Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

To start off Im uploading Chapter 3 of Jaiva Dharma. (see attached zipped .pdf file 95KB)

This is here for us to either read for the first time or to refresh our hearing.

Ill post more later but I need to duck out for a few hours.

Hare Krsna! Dandavats to all.

I love Jaiva Dharma and have already read it three times! Its interesting that you chose this particular section because it was exactly this part of the book that inspired me to write my article entitled "Vaishnava-Dharma is Very Liberal":

http://www.galva108.org/liberal.html

I received some of my most favorable appreciations from that article and it even inspired H.H. Hridayananda Goswami to write his own groundbreaking essay, "Vaishnava Moral Theology and Its Application on the Issue of Homosexuality" (2005). Maharaja commented on my original article as follows:

"In a recent essay appearing on Chakra, "Vaisnava-Dharma Is Very Liberal," Amara prabhu raises the following question:

" Gay marriage is . . . taken to be outside of the rigid varnasrama system and the ordinary prescription for married life, but suppose it is found to be the best practical arrangement to sustain a persons bhakti, someone who is exclusively homosexual and unable to follow complete celibacy. Can an exception be made to the general rule in the spirit of encouraging bhakti, as cited above, or should we give more importance to the rigid codes of ordinary dharma?

"I agree with Amara that a truly spiritual society must constantly seek a balance between the strict codes of varnasrama, and the practical spiritual needs of sincere devotees. There can be no doubt that a significant number of souls, whose external sexual orientation is homosexual, sincerely strive to be Krishna conscious. It is entirely natural and predictable that a majority of these devotees, as with most hetereosexual devotees, will not be suited for lifelong celibacy.

"My view of this issue is as follows:

1) As a general rule, we should appreciate devotees in terms of the sincerity and diligence of their spiritual attempts, given the psycho-physical circumstances of their life. In other words, in any condition of life, if a devotee sincerely strives to please Krishna, that devotee is to be admired.

2) It is the duty of any society to recognize, and thus encourage, the admirable behavior of its members. Monogamy, among devotees of any orientation, is an admirable achievement in the context of todays promiscuous society, and should be thus appreciated and encouraged.

3) Given the need to balance strict varnasrama with liberal spirituality, I believe that ISKCON should recognize and encourage monogamy among all its members of whatever orientation, and that such recognition and encouragement should take appropriate forms that achieve both purposes: the maintenance of varnasrama and the encouraging of spiritual sincerity.

4) I am not convinced that marriage is the best means in all cases, but some serious, formal and public recognition and appreciation of gay monogamy is, in my view, in the best interest of ISKCON and its members."

Hridayananda dasa Goswami

I realize everyone is probably already familiar with these articles but I just thought Id point them out since they were both originally inspired by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakuras "Jaiva Dharma," particularly chapters 3 and 7.

-Amara

The thread starter is talking about very general things whihc is not about homosexuality. We already have a thread to discuss homosexuality. Why should all topics be taken in one direction only?

Thanks for the intelligent thread. Subscribing...

from Upakhyane Upadesh - short stories by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura

A wealthy landlord called upon a goldsmith in his village and, handing him a lump of pure gold, said, "I want you to make a nice pot with this amount of gold. But dont you dare corrupt this gold by mixing in another metal just to steal the excess!"

Bowing and srcaping, the goldsmith readily agreed and took the gold into his workshop. He was sorely tempted by the great wealth that would fall into his hands if he just found a way to cheat the landlord. Sitting at his workbench, he thought to himself, "That man will immediately recognize gold alloy. Hell have me arrested, flogged and probably killed if I attempt to trick him in that way. But there must be another way to do it." Suddenly a plan that he was sure was foolproof popped into his head. A few days later the goldsmith delivered a gold-plated stone pot to the landlord. The rich mans eyebrows rose high in astonishment when he saw it. "Now what is that?" he demanded.

The goldsmith replied, "My lord, this is the golden pot you ordered." The landlord stared at the goldsmith in amazement that was turning to anger. "Are you joking with me? Anyone can see that this is a stone-pot with a gold plating on it!" The goldsmith shook his head and grinned. "Oh no, my lord. I have made you a gold pot fashioned after a stone-pot. It is a golden stone-pot!"

