[ Background Music ]
>> Stanford University.
[ Pause ]
[ Discussion ]
[ Pause ]
[ Laughter ]
>> Welcome to the
Stanford Memorial Church
for our third annual
Harry's Last Lecture
on a Meaningful Life.
I'm Scotty McLennan the Dean for
Religious Life and I welcome you
on behalf of all members of
the Office for Religious Life.
We're honored and
thrilled that His Holiness,
the Dalai Lama is our third
Rathbun visiting fellow
following Secretary
George Shultz in 2009
and Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor in 2008.
His Holiness has
actually spoken here
in the Memorial Church twice
over the last 15 years,
and we're grateful to have
him back here again today.
The Harry and Emilia Rathbun
Fund for Exploring What Leads
to a Meaningful Life
was made possible
by an endowment established
in 2006 by the Foundation
for Global Community
which is directed
by their son, Richard Rathbun.
Its purpose is to help
Stanford students engage
in self-reflection and moral
inquiry and exploration
of life's purpose especially in
commitment to the common good.
Its centerpiece is a
visiting fellow program
which brings notable, wise,
and experienced people
to campus each year.
After receiving his
undergraduate
and master's degrees
in engineering,
Harry Rathbun worked
in government
and private industry
positions developing
and manufacturing telegraph
and radio transmitters.
He became the Vice President
of the Colin B. Kennedy Radio
Company before returning
to Stanford to earn
his law degree.
As a beloved law professor here
then, from 1929 until 1959,
he also became known
university-wide
for setting aside his final
course lecture in law to talk
about the kinds of
values and commitments
that would lead students to
a meaningful life as a whole.
Emilia and Harry
were also generous
in opening their home weekly
to students to discuss ethics,
psychology, and religion.
They cofounded the Sequoia
Seminar here in the Bay Area
which was later known
as Creative Initiative
and then Beyond War,
and finally,
the Foundation for
Global Community.
Many board members and
participants in the foundation
and its predecessor
organizations are here this
afternoon, and I especially
want to greet you and thank you.
The Office for Religious Life
is committed in its mission
to guide, nurture, and
enhance spiritual, religious,
and ethical life university-wide
at Stanford including
engaging ourselves
in the sacred duty
to repair the world.
My Associate Dean colleagues,
Rabbi Patricia Karlin-Neumann
and the Reverent Joanne Sanders
direct programs with titles like
"What Matters to Me and Why",
"Sports and Spirituality",
and the "Fellows for
Religious Encounter"
which are all supported
by Rathbun funding.
Three of us work
with the talented
and committed staff we're
very grateful in particular
to NaSun Cho, the Rathbun
Program Manager who's been
responsible for planning and
organizing this lecture today.
I also want to acknowledge
development officer Maura
McGinnity who's worked with
the Foundation from the start
to conceptualize this program
and stayed helpfully involved
every step of the way.
So, it's now my pleasure to
introduce Richard Rathbun,
President of the Foundation
of Global Community--
for Global Community, who will
make the formal introduction
of our visiting fellow,
the Dalai Lama.
Richard is a social visionary
who's put his commitments
into practice from his early
days in the Peace Corps
to the groundbreaking
work that he did
in leading the Beyond War
Organization that's now become
the Foundation for
Global Community.
And he's traveled extensively
in more than 50 countries
and has one of the most
genuinely global perspectives
I've ever known, so with the
utmost respect and appreciation
that I now introduce
Richard Rathbun.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you, Dean McLennan.
It's a rare opportunity we
have today to gather together
in this awesome place - the
place that helps us to connect
with some of the most
expansive and important ideas
that we may ever encounter.
It's more than symbolic
that this space occupies the
very center of the university.
Our speaker this afternoon
hardly needs an introduction,
so I will be very brief.
The typical introduction
might begin this way.
His Holiness, the 14th Dalai
Lama has traveled to more
than 62 countries
spanning six continents.
He's met with countless
political, religious,
and scientific world leaders.
In addition to the
Nobel Peace Prize,
he has received numerous
awards, honorary doctorates,
and prizes in recognition of his
message of peace, nonviolence,
inter-religious understanding,
universal responsibility,
and compassion.
He's authored more
than 72 books.
Those are among his
worldly accomplishments.
But it is his inner journey
that distinguishes
him from all others.
There's probably no one in
today's world more able to speak
about the meaning and purpose
of life than His Holiness,
Tenzin Gyatso, the
14th Dalai Lama.
His life represents an
extraordinary personal journey
of rigorous exploration coupled
with a highly disciplined
expression
of the fundamental principles
that can lead to pain
and suffering or, on the other
hand, to meaning and happiness.
His Holiness takes his rightful
place in an extended lineage
that is perhaps as
old as our species.
The lineage engaged in
the search for answers
to the most profound questions
we can ask both of ourselves
and of our societies
to which we belong.
So I encourage us all
to listen carefully.
