By and by, I want to take this opportunity to thank the Dalai Lama for his words. I've been asked by the Berkeley Area Interfaith Council to be one of the speakers at the Circle of Concern tomorrow at the campus. And when I think about how to say something, I have to come back to Shakyamuni Buddha's

[01:14]

words in the Dhammapada, where he says, everything that we are is a result of what we have thought. And it is made up of our thoughts and our acts. And our acts, actions, follow our thoughts like the result of our thought and our action follows like the wheel of a cart that follows on the hoofs of the oxen. So what he's talking about is what we call karma. The result of our karma, karma is action, the result of our action follows, and follows

[02:17]

according to what we do. If we do something, he says, if we do something, evil actions, then there's an evil result. And if we do wholesome actions, there's a wholesome result. This is undeniable law of the universe. So when I think about the problems that we have today in our world, they can easily be traced to our actions from the past and the direction which we've taken.

[03:23]

Today we're faced with, this whole world is faced with the possibility of total destruction, as we know. I don't even like to say it, it's so obvious. And we have this desire to turn the direction, we want to turn the direction, because if the direction doesn't get turned, then it's inevitable that there'll be a tremendous catastrophe. So the karmic result of creating so many weapons and so much destructive force is that

[04:26]

that force will have to be consummated, have to be used somehow. You can't spend years and years of research and manufacturing and direction and have it come to an anticlimax. If those weapons aren't used, it will be an anticlimax, and there'll be a lot of disappointed people. People spend their whole lives in this kind of work, and if you spend your whole life doing something and you want to see it consummated, it'll work.

[05:30]

So it's pretty hard to turn that around, there's so much momentum to go in that direction, it's kind of like a horse that's out of control with a headless rider. So we have to wonder, how can it be turned around? Is it possible to turn it around? I don't know if it is possible to turn it around. Even our House of Representatives voted against nuclear freeze. So even the people who represent the people are selling out people, selling the people

[06:44]

short. So it makes the situation seem even more hopeless and makes people seem even more helpless. But there must be some way, if we want to find a way, there must be some way, some approach. I have a lot of admiration for the nonviolent action at Livermore. Nonviolence, the practice of nonviolence is an incredible practice, which was started by Gandhi, Mahatma Gandhi in India.

[07:48]

And it was this skinny little brown man, Winston Churchill thought he was the worst person he'd ever met. But in the end, he defeated Churchill just by his willpower. And he gave India its independence. And he didn't have anything.

[09:04]

When Gandhi died, he had pair of glasses and a loincloth. But his sheer willpower for, I hate to use the word righteousness because it's so misunderstood. But actually, his righteous activity and his willpower is what turned the whole situation. So the problem that we have today is that we can trace it back to, in a very simple

[11:07]

way, to its root, and what we call greed, hate, and delusion. If we want to talk about it in some fundamental way, we can talk about greed, hate, and delusion. And the opposite of greed is generosity. And the opposite of hate or ill-will is loving-kindness. And the opposite of delusion is wisdom. So the problem is, how do we turn greed, hate, and delusion? How do we get other people to realize this?

[12:19]

How to do something through some means that you can really believe in. That's the point. How can you do something with just the tools that you have without resorting to violence or resorting to tools that you're not familiar with or that don't seem right to you? How can you make a correct attitude prevail over an incorrect attitude? So I think the non-violent demonstration was a real practice, a real kind of example of how people can do something together, which is just based on attitude.

[13:35]

If instead of basing our life on greed, hate, and delusion, which have really poisoned this country, we can teach other people how to live in a simple way and how to be an example for people to live. We don't need so much. Originally, we say that people are entitled to some kind of prosperity. This country gained some prosperity, but it wasn't enough. Once you gain prosperity, you don't know where to end.

[14:38]

So prosperity turns into greed because it doesn't have any limits. It doesn't know where to end. And so, as Buddha says, what we are is a result of what we think. And if we think we need so much or if we want so much, then there's no end. Wanting begets wanting. Need begets need. And unless you know how to limit your needs and desires, you end up with a machine that won't stop. It's like you put a nickel in a candy machine and it doesn't stop. You don't know what to do with all this stuff. You don't know what to do with all the little pieces of gum that come out. We can give them away. That's what we should do.

