This is a TRC 89-2. The East West Foundation presents Harmonia Mundi. Worlds in Harmony. October 1989 in Newport Beach, California. This is a forum dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama. We want to continue our discussion today. We now have heard from everyone who was in the group. Most people did go to groups. And we've heard some questions and we'll be hearing those during the session as well as those from the panel. So why don't we just begin. Could you perhaps speak a little just to see if the audience will hear you. Some people are saying that they couldn't quite understand what you were saying earlier. And it might be a mic problem. Is that clear in the back?

[01:02]

What did he say? Okay. Why don't we just proceed with any questions that have been discussed? Yes. We'll hear from the audience. There are several questions. In fact, there are a large number of questions and statements and issues which came from the 30 groups that we had. And Dan and I have done our best to boil those down and condense them into the essence of what came up this morning. And the first one is really two or three questions that are very similar or related to each other. And that is, is suffering an essential element, an essential part of life?

[02:08]

That is, is suffering inevitable, or is it something that we are creating by the dualistic way we think about the world and also it can some good come out of suffering. Based on, for this question, based on different belief systems that individuals might have, answers could be different according to individual. You know, from Buddhist viewpoint, solo are main mind dominated by ignorance or negative emotions.

[03:15]

You know, suffering, one form or another, always there. Of course, there's some suffering which we ordinary people do not recognize as a suffering. So, you know, to me, In Buddhist teachings, sufferings are spoken of at three different levels. One type of suffering is very obvious, physical sensations like pain. And the other level of sufferings is the suffering of change, which normally we associate with happiness, pleasure. And then the third level of suffering is the pervasive suffering of conditioning. That's the way it is. But these sufferings do have one positive aspect, which is by being aware of the sufferings, then this can inspire within oneself a wish to be free of suffering, look forward to a liberation from suffering.

[04:49]

But the sufferings by themselves are not desirable. It's something that is totally undesirable. So it's really how we use the suffering. I would like to raise another question in this connection, which is that everybody knows that suffering by all human beings, indeed all sentient creatures, one might say, throughout history has been part of the sentient condition, whether of other creatures or humans. However, I have come reluctantly to the conclusion that at this moment of history we stand in a place where there is something absolutely unique in human history which is that the risks that are being taken by the people who really hold the power of the world in their hands mostly men i might add that is true that uh

[05:56]

the risks that are being taken for an amazing level of suffering, which has never been known in history, to include possibly the end of all human experience, and perhaps of sentient creatures of all kinds, that this is a unique moment about suffering. So that I don't think it's in a way proper to simply ask the question, is suffering something we must accept as part of existence, really? Because we stand, in my opinion, in a unique place in all history. I'm wondering what you would say to that. Then I think here maybe usually I make a distinction, that men made suffering. And the suffering of another. Okay. Another form. Then, you see, the man-made suffering, definitely, if we adopt certain, how to say, attitude, and if not completely eliminate, definitely we can redo.

[07:09]

In that field, you see, everyone is concerned, isn't it? Yeah. The other type of suffering, there is something, something, I don't know, something, that I think is mainly concerned about individual, according to individual faith and individual practice. We had people who wanted to find, to see ways of telling the difference between being able to tune in, to be aware of other people's suffering, or distinguishing that from really feeling their own suffering and projecting it on the other people, when they were really feeling other people's suffering. So there's some... I don't know.

[08:37]

The question is, Oh, how do you... Oh, projecting. Whether you know you're reacting to someone else's suffering or to your own, which you project onto them. Yes, it is. I mean, there are other things. And then how to... How to tell the difference. Any suggestions? Well, you know, I'm not surprised that His Holiness said, I don't know, ask them to help. Because the fact is that whereas I imagine most of the people in this room are in the helping profession one way or another, not all, but most.

[10:03]

that that question confronts us daily in our clinical work, which is, how do I tell the difference between whether I'm simply reading into this person's feelings, something I'm feeling and I'm suffering about, or whether this is something truly in this other human being? I would only say to that, that since suffering is a fairly universal experience to begin with, you can't go too far wrong, meaning that to simply say, this is my feeling and I am pretending it's this person's feeling, is probably never altogether true, because suffering is suffering after all. I would say, though, that sometimes, at least in my own experience, which extends over more years than I care to think about, one of the guidelines, it seems to me, is that if you feel

[11:08]

this person is suffering about this, and you say what you think, then you can tell by the response from that person whether you are simply reading something into their feelings or whether they are responding in such a way which says, you're right, and now let me tell you, and they go on with this and this and this, which suggests there is something in them as well, at least as well as in you. That's a guideline which I find very useful. George Hendricks. Joanna. This question about, am I feeling my own pain? Or am I feeling the world's pain comes up a great deal? And I think we cannot really categorically separate because we are interconnected. And when we see the suffering of our brothers and sisters, of other countries, of other species in our own place, we are part of the culture that is doing that.

