Skip to content
For a plain text, easier-to-read version of this essay, follow this link.

Essay: Colonial Ghosts in a Temple: Why ISKCON Needs to Uproot Abrahamic Influence

by C.K. (The Chameleon)

I'm a queer, transgender Krishna devotee -- and I've had enough of seeing Abrahamic shame culture smuggled into a tradition that was never meant to carry it. I didn't come to Krishna Consciousness to be told my body is a problem, my love is impure, or my gender disqualifies me from devotion. But the more I read, the more I chant, the more I study -- especially after hearing what one ISKCON Swami told Boy George -- the clearer it becomes: some of what's being taught, and has been taught, doesn't come from Krishna. It comes from colonization. And if we want our movement to survive, heal, and truly welcome souls, we have to face that.

Let's talk about what inspired me to write this essay. For those who don't know, I'm a fan of the beautiful and wildly talented musician, Boy George. Back in the late 1980s, George became involved with ISKCON--he was basically a devotee himself. But during a reread of his 1995 autobiography, Take It Like a Man, I came across a passage that shook me. He wrote: "A swami, who I was very fond of, told me it was harder for homosexuals to enter the gates of heaven. I replied, 'Especially if you keep them shut.'"[1]

That hit hard. Because knowing what I know--from reading the Bhagavad Gita, from reading other various texts before and during the creation of this essay, from researching ISKCON before choosing this path myself, and from my lifelong fascination with Vedic traditions (shoutout to my 7th grade social studies teacher for planting that seed)--I had to ask: Why was this Swami talking about "heaven" when Vedic faiths like Krishna Consciousness don't even center around heaven in the first place?[2] We believe in reincarnation. The entire framework is different.[3] So where was this coming from?[4][5]

George also went on to say: "I enjoy the rituals of offering obeisances to Krishna and chanting, especially when there are hundreds of devotees jumping and banging drums. At that moment it seems like the human ego is truly transcended. I do find the sexual attitudes far too rigid, though I admit the cycle of desire is fraught with anxiety and disappointment. I don't choose to cut off from it, maybe I enjoy the pain."[6]

That quote hit me too, because it shows the heartbreak of it all. George felt the transcendence. He wasnted to be part of something sacred. He was immersed in the vibration of kirtan, in surrender, in devotion. And yet... the rigid, shame-heavy views on sexuality pulled him away.[7][8] He didn't leave because he lacked faith. He left because the judgement made the space unsafe.

And here's the thing: in all my research into Vedic traditions, I've never seen this kind of sexual rigidity outside of ISKCON. It's not part of ancient Krishna worship. It's not baked into Hinduism as a whole. So, again... where did it come from? Because it's certainly not Krishna's way in its purest form. If anything, Krishna Himself is the embodiment of divine play, sensuality, and joyful connection.[9][10] This cold, "sex-is-bad-unless-you're-making-babies" attitude? That feels imported. Like someone else's shame got woven into the fabric.[11][12][13][14]

Yoou see, the Hare Krishna movement--and ISKCON in particular--generally views all sex and sexuality as "illicit" unless it's for the purpose of procreation.[15][16] The idea is that one's life should be focused on spiritual growth, not sensual pleasure. But this doesn't actually align with the larger Vedic tradition.[17][18] Our founder, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada didn't discriminate based on sexual orientation in terms of association, but he did condemn homosexual sex on the basis of a common argument: that all sex is a form of material attachment, but heterosexual sex can at least be "spiritualized" through procreation--rasing children in Krishna Consciousness--where as homosexual sex, he claimed, lacked that potential.[19][20]

This logic, however, excludes countless people from meaningful spiritual expression--trans people, infertile people, asexual people, queer people, and more. I myself--a trans man who had his uterus removed due to health issues--am technically excluded by Prabhupada's own words.[21][22][23] He once said: "The sex life between man and woman can be sanctified by marriage. That is the difference. Krishna says in the Gita that "I am the sex life within marriage." So within marriage it can be used for having nice Krishna Conscious children, but not like this. This is very low class."[24]

He then went on to say: "In other words, the homosexual appetite of a man for another man is demoniac, and is not for any sane male in the ordinary course of life."[25]

Let's unpack that, because there's a lot to sit with here. Not only does this contradict the broader tone of Vedic traditions--which are diverse, fluid, and not nearly as rigid as ISKCON sometimes makes them out to be--it also does not align with Krishna Consciousness in its purest, most loving form.

