The Dalai Lama on Mindfulness, Compassion, and Rabid Dogs

Published on June 3, 2009 by Jonathan S. Kaplan, Ph.D. in Urban Mindfulness

Last month, I attended a two-day conference on meditation and psychotherapy co-sponsored by Harvard Medical School. The theme of the conference was "Wisdom and Compassion", featuring the Dalai Lama as the main speaker. In a previous post, I discussed the refreshing novelty of his frequently professed ignorance
In this post, I wanted to share a few insights and observations that he did offer.

Mindfulness is Important

Not surprisingly, the Dalai Lama emphasized the importance of mindfulness. He explained that wisdom and compassion can be cultivated through "mental engagement" with an object and aspiration, respectively. In other words, we become wise through deepening our understanding of things around us, and we become compassionate by focusing on compassion. He noted that mindfulness is relevant for both: it helps us maintain our focus, whether on a particular fact or goal.

City Living is Particularly Challenging

Dr. Judith Jordan, one of the Founding Fellows and current Director of the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute, inquired about cross-cultural differences in relationships and autonomy. She observed that Western culture (and psychotherapy) emphasizes separateness and individuality, while Eastern culture emphasizes interdependence and collectivism.

The Dalai Lama opined that there is "no big difference" between the West and East mentally, emotionally, and physically. However, there is a "difference between the big city and countryside." He indicated that urban environments cultivate a mental state in which people more concerned with money, which gives rise to more anxiety and stress. He also noted that rich people are more likely to experience "destructive emotions" (e.g., jealousy, arrogance, etc.) and a decreased sense of community. As a result, he noted--somewhat self-consciously--that it is even more important to mindfully maintain humility and connectedness when when you become "an object of reverence."

"Wrong is Wrong"

Judith Herman, founder of the Victims of Violence program in Boston, asked a question about the limits of compassion, especially relative to perpetrators of violence. She noted that there is an apparent burden on the survivor of violence to forgive in order to more forward. The Dalai Lama responded by delineating two levels of compassion. In the first level, one seeks to understand compassion intellectually and consider factually what has happened, which can promote a sense of attachment to our selves and loved ones (i.e., me vs. "him/her"). As a result, it can lead to hatred or anger directed against the perpetrator. In the second level, one trains to cultivate compassion through a genuine sense of concern for others, including the perpetrator. At this level, one is capable of doing two things: (1) oppose the "wrongful acts" done by someone else; and (2) recognize the inherent humanity of that person. He suggested that it is possible to take the following compassionate action: (1) feel solidarity in the fact that all human beings want to overcome suffering; (2) point out what is wrong in the behavior, out of concern for the individual; (3) consider the well-being of all society, which suggests that wrong doers deserve justice. He added, "Wrong is wrong. We have to make it clear."


Metta Won't Stop a Rabid Dog

Many times during the meeting, the Dalai Lama reflected on the complexity of the human condition, and our collective inability to provide simple solutions to life's circumstances. He noted, for example, "For mental problems, there is not one antidote." What this means, of course, is that the cultivation of any one single attribute--whether compassion, wisdom, or mindfulness--is not sufficient. Compassion is a wonderful attribute to develop, but it has limits. As the Dalai Lama stated simply, "If a mad dog is coming towards you, compassion is no use. You need to use your intelligence." It might also help if you can run really, really fast...

Politics and Environment: An Interview with the Dalai Lama

Dalai Lama: In general, I feel that laws should serve as guidelines for the proper use of human initiative, creativity and ability.

Fabien: Do you think that democracy is helping laws to evolve in this way?

Dalai Lama: Yes, in democratic countries, legal systems should work that way and generally do. Bur these laws nevertheless partially contradict the Buddhist principle of interdependence, since they do not include "democratic rights" for the environment and the animal realm. Most legal systems refer only to human rights and do not consider the rights of animals or other beings that share the planet with us. Laws that protect human rights and values and indicate proper ways co use human ability are not in contradiction with karma or causality - not in the Western sense where the same causes have the same effect, but in the Buddhist sense where each effect proceeds from a cause that also needs to be considered.

In reality the problem is that for most "powerful" people there is a difference between the principle of the law and its application almost all legal systems condemn killing. This notion occurs in most countries of the world. Yet in practice, powerful people treat killing as they treat lying. For politicians, small lies are prohibited, but large lies are accepted. For a Buddhist, this is a very obvious Contradiction. The same applies to killing. When a man who is desperate kills another person, this small act is defined as murder. It is wrong. But the man who kills or gives orders to kill thousands of people is a hero! That is very unfortunate.

