2021/04/04

How Bill Gates Premeditated COVID Vaccine Injury Censorship « Aletho News

How Bill Gates Premeditated COVID Vaccine Injury Censorship « Aletho News

How Bill Gates Premeditated COVID Vaccine Injury Censorship

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | March 30, 2021

In 2000, everything about Bill Gates’ public persona changed. He morphed from a hardnosed and ruthless technology monopolizer into a soft, fuzzy and incredibly generous philanthropist when he and his wife launched the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.1

It was a public relations coup. May 18, 1998, the U.S. Justice Department, in collaboration with 20 state attorneys, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft.2 At that time, the company was 23 years old and was ruling the personal computer market. The Seattle Times described the fallout from the antitrust lawsuit:3

“The company barely escaped being split up after it was ruled an unlawful monopolist in 2000 for using its stranglehold on the PC market with its Windows operating system to cripple competitors, such as Netscape’s Navigator Web browser.”

How would the world be different today if the company had been split? Yale law professor George Priest described the antitrust lawsuit as “one of the most important antitrust cases of its generation.”4 In 2002, a court settlement placed restrictions on Microsoft to curb some of its practices for five years.

It was later extended twice and then expired May 12, 2011. The lawsuit had a dramatic effect on “the emergence of an entirely new field called IP (intellectual property) antitrust,” Iowa law professor Herbert Hovenkamp told the Seattle Times.5

Later, large sums donated from the foundation made the news multiple times, including $9.5 million to GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines), a second $7.5 million to GAVI and $6.8 million to the World Health Organization in 2017.6

By June 2020, in the middle of a global pandemic, the Gates Foundation’s donations totaled 45% of WHO’s funding from nongovernmental sources.7 Once mainstream media’s attention was no longer on Gates’ antitrust activities and focused on the philanthropist actions of the foundation, Gates publicly turned his attention to vaccinating the world, long before COVID-19.8

Event 201: A Preplanned Pandemic

In a deep dive into the Gates Foundation’s charitable donations, The Nation found there were $250 million in grants to companies where the foundation held corporate stocks, including Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi and Medtronic. The money was directed at supporting projects “like developing new drugs and health monitoring systems and creating mobile banking services.”9

What Gates had discovered was an easy path to political power, allowing him to shape public policy without being elected to office. In other words, favorable headlines could be bought with charitable contributions.10 One event that Gates has personally supported and participated in was Event 201.11

Writing in The Defender, Robert Kennedy Jr. describes the exercise that Gates organized in October 2019. Many high-ranking men and women with governmental authority participated in Event 201, which coincidentally simulated a worldwide pandemic triggered by a novel coronavirus, just months before SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, changed the world.12

They included representatives from the World Economic Forum, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Johns Hopkins University Population Center, the World Bank, the Chinese government and vaccine maker Johnson & Johnson. During the event, the group developed strategies to control a pandemic, the population and the narrative surrounding the event.

At no time did they investigate using current therapeutic drugs and vitamins or communicating information about building immune systems. Instead, the aim was to develop and distribute patentable antiviral medications and a new wave of vaccines.

As Kennedy reports, Gates spoke to the BBC13 April 12, 2020, and claimed these types of simulations had not occurred, saying “Now here we are. You know we didn’t simulate this; we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies … we find ourselves in uncharted territories.”

Yet, videos of the event are available14 and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security released a statement naming the Gates Foundation as a partner in sponsoring the pandemic simulation.15 It seems strange and alarming that a man with the responsibility of running the Gates Foundation and the powerful influence he has over global public policy decisions had forgotten an exercise he organized only six months before the interview.16 Or was it deception?

Uncanny Prediction or Planned Event?

During the pandemic exercise, the global experts “modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic.”17 After questions arose about whether the exercise had “predicted the outbreak in China,” Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security released a thinly supported statement, saying:18

“… the exercise served to highlight preparedness and response challenges that would likely arise in a very severe pandemic … Although our tabletop exercise included a mock novel coronavirus, the inputs we use for modeling the potential impact of that fictional virus are not similar to nCoV-2019.”

Kennedy characterizes the fourth simulation in Event 201, writing that “the participants primarily focused on planning industry-centric, fear-mongering, police-state strategies for managing an imaginary global coronavirus contagion culminating in mass censorship of social media.”19

The transcript of the fourth simulation shows that the participants discussed communication strategies using dissemination of information and censorship on social media.20,21 Communication strategist Hasti Taghi, who works for a major media company and leads strategic initiatives with the World Economic Forum,22 said:

“So, I think a couple of things we have to consider are even before this began, the anti-vaccine movement was very strong and this is something specifically through social media that has spread.

So, as we do the research to come up with the right vaccines to help prevent the continuation of this, how do we get the right information out there? How do we communicate the right information to ensure that the public has trust in these vaccines that we’re creating?”

The question the group undertook wasn’t how to communicate the truth about the vaccine development, manufacture and distribution, but rather how to “communicate the right information to ensure the public has trust in these vaccines that we’re creating?”

The issue of gaining public trust to take a vaccine was significant in this simulation, even though the U.S. population is well indoctrinated in the perceived value of annual flu shots and childhood vaccinations. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has a list of 26 different types of vaccines currently in use in the U.S.

In addition to the long list of recommended childhood vaccinations, there are adult vaccines against shingles, tetanus and pneumococcal pneumonia that are routinely given. Why, then, did the global experts in communication and control believe communicating the “right information” would be necessary to “ensure the public trust”?

Group Calls for Social Media Censorship

This was only one of the highly predictive conversations during Event 201 that played out in 2020 as the global COVID-19 pandemic unfolded. George Gao, director-general, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention,23 predicted:24

“By and long, we have more cases in China and also death cases reported. And also, my staff told me that before there’s misinformation and there’s some belief. People believe, ‘This is a manmade … some pharmaceutical company made the virus,’ so there’s some violations of human … That is because of this misinformation.”

Others agreed with the need for social media censorship as it may pertain to the spread of “disinformation” about the pandemic or vaccines and vaccine injury, without regard to the source. The idea was to remove any information that did not align with the government’s mandates and ideas. Kevin McAleese, who is a communications officer with a Gates-funded agricultural project, said:25

“To me, it is clear countries need to make strong efforts to manage both mis- and disinformation … If the solution means controlling and reducing access to information, I think it’s the right choice.”

During the ensuing conversation, Tom Inglesby, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security,26 replied, “In this case, do you think governments are at the point where they need to require social media companies to operate in a certain way?”27

At each step of the simulation, the global “experts” agreed that information censorship through media platforms would be necessary to control the flow of the “right information” in order for people to willingly follow the leader.

What is interesting about the transcript from Event 201 is that what was planned and shared was frighteningly close to what has happened since January 2020. It may have been a coincidence to predict one or two major public health decisions, but it appears that the group was either phenomenally prophetic or they shaped the decisions and events of 2020 from behind the scenes.

Framing the Vaccine Message to Trigger Action

From the outside, the driving force behind economically devastating lockdownswarp speed vaccine development and population control and surveillance strategies has been to “flatten the curve” and lower the death rate of SARS-CoV-2. Yet, as I and others have exposed, when these strategies are analyzed, it’s apparent there is more than what meets the eye.

In July 2020, Yale University28 announced a study of the trigger words and phrases that would have a higher likelihood of promoting an otherwise individualistic society to quietly follow mandates (not laws) to control behavior. The phrases tested were believed to be most successful at conveying feelings about health, helping others and fear.

The hope was to manipulate behavior in such a way that it lowered the governmental risk for riots and dissidence. The study was conducted by Yale University using 4,000 participants who were randomized to receive one of 12 different messages. After the message, they were then evaluated to “compare the reported willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine at three and six months of it becoming available.”29

The primary outcome of the study was to find the right combination of phrases and messaging that would increase the number of people who got the vaccine. The study began July 3, 2020, and the last participant underwent testing by July 8, 2020.30 To date, the results of the study have not been published.

The president of the U.S. announced in July 2020 that there would be an “overwhelming” vaccine campaign launched by November 2020.31 In December 2020, the National Institutes of Health released a COVID-19 vaccination communication recommending behavioral and social science actions that might address vaccine hesitancy and increase the number who take the vaccine, including:32

  • Framing accepting a vaccine as a social norm including “promotional materials that induced peer pressure to vaccinate.”
  • Encouraging those who vaccinate to share their positive experience on social media.
  • Nudging a person into accepting the vaccine by making it convenient and easy, leveraging electronic portals to send messages and using competition, gamification and incentives to encourage behavioral changes.
  • Assessing the values of the target audience and then embedding those values into messages about vaccinations. Examples might include being a protector of the community, building on desires to go back to normal activities or as a way of enacting equality and social justice by protecting vulnerable people.

In other words, many of the messages that you’ve been seeing in the media and your doctor’s office have been designed to trigger emotions that would lead you to take the vaccine. These same pressure tactics are not routinely used in the media for some of the more common adult vaccinations including pneumococcal, tetanus, hepatitis or shingles vaccines.

It’s Time to Speak With One Voice and Fight for Freedom

As I’ve written before, what we lose as a society when we acquiesce to these mandates and controls will be exponentially harder to get back. One of the freedoms we give away is allowing our thoughts and beliefs to be censored on social media without fighting back.

It is essential to safeguard your constitutional rights and civil liberties against unlawful overreach, and yet many appear to be willing to give up easily. Although the government has a duty to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, this must be balanced against the loss of civil rights and liberties.

We’re currently facing a battle of freedom versus tyranny. For example, multiple studies have demonstrated that long-term lockdowns are clearly not in the public’s best interest.33,34 Instead, it’s tantamount to abuse. And yet many have gone along with these mandates, which were not laws.

It’s vital to understand that the vast majority of information you consume in mainstream media is carefully designed propaganda that has been crafted from nearly two decades of personal data collected from you.

Although Yale University undertook a study with 4,000 participants for a COVID-19 messaging campaign, that data had been gathered and collated through your use of social media.

As I have carefully identified in many previous articles, this plan will result in a progressive loss of your freedom and liberty that eventually results in tyranny and slavery. It is crucial to be vigilant and seek the truth so that you can understand how to distinguish between fact and a fictional narrative that promises you liberation but eventually enslaves you.

My newest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” will be available April 29, 2021, on Amazon. In it, I investigate the origins of the virus and how the elite has used it to slowly erode your personal liberty and freedom. In addition, I’ll also show you how to protect yourself against the disease and what you can do to fight back against the technocratic overlords.

