2021/04/04

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. 
 
 
 
 
 



Cultivating Peace: Buddhist-Inspired Approaches to Conflict Resolution | Buddhistdoor

Cultivating Peace: Buddhist-Inspired Approaches to Conflict Resolution | Buddhistdoor:



Cultivating Peace: Buddhist-Inspired Approaches to Conflict Resolution
By Nina Müller
Buddhistdoor Global | 2020-11-25 |


Thich Nhat Hanh. From uplifeconnect.com


Traditionally, Buddhism has focused on the development of the inner mind’s enlightened qualities as a means to reduce suffering and conflict. This is because the tradition sees the three poisons (Skt: trivisha) of greed (raga), aversion (dvesha), and delusion (moha) to be at the root of all suffering. In order to attain any semblance of peace, the Buddhist practitioner must turn inward and cultivate the opposite qualities of wisdom, generosity, and loving-kindness. It naturally follows that the cultivation of these qualities will have a positive impact on society as a whole.

In recent times, Buddhism has become far more socially engaged, and Buddhist ideals have helped to inform a variety of approaches to conflict resolution (both directly and indirectly). In this article, I look at some of these approaches with the hope that they may provide some ideas about how humanity can move toward peace in these challenging times.

Being peace


Vietnamese Buddhist teacher and author Thich Nhat Hanh was exiled from his homeland during the Vietnam War, and he has spent the decades since preaching and practicing “embodied peace” as a means to alleviate global suffering. In order to understand the significance of embodied peace, I turned to one of Hahn’s students, Buddhist teacher and writer Cuong Lu.

Cuong Lu was also born in Vietnam and fled the country as a young boy during the war. In his book The Buddha in Jail (2019), Lu recounts how, when he moved to the peaceful country of the Netherlands, he could not help but bring the war with him. Having only experienced life within the context of heightened and violent conflict, it took him a great many years of practice to develop a sense of inner peace and to trust the outside world. 

Fortunately, his experience of touching his deep suffering enabled him to awaken similar qualities in the hardened prisoners that he encountered working as a prison chaplain. The following is an expert from the book that beautifully captures the ripple effects of embodied peace:

Happiness is in each of us, but we don’t know it. Prisoners feel it right away; they just need an example. The people they met before—their parents, teachers and friends—weren’t happy. When I embodied happiness, they felt it. One day as I was walking past a row of cells, a man behind bars looked at me and said, “You see the light, right?” I laughed and said, “I’m happy.” He nodded, “I can see it. Very nice.” (Lu 2018, 31–32)

Throughout the book, Cuong outlines the positive effects that simply being (ie. being present, being at peace, being happy) can have on inmates, which in turn contributes to a more harmonious prison life.

Practices for cultivating embodied peace include: conscious breathing, kissing the Earth with our feet, mindful eating, sitting together, simply listening, and more.

Secular versions of "being peace"

While it may not immediately be apparent, Buddhism—and particularly the “mindfulness” component of the Buddhist practice—has had a significant impact on Western psychology. This means that people who do not identify specifically with Buddhism as a religion can still engage in practices that help cultivate inner peace.
In the 1970s, Jon Kabat Zinn famously developed the mindfulness-based stress reduction and psychotherapy (MBSR) program, an eight-week course that focuses on mindfulness as a means to address depression, anxiety, and physical pain. The training module has seen significant success the world over and it regularly features in hospital and school curricula. MBSR is generally conducted in a group setting and includes practices such as meditation, body scans, and mindful yoga, as well as group therapy.
From pressensa.com


Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), on the other hand, resembles the more typical therapy session in that it usually takes place one-on-one, between the therapist and the patient. Similarly to cognitive-based therapy (CBT), which is widely practiced in the Western world, MBCT educates the practitioner about depression and the role that cognition plays within it. It encourages patients to recognize their thoughts and feelings just as they are, without becoming overly attached to or judgemental or reactive to them.

Nonviolent communication

The late psychologist Marshall B. Rosenberg came up with what he refers to as “a process of communication” that is rooted in attentiveness and compassion: “I have . . . identified a specific approach to communicating—both speaking and listening—that leads us to give from the heart, connecting us with ourselves and with each other in a way that allows our natural compassion to flourish. I call this approach Nonviolent Communication, using the term nonviolence as Ghandi used it—to refer to our natural state of compassion when violence has subsided from the heart.” (Rosenberg 2003, 2)

In a similar fashion to Buddhism, nonviolent communication (NVC) encourages both the listener and the speaker to observe things as they are—instead of evaluating or judging what the person is saying, one learns to listen from the heart. NVC also invites the listener/speaker to take ownership of their feelings and to find ways to express their needs. Founded on the principals of compassion, it serves as a valuable resource for communities facing violent conflicts the world over.