[12:21]

Just as we were walking in here, Stephen was saying, I am very tired because all year Andrea and I have been working with sexually abused women. And you spoke, you were feeling pain. Is it your pain or the women's pain? See? If there's a place in me that the pain can stick to, it will. That's a good answer. When we were working with people who were dying from 10 years anyhow, the naturalness of death, not much resistant. People die with pain in the body. But when we started to work with people who had voluntarily been tortured, somebody's heart, somebody's mind had been so closed, so unsensitive, You mean purposely rather than voluntarily?

[13:24]

Purposely. That there was a voluntary... There was a voluntary suffering. Involuntary suffering of dying, we all die. We aren't all tortured, though. And I found in myself... I don't think you mean voluntary excuse me I just want to clarify the torturer some other person chose to inflict the torture the person did not volunteer to receive it no one person intended to hurt another where there's no intention of harm and death it's just a process and I saw in myself as we worked more with people who had been hurt intentionally by others, more fatigue, that it stuck to me more. There were more places in myself that fought injustice, that felt uncomfortable with the suffering we all are involved in, this train of suffering, this conspiracy of suffering.

[14:34]

And I think I found it stuck to me more where there was that quality of someone willing to hurt another. Intending, even. Intending, exactly, is the answer. I was wondering, did it also... Oh, okay. Should we have some reading? I'll give you one. This is very true because you sort of lived experience and you sympathize. You involved yourself personally in the suffering of the dying person. That's a very good thing. I think it's very good. Could we? Your holiness, when you say it's very good, you mean it's very good to be so personally involved that you feel the pain of the person you're working with?

[15:44]

Yes. But Stephen was saying that he felt it so much that he was feeling he couldn't go on with the work. Well... that he was very tired. Go on with the world. I'm still here. Are we talking about the difference between pain and suffering here? Pain is a given. If you're born, you have a body that has nerves. If you bump it into something, it hurts. We're born with a desire system. We don't seem to accumulate it as much as reinforce what's already there. Good? The difference between pain and suffering. Pain is a given. If you have a body and you hit it against something, it hurts. Is suffering our response to pain? Could one just live in the pain and not be suffering?

[16:45]

I'm saying both physical and emotional. Compared to the sensations of... Now, first of all, let us define between pain and suffering. Pain here, we are talking in terms of physical sensations. Pain in terms of sensations. very suffering in terms of mental responses that you experience as a result of the pain. Now, if we define in that way, then one could say that mental suffering and mental happiness, mental joy, are more accurately felt than physical sensations of pleasure or pain. Therefore, it is possible that by the force of mental pleasure or mental suffering, it's possible to overwhelm the force of physical sensations.

[18:05]

So your main question is... So His Holiness' answer to your question, whether it's possible to, in spite of having experience of pain, whether we can avoid suffering, His answer is yes, definitely yes. But sometimes, for example, I think certainly physical pain, I think actually voluntarily, how to say, accept sometimes. Now, for example, in order to, how to say, to have healthy body, let's say too much exercise, during that moment, you may feel very tired, isn't it? And even if it's some joint, you may feel pain. But these things, you see, there is some, how to say, cathartic. I mean, reason to accept these things. So mentally, no suffering. Isn't it?

[19:12]

Even you, because of that, instead of having a mental suffering as a result of these physical pains, when you see muscles growing up, you might even feel happy. Yes, sir. I found myself reacting to Stephen, who in working with abused women is having much more of a hard time of it than working with people who are dying. And I think about how it might be because It is done by people like us, and in this case it's done by men to women. And whenever I listen to suffering that is inflicted by a human being on another human being, there is a different feeling about how could a person like me do this awful thing to another person like me. And the ease, you say easily, it can be done easily.

[20:16]

And it's appalling. And whenever we are in cultures where power over others is part of this essentialness of it, it seems as if there is some pleasure in having power, expressing power, which unfortunately often has to do with inflicting pain on other people. And this seems to be in the area of man-made, or human-made, but essentially in our culture, man-made pain, which you were describing as something that is unnecessary when suffering. This brings to me the question of how much we should try to change the world to make it different. Don't show the book. What are you saying? Huh? Huh?