[15:40]

We should give it all away. We should know how to give it away. This country is so wealthy, it's so prosperous. And we give with one hand, but we take with the other. We don't know what true giving is. We're still children. So, to turn greed into generosity means to be able to know our limits, to teach people what limits are. We don't teach peace in school. We don't really teach how to get along with people or relationships or ethics. Originally, this country is based on a system of ethics, but actually it's based on merchandise.

[16:49]

It's based on get what you can get, when you can get it. Right now, the latest phrase is, go for it. If you see the opportunity, go for it. If you like it, Fortune magazine has an advertisement. Not Fortune, one of those. Maybe it is Fortune magazine. It says, now is our chance. Have you ever read the ads? Now is your chance to get what you can get. Don't let anything hold you back. It's open season for our greed. And it's just all around us. And we keep our military machine going by creating hateful attitudes and fear attitudes.

[17:59]

It's a well-known fact that the munitions manufacturers and the weapons manufacturers keep creating wars, little wars all over the world in order to keep business going. That's quite a well-known fact. So, if you're in business, whatever your business is, you have to keep it going. And if you're in the business of making weapons, you have to keep that business going. If there's peace, how come you won't make a nickel? So, since the Second World War, during the Second World War, the military really established itself. It gave a lot of people something to do and a way of life that was very exciting for them.

[19:08]

And since that time, on that base, the military and the weapons industry have really created a place for themselves. Today, we're faced with such a monster that we don't know what to do with it. So, we keep creating various situations to keep big business. So, if we turn that around, it would be quite a challenge to actually create some useful, some helpful situation in the world.

[20:21]

This country has so much to offer to the world, and what we're actually offering is the worst thing you can offer. And our delusion is that we feel that by controlling the world as it belongs to us, that's our delusion. We think that if we're powerful enough, we can control everybody, eventually. Where, if we really had turned that delusion into wisdom, we would immediately start learning something from everybody.

[21:34]

Learning something from the rest of the world, who would respond to us, I'm sure. And I'm sure we could learn a lot if we really listened to the world, instead of trying to create it in our own image. We want to recreate the world in our own image. But if we gave the world back to itself, and each country had its own sense of dignity, we'd have real prosperity instead of this false prosperity that's based on exploitation.

[22:46]

So in the face of despair, what can you do? My feeling is that there's nothing else to do but to do what you have to do. In a sense, it's like you know that everybody's going to die. So with that known fact, what do you do in this world? It's the problem of not just Buddhism, but it's just the fact of life, the problem of everybody. But we deal with that problem in Buddhism.

[23:48]

That's the central problem. So what are you going to do in that space of time? Fortunately for us, our practice begins in the midst of this kind of situation. Our practice begins with this kind of problem, and dealing with this kind of problem. There's no problem that's so overwhelming that we can't deal with it. In some way, the pressure of the situation creates a field for us to practice.

[25:04]

And the greater the pressure, the more stimulating and the more responsive we have to be. This situation is unusual, a little unusual, but for us, for a Zen student, it's a real practice situation. I don't mean practice that's different from reality. It's a real thing. We say that diamonds are made under great pressure and heat in the earth.

[26:13]

And if they don't have that pressure and that great heat, they don't turn into diamonds. This kind of situation is a real opportunity for us to test our character and to sharpen our stone. We say, how can we do something? And then we look at somebody else and say, well, how can we do something? What are you going to do? What can you do? What do you think I should do? But the situation faces each one of us, and each one of us has to know what to do.

[27:19]

Each one of us has to be able to do something. What will you do? We can stay away from the situation for a while, but it's kind of unavoidable, really unavoidable. And it really has to do with, what is our own attitude? How do we think about ourself, and how do we think about ourself and the world? And how do we think about ourself and our activity in the world? And how do we lend our weight to what we want to establish or believe in?

[28:31]

So, I don't know whether it's a matter of doing some overt thing, or just standing up at the right time. I think that one of the biggest, most positive factors in turning this whole thing is just the sheer weight of, the sheer force of people's standing up. Because even if it's ignored, it can't be ignored totally, but even if it's ignored, if it's continued, it can't be ignored.

[29:51]

It may be ignored now, but it can't be ignored forever. And all you have to do is count yourself, or be counted. And that influences people. It's a great temptation, you know, for me to talk about a negative way, you know, to talk about President, Congress, and people that are easily targets for censure.

[31:04]

But I would rather just talk about ourselves, and about the basic problems and principles involved. So, if we want peace, then we need to think in that way. And if we think in that way, then our actions will follow. And if our actions follow our thought, then some kind of peace will appear in the world.

