His Holiness’ talk at the Royal Albert Hall on 22 May
Wednesday, 13 August 2008, 12:24 p.m.
Riki Hyde-Chambers: Ladies and gentlemen, it is my very great
privilege to introduce you to His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th
Dalai Lama of Tibet.
 |
Someone in audience: We love you.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: Thank you. Firstly, let me sit more
comfortably. Don’t worry, I am not going to meditate in silence. Thank
you very much. I am very very happy to be meeting with the public in
this hall once more. I think it is the third time, or maybe the second.
I don’t remember.
Dear brothers and sisters, I am extremely happy to sit here with you
and interact. I will begin by speaking for about 30 or 40 minutes. When
I talk, it is not for a precise time; it depends on my mood. If my mood
is good I will speak for longer; if my mood is not that good the talk
will be shorter. Whenever I give a talk I do not do any preparation or
have any notes. I just express what I feel in a completely informal
way. Then there will be some questions. That will be helpful to me,
because sometimes there are unexpected questions, or points that I had
never considered. That helps me to think about the point more
seriously; so there is mutual benefit.
To begin, I want to thank the organisers, mainly I think the
Tibet Society. I think that it is the oldest such society, formed when
we became refugees, to support the Tibet cause. I remember the late
Lord Ennals, and other very active members, who made a great
contribution to the Tibetan cause. He is no longer with us, but, Riki
was here on my first visit in 1973, and since then in his face there
has not been much change. He is physically not very big, but he is full
of energy and warm feeling. These people carry the original spirit, and
make it even stronger. I want to thank the Tibet Society, and our other
friends and supporters. Thank you very much. Among the
parliamentarians, there are a number of people who show genuine
concern. Thank you. I always believe that our supporters are not
pro-Tibetan but rather pro-justice. I very much appreciate that.
I also want to thank the Tibetan musicians and dancers. I very
much appreciated them. For nearly half a century they have been
homeless; the generations change, but our people keep the Tibetan
spirit alive. Here in England there are very few Tibetans, but they
keep our spirit very much alive. Not only that, but those young
children who were born here have received a transfer of the Tibetan
spirit from their parents. A transfer from the older generation to the
younger generation. That was our original aim. As soon as we became
refugees, our main concern was to preserve the rich Tibetan Buddhist
culture. In other words, a culture of peace, of compassion. Today, that
is something very relevant to this world. Therefore, right from the
beginning, our main effort has been to preserve the Tibetan culture.
Nowadays our main discussions with the Chinese authorities are about
how to protect Tibetan cultural heritage. That is our main concern.
This small group here made an effort to preserve our spirit, our
cultural heritage. Thank you very much.
Turning to my talk here, I think that most of you know that I
have two main concerns. No. 1 – now because of this light this is
necessary [dons peaked cap]. This is not the red hat sect, the yellow
hat sect or the blue hat sect. It is something very practical. My main
interest, my main commitment on a voluntary basis, is to two things:
No. 1, the promotion of human value and No. 2 the promotion of
religious harmony. I am committed to those two things until my death.
The third commitment is regarding Tibetan problem/struggle. It is not
necessarily a voluntary commitment, because of historical facts. The
most important thing is that the Tibetan people both inside and outside
of Tibet trust me very much and pin a lot of hope on me, and so I have
the moral responsibility to serve them as well as I can. Of course, my
ability, knowledge and experience in various fields are very limited,
but it is my moral responsibility to serve them in whatever way I can.
But there will be a time limit. I am already in something like a
semi-retired position, as we have had an elected political leadership
since 2001. So, my position is something like that of senior adviser.
In most cases, the political leadership listens to my view, but
sometimes it doesn’t. That is good. Also, on my part, I have some
reservations about some of his policy, but I always remain quiet. So,
we are sincerely practising democracy.
In response to an invitation to visit, I generally talk about
two things: the promotion of human value and the promotion of religious
harmony. But my recent visits to America, Germany and now here, have
become much more politicised because of the recent events in Tibet.