Sources and References

Buddhism: A Pathway to Peace and Conflict Resolution

Buddhism: A Pathway to Peace and Conflict Resolution




Hoya Paxa
Buddhism: A Pathway to Peace and Conflict Resolution

By: Harshita Nadimpalli

June 24, 2016




On June 22, the Royal Thai Embassy and the Berkley Center invited two Western-born Theravada Buddhist monks, Ajahn Pasanno Bhikkhu and Ajahn Jayanto Bhikkhu, to share their perspectives on how Buddhist principles are relevant for conflict resolution and peace. The event was moderated by Katherine Marshall, senior fellow at the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs and executive director of the World Faiths Development Dialogue.


Ajahn Pasanno shared that in a world of human suffering and conflict, Buddhism teaches that individuals must first understand their own personal suffering and understand their own hearts. Only then can an individual understand and empathize with others; otherwise, he said that empathy becomes theoretical. Ajahn Jayanto, too, addressed how Buddhist principles of peace and communal harmony stem from individual responsibility and individual recognition of oneself; lack of individual reflection can make us numb to the suffering and condition of the community around us. He reminded the audience that “we are all brothers and sisters in suffering,” and that although we can get caught up in our ideals, it is important to recognize that we are no different or better than any other individual. We are all caught in the same problem of human suffering in this world, and although we are born into different situations, we share a collective responsibility to address the problem of suffering and conflict in the world. Ajahn Jayanto then explained that the roots of outside conflicts, on a larger scale, stem from the same things that drive our personal conflicts, such as greed, desire, etc. So when we understand ourselves, that increases our capacity to understand conflicts and better equips us to judiciously respond to those.

Ajahn Jayanto used a metaphor of a sinking ship to further illustrate this point. When a ship is sinking, everyone who is onboard must work to save the ship, and each person has a different role; some may have to use buckets to bail out the water, some may have to work on fixing the holes in the ship, etc. Thus, each individual has a unique role in addressing complex problems, whether it’s a sinking ship, or violence and conflict in the world. Understanding that role through self-awareness and self-reflection is what Buddhism encourages each individual to start with in the journey to bring peace to the world.

Another theme that Ajahn Pasanno addressed was that humans have a desire to always know what is right or wrong and to define everything as either black or white. But human relationships and conditions are often gray, and it can be difficult to accept this, and be comfortable without forcibly categorizing everything. At the event, I could sense a deep inner peace that the monks possessed that stood out from the rest of the room; it wasn’t nonchalance, but rather, it was this exact ability to organically embrace the present situation that Ajahn Pasanno had described.

When asked about the role Buddhism plays in the state, Ajahn Pasanno stressed that with his experience in Thailand, Buddhism does not engage with the state or directly become involved in the political process; although sometimes, Buddhist monks are consulted for advice. He expressed that when religion becomes tied to a state or state policy, it loses its autonomy and its ability to have “spiritual gravitas.”

Finally, addressing religious extremists, Ajahn Jayanto said that some people point out all the harm that religiously-affiliated people are doing in the world; but it is equally easy to point out all the harm that non-religious people do as well. So it’s important to focus on the individual, rather than their affiliation, and not attribute actions of an individual to an entire group of people made up of countless more distinct individuals who are not doing harm.

What resonated most with me was when Ajahn Pasanno said, “The Buddha didn’t actually teach Buddhism...he taught the way of human understanding.” This event reminded me of the importance and role of the individual in creating peace, because often, the focus is on what governments and institutions can do as whole organizations to create change. But each organization is made up of individuals and is only as strong as the individuals it is composed of, and thus, we cannot ignore individual responsibility. Individual respect and empathy transcend the boundaries of religion as we strive towards cultivating a more peaceable world.

원효의 화쟁사상

원효의 화쟁사상


Ⅰ.序論

원효 사는 의상과 함께 신라의 이 거승으로 한 정신 지도자이며 민족 역사상에서 보기 드문

인이며 성자이다.

그 다면 먼 그의 사상을 알기 에 그의 생애부터 간단히 살펴볼 필요가 있겠다.

원효는 신라 진평왕 39년에 태어났으며 속성은 설씨이고, 이름은 서당이다. 태어나면서부터 매우 특하 으며 10 에 출가하 다. 출가 후 그는 의상과 같이 당으로 유학을 떠난다. 가는 도 에 ‘해골물’을 마시고 모든 것은 마음뿐이라는 진리를 깨치고 당 유학 길을 포기하고 다시 신라로 돌아와 생교화에 힘쓴다. 원효는 운융무애한 일심을 몸소 깨닫고 스스로 무애인이라 칭하고, 마음에서만 아니라 행동에서도 무애로 움을 얻으려 했다. 그래서, 그는 그때부터 속인의 모습으로 술집이나 창가에 들어가 놀기도 하고, 도살장에 도 들어가며 거기에서 뛰고 춤추며 ‘무애가’를 부르는가 하면, 때로는 한 한 곳에서 좌선을 하는 등 도무지 일정한 형식이나 규율에 매임이 없었다. 원효의 이러한 행동을 당시의 사람들, 더구나 일반 승려들조차 이 해하지 못하 으며, 당시 임 님께서 인왕백고좌회를 열고 국의 석학고승들을 모집할 때도 원효의 사람됨 을 이해 못하는 승려들의 반 로 그의 높은 학덕에도 불구하고 제외되었다. 훗날 원효는 이를 빗 시를 읊기도 했다. 1)

원효는 무애가를 부르고 다니다 요석공주와의 사이에 설총을 낳는다. 이후 자각 성지의 높은 종교 각 체험과 무애도의 실 을 성취한 후, 그의 장년 시 를 불교의 화를 해 국 각지를 순회하고, 불교의 진리를 들이 쉽게 알아들을 수 있는 가요나 춤에 담아 하는 등 헌신하 다.

이러한 그의 노력으로 불교의 진리가 그들의 생활 속 깊이 고들 수 있었으며, 귀족, 천민의 구별을 월 한 생활불교로 발 할 수 있었다. 원효의 함은 그의 여러 사상에서 엿볼 수 있는데 본 에서는 그 화쟁사상에 해 알아보려 한다.

Ⅱ.本論

1. 화쟁사상

이는 모든 논쟁을 조화시키려는 불교사상으로 신라시 원 과 자장에서 비롯되어 원효에 의해 집 성 되었으며 근본원리는 극단을 버리고 和와 諍의 양면성을 인정하는 데서 출발하고 있다. 이러한 원효의 화쟁사상을 엿볼 수 있게 하는 것으로 먼 그의 여러 서를 들 수 있다. 먼 『十門和諍論』을 들 수 있는데, 여기서 그는 화쟁의 내용을 10문으로 분류한다.2) 『涅槃宗要』에



1) 옛날 백개의 석가래를 구할 때에는/ 참여할 수 없었는데,/ 오늘 하나의 들보를 가로지르는 데는 / 오직 나 홀로 구나./ 「 강삼 매경」을 강설하는 법당에서 구름처럼 몰려든 청 을 보며 지은 시다. 교재 『한국철학사(道家․佛家哲學), 60p

2) 이 책의 문이 다 하지 않아 10문제 해서는 후 내용과 다른 술들을 통해 추정할 뿐인데, 이는 三乘一乘․空有異執․人法異執․三性異義․五性成佛․二障異義․涅槃異義․佛身異義․佛性異義․眞俗異執의 화쟁문 등으로 간주된다. 원효는 三乘과 一乘, 空과 有, 眞과 俗 등의 異執과 異諍을 화해시키고 회통시키고 있는 것이다. 이 十門의 십이라는 수는 화엄에서의 원만수이니 無盡 의 의미이다.

서 『涅槃經』의 핵심 내용인 열반을 드러내는 방편 한 화쟁을 통해서임을 엿볼 수 있다.[1]) 이 외에도 그 여러 서에서 그의 화쟁사상을 엿볼 수 있다.

화쟁 사상이란 “뭇경 의 부분 인 면을 통합하여 온갖 물 기를 한 맛의 진리바다로 돌아가게 하고, 불교의 지극히 공변된 뜻을 열어 모든 사람들의 서로 다른 쟁론들을 화회(和會)시킨다."[2]) 즉 모든 것이 물에 기름처럼 분리되고 서로 배척하는 것이 아니라 서로 섞이고 녹아 회통하는 것, 한 마디로 마음을 히 하 여 남을 껴안아 서로 받아들여 화합하는 것이다.

원효의 화쟁 사상을 이해하려면 시 상황의 이해가 필요하다. 원래 부처님께서 말 하신 참뜻은 하나이 건만 당시의 시 상황은 사람에 따라 종 에 따라 무도 다양하게 해석하여 서로 자기의 이론만 옳다고 다투는 상황이었다. 이에 원효는 ‘하나의 마음’으로 돌아가 모든 생명에게 이로움을 주는 삶의 요성을 강 조하며 립하는 여러 종 를 통합하고자 했으며, 이에 따라 원효는 화쟁의 논리로 각 종 의 서로 다른 이 론을 인정하면서도 이를 보다 높은 차원에서 통합하고자 했으니 이것이 화쟁 사상이다.

2. 화쟁의 근거 : 一心

에서 살펴본 원효의 화쟁사상의 근거는 바로 하나의 마음, 즉 일심이다. 원효는 일심의 근원으로 돌아 갈 것을 히 강조하고 있다. 『 승기신론』은 一心二門으로 되어있다. 이문(二門)이란 진여문(眞如門)과 생멸문(生滅門을) 말한다. 그런데, 원효는 더럽고 깨끗한 모든 법은 그 본성이 둘이 아니고 진(眞)망(妄)두 (二)문(門)이 다르지 아니하므로 일(一)이라하고, 그 성품은 스스로 신기하게 이해하므로 심(心)이라 하며, 진리는 말을 여의고 사려가 끊어졌으므로 어떻게 지목하여 부를 것인가를 몰라 부르기 쉽게 일심이라 하 다는 것이다.[3][4]) 일심은 본래 정멸이지만 생은 무명에 따라 분별망상을 일으켜 이 번뇌의 물결에 따라 육 도에 윤회를 거듭한다는 것이다.

일심은 우리들 앞앞이 갖추고 있는 본래의 마음이며 이 마음이 바로 깨친 바탕이기도 하다. 하나인 마음 은 더러움과 깨끗함이 둘이 아니고 참과 거짓 한 서로 다르지 않기 때문에 하나라고 한다.6) 일심은 주 (나)과 객 ( 상 세계)의 구별을 떠난 무분별의 마음을 말한다. 『화엄경』에 ‘삼계유심 만법 유식’ 이라는 말이 있다. 삼계(색계, 욕계, 무색계)는 본래 모든 분별을 넘는 진여일심의 경계이지만 우리들 속의 분별심 때문에 우리 앞에 수만가지 상들이 나타난다고 하는 것이다. 원효가 해골박에 썩은 물을 마 시고 바로 화엄경의 내용, 모든 것은 내 마음속에 있는 것을 깨달은 것이다. 즉 깨끗한 것과 더러운 것, 좋 은 것과 나쁜 것을 분별함으로 쾌, 불쾌의 감정에 흔들리고 괴로워 하는 우리의 마음은 본래 일체 분별에서 자유한 일미평등의 평화스러운 마음, 곧 진여일심이며 원효는 이를 직 체험하 던 것이다. 원효는 이러한 마음의 근원, 일심이 구에게나 깃들여 있으며 이러한 마음을 회복한다면 구나 극락에 갈수 있다고 했다. 회복의 수단으로 육바라 의 실천을 강조한다.

