IS OSHO MAITREYA?
Here follows a portion of a discourse given by Osho ( talks on Zen),
"This, This, A Thousand Times This," Discourse #4
By the way, just a few days ago I received an invitation from the Soto sect, founded by Tozan. They were celebrating a thousand-year-old tradition on a great scale. And the chief of Soto Zen must have read my books. He must also have heard the story that I have accepted that I am the fulfillment of Gautam Buddha's promise that he will be coming after twenty-five centuries and his name will be `friendliness' -- maitreya.
The representative of Tozan and his sect -- there are only two sects of Zen, Soto is the more ancient... And you will be happy to note that the chief of Soto Zen has recognized that I have the consciousness and awareness, that I have fulfilled the promise. He asked if I could come to their ceremony, and if I cannot come, I should at least send my robe -- that is an old tradition in Zen.
I have sent one of my robes -- with my message -- to their ceremony. In the ceremony almost a million people are participating, and more than two hundred fifty government officials are deputed by the government of Japan to be present in the ceremony.
I have told my sannyasins there to go with my robe, my note and message. The chief of the sect presented my robe and my message to the whole gathering with deep love and devotion. He has informed me that he will be coming here soon to visit me and to see my people.
In fact this is the only alive Zen assembly. In those one million people and two hundred fifty government representatives, not a single person knows exactly the space that you are feeling every day.
One anecdote about Tozan:
WHEN TOZAN WAS WITH NANSEN, another great master, ONE OF BASO'S DISCIPLES... Baso is the ultimate as far as Zen is concerned. NANSEN OBSERVED THE ANNIVERSARY OF BASO'S DEATH AND SAID TO THE ASSEMBLY, "WILL BASO COME BACK TO US?"
TOZAN SAID, "IF THERE IS COMPANY FIT FOR HIM, HE WILL!"
NANSEN APPRECIATED THE ANSWER VERY MUCH.
... Because the words -- Buddha or Bodhidharma or Nansen or Baso -- are just names of the forms. They all represent the same space; and whenever there are people who are ready to receive, they suddenly descend there.
I have received many letters saying that in the meditations a strange feeling happens -- as if something is descending, a deep silence from beyond, heavy, almost tangible. In that silence Baso is present, Buddha is present. When you are absent all the awakened ones are present to you. Then this assembly becomes an eternal phenomenon.
We have been here always and always. Once in a while you forget who you are, but it is immaterial: Sooner or later you recognize again, sooner or later you again see your crystal clear being.
Neither time matters, nor space, you are the one who never comes and never goes, the one who simply is.
THIS!
WHEN TOZAN WAS STUDYING WITH ISAN, HE ASKED ISAN ABOUT CHU KUKUSHI'S "SERMONS BY INSENTIENT CREATURES."
ISAN SAID, "SERMONS BY INSENTIENT CREATURES ARE GIVEN HERE FOR US TOO, BUT FEW CAN HEAR THEM."
Do you hear the bamboos? These are the sermons referred to, sermons from insentient beings. Once you are silent, even roses start speaking to you.
(THE WIND IS BLOWING AND THE BAMBOOS START COMMENTING WITH THEIR CREAKING.)
Do you hear the loud speaking of the bamboos?
The deeper your silence, the louder you will be able to hear it.
TOZAN SAID, "I AM NOT YET CERTAIN ABOUT THEM, WOULD YOU PLEASE TEACH ME?"
ISAN SAID NOTHING, BUT RAISED HIS STICK STRAIGHT UP.
TOZAN SAID, "I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN IT TO ME?"
ISAN SAID, "I WOULD NEVER TELL YOU ABOUT THIS WITH THE MOUTH GIVEN TO ME BY MY PARENTS!"
THIS WAS HIS WAY OF TEACHING.
This mouth, given by your parents is not capable of saying it; but the being is not given to you by your parents. You have come through them, they have been vehicles, but you are not part of them. Your body is made by your parents, the temple is raised by them, but the deity in the temple, the being, comes from eternity, it cannot come from mortal bodies.
