Jump to content
Dharmaling Forums
Sign in to follow this  

Homosexuality In Buddhism

Recommended Posts

I was reading lately in the media some articles on the topic of homosexuality, more specifically about their rights i.e. if marriage and adoption should be allowed for gay couples. There are many different positions on this subject, so I was wondering how does Buddhism look on homosexuality in general and also what is Buddhist opinion on the topic of gay marriage and adoption? Thank you and best regards :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Among all religions, Buddhism has a very specific definition and practice of "Compassion", which is not comparable with the similar word in our languages. "Bodhicitta" is a core motivation to practice, and progress towards Enlightenment for the sake of the others, and this without any limit in time - lives after lives - or in space - a Buddha can help in various places at same time. The aim is not a kind of paradise, but to remain among people as long as one will remain to be helped.

This said, it explains why Buddhism is, and will always be tolerant toward all sentient beings, without discrimination.


Then, we have in all circumstances to differentiate a being from his ideas. We can agree or disagree with ideas, coming from our background, educational, society, and other influences. We can identify with the good some people are doing, and dissociate from the negatives actions of others. But in no case we shall remove anyone from our Compassion and wish to help.


From the above statements, we can say that Buddhism is not in favour of homosexuality, but does not discriminate homosexual. We do have homosexuals, men or women, in our community, and that is not a problem at all.


We observe the world, how it is made and sustained. Naturally, the creation of another human being requires having a man and a woman, two beings of complementary energy. The synergy of this complementarity brings in movement a specific alchemy of life, creating it, acting for it, sustaining it.

Technically, we can by-pass this natural rule and create a being just with a female cell (not yet from only a male cell). We do create a body artificially. Yet, we are still facing lot of trouble as to sustain this form, and such way to create is dependant of technology, laboratory, and lot of money. It's clear that it's not natural. And we are talking about the physical form, usually performed on animals. What's about the psychology behind? This is surely another matter.


Regarding marriage of homosexuals. In Buddhism, there is no real marriage protocol, as marriage is regarded as a secular ceremony. Monks can provide a blessing ceremony to wish good luck to the married. So, it seems there is no real obstacle that homosexual could get married and get some social benefit from it. Though, I would be much more in favour of another administrative form of concubinage, and remain with the idea that the creation of a family is based on a man and a woman.


Regarding adoption of children. As developed above already, I tend to believe that a child does need both parents, a man and a woman, to grow healthily. It is how the nature is made. You need two beings of complementary sex and gender to produce another being, not just the physical envelop but also its psychology.


A child needs clear information about who is taking care of him/her in term of identification, of example, of role model. Can a homosexual couples provide such structure? Not sure. A situation which is not "meant" might be confusing.


I am absolutely not doubting here the love and care homosexual could provide to a child. But there are so many things that we pass on to our children beside our will, which have to be taken in consideration. The understanding and response unique to every child is also a factor we can't much control over. I see no reason why to impose to a child to live in a different structure, from which s/he might not get all elements necessary to his healthy psychological growth; and which, given the situation of our society, might also be source of discomfort, or mocking from his peers specially when entering school?


From where homosexuality comes from? This is a question which surely has many answers. Believing in karma, I would includes causes created in the past existence as a possible piece of the puzzle. But also education and various influences. By education, I would not go in the direction of blaming parents, because they can have done all "correctly", a child has his/her own way to understand, to interpret, and to get affected by a situation or another, sometime far away from the initial intention.

We could also accuse the various chemical we are absorbing continuously, starting from pesticides which are sometime heavily disturbing our hormonal system, up to create some serious confusion at the time the brain of the foetus is created!


And, at last but not least, there is a strong influence of the medias regarding social roles.

The social roles are also shaken for commercial and financial reasons. We have just to see that now some men are using make-up, special razors to shave any signs of what would make their "virility" (not at all "machismo" but closer to "manhood"), following the perverted influence of "androgynism" and cultivating the fear of maturity, aging. The fear of pilosity (signal of passing from childhood to adulthood) is a clear sign of what is going on, and has been also largely promoted by the pornography industry through the internet.

This 'androginity' creates trouble in the role of each gender, since there is no more clear definition of related characteristics. And this is one more piece of the puzzle about the reason why homosexuality and bi-sexuality might develop in our societies.


Furthermore... it's better for a society to keep people in the illusion that they will always remain young, look young, and "act young" i.e. not standing ever with strength for his rights, not developing to its optimum his capacity of free thinking and understanding.


Any further question?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening,


And, at last but not least, there is a strong influence of the medias regarding social roles.