이상의 내용을 간추려 보면 원효의 화쟁사상을 크게 세가지 에서 요약할 수 있다.

첫째 형이상학 에서 세상 모든 것은 일심에서 비롯되므로 모든 립 인 이론들은 결국 평등하다는 것이다.

둘째 언어철학 입장에서 화쟁은 언어로 표 된 이론을 상으로 하므로 진리를 달, 는 왜곡하기도 하는 언어 자체의 성격에 해 정확하게 악하고 언어에 집착하지 않으면 이견의 립에서 벗어날 수 있다는 것이다.

셋째 윤리 태도로서 자기의 견해만 맞다고 하는 아집․집착을 버릴 때 쟁론이 해소된다는 것이다.

Ⅲ. 結論 

이상과 같이 원효의 화쟁사상을 살펴보았다. 원효의 사상을 아무리 머리로 이해하려해도 실로 복잡하고 어렵다는 것을 알았다. 알 듯 하다가도 처음 보는 단어처럼 생소하고 멀어져 가는 느낌을 받기도 했다. 짧 게 나마 결론을 지어보면 다음과 같다.

그의 사상은 여러 술 등에서 볼 수 있듯이 그 어느 한가지를 가지고서 그의 사상을 변시키기 쉽지 않 으나, 그 사상을 피력하는 기본 인 태도는 화쟁의 입장이라 할 수 있겠다. 이러한 원효의 화쟁사상은 일심 에 근거를 두고 있으며 통일신라 후의 여러 종 들의 난립과 갈등을 화해시키고, 무엇보다 민 의 고통을 해결해 주려 노력했다. 이는 오늘날 우리가 직면하고 있는 수많은 갈등과 모순을 풀어나가는 방안을 모색하 는데 시사해 주는 바가 크다고 볼 수 있겠다.

를 사는 우리는 늘 상 사회생활이나 단체생활에서 자기와 동조자의 견해는 옳고, 남의 견해는 그르다 고 업신여기고 때론 얕잡아 보기도 한다. 원효는 이러한 소견이 좁은 사람을 두고 『십문화쟁론』에서 갈 구멍으로 하늘을 보는 것에 비유했다. 자기만 옳고 남은 그르다고 하여 남의 법은 받아들이지 않으면 이런 사람들을 크게 어리석은 사람이라고 하 다. 우리는 주 어디서든 립과 반목을 경험하고 살아가고 있다. 종교간의 갈등, 국가간의 립, 개인 이기주의, 집단 이기주의, 지역이기주의, 노사분규 등등 만 뜨면 팽팽 한 립을 보며 산다.

이러한 실 속에서 원효의 화쟁사상은 큰 가르침을 다. 원효의 말 처럼 마음의 근원을 회복하여 마 음을 깊이 통찰하고 일체의 차별상을 없애고 만물이 같이 평등하다는 것을 깨쳐 만물을 차별없이 사랑하 는 자 비의 마음을 얻어 구나 어디에도 걸림이 없는 무애의 삶을 살아갈 수 있다면 다툼도 화도 쟁 도 없는 구나 동경하고 있는 고요하고 평화로운 삶을 살수 있지 않을 까 그려본다.

※ 참고문헌

1. 황 선 편 , 『원효의 생애와 사상』, 국학자료원, 1996.

2. 정용선, 『한국의 사상』, 한샘출 사, 1994.

3. 한국동서철학연구회, 『東西哲學通論』, 문경출 사, 1993.

4. 교재, 『한국철학사』

5. http://dreamwiz.com

6. http://Tms.inchon-mah.ed.inchon.kr

7. http://members.tripod.co.kr

8. http://myhome.netsgo.com/buddihismsc

9. http://von.ulsan.ac.kr

10. http://zen.buddhism.org/zen/wohyo.html




[1] ) 이경은 불법의 大海이고, 方等의 秘藏이니, 그 교됨은 측량하기 어렵다. 진실로 넓어서 끝이 없고 깊고 깊어서 바닥이 없다. 바 닥이 없으므로 다하지 못함이 없고 끝이 없으므로 다 포섭하지 못함이 없다. 여러 경 의 부분을 통섭하고 만류의 一味에 돌아가 佛意의 至公을 열고 百家의 異諍을 화해시켜, 드디어 시끄러운 四生으로 하여 無二의 實性에 돌아가게 하고 꿈꾸는 긴 잠을 大覺의 극과에 도달하게 한다.


[2] ) http://www.dharnet.net, 2 p.


[3] ) 황 선 편 , 『원효의 생애와 사상』, 국학자료원, 1996, 484 p.


[4] ) 교재, 『한국철학사』, 66 p .

'화쟁'이란 무엇인가? - 불교신문

'화쟁'이란 무엇인가? - 불교신문



'화쟁'이란 무엇인가?

장영섭 기자
승인 2019.06.28
화쟁사상
​김영일 지음 혜안​



화쟁(和諍)은 불교계가 만들어낸 최고의 사회적 가치 가운데 하나일 것이다. 정치인들은 여야 할 것 없이 한목소리로 화쟁을 외치며 국론통합을 강조한다. 불교를 믿지 않더라도 누구나 한번쯤 화쟁을 들어봤을 법한데 그 구체적 의미나 과정에 대해서는 모르는 사람들이 적지 않다. <화쟁사상>은 화쟁에 대한 종합설명서를 자임하는 책이다.

알다시피 화쟁의 개념을 최초로 창안한 인물은 신라 원효대사다. 당대 동아시아의 으뜸가는 철학자였던 스님은 <십문화쟁론(十門和諍論)>>이란 저술에서 화쟁을 기반으로 당시 불교의 다양한 종파를 통합했다. 삼국통일 이후 민족의 조화와 공영에도 이바지했다.

<화쟁사상>의 저자인 김영일 동국대 연구교수는 한양대 법학과를 졸업하고 동국대 대학원 불교학과에서 박사학위를 받았다. 논저로 ‘원효의 화쟁논법 연구’, ‘원효와 지눌의 돈점관’, ‘도신과 원효의 수행관’ 등의 논문을 낸 ‘원효’ 전문가다. 책은 화쟁사상을 지속적으로 탐구해 온 저자가 그 결실을 독자들과 함께 나누고자 서술한 것이다.

원효의 삶에서 화쟁사상이 어떠한 의미가 있는지, 지금까지 학자들은 어떠한 연구를 하였는지, 그리고 이 책은 어떠한 내용을 서술하고 있는지에 대해서 적고 있다. 특히 화쟁의 여러 사례를 분석해 원효가 도대체 어떻게 화쟁을 했는지… 그 방법에 대해 소개하고 있다. 스님이 잡다한 학설을 화쟁하는 데 바탕이 되었던 방대한 사상적 근거에 대해서도 살펴볼 수 있다.

김영일 교수는 “올바른 이치를 알지 못해서, 자신만의 좁은 견해에 얽매어, 갈등과 분열로 멍든 지구촌을 바라본다”며 “전체와 부분이 진정 상생할 수 있는 방안의 하나로 원효성사(聖師)의 화쟁사상을 생각해봤다”고 소감을 전했다.
저작권자 © 불교신문 무단전재 및 재배포 금지

화쟁사상(和諍思想) - 한국민족문화대백과사전

화쟁사상(和諍思想) - 한국민족문화대백과사전

화쟁사상(和諍思想)

불교개념용어

 모든 논쟁을 화합으로 바꾸려는 불교교리.   


대승기신론소
분야
불교
유형
개념용어

모든 논쟁을 화합으로 바꾸려는 불교교리.

우리 나라 불교의 저변에 깔린 가장 핵심적인 사상이다. 불교교단의 화합을 위한 화쟁과 불교교리의 화쟁으로 대별된다. 교단의 화합을 위한 화쟁은 불교의 계율에 잘 나타나 있다.

불교 교단을 뜻하는 상가(saṅgha, 僧伽)는 화해, 화쟁의 의미가 있다. 
우리 나라의 승려들이 구족계(具足戒)로 받는 비구 250계, 비구니 348계 중에서도 두번째 군(群)에 속하는 승잔계(僧殘戒)에 화합을 깨뜨리는 것을 경계한 몇 가지 조목이 보인다. 이들 소승계에서는 화합을 깨뜨린다 하여 승려의 직을 박탈하는 바라이죄(波羅夷罪)로 규정하지는 않았다.
그러나 대승의 보살들에게 주어지는 보살계에는 승단의 화합을 깨뜨리는 죄를 바라이죄로 다루어 엄히 다스리고 있다. 보살의 십중대계(十重大戒) 중 제6인 ‘사부대중(四部大衆)의 허물을 말하지 말라[不說四衆過]’, 제7인 ‘자기를 칭찬하고 남을 헐뜯지 말라[不自讚毁他]’, 제10인 ‘삼보(三寶)를 비방하지 말라[不謗三寶]’ 등의 3계가 이에 해당한다. 신라의 고승들은 승단의 화합을 깨뜨리는 이들 계들을 집중적으로 연구하여 교단의 기강을 바로잡는 데 크게 노력하였다.
---
특히, 원효(元曉, 617-686)는 보살의 십중대계 중 자찬회타계를 범하는 것을 가장 큰 허물로 보았고, 승단의 불화합이 이로 말미암아 생기는 것이므로 특히 경계해야 한다고 주장하였다. 또, 비구계와 비구니계에서는 쟁론을 없애는 일곱 가지 멸쟁법(滅諍法)을 두었다. 승단에서 쟁론이 일어날 때는 그 해결점을 국법이나 속인에게 맡기지 않고 이 멸쟁법에 의해서 다스리게 되어 있다.

내용은 
① 본인이 있는 데서 잘못을 다스려라, 
② 쟁론이 있을 때 잘못을 기억하게 한 뒤 죄를 다스려라, 
③ 정신착란으로 논쟁을 일으켰으면 정상으로 회복된 뒤에는 묵인하라, 
④ 마땅히 본인의 자백에 의하여 죄를 다스려라, 
⑤ 마땅히 죄상을 추구하여 죄를 다스리되 반드시 다수결에 의하여 단죄하라, 
⑥ 승단 내에서 파당싸움이 벌어져 잘잘못을 오랫동안 가리지 못할 때는 풀로 땅을 덮듯 불문에 붙여라 등이다.