[21:21]

Hello? Hello? Yes? Hello? Yes? Huh? Huh? Although the answer might seem quite sort of benign. The answer might seem sort of a little bit simplistic, but speaking from his point of view as a monk, all of these... He might believe it.

[22:25]

He might believe it. All these things happen due to level of altruism, compassion, a sense of responsibility, a genuine sense of brotherhood, sisterhood. So you consider something superior. And whenever opportunity there, you exploit the other side. So essentially, their level is more, I think, moral. This is epidemic in the world. And he asked, shall we try to change this? very unusual so you see people eventually i think my my idea would be through education through various means through media through education through family life

[23:33]

You see, educate or make different awareness. And if not our present generation, but the coming future generation to the mind, to introduce the necessity of this altruistic mind and attitude. That's the question of survival, not question of luxury. Present them clearly. His Holiness views that in order to awaken the future generations' mind to these issues, it is important to present them as a question of survival, not a matter of religion or morality, but rather as a question of survival. With this moment in history, it really is. Yes. Anyway, pain or unfortunate things, sometimes it's very bad, but it may become an important factor to wake up.

[24:40]

It's a new idea, the realisation of something lacking. That's nice. Yeah, I wanted to pick up on something that Stephen said also, another aspect of it. You said, if there's any place where it will stick to you, it will. I want to put a word in on behalf of things sticking to you. Jack, could you say a little what you mean by sticking to you? Yeah. I rely on Alan to help me with this. No, no. What I have in mind is the idea that both from a Buddhist point of view and also from a psychotherapeutic point of view, there's sort of an ideal that somehow we should be above suffering, that we should not be touched by, not touched exactly, but that we should be in some position of equanimity.

[25:45]

And that often means somehow above the pain or beyond it or not be touched by it or not be affected by it. And I don't think that's ever helpful. I think we ought to be touched by it, even if... I'm not sure that's possible. Oh, it's very possible. Therapists do it all the time. Not good therapists. No, and... No, we can do this all the time. Hold this up for translation, please. the so-called neutral therapist, the objective therapist. While they're sorting that out, you know, I mean, that's part of the training of many people. I think in order to, as I say, other persons, they suffer people's, I mean, the person who suffer, in order to lessen that suffering, if you take some part of that suffering, that means actual feeling cannot take, but you yourself join the same sort of, you see, mood or same, I'd say, suffering, then that helps the other person's, I'd say, feeling.

[27:17]

Isn't it? So there is some benefit in shared suffering. And sharing another person's suffering, you can take off some of the burden. When you see someone, although I'm not a third on this line, now you see just meeting some, you see, unfortunate people, when they complaining about their, sort of, you see, unfortunate things, then I join, you see, with them and my own, you see, unfortunate things and mention, You are not alone. There are many people, including myself. They're eternal. We are going to give you a license in the State of California. I think people will line up for his office. Jack, did you want to continue? Good. Very good. That's it.

[28:21]

Dan, did you have a point? Yes. The original question was how do we tell the difference as to whether we're reading into the suffering that we perceive or whether we're genuinely feeling something of the suffering of that individual or group. It seems to me that the answer to that question depends on one's level of consciousness, a level of awareness, and that with an ordinary mind of ignorance, then it's not clear, and that many times we misperceive and we think that the suffering out there is really suffering, but it's really our own fantasies. Then I think that in the Western psychotherapy traditions, there are methods that people learn to make the distinction. They learn to... gain a greater analytical knowledge of their own feelings and fantasies.

[29:23]

And they are taught in their training to discriminate more clearly between when it's their own fantasy and feeling and when it's pertaining to the suffering of the person there. And that is a kind of learning that occurs in good clinical practice in this country. And it's a certain level of consciousness, if you will. But then it seems to me, It seems to me that what we learn from Buddhist practices is another level of awareness by which we can answer this question, and that is that if people through meditation practice have the direct experience of codependent origination, if they have the direct experience of everything being connected in some way, then from that direct experience If I have a thought or an action, it's clear to me that my thought or action ripples out and affects everything else, or that if I perceive

[30:30]

suffering out there that that suffering of a person or a group affects my consciousness and ripples out in all directions and that that causes a great disturbance if it's a great kind of abuse. And I cannot fail to be affected by that. It does affect me very deeply. So when you have the experience of some interconnection, then That question of what's the difference between fantasizing or reading into suffering and the reality of the person suffering just doesn't occur. Of course you must be affected because everything is interconnected. Did you want His Holiness to respond to some part of that? I don't know. I don't know. Press into the steam.

