The Unnatural Law

The Deity said:

"In hundreds and in thousands see my forms, O son of Prithâ! various, divine, and of various colours and shapes. See the Âdityas, Vasus, Rudras, the two Asvins, and Maruts likewise. And O descendant of Bharata! see wonders, in numbers, unseen before. Within my body, O Gudâkesa! see today the whole universe, including (everything) movable and immovable, (all) in one, and whatever else you wish to see. But you will not be able to see me with merely, this eye of yours. I give you an eye divine. (Now) see my divine power."

—The Bhagavad Gita

In 1991, the prestigious journal Science published an article stating that the brains of homosexual men were structurally different from the brains of heterosexual men. The author, Simon LeVay, then associate professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies and Adjunct Professor of Biology at the University of California, had measured the volumes of four cell groups (INAH 1, 2, 3, and 4) in the anterior hypothalamus of the brain, in postmortem tissue from three subject groups—women, heterosexual men, and homosexual men. He found no differences between the groups in the volumes of INAH 1, 2, or 4. However, INAH 3 was more than twice as large in the heterosexual men compared to the INAH 3 in women and homosexuals. This implies INAH 3, the nucleus that triggers male-typical sexual behavior, was of the same size for gay men and women. Thereafter, LeVay went on to discover that the corpus callosum (a band of tissue through which the left and right hemispheres of the brain communicate) was bigger in gay men and women compared to that in straight men.

Three years later, a study led by molecular biologist Dean Hamer of the National Institute of Health in Washington, DC, found evidence to suggest that a specific gene—carried on the maternal line—influenced sexual orientation in men. Further research suggests that sexual orientation may be influenced by a combination of genes rather than a single gene.

Put together, the above studies provide strong evidence that homosexuality is rooted in biology, and is not "unnatural" as stated by a saffron clad yogi, the Catholic Church, and in Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. It is interesting to note, that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was drafted in 1860 by Lord Macaulay during the British rule of India and is a reflection of the British Judeo-Christian values of that time. It has nothing to do with "Indian culture" as the self-proclaimed protectors of Bharatiya Sanskriti would have us belief.

"Indian culture" to me is reflected in the passage from The Bhagavad Gita that I have reproduced at the beginning of this blog. "Indian culture" as I see, has always had the wisdom to accommodate everyone and everything. When Krishna shows his universal form to Arjuna, all that existed could be seen in him—things that Arjuna did not know, things that Arjuna never imagined, things that filled Arjuna with awe and wisdom. He realized how foolish he was to limit his vision as Krishna revealed his limitless form resembling the brilliance of a thousand splendid suns. In humility he bowed to the limitless brilliance—to the limitless possibilities of existence.

And it does not end here … it is Krishna who welcomed Shikhandi—born as a female, raised like a son, made a man by a Yaksha—to fight against Bhisma. Is Shikhandi a man or a woman … or both … or neither? What is Shikhandi's sexual orientation? What is the sexual orientation of Mohini, the female form of Vishnu, who enchanted even Shiva? What is the sexual orientation of Shiva who took the form of a milkmaid so that he could dance the raas-leela with Krishna?

Is nature not all-inclusive? Is nature unnatural … or the law?

I pray to Krishna that he bestows all of us with the divine eye, including the saffron clad yogi and the Catholic Church, so that we never have to suffer from homophobia.