-----

The moral is that Vaisnavas are pure gold. Just as it is a mockery to claim that one has made a golden stone-pot, or a mango-cake of jackfruit, it is a mockery to speak of brahmana Vaisnava, sudra Vaisnava, candala Vaisnava, yavana Vaisnava or Hindu Vaisnava. Either one is a Vaisnava or he has some other designation according to Varnasrama considerations. But when one is accepted as a Vaisnava, then mundane classifications simply do not apply.

Arent these posts are little too long for the Internet?

Nitai, you should start a new discussion thread for your question. ;-)

Ekendra, with reference to this story. This is a fact. This is the same mentality and vision that Jada Bharata displays in Perfect Escape (and the 5th Canto of SB that it is based on). The spirit soul exists beyond designations. Therefore a Vaisnava, in the sense of a person who has realized their identity as a pure spirit soul, servant of the Supreme Lord, is beyond all designations. At the same time, even a Vaisnava of the kanistha order can be considered this way in terms of his ideal and eventual destination. This is the purport of the "If a saintly person commits abominable acts.." verse in Bhagavad-gita.

At the same time - one observation that I have is this.

We pull people in to the movement. "Train them up" as brahmanas, and then end up with them becoming "congregational members" and effectively merging back into the surrounding social structure.

I think we should be helping people to get situated where they are really at. Rather than giving them the option of "all or nothing" - brahminical temple service or drowning in material existence, we need to expand programs like Gaura Yoga and Atma Yoga that exist in the community, and create a broader community structure around the temple.

Just a quick note to everyone to explain why Im not posting. My mother-in-law is over from NZ and today I had to perform some naimittika dharma and go with the whole family to Sea World up on the Gold Coast. It was pretty cool actually. (Sita-pati, I think Prahlad would love it! I can get discounts from the back of the Coles docket if you want.)

Im going to bed now - have to get up at 3 something to cook for the deities tomorrow. So I hope after that I can contribute something useful to the discussion.

Gauranga!

I agree that we should be assisting people at more realistic levels than expecting them to just move into a temple and give up whatever is going on in their lives. Thats not our philosophy so why should our methods reflect otherwise.

I know there has been a lot of improvement in this attitude in the last decade since Ive been around but I still think weve a long way to go before we have a realistic and functioning model.

Granted, there are some for whom temple life is a big help and I think it would be great if our communities were supportive enough to allow for the sincere single men and ladies to volunteer for systematic training in pancharatrik life there. Its good for most people some of time but not for all the people all the time.

Great that Atma-yoga and Gaura-yoga centers provide a place for people to be a bit more realistic in the beginning with themselves. Ive observed that when people join up there many still seem to go through a heavy phase of this is where its at - outside of my paradigm people arent actually surrendered mentality. This has to be tolerated though just like we tolerate the same stuff from young twenty-something temple devotees.

My hope is that, rather than rely solely upon the expansion programs youve mentioned, the temple itself should be a bit more of a realistic place for people to plug into. My observation is that temple managers tend to struggle like anything just to keep the spots on the roster filled. Temple centered devotees or residents are typically overburdened and a bit unhappy (many exceptions to this though). This strains community relations.

I think the temple should serve as an educational center for the entire community. (not just devotee community but entire community) The deity worship should be maintained at a standard that is practical and will still allow the devotees who either live in or directly support the temple to focus on the essential process of hearing and chanting.

Dear Ekendra prabhu, you spent time in Christchurch with their Loft center that was on the periphery of the whole scene and crashed into a burning heap. Youve never spent time at either Atma Yoga or Gaura Yoga, so please be careful about making generalizations and observations that you havent actually made. :-)

Yes, I agree with you, the local ISKCON temple should be a center of brahminical excellence. In many cases Atma Yoga and Gaura Yoga have provided the staff for the ISKCON temples, most notably in this region Melbournes Mahaprabhu Mandir. There are even people there from Christchurchs Loft attempt.

