Talk:Dalai Lama

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The article makes it look like RW really believes in reincarnation. - LucidFox (talk) 10:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that. While never explicitly stating reincarnation is false (that's more for the article itself to do isn't it?), it refers to reincarnation in terms of points of view and official recognition. Failing to say "reincarnation is false" is not the same as saying "reincarnation is true." Rennie McGreet (talk) 11:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Assuming reincarnation is false, there will still be people who believe in it and will weigh their judgment based on that belief. Thus this article mentions that the current Dalai Lama spends most of his time in India in order to render the weight of judgment more favorable towards RW's agenda (it sounds more conspiracey than it really is). People might be dumb and not right (I'm not saying that outright about Dalai Lama, I'm just saying that in general), but that doesn't change the fact the world sometimes revolves around them and it works around them. And one person's dumbassery can affect many people's judgment. Stalin was a psychopatic piece of shit, but nobody really cared (exaggerated, they actually did care, but they were too scared), so he held much of the Eastern world by the balls. Get my point? Loc (talk) 22:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Should the whole article be rethought?[edit]

I admit right away that I'm no expert here, but I do wonder whether the portrayal of the Dalai Lama doesn't suck up to someone who doesn't, from a rational point of view, deserve it at all. Now, some of the Lama's more questionable stuff is indeed mentioned, but mostly as side issues. Can anyone really give me a good reason why this homophobic, misogynist, creatonist theocrat, who has said that atheism is one of the greatest threats to the Western World (discussed here) shouldn't be treated as, well, exactly that? In fact, apart from his pacifism, he does strike one as remarkably similar to standard televangelists. True, he's said a lot of good about science, but even the Discovery Institute says a lot of good about science (indeed, they repeatedly assert that they truly and dearly love science), but when science actually happens to conflict with religion, regardless of what one says should happen in advance ... well, the Lama's track record isn't particularly good in those cases (and the DiscoTute sure endorses him wholeheartedly for his views on evolution). I don't think quasi-racist appeals to orientalism and Ancient Eastern Traditions suffice as a defense of him, but seems to the source of much of the admiration.

Ok, so maybe I am exaggerating here, but I do have misgivings about the tenor of this article. Anyone else?

Homosexuality and gay marriage[edit]

"...although he's not exactly comfortable with homosexuality..."

I think this clearly states the opposite. [1]

Basically, in some schools of Tibetan Buddhism, there is a belief in sexual misconduct, which is defined as the use of sexual organs that is not penis-vagina intercourse, and in some interpretations, vaginal intercourse is considered misconduct if the act is not procreative. Some schools of Buddhism do not teach or emphasize this to the same extent, but despite this explicit teaching in Gelug Buddhism, the current Dalai Lama seems to be quite supportive of gay rights.

Other sources: [2] [3]

Also, wikipedia:14th Dalai Lama#Social stances

Kvltcat (talk) 00:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


I think the "poking fun" at the DL peace posture is, well, overly cynical and puerile. I suggest a more elegant piece of humor that conveys "respect unless otherwise directed (RUOD). Their are uncruel forms of humor that all cynics should cherish. Recommend - deleate/replace it — Unsigned, by: Purebread / talk / contribs Purebread (talk) 06:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

It is a wiki, do it yourself.--Kugelschreiber (talk) (mail) (block) 23:16, 13 June 2016 (UTC) 23:16, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

So done Purebread (talk) 05:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)