[hygtfrdes]

Lets not forget that Buddhadasa was a celibate monk and as far as I know monks in Thailand did practices focusing on the unpleasant aspects of the body in order to lessen desire/ attachment to it.

Hi Aloka

your point above is not really relevent

the quotes from Buddhadasa were given in the context of him giving advice to laypeople

i am not an apologist for Buddhadasa nor can i raise any strong disagreement to the responses of Lazy Eye

i can only comment i regard Buddhadasa's views here as rather idiosyncratic & certainly not something i would personally defend or adhere to

Buddhadasa started his career well by clarifying the Buddha-Dhamma but then later seemed to take an interest in Christianity (creationism) & Mahayana

for example, imo, the following Mahayana-like or Kingdom-of-Heaven-On-Earth-like quote is non-sensical

....the human race must be preserved through the duty of reproduction for as long a time as is necessary for humanity to realize the highest Dhamma – nibbana. my view is Buddhadasa had some beneficial things to say about sexual excesses & the unique duties of male & female but, apart from that, some of his views about sex only for reproduction are idiosyncratic & extreme and, imo, cross the line of demarkation established by the Buddha between monks and laypeople

the article continues that those attracted to Buddhadasa's views went on to engage in certain religious & political cults

kind regards

element

Significantly, contemporary Thai Buddhist views on laypersons' sexual behaviour are often more proscriptive and extreme than attitudes reflect in the Pali canon or in traditional or popular Thai accounts of Buddhist doctrine and ethics. Phra Buddhadasa's work has been especially influential among educated and middle class Thai Buddhists. However, his views on sexuality are at variance with Thai Buddhism's traditional distinction between lay and clerical ethical conduct. The ethical extremism of Phra Buddhadasa and other contemporary Buddhist reformists in Thailand such as Phra Phothirak results from a clericalising trend whereby ethical demands traditionally made only of monks are now increasingly also being required of laypersons. The much publicised asceticism and celibacy of the prominent political figure and strict Buddhist Major-General Chamlong Srimuang, epitomises the monastic regimen that some contemporary reform movements within Thai Buddhism (e.g. Santi Asoke) require of their devout lay followers.

[anatmob]

I still don't understand how HHDL can legitimate both recognizing that he doesn't have the authority to unilaterally interpret for all buddhists, and yet pronounce that it is even generally accepted that homosexuality is seen as sexual misconduct from a "buddhist" point of view.

I would be much less concerned if he only spoke for Geluk TB buddhists when he spoke of these kinds of things. That is his charge, anyway. He might be expanding his brief a little bit. But then again, this NKT thing has shown that he's not a stranger to that kind of behavior.

I do not personally have anything against him. I only criticize in respect to his position as an official.

[ORDERCHEAPVIAGRASOFTWARE]

kagyupa, homosexuality and transgenderism are, sadly, still not completly welcome even with highly trained Buddhists. For Buddha all people, gey, transgender or straight has the same homework to be done: Craving, clinging and attachment (as referred by Kris # 18) and the Four Noble Truths applies for all.

[LoohornePharp]

it is interesting to investigate in thought how this might be done. I base my thought experiment here on my experience as a caucasian person, living in an (more the most part) caucasian community. I am thinking and basing my thoughts upon the insights I have gained into relationships with people of other races.

Now, mayahanists talk alot about the individual (a funny word) enjoying "no seperate existence." Therefore, who is there to accept?

I remember listening to a video recording of chogyam trungpa speaking on how aggressive the thought process can be. How aggressive the wish for realization can be. You project the mind outward to accrue new knowledge. You want to possess the object that you crave, to "suck it's blood" as he said.

But blacks and whites, gays and straights have no seperate existence. And meditation is not a goal-oreinted activity (Chogyam trunpa once said "meditation is a noun, not a verb). You dig the present moment. That is the practice. And the only way now to get caught in the trap of being crushed under the authority of societies that tell you "you must accept" or "you must reject" is to share in the enjoyment of the present moment with those people you are trying to accept. There is no special proceedure. You do not worry about the feelings of the person you are trying to accept, as if they must accept your acceptance. You simply enjoy the present moment for yourself, and enjoy cohabitation. ("Enjoy" is such a good word. I appreciate how Thich Naht Hahn reminds his students to "enjoy" the breath. It is a clever way of getting the mind interested in the object of it's awareness)

As my favorite political philosopher, Hannah Arendt said in The Banality of Evil, "the world is a place fit for human habitation." She also indicated, in that essay, that the failure to share the world with others is a root of great evil.