더 나아가 승가교단의 단체생활의 화합을 위한 
보다 적극적인 육화경(六和敬)이 제정되어 실천되고 있다. 
육화경의 덕목은 신화경(身和敬)·구화경(口和敬)·의화경(意和敬)·계화경(戒和敬)·견화경(見和敬)·이화경(利和敬) 등이다.

신화경은 함께 예배하여 몸의 업을 닦는 것이고, 
구화경은 함께 찬영(讚詠)하여 구업(口業)을 닦는 것이며, 
의화경은 같은 신심(信心)으로 의업을 밝혀가는 것이고, 
계화경은 똑같이 불계(佛戒)를 실천하여 불법을 함께 따르는 것이며, 
견화경은 함께 모든 법의 공(空)한 이치를 바로 보고 실천하는 것이고, 
이화경은 의식을 함께 하여 이익을 고르게 나누는 것이다.

이 육화경을 실천적인 측면에서 구체적으로 표현하여 선종을 중심으로 새롭게 제정되었는데, 이는 우리 나라에서도 승단의 화합이념으로 크게 신봉되었다. 
이것을 살펴보면 
몸으로 화합함이니 함께 머물러라[身和共住], 
입으로 화합함이니 다투지 말라[口和無諍], 
뜻으로 화합함이니 함께 일하라[意和同事], 
계로써 화합함이니 함께 닦아라[戒和同修], 
바른 지견(知見)으로 화합함이니 함께 해탈하라[見知同解], 
이익으로써 화합함이니 균등하게 나누어라[利和同均] 등이다.

교리의 화쟁은 우리 나라 불교의 가장 큰 특징이다. 
이 화쟁사상은 신라의 원광(圓光, 542-640)이나 자장(慈藏, 590-658)에서부터 그 연원을 찾을 수 있다. 
원광은 세속오계(世俗五戒)를 제정할 때 불교의 승려이면서도 유교를 비롯한 그 시대의 상황에 맞는 윤리관을 제시하였으며, 
「걸사표(乞師表)」를 지어 신라에 이익이 돌아오게 함으로써 모든 것을 원융(圓融)의 바탕 아래 무쟁(無諍)으로 나아가게 하는 기틀을 마련하였다.

또, 자장은 종파분립을 초월한 통화불교(統和佛敎)의 길을 걸음으로써 
우리 나라 불교를 중국 불교와는 다른 독특한 불교로 이끄는 데 크게 공헌하였다. 

그는 계율생활을 엄히 다스려 교화에 진력하였지만, 
계율종(戒律宗)이라는 종파를 따로 개종(開宗)하지 않았고, 
오히려 화엄사상이나 신라불국토사상(新羅佛國土思想)에 더 큰 비중을 두었다. 

그리고 섭론종(攝論宗)이나 정토교(淨土敎)에도 적지않은 관심을 가짐으로써 종파의 분립 없이 통화불교로 교화에 진력하였음을 알 수 있다.

원광과 자장에 의하여 싹이 튼 화쟁사상은 삼국통일을 전후한 시기에 원효에 의하여 집대성되었고, 일찍이 그 어떤 불교인도 이루지 못하였던 화쟁의 논리를 확립시켰다.

원효는 많은 글을 썼지만 문자나 형식에 사로잡혀서는 안 됨을 강조하는 한편, 
불교의 궁극적인 목표는 깊은 철학과 함께 항상 중생을 구제하는 데 있다고 하였다. 
평등 가운데 차별이 있으며 차별 가운데 평등이 있다는 화엄(華嚴)의 사상을 쉽게 풀이한 「무애가(無碍歌)」를 지어 뭇 사람의 관심을 끄는 가운데, 

때와 장소를 가리지 않고 큰 표주박을 두드리면서 노래하며 이 거리 저 마을에 나타남으로써 불교를 생활화하는 데 힘을 기울였다.

평화와 화합이 깃들인 신라사회를 건설하고자 하였던 원효는 대중과 함께 살고 고락을 같이하는 가운데 어떻게 하면 대중에게 더 많은 복을 가져다 줄 수 있는가에 마음을 기울였던 것이다. 화쟁의 원리에 입각하여 행동하였던 그는 저술활동에 있어서도 화쟁사상의 천명에 큰 힘을 기울였다.

불교사상에 관한 것이라면 대승·소승을 막론하고 무엇이든 읽고 연구하면서 사색과 체험을 통하여 완전히 자기의 것으로 만들고 그 이해한 바를 남김 없이 글로 표현하였다. 
그리고 경전마다 종요(宗要)를 지어 그 경전의 특징적인 요지와 함께 다른 경전과도 서로 화합할 수 있는 화쟁의 원리까지 제시하였다.

불교의 이론은 대체로 연기론(緣起論)과 실상론(實相論)의 둘을 바탕으로 해서 무궁무진하게 전개되어 인도에서는 부파(部派)를, 중국에서는 많은 종파가 성립되어 각각의 종지(宗旨)를 고집하는 경향이 두드러졌다.

그런데 원효는 그 어느 교설이나 학설을 고집하지도 버리지도 않았다. 그는 언제나 분석하고 비판하고 긍정과 부정의 두 가지 논리를 융합하여 보다 높은 차원에서 새로운 가치를 찾았다. 모순과 대립을 한 체계 속에 하나로 묶어 담은 이 기본구조를 가리켜 그는 ‘화쟁(和諍)’이라 하였다. 통일·화합·총화·평화는 바로 이와 같은 정리와 종합에서 온다는 것이 그의 신념이기도 하였다.

화쟁은 그의 모든 저서 속에서 일관되게 나타나고 있는 기본적인 논리이다. 마치 바람 때문에 고요한 바다에 파도가 일어나지만 그 파도와 바닷물이 따로 둘이 아닌 것처럼, 중생의 일심에도 깨달음의 경지인 진여(眞如)와 그렇지 못한 무명(無明)이 둘로 분열되고는 있으나, 그 진여와 무명이 따로 둘이 아니라 하여 『대승기신론소(大乘起信論疏)』에서 화쟁의 원리를 제시하였다.

『열반경(涅槃經)』에서는 모든 중생이 부처가 될 성질을 지니고 있으므로 다같이 성불(成佛)할 수 있다고 하는 한편, 악한 짓만을 일삼는 무리인 일천제(一闡提)는 성불할 수 없다고 설하였다. 중국의 법상종(法相宗)이 일천제의 성불을 영원히 불가능한 것이라고 주장한 데 반하여, 원효는 폭을 넓혀 마음의 핵심인 아뢰야식(阿賴耶識)에는 본시 부처가 될 요소인 무루종자(無漏種子)가 있는 것이라 함으로써, 『열반경종요』에서는 일천제도 성불시키는 화쟁의 솜씨를 보였다.

원효가 화쟁에 자주 사용한 방법의 하나는 차원 높은 은밀문(隱密門)과 보다 차원이 낮은 현료문(顯了門)의 두 문을 설정하는 일이었다. 불교수행에 있어서 근본적인 장애를 가져오는 소지장(所知障)과 번뇌장(煩惱障) 등 이장을 끊는 일은 매우 중요하므로 『대승기신론』과 『유가사지론(瑜伽師地論)』에서도 다같이 이 문제를 다루었지만 그 견해는 서로 달리하고 있다.
이에 원효는 『이장의(二障義)』를 지어 대승기신론과 유가사지론의 두 논설을 각각 현료문과 은밀문으로 설정하고, 현료문에 의해서는 은밀문의 소지장을 설명할 수 없어도 현료문의 이장은 번뇌장을 가지고 능히 설명된다고 함으로써 두 논설을 하나로 묶었다. 원효가 주창한 화쟁사상의 근본원리는 인간세상의 화(和)와 쟁(諍)이라는 양면성을 인정하는 데서부터 출발한다.
화쟁은 화와 쟁을 정(正)과 반(反)에 두고 그 사이에서 타협함으로써 이루어지는 합(合)이 아니라, 정과 반이 대립할 때 오히려 정과 반이 가지고 있는 근원을 꿰뚫어보아 이 둘이 불이(不二)라는 것을 체득함으로써 쟁도 화로 동화시켜 나간다. 천차만별의 현상적인 쟁의 상태도 그 근원에서 보면 하나로 화하는 상태에 있을 뿐임을 체득한 원효는 이 원리에 따라 진망(眞妄)·염정(染淨)·이사(理事)·공유(空有)·미오(迷悟)·인과(因果) 등을 불이의 화쟁론으로 전개시킨 것이다.

이와 같은 원효의 화쟁사상은 이후의 우리 나라 승려들에 의하여 계승되었음은 물론, 중국의 법장(法藏, 643-712)과 징관(澄觀, 738-839) 등에도 큰 영향을 미쳤으며, 일본에서도 크게 신봉되어 (善珠, 723-797)·명혜(明恵, 1173–1232)·응연(疑然, 1240–1321) 등은 그의 설을 그대로 계승하고 있다.

원효의 화쟁사상을 계승하여 널리 선양한 고려시대의 고승으로는 의천(義天, 1055-1101)이 있다. 그는 원효의 화쟁사상이 『법화경』의 회삼귀일사상(會三歸一思想)과 그 맥을 같이하는 것임을 파악하고, 천태종(天台宗)을 창종(創宗)하여 화엄을 비롯한 여러 교학과 선을 일치 통합하고자 하였다.

그는 화엄종에 속한 승려였지만 당시 화엄종과 법상종에서 각각 성(性)과 상(相)의 문제를 놓고 오랫동안 쟁론을 계속하였으므로 성상융회(性相融會)를 내세워 이들을 화쟁시키고자 하였다. 나아가 지관(止觀)의 수행을 중시하는 천태종을 창종하여 선종과의 화쟁도 꾀하였던 것이다. 그의 교관병수사상(敎觀幷修思想)은 화쟁의 원리를 가장 잘 채택한 것으로, 우리 나라 불교의 한 전통적 특징을 이루게 되었다.

의천이 교의 입장에서 선을 수용하려고 하였던 데 반하여, 지눌(知訥, 1158-1210)은 선을 중심에 두고 교를 통화하려 하였다. 그는 참된 것과 속된 것을 엄격히 구별하였으나 그것이 둘이 아님을 잊지 않았고, 선종의 승려로서 평생을 참선에 몰두하였지만 틈틈이 불경을 읽는 것을 게을리하지 않았다. 그리하여 지눌은 부처의 뜻을 전하는 것이 선이요 부처의 말을 깨닫는 것이 교라고 믿었기 때문에 선과 교는 서로 떨어질 수 없고 함께 닦아야 한다고 본 것이다.
그래서 당시 세상사람들이 부처의 참뜻을 모른 채 선종이니 교종이니 하고 싸우는 것을 막고자 하였고, 그 무의미한 논쟁을 매듭지어 참다운 수행의 길을 걷게끔 하기 위하여 일생 동안 노력하였다. 오늘날 지눌을 선교합일(禪敎合一)의 주창자요 정혜쌍수(定慧雙修)의 구현자라고 말하는 것은 그의 화쟁정신에 입각한 것이다. 그 이후 우리 나라 불교는 선과 교를 함께 닦는 정혜쌍수의 전통을 계속 유지하게 되었다.

