Yesterday we got to go see the Karmapa and tomorrow we get to see the Dalai Lama. The Karmapa visit was pretty interesting. Our group asked a lot of questions about the environment and what is the most important thing in saving hte environment. There were a few proposed things such as technology, education, policy making, or a few other things. His answer basically boiled down to education, since that is what can be most easily change. Technology has to be there in order for the education to work and policy making depends on politicians, which depends on education. It was also pretty interesting that he talked about that we should extend compassion ( a big theme in Buddhism) towards the environment, which includes plants and trees, since they obviously have a desire to be free of suffering (another theme in buddhism) since you can see they try to go towards what is most beneficial for them (i.e. up a cliff towards sunlight). This is a sort of newer concept for Buddhist (or at least for their leaders to be saying) becuase they define things that have consciousness as what you have compassion for (becuase you can be reborn into any sentient being in another life). So for example they say you shouldn't kill another sentient beings (whcih normally is defined as anything that has feelings), but it could be argued that plants have some sort of feeling, becuase they also respond to positive stimuli (or stimuli that makes them survive) in the same sort of way that everything else does. This argument has been a source of discussion for our group the entire time we have been here, because we had an argument does life equal consciousness. And if it doesn't why not? Basically our resposne has kind of been it has to have a brain/emotions/something of that sort. But the question always kinds of sits with them (that they don't really resposnd to particularly well with) is that all of those things are just cells responding to stimuli, so why can't a plant have consciousness or something that is not an animal (such as bacteria).
Tomorrow we get to visit the Dalai Lama. Today we spent basically an entire class trying to narrow down all of our questions for him to two. It was extreeeemely difficult becuase everyone has their own ideas of what they think would be most beneficial to hear. But I think the questions have been narrowed down to something along the lines of:
1) With the program of Emory-Tibet Science Initiative, and the science being taught to the monks, is there any threat or dangers that can come out of this education to Buddhism? And is there any dangers to Western society taking parts of Buddhism but in a more secular way (such as only meditation as a medically beneficial practice?
2) Something about primordial consciousness and imagination and what are the differences, or are tehy the same? (Not my favoriate question, but some people were really interesting in it)
There is going to be an alternate question if we have enough time about interfaith dialogue and what can other religions gain from these discussions with Buddhism and what can buddhism gain from this discussion?
The Dalai Lama is known for this type of topics and questions and is a leader of the different kinds of religions of having this discussion. One intersting point that one of the monks brought up in Dharma night (where we can ask any question about Buddhism to the monks), and said that the Dalai Lama has said about waht religion is the best. He made this analogy: When asking what kind of medicine is the best, you don't just pick the one that is the most expensive, or has the best reputation, you pick the medicine that you know works best for you. The same applied to religion, you don't pick the one that everyone picks or any other reason, but what identifies wtih you most and fits into your life the best. I think this is a pretty valuable point, that is really intersting, especially from a religious leader.
No comments:
Post a Comment