ISAN THEN SUGGESTED THAT TOZAN VISIT UNGAN WHO TOZAN LATER SUCCEEDED. COMING UP TO UNGAN, TOZAN ASKED, "WHO CAN HEAR THE SERMONS OF INSENTIENT CREATURES?"
"INSENTIENT CREATURES CAN HEAR THEM," ANSWERED UNGAN.
"WHY CAN I NOT HEAR THEM?" ASKED TOZAN.
UNGAN RAISED HIS STAFF STRAIGHT UP AND SAID, "DO YOU HEAR?"
"NO, I DON'T," ANSWERED TOZAN.
UNGAN SAID, "DON'T YOU KNOW THE SUTRA SAYS, `BIRDS AND TREES, ALL MEDITATE ON THE BUDDHA AND THE DHARMA?'"
AT THIS TOZAN SUDDENLY BECAME ENLIGHTENED.
HE WROTE THE FOLLOWING VERSE:
WONDERFUL! HOW WONDERFUL!
SERMONS BY INSENTIENT CREATURES;
YOU FAIL IF YOU LISTEN WITH YOUR EARS;
I repeat:
YOU FAIL IF YOU LISTEN WITH YOUR EARS.
LISTENING WITH YOUR EYES, YOU HEAR THEM.
By the eyes he does not mean the ordinary eyes, he means the eyes of an awakening clarity of your being. If you can hear in your silence, if you can see in your silence, then everything in the world is speaking, giving sermons, singing songs, dancing.
Can't you see? But these eyes and these ears won't do. You will have to dig deep within yourself to find the right approach to see the eternal dance of existence, to hear the music and to see the beauty of it.
TOZAN CONTINUED PRACTICING ZAZEN AND WAS EVER WATCHFUL. ONE DAY WHILE HE WAS SWIMMING IN A STREAM, HE SAW HIS SHADOW CAST ON THE WATER AND EXPERIENCED HIS GREAT ENLIGHTENMENT. HIS VERSE ON THAT OCCASION WAS:
LONG SEEKING IT THROUGH OTHERS,
I WAS FAR FROM REACHING IT.
NOW I GO BY MYSELF;
I MEET IT EVERYWHERE.
IT IS JUST I MYSELF,
AND I AM NOT ITSELF.
UNDERSTANDING THIS WAY,
I CAN BE AS I AM.
Tozan has talked about two enlightenments. The second one he calls the greater enlightenment. The first enlightenment was upon hearing the sutra of Gautam Buddha, that insentient beings are not insentient. They are also living, loving. They are also singing, giving sermons. And he became enlightened; this sutra pierced his very being. But he calls it just enlightenment.
The Great Enlightenment happened when he saw his own shadow in the river and suddenly became aware that, wherever you go to seek, to find the truth, you are going far away. Your being is with you just like your shadow. You don't have to go anywhere, you have just to look in the mirror of your being.
Naturally he calls it a Greater Enlightenment, because it is no longer concerned with anybody else. It is authentically his.
Question 1
Maneesha has asked:
BELOVED OSHO,
I UNDERSTAND TOZAN TO BE SAYING THAT NOTHING IS TO BE AVOIDED, ON THE CONTRARY, TO MEET EVERYTHING HEAD-ON. AND THAT TOTALITY IS TRANSCENDENCE.
COMPARED TO ZEN, OTHER, FORMAL RELIGIONS, SUCH AS CHRISTIANITY AND HINDUISM, SEEM TO BE SO CHILDISH IN THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF LIFE -- WITH THEIR GODS AND ALL THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PARAPHERNALIA THAT GOES WITH GOD-WORSHIP -- AND SO INSENSITIVE TO THE SUBTLE AND THE POETIC.
IN FACT, IT SEEMS AS IF EITHER ZEN IS A RELIGION AND THE OTHERS ARE NOT; OR ZEN BELONGS TO A CATEGORY ALL OF ITS OWN. WOULD YOU PLEASE COMMENT?
