In Mahabharata Vyasa depicts S'akuntala as chiding Dushyanta for not accepting her as wife.He describes her angry expressions as follows:स।न्रम्भामर्षताम्राक्षी स्फुरमाणोष्ठसम्पुटा |
कटाक्षैर्निर्दहन्तीव तिर्यग्राजानमैक्षत || आदि 68-21||
She describes भार्या as worthy of arghya , archanaa.
स्वयं प्राप्तेति मामेवं मावम।न्स्थाः पतिव्रताम् |
अर्घ्यार्हां नार्चयसि मां स्वयं भार्यामुपस्थिताम् ||आदि 68- 33||
She describes wife as the best friend (श्रेष्ठतमः सखा ).
अर्धं भार्या मनुष्यस्य भार्या श्रेष्ठतमः सखा |
भार्या मूलं त्रिवर्गस्य भार्या मित्रं मरिष्यतः || आदि 68-40||
She describes wife as contributing to the work efficiency of the husband.
भार्यावन्तः क्रियावन्तः सभार्या गृहमेधिनः |
भार्यावन्तः प्रमोदन्ते भार्यावन्तः श्रियान्विताः || आदि 68-41||
She describes wife as the ultimate shelter of the man.
कान्तारेष्वपि विश्रामो नरस्याध्वनिकस्य वै |
यः सदारः स विश्वास्यस्तस्माद्दाराः परा गतिः || आदि 68-43||
She describes wife as the best solace for the grief-stricken male.
दह्यमाना मनोदुःखैर्व्याधिभिश्चातुरा नराः |
ह्लादन्ते स्वेषु दारेषु घर्मार्ताः सलिलेष्विव || आदि 68-49||
She daunts him not to be confident about his not getting a witness for the crime committed in privacy.
एको।अहमस्मीति च मन्यसे त्वं; न कृच्छयं वेत्सि मुनिं पुराणम् |
यो वेदिता कर्मणः पापकस्य; तस्यान्तिके त्वं कृजिनं करोषि || आदि 68-27||
मन्यते पापकं कृत्वा न कश्चिद्वेत्ति मामिति |
विदन्ति चैनं देवाश्च स्वश्चैवान्तरपूरुषः || आदि 68-28||
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:The customary statement draft by me has a mistake. It should have beennotThe opinions expressed in the reference provided by the posting member of the list are totally the opinions or ideas or findings of the authors. They need not necessarily be the opinions of the member providing the reference"The opinions expressed in the reference provided by the authors are totally the opinions or ideas or findings of the authors. They need not necessarily be the opinions of the member providing the reference"On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Patrick,The thread initiator Shyam-ji asked for discussions on the topic. The replying persons are posting references to articles etc. Mine was one such post.Your response seems to necessitate a customary statement"The opinions expressed in the reference provided by the authors are totally the opinions or ideas or findings of the authors. They need not necessarily be the opinions of the member providing the reference"to be added to every such reference providing post, unless otherwise the content of such a statement is taken for granted by the reading members as is currently being done.Prof. Bharat Gupt has never been my 'colleague' as you wrongly assume.After stating that flawed assumption of you , you go on pouring your statements with repeated YOU, YOU sentences taking all the sentences in the report to which I provided reference as my sentences, my statements and my opinions.I don't think the ideas in the movie Lipstick are yours.You provided a link to a critique of the film.I did not provide any link to a critique of Prof. Gupt's piece. I need not. Nevertheless, the ideas expressed in that piece need not necessarily be mine.The context is not our ideas on gender.The topic is discussion of it in ancient Sanskrit sources.The piece to which I directed, mentions such sources. The value of the piece in the context of the present thread is only to that extent.Prof. Gupt's own opinions may make a topic for a new thread.The sources cited in the piece take the coverage in the references being cited to the gender categories beyond male, female that are discussed in all other references in the thread.That is the point that deserves attention here.On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 7:41 AM, patrick mccartney <psdmccartney@gmail.com> wrote:Nagaraj,It sounds like this habitat centre talk was more a homophobic hate group than anything else.These assertions >>Some difference between gay partnership and heterosexual marriage is necessary. He argued that children adopted by gays are very likely going to acquire a gay syndrome. This is going to be unhealthy for the institution of family which is already under many threats and is almost on the verge of extinction in Europe and America.are absolutely ludicrous. I do not see how someone like yourself is able to articulate a sentence with the phrase "gay syndrome" in it, as if it has an idiopathic etiology, and, as you implicitly phrase, a problem. Perhaps we should get Ramdev's yoga involved to cure this 'mental illness'?You and your colleagues seem exceptionally misinformed about child wellbeing. I would strongly urge you to explore the literature on children's wellbeing in gay families - which is abundant, here is one example: https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/same-sex-parented-fami lies-australia/childrens-wellb eing-same-sex-parented-familie s Further to the point, if you are going to talk about the decline of population as directly caused by, as you put it, 'the gays', and if Putin, etc is so worried about population decline, perhaps they should look at the neo-liberal system that places excessive economic pressure and job instability on the younger generations, who feel unable to actually support a family, and hence, either choose to not marry, marry later, or not have kids at all https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/07/e conomist-explains-16 Also, a significant problem is the 50% reduction in the viability of male semen https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2818620/ How can you honestly say that the LGBTI population, which across the globe makes up less than 5% of the population, is to blame for wrecking families,>> Under the garb of providing equality the same right lobby is going to create greater instability as gay marriages do not hold any particular assurances of stability.NO MARRIAGE HOLDS ANY PARTICULAR ASSURANCE OF STABILITY.I'll give you a very personal, anecdotal example. My auntie is a lesbian and has been in a stable, monogamous relationship for over 30 years. I know of many stable homosexual partnerships that have lasted as long, if not longer, than many heterosexual partnerships.How can the 'gay syndrome' be the cause of the decline of the family, when most families are nominally heterosexual, and they are the ones that are responsible for estrangement and divorce?All the best,Patrick McCartney, PhDFellowSchool of Culture, History & Language
