I replied to this message on the GB list. But the issue seems to be simmering more on this list, so I decided to copy my response here as well. But before we get into it I must confess that I find there is a lot of confusion over some aspects of the issue - mainly to the effect what GOD is and means. Judging from the messages, some of us seem to have confused between GOD as a 'concept' and GOD as an 'icon'. The question which originated this thread surely did not address to GOD as a 'concept', it referred to certain icons in the Hindu pantheon, namely Muruga/Skanda/Karttikeya. While GOD as a concept is largely to be left to the subjects of philosophy and epistemology, GOD as an icon is quite certainly a human creation and therefore falls within the tangible realms of human endeavour, i.e. history, art and culture. Those guys who are making claims and counterclaims do need to bear this distinction in mind before they commit themselves to any opinion.
Now I post my original message below: Funny how passions can flare with what was just a simple question! While I personally don't think either Muruga, Karttikeya or Ayappa were 'gay' in their individual ways, I have absolutely no problems with contemporary gay subculture deriving empowering ideals from any of our 'Puranic' or 'Shastric' stories. After all Hindu religious literature has always been subject to re-interpretations, each of which have their own chronological context, which may be either mythical/spiritual or temporal. But whichever way one looks at it, the scholars who offer such interpretations have also articulated the ways in which these two elements of the chronological context can be created and sustained vis-a-vis what was actually happening around them, i.e. they have an element of judging the 'zeitgeist' and suiting their interpretations to it. People like Sahil and Shirish Gajjar (here we go again!) have vociferously condemned even the thought of associating GOD with GAY proving that they are not in tune with this essentially 'Hindu' spirit of questioning the religious authority. They may retort by saying to question one needs 'authority' and the realm of such 'questioning' or inquiry is to be left to those who belong to the same scholarly ilk. In other words, it is not the job of hoi- polloi to engage in such discussion. That the so-called Hindu/Brahmanic/Vedic tradition did not believe in this tenet is amply illusrated by vedic stories such as that of Naciketas who actually gained that scholarly authority through his 'questioning' even when he did not have it to start with. I find it painful to see that most of the latent 'Hindu' vitriole has forgotten such basic tenets on which most of our religious inquiry was based and conviniently gone for what I regard as 'Fatwah- fication' of Hinduism. While it may suit politicians to create such social thinking patterns in order to fulfill their ulterior motives, it is very sad to see it happening on a day-to-day basis wherein simple debates are killed instantly in the name of 'hurting sentiments'. Those who claim to be 'hurt' retort in such a way that they kill the free spirit associated with any debate. This leads to Jingoism at best. If, as the name suggests, Sahil Khan is Muslim, his backlash against the 'hurting of the (so-called) Hindu sentiment' is an agonising face of contemporary society because it is obviosuly a rettributive assertion out of his own insecurities as a member of the minority community - and dare I say, add to that his insecurities as a gay man. Shirish's mail to the G_B list is full of his usual anger, which is partly due to his ignorance about what he regards as 'Hindu' tradition and largely because he thinks he knows the best!! As for Muruga and Karrtikeya, each of them follow an iconic genesis of their own. Their study illustrates a phenomenon which is extremely well-known to students of ancient Indian social history - that of 'cultic assimilation'. Muruga or 'Subrahmanya' is a essentially a Tamil deity of the 'Guardian' (Ksetrapala) class that gets assimilated into the Saivite pantheon around 10th century AD. Karttikeya, as several myths suggest, evolves on a totally different trajectory. In the Vedas he is the son of Agni the Fire-god. Story goes that he wasn't keeping his own wife happy while doting on the wives of the seven officiating high fire-priests (the Saptarsis). Mrs. Agni therefore decided to take the guise of ech of them in turn so that she could have sex with her husband. Each time they copulated, Agni ejaculated and his wife collected his semen in a cave. But The wife of the last sage Kasyapa was so pure and chaste that Mrs. Agni could not impersonate her. So she had to be content with six rounds of sex and the semen that was collected by her couldn't be wasted as it was 'hot' being derived from Agni himself. The Krittikas, a group of celestial nymphs (the pleiades of western world), undertook that responsibilty and as such a baby with six heads was borne out of it. That was named 'Karrtikeya' after the Krittikas. As one may see there is no familiar 'Siva' connection with this story at all. That comes later in the chrnological context - when certain other 'Guardian' cults, mainly from the North-west regions get assimilated to create a new identity for Karttikeya as the son of Siva. As late as 3rd century AD we see the constituent deities such as Mahasena, Skanda, Kumara and Vishakha retain their individual identities. It is only during the Gupta period (4th-5th cent. AD) we see a single god named 'Karttikeya' the son of Siva - who is different from the Vedic Karttikeya - emerges out of them. The names of the constituent deities become aliases of Karttikeya. Ayyappa, being the son of Mohini a female form of Vishnu and Siva, could gladly fulfill the conditions for a gay icon! But one has to bear in mind that the process of cultic assimilation has claimed yet another 'victim' here - in all probablity the story was created to 'bring in' a local deity into the Brahmanic fold. Such attempts are indeed a continuous happening, very often cross so- called 'religious' boundaries and are often substantiated by emregence of 'complimentary' lytturgy, often in Sanskrit but also in vernacular, which 'ease' the assimilative processe. A good recent example is that of the Saibaba of Shirdi, who in spite of being a Muslim religious master, of a well-known Sufi order, has been 'brahmanised' - there is a temple dedicated to him while the mosque that was his abode no longer remains the lytturgical focus of his cult; his grave (dargah) has been called a 'samaadhi' and there are several 'stotras' composed praising and institutionalising his spiritual prowess. While engaging in any debate over religious apsects one must also bear in mind the plain fact that all this is (and will be) entirely a Human creation. To use the Marxist slang, this is the 'superstructure' which is an evolutionary process and like any other cultural process cannot be 'bracketed' or locked away in time. Its constituent aspects and their socio-economic manifestations come with their own chronological contexts. They have been and should always be open for inquiry. Only that spirit will help us learn about them and encourage the age-old 'churning' which 'Hindu' philosophers and religionists have always placed their firm belief in. Making people shut up by hiding behind 'hurt sentiments' is therefore a most unhealthy practice! cheers, Shailen ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/WfTolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Group Site: http://www.gaybombay.info ========================== NEW CLASSIFIEDS SECTION SEEKING FRIENDS? VISIT www.gaybombay.info click on classified section and type your message in the post section once the link opens What's hot? What's not? Where are the LGBT parties being held and when? Click here!! http://calendar.yahoo.com/YYY,04497/srt,0/gaybombaygroup/?v=42&POS= Post:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Digest Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Mail Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Individual Mail Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Us:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Groups Homepage:- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gay_bombay Unsubscribe:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gay_bombay/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