There is no need of any comment. You are all experiencing Zen. It is not a religion in which you have to believe. It is an experience, like love, which you have to live, which you have to experience.
In other words, Zen is the most essential religion -- without anything unnecessary. Just the core, the essential. You can call it religion, you can call it science, it does not matter what name you give to it. In its pure simplicity it is experiencing your own being. And the moment you experience your own being, you have experienced the being of this whole universe because your heartbeat is part of the heartbeat of the universe.
Just be silently aware, and you are filled with Zen inside and out. It is not a formal religion like Christianity or Hinduism. It is very individual, unique, a category of its own. It is only for the eccentric people, only for the very intelligent. It is not for the mediocre, for the crowd. It is only for the individual who has the guts to stand up alone and listen to his own being without being bothered about what others are saying or believing or worshipping.
It is not an argument, it is not a belief. It is a pure experience, just like love or beauty or silence. It is anonymous.
Before we enter into Zen, although you are already standing on the door steps of the temple, I would like you to have a few laughs. Because I want you to enter into the temple laughing and dancing, joyous.
(Osho tells a few jokes, before leading Gibberish, Let Go Meditation.))
OSHO Discourses are available in the Osho Library at Osho.com
Universal Responsibility
and
Human Rights
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama
No matter what country or continent we come from we are all
basically the same human beings. We have the common
human needs and concerns. We all seek happiness and try to
avoid suffering regardless of our race, religion, sex or political
status. Human beings, indeed all sentient beings, have the
right to pursue happiness and live in peace and in freedom. As
free human beings we can use our unique intelligence to try to
understand ourselves and our world. But if we are prevented
from using our creative potential, we are deprived of one of
the basic characteristics of a human being. It is very often the
most gifted, dedicated and creative members of our society
who become victims of human rights abuses. Thus the
political, social, cultural and economic developments of a
society are obstructed by the violations of human rights.
Therefore, the protection of these rights and freedoms are of
immense importance both for the individuals affected and for
the development of the society as a whole.
The key to creating a better and more peaceful world is the
development of love and compassion for others. This naturally
means we must develop concern for our brothers and sisters
who are less fortunate than we are.
I believe that our every act has a universal dimension.
Because of this, ethical discipline, wholesome conduct, and
careful discernment are crucial ingredients for a meaningful,
happy life. But let us now consider this proposition in relation
to the wider community.
In the past, families and small communities could exist more
or less independently of one another. If they took into account
their neighbors' well-being, so much the better. Yet they could
survive quite well without this kind of perspective. Such is no
longer the case. Today's reality is so complex and, on the
material level at least, so clearly interconnected, that a
different outlook is needed.
I am convinced that it is essential that we cultivate a sense of
what I call Universal Responsibility. This may not be an exact
translation of the Tibetan term I have in mind, chi sem, which
means, literally, universal (chi) consciousness (sem).
Although the notion of responsibility is implied rather than
explicit in the Tibetan, it is definitely there. When I say that
on the basis of concern for others' well-being we can, and
should, develop a sense of universal responsibility, I do not,
however, mean to suggest that each individual has a direct
responsibility for the existence of, for example, wars and
famines in different parts of the world. Clearly certain things,
such as the poverty of a single village 10,000 miles away are
completely beyond the scope of the individual. What is
entailed, however, is not an admission of guilt, but, again, a
reorientation of our heart and mind away from self and toward
others. To develop a sense of universal responsibility - is to
develop an attitude of mind whereby, when we see an
opportunity to benefit others, we will take it in preference to
merely looking after our own narrow interests. Of course we
care about what is beyond our scope--we accept it as part of
nature and concern ourselves with doing what we can.
An important benefit of developing such a sense of universal
responsibility is that it helps us become sensitive to all others-
-not just those closest to us. We come to see the need to care
especially for those members of the human family who suffer
most. We recognize the need to avoid causing divisiveness
among our fellow human beings. And we become aware of
the overwhelming importance of contentment.
