught:

Hinduism neither condones nor condemns birth control, sterilization, masturbation, homosexuality, petting, polygamy or pornography.

This supports the comment from The Handbook of Sri Vaishnavism (p.41) that the acharyas never found these topics worthy of discussion or commentating on.

 

[Riverwolf]

Let us take the scriptures for what they are and base our discussion on what the scriptures say.

Taking the other way, all religious scripts the world over Bible, Quran etc. can be treated as imaginary works. So, let us not take it there.

Reason and logic can be utilized to determine whether what a piece of Scripture says is right or wrong. With those tools, the "all or nothing" approach becomes unnecessary.

 

[En'me]

Speaks volumes for your scriptural knowledge.

Read Manusamhita on punishments for acts of homosexuality. You will be enlightened.

There is 'speculation' of homosexuality depicted in Kamasutra.

It is better to be religious than to propagate irreligious behavior in the name of religion.

Manusmriti has been heavily adultareted. More than half of the text has been added and within scholars this is widely known. Do you want to know why this is? Because it is a smirti!

MISCONCEPTION 3:- Violence against animals; meet eating, etc - VedicGranth.Org
Manu Smriti and Punishment - Agniveer

Let me explain it to you like this: Vedanta and all it's sub-divisions which try to interpret it correctly, are focused on one thing: the dissolution of your ego and samadhi either prior or at the moment of death, resulting in mukti. Sexuality, whether heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality or asexuality dissolves when the ego does as well and is irrelevant. So tell me, how is it valid that homosexuals are not accepted in Hinduism?

Furthermore, you are accepting Vaishnavism and their scriptures (only smriti, ofcourse) as the only way of explaining Hinduism. This is obviously false and is misguiding to anyone who is reading this or anyone you are communicating with about such a subject. Your express view of homosexuality in Hinduism is adharmic even to Vaishnavism, to which most people agree that sexuality different from hetero is accepted and not a single verse that I know of in Srimad Bhagavatam does it say that homosexuality (or other forms of aheterosexuality) is wrong.

Do you know why Hinduism is "silent" on this matter? Because it doesn't matter. Why? Because Hinduism refers to schools and sects who try to explain, to the best of their ability, the Upanishadic content, which states that the ego is supposed to be subdued so that eventually, you can discover atman/paramatma, in which case, at the end, asexuality, bisexuality or whatever has dissapeared all together.

Furthermore, what does it mean to you that a homosexual is not accepted in Hinduism? Does it mean he cannot practice the said religion if he doesn't (magically) convert to heterosexual? Can he/she approach God in any human state? Are you taking away their right to worship? How about meditating? Or being social with Vaishnavities? Other Hinduistic schools?

Also please present how it is adharmic to be homosexual? Although Dharma means "that which upholds, supports or maintains rta" it also encompasses many different things, such as ethics and morality which are based on blantant logic, so please logically ascertain why there is a problem with someone being a heterosexual?

Just a hunch, but I have feeling you might ignore this. I hope you prove me wrong.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

No.

Vedic society is organized on the varna-āshrama system, which classifies society in four categories - Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas Shudras and Brahamachārī, Grahasta, Vanaprastha and Sanyas.

This is what Lord Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad Gītā:

cātur-varṇyaḿ mayā sṛṣṭaḿ
guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ
tasya kartāram api māḿ
viddhy akartāram avyayam​

According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable. [B.G.4.13]

That shows that your understanding of Bhagavad Gītā is warped my friend. If you want believe homosexuality is allowed by Lord Kṛṣṇa... you are fooling neither Kṛṣṇa, nor Hinduism...just yourself! So, go right ahead!

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Reason and logic can be utilized to determine whether what a piece of Scripture says is right or wrong. With those tools, the "all or nothing" approach becomes unnecessary.

If you do not want to believe scriptures, but your mind as scriptures, why are you even discussing scriptures? Time pass?

 

[Jainarayan]

That shows that your understanding of Bhagavad Gītā is warped my friend. If you want believe homosexuality is allowed by Lord Kṛṣṇa... you are fooling neither Kṛṣṇa, nor Hinduism...just yourself! So, go right ahead!

OK, whatever you say. I'm off this with you.

 

[Riverwolf]

If you do not want to believe scriptures, but your mind as scriptures, why are you even discussing scriptures? Time pass?

Discussion is one of the methods of research. It's a way of finally coming to the truth.

Reason and logic, two of the abodes of Lord Ganesha, are beyond the human mind, which frequently violates both. It's why we engage in discussion and cross-examination.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

OK, whatever you say. I'm off this with you.

Great! For the record, I will not share any part of the misery that comes your way for irreligious acts like homosexuality etc. You are going ahead at your own risk.

 

[Riverwolf]

Great! For the record, I will not share any part of the misery that comes your way for irreligious acts like homosexuality etc.

And what would those miseries be?

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Discussion is one of the methods of research. It's a way of finally coming to the truth.

Reason and logic, two of the abodes of Lord Ganesha, are beyond the human mind, which frequently violates both. It's why we engage in discussion and cross-examination.

A discussion does not happen with a biased opinion my friend. You cannot accept scriptures when it suits you and reject them when it does not. Like I said earlier, if you are given a horse, you cut off itṣ tail, one leg, one ear ... because they do not make sense to you, then what you will be left with is no longer a horse. Same goes for religion. Discussion happens with an open mind to understand various facets of religion and scriptures - logically and rationally. Not whimsically accepting and rejecting portions and scriptures.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

And what would those miseries be?

Try google

 

[Riverwolf]

A discussion does not happen with a biased opinion my friend.

Wrong.

We all have biased opinions. One of the purposes of discussions is to help get past them.

You're giving a biased opinion. I'm giving a biased opinion. But those biased opinions are so different from each other and derive from ways of thinking so alien to each other that we're having trouble communicating accurately.

You cannot accept scriptures when it suits you and reject them when it does not.

I agree. That's not what I'm doing.

From reason and logic I have determined that homosexuality is not wrong. But whether it is or not has no effect on me, since I'm heterosexual.

Like I said earlier, if you are given a horse, you cut off itṣ tail, one leg, one ear ... because they do not make sense to you, then what you will be left with is no longer a horse. Same goes for religion.

Religion is not analogous to a horse. One is an abstract concept formulated by the human mind attempting to understand its place in the universe, while the other is an objective entity that would exist whether the human mind does or not.

Discussion happens with an open mind to understand various facets of religion and scriptures - logically and rationally. Not whimsically accepting and rejecting portions and scriptures.

I agree. Logic and reason cannot function with whims. Therefore, I try my best not use them in my acceptance or rejection of portions of scriptures.

Having an open mind is not the same thing as being gullible.

 

[Haridas]

A discussion does not happen with a biased opinion my friend. You cannot accept scriptures when it suits you and reject them when it does not. Like I said earlier, if you are given a horse, you cut off itṣ tail, one leg, one ear ... because they do not make sense to you, then what you will be left with is no longer a horse. Same goes for religion. Discussion happens with an open mind to understand various facets of religion and scriptures - logically and rationally. Not whimsically accepting and rejecting portions and scriptures.

Good one, Prabhuji...:bow:

 

[Jainarayan]

And what would those miseries be?

Statistics published by a thoroughly discredited 'researcher' (gosh, I forget his name) who combed the obits. in gay newspapers and compiled 'statistics' citing the high death rates among homosexuals due to a variety of reasons. However, he did not measure those statistics against the general population. When that was done, the death and illness rates of homosexuals dropped to negligible numbers. His 'research' was damn near laughed out of the galaxy.