Dimensions
of Spirituality
His
Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
---o0o---
Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth
Dalai Lama 1995
This teaching was given at the
National Tennis Centre, Melbourne, Australia on May 4, 1992.
Two Levels of
Spirituality
Brothers and Sisters, I
would like to address the topic of spiritual values by defining
two levels of
spirituality.
To begin, let me say
that as human beings our basic aim is to have a happy life; we all
want to experience
happiness. It is natural for us to seek happiness. This is our
life's purpose. The reason
is quite clear: when we lose hope, the result is that we become
depressed and perhaps even
suicidal. Therefore, our very existence is strongly rooted in
hope. Although there is no
guarantee of what the future will bring, it is because we have
hope that we are able to
continue living. Therefore, we can say that the purpose of our
life, our life's goal, is
happiness.
Human beings are not
produced by machines. We are more than just matter; we have
feeling and experience. For
that reason, material comfort alone is not enough. We need
something deeper, what I
usually refer to as human affection, or compassion. With human
affection, or compassion,
all the material advantages that we have at our disposal can be
very constructive and can
produce good results. Without human affection, however, material
advantages alone will not
satisfy us, nor will they produce in us any measure of mental
peace or happiness. In fact,
material advantages without human affection may even create
additional problems.
Therefore, human affection, or compassion, is the key to human
happiness.
The First Level of
Spirituality:
The Religions of the World and Their Value for Humanity
The first level of
spirituality, for human beings everywhere, is faith in one of the
many religions of the
world. I think there is an important role for each of the major
world religions, but in
order for them to make an effective contribution to the benefit of
humanity from the
religious side, there are two important factors to be considered.
The first of these
factors is that individual practitioners of the various religions
-- that is, we ourselves
-- must practice sincerely. Religious teachings must be an
integral part of our lives;
they should not be separated from our lives. Sometimes we go into a
church or temple and
say a prayer, or generate some kind of spiritual feeling, and
then, when we step outside
the church or temple, none of that religious feeling remains. This
is not the proper way
to practice. The religious message must be with us wherever we
are. The teachings of our
religion must be present in our lives so that, when we really need
or require blessings or
inner strength, those teachings will be there even at such times;
they will be there when
we experience difficulties because they are constantly present.
Only when religion has
become an integral part of our lives can it be really effective.
We also need to
experience more deeply the meanings and spiritual values of our
own religious tradition --
we need to know these teachings not only on an intellectual level
but also through our own
deeper experience. Sometimes we understand different religious
ideas on an overly
superficial or intellectual level. Without a deeper feeling, the
effectiveness of religion
becomes limited. Therefore, we must practice sincerely, and
religion must become part of
our lives.
The
Importance of a Close Relationship Among Religions
The second factor is
concerned more with interaction among the various world religions.
Today, because of
increasing technological change and the nature of the world
economy, we are much more
dependent on one another than ever before. Different countries,
different continents, have
become more closely associated with one another. In reality the
survival of one region of
the world depends on that of others. Therefore, the world has
become much closer, much
more interdependent. As a result, there is more human interaction.
Under such
circumstances, the idea of pluralism among the world's religions
is very important. In
previous times, when communities lived separately from one another
and religions arose in
relative isolation, the idea that there was only one religion was
very useful. But now the
situation has changed, and the circumstances are entirely
different. Now, therefore, it is
crucial to accept the fact that different religions exist, and in
order to develop genuine
mutual respect among them, close contact among the various
religions is essential. This is
the second factor that will enable the world's religions to be
effective in benefiting
humanity.
When I was in Tibet, I
had no contact with people of different religious faiths, so my
attitude toward other
religions was not very positive. But once I had had the
opportunity to meet with people of
different faiths and to learn from personal contact and
experience, my attitude toward
other religions changed. I realized how useful to humanity other
religions are, and what
potential each has to contribute to a better world. In the last
several centuries the
various religions have made marvelous contributions toward the
betterment of human beings,
and even today there are large numbers of followers of
Christianity, Islam, Judaism,
Buddhism, Hinduism, and so forth. Millions of people are
benefiting from all these
religions.