The message we are about to
hear today may contain some
of the most important
information we will ever hear,
that's one of those
little warning lights.
Labels that you see
on the gas pumps.
The message we are about to
hear today may contain some
of the most important
information we will ever hear.
So please join me in giving a
warm Stanford welcome to a man
who describes himself as
a simple Buddhist monk,
His Holiness, Tenzin
Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama.
[ Applause ]
>> Usually I prefer
to speak from there,
but today, a little time.
So I'll-- I want to
seek your permission
to speak from here, okay.
[Laughter] And from here, no
difficulties to see your face.
Sometimes to see little bit
low, then I'd prefer to stand,
but here, not need to stand.
So, indeed I'm very happy,
great honor to speak,
share some of my
experience with you.
Basically, we are same
although I come from Tibet.
In the past, outside world
consider mysterious land.
>> And of course the Tibet,
land of snow, a bit isolated.
And Tibetan themselves
also easily prefer being
in isolation.
I think that I feel foolish.
[Laughter] So, in any way, I
come from that area-- that land.
You are these very
modernized nations.
Not only human level,
fundamental level we are same.
I think I often received feeling
that modernity maybe means
external sort of structure,
buildings and more
emissions, more cars.
But we here, user of
these modern things,
still we are I think
same human being.
Last, at least several thousand
years, we still the same.
Our emotions, same.
Our intelligence, the
real sort of the--
the seat of intelligence, same.
So long the size of the brain
remain same, these are same.
And then, so therefore, my only
experience also maybe some--
offer some help to you and
particularly experience
from one older people to younger
people sometimes maybe useful.
So, now here the
thing, meaningful life.
Actually, of course
the explanation
of meaningful life may be
the different explanation due
to different philosophical
teaching.
For example, according
to theistic religion,
theistic faith may have
some different explanation.
And non-theistic and
other non-theistic sort
of religion faith also may have
some difference of explanation.
But I always see
talking on the level
of human being not
as religious faith.
So a meaningful life
on that level
in the sense of meaningful life.
Firstly, you yourself
achieve happy days and nights,
weeks and months, years.
Then second-- secondly,
we are social element.
Individuals so sort of the happy
life much depend on the rest
of the community because
we are one of them.
If we really remain-- when
I was young, I saw one--
thousand or something--
>> Thousand.
>> Thousand or something
remain very smooth area
and occasionally shouting.
[Inaudible] like
that, then okay,
only think oneself not
necessarily to develop sense
of concern of other,
it was you yourself is
completely independent.
Your survival depend
on some fruits,
some wild fruits, that's all.
But we are not that way.
Our daily existence, our food,
our shelter, our clothes,
all is they come from other
fellow, other's effort.
Then one very important
sort of element
for happy life is good friend
to whom you share your
difficulties, your joyfulness.
Friendship on the basis
of genuine affection.
Friendship, genuine friend
will not bring by money alone
or by those that's
we may call friend
who showing you some smile,
some nice word, but actually
such friend are friend of
money or friend of power,
not friend of being, the person.
So genuine friendship
comes from heart,
genuine trust measure respect.
So genuine trust and respect
come if you treat them honestly,
truthfully, sincerely.
And with that, no
hypocrisy, no telling lie.
Transparent.
These are the basis of
foundation of trust.
So this very much a little
bit your most sense of concern
of other's well-being.
That automatically
brings respect and trust.
Other hand, extreme
self-centered attitude,
they often brings suspicion,
distrust, hypocrisy.
So therefore, to both
one's own happy life,
you need self confidence.
Compassion brings
self confidence.
More self confidence, more
inner strength, less fear.
Less fear, your mild
will be more calm.
That also immense benefit to
body health, physical health.
So sometime back, some sort
of discussion about health
with scientist or concerned
scientist is indeed healthy
mind, healthy body.
Without sort of big attention
in order to have healthy mind,
just healthy body is difficult.
So we must bring equally
attention about healthy mind.
So for individual's happiness,
successful life, healthy mind,
healthy body, important.
And second level, as a social
element is that we have
to create more compassion
in the society,
compassion in the family.
There also key factor is
wholeheartedness, honest.
So that be respective both
a believer or nonbeliever.
So long we are human
being, so long we are part
of the humanity, these
are fundamental value
that I believe.
So, in order to carry
meaningful life, money,
power, these are secondary.
You know what in order to be--
in order to carry meaningful
life, money, better facility.
>> These are important but
not ultimate source, factor.
Ultimate factor is mind,
more compassionate mind.
So then that's usually I
describe secularly of approach
to increase this inner value
which itself secularities mainly
by logical factor
of these things.
Then alas a thousand years, I
think 4 to 5 thousand years,
the faith eventually
developed on this planet.
So all these different
faith, the essential message,
essential teaching is
same - love, compassion,
with that forgiveness,
tolerance, and self-discipline
and the practice of contentment.
Too much greed brings
more sort of restlessness.
And also too much greed now
today even ecological problem
or globally economic
crisis here also.
