The Dalai Lama; One of the most evil men on Earth?

[JKirkLVNV]

Why does any one religion have to be ‘correct’? I see truth in ALL religious traditions, just as Buddhists do.

Naturally I feel Judaism is the best for JEWS. But there is God in all religions, and all religions are simply man’s way of searching for God.

There may well be a degree of truth in other religions, inasmuch as they have grasp the same things that Christianity teaches in terms of morals. That said and with the greatest respect, truth is, of its very nature TRUE. Someone made the point that ALL religions cannot be true. It’s a terse statment, but no less correct for its brevity. Islam asserts that the error of Christianity is that there is no “association” (if I remember the term correctly and I may not) with God, ie., He has no son, that He is One and His Unity excludes any possibility of such a relationship. Christianity maintains the exact opposite: we teach that Jesus of Nazareth is intimately associated with God, in fact that He is Himself God, the Second Person of the Most Holy and Blessed Trinity, One of Three Persons in an undivided Unity. One of those is HAS to be incorrect and not merely incorrect, but radically incorrect.

 

[mark_a]

Me too. Obviously, I don’t agree with his religion or his relativism, but he has a lot of wisdom. For example…

Sounds fairly…Catholic.

“It is fascinating,” he says, speaking in slightly stilted English. “In the West, you have bigger homes, yet smaller families; you have endless conveniences - yet you never seem to have any time. You can travel anywhere in the world, yet you don’t bother to cross the road to meet your neighbours; you have more food than you could possibly eat, yet that makes women like Heidi miserable.”

The West’s big problem, he believes, is that people have become too self-absorbed. “I don’t think people have become more selfish, but their lives have become easier and that has spoilt them. They have less resilience, they expect more, they constantly compare themselves to others and they have too much choice - which brings no real freedom.”

He has lived as a monk since childhood, but the Dalai Lama views marriage as one of the chief ways of finding happiness. “Too many people in the West have given up on marriage. They don’t understand that it is about developing a mutual admiration of someone, a deep respect and trust and awareness of another human’s needs,” he says. “The new easy-come, easy-go relationships give us more freedom - but less contentment.”

Which just goes to show you, you can have reason without faith, but not faith without reason.

 

[Pope_Noah_I]

Is that a photo of Ghandi? He didn’t believe that Jesus was God. Was he an evil monster?

Well, to an extent. Gandhi was a theist. He believed God was the true good of humanity and he did everything to serve humanity, and thus God. He believed the whole point of existence is union with God, and his belief in non-violence was rooted entirely on the premise that there is a omnibenevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, all powerful Being who created and governs the universe. While his views on religious tolerance were wrong, and thus evil, he still accepted the existence of and complete reliance on God. The Dalai Lama says there is no God, which places him in complete opposition to Christianity, and thus the ultimate good of mankind.

 

[notself]

They are all sourced on wikiquote. The thing is, if God is the sole good of humanity, than surely anyone who says that He is unneccesary is doing the opposite of what is good for humanity, which is evil. Whereas other atheists, ya’ know, killed millions, this one is spreading a message of secular ethics and morality ignoring God completely, brushing Him off to the side as merely a useful idea to attain social peace, and nothing more. As a Catholic, I’d say that is evil.

It appears that Pope John Paul either liked keeping company with evil men or he did not see the Dalai Lama as evil. He met with the Dalai Lama at least eight times.

Here is a link.

wwrn.org/article.php?idd=15239&sec=52&cont=5

By the way, I am still waiting for that link from you. I tried to find the quotes you posted on Wiki Quotes, but no luck. I did find this link with quotes from Wiki. It is close to what you posted but not exactly the same.

katinkahesselink.net/tibet/dalai-lama-quotes.html

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

As a catholic, perhaps you should tend more to the evil in your own house. Cant say I remember the last Buddhist sexual abuse lawsuit settlement, can you?

Well, the below link isn’t a lawsuit settlement, but then again, the folks in Sri Lanka might not have that option:

wwrn.org/article.php?idd=16867&sec=52&con=29

Monk Bellana Panniyaloka was found guilty of grave sexual abuse of a 16-year-old girl in 2001 and was given the maximum 20-year penalty, court official N.K. Siripala said…

…Yesterday’s conviction came a day after a senior Buddhist monk was arrested on charges of sexually abusing a teenager in another Sri Lankan temple, officials said.

The monk, who heads a temple in the coastal town of Matara, 80 miles south of Colombo, allegedly abused a 15-year-old girl, said Dimutu Galappatti, spokesman for the National Child Protection Authority.

Reports of child abuse by Buddhist priests have increased in recent years, but Panniyaloka’s trial is the first conviction of a monk on abuse charges.

About 70 percent of Sri Lanka’s 19 million people are Buddhists, and monks hold a tremendous influence in this Buddhist-majority country. They play a major role in molding the island’s political and social fabric.

