This is tape TRC 89-6. 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 and closing statements. This afternoon we're continuing with the topic of how to make a difference through compassionate action. And as has been our custom, we're going to begin with the questions from the groups. Mr. Holy. Live here? Okay. In our Western society, Your Holiness, the external achievements such as how much money people make or what position they have, whether they're presidents of companies, are indicators of success. What signifies success in Tibetan society?

[01:03]

As a Tibetan, it's very difficult to give an answer to this question. Just offhand. Then, you see, when we have some knowledge about other people and their mental states, then it seems, comparatively, the Tibetan mind, I think, is a little bit calmer. Confused. Confused. It seems like a simple question.

[02:24]

There are really two things happening in Tibet. On the one hand, there are secular affairs. People engage in business and so forth. And then there are the more spiritual, the spiritual side. In terms of the more secular side of life in Tibet, the notion of success is more or less the same. But then there is also the spiritual dimension. And so for those who are more drawn to that, then not these outer accoutrements about wealth and so forth, but rather the inner realization, the quality of your awareness and so forth, these are what constitute success. There's not much to say besides that. Okay. We understand that it's fortunate enough among the Tibetan people that there is a lot less incidence of family violence. And we're wondering what the families in Tibet do differently so that there is that much less violence. It's not to say that there was never any violence in the homes in Tibet, but when it happened,

[04:10]

people tended to be amazed and say, oh, look what happened, which suggests that it was rather rare. But now the exact reasons for that, the whole context for it, His Holiness really hasn't paid a whole lot of attention and investigated into it. So it's hard to come up with a clear answer at this point. So in the case of divorce in Tibet, it would happen on occasion, but when it did, people would raise their eyebrows in surprise and say, oh, what happened? So it was signifying that it was an unusual event. In terms of relationships within the family, His Holiness feels in the East, that is Asia, probably a better situation than in the West. When he hears the complaints in contemporary Indian society, that in traditional Indian

[05:20]

society, this is to say in Asia, that there was a very strong emphasis on the extended family. And so there was a lot of very strong emphasis on family ties, family harmony, and seeing the onslaught of Western influence, that this cherishing of the extended family has gradually, gradually diminished more down to the nuclear family. And the traditional Indians feel a lot has been lost in this process. In fact, one time I met one Indian gentleman, he explained about this situation. He told me in his family, there were 200 people. That's too much, I think. Okay. The overall theme today and for a good part of the conference is compassion. And you did

[06:21]

speak and gave a definition this morning of compassion. But a number of people in the hall would like you to speak more about compassion. What do you think? Which approach to take? Perhaps on the cultivation of compassion. This will be a topic of discussion by His Holiness tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Okay, we'll save it for then. So perhaps the time would be, perhaps it would be redundant to take that time now when the same material will be covered in a couple of days. There's a specific question that came up that was interesting to us.

[07:23]

And that when it comes to organizations, whether they're business organizations or social organizations or government organizations, how do you help organizations act compassionately as organizations? On the one hand, there is no organization or group of people that is not constituted by individuals. Apart from individuals, there are no organizations. And so wouldn't it be beneficial then to focus upon the individuals in the organization,

[08:32]

especially those who bear great responsibility, and try to cultivate in them or encourage in them a greater sensitivity and awareness of compassion? And moreover, in society as a whole, if we can simply bring a greater emphasis, a greater awareness of the importance of the benefit of compassion, and without any particular association to one religion as opposed to another, simply the benefits for society, His Holiness feels this will be of benefit as a matter of survival. Thank you. I wanted to, Your Holiness, would you elaborate more on it being a matter of survival? You go ahead.

[09:55]

I think I got it. And that is, there's been a lot of discussion here about the crisis of contemporary civilization, the great turmoil, the problems we're encountering. Where are these arising from? From the very lack of loving kindness and compassion. So if we can focus on this, then the benefits of compassion are obvious. Then, of course, you see, the threat of nuclear weapon. That is something very, how to say, very dangerous thing. Now, you see, in order to stop that or in order to reduce the threat, again, ultimately, compassion. They realize the other people, the other side of the country or the people, realize as another human brother, sisters. So, ultimately, again, in that field also, the compassion, I think, is important.

