A: Of course, from the Buddhist viewpoint, not just from that of common sense, there is a beginning and there is an end. That is logical; that is law; that is nature. So whatever we call the Big Bang or such things, there is a process of evolution or a process of beginning. So there must be an end. In any case I think the end won't come for several million years.
Now, pollution - As you know I come from Tibet. When we were in Tibet, we had no idea about pollution. Things were very clean! In fact, when I first came across pollution and heard people say that I could not drink the water, it was a surprise to me. Eventually our knowledge widened.
Now it is really a very serious issue. It is not a question of one nation or two nations, but of the survival and health of all of humanity. If we have a clear conscience about this problem and behave accordingly, it seems there is a way to at least lessen this problem. For example, two or three years ago when I was in Stockholm beside the big river, some of my friends told me that 10 years previously there had been no fish in the river because the water was so polluted. Around the time of my visit some fish had begun to appear because of the control of pollution. So this shows that there is the possibility of improving things.
Killing and situations like Bosnia are immediately striking to our minds. Yet pollution and other environmental problems lack this kind of striking appearance. Gradually, month by month, year by year, things become worse. By the time a problem becomes very obvious it may be too late. Therefore I think it is a very serious matter. I am quite encouraged that in many places people are clearly concerned, and even some political parties have been set up based on the ideology and policy of environmental protection. I think this is a very healthy development. So there is hope.
A: I think that there are many levels of suffering. Generally speaking, it is definitely possible to reduce the level of suffering. I don't personally believe that conditions are essential for one's well-being and happiness necessarily involve harming and affecting someone else's life in a negative way.
Here I would like to say something. I feel that television and newspapers usually report negative things. Killings, for example, or unfortunate events are immediately reported. In the meantime, millions of people are actually receiving help, or being nourished or looked after by human affection, such as millions of children, sick and old people. But usually in people's minds these good things are taken for granted. They are not seen as something to which we should pay special attention. Actually, this shows that the very nature of humanity is compassion or affection. We simply ignore all the work of affection because it seems natural. But we are surprised at things like bloodshed; it shocks our minds because our nature is not of that kind. As a result, many people get the impression that human nature is negative, aggressive and violent. I think that psychologically this is very bad , especially for young children who, through television, see negative human elements, but always for a short time. At that moment or for a short period, these things like killing or hitting can be a little bit exciting. But in the long-term, I think these violent things are very, very harmful to society. In fact, I recently had a meeting with Karl Popper, the philosopher. We have known each other since my first visit to this country in 1973. In our meeting we discussed violence on television and my view that too much violence is having a very negative impact on the minds of millions of children. He is, I think, of the same opinion. A proper way of education is the most important element in terms of hope for a better future.
A: I think they largely depend on education. I feel the more correct information and the more awareness and contact you have, the better. Of course, you also have to adopt an open mind. After all, you are just one human being out of five billion and one individual's future depends very much on others. Part of the problem I see is a lack of awareness of other cultures and the existence of other communities, and also a lack of understanding of the nature or reality of modern existence. If it were possible to gain complete satisfaction and fulfilment by being totally independent within one's own culture and one's own community - to be totally independent and unrelated to other communities around the world - then perhaps one could argue that there were grounds for subscribing to these misconceptions like bigotry and racism. But this is not the case. The reality of the existence of other cultures and other communities cannot be ignored. Moreover, the nature of modern existence is such that the well-being and interests of other communities and other societies. In such a complex modern world there is no room for bigotry and racism.
Now according to my own experience, there is no doubt that Buddhism is the most suitable religion for me. But this does not mean that Buddhism is best for everyone. Each individual has a different mental disposition and therefore for some people a particular religion is more suitable or more effective than others. So if I respect each individual's right, then I must respect or accept the value of these different religions because they work for millions of other people.
When I was in Tibet I had little information, through books or from personal, about the nature and value of other traditions. Since I've become a refugee, I have had more opportunity to have closer contact with other traditions, mainly through individuals, and I have gained a much deeper understanding of their value. As a result, my attitude now is that each one is a valid religion. Of course, even from the philosophical viewpoint, I still believe that Buddhist philosophy is more sophisticated, that it has more variety or is more vast, but all other religions still have tremendous benefits or great potential. So on both bases, I think my attitude towards other religions is greatly changed. Today, wherever I go and whenever I meet someone who follows a different religion, I deeply admire their practice and I very sincerely respect their tradition.
A: It is definitely relevant in the modern world. But perhaps I should clarify this . Many years have passed since various religious traditions started, so certain aspects are, I think perhaps out of date. But this does not mean that religion as a whole is irrelevant in modern times. Therefore, it is important to look at the essence of different religions , including Buddhism. Human beings, no matter whether today's or those of 100, 1,000, 4,000 or 5,000 years ago, are basically the same. Of course, a lot of the cultures and the ways of life have changed, but still we have the same kind of human being. So therefore, the basic human problems and suffering - such as death, old age, disease, fighting and all these things - are still there. I don't know what kind of shape humans will be in after 10,000 years or 100,000 years; nobody knows. But at least over the last few thousand years, they have, I think, kept basically the same nature.
So I think the various different religions actually deal with basic human suffering and problems. On that level, because human nature and suffering have remained the same, the religions are still very relevant. On the other hand, certain ceremonial aspects and so on have changed. In India, during the feudal system or the reign of kings, the way of practice was very much influenced by those circumstances. But that has changed and, I think, has to change further.
As far as Buddhism is concerned, it of course not only deals with this life but with other mysterious aspects. Unless, just as modernisation is taking place in other realms of existence, I think Buddhism will retain its relevance and appropriateness, not only to our modern world, because many of the fundamental problems of human existence still remain, but also because it addresses issues which are related to other mysterious forms of existence. I always believe that the modern change is just a surface change and that deep down we are the same. Last year at the border between Austria and Italy, they recovered an old body. I think we could still communicate with him. Yet the body is about 4,000 years old. Of course, that person would have a different culture and maybe slightly different expression, but basically we could still communicate.
Copyright © 1996 The International Communique Ltd