Extreme greed makes some certain
contribution on this crisis.
So for that, contentment,
practice of contentment
is very good.
Many of those religious sort
of follower like Christian,
particularly, and also in
the monastery, monk on nuns,
their life very simple, simple.
They understood simplicity.
That is practice of contentment.
Then, in anyway, we came across
some uncomfortable things,
then we face that practice of
patience, practice of tolerance.
That immense help.
All this based on practice
of love, compassion.
Then I want to share with you
the meaning of discipline.
Discipline in some cases
imposed by authority.
That discipline is
something different matter.
But when we-- religiously
felt discipline mainly
means self-discipline.
So that means voluntarily
you succumb.
And out of awareness
if I do this
out of the negative
consequences for myself.
So out of awareness these
things, out of awareness
of consequences then
resisting this wrongdoing,
that's self-discipline.
Like, you see, according
to doctor if someone,
you see they have some
problem, then doctor say,
oh you should get more exercise
or you should resisting eating
this kind, that and this
and that kind, oh, so then we
voluntarily resist this thing.
Although I love this but
doctor say should not take,
so resist it.
That's self-discipline for one's
own protection, not imposing.
Isn't it? So that is, I
think, in a religious sense,
a genuine meaning of
discipline is like that.
So, all religions, all
religious tradition the same--
same message, same practice.
Now, in the philosophy
field big differences.
Some say there is God.
Some no God.
Some say rebirth,
there is rebirth.
Some say no rebirth, that
this is just one life.
So big differences,
but it doesn't matter.
If you ask what's the purpose
of these different philosophy,
same purpose - to strengthening
these practice of love,
compassion, forgiveness,
these things.
The teachings of
religion, there's God.
So when you submit or
constitute total delivery
that results submission to God
that reduce self-centered
ego, very good.
Then description about
God is infinite love
that give us inspiration,
practice of love, so wonderful.
Then non-theistic like Buddhism
or Jainism emphasis
love causality or karma.
Karma means action.
So they are simple.
If you do good things to
other, you get a benefit.
If you do bad things to
other, you get suffering.
That's the law of karma.
So that also you see there
if you practice compassion
and serve other, at least not
harm other, you get benefit.
The same purpose and too
much greed you get trouble.
Contentment, have self
discipline or all these things.
You see due to--
from the viewpoint
of love causality you see
these practices here come,
same purpose.
So even within Buddhist
tradition,
there are different philosophy
taught by Buddha himself.
So sometimes I'm
telling audience,
this contradictory philosophy
come from same teacher, Buddha.
This certainly not out
of his own confusion.
He tell one day this philosophy
to one audience then another
occasion he tell something
different, which of course, I'm
Buddhist with respect to Buddha.
This contradiction
philosophy come not
out of alcohol [laughter] or
little confusion, certainly not.
No, he deliberately try
to create more confusion
among his follower.
One day he said this,
one day he said that.
No, certainly not.
Then the answer is because among
his disciple there are different
mental disposition.
Therefore, to some people,
certain philosophical viewpoint
is more suitable, more helpful.
So he taught accordingly.
And some people, different sort
of philosophical
viewpoint is more suitable,
more effective, he told that.
So same purpose, out
of his compassion,
out of his sense of concern.
So from this we learned,
oh different traditions,
some say God, some
say Creator, absolute,
but others say no absolute, it
doesn't matter, same purpose.
But sometimes in order
to create more sort
of closer relation just--
some similar things,
those differences put behind.
This is a wrong method.
Then I participate
interfaith sort of dialogue,
I always make clear
all these differences.
Then in spite these differences,
the essential practice
is constant, same.
We had all these different
philosophical viewpoint,
same purpose.
Through that way,
through that way,
you can develop genuine respect,
admiration to all the
different major traditions.
So, now, today, although I
think among different religious
traditions, the Buddhism
of religion is a preserved
Buddhism, now, is it coming?
>> Like India, thousand
years, I think more
than 3 thousand years,
the different religious
tradition already exist.
For example, homegrown religion,
different Hinduism, Jainism,
Buddhism, later Sikhism,
these homegrown religion.
Therefore, outside, Zoroastrian
from Iran, ancient Iran,
Parsi come to India when
they faced some problem
in their own land.
And then Christianity,
Islam, Judaism,
all major world's tradition
exist, live together
in that continent,
in that country.
So, why not on this
whole planet not
because of different
information,
'cause with the easy
information.
So, now information of
difference with faith
or like America as
immigrants immigrates there
from different part of
the world, so do society
like multicultural society,
multi-judicial society.
So this actually will happen
in all part of the world.
So I think that we should
take India as an example,
all major tradition live
together, we should respect.
Occasionally, some problems,
it is understandable.
India, now over billion
human being,
some you see these people
take for granted always there.
Some of that is understandable.
But all picture, all these
major religious tradition
live together.