또, 조선 초기의 고승 기화(己和, 1376-1433)는 불교 내의 화쟁에서 한 걸음 더 나아가 유교와 불교와의 화쟁을 도모하고자 하였다. 유불의 논쟁은 고려 때부터 계속되어 온 것이었지만, 고려시대는 불교를 국교로 삼았기 때문에 논쟁이 크게 문제시되지 않았다. 그러나 조선왕조가 억불정책으로 불교를 핍박하자, 기화는 『현정론(顯正論)』·『유석질의론(儒釋質疑論)』 등을 저술하여 억불의 부당성과 함께 유불도 3교의 회통을 천명하였던 것이다.

『현정론』의 첫머리에서 유교의 오상(五常)과 불교의 오계(五戒)를 비교하면서 불살생(不殺生)은 인(仁)이요, 부도(不盜)는 의(義)며, 불음(不淫)은 예(禮)요, 불음주(不飮酒)는 지(智)며, 불망어(不妄語)는 신(信)이라고 하였다. 그리고 유교에서 사람을 가르치는 방법은 주로 정형(政刑)으로 정형적 교육에는 상벌이 따르고 상벌은 일시적인 복종만을 조장시키는 데 반하여, 불교는 인과법을 가르치기 때문에 각자가 스스로 깨닫고 자각적으로 심복(心服)하게 된다고 주장하였다.

이어 그는 세상에는 여러 가지 종류의 사람들이 있어서 상벌로 지도해야 할 사람들도 있고 인과법으로 지도해야 할 사람들도 있기 때문에, 유교나 불교가 둘 다 필요하다는 화쟁론을 전개하였다.

또한, 조선시대 불교의 중흥조라 일컬어지는 휴정(休靜, 1520-1604)은 지눌의 정혜쌍수를 계승하였을 뿐 아니라, 선과 염불의 일치를 주장하여 선과 교와 염불의 조화를 정착시켰다. 그 뒤 조선시대에는 이 셋을 함께 공부하는 사상적 조류가 계속됨에 따라 우리 나라 불교는 종파를 중심으로 한 사상적 논쟁이 거의 없어지게 되었다. 또한, 조선왕조 500년의 억불책 속에서도 불교가 그 혜명(慧命)을 전승할 수 있었던 것도 이 화쟁사상에 근거한 것이다.

그들은 왕실과 유생들의 탄압을 쟁으로 맞서기보다는 화의 정신에 입각하여 쟁을 이겨나갔고, 오히려 쟁을 화로 승화시켜 그들을 교화시켰던 것이다. 화쟁사상은 절대자유와 평화완덕(平和完德)을 그 이상으로 삼은 것으로, 석가모니 이후 우리 나라 불교에서 꽃피우게 된 금자탑으로 평가되고 있다.

 참고문헌
  • 한국의 불교  (이기영, 세종대왕기념사업회, 1974)

  • 『불교계율해설(佛敎戒律解說)』(묵담,법륜사,1982)

  • 한국불교사연구  (안계현, 동화출판공사, 1982)

  • 한국화엄사상연구  (동국대학교 불교문화연구소, 1982)

  • 한국불교철학의 어제와 오늘  (정병조, 대원정사, 1995)

  • 『화엄일승사상(華嚴一乘思想)의 연구』(요시즈 요시히데(吉津宜英),대동출판,1991)

  • 「한국불교의 화사상(和思想)연구」(김운학 외,『불교학보』 15,불교문화연구소,1978)

 집필자
집필 (1997년)
김상현

[출처: 한국민족문화대백과사전(화쟁사상(和諍思想))]

A Buddhist Approach to Interreligious Conflict and Harmony | Buddhistdoor

A Buddhist Approach to Interreligious Conflict and Harmony | Buddhistdoor

A Buddhist Approach to Interreligious Conflict and Harmony
By Rev. T. Sumiththa TheroBuddhistdoor Global | 2020-03-20 | 


Rev. Sumitha Thero is the spiritual advisor and founder of the Sri Lankan Buddhist Cultural Centre Hong Kong (SLBCCHK).

Interreligious disagreements and conflicts have dominated local and global politics for millennia. The Buddha himself encountered religious conflict, not only among different religions but even among different fraternities or schools within the same religion. Many of us acquire a faith tradition based on our upbringing and believe that our particular scripture is the most trustworthy. If taken to the extreme, this clinging becomes a cause of violence that threatens world peace. Religious conflict has led to a common secular assessment of religion as doing more harm than good in the world.

We should not be satisfied with concluding that an elephant is huge just because we see big footprints on the ground. In order to confirm the size of the elephant, we need to investigate further and see for ourselves the elephant itself. In the same manner, we need to be open-hearted in our investigation until we see for ourselves the realities within religious scriptures, without taking extreme positions.

Religions share the same goals in seeking absolute truth. All humans face the same existential sufferings: sickness, aging, and death. Different traditions offer contradictory and conflicting solutions, but in the end, all orthodox traditions accept that the absolute truth is ineffable and hidden. Unfortunately, irrational followers insist on the supremacy of their specific version of this unseen truth. Some of them are not even aware of the difference between conversion and coercion, with the latter culminating in the logical extreme of terrorism or violence. The Buddha said that the person who misunderstands the teaching faces the greatest and severest danger.

Historically, Buddhism emerged as new religious movement in a context of diverse and competing schools of thought; Indian Buddhist literature acknowledges this. Jain texts also make references to a plurality of views that can be considered religious views at the time. We find in the Brahmajala Sutta 62 philosophical views or religious approaches to life. There was a religious revival during the time that Buddhism came into being. The fifth century BCE bore witness to competing religions, many of which were hostile to each other, from verbal debates to public confrontations.

Hostility against other schools was not uncommon during the Buddha’s time. We can find references in the Pali Canon in which the Buddha responded to Brahmins and wandering ascetics who sought to attack the Dharma. Some Brahmins sought to debate with the Buddha or tried to persuade potential disciples from converting to the Buddhadharma. They saw the Buddha as someone who was destroying the social order established by Brahmins. During the early career of the Buddha, they accused him of making women widows by asking their men to become monks. Buddhist literature also records conspiracies to discredit the Buddhist order through manufactured scandal or slander. Religious antagonism then was not very different to today. Where we find religious hostility or armed conflict in the world based on religious identity, Buddhism sees issues of identity, the self, and attachment to self-understanding.

In contrast to the hostile attacks against his own tradition, the Buddha never imposed his beliefs on others, even after securing the support of local kings or powerful businessmen. He consistently refrained from insisting that others swear to practice his doctrine. We can see the Buddha as an exemplar of interreligious harmony because he was sensitive to the broader social and cultural context in which he lived, which was a Brahminical one. 

However, if conflict only spurs further conflict, then what resolution or end can there be to interreligious disputes? Most references to interreligious conflicts in the Buddhist canon direct the follower to present arguments in a logical manner that helps the “opposing” party to reach their own answer in a rational and logical manner. The way the Buddha and his great disciples responded to hostilities with other religions are exemplary models for how we can resolve confrontations today.

The first sutta of the Digha Nikaya has an important reading regarding the Buddhist attitude toward religious differences. 

In the Brahmajala Sutta, where these different ditthis (views) among the 62 are mentioned, the Buddha notes that dogmatic grasping of any view is not conductive to the religious goal he prescribed. In the sutta, he was not committed to founding one more sectarian dogma. The emphasis in the sutta is on transformation of the person, the development of the inner nature of the person, a kind of very evident change in the experience of the spiritual path, not just dogma and theory.

The Buddha was probably challenged by the religious groups referenced as Parivrajakas (wandering ascetics), Nighanthas, and Brahmins. They sometimes confronted the Buddha with ideas about creation and the afterlife. In such situations, Buddha did not emphasize “winning” the argument, and therefore did not even always engage in such situations as his teaching mainly focused on teaching the path to end the suffering of samsara.

In the Pasura Sutta, a combative individual called Pasura challenged the Buddha with the intention of discrediting him. The Buddha refused to participate because Pasura was not interested in an honest discussion, saying: “I don’t cling to a view, and I will not engage with someone who is defiled with anger and hatred.” In other words, conflict is not only intellectual. A person whose mind is free from defilements cannot move with one whose mind is not.

The Kathavatthu Sutta examines how discussions and debate can be conducted productively and in good faith. The different parties are fit to talk only when they have certain qualities. The sutta reveals how a wise man talks: 
  • “Those who discuss when angered, dogmatic, arrogant, following what’s not the noble ones’ way, seeking to expose each other’s faults, delight in each other’s misspoken word, slip, stumble, defeat. Noble ones don’t speak in that way.”

• The person, when asked a question, gives a categorical answer to a question deserving a categorical answer, gives an analytical answer to a question deserving an analytical answer, gives a counter-question to a question deserving a counter-question, and puts aside a question deserving to be put aside, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

• The person, when asked a question, stands by what is possible and impossible, stands by agreed-upon assumptions, stands by teachings known to be true, stands by standard procedure, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

• The person, when asked a question, doesn’t wander from one thing to another, doesn’t pull the discussion off the topic, doesn’t show anger or aversion or sulk, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

• The person, when asked a question, doesn’t put down [the questioner], doesn’t crush him, doesn’t ridicule him, doesn’t grasp at his little mistakes, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

The “ten philosophical issues” of Indic thought were hotly debated during Buddha’s time. Sometimes people came to argue with the Buddha on these issues, but the Buddha refused to participate in any conversation with someone did not meet the Kathavatthu Sutta’s criteria.

One common way to promote interreligious harmony is by admitting that every religion is true. Buddhism does not maintain this view. Furthermore, this method of promoting harmony, while well-intentioned, does injustice to all parties. 
The Buddha clearly maintained the uniqueness of his teachings from those of other teachers. He agreed with them often on their morality or ethics, but he disagreed with them on metaphysical matters and on the extinguishing of existential suffering.

There were masters and sages who had studied diverse religious theories at that time, so they are referred to as “those who have studied the theories of other religions.” What the Buddha found disturbing was partisan or sectarian demolishing of the values of other religions. The idea is not simply to win an argument or score points, but to understand things as reliably as possible.

Buddhism encourages conflict resolution through education because Buddhism trusts in our capacity to perform good deeds with the correct information. 
This “voluntary” ideal appeals to people to look and see for themselves. 
Obviously, education doesn’t only mean the cultivation of some academic or professional expertise. 
Outside of the professional spheres, there is a wider ethical duty attached to each profession; namely, the good or harm that can follow as a consequence of human actions. 
Because of this “karmic” aspect, Buddhism understands education as the only way to discern right and wrong. 
Where ethical concern is lacking, technological advancements can be applied recklessly or incorrectly, and scientific progress can be self-defeating.