Okay. So the theme of my talk here is universal responsibility in the
modern world. Since my first visit to Europe in 1973, I carry this
message of universal responsibility, of a sense of global
responsibility. Since I went to India in 1959, I have had the
opportunity to meet a variety of people – and my broken English is
quite helpful for listening to the BBC World Service – and it seems to
me that we are facing many, essentially man-made, problems. Of course,
natural disasters are something different, but a major portion of our
problems are essentially of our own creation. At the same time, nobody
wants problems. There are a few thousand people in this hall, and I
think that when you get up in the early, or late, morning, none of you
hopes that you have more problems, more trouble that day. Nobody feels
that. From early morning, as soon as I wake up, I think, hope or wish
that it will be a pleasant day. A joyful day with no problems. That is
human nature. Essentially, most troublemakers are not intentionally so,
but their approach has become unrealistic and that causes unexpected
problems. An unrealistic approach does not happen intentionally either,
but comes about because of a lack of a holistic, comprehensive
perspective, and in many cases short-sightedness. So, ultimately, that
is a lack of a sense of global responsibility, which divides us into
“us” and “them” and makes us feel that our interests are independent
from others’. We consider our own interests as the most important ones
and disregard others’ interests. So that creates a problem. In reality
our interests and others’ interests are very much interconnected; we
are part of the six billion human beings. Therefore, if six billion
human beings are happy, one individual is bound to be happy. If six
billion get trouble, you cannot escape. That is the reality. According
to that reality, our centuries-old concept that “us” and “them” are
independent is, I think, outdated. Now, particularly in these modern
times, with the economic conditions, the environmental issues and the
sheer size of the population, everything is interdependent. So, in
those circumstances, a Buddhist concept is that you should consider all
sentient beings as the mother sentient being, to whom you should
develop the same sense of closeness as to your own mother. So,
according to theological religion, all creation is created by God. So,
we human beings, other sentient beings and the whole world were created
by God. A Muslim friend told me that a true Muslim should love the
whole of creation as much as they love God. So different words, a
different approach, but the same meaning. Therefore, there is the idea
that there is a sense of global responsibility, that we should develop
a sense of concern for the whole of humanity, the whole world. That
eventually develops. For more than 30 years that has been my concept,
and it is still relevant. More and more people seem to agree with it.
So, how do you develop a sense of global responsibility? It is
very much related to commitment to the promotion of religious harmony
and human value. Firstly, I will touch on the promotion of human value.
What is human value? Money? Oh, yes. That is very important. In
Tibetan we say Kunga Dhondup. That is a nickname for money, which
literally means, “That which makes everybody happy and can accomplish
everything”. That is true, without money you cannot do things. Money is
important. Sometimes I make a joke to Buddhist audiences, particularly
Tibetan: we usually recite a special sort of Tibetan mantra, “Om Mani
Padme Hum”. Some of you know that, I think. We recite that, sometimes
hurriedly, so it becomes: “Om Mani Padme Hum, Om Mani Padma Hum,
OmManiPadmaHum”, then it become “OmMani, OmMani, Mani, Mani, Mani”
[spoken more and more quickly]. It sounds very much like, “money money
money money”. Maybe, “dollar money dollar money”, or “pound money pound
money”. So, money has value, and all these external facilities are
valuable. Good. But they all provide physical not mental comfort. If
you have plenty of money, you have some sort of satisfaction in your
mental life: “Ah, I have a lot of money.” That is an illusion, because
we notice that a billionaire has plenty of money but is a very unhappy
person. We notice that. They have a lot of worry, anxiety, suspicion
and jealousy. Money fails to bring them inner peace. More money brings
more suspicion, discomfort and worry. To truly believe that if you have
money everything can be sorted out, that you will get 100 per cent
satisfaction, is an illusion. But, of course, you must be the judge of
that, because I never say that the points that I make are 100 per cent
correct. Please investigate for yourselves. I myself am trained in such
a way that I am always investigating.
The Tibetan Buddhist tradition is actually the Nalanda
tradition. Nalanda is, I think we can say, the oldest university,
because it is more than 2,000 years old. It is not just a monastery,
but a learning centre. The Tibetan Buddhist tradition was established
by a great Indian philosopher, a logician, from that university. His
name was Shantarakshita. In the 8th century he was invited to Tibet by
the Tibetan emperor. He was aged 900, according to the Tibetan age
system; according to an Indian friend he was around 75 years old. That
friend teases that Tibetans add an extra zero, so that 90 became 900.
Shantarakshita-his name sounds good, in Tibetan Shiwa Tso-was the
person who established Buddhism in Tibet, with the help of the Tibetan
emperor. Since he was a great scholar and logician, he was never
satisfied. He said, “always investigate, always argue, always reason.”
So that was his style. He introduced the Buddhist tradition in that
way. Up to now, the major Tibetan Buddhist institution has always
carried study in such a manner: investigation, investigation. I myself
am also trained in investigation and experiment, and so I want to share
with you, even regarding my own talks: “Please carry on investigating.”
Do not just accept my word.
Real inner peace and inner satisfaction ultimately depends on
our mental attitude. What kind of mental attitude? Firstly, we are
social animals, so there must be an emotional factor that brings us
together as a social group. There is also a biological factor. We are
born from our mother’s womb, and at that moment are just like animals,
tiny infants. Our survival totally depends on someone else’s care,
usually our mother’s. If your mother abandons you for just one, two or
three days, I think that you will die. Our survival totally depends on
others’ care. Furthermore, the physical body survives with the
nutrition of the mother’s milk. The survival of the youngsters of not
only human beings, but of cats, dogs and even birds, entirely depends
on others’ care. That is a fact. So, there must be an emotional factor
that has developed that kind of determination on the part of the
mother: the mother’s affection. That affection brings with it the
determination of a mother to sacrifice her own comfort, or even her
life, in order to protect and care.
Recently I was on an overnight flight, from I think Japan to
America or from America to Europe. In the front seat there was a couple
with two children. One was perhaps six or seven years old, and the
other one year old. The younger one did not sleep the whole night; he
was walking here and there and shouting. On one occasion, I offered him
a sweet from my pocket. He took it and then carried on walking. At the
beginning, the father was taking so much care of him, but after around
midnight he suddenly lay down on the chair. Then the mother took care
of the child through the whole night. The mother’s eyes became red due,
I think, to lack of sleep. So that reaffirmed for me, that the mother
is so, so kind. That kind of attitude does not come from religious
teaching, but from nature. It is mainly a biological factor. That
affection is ultimately the basis of our life.
There has been some scientific research. On one occasion, a
scientist made a presentation about young monkeys, some of whom were
with their mothers and some of whom were separated from their mothers.
The monkeys who were with their mothers were always playful and very
rarely fought. The monkeys who were separated from their mothers were
always in a bad mood and often quarrelled. We are the same. Therefore,
a happy, peaceful life is ultimately very much related to affection. On
another occasion, a medical scientist at a conference talked about how
guinea pigs, or mice, licking each other had a very positive effect on
the healing of wounds. That also indicates that affection has an effect
on our physical selves and on our mental comfort. Therefore, we can say
that human affection is the basic human value. From the time of birth
until death, affection, or human compassion, plays a very important
role.
Now immense crises have developed, compassion really makes a
difference. My own case is the recent developments, since 10 March. On
the afternoon of 10 March I received news from Lhasa that some Tibetans
were now demonstrating. As soon as I heard that, I had the same
experience as on 10 March 1959: a lot of anxiety and also fear. At the
intelligence level, there was a lot of anxiety, fear, doubt and
uncertainty. But underneath, on a more emotional level, it seemed quite
okay. Usually I sleep for at least eight or nine hours. What do you
think, is that too much? Fortunately, in spite of a lot of disturbances
at the intelligence level, my sleep is never disturbed. So, underneath,
there seems to be some calmness. The main factor is my training, and
daily meditation. One particular sort of meditation is “take and give”,
“give and take”-the Tibetan word is Tonglen. I usually meditate on
that, on altruism. Of course, my day starts at 3.30am every morning,
when I do at least four hours’ meditation, mainly analytical
meditation. One part of my meditation is to visualise those individuals
who take decisions, and develop altruism. It is very important to make
a distinction between the action and the person. As far as action is
concerned, we have to oppose, to make a response. But the person who
carried out the wrongdoing really deserves our compassion, our concern.
It was their wrongdoing, so from the Buddhist viewpoint, from the
non-theistic religious viewpoint according to the law of causality,
they have to face the consequences. So there is more reason to feel
concern about that troublemaker than about their victims. Visualise
those things and then take their anger, hatred and suspicion and give
them compassion, a spirit of forgiveness and patience. That kind of
meditation practice looks silly because it is just imagination. Yes, it
has no actual effect. But the practitioner’s emotional level gets
immense benefit from it. That is my experience, but it is nothing
special.
In the past I have also told the story of a Tibetan monk I knew
well before 1959, who spent 18 years in a Chinese gulag. In the early
80s, the Chinese Government adopted a new policy allowing Tibetans to
go to India, and allowing Tibetans outside of Tibet to go “home”, to
their villages. So this monk then joined Dharamsala. So since we knew
each other very well, one day we chatted. He told me that during 18
years in the Chinese gulag he had faced danger on a few occasions. I
thought that maybe he meant that his life had been in danger. I asked
him, “What kind of danger?” His answer was, “Danger of losing
compassion towards the Chinese.” That is the kind of attitude I am
talking about. A practitioner has a certain kind of inner peace through
that practice, and this is an example.
In order to keep inner peace, compassion really makes a
difference. That is very important. When I talk about compassion, I
think it is worthwhile to be more precise. One kind of compassion is
essentially low level and has a biological factor, it is low-level
compassion mixed with attachment. That limited compassion, as a seed,
can be strengthened with the help of reasoning and become a higher
level of unlimited, unbiased compassion. We need that. To give an
example, as I mentioned before, for my own happy and successful future
as a social animal, as one of the six billion human beings, I have to
take care of the other human beings, because my future depends on them,
doesn’t it? If I create more enemies I will suffer. If I create more
friends I will benefit. How do we create friends? Only through money?
No. Money can bring friends, but they are essentially friends of money,
not of you yourself. When your fortune grows and you become richer,
richer, richer, you will find more friends. When your fortune goes,
those friends will also disappear. Even if you phone them they may not
answer. Those friends are not genuinely your friends, but friends of
your money. Therefore, real friends come only out of a sense of concern
or respect. Respect them. Develop a genuine sense of concern, of
compassion, as even animals do. My main point is that a seed of
happiness, of inner calmness, of inner strength, creates more inner
strength, more self-confidence and less fear. That automatically causes
some kind of close feeling towards other human beings to develop. A
compassionate attitude opens our inner door, and as a result it is much
easier to communicate with others. If there is too much self-centred
attitude, then fear, doubt and suspicion come and as a result our inner
door closes. Then it is very difficult to communicate with others.
There was a doctor at a conference in America who presented the
data from an experiment he had done. He said that individuals who often
use the words, “me”, “my” and “I”, are at a greater risk of a heart
attack. Why was that? He didn’t explain. But I thought, “Ah, that could
be true”, because a self-centred person is someone who cherishes him or
herself, and only him or herself, and that feeling is reflected in
their use of the word, “I”. There is nothing wrong with that word, but
the attitude behind it is thinking of just oneself. If you think only
of yourself, even a tiny problem appears unbearable. If you think more
about others’ wellbeing – “others” is infinite-your mind opens wider
and your own problem appears insignificant. The same problem, the same
tragedy can appear very different. From one angle, you can see
something as very bad; from another angle you can see it and say, “Oh,
that’s okay.” That often happens, and therefore a compassionate
attitude really widens your mind. One small problem is not very
serious. That makes a difference to our inner peace. That is the way to
promote human value, which is the basis of our inner peace. That is a
very important factor for a happy life, including a healthy body.
A scientist told me that anger, hatred and fear are actually
eating our immune system. Compassion strengthens our immune system.
Therefore, from the point of view of physical health, and mental
health-because of peace of mind-warm-heartedness is a key factor. That,
as I mentioned earlier, does not necessarily come from religious faith,
but from nature. Therefore I usually call it “secular ethics”. That is
very very important for peace. Genuine, lasting world peace must be
through inner peace. I sometimes call that “inner disarmament”. Through
anger and hatred, genuine peace is very difficult. Even at the family
level, if you are full of hatred and suspicion, how can you develop
genuine peace in that family? Compassion brings real peace.
