Author Topic: Homosexuality in Buddhism  (Read 55169 times)

Big Uncle

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #45 on: May 13, 2012, 06:14:52 PM »
Then how would you explain homosexuals? and transvestite?  What were they attracted to when they saw the copulation happening and what were they thinking???
Especially transvestite/queens... what kind of karma did they collect to be trap in a body they do not wish to be in?

I have read somewhere that homosexuality and transversite/transsexuals are all the results of disrespecting women in their past life, as in disrespecting their feelings, using their bodies and being a playboy etc. Does make sense because most gay friends i know tend to make more snide comments against women in general. Its the same mind continuing.

This is very interesting. I have thought about it and my views defer from Ensapa's view. I can't explain the Tantric view of gender formation but I do believe that transvestites have very strong imprints of being females from previous lives. The imprints are so strong that they do not identify with their male physical bodies. Hence, they identify themselves as females. This is most likely a result of negative karma because this gender crisis consumes them and creates a lot of suffering. However, there are exceptions but that's what I have observed.

jessicajameson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #46 on: May 13, 2012, 06:38:13 PM »
Then how would you explain homosexuals? and transvestite?  What were they attracted to when they saw the copulation happening and what were they thinking???
Especially transvestite/queens... what kind of karma did they collect to be trap in a body they do not wish to be in?

I have read somewhere that homosexuality and transversite/transsexuals are all the results of disrespecting women in their past life, as in disrespecting their feelings, using their bodies and being a playboy etc. Does make sense because most gay friends i know tend to make more snide comments against women in general. Its the same mind continuing.

Hmmm.... I disagree that disrespecting women (disrespecting their feelings, using their bodies, being playboy... etc) in one's past lives creates the causes for the person to have homosexual tendencies or become a transvestite/transexual... Why? Because by the logic of Karma, if we cause harm to someone, that very harm will return to us (in a nutshell!). So, how can we "return" and cause the same harm again. Surely the person would be born in less opportune conditions and suffer the "same fate" as what they caused in their previous life?

I would be more inclined to think the person in question would come back as a bitter spinster that has no love and will still be disrespecting (same mindstream) to other women because they are jealous.

Perhaps I am wrong but it makes more sense to me...

@PositiveChange I disagree with your statement. We all know that karma is complex, so it could turn out either way, but disrespecting women (disrespecting their feelings, using their bodies, being playboy... etc) in one's past lives does and can create the cause for the person to become a transvestite/transexual in their next life.

We don't have to come back with the exact same fate, coz the harm that comes back to us is equally as suffering if we are reborn as a transvestite/transexual. It's suffering looking down at our body and feeling trapped that our appearance doesn't reflect the gender that we feel we are. It's suffering that our family rejects us and our "friends" make fun of us. It's suffering that society rejects us. It's suffering to go through surgical changes, only to find ourselves still getting jobs when the sun sets.

For men that beat up their wives, they hate women, they mistreat them, they make them suffer physically, emotionally and psychologically. That suffering can be translated into becoming a transvestite in their next life only to feel that physically, emotionally and psychological suffering they themselves inflicted on another person in their previous life.

buddhalovely

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #47 on: June 09, 2012, 01:39:30 PM »
In the Vinaya (regulations for Buddhist monks), the Buddha states that those who openly expressed cross-gender features or strong homosexual desires and actions may not become a monk. Note that just having homosexual desires eliminates the person from the possibility of being a Buddhist monk.

What about the Buddhist lay person? The answer is still, no, it does not allow homosexuality.

In answering this question shouldn't the actual teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, the original Buddah and the founder of Buddhism, be followed? The basic teachings of classical Buddhism (Theravada Buddhism) are found in the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Fold Path.

Positive Change

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2012, 11:38:25 AM »
In the Vinaya (regulations for Buddhist monks), the Buddha states that those who openly expressed cross-gender features or strong homosexual desires and actions may not become a monk. Note that just having homosexual desires eliminates the person from the possibility of being a Buddhist monk.

What about the Buddhist lay person? The answer is still, no, it does not allow homosexuality.

In answering this question shouldn't the actual teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, the original Buddah and the founder of Buddhism, be followed? The basic teachings of classical Buddhism (Theravada Buddhism) are found in the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Fold Path.

