Excerpts from Dalia Lama's interview

Buddhism speaks of idiosyncrasies, latent admirations and underlying tendencies, which together with one's intellect, circumstances and so forth constitute one's karmic dispositions. These are major factors determining which path one should follow.

Question: As self-cherishing and ego-holding are forces which have been active since beginingless time, is it possible to set out upon a spiritual path without developing a negative egoism toward it, leading to sectarianism?
To avoid that it is necessary to take care that your Dharma practice is really a Dharma practice. This way, although the power of familiarity with ego is great, its effects are not overwhelming. If you study Dharma but do not actually apply it, your so-called spiritual activities can easily become directed at material gain, fame and so forth. In which case only egoism and such negativities as anger, attachment, sectarianism, etc. are developed. However, if each word of Dharma that you hear is used to cultivate your mind then every single word brings only benefit, and no matter how much Dharma learning you amass your learning will never go to the development of egoism.
The most important point is to be very careful in the beginning with your motivation in receiving a teaching or doing a practice. If this is done well, there is little danger.
It is important to think very well before entering a particular spiritual tradition. Once you have entered one you should stick to it. Do not be like the man who tastes food in all the different restaurants but never actually gets down to eating a meal. Think carefully before adopting a practice; then follow it through. This way you will get some results from even dedicating a little time each day. Alternatively, if you try to follow all the various paths you will not get anywhere.
Also, patience in practice is required. In this age of machines everything seems to be automatic. You may think that it is the same with Dharma—that by merely turning on a switch you will gain realization. Be patient. The development of mind takes time!
You should try to maintain a steady effort in practice. It is useless to try very hard for a few months, then give up this kind of application and then try very hard again. It is best to exert yourself in a constant and steady way. This is extremely important.
If you have adopted Buddhism you should not consider yourself a 'great Buddhist' and immediately start to do everything differently. A Tibetan proverb states, 'Change your mind but leave your appearance as usual.’
In all of Buddhism and especially in the Mahayana, the benefiting of others is heavily stressed. In this context Shantideva says inVenturing into the Deeds of a Bodhisattva, 'First investigate what is acceptable and what is unacceptable to the people (of the society in which you live); then avoid that which is unacceptable.' Of course, you must consider whether or not what is acceptable and unacceptable is in contradiction with the Dharma. If the social norm does not contradict Dharma you should try to live in accordance with it. In this way people will respect you. This is not done out of vanity but in order to bring the maximum benefit to all.
In Dharma practice it is necessary to always keep an attitude of love toward others, for this is the basis of Bodhicitta. Love is a simple practice, yet it is very beneficial for the individual who practices it as well as for the community in which he lives, for the nation and for the whole world. Love and kindness are always appropriate. Whether or not you believe in rebirth, you will need love in this life. If we have love, there is hope to have real families, real brotherhood, real equanimity, real peace. If the mind of love is lost, if you continue to see other beings as enemies, then no matter how much knowledge or education you have, no matter how much material progress is made, only suffering and confusion will ensue. Beings will continue to deceive and overpower one another. Basically, everyone exists in the very nature of suffering, so to abuse or mistreat each other is futile. The foundation of all spiritual practice is love. That you practice, this well is my only request. Of course, to be able to do so in all situations will take time, but you should not lose courage. If we wish happiness for mankind, it is the only way.