[31:53]

I would like to get down to a very specific... Be that as it may, there still is a distinction between one person's consciousness and that of another person. They're not simply all mushed together. In the specific example department, You described this morning of yourself, your feeling reaction to events. Your country was invaded, people were killed and raped, and a great deal of awfulness happened there. As psychotherapists and human beings, we always wonder how people bear this, go on feeling joyful, and go on being active in the world to change the situation. Somehow I get the impression that you have managed to do that. That you have not, it's clear that you are not obsessed by anger, fear, hostility.

[33:31]

Yet you are actively representing your people in the world. I wonder if you could tell us anything about how you personally dealt with the awfulness that you saw and experienced. I think my personal experience I don't know. Is it perhaps Tibetan? And personality or characteristic? I think some kind of, how to say, when you face tragedy, still you take it that easy way.

[34:34]

I think that kind of is in nature in Tibetan. character. But that is a character developed due to Buddhist influence or not. Still we need further investigation. So in any way... Part of the national character of Tibetans and you're asking whether is this part of Buddhist practice? Yes, that's right. What to attribute it. Okay. I think the one is my easy . This is the reason why we have a lot of competition in the world.

[35:39]

We have a lot of competition in the world. We have a lot of competition in the world. We have a lot of competition in the world. His only point is this, and that is in Tibet you have a very large region of land with quite a low population density. And in this kind of simply geographical situation or sociological situation, then there's a natural tendency to look upon your neighbor as a person to help and from whom to receive help. Reliance is built into the situation by the geography itself. Now, when you have people living in a very high density situation, then there may be a much more natural tendency to look upon your neighbor with suspicion and with a sense of competitiveness. So you're withdrawing from that person. So given this, and given the Buddhist influence, His Holiness then wants to check this out further to see, well, what really shall we attribute this Tibetan resilience to?

[36:42]

And simply the feeling of space that was there into that. So basically, as a Tibetan, that's one thing. Then Buddhist training, of course, naturally. a deeper realization or deeper understanding about a different level of suffering. That's also very useful. And also acceptance, the rebirth theory. And also, you see, the theory of action, karma or action. That also is very useful in order to lessen, you see, mental burden or mental suffering. Then another thing. You see, the things already happened. There's no use to worry. No use crying over spilled milk, we say.

[37:49]

So then, you see, try our best and with sincere motivation. If success, very good. If not success, no regret. That's that kind of, you see, analytical, I'd say. additive approach, yes, that have a lot. Then perhaps I can short-sighted. There is no immediate danger. Then happy. Short-sightedness helps. That's very formal, isn't it? Well, it seems like short-sightedness really means that you can live in the present. I mean, what you are defining as short-sightedness means that you can be in the moment, in the present, and enjoy it, regardless of what happened the day before yesterday, and not losing track of tomorrow.

[39:08]

This is a joke, isn't it? This remark, the last remark, was partly as a joke. And also maybe, I think, if you see imminent personal danger, if something's here, then may not be so calm. May not be so calm. You may find that the batons aren't quite so resilient if somebody's grabbed them right in the back of the neck. Your Holiness, this morning you spoke a number of times about the notion of penetrating suffering, going into suffering. There were many people in the audience who would like to hear you speak about some technology, some methods for exploring that suffering and for penetrating into it, that they could be personally helpful to them in their own exploration.

[40:15]

Now for a practitioner, Buddhist practitioner, the suffering nature of samsara, instead of forget or avoid, just concentrate on it, meditate on it, analytical meditation. And then also is another thing. I think you see daily life, some problem, some tragedy happen. Then if you look at that problem from very closely, then it appears something very big. Then, you see, try to, how to say, try to look at from distance. then the same problem, same tragedy, appears smaller. And also, you see, very important to remember,

[41:21]

And also, the state of mind that you adopt, mental attitude that you adopt towards looking at the suffering also matters a lot. For instance, if you have a tragedy, a personal tragedy or a problem, And if you look at it from a close-up and feel so overwhelmed by it, be so obsessed by it, and feel depressed, then on top of the tragedy itself, you will have mental anxieties and so on. But you could look at it from a different point of view, different angle, thinking that Although it's very sad and tragic that I have to suffer this, but I could have suffered more, thinking more of what could have happened. So if you look at it that way, even by that type of mental attitude reduces your mental anguish and suffering. As you mentioned, you see, from Buddhist viewpoint, everything are relative.

[42:53]

So you see, there are many, one thing, one object, one event, there are many different aspects. So when we look at one, you see, negative aspect, only you see, think about that, then it, it, it increase, I say, it through bootlatch for that. the enormity of it seem to appear to increase for you. It worsens it. Now, for example, you see, you met some, you see, the troublemaker, one person, harms you or hurts you. Then if you look that person, on the aspect that person is harming, and the only thing about that Then anger will develop, increase. But then, look at the person from different angle.

[43:57]

Now, he did something, he or she did something bad. But then, anyway, how to say, it actually, you see, give me some kind of opportunity or, I think, chance to experiment my, how to say, inner strength. She or she give me opportunity for practice of patience or practice of tolerance, looking that way. And then sometimes, you see, reduce the negative feeling. That, you see, unfortunate event. something betterment. This is related to forgiveness, right? That's right. If you take the situation in such a way that thinking that that unfortunate incident or event gave rise to certain possibilities for you to increase your inner strength and so forth, benefits that you derive from it, then that in itself, by itself, reduces the feeling of negativeness towards that.

[45:14]

So you see, that kind of... that kind of approach to suffering. That is what I call, you penetrate into the suffering. This concludes side 1. To continue listening, go now to side 2. Forget about suffering. That's something like, you see, we made some kind of picnic or holiday. The problem yet to solve. It's just a short-term relief, isn't it? So instead of doing that way, penetrate the suffering itself, or the tragedy itself. Then once your mental attitude somehow changes, that is a real tattva, overcoming the problem. In a way, you're saying you always must be in a position attentively to give the other person another chance.

[46:23]

Meaning, as Gandhi said, we must not think of the one who harmed me as an evil person. We must think of him or her as having done a harmful or evil action. But there's always another chance. You know, I had the thought last week when preparing for this conference that the relationship of this to individual suffering and individual us trying to help other individuals who are suffering is that if one can help a person to do that within him or herself, to give one's self another chance, to give oneself another opportunity to respond in some other way, rather than part of oneself being judgmental and angry and violent toward the other part of oneself, that there is an internal forgiveness which must happen if indeed the conflict is to be helped.

[47:24]

Do you like this? That is true. That is true. Absolutely. That's very important. It is very important to make this distinction between the act and the actor, not simply to be identifying the actor as 100% negative. Is it possible to follow this question further, having taken a different point of view to the suffering, than what?

[48:25]

God. How does one practice from there? Then the suffering of the mind decreases. I don't know. [...] Um.

[49:29]

Up to now His Holiness has been talking about how you change your mental outlook, mental attitude towards how you take the suffering, how you view it, look at it. And after having done that, that is to retain your equanimity in your mind, calmness of mind, and you don't react negatively. But after that, whether you let the other person continue with that kind of undue taking advantage of you or not depends upon the situations. You really have to judge the situation on an individual basis. Yes. So it's a forgiveness or it's a patience. It does not mean you completely, sorry, gogol marwa. acquiesce to anything that anybody does to you. Doesn't mean completely giving in. What's your imperative?

[50:55]

Now, for example, you see, you remain very humble, you see, very tolerant one. Then the other person takes that opportunity and is demanding, some use it as an unreasonable thing. Then, under such circumstances, without anger, without ill-feeling, then judge the situation. Then, if the situation shows that you need countermeasure, then take countermeasure. Like, for instance? Yes, resistance, right? For example, Now in our own case, Tibetan case, now you see, a lot of suffering happened under the name of liberation.

[51:59]

But then, you see, analyze Chinese, even Chinese leader, as a human being, as our neighbor, But people who are from our neighbor country, and a long history, you see, they're high civilization. So, you see, thinking this line, instead of feeling ill feeling, you see, respect. So, that help reduce, let's say, negative people. Patience, tolerance. This does not mean we accept, you see Chinese, how to say? Oppression. Say we try to do whatever we can do and necessary, whatever necessary to stand firm. We do. Without it feeling.

[53:02]

Sounds like civil disobedience to me. Really? Yes. Well, it's resistant. So individual case also. I'll say something similar. There's something that is an unreasonable demand or something. They need resistance or countermeasure. Then I often use mention or explaining that countermeasure in fact may be more effective than supposed to countermeasure motivated by anger, that counter measure may not be effective. Because, you see, when our mind is dominated by anger, then how to become mad? You won't be able to hit the target. Very nice. It also seems to me that as we get older, we get wiser in the sense of this too shall pass.

[54:12]

And as I hear about your attitude and know that you have an awareness of your previous lives then partly are you able to detach or forgive because you really know this too shall pass that this is just one event in a series of historical events that you can detach from? I mean, is that part of your perspective, is a long, long historical view of things? As I explained earlier that the Buddhist upbringing, belief in life after death, the theory of karma, that the law of the karma actions and its effects and so forth, these do contribute towards one's developing that kind of equanimity, acceptance of karma.

[55:49]

I think it's a very important thing. I think it's very important. I think it's a very important thing. I don't know if you can understand what I'm saying. I don't know if you can understand what I'm saying. I don't know what I'm saying. So the point here is in terms of suffering in general as opposed to the suffering that we as individuals or as groups have already experienced.

[57:01]

So the point His Holiness is making here is not that we gain insight into the impermanence or the passing nature of suffering and then go into an apathetic state, just feeling, well, that doesn't really matter because it doesn't, and it's okay if I experience suffering in the future. This is not the point at all. That in terms of suffering, the idea is to recognize it and allow that recognition to give rise to a yearning and aspiration to gain liberation from it, but not an apathetic response to it. But now in contrast to the suffering that we've already experienced in the past, it is completely fruitless to simply go into a turmoil state or anguish or anxiety about that and get caught up in it. Leave that, but in terms of the suffering of the present and the future, the recognition give rise to a yearning for liberation. Well, that's marvelous. It seems to me what Joanna said earlier about this going into a kind of opposite in terms of this has happened before, it will happen again. and it's all impermanent and therefore it's okay.

[58:03]

The opposite is in fact the case. This is what I think if I understood her. Joanna was saying it's a spiritual trap to go into apathy on the basis of a misunderstanding of Buddhist teaching. Did I understand that correctly? Well, I read it or something. I think that is what His Holiness is saying. We have about 15 minutes remaining. I knew that Jack and Jean and you, Margaret, had specific questions. Why don't we... Dan and Jean and Mark, why don't we just go... This question, again, is based on my experience, and I gather a number of other people here, working with individuals who have suffered some sort of extreme abuse... Could you say what you mean by abuse? Oh, for example, physical abuse to children, sexual abuse to children and adults, victims of various atrocities committed to refugees like the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and Central America and Cambodia, for example.

[59:18]

We can take the specific instance of political torture. If I am working with somebody, for example, a man in his 50s who in his South American country was very, he was a small farmer and actively and genuinely concerned to help the poor people in his country and to better them, to better their condition and work against the oppression. And he would help in terms of reforming the laws about distribution of land and, well, in the course of doing that, he was taken, he disappeared, and was tortured. And the torture consisted of being taken away from his family and in the course of that blindfolded and submitted to many numerous beatings and being submerged in water with excrement.

[60:29]

and applied various electrical shocks to the body and being hung from his hands and knees like a helicopter spun around and beaten. This happened for about six months. He was released and then went back to his work, helping his people, although he got many nightmares and was very anxious. Because he did not stop in his help towards people, two of his five children were murdered. When he saw the grave risk for his family, he left his country and sought refuge in another country. in this country, and tried to continue his help for his people here. But in doing that, felt that in some ways by leaving and not carrying on the fight for his people directly, that he had somehow let his people down.

[61:36]

But he did overcome his despair and continue. And in continuing, later learned that his other three children had all been murdered as a way of trying to demoralize him. Now, he gets sometimes depressed and sometimes suicidal. He gets very panicky. And yet, in working with him, The people who work with him try and help him to continue his purpose, to help his people. Now, when I hear a story like this, and hear many stories like this, I have a very strong reaction to the overwhelming suffering of someone with good intention. I wonder about, this is the first question, about how we might view that suffering from a Buddhist perspective. It seems to me that in Buddhism, the emphasis on suffering is on the suffering of the ordinary mind, how the three poisons, clinging, aversion, and ignorance, contribute to the suffering of the ordinary mind.

[62:52]

It seems to me that the emphasis in people in Western therapy who work with trauma, the emphasis is on the reality and the social reality of this intense pain and suffering that's inflicted willfully and intentionally to destroy the will and dignity and humanity of another person to prevent them from helping people who are oppressed, who are not in power. The first aspect of the question is, how are we to correctly view this suffering? From an ultimate perspective, is this kind of story of suffering empty? Is it merely an illusion because we don't understand it properly? I don't understand this, and I would like some way to know how one can view this intense suffering and reconcile that with notions of emptiness.

[63:57]

The second aspect of the question... Should I wait there? Okay. Yeah, right. When I was a child, I used to go to school with my parents. [...] Here His Holiness feels that it's important to understand the meaning of illusion that is being spoken of in Buddhist context. There are many different levels and meanings of illusions in a broader sense of the term and on sort of more specific and

[64:59]

specific sense. And in this case, when you confront people with that kind of mental suffering, trauma, who have undergone traumatic experiences, these are indeed sufferings, and these are real sufferings. They are not just illusions. there are two types of illusions that are being dealt with here and that is one is an illusion where your mind is simply confused you're mixed up you're confused and therefore you perceive an illusion because of the confusion of your own mind this is a very conventional a normal level and this is in this case the the uh... the anecdote or the situation that you described, this is not the case. There's real suffering and we have a correct perception of it. And so there's a point here of verifying cognition. Well, a verifying cognition means valid. You have validly perceived the situation and seeing this man has experienced tremendous suffering. When you speak in terms of Buddhist philosophy, there's another level altogether, which is far more subtle, which does not have to do with this level of confusion at all. And it's on that level you'd say, yes, there is, because these are dependently related events, in that sense, there is an illusory aspect to it.

[66:07]

But it doesn't come into the common English usage of the term illusion. Okay. Usually here you see, I think great risk to misunderstand the meaning of emptiness, voidness. actually the meaning emptiness here just is absence of independent existence that kind of thing so that shows is it a nature of dependency The emptiness here is made in terms of empty absence of an independent existence that we project onto events and things.

[67:28]

Therefore, emptiness has a connotation of fullness, a connotation of being dependent, fullness, a connotation of being dependent upon other factors, so there is interconnectedness implied in the doctrine of emptiness. So without going into any detail into a very profound and elaborate topic, what is meant in Buddhist philosophy, specifically Madhyamaka by the term illusion, is that whereas phenomena appear as if they were inherently existent, did have this independent existence, in fact, they do not exist in that way. So the appearances are, in fact, somehow contrary to their actual mode of existence.

[68:29]

This is all that's meant by illusion, and not that it simply is not really there or something. You know, I would just briefly like to return this question to the practical issue with Stan Rave when he talked about the people who had, in fact, been sources. who had in fact had their relatives kidnapped and so forth. And he spoke of one man whom they were trying in their work with him as healers to help him resume his work of resistance against this kind of harmful action to himself, his family, his community. And I think this is a terribly important part of this story because if we leave it simply on the philosophic level, then it's not so useful. Margaret, let me follow that up. That was really the second part of the question. Sorry. And that is that as clinicians... We have been struggling with how to develop good methods to treat people who have experienced this extreme kind of abuse or torture in our country.

[69:45]

And we find that people go through various stages of recovery, and at each stage there are certain methods that are useful. In your experience, and particularly your experience with your people, many of whom have also undergone this extreme kind of abuse and torture, what do you find helpful by way of the view that is taken in Buddhism and also by way of the kind of way to practice that will help people overcome this kind of harm that's been done to them? In case it's a Tibetan, usually I tell them, in a way, This tragedy is very sad, very unfortunate.

[71:00]

Our generation, who born this particular period, the period, the darkest period, all Tibet history. It's very sad. But one way, when tragedy there, when there is challenges there, that's good. to fight, to confront it. So in a way, you see, our generation, very unfortunate, but at the same time, if you look, this is a good opportunity. You see, to fight, to carry out a freedom fight. How to fight? So you see, that's... Discourage Chathuriya. If you look at this situation as an opportunity to test your integrity, your inner strength, then you can

[72:09]

You can, instead of being overwhelmed by the enormity of the situation, in fact, you can increase your determination and strength, because you can see it as a test of your integrity and strength. Dan, did you want to follow up? Yes, we find that... Yeah, I think sometimes people, again, misunderstand the karmic theory. Something happens, generally speaking, due to past karma. But then, obviously, these things happen due to the social, sorry, something the social has to say, injustice. Here, you see, we made, we should make it, you see, two levels. Two, sorry, two. The social injustice, it can't go away. So in this situation, it's easy to misunderstand the Buddhist notion of karma.

[73:17]

We need to understand what is more of the primary cause and what are the contributing circumstances. So in the case of, let's say, great suffering coming about as a result of social injustice or this kind of situation, you can say the primary cause behind it is the karma of the individuals involved who are experiencing the suffering. The cooperative conditions that allow that karma to ripen are the social injustices that are evident. That's a very large arena. For example, in the case of the Tibetans, the suffering that Tibetans actually experienced comes, it arises essentially from their own karma. That is the primary cause, their own actions and previous lives. But the conditions that allowed that karma to ripen is the Chinese, that's constituted by the Chinese oppression. And so in this regard, then, to struggle, to fight against these conditions of social injustice and so forth, this is appropriate.

