Vedanta and Philosophy - 2016-04-20

next day → last day (2565 days later) »

4:37 PM

@Amit Saxena I am not disrespecting your point but I am talking about validity and relevance of your claims.

@Amit Saxena Respect and disrespect are not matter of concern here. BTW, i didn't downvote your answer. But we want to truth what Sanatana Dharma says about this homosexuality. what do you mean by this "Fourthly, I respect your opinions and I can sense multiple reasons why you might not want to acknowledge it"?

Okay :)
Lets move on from the topic of respect then.
Regarding validity and relevance, I think I have already explained my viewpoints in the comments.

I say Mohini is female energy of Lord or as you said in that particular manifestation Vishnu has more female energy. This is normal union. Wherein homosexuality come here?

5:44 PM

@AmitSaxena I agree with @TheDestroyer, but I have difference of opinion like Destroyer said Mohini is female energy I think mohini is a female by body, and Shiva is Shiva the linga himself.

Even if there is no claim in shastras regarding homosexuality, but having intercourse with anyone (here it means anyone including animals) just for fun is sin. While you can do that in Grihastashram, with your own Wife/Wives. I think there were no homosexuals at the time of compilation(by Ved vyasa) of Nigamas(Vedas samhita+bramhanas), so they wouldn't have commented on this undiscovered Aspect of Sexuality

@TheDestroyer I have come across a verse in manusmrit that A man should marry woman of Small age(of same varna/lower varna). now this can be one proof of marrying only women, so by that means I personally think doing such henious acts for pleasure is pure sinful act.

1 hour later…

Keshav Srinivasan

7:15 PM

@Creator @AmitSaxena @TheDestroyer Two things. First of all, contrary to popular belief, Ayyappa is not the child that was produced during Shiva's encounter with Mohini; the child produced was a god named Dharma Shasta. Ayyappa refers to prince Manikandan of Pandalam, who was a human incarnation of Dharma Shasta who lived relatively recently; see my question here:

1

Q: What scriptures prophesy the birth of Ayyappa?

One of the most popular religious destinations in the world is the Ayyappa temple in Sabarimala; it gets far more visitors per year than Tirupati and the Vatican combined! The story of the temple begins with the birth of Dharma Shasta, the son of Shiva who was born during Shiva's encounter with ...

mythology vishnu shiva temples ayyappa

@Creator @AmitSaxena @TheDestroyer Second of all, the Manu Smriti says that it's a sin for two men to have intercourse.

@Creator: 1. The fact that Vishnu can switch form to Mohini shows the ability to toggle to and fro in the gender continuum.
2. In the Ajanta caves, you will see many sculpltings around the temples showing homsexual acts. How do you explain that?
3. I agree with you that homsexuality is mental things instead of physical (as in the case of of transgenders)
4. Although, to call it a sin lol This is insulting at a human level. I have friends who are gays and lesbians. Please grow out of such outdated thinking.

7. Also, I agree that if people are stuck too much in 'body consciousness', then this is relevant. Once you grown into your nature, that you act naturally in sync with the physical form you are in.

Pardon the typos :)

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena "The fact that Vishnu can switch form to Mohini shows the ability to toggle to and fro in the gender continuum." It doesn't say anything at all about the gender continuum, it just says that gender is a matter of the body, not the soul, and Vishnu can incarnate into any body he likes. Vishnu is not a male human, or a female human, or a male boar, or a female boar. The fact that Vishnu incarnated as a male boar and as a female human says nothing at all about a "gender continuum".

@AmitSaxena "Although, to call it a sin lol This is insulting at a human level. I have friends who are gays and lesbians. Please grow out of such outdated thinking." I have friends who are liars. That does not mean that it's wrong for people to say that lying is wrong. Sometimes our friends do wrong things.

7:31 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan: 8,Very good point. You are talking in terms on neti neti i.e. He is neither male or female, as they conception of gender does not exist. This is correct. Although, you can also talk in the form of 'Vishnu is both male and female' or the gender continuum. This is also correct.
9. On what basis are you calling it wrong?

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Well, to be clear I'm not saying that Vishnu is not a male. Vishnu is a male god, but he is not a boar or a human. So whether he incarnates as a male human or a female human, or a male boar or a female boar, says nothing at all about his actual gender, anymore than it says anything about whether he's a boar or a human.

@KeshavSrinivasan: When you say God, that has already gone beyond the conception of Gender:
a. So, Vishnu is neither male nor female
b. Or, both male and female
When you say male God, you are mixing body level i.e. male with spirit level i.e. God which is wrong

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena "On what basis are you calling it wrong?" On the basis of the Manu Smriti and other Dharma Shastras. Now you may believe that some of what's written in the Manu Smriti is "nasty" or wrong, but I take the Manu Smriti as scripture and thus accept what it says as Sabda Pramana.

@AmitSaxena I agree with @KeshavSrinivasan on the Shabda Pramana

@KeshavSrinivasan If that is mentioned in mausmriti why don't you provide answer for that question?