What is the Mind? by HH The Dalai Lama

One of the fundamental views in Buddhism is the principle of "dependent origination." This states that all phenomena, both subjective experiences and external objects, come into existence in dependence upon causes and conditions; nothing comes into existence uncaused. Given this principle, it becomes crucial to understand what causality is and what types of cause there are. In Buddhist literature, two main categories of causation are mentioned: (i) external causes in the form of physical objects and events, and (ii) internal causes such as cognitive and mental events.
The reason for an understanding of causality being so important in Buddhist thought and practice is that it relates directly to sentient beings' feelings of pain and pleasure and the other experiences that dominate their lives, which arise not only from internal mechanisms but also from external causes and conditions. Therefore it is crucial to understand not only the internal workings of mental and cognitive causation but also their relationship to the external material world.
The fact that our inner experiences of pleasure and pain are in the nature of subjective mental and cognitive states is very obvious to us. But how those inner subjective events relate to external circumstances and the material world poses a critical problem. The question of whether there is an external physical reality independent of sentient beings' consciousness and mind has been extensively discussed by Buddhist thinkers. Naturally, there are divergent views on this issue among the various philosophical schools of thought. One such school [Cittamatra] asserts that there is no external reality, not even external objects, and that the material world we perceive is in essence merely a projection of our minds. From many points of view, this conclusion is rather extreme. Philosophically, and for that matter conceptually, it seems more coherent to maintain a position that accepts the reality not only of the subjective world of the mind, but also of the external objects of the physical world.
Now, if we examine the origins of our inner experiences and of external matter, we find that there is a fundamental uniformity in the nature of their existence in that both are governed by the principle of causality. Just as in the inner world of mental and cognitive events, every moment of experience comes from its preceding continuum and so on ad infinitum. Similarly, in the physical world every object and event must have a preceding continuum that serves as its cause, from which the present moment of external matter comes into existence.
In some Buddhist literature, we find that in terms of the origin of its continuum, the macroscopic world of our physical reality can be traced back finally to an original state in which all material particles are condensed into what are known as "space particles." If all the physical matter of our macroscopic universe can be traced to such an original state, the question then arises as to how these particles later interact with each other and evolve into a macroscopic world that can have direct bearing on sentient beings' inner experiences of pleasure and pain. To answer this, Buddhists turn to the doctrine of karma, the invisible workings of actions and their effects, which provides an explanation as to how these inanimate space particles evolve into various manifestations.
The invisible workings of actions, or karmic force (karma means action), are intimately linked to the motivation in the human mind that gives rise to these actions. Therefore an understanding of the nature of mind and its role is crucial to an understanding of human experience and the relationship between mind and matter. We can see from our own experience that our state of mind plays a major role in our day-to-day experience and physical and mental well-being. If a person has a calm and stable mind, this influences his or her attitude and behavior in relation to others. In other words, if someone remains in a state of mind that is calm, tranquil and peaceful, external surroundings or conditions can cause them only a limited disturbance. But it is extremely difficult for someone whose mental state is restless to be calm or joyful even when they are surrounded by the best facilities and the best of friends. This indicates that our mental attitude is a critical factor in determining our experience of joy and happiness, and thus also our good health.
To sum up, there are two reasons why it is important to understand the nature of mind. One is because there is an intimate connection between mind and karma. The other is that our state of mind plays a crucial role in our experience of happiness and suffering. If understanding the mind is very important, what then is mind, and what is its nature?
Buddhist literature, both sutra and tantra, contains extensive discussions on mind and its nature. Tantra, in particular, discusses the various levels of subtlety of mind and consciousness. The sutras do not talk much about the relationship between the various states of mind and their corresponding physiological states. Tantric literature, on the other hand, is replete with references to the various subtleties of the levels of consciousness and their relationship to such physiological states as the vital energy centers within the body, the energy channels, the energies that flow within these and so on. The tantras also explain how, by manipulating the various physiological factors through specific meditative yogic practices, one can effect various states of consciousness.
According to tantra, the ultimate nature of mind is essentially pure. This pristine nature is technically called "clear light." The various afflictive emotions such as desire, hatred and jealousy are products of conditioning. They are not intrinsic qualities of the mind because the mind can be cleansed of them. When this clear light nature of mind is veiled or inhibited from expressing its true essence by the conditioning of the afflictive emotions and thoughts, the person is said to be caught in the cycle of existence, samsara. But when, by applying appropriate meditative techniques and practices, the individual is able to fully experience this clear light nature of mind free from the influence and conditioning of the afflictive states, he or she is on the way to true liberation and full enlightenment.
Hence, from the Buddhist point of view, both bondage and true freedom depend on the varying states of this clear light mind, and the resultant state that meditators try to attain through the application of various meditative techniques is one in which this ultimate nature of mind fully manifests all its positive potential, enlightenment, or Buddhahood. An understanding of the clear light mind therefore becomes crucial in the context of spiritual endeavor.