Now, let's be clear: I have deep respect from Srila Prabhupada and the path he brought to the West. But I also recognize he was a man born in early 20th-century India, and like all of us, shaped by his environment. That doesn't mean we have to accept his every word as eternal law--especially when those words create harm or exclusion. Krishna Consciousness isn't about blind obedience, and questioning our leaders is something that is healthy. Because, if we are blindly obedient and don't question our leaders... that would make us the one thing we have been labelled for years--a cult. If something causes pain and turns people away from Krishna, we have to ask: is this truly Krishna's will? Or is it human limitation speaking through divine language?

I don't believe Krishna turns away anyone with a sincere heart. I chant. I offer food. I meditate on Krishna's name and form. I live my life with compassion, humility, and devotion. And I do this as a queer trans man. Nothing about my gender or orientation makes my bhakti less real. In fact, it's often my queerness that deepens my empathy and helps me see Krishna in others. That's the essence of Krishna Consciousness--not who you sleep with, but how you love.

It's also worth noting that queerness is not some modern Western invention--it's existed ceturnies across the world, including in India.[26][27] Ancient texts mention nonbinary beings, gender-shifting deities, and same-sex relationships.[28][29] Krishna Himself danced with both boys and girls in Vrindavan. So where did this sudden rigidity come from? Why are we being erased from a tradition that once made space for all souls?

I'll tell you where it came from. British colonialism. When the British colonized India, they didn't just take land and resources--they took aim at the culture, the spirituality, the sexuality, and the very soul of the people. Victorian morality was exported like poison, wrapped in the language of 'civilization.' They labeled eveything outside their binary worldview as savage, sinful, or obscene. That included fluid gender roles, temple traditions, artistic expressions of divine love, and yes--queerness.[30][31][32] Before colonization, India wasn't some utopia, but it had nuance. It had space. There were hijras and sadhus who rejected binary identity, stories of gods who switched gender or loved across the so-called "lines." There was Kama Shastra and temple carvings that told us plainly: human intimacy was sacred. Not something to be shamed or hidden.[33][34]

The colonizers couldn't stand the idea of spirituality being tied to pleasure, to art, to gender fluidity, to divine play. So they rewrote the narrative. They criminalized queerness under Section 377. They censored temple art. They painted bhakti as wild and backwards, and demanded structure, hierarchy, and shame. They used Christian moralism as a bludgeon, and unfortunately, that poison seeped deep. Over time, even some Indian reformers began to internalize this shame, trading ancient nuance for Western rigidity.[35][36][37][38][39][40]

And here's the tragic part: when Prabhupada brought Krishna Consciousness to the West in the 1960s, he was stepping into a world still marinating in that same Victorian hangover.[41][42] Homosexuality was still criminalized.[43] Gender roles were strictly policed.[44][45] The hippies were awakening to love, but the law, the culture, and the religious institutions were still soaked in judgement.[46][47] So when Prabhupada tried to present bhakti in a way Westerners could understand, he sometimes reached for what they already knew: a God who rewards piety and punishes "sin". A path defined by denial, not dance.[48][49][50][51][52][53][54]

That's how Abramahic influence crept in through the back door--because the West had no framework for sacred sensuality, for God as Lover, for queerness as divine. And unfortunately, instead of challenging that, parts of ISKCON adapted to it. We started hearing words like "sinful", "abomination", "perversion"--words that don't come from Sanskrit, but from shame-soaked Bible verses and colonial penal codes.[55][56]

And now? Those borrowed chains are still binding people today.[57][58] Devotees who don't fit the binary. Devotees whose love doesn't lead to babies. Devotees who, like me, chant sincerely, love Krishna fiercely, and are still told, "Your existence is wrong", "Your love is wrong".

But if we strip away the colonial grime, we find something incredible underneath--something ancient, expansive, and deeply queer.[59][60]

Vedic spirituality was never this rigid.[61][62] Long before British boots hit Indian soil, Hindu texts had already embraced the idea that gender, sexuality, and spiritual worth were not tied to biology or reproduction. In fact, some of our most revered stories celebrate transformation, ambiguity, and the love that transcends the body.

Take Ardhanarishvara--half Shiva, half Shakti--literally one body that is both masculine and feminine. Not a metaphor. Not a symbol of balance. A divine form that is gender fluidity.[63][64][65]

Take Shikhandi, the warrior in the Mahabharata born as a girl and later transformed into a man. His identity is never mocked or questioned by Krishna--instead, Krishna helps him fulfill his destiny.[66]

Take Krishna Himself, who took the form of Mohini to marry Aravan in the Mahabharata. Krishna literally became a woman to fulfill Aravan's last wish for love before death. He didn't do this out of obligation. He married him. That's love. That's bhakti. That's queer divinity.[67][68][69]

And then there's the hijra communities--sacred third-gender people who've existed in South Asia for thousands of years. They're mentioned in ancient temple inscriptions, in poetry, in oral traditions.[70] They were once respected as spiritual intermediaries, especially in rites of fertility and transition. Their erasure didn't begin until the British labeled them "criminals" and tried to legislate them out of existance.

So when someone says, "Queerness and/or homosexual sex has no place in Krishna Consciousness," I have to ask: Which Krishna are you talking about? The colonial one--twisted through shame and control? Or the real Krishna, the divine cowherd who wore flowers in His hair, who danced with boys and girls, who became a bride for a dying soldier, who shattered norms with every footfall?

Because the Krishna I love? He isn't afraid of love or sex in any form. He isn't clinging to binaries. He is rasa--pure taste, pure relationship, pure ecstatic exchange.[71][72][73] He is ever-shifting, ever-playful, ever-radical. And when we return to that Krishna... we all belong.

If we want ISKCON and Krishna Consciousness to truly survive and thrive--not just in numbers but in truth--we need to release these Abrahamic ideas that have infected the movement for far too long. These are not Vedic values. They are colonial imports--rigid, moralistic, body-obsessed distortions passed off as "pure", when in fact they're steeped in fear, shame, and control.[74][75][76]

Times are changing. Who'se to say that in the near future, queer sex--homosexual sex--won't lead to children through scientific advances? That possibility is very real. And when it happens, what then? Will ISKCON still label it "illicit"? Will the definition of "Krishna Conscious sex" suddenly shift to accommodated new reproductive norms?

We don't need to wait for some techno-futurist moment to make space for queer intimacy. We don't need to tie divine love to the production of children at all. Love itself is divine. Desire, when offered with devotion, is a path to Krishna. Sacred touch, sacred sex, sacred affection--these are not distractions; they're expressions of rasa, the soul's longing to connect. They can be just as holy as a round of japa, if not more so when offered with full surrender.

And let's be honest: ISKCON already pushed away a bright, beautiful queer light--a global icon--because of one Swami's colonized vision. George's music--specifically the song Bow Down Mister--and heart brought millions to Krishna--including myself--and still, he was pushed out. If he was deemed unworthy... how many others have quietly left? How many queer bhaktas fall in love with Krishna Consciousness only to be told there's no room for them at the altar, that they can't be Krishna Conscious and have queer sex?

Krishna wouldn't--and doesn't--want this kind of exclusion.

Queer, trans, asexual, intersex, neurodivergent, and other marginalized devotees belong in Krishna Consciousness. We always have. It's time we stop acting like bhakti is conditional. It's not. We are already enough. We are already sacred. The way we have sex is not illicit, nor is it wrong. And we are not going anywhere.

So what now?

It's time to change the conversation. Time to center on love, not fear. Time to unlearn colonial shame and remember the radical, expansive, boundary-shattering love that Krishna represents.

We need temples where all bodies are honored.

We need sanga that embraces queerness with joy.

We need leaders who listen, not lecture.

We need rasikas and rebels. Saints and sacred misfits.

We need each other.

You don't have to choose between Krishna and your truth.

You are already worthy of love, of liberation, of lila.

So dance. Chant. Love. Kiss who you kiss with open eyes and open hearts.

Offer every ounce of your being at Krishna's feet, not despite your queerness--but through it.

Because this, too, is bhakti.

This, too, is sacred.

Hare Krishna. Hare Rama.

Love is love. Bhakti is for everyone.

Radha's arms are open. Krishna's smile is yours.

Jaya Jagannatha

Jaya Sri Radhe

Jaya Queer Bhaktas

Jaya Sacred Rasas

Jaya Love in All Forms

And finally...

To George Alan O'Dowd, aka Boy George: Thank you. You were the first to show me that Krishna could dance in a queer heart. You lit the spark that brought me home to the Divine. Your music saved my life as well. I offer this piece at your lotus feet with love and gratitude.

Hari bol.

Sources/Suggested Reading

  1. O'Dowd, George, & Bright, Spencer. Take It Like a Man, 1995. pp 481-482↩︎
  2. Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. Bhagavad-gita As It Is., 1972. Chapter 8, Chapter 9↩︎
  3. Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. Bhagavad-gita As It Is., 1972. Chapter 8, Chapter 9↩︎
  4. King, Richard. Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and 'The Mystic East', 2002.↩︎
  5. Pennington, Brian K. Was Hinduism Invented?: Britons, Indians, and the Colonial Construction of Religion, 2005.↩︎
  6. O'Dowd, George, & Bright, Spencer. Take It Like a Man, 1995.↩︎
  7. Rochford, E. Burke Jr. Hare Krishna in America, 1985.↩︎
  8. das, Vrajabhumi. Queer Krishna: The Struggle of LGBT Devotees in ISKCON, 2020.↩︎
  9. Hawley, John Stratton, & Wulff, Donna M. Devi: Goddesses of India, 1996.↩︎
  10. Kinsley, David. The Divine Player: A Study of Kṛṣṇa Līlā, 1979.↩︎
  11. Ketola, Markus. Spiritual but Not Too Sexual: The Ambivalence of Sex in the Hare Krishna Movement, 2008.↩︎
  12. Knott, Kim. Hinduism: A Very Short Introduction, 2000.↩︎
  13. Thapar, Romila. Syndicated Hinduism, 1971.↩︎
  14. Nanda, Meera. The God Market: How Globalization is Making India More Hindu, 2009.↩︎
  15. Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. The Nectar of Instruction, 1975.↩
  16. Ketola, Markus. Spiritual but Not Too Sexual: The Ambivalence of Sex in the Hare Krishna Movement, 2008.↩<
  17. Kinsley, David. The Divine Player: A Study of Kṛṣṇa Līlā, 1979.↩︎
  18. Wilhelm, Amara Das. Tritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex in the Sexuality and Gender Diversity of Hinduism, 2004.↩︎
  19. Gelberg, Steven J. Interview.↩︎
  20. Bhaktivedanta VedaBase. Online Archive of Prabhupada's Letters and Lectures↩︎
  21. Ketola, Markus. Spiritual but Not Too Sexual: The Ambivalence of Sex in the Hare Krishna Movement, 2008.↩︎
  22. das, Vrajabhumi. Queer Krishna: The Struggle of LGBT Devotees in ISKCON, 2020.↩︎
  23. Wilhelm, Amara Das. Tritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex in the Sexuality and Gender Diversity of Hinduism, 2004.↩︎
  24. Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 7.11, 1968.↩︎
  25. Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. Letter to Jayapataka, 1974.↩︎
  26. Vanita, Ruth, & Kidwai, Saleem. Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History, 2001.↩︎
  27. Nanda, Serena. Gender Diversity: Crosscultural Variations, 1999.↩︎
  28. Pattanaik, Devdutt. Shikhandi and Other Queer Tales They Don't Tell You, 2014.↩︎
  29. Doniger, Wendy. The Kamasutra, 2002.↩︎
  30. Gupta, Alok. Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals, Economic and Political Weekly, 2006.↩︎
  31. Vanita, Ruth. Love's Rite: Same Sex Marriage in India and the West, 2005.↩︎
  32. Misra, Geetanjali. Decriminalising Homosexuality in India, Reproductive Health Matters, 2009.↩︎
  33. Nanda, Serena. Neither Man Nor Woman: The Hijras of India, 1999.↩︎
  34. Forbes, Geraldine. Women in Modern India, 1999.↩︎
  35. Human Rights Watch. This Alien Legacy: The Origins of 'Sodomy' Laws in British Colonialism, 2008.↩︎
  36. Vanita, Ruth, & Kidwai, Saleem. Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History, 2001.↩︎
  37. Pattanaik, Devdutt. The Man Who Was a Woman and Other Queer Tales from Hindu Love, 2002.↩︎
  38. Hawley, John Stratton. A Storm of Songs: India and the Idea of the Bhakti Movement, 2015.↩︎
  39. Arondekar, Anjali. For the Record: On Sexuality and the Colonial Archive in India, 2009.↩︎
  40. Sinha, Mrinalini. Colonial Masculinity: The 'Manly Englishman' and the 'Effeminate Bengali' in the Late 19th Century, 1995.↩︎
  41. Bristow, Joseph. Sexuality, 1997.↩︎
  42. Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1, 1976.↩︎
  43. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Timeline: A History of Sodomy Laws in the United States.↩︎
  44. Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique, 1963.↩︎
  45. Stryker, Susan. Transgender History, 2008.↩︎
  46. Miller, Timothy. The 60s Communes: Hippies and Beyond, 1999.↩︎
  47. Ellwood, Robert. The 60s Spiritual Awakening: American Religion Moving from Modern to Postmodern, 1994.↩︎
  48. Bryant, Edwin, & Ekstrand, Maria. The Hare Krishna Movement: The Postcharismatic Fate of a Religious Transplant, 2004.↩︎
  49. Goswami, Tamal Krishna. A Living Theology of Krishna Bhakti: Essential Teachings of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, 2012.↩︎
  50. Tellis, Ashley. The Queer Subject of Secularism: Colonial Law, Christianity, and Pastcolonial Gay Rights in India, Journal of South Asian Studies, 2013.↩︎
  51. Vanita, Ruth, & Kidwai, Saleem. Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History, 2001.↩︎
  52. Gupta, Alok. Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals, Economic and Political Weekly, 2006.↩︎
  53. Rochford, E.B. Hare Krishna Transformed, 2007.↩︎
  54. Gupta, Ravi, & Valpey, Kenneth. The Bhagavata Purana: Sacred Text and Living Tradition, 2013.↩︎
  55. Schweig, Graham M. Dance of Divine Love: The Rasa Lila of Krishna from the Bhagavata Purana, 2005.↩︎
  56. McDaniel, June. Offering Flowers, Feeding Skulls: Popular Goddess Worship in West Bengal, 2004.↩︎
  57. Vanita, Ruth, & Kidwai, Saleem. Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History, 2001.↩︎
  58. Tellis, Ashley. The Queer Subject of Secularism: Colonial Law, Christianity, and Pastcolonial Gay Rights in India, Journal of South Asian Studies, 2013.↩︎
  59. Nanda, Serena. Gender Diversity: Crossculture Variations, 1999. ↩︎
  60. Trautmann, Thomas Aryans and British India, 1997.↩︎
  61. Doniger, Wendy The Hindus: An Alternative History.↩︎
  62. Pattanaik, Devdutt. Shikhandi and Other Queer Tales They Don't Tell You, 2014.↩︎
  63. Shaiva scriptures (Skanda Purana, Linga Purana, Shiva Purana)↩︎
  64. Doniger, Wendy. The Hindus: An Alternative History.↩︎
  65. Doniger, Wendy. Siva: The Erotic Ascetic.↩︎
  66. Mahabharata (Udyoga Parva, Bhishma Parva)↩︎
  67. Mahabharata (Udyoga Parva, Bhishma Parva)↩︎
  68. Vanita, Ruth. Love's Rite: Same Sex Marriage in India and the West, 2005.↩︎
  69. Vanita, Ruth, & Kidwai, Saleem. Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History, 2001.↩︎
  70. The Kama Sutra, ca. 2nd Century CE.↩︎
  71. Goswami, Rupa. Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu.↩︎
  72. The Caitanya Caritamrita.↩︎
  73. Schweig, Graham M. Dance of Divine Love: The Rasa Lila of Krishna from the Bhagavata Purana, 2005.↩︎
  74. Sugirtharajah, Sharada. Imagining Hinduism.↩︎
  75. Hatcher, Brian A. Hinduism Before Reform.↩︎
  76. Stewart, Tony K. The Final Word: The Caitanya Caritamrta and the Grammar of Religious Tradition.↩︎