[32:08]

But peace is not the same as absence of, maybe it's the same, but it's not the absence of aggression. It has to be something positive. If you take away the aggression, then it looks like you have the peace. But I think that the peace has to be established with the same kind of determination as the aggression. Somebody suggested having a peace institute, and it got lost someplace. People don't want to think about it. Maybe you have some thoughts about it that you'd like to discuss.

[33:17]

Yes? I'm curious about how you answer the people who say, the proponents of nuclear weapons and so on, who say that we're not full of Greek hate and delusion, but our enemies are. These people on the other side are. We have to do this because they're full of these qualities and we can't trust them. It's not up to us, but we're responding to something else. The problem is that it exists on both sides. It exists in this country and it exists someplace else. It's not just us. But when you confront aggression with aggression, then you just keep escalating aggression.

[34:26]

And it's an old trick, and it's a trick that is being used. There are a lot of people in power who want to make confrontations in order to arouse the other side. It's like shaking a stick at a dog. Just get him aroused. And they say, look, that mad dog is biting at the stick. If we don't put up this big fence, he's going to climb over the fence when you're asleep and tear your throat out. So people just fall for it. They fall for that. And it takes... Not everybody is willing to trust, you know. You have to have a great deal of trust and a willingness to... to want something to happen.

[35:39]

People can say whatever they want, you know. They say, well, you know, it's because they're so aggressive that I have to work in this factory. But that's just an excuse. They don't have to do that. Isn't one of the lessons that Gandhi sort of taught was that it's very difficult to govern another country if that country does not want to be governed? And I think the basic fear is that they, whoever they are, are going to come over here and tell us what to do and take over. If we can teach people that, hey, if you have inner strength, that's just plain not going to happen. You cannot govern people who do not cooperate. Denmark did it to the Germans and India did it to the British. And if we can teach people that it's not necessary to have weapons to protect yourself, but there are other ways of doing so, then maybe the fear would not be so high.

[36:42]

You know, the handgun ban in San Francisco really caused a lot of controversy. And it's a real example of how people don't want to give up their guns. They don't. This is a really good start. I think it's a very courageous start because there's a lot of opposition, a lot of pressure against the mayor and so forth. And to stick with that, you know, say, no, you've got to turn in your guns. Just little by little, people will have to think about giving up the guns. But if they can't even give up their handguns, you know, how can they give up their big bombs? What are we going to do with all those bombs?

[37:43]

Even if we stop, you know, what's going to happen to all those bombs? Yeah. I think that's right. And I was talking to Pam one day and she said, well, you know, you've just got to vote. People just don't vote. They have to get out there and vote. And, you know, you can say, well, geez, the representatives didn't do what I wanted them to do. But people don't vote for them. The people, you know, the most non-aggressive people don't, aren't so organized. That's a problem.

[38:45]

The aggressive people, if they want to pass something, if they want to pass Proposition 13, they all get together and they do it. It's a good example, really. I'm not an organizer. I don't even like organizations that you're being involved in. But I know that that's the truth. There's just not enough support for, it's kind of like freedom, you know. It has a bottomless bottom. And it's not thought of in a positive way. Whereas aggression is really, is brought together, all the elements are brought together and create a power. And people use that power. And we just haven't brought peace together in a powerful enough way to make it work, to make that a driving force.

[39:50]

So maybe the problem is we have to draw again some person who will bring it together. And I'm not that person, thank you very much. So how do you do? I don't think we can wait for Gandhi. He's been writing a note, we're doing something. Gandhi himself said that everything we do will be insignificant, but it's of utmost importance that we do it. It's true. I think it seems to be clear that this is the time of the world without leaders, because we have leaders. It's now the time for humanity. It's a different state. It's a different state we have to be in. We can't come out of it alone. They've all been eliminated, all the big guys with the charisma and all that stuff. Well, they keep emerging. Huh?

[40:51]

They keep emerging. Yeah, they're boring. How do you distinguish between, well, if I think about the Livermore blockade, I would call that an aggressive action. It's non-violent, so there's a distinction between that kind of aggression and nuclear war aggression. Yeah. But that was an aggressive action. It was, yeah. It was not that kind of aggression. Right. So there's some more distinctions that have to be made. It was aggressive, but it was non-violent. So you can use the word aggressive in various ways. But when we talk about aggression, as a technical term, we mean violent, pushy.