[11:00]

Then, I think, in a family, with the family, I think the whole atmosphere, compassionate atmosphere, then not only is the parent or those elder people enjoy, but also the coming generation. As we already discussed, they have mental development and physical, even physical development is both cases much healthier. So, you see, so that's that. I always believe that. As I remarked earlier, I personally very deeply believe that compassion is the root,

[12:11]

not only for the evolving of full human being, but also the very survival of the human being right from the beginning of the conception and then through the birth and then growing up. Well, you know, it was quite clear. I don't know. We can discuss later, I think. As an interpreter, I'd like to interject very briefly, and that is in Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, when using the term mind, it does not refer to mind as opposed to heart. In Tibetan Buddhism, there's no distinction between the two, so it includes both. When you speak of the development of the mind, it includes compassion, loving-kindness, not just men. The question is, what can we do to help reduce the suffering of the earth itself, of Mother Earth? That is, how can we strengthen our love for and our service to the living earth? In terms of, from the Buddhist perspective, if there is something that is itself devoid of

[13:28]

consciousness or devoid of sentience in the sense of having feelings of pleasure and pain, then we don't speak of having compassion towards such an inanimate object. But now when we speak of the environment, it seems that two facets are involved, or we're speaking of two kinds of situations. One is really the globe, or the planet, essentially our own home. Taking care about the world, about the planet, is not something moral or something, but it is just like taking care about our own house. We need a house. Isn't it? Our very livelihood depends upon this earth, our environment. So sometimes I call, because of the earth, because of the elements of the earth,

[14:34]

we human beings develop. So the earth is almost like a mother. So up to a certain extent, our mother is so kind, whatever we like to do, the mother tolerates it. Now time is rich. You see, our ability, destructive power reaches such a stage, and also population. So you see, our mother, mother earth, mother planet, now should, how to say, compelled to signal day. Be careful, be careful, that kind of indication, isn't it? So naturally, you see, its own limitation is there. I think this is one way to approach. Then another way to approach, what? About environment.

[15:34]

This body is composed of different elements. So you see, the planet itself also is composed by different elements. So this we call nature law. So after all, you see, no matter how we are, we have some sophisticated mind and complicated missions, but basically, we have to go according to nature law. Beyond that, there are simply natural laws, and if you try to break them, you're not going to meet with success. But your holiness, with modern technology,

[16:37]

the way we live our daily life, the things we use every day, the things we buy, the things we throw away, when you multiply them by about a billion, or maybe four billion, very minor acts multiplied have vast consequence for the planet. How can each of us be more heedful, more mindful of what we're doing to our mother? It is awareness itself. Simply be more aware. Education, education. But I think maybe education, but for each one of us, you know... Sense of responsibility. Yeah. But is there a role for something like mindfulness in this kind of compassion to the planet, where we can be more attentive to the things we buy? You certainly need mindfulness. Yes. Here's how His Holiness understands mindfulness, and that is, first of all,

[17:58]

have education so you know what you're to be mindful of. You have to have that to open your eyes in the first place. So you get that in principle, you get it in theory, and then you're engaged in life, and you encounter situations that correspond to what you've learned about in theory, or in your education. What mindfulness is concerned with then is really focusing in on those situations, those actual situations, being aware of them, and responding appropriately. But the mindfulness goes hand-in-hand with education. And then compassion comes from that. You're saying, and then from that you can act compassionately, because then you know. Is that right? So from this will certainly come a cherishing, or placing a high value on the environment. There is... One final question from this morning, Your Holiness.

[19:09]

Much of what we've talked about has to do with suffering and harmfulness. And the group would like to hear us talk more a discussion of joy and happiness, and of whatever problems there are that may come from success, whatever success means. How does one maintain and expand one's compassion and joy? Isn't it already happiness in simply decreasing your suffering? We have a saying in Tibetan which reads,

[20:24]

if you are too much excited by joy, then you might have to weep, you might have to cry. So this shows the relative nature of what we identify as joy and pain. And it implies that there should be a limit. From a Buddhist viewpoint, from a Buddhist practitioner's viewpoint, that the important thing is mental state remain steady, not much ups and downs. That is better, that is stable. Yes, Joyce, some, some limitation, and some pains, yes, depression, but not too low, not too high. And that's the proper way.

[21:25]

That's just what my mother used to say too. So anyway, you see, that way of life is something colourless, I think, isn't it? Not like colourful. If life is too much high, too much low, ups and downs, too much, then maybe more colourful, excited. More exciting. But I think in, in deep sense, that is not good. It's like having light and lighting in the room, and sometimes it's blindingly bright, and other times it's too dark to see. It's not very useful. So something like that, I think the whole way of life, mainly, you see, mental attitude, remain something calm, something stable.

[22:30]

That's, I think, most important. Anyway, you see, that, that is the, once the mind, through training, mind hardened, then you see, the external, you see, small, I mean, external causes, very little effect on internal mental attitude. Mind hardened means, once hardened mind becomes more resilient, firmer, less likely to flip out. The opposite is too much sensitivity, so that the slightest downside will throw you into depression, and the slightest upside will make you very excited and agitated. This is not helpful. So in...