In being a monk one has to renounce sexual desire, so what is the difference if that person becoming a monk has heterosexual or homosexual tendencies? Surely at that point it really does not matter or does it? How can one be pigeon holed into what one can or cannot do in this age?

I dare not challenge the Vinaya... but surely this has some room for interpretation? I really do not see the relevance of one's sexual desires when it comes to be a monk. Everyone has it regardless of one's  preferences. Surely sexism does not exist in Buddhism or am I being a bright eyed bushy tailed rabbit!?

ratanasutra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #49 on: June 26, 2012, 05:06:47 PM »
i understand that in Buddhism, we are not defiant or support Homosexuality.

As long as you do not break the vow of sexual misconduct that will be fine. Which mean it can be between man-man, man-woman, woman-woman etc as long as you not harm or hurt other, you partner by having affair with the third person who is single or have family then you do not break the vow.

What is the cause to become a Homosexual because of previous life you look down of woman, play boy, not respect woman etc   

Since we know what is the cause for that, be mindful and careful, do not act in that such way to create the cause to become that.

Positive Change

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #50 on: June 27, 2012, 12:41:55 PM »
i understand that in Buddhism, we are not defiant or support Homosexuality.

As long as you do not break the vow of sexual misconduct that will be fine. Which mean it can be between man-man, man-woman, woman-woman etc as long as you not harm or hurt other, you partner by having affair with the third person who is single or have family then you do not break the vow.

What is the cause to become a Homosexual because of previous life you look down of woman, play boy, not respect woman etc   

Since we know what is the cause for that, be mindful and careful, do not act in that such way to create the cause to become that.

There has been much said about homosexuality in this thread... not surprising as it is a thread about just that. It is however, interesting to note how homosexuality is still perceived by some in this day and age. It is almost archaic to a point of being rude and derogatory. For me this is a shame really as that reflects the mindset and perception one still has for the minority.

Just because homosexuality is not the norm in society, does that mean it is something negative and as such a repercussion of bad karma? Are homosexuals not sentient beings as well? What makes a heterosexual person any better than a homosexual person? Why I say this is because some of the posts presented here view homosexuality as a result of bad karma. I on the other hand tend to disagree with this not because I reckon homosexuality is better but purely because there are variants with regards to karma.

Perhaps being born homosexual is a result of good karma because one does not have the "problems" of heterosexuals, in that the pressure to have children or the in cling to have children that sometimes hinders our practice. Not everyone is suited to have children... that in itself is another can of worms entirely.

Hence my point is, homosexuality though not the norm may not be the result of negative karma but perhaps of good merits. It all depends on how one views or sees the situation. There are many different existences out there... are heterosexual people the "promised" ones? Ridiculous no if one looks at the big picture!

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #51 on: June 27, 2012, 03:25:17 PM »
Hmmm.... I disagree that disrespecting women (disrespecting their feelings, using their bodies, being playboy... etc) in one's past lives creates the causes for the person to have homosexual tendencies or become a transvestite/transexual... Why? Because by the logic of Karma, if we cause harm to someone, that very harm will return to us (in a nutshell!). So, how can we "return" and cause the same harm again. Surely the person would be born in less opportune conditions and suffer the "same fate" as what they caused in their previous life?

I would be more inclined to think the person in question would come back as a bitter spinster that has no love and will still be disrespecting (same mindstream) to other women because they are jealous.

Perhaps I am wrong but it makes more sense to me...

I have actually read that story many years ago amongst my father's collection of Dharma books. It was from the biography of a thai monk whose name slips my mind. It was more than 10 years ago, but i vividly remember the story as the monk's nephew was sent to stay with him as the nephew was effeminate and was essentially a woman in a man's body as he was shy to walk around bare chested and acted in other kinds of feminine ways. Also, halfway through the story, there was a rock that had a male ghost residing in it and it was brought to the temple. Not too long after, a haunted broom with a female ghost was brought to the temple and placed next to the rock. The monk commented that it was a true love united at last but the nephew commented that if the man was a real man, he would have loved him and that they were monsters in love. The monk scolded him back and said he was the monster by acting like a woman when he was a man and further added that he was born this way as a result of being a playboy and breaking the hearts of many women. It was a really funny story and I remembered it for years. The entire biography was actually set during the 1920s.

