Jwayne

The implication is that Salvijus (you) possesses a unique ability to detect 'genuine compassion' and that victims everywhere were abused because they couldn't differentiate 'genuine compassion' from 'lust'. Otherwise, what's your point? What you call 'compassion' millions of others consider to be abusive. So maybe keep that 'compassion' away from other peoples' children.

It's easy? That's victim blaming. As if it were the fault of the abused for not detecting a predator. If it were easy then there wouldn't be scandal after scandal all over the world.

I want you to be careful, because you may have kids one day. Or be responsible for children in some capacity. A predator may be a very pious and compassionate person. They may be loving and friendly towards the kid without any obvious signs. But, if you were to follow them around, you would see the things I mentioned: compliance testing, trust-building, keeping secrets, increased physical contact, and so on. My point is that the Dalai Lama exhibited increased intimate contact (e.g. mouth kissing) and some degree of compliance testing in this 50-second clip. And not with an adult woman (or man), which would be a normal part of the mating ritual. But with a young boy. That's an abnormal red flag you should pay attention to in your real life. You may want to dismiss it because he is recognized to be a very spiritual person. But please, be skeptical, in your own life, for the sake of potential victims. Don't be naive about how, unfortunately, common child abuse is.

Yes, theoretically. But we are discussing an actual moment recorded on video. Are you omniscient? Can you see inside other people's minds? So what's the point of you saying whether someone is acting out of 'lust' or 'playfulness'?

Some predators seek the consent of children. And when the child agrees to the act, then will they procede together. The predator feels morally satisfied that the child has agreed to participate. And so they don't feel they have done anything wrong, even if the victim later recounts their pain. You may also have consent under coercion, such as being on-camera in-front of a large audience seated before a godly figure whom you are taught can do nothing wrong. The entire situation leads you to believe whatever they do must be right and my feelings must be wrong. It would take Herculean courage for a kid to reject the advances of a holy man in such a situation. The predator has many ways of framing it, but they all serve to justify the enjoyment of the adult over the helpless minor.

I have to add that many predators (i.e. pedophiles) are also 'compassionate', 'respectful' and 'loving' towards their victims. Some are violent offenders, no doubt. But many are simply seeking intimacy (albeit in the wrong place). They get that intimacy by grooming children via building trust and through compliance testing, such as keeping secrets. The victim may not even recognize their own trauma and suffering until many years later. At the time of the abuse they may report feeling normal, or even positive. So that the Dalai Lama was non-violent does not mean he wasn't being abusive. Children cannot give consent. Does every adult have the right to mouth kiss other people's children and ask 'and suck my tongue'? Do exiled Heads of State and religious authorities have greater privileges over children's bodies than others?

Exactly my point. Children cannot give consent because they are minors. Is it worse to ask a minor for a mouth kiss and 'suck my tongue', or to just do it? They're both reprehensible, are they not? Suppose you ask. The kid may say no. I would prefer a predator asks so the kid has an extra opportunity to defend themselves. So its safer for a predator to not seek permission and rather ask for forgiveness later. Exactly as the Dalai Lama has done.

Maybe the Dalai Lama should have sought consent before making intimate advances. "Would you like to kiss my mouth?" "Would you like to suck on my tongue?" Instead he leveraged his authority over a powerless child without asking (or caring) about the kid's opinion, or the kid's guardians/parents opinions. He could have asked the parents, "Will it be okay if I make a sexually suggestive joke on-camera with your son? I want to ask him to suck my tongue and then see if he will comply and really do it, or not."

I'll give you something for your list. #1. Grooming behavior. The Dalai Lama used a series of compliance tests to see how much he could get away with. Which is a common practice amongst sexual predators. First something inoffensive, like "come closer". And then progressing to more intimact contact, like hug and mouth kiss. And then after a moment of deliberation, an escalation to something even more inappropriate.

I can promise you that the people you are discussing with on this forum right now don't have children nor close relations with them. It is impossible to be so crass about this subject ('haha it's just a sex joke') when you are personally around children that you love and care about on a daily basis, and see how impressionable and sensitive they are.

People in the 'East' are also outraged. That's my entire point. People in India, China, Korea, Japan, etc. are also disgusted by this. There is no 'cultural defense' for this. Hence why HH was forced to issue an apology. If it was standard behavior then he would be able to explain. This is very symptomatic of the dark side of repressed sexuality that can show up in voluntary celibates, such as Catholic Priests. The Dalai Lama used his authority to tower over the child in this situation. That's how trauma is formed and its exploitative. Now what's happening is a kind of gaslighting against Eastern people by Western people because Eastern people are very protective of their children. No nation in the East has sex education textbooks showing blowjobs, etc. like certain European countries (e.g. Netherlands) do. The sexualization of children is a Western phenomenon and this is being projected onto the East, as if Eastern people also think the same way. This is not about Tibetan 'tongue greetings'.

