by Dalai Lama
In such a context, Buddhist tradition has provided an exhaustive classification of mental states, as well as contemplative methods aimed at refining certain qualities of the mind. An authentic exchange has been established between the accumulated knowledge and experience of Buddhism and modern science on the great questions dealing with the human mind, from cognition and the emotions to the understanding of the brain’s inherent capacity for transformation. This dialogue has turned out to be profoundly interesting and beneficial. For my part, I have drawn much from my conversations with neuroscientists and psychologists when we discussed the nature and role of positive and negative emotions, of attention, imagery, and cerebral plasticity. The indisputable proofs furnished by the neurosciences and medicine on the crucial role of affection transmitted by simple physical touch in regards to the physical development of a newborn infant’s brain during the first weeks of life confirm the close link between compassion and the human quest for happiness.10
Humanity is at a crossroads
I AM CONVINCED THAT a close collaboration between our two investigative traditions, Buddhism and science, can contribute significantly to developing an understanding of the complex inner world of subjective experience that we call the mind. The benefits of such a collaboration are already being demonstrated. According to preliminary reports, the effects of training the mind, such as simple mindfulness practiced on a regular basis or development of compassion in the Buddhist sense, provoke observable changes in the zones of the brain related to positive mental states. These changes have been measured, and recent discoveries in the neurosciences have demonstrated the internal plasticity of the brain, in terms of both synaptic connections and the birth of new neurons due to external stimuli such as voluntary physical exercise or an enriched environment.
The Buddhist contemplative tradition can help extend this field of scientific research by offering certain forms of mind training associated with cerebral plasticity. If it is proven, as Buddhist tradition maintains, that mental practice can effect observable synaptic and neural changes in the brain, this could have far-reaching implications. The repercussions of such research will not be limited to the development of our knowledge of the human brain. Perhaps more importantly, they could contribute to our understanding of education and mental health. Similarly, if, as Buddhist tradition claims, the deliberate practice of compassion can bring about a radical change in an individual’s outlook, leading to a greater empathy for others, this could have important consequences for society in general.
Finally, I believe that collaboration between the neurosciences and the contemplative tradition of Buddhism can shed a new light on the question of the interface between ethics and the neurosciences, which is of vital importance. Whatever we might think about the relationship between ethics and science, in actual practice, science has evolved first as an empirical, morally neutral discipline. It has come to be regarded mainly as a method of investigation that provides a detailed knowledge of the empirical world and the underlying laws of nature.
From a purely scientific standpoint, the creation of nuclear weapons represents a remarkable achievement. However, since these weapons have the power to inflict an immense amount of suffering by causing death and massive destruction, we regard this achievement as an aberration of science.
It is ethical evaluation that allows us to determine what is positive or negative in the sciences. Until recently, it would seem that ethics and science have been successfully compartmentalized, with the understanding that the human capacity for moral thinking evolved along with knowledge. Today, however, I believe that humanity is at a critical crossroads. The radical advances in the neurosciences, and especially in genetics, toward the end of the twentieth century have opened up a new era in human history. We have reached a point where the ethical challenges posed by these advances are immense.
Obviously, our moral thinking has not been able to keep pace with such a rapid development of knowledge and the power it confers. Yet the ramifications of these new discoveries and their applications are so far-reaching that our very concept of human nature and the preservation of the species are called into question. So it is no longer acceptable to adopt the view that our responsibility as a society is simply to support scientific knowledge and reinforce technological power, leaving open the question of what should be done with them. We must find a way to allow humanitarian and ethical considerations to determine the direction of scientific progress, especially in the life sciences.
By invoking fundamental ethical principles, I am not advocating a fusion between religious ethics and scientific research. I am referring rather to what I call “secular ethics,” which includes the key ethical principles such as compassion, tolerance, kindness, and the responsible use of science and power. These principles transcend the boundaries between believers and nonbelievers, as well as those between disciples of different religions. The world in which we live is one world. The modern economy, electronic media, international tourism, and environmental problems all remind us on a daily basis how interconnected the present world is. The scientific communities play a vital role in this interconnected world. Science today enjoys society’s great respect and trust, much more than my own philosophical and religious discipline does. I appeal to scholars to bring into their professional work the values stemming from the fundamental ethical principles we all share as human beings.11
Ethics in the sciences to save life
I SEE AN ENCOURAGING SIGN in the increasing compatibility between science and religion. Throughout all of the nineteenth century and for a large part of the twentieth, there has been profound confusion because of the conflict between these two seemingly contradictory views of the world. Today physics, biology, and psychology have reached such sophisticated levels that many researchers begin by asking the most profound questions about the ultimate nature of the universe and of life—the same questions that are of prime interest in the field of religion. So a real potential for a more unified vision does exist. More particularly, a new concept of the mind and of matter seems to be emerging. Historically, the East was more concerned with understanding the mind and the West was more involved in understanding matter. Now that both have met, these spiritual and material concepts of life can come to harmonize.