[23:34]

And so the point here is, in the depths of your heart-mind, not just mind, but heart-mind, in the depths of your mind, have a cleverness, have a wisdom, that such that when you encounter something that's downside, you don't go down, that you simply take it in stride. Like take it in stride. And likewise, when something good happens, you don't become all excited and agitated and lifting off the ground, but you take this in stride too. So I think this taking in stride is the key concept. Is it? All right. Yes. Jack, would you like to begin? Your Holiness, I wanted to ask you a question about this issue of compassionate action, a difficulty I found for myself, maybe I'm not the only one. When I was a young man, and full of enthusiasm and energy and idealism, I didn't know how to be compassionate in the world, I didn't know how to be effective, how to make a difference,

[24:57]

how to change things. And so I looked for ways to change myself, and I found a lineage, a tradition of Buddhist practice that focused very much on going inside and investigating the self. But in my single-minded pursuit of that for many years, I forgot about, I can't say I totally forgot, but I often neglected family, friends, work, society, other kinds of responsibilities in this single-minded pursuit of this practice. And now that I'm old and gray, I've learned how to be more effective in the world, and devote a lot of my time to service, my professional work and other work. Now I find I have the opposite problem, that I often get so busy and so lost in the activities of service that I lose myself.

[26:01]

And I find I also don't, I'm not as effective either, and my action turn, my action, even though it's in the service of helping other people, stops being very compassionate at a certain point. I get tired, I get impatient, I get frustrated when my actions don't bear fruit, or people don't respond, or I can't accomplish my goals. And I often find myself caught in this dilemma. So maybe this is another don't-know space that is just mine to work with, but I'm sure this must have come up, and must be a question that all sorts of people bring to you, how to balance this need to work on myself, to pay attention to what's going on in me, but

[27:02]

also to be of service to others, and not get lost in either pursuit. How to do that? I find that's not so easy. Speaking from a Buddhist perspective, that if one is concerned with effectively serving

[28:34]

others, one won't be fully effective until one is really quite a highly, highly realized bodhisattva. Until then, our effectiveness there is going to be limited, and that's simply the way it is. And so even within Buddhism, there are many paths. It's not simply one, but there is, there does tend to be a shifting of emphasis. So from the outset, one's, from the beginning, one's ability to be effectively, to effectively serve others is very limited. So the emphasis tends to be more upon healing oneself, transforming one's own mind, one's own heart and mind, thereby increasing one's ability to be of service to others. Now, as we go out, if we've brought to full capacity our effectiveness in serving others, then we're in great shape. But otherwise, we may get overwhelmed by the demands on our time, by the suffering and difficulties of other people, getting to a point where we are now simply exhausted, not able any longer to effectively serve anyone at all, and moreover, not serving ourselves as well. So it's a time then for refreshment, for coming back. So at the beginning and during the initial phases of practice, you simply do as well

[29:49]

as you can. I think your case, I think my case, more or less I think the same nature, you see? One hand trying to improve oneself, at the same time, try as much as possible, as much as we can serve or help other people. Then both feel there is limitation, and we have to accept that limitation. Well, that's much more helpful to hear because at first what it sounded like was, I need to do a certain amount of work in improving and healing myself before I can act in the world and be effective for others, and we can't. We have to act all of the time. We can't wait until we reach some ideal of development before we need to act. And I think often spiritual practice can encourage that delusion or that belief. So it's good to hear you say what you just said now because I think that corrects that misinterpretation.

[30:49]

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And so there are different approaches here, and that is one may engage in meditation even over many years with the simple motivation of improving oneself. I want to attain liberation. I want to overcome the afflictions of my mind, and that may be the overwhelming motivation. That's one case. However, in the context of bodhisattva practice, the emphasis tends to be on the service of others. And so in the course of that, as one is very actively engaged in serving others, actively involved in society, in the process of that, if one's own personal practice does diminish

[32:15]

somewhat with that orientation, we can say, well, nevertheless, it was worthwhile because I am being of some service. Just to follow up on that, based on His Holiness's knowledge of this society, what would be the relative emphasis in his opinion? Well, fifty-fifty, Thung Tua, fifty-fifty. Fifty-fifty. Fifty-fifty. Just like you say, in order to serve other people, you must have strong determination and positive motivation. Now, in this aspect, from time to time, we need some kind of electric recharge. So you say fifty, must go there. Then the very purpose of recharging, serving other people.

[33:16]

So you say half serving other people. So that's the only way, isn't it? And that's also circumstances, that needs determination. And also it's much dependent on particular circumstances. So at least it's in my own experience. At least I'm trying like that way, but I don't know. I wish to ask a question further about the inner nature of this practice. In my limited understanding of Buddhism, in working with different qualities of mind, either virtuous, non-virtuous qualities of mind, there seem to be two kinds of practices. There are practices that are designed towards working with the more negative or non-virtuous qualities of mind. And then there are other practices, say, for example, offerings or whatnot,

[34:21]

that are designed to actively cultivate certain virtuous or positive qualities of mind. And in my impression of studying Buddhism, that these are related but somewhat complementary or independent practices. Then don't rush at all. To work with the negative states of mind doesn't necessarily lead to the rising of positive virtuous qualities of mind. But one needs to, in addition to working with the negative qualities of mind, one needs to actively cultivate these positive qualities. This morning we had a very fruitful discussion, I thought, about some of the obstacles to the development of compassion, such as the experience of depression. And that discussion was very useful in helping us all understand how to work with some of the negative qualities of mind.