So things are improving
but at the meantime,
we need more constant effort
to bring closer relation,
closer understanding among
different religious tradition.
So I always try to bring more
closer understanding than that.
Then what else?
I think I'm finish.
My talk finish-- actually,
I have 2 commitments.
The one of them is
promotion of human value
that also I already talk first.
Then second my commitment
is promotion
which is harmony,
that also I touched.
So now complete.
Thank you.
Some questions now?
[ Laughter ]
>> So this is a time where
we will have questions
from the floor, but also we
collected questions online.
So, I think what I'll do is just
begin with the question online
and then-- are there people
at the mics here on the floor?
Could you just--
>> There.
>> Well set there, okay good.
So let me start with a question
that came through online.
To what extent should we act
for others at the expense
of our own personal happiness?
Where do our responsibilities
to others end
and where do our
responsibilities
to ourselves begin?
[ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
[ Foreign Language ]
>> I think, generally, more
sort of service to other
and show affection, respect,
I have nothing to lose.
>> You lose nothing on.
>> Oh, from your side, nothing.
Of course, for example, when
some very hungry person there,
you have a packed lunch
and you have to share half,
that you lose something,
but that is one better.
[ Laughter ]
>> Then sometimes, you see,
in order to save other's life,
sacrifice your own life.
Such things are quite serious,
then you have to think,
if I sacrifice my own
life for the benefit
of other, how much benefit.
Other hand, if I survived,
my life should presume,
how much benefit, how much
I can do still continuously.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> Weigh them.
>> Weigh them.
If things are really almost
as if 80 to 90 percent sure
if I sacrifice my life for
immense benefit to other,
my life will remain another sort
of few decades not much
diversity cause of that,
no obvious diversity show.
So this time, right time,
I'll sacrifice my life
for the benefit of other,
then I think it's worth it
to sacrifice your own life.
And also it is like giving eye
or some kidney or some organs,
that definitely benefit, then
sometimes you see, worthwhile.
Again, you should
calculate the others' life,
other one who suppose
you give donation,
organ donation, organ re--
>> Yeah, organ.
>> There are life, something
really good, meaningful life.
Or if this organ, my
organ is offered, then he
or she survive longer period
and lot of [foreign language]--
[ Foreign Language ]
>> Laundering or
cheating, bully, like that.
That not much worthy.
So all these you see
depend on the circumstances
or depend on case to case.
So we have to use our
intelligence, long term benefit
and short term benefit.
For bigger benefit and shorter
lose-- [foreign language]--
>> Smaller purpose.
>> Smaller--
>> Purpose.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> So you have to compare in
between the bigger benefit
that a particular act would, you
know, bring about and the degree
of cost it's going to
infect upon yourself.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> And there's a phrase
in the Tibetan ethical--
Buddhist ethical teachings
which says that for the purpose
of a small goal, you should
not sacrifice something
that is larger.
>> Some other question?
>> Let's take a question from
the right hand mic here, please.
[ Pause ]
>> Hello, Your Holiness.
My question is do you
feel that the quality
of unconditional love that is
something that is known at birth
by a mother is something
that can be cultivated
in the religious life and
in the life of our inclusion
of all beings so that we
have some sort of parameter
for bringing about a kind
of peace and allowing
for what we might say
as the stronger sex
that right now doesn't appear
to be in our very violent world.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> On religious matter,
of course I cannot say,
I cannot sort of say
the role definitely.
The old different traditions,
that's what I'm going to say.
But generally, now
in today's world,
I think generally
education highly advanced.
Everywhere people, I mean,
unanimously agree the
importance of education.
So I think the result
also quite satisfactory.
But still we are facing a
lot of manmade problem, why?
Not lack of education,
not lack of vision,
but sometimes wrong
vision, sometimes education,
smart brain utilized
for destruction.
So this clearly shows we
are lacking the real sense
of responsibility on
the basis of compassion,
sense of well-being of other.
So, now share regarding
compassion.
The biological female more
sensitive to other's being.
One occasion, some scientists
out of their experiment,
they noticed two persons,
one male and one female,
witnessed someone's painful
experience then the response,
the heartbeat and
all these response,
female much more stronger.
I have one story.
You know, I myself noticed
one time, long flight,
night flight I think
from Japan to America
or something, quite long flight.
So, in the airplane, passenger,
one quite young couple,
two babies.
One baby, I think,
5 or 6 years old.
One either 1 year or older than
1 year or like that, very small.
So the daytime, the elder
one running here and there,
little disturbances but not
much, but not much problem.
But sometimes it amused
me demonstratively.
>> Quite amusing.
>> Oh, quite amused and I think
on one occasion I also
offered one sweet, like that.
Then night start, the
elder one asleep nicely.
The smaller one from
time to time cried
and then the early night, at
the beginning of the night,
both parent, father and
mother both, you see,
taking care of the young baby.
Then about midnight, the
father slept with rest.
Only mother taking care,
still sacrificed her sleep.
