Buddhism in Today’s Scientific Age — A Conversation with Professor Gayley

New Ten Virtues in the New Age: Part I

Professor Gayley : Tashi Delek. Thanks to Khenpo for coming to the University of Colorado. I have some questions for you. First of all, I’m curious about when the New Ten Virtues became established at Larung Gar, who came up with the idea, who decided to create these New Ten Virtues and why.

Khenpo Sodargye: In Buddhism, we have a sutra called, The Discourse on the Ten Wholesome Ways of Action, which has been translated into both Tibetan and Chinese; the Tibetan version has existed for a long time. According to the teachings in this sutra, during the reign of King Songtsen Gampo, the king established Sixteen Pure Human Laws to serve as the people’s code of conduct. Now at Larung Gar, also based on this sutra, we’ve set up new codes of conduct that are better suited to modern times; some come directly from the sutra while others are newly created, in order to keep pace with the changing world. In short, the Ten Virtues are ten ways to help people refrain from the impurities of body, speech, and mind that arise from ignorance, and so they are called the Ten Virtues, or the Ten Wholesome Ways of Action.

New Ten Virtues in the New Age: Part II

Professor Gayley: What specific social issues are the New Ten Virtues responding to? For example, the New Ten Virtues include not slaughtering yaks, not drinking, and not smoking or visiting prostitutes. Are they responding to specific social issues that are directly related to our modern world?

Khenpo Sodargye: In terms of its relevance, Buddhism is always responding, both to society and to the times we are living in, this of course, while responding to the needs of all living beings. The wholesome ways implied in the New Ten Virtues are the causes of happiness both for oneself and for others, while the unwholesome ways, conversely, are the cause of suffering for both oneself and others. For example, the New Ten Virtues include refraining from smoking and gambling, the harmfulness of which is explained extensively in the Buddhist texts. Guru Rinpoche, as well as many great lamas, specifically talked about the harmfulness of smoking. Similarly, gambling is against the teachings of Buddhism as it makes people desultory and unable to complete anything.

These teachings must not be allowed to become outdated, when examined in the context of modern society. For example, modern medical science has also proven that smoking can be physically harmful to one’s lungs; empirical evidence has demonstrated with certainty, that many people have died of smoking. So, to maintain good health, it is necessary to stop smoking. As for gambling, some people in our region have overindulged in it to the point of losing everything including not only their money, but also their homes, and spouses, and that has severely impacted the well-being of many communities and the whole of our society. To avoid outcomes such as these, and for the benefit of society as a whole, we encourage people to follow as their code of conduct, the New Ten Virtues, all of which correspond exactly to the teachings of Buddhism and which are indispensable to the development of healthy societies in this modern age. Such is our motivation.

The Karmic Effects of Eating Meat and Killing Animals

Professor Gayley: You ask people to take the vow not to sell their yaks for slaughter. So I’m wondering, since most Tibetans will continue to eat meat even if they take the vow not to slaughter, if people don’t become vegetarians, is it better for them to slaughter their own animals to have meat, or to buy meat at the market? We’ve been having this discussion in my class on Buddhist ethics. Which is better in terms of karma?

Khenpo Sodargye: The virtue of non-killing in the New Ten Virtues was not added simply because we wanted it to be there, but is due to the negative karmic effects of bringing immense suffering to living beings since all sentient beings are strongly attached to their own life.

We Tibetans are very devout Buddhists. So I often suggest to herdsmen that there are many ways to make a living other than by killing yaks. A butcher may have no choice but to kill. However, the herdsman can choose to be a farmer or a businessman like many other people in the world, to support themselves with their own skills and intelligence. Some claim that non-killing may impede economic development, but I believe if we refrain from killing yaks, people will still be able to make money by selling yogurt, milk and yak butter. These resources and sources of income are immediately destroyed if a yak is killed.