[35:23]

But if we are going to balance this, we also have to learn more about how to actively cultivate positive qualities of mind. I wonder if His Holiness would comment on ways to practice, ways to actively cultivate virtuous qualities of mind, like faith, like patience, like altruistic attitude. In our society, in our therapies, a lot of the more analytically oriented therapies, like psychoanalysis, have been emphasizing working with certain negative qualities of mind. Other therapists, namely the transpersonal therapists, came along and said that wasn't enough. You also have to cultivate these positive qualities. So we are also struggling with the same kind of issues. How, in Buddhism, are these positive qualities developed? I don't know.

[36:28]

So take, for example, the cultivation of an altruistic motivation. In terms of the actual cultivation or meditation leading to this, there are two facets, especially at the outset. And one of these is reflecting again and again upon the benefits of really caring for others, cherishing others, taking their well-being really to heart. So this is a positive thing. But it's balanced too by reflecting again and again upon the disadvantages and the faults of simply cherishing one's own well-being, placing priority upon oneself as opposed to everyone else. So it has two facets leading to a wholesome state of mind. And similarly, in terms of cultivating... Well, similarly, there's another pair, and that is the cultivation of loving-kindness. So here is something wholesome, something virtuous, but this is complemented by countering hatred, and the two go together. And, of course, they are mutually very helpful.

[37:47]

They aid each other. And now maybe we can ask, well, which requires the initial emphasis? And for some people it's certain, but you can't make any uniform statement. It is an individual matter. Sometimes in analytic therapies like psychoanalysis, people would put the emphasis on working with the negative mind states. And after many years of going through this kind of therapy, people would finish, they would complete it. They would not have depression. They would have some understanding of negative mind states, like anger, some insight into that. But they wouldn't be nice people. So we have learned from that that the emphasis on these positive qualities is necessary, but we have not developed that as much in this society, in our therapies, as is in Buddhism. It's a little bit like, in terms of the Four Noble Truths,

[39:11]

simply being aware of the first two, and that is suffering and the source of suffering, becoming totally involved in that, and never getting around to the truth of liberation and the path to liberation. Your Holiness, maybe you can help us, because in the West we have a model of mental health, of mental wholesomeness, which only goes part way. What is the Tibetan Buddhist model of mental health? What are the next two steps? Zen Shasara.

[40:15]

Zen Shasara. So if you're looking at it ultimately, you can say the only healthy person is a Buddha. But this is a bit far away, so leaving that aside, and we come back and getting our feet back on the ground and look at our present circumstance and say, when is a person healthy? We simply look then to worldly convention and that is the window society acknowledge a person and say, ah, you're a very good person, you're a very wholesome person, you have a very good mind, very good heart, and so it's simply looking to ordinary convention. Now, there's nothing ultimate here because you can find one person and say, here's a

[41:16]

very fine person, but you might find another person with even deeper compassion or greater wisdom, in which case this person is now inferior. So there's no absolute criteria in here, but we just look to worldly convention. But if you want to be a bit more definitive, what is a healthy person? A healthy person is when there's the opportunity to be of service to other people, to other sentient beings, one engages in that service, when that's not possible, one at least avoids getting harm. A person who does that, that's a healthy person. And as His Holiness has frequently said, this is the essence of Buddhism. And it seems true, this is the essence of all spiritual traditions of the world. Taking that a step further, if this full healthiness involves being sensitive to opportunities

[42:29]

to help, to serve, what is it that allows some people to be so much more open to serving other people? From a Buddhist perspective, you'd say because of that very limitation, some people not seeing the opportunity to serve or not having the ability to effectively serve, it's that very limitation that leads Buddhists to want to overcome the obscurations of the mind, especially those that are called cognitive obscurations. That's an incentive for Buddhist spiritual practice.

