homosexuality in sikhism

[Sukhi]

thank you Pheenu.

[Pheena]

i will type the the pages in oshos book..altho they seem to be quite strong in his opinion and might be even offensive, i am reluctant to post them. If i get a request from somoene before i get home i will type them.

[Sukhi]

i am making a request for you to post them. don't say no. do what nike says... just do it!

[Infernal Monk]

i am making a request for you to post them. don't say no. do what nike says... just do it!

Nike is not a very good influence..do you want little kids working in sweat shops?

[Dalvir]

Nike is not a very good influence..do you want little kids working in sweat shops?

lol.

[Dalvir]

Dalvir, the shabad seems to be about respecting women.

as for referring to all of humanity as brides/women and God as the husband/man, it's a metaphor for the love and devotion we should feel for God, not how to align our social relationships.

so i guess i don't know what you mean, dalvir and drummer boy.

i can see that that shabad can be used as a metaphor, but also just dont look @ a shabad as 1 thing, there's always a deeper meaning. as i intrepret that shabad i think of 2 things, the shabad respects women, and its also a HINT to us humans as to how we should live (man with women, NOT man with man, or women with women)

[guv]

i think u're reading a bit too hard between the lines there dalvir. if u look for something hard enough, u're bound to find it.

the argument u use could be used with the majority of the pop songs in the charts... though if u tried to suggest that those songs showed the singers opposition to homosexuality, they would i'm sure vehemently deny such charges.

guru gobind singh ji refers to homosexuality in treh charritar... unfortunately someone has "borrowed" my copy, so i am not able to reference the relevant passages. can anyone help out?

[Pheena]

i am forewarning you, what you read below can be offensive and ignore the error you get when you open the .pdf.

http://www.khalis.net/SikhAwareness/Text/Osho_homosexual.pdf

[Sukhi]

truly very interesting.

so in essence what he's saying is that homosexuality is unnatural and that it hinders one's spiritual growth because there's no conflict and room for growth because things are similar.

i have issues believing that. and the reason i say this is because it seems to me that for a lesbian, it's just as difficult to maintain a relationship with another lesbian. the physical characteristics of the two may be the same, but the mental and emotional challenges remain.

anyways. i found what i was looking for. Osho doesn't seem to disrespect homosexuals though. he repeats how he feels that he can't condemn homosexuals but rather feels pity for them because their growth is hindered.

so in essence, even though he feels that they're gonna miss out, he doesn't use it as an excuse to put homosexual individuals down.

[Pheena]

i believe osho is talking about the conflict between the 2 opposite energies, not the disagreement of materialistic items or being emotionaly upset over yelling or disagrement which tend to happen regardless of gender, but are a part of the individual persona.

[Sukhi]

hmmm... Pheena, put up something about male/female energies so we get a clearer idea of what's being discussed.

[Pheena]

one thing to understand as well is that no one is 100% female or 100% male, the combination of both energies or attributes exist in an individual.

The meeting of female and male within the body seems at first sight simple and obvious, but the more we ponder over this phenomenon, the more we realise its complexity. It soon becomes evident that one has to know oneself intimately as a person in order to be able to experience and understand this subtle meeting of "opposites": a female has to be aware of the male within herself; a male has to be aware of the female within himself.

How to become aware of these two opposite and complementary energies within oneself and how to deal with them?

It is primarily a matter of attitude towards one's practice.

Since the balance of male and female energies is in principle very fragile, one has to learn to detach from oneself, from the greed of end-gaining in practice, in order to be able to integrate the male and the female to the whole self, body, mind and spirit.

In the context of yoga, the answer will come through a balanced practice of the postures whereby the out-flowing male energy balances the in-flowing female energy.

The Hindus say that without Shakti, the personified feminine life force, Shiva, who encompasses the ability to act, becomes a corpse. It is necessary here to define the role of the female, and the role of the male: the female feeds, instigates, initiates; the male executes, acts, manifests (makes visible).

Shakti is the life energy who animates the male principle of Shiva, and the male principle in turns animates action in the world. By remaining attentive and centred during practice, the polarity between the male expression and the female introspection will manifest. The male determination will encourage the body in its endeavour to find precision and achieve a certain goal, whereas the female sensitivity will guide the body to explore its gifts and respect its limitation. Strength could be a wrong representation of the male energy. Therefore, instead of using ones body to tame and master a posture in order to bring the body into submission, one should allow the space between the limbs and the muscles to create a natural movement so that an organic action (female/male interaction) and not a rigid representation of a certain shape can be achieved. Such a space concept does not mean emptiness, but a living element where Shakti and Shiva can meet and from which the innermost structure of the Self can be realised.