In general, the mind can be defined as an entity that has the nature of mere experience, that is, "clarity and knowing." It is the knowing nature, or agency, that is called mind, and this is non-material. But within the category of mind there are also gross levels, such as our sensory perceptions, which cannot function or even come into being without depending on physical organs like our senses. And within the category of the sixth consciousness, the mental consciousness, there are various divisions, or types of mental consciousness that are heavily dependent upon the physiological basis, our brain, for their arising. These types of mind cannot be understood in isolation from their physiological bases.
Now a crucial question arises: How is it that these various types of cognitive events—the sensory perceptions, mental states and so forth—can exist and possess this nature of knowing, luminosity and clarity? According to the Buddhist science of mind, these cognitive events possess the nature of knowing because of the fundamental nature of clarity that underlies all cognitive events. This is what I described earlier as the mind's fundamental nature, the clear light nature of mind. Therefore, when various mental states are described in Buddhist literature, you will find discussions of the different types of conditions that give rise to cognitive events. For example, in the case of sensory perceptions, external objects serve as the objective, or causal condition; the immediately preceding moment of consciousness is the immediate condition; and the sense organ is the physiological or dominant condition. It is on the basis of the aggregation of these three conditions—causal, immediate and physiological—that experiences such as sensory perceptions occur.
Another distinctive feature of mind is that it has the capacity to observe itself. The issue of mind's ability to observe and examine itself has long been an important philosophical question. In general, there are different ways in which mind can observe itself. For instance, in the case of examining a past experience, such as things that happened yesterday you recall that experience and examine your memory of it, so the problem does not arise. But we also have experiences during which the observing mind becomes aware of itself while still engaged in its observed experience. Here, because both observing mind and observed mental states are present at the same time, we cannot explain the phenomenon of the mind becoming self-aware, being subject and object simultaneously, through appealing to the factor of time lapse.
Thus it is important to understand that when we talk about mind, we are talking about a highly intricate network of different mental events and state. Through the introspective properties of mind we can observe, for example, what specific thoughts are in our mind at a given moment, what objects our minds are holding, what kinds of intentions we have and so on. In a meditative state, for example, when you are meditating and cultivating a single- pointedness of mind, you constantly apply the introspective faculty to analyze whether or nor your mental attention is single-pointedly focused on the object, whether there is any laxity involved, whether you are distracted and so forth. In this situation you are applying various mental factors and it is not as if a single mind were examining itself. Rather, you are applying various different types of mental factor to examine your mind.
As to the question of whether or not a single mental state can observe and examine itself, this has been a very important and difficult question in the Buddhist science of mind. Some Buddhist thinkers have maintained that there s a faculty of mind called "self- consciousness," or "self-awareness." It could be said that this is an apperceptive faculty of mind, one that can observe itself. But this contention has been disputed. Those who maintain that such an apperceptive faculty exists distinguish two aspects within the mental, or cognitive, event. One of these is external and object-oriented in the sense that there is a duality of subject and object, while the other is introspective in nature and it is this that enables the mind to observe itself. The existence of this apperceptive self-cognizing faculty of mind has been disputed, especially by the later Buddhist philosophical school of thought the Prasangika.
In our own day-to-day experiences we can observe that, especially on the gross level, our mind is interrelated with and dependent upon the physiological states off the body. Just as our state of mind, be it depressed or joyful, affects our physical health, so too does our physical state affect our mind.
As I mentioned earlier, Buddhist tantric literature mentions specific energy centers within the body that may, I think, have some connection with what some neurobiologists call the second brain, the immune system. These energy centers play a crucial role in increasing or decreasing the various emotional states within our mind. It is because of the intimate relationship between mind and body and the existence of these special physiological centers within our body that physical yoga exercises and the application of special meditative techniques aimed at training the mind can have positive effects on health. It has been shown, for example, that by applying appropriate meditative techniques, we can control our respiration and increase or decrease our body temperature.
Furthermore, just as we can apply various meditative techniques during the waking state so too, on the basis of understanding the subtle relationship between mind and body, can we practice various meditations while we are in dream states. The implication of the potential of such practices is that at a certain level it is possible to separate the gross levels of consciousness from gross physical states and arrive at a subtler level of mind and body. In other words, you can separate your mind from your coarse physical body. You could, for example, separate your mind from your body during sleep and do some extra work that you cannot do in your ordinary body. However, you might not get paid for it!
So you can see here the clear indication of a close link between body and mind: they can be complementary. In light of this, I am very glad to see that some scientists are undertaking significant research in the mind/body relationship and its implications for our understanding of the nature of mental and physical well-being. My old friend Dr. Benson [Herbert Benson, MD, Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School], for example, has been carrying out experiments on Tibetan Buddhist meditators for some years now. Similar research work is also being undertaken in Czechoslovakia. Judging by our findings so far, I feel confident that there is still a great deal to be done in the future.
As the insights we gain from such research grow, there is no doubt that our understanding of mind and body, and also of physical and mental health, will be greatly enriched. Some modern scholars describe Buddhism not as a religion but as a science of mind, and there seem to be some grounds for this claim.