To give an example of
the value of meeting people of different faiths, my meetings with
the late Thomas Merton
made me realize what a beautiful, wonderful person he was. On
another occasion I met with
a Catholic monk in Monserrat, one of Spain's famous monasteries. I
was told that this monk
had lived for several years as a hermit on a hill just behind the
monastery. When I
visited the monastery, he came down from his hermitage especially
to meet me. As it
happened, his English was even worse than mine, and this gave me
more courage to speak
with him! We remained face to face, and I inquired, "In those few
years, what were
you doing on that hill!" He looked at me and answered, "Meditation
on
compassion, on love." As he said those few words, I understood the
message through
his eyes. I truly developed genuine admiration for this person and
for others like him.
Such experiences have helped confirm in my mind that all the
world's religions have the
potential to produce good people, despite their differences of
philosophy and doctrine.
Each religious tradition has its own wonderful message to convey.
For example, from the
Buddhist point of view the concept of a creator is illogical;
because of the ways in which
Buddhists analyze causality, it is a difficult concept for
Buddhists to understand.
However, this is not the place to discuss philosophical issues.
The important point here
is that for the people who do follow those teachings in which the
basic faith is in a
creator, that approach is very effective. According to those
traditions, the individual
human being is created by God. Moreover, as I recently learned
from one of my Christian
friends, they do not accept the theory of rebirth and, thus, do
not accept past or future
lives. They accept only this life. However, they hold that this
very life is created by
God, by the creator, and that idea develops in them a feeling of
intimacy with God. Their
most important teaching is that since it is by God's will that we
are here, our future
depends upon the creator, and that because the creator is
considered to be holy and
supreme, we must love God, the creator.
What follows from this
is the teaching that we should love our fellow human beings --
this is the primary message
here. The reasoning is that if we love God, we must love our
fellow human beings because
they, like us, were created by God. Their future, like ours,
depends on the creator;
therefore, their situation is like our own. Consequently, the
faith of people who say,
"Love God," but who themselves do not show genuine love toward
their fellow
human beings is questionable. The person who believes in God and
in love for God must
demonstrate the sincerity of his or her love of God through love
directed toward fellow
human beings. This approach is very powerful, isn't it?
Thus, if we examine each
religion from various angles in the same way -- not simply from
our own philosophical
position but from several points of view -- there can be no doubt
that all major religions
have the potential to improve human beings. This is obvious.
Through close contact with
those of other faiths it is possible to develop a broadminded
attitude and mutual respect
with regard to other religions. Close contact with different
religions helps me to learn
new ideas, new practices, and new methods or techniques that I can
incorporate into my own
practice. Similarly, some of my Christian brothers and sisters
have adopted certain
Buddhist methods -- for example, the practice of one-pointedness
of mind as well as
techniques to help improve tolerance, compassion, and love. There
is great benefit when
practitioners of different religions come together for this kind
of interchange. In
addition to the development of harmony among them, there are other
benefits to be gained
as well.
Politicians and national
leaders frequently talk about "coexistence" and "coming together."
Why
not we religious people too? I think the time has come. At Assisi
in 1987, for example,
leaders and representatives of various world religions met to pray
together, although I am
not certain whether "prayer" is the exact word to describe the
practice of all
these religions accurately. In any case, what is important is that
representatives of the
various religions come together in one place and, according to
their own belief, pray.
This is already happening and is, I think, a very positive
development. Nevertheless, we
still need to put more effort toward developing harmony and
closeness among the world's
religions, since without such effort, we will continue to
experience the many problems
that divide humanity.
If religion were the
only remedy for reducing human conflict, but that remedy itself
became another source of
conflict, it would be disastrous. Today, as in the past, conflicts
take place in the name
of religion, because of religious differences, and I think this is
very, very sad. But as
I mentioned earlier, if we think broadly, deeply, we will realize
that the situation in
the past is entirely different from the situation today. We are no
longer isolated but are
instead interdependent. Today, therefore, it is very important to
realize that a close
relationship among the various religions is essential, so that
different religious groups
may work closely together and make a common effort for the benefit
of humankind.
Thus,
sincerity and faith in religious practice on the one hand, and
religious tolerance and
cooperation on the other, comprise this first level of the value
of spiritual practice to
humanity.
The
Second Level of Spirituality:
Compassion as the Universal Religion
The second level of
spirituality is more important than the first because, no matter
how wonderful any
religion may be, it is still accepted only by a very limited
number of people. The
majority of the five or six billion human beings on our planet
probably do not practice
any religion at all. According to their family background they
might identify themselves
as belonging to one religious group or another -- "I am Hindu"; "I
am
Buddhist"; "I am Christian" -- but deep down, most of these
individuals are
not necessarily practitioners of any religious faith. That is all
right; whether or not a
person embraces a religion is that person's right as an
individual. All the great ancient
masters, such as Buddha, Mahavira, Jesus Christ, and Mohammed,
failed to make the entire
human population spiritually minded. The fact is that nobody can
do that. Whether those
nonbelievers are called atheists does not matter. Indeed,
according to some Western
scholars, Buddhists are also atheists, since they do not accept a
creator. Therefore, I
sometimes add one more word to describe these nonbelievers, and
that is
"extreme"; I call them extreme nonbelievers. They are not only
nonbelievers but
are extreme in their view in that they hold that spirituality has
no value. However, we
must remember that these people are also a part of humanity, and
that they also, like all
human beings, have the desire to be happy -- to have a happy and
peaceful life. This is
the important point.
I believe that it is all
right to remain a nonbeliever, but as long as you are a part of
humanity, as long as you
are a human being, you need human affection, human compassion.
This is actually the
essential teaching of all the religious traditions: the crucial
point is compassion, or
human affection. Without human affection, even religious beliefs
can become destructive.
Thus, the essence, even in religion, is a good heart. I consider
human affection, or
compassion, to be the universal religion. Whether a believer or a
nonbeliever, everyone
needs human affection and compassion, because compassion gives us
inner strength, hope,
and mental peace. Thus, it is indispensable for everyone.
Let us, for example,
examine the usefulness of the good heart in daily life. If we are
in a good mood when we
get up in the morning, if there is a warm-hearted feeling within,
automatically our inner
door is opened for that day. Even should an unfriendly person
happen along, we would not
experience much disturbance and may even manage to say something
nice to that person. We
could chat with the not-so-friendly person and perhaps even have a
meaningful
conversation. But on a day when our mood is less positive and we
are feeling irritated,
automatically our inner door closes. As a result, even if we
encounter our best friend, we
feel uncomfortable and strained. These instances shows how our
inner attitude makes a
great difference in our daily experiences. Therefore, in order to
create a pleasant
atmosphere within ourselves, within our families, within our
communities, we have to
realize that the ultimate source of that pleasant atmosphere is
within the individual,
within each of us -- a good heart, human compassion, love.
Once we create a
friendly and positive atmosphere, it automatically helps to reduce
fear and insecurity. In
this way we can easily make more friends and create more smiles.
After all, we are social
animals. Without human friendship, without the human smile, our
life becomes miserable.
The lonely feeling becomes unbearable. It is a natural law -- that
is to say, according to
natural law we depend on others to live. If, under certain
circumstances, because
something is wrong inside us, our attitude toward fellow human
beings, on whom we depend,
becomes hostile, how can we hope to attain peace of mind or a
happy life? According to
basic human nature, or natural law, affection-compassion-is the
key to happiness.
According to
contemporary medicine, a positive mental state, or peace of mind,
is also beneficial for
our physical health. If we are constantly agitated, we end up
harming our own health.
Therefore, even from the point of view of our health, mental
calmness and peacefulness are
very important. This shows that the physical body itself
appreciates and responds to human
affection, human peace of mind.