College of the Asia-Pacific
The Australian National University
Canberra, Australia, 0200
Skype - psdmccartneyPhone + Whatsapp: +61 414 954 748Twitter - @psdmccartneybodhapūrvam calema ;-)On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Nagaraj Paturi via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:This is a report published in another list:Prof Bharat Gupt, a classicist and dharma shastra scholar gave a talk at the Habitat Centre on Nov 25 on "Hindu View of Homosexuality." He examined the issue along with a fellow speaker and discussant Dr. Come Carpentier. He observed that talking about the Rights of the Homosexual/Gay individuals seems to be one of the major agendas of social reforms in India today. Many people think that ancient Hindu ideas were entirely compatible with the views of modern European and American notions.Therefore it was imperative that one goes to see the classical texts to collect evidence on the status and life of homoerotic individuals in ancient India. One hears all the time, he said, the usual sentiment that as Hinduism is a very tolerant culture, that it was totally open homosexuality and that it was more modern than the moderns. Many people argue, like the scholars of the Hare Krishna order, that as Hinduism believes that every human being is part of Supreme Being Brahma, homosexuals cannot be considered as beings of lower category. They also think, with out any evidence, that in the Vedic age, homosexuals were fully integrated into social and monastic orders. Prof Guptsaid that most of these sentiments are uninformed.Talking about the textual evidence, Prof Gupt mentioned that the KAMASUTRA of Vatsyayana, does define a third order of humans called the 'tritiiyaa prakriti' or third nature. This third nature persons are of two kinds, one of the female kind and the other of the male sort ("dvividhaa tritiityaaprkritih, striiruupinii purusharuupinii ca." 2.9.1). Vatsyayana goes on to say that "she", who behaves like a woman, is to be employed for oral sex ("tasyaa vadane jaganakarma tadauparisht.akamm aachakshate" 2.9.3). She was a paid sex-worker like a courtesan ('vaishyaavat charitam prakaashayet' 2.9.5) . For the male kind who has the desire for males but who cannot make her nature very evident, 'he' should take to the profession of massage-giver and thus coming into contact with males satisfy them through oral sex (2.9.6-10). In this context the act of auparisht.aka is described in detail in the Kamasutra.The ancient Hindu society, as is evident here, did not consider the homosexuals as perverts or sinners. As the term, tritiiya-prakriti or third nature describes them, they are being themselves, they are being natural. This is the primary difference between the Christian and the Hindu attitude. Christianity did not accept the third nature and hence imposed a punishment on their activities.For the Hindu social order the homoerotic were not expected to follow the heterosexual norms of behaviour. So they cannot be blamed for being what they are. And for this reason, accepting their nature, they were not excommunicated or purged from human societies. They had to be given a place in it and they were to be protected and prevented from harm by the State. The Arthashastra prescribes a fine for those who persecuted a homoerotic person (3.18.4) and it does not prohibits making of eunuchs even in the conquered population by a king by castrating captured males of the vanquished (13.5.13). Thus Hindu society accepted the third nature of persons who were born with it and did not want to replicate them for any purpose of social engineering. Prof Gupt said that Christians promoted homosexuals to practice religious castration and Muslims profusely castrated the vanquished populations to create classes of menial and warrior slaves. Dr. Come Carpentier pointed out that modern corporations want to promote homoeroticism as homosexuals not having the burden of families are great consumerists and hence great customers.While accepting the third nature persons, the ancient Hindus gave them a special place in the social order. They were designated to be part of the class of sex-workers and performers of music and dance. As till around the 10 century prostitution was a legal profession, taxed and protected by the State and enshrined as duty of the king in the dharmashastra texts, the homoerotics as part of the class of courtesans, musicians, dancers and performers had the legal protection and their incomes and their sustenance ensured. This position was certainly not respectable and was disadvantaged, as it was of a lower category. In fact, it was out of the varna order or varnabaahya. But they also had the freedom/advantage of not having any obligations of adopting/ raising any children or performing the rituals for ancestor worship which was a major obligation for the varna Hindus. Difficult for us to imagine today, it was a free life in a major way.Prof Gupt pointed out that ancient Hindu society envisaged marriage as primarily devoted to procreation and raising of able and educated individuals who would contribute to society by performing duties to living and the ancestors. While pleasure (rati) was one aspect of sexuality, dharma (obligations) and artha (commerce) and moksha (liberation) were the other three. As the kinnars were not capable of doing obligations they were made into a special class and given a jati or guild. It may also be pointed out that many homoerotics, impotents or sperm-count deficient persons continued to be part of usual varnas and jatis. Ways were found to provide them heirs one method being niyoga. Coming to the present day situation, Prof Gupt said that