Interiew with Dalai Lama

Exclusive Interview - 'I am a supporter of globalization'
Published: Friday, 10 July, 2009

Dharamsala, HP, India, 5 July 2009 (By Joerg Eigendorf, Die Welt) - Getting to the Dalai Lama is a long and treacherous journey. The religious leader and Tibet’s head of state lives in exile at the foot of the Himalayas, two hours north of New Dehli by airplane. Here in Dharamshala his residence lies on an idyllic hill, right next to a Buddhist temple. Those who want to get to him must go through strict controls performed by both Indian as well as Tibetan security guards. Even bare fingers are patted down.

Fears over His Holiness are great. On one hand, the over 50-year-old non-violent fight for the autonomy of the Tibetan state has made the Nobel Peace Prize winner an international superstar. On the other hand, the Chinese have seen him as their archenemy since 1959.
But for years now the monk has shifted his focus from solely the Tibetan question and the fight against violence and has engaged himself in matters of the global economy and the challenge of how wealth can be distributed more fairly. Shortly before his trip to Germany at the end of July the Dalai Lama warns not only against greed, but also against having too much faith in the state.

WELT ONLINE: Your Holiness, for the Tibetans you are a divine king and you have many followers in the western world who idolize you. Do you have any weaknesses?
Dalai Lama: (laughs) Yes, I am lazy. Of course I wake up every morning at 3:30am and do some excercises, mediate, eat breakfast and meditate again. This goes on for four or five hours. In the spiritual regard I am not lazy. But when I sit in an airplane I always see people reading, writing or working on their computers, preparing presentations. I never do that – no homework, no preparations. These are signs of my laziness.

Does it bother you?
No, because when I prepare for something to intensely I always feel like it is too fake. I feel much better when I am spontaneous, because it comes from the heart.

Can you imagine how long I spent preparing for this interview?
(laughs again): You are German, so everything has to be precise. Besides, your questions have to be interesting. If I had to be the one asking questions, I would prepare for it too. But I just need to answer your questions, and if I don’t know an answer, I will just tell you.

Ok, how will we solve the financial crisis in the short-term?
See, this is one of those questions – I don’t know. The politicians must decide this. I am no expert in regards to solving a severe crisis. The same goes for violence and terrorism. In the short-term governments will have to act to prevent from endangering its citizens, which is the right thing to do. But with all the short-term actions we are taking, we shouldn’t forget the root cause of the problem.

What, in your opinion, is the root cause of the financial crisis?
Greed and gambling. Many people and companies only have one goal: money, money, and more money. Greed is ok when you let others profit from it, but greed for oneself is bad, it makes you ill. The egotistical ambition to always want to earn more money harms both the company and the individual himself. That is the biggest weakness of many managers – the financial crisis has proven this.

So it’s ok for someone to earn a lot as long as they share?
Wealth is not necessarily a bad thing when it has been earned in an honest manner and neither other individuals nor the environment suffered for it. As Buddhists we recognize that wealth is a basic prerequisite for a happy life. But a billionaire also only has ten fingers. He can fit three or four rings on each finger, but that would look weird. The satisfaction many millionaires who don’t share their wealth have in their heads is fictitious and not real. Rich people should help reduce poverty.

Some managers earn 10, 20 or even 30 million euros per year. You really don’t have a problem with this?
Just like in the music industry or sports there are exceptions. They can earn as much as they want, as long as it remains transparent and traceable why they earn so much money. Unfortunately there are only few such people. It is, however, unacceptable if a chief executive continues to increase his wealth while the company is sliding into bankruptcy, the shareholders lose their savings and the employees lose their jobs or don’t earn enough to afford a decent standard of living.

