Stripping the Gurus

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think that being pro-nuns-slapping-each-others'-genitals-for-pleasure is a very noble and underappreciated cause.

[Cardinal Pizza Deliverance.]

I think that being pro-nuns-slapping-each-others'-genitals-for-pleasure is a very noble and underappreciated cause.

I was going to say . . . shouldn't this be promoted as a sport or something?

[Phox]

I think that being pro-nuns-slapping-each-others'-genitals-for-pleasure is a very noble and underappreciated cause.

ECH is correct. Now let's convince that pesky Pope that this highly enlightened., Eastern ideal works well within the strictures of Catholicism as well.

[Telarus]

 

[Lies]

Ah, but he's using the arguments provided in the book on those who DO believe, so...

Yeah, thats what I saw this as. Not to mention the comments on his rather odd ideas about being reincarnated as a computer, or that Sex during the day is bad, but Nuns slapping each others genitals for pleasure is OK... maybe some of his followers have no clue about some of his more controversial commentary.

OK, but I was responding to Lies' comment:

One of my favorites mentioned is the Dalai Llama. I've actually met the dude. I knew something seemed a bit "off" about him, and this book pretty much confirms stuff I've thought for a while.

The book does no such thing, unless you buy into the idea that the current Dalai Lama is actually the same guy as previous ones who were creeps. Unless it's not in the chapter about the Dalai Lama, it had pretty much nothing bad to say about the current Dalai Lama at all.

How much did you read of it Nigel?
TL:DR heres a youtube clip summarising http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kstH-8jwa80

[Lies]

Oh, and thanks Cain for saving me the trouble of having to actually elaborate on the shiftiness of the Dalai-Lama.

[Lies]

http://www.strippingthegurus.com/index.html

Great book which exposes pretty much every famous "guru" and is great fodder to use on devotees.

One of my favorites mentioned is the Dalai Llama. I've actually met the dude. I knew something seemed a bit "off" about him, and this book pretty much confirms stuff I've thought for a while.

Enjoy.

Most of the chapter on Ramakrishna seems to be about him being trans and/or gay.  I fail to see the problem or why this would invalidate him as a spiritual leader.

I dunno who that is.

But I assume, if he preaches one thing and does another, that would invalidate his spiritual leaderness, and I don't know many spiritual leaders of prominence being ok with the gays.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Ah, but he's using the arguments provided in the book on those who DO believe, so...

Yeah, thats what I saw this as. Not to mention the comments on his rather odd ideas about being reincarnated as a computer, or that Sex during the day is bad, but Nuns slapping each others genitals for pleasure is OK... maybe some of his followers have no clue about some of his more controversial commentary.

OK, but I was responding to Lies' comment:

One of my favorites mentioned is the Dalai Llama. I've actually met the dude. I knew something seemed a bit "off" about him, and this book pretty much confirms stuff I've thought for a while.

The book does no such thing, unless you buy into the idea that the current Dalai Lama is actually the same guy as previous ones who were creeps. Unless it's not in the chapter about the Dalai Lama, it had pretty much nothing bad to say about the current Dalai Lama at all.

How much did you read of it Nigel?
TL:DR heres a youtube clip summarising http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kstH-8jwa80

I read the chapter about the Dalai Lama. So unless all the dirt about the Dalai Lama was in chapters that weren't about him, I'm confused about what you said. How much of it did you read? What parts confirmed which thoughts you'd had about him being "off", in what ways?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I don't think you read it. Did you?

[Lies]

Yes,I did.

My feelings about him are long and winded, actually this is just one of many things that have confirmed what I always felt deep inside.

Lets just say, the warning bells went off around the time I realised if you have a question for his holiness, it must be screened and processed and be the "right" question before you get to hear his answer,.

[Succulent Plant]

I'm no fan of the Dalai Lama, but I am a fan of non-fiction books clearly citing reliable sources.  This book doesn't seem to.  When I started reading the chapter about the Dalai Lama I read this quote:

Given this reincarnational lineage, then, we need hardly be surprised that the current Dalai Lama has himself voiced a thought or two concerning sexual matters. For, when questioned as to which common experiences he had most missed out on, the retirement-aged monk "pointed at his groin and laughed: 'I obviously missed this'" (Ellis, 2003).

and clicked the link in the source and its a broken link to The Mirror. 

Then this one:

"Ignoring the sacred customs of Lamas and monks in Tibet he began by bestowing care on his hair, then he took to drinking intoxicating liquors, to gambling, and at length no girl or married woman or good-looking person of either sex was safe from his unbridled licentiousness" (French, 2003; italics added).

the source is not a link, so we have nothing but "French, 2003" for a source.  The fuck?  Half a name and half a date?  Sure I could google the quote and find out if this is a person by the name of French or the collective citizenry of France circa 2003, but meh.  I'm not very educated or well versed in current academic standards so maybe this type of thing is acceptable, but as an average person reading a non-fiction book I expect the sources to be more specific and reliable before I'll pay any attention to the content and conclusions.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yes,I did.

My feelings about him are long and winded, actually this is just one of many things that have confirmed what I always felt deep inside.

Lets just say, the warning bells went off around the time I realised if you have a question for his holiness, it must be screened and processed and be the "right" question before you get to hear his answer,.

This has nothing to do with my feelings about the guy; I assume religious leaders are total shits. I'm just calling bullshit on what you said because the actual chapter on the Dalai Lama didn't really contain anything condemning of the current one. And the book doesn't look like anything I'd cite with confidence anyway... it's very tabloidesque. And,  you didn't answer my questions.

I read the chapter about the Dalai Lama. So unless all the dirt about the Dalai Lama was in chapters that weren't about him, I'm confused about what you said. How much of it did you read? What parts confirmed which thoughts you'd had about him being "off", in what ways?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

My feelings about him are long and winded, actually this is just one of many things that have confirmed what I always felt deep inside.

Alarm bells should be going off, right about now.

[Cain]

the source is not a link, so we have nothing but "French, 2003" for a source.  The fuck?  Half a name and half a date?  Sure I could google the quote and find out if this is a person by the name of French or the collective citizenry of France circa 2003, but meh.  I'm not very educated or well versed in current academic standards so maybe this type of thing is acceptable, but as an average person reading a non-fiction book I expect the sources to be more specific and reliable before I'll pay any attention to the content and conclusions.

That form of citation is actually fairly common in academic writing.  It should be covered in the bibliography...if there is one.  If there isn't, then that is pretty useless, I agree.

[Succulent Plant]

the source is not a link, so we have nothing but "French, 2003" for a source.  The fuck?  Half a name and half a date?  Sure I could google the quote and find out if this is a person by the name of French or the collective citizenry of France circa 2003, but meh.  I'm not very educated or well versed in current academic standards so maybe this type of thing is acceptable, but as an average person reading a non-fiction book I expect the sources to be more specific and reliable before I'll pay any attention to the content and conclusions.

That form of citation is actually fairly common in academic writing.  It should be covered in the bibliography...if there is one.  If there isn't, then that is pretty useless, I agree.

I was afraid there would be a simple explanation that I was missing. lol Thanks.

Looked in the bibliography, here's the source: French, Patrick (2003), Tibet, Tibet: A Personal History of a Lost Land (New York: Alfred A. Knopf).