Source: http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/2008/08/homosexuality.html
Homosexuality
Homosexuality is the tendency to be sexually attracted to persons of the same rather than the opposite gender. According to the ancient Indian understanding, homosexuals were thought of simply as being ‘the third nature’ (trtiya prakti), rather than as perverted, deviant or sick. With its emphasis on psychology and cause and effect, Buddhism judges acts, including sexual acts, primarily by the intention (cetana) behind them and the effect they have. A sexual act motivated by love, mutuality and the desire to give and share would be judged positive no matter what the gender of the two persons involved. Therefore, homosexuality as such is not considered immoral in Buddhism or against the third Precept, although this is not always understood in traditional Buddhist countries. If a homosexual avoids the sensuality and licence of the so-called ‘gay scene’ and enters into a loving relationship with another person, there is no reason why he or she cannot be a sincere practising Buddhist and enjoy all the blessings of the Buddhist life.
None of the legal codes of traditional Buddhist countries criminalized homosexuality per se, although of course there were penalties against homosexual rape and homosexual acts with minors just as there were for similar offences committed by heterosexuals. In most Buddhist countries today, homosexuality is usually considered strange and laughable although not wicked or evil. Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Mongolia, Japan and South Korea have no laws against homosexuality between consenting adults. Homosexuality is illegal in Burma and Sri Lanka mainly because their legal codes were in part drawn up during the colonial era. Recently in Sri Lanka, the penalty for homosexuality was increased in an ill-considered response to the growing problem of sex tourism in the country.
The Dalai Lama and Homosexuality
At a press conference in 1997 the Dalai Lama said; ‘From a Buddhist point of view (lesbian and gay sex)…is generally considered sexual misconduct.’ He very soon found that he had stumbled into a pink minefield when some Western Buddhists, a significant number of who are gay, loudly expressed their outrage. Together with promoting the Dhamma, the Dalai Lama’s main purpose in touring the West is to win support for his cause, and to this end he defiantly does NOT want to alienate anyone. As soon as he realized what he had done he immediately back-peddled. He called a meeting with gay and lesbian representatives, during which he expressed the ‘willingness to consider the possibility that some of the teachings may be specific to a particular cultural and historic context’. Dawa Tsering, spokesperson for the Office of Tibet released a suitably politically correct and safe statement; ‘His Holiness opposes violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation. He urges respect, tolerance, compassion and the full recognition of human rights for all.’ Ruffled feathers were smoothed, gay Western Tibetan Buddhists left convinced that the Dalai Lama approved of their sexual orientation and the Dalai Lama continued believing that homosexuality is wrong – only now making a careful note never to say so again in public.
The truth is that while the Dalai Lama is one of the kindest people imaginable, he is also a very traditional Tibetan in many ways – and traditional Tibetan culture, like most cultures, has very skewed and confused ideas about homosexuality. Tibetan Buddhism does not derive its ideas about homosexuality from the earliest teachings of the Buddha but from Mahayana sutras and sastras, the earliest of which dates from approximately 500 year after the Buddha. By this time Indian Buddhists were being influenced by various popular Indian notions and incorporating them into their understanding of the Dhamma; sometimes with not very happy results. One such notion was the idea that sexual acts could be judged right or wrong depending on ‘place, person and orifice.’ Thus having sex anywhere near a temple or stupa was a wrong place, with anyone other than one’s spouse was a wrong person and anywhere other than the vagina was a wrong orifice. To be frank, this is a rather good example of the numbering, sub-dividing, categorizing mentality that became dominant in Buddhist clerical thinking. I do not know when this strange idea evolved but I think the earliest mention of it that I know of is in the Ugrapariprccha (or maybe it is the Upasakashila Sutra) which may date from about the 2nd century CE. And it doesn’t take much sense to see how unfounded it is from the Buddha’s point of view.