Mindful of race

American Buddhist teacher and author Ruth King carries out a training program across the US called Mindful of Race, which encourages participants to deeply investigate their relationship with racial bias and ethnic discrimination. King offers a variety of tools with which to address racial ignorance and distress. Among these are: guided sitting and walking meditations; RAIN (Recognize, Allow, Investigate, Nurture), a mindfulness-based practice that enables us to recognize our racial biases and distress; and Racial Affinity Groups (RAG), a space for people of the same ethnic background to come together in order to investigate and transform habits of harm.

As all the above practices indicate, there are diverse ways to reduce harm and bringing about peace. However, it is not easy and remains a long-term, even lifelong commitment. Whether it be learning new ways of communicating and relating to our thoughts, engaging in group discussions about race, or treating each step as though it were a kiss to the Earth, we can all take some measures to help reduce conflict in our hearts and, ultimately, the world.

References

Lu, Cuong. 2018. The Buddha in Jail: Restoring Lives, Finding Hope and Freedom. New York and London: OR Books.

Rosenberg, M. B. 2003. Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. Encinitas: PuddleDancer Press.

King, Ruth. 2018. Mindful of Race: Transforming Racism from the Inside Out. Boulder: Sounds True.


---------------

The Saints Don’t Grieve | Meditations3 [conflict resolution]

The Saints Don’t Grieve | Meditations3

The Saints Don’t Grieve

NAVIGATIONBooks/Meditations3/The Saints Don’t Grieve
January 28, 2005

One of the most difficult but important principles in the practice is what the Buddha called, “Learning to see renunciation as freedom.”

For most of us renunciation seems to be a restriction — as when you’re getting the mind to focus on the breath. Before you make up your mind to do that, the mind doesn’t seem to be restricted, doesn’t seem to have any violent wishes, or disorderliness or unruliness. But then all of a sudden, as soon as you tell it to stay with the breath, it finds all sorts of other places where it wants to go. It complains that it’s being constricted, that it’s being tied down. You have to learn not to listen to those complaints, because, as the Buddha explains, when the mind really does settle down with one object, it’s freed from a lot of restrictions and burdens.

He describes progress through stages of concentration as stage-by-stage release. Simply getting the mind to stay consistently with the breath, you’re released from unskillful mental states, released from sensual desires. That’s a state of freedom, but there’s a part of the mind that doesn’t see it that way. And that part of the mind gets a lot of encouragement from the world outside, partly because it’s in other people’s interest to have us chained to our sensual desires. Once we’re chained to our sensual desires, they have a hook to sell us things, to make us buy, and our desires play along with that.

We mistrust the impulse toward celibacy, toward renunciation. I was talking a while back to a Zen practitioner — admittedly someone who wasn’t all that advanced — about conflict resolution in the community, and I pointed out that having the Vinaya as our standard was very liberating. To him that was an unusual idea — that rules could be liberating. Part of his quest, he said, was “to learn how to see beyond rules so that you weren’t confined by them. So how could rules be liberating?” I pointed out, “For one thing, we don’t have to sit around discussing what the standards of behavior in the community are going to be week after week after week. It’s all settled. The standards are livable, they’re humane. So having the standards established frees us to have a lot more time to practice.”

And that’s just a very basic example. There are other ways in which rules are liberating as well. Popular culture likes to hear about monks and nuns who are having trouble with their vows, who end up either disrobing or acting out their desires in weird and convoluted ways. This shows that they’re being confined and restricted by their rules, that they really miss the things that they gave up. That’s what popular culture likes to hear — that it’s offering us all the really good things in life, and that the alternatives are bogus. But when you really get a taste of what it’s like to get the mind to settle down without having to hanker after other things, you find how liberating it is. When you see the rewards, you’re more and more willing to let go of the things that you’re normally attached to in favor of the freedom of not being attached.

This impulse to mistrust the principle of renunciation isn’t just an American or a Western issue. It goes way back in Buddhist history. For example, there’s the Mahayana ideal that the arahants are stuck in a limited nirvana. The Mahayanists feel that bodhisattvas have more freedom because they have a foot in both worlds, they say.