At the global level, we need external disarmament for genuine
world peace. If there is first inner disarmament, there is a real
possibility to achieve external disarmament, step by step. I usually
talk about “my century”-the older generation, of more or less my age,
60 or 70, belongs to the 20th century. Our century, whether we like it
or not, has become the century of bloodshed, war and violence. Our
generation will now let the younger generation solve the problems that
it started. Our younger generation, which belongs to this century, the
21st century, will hopefully have a peaceful century. Peace does not
mean no more conflict among humanity. Conflict is bound to happen, so
in order to keep peace in spite of conflict, the only realistic method
is the spirit of dialogue, respecting the other side and understanding
their viewpoint. We need to try to solve problems in a spirit of
brotherhood and sisterhood, in a spirit of reconciliation and
compromise. I often share this with people: let us now try to make this
century a century of dialogue. Then there will be a real possibility of
peace.
So, that was about the promotion of human value. Now I will talk about
the promotion of religious harmony. If you have a sense of global
responsibility, all human beings, including non-believers and even
those who criticise religion, who are anti-religion, are your brothers
and sisters. Once we develop that, there is no problem with people
having different religious faith. That is their right. If you look
closely, all major religious traditions, as I mentioned briefly before,
carry the same message of love, compassion and forgiveness. A different
approach is necessary because of different locations, different times
and different climates. People’s mentality is a little different.
Therefore a different approach is necessary to promote these human
values. All major religious traditions carry the message of love, and a
sense of brotherhood and sisterhood. So, it is a matter of a different
approach. Some say that there is God, that God made all these things
and that we are therefore brothers and sisters in a true sense. Some
say it is the law of causality. Again, good experience comes from love
and respect for others. Bad experience comes from harming others. That
brings negative consequences. It is the same end but with a different
approach. Therefore, if you understand these things, you will see that
there is no obstacle to bringing genuine harmony among religious
traditions. It may be useful here to make a distinction between faith
and respect. Faith is towards one’s own religion, respect is to all
religions. That is one thing. Another thing is the concept of one
religion, one truth and the concept of several truths, several
religions. Those two things appear contradictory, but that is due to
the different context. On an individual basis, the concept of one
truth, one religion is very relevant in developing a single-pointed
faith, but in terms of a group of people, the concept of several
truths, several religions is relevant. That is a fact. That is reality.
Therefore there is no contradiction between the concept of one truth,
one religion and the concept of several truths, several religions. That
is my way of promoting religious harmony. Full stop. Now the Questions
and Answers.
Norman Baker MP: Your Holiness, thank you very much for a
wonderfully warm and compassionate speech. You had the audience rapt,
listening to every word here at the Royal Albert Hall. We are all
delighted that you are in London, and to hear your address this
afternoon. You are a beacon of hope and inspiration, not just to
Tibetans but to many millions around the world. Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am Norman Baker MP, president of the
Tibet Society. It is my tremendous privilege to conduct this question
and answer session, which I am afraid necessarily will be a little
truncated, because His Holiness has a very important engagement shortly
after this engagement here. So straight on to the questions, if I may.
The first question is: “What are your opinions on the earthquake crisis in China?”
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: I was very sad and very shocked,
particularly when I saw the picture of the young student who perished
under the rubble of the collapsed school. I immediately felt, “Oh, due
to the one-child policy, many of the parents of these students have
only one child.” One mother, one child. How much pain do those mothers,
those parents feel? Their only child. That is very sad. But one really
encouraging thing was the worldwide response, similar to when the
tsunami happened. With the Burmese case also, although the military
junta’s handling of the situation is very poor, I think that the
response has been wonderful. The Chinese case is also very encouraging,
including the response from those Tibetans who have recently suffered
very much. For example, the monks in the Drepung monastery near Lhasa
have suffered a lot recently. A lot of monks were arrested or missing,
but, after the earthquake, monks from that monastery also raised funds
for the victims. Another encouraging sign is the transparent way the
Chinese Government has handled that problem. That is very very
encouraging. So, hopefully now there will be more transparency over a
wider field.
Norman Baker: Thank you. The second question is rather different: “What makes you laugh?”
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: In one word, Love; in another, I
immediately laugh at others’ little mistakes. Once in London, we
visited a place, I can’t remember where, where a young Tibetan was
performing a dance or something like that. The child was wearing very
big shoes, and as soon as I saw those big shoes I laughed and laughed.
Sometimes people are too serious. Once in Mexico City at an interfaith
service, there were a few representatives of different traditions,
including a representative of Japanese Buddhism. As usual, he was quite
stern-or very dignified-and as usual he did the rosary like this. Then
somehow the string broke, and the beads scattered all over. But he
still remained like that. I laughed a lot at that.
Norman Baker: The third question is: “What can we in the United
Kingdom do to help in the struggle to keep Tibet and its wonderful
traditions alive?”
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: Thank you for your concern. Our
main aim, as everybody knows, is not to seek separation, because our
interests remain within the People’s Republic of China. We get much
benefit from that, as far as material development is concerned,
provided that we have meaningful autonomy, with the safeguard of
preserving our culture. There is no time to explain in detail now, but
recently the Chinese Government seems to be paying more attention to
the Tibetan problem. Also, I think that the clear worldwide signal of
concern definitely impacts on the leaders of the Chinese Government.
So, please continue to express your solidarity and concern. It is
really helpful. I particularly appreciate the sincere concern of the
parliamentarians and their desire to help. That is really very helpful.
Please continue. And then, wherever you find an opportunity to talk
with Chinese brothers and sisters, then talk. Educate them, because
some of the Chinese do not have the full information about the reality.
Sometimes there is a feeling that there we Tibetans are anti-Chinese,
but they are absolutely not. So it is important to educate them.
Norman Baker: Sadly, I have been told that I am only allowed one
more question. I am very sorry about that. “Would you like to be reborn
in London?”
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: What do you mean by “reborn”?
Norman Baker: Reincarnated.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: Yes, that’s possible. Since my
childhood, we have described Englishmen as “big noses”. So my next
reincarnation could be as a big nose! That is theoretically speaking.
It is important that there is some usefulness. As I always pray, as
long as sentient beings’ pain and suffering remains, I will remain in
order to serve them. That is my favourite sort of prayer. I try to
develop that kind of determination. So naturally, my next life will be
wherever it would have some usefulness. That is for sure. So, if there
is more usefulness here, then naturally I will be reborn here.
Norman Baker: We would love to have you here if you do that.
Ladies and gentlemen, I was asked by the BBC this week, “Why
Tibet?” It is not simply the wonderful culture and history of the
country, nor the terrible human rights abuses that have occurred, nor
the inspirational leadership of His Holiness. It is also because the
Tibetan cause is our cause, a struggle for every person’s right to be
free, to say what they want to say, without being subject to arrest,
imprisonment or torture. It is a right to be able to demonstrate
peacefully for causes in which they believe. It is the ability to
follow one’s religion and culture, without being intimidated by the
state or by others. Those are not simply Tibetan causes; they belong to
us all. In your programme, you will have seen some of the action points
that some of us are pursuing in parliament, and which the Tibet Society
is pursuing as well. Please take a moment to look at those, and see if
you can help in some way. If you are not a member of the Tibet Society,
please do join us and help us in our campaign for justice so that we
can await the day, not too far away I hope, when Tibet will once again
be free, and we can meet in Lhasa.
Lastly, I want to tell you of an initiative, which I hope, Your
Holiness, you will agree with. It is called is “Give Peace a Hand”. In
a moment you will, I very much hope, shake my hand, and there are two
Tibetan children outside who I will pass that handshake on to. There
are also 2,000 people between here and the Chinese Embassy, and that
handshake of peace will go from here to the Chinese Embassy. I hope
very much that that will be a message of peace and reconciliation, and
a constructive end to this very useful and wonderful occasion this
afternoon. Thank you very much for coming.
–The transcript of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s talk
at the Royal Albert Hall, on 22 May 2008, is reproduced by the courtesy
of London-based Tibet Society, www.tibetsociety.com.