Most religious systems condemn murder, rape, and theft. In my opinion, religious principles are based on natural human attitudes and feelings. Their essential function is to inspire human beings to develop basic human qualities. Thus it seems logical that most laws would be consistent with the principles of positive karma. But in order for both religious and secular laws to conform to the principles of interdependence, we need to widen their perspective to include protection of the environment and the animal realm. This is how we can apply the Buddhist view of interdependence to a broader vision of law and order.

Dalai Lama: [...] In any case, all the natural resource specialists with whom I have spoken warn me that this gap between the "haves" and "have-nots" should be reduced. At present there are around 5.5 billion human beings on earth. If the living standard of the southerners were raised to 'the level the northerners are presently enjoying, what would happen to the world's natural resources? This situation would not be sustainable. China, for example, has a population of 1.2 billion. If each family were to have two cars, the environmental damage would be unimaginable. Nine hundred million people live in India.

The Western concept of increasing the GNP each year must change, and fast. The principle itself contradicts all natural and logical laws.

Fabien: Do you think Westerners should also have fewer cars?

Dalai Lama: Certainly. They need to develop a sense of contentment and more consideration towards others. Things should be done in a more just, equal manner. In the meantime, the birth control question must also be addressed. The southern countries must curb their population growth.

Fabien: Efficient birth control mainly depends on standard of living. The more access to education women have, the fewer children they 'produce, statistically speaking. So, education seems to be the best way to curb the population explosion.

Dalai Lama: That's very good. But what education? To tell you the truth, I think the first thing the southerners must do is recognize the negative consequences of the present Western concepts of life and economy. We have to correct or remould this erroneous belief in, the value of an ever-increasing GNP.                    
Likewise, although some factories and industries are now adopting, new ways to protect the environment, the northerners are inflicting a lot of damage on the world's environment. This prompts me to say that from a global point of view the money produced by the northern world is still insufficient.

[. . .] In the early part of this century, everyone foolishly thought that natUre's resources were limitless and at the disposal of humanity. Today ecological ideology even influences political parties. All these changes stem from the experience we have acquired as human beings. In the same way; the concept of human rights, whether individual or general, such as die right to self-determination for a given group, has evolved. These ideas are now universally recognized. Such progress gives me hope for the future.

Fabien: Do you think that one individual can change the world?

Dalai Lama: Yes.

Fabien: In that case, the best thing to do is to start trying to improve oneself.

Dalai Lama: It seems quite simple. First, it is important to realize we are part of nature. Ultimately, nature will always be more powerful than human beings, even with all their nuclear weapons, scientific equipment, and knowledge. If the sun disappears or the earth's temperature changes by a few degrees, then we are really in trouble. At, a deeper level, we should recognize that although we are part of nature, we can control and change things, to some extent, due to our intelligence. Among the thousands of species of mammals on earth, we humans have the greatest capacity to alter nature. As such, we have a twofold responsibility. Morally, as beings of higher intelligence, we must care for this world. The other inhabitants of the planet - ­insects and so on - do not have the means to save or protect this world. Our other responsibility is to undo the serious environmental degradation that is the result of incorrect human behaviour. We have recklessly polluted the world with chemicals and nuclear waste, selfishly consuming many of its resources. Humanity must take the initiative to repair and protect the world.
   
Of course, when we say, "humanity" or "society", it's obvious the initiative must come from individuals. It is wrong to expect our governments, or even God, to give us any guidance on these matters.

[...] Actually, I'm quite optimistic. Take the example of environmental problems. The scientists and associations that defend the environment have repeatedly informed us about the ecological problems now facing the earth, like global warming and widespread pollution of our water and air. Now, awareness is growing worldwide. New techniques are evolving so that we can avoid pollution without changing the process of industry or the economy. During a recent visit to Stockholm, my friends told me that ten years before the fish had practically disappeared from the nearby river. Now they are regenerating, simply because the industrial plants along that river have made some efforts to protect the environment. In other words, they managed to improve the situation without destroying the industry. I was recently in the Rohr region of Germany, a centre of industry. One large company showed me a film on the different means they were raking to reduce pollution and recycle waste material. Without changing their entire structure, they were causing much less damage to the environment.