What part does yoga play in the process of balancing male/female energies?

*

Yoga builds strength in a non-aggressive and non-end-gaining manner (male/female complementarity).

*

Yoga releases energy through a tension-less process, so that there is no wastage and mis-use of precious inner power (male/female energy saving).

*

Yoga refuses to use an extroverted will but seeks an inner force to inspire the body to perform a pose (male/female harmonisation).

Therefore, one needs to maintain a constant balance between stretching and relaxing, between strengthening and yielding, and between the quietness of the inner self and the performance of the outer body (male/female Cupertino).

What bonds these energies; what is the hidden language of the body? It seems that without awareness and love in yoga practice, the male and female energies move in separate directions making the person fragmented and vulnerable. But with a proper understanding of the self through the practice of the postures and the observance of the breath, self-respect and self-love will manifest and the two otherwise opposite energies will find equilibrium in a sacred bonding. It is within the boundaries of the physical body that the tension between the two poles takes place and longs for equilibrium, but it is within the space of the sacred body that the two opposite energies still themselves into a perfectly balanced force. And it is in this space that bipolarity is transformed into the coincidence of opposites.

The body has thus become the chalice of the Presence, a marriage of “opposites" and an icon of reciprocity. The body has become a link between the intangible world and the physical manifestation of life. Finally, the body has become the avatar of the soul; and it is within the soul only that male and female, man and woman, will know the bliss of perfect union.

The body has thus revealed to us the truth that in life we are not so much men versus women, as Masculine and Feminine in their fullness and total reciprocity.

Danielle Arin

[Pheena]

This one you have to read....The Author makes very interesting points.

BISEXUALITY

&/or

HOMOSEXUALITY

by Shepherd Hoodwin

Your soul has no gender. Each soul has varying percentages of male (focused) and female (creative) energy, but everyone has both male and female energies, and each soul can relate energetically to any other. The soul in this sense is bisexual -- it can take either side in a creative act. This flexibility is the natural state of the universe. Whether or not you express this bisexuality through physical sex, everyone has the ability to relate in some way to both male and female energy, and must, if he is not to become one-sided. It is common for people to be physically bisexual to some degree in many of their lifetimes. In addition, virtually everyone will have at least one lifetime in which he is homosexual, because that is part of life on earth.

When you are in a male body, your primary lessons are about male energy, and in a female body, about female energy. However, the more lifetimes you have in both male and female bodies, the less your identity is limited to the sex of your present body. Therefore, you can use both your male and female energies as appropriate.

Satisfying sexual relationships are as you define them. All other things being equal, you have more balancing sex with someone of the opposite gender because, by definition, what is opposite is balancing. However, this does not invalidate sexual experiences with members of the same gender. If a sexual experience fulfills your particular needs and is satisfying to you, that is what matters. The choice to be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or nonsexual is individual. There are no wrong choices. Every soul will choose each of those options at one time or another in order to experience growth.

The physical body has tendencies apart from the personality living in it. For example, a forty-year-old physical body tends to be most comfortable with others in approximately the same age range. Nevertheless, the person living in the body may feel differently, for whatever reasons, and nullify the body's tendency. For instance, he may have made an agreement before the lifetime to mate with someone who happens to be much older or younger than he is. Or, he may have unresolved issues that he can work out with an older or younger partner. Therefore, he is attracted to such partners.

There is much more to you than your physical body. You are the total of all your parts. This aspect of balance between opposite genders is just one element of many that can contribute to sexual satisfaction in a relationship. If it is missing because you are with someone of your own gender, there are many other elements that can bring satisfaction. It is not "wrong". Bisexuality and homosexuality are valid.

Your sexual orientation was not specifically determined by your soul before your lifetime began; rather, you unconsciously chose it early in childhood at the same time you chose other key ideas on which to base your life. However, your soul can set up your life to point it in a certain direction through its choice of family dynamics and circumstances, among other things. Your life plan, which includes agreements and karmic debts to be repaid, can also make a particular choice of sexuality all but inevitable. Past life factors being worked on in the present lifetime also influence this choice. Nonetheless, the choice itself occurs on the level of personality, since the personality has free will. The personality usually ratifies the soul's influences, but it may not.

Some souls need same-sex relationships for internal balance. For example, those who have not been male frequently and who want to learn as much as they can about male energy might choose both to be born into male bodies and to have sexual relationships with males as a way of reflecting their own experience back to them. Souls may also use homosexuality to learn to have loving relationships with the same sex if their same-sex relationships were often unloving in lifetimes when they were heterosexual. Those who persecuted homosexuals in a previous life may choose homosexuality as a way to learn compassion.