Science and technology do not investigate the ethical value of one’s desires and wants; they simply strive to meet them. Without this ethical assessment, science and technology can be misused to fulfill human desires that are destructive and harmful. If there is no ethical reflection regarding life and the nature of life, things may be too late by the time the technology is developed. 
It may well be that Buddhist reflections on human dignity and well-being are even more relevant today than in the distant past. 
We have developed so many technologies that are transforming what it means to be human that, without spirituality and ethics, we are rapidly reaching a point of no return.

There are very rare instances where Buddhist society has used religion to justify conflict with other religious groups, including forcible conversions. However, this is not an inherent characteristic of the Buddhist tradition. Even in the contemporary West, Buddhism remains attractive not due to its military or economic power, but through its appeal to logic, reasoning, and sublime spiritual teachings.
----

Buddhistdoor Global Special Issue 2020

Buddhism and Conflict Resolution 



Tags:
asian philosophybuddhismbuddhist historyconflictdebateindian buddhisminterfaithinterreligious dialogueinterreligious encountersphilosophyphilosophy of religionThe Buddha

Categories:
CommentaryInterfaithPhilosophy and Buddhist StudiesSocial EngagementTheravada

CONFLICT RESOLUTION WITHIN A BUDDHIST CONTEXT

MMT-conflict-2016.pdf
CONFLICT RESOLUTION WITHIN A BUDDHIST CONTEXT

CONFLICT RESOLUTION WITHIN A BUDDHIST CONTEXT 
 
Michael M. Tophoff 
 
 
Abstract  
 More than ever before, adequate conflict resolution skills belong to the indispensable competencies of anyone who deals with intra-personal and inter- personal conflicts, not only on a personal level, but also in professional, organizational, and corporate areas. In recent literature a fair number of conflict resolution tools have been described within a pragmatic context of skill development (Liu & Opotow, 2014; Coleman & Prywes, 2014). These skills are presented without discussing fundamental, personal variables, such as the mediator’s mindset fundamental to conflict reconciliation. In that way, these skills become mere techniques – not competencies. In order to become true competencies, the tools must not only emanate in a transparent way from the mediator’s inner attitude and correspond with his/her mindset. In order to fully ‘own’ these tools, and to be able to use them sensitively, the mediator must also be aware of their roots and of their deeper origins. On closer look it appears, that many of these tools have an ancient basis and are rooted in Non- Western, Buddhist teaching. 

The aim of this paper is: 
1. To show how Buddhist teaching may offer a solid foundation for the understanding of conflict and conflict resolution in mediation. Here, the Buddhist concept of self-versus non-self will be highlighted, as well as the Buddhist teaching on suffering and ‘unwholesome states’. Complementary to and in line with these Buddhist concepts, some neurophysiological aspects of conflict will be presented. 
2. To develop a theme relevant framework for training of mediators and for the practice of mediation, Buddhist virtues of non-violence, compassion, wisdom, benevolence and empathy are described as important prerequisites to help the mediator in her professional practice. 
3. To present essential Buddhist self-management techniques such as self- regulation and meditation-inaction. 
4. To outline some strategies for effective mediation based on the above. 
The paper is concluded with a summary of the essence of the argument along with the implications for the target audience. 
 
Keywords 
Conflict resolution, Buddhist context 
http://jmaca.maynoothuniversity.i e


1. BUDDHIST FOUNDATIONS OF CONFLICT 
1.1. Self and non-self 

 In Hinduist thought, the self (Sanskrit. atman) is a reality. The historical Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama, c.485-405 BCE) revolted against this notion: the central Buddhist teaching revolves around anatman, no-self. ‘It is important to note, that anatman is not solely a philosophical but also a psychological concept, because it touches on the fundamentals of suffering: the affirmation of a self implies the distinction between “I” and “other”’ (Tophoff, 2013, 44). Psychologically, the ‘I’ is close, the ‘other’ distant, the ‘I’ is familiar, the ‘other’ foreign. The more the person identifies with herself in a complete attachment, the more distant, sometimes even hostile the other(s) become. Here, the basis for suffering is built. 
 The notion of a permanent self lies at the base of interpersonal conflict, since it opens the gap between self-versus other, between ‘us’ versus ‘them’. It is only when this distinction is transcended that true conflict resolutioni can take place. According to Buddhist thinking, transcending this distinction, transcending the self, eventually leads to nirvana, ultimate bliss. Nirvana, literally, means extinction, in this case: the extinction of the self. When there is no self and no other, suffering will cease. 
 The Four Noble Truths2 are the core Buddhist teaching. The first of these Truths points to the reality of suffering. The cause of suffering, according to the second of the Noble Truths, is craving and ignorance.3. Craving always is directed to all that is external to one’s own experienced self, to what the self-desires. Here, the experiencing of one’s own self is taken as the basis of the seeming existence of the self, with characteristics such as stability, permanence and separateness. Buddhist teaching, in contrast, denies the existence of a permanent self. Clinging to the idea of a separate self, which includes clinging to one’s body, leads to suffering of oneself and of other beings (Tophoff, 2013). In conflict situations, vis-ávis one’s personal self, a separate other is dialectically and implicitly constructed. In making a distinction between oneself and the other, a Pandora’s box may be opened. 
 The Third Noble Truth, which refers to the end of suffering, implies the letting go of craving and of desires. As long as the idea of a separate self is cherished, this letting go of the self’s desires is not possible. Pandora’s Box then will manifest not only craving, but also desires as well as the urge to gratify these desires, be it at the cost of others. The others, at their turn, will react defensively or aggressively, and again, a spiral of suffering and conflict results. The suffering enhanced by clinging to this distinction is poignantly described by Seng-ts’an (d.606 CE), (Austin, 1998, 700): 
 ‘The Great way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. When love and hate are both absent, everything becomes clear and undisguised. Make the smallest distinction, however, and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. If there is even a trace of this and that, of right and wrong, the Mindessence4 will be lost in confusion’ 
  
http://jmaca.maynooth university.ie
1.2. The Buddhist Noble Truth of suffering 

 Conflicts and suffering seem to be inherent in the behaviours of the human being, as in all other mammals. Where most animals usually experience conflicts in a one-to- one situation, however, man is confronted with intra-psychic conflicts, with person-to-person conflicts, with intra-group and intergroup conflicts, even with conflicts between countries and continents. Technological progress in our century makes us perceive the world as ‘smaller’ than ever before, and connects people to close and almost tangible units. Unfortunately, contact through closeness and connectedness does not necessarily make for more interpersonal harmony, or even for peace. The reality of suffering, the first Noble Truth of Buddhism, is experienced by anyone of us. 
 Craving, is one cause of suffering. Craving, or attachment, is experienced as clinging to desired states, to persons or to objects, to health or to material possessions. On a wider scale, attachment to one’s territory or country leads to a world divided between mine versus yours: ‘I am right and you are not’. Attachment can manifest itself in holding on to one’s convictions, persuasions, or religion. 
 Craving easily breeds negative emotions such as anger, greed and hatred that play a crucial role in generating and escalating every kind of suffering and conflict. As to emotions per se, Buddhist teaching holds a teleological viewpoint: the function of emotion depends on its outcome: does the emotion lead to a state of happiness or to harming someone? If the emotion results in harming someone, and thus in suffering, it is, in Buddhist terminology, an unwholesome state, and as such it is a barrier on the path of conflict resolution. 
 And again, echoing the above words of Seng-Ts’an, the existence of preferences is the causal factor in negative emotional states. A person wants what he desires and may become attached to it once he has acquired it. He refuses what he does not want, which may result in aversion or hatred. 
 Suffering often entails other unwholesome states like fear, anxiety and anger.  Fear, for instance in the sense of a phobia, is usually directed towards a well- defined object or a certain behavior. It might be the fear of losing what we cherish and what we think we possess, be it a partner, a child, material goods, our health. Anxiety has a more general, free-floating and less circumscribed character. Anxiety may result when struggling with existential questions, with premonitions about one’s own death, with televised crises of war and atrocities. Anger frequently has destructive connotations. Here, destruction may be expressed or interjected, on the one hand, as retaliation for acts of aggression, on the other as selfdestruction and depression. 
  These negative emotions will generate new conflict related actions in the other party, either in an individual or in a group. (1) Fear and anxiety may become linked to indignation and anger in an explosive mixture leading to verbal or physical abuse and attacks. (2) Anger can also be interjected by the individual. In that case, and in combination with fear, flight and depression result. (3) Extreme fear can be expressed in a stupor like, frozen shock. 
 Unwholesome states tend to exacerbate conflicts, which in turn can spiral into new and usually higher levels of negative emotions. Anger breeds anger. Emotional arousal, however, neurophysiological 
http://jmaca.maynooth university.ie
 
blocks quiet thinking and hinders sensitive listening to the other(s). In conflict resolution, it is of paramount importance to keep levels of emotional arousal as low as possible. This pertains especially to these situations where discord is expressed honestly and fully. Expressing of discord by one party necessitates the willingness of the other to truly listen. To realize this, a climate of trust and the readiness to hear one another has first to be established between parties. 
 In his illuminating study of self-regulation in the service of conflict reconciliation, Mischel focuses “on the ability to inhibit impulsive, automatic, ‘hot’ emotional responses” (Mischel et.al. 2014, 310). The process of emotional inhibition, however, is precisely is most difficult in those peaks of conflict that are in themselves characterized by high negative emotional arousal. In section 4 of this paper I will discuss Buddhist based methods of training in self-regulation as a process of cognition, contemplation and introspection. Let us first turn briefly to some neurophysiological aspects of conflict that are in line with the Buddhist concepts presented earlier. 
 
1.3. Neurophysiological aspects 

 Unwholesome states are characterized by high emotional arousal, such as in stress producing situations of conflict. Here, the brain – hypothalamus and pituary gland – activates the adrenal cortex to produce cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenaline. Consequently, there is a rise in blood pressure, cardiac stimulation and oxygen increase. In other words, the body becomes alert and is ready to deal with a conflict (Austin, 1998; 2006; 2009). If, however, in situations of protracted conflict, the stress becomes chronic, the stress hormone cortisol continues to be produced so that blood sugar levels increase – the body stays in a continued, chronic state of alarm. 
 High levels of arousal are also instrumental in the activation of another neurophysiological structure, the amygdala, part of the limbic system. The amygdala scans one’s surroundings as to potential threats and reacts to unwholesome states as anger and anxiety. When the person is threatened, the amygdala almost instantly sends out signals of alarm to the body (Mischel et.al., 2014, 315)– in other words it prepares the person to either fight, flight or freeze – behaviours that are incompatible with constructive conflict reconciliation. Inhibition of ‘hot’ emotional impulses during that state becomes almost impossible. Self- regulation, so fundamental in conflict reconciliation, cannot occur. 
 