I have been thinking about that and the possibilities as thai culture is much more accepting of homosexuality so there must be some sort of proof to it because i do see a lot of gay friends of mine make snide remarks against females and perhaps although they have created the karma to have a male body, they also create the karma to suffer the same things that a woman would, the same way they insult and deride women in their past life. I have also read somewhere before that a man dissuading a woman from being a woman by highlighting the flaws results to the man being born in a woman's body in the next life and that is a Tibetan text that I read but not turn gay and as different karmas can mix and ripen at the same time and not neutralize each other.

In any case, whether or not one is gay or not, there is nothing much we can do about it. If we turn out to be homosexual, its too late to be straight again as it is a physical wiring in the brain that causes us to be this way. best is not to ponder upon it, but make the best use of this human life and make a wish to not be burdened by the sufferings that come with having an unconventional sexual orientation so that it will not affect Dharma practice.

lightning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #52 on: June 28, 2012, 04:40:02 AM »
I like what Ensapa said and comments a lot of times

Aside to PS,
Homosexual is definitively a result of bad karma incurred, heterosexual too. U can check with your Guru to confirm on this

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #53 on: June 28, 2012, 11:30:36 AM »
I like what Ensapa said and comments a lot of times

Aside to PS,
Homosexual is definitively a result of bad karma incurred, heterosexual too. U can check with your Guru to confirm on this

There is no need to mention that being born gay is a result of negative karma because it covers all of us.The very fact that we are in samsara is the result of bad karma incurred. There is no denying about it so people will still be people. Gays are still normally functioning human beings despite the fact that they are a little different from what everyone is brought up to believe due to centuries of mental conditioning, but they are still people. There is no need to discriminate against them, nether is there any need to make them feel worse than they already are going through. Many have gone to Buddhism for refuge because the only thing the Buddha said about them is, they cannot become monks and it ends there, although the Buddha was not clear cut. He used the term Pandaka to describe homosexuality which also seem to include other nonstandard sexual orientations:

Quote
asittakapandaka—A man who gains sexual satisfaction from performing oral sex on another man and from ingesting his semen, or who only becomes sexually aroused after having ingested another man's semen (ibid. :235-236).
ussuyapandaka—A voyeur, a man or woman who gains sexual satisfaction merely from watching a man and a woman having sex (ibid. :236).
opakkamikapandaka—Eunuchs, that is, castrated men lacking complete sexual organs. Unlike the other four types of pandaka Bunmi describes, these men attain their condition after birth and are not born as pandaka (ibid.:236). 15
pakkhapandaka—PeopIe who by the force of past misdeeds become sexually aroused in parallel with the phases of the moon, either becoming sexually aroused during the two week period of the waning moon (Pali: kalapakkha) and ceasing to be sexually aroused during the fortnight of the waxing moon (Pali: junhapakkha) or, conversely, becoming sexually aroused during the period of the waxing moon and ceasing to be sexually aroused during the period of the waning moon (ibid.:236). 16
napumsakapandaka (also sometimes called simply napumsaka)—A person with no clearly defined genitals, whether male or female, having only a urinary tract (ibid. :237). Another definition of a napumsaka given by Bunmi is, "a [male] person who is not able to engage in activities like a man" (ibid. :239). Elsewhere Bunmi adds that napumsakapandaka are born without any genital organs as punishment for having castrated animals in a past life (ibid. :267). 17

A more contemporary definition from Buddhagosha, the monk who wrote Vishuddi Magga (the path to purification, essentially, the Lamrim for the theravardans) defines pandaka as:

Quote
According to Buddhaghosa pandakas are full of defiling passions (ussanakilesa); their lusts are unquenchable (avapasantaparilaha); and they are dominated by their libido (parilahavegabhibhuta) and the desire for lovers just like prostitutes (vesiya) and coarse young girls (thulakumarika) (Samantapasadika III, p.1042). Thus the pandaka . . . was considered in some degree to share the behaviour and psychological characteristics of the stereotypical "bad" woman.

It seems that pandakas refer to people who are unable to control their lust or sexual deviants. These people are not allowed to be monks as it would be complicated.

It appears that Ananda himself was born as a gay/transgender for many lifetimes before his last rebirth as Ananda as a result of adultery. This seems to be a Thai belief(?)
Quote
In previous existences Phra Ananda, the Buddha's personal attendant, had been a gay or kathoey for many hundreds of lives. In his last life he was born as a full man who was ordained and was successful in achieving arahantship three months after the Buddha attained nibbana. The reason he was born a kathoey was because in a previous life he had committed the sin of adultery. This led to him stewing in hell for tens of thousands of years. After he was freed from hell a portion of his old kamma still remained and led to him being reborn as a kathoey for many hundreds of lives (Prasok 1989:10).

And here is the vinaya rule and the story behind it on why pandakas are not granted ordination. I am not sure if exceptions are allowed in any case, but it is interesting to know:

Quote
The Story of the Prohibition of the Ordination of Pandaka
At that time a Pandaka had been ordained in a residence of monks. He went to the young monks and encouraged them thus, 'Come all of you and assault 23 me." The monks spoke aggressively, "Pandaka, you will surely be ruined. pandaka, you will surely be [spiritually] destroyed. Of what benefit will it be?" Having been spoken to aggressively by the monks, he went to some large, stout novices and encouraged them thus, "Come all of you and assault me." The novices spoke aggressively. "Pandaka, you will surely be ruined. Pandaka, you will surely be destroyed. Of what benefit will it be?" Having been spoken to aggressively by the novices, the pandaka went to men who tend elephants and horses and spoke to them thus. "Come all of you and assault me." 24 The men who tend elephants and horses assaulted him and then publicly blamed, rebuked and criticised [the sangha], saying, "A samana of the lineage of the son of the Sakyas is a pandaka and these samanas, even those who are not pandakas themselves, assault the ordained pandakas. When such is the case these samanas are not practising brahmacariya (celibacy)." The monks heard the men who tend elephants and who tend horses blaming, rebuking and criticising thus and informed the Blessed One of the matter.

The Blessed One then ordered the monks, "Behold monks. a pandaka is one who is not to be ordained. Monks should not give them ordination and those who have been ordained must be made to disrobe" (Vinaya, Vol. 4, pp. 141-142).

diablo1974

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #54 on: June 29, 2012, 07:56:13 AM »
Archeologists had findings to prove that homosexuality existed in ancient civilization such as ancient greece. Ancient people has no concept of homosexuality in the 'modern sense', its just simple expression of love and affection through the act of intimacy with their own gender, nothing more than this. Heterosexual marriage legalization has degraded the concept of love in the same gender and in further conservative mindset concludes that its against the law of 'nature'. In buddhism, there's no mentioning of homosexuality is evil or 'dirty' (not that i know of). But there's vow of 'sexual misconduct' and this vow doesn't only apply to heterosexual but also homosexual.

Positive Change

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #55 on: June 29, 2012, 10:01:00 AM »
Let us for a moment throw our perceptions to the wind and see sexuality from a wider perspective. Here are some interesting articles that may perk one's interest. I have taken the liberty in highlighting some pertinent and interesting points. In these articles, there are some strong hypothesis but nothing conclusive as such, so perhaps the missing key or link in this case could well be the spiritual or should I say, the "Karmic Key". Now wouldn't THIS be interesting to prove!:

Sexual Orientation:

Sexual Orientation is a term used to describe our patterns of emotional, romantic, and sexual attraction—and our sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions. Recent research suggests that a person's sexual orientation is not a black or white matter; sexual orientation exists along a continuum, with exclusive attraction to the opposite sex on one pole and exclusive attraction to the same sex on the other.

Heterosexuality (attraction to members of the opposite sex), homosexuality (attraction to members of the same sex), and bisexuality (attraction to members of either sex) are the three most commonly discussed categories of sexual orientation.

Few issues are as hotly contested as what determines a person's sexual orientation. While most scientists agree that nature and nurture both play complex roles, the determinants of sexual orientation are still poorly understood. Current reseach into its underpinnings frequently focuses on the role of genes, environment, brain structure, and hormones.


Finding the Switch:

If there is one thing that has always seemed obvious about homosexuality, it's that it just doesn't make sense. Evolution favors traits that aid reproduction, and being gay clearly doesn't do that. The existence of homosexuality amounts to a profound evolutionary mystery, since failing to pass on your genes means that your genetic fitness is a resounding zero. "Homosexuality is effectively like sterilization," says psychobiologist Qazi Rahman of Queen Mary College in London. "You'd think evolution would get rid of it." Yet as far as historians can tell, homosexuality has always been with us. So the question remains: If it's such a disadvantage in the evolutionary rat race, why was it not selected into oblivion millennia ago?

Twentieth-century psychiatry had an answer for this Darwinian paradox: Homosexuality was not a biological trait at all but a psychological defect. It was a mistake, one that was always being created anew, in each generation, by bad parenting. Freud considered homosexuality a form of arrested development stamped on a child by a distant father or an overprotective mother. Homosexuality was even listed by the American Psychiatric Association as a mental disorder, and the idea that gays could and should be "cured" was widely accepted. But modern scientific research has not been kind to that idea. It turns out that parents of gay men are no better or worse than those of heterosexuals. And homosexual behavior is common in the animal kingdom, as well—among sheep, for instance. It arises naturally and does not seem to be a matter of aloof rams or overbearing ewes.

More is known about homosexuality in men than in women, whose sexuality appears more fluid. The consensus now is that people are "born gay," as the title of a recent book by Rahman and British psychologist Glenn Wilson puts it. But for decades, researchers have sought to identify the mechanism that makes a person gay.

Something seems to flip the sexuality switch before birth—but what? In many cases, homosexuality appears to be genetic. The best scientific surveys put the number of gays in the general population between 2 and 6 percent, with most estimates near the low end of that range—contrary to the 10 percent figure that is often reported in the popular media. But we know gayness is not entirely genetic, because in pairs of identical twins, it's often the case that one is gay and the other is not. Studies suggest there is a genetic basis for homosexuality in only 50 percent of gay men.

No one has yet identified a particular gay gene, but Brian Mustanski, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago, is examining a gene that helps time the release of testosterone from the testes of a male fetus. Testosterone masculinizes the fetal genitalia—and presumably also the brain. Without it, the fetus stays female. It may be that the brains of gay men don't feel the full effects of testosterone at the right time during fetal development, and so are insufficiently masculinized.

But if that gene does prove to be a gay gene, it's unlikely to be the only one. Whatever brain structures are responsible for sexual orientation must emerge from a complex chain of molecular events, one that can be disrupted at many links. Gay genes could be genes for hormones, enzymes that modify hormones, or receptors on the surface of brain cells that bind to those hormones. A mutation in any one of those genes might make a person gay.

More likely it will take mutations in more than one gene. And that, as Rahman and Wilson and other researchers have suggested, is one solution to the Darwinian paradox: Gay genes might survive because so long as a man doesn't have enough of them to make him gay, they increase the reproductive success of the woman he mates with. Biologists call it "sexually antagonistic selection," meaning a trait survives in one sex only because it is useful to the other. Nipples—useless to men, vital to women—are one example, and homosexuality may be another. By interfering with the masculinization of the brain, gay genes might promote feminine behavior traits, making men who carry them kinder, gentler, more nurturing—"less aggressive and psychopathic than the typical male," as Rahman and Wilson put it. Such men may be more likely to help raise children rather than kill them—or each other—and as a result, women may be more likely to choose them as mates.

In this way, over thousands of generations of sexual selection, feminizing genes may have spread through the male population. When the number of such genes exceeds a certain threshold in a man, they may flip the switch and make him want to have sex with other men. Evolutionarily speaking, that is bad for him. But for the women who are doing the selecting, the loss of a small number of potential mates may be a small price to pay for creating a much larger number of the kind of men they want.

Some gay genes may benefit women more directly—to the detriment of their own sons. The evidence comes from groundbreaking studies by Andrea Camperio-Ciani, a researcher at the University of Padua in Italy. Camperio was interested in understanding the evolutionary paradox and began by replicating a family-tree study done in the early 1990s by geneticist Dean Hamer of the National Institutes of Health. Hamer had concluded that some cases of homosexuality are passed down on the X chromosome, which a boy receives from his mother. Camperio and his colleagues compared the family trees of gay men to those of straight men, and confirmed that homosexuals had more gay male relatives on their mother's side than on their father's side—which suggests an X-linked trait. But the Italian researchers also found something more intriguing: Compared with the straight men, the gay men had more relatives, period.

ilikeshugden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #56 on: June 29, 2012, 11:11:56 AM »

Homosexuality is not mentioned as something bad in Buddhism. Anyone is allowed to be gay. People are just very homophobic and they will attempt to say that having a relationship with a person of the same gender is bad and it is stated in the bible or sutras. But in fact, even the Bible does not disapprove heavily for acts of homosexuality. Therefore, it is not against creation. However, in Buddhism, having desire is bad too. So, in this case, homosexuality is a type of desire too. As long as the act of desire does not harm people, animals or other sentient beings, I guess it would be okay.