Let’s assume a chief executive discovers that he can develop a software in India for a tenth of the price it would cost in Germany. In order to do so, he must cut 1,000 jobs in Germany and create new ones in India. The owners of the company are pushing him to do this. What should the manager do?
The manager should consider the situation from all possible angles – the shareholders, the employees, the clients and society. Yes, even global society. A good manager must have a clear image of the problem. This sounds self-evident, but it doesn’t happen that often. Most of the time it is about maximizing profits.

Companies can’t survive without profits.
Yes, but companies are living, complex organisms and not profit machines. The profit should therefore not be the object of a company, but rather a result of good work. Just like a person can’t survive for long without food and water, a company can’t survive without profits. Not that I would ever reduce the purpose of a human to that, as eating and drinking are the only prerequisites for a meaningful life.

How do you feel about western companies investing in low-cost countries? Is that exploitation or does it help the national economy of these countries to close the gap with industrialized nations?
It depends on the investor’s incentive. I don’t think that many of the companies to invest in Indian or Chinese businesses are really interested in the Indian and Chinese people’s well-being. Quite often the interest lies in exploiting cheap labor, which I disapprove of. Yet if a company has a moral responsibility to improve the quality of life and to help China as a whole, then it is fine to profit from cheap labor. Global businesses can help China to become more democratic, help it to achieve an independent legal system and help to ensure a freedom of the press.

You won’t make many friends among those against globalization with your argument.
I am essentially a supporter of globalization. In the past societies and countries could seal themselves off from the rest of the world, but today this has become impossible. When we search for organizations that have the capacity and ability to improve our world, global companies are at the top of the list. In particular integrated global corporations are in an ideal position to support developing countries to close the gap to leading national economies.

Do you not have sympathy for anti-globalists?
I do when they remind leaders and companies that it is about more than just making profits. At the same time the growing opposition to globalization is dependent on our reluctance to accept the principle that everything is perishable: Meaning, the fact that everything is subject to permanent change. For Buddhists this is one of the basic pieces of wisdom that one must accept.

These liberal attitudes don’t really fit to someone who once called himself a Marxist monk. Do you still see yourself as one?
Yes, I still believe I am a Marxist monk. I don’t see a contradiction here either. In the Marxist theory the focus lies on the just allocation of wealth. From a moral perspective this is a correct claim. Capitalism, on the other hand, values the accruement of wealth – the allocation of it doesn’t matter here initially. In a worst case scenario the rich will keep getting richer while the poor keep getting poorer.

Why is it then that you are so against communism and socialism?
Communism? What is communism? Is China a communist country? (He laughs out loud). I am confused. The Chinese communists are communists without a communist ideology. But if you mean socialism, like it first existed in the Eastern Block and now in North Korea and Cuba, I believe it goes against human nature; it destroys creativity. It is not enough for people to have just enough to eat, clothes and a roof over their heads. We need to self-actualize ourselves. Buddha encouraged entrepreneurs to become successful through dependability and sales skills. Those who are successful can help others.

Yet you used to be a long-time admirer of Mao Zedong. How could you be so wrong?
I am still convinced that Mao Zedong was a Marxist, who wanted to help workers and farmers, in his early years up until the mid-1950s. In the mid-1950s I spent six months in Beijing and another four months in many other parts of China. The party leaders, to me, seemed really dedicated to their cause.

What impressed you about Mao?
He always looked like a farmer – his clothes were old and ruined. And when he spoke, he did so very slowly, so every word had an importance. He never beat around the bush, never said niceties; he always came straight to the point. All of his party members that I met back then were like that, which impressed me.

How did Mao fail, in your opinion?
Mao once told that the communist party must endure criticism, and that self-criticism was very important. Without criticism every system of power is like a fish without water. But then, in 1957, suddenly all party officials who dared to criticize were eliminated. That was the end of Maoism. The system failed because of its own arrogance and a lack of self-discipline. The abolishment of private property led to many belongings ending up in the hands of a state that devolved into a party elite which exerted an authoritarian reign – much like aristocrats of the past.

What role does the state play for you in the economy?
That is a very hard question. I don’t think that equality can be established on a national level. Nations can cause a lot of damage. This is why I warn against expecting too much from governments when it comes to the redistribution or regulation of the financial markets. People will always find ways around rules and laws – even if they are the best rules or laws. Or do you think it was the lack of regulations that lead to this financial crisis? The rules in the United States were good; but responsible action demands more than law-abidance

In your opinion the free market isn’t performing well, and you also don’t believe in regulation. So what it is that we need?
I call it a "responsible free market economy”. In the end it comes down to every single individual; it is dependent on each individual’s sense of moral responsibility, self-discipline, and values. This financial crisis isn’t purely a crisis of the market economy, but rather a crisis of values.

Alright, so the first thing we must do is send all government leaders and chief executives of large companies to Buddhist convents so that they may learn self-discipline and gain some morals.
(laughs): Three-week seminars in our convents won’t achieve much. It would be like laying a piece of ice on a rock – a little while later the rock would be wet, but nothing more. The rock will still be there. No, it’s unrealistic to expect a rapid systematic change in the global economy. The changes need to happen within each individual person and within the companies. This is dependent on the efforts we make in people’s education; this is about beginning in Kindergarten and not about a few weeks’ worth of discussions.

So what you are saying is that not only mathematics, history and languages need to be focused on in school, but that morality, ethics and religion need to be taught in a much greater scope.
History, math, languages and economics – these are all subjects for the brain. But responsibility – moral responsibilities, responsibilities regarding society – these are things that come from the heart. This, combined with the power of the brain, is what governments and large companies need. I will give you an example: we Tibetans believe that our national issue with China can only be resolved non-violently. This is what we preach from Kindergarten onwards throughout the entire education of an individual. When a Tibetan is confronted with a conflict, his reaction should immediately be: “How can I resolve this in dialogue?” It is important to us that young people in our schools understand that violence is the wrong way, that violence cannot solve problems. This attitude has become a part of many Tibetan’s lives through education and training. The same needs to occur in regards to economy and justice.

How many decades or centuries will it take until we are really ready for a “responsible free market economy”?
This financial and economic crisis will help it to happen faster, because those people who only think about money – even dream about it – are affected the most by it. The crisis is terrible for many people, but it also shows the value of money is limited and the insecurity is huge. Inner values like friendship, trust, honesty and compassion are much more reliable than money – they always bring happiness and strength.

But only few people are promoted because they value friendship, trust and compassion. Isn’t your approach a little idealistic?
What you are saying is one of the greatest contradictions. Those who assert themselves often have very little morale, and those who have a good sense of morale often don’t know how to assert themselves. This problem, by the way, is much larger in socialism than in economics. Often times the incompetent were leaders and governed and constricted the competent. We saw what happens then. A company that behaves the same way will fail because it wastes so much potential and will never develop its own values.

Every good CEO has prerequisites for a suitable successor, yet finding your successor is much more complicated and extensive. Do you worry about it?
No, it’s not so difficult. As a simple monk I don’t need a successor when I die. And in regards to the role of the Dalai Lama as a government leader: I ceded all of my governmental responsibilities eight years ago – we have an elected government, so this is also not a problem. This leaves the question of a successor of the Dalai Lama as a spiritual leader. In 1969 I said the Tibetans need to decide themselves whether there will be a 15th Dalai Lama. I gave suggestions, but I cannot and do not want to get more involved than that.

Can you understand that leaders all over the world would like to meet with you – but don’t – in order to prevent endangering their economic relations with China? I think it is fine when a politician weighs all of the options and comes to the decision that abides by the nation’s interest. However, many politicians make it too easy for themselves – for them it is only about their own companies earning as much money as possible. Is this a terrible problem for me? Not really. My main interest is to promote human values like harmony, responsibility and charity. To do so I need to speak with people, not their leaders. If a government leader wants to meet with me for spiritual reasons, I’d be glad to meet with them. If they don’t, then they don’t, and there is no problem with that. I don’t travel the world only for my people and the question of Tibet’s future – I want to reach as many people as I can.

Will this century be marked by China’s ascent?
China has developed enormous power. It is the evidence for how well an economy can develop better under more freedom on a corporate level. What China is missing, however, are values its society can rely on. The standards that were relevant before the communist revolution are long gone. And what has taken their place? Nothing but money. The communist elite only think about power and money, and this can be very destructive.