The next morning, I noticed
her eyes become very red.
So this demonstrated although
both parents taking care
out of their affection
but in real sense,
mother taking more care.
And then look dogs, father
enjoy then disappear but mother,
the whole period 'til the puppy
you see become independent,
the mother whole time is taking
care and birds also like that.
That's a biological
fact there so therefore,
at the time we need more
effort for promotion
of human affection,
human compassion,
I think female should take
more active role in this field.
This I really feel.
The religious field, that is of
course, we have to go according
to one's own tradition.
So I have no right to interfere
in these fields, like that.
So that's my view.
Next question.
>> Let's take one
from the left side.
Mic please.
>> Your Holiness.
I have-- my question
is about something
that we face a lot in life.
It's about the decision
that we make.
Many times when we make
a decision or we are
about to make a decision,
we often think
of what outcome it's
going to have
and like how it's going
to affect our lives.
So, and after making
a decision often we
like regret making
decisions like well,
I shouldn't have made this,
I shouldn't have done that.
So, what would you suggest
is like a proper way
to make a particular decision?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> Excuse me, can you
repeat the first part.
>> Can you repeat the first
part of the question, please?
>> It's about the decisions
that we make in life.
How should we go about it?
Like many times we know when
we look back at our life,
we think that you
know some decisions
that we made were wrong and some
affected our lives negatively
so, what should be like
our basic like, you know,
what should be our rule of thumb
when we are making a decision?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> You need a kind
of clairvoyance.
[ Laughter ]
>> But that also difficult.
[ Laughter ]
>> So naturally, that before,
sort of a small decision,
small matter, 'cause it
doesn't matter but more serious
of the matter if this is
subject to time or some kind
of earthquake happen
then no time to think
which direction come and
then gradually moving.
No, no, no.
Immediately you have
to escape like that.
So these are something different
but usually decision
should not take hurriedly.
Think well, again and again.
And then also ask some of your
trusted friend then think very
carefully and also take some
different suggestions then
finally, decide.
Then later if it goes wrong,
you will not get regret.
I consulted with my friend
and I myself also constantly,
carefully thought about it
and finally, we decided.
No regret.
So my own experience goes like
that since my age 60 year old,
now 75, over 75 years.
So major decision
I always, firstly,
I myself think, think and think.
I then ask different
opinions and consult people
and also honor my
friend including sweeper,
I ask what is their opinion.
Then of course as Buddhist
practitioner I also am
using divination.
>> Mysterious procedure
for determining.
>> Then if-- then--
option discussed and to
use human intelligence
and almost certain one
decision is better then decide.
>> If still some
dilemma, I don't know,
then I use this mysterious
way of investigation,
then decide, there
are no regret.
Even if something goes
wrong, no regret, like that.
So that's the way.
So ultimately, it depend
on the decision maker
himself or herself.
>> Another question from online,
doesn't discovering the way
to lead a meaningful life
demand experiential learning.
And to what extent is that kind
of knowledge actually
communicable
by a teacher like yourself?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> I think mainly information.
I had [inaudible] a 17 years
study from kindergarten
up to university level.
This is supposedly
give us information
and to utilize our intelligence
more effectively, more wisely,
so a lot of information.
Then and important I
think when we study
to just we see some sort of
superficial knowledge from books
or from teachers-- of
explanation just like copy.
That's not sufficient.
These knowledge which come
from others word or books,
then analyzed yourself and
experiment, then develop sort
of the full knowledge about
the subject, then some cases,
certain subject such as
the practice of compassion,
these things then time
factor is very important
so familiarize these things.
They eventually become
part of your own life.
So add knowledge through
that way is a real teacher--
the more sort of knowledge
through that way you don't need
any sort of university person--
>> External teacher.
>> External teacher like that.
Here, one story I
think 10th century,
11th century one great master
at the time he passed away--
>> He was passing away--
>> He was a--
>> He was passing away.
>> Passing away, some of
his disciple they expressed,
"Till now you are here whenever
we face some sort of questions
or doubt we can ask
you, now you are--
you will no longer
be with us, so--
>> What to do?
>> And he mentioned text--
>> Texts--
>> Text, this should
be your teacher,
you should not rely
on human being--
>> On a person.
>> On person but
rely on this books.
So that I think is
a very good advice.
So we-- so acquire sort of
more information and knowledge.
And then also now these days,
immediate people also immense
help is it to know the reality?
And what other people are doing
when they face similar sort
of problems or difficulties,
sort of like that.
So here, one Buddha
statement is quite useful.
Ultimately you are
your own master.
You have to take care yourself
and use human intelligence
and human experiences maximally.
>> Question here from the mic
on the right hand side, please.
>> Hello Your holiness,
I'm wondering what your
favorite time of the day is?
[ Laughter ]
[ Foreign Language ]
>> Sleep.
[ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
>> At all cost, long
thorough, long days,
mines are daily life
start 3:30 early morning,
then some meditation or
analytical meditation, think,
think, think like
that-- analyze, analyze,
and also occasionally some
single-pointed meditation.