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena "When you say male God, you are mixing body level i.e. male with spirit level i.e. God which is wrong" Well, regardless of whether you think God is ultimately formless or has a form, it is still a case that there is a four-armed being who wields a Shankha, Chakra, Gada, and lotus flower in his hands, and if you were to examine the body of that being, you would find that that being has the body of a male.

7:40 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan Why are you talking like a typical Advaitin?

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator Yeah, I could write an answer.

@KeshavSrinivasan But Eariler you had commented on the question without answering may I know why?

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator How am I talking like an Advaitin? I just saying "regardless of whether you think God is ultimately formless or has a form".

@KeshavSrinivasan Advaitins Try to secularize themselves with the other beings regardless of what their dharma calls for

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator How am I secularizing myself?

7:42 PM

That is how you described Shri hari Vishnu, a being welding Weapons and has a male appearance

@KeshavSrinivasan: 9.I respect that view of treating it as Sabda Pramana but do not prescribe to it. If somethings is wrong, it can be revived. e.g Manu Smriti says "Wise people should avoid sitting alone with one’s mother, daughter or sister. Since carnal desire is always strong, it can lead to temptation." This I do not accept. There are many such examples.
10. I do not prescribe to four-armed being concept either. This is just a symbolic form and should be used to eventually attain the formless. These forms are prescribed only because huaman mind finds it difficult to relate to the abstr…

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator I'm just saying regardless of whether someone believes in Advaita or Visistadvaita, all Hindus can agree that there exists a four-armed being wielding weapons who sleeps on a serpent.

@KeshavSrinivasan: No, I know many Hindus who believe that Vishnu is a cosmic energy all around us rather than a four-armed being.

@Creator: Are our views more in sync now or not? :P

11. ManuSmiriti also says that "One should not marry women whose names are similar to constellations". I have a friend whose name is Krittika. Thanks Vishnu that there people who do not treat such texts as absolute otherwise she would never get married :P

@Creator: Are our views more in sync now or not? :P

@AmitSaxena What are you talking about?

@Creator: The points I made above, did that clarify my position better?

7:51 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan @AmitSaxena Quote the Manusmriti Verses both of you are talking about

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena "This I do not accept. There are many such examples." Well, if you find that your moral intuition disagrees with Sabda Pramana, that is an indication that your moral intuitions are wrong. Both the Vedanta school and the Purva Mimamsa school agree that morality deals with an unseen realm, so what is right and wrong is fundamentally inaccessible to the mind. That is why it is necessary to turn to Sabda Pramana as the final arbiter of morality.

@AmitSaxena What exactly is your position, you quoted Sri Sri as answer I downvoted it because I had a reason

@Creator: What Sri Sri said, that is my position :)

@KeshavSrinivasan: ManusSmriti 3.9 says "One should not marry women whose names are similar to constellations"
So, is someone marries a woman name Krittika, their moral compass is screwed? :P

*if

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena And in any case, the example you cited makes total sense. It is true that carnal desire is very strong, and that if it becomes desperate enough it can turn into incestuous desire. So it is important to avoid temptation.

@AmitSaxena Even if what @KeshavSrinivasan Says is true that Aiyaapa is not son of Mohini and shiva then also Sri Sri's statemtent is false

@AmitSaxena This is what Sri Sri Says Homosexuality has never been considered a crime in Hindu culture. In fact, Lord Ayyappa was born of Hari-Hara (Vishnu & Shiva). It is not a crime in any Smriti.

"Homosexuality has never been considered a crime in Hindu culture. In fact, Lord Ayyappa was born of Hari-Hara (Vishnu & Shiva). It is not a crime in any Smriti. "

Lord Ayyaapa was never born out of Shiva and mohini

and Smriti has quotes as claimed by @KeshavSrinivasan, so he is wrong again.

Keshav Srinivasan

7:56 PM

@AmitSaxena Yes, the fact that marrying a woman named Krittika may not feel morally wrong to your mind, but that is only because your mind does not have access to the unseen realm, and thus it does not understand the true consequences of marrying a woman named Krittika in that unseen realm.

@Creator There is a very easy way to solve that problem, by the way: have the woman change her name. There are rituals for changing your name if your parents chose an inauspicious one.

@KeshavSrinivasan @AmitSaxena @TheDestroyer The purpose of Asking this question was my Dilemma. I didn't have had knowledge of any Scriptural Proof About Sexuality and specially Homosexuality, and from my antaratman I knew that it is sin and henious act which is spread due to kaliyuga effects. So to affrim my belief I posted this question and now I am close to answer, with the help of @KeshavSrinivasan 's Manusmriti Verse, Since Shabda Pramana cannot be challanged.

@KeshavSrinivasan: Wow, okay. So, everyone married to someone named Swati is screwed. I do not know whether to cry or laugh now. Can I post this as a question: "Is it wrong to marry a woman named Swati according to Hindusim?"

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Yeah, although it would be better to post "Is It wrong to marry a woman named after a constellation". Focusing on the name Swati might make it seem like you're asking a personal advice question.

I meant can I post this question on the website?

Okay, I wil. Wow, I am stunned!