A Sri Lankan buddhist might be wondering when the last time there was a Catholic conviction for sexual abuse. Of course since the Catholic population in Sri Lanka is low, you likely wouldn’t hear about it. I’m sure it’s the same regarding hearing about a Buddhist monk paying a lawsuit settlement here in the US.

My point is that your point could be a bit misleading.

 

[grandfather]

Your post in incredibly upsetting to me. I happen to be good friends with both Tibetan Buddhists and Cambodian Buddhists, some of whom were neighbors of mine for many years.

What you dislike about Buddhism is the very thing I LIKE about it: they do not teach that their way is the only right way, and they see the good in all religious paths.

Why do you insist everyone be intolerant?

Suppose just for a few minutes that there is only one truth, one true religion. What would be the ramifications if it were true that the precepts of only one religion this were true? Don’t think yet about which one might be true, if ony one is true, but just let yourself suppose for five minutes what the ramifications are if only one religion holds truth about spiritual reality. The very thought may be incredibly upsetting to you, but if you can get past the emotional repsonse and use logic, what would it mean?

The Jews after all claimed and I would hope still claim that there is only one God and He revealed Himself to them as His chosen to be His people among all other nations. Does that upset you? It does not upset me. It so happens that I agree with them, but if they are wrong, the claim does not bother me a bit. The Mormons, Jehovahs Witnesses claim to be the only sects to have all the truth. That does not upset me either. The Buddhists are relativists and whether or not they are right or wrong their religion does not upset me.

The title of this thread is a bit bizarre, but if the Jews were right, the Tibetens, Zens, and others are wrong.

 

[Namesake]

Well, to an extent. Gandhi was a theist. He believed God was the true good of humanity and he did everything to serve humanity, and thus God. He believed the whole point of existence is union with God, and his belief in non-violence was rooted entirely on the premise that there is a omnibenevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, all powerful Being who created and governs the universe. While his views on religious tolerance were wrong, and thus evil, he still accepted the existence of and complete reliance on God. The Dalai Lama says there is no God, which places him in complete opposition to Christianity, and thus the ultimate good of mankind.

Ghandi completely rejected the idea that Jesus was God. That completely rejects Christianity. He thought Jesus had some good ideas, but he did not accept the divinity of Jesus.

A quote attributed to Ghandi went something like, I like the Christ of Christianity but I do not much like your Christians.

 

[brycelaliberte]

I don’t think he’s possibly one of the most evil men on earth, although he might be the biggest pushover. I’m sure I could go talk to him, have him agree with everything I say, and then someone else go talk to him who is in complete opposition to me, and he’d be in complete agreement.

Seems like a waste of time to even worry about someone like that.

 

[thecoach]

I don’t think he’s possibly one of the most evil men on earth, although he might be the biggest pushover. I’m sure I could go talk to him, have him agree with everything I say, and then someone else go talk to him who is in complete opposition to me, and he’d be in complete agreement.

Seems like a waste of time to even worry about someone like that.

Ah yes, a glowing Catholic example yet again

 

[Lilyflower]

The correct title for the Dalai Lama is ‘His Holiness’. I think that says it all.

I have the most profound respect for this great religious leader.

 

[Tic_Toc]

Why does any one religion have to be ‘correct’? I see truth in ALL religious traditions, just as Buddhists do.

Naturally I feel Judaism is the best for JEWS. But there is God in all religions, and all religions are simply man’s way of searching for God.

Ah, Hashem Echad, you are a man after my heart.

Religion is indeed man’s search for God. The core beliefs in Catholicism and the Sacraments all emphasize our relationship with Christ, and that’s why I love it, because those are the ways I can relate to God; but I think more important than religion is spirituality, around which Buddhism focuses. Catholicism forms the spirituality of the Catholics, Judaism forms the spirituality of the Jews, Islam for the Muslims, and on and on.

Just because you don’t agree with some of the Dalai Lama’s messages, or even what Buddhism teaches, that doesn’t make him evil. I’m sure the Dalai Lama doesn’t agree with some people here (maybe some of the intolerance, or the rigidity), but he respectfully acknowledges your right to believe what you want. Though, I think we all practice Buddhism a little bit, even if we don’t acknowledge that’s what it is; we’ve all done some personal introspection and I’m pretty sure most of us will agree with the philosophy of the middle way.

 

[grandfather]

The correct title for the Dalai Lama is ‘His Holiness’. I think that says it all.

I have the most profound respect for this great religious leader.

What is the reason or reasons for which you respect him? Can you explain them?

 

[notself]

I don’t think he’s possibly one of the most evil men on earth, although he might be the biggest pushover. I’m sure I could go talk to him, have him agree with everything I say, and then someone else go talk to him who is in complete opposition to me, and he’d be in complete agreement.

Seems like a waste of time to even worry about someone like that.

Could you give some examples of him being a “pushover”? A link would be nice too.

 

[Lilyflower]

What is the reason or reasons for which you respect him? Can you explain them?

He is an advocate of peace. He enjoyed a special relationship with his late Holiness JP 2. I believe JP would not have entertained anything not of truth.