Universal responsibility also leads us to commitment to the
principle of honesty. What do I mean by this? We can think of
honesty and dishonesty in terms of the relationship between
appearance and reality. Sometimes these synchronize, often
they do not. But when they do, that is honesty, as I understand
it. So we are honest when our actions are what they seem to
be. When we pretend to be one thing but in reality we are
something else, suspicion develops in others, causing fear.
And fear is something we all wish to avoid. Conversely, when
in our interactions with our neighbors we are open and sincere
in everything we say , think and do, people have no need to
fear us. This holds true both for the individual and for
communities. Moreover, when we understand the value of
honesty in all our undertakings, we recognize that there is no
ultimate difference between the needs of the individual and
the needs of whole communities. Their numbers vary, but
their desire, and right, not to be deceived remains the same.
Thus when we commit ourselves to honesty, we help reduce
the level of misunderstanding, doubt and fear throughout
society. In a small but significant way, we create the
conditions for a happy world.
The question of justice is also closely connected both with
universal responsibility and the question of honesty. Justice
entails a requirement to act when we become aware of
injustice. Indeed, failure to do so may be wrong, although not
wrong in the sense that it makes us somehow intrinsically bad.
But if our hesitance to speak out comes from a sense of selfcenteredness,
then there may be a problem.
If our response to
injustice is to ask, "What will happen to me if I speak out?
Maybe people won't like me," this could well be unethical
because we are ignoring the wider implications of our silence.
It is also inappropriate and unhelpful when set in the context
of all others' equal right to happiness and to avoid suffering.
This remains true even for example when, governments or
institutions say, "This is our business" or "This is an internal
affair." Not only can our speaking out under such
circumstances be a duty, but more importantly it can be a
service to others.
It may, of course, be objected that such honesty is not always
possible, that we need to be "realistic." Our circumstances
may prevent us from always acting in accordance with our
responsibilities. Our own families may be harmed if, for
example, we speak out when we witness injustice. But while
we do have to deal with the day-to-day reality of our lives, it
is essential to keep a broad perspective. We must evaluate our
own needs in relation to the needs of others and consider how
our actions and inactions are likely to affect them in the longer
term. It is hard to criticize those who fear for their loved ones.
But occasionally it will be necessary to take risks in order to
benefit the wider community.
A sense of responsibility toward all others also means that,
both as individuals and as a society of individuals, we have a
duty to care for each member of our society. This is true
irrespective of their physical capacity or of the capacity for
mental reflection. Just like ourselves, such people have a right
to happiness and to avoid suffering. We must therefore avoid,
at all cost, the urge to shut away those who are grievously
afflicted as if they were a burden. The same goes for those
who are diseased or marginalized. To push them away would
be to heap suffering on suffering.
As a result of the many extraordinary events humanity has
experienced during the course of the 20th century, we have, I
feel, become more mature. It is worth noting the lesson from
history which shows that order imposed by force is only ever
short-lived. Moreover, the consensus (among some Buddhists
too) that science and spirituality are incompatible no longer
holds so firmly. Today, as the scientific understanding of the
nature of reality deepens, this perception is changing. Because
of this, people are beginning to show more interest in what I
have called our "inner world." By this, I mean the dynamics
and functions of consciousness, or spirit: our hearts and
minds.
There has also been a worldwide increase in environmental
awareness, and a growing recognition that neither individuals
nor even whole nations can solve all their problems by
themselves, that we need one another. To me, these are all
very encouraging developments, which are sure to have farreaching
consequences. I am also encouraged by the fact that,
regardless of its implementation, there is at least clearer
acknowledgment of the need to seek non-violent resolutions
of conflict in a spirit of reconciliation. There is also growing
acceptance of the universality of human rights and the need to
accept diversity in areas of common importance, such as, for
example, in religious affairs. This I believe to reflect a
recognition of the need for a wider perspective in response to
the diversity of the human family itself. As a result, despite so
much suffering continuing to be inflicted on individuals and
peoples in the name of ideology, religion, or progress, or
economics, a new sense of hope is emerging for the
downtrodden. Although it will undoubtedly be difficult to
bring about genuine peace and harmony, clearly it can be
done. The potential is there. And its foundation is a sense of
responsibility on the part of each of us as individuals toward
all others.