historical developments have jumbled up the ancient solution. The Islamic intervention in the medieval period altered the status and social acceptability of the homoerotic class. The performing arts of theatre and dance were now taboo in urban life and prostitution lost its legal and respectable status though still preserving itself as a repository of music and dance. However, homoerotics had a much greater employment in harems of Sultans and Rajas and a connection with espionage as of yore.It is the British who delivered the stroke of grace for the homoerotics. The Biblical and Christian prejudice against sodomy turned the kinnars of India into criminals. It delegitimized the profession they had earlier and prevented them from taking to a new one. As Indians have been too slow to alter the Criminal Procedure Code, the section stating punishment for homoerotic contact has not been still eliminated from Indian Law. It should be soon done away with the traditional freedom restored. But the dismemberment of these people from social order created by the British cannot be restored so easily. It would take some serious research to find out what are they now tending towards as professions. At a cursory glance one may say they are to be found a lot in fashion and film industry.Prof Gupt, then commented upon the contentious issue seizing the arena of debate, whether gay marriage should be legalized or not. He expressed his candid opinion that while gay cohabitation should not be illegal, persecuted or even frowned upon, giving the same rights to gaycohabiters as to the married heterosexuals couples is not advisable. Some difference between gay partnership and heterosexual marriage is necessary. He argued that children adopted by gays are very likely going to acquire a gay syndrome. This is going to be unhealthy for the institution of family which is already under many threats and is almost on the verge of extinction in Europe and America.Dr. Come Carpentier made the most revealing suggestion that Western fascination with homoeroticism is based on consumerism. Under the garb of providing equality the same right lobby is going to create greater instability as gay marriages do not hold any particular assurances of stability. He agreed that adopted children of gays are very likely to be gay and thus we create unnatural gays. Putin has explicitly stated that Russia under a population decline and they need more children which gay marriages are not going to provide. Dr.Carpentier said, that gays are asking asking for unrestricted cohabitation, then property inheritance and finally all the parity with non-gay marriage.The talk was followed by a very animated and prolonged discussion. Many in the audience believed that there should be no discrimination and as increasing the population was no longer a necessity in the modern world, gay marriages are in no way detrimental to society while others thought them bad for the instition named as family.--On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Lubomír Ondračka via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Dear Shyam,
in such a case, a normal starting point would be any standard reference work. I would recommend e.g. Brill's Encyclopedia of Hinduism. The main article on this topic, Karen Pechilis' entry "Gender" (vol. 4, pp. 788-805), has an extensive and up-to-date bibliography. Plus this theme is discussed in several other entries in this Encyclopedia (they are easily to be found using an index).
Best,
Lubomir
On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 22:44:14 -0400
Shyam Ranganathan via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> This is a question from a colleague who is not on the list. This
> colleague teaches a course on Sex and Gender theory and is interested in
> articles that addresses the topic from differing cultural vantages. I
> was asked about what was available on the topic that discusses the issue
> from the perspective of the Indian tradition. I didn't know what to
> say. I'd be grateful for any suggestions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shyam
>
>
> --
>
> ShyamRanganathan
>
> MA,MA, PhD
>
> Department of Philosophy
>
> York University, Toronto
>
> shyam-ranganathan.info <http://shyam-ranganathan.info/ >
>
> /The Bloomsbury Research Handbook of Indian Ethics
> <http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/the-bloomsbury-research-handbo >/ok-of-indian-ethics-9781472587 770/
>
> /Patañjali`s Yoga Sūtras
> <http://penguin.co.in/book/classics/patanjalis-yoga-sutra/ >/ (Translation,
> Edition and Commentary)
>
> /Translating Evaluative Discourse: The Semantics of Thick and Thin
> Concepts <https://philpapers.org/rec/SHYTED >/
>
> Full List, Publications <https://philpapers.org/s/shyam%20ranganathan >
>
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)Nagaraj PaturiHyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, MaharashtraBoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, KeralaFormer Senior Professor of Cultural StudiesFLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education,(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)--Nagaraj PaturiHyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, MaharashtraBoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, KeralaFormer Senior Professor of Cultural StudiesFLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education,(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )--Nagaraj PaturiHyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, MaharashtraBoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, KeralaFormer Senior Professor of Cultural StudiesFLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education,(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )--Nagaraj PaturiHyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, MaharashtraBoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, KeralaFormer Senior Professor of Cultural StudiesFLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education,(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )