B1 Intermediate Other 4829 Folder Collection
After playing the video, you can click or select the word to look it up in the dictionary.
Loading...
Report Subtitle Errors
[ 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.
    You must  Log in  to get the function.
Tip: Click on the article or the word in the subtitle to get translation quickly!

Loading…

Harry's Last Lecture on a Meaningful Life: The Dalai Lama

4829 Folder Collection
李承 published on March 13, 2015
More Recommended Videos
  1. 1. Search word

    Select word on the caption to look it up in the dictionary!

  2. 2. Repeat single sentence

    Repeat the same sentence to enhance listening ability

  3. 3. Shortcut

    Shortcut!

  4. 4. Close caption

    Close the English caption

  5. 5. Embed

    Embed the video to your blog

  6. 6. Unfold

    Hide right panel

  1. Listening Quiz

    Listening Quiz!

  1. Click to open your notebook

  1. UrbanDictionary 俚語字典整合查詢。一般字典查詢不到你滿意的解譯,不妨使用「俚語字典」,或許會讓你有滿意的答案喔