This shouldn't be a grim undertaking, in fact, perhaps we can learn to enjoy ourselves to a greater degree.

[joOEMcheapSOFTWARE]

Hi Aloka

your point above is not really relevent

Perhaps not. However my other responses were in relation to lack of evidence about LGBT issues in the 'Two Kinds of Language' quote.

[omaculer]

However my other responses were in relation to lack of evidence about LGBT issues in the 'Two Kinds of Language' quote.

Buddhadasa aired his idiosyncratic views & thus opened himself to criticism

There is no need to give Buddhadasa the benefit of the doubt or defend him as though he was an untouchable uncriticisable saint

Old (Mahayana) habits die hard

Kind regards

[Oxzzlvpg]

There is no need to give Buddhadasa the benefit of the doubt or defend him as though he was an untouchable uncriticisable saint

Old (Mahayana) habits die hard

There is no need to try to put words in my mouth which aren't there.

Old habits do indeed die hard.

kind regards

[Scukonahuy]

why do we even read shastras? I thought a good teacher empowers his student to find their own discerning wisdom.

The words of the buddha should be enough. That's plenty to chew on without some other monk's interpretation.

[97dYA9L3]

I was sitting up thinking about this subject, or rather one which was related to it. You have to realize that I don't have much of a life these days, which is why i'm so active on the forum at this time.

Maybe to understand how buddhism really relates, we have to take a look at what buddhism says on love. I hope it doesn't sound like i'm blogging in relation to my personal life. If I am, I can't help it. Or won't.

I know now from memory that the experience of love for someone of the same gender can be a powerful thing in it's own right. The morality of sexual expression in that context ceases to be a concern because morality is always a dualistic enterprise. judgements placed on the values of actions- wholesome or unwholesome. The kind of love that we are ideally discussing is non-dual. it doesn't imply attatchment to the other person as a subject, though the experience gives one a sense of wellbeing and pleasure.

Even for people who choose to identify themselves as homosexuals might not have this refined of a concept of the process in question, but i see it to be true. IMHO it is unfortunate that the experience of being identified as persons "belonging to" an alienated sub-culture often prevents homosexuals themselves from feeling confident in their ability to know "what love is."

I'll elaborate by turning the focus of this post towards the old stereotype that gay men are slutty and incapable of commitment.

Now, I think to a certain extent minorities take on, identify with and begin to emulate the projections society forces onto them. Perhaps subliminally, gay men are told that committed love is inaccessable to them. Juxtapose this to the philosopher plato (a gay man), who argued the "true" love can only be shared by members of the same sex.

[edit: I know from time to time I quote western philosophers. I hope I am forgiven for this sin.]

[VDAu5p33]

Gay or hetro have exactly the same work to do. Attachment, aversion & ignorance - the rest is window dressing IMHO.

I agree. This statement is quite simple but very effective. There is one thing we can all agree on. That is, all unenlightened beings have one thing in common - suffering.

We can define our own roles in nature and a set boundaries to human behavior as "gay sex is bad since it is not reproductive" or "premarital sex is bad" or "human beings have unique duties of male & female" or "females should not ordain since it disrupts the domestic 'balance'" etc. One statement is no better or worse than the other. They are just statements based on what one individual thinks is good or bad - just subjective theories, not hard-coded facts of nature.

So, for the OP, I agree with most posters here. Sexual orientation does not matter to your practice unless you make it.

[BarBoss]

I still don't understand how HHDL can legitimate both recognizing that he doesn't have the authority to unilaterally interpret for all buddhists, and yet pronounce that it is even generally accepted that homosexuality is seen as sexual misconduct from a "buddhist" point of view.

I would be much less concerned if he only spoke for Geluk TB buddhists when he spoke of these kinds of things. That is his charge, anyway. He might be expanding his brief a little bit. But then again, this NKT thing has shown that he's not a stranger to that kind of behavior.

I do not personally have anything against him. I only criticize in respect to his position as an official.

Kind of like the US Supreme Court commenting that a particular ruling may have outlived its usefulness and that Congress should consider acting to change the law upon which the ruling was original handed own, whilst refusing to strike that same creaky old ruling down because it's directly on point and has the weight of precedent and therefore not within the power of the Court (which respects precedent and sees it as a function of Congress to act to remove senseless but clearly constitutional laws).