@AmitSaxena Yeah names could be changed and this ritual is done at the time of marriage, in Maharistrian system there is a ritual after Saptapadi that Husband assigns new name for the Wife/Bride as it is her new Birth, since Dwija women take second birth after marriage, by marrying a dwija person./

person.

Btw @KeshavSrinivasan isn't it sin to befriend a lier?

8:02 PM

So, the couple cannot be happily married, if the woman sticks with the name Swati, according to you?

@AmitSaxena are you asking me

?

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena I'm not saying that people who marry a woman named Krittika are utterly doomed, I'm just saying that they've done something wrong, and so they'll suffer some negative consequence. The person may still have a happy marriage and all that, but sooner or later they'll reap the consequence of it.

Okay, gotcha

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Now this may be a fairly minor thing, so the negative consequence might be that his car breaks down and so ends up missing work or something, but the point is that it's wrong, and it's wrong in a way that can't be gleamed by the mind alone.

@KeshavSrinivasan btw I also have a friend named Kritika, it is one of the most common name for girls in India

8:04 PM

The point is that in no world it is wrong, according to me. :)

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator I think some people name their babies without consulting scripture.

This is a fatalistic viewpoint, sticking to a text literally word for word.

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Well, that's because you don't see the unseen consequences of marrying Krithika, you just see the immediately visible consequences. There are unseen consequences, like it may be that whenever Rahu passes through the Nakshatra, something bad will happen.

Okay, this is where we should agree to disagree

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Well, that's a fundamental difference between us, I do take Hindu scripture literally. But in any case what does that have to do with having a fatalistic viewpoint?

8:09 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan How are you so sure that the consequences would be minor? isn't it a matter of Astrology if you are linking it with Rahu in Kritika Nakshatra

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator I just said it may be minor, I have no idea if it's major and minor. And I'm just speculating that it may be connected to astrology. The point is, one way or another it has some connection to the unseen realm that we don't know about, so we cannot just examine the action and evaluate it according to our mental intuitions. Our mind is fundamentally limited when it comes to right and wrong.

@KeshavSrinivasan Okay, so finally when are you asnwering the question.

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator I don't know whether I'll answer it or not; I told you before how I'm reluctant to answer certain types of questions. In any case here's the Manu Smriti verse: "175. A twice-born man who commits an unnatural offence with a male, or has intercourse with a female in a cart drawn by oxen, in water, or in the day-time, shall bathe, dressed in his clothes." sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu11.htm It's discussed in other Dharma Shastras as well.

room topic changed to Disscussion on Vedanta and sexuality: disscuss Homosexuality and other topics related to Sexuality and Vedic veiw poin (no tags)

room topic changed to Disscussion on Vedanta and sexuality: disscuss Homosexuality and other topics related to Sexuality and Vedic point of view (no tags)

Is unnatural offence similar to intercourse word?

Keshav Srinivasan

@Creator Yeah, I think the translator may be using a euphemism.

8:19 PM

ManuSmirit 3.11: A man should not marry a woman who has no brother

So, if two girls are born in a family, they both should stay unmarried?

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Again, do not try to judge scriptural injunctions using moral intuitions. That's another example of an injunction that has an excellent justification in the unseen realm: namely, that the father of such a girl has no male offspring and through his intentions the Shraddha offerings which will be done by the girl's sons may go to the father's Pitris and thus the Pitris of the girl's husband may remain unnourished.

Wow, you have an explanation for everything, eh

@AmitSaxena Manusmriti 3.6 In connecting himself with a wife, let him carefully avoid the ten following families

ManuSmirti 3.9 also says this: A man should not marry a woman who is named after a river. Justify that.

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Well, not for everything, that's precisely why I rely on Sabda Pramana; because I have limited knowledge of the unseen realm.

8:25 PM

@AmitSaxena The laws thus described are for twice born's. If a twice born is really willing to marry he may marrying bearing the consequences that is why the word 'Avoid' is used instead of Should not marry dictation.

But, you still believe that a man should not marry a girl named Ganga even if you cant explain it.

*or avoid, otherwise there will be consequences

bad consequences

he may marry*

Keshav Srinivasan

@AmitSaxena Yes, because ultimately mental explanation is limited when it comes to knowledge of morality. The intuitions of the mind are fundamentally powerless in accessing that which transcends the physical world.

@AmitSaxena Now I could certainly speculate what unseen consequences it might have. For instance, the girl's future could be tied to what happens to the river that she's named after, like if it dries up or if it floods. Or she might have adverse effects if she goes near that river, or adverse consequences if she stays away from it. There's lots of possibilities.

@AmitSaxena But again, the simple solution is renaming before marriage.

@AmitSaxena By the way, if you want to understand better the connection between morality, Sabda Pramana, and the unseen realm, I suggest you read Adhyaya 1 Pada 1 of Shabara's commentary on the Mimamsa Sutras: archive.org/details/shabarabhasyavol032868mbp

next day → last day (2565 days later) »

Transcript for

Apr '1620

Vedanta and Philosophy

Discuss various philosophies of Hinduism

hinduism philosophy vedanta

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile