|
The 3-day International Conference on Buddhism in the 21st century held in Rajgir was inaugurated by H.H. the 14th Dalia Lama and the Culture Minister of India. International Buddhist leaders from Thailand, Burma, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Vietnam, Mongolia were among the participants together with dignitaries from many countries. From Tibetan Buddhism, many great religious leaders were invited and participated. The Supreme Guru Vajradhara Chamgon Kenting Tai Situpa of Palpung Sherabling Monastic Seat also attended upon invitation and shared his great wisdom by giving a talk on the subject of "Buddhism for the 21st Century: Perspectives and Responses to Global Challenges and Crisis."
Below is the summarized speech from Guru Vajradhara Chamgon Kenting Tai Situpa -
Buddhism for the 21st Century: Perspectives and Responses to Global Challenges and Crisis
Buddhism for the 21st Century: Perspectives and Responses to Global Challenges and Crisis, Rajgir Nalanda, March 17, 2017
Today's subject is conflict avoidance and peace building and its Buddhist response.
This particular conference is organized by Nava Nalanda Mahavihara Nalanda and the Minister of Culture, Government of India. This is the inspiration and aspiration of H. H. The Dalai Lama. To always make the ethical way of thinking, the avoidance of conflict and also the Buddhadharma relevant and useful not only for Buddhist but for all the common men and women. Not only that but also to the environment as well as all the other living creatures. Not just human beings, not just people who believe in religion but to all.
Looking at this very important subject from this perspective, then two things come to my mind. First, because it is so vast and so big and so important I have to simplify it. After that one must clearly see what the solutions are and how to remedy them. Otherwise I will be talking for ten months and still get nowhere. I only have 10 minutes therefore, to make it meaningful I have to simplify it.
What is conflict? Conflict means disharmony. If things are not going harmoniously then there is conflict. When things are in harmony then there is no conflict.
Then avoidance. Avoidance to me defines clearly that the conflict is not there. We have to avoid it. It is about to happen. It's like some kind of accident. A big truck is driving on your way and you are driving towards it, so there is going to be a big accident and you have to avoid it by driving the right way or giving the right signal or something. We all know there are lots of conflicts in this world. So therefore I think this definition of avoidance is how to avoid future conflicts, perhaps by learning from the past and present conflicts. That is how I see it.
And then, peace building. In my mind when I hear the word "peace," what comes to my mind is the popular, very politically correct notion of "peace." Some kind of "no problem." Some kind of "tolerating everything." Something like that. That is truly wonderful but I'm a pragmatic person so therefore it has to be a long lasting sort of sustainable peace, rather than a stopgap measure.
To somehow tolerate something cosmetically which you can't really internally tolerate but externally you pretend to tolerate it, so you can avoid it but somebody is going to face it. And if they are not going to tolerate it then there is going to be a conflict. Also the person's situation which is calling for conflict, intentionally or unintentionally, as long as it is there you cannot really justify it just by avoiding it, because it is there. For example if there is a big boulder which rolls down from the mountain and sits in the middle of the highway you can avoid it but if you are not dealing with it somebody will be hit by it. Somebody will be in trouble. So that way peace is not just passive peace. I believe in passive peace for individuals. The Nirvana, the peace within you. I like to have it. Everybody likes to have it. But that does not solve the problem of everyone else. Therefore active peace is a continuous progressive effort. I don't want to talk about myself but I have to let you know that I have done some work 25 years ago; I went around the world for 10 years for active peace. It was "One World – One Humanity – Active Peace". This means to be constantly mindful and aware of the consequences of the things that we do and that are happening around so we constantly upgrade the environment, upgrade the education system, upgrade the interreligious understanding upgrade the economic system, upgrade the science and technology, so on and so forth. I had nine major fields of discussion during these 10 years of my work so I don't want to talk more about it. It is not boring but there is no time. You can learn and think about it.