I believe that the culture of perpetual economic growth needs
to be questioned. In my view, it fosters discontent, and with
this comes a great number of problems, both social and
environmental. There is also the fact that in devoting
ourselves so wholeheartedly to material development we
neglect the implications this has for the wider community.
This is less a matter of the gap between First and Third World,
North and South, between developed and underdeveloped,
between rich and poor, being immoral and wrong. It is both of
these. But in some ways more significant is the fact, that such
inequality is itself the source of trouble for everyone. If it
were the case that, for example, Europe was the whole world,
rather than home to less than ten percent of the world's
population, the prevailing ideology of endless growth might
be justifiable. Yet the world is more than just Europe. The fact
is that elsewhere people are starving. And where there are
imbalances as profound as these, there are bound to be
negative consequences for all, even if they are not equally
direct: the rich also feel the symptoms of poverty in their daily
lives. Consider, in this context, how the sight of surveillance
cameras, and of iron security bars over our windows, actually
detracts a little from our sense of serenity.
When I traveled to Europe for the first time in 1973, I talked
about the increasing interdependence of the world and the
need to develop a sense of universal responsibility. We need
to think in global terms because the effects of one nation's
actions are felt far beyond its borders. The acceptance of
universally binding standards of Human Rights as laid down
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the
International Covenants of Human Rights is essential in
today's shrinking world. Respect for fundamental human
rights should not remain an ideal to be achieved but a requisite
foundation for every human society.
When we demand the rights and freedoms we so cherish we
should also be aware of our responsibilities. If we accept that
others have an equal right to peace and happiness as ourselves
do we not have a responsibility to help that in need? Respect
for fundamental human rights is as important to the people of
Africa and Asia as it is to those in Europe or the Americas.
All human beings, whatever their cultural or historical
background, suffer when they are intimidated, imprisoned or
tortured. The question of human rights is so fundamentally
important that there should be no difference of views on this.
We must therefore insist on a global consensus not only on the
need to respect human rights world wide but more importantly
on the definition of these rights.
Some Asian governments have contended that the standards
of human rights laid down in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights are those advocated by the West and cannot be
applied to Asia and others parts of the Third World because of
differences in culture and differences in social and economic
development. I do not share this view and I am convinced that
the majority of Asian people do not support this view either,
for it is the inherent nature of all human beings to yearn for
freedom, equality and dignity, and they have an equal right to
achieve that. I do not see any contradiction between the need
for economic development and the need for respect of human
rights. The rich diversity of cultures and religions should help
to strengthen the fundamental human rights in all
communities. Because underlying this diversity are
fundamental principles that bind us all as members of the
same human family. Diversity and traditions can never justify
the violations of human rights. Thus discrimination of persons
from a different race, of women, and of weaker sections of
society may be traditional in some regions, but if they are
inconsistent with universally recognized human rights, these
forms of behavior must change. The universal principles of
equality of all human beings must take precedence.
It is mainly the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes who are
opposed to the universality of human rights. It would be
absolutely wrong to concede to this view. On the contrary,
such regimes must be made to respect and conform to the
universally accepted principles in the larger and long term
interests of their own peoples. The dramatic changes in the
past few years clearly indicate that the triumph of human
rights is inevitable.
There is a growing awareness of peoples' responsibilities to
each other and to the planet we share. This is encouraging
even though so much suffering continues to be inflicted based
on chauvinism, race, religion, ideology and history. A new
hope is emerging for the downtrodden, and people everywhere
are displaying a willingness to champion and defend the rights
and freedoms of their fellow human beings.
Brute force, no matter how strongly applied, can never subdue
the basic human desire for freedom and dignity. It is not
enough, as communist systems have assumed, merely to
provide people with food, shelter and clothing. The deeper
human nature needs to breathe the precious air of liberty.