It took about 4 or 5 hours,
then some meeting like that.
Now, getting older,
in the late evening,
a little feeling of tiredness.
So sleep is very
important [laughter].
Then I think more
serious, like this meeting,
meeting with people,
human brothers,
sisters who have the same
sort of the potential
and also facing day
by day some kind
of problems are always there.
So then how to tackle
this problem?
Share each other's experience.
I feel some fulfillment
of one own life,
your life becomes
something of a benefit,
meaningful-- benefit to others.
So that's the real
meaning of life, like that.
Next?
>> From the left, please?
>> Alright so, first of all,
very nice color coordination
with the hat and the robe.
So my question is
about meditation.
I feel like meditation
encourages you
to detach yourself from, you
know, worldly objects or things
in your life but at
the same time I feel
like it's enabling you to
gain a sense of oneness
with your environment
or, you know,
a feeling interrelatedness
with everything.
So can you just explain what
seems like two opposing things?
How can a feeling of detachment
from everything lead to a sense
of oneness with your
environment?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> No contradiction.
Actually-- or first of all,
what kind of meditation?
There are a lot of differences,
a lot of different meditations.
>> I'm just talking about Zen.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> The compassion or
closeness feeling with other.
There are two things,
two different sort of,
different kind or two levels.
>> One level, biological factor.
That's closes feeling towards
your own family members,
or parents, children,
brothers, sisters like that.
That kind of sort of closest
feelings among animals also
have, that's biological factor.
Here, very much mixed
to it attachment.
Now, the second level or
higher level of compassion
or closeness feeling, think--
what is the right to
overcome suffering.
Now for example, one
self feel some kind
of self-care, dear self.
That feeling is not developed
on the basis of some kind
of recognition, one self
very kind to oneself, no.
But simply one self want--
>> Happiness.
>> Happiness and have right
to overcome suffering.
So that reason to other
infinite sense of being,
infinite human being, say
each one have the right
to overcome suffering.
Each one have that desire by
innate that resides there.
So, on that basis like one wish
overcome suffering for one self,
similarly do wish others
also to overcome suffering.
Now, the previous
one very much sort
of oriented towards
others' attitude.
The second one, not oriented
to the others' attitude
but self only-- self--
>> The person.
>> Person, itself.
The previous one, very
much mixed with attachment.
The second one, without
attachment, unbiased.
So no attachment there, that
closeness feeling is biased.
So attachment become
hindrance of development
of the second kind of compassion
which essentially detach.
No preference, this one my
close friend, this one my enemy,
more distance, no
that, all equal.
My enemy also have the
right to overcome suffering.
So, on the basis of that kind
of sort of understanding,
they develop the
genuine sense of concern
of well being of other.
That's real compassion.
So there's no contradiction.
Detach and develop
genuine compassion.
That limited compassion
with attachment.
Clear? Thank you.
>> Another question?
>> And also thank you for
comment on this color.
Thank you.
[ Laughter ]
>> Another from online is,
generally speaking
most religions
and certainly what I know
of Buddhism advocate the
overcoming of desire.
However, is one's choice to live
a meaningful life not driven
by the desire for meaning?
Is there a way to differentiate
one desire from another?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> Desire, then of the text
say desire is something causing
for suffering, particularly
desire.
Otherwise you see without
desire, then movement--
>> Not possible.
>> Not possible and even you
see, wishing a happy life,
wishing happy life of all
human beings of healthy planet.
All these are wish, desire.
Desire leads action.
Without action, that
means without a cause,
how can develop effect.
Effect must come from action.
Action must come
from motivation.
Motivation must come
from desire.
Now, desire and attachment
are kind
of desire very much
mixed with attachment.
That's wrong thing.
[ Pause ]
[ Foreign Language ]
>> So, even you see-- so
desire, among the desire,
positive constructive desire,
destructive desire
or neutral desire.
Just this one eating here
- scratch - one desire,
very neutral, nothing
wrong, nothing will benefit,
like benefits altogether.
>> Neither ethical
nor unethical.
>> So, then similarly the
strong-- sense of strong self,
there are also you see 2
kinds, positive and negative.
Usually, when we refer
egoistic attitude,
that's extreme self-centered
ego which leads harming other,
cheating other, bullying other
regardless others' feeling.
That's a negative
egoistic attitude.
But then other hand,
I want to serve them.
I want to do them even as I
want to centralize my own life.
There should be strong
sense of self.
Without that, you
cannot develop will.
You cannot develop--
>> Courage.
>> Courage or self-confidence.
So there are 2 kinds ego,
one positive, one negative.
Even anger, one positive,
one negative.
Positive, out of
sense of concern,
some sort of-- wrathful
thinking.
>> Yeah, wrath.
>> Strong and-- strong attitude.
>> Feeling something like anger.
Out of compassion, out
of sense of concern
of others' well being.