And then, peace building means it is continuous. I don't want to be pessimistic but I can't help but being realistic and pragmatic. It is hard to believe that there will be a time when humanity will be able to say, "Everything is in peace forever. Now we don't have to do anything. Everything will be like a Swiss clock that goes on and on and on, peacefully forever". I believe that forever is a very very long time. Billions of centuries. Even Swiss clocks break down after some time, you know. Individually yes. Once you achieved Buddhahood you reached the ultimate peace. You will never fall back into samsara. That is true. But as humanity, as a world, as a society we have to continuously build peace. We have to continuously be active. H. H. Dalai Lama mentioned "Buddhism being relevant to the mass" this morning. Of course Buddhism is relevant to Buddhists. But it is about Buddhism being relevant to the humanity at large. Then we have to go beyond religion. And this idea of Buddhism whether it is a religion or not is a subject which was raised, perhaps more than hundred years back by scholars and thinkers. But that is not an issue but a meaningful discovery.
Now I must submerse and conclude because my time is up. For the teachings of The Buddha to become relevant to the mass, it has to be the essence of The Buddha's teachings rather than the institution of Buddhism. Of course, I'm a Buddhist. I'm a Bikshu and I have a long history. So does Venerable and many others. And we practice the holy Dharma. But the essence of all the Dharma is that everybody likes to be happy and nobody likes to suffer. That is not only a Buddhist idea but the basic nature of all living beings. When Buddha taught in Varanasi for the first time after his enlightenment, the First Turing of the Wheel of Dharma, it started with the Four Noble Truths. The Four Noble Truths start with the Truth of Suffering. Why? Because no sentient being likes to suffer. That is the truth. So it goes beyond religion.
Now one last thing. When we say conflict one should look deep in to it with the question, is this conflict really there? Ultimately there is no conflict if you really think about it. Is the conflict ultimate? No. There is no ultimate conflict. There is no ultimate negativity. There is no ultimate suffering. There is no ultimate badness. The ultimate is harmony. The ultimate is good. The ultimate is peace. The ultimate is compassion. Therefore knowing this has to be the basis of all the definitions of conflict avoidance and peace building. There are so many levels to it. But knowing when you have a problem, it is there relatively but not ultimately. All the problems are relative problems. And no matter how big they are they are impermanent. Knowing that, hope and the confidence will be there. As H. H. Dalai Lama mentioned this morning "it is very important to have self-confidence" and "it is very important to have trust between people". If you have compassion you have trust. If you have no compassion you will not have trust. I don't mean you should not trust but you will not trust. If somebody is exploiting you for example, you will not trust that person but if someone is being kind and generous and considerate you will trust that person. Even animals and nature function this way.
I hope what I said here is meaningful for this very important conference. There is a galaxy of things to explore and work on but of course it has to be based on realistic, manageable ways and means. This is a little tiny bit, minus one percent contribution to this enormous subject.
I want to thank Nava Nalanda and the Minister of Culture, Government of India for organizing this conference "Buddhism for the 21st century".
Thank you everyone.
Question and answer:
Even the other person is driving on the wrong side of the road you have to understand that else you and the other driver would be encountering a big collision. Just to avoid this tragedy for both yourself and the other driver you should give away just that one second to the other driver to avoid problems for the safety of you and the other person as well. Once you reach the safety then you can stop your car. And you can walk back to the person and you can have a good discussion, if that did not work out than you can even call the police. Preventing that irresponsible drive will not cause a bad accident in the future.
Question and answer:
I think I know what you are saying. I tell you even if the worst thing happening is very bad but it is not ultimate. We should avoid tragedies. But we should not be so negative and so hopeless when there is a possibility of tragedy because we know that there is no tragedy that is an ultimate tragedy. Anything can be fixed. I think the other driver has a big ego, you also have a big ego. Maybe your ego or that other person's ego is right - who knows but to avoid the accident you have to give up your ego for few seconds. After the safety is achieved then you can reclaim your ego if you like it so much. Ok.
Thank you all.
Teaching by H. H. The Chamgon Kenting Tai Situpa Rinpoche
Above concluded Guru Vajradhara Chamgon Kenting Tai Situpa's speech.
On the third day, as a conclusion of the conference, His Excellency President of India together with Governor and Chief Minister of Bihar State arrived and declared a productive 3-day conference.
|
