Homosexuality

[Admin_PC]

I'm not talking about the historical Buddha ofcourse (before ppl hit the report button) but it would be naive to think that all Buddhist text were free from political motivation, if memory serves me right sodomy was no issue in the old testament, only in the new testament it became a "sin".

This isn't a comparative religion site, but that statement's not correct. Leviticus is the 3rd book of the Old Testament and contains the rules against homosexuality.

.

The rest of your post, I agree with you - especially regarding hells. This happens a lot; whether it's sutras of questionable origins or words directly from masters. Amplifying threats of hell is a common tactic used by those looking to influence the behavior of others.

Whoever is "anti" or "pro" anything could always find a match for their preconceived notions in the vast library of Buddhism to conveniently assert a point or negate those of others. Which is basically the same political/manipulative effort. Be careful please blindly quoting sutras and words of masters/teachers plucked from the interweb, especially involving hell and rebirth.

This is really good advice.

[Tenma]

First, if what he's calling the blood bowl sutra is what i think, it doesn't mention homosexuality.

The reference was made to point to an example of a sutra of questionable provenance with views that go directly against the Buddha's teachings but were embraced by certain practitioners.

that quote was a response to the op asking which sutras condemn homosexuality (none that I can think of)
but to say that those views, that is, views like the master hsuan hua shared, are not widely embraced, that part seems incorrect.

Ven Hsuan Hua's views on the matter were largely informed by Chinese culture and not necessarily Buddhism.

Homosexuality is embraced in what is left of the west, yes but traditionally the view of homosexuality seems to be more in line with the masters.

Which ones? Because I'm not finding a whole bunch of comments by anybody before Ven hsuan hua.

If you look at some of the texts describing hells, they often name things like adultery, etc. They also will say things like 'inappropriate' or 'abnormal' sexual behaviors. Many people take these types of passages to be referring to homosexuality. I understand that strict Buddhists don't take these types of texts seriously, but hey have had their influence.

Interesting, because the sutra passages I am aware of typically describe sexual misconduct as using sex to harm - either by violating someone against their will or violating the trust of another in a relationship.

Also we have clarify what 'widely embraced' means...do we mean among buddhists generally? western buddhists? now or in the past? etc..

Other asian cultures where homosexuality has been a bit more accepted (Japan, for example), you don't see a whole lot of writings using Buddhism/Buddhist teachings to attack homosexuality.

The situation for gays and lesbians in China is complex. It has been argued that traditional Chinese culture was comparatively tolerant of homosexuality, and that the tendency to treat homosexuality as a perversion only developed as part of Chinese efforts to emulate the West and modernize after the Opium Wars. There are indications that the majority of Chinese are now returning to traditional tolerance: Homosexuality has been decriminalized since 1997, and was removed from the official list of mental illnesses in 2001. Moreover, a 2014 poll by the Chinese Journal of Human Sexuality suggests that 85 percent of Chinese support same-sex marriage, with only 2 percent opposing it, and 13 percent undecided. Ironically, “comrade,” long a term for a loyal fellow Communist, is now slang for a gay person. Consequently, when Justice John Roberts cited the supposed views of “Han Chinese” against same-sex marriage in his own dissent, he was dealing with a much more complex topic than he realized.

However, Chinese parents and society as a whole put intense pressure on young people to marry and produce offspring. According to one estimate, 90 percent of gay men in China marry women, often without telling them their actual sexual orientation. Understandably, this can lead to frustration, adultery, and unhappiness. This emphasis on producing children can be traced in part to the Confucian tradition. Mencius, one of the most influential Confucian philosophers of all time, argued that to fail to have children is the most unfilial of all acts. Consequently, the online edition of The People’s Daily, a source with close ties to the Chinese government, claimed that Chinese were “baffled” by Kennedy’s use of Confucius. Professor Zeng Yi of the Philosophy Department of Tongji University was blunter, stating that Kennedy had “distorted” Confucius, and opining that any Confucian should view homosexuality as “a crime against humanity.” Critics like Zeng point out that the Classic of Changes, a seminal Confucian treatise of divination and cosmology, claims that traditional gender identities are an immutable reflection of cosmic principles.

Speaking of Japan, isn't Manjushri associated with homosexuality?

[Sentient Light]

Outside of Pureland though, does the Buddha teach that you must become a man before reaching Buddhahood?

You may be interested in reading through this translation and commentary by Bhikkhu Analayo on a Jataka story of the Buddha as a woman: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... incess.pdf

This text doesn't exist in the Pali canon, but exists in multiple forms in multiple other canons. All the versions have the same basic story, but the ending is different every time. There is a Pali mention of this story, but the characters are rearranged and it doesn't suggest the Buddha was the princess in question. The different endings are different approaches to resolving the idea that a woman cannot receive a prediction to Buddhahood (not that she can't become a Buddha eventually, but simply that she can't receive the prediction). In some versions, she is transformed into a man. In others, the Buddha of that time suggests to her she will receive a prediction at a later time (as Sumedha, in the time of Dipankara). And so on.