Exactly how does the law of kamma distinguish one orifice from another? Other problems arise when we realize that many male homosexuals practice intercural sex and mutual masturbation rather than penetrative sex. And exactly which sexual organ do lesbians use to penetrate the vagina of their partner? The Dalai Lama is also reported to have said that he had difficulty imagining the mechanics of homosexual sex, saying that nature had arranged male and female organs ‘in such a manner that is very suitable…Same-sex organs cannot manage well.’ With all due respect to the Dalai Lama, and I do have the highest respect for him, this statement shows both his ignorance and naivety concerning sex, and I might add, of some aspects of the Dhamma as well.
What on earth have Buddhist ethical judgments got to do with two body-parts fitting together ‘properly’ or not? I often clean my ear with my finger despite it not fitting into my ear canal very well. Does mean I make negative kamma every time I clean my ear? Also, the old argument ‘It’s unnatural’ is both unsound and irreverent as far as the Dhamma is concerned. If homosexuality is ‘unnatural’ then celibacy is more so and all Gelupa monks are breaking the fifth Precept by abstaining from sex. The Buddha’s criteria of right and wrong is not based on ideas of ‘natural’ or ‘unnatural’ which are usually social constructions, but on the intention behind the act. I am sorry to say that the Dalai Lama’s ideas about homosexuality are on a par with his (and other Tibetans’) belief that turning a prayer wheels will ‘pray’ for you, that the Tibetan state oracle gets messages from gods, that seeing the Karmapa’s black hat will get you enlightenment within seven lifetimes and in the existence of wrathful deities like Dorje Shukden. In short, it is medieval.
The two most sensible things on the issue of homosexuality and Dhamma I have found on the internet are Homosexuality and Theravada Buddhism by A. L. De Silva at http://www.buddhanet.net/ and Kerry Trembath’s Buddhism and Homosexuality at http://www.yawningbread.org/guest_1997/guw-010.htm. And if you would like to know what some Tibetans other than the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan monastic hierarchy think about homosexuality, have a look at gaytibet.blogspot.com. This website and particularly its posting on the rapping rimpoche would have to be the last nail in Shangri La’s coffin.
[...] link: Heartland [...]
Homosexual acts are against the nature of things and is against the 3rd precept. However, this does not mean that I am trying to put homosexuals down because they are such due to the causes and conditions of previous karma.
Whether a person is (any)sexual, he/she should learn to put down their attachments to their own “masculinity” or “femininity” as these are but false forms. Buddhism teaches us to put down all attachments. Lust should be severed – this is to truly observe the 3rd precept, not only in body, but at the levels of speech and mind.
If everyone would choose not to focus on their own and others’ maleness and femaleness – weaken their mark of self and others, and channel their energies instead to spiritual cultivation to get out of samsara, there wouldn’t be any need to fight for any LGBT “rights”, or deal with issues of abortion, extra-marital affairs and such. There is really no need to fight or debate over such things, if we are lucky to be born again as humans, these debates will still continue, and we can debate and debate life after life and there is still no end. What use is there is that when we could soon turn into animals, hungry ghosts, or hell beings suffering immeasurable pain? End birth and death, and all problems will end of their own.
Being a homosexual or heterosexual or whatever is suffering, why? Because of the mind of love and desire. If there isn’t love and desire, there wouldn’t be any problem in the 1st place. So to cut of love and desire solves the problem at the root. When we cut off the 3 poisons of greed, hatred and delusion, we severe love and desire.
There is a method of getting rid of the 3 poisons of the mind. That is to constantly and sincerely recite the name of Guan Shi Yin Pu Sa and revently bow to Guan Shi Yin Pu Sa. This was stated very clearly in chapter 25 of the Lotus Sutra.
“If living beings who have much sexual desire constantly and reverently recite the name of Guanshiyin Bodhisattva, they will be separated from desire.
If those who have much hatred constantly and reverently recite the name of Guanshiyin Bodhisattva, they will be separated from hatred.
If those who are very stupid constantly and reverently recite the name of Guanshiyin Bodhisattva, they will be separated from stupidity.”