Carpenter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #57 on: June 29, 2012, 12:00:16 PM »
There seems to be quite a debatable subject this is, but recently I read from an article about interviewing Dalai Lama which took place in San Francisco year 1997. So that means Homosexual is prohibited since it is mentioned by Dalai Lama as that?

In a 1997 interview, the Dalai Lama was asked about homosexuality. He did not offer any strong answer either way, but noted that all monks are expected to refrain from sex. For laypeople, he commented that the purpose of sex in general is for procreation, so homosexual acts do seem a bit unnatural. He said that sexual desires in themselves are natural, perhaps including homosexual desires, but that one should not try to increase those desires or indulge them without self-control.
In a 1993 talk given in Seattle, the Dalai Lama said:

Nature arranged male and female organs "in such a manner that is very suitable... Same-sex organs cannot manage well." But he stopped short of condemning homosexual relationships altogether, saying if two people agrees to enter a relationship that is not sexually abusive, "then I don't know. It's difficult to say."

The Dalai Lama was more specific in a meeting with Buddhist leaders and human rights activists in San Francisco in 1997, where he commented that all forms of sex other than penile-vaginal sex are prohibited for Buddhists, whether between heterosexuals or homosexuals. At a press conference the day before the meeting, he said, "From a Buddhist point of view, [gay sex] is generally considered sexual misconduct." But he did note that this rule is for Buddhists, and from society's viewpoint, homosexual relationships can be "of mutual benefit, enjoyable, and harmless."

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #58 on: June 29, 2012, 12:21:28 PM »
Here's another view of homosexuality by the famous master Hsuan Hua who is very attained and pretty much a mahasiddha in his own right:

Quote
Next Life?I Want to Be a Siamese Twin
 
from Venerable Master Hsuan Hua's talk given in 1994?
Chapter 6? - Next Life?I Want to Be a Siamese Twin
 
The opinion I just expressed is not at all over-stated?and I am certainly not scolding people? Such depraved behavior actually does go on in Buddhism?and that is why Buddhism cannot prosper?
 
Although I could have avoided mentioning that matter?there is another?more serious issue concerning all mankind?which I must bring up? That is?homosexuals nowadays are getting more rampant all the time? In New York and San Francisco?for instance?there are several hundred thousand homosexuals? These days?even government officials openly admit to being homosexual?support homosexuality?and proclaim that the society should support homosexual marriages? You should know that homosexuality is an evil practice which goes against the principles of Heaven and Earth and contradicts human obligations? Behind it are demons?ghosts?and goblins egging people on?fanning the flames?telling people to head straight for the gates of the hells?
 
Earlier I mentioned the stupid love between a man and a woman?and their oath?"In the heavens?we vow to be birds who share a wing? On the earth?we vow to be trees whose branches intertwine?" The marriage of a man and a woman is the accepted custom everywhere? As it is said?"The matter between a man and a woman is the great obligation of mankind?" If you're following the road of birth and death?then getting married and having children does not go against the way of Heaven? On the other hand?homosexuality is a perverted behavior which contradicts natural law?human ethics?and biological structure? Its retribution is to be born as a Siamese twin in the next life? In the world now?we have heard about the birth of Siamese twins for some time? In the near future?many Siamese animal twins will appear? Since these people have committed perverse acts of evil and engaged in the most vulgar and depraved sort of conduct?they will inevitably undergo rebirth in the lower path of animals?


Sometimes, certain masters whose attainments are narrowed down by cultural barriers may have interesting views on things. Perhaps he did have clairvoyance but he happened to gaze on the gay couple that was heavily afflicted with negative karma and imprints and they ended up in hell or that their homosexuality were influenced by other beings (as a result of karma as well) that he came to this conclusion.