[43:32]

There is motivation, there is determination to help or to serve. But whether that really becomes a benefit or not, it's very difficult to know. And there are so many, from a Buddhist viewpoint, there are so many, how do you say, There are many propensities, inclinations and so forth from one individual to another. It's a very, very complicated situation. And also, as you're praising the effectiveness of your own service, there's short-term effectiveness and long-term effectiveness. Again, it's a complex situation. This concludes side one. To continue listening, go now to side two. And so, come what may, let alone this whole business of cognitive obscurations and so

[44:41]

forth, it really boils down to motivation. And if you can proceed in service with the purest of motivation, then no matter what comes, you can proceed without any regret and with complete sincerity, purity of sincerity and purity of motivation. It's my own case. Now, you see, I mean, there's no clear sort of, There's no clear criteria, even in his own personal life, whether he's meeting with a whole group of people or with individuals. In each case, he tries with sincerity, with his purity of his motivation to be of the

[45:42]

greatest service he can. But how effective is it in the short term, the long term? There's no way to tell. But engaging with complete sincerity, then come what may, there's no regret. Again, now, you see, sometimes, you see, though very sincere motivation, but too much hesitation, also another obstacle. Too much hesitation, hesitate. So you can simply be idling in hesitation, what to do, what to do, what to do, and the whole situation, the opportunity is lost. Perhaps there's something else, though. What about preoccupation? Let me tell you a short, quick story. An experiment was done with students studying religion, divinity school. They were given a story from the Bible, Christian Bible, about what's called the Parable of the Good Samaritan. The story from the Bible is a man walking along a road, and he sees a man who's hurt

[46:43]

by the side of the road. Three people pass by that don't help him. One person stops and helps. He's called the Good Samaritan. The students were going to go to another building to give a talk about this story, like a Dharma talk. On the way over, they passed someone in a doorway who's moaning, oh, help me, help me. They didn't stop. They were thinking about this idea that they should talk about how to help people. It may be that they were simply lacking in mindfulness at that time.

[47:48]

They were caught up in what they should be talking about and missed the opportunity to put it, to implement it. But you see, Your Holiness, we're all preoccupied most of the time with our petty concerns. And we pass so many opportunities, isn't it, to stop and help? What can we do? Uh, you shouldn't see me as a computer. By hitting the key, you know, by hitting the key, you could get the information that you desire. I'm here also for myself to learn from this dialogue.

[48:54]

Since that's the case, this is our final afternoon. Do you have any particular question in mind? Quite true, Kharadonkar. I don't know. Yes, you have one question, good question. I was wondering how psychotherapists help people who have hallucinations, fantasies. Like, you know, people with suffering. But what's the term? Schizophrenia.

[50:00]

I could further elaborate on it. Like, often, you know, from what I know, often it is emphasized that if you don't have a sense of solid ego or solid self, then you are bound to have personal conflicts, conflicts of identity, characters and so on. So is that the basis on which you work on, helping these patients? The first basis is having a relationship with your patient. That the psychotherapist must have love or compassion, accept and connect emotionally with the sufferer who is the patient with schizophrenia, so that there is some connection, some human, heartful connection with that person. And that helps stabilize the mind, heart and mind of the patient. We also now have a great many useful medications called the major tranquilizers

[51:13]

that serve almost as what I would call ego glue, that is... That's a good one to translate. It helps the patient to have a sense of an observing mind. It helps to know what to pay attention to. The schizophrenic doesn't know what to pay attention to, is tuning in or listening in or paying attention to too many fragmentary things. The medications reduce or eliminate the hallucinations, but it doesn't bring the person... And then it helps that person to be able to be in the world. I mean, it's a lot easier to be in the world if you're in the world. You're not hearing voices other people don't hear, but you still need to connect with other people in the world, and usually that comes through a relationship with your therapist

[52:13]

as a beginning connection. So that's one way of describing how psychotherapists take care of schizophrenic patients. The other element is people, when they are schizophrenic, sometimes move into that realm of what would be called the symbolic unconscious or all... Like the images of all of the deities on the Kalachakra wheel. So a schizophrenic may be plunged into that world of light forms and demonic forms and lose themselves in it. And a therapist can often help by making meaning of the experience they're having. So that is a third help in schizophrenia.

[53:14]

I have one question. A human being, one species of mammon, right? The intelligence... Intelligence. [...] We are not a mammal, we are not a mammal. His Holiness made the observation that in some people, they may be very, very high in intelligence. Some people are like that. No, no, no. Generally. Generally, it's a mammal. Human beings, compared to other mammals, you see, much more intelligent. So at the same time, I think, more trouble among humanity than other mammals. Mammals, yeah? So, you see, intelligence. In a way, you see, very good, very useful. In a way, troublemaker. Isn't it? Then, then you see, among those other animals, you see, just like, you see, the other day,

[54:28]

I visited, for say, sea, sea world. Some other, some certain, you see, animal, you see, more intelligence, we can train. Some, you see, comparatively less intelligence. So, you see, among these animals, those more intelligent ones, again, you see, more troublesome. I don't know. There's the question. Is it clear? Yes. There's the question that human beings are generally more intelligent than other mammals, but we also have a lot more problems. It seems to correspond with a heightened intelligence. Now, among the other mammals, such as dolphins, as opposed to non-mammals like fish, we have other animals that are more intelligent than others. Do the more intelligent animals tend to have more problems than the less intelligent? Now, you see, everyone, the one troublemaker, you know, obviously, anger and desire. That, animals, most cases, is the same. Right. Human being, from human being to certain... Insects, I think, more or less the same, you see, sexual desire, all this, and anger, there.