Hi anonymous,
A few things that you need to clarify:
1) What is “against the nature of things?” Is using forks and spoon or chopsticks against nature of things? or using plastic or using condoms for that matter? What is your definition of “nature” and “the nature of things”?
2) Which specific reference in the 3rd precept is “against” homosexuality? In what context was this spoken and what explanation/logic was give for this misconduct?
Metta
Kelvin Wong
Hi Kelvin,
I don’t wish to go into a lengthy debate on whether homosexuality is acceptable in Buddhism, for there are enough debates out there already.
The point I want to make is, Buddha’s teachings is for us to exit samsara, not for justification of orientation.
Whether a person is a homosexual / heterosexual or any other orientation, the most important point as a Buddhist is to get out of samsara. To get out would mean severing lustful desires.
A homosexual person suffers when he/she feels society cant accept them and their behaviour, or when his partner has a change of heart etc.
Similarly, a heterosexual person too suffers when he/she feels unacceptable by society in anyway, or when his partner has a change of heart etc.
What is really the cause behind these sufferings? It is lustful desires. If there are no lustful desires, such suffering will not exist. So whether one is homo or hetero, it is important to severe lustful desires to end these suffering in the ultimate way. This is the point I am trying to bring forth in the previous post.
Hi anon,
I don’t disagree with you at all from the perspective that as a Buddhist who wishes to walk the path towards nirvana, any forms of attachments from desires are indeed hindrances.
However, if we are talking about practical daily life with desires and wants and needs and how to balance and live those life without fear. Then it is important for people who are attracted to the same sex that the Buddhist teachings does not discriminates or judge their desires or acts differently from the others.
So that same with lay Buddhists who wishes gets married and have children and form a family. Perhaps all Buddhist organizations and monks and nuns, should also discourage them from getting married and forming a family and having children because it all desires and hindrance, no? Tell them during their wedding that getting married is a hindrance and suffering and perhaps also tell them when their first child is born that that desire is also a hindrance and suffering.
Perhaps you can preach this way to everyone you know including your parents, your married siblings and to be married friends or siblings and the grandparent who is happy they just got their first grandson… perhaps you should tell them that all is suffering is should be abandoned and avoided.
I hope that you don’t get offended because all I am trying to do is just to use your own logic to ask you to apply what you have said to the people around you.
If you can convince all the heterosexuals around you, then perhaps it will work against homosexuals.
Greetings Bhante,
It was good to read your characteristically well-reasoned arguments, all in keeping with the intent of the Dhamma (as far as we are able to ascertain this). I just wanted to draw you attention to something…you said:
“Buddhism judges acts, including sexual acts, primarily by the intention (cetana) behind them and the effect they have…”
…and then…
“…I am sorry to say that the Dalai Lama’s ideas about homosexuality are on a par with his (and other Tibetans’) belief that turning a prayer wheels will ‘pray’ for you…”
Now I’m a Pali Tipitaka man myself, but I feel that if it is intention that determines kamma, and the prayer wheel is being pushed with the intent that this act will help ease the sufferings of other living beings, then the prayer wheel is functioning as a kind of ‘reminder’ in the same way as when we bow to the Buddha image, we realize that we are not bowing to the literal Buddha, but to the concept (as a way to show respect and purify our mind). If, however, someone’s mind did not incline towards goodness while turning the prayer wheel, I have to agree that I also cannot see how the prayers contained within could still ‘work’ (but do some people actually believe they still would work??)
May you be well, and continue blogging for the benefit of all cyber-Byuddhists,
Andrew.
RE: homosexual rape being illegal in Buddhist countries;
Homosexual rape of young novices is institutionalized in Tibetan Buddhist monsteries. This includes India, Nepal, Taiwan, and…we don’t know if this practice continues in Chinese Tibet. For information on the problem in India and Nepal, see: http://www.lamashree.org/dalailama_08_childabuse_tibetanbuddhistmonasteries.htm