Buddhism is not to be feared. The end state according to Buddhism is enterely consistent with that taught by the Jesuits. Merton postulated that ultimately when our new life in eternity is done, all matter of spirit shall ultimately to and be re-united with The Spirit [which is God] and then God will be all in all with His creation. He postulated a great re-unification of spirit to the Spirit.

Merton’s postulated an end state is entirely consistent with Buddhism.

That apart, Zen is practiced the world over by Catholic clergy and religious. Our own parish priest in our Sacristy we have a picture of the Dalai Lama. Our PP in case you are wondering, is very very Catholic and dedicated to preaching the Gospel and celebrating the Sacrifice.

What JP was to Communist Russia, his Holiness will be to Communist China…watch this space!!!

 

[Lilyflower]

What is the reason or reasons for which you respect him? Can you explain them?

He teaches that his religion is simple it is: ‘forgivness, tolerance, peace, goodwill to all creation’.

If that is evil then satan has converted

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

I’m going to see the Dalai Lama speak in July. I’m frustrated. I want to admire him, so much. He’s a monk, he’s a social revolutionary and a prominent proponent of non-violence. There’s one problem though, he’s a Buddhist. Buddhism makes me angry, mainly because it is the only major religion that denies God. I would have so much more respect for him if he said, “Buddhism is the only way. You cannot lead a productive life or reach Nirvana unless you are a Buddhist.” He could at least side with the other religions, but instead he tells people to avoid organized religion, and insists that religion is subordinate to science. He says religion and faith are unneccesary, and don’t even get me started on his ethics. I want to love the man, but he’s basically the Pope of liberals. He represents “spirituality” with our religious obligation. “Faith? Don’t need it! Buddha? Unneccesary! Religion? Fugedabout’it! Just be nice to other people, and be happy!” Which leads me to ask the question, other atheists showed themselves as the monsters they truly were. What about this atheist? He champions secular ethics while denying God! So, does that make him even more evil than Stalin or Mao? Is he truly one of the most evil men alive?

It is the only major religion that postulates the existence of a Creator God. It does not deny the possbility. And, it depends on the Buddhist tradition. A Zen Buddhist may have no problem with God. Even the Buddha spoke of Brahma as if he actually existed.

Those are some serious paraphrases and the links you showed were snipped out of the context (it appears) of what he was trying to say. You also have to remember that English is not his first language. He stumbles through it mostly.

For the record, he is not the equivalent of the Pope and he is not a liberal. His vows are very conservative actually. But, as one of the leaders of the Buddhist faith, he does not seek to rule Buddhists with an iron fist. That goes contrary to the faith.

Every Buddhist makes at least the 5 basic vows, all very conservative. You are mixing his beliefs with his governmental role. He is the spiritual leader of only one of the Vajrayana traditions and the temporal leader of the Tibetan people. So, he is church and state which leaves him unable to fully live up to either one.

He is one of the greatest people I’ve ever come across, regardless of his beliefs. His heart is filled with love, peace and kindness. I wish I lived as holy as he does.

Peace…

MW

 

[AgnosTheist]

Suppose just for a few minutes that there is only one truth, one true religion. What would be the ramifications if it were true that the precepts of only one religion this were true?

the ramifications depend on what that “one true religion” is saying.

Now suppose just for a few minutes that there is NO true religion. What would be the ramifications between the Buddhist teaching and the Catholic teaching?

 

[Pilar]

Very, very true. Let me tell you of something that happened to a couple of Orthodox Jewish friends of mine, who have been active (as I am) in Jewish-Christian ecumenical work.

The Dalai Lama had requested to meet with Jewish leaders, in the hopes of grasping how Jews have managed to maintain our heritage and faith in the 2000 years of our most recent exile. The Tibetan Buddhist people are also in exile, and the Dalai Lama wanted to know if there was any advice Jews could give his people.

So, a meeting was arranged. One problem that arose was that the Dalai Lama wanted to have a banquet with his guests, but alas, they keep strictly kosher!

When this was explained to the Tibetan Buddhists, they pulled out all the stops, and went to extraordinary lengths to make the kitchen suitable for preparing kosher food, they did whatever they could so their guests would not have to be put in a situation of possibly violating any Jewish religious laws.

The wife of the Orthodox rabbi who was at this meeting expressed her plesant surprise, when she said, “They did all that for us, going so far out of their way to take upon themselves the trouble and expense, just so we could follow our religious beliefs while meeting with them? And they did not even have an ulterior motive as in seeking our conversion?”

(Its often been the experience of many Jews, historically, that when Christians or Muslims are nice to them, its with the hidden motive of seeking their conversion by doing so. Yet the Buddhists had no such motives.)

This is a beautiful testiment to the work of the Holy Spitit even when no one knows . . .

 

[Lilyflower]

Pilar posted:

Its often been the experience of many Jews, historically, that when Christians or Muslims are nice to them, its with the hidden motive of seeking their conversion by doing so. Yet the Buddhists had no such motives.)

Amen

 

[AgnosTheist]

^ I agree to that as well.