[55:30]

So, now, the difference is intelligence. Right. Your Holiness, the difference is humans have this very large cortex on top of the brain, which makes them able to do all kinds of things animals can't do. So, if the cortex is being run by desire or by anger, they can do much more damage. Very clearly. His Holiness' question was, do you observe any differences in the other species of mammals based on the different height of the intelligence? Among those mammals which have more intelligence, they themselves, I mean, among them, it seems there is more trouble. Do they seem to have more troubles? I don't know for sure, but what little I know about studies on dolphins and whales, they seem to be more protective of their species, more protective of their community of similar animals than humans are. Hmm. And I think it gets back to what Danny is talking about.

[56:36]

Humans have more cortex, it means they have more thoughts. And the suggestion may be that we need to quiet our thoughts so we don't cause so much trouble. Then another thing, you see, now here it is, I often take a good example from those, you see, small bees and certain ants, you see, who, they are, how to say, very survivable. They have to work together. So, they have very good, you see, sense of responsibility. You see, no religion, it means no compassion, isn't it? Exactly. No education, but somehow, due to, you see, their body, you see, they have very good, you see, sense of responsibility. We human beings are basically, you see, social animals. We have to live together, isn't it? Without others, we can't survive. Yet, we always fight. We, you see, we are very difficult to develop that kind of sense of responsibility.

[57:36]

Why? What is the reason? Yeah, in a psychological way. I think, yeah, you see, the body itself, you see, produce something. Because the range, the range of options is much wider for human beings. More choices. For ants, more choices, more choices, more choices, so that the possibility for an ant to decide whether to fight, though there are fighting ants as well, by the way. Yes. You know, but generally speaking, in the insect colonies, where survival depends, as it now does in human history, on teamwork, cooperative work, usually the programming, if we can call it that, within the ant is much more in a narrow range. There aren't such choices, whereas human beings with this large cortex is different. So intelligence makes differences. Yes, yes, exactly. Margaret, I think there's another reason.

[58:38]

I think with this large cortex, human beings have the capacity to imagine a future and imagine getting what we don't have. The long future. The long future. We also have the capacity to remember the past in a different way, and that brings with it certain advantages, but I think it also brings with it the capacity to be enormously frustrated and upset when we don't get what we want. To know what other people do have and don't have. And that's part of the risk that comes along with this capacity to imagine. Which is greed and competitiveness. That's right. And war, really. Someone was talking about this, I think, after this morning's session. Something that's culture-specific, perhaps to Americans, more so than other Westerners. Culture-specific means what's more true, perhaps, of American culture than some other cultures, and that is we often proceed with the idea that we have a right to be happy.

[59:39]

And we get enormously angry when we're not, or when someone else gets it and we don't, or they get more of it. And this seems to be built into a lot of the assumptions on which this country was founded. It's a different notion than the Buddhist notion, I think, that we can be happy. The idea that we have a right to it, and we have a right to it now, and we shouldn't have to wait for it. Or we shouldn't have to work very hard to get it. It's very, very destructive, I think. But it's very much part of the American dream, and it's even written into the American Constitution. No, it's not. You know what the American Constitution says? The American Constitution says, not that you have a right to happiness. To the pursuit of happiness. To the pursuit of happiness. That's what we've forgotten. That's very different. That's what we've forgotten. Very different. The pursuit only. But I think this colors the way we do practice in this country. We forget that, because if the practice doesn't produce happiness immediately for us,

[60:41]

it also inhibits our ability to take the view or the perspective of a bodhisattva, the perspective of service and compassion. Because still behind all of that tends to be this issue of our own happiness, which tends to be very paramount, and that's reinforced by our own culture over and over again. There is a difference between... I think, generally speaking, competitive, competition, also, I think, a very positive thing.

[61:43]

Because of the competition, it's possible to have development, progress. So anyway, there is some... If competitiveness is used in the right way, I think it's something useful. It is a natural right to pursue one's happiness and also to work hard to get it now. But it is very different from someone who is pursuing it, totally neglecting and ignoring, and even at the cost of others' happiness. There is a big difference between the two. Your Holiness, there's another aspect to this too. Although we seek... Many. Although we seek happiness, I know many people who have done a lot of

[62:49]

very profound work on themselves and come to a place where they find that they don't really experience a lot of joy, a difficulty in experiencing joy in their lives. Not just the recognition of the suffering of grasping after satisfaction and pleasure, but a profound sadness arises in many people I know who are of service to a lot of others, that there isn't a lot of joy in their life. How can we learn to play in the Dharma? Maybe you can extract a little bit from the Tibetan brains. Tibetans certainly are a cheerful lot. His Holiness can't say.