New Zealand just cracked the top five temples in the world for raw quantity of book distribution, in spite of having only 4 million population, based on the results of the two Loft preaching centers (Aucklands Loft and Wellingtons Gaura Yoga) and the people who have come from them.

So please again, if you want to talk about your experience in Christchurch, thats one thing. But please dont pretend that you have intimate familiarity with either Gaura Yoga or Atma Yoga, or the people there. I dont think its good to make statements like that, especially about what people are "supposedly thinking".

This is maybe getting off-topic, but one thing Ive noticed is that certain groups of people will often think that someone "thinks that they are better than me". I dont know where they get their special insight into someone elses internal consciousness, but it seems as though when you try to do something, some people automatically become threatened by it, and their natural response is to project some kind of mentality or attribute some kind of motivation to you.

I spent a lot of time talking with one devotee about this at the festival at New Govardhana at the start of this year. I told him: "Prabhu, I dont think Im better than you. In fact, Im sorry to have to admit this to you, but I dont think about you. I think about my job, about my service, about the people that I have responsibility for looking after. Im not thinking about you at all, much less thinking that Im better than you."

So I know this about a lot of devotees. They dont think that other people are not surrendered, they simply do what they do, and they dont allow others to distract them from that. One thing that happens, and this happened to me when I visited Christchurch, is that someone tries to reach inside your space and tell you: "You might be fired up now, but in another five or ten years..."

Those kinds of incursions are rebuffed. Its best for people to stay inside their own space and comfort zone and offer respect to the other devotees, instead of trying to reach inside their internal consciousness, either by attributing motives to them, or by trying to project their own realizations into their space.

My personal realization is that you have the right to preach to someone as far as you are willing to put yourself out for them. If you are willing to "go all the way", including taking them into your house, working through all their issues, supporting them through their development, and facilitating them as they need, then you can "preach it up". Otherwise its best to just focus on your own area of responsibility.

Another related one is this "you want to be a leader". I get that all the time. No, I dont "want to be a leader", Ive just noticed that wherever I go, I end up with people looking to me for guidance and direction, so one day I said: "Hey, Id better accept my lot and life and start studying how to discharge this function properly."

We have to be careful about attributing motivations to people. Its best to just deal with people respectfully, remembering that our attempts to interpret their own internal states of consciousness are subject to "atmavan manyate jagat", the fact that we dont see the world and others as they are, but rather as we are.

Hare Krsna!

Getting back to the differences between Naimittika and Nitya dharma, I think it is very important for devotees to understand these distinctions. Many devotees often use the word "dharma" without differentiating between the two types. As Vaishnavas, we are concerned with "sanatana-dharma" and not ordinary, mundane "smarta-dharma." We are only concerned with smarta-dharma" when it serves "sanatana-dharma" and not otherwise. This has to be remembered, and Bhaktivinoda Thakura specifically warns against the danger of becoming attached to "naimittika-dharma."

In terms of "varnasrama-dharma," we should similarly only be interested in "daiva-varnasrama" and not ordinary or mundane "varnasrama." "Daiva-varnasrama" refers to selectively utilizing those rules of varnasrama that are helpful in "bhakti" and rejecting the ones that are unhelpful. Artificially applying all the rules and regulations of ordinary "varnasrama" indiscriminately, without considering time, place and circumstance, will not at all be helpful in our mission of spreading Krsna consciousness.

Regarding Vaishnavas being transcendental to varna and all other bodily considerations, this refers to pure Vaishnavas. Otherwise, in a practical sense, it is useful to at least minimally recognize our present psychophysical states. For example, if a male Vaishnava thinks, "I am not a man or anything else--I am only Vaishnava" and walks into the ladies asrama to shower, that will be a foolish idea. We need to pay some attention to our bodily distinctions such as gender (including a third gender), and also in terms of natural proclivities or "varna."

Yes, ultimately we must identify only as spiritual entities and servants of God, but this does not mean ignoring or failing to recognize our current psychophysical embodiment.