[41:58]

We think of aggression as power manipulation. Actually, it was a kind of negative aggression. It wasn't a positive aggression. It was a negative aggression. So it was a little bit different. You have to think of it in a different way. Because negative aggression is to stop something and not to push something. And then again, using your first example of the cart that's going forward, you're saying, how do you turn the cart around? Well, it's a lot easier to turn the cart slightly in another direction than it is to turn it all the way around.

[43:01]

And perhaps what we need to do is rather than keep saying, no, no, no, no, no, we have got to get it together and come up with some positive actions ourselves. Because the question is always, okay, if we don't do this, then what do we do? And if your answer is, well, I don't know, just don't do that. That's not very useful. That's right. It has to be some positive. Do this or do that. I agree with that. I was going to say, apropos of waiting for a leader, somebody charismatic, I think that for each of us there are a group of people that we can reach in our immediate surroundings, family or colleagues, places close to us. Not as many people as can be reached by the President of the United States or a national leader. But we can do a cent in terms of, you know, besides getting ourselves out to vote, figuratively out to vote, we can raise other people's consciousness about the issues.

[44:09]

I think a lot of what's happening recently in the area of nuclear weapons is just that a lot more people are thinking about the question than were thinking about it five years ago. And I can tell for myself, it's just a matter of thinking about the issue more makes one want to do something about it. And to a large extent it's just been a lot of people publicizing the issues and taking positive steps to make people more aware that there's something to think about. And that causes people to respond to it. Yeah, I think so. That's true. If we just make people aware of it in our own context, then that keeps spreading. I'm really interested in what Emily said about this being a time without leaders.

[45:13]

And I'm not sure, you know, I don't know enough whether to say it's true or not, but it's a real interesting opportunity. I was in Selma a year after the big march. And the people there were waiting for Martin Luther King to come back and have another big march. And the difficulties of dealing with everyday problems were made much worse, in a way, after his coming, having to go back to the ordinary dullness of their lives. And the people who were trying to work on things like voter registration and other kinds of things had to encounter this desire to be led and, you know, tell them it's up to every person. And I think that's very hard for us to realize that what we do really counts.

[46:14]

When we're trying to think of how to talk to people whose ideas differ from us, it's really important, I think, to come back to ourselves and realize that we are them. We have the same fears and aggressions and angers. It's just that we may constellate them around a different issue. But, you know, my tendency is always to think it's not me, it's them. And that goes on from the smallest level up to the largest, I think. It's really important to remember it, because otherwise, to us, it is always them. I was really impressed at Livermore, Emily, watching you talk to people, like talk to the police, because that's the hardest thing for me to do. It's pretty easy to just put my body somewhere, but to open my mouth and try and engage people in conversation is very difficult. And I thought that that was one of the best things that happened.

[47:16]

I've been thinking, I can't agree with Pam that people cannot be governed when they don't want to be. I'm thinking of Uganda, Quebec, Hungary, Poland, and here even, where so many of us don't want what's happening, and it's happening. So my question really is, just like on the block, how do you cope when you want to live in loving kindness with a bully who wants to beat you up? There's evil that you have to confront. Gandhi did it all the way with nonviolence. And you can say that you have to deal with certain situations according to the situation.

[48:36]

You have to respond to the situation in various ways according to the situation. Sometimes you have to be violent. Sometimes you have to be violent to do something. But if you can really be so ideal that you say, I will only do it this way, that makes you very strong. And you may end up in some difficult situations. Gandhi was in jail for years. But you always keep your integrity. So the important thing is to always keep your integrity. And this is always the basis of our practice. It's important that you do something, but the most important thing is that you keep your own integrity. And if you use that as the rule, then you kind of know what to do. And someone may beat you up, but you have your to-get-it.

[49:44]

And you may suffer, but if you do something else, you suffer in a different way. You do something that goes against your integrity, that goes against the way you want to do something and feels right, then you suffer in that way. So you have to pick your suffering or pick your juice. But if you always choose according to what really keeps you together, then you always have a way. I didn't mean to say that it was going to be easy to not be governed. It is extremely difficult, but it is still difficult on the other side for them to govern you. And you will lose some people. People will be killed. People are killed in wars as well. It's a different kind of inner strength and a different kind of approach to aggression. And all I'm saying is that it has been done at a great cost, but then wars cost as well.