Religion, states and economy have grown increasingly apart. Do you really believe that religious leaders such as yourself and the pope can change the world for the better?
I do not travel the world as a religious leader. I am a simple person, a simple monk. Sure I have more opportunities because I am welcomed as the Dalai Lama and because I have gathered a lot of experience in my 50 years of living in exile. These are experiences I can share with people. But the moral principles we are talking about here give me an inner strength, and inner strength gives me inner peace. This is how I hope to reach out to people.

How do you feel about staying in five-star hotels when you travel abroad?
To be honest, I don’t feel comfortable in large hotel rooms. Sometimes I think there could be a ghost in the room (laughs). This is why I always ask to be accommodated humbly and simply. I like places I stay in to be modern, clean and comfortable. But most of the time I cannot influence where I stay.

Don’t you get a guilty conscience when you stay in luxury accommodations?
Why should I? When feel good, I can do more for others. But of course it hurts me when I see poor people. Once when I was going to bed in Vienna I saw a man lying on the street outside, and when I woke up in the morning he was still there. I sent him fruits and bread; even though I know it will only temporarily ease his agony.

When was the last time you were unfair or unjust?
(Thinks): Sometimes I lose my patience, but then I apologize. It happens sometimes.
You have written books about how damaging anger is, and still you get angry sometimes?
Of course. It is not about eliminating anger, but rather finding the cause for it and working against it. If you do not understand where the anger comes from and don’t work against it, the anger will grow. Anger is a destructive emotion which is based on arrogance. This is why one must find the cause and counteract it.

You possess neither a credit card nor a bank account. Are there any objects that you really need, ones that you can’t live without? Like for example your home exercise equipment?
No, there is nothing I can’t live without. I learned this attitude when I was a child.
* * *
Translated by Carolin Wittek

HANDLING ANGER - APPLYING ANTIDOTES

Below is a summary of various approaches to anger. They obviously will be most efficient when used with a calm and concentrated mind, either during meditation or at the moment you realize that something needs to be done about your anger. Obviously, the problem during an actual difficult situation is to have a calm and concentrated mind - a regular meditation practice can be of great help then! One of the best ways to really make progress with understanding and changing the functioning of our own mind is to try out analytical meditation, combined with these clues.

ANTIDOTE 1 - Patience

Patience is the main antidote to anger. As common wisdom says: just count to 100... During this time, any of the below methods can be effective. The most effective method will depend on the actual situation. Especially in our age of rush and intense change, patience may not be seen as a positive quality, but take a minute to think impatience can easily give rise to a general feeling of anger.

ANTIDOTE 2 - Realisation of the Noble Truth of Suffering

Once one understands that problems and frustration is a basic fact of life, it can reduce our impatience with our own unrealistic expectations. In other words: nothing is perfect, so don't expect it. If I believe that things should be perfect, it is almost unavoidable to feel disappointed and hurt.

ANTIDOTE 3 - Understanding Karma

As explained in the page on Karma, the real reasons for our problems are our own actions, which are in turn caused by our own negative states of mind. If someone makes us angry, it can have a sobering effect if we dare to think that the real reasons for this situation are our own past actions, and the person is just a circumstance for our own karma to ripen.

ANTIDOTE 4 - Changing or Accepting

Basically, we can find ourselves in two types of unpleasant situations: ones we can change and ones we cannot change. - If I can change the situation, I should do something about it instead of getting all worked-up and angry. Not acting in such a situation will cause frustration in the end. - If I cannot change the situation, I will have to accept it. If I don't, it will only lead to frustration and a negative and unpleasant state of mind, which will make the situation only worse. For some reasons unclear to me, Westerners (including myself) appear to have big problems with accepting unpleasant situations which we cannot change. Could this be a result of impatience (a form of anger) with imperfection (an unrealistic expectation)?Do consider the wisdom in the following remarks (from an online discussion - forgot the writer.):

"How does this effect my Buddhist practice? It doesn't. These reported events are like an arrow shot at my heart but it lands at my feet. I choose not to bend over, pick it up, and stab myself with it."