Well, nirvana is the opposite of being stuck. For one thing, it’s not a place. When there’s no place, there’s no being stuck anywhere. Second, the person who attains nirvana is totally undefined, with no restrictions whatsoever. From the outside it looks uninviting, but from the actual experience of the practice — of learning to let go, let go, let go and be less and less defined by this, that or the other attachment — it brings a huge sense of freedom.

So, as we stick with our efforts to stay with the breath, to stay with one thing, remember: We’re sticking, but we’re not stuck. We’re not being confined. We’re learning to give up restrictions, learning to get out of the chains that have become so familiar that we’ve learned to mistrust the idea that anybody could be happy outside of those chains. But the freedom beyond those chains is just what the Buddha’s talking about. All his teachings aim in that direction. He said that his teachings all have a single taste. Just as the ocean has the taste of salt — anywhere you go in the ocean the water tastes salty — everywhere you look in his teachings there’s the taste of freedom, the taste of release.

Even when he teaches restraint of the senses, again, it’s for the purpose of liberating the mind from all the unskillful states that would arise if you weren’t careful. He says that if you’re not careful about how you look at things, how you listen to things, how you smell things, taste things, touch things, then the mind is assailed. It’s injured by sense objects. To many people that amount of restraint sounds confining, but when you take the mind to a state of concentration where it’s not injured in that way, you realize the sense of freedom, the sense of relief that results.

So a lot of the practice comes down to a willingness to take the Buddha at his word in spite of all of our fear of what it might be like to renounce things, to give things up, to show restraint. Our preconception is that it’s very confining, and, as the song goes, “The saints are so miserable they’re crying and grieving. I’d rather laugh with the sinners than grieve with the saints.”

Well, the sinners don’t laugh all that long — and the saints don’t grieve: They’re totally free.

So allow space in your imagination for that possibility: that renunciation really is freedom, when you do it wisely, when you do it to learn and understand. Open up your imagination to the possibility that the Buddha was right — that all these practices and rules really do have the taste of freedom.

Justice vs. Skillfulness | Meditations8 : Dhamma Talks [conflict resolution]

Justice vs. Skillfulness | Meditations8 : Dhamma Talks

Justice vs. Skillfulness
NAVIGATIONBooks/Meditations8/Justice vs. Skillfulness
July 31, 2016
When we develop the brahma-viharas—attitudes of goodwill, compassion, empathetic joy, equanimity—we try to make them unlimited. In other words, we develop goodwill for all beings, compassion for all, empathetic joy for all, and we have to learn how to apply thoughts of equanimity to all when necessary.

The problem is that although our attitudes may be unlimited, our resources for actually helping people and improving the world are not. This is why we need a clear set of priorities as to what we can do, what we can’t do, what things are worth doing, worth improving, what things are not—because if you spread yourself too thin, you end up not accomplishing much at all. Or, if you focus on solving the wrong problems, you end up regretting it later.

For example, sometimes we’re told that the Buddha’s main purpose in teaching was to put an end to all suffering. Well, yes, but his approach to accomplishing that end was very specific. Instead of running around trying to right all the sufferings caused by the injustices of the world or the structure of society, he focused on one type of suffering: the suffering we each cause ourselves, through our own craving, through our own clinging, through our own ignorance. When we put an end to that suffering, we don’t suffer from anything outside at all. But the problem has to be solved from within, which is why he never said that the whole world, or half the world, or whatever, would put an end to suffering. He simply taught the way. It’s up to each of us to follow it. And none of us can follow it for anyone else.

As for the suffering that comes from the three characteristics, that’s something that can’t be stopped. Those characteristics are still going to keep on manifesting themselves in the world. The question is: Do you have to suffer from them, does your mind have to suffer from them? And the answer is No.

So the focus is specifically on how the way you engage with the world is causing suffering through your engagement, through clinging and craving and ignorance. That’s what we work on as we meditate.

As for helping other people, that’s a matter of generosity. The Buddha set out duties only in terms of the four noble truths. As for the issue of helping other people, he didn’t place a duty on anyone. He pointed out the advantages of being generous, but he didn’t try to force anyone in that direction. He simply pointed out that certain things are skillful and certain things are unskillful in your engagement with other people, and it’s up to you to choose what you want to do—realizing the consequences that will come from your choices.