The social roles are also shaken for commercial and financial reasons. We have just to see that now some men are using make-up, special razors to shave any signs of what would make their "virility" (not at all "machismo" but closer to "manhood"), following the perverted influence of "androgynism" and cultivating the fear of maturity, aging.

When it comes to such perverse commercials, this one must be close to the top:


Slovene public opinion on Family law introducing same sex marriages and possibility of same sex couple adopting a child:

Against such law: 69,4 %

In favour of such law: 27,7 %

I don't know: 2,9 %.


Among proponents of such law there are more women, younger respondents and persons with higher or high education.


Delo Stik, phone survey, 23th-24th of September 2009, N=512. Published in newspaper Delo, 28th of September 2009, page 2.


Best regards,


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know if you would consider also the following situations as the situations which are 'not' meant' and what solutions would be possible and 'healthier' in such cases: for ex. many Tibetan children come to live in monasteries and grow up being taken care of by monks, then other children over the world in orphanages mostly run by nuns (and/or mainly femaile volonteers), maybe even the question of more traditional boarding schools…would you consider them all cases of equally inappropriate environments for children that risk growing up even gay (ie as one risk element, besides the media etc.) becasue of the absence of the clear information about who is taking care of him/her in term of identification, ie absence of the role model of the one or the other gender? 


Thank you for your answer!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are fundamental differences with the Christian's monks and nuns, among which:

1. monks/nuns in Buddhist traditions can give up their vows, at any time, without any troubles or further discrimination (was a time when monks of nuns who would disrobe in the West were excommunicated(1)!) :bishop:

2. sexuality is not a taboo topic in Tibetan society, which doesn't see it as "evil" :[


Within monasteries, of course sexuality is not promoted, or encouraged in any way. But, little monks do not know if they will remain ordained or not, and they are not excluding the possibility to go to lay life and family later on. Therefore, discussions are going on among kids, toward a normal sexuality and roles of men and women :ssst: . If never encouraged, it never appeared to me that such normal discussions were condemned or punished by elder monks in charge of them.

Role models are men who are monks but (vast majority, as exception can of course occur) not homosexuals. All monks I have seen to disrobed and leaving the monastery went with women, and had a family.

Role models are also the parents of these kids, men and women, even if they don't see them much, when they are in a monastery.

Kids in monastery are not usually younger than 8/9 years old. Nowadays, monasteries are even fixing the limit at 13 years old. Far over the age when a child identifies with his own gender with the help of landmarks s/he finds around him/her


Usually a child acquires his/her sexual identity between 3 and 5 years old. This is done by comparison with what they see around themselves. Then comes the question of "where I come from?", "how babies are made?", etc.

Many homosexuals tend to say: "the proof that it's not acquired (note: but eventually genetic or such explanation) is that I remember myself as I am since ever in my childhood". Well, 3/5 years is quite early indeed in the childhood...


There is a second moment which seems also important, is when the child enters puberty. There is a strong narcissist(2) phase, during which the teenagers spend hours observing, discovering, and eventually enjoying their body. They are getting used to this "mechanic", looking in mirrors, etc. At this age, it's much easier to relate to peers boys or girls, same sex friends, as we know how they are made, how they react, and what they are looking for. We see in same sex friends the image of ourselves.

During this phase, it's not rare that teenagers would even have some sexual games with their peers. It's often done as comparing their attributes, competing. And it can also be appreciate to have a gentle contact, since we don't really want the touch of the parents anymore (we are not babies!), and would like to touch the opposite gender without yet daring to. :unsure:

This phase can be very short, only Platonic, even negated, or... last much longer with complete substitution of the object of desire (even sometime without even have tried a relation with the opposite sex by fear of it, of what could be experienced!) :o .


Wrong setting of role models is far from lacking the presence of one of the two usual role models. Such as mono-parental families. One of the two, man or woman, might be missing at time, but the child gets the message that we are here dealing with two different sex identity models.

Whereas, in an homosexual family cell, the child see that both parents are same sex, living a family and sexual relationship, and of course presenting it has normal, whereas most other family are not like that and a man and a woman are usually needed to make a baby. It can create a certain amount of conflict in the psychological development. :wacko:


At last, yes, institutions taking care of children, such as kindergarten, would benefit a lot to have a more equal number of men and women! The society should stop to consider that small children can only be taken care by women, and that men taking care of toddlers are sissies :taptap:

But here we are touching another subject... :-//



(1): Excommunication is a religious censure used to deprive or suspend membership in a religious community. The word literally means out of communion, or no longer in communion. In some churches, excommunication includes spiritual condemnation of the member or group. Censures and sanctions sometimes follow excommunication; these include banishment, shunning, and shaming, depending on the group's religion or religious community.

(2): Narciss, from Greek mythology, was in love with his own reflection in water.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...