6.6. Sexual Minorities in Ancient India

[Full title: Ancient Indian Social Life: Excerpts from Kāmaśāstra (6): Sexual Minorities]

From time immemorial, the world is divided only for men and women. The criterion for this division is mostly based on sexuality. The relationship between a male and male or a female and female is considered as unusual or anti-natural. The human sexuality is basically categorized under three heads viz; heterosexuality (sexual relation between men and women), bisexuality (sexual relation between both men women) and finally, homosexuality (sexual relation between same genders only). Of them, the homosexuality is again divided into two divisions as gay and lesbian. Relationship between two females is lesbian and between two males is gay. Except heterosexuality, all others are considered as anti natural and especially homosexuality is considered as a sin by the society. Here it is to be think that what is the sin in this type of naturally happening orientation issues? Different cultures in different times approached homosexuality in various views.

The erotic life of ancient India was generally heterosexual. Homo-sexualism of both sexes was not wholly unknown; it is condemned briefly in the law books, and the Kāmasūtra treats of it, but cursorily and with little enthusiasm. Literature ignores it. In this respect ancient India was far healthier than most other ancient cultures (Basham A. L., 1986: 172). Sanskrit language handles the terms like tṛtīyāprakṛti, klība, ubhaya, napumsaka, or ṣaṇḍa etc for indicating heterosexually dysfunctional people. Indian culture admits and denies such orientation issues according to circumstances. But usually, it is seen as a wicked conduct in every respect.

In Kāmasūtra, sexual minorities are termed as tṛtīyāprakṛti or third nature^[1] and it is of two kinds as in the form of a woman and in the form of a man^[2]. Of them, the first one imitates a woman in dressing, chatter, grace, emotions, delicacy, timidity, innocence, frailty and bashfulness respectively. All the sexual acts done in a woman can also be done in such persons and it is termed as oral sex. From this, they will get pleasure as well as the means of livelihood and they will live as like a courtesan^[3]. Then the third nature in the form of a man however conceals their desire when they wants a man and makes their living as a masseur^[4]. Kāmasūtra also explains about the oral sex between nāgarakas done each other^[5]. Interestingly enough Vātsyāyana also mentions that some people marry (parigraha) members of their own sex and live together either openly or in secret^[6]. The woman in harem also do sex with the same gender.

The reason for that says thus:

“The woman of the harem cannot meet men, because they are carefully guarded; and since they have only one husband shared by many women in common, they are not satisfied. Therefore they give pleasure to one another with the following techniques. They dress up a foster-sister or girlfriend or servant girl like a man and relieve their desire with dildos or with bulbs, roots, or fruits that have that form. They lie statues of men that have distinct sexual characteristics”^[7].

It cannot be said that a fully developed thought about the issues regarding gender or sexual identity existed in earlier times. But it is observed some initial instincts are seen at that time. Kāmaśāstra society observed sexuality in its all forms as mainly depended upon physical body as well as mental pleasures. All the categorizations are based on that physical nature of male or female bodies. So, today homosexuality is observed as an inclination of mind, but in ancient times it is totally observed as a way of satisfying sexual thirst temporarily.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

bhinnatvāttṛtīyā prakṛtiḥ pañcamītyeke ||

[2]:

dvividhā tṛtīyāprakṛtiḥ strīrūpiṇī puruṣarūpiṇī ca ||  (kāmasūtra, 1. 5. 27) (kāmasūtra, 2. 9. 1)

[3]:

tatra strīrūpiṇī striyā veṣamālāpaṃ līlāṃ bhāvaṃ mṛdutvaṃ bhīrutvaṃ mugdhatāmasahiṣṇutāṃ vrīḍāṃ cānukurvīta | tasyā vadane jaghanakarma | tadaupariṣṭakamācakṣate | sā tato ratimābhimānikīṃ vṛttiṃ ca lipset | veśyāvaccaritaṃ prakāśayet | iti strīrūpiṇī || (kāmasūtra, 2. 9. 2-5)

[4]:

puruṣarūpiṇī tu pracchannakāmā puruṣaṃ lipsamānā saṃvāhakabhāvamupajīvet || (kāmasūtra, 2. 9. 6)

[5]:

pramṛṣṭakuṇḍalāścāpi yuvānaḥ paricārakāḥ |
keṣāṃcideva kurvanti narāṇāmaupariṣṭakam ||
tathā nāgarakāḥ kecidanyonyasya hitaiṣiṇaḥ |
kurvanti rūḍhaviśvāsāḥ parasparaparigraham || (kāmasūtra, 2. 9. 35-36)

[6]:

http://devdutt.com/articles/appliedmythology/ queer /did- homosexuality-exist-in-ancient-india.html

[7]:

nāntaḥpurāṇāṃ rakṣaṇayogātpuruṣasaṃdarśanaṃ vidyate patyuścaikatvādanekasādhāraṇatvāccātṛptiḥ | tasmāttāni prayogata eva parasparaṃ rañjayeyuḥ | dhātreyikāṃ sakhīṃ dāsīṃ vā puruṣavadalaṃkṛtyakṛtisaṃyuktaiḥ kandamūlaphalāvayavairapadravyairvātmābhiprāyaṃ nivartayeyuḥ | puruṣapratimā avyaktaliṅgāścādhiśayīran || (kāmasūtra, 5. 6. 1-3)