We have to renew our commitments to human values in the sciences. Although the main aim of science is to gain ever more knowledge of reality, another of its objectives is to improve the quality of life. Without altruistic motivation, scientists are unable to distinguish between beneficial technologies and harmful, short-term expedients. The damage caused to the environment around us is the most obvious consequence of this confusion. A suitable motivation is even more imperative when it is a question of managing the extraordinary spectrum of new biotechnologies with which we can now manipulate the subtle structures of the living organism. If we don’t base these manipulations on an ethical foundation, we risk causing irremediable harm to the delicate web of life.
The Dalai Lama thinks that in our time Buddhism should take on a special responsibility, one derived from the teaching of the Buddha that posits meditation on interdependence as inseparable from the practice of compassion. The concept of interdependence, as it was presented by the Buddha 2,500 years ago and then commented on by the sages of ancient India and Tibet, fits into the vision of the world that stems from general relativity and its subsequent developments. On this subject, the Dalai Lama often quotes Abdul Kalam, whom he calls “the Indian Sakharov.” This former president of India, a specialist in nuclear physics, told the Dalai Lama that he had found the essence of quantum uncertainty in the thinking of the Indian sage Nagarjuna, as expressed in these verses paying homage to the Buddha:
I bow down to You, who transcend the world, Versed in the wisdom of absence! For the good of the world
You suffered for a long time, with great compassion.
You assert that aside from the simple aggregates
No sentient being exists.
However, O Great Sage, You remain constantly
Completely devoted to the welfare of beings.
An existent thing is not produced,
Nor is a nonexistent thing, nor both together.
It is produced neither from itself nor from something else,
Nor from both, so how could there be production?
First of all, it is not logical for an effect to emerge
From a cause that is itself destroyed;
Nor is it produced from a nondestroyed cause.
So You accept a production that is like a dream.
The emergence of effects from a cause
Through destruction or nondestruction,
This production is like the manifestation of an illusion,
And You taught that this is true for everything.
Whatever is produced in dependence
You maintain is empty,
That it does not exist as an independent entity,
That is what You proclaimed with the lion’s roar,
O incomparable Master.
Since You teach the nectar of emptiness
In order to help us abandon all concepts,
You strongly condemned
The act of being attached to this emptiness.
Since phenomena are inert, dependent, and empty,
Similar to an illusion and born from conditions,
You made it known that they lack reality.
Without entering into meditation,
As the Noble Ones have demonstrated,
Can awareness ever do without signs?
Without entering into the absence of signs
There is no Liberation, You declared.
So You presented the absence of sign
Completely in the sutras of the Great Vehicle.
By praising You, O praiseworthy vessel,
Thanks to whatever merits I have obtained,
May all beings, without exception,
Free themselves from enslavement to signs.12
The tragedy of September 11, 2001, taught me that we must not separate ethics from progress
DESTRUCTIVE EMOTIONS like anger, fear, or hatred can have devastating effects on the world. When current events offer us a tragic reminder of the destructive power of these emotions, we should ask ourselves how we can control them. Of course, they have always been part of the human condition. Humanity has been grappling with them for thousands of years. But I believe that we should seize this occasion to transform them, thanks especially to a collaboration between religion and the sciences. It is with this idea in mind that starting in 1987 I became involved in a series of dialogues organized by the Mind and Life Institute; I found that while scientific discoveries offer a more profound understanding of fields of knowledge like cosmology, Buddhist explanations can help scholars see their own field of research in a different light.
Our dialogue benefited not just science but also religion. Although Tibetans have a valid knowledge of the inner world, we have remained apart from material progress because of a lack of scientific knowledge. Buddhist teachings insist on the importance of understanding reality; therefore, we should examine how contemporary scientists see the reality discovered by their experiments and their quantifications.
At the beginning of these dialogues, there weren’t many Buddhists. I was the only one, working with two translators. But recently we have begun to introduce the study of contemporary sciences in our monasteries, and during recent sessions of dialogue there were about twenty Tibetan monks in the audience.
The aim of these conversations is twofold. One is of an academic nature: developing knowledge. In general, science has represented an extraordinary instrument for understanding the material world, and it has made huge advances in our lifetime, even though many things still remain to be explored. But modern science does not seem to have progressed much with regard to inner experience. On the other hand, Buddhism, an ancient system of Indian thought, testifies to a profound analysis of how the mind functions. For centuries a great number of meditators have conducted what could be called “experiments” in this realm and have obtained significant and sometimes extraordinary results, using all the knowledge available to them. A deeper discussion and joint study carried out by both scientists and Buddhist scholars could be very useful on an academic level in furthering human knowledge.
On another level, if humanity is to survive, happiness and inner peace are essential. Otherwise, the lives of our children and their children risk being unhappy, desperate, and short. The tragedy of September 11, 2001, showed that modern technology and human intelligence, guided by hatred, can lead to immense destruction. Of course, material progress contributes to happiness to a certain extent, and to a comfortable way of life. But that is not enough. To reach a deeper level of happiness, we cannot neglect our inner development. My feeling is that our sense of basic human values must be pursued at the same pace as the recent increase in our material abilities.
It is for this reason that I have encouraged scholars to examine advanced Tibetan meditators in order to determine how their spiritual practice could be more beneficial to others outside the religious context. For it is important to have a better understanding of the world of the mind, of awareness, and of the emotions.
Experiments have already been carried out demonstrating that meditators can reach a state of inner peace and maintain it, even in difficult circumstances. The results prove that they are happier, less subject to destructive emotions, and more receptive to the feelings of others. Contemplative methods are not just useful but inexpensive! You don’t have to buy anything or make anything in a factory. You don’t need medications or injections.
The question that arises is how to share the benefit of these results with non-Buddhists. For it is a matter of not limiting this investigation either to Buddhism or to any other religion, but of understanding better the potential of the human mind. Spiritual methods are at our disposal, but we must make them accessible to the majority who aren’t interested in spirituality. That is the only way they will have the greatest impact.
Such an initiative is important because science and technology alone cannot solve all our problems. We must join material progress with the inner development of the human values of compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, moderation, and self-discipline.13
In approaching the tragedy of September 11, 2001, as a “spiritual” problem, the Dalai Lama denounces the absence of a code of ethics in scientific research. As a result of this absence, major actions conceived by the human mind turn against human beings, whether in the terrorist attack against the twin towers of the World Trade Center, in uncontrollable genetic experiments, or in the accelerated degradation of the environment that threatens future generations. As a Buddhist monk, the Dalai Lama states that on this question too, spirituality, understood as a return to essential human values, is the key to our survival.
5
Taking Care of the Earth
Our Ecological Responsibility
As a child, I learned from my teachers to take care of the environment
AS A LITTLE BOY, when I was studying Buddhism, I was taught to take care of nature, since the practice of nonviolence applies not just to human beings but to all sentient beings. Everything that is animate possesses consciousness. Wherever there is consciousness, there are feelings like pain, pleasure, and joy. No sentient being wants to suffer. On the contrary, all beings search for happiness. In Buddhist practice, we are so used to this idea of nonviolence and to the wish to put an end to all suffering that we are careful not to attack or destroy life unwittingly. Obviously, we do not believe that the trees or flowers have a mind, but we treat them with respect. So we assume a sense of universal responsibility toward humanity and nature.
Our belief in reincarnation explains our concern for the future. If you think you are going to be reborn, you make it your duty to protect certain things so that, in the future, your incarnation will profit from it. Even though
you could be reborn on another planet, the idea of reincarnation motivates you to take care of the Earth and of future generations.
In the West, when we speak of “humanity,” we are usually referring merely to the present generation. The humanity of the past no longer exists. The humanity of the future, like death, does not yet exist. From a Western standpoint, we are concerned with the practical aspect of things, solely for the present generation.