-Amara

Haribol. In my post below Ive written a few words IN ALL CAPS because Im not sure how to use italics in this forum or if thats even possible. Im not SHOUTING Im just trying to emphasise a word. Sorry.

Sita-pati wrote: "Youve never spent time at either Atma Yoga or Gaura Yoga, so please be careful about making generalizations and observations that you havent actually made. :-) ..... please dont pretend that you have intimate familiarity with either Gaura Yoga or Atma Yoga, or the people there. "

I dont want there to be any misunderstanding so Ill explain the merits of my observation. Ive been in the loop with the whole loft scene and NZTSKP since 1997 as I joined along with Dina Dayalas ex. I have several close friends (mostly godbrothers and sisters) who are currently involved in Auckland, Wellington and Melbourne scenes who I keep in touch with regularly. Also Ive spent a few weeks living at the Gaura Yoga center (actually the Parama Koruna asram) in Wellington. I helped a fair bit to get the Melbourne loft up and going back when I used to go there regularly for book distribution. I put a lot more energy into the shortlived attempt at the Adelaide Loft with Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja back in the day. The reason I never committed myself to these places long term was by personal choice and preference. And I dont think id even need this much insight to make an observation. phalena pariciyate

Plus my wife was the 2nd loft devotee after Krishnaloka joined. Ask your wife. Shes been with this scene since the beginning and still keeps in touch with her old friends (and new ones).

In any case, there is an overwhelming amount of good going on in these centers and Im sure at the Atma Yoga center too. Im not biased (or stupid) enough to use the CHCH mish-mash as a measuring stick for the rest of the Urban Preaching scene. I never thought that way not even for a second.

Im sorry that my insensitivity put you on the defensive. I didnt predict that would happen with a just few words in a larger context.

The only reason I mentioned it was to draw a comparison between one VERY GOOD aspect of the Loft Atma Yoga Gaura Yoga movement and a shortcoming of the current ISKCON temple scene. At least at these urban outreach places folks can come along and feel a bit comfortable with their western ways and habits until they choose to go deeper. Its an effective mechanism that has a far more balanced effect on the way these people can come in for a landing. Rather than take the plunge folks can splash a bit in the shallow end until they voluntarily want to go deeper. This is a GOOD thing and is directly related to the topic of Understanding Naimittika and Nitya Dharmas in the 21st Century. I just didnt want to unrealistically describe these places as some sort of utopia where the staff are completely free from issues. Fair enough?

"We have to be careful about attributing motivations to people. Its best to just deal with people respectfully, remembering that our attempts to interpret their own internal states of consciousness are subject to "atmavan manyate jagat", the fact that we dont see the world and others as they are, but rather as we are."

Agreed. I think you might be reading a bit more into my comment then I intended. I was just trying not to be one-sided in my analysis. And everything we think is subject to atmavan manyate jagat but that doesnt mean we should give up discriminating. I think we just have to be a bit humble and know that our observations are subject to limitations. Maybe I should try to make it more clear that I dont consider my opinions to be conclusive? Would that make this dialogue easier for you?

I was really hoping that wed arrive at a deeper understanding of each other here and not make this a continuation of the Sita-pati/Ekendra just cant see eye to eye discussions weve had for the last three years. Im trying to grow out of that and Im really sorry for being insensitive.

Pranams, Amara Prabhu.

you wrote: "For example, if a male Vaishnava thinks, "I am not a man or anything else--I am only Vaishnava" and walks into the ladies asrama to shower, that will be a foolish idea."

Thats a great analogy! I laughed out loud. And it makes perfect sense.

We certainly do need to take into account our psychophysical situation dont we? Even if we were perfected wed still need to set the example for others.

I also agree that, like everyone else, homosexually oriented devotees need to just accept the way theyre karmicly conditioned, deeply come to terms with the fact that by their own desire and activity theyve arrived there and start making earnest progress in sadhana. They also need the support and understanding of those who can understand them well enough to give them practical advice for how to overcome their specific attachments. And, of course, we all just need friends, dont we?