Basic
Human Nature
If
we look at basic human nature, we see that our nature is more
gentle than aggressive. For
example, if we examine various animals, we notice that animals of a
more peaceful nature
have a corresponding body structure, whereas predatory animals
have a body structure that
has developed according to their nature. Compare the tiger and the
deer: there are great
differences in their physical structures. When we compare our own
body structure to
theirs, we see that we resemble deer and rabbits more than tigers.
Even our teeth are more
like theirs, are they not? They are not like a tiger's. Our nails
are another good example
-- I cannot even catch a rat with my human fingernails alone. Of
course, because of human
intelligence, we are able to devise and use various tools and
methods to accomplish things
that would be difficult to accomplish without them. Thus, as you
can see, because of our
physical situation we belong to the gentle- animal category. I
think this is our
fundamental human nature as shown by our basic physical structure.
Compassion and
Conflict Resolution
Given our
current global situation, cooperation is essential,
especially in fields such as economics and education. The concept
that differences are
important is now more or less gone, as demonstrated by the
movement toward a unified
Western Europe. This movement is, I think, truly marvelous and
very timely. Yet this close
work between nations did not come about because of compassion or
religious faith, but
rather because of necessity. There is a growing tendency in the
world toward global
awareness. Under current circumstances a closer relationship with
others has become an
element of our very survival. Therefore, the concept of universal
responsibility based on
compassion and on a sense of brotherhood and sisterhood is now
essential. The world is
full of conflicts -- conflicts because of ideology, because of
religion, even conflicts
within families: conflicts based on one person wanting one thing
and another wanting
something else. So if we examine the sources of these many
conflicts, we find that there
are many different sources, many different causes, even within
ourselves.
Yet,
in the meantime, we have the potential and ability to come
together in harmony. All these
other things are relative. Although there are many sources of
conflict, there are at the
same time many sources that bring about unity and harmony. The
time has come to put more
emphasis on unity. Here again there must be human affection. For
example, you many have a
different ideological or religious opinion from someone else. If
you respect the other's
rights and sincerely show a compassionate attitude toward that
person, then it does not
matter whether his or her idea is suitable for yourself; that is
secondary. As long as the
other person believes in it, as long as that person benefits from
such a viewpoint, it is
his or her absolute right. So we must respect that and accept the
fact that different
viewpoints exist. In the realm of economics as well, one's
competitors must also receive
some profit, because they too have to survive. When we have a
broader perspective based on
compassion, I think things become much easier. Once again,
compassion is the key factor.
Demilitarization
Today, our world
situation has eased considerably. Fortunately, we can now think
and talk seriously about
demilitarization, or at least the idea of demilirarization. Five
years ago, or perhaps
even as recently as two years ago, it was difficult even to think
about it, but now the
Cold War between the former Soviet Union and the United States is
over. With regard to the
United States, I always tell my American friends, "Your strength
comes not from
nuclear weapons but from your ancestors' noble ideas of freedom,
liberty, and
democracy." When I was in the United States in 1991, I had the
opportunity of meeting
with former President George Bush. At that time we discussed the
New World Order, and I
said to him, "A New World Order with compassion is very good. I'm
not so sure about a
New World Order without compassion." I now believe that the time
is ripe to think and
talk about demilitarization. There are already some signs of
weapons reduction and for the
first time, denuclearization. Step by step, we are seeing a
reduction in weapons, and I
think our goal should be to free the world -- our small planet --
from weapons. This does
not mean, however, that we should abolish all forms of weapons. We
may need to keep some,
since there are always some mischievous people and groups among
us. In order to take
precautions and be safeguarded from these sources, we could create
a system of regionally
monitored international police forces, not necessarily belonging
to any one nation but
controlled collectively and supervised ultimately by an
organization like the United
Nations or another similar international body. That way, with no
weapons available, there
would be no danger of military conflict between nations, and there
would also be no civil
wars.