Concern for ecology grows with the proper and widespread dissemination of information. People have gradually become convinced what the situation is serious and what we must take care for our planet. I've noticed that now, in some hotels, we are asked to not waste electricity or water. This is a good start. Likewise the media must speak of the importance of altruism in every human activity. It must be discussed again and again, in newspapers, in the movies, on the radio, on TV. I think there is plenty of momentum to do this. Medical and scientific fields should support the theory of altruism. Ecologists will support it, as the peace movement, providing the educational systems are also improved so that children become less violent. Then, even the police force will change. and everyone will gradually begin to think and act with more kindness, altruism, and compassion.

Excerpt from the book Imagine All the People: A conversation with the Dalai Lama on Money Politics and Life as it Could Be, Wisdom Publications, Boston. 

His Holiness the Dalai Lama Reflects on Working Toward Peace

Today's world requires us to accept the oneness of humanity. In the past, isolated communities could afford to think of one another as fundamentally separate. Some could even exist in total isolation. But nowadays, whatever happens in one region eventually affects many other areas. Within the context of our new interdependence, self-interest clearly lies in considering the interest of others.

Many of the world's problems and conflicts arise because we have lost sight of the basic humanity that binds us all together as a human family. We tend to forget that despite the diversity of race, religion, ideology, and so forth, people are equal in their basic wish for peace and happiness.

Nearly all of us receive our first lessons in peaceful living from our mothers, because the need for love lies at the very foundation of human existence. From the earliest stages of our growth, we are completely dependent upon our mother's care and it is very important for us that she express her love. If children do not receive proper affection, in later life they will often find it hard to love others. Peaceful living is about trusting those on whom we depend and caring for those who depend on us. Most of us receive our first experience of both these qualities as children.

I believe that the very purpose of life is to be happy. From the very core of our being, we desire contentment. In my own limited experience I have found that the more we care for the happiness of others, the greater is our own sense of well-being. Cultivating a close, warmhearted feeling for others automatically puts the mind at ease. It helps remove whatever fears or insecurities we may have and gives us the strength to cope with any obstacles we encounter. It is the principal source of success in life. Since we are not solely material creatures, it is a mistake to place all our hopes for happiness on external development alone. The key is to develop inner peace.

Actions and events depend heavily on motivation. From my Buddhist viewpoint all things originate in the mind. If we develop a good heart, then whether the field of our occupation is science, agriculture, or politics, since the motivation is so very important, the result will be more beneficial. With proper motivation these activities can help humanity; without it they go the other way. This is why the compassionate mind is so very important for humankind. Although it is difficult to bring about the inner change that gives rise to it, it is absolutely worthwhile to try.

When you recognize that all beings are equal and like yourself in both their desire for happiness and their right to obtain it, you automatically feel empathy and closeness for them. You develop a feeling of responsibility for others: the wish to help them actively overcome their problems. True compassion is not just an emotional response but a firm commitment founded on reason. Therefore, a truly compassionate attitude towards others does not change even if they behave negatively.

I believe that we must consciously develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. We must learn to work not just for our own individual self, family, or nation, but for the benefit of all humankind. Universal responsibility is the best foundation both for our personal happiness and for world peace, the equitable use of our natural resources, and, through a concern for future generations, the proper care for the environment. . . .

A new way of thinking has become the necessary condition for responsible living and acting. If we maintain obsolete values and beliefs, a fragmented consciousness, and a self-centered spirit, we will continue to hold to outdated goals and behaviors. Such an attitude by a large number of people would block the entire transition to an interdependent yet peaceful and cooperative global society.

If we look back at the development in the twentieth century, the most devastating cause of human suffering, of deprivation of human dignity, freedom, and peace has been the culture of violence in resolving differences and conflicts. In some ways the twentieth century can be called the century of war and bloodshed. The challenge before us, therefore, is to make our new century a century of dialogue and of peaceful coexistence.

In human societies there will always be differences of views and interests. But the reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to coexist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and nonviolence for the future of humankind is thus an important task of the international community. It is not enough for governments to endorse the principle of nonviolence or hold it high without any appropriate action to promote it.

It is also natural that we should face obstacles in pursuit of our goals. But if we remain passive, making no effort to solve the problems we meet, conflicts will arise and hindrances will grow. Transforming these obstacles into opportunities for positive growth is a challenge to our human ingenuity. To achieve this requires patience, compassion, and the use of our intelligence.

Resources for Teachers & Students © 2008 Markkula Center for Applied Ethics; Essays, Santa Clara, CA

Original article link: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/architects-of-peace/Dalai-Lama/essay.html