And it’s important to note that the main emphasis is on what’s skillful and not. This is indicated in the set of questions that the Buddha says lies at the beginning of discernment: “What, when I do it, will lead to my long-term welfare and happiness? What is skillful? What is blameless?” Those are the questions on the positive side. Then on the negative side: “What, when I do it, will lead to my long-term harm and suffering? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy?”

Notice the terms of the questions. There’s never a question, “What is justice?” The question is, “What is skillful?” When you look at the world around you, you see a lot of injustices. You see a lot of mistreatment of people and animals. But are we going to deal with it primarily as an issue of injustice, or as an instance of unskillful actions?

Our idea of justice is based on the idea that there’s a beginning point to a story. From that point, you figure out who did what first, and then who did what second, and then at the end of the story you tally up how things should be apportioned in terms of guilt or lack of guilt, based on which actions were justified by what went before and which ones weren’t, so as to bring things into a proper balance.

But in the Buddha’s vision of time, there’s no beginning. As he said, you could trace back, back and back and back, and not find a conceivable beginning. The beginning point, he said, is inconceivable. Not just unknowable, inconceivable. You can’t even think it. We’ve been through the ups and downs of time so many times, through so many universes, that, as he said, it’s hard to meet someone who hasn’t been your mother or your father or your brother or your sister or your son or your daughter in all that time. The stories are very long.

So if you’re going to start apportioning blame and trying to bring things into balance, where do you start?

There’s a famous story concerning Somdet Toh. A young monk once came to him to complain that another monk had hit him, and Somdet Toh said, “Well, you hit him first.” The monk replied, “No, no, he just came up and hit me over the head and I hadn’t done anything at all.”

Somdet Toh said, “No, you hit him first.”

They went back and forth like this for a while, and then the young monk got upset and went to see another senior monk to complain about Somdet Toh. So the other senior monk came and asked Somdet Toh what was up, and Somdet Toh replied, “Well, obviously it’s his kamma from some previous lifetime. He had hit the other monk first at some point in time.”

And, of course, that might have been after the other monk had hit the first monk first—so it goes back and forth, back and forth like this.

So when you see mistreatment around you, the first question isn’t, “Is this just or unjust?” The question is, “Is the person dishing out the mistreatment behaving in a skillful way or unskillful way, and what can I do, behaving skillfully, to put a stop to unskillful behavior?”

Now there’s some unskillful behavior you can stop, and other unskillful behavior that you can’t. The kinds you can’t stop are the cases where someone’s kamma—your own or the other’s—gets in the way. But the basic question is this: When is it skillful to interfere, when is it skillful to get involved, and what kind of interference would be skillful? What would be a wise way to be generous, virtuous, or to show goodwill? In other words, what would be a skillful way to alleviate the problem through acts of merit? Sometimes the answer is clear and sometimes it’s not. If you have the energy and the wherewithal and it’s not too dangerous, you try to help. Then, if you see that it’s not working, you pull back.

But a lot of this also has to do with your priorities. There are some unskillful things happening in the world that really are worth banding together with other people, getting your energies together, and seeing if you can put a stop to them. But you have to do it in a skillful way. There’s never a case in the Dhamma where good ends justify unskillful means. The means have to be good—in fact, everything is all means. After all, where would you put the ends? You settle one issue and there’s another issue. You settle that issue, then everyone dies, they get reborn, and things start up again. We don’t have the closure of a final judgment.

The only real closure in the Buddha’s teachings is nibbana, and that’s a closure that each of us has to find within ourselves. We’re not going to find closure out in the world, because the nature of the world is that everything falls apart—even the best things—and then gets reconfigured again and again, around and around and around. Even at the beginning of each cycle in the universe, there’s not just one beginning. The Buddha has several ways of describing how the universe starts to evolve. There’s no one person behind the evolution, no one plan behind the evolution. There are just lots of individuals with lots of plans, and they’re driven mainly by craving and ignorance. That’s what keeps the whole thing going.

As long as you’re trying to straighten things out outside, your attempts are dealing in craving and ignorance. Sometimes it’s other people’s craving and ignorance; sometimes it’s yours. Your ideas of a just resolution, their ideas of a just resolution, contain a lot of ignorance. In fact, most of the problems of the world come when people’s ideas of justice conflict. One side tries to impose its ideas of justice on another side, which has its own different ideas of justice, and they can believe so strongly in their ideas of justice that they’re willing to kill to get them imposed. This is where a lot of fanaticism comes from. So you have to be very careful around this issue.