[50:49]

And if we can teach people that kind of inner strength, then there is less fear. And the less fear there is, the more likely it is that you can fight off the aggressor. Because it's fear that keeps people traveling off to concentration camps. It's not total reality. If everybody stood there and said, OK, shoot me, some people will get shot. Absolutely. But there's only so many people you can shoot still around the country. It's hard to get away. It's a very difficult concept to get across, but I do know that two countries in this century have done it. And have done it with great success. Denmark and India. And if you look at how they did it, that is a way of teaching you the lesson of how it can be done.

[51:56]

I think if we are governed in a way that doesn't suit us, it's by our consent. Because we don't want to give up certain things, because we find it uncomfortable, and so we can't. What's that? We don't want to sacrifice. We like what we have. So we have to pay for it in some way. But that's how we're kept in this situation. Oh, take all these, stay comfortable. Don't do anything to make yourself uncomfortable. And don't you think that a great advantage that Gandhi had was, because of the poverty and deprivation, he really had no trouble in getting his people behind him, against the British. But here, because they're split in the hands and not so sharply, a great many people believe that their security lies with the force. And it's how, for those of us that feel here deluded and without wisdom,

[53:04]

how to get through to these masses of our own countrymen, which Gandhi didn't have to face. We should be a little more mindful of what Gandhi did and didn't do, and what the opportunities are for us here. Gandhi was a very dramatic, charismatic leader. He appeared at a crucial time in Indian history. But he did not, by any means, eliminate violence from the Indian scene. He solved a problem in a unique way that was available to the Indian culture. But as soon as the British left, there were just terrible massacres between the Muslims and the Hindus. Ghastly scenes of terrible destruction. This was in a land that followed Gandhi. We have a much better situation here, where we have institutions and traditions of settling these problems, and we only have to aspire ourselves to the activities that are available to us.

[54:06]

I don't think looking for a leader like Gandhi is... Maybe we feel it would solve some problems for us, but I'm a little leery of that kind of looking. It's hopeless anyway. I'm not so sure what you're looking at in that kind of direction. You don't find someone exactly like Gandhi, but someone who has that kind of spirit, I think, is essential. I think part of the problem is in thinking that whatever we do, we don't run a risk. With the nuclear weapons freeze, we do run a risk. And it's silly to say that we don't. It's just that we're saying the risk of total annihilation is worse, but we're actually saying that this is a lesser risk.

[55:07]

And you can't convince someone who thinks that the most important thing is to keep this country intact no matter what, that a freeze or the elimination of nuclear weapons is a worthwhile thing. They're never going to agree with you. They would have to change that fundamental premise of self-protectiveness first. There just aren't guarantees, and it's not a worthwhile argument to pretend that there are. So somebody who has that feeling of self-protectiveness, and mainly is operating out of a sense of self or group preservation, not so much wanting to kill somebody else, but wanting to protect themselves, and they feel like nuclear arms are their best way to protect themselves, do you feel like that person can be a good Buddhist? Or if that's... you could say that they're...

[56:09]

that... could somebody... Would that add to it? Yeah, thoroughly understand Buddhist practice and be thoroughly practicing? I don't think so. They may understand it, but they wouldn't be practicing. They may understand it, but... I mean, they may have some understanding of Buddhist practice, but they wouldn't be practicing Buddhist practice with that attitude. It's not at all an attitude that's compatible with Buddhism. Where's the point where it's not? Well, self-protection in the first place is not compatible. And self-protection... To use self-defense instead of trying to come to terms with a situation is just a bad attitude.

[57:13]

You know, there has hardly been a discussion between the United States and Russia about peace in the last 20 years. There's hardly been any real... If you were the president, what would you do? I was telling her to read that. Jesus. If you're a Buddhist president, you know, oh, they like me president. Oh, I'm going to go over there and talk to... I want to go and talk to the Russians, you know, and talk to Russians and all those people and invite them over and see what we can do about making peace, you know, back down a little bit, you know, accept some of the things they do, and they accept something of yours, and you accept something of theirs, and they accept something... Pretty soon, you have something going. But if you don't talk to people, nothing... You don't get anything going. And if you just show them your... That's all you get, you know, pretty soon.

[58:19]

Jerry had something to say. The technology we have is incredible. There's no question about that. And the way we deal with our problems is through our technology. And we don't really deal any different...

[58:35]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_49.5