[63:57]

I think very little. Again, I think... I think variety, maybe. Then, of course, I think sometimes, you see, when a certain person, his whole life story is something unfortunate, a tragedy. In that case, now this Buddhist theory, the infinite lifetime. So once you accept there were many past lives, and in the future also there are many lives. So then compare these infinite lives. Now this present life is very short. So even if it appears hopeless in the context of this life, there is a broader context, and that is a future life. So,

[65:30]

and so I simply drew back to the situation that I think what you're speaking about is not a life filled with misfortune, but rather a life that was really focused on spiritual practice, personal, and then on serving. And then, in the context of all this, then feeling depressed and unhappy, and not really feeling the joy. Not necessarily even... I did translate directly, not having the capacity for joy. And His Holiness' response here is the following, and that is, in the process of meditation, then one may gain a fairly deep insight in the nature of the mind, including some of the false, the unsatisfactory nature of this cycle of existence. And in the process of this, one develops a real yearning to be free of this. However, as a result of one's own personal practice and engagement with society, one may find that one's expectations were not fulfilled. You didn't do as well as you wanted to do, or expected to do, and this could detract from your capacity for joy. It may have something to do with that. Expectation. Expectation, exactly. Disappointment. And it can happen that one has too much expectation at the beginning, which can take out the joy later on.

[66:34]

May I say something? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I would really like to return to what is the essential topic for this part of the conference, which is the transformation of consciousness in this life. And what we were really wanting to talk about this afternoon is making a difference through compassionate action. Now, when you said to us earlier, Your Holiness, that one must first of all educate oneself about what is the context in which I live. Where can I make a difference? How can I make a difference? So that's step one. But then the question becomes, having located that context very self-consciously, and that means mindfulness in the nth degree, and that's what I would hope, that perhaps we can inspire lots of mindfulness,

[67:40]

lots and lots of mindfulness, in order to see how can I make a difference in the context in which I live, whether it's my family, whether it's the larger society, whether it's the planet, and in what area. Has it to do with helping to preserve Mother Earth from being poisoned to death? Perhaps it has to do with ending nuclear weapons production or testing, wherever you are. So I was actually, we talked about this ahead of time, and I was asked by the group, and I'm very privileged to do it, to offer you an example of one person who has made a transformation of personal consciousness on a level of government having to do with nuclear weapons and war in general that is probably, I'm not sure this is true what I'm about to say,

[68:41]

but I think it may be true, may be singular in history. And that's the story of Daniel Ellsberg, whom I have interviewed at great length about his transformation of consciousness because I want to understand it. I still don't, but to some degree I do. And this is the story. There comes a young, very, very gifted man in his late 20s into the highest levels of government who has access to the most deep secrets of government. For example, what are the plans, this is in late 50s, early 60s, what are the plans for nuclear war? And he proves himself to be so elegantly gifted in these matters that Jack Kennedy says, okay, fine, you write the plans for nuclear war. Jack Kennedy was the president at that time. So, he feeling himself,

[69:45]

as he has told it to me, feeling himself at that time thus to be in a position maybe to prevent nuclear war by making, quote, good plans, you know, says, fine, I will make these plans. He makes some plans. He discusses it with other people who are working in nuclear weapons making. Finally, he comes to the place where it is clear to him that something about how many lives are we risking here if something goes wrong and I don't prevent nuclear war. He always wanted to prevent general war, nuclear war. Since he first heard about the atom bomb, he always wanted to prevent it. That was his life mission to prevent nuclear war. Okay. So, he then comes to the place early in the 60s of speaking to the chiefs of staff

[70:48]

of the military of this country and asks them, have you figured out how many people will be dead within the first few months if something goes wrong and we don't prevent nuclear war? They said, yes, we have figured it out. Very calmly, they said, it will be in the first few months 625 million people. He said, what? You say such a figure so calmly? And he was very disturbed. So, he said to himself, who are these men that I'm working with? He said, I drink beer with these men. These men are very nice to their dogs. They're very nice to their wives even, let alone their dogs. Very nice sometimes to their children. But they announced this kind of preparation for all-out general nuclear war, meaning taking the risk.