This is why we work on the mind, because only in the mind can closure come. Meanwhile, outside, the main question is not an issue of justice or injustice. The issue is, is this particular action I’m contemplating doing skillful or unskillful?

The Buddha never tries to justify, say, oppression by saying that the oppressed people deserved it. The word “deserve” also doesn’t appear in the Buddha’s teachings, aside from the statement that arahants are deserving of offerings. In fact, that’s what “arahant” means: deserving.

Until we reach that point, there are simply skillful actions with good results and unskillful actions with bad results, and we all have a big mix of both. So when you see somebody suffering, you don’t know which part of that person’s mix is showing, and how much good stuff, say, is not showing. The part that’s not showing is what gives the potential for you to help them.

In other cases, it’s clear that you can’t help. Like the squirrel I saw yesterday: Something was obviously wrong with one of its legs—or maybe two of its legs—but the closer I got to it to see what was wrong, the more it tried to struggle and struggle to get away from me. I realized that my concern was causing it a lot of suffering. So I had to back off.

That’s the kind of situation where you obviously can’t help. But other situations are not quite so easy to see. The important thing is to remember the categories. It’s not about ends. It’s about means. It’s not about just or unjust ends. It’s about skillful or unskillful means. That way, we can live with one another—and with ourselves.

When there’s unskillful behavior outside, at the very least you don’t condone it. You don’t encourage people to engage in killing or stealing or lying, no matter how you glorify the ends to which that behavior could lead in the short term. And if you can think up some skillful way to stop unskillful behavior, you try. But your primary responsibility is what you’re genuinely responsible for, i.e., your own choices, what you do and what you choose to tell other people to do. Make sure that those choices are skillful.

If everybody looked after this one issue, the world would settle down. Our problem is we’re trying to straighten everybody else out by imposing our ideas of justice without straightening ourselves out first.

This is why we have to develop equanimity in addition to goodwill, because there are cases where, because of karmic obstacles, past or present, we can’t help. After all, for people to be happy, they have to create the causes for happiness. You can help them by encouraging them to be skillful, but the choice of whether or not to follow your advice and example is theirs.

As for the unclear cases where you’re not sure whether you can help, you have to keep your priorities straight. What are the most important things for you to do? Where do you want to focus your energies to make a difference in the world? In other words, where do you want to choose to be generous?

As the Buddha said, with generosity there are no shoulds, there’s no imposition. He simply recommended that you give where you feel inspired, where you feel the gift would be well-used. That applies not only to material gifts but also to gifts of your time, gifts of your energy to improve things in the world. It’s up to you to decide where you want to make your mark, who you want to help, realizing that once you’ve chosen that, there are other things you’re going to have to put aside. If your energies get too scattered, the Thai phrase is that you take a container of pepper sauce and pour it into the sea. There’s so much water in the sea that the pepper sauce makes no difference at all.

This is why we have to practice equanimity. We have goodwill for all but we have to realize that we can be helpful only in certain circumstances, and we have to be very careful about when our efforts at help are skillful and when they’re not.

Make sure that those are the terms of your analysis. Once you keep that point straight in your mind, then it clears up a lot of other difficulties.

Now, our society doesn’t think in these ways. Most people think in the terms of a story with a beginning and an end, where it’s clear to them who’s right and who’s wrong. We argue over the details, especially about what’s relevant to the story and what’s not—that’s why there’s so much conflict—but everybody seems to have the idea that there’s a beginning point and an end point and a plan to all this—and that there’s somebody up there who’s got an idea about a just way to arrange things, and assigns us duties.

But that’s not in the Buddha’s universe at all. There’s no clear end, no clear beginning, and “There’s no one in charge.” As that passage also says, the world is swept away. Just make sure you don’t get swept away with it. Try to be clear about what you’re doing, clear about doing it skillfully. That’s how you come to closure. That’s how you get out.

This is what the practice is all about: getting out. We try to leave some good things behind as we get out—in fact you can’t get out without leaving some good things behind, in terms of your generosity, virtue, and goodwill—but sometimes the best gift you can give to other people is simply to show them that there is a way out that they can follow, too.

Try to keep that way open as much as you can through being skillful in your thoughts and your words and your deeds. Look at the Buddha: He gave the greatest gift of all. He gave us the Dhamma, showed us the path, and then he left. Now it’s up to us to give that gift to ourselves and to the people around us as best we can.

table of contents