'That female must be attractive, otherwise it is not much use': the Dalai Lama's controversial comments

  • Thread starter Thread starter Exiled_Child
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Porknpie said:
Actually, I’ve heard the opposite more so in my life: an attractive woman is admired for her beauty, the focus is on her beauty and not for who she is and what she says.
Click to expand...
There is truth in beauty and beauty in truth. Befriend a beauty and fear not. Beauty can initially lead others in, and then SLAP! - the hard-hitting proverbial forehand of truth. Nice.
 
I hate to say this, but I believe that many have to agree with me.

I have seen beautiful women, and great looking men, who have caused more in this world to sin, then ugly people. Just sayin!!
 
rinnie said:
I hate to say this, but I believe that many have to agree with me.

I have seen beautiful women, and great looking men, who have caused more in this world to sin, then ugly people. Just sayin!!
Click to expand...
Four questions:

What do you term as “ugly”?

What do you see as “great looking”?

Do you think classically aesthetically pleasing people don’t have their own crosses?

Do you think physically unattractive people are the lucky ones or the unlucky ones?
 
friardchips said:
What do you term as ‘ugly’?
Click to expand...
You know! 😛

What I am saying is everyone has a image of beauty and ugliness of their own.

whatever beauty is to that person, has a way of getting more out of that person, then what ugliness does.

As we get older and wiser in life, we can see beauty in different ways. But if you truly don’t know what the average world sees as ugly and beautiful look at the star, look for a old video of the benny hill show. I can still see and hear my Dad laughing, even after all these years.

Example the wedding I will never forget. On Benny Hill.

All the Sisters and Mom weighed about 300 or more pounds. The bride was beautiful, skinny, what this world sees as pretty. As the wedding processed she started eating, the dress started popping at the end she was large, sloppy, etc. Humor at its best,.
 
Porknpie said:
Actually, I’ve heard the opposite more so in my life: an attractive woman is admired for her beauty, the focus is on her beauty and not for who she is and what she says.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I agree with what the Dalai Lama said, but that’s my interpretation of his attempt at humor.
 
rinnie said:
You know! 😛

What I am saying is everyone has a image of beauty and ugliness of their own.

whatever beauty is to that person, has a way of getting more out of that person, then what ugliness does.

As we get older and wiser in life, we can see beauty in different ways. But if you truly don’t know what the average world sees as ugly and beautiful look at the star, look for a old video of the benny hill show. I can still see and hear my Dad laughing, even after all these years.

Example the wedding I will never forget. On Benny Hill.

All the Sisters and Mom weighed about 300 or more pounds. The bride was beautiful, skinny, what this world sees as pretty. As the wedding processed she started eating, the dress started popping at the end she was large, sloppy, etc. Humor at its best,.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. You’re being matter-of-fact. I think Audrey Hepburn was classically beautiful yet she was also a good person and so her inner character seemed to radiate sweetness. So the rule is not absolute. As you said though, as we get older we are able to disengage ourselves from worldly illusion and so too the world’s idea of what beauty is, and see beauty in creation that we did not see as such before. For instance, I think seeing nuns is a beautiful sight to behold. I don’t care if they are not classically amazing-looking. But classical beauty is not always a sign of inner selfishness. People are people and we all have our crosses. Sometimes a person can be ‘ugly’ one day and beautiful another whether classically attractive or not. I think this is why nuns are so appealing because they illumine another kind of beauty. Maybe the difference is beholding beauty with a freeing innocence and beholding beauty which we want to capture. Again, maybe the Dali Lama was trying to see the positive side of classically beautiful people and their potential. Quite likely for a Buddhist!
 
I’m not convinced that he was joking. I watched the interview on salon.com, and he says “No, true” when asked again if he is joking.

Beauty does get people to pay attention and listen and linger. It can melt hard hearts. Perhaps he was thinking he was being practical.

However, though I think he meant his comments seriously, if he did, I disagree with him. I certainly don’t need a female or male spiritual leader to be beautiful to get me to listen to them.
 
friardchips said:
Maybe the difference is beholding beauty with a freeing innocence and beholding beauty which we want to capture.
Click to expand...
Yes. Can we appreciate physical beauty, give thanks to its Maker for it and let it go, or must we possess and control to the bearer of beauty.
 
AbideWithMe said:
Yes. Can we appreciate physical beauty, give thanks to its Maker for it and let it go, or must we possess and control to the bearer of beauty.
Click to expand...
Maybe the difference between love and lust: to love is to accept but to lust is to steal.
 
I see it more as a comment on the state of society. People don’t claim to only follow beauty, but look at the media and you will see that people DO follow beauty, many without even realizing it. Every celebrity that has plastic surgery, every supermodel, & most actresses know it and live it everyday.

I don’t think its funny. I think its very, very sad.
 
Lost in translation?

After all, didn’t our own Pope condone gay marriage when he said “Who am I do judge?” and say that atheists will go to heaven just believers will, and that the Koran is as valid as the Bible?
 
on_the_hill said:
Lost in translation?

After all, didn’t our own Pope condone gay marriage when he said “Who am I do judge?” and say that atheists will go to heaven just believers will, and that the Koran is as valid as the Bible?
Click to expand...
No our own Pope did NOT condone gay marriage. The Pope said what every true Catholic should say, that we do not judge the soul of anyone and claim they will go to heaven or hell. Only God can make that claim.

What the RCC and what the RC Pope teaches is that marriage in between a MAN and a WOMAN.
 
friardchips said:
Maybe the difference between love and lust: to love is to accept but to lust is to steal.
Click to expand...
I agree again; plus love always returns gratitude to the Maker of all things. He gives Himself to everyone, with a beauty that can’t be controlled, and which never fades. I love the line from Gerard Manley Hopkins’ “Pied Beauty”:

“He fathers forth whose beauty is past change: Praise Him”.
 
on_the_hill said:
Lost in translation?

After all, didn’t our own Pope condone gay marriage when he said “Who am I do judge?” and say that atheists will go to heaven just believers will, and that the Koran is as valid as the Bible?
Click to expand...
I wondered about that, but I saw the actual interview on salon.com and his English is pretty good. He knows what he’s saying.
 
AbideWithMe said:
I agree again; plus love always returns gratitude to the Maker of all things. He gives Himself to everyone, with a beauty that can’t be controlled, and which never fades. I love the line from Gerard Manley Hopkins’ “Pied Beauty”:

“He fathers forth whose beauty is past change: Praise Him”.
Click to expand...
🙂
 
rinnie said:
No our own Pope did NOT condone gay marriage. The Pope said what every true Catholic should say, that we do not judge the soul of anyone and claim they will go to heaven or hell. Only God can make that claim.

What the RCC and what the RC Pope teaches is that marriage in between a MAN and a WOMAN.
Click to expand...
I think that’s what on_the_hill meant, that the true meaning of the Pope’s words, as well as those of the Dalai Lama, was lost in translation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top