ANTIDOTE 5 - Realistic Analysis

For example: someone accuses me of something. - If it is true, I apparently made a mistake, so I should listen and learn. - If it is untrue, the other person makes a mistake. So what? Nobody is perfect. I also make mistakes, and it is all too easy to label the other as "enemy", in which case a helpful discussion or forgiving becomes difficult. It may also be worthwhile searching for the real underlying reason of the problem. Of special importance is to evaluate one's own role in the situation: my own fears, insecurity, being very unfriendly, or not being blameless (like leaving home much too late for an appointment and blaming the 5 minutes delay of the train).

ANTIDOTE 6- Realisation of Emptiness

If one deeply realises the emptiness of inherent existence or interdependence of the other person, the situation and oneself, there is nothing to be angry about. The realisation of emptiness is therefore the ultimate means of ridding oneself of unrealistic negative emotions like anger.

ANTIDOTE 7 - Equanimity

Equanimity means that one realises the basic equality of all sentient beings; others want happiness, just like I do. Others make mistakes just like I do. Others are confused, angry, attached just like I often am. Is the other person happy in this situation, or just struggling like I am?

ANTIDOTE 8 - Openness

Be prepared to be open for the motivation of others to do what causes you problems. Talking it over and being prepared to listen can suddenly make a problem acceptable. Did you ever notice the difference when a plane or train has much delay and nobody gives any reasons for it? People very quickly become irritated and hostile. Then when the driver or pilot explains there is a technical defect or an accident, suddenly waiting becomes easier.

ANTIDOTE 9 - Relativity

Ask yourself if this situation is actually important enough to spoil your own and other people's mood. Is this problem worth getting upset in a life where death can hit me at any moment?

ANTIDOTE 10 - Change Your Motivation

In case a situation is really unacceptable, and another person needs to convinced that something is to be done or changed, there is no need to become upset and angry. It is likely much more efficient if you show of understanding and try to make the other understand the need for change. If one needs to appear angry for some reason to convince the other person of the seriousness of the situation, one can think like a parent acting wrathful to prevent the child from harming itself.In general, to be really effective one needs to reflect on quite a number of aspects in one's own mind like; forgiveness, peace of mind, fears, self-acceptance (no acceptance of others is really possible without self-acceptance), habits, prejudices etc. A list of aspects to start with is given in the page about the mind, under the 26 non-virtuous mental factors.

ANTIDOTE 11 - Watch Your Hands

An interesting suggestion from Jon Kabat-Zinn, from 'Wherever You Go, There You Are': "All our hand postures are mudras in that they are associated with subtle or not-so-subtle energies. Take the energy of the fist, for instance. When we get angry, our hands tend to close into fists. Some people unknowingly practice this mudra a lot in their lives. It waters the seeds of anger and violence within you ever time you do it, and they respond by sprouting and growing stronger. The next time you find yourself making fists out of anger, try to bring mindfulness to the inner attitude embodied in a fist. Feel the tension, the hatred, the anger, the aggression, and the fear which it contains. Then, in the midst of your anger, as an experiment, if the person you are angry at is present, try opening your fists and placing the palms together over your heart in the prayer position right in front of him. (Of course, he won't have the slightest idea what you are doing.) Notice what happens to the anger and hurt as you hold this position for even a few moments."

ANTIDOTE 12 - Meditation

Last, but certainly not least, meditation can be the ultimate cure to completely eliminating anger from your mind. In the beginning, one can do analytical meditations (like this meditation on anger), but also meditation on compassion, love and forgiving reduce anger as well. Ultimately, the realization of emptiness eradicates all delusions like anger.

Insult ..

On one occasion, the Buddha was invited by the Brahmin Bharadvaja for alms to his house. As invited, the Buddha visited the house of the Brahmin. Instead of entertaining Him, the Brahmin poured forth a torrent of abuse with the filthiest of words.

The Buddha politely inquired:"Do visitors come to your house, good Brahmin?"

"Yes," he replied.

"What do yu do when they come?"

"Oh, we prepare a sumptuous feast."

"What do you if they refuse to receive the meal?"

"Why, we gladly partake of them ourselves."

"Well, good Brahmin, you have invited me for alms and entertained me with abuse which I decline to accept. So now it belongs to you."

From the Akkosa Sutta