Now for example,
there is one child,
just running facing the
danger of fell down.
Then shouting and one time
warning, not listening.
Second time warning,
not listening.
Third time, then
you made rules anger
and some harsh sort
of physical action.
That is-- that's some kind
of anger or wrathful sort
of mental attitude
is actually positive
because that motivated
by compassion.
So when we talk these
emotions, the emotion--
tells us different
emotions interrelated.
So, we cannot say desire wrong.
We cannot say egoistic
attitude wrong.
We cannot say anger is bad.
So we have to analyze difference
of nature, different category.
So, we need more study
about our inner world,
the mental world, people.
So every school say, study
geography from this up to there,
how many kilometers-- if you
go by car, how many hours?
Important, but equally more
important, we can discover lot
of complications there.
Studying more about this
nature is very essential,
directed religion
without dangerous life.
>> So therefore, I usually
describe Buddhism tea pots.
Buddhist signs or
in other words signs
which come from Buddhist texts.
Then, philosophy which
come from Buddhist songs,
then Buddhist religion.
So Buddhist religion
meant for Buddhist.
But signs and concept which come
from Buddhist literature
is something universal,
something academic subject.
So we already are
planning some sort of--
particular sort of textbook,
collected modern signs
and Ancient-- Asian
signs or Buddha signs
about mind, about particles.
Then different concept from-- as
an ancient non-Buddhist thought
or Buddhist thought
and modern like--
including like button
dresses sort
of the thought of philosophy.
There's no philosophy
from Greek.
So we're already
making some-- textbook.
So eventually, we'll
translate in English
and some other language,
so maybe useful.
So then, Buddhist information
can enrich our knowledge
about inner signs.
Good-- ness.
>> From the right please.
>> Hello. So, you
mentioned envisioning world
where someday all the people
of the earth would be unified,
what are your thoughts
on spreading the ideal--
the Buddhist ideals of
compassion and tolerance
as a means to accomplish
that goal?
[ Foreign Language ]
>> I always sort of believe
different religious tradition is
really helpful for
a variety of people.
So simply, one religion cannot
satisfy variety of people
so we need different
religions-- religious faith.
And then the subject
compassion, these,
are at all major religion,
as I mentioned it
before, is the same.
Now here a problem.
One time in Argentina
on our meeting including
some scientists
and some religious
leader, one scientist--
one Chilean scientist--
physicist, I was told
she was the teacher
of late Varela-- Francisco--
>> Francisco Varela, yeah.
>> So he once told in our
gathering, he's scientist,
physicist but if he developed
attachment regarding his own--
>> Field.
>> Scientific subject--
field, it is wrong.
At that time, I learned.
I really sort of felt,
"Oh it is very true.
I'm Buddhist.
If I have too much attachment
towards Buddhism, it's wrong."
Then I cannot see the
value of other tradition.
So that's a problem.
The fundamentalist thinking
is a lack of knowledge
of others' faith because
too much attachment
with your own faith.
That I think we have to remove.
Otherwise, these learned
traditions must be preserved
and not necessarily-- I
mean not Buddhism alone is
to have some special
sort of message, no.
All religion have
the same message.
Now important-- one
time in Germany,
I think when still 2
parts of Germany there,
the West Germans, one minister.
We casual talk-- I say, one
meeting-- one public meeting,
before that, we casual
talk something.
And I asked whether
there is secular ethics
without religion, I ask him.
He say, no.
Ethics-- moral ethics must
base on religious faith.
[ Pause ]
>> And one time, my late,
greatest special friend
almost spiritual comrade,
the late Pope of John Paul VI--
>> Second.
>> Second.
He-- of course, since the
beginning, he'd become pope,
I had sort of audience,
then several occasion,
you see, a meeting.
Then also, he initiated--
assisted meeting, wonderful.
I really respect and know
each other very well.
So one day, I developed
some courage
to ask him even the
moral ethics must base
on religious faith or not.
He didn't give an answer.
[Laughter] But his sort of,
Lieutenant, one cardinal.
One cardinal said,
"Oh yes, must be--
must base on religious faith."
Now, that's a problem now.
That's a problem.
There are millions of
nonbeliever understand it.
These also human being.
These people also
want happy life
but since they have no
interest about any religion,
so they also neglect completely
about these values, compassion,
forgiveness, these things.
In fact, some of them consider
compassion is something signs
of weakness, totally wrong.
Lack of awareness and
full of ignorance,
misunderstanding like that.
So therefore, in order to
reach these nonbelievers,
we must develop traditional
approach.
That's secular way.
I always tell secular way.
The secularism often is
to get the impression disrespect
tradition, just totally wrong.
According to Indian
constitution,
secularism means
respect all religions.
Mahatma Gandhi himself in his
daily prayer, Muslim prayer,
Hindu prayer, Christian
prayer, many prayer together,
and he himself very
religious minded.