2. IMPORTANT PREREQUISITES FOR MEDIATION: THE BUDDHIST VIRTUES 
2.1. Practicing Buddhist virtues in mediation 

 A deeper insight into and an understanding of Buddhist teachings may help the mediator to build a mindset which is conducive to conflict reconciliation. This is why, before focusing on the mediator’s training of self-management and of conflict reconciliation strategies, a number of virtues that are important prerequisites for these conflict resolution strategies will first be presented. These virtues include the practice of non-violence, compassion, wisdom, empathy and benevolence. Deeply understanding these virtues so that they become part of the mediator’s mindset, allows her to pass them on to the clients, by example and by pointing out their relevance for the process of reconciliation of their conflict. Practicing these Buddhist virtues will not only help to cool down high levels of negative, and potentially destructive emotions. Cultivating these virtues is instrumental for the development of feelings of friendliness, agreeableness and loving kindness – and these are essential ingredients when we wish to build a solid and stable basis for effective conflict reconciliation. 
 
2.1.1 Non-violence 

 The fundamental ethical principle of non-violence (Skt. ahimsa), not harming other sentient beings, was described prior to the Buddhist era by Mahavira (599-527 BCE), the founder of Jainism. It is a basic prerequisite for constructive conflict resolution. Here, violence is defined in general terms. It entails all conscious actions to the effect that they may hinder, damage or threaten someone. Ahimsa is integrated in the Buddhist canon through the Eightfold Path, the fourth of the Noble Truths, which is called 
Right Action, implying the avoidance of violence inany form5. Right action is concerned with the development of compassion with all sentient beings. Non-violence by thought, word or action includes (1) the resolve not to harm others, (2) the avoidance of lying (which can also do harm), (3) the avoiding of violent action. By injuring someone else, one injures oneself (Faure, 2009): ‘don’t do unto others what you don’t want them to do unto you’. 
 
2.1.2 Compassion 

 Deeply related to the concept of non-violence is the virtue of compassion with living beings (Skt. karuna). Where ahimsa formulates personal behaviour in more negative terms, compassion is described as a fundamental and positive attitude essential for conflict resolution, because it entails empathy, respect and appreciative acknowledgement of the other party. Compassion is one of the core Buddhist virtues, to be integrated as a basic foundation or mindset. An essential prerequisite in conflict resolution strategies, compassion is one of the core Buddhist virtues which are called ‘The Four Brahmavihara’s’ (tr. Divine States of Being). They are: Compassion, Loving Kindness, Sympathetic Joy, Equanimity. Compassion with her clients should be part of the mediator’s mindset. Ideally, the mediator may, by example and through her interventions, contribute to a more compassionate attitude between clients. 
 
2.1.3 Wisdom 

 Murti (1974) emphasizes the close connection between compassion and wisdom. Wisdom (Skt. Prajna) in Buddhist terms refers to the insight into the Four Noble Truths, the insight in the reality of suffering. Compassion and Wisdom go hand in hand: ‘Karuna is the actualized state (of Wisdom)’ (Faure, 2009, 264). Wisdom is realized through practicing of compassion. It is ‘inseparable from practice’ (Watson, 1998, 84). Very much down-to-earth, Buddhist teaching here refers to practice: how do I, in fact, communicate compassion to my clients? In this case, the important concept of ‘Skillful Means’ (Skt. Upaya) is highly relevant. Compassion must be communicated ‘skillfully’ to the clients, which means that the communication, guided by empathy, must be tailored specifically to the needs of the other party. Compassion implies a responsibility to act. Austin (1999, 651) has this to say: (On the basis of empathy) ’we reach out selflessly to respond in the most sensitive, appropriate way…nonintrusively…In this way, compassion should be skilfully applied’. 
 The intricate relationship between compassion and action is further clarified by the Chinese Ming philosopher Wang Yangming (1472-1529).6 Wang focuses on intuitive or innate knowledge (Tophoff, 
2007), which includes compassion. For Wang, intuitive knowledge and action are inseparable. In fact, 
“contacting one’s innate knowledge already implies (right) action…it is practiced by the one who deeply ‘sees’ the human condition of suffering and focuses on its elimination through the letting go of ‘selfish desires’’ (Tophoff, 2007, 186). In this way, insight into the nature of these virtues only becomes tangible if these virtues are indeed manifested in overt behaviour, in real actions. 
 The most venerated Buddhist symbol for compassion is the Bodhisattva7 Avalokitesvara (Chin. Guanyin). In Indian and Chinese Buddhist art she is often depicted as a female with many arms. These symbolize her compassionate determination to save all beings. In fact, she is ‘the veritable incarnation of all the Buddha’s compassion…she even descends into hell in order to save the suffering hell-beings’ (Williams, 2009, 221-222). 
 
2.1.4 Benevolence and empathy 

 In conjunction with non-violence and compassion, the virtue of benevolence or kindness (Skt. metta) is another basic prerequisite for conflict resolution. Buddhist monks in South East Asia recite daily the Metta Sutra, the sutra on Kindness: “…. the man who is wise …let him be strenuous, upright and truly straight, without conceit of self …let his senses be controlled …let none by anger or ill-will wish harm to another…” (Schuhmacher, 1989, 225). Like non-violence and compassion, kindness is neither a technique nor a strategy. What matters is not what someone does, it is what someone is. In other words, these virtues have to become conscious parts of one’s mindset, which than forms the starting point for effective action in conflict reconciliation. Empathy is related to benevolence and compassion.  It is one of the virtues most needed by the mediator. Practicing empathy, the mediator tries to be in the shoes of her client, without, however, identifying with him. The essential part is the mediator’s capacity to fully and actively communicate this -to the client, so that the client not only hears the words, but feels the connection. 
 Buddhism teaches that these virtues are inborn, as part of one’s innate ‘Buddha- nature’. Recent neurophysiological and cognitive-behavioural research seems to offer scientific support to this view (Siegel, 2007; de Waal, 2009). Notwithstanding that these virtues are, so to say, neurologically preprogramed, they have to be developed and trained in order to become true competencies of conflict resolution.  

3 BUDDHIST SELF-MANAGEMENT FOR THE MEDIATOR 
3.1 Impulse-regulation and meditation-in-action 

 Conflict resolution tools for the mediator can be trained academically as part of a wider ‘personal skills’ curriculum. For those tools to become both meaningful and effective, training has to take place on a more person-centered level, too, since the functioning of the whole person is concerned. Here the focus is twofold. 
 First, the Buddhist virtues have to be developed as prerequisites for mediation. These virtues need to be focused on during mediation training. Here, gaining theoretical insight into their function within conflict reconciliation is important. However, as Wang Yangming reminds us, insight should go hand in hand with action. This makes role playing of these virtues in mediation practice an excellent training tool. It allows the students to grasp their effectiveness when they learn to manifest them in their practice. 
 Second, equally important, self-management mechanisms have to be learned as well. To fully evolve as a person, in the professional sense, management of self has to precede management of others (Tophoff, 2007; 2013; 2014). Before being able to manage conflicts in the outside world, the mediator has to first listen to her/his ‘inner’ world. It is from this personal vantage point that she proceeds when constructive reconciliation is needed. 
 Adequate self-management requires the capacity of the mediator of impulse regulation. Assisting in the process of reconciliation, intense emotions may be provoked in the mediator.  Likewise, emotions of the other parties may easily ‘infect’ her. So it is fundamental for the mediator to be able to control high levels of emotional arousal and to ‘cool down’ to a state of a clear, non-judgmental, attentive awareness of what is occurring in the moment. This state is mindfulness. Without it, conflict resolution fails. 
 Mindfulness might be imparted in several ways (Siegel, 2007; Tophoff, 2003). One of the most important of these is practicing meditation and learning to concentrate on breathing. Mindful breathing is an anathema to emotional arousal. As the mediator focuses her attention on her breathing, breathing will by itself get deeper and slower. Mindful breathing does not take more than two minutes to realize. By employing mindful breathing, the level of emotional arousal will be brought down. As such it is the basic ingredient for deactivating highly emotionally loaded states of arousal. In order to practice mindful breathing in order to achieve this attitude of stillness and self-reflection, the mediator might want to devote twenty-minute- periods daily to meditation. Meditation entails a quiet, non-judgmental observation of what is happening within and around the person without any attachment to these stimuli. Meditation thus helps the mediator to contact her ‘inner theater’ and to train her introspection and self-reflection, allowing the mediator to focus more consciously and clearly on the style and content of her interventions.  Gradually, the mediator will be more and more capable of manifesting the virtues within her profession, and to help her clients to reconcile and to grow. Once self- regulation techniques are mastered by the mediator, she may then start to teach them to her clients. Learning by example is the easiest way, for the mediator’s clients too. Mindful breathing, as a powerful antidote against ‘hot’ emotional responses from clients, is easily taught to them. The transmission of the virtues, likewise, advances best by setting an example. If the mediator is capable to share these attitudes and techniques within her work, the atmosphere between clients will change accordingly. 
 In the Chinese Buddhist traditions, meditation is ‘extended’ and generalized into whatever action: meditation-in-action, or ‘meditation-in-the-marketplace’ (Tophoff, 2003, passim). In early Buddhism, meditation was the domain of monks and nuns. It was directed towards transcendence of worldly matters in the process of reaching nirvana. Buddhism arrived on mainland China around 550 CE. In China, however, the function of meditation changed fundamentally. Here, meditation was no more an activity confined to monks and nuns, but to be practiced by anyone. Indeed, meditation became integrated in day to day living, as an inner attitude, emphasizing an attentive focus on whatever activity without judgment. Meditation became: meditation-in-action, or: meditation-on-the-, marketplace (Tophoff, 2003). 
Meditation-in-action is mindful action8. Since, as we have seen, Buddhism warns against the making of distinctions, each action is of equal importance, and each action merits the same degree of mindfulness. So meditation becomes an essential tool ‘on the marketplace’: “For penetrating the depths of one’s own true self-nature and for attaining a vitality valid on all occasions, nothing can surpass meditation in the midst of activity”, says Hakuin (1686-1769), a famous Chan Buddhist teacher (Tophoff, 2003, 105). 
 As one becomes able to connect to a state of mindfulness, overt and sometimes violent expression of negative emotions, such as anger – counter-productive in conflict resolution - is no longer needed. Anger, however, might also be dealt with Introspectively. In this case, the emotion is mindfully acknowledged without judgment. Emotion is, so to say, ‘permitted’ to be present in awareness.  Integrated with mindful breathing, the intensity of the emotion will then fade, so that conflict resolution can proceed from inner quiet and from a receptive mindset.  