Analayo surmises that this Jataka tale must be very early, because it appears in all the earliest canons in some form, and all the events are very neatly lined up in each version. He also surmises that the endings must have been written after sectarian schisms, since each tradition tried to resolve the 'problem' in their own way, while keeping to the core of the text. Which suggests that the 'problem' didn't exist--didn't need any resolution--in the earliest tellings.

Here is another translation/commentary between the Nikayas and the Agamas this time: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... hatuka.pdf In the Pali text, there is a claim that women cannot become Buddhas or chakravartins. The Agama text makes no such mention. Analayo makes a detailed and convincing case for snippet in the Pali to be a later insertion.

And while these are all early texts, I think it builds a strong case against the idea that women cannot become Buddhas.

Sidenote, the colloquial name for Avalokitesvrara in Vietnamese transliterates to, "Mrs. Buddha." So we pretty much regard her as a Buddha anyway.

[fuki]

This isn't a comparative religion site, but that statement's not correct. Leviticus is the 3rd book of the Old Testament and contains the rules against homosexuality.

Thanks for the correction!

[Sādhaka]

Speaking of Japan, isn't Manjushri associated with homosexuality?

Only according to an apocryphal Shingon claim, and the fantasies of an 17th century artist called Yoshida Hanbei it seems.

[Mantrik]

What did Buddha say?
Why did he say it, where and and to whom?
What did he mean?
What would he say now?

Context matters!

You could of course ask those questions of the key figures in many religions.

If Buddhism is not fossilised then I would hope we can abide by the basic principles, compassion in the main, and adapt to modern society without the angst and schisms besetting other faiths. What evidence is there that this is or is not happening?

(I suspect that context will rear its head again and Buddhists in intolerant cultures will reflect them.)

[Simon E.]

Aye...

[sth9784]

Outside of Pureland though, does the Buddha teach that you must become a man before reaching Buddhahood?

The ability of women to attain Enlightenment seems settled if you accept the Lotus Sutra which includes the above mentioned Enlightenment of the Dragon Girl, in my opinion anyway (for whatever that is worth).

I have wondered about this before when I have seen Jains mentioned in the Lotus Sutra as a group of people to avoid (maybe not avoid, but something like it- it has been a while since I have read the Lotus Sutra). The Digambara sect of Jainism denies females can attain moksha in this life, so they must first be reborn as a man. The Shvetambara sect is more liberal, and even say that one of the 24 Tirthankara's (Mallinatha) was a female which the Digambaras do not accept (they say Mallinatha was a male). So I have sometimes wondered if the story of the Dragon Girls' Sudden Enlightenment is a reaction against the Digambara Jains' beliefs about women not being able to attain moksha. That is not to say that an anti-Jain polemic is the only reason for the Dragon Girl episode in the Lotus Sutra, but it is just something I have wondered about.

[Admin_PC]

Well the debate was already raging in Buddhism from very early on, without having to look at the Jains. The Mahīśāsaka school; one of the 18 early schools, denied that women could achieve Buddhahood. The Dharmaguptaka (which became the predominant vinaya school in China) broke off from the Mahīśāsakas.

[Könchok Thrinley]

From the original passage the OP cited I believe the important word is "boys". It is often that behaviour that is usually denounced in scriptures of various traditions. Be it Bible where some academics argue that men laying with boys are the bad ones. It is the same here I'd say.

But in general to the topic of innaproriate sexual behaviour for example Patrul Rinpoche in his WomPT dennounces oral, anal and any other "fun" form of sex. I dare say these limitations might be there because back then societies didn't have condoms and proper forms of lubrication which meant lot of pain and spread of disseases via these forms of intercourse, so that I believe to be the reason for this "ban". Nowadays we are far away from that and there is usually a little suffering connected to these forms of sexual behaviour which I think naturally means it is more safe to engage in those. Not to mention it is even safer from the social point of view (in some parts of the world, we are looking at you Russia!! ).

I think it is time for us westerners to work with this. Even HH. Dalailama said we should think about this and maybe try to change if it does not correspond.

[Caoimhghín]

\On the other hand, Ven Hsuan Hua did have some very strong views about homosexuality, but I wouldn't say those views are widely embraced these days.

He literally believed that gays are all members of a profoundly ancient esoteric religion.

Little did Ven Hsuan Hua know, it was actually he who was part of a profoundly ancient esoteric religion.