I think that an overwhelming majority of devotees see things this way (I hope). There are only a very few who are prejudiced with an outright anti-gay stance. (I hope Im right here)

The issues come up when we try to make an official policy or position on this for the whole society. Srila Prabhupada was clearly against condoning homosexual behavior (I wont repost the list of quotes for fear of them being taken out of context). Srila Prabhupada was also clearly supportive of gays who wanted to sincerely take up Krishna Consciousness.

So without being hostile, officially approving a gay marriage is, I think, a bit much to ask of society. It sets the precedent that pancaratrik marg is extendable towards any conditioned situation. For example its a fact that a person with the tendency towards pedophilia, indeed, has that sort of conditioning. We cant sanction that by devising a new asrama for them and giving them some allowance for fall-downs as they struggle on with their conditioning though. I know there is a big difference between mutually consenting adults and predatorially conditioned ones but the question remains - can we roll out a varnasrama 2.1 with all the latest conveniences and features to address the current dystopia in the world?

Heterosexual activity is also degrading but at least is redeemable by the fact that kids can come from it. And hopefully these kids can be raised in God consciousness and do something good for the world. So there is a religious way to go about it. I cant understand the religious way to go about homosexual inclinations.

I think that just as we question someone being transcendental to using the appropriate gender-specific shower facility we should also apply this discrimination to all sections of society. Im not accusing you of promoting this, but I think its a mistake to count a homo-monogomous relationship as equal to a hetero-monogomous religiously sanctified marriage. They have different levels of usefulness to the greater society.

I want every gay man and woman to chant Hare Krishna and go back to Godhead. Based on the book Jaiva-dharma Ive learned authoritatively that there is a place for everyone to deal with their conditioned nature and make gradual progress. The main emphasis should be on the bhagavat-marg - hearing and chanting (education) and then the secondary issue of what to do with our conditioned natures is a lot easier to keep in perspective.

I wish the temples had a focus on educating the devotees. This way wed all have a commonly understood and agreed upon point of reckoning. All kinds of people could find their place and which classes they are interested in. And they would see how useful temples really are and might even lend a hand or some cash to help out. Those living in the temple should be either highly committed to their own spiritual lives or in training by someone like that.

What do you think about what Ive written Amara and Sita-pati Prabhus?

-- "Its best for people to stay inside their own space and comfort zone and offer respect to the other devotees, instead of trying to reach inside their internal consciousness, either by attributing motives to them, or by trying to project their own realizations into their space."

If we took this conclusion at face value then I wouldnt be able to even advise my students or kids. This is what education is all about. Granted, if someone is determined not to listen for whatever reason then, of course, it can be pointless and counterproductive to pursue. Thats a hard lesson to learn if you really care about that person though. I always hope that devotees are open to listening to each other and heeding good advice. And usually this seems to be the case, in my experience both giving and receiving help.
-----------
-- "My personal realization is that you have the right to preach to someone as far as you are willing to put yourself out for them. If you are willing to "go all the way", including taking them into your house, working through all their issues, supporting them through their development, and facilitating them as they need, then you can "preach it up". Otherwise its best to just focus on your own area of responsibility."

Ive always tried to make you feel welcome in my home and free to stay here as long as you like.
-----------
"Ive just noticed that wherever I go, I end up with people looking to me for guidance and direction, so one day I said: "Hey, Id better accept my lot and life and start studying how to discharge this function properly."

Ive noticed that wherever I go, people from these urban preaching scenes come to me complaining about their experiences wanting advice. Ive just adapted to this and tried to help them appropriately. (Usually by encouraging them to soldier on in their current situation, mind you. I do know the pitfalls of being in an uncoordinated temple scene and/or trying to begin Krishna Consciousness without guidance and association.) We are on the same team here.

> Thats a great analogy! I laughed out loud.

Im glad I brought you some laughter, prabhu!

> I think that an overwhelming majority of devotees see things this way (I hope). There are only a very few who are prejudiced with an outright anti-gay stance. (I hope Im right here)

I believe thats mostly true. Only a few devotees have been openly bad-mouthing gays and calling for their exclusion. Most seem to realize this attitude is not at all in the mood of Srila Prabhupada and Lord Caitanya.

In terms of gay marriage, I believe devotees will eventually recognize this in the future, at least at the congregational level outside the temple. Most people understand that lifelong celibacy is not a practical demand to make of anyone, particularly of young people. Most understand the need for human intimacy and life companionship.

I dont see any purpose in comparing or equating homosexual and heterosexual marriages, either. Like anything else, a marriage is to be judged according to its own merits and ultimately in terms of the "bhakti" cultivated within it. For example, there may be a "grhastha" couple that is opposite-sexed (male and female) and married by fire sacrifice in the temple. Despite this, the couple neglects their chanting and Deity worship at home, and regularly engages in illicit sex. They often fight and sometimes the husband even beats the wife. On the other hand, there may be a "grhastha" couple that is same-sexed (homosexual) and outside of the normal "varnasrama" system, but nevertheless the couple chants regularly and worships the Deity at home with sincere devotion, refraining from sex and working together in the spirit of cooperation and affection. Which of these two are superior? Whichever has the most "bhakti," thats all. The "bhakti" is more important than whether or not one type of marriage is higher or lower on the material echelon.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura confirms this in "Jaiva Dharma": "So we see that there are two kinds of "grhastha-bhaktas:" one who is part of "varnasrama" and one who is excluded from "varnasrama." Which is superior of these two? Whoever has the most "bhakti" is superior." ("Jaiva Dharma," Chapter 7, p. 172)

-Amara

so true...

"I dont see any purpose in comparing or equating homosexual and heterosexual marriages, either. Like anything else, a marriage is to be judged according to its own merits and ultimately in terms of the "bhakti" cultivated within it. For example, there may be a "grhastha" couple that is opposite-sexed (male and female) and married by fire sacrifice in the temple. Despite this, the couple neglects their chanting and Deity worship at home, and regularly engages in illicit sex. They often fight and sometimes the husband even beats the wife. On the other hand, there may be a "grhastha" couple that is same-sexed (homosexual) and outside of the normal "varnasrama" system, but nevertheless the couple chants regularly and worships the Deity at home with sincere devotion, refraining from sex and working together in the spirit of cooperation and affection. Which of these two are superior? Whichever has the most "bhakti," thats all. The "bhakti" is more important than whether or not one type of marriage is higher or lower on the material echelon."

Are there any sastric assents and precedenses in acaryass writings re same-gender marriage?

Yes I would like to see some too.

> Are there any sastric assents and precedences in [our] acaryas writings re same-gender marriage?

Homosexuality has been illegal in India since early British rule so same-sex marriage has not been publicly discussed until recently. Our previous acaryas do not seem to have addressed this issue and even Srila Prabhupada only expressed his initial reactions to the subject--he never discussed it at any length or in great detail with his gay and lesbian disciples.

In "Jaiva Dharma," Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura mentions in a general way that even outcastes have the right to practice Vaishnavism and live as householders, even if they are outside of the varnasrama system.

Prior to the advent of Christian and Muslim influence, homosexual marriage is indeed mentioned in ancient Sanskrit texts such as the Kama Shastra--the sister text to the Dharma and Artha Shastras. In the section pertaining to homosexual relations, for instance, it is stated, "There are also third-sexed citizens, sometimes greatly attached to each other and with great faith in one another, who get married together." (KS 2.9.36) In his twelfth-century commentary on this verse, the scholar Yashodhara writes, "Citizens with this kind of [homosexual] inclination, who renounce women and can do without them willingly because they love each other, get married together, bound by a deep and trusting friendship." While not equated with traditional religious marriage, we can at least observe that homosexual marriages were known to exist and apparently accepted as a fact within general society.

H.H. Hridayananda Goswami has written--"We must search the most important Vaishnava scriptures presented by Srila Prabhupada--the Bhagavad Gita and the "Srimad Bhagavatam"--for specific, explicit, unambiguous statements about homosexuality. The result? There are none. Remarkably, neither the Gita nor the "Bhagavatam" gives a single explicit reference to mutually consensual homosexuality...Thus according to Krsnas own statement, since we do not find a specific, unambiguous set of rules for dealing with homosexuality, we must engage in spiritual reasoning about it."

Naturally, devotees like to have things clearly spelled out for them in every case, but in this situation and undoubtedly in other situations that will arise in the future, we are left to apply our own best reasoning, compassion and common sense. Our acaryas would no doubt encourage us to do this as Vaishnavism continues to evolve and adapt to constantly changing times. Contemporary gurus--both Vaishnava and Hindu--are now beginning to demonstrate a willingness to address these issues reasonably and this give us much hope.

-Amara

Dear Ekendra, apologies for hitting the hot button. Some things we will always just have to agree to disagree on. :-) Dissenting voices are a necessary factor in any healthy society.

As far as gay marriage is concerned, I dont think that there is a sastric basis for it, in the same way than there is no sastric basis for independent women. Its simply a practical reality of todays society.

Just as Srila Prabhupada had to adapt the mission to take into account independent women in the 60s and 70s, we will have to adapt the mission to take into account gay marriage in the next ten years.

"Dear Ekendra, apologies for hitting the hot button. Some things we will always just have to agree to disagree on. :-) Dissenting voices are a necessary factor in any healthy society. "

My apologies for being blunt and not detecting my own insensitivity. I agree that in a healthy society there is variance. But the thing that makes it healthy is the respect for one another (which develops into affection).

So for anyone who doesnt know, Sita-pati Prabhu is my self-sacrificing Godbrother who maximumly puts himself out to help others despite a corporate job and raising a family. Hes opened his home to others who live with him and develop in their Krishna Consciousness. Hes a real inspirational model to me of someone who takes on inconvenience for the sake of helping people become Krishna Conscious.

We often approach subjects from what seems to me like diametrical perspectives which can turn into an exercise in patience and humility (for both of us I assume). I think Krishna put him into my life to help me grow up.

:)

:)

Yeah ... its a fact ... sastric basis or not .... we cant just hide our hands in the sand .... gay marriage is a social phenomenon that the secular world now has just got to get used to.

My concern is how to articulate an official ISKCON position that stays true to Srila Prabhupadas spoken opinions on the ecclesiastic condoning of homosexual marriage and at the same time reflects the reality that Krishna Consciousness is open to everyone.

On the one hand Srila Prabhupada speaks clearly that when a religious/spiritual organization condones homosexual behavior they "have no value".

On the other hand he encouraged homosexual disciples to continue in their Krishna Consiousness and didnt want to see them give it up based on bodily over-identification.

I really think that we need an official position statement on homosexual marriage that really makes our stance clear ... something that cant be used as an anti-gay weapon by those who may be inclined towards hate .... and something that cant be interpreted as permission to engage in homosexual relations ... or a clarion call for gay activists to use our movement as a propaganda model for permissive sanction.

Are there any examples of something like this from a religious group? I dont mean like the Unitarian church full go ahead thing ... theyd need to be true to their teachings and also express encouragement for gays to get involved.

Im not exactly sure what type of example youre looking for but in the World Religions of today, you can find an entire range of policies dealing with gay couples from execution and death (Islam) to The Church of Sweden, which is currently poised to become the first major Christian denomination granting equal status to all marriages, gay or straight.

Often, an official "middle-of-the-ground" position ends up pleasing neither side!

Also, I think ISKCON may be too diverse right now to offer any type of official, universal policy. Some temples, like those of Danavir Swami, still demonize gays and dont allow them inside. They advise gay devotees to "cure" their homosexual "disease" through heterosexual marriage or lifelong celibacy. Other temples are more progressive and welcome gay people equally. They treat them very nicely and advise either celibacy or gay monogamy. I dont think either type would appreciate being told to change their stance and probably wouldnt anyway, even if they were.

-Amara

What does Bhakti Vikash Swami say about all this "gay marriage is ok" thing?

Heres a "thought experiment" that you can carry out:

A legally married gay couple start coming to your preaching center. How do you deal with them and interact with them? What do you tell them is your social policy? How do you integrate them into your community as they become more and more serious practitioners of Krishna Consciousness?