HHDL isn't about to say that Gampopa (founder of the Kagyu lineage) and student of the revered Naropa, needs to be put out to pasture along with the Abhidharma moralists. If he were to do that he'd have a revolt on his hands, and it would not be mainly from Gelugpas. Just look at how long it's taken him to bring women in the monasteries....decades; and he's been trying to get it done as quickly as he can. It's not like he says something and suddenly the skies open up and 1000 year old rules are magically eviscerated. He isn't even the leader of the Gelugpa. The Ganden Tipa calls the shots. And he has some influence in other lineages but far less than their respective leaders. For example, the Karmapa or Sakya Trizen, etc.

He is perceived as speaking for all Tibetan Buddhism only because we see him that way. He knows that he doesn't speak for Tibetan Buddhism and he never claims to do so either. I do think he is reciting a standard position from way back; one that needs to be re-examined in light of current cultural and scientific changes, that have allowed society to begin to understand same sex attraction better and to correspondingly eliminate discriminatory laws, rules, regulations, along with the bias and ostracism that goes with it. He stated something pretty close to that in the interview I posted.

I think he's in a similar position to Obama, here, on the issue of gay marriage. Obama knows that just coming out and saying he's for gay marriage will cost him a couple of percent in the next election (coming up in 2012); so he says that "My position is evolving", whatever that means. It probably means that, if he's re-elected for another 4 year term he'll come out in favor of it.

I hope that HHDL finds a way to bring about a re-examination of this topic within his lineage and within all of Tibetan Buddhism. It's about time.

[giDdfezP]

Do buddhists have their own wedding rituals?

Rituals can act like very potent empowerments. Wedding ceremonies can plant seeds of devotion between two people deep in a person's psyche. What does buddhism have to say on the psychological good that allowing gays to marry would bring?

[Lån-Penge]

Psychology only emerged in the late 19th century, so in the times of the Buddha it was unknown. Therefore, I suggest that Buddhism does not have anything to say about the benefit of gay weddings in a psychological sense.

Marriage or civil partnership is really something registered by the state of each country. The ceremony leading to registration can be conducted by a Buddhist abbot (or equivalent) just as it can be done by a vicar or priest, if the right forms have been filled in.

The ritual of marriage is very well-defined by the Christian churches in the Western world, because they have been "doing" it for centuries. If two Buddhists want to marry in a Buddhist way, it's largely up to the individuals to invent their own vows and decide on their own ceremony.

I think that brings a lot more thought to it, and enhances the process considerably.

[flower-buy]

"I see that these people are homosexuals. I know that they are homosexuals for a reason. I do not know what the reason is. So there is no reason to treat them differently than non-homosexual people. Because non-homosexual people are not homosexual for reasons that I cannot fathom either."
.

Namaste,

I find this statement of Yuan's to sum up my opinion. And if I may also say that when it comes down to it (to be a tad crude) I don't care who you love or f**k, I think if you practise with integrity and truth then that's all that matters.

Then again I'm no expert so take these words for what they are - an uninformed opinion

In metta,
Raven

[Dabdklwu]

https://picasaweb.google.com/santifm...ditationGroup#

Sydney Gay Meditation group

[invest7manager]

As a gay man, I question what it means to be gay. I don't feel different from heterosexuals. I don't feel like I'm a woman trapped in a man's body, as pat robertson might theorize. I don't, even as my own grandmother suggested to me some time ago, have a testosterone deficiency. I would have to shave much less frequently if that were the case. Hell, I'd almost welcome that (ouch!)

You know, as a straight man, I used to question that too. I grew up a Christian in the South. Homosexuality was a sin, etc. I always wondered what would make someone want to be gay, and I thought about how bad of people they must be (obviously I'd never met any who were open).

I then ran into one of my old friends I hadn't seen since middle school, and we starting hanging out more often, and finally decided to be roommates. It wasn't until that point he told me he was gay. All the people in the area already knew that, but I was the new kid around town. At first I didn't know what to think. But then I realized, that aside from that little tidbit of knowledge, he was exactly the same person I identified as one of my best and most trusted friends, haha. After a few years living with him and meeting other gay people, I realized that it really doesn't mean all that much, unless you over think it. No more than being heterosexual does.

I'm not able to even to understand what makes me attracted to women, and in that light, I imagine it would be the exact same way if I were attracted to men.

As far as it goes in Buddhism. Well, I don't know much about Buddhism yet. But I'm starting to get the understanding that someone with the wisdom of the Buddha would probably see these things in a much more positive light than so many people in the world do now.

[dr-eavealer]

as a gay man i have never read anything that implies that homosexuals are outcast in the same way as you find in Catholicism or Islam

[Bymnbypeten]

I'm lucky enough to be in love with someone who treats me with kindness and respect and allows me to do the same back. I would think that anyone else's speculation on weather or not that is healty or right is something for them to think about, not me.