4 BUDDHIST BASED STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE MEDIATION 
4.1 Transcending the self 

 The foremost important and certainly the most time consuming task for the mediator in every kind of conflict resolution process is building a twofold respectful connection: 1. with the stakeholders and 2. between the persons. In both instances, this requires a transcending of the ‘I’ versus the ‘You’. To do this, the emphasis is no longer on differences. Instead, it is important to make explicit the commonalities that transcend the purely individual targets of each person separately. In order to bring this about, several consecutive actions are necessary. After assessment of the conflict situation, and after introspectively having become aware of her one’s inner emotional state the mediator has to neutralize the level of arousal before meeting his clients. Here, and at any further period with high levels of emotion, the mediator’s focus is on impulse regulation and on establishing an inner atmosphere of mindful quiet. Only in this way she can manifest an open and receptive stance. It is from this inner quiet, that the mediator can take the first step to build a meaningful connection with the persons. This connection is achieved by 
Active listening. Active listening implies true understanding of another’s position, explicitly communicated 
in such a way that the client does indeed feel understood and acknowledged. Subsequently, the mediator will respectfully communicate empathy, compassion and benevolence (5), so that her client feels esteemed and acknowledged. 
 During this process, through the mediator’s interventions, a positive climate of growth may be facilitated between the conflicting parties. Existing differences are not diminished or denied, but nonjudgmentally acknowledged. As both parties feel more and more accepted in this way, there will more space to consider potential common ground. 
 Establishing a connection in this way is the foremost priority in the process of conflict resolution. Once the connection is: (1) fully established and acknowledged by both parties, and (2) impulse-regulation is maximized, the factual problematic issues - the so-called causes of the conflict, (which in fact they are not!) - can then be dealt with in a non-threatening atmosphere of trust, respect and security. In dealing with these disputes, it is essential to differentiate between person and problem. This means that the problem has to be externalized. The other party is not the problem; the problem is the problem. By objectifying the problem both parties can look at it together in order to reach a solution which is satisfying and rewarding to both of them. 
 
4.2 Welcoming the enemy 

 Sometimes, however, the mediator has to deal with direct forms of aggression. Then ‘welcoming of the adversary seems to be the best of strategies’ (Tophoff, 2013, 29). This strategy originally stems from Eastern martial arts, such as aikido and judo. Judo signifies the friendly way, whereas aikido may be translated as the way of harmonizing the energy. Note that already in the names of these martial arts the contrary of aggression is expressed. 
 In the welcoming the adversary strategy, the aggressor is no longer an opponent one has to be fight, or from which one must run away, or in whose presence one freezes in anguish and stupor. In successful conflict resolution, this party is reframed and treated as a ‘welcome guest’. Our guest brings a gift: his attack (Tophoff, 2013). This gift is appreciated by the mediator, who flows and moves with the energy of the attack – instead of fighting it. The attack, in this way, misses its goal, and the energy of it fades. Now the mediator can start to build a positive connection. 
 Here, of course, lies a critical challenge for the mediator: to respond emotionally with a response that is not intended or perceived as a counter attack. In implementing this strategy, he need for an adequate self-regulation becomes ever more obvious. This is phrased beautifully in an ancient Buddhist text: 
 ‘An enemy should be looked on as a beneficial treasure, for he gives one a good opportunity for practicing patience, and should be venerated accordingly’ (Bodhi- caryavatara VI, in Harvey, 2000, 245). 
Paradoxically and in Buddhist terms9, the other party – the ‘adversary’- becomes a true Bodhisattva. In his turn he will show benevolence and compassion, and he will let these very same virtues shine in the mediator. 

5. SUMMARY 

 The aim of this paper is to show how Buddhist teaching may offer a solid foundation for understanding and managing conflict and conflict reconciliation in mediation. 
 At the base of interpersonal conflict lies the notion of a permanent self. The affirmation of self implies the distinction between self and other, between us versus them. Buddhism teaches the importance of transcending this distinction. Only then conflict resolution can take place. Clinging to the idea of a separate self leads to suffering. One of the main causes of suffering is craving. Craving breeds negative emotions. Neurophysiological and psychologically these lead to high emotional arousal. Conflict resolution, however, is negatively correlated with high emotional arousal. Essential Buddhist based prerequisites for mediation such as virtues as non-violence, compassion, wisdom, empathy and benevolence, facilitate impulse regulation as they become part of the mediator’s mindset. 
 The implication of the above for the mediator – and for her training – are manifold. Selfmanagement of the mediator (and eventually of his clients) has to precede management of conflicts of others. Self-management includes impulse regulation. Buddhist based techniques such as meditation and mindful breathing are helpful towards this end. They have to be trained and practiced by the mediator. Consequently, these techniques may then be taught to the mediator’s clients. Likewise, a mindset characterized by Buddhist virtues, may first be learned in person-cantered courses, and then be practiced in the mediation process itself. 
 In this way, the mediator learns to build a respectful connection with the clients, and, by example, can influence the climate between them. Gradually, the mediator develops high states of mindfulness. But, even more important, she assists her clients in their own process of reconciliation and growth. 
 
FOOTNOTES 

1 In true conflict resolution winners nor losers exist. True conflict resolution leads to a mutual and respectfull communality, where the ‘we’ transcends the ‘me’ and the ‘you’. 
2 The Four Noble Truths are: 1. The reality of suffering. 2. Suffering is caused by craving.3. Suffering can end. 4. The Eightfold Path to end suffering. 
3 Ignorance, here, refers to not being able to grasp the Four Noble Truths. ‘It is that state of mind that does not correspond to reality … and brings forth suffering (Schumacher, 1089, p.26) 
4 In Siegel’s (2007, 5) Buddhist inspired definition of mind, the emphasis is on transience and change: “Mind is a process that regulates the flow of energy and information”. Buddhists maintain that mind is essentially empty (Fung Yu-Lan, 1983). This refers to the awareness of and the insight into the   illusion of permanence and fixed stabilities. In that sense, even the concept of emptiness is an illusion. 
Even ‘a trace of this and that’ already suggest difference and concept.  5 This is the reason why devout Buddhists are vegetarians. 
6 Though Wang Yangmin is frequently considerd a Neo-Confucian philospher ((Chan, 1962; Henke, 1964; Tu Wei-ming, 1976), Tophoff (2007) presents him as a Chan Buddhist. 
7 A Bodhisattva is an enlightened being ‘who renounces complete entry to nirvana untill all beings are saved. The determining factor for his action is compassion, supported by highest insight and wisdom’ (Schuhmacher e.a. 1986, 39). 
8 It is also a fundamental factor in the prevention of stress-related disorders and recurrent depression (Teasdale et al., 2000; Davidson, 200). 
9 A note of caution: Orientalistic Asia lovers often equalize Buddhism with peace and serene harmony. Also in Buddhism, however, theory and practice sometimes don’t connect at all. Zen Buddhist monks during World War II ‘often justified some of the worst forms of brutality in the name of “ruthless compassion”’ 
(Faure, 2009, 125). 
 
REFERENCES 

Austin, J.H. (1998) Zen and the Brain. Cambridge, M.I.T. Press. Austin, J.H. (2006) Zen Brain Reflections. 
Cambridge, M.I.T. Press. 
Chan, Wing-tsit. (1962) How Buddhistic is Wang Yangming? Philosophy East & West, 12, 2013-215. Coleman, S.W. & Prywes, Y. (2014) Teaching Conflict Reconciliation Skills in a Workshop. In: Coleman, P.T.et al. (2014) The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass. 
Davidson, R.J., Kabat-Zinn J, Schumacher  J, Rosenkranz  M, Muller  D, Santorelli SF, Urbanowski F, Harrington A, Bonus K, Sheridan JF. (2003) Alteration in  brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation.  Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 564-570. 
Faure, B. (2009) Unmasking Buddhism. Malden MA, Wiley-Blackwell. 
Fung Yu-lan, (1973) A History of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. II. Princeton, Princeton University Press. 
Harvey, P. (2000) An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 
Henke, F.G. (1964) The Philosophy of Wang Yangming. New York, Paragon Book Reprint Corp. 
Linder, E.G. (2014). Emotion and Conflict. In: Coleman, P.T.et al. (2014). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. 
Mischell, W. et al. (2014) Self-Regulation in the Service of Conflict Resolution. In: Coleman, P.T.et al. (2014) The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. 
Liu, W. & Opotow, S. (2014) Aggression and Violence: Causes and Correctives. In: In: Coleman, P.T.et al. (2014). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San  Francisco, Jossey-Bass. 
Murti, T.R.V. (1974) The Central Philosophy of Buddhism. London: George Allen  and Unwin. 
Nelson, C.A. (1999) Neural Plasticity and Human Development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 2, 42-45. 
Schuhmacher, S. & Woerner, G., (1989) Encyclopedia of Eastern Philosophy and Religion. London, Rider Books. 
Siegel, D.J. (2007) The Mindful Brain. New York, W.W. Norton & Company. Teasdale, J.D. Segal ZV, Williams JM, Ridgeway VA, Soulsby JM, Lau MA. (2000) Prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depression by mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68: 615-623. 
Tophoff, M. (2003). Chan Buddhism: Implication of Awareness and Mindfulness Training on Managerial Functioning. Destelbergen, Cartim. 
Tophoff, M. (2007) The Ethics of Knowledge and Action in Postmodern 
Organizations. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 14, 181-200. 
Tophoff, M. (2013) Daoist and Chan Buddhist Dimensions of Self and No-self in Integrative 
Psychotherapy. The British Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 10, 2, 43-49. 
Tophoff, M. (2013) Daoist Principles in the Martial Arts: their Relevance for Illness Prevention. Journal of Daoist Studies, 6, 161-175. 
Tophoff, M. (2013) Verwelkom je tegenstander (Welcome your ennemy), 
Auditmagazine, 4, 27-29. 
Tu Wei-ming. (1976) Neo-Confucian Thought in Action. Berkeley, University of California Press. 
Waal, de F. (2009) The Age of Empathy. New York, Harmony Books. 
Watson, G. (1998) The Resonance of Emptiness. Richmond, The Curzon Press. Williams, P. (2009) Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. London, Routledge. 
 
Michael M. Tophoff, Ph.D., clinical psychologist, specialized in Psychotherapy, Group Process and Sensory Awareness in Europe and in the USA. He received Zen training in Japan (Omori Sogen Roshi). He obtained his doctorate at the University of Utrecht with a dissertation of Chinese Buddhism and Management. He teaches Conflict Management and Personal Skills at the University of Amsterdam and publishes widely in the fields of Management, Ethics, Buddhism, Sensory Awareness, Psychotherapy and Health. 
 
Dr. Tophoff conducts training seminars in Europe and Asia, focusing on conflict reconciliation and personal development. Being a student of Chinese martial   arts, in his seminars he uses Eastern martial ways to defuse and resolve situations of stress and conflict.