If you also have to imagine that you have a preaching center, then it might not work so well, because you wont be so aware of the real constraints that operate around a functional outreach center. Just imagine that they are becoming more and more serious practitioners of Krishna Consciousness in your temple. How do you think they will integrate? How would you interact with them?

Here is another one, one that Im actually dealing with:

Someone is chanting 16 rounds and is taking shelter of an ISKCON spiritual master, who has asked you to look out for this person. This person is undergoing gender reassignment and is starting to show external symptoms. They approach you and inform you that they are going to change their dress to their new gender, and they want to know how this is going to go down in your community. What programs can they attend? Where should they stand?

Any realizations, experiences, or practical suggestions are welcome...

Here you deal with having to accommodate very different people in one environment, the temple.

I would take care of everyone that wants to practice KC, regardless and tend to the people who might object with due explanations.

There is a strong tendency to discriminate people that come to temples this days based on social position, etc.

But we have to stick to Lord Caitanyas open doors principle, only restriction would be cleanliness and respect to others.

It might cause some disruption, it will be not the easiest of things, but at the long term integrity will pay off for sure.

Personally, I would just treat everyone equally with love and friendship. That is the easiest and also the highest!

Problems come only when we are still predominantly on the bodily platform--when we only look at a persons body, race or gender without seeing them as spirit-souls sent by Krsna. This has to be transcended, and the cases you mention can be great learning opportunities for everyone involved.

Our own cultural milieus also come into play. For instance, in Western countries such as the Netherlands, gay couples are already attending temples regularly without any difficulty. Some of the gay couples are initiated devotees, appreciated within the community and have been attending for years. Everyone understands that a gay monogamous relationship is the best this couple can do right now. In strictly conservative countries such acceptance is unheard of and the situations themselves dont even arise, due to deep social prejudices and hatred. In quasi-conservative countries such as Australia or the U.S., attitudes are still transitioning and will vary from place to place.

In regard to the transgender situation you mention, why not simply follow Srila Prabhupadas own advice? ["First of all, you decide whether you are male or female, then be one or the other. Then, you may enter our temple anytime you like."] Another good example is that of Maharaja Virata, who graciously welcomed Arjuna (as Brihannala) into his palace, even though he dressed, walked and spoke like a woman.

Unfortunately, due to many centuries of Christian and Muslim influence, people are no longer familiar with homosexual and transgender people as a part of society and culture. This has to be relearned. A few years ago at the San Diego temple, two transgender guests were kicked off of the premises and told not to come back simply because of how they were dressed! This is all due to a lack of culture. In Vedic times, and still in some parts of India today, people understood that cross-gender persons were symbols of peace and good luck.

It seems that its in the air: Swami B.V. Tripuraris latest "Sanga" missive contains this question and answer:

Q. Im a female-to-male transgendered person. Ive been involved with Krsna consciousness for some time even though my experiences with devotees have mostly been negative due to their homophobia. I also have an addiction to alcohol and cigarettes that I am trying to resolve. Due to those unhappy experiences and my own bad habits Im a little skeptical of my ability to take shelter of a guru, but ultimately I feel that I should try. Is there any hope at all of my finding a guru that is completely accepting of me as a transgendered person?

A. There is no reason to be hopeless. Sri Krsna nama is extremely generous and anyone who actually represents him will naturally be generous as well. Although Sri Guru will accept you as you are, if you seek his or her shelter you should be prepared to make appropriate changes in your life. Along with regular chanting, these would include adherence to a moral standard that seeks to responsibly harness sexual desire and forgoing destructive habits such as intoxication and smoking. Ultimately, spiritual life is about change. We have to change our angle of vision, seeing ourselves as servants rather than enjoyers.

If you can make this essential change, then everything else will naturally fall into place.

All considered, your transgendered status should not be an issue, especially as you have already made your choice in the matter. In this regard it was reported that my own guru once said to a person who was in a similar situation, "Pick one (sexual orientation) and stick with it."

[See Sanga: Spiritual Life is About Change http://www.swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/volume_six/m235.html]