Why is beauty so important?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomarin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
  1. From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense.
Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry.

vaniquotes.org/wiki/Six_opulences

Bhagavad-gita As It Is
BG Chapters 7 - 12
BG 10.1, Purport:

The word bhagavān is explained thus by Parāśara Muni: one who is full in six opulences, who has full strength, full fame, wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation, is Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. While Kṛṣṇa was present on this earth, He displayed all six opulences. Therefore great sages like Parāśara Muni have all accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

The six opulences possessed by God, attributed mythically to Krishna, but derived by the Hindus through much study and meditation, belong by right to Jesus. To enumerate them directly,

Strength
Fame
Wealth
Knowledge
Beauty
Renunciation.

Now it is already commonly accepted as Catholic Doctrine that God possesses all strength — that is the doctrine of Omnipotence. Similarly, all knowledge — the doctrine of Omniscience. We also know that Jesus possessed all renunciation, since,

Philippians 2:5. . . Christ Jesus: 6 Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. 8 He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross.

Jesus could have chosen to be born like Solomon was, into the palace of a King, with fame and wealth at His command. He chose, rather, to be born instead into obscurity and poverty, notwithstanding that Joseph was actually the rightful heir to the throne of Judah (hence the genealogy of Saint Matthew). Jesus Himself is the Most Beautiful Being there ever was or ever can be, being Himself the Transcendent Source and Reservoir of all True Beauty. But to fulfill the prophecy of Isaias,

Isaias 53:2. . .there is no beauty in him, nor comeliness: and we have seen him, and there was no sightliness, that we should be desirous of him:

He did not manifest His Transcendent Beauty while on Earth, except perhaps in the Transfiguration. When He returns in His Glory, then, we shall see Him as He is. Amen!
If your quote from Isaiah is concerning Jesus. I am very familiar with the six opulences. But keep in mind Krishna as I’m sure jesus also could, appeared to people as they wanted to be seen. Especially Jesus after the transfiguration. Krishna never had a physical body but appeared to some to. In these two cases Paul’s words of that “which is imperfect has been made perfect” comes to mind. One day we’ll be just like them!
 
Physical beauty gives pleasure or comfortable to look at, ugliness; some discomfort. Physical beauty got sexual effect. But not the most important characteristic, but good anyway. I see an old big nosed newscaster in TV and it’s he’s admirable.
 
If your quote from Isaiah is concerning Jesus. I am very familiar with the six opulences. But keep in mind Krishna as I’m sure jesus also could, appeared to people as they wanted to be seen. Especially Jesus after the transfiguration. Krishna never had a physical body but appeared to some to. In these two cases Paul’s words of that “which is imperfect has been made perfect” comes to mind. One day we’ll be just like them!
I am interested to know more about Krishna and what you have read or heard about him, and where you read or heard it. I have never heard it said before that he had no physical body. It this from the Gita, where he says, “this is merely my Maya, my prakriti, my illusion.”?

I have heard that verse interpreted as to say that the whole material manifestation is an illusion, or that continual reincarnation and rebirth is an illusion, but never to say that only the appearance of Krishna’s physical body was the illusion referred to. Can you kindly elucidate some more on this? Thanks!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top