Master Hsuan Hua is a very realized master, by the way:

Quote
Throughout his life the Venerable Master was totally selfless. He vowed to take the suffering and hardships of all living beings upon himself, and to dedicate all his own blessings and joy to the living beings of the Dharma Realm. He practiced what was difficult to practice and endured what was difficult to endure, persevering in his heroic and pure resolve. He was a candle that refused to be blown out by the gale, an irreducible lump of pure gold in the hot fire. The Venerable Master composed a verse expressing his principles:

Freezing to death, we do not scheme.
Starving to death, we do not beg.
Dying of poverty, we ask for nothing.
According with conditions, we do not change.
Not changing, we accord with conditions.
We adhere firmly to our three great principles.

We renounce our lives to do the Buddha's work.
We take the responsibility to mold our own destinies.
We rectify our lives as the Sangha's work.
Encountering specific matters,
we understand the principles.
Understanding the principles, we apply
them in specific matters.
We carry on the single pulse of the patriarchs'
mind-transmission.

From the time he left the home-life, the Venerable Master firmly maintained the six great principles do not fight, do not be greedy, do not seek, do not be selfish, do not pursue personal advantage, and do not liebringing benefit to the multitudes. Teaching with wisdom and compassion, dedicating himself to serving others, and acting as a model for others, he influenced countless people to sincerely change their faults and head towards the pure and exalted Bodhi Way.


http://www.cttbusa.org/founder/biography.htm

So the only explanation would be that his attainments were moulded by cultural barriers and lack of exposure.

Poonlarp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
    • Email
Re: Homosexuality in Buddhism
« Reply #59 on: July 01, 2012, 11:35:51 AM »
Extract from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_sexual_orientation

Within the earliest monastic texts such as the Vinaya (c. 4th century BCE), male monks are explicitly forbidden from having sexual relations with any of the four genders: male, female, ubhatovyanjañaka and pa??aka; various meanings of these words are given below. Later, the Buddha allowed the ordination of women, but forbade ordination to these other types of people. The Buddha's proscriptions against certain types of people joining the monastic sangha (ordained community) are often understood to reflect his concern with upholding the public image of the sangha as virtuous; in some cases, this is explicitly stated. Social acceptability was vital for the sangha, as it could not survive without material support from lay society.

The word ubhatovyanjañaka is usually thought to describe people who have both male and female sexual characteristics: hermaphrodites. In the Vinaya, it is said that hermaphrodites should not be ordained, on account of the possibility that a hermaphrodite would entice a fellow monk or nun into having sex.

The pa??aka is a complex category that is variously defined in different Buddhist texts. In the earliest texts, the word seems to refer to a socially stigmatized class of promiscuous, passive, probably transvestite homosexuals, who were possibly prostitutes.

Pa??aka are categorized with others who are also excluded from ordination; either those with physical abnormalities such as deafness or dwarfism, or those who have committed crimes. "The Story of the Prohibition of the Ordination of Pandaka" from the Vinaya explains that the ban is a response to the example of a monk with an insatiable desire to be sexually penetrated by men, who requested and received this from some animals handlers, who then in turn related the incident to the wider community and brought disgrace upon the sangha.


The current Dalai Lama follows the traditional Tibetan Buddhist assertion that inappropriate sexual behaviour includes lesbian and gay sex, and indeed any sex other than penis-vagina intercourse with one's own monogamous partner, including oral sex, anal sex, and masturbation.

In a 1994 interview he stated "If someone comes to me and asks whether homosexuality is okay or not, I will ask 'What is your companion's opinion?' If you both agree, then I think I would say 'if two males or two females voluntarily agree to have mutual satisfaction without further implication of harming others, then it is okay'".

However, in his 1996 book Beyond Dogma, he states, "A sexual act is deemed proper when the couples use the organs intended for sexual intercourse and nothing else ... homosexuality, whether it is between men or between women, is not improper in itself. What is improper is the use of organs already defined as inappropriate for sexual contact."



For me, those people are recognized even back then during Buddha's generation, this state that these "in between" gentle does exist by nature, just like any other animals and beings. Personally I do not see homosexual is something bad, it's just their living nature.