However, some governments still consider the fundamental
human rights of its citizens an internal matter of the state.
They do not accept that the fate of a people in any country is
the legitimate concern of the entire human family and that
claims to sovereignty are not a license to mistreat one's
citizens. It is not only our right as members of the global
human family to protest when our brothers and sisters are
being treated brutally, but it is also our duty to do whatever
we can to help them.
This need for co-operation can only strengthen humankind,
because it helps us to recognize that the most secure
foundation for a new world order is not simply broader
political and economic alliances, but each individual's genuine
practice of love and compassion. These qualities are the
ultimate source of human happiness, and our need for them
lies at the very core of our being. The practice of compassion
is not idealistic, but the most effective way to pursue the best
interests of others as well as our own. The more we become
interdependent the more it is in our own interest to ensure the
well-being of others.
I believe that one of the principal factors that hinder us from
fully appreciating our interdependence is our undue emphasis
on material development. We have become so engrossed in its
pursuit that, unknowingly, we have neglected the most basic
qualities of compassion, caring and cooperation. When we do
not know someone or do not feel connected to an individual or
group, we tend to overlook their needs. Yet, the development
of human society requires that people help each other.
I, for one, strongly believe that individuals can make a
difference in society. Every individual has a responsibility to
help more our global family in the right direction and we must
each assume that responsibility. As a Buddhist monk, I try to
develop compassion within myself, not simply as a religious
practice, but on a human level as well. To encourage myself in
this altruistic attitude, I sometimes find it helpful to imagine
myself standing as a single individual on one side, facing a
huge gathering of all other human beings on the other side.
Then I ask myself, 'Whose interests are more important?' To
me it is quite clear that however important I may feel I am, I
am just one individual while others are infinite in number and
importance.
The Environment
As a boy studying Buddhism, I was taught the importance of a
caring attitude toward the environment. Our practice of
nonviolence applies not just to human beings but to all
sentient beings any living thing that has a mind. Where there
is a mind, there are feelings such as pain, pleasure, and joy.
No sentient being wants pain; all want happiness instead. I
believe that all sentient beings share these feelings at some
basic level.
In Buddhist practice we get so used to this idea of nonviolence
and the ending of all suffering that we become accustomed to
not harming or destroying anything indiscriminately.
Although we do not believe that trees or flowers have minds,
we treat them also with respect. Thus we share a sense of
universal responsibility for both mankind and nature.
Our belief in reincarnation is one example of our concern for
the future. If you think that you will be reborn, you are likely
to say to yourself, I have to preserve such and such because
my future reincarnation will be able to continue with these
things. Even though there is a chance you may be reborn as a
different creature, perhaps even on a different planet, the idea
of reincarnation gives you reason to have direct concern about
this planet and future generations.
In the West when you speak of "humanity," you usually mean
only our existing generation of human beings. Past humanity
is already gone. The Future, like death, has yet to come.
Western ideas usually deal with the political side of things for
only this present generation of human beings.
Tibetan feelings about the environment are not based entirely
on religion. They are derived from the whole Tibetan way of
life, not just from Buddhism. For example, consider
Buddhism in Japan or Thailand, in environments different
from ours. Their culture and their attitudes are not the same as
ours. Our unique environment has strongly influenced us. We
don't live on a small, heavily populated island. Historically,
we have had little anxiety with our vast area, low population,
and distant neighbors. We haven't felt as oppressed as people
in many other human communities.
It is very possible to practice the essence of a faith or culture
without practicing a religion. Our Tibetan culture, although
highly influenced by Buddhism, did not gain all its philosophy
from Buddhism I once suggested to an organization dealing
with Tibetan refugees that it would be interesting to do some
research on how much our people have been affected by their
approach to life itself in Tibet. What are the factors that make
Tibetans generally happy and calm? People are always
looking for answers in our unique religion, forgetting that our
environment is just as unusual.