[71:48]

Nobody intended it, nobody desired it, nobody intends it now or desires it. So, he was so horrified by this, he asked himself, how can I reveal this to the American public? How can I do this? And it was a source of great anguish to him for suffering, great suffering. Now, wait, it's all right, I'll move fast. So, then, in the middle of this comes the Vietnam War. And it is his feeling that yes, in the beginning, maybe we are going to Vietnam to liberate these people. But as it became clear that nothing of the sort was happening, he then decided to go to Vietnam and see for himself what is happening there. When he went there, it's as I mentioned the other day in this group, he became so aware that it was a disaster, that it was a catastrophe,

[72:49]

that it was the most sinful thing that was going on. So, he said this sentence, which I said here, and this is very important for us, I believe. He said, that the Vietnamese people became as familiar to me as my own hands. Meaning, I am you, you are me, we are all the same, interdependence, intrinsic of the entire planet and of humanity. So, when he became clear about this, that that war must be ended, he began to think, how can I help to make clear to the American public who were being lied to by every president, didn't matter, Democrat, Republican, Johnson, didn't make any difference, all were lying about what was really going on there. So, he came back and then one day an Indian young woman, a Gandhian, actually with whom he fell in love, took him to a meeting and at this meeting,

[73:50]

which was a meeting of Gandhians, there was a young man from Harvard of which he was a graduate also, a young man that he felt, this man is like me and this man gave a speech and this young man named Randy Keeler who later became a very important member of the peace movement in America, he said, I am on my way to prison. It's very moving to me. Sorry. Randy Keeler on his way to prison said, I have to go to prison rather than go and kill my brothers. Dan Ellsberg sitting in the audience hearing this, at that moment came such a transformation of consciousness that he said to himself, which he has said to me,

[74:51]

at that moment my life split in two and he went to the men's room, sat down on the floor and cried for an hour and then at the end of that hour he said, I asked myself if I were willing to go to prison, what could I do in my context where I am in government, what could I do to tell the American people the truth of what's going on. And so he thought immediately, all right, I will go to prison forever for what I'm about to do and he decided to reveal the truth to the American people and tell them what was really going on, how they were being lied to, how the people of Vietnam were being destroyed. It was a terrible, terrible thing and that's when he revealed what are known here as the Pentagon Papers,

[75:52]

meaning the secret files from the Pentagon of all these things that were the truth of how many people were being killed and how the American people were being lied to. So then, of course, he revealed this, the New York Times published the truth and every other paper. Actually, the New York Times was the first to publish the Pentagon Papers and so he went on trial and as it happens for many technical reasons, it turned out that the government was filled with misconduct so that the trial did not end in his going to prison though he assumed it would, that he would go for the rest of his life. And the reason I'm telling this whole long story is not simply the story of Dan Ellsberg but to say that in his context, in his life, in the highest levels of government and power, that he had found a way, a way to make a difference

[76:53]

because this revealing of the truth to the American people then resulted in helping end the Vietnam War. Congress cut off the money for the war and that really helped to end it. So I'm saying that the lesson here in a way and the question that I would be asking you, Your Holiness, at this point, is how can all the people in this room who have asked us, you know, please address this question, how can they help themselves to locate in their own lives their context, their place where they have leverage, power, whatever you want to call it so that they can make a real difference through compassionate action. Thank you very much. The potential

[78:29]

and possibility for possibilities are always there for everyone. And as we discussed earlier, that a simple act, a mere act of throwing a trash for that person might seem very insignificant. But when we count it in terms of billions of others who might do it, then the consequence becomes enormous. So thinking in such terms, everybody could find their own context where they can make a difference. So similarly, each individual person, if we look around oneself, this limitation, nothing really, significance, very insignificance. But then, human community, you see, humanity means these such individuals combined, then we call it humanity or the nation. In fact, this morning

[79:30]

one arrived, interview, television interview, then the person, the poor lady asked me whether I myself consider peace maker. Then I told her, I don't feel like that. I feel just one human being. So you see, every human being wants peace. Peace is something Peace meant for everyone. Therefore, each individual human being have responsibility for it. So from that viewpoint, each individual person as a peacemaker. So I myself, from that context, I am taking my own share. So this is my basic belief. So you see, one,

[80:31]

you see, I mean individual person, first, you see, if you want to change, you see, other or outside, first one wants oneself, you see, try to improve, change, change within self, then it helps, you see, it can influence or it can help to change in family, then go bigger and bigger, it make some effect, impact. So that is my, as usual, how to say, belief. So wherever I go, I always see trying to trying to make clear the responsibility of individual person. So we should not think something about that. Not the case, I must clear or I must do something about that. So we shouldn't, go ahead. So we shouldn't feel that

[81:32]

I am insignificant, what I do doesn't matter. I don't know, I think America, a democratic country, I think public opinion, public voice, very strong, I think, very influential, isn't it? Yes. Shall I sing with you? I don't know anything beside that. Your Holiness, do you have any final thoughts or questions for us to ponder as we go each on our own way home in these next days? Your Holiness, Your Holiness has nothing special to offer this time. He says he himself has found this very beneficial. I very much appreciate Your Holiness.

[82:58]

Before you go, I would like to thank you for the great gift of your presence, your wisdom, and your willingness not to know. Thank you so much. And also, we have another deep debt to Thupten Jigme and Alan Wallace. Thupten Jigme, Alan Wallace. This concludes take number six and the session. Thank you.

[83:53]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