QUESTION: Whether homosexulity was recognised in ancient India particularly in our ancient texts and the sastras? Explain.
A question posed to me via email this morning by a very learned friend —- a retired very high ranking IAS officer.
My answer to him in my email reply.:
Sir, turning to your question on “whether homosexulity was recognised in ancient India particularly in our ancient texts and the sastras”.
It depends on what one means by “recognised”. There is socialrecognition, ethical recognition and recognition in terms of legal rights and legal liabilities .
Which one are we talking about ?
The “ancient texts and Sastras” you talk about are principally the Vedasor Upanishads, the Brahma Sutrasand the Bhagavath-Gita (together called “prasthaana traya”). Then there are Itihaasaas (2) and Puranas(18 major ones) and scores of “upa puraanas” (minor ones).
Then there are “dharma saastraas” which probably number several dozens — of which the famous (or infamous) Manu Smriti is the foremost. Over several centuries after Manu, dozens of other Smritis and dharma sastras have been authored by generations of ancient rishis who were also erudite sociologists and law givers. These are far too numerous to list, but then fortunately there are “Nibhandhas” or comprehensive digests of various dharma sastras compiled as great manuals. …. For e.g. there is a Nibhandha called “kritya kalpataru”, a voluminous book having 18 kāndas, and was composed in the 11th century CE by Lakshmidhara. (Please see https://ignca.gov.in/Asi_data/8187. )
Now, if one had a digital search-engine like Google or ChatGPT , and if the vast body of texts and sastras mentioned above were to be available in a mass data-base , one could perhaps type in the word or key-string or tag “homosexuality” on a keyboard and come up with several URL hits and results. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge there is no such database or search engine easily available in the public domain to enable us dredge out answers for your question conclusively.
Under the circumstances what one can reasonably do is to rely upon popular but scant sources of information that we know are readily accessible with us. And the most accessible of them all is the Mahabharata.
Shikandi was a eunuch , a homosexual transgender (through voluntary sex change) who was greatly respected as a royal courtier and politician in the family of the Kauravas and Pandavas. He was the son of King Drupada and brother of Draupadi . He was admitted into the highest circles of power at the Royal court. He was a warrior-commander too and fought on the side of the Pandavas. He was the one who felled the great Bhishmacharya on the battlefield of Kurukshetra.
Now, what can we glean from the above facts and account of an homosexual as eminent as Shikandi and surmise about the general status of homosexuals in those ancient times? ( Some will say Shikandi was a transsexual and not homosexual. Please take it that I’m referring to the LGBTQ class as a whole … and Shikhandi is being treated as a member in that omnibus grouping ) .
—- Shikandi was a Kshatriya by caste. In those days even Kshatriyas were enjoined to study the Vedas and gain expertise in at least a few branches of Vedic sciences. So, it stands to reason that education was never denied to anyone on the basis of sexual orientation. This proves there was indeed due “social recognition”given to homosexuals.
— Shikandi was a warlord and feudatory king himself of a vassal state of the Pandavas (the kingdom of Drupada) . Thus, it can be concluded that even homosexuals could aspire to very high political office without their sexual orientation getting in the way. This proves that indeed there were no troubling questions or qualms of “Raja dharma” over whether it was ethically correct for a homosexual to occupy high office of overlordship or rulership over subject peoples.
– Shikandi’s legitimacy to rule his vassal state as crown-Prince was never questioned. So, it is safe to assume that a eunuch or homosexual enjoyed property rights just as completely as anyone else equally qualified or legitimate. Sexual orientation did not matter. This proves indeed that in those ancient times of the Mahabharata, homosexuals enjoyed equal legal recognition to enjoy lawful rights as any other citizen of other sexual orientation.
From the above, it may be reasonable to infer that in ancient times, the homosexual was not denied what you call “recognition” —- certainly not in terms of social, ethical or legal norms and mores of the day.
The question however remains : what about marriage rights ? Do the ancient texts shed any light upon homosexuals’ and lesbians’ claim to marital rights under law and to the same legal rights arising out of matrimony to heterosexual couples ?
This question is rather difficult to answer for the simple reason that as far as I know to the limits of my own meagre knowledge of the dharma sastras, there is no mention anywhere of same-sex marriages or same-sex parenthood.
In the Vedic scheme , lawful recognition is accorded to only the following forms of marriage:
According to Manusmriti, or Manu’s text, there are eight different types of marriages. Not all eight approved by the Dhaarmic Scriptures. The last four were not advocated and the last one was condemned. These are: Brahma Marriage, Daiva Marriage, Arsha Marriage, Prajapatya Marriage, Gandharva Marriage, Asura Marriage, Rakshasa Marriage, Paishacha.
(Even the Supreme Court of India in Koppisetti Subbharao vs the State Of A.P, recognised the existence of 8 forms of marriage given by Aryan Hindus.Details of the 8 forms of marriage can be viewed here https://blog.ipleaders.in/forms-marriage-hindu-religion/. )
According to the Veda, marriage (vivaaha samskaara) thus is a union between a masculine and feminine entity with commitments to pursue Dharma (duty), Artha (earning money and other possessions), Kama(physical and other desires) and Moksha (the eternal liberation) in unison. Homosexuality is seen to be founded on the principle of Kama primarily.
Scripturally, heterosexual marriage is viewed as a celebration of sensual pleasure, progress, prosperity and joy as it is also a pyramid of elevation to the next level of one’s Karmic experience. Vedic Society recognises this and puts in place quality controls since it influences the social and cultural growth of society. Homosexual marriage as a social institution does not seem to have been accorded the same status.
The Upanishad’s own conception of parenthood is contained in the exhortation it gives to all human beings “maatr devo bhava, pitr devO bhava …” I.e. regard your mother as a goddess , regard your father as a god . The Upanishad clearly did not envisage parents being of the same sex. It recognised that parenthood is made up of a male principle and a female principle in the natural and indivisible order of the cosmos.
It is therefore not clear to me at all in which of the 8 different categories of marriage the class of same-sex marriage will fall into? Maybe, in the times we live in it is quite possible that under the Indian Constitution, the 8 Vedic forms of marriage will be deemed irrelevant and the institution of Civil Marriage under civil laws (within the larger framework of a Uniform Civil Code) alone will be worthy of recognition in a modern Hindu society?
Only the wisdom of the Justices of the Supreme Court of India will bring finality to this vexing question.. which is truly centred in a morally treacherous area or zone — an area into which our ancient rishis and wise ancestors (bless their souls!) were so careful never to tread mindlessly or recklessly.
I trust Sir I have been able to answer your question to some limited extent.
Sudarshan Madabushi