Often fixed homosexuality is a reaction to a culture's excessive polarization of the masculine and feminine. Like many other cultures, yours tend to see masculinity and femininity in terms of "either/or", rather than as two interrelated aspects of one thing on a continuum. They are promoted as extreme, limited, and rigid stereotypes rather than all-encompassing aspects of human potential. The softer qualities of manhood and the more focused qualities of womanhood are not adequately acknowledged and respected. Those who exhibit them are often seen as not being fully acceptable and are not allowed to simply be who they are.

At an early age, many children are given the message that they must fit into their gender's sexual stereotype. Boys often repress their softer traits, and girls, their more focused ones. This has begun to change in society, but there is a long way to go. Young children who find their own gender's sexual stereotype unacceptable, unattainable, or both, might identify with the other. This is a factor in some homosexuality.

Another factor can be unresolved rage toward the opposite sex. Where this is present, a child might reject that gender sexually. Of course, a child's relationship with his parents, as well as beliefs he brings in from past lifetimes, can influence his sexual orientation, so rage toward the opposite sex parent can be a dominant influence.

As with anything, those who choose same-sex orientation simply because they want to, because it will bring valuable lessons, rather than in reaction to external factors, tend to have an easier, more comfortable experience.

Many who classify themselves as strictly heterosexual or homosexual are capable of bisexuality and might be more comfortable if that option were truly open in them, not necessarily for sexual intercourse, but at least for physically expressing affection. If their boundaries were not so rigid, they would have greater freedom to express love to others in whatever ways seem appropriate.

Any stimulation of the body in a pleasurable way can be construed as being sexual. This is why those who are homophobic sometimes have difficulty even hugging someone of the same sex. A hug can be pleasurable, and that brings up fears that they are being sexual with a member of the same sex. Having such rigid definitions of one's sexuality is not conducive to loving relationships. We encourage openness, letting your experience be whatever it naturally is.

This article is excerpted from

Loving from Your Soul -- Creating Powerful Relationships

by Shepherd Hoodwin.

[guv]

the extract of osho's is hilarious!! i can't believe he uses sooo many gross generalisations!

soldier = gay

feminist = lesbian

also his assertion that homosexuality did not exist in india is false according to walter penrose's "female homoeroticism and women of a third nature in the south asian past"

[sexy_singh]

homosexuality sucks .. , so it follows that the two go together.

ps. hi sukhi

[Infernal Monk]

hmm..."hi sukhi" in every post u make...interesting....

do you have something to get off your chest sexy.... :wink:

[Sukhi]

lol @ guv... i noticed that too. and there were other things (ie his assumption that all gay people would be attracted to him). but there was a point to what he was saying.

in the case of lesbians, he specified a certain type of feminist that would be most likely to become gay: one who sees the opposite sex as an enemy. but even then, there are plenty of man-hating bra-burning chicas who are "straight". and the same goes for soldiers.

hey sexy singh. <- i made that bold in case you couldn't see it. why does homosexuality suck? got any reasons?

hell-bound monkey... ... did you notice that too?

[tableji]

why is everyone so concerned about others private life?? Let ppl do what they chose to do....and u do what u chose to do...if someone asks for ur opinion, then give it....dnt feel the need to TELL someone what u think

[guv]

why is everyone so concerned about others private life?? Let ppl do what they chose to do....and u do what u chose to do...if someone asks for ur opinion, then give it....dnt feel the need to TELL someone what u think

is that a reference to the topic of the thread or to sexy's comment to sukhi? :wink:

[tableji]

damn my secret is out lol...nah only joking, i was jus making a general comment wasnt directed at sexy singh at all....

[sexy_singh]

why does homosexuality suck? got any reasons

yeh, i do. firstly, honest disclosure. i dont like gay ppl. its a personal thing, like not caring much for say britney spears or the AKJ. or whatever. i dunno if its anything like hate - because i've known hate, and this isnt so much hate. I've hated individual homosexuals before, but that was probably just cuz they were so damn annoying. *ahem*

my reason? What bothers me is that the world is supposed to be all accomodating for their sexual preference. Why should it be an issue at all? Its made an issue because its one of those stupid tell-tale signs of overenthusiastic social reformists who have no meaning in their lives beyond trying to glean moral superiority by noting the apparent flaws in the morality of others. As far as i can tell, its a non-issue. It should never be such a big deal that some sexual deviants wish to live their lives in a particularly strange and destructive manner. That these ppl (or perhaps just the so called activists) demand for special consideration is silly.

There. i've said it. Now we can stop asking stupid questions like "is homosexuality allowed in sikhi" just because its the convinient social reform issue of the day.