[Caoimhghín]

90 percent of gay men in China marry women

IMO, 90+% of gay men everywhere marry women. I know more "straight" guys than I can count on my fingers who are essentially "old fashioned gays".

Back in the days before gay marriage, you either lived alone, childless, and isolated as a "confirmed batchelor" or you just cheated on your wife. Most people chose to cheat on their wife rather than face social alienation. Most men who have sex with men ("MSM", it is a category created for this) are not "gay" in the sense that they do not act gay and will not call themselves gay. But they are secretly having sex with men.

This practice actually puts a lot of strain on the women these men are involved with, generally, if they are not good enough at lying & sneaking around.

Furthermore, the notion of "homosexual" as something that someone's "identity" can be is quite new. Homosexuality is a behaviour, not an identity, although certain people have this behavioural tendency and not others, hence why it becomes an identity.

When X people have Y stance towards homosexual behaviour, the people who exhibit that behaviour are, by X people with Y stance, "transformed into homosexuals", effectively speaking.

[Ricky]

What did Buddha say?
Why did he say it, where and and to whom?
What did he mean?
What would he say now?

Context matters!

You could of course ask those questions of the key figures in many religions.

If Buddhism is not fossilised then I would hope we can abide by the basic principles, compassion in the main, and adapt to modern society without the angst and schisms besetting other faiths. What evidence is there that this is or is not happening?

(I suspect that context will rear its head again and Buddhists in intolerant cultures will reflect them.)

Its completely irrelevant in Pure Land. Any homosexual who recites the nembutsu with faith while still performing homosexual acts throughout their lifetime will be able to take birth in the low grades of Sukhavati.

[Admin_PC]

Its completely irrelevant in Pure Land. Any homosexual who recites the nembutsu with faith while still performing homosexual acts throughout their lifetime will be able to take birth in the low grades of Sukhavati.

They are not restricted to low grades in Sukhavati.

[PadmaVonSamba]

There is sexual conduct, and there is sexual misconduct.
There can be sexual conduct between any two people, and there can be sexual misconduct between any two people.
Thus, you can be gay and at the same time, avoid sexual misconduct between two members of the same sex.
.
.
.

[Ricky]

Its completely irrelevant in Pure Land. Any homosexual who recites the nembutsu with faith while still performing homosexual acts throughout their lifetime will be able to take birth in the low grades of Sukhavati.

They are not restricted to low grades in Sukhavati.

I doubt it considering what the Buddha has said about it in other sutras.

[Admin_PC]

Its completely irrelevant in Pure Land. Any homosexual who recites the nembutsu with faith while still performing homosexual acts throughout their lifetime will be able to take birth in the low grades of Sukhavati.

They are not restricted to low grades in Sukhavati.

I doubt it considering what the Buddha has said about it in other sutras.

Lucky for us, we don't have to worry about your baseless speculation. The Larger Sutra has an "evil ways of the world" section that completely explains what qualifies as precept violations in Pure Land. Homosexuality is not in itself a basis of precept violation. Homosexual acts between 2 committed partners also does not fall under what is listed.

[Grigoris]

Its completely irrelevant in Pure Land. Any homosexual who recites the nembutsu with faith while still performing homosexual acts throughout their lifetime will be able to take birth in the low grades of Sukhavati.

They are not restricted to low grades in Sukhavati.

I doubt it considering what the Buddha has said about it in other sutras.

You are in the Pureland sub-forum, so Pureland teachings are considered authoritative.

[明安 Myoan]

Furthermore, the notion of "homosexual" as something that someone's "identity" can be is quite new. Homosexuality is a behaviour, not an identity, although certain people have this behavioural tendency and not others, hence why it becomes an identity.

When X people have Y stance towards homosexual behaviour, the people who exhibit that behaviour are, by X people with Y stance, "transformed into homosexuals", effectively speaking.

As a gay man, there are ways simply not being attracted to women excludes us from all kinds of socialization, behaviors, and interactions that hetero men take for granted. In this way, gay people have a shared experience. I could go into detail but I'm not sure this is the place.

[Könchok Thrinley]

Furthermore, the notion of "homosexual" as something that someone's "identity" can be is quite new. Homosexuality is a behaviour, not an identity, although certain people have this behavioural tendency and not others, hence why it becomes an identity.

When X people have Y stance towards homosexual behaviour, the people who exhibit that behaviour are, by X people with Y stance, "transformed into homosexuals", effectively speaking.

As a gay man, there are ways simply not being attracted to women excludes us from all kinds of socialization, behaviors, and interactions that hetero men take for granted. In this way, gay people have a shared experience. I could go into detail but I'm not sure this is the place.

Oh, please do go into detail.