I absolutely agree that sexualizing children is exploitative.

Danioover9000 probably doesn't have kids, and neither does the Dalai Lama. People without close connection to children through either family or vocation can't relate to why others have a protective instinct towards them. And they can't appreciate the way children experience the world, how impressionable they are, and how trauma forms. It's not okay to make sexual jokes with children. Nothing even remotively sexually suggestive in any way with children is appropriate. The Dalai Lama's actions were very direct and straightforward, and wrong.

Some want to 'speak for' Tibetan culture when they're not Tibetan themselves. And neither have they asked Tibetan people whether they need someone else to speak on their behalf. Nor have they even asked a Tibetan person their opinion. And they can't produce any evidence that men asking children to suck on their tongues has anything to do with Tibetan culture. They can't produce any evidence of why adults kissing children on the mouth and asking them to 'suck my tongue' would be funny to Tibetan people. The nervous laughter in the video is disbelief that the Dalai Lama is being serious and how wildly inappropriate it is, hence His Holiness' apology (which by the way, were only for his hurtful words, and not even his actions).

Shame on you for suggesting that children sucking men's tongues is a normalized part of Tibetan culture. Dalai Lama didn't merely 'stick his tongue out' as a greeting from a distance but said to the boy to kiss him on the mouth and after he did so he requested "and suck my tongue". And then leaned his tongue towards the boy's mouth. Can you find any examples of Tibetan men asking or joking with children to suck their tongues? Can you find any evidence that this is a joke in Tibetan culture? Are there any other videos where people do this? Shame on you for suggesting that Tibetan people think pedophilia jokes are okay. You want to 'defend' their culture, but have you asked any Tibetan people what they think? You are highly presumptuous.

Watch the video a few times to realize he wasn't joking. First he made the mouth kiss last a long time. Not like a peck on the lips. It was a passionate kiss. Then he held the kid's head for a long time like you would a lover. Yes, his 'suck my tongue' words are seemingly spoken as if a joke. And just because its so outrageous the people in the background nervously laugh. But he actually sticks his tongue out and gets in the kids face. He leans into the boy's face after saying that. The larger point is that he's a virgin and previously admitted on video that not knowing sex was the biggest thing he regrets in life. It's like the pedophilia prevalent in other religions almost always by volcels.

To start a family and have children. Having a family returns an unfathomable amount of richness, pain, beauty and joy into your life. Also family is a source of power. Even if you don't start a family, long relationships provide companionship which means someone to laugh with, explore together, romance, have fun with and to cooperate in sharing labour and knowledge.

Don't go to college to study Buddhism. Go to college to get a practical certification or degree that's going to further your career aspirations. I'm sorry but, my opinion is that, spirituality certification is not going to pay in Indiana.

But people read 'perfect' and interpret it according to their conceptualized expectations, as in having all of their desires fulfilled, especially the 'spiritual' ones, like infinite pleasure without a moment of pain. Many people think 'enlightenment' must be like that. Whereas you mean, I assume, a different sense of perfection.

Specifically, I say that, because the conscious effort to love is indubitably moving in the right direction. And it is suitable for everybody. Whereas the effort to 'awaken' can take you in many different (even opposite, conflicting) directions, including onto potentially dangerous paths not meant for everybody, like an obsession with the use of recreational substances.

But you don't need to wait or rely on 'awakening' to 'LOVE'. You can start being loving right away.

Of course!

Also, "you" can't do it alone. Anything substantial in the world requires the collaboration of others. That's the crucial part missing in all self-help/spiritual discourse. Of course, you should seize the day and not resign yourself to a belief in fate that will justify your anxiety/unwillingness to act, but also, you must work with and serve others.

Exactly, its a game of semantics. It is better not to engage in such silly ego contests, nor to fuel the egomania of the persons starting them.

Love, beauty and bliss are always there but we also have lives to live that demand our attention to be occupied with other tasks. The demand to be entertained or pleasured with "24/7 bliss" is pathological. Instead, you should learn how to contact bliss so that you can be with it when you are not engaged with other more urgent, distracting worldly things. Obviously, bliss is also present in the worldly activity too but not in the form you were expecting, or have as yet learned to appreciate. To appreciate the extraordinary in the ordinary is a wiser intention than to demand 24/7 pleasure from mystic-realization-experiences.