Concern for the environment is not necessarily holy, nor does
it always require compassion. We Buddhists express
compassion for all sentient beings, but this compassion is not
necessarily extended to every rock or tree or house. Most of
us are somewhat concerned about our own house, but not
really compassionate about it. We keep it in order so that we
can live and be happy. We know that to have happy feelings
in our house we must take care of it. So our feelings may be of
concern rather than compassion.
Similarly, our planet is our house, and we must keep it in
order and take care of it if we are genuinely concerned about
happiness for ourselves, our children, our friends, and other
sentient beings who share this great house with us. If we think
of the planet as our house or as our mother-Mother Earth we
automatically feel concern for our environment. Today we
understand that the future of humanity very much depends on
our planet, and that the future of the planet very much
depends on humanity. But this has not always been so clear to
us. Until now, you see, Mother Earth has somehow tolerated
sloppy house habits. But now human use, population, and
technology have reached that certain stage where Mother
Earth no longer accepts our presence with silence. In many
ways she is now telling us, "My children are behaving badly."
She is warning us that there are limits to our actions.
The Tibetan Buddhist attitude is one of contentment, and there
may be some connection here with our attitude toward the
environment. We don't indiscriminately consume. We put a
limit on our consumption. We admire simple living and
individual responsibility. We have always considered
ourselves as part of our environment, but not just any part.
Our ancient scriptures speak of the container and the
contained. The world is the container our house and we are
the contained the contents of the container. From these simple
facts we deduce a special relationship, because without the
container, the contents cannot be contained. Without the
contents, the container contains nothing. It's meaningless.
I have proposed that all of Tibet become a sanctuary, a zone
of peace. Tibet was that once, but with no official designation.
Peace means harmony: harmony between people, between
people and animals, between sentient beings and the
environment. Visitors from all over the world could come to
Tibet to experience peace, harmony. Instead of building big
hotels with many stories and many rooms, we would make
small buildings, more like private homes, that would be in
better harmony with nature.
It is not at all wrong for humans to use nature to make useful
things, but we must not exploit nature unnecessarily. It is
good to live in a house, to have medicines, and to be able to
drive somewhere in a car. In the right hands, a machine is not
a luxury, but something very useful. A camera, for example,
can be used to make pictures that promote understanding.
But everything has its limit. Too much consumption or effort
to make money is no good. Neither is too much contentment.
In principle, contentment is a goal, but pure contentment
becomes almost like suicide, doesn't it? I think the Tibetans
had, in certain fields, too much contentment. And we lost our
country. These days we cannot afford too much contentment
about the environment.
Peace and survival of life on earth as we know it are
threatened by human activities that lack a commitment to
humanitarian values. Destruction of nature and natural
resources results from ignorance, greed, and lack of respect
for the earth's living things. This lack of respect extends even
to the earth's human descendants, the future generations who
will inherit a vastly degraded planet if world peace does not
become a reality and if destruction of the natural environment
continues at the present rate.
Our ancestors viewed the earth as rich and bountiful, which it
is. Many people in the past also saw nature as inexhaustibly
sustainable, which we now know is the case only if we care
for it. It is not difficult to forgive destruction in the past that
resulted from ignorance. Today, however, we have access to
more information. It is essential that we reexamine ethically
what we have inherited, what we are responsible for, and what
we will pass on to coming generations.
Clearly this is a pivotal generation. Global communication is
possible, yet confrontations take place more often than
meaningful dialogues for peace. Our marvels of science and
technology are matched, if not outweighed, by many current
tragedies, including human starvation in some parts of the
world and extinction of other life-forms. Exploration of outer
space takes place at the same time the earth's own oceans,
seas, and freshwater areas grow increasingly polluted, and
their life-forms are still largely unknown or misunderstood.
Many of the earth's habitats, animals, plants, insects, and even
microorganisms that we know as rare may not be known at all
by future generations. We have the capability and the
responsibility. We must act before it is too late.
anupama@ahastories.com
Home Main Menu |
|