[74:26]

I think we have time now for one last question, and it begins. In many parts of the world, women are treated as lesser beings over whom men have power. And this creates many kinds of oppression, from lack of education to working, to sexual and physical abuse. And I wanted to ask you specifically, what is a Tibetan Buddhist attitude towards women? Are men considered spiritually superior to women in Tibetan Buddhism? And what are the essential differences between the sexes? And then I had the one question which was, has His Holiness recall of previous lives as a woman? I wrote that. I wrote that. Right? um let alone being able to recall my experiences in my previous life i even sometimes can't recall what i did yesterday that's okay as a buddhist you know they say who accept i don't believe i accept and believe the theory of rebirth

[76:02]

So as if, no question, in my previous life, there were a lot of women births. There's some death, isn't there? And future life, also, you see, not at all certain. Women body, or male body, or some different form of body, I don't know. Now I think the most important thing, Buddhist concept about, you see, the sex, men, women. Now in, I think in basically in Buddhism, no discrimination, I think. the ultimate aim, you see, equal, male and female.

[77:06]

In order to, I mean, in order to achieve Nirvana, in order to achieve Buddhahood, no differences. Then, so that right is over there. Right is concerned, the ultimate right is concerned, the same. But then, in Vinaya Sutra, I mean, what is that? Monastic discipline. Yes. There is a bhikshu or male fully ordained monk. The fully ordained monk is placed in a position of seniority over women. And so the totally ordained monk does have a higher position of status, somewhat higher status than that of a nun, an ordained Buddhist nun.

[78:15]

In the Vinaya, which is the Buddhist teachings of monastic discipline for men and women. But now, by and large, it seems that in the sutrayana, the teachings of the bodhisattva path, and... In the lower tantric, in the lower tantras, that in the very life in which one attains full awakening of Buddhahood, it seems that it's, what, necessary? Yes. Necessary to be male in that particular lifetime. Then the ultimate or highest tantra, according that, no differences. So in terms of the highest region or dimension of Buddhist practice, namely highest yoga tantra, from that perspective, there is no distinction even in that final life in which you attain Buddhahood.

[79:27]

There's no difference whether you're male or female. You see, in this system, actually, it's the same system more, how to say, I think more concerned about female rather than male. For example, An example of that is there are a number of root downfalls in the context of this highest yoga tantra practice. Among these root downfalls is for a male to abuse or to look down upon a female. If one does that, it's a root downfall. It's a disastrous deed. There is no comparable downfall for a woman looking down on a man. So we are jealous. So the men are jealous. That's all in theory. Very good. Then I think it's a Tibetan society.

[80:27]

Now, in Tibetan society, which is a different issue, it's more or less the case that there's not much difference in status or position of males as opposed to females. I think, you see, when we were in Tibet, you see, we have no, how to say, no botheration or no notice about it. Then, later, we, how to say, we came to know about the, some way or the other, we see, differences in male and female in India. or in China, compared to these two big neighbors, then our situation is much happier. Really? That's impressive. Can you ever imagine being reincarnated as a woman Dalai Lama? That of course is possible. That's possible? That's possible. Now you see, in religious, how do you say, One Lama, the female Lama, considered very high.

[81:40]

But if you are a teacher, a Lama teacher, a spiritual teacher, if you are [...] a spiritual teacher, In terms of lamas or spiritual teachers in the Tibetan tradition, there's simply not much distinction is made between men and women. The whole point is, do you have, is your practice good if you gain kind of realization? If you have, then you're bound to have students and then you become a lama. So here I think, like the goddess Tara, So there's a true feminist movement in Buddhism which relates to the goddess Tara. Tara? You know? And the account goes as follows, and that is that when she, following her cultivation of bodhicitta, the bodhisattva's motivation, then she looked upon the situation of those who were striving towards full awakening and attaining that.

[83:25]

She felt that there were too few people who attained Buddhahood as women. it's too small a minority so she developed the resolve stating that well I've developed bodhicitta this bodhisattva's motivation as a woman for all of my for my lifetimes along the path I resolve to be born as a woman and upon my in my final lifetime when I attain buddhahood then too I will be a woman so this is true feminism thank you very much your holiness could you remain in this concludes tape TRC 89-2

[83:57]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_75.8