[Sukhi]

hmmm...

i see where you're coming from.

but if you're right, then we should just sit back and let people discriminate against homosexuals however they want.

and expanding on your way of thinking, i don't think we should bother with tackling racism or gender equality either. you know what, i think we should simply forget about human rights period. let everyone live for themselves.

(if you didn't get it, this is me being sarcastic.)

[tableji]

lol

[sexy_singh]

Sukhi, i admire your open mindedness here. The thing is, people who care about social inequity (like say you or me) have been "forced", in some way or other, to a priori take upon the mantle of defending anyone and anyone who is different, for whatever reason in the name of equality and other vague things like tolerance.

Because someone cares about injustice, this should immediately elicit a quick fire, text book response in defending, for example homosexuals with a convenient catch phrase, such as "you are a homophobe or homophobic". Not only is this silly, it is also unrealistic. If the idea of social responsibility is confused into becoming a politically correct struggle that denies the existence of difference and at the same time advocates a world where we are all "equal", in some vague manner, then it is a dishonest and false struggle.

It is to do a deservice to ourselves and those who suffer from inequity to propagate this false veneer of "tolerance". I'd rather we be honest with ourselves and others and admit our prejudices, thus coming to terms with a real understanding, than towing the politically correct party line as part of general group think. If we dont base our actions in honesty then who knows where we will drift and then why should anyone take us seriously for we lack substance and are guided by an external notion of correctness instead of our own personal morality and rationality.

Social responsibility, the act of acting responsibily in our social systems does not, and should not be hijacked or pushed into absurdity as a reaction. Socially responsible acts involve "doing something cuz u truly care". The fact is that homosexuals, for one reason or another, are different from "us" and conventional wisdom dictates that we must embrace this difference to the point that there is no difference and we can all hold hands and be happy. I have no problem with that if you truly believe it. However i very much doubt that this is practical, for most people.

You see, we lie with ourselves when we say that we believe in the freedom of equality. Because were this true, then it would in turn require that individual responses to particular differences be free from expectation, prejudice or even preference. But this simply isnt true. For there are Correct responses and there are Wrong, Immoral and *cist responses. It is this ruse of equality that bothers me. We live in a world of difference and Equality says, "well there really isnt any difference. its all in your head. do away with this difference and you have equality". The problem with that is, taken to its rightful conclusion, this Equality leaves us in a worser state than we began with - namely, it forces upon us uniformity and homogeneity which supposedly was our problem in the first place. That is, the minority groups were pressured to conform to a particular way of thought and act - that of the majority. In this way, Equality pretends to offer an alternative, taking us around a bent circular track and shunning the very differences it claims to defend.

Finally i leave with you something to consider. We are taking about homesexuals today. I would like to offer another example, that of the monosexual. Since this sounds like a strange thing, lets define our monosexual in the way of construction. Sexy Singh (entirely unrelated to yours truly!) lives a quiet unassuming life. Infact, it is so quiet that sexy singh has no partner to share with, the pleasures and mispleasures of relationship. Fated, through a horribly stifling personality and conventional unattractiveness, SS struggles to get by. His only comfort comes from the blue grey glimmer of a television screen late at night. Sexy is miserable because he sees happy, smiling and fun loving people having lots of .. uh, fun. Since he cannot do any of these things, he settles for the next best thing, becoming acquintated with his various appendages and imagination. The sad thing is, no one cares about poor old sexy. There are a million and one sexy singhs in this world, so called monosexuals who have been forgotten. Whos looking out for the one handed wrestler? Where is the recognition, where are the rights and where are the social activists dedicated to giving sexy a voice and a, uh, hand.

No one cares about sexy because it doesnt matter what sexy does in teh comfort of his bed, late at night. And truly, that is the way it should be for homosexuality, or any other sexual perversion. Sexy could choose to publically declare his monesexuality by bookmarking porn websites, subscribing to various magazines and all kinds of other media. He could express his "self" on t shirts, or even write books and organise protests. Sexy though, realises that his sexuality is his sexualty and doesnt see the need to make a big fuss about it. I'll leave it there for now because im tired of typing

[guv]

hahahhaha... are u sure u're not talking about urself?

deservice

it's disservice...

i quite agree with u sexy, taking the concept of equality to its logical extreme results in exactly the ugly discrimination it sought to remove, in the form of positive discrimination.

but u seem to be arguing against something that isn't there. the thread is whether homosexuality is an issue in sikhism & was started due to comments made on another thread. as u have said urself, it is not an issue... but u seem to also have a problem with someone asking the question itself. :?