And also the-- I think
one great sort of lawyer,
the first Indian
President, Rajendra Prasad,
very religious minded.
But these people produce sec--
constitution based
on secularism.
So secularism according
Indian sort of understanding,
not at all disrespect, but
rather respect all religion.
But in the meantime, no
sort of particular religion.
No preference to-- on
particular religion.
So that I think very, very good.
And also the non-- the
secularism according Indians--
the definition, the secularism
also respect nonbeliever.
So therefore, I'm trying to
make clear to audience the--
this basic ethics-- moral
ethics which we'll learn
or which we develop from
birth, biological effect.
It's not included with religion.
So therefore, these
ethics itself--
>> Secular values.
>> Secular sort of value.
The method to promote this
also should be secular way,
without attaching religion,
that I think we really need.
This is no contradiction
with religious faith.
All major religion
have importance
of love and compassion.
So using different reasons--
so that I think we need.
And now here like in Europe and
some other country, also the--
in public school, the teaching
of religion sometimes
with civil--
>> Problematic.
>> Problematic.
So we must invent without
touching religion but education
for secular ethics that's
I think very necessary,
so some of my friend actually
is working in this field.
So, if you have question,
it seems as if in order
to build happy world and thus,
near the 7 billion human
being should become Buddhist.
[Laughter] No.
That's unrealistic, unnecessary.
Next question?
>> We only have five minutes
left, so I'm gonna need
to take a last question
please, from the left hand.
Microphone.
>> Thank you, Your Holiness,
you've stated your opposition
to the death penalty.
What is your best argument
against the death penalty
and what advice do
you have for us,
who are fighting to
end this practice?
[ Foreign Language ]
[ Pause ]
>>So--
[ Pause ]
>> I think two reasons.
Those people who carry
death sentence is--
they believe death sentence
can be preventive measure
in the future [Foreign
Language].
>> Form of a deterrence.
>> But death seems to be failed.
Look China, the maximum
death sentence there
but the corruption and negative
things, I think increasing.
[Laughter] So not much
deterrence then another thing
just revenge.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> For the proponents of
death penalty, one argument is
that deterrence argument
which doesn't seem to work.
The second argument
is the retribution
because the person there
has done an unjust deed
and he or she must pay.
>> Both the reasons look as
if not satisfactory reason--
the first as I mentioned
earlier.
I think if we analyze those
country no longer death
sentence, not necessarily
do more crime,
more criminal, I don't think.
So similarly as I mentioned
earlier, those country
which still practice death
sentence not necessarily
lesser problem.
Then--
[ Pause ]
>> The [Foreign Language] was--
I think more effective
thing is put
in [Foreign Language],
life prison.
>> Yeah, life prison.
>> And they are also not just
rejected from the society
and commoner prisoner not that
way, give them-- opportunities.
Give them some kind of
sense they still belong
to the society.
And in the prisoner--
in the prison, should
have some Indian jail.
Some concerns of the official
provided some spiritual sorrow--
informations and
also some meditation.
I think in America
also, in Europe also,
I heard that there are
some people, visit prison
and talk prisoners and
given them some kind of--
love and kindness.
So that really, I
think effective method
to change the person.
Today, criminal person, through
training, through transformation
of their mind eventually
can be very useful person
and that's the way
because of the--
[ Foreign Language ]
.
>> That's a more
effective way of deterrence
>> Then-- [Foreign Language].
>> As for retribution.
>> That--
[ Pause ]
>> Then one occasion in India--
of course unfortunately India
still using death sentence, ha.
So one occasion,
I expressed the--
as far as potential of the
crimes including myself,
everyone have potential, same
potential, anger, hatred,
ignorance, everybody had that.
So, as far as potential
is concerned, everybody--
have to go candidate
for death sentence.
[Laughter] Then as far
as action is concerned,
even this criminal
people also can change.
So that's my reason,
my argument.
Then, in human society,
just is very important.
War, this big hero actually
big murderer but we prison them
and poor person, sometimes
[inaudible] take one's life,
that we call murder
and put in prison,
sometimes in death
sentence that also--
>> Unfair.
>> Unfair and all these
people from childhood,
the same human being, same
sort of compassion to person.
That's my argument.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> That I usually feel,
then further reason usually
investigate, I don't know.
[Laughter] I appreciate
your work.
[ Foreign Language ]
>> I think several years
ago, Amnesty International is
to start some movement
abolishing death sentence,
I'm one of the signatory.
So like that, we have to work.
We have to work, then--
>> Your Holiness, we began
the week here at Stanford
with a showing of a
film Compassion Rising
that showed your meeting in 1968
with the Roman Catholic Monk,
Thomas Marden and that was
more than 40 years ago now.
You have been teaching not
only within your own tradition
but across traditions
and around the world,
you have been our great
spiritual teacher.
We are very grateful for that
and we hope you will continue
to teach for decades and we
look forward to seeing you back
at Stanford again soon.
Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> For more, please
visit as at stanford.edu.