War has remained, sadly,
a part of human history up to the present, but I think the time
has come to change the
concepts that lead to war. Some people consider war to be
something glorious; they think
that through war they can become heroes. This usual attitude
toward war is very wrong.
Recently an interviewer remarked to me, "Westerners have a great
fear of death, but
Easterners seem to have very little fear of death." To that I
half-jokingly
responded, "It seems to me that, to the Western mind, war and the
military
establishment are extremely important. War means death -- by
killing, not by natural
causes. So it seems that, in fact, you are the ones who do not
fear death, because you are
so fond of war. We Easterners, particularly Tibetans, cannot even
begin to consider war;
we cannot conceive of fighting, because the inevitable result of
war is disaster: death,
injuries, and misery. Therefore, the concept of war, in our minds,
is extremely negative.
That means we actually have more fear of death than you. Don't you
think?"
Unfortunately, because of certain factors, our ideas about war are
incorrect. Therefore,
the time has come to think seriously about demilitarization.
I felt this very
strongly during and after the Persian Gulf crisis. Of course,
everybody blamed Saddam
Hussein, and there is no question that Saddam Hussein is negative
-- he made many mistakes
and acted wrongly in many ways. After all, he is a dictator, and a
dictator is, of course,
something negative. However, without his military establishment,
without his weapons,
Saddam Hussein could not function as that kind of dictator. Who
supplied those weapons?
The suppliers also bear the responsibility. Some Western nations
supplied him with weapons
without regard for the consequences.
To think only of money,
of making a profit from selling weapons, is really terrible. I
once met a French woman who
had spent many years in Beirut, Lebanon. She told me with great
sadness that during the
crisis in Beirut there were people at one end of the city making a
profit selling weapons,
and that every day, at the other end of the city,
other-innocent-people were being killed
with those very weapons. Similarly, on one side of our planet
there are people living a
lavish life with the profits made from selling arms, while
innocent people are getting
killed with those fancy bullets on the other side of our planet.
Therefore, the first step
is to stop selling weapons. Sometimes I tease my Swedish friends:
"Oh, you are really
wonderful. During the last period of conflict you remained
neutral. And you always
consider the importance of human rights and world peace. Very
good. But in the meantime
you are selling many weapons. This is a little bit of a
contradiction, isn't it?"
Therefore,
since the time of the Persian Gulf crisis I myself made an inner
pledge -- a commitment
that for the rest of my life I will contribute to furthering the
idea of demilitarizarion.
As far as my own country is concerned, I have made up my mind that
in the future, Tibet
should be a completely demilirarized zone. Once again, in working
to bring about
demilitarization, the key factor is human compassion.
Conclusion: The
Meaning of Compassion
I have talked a great
deal about compassion without explaining its precise meaning. I
would like to conclude by
explaining the meaning of compassion, which is often
misunderstood. Genuine compassion is
based not on our own projections and expectations, but rather on
the rights of the other:
irrespective of whether another person is a close friend or an
enemy, as long as that
person wishes for peace and happiness and wishes to overcome
suffering, then on that basis
we develop genuine concern for his or her problem. This is genuine
compassion.
Usually when we are
concerned about a close friend, we call this compassion. This is
not compassion; it is
attachment. Even in marriage, those marriages that last a long
time do so not because of
attachment -- although it is generally present -- but because
there is also compassion.
Marriages that last only a short time do so because of a lack of
compassion; there is only
emotional attachment based on projection and expectation. When the
only bond between close
friends is attachment, then even a minor issue may cause one's
projections to change. As
soon as our projections change, the attachment disappears --
because that attachment was
based solely on projection and expectation.
It is possible to have
compassion without attachment -- and similarly, to have anger
without hatred. Therefore,
we need to clarify the distinctions between compassion and
attachment, and between anger
and hatred. Such clarity is useful in our daily life and in our
efforts toward world
peace. I consider these to be basic spiritual values for the
happiness of all human
beings, regardless of whether one is a believer or a non-believer.
Source:
www.buddhismtoday.com