Therefore, when speaking to Buddhists, we call on them not to kill because the Buddhist teachings require us to value the life of all sentient beings. Meanwhile, for non-Buddhists, non-killing is also suitable because it protects their economic resources over the long term. It is a great pity and an unbearable cruelty, if the yaks are sold to the slaughterhouse where every day, they are killed en masse.

In terms of karmic effects, there are significant differences between buying meat at the market and doing the killing oneself. If an animal is not killed specifically for oneself, the fault of eating its meat exists, but it is not as bad as doing the killing oneself. Why? Because it’s sold as a commodity in the market and it’s not the buyer who has intentionally deprived a being of its life—in that case, the fault is much larger.

Purchasing Meat May Cause More Carbon Footprint?

Professor Gayley: So this raises a really interesting question concerning ethics in Buddhism where, because one does not want to directly harm an animal, one purchases these products at the market which still gives them an indirect relationship to the deed. From an ecological standpoint, it’s said that it’s better for production to remain local. So if Tibetans are not selling their yaks for slaughter locally and not slaughtering yaks themselves for their own consumption, then does that mean they’ll be importing meat from other places in China, thereby creating a much larger carbon imprint which is not ecologically friendly? So that’s an interesting tension between an ecological concern and a Buddhist ethical concern.

Khenpo Sodargye: Here is my opinion. Meat consumption has a very negative impact on the environment as shown by the scientific evidence that the melting of glaciers at the North and South Pole is largely impacted by this dietary choice. As such, from the perspective of environmental protection, people now generally acknowledge that meat consumption accelerates global warming. Additionally, considering the human body itself, scientific research shows that our digestive system is not the same as that of carnivores, which have much shorter intestines. As our digestive system is pretty similar to that of herbivores, it doesn’t have the same advantages in digesting meat as carnivores do; this can result in bad health. Given these reasons, we would be better off eating less meat or no meat at all. This would benefit everyone.

Actually, many people have chosen to be vegetarians for health considerations rather than because of religious beliefs. For example, President Obama and his family, as well as President Clinton, refrain from eating meat for both health and environmental reasons. I believe this is a nice choice.

To address the carbon footprint issue, currently in Tibet, because local needs are moderate, very little meat needs to be imported as small markets can easily meet the need. As far as I know, there is basically no need to import meat from the Han region other than for a small demand for pork, because there’s not much in Tibet, but absolutely no need for beef.

Buddhism vs Science: Difference and Similarity

Professor Gayley: Maybe we can switch topics to think about some of the ways that Buddhism and science can come together. These days there’s a great deal of discussion about Buddhism and science, and so I’m curious, from your point of view, what is the most compelling connection between Buddhism and science, and where do you see serious differences?

Khenpo Sodargye: Speaking of Buddhism and science, Buddhism’s history is older than 2,500 years while science emerged in our world only a few centuries ago, which itself is suggestive of a large difference between them. Today, many people take science as their only standard and thus, we can say that they are followers of Scientism. However, from the perspective of Buddhist teaching, one should examine the rationality of any statement, even if the majority accepts a given assertion. Otherwise, it becomes a matter of blind faith if one simply accepts everything claimed by science without analyzing whether these claims are based on mistaken tenets.

When we talk about the similarities between science and Buddhism, I think we are mainly talking about the study of the external world. Either from the macroscopic or microscopic point of view, Buddhism pretty much agrees with science; this is the conclusion I have come to as a result of many years of study. However, regarding the internal world and the nature of the mind, scientific research has not yielded many results, as science, to this point has placed more emphasis on the material world and has given much less attention to the inner world. This amounts to a missing field of study in that discipline. Because of this, human feelings and emotions, such as happiness, are better explained with the help of spiritual traditions like Buddhism.

Buddhism vs Science: What Is Mind?

Professor Gayley: So what does science have to learn from Buddhism about the mind?

Khenpo Sodargye: I think that there are many aspects of Buddhism that science can learn from, all of which can be simply categorized into what we can call the mind and mental factors. I have read some books on modern psychology in Chinese but have not felt very satisfied with their explanations of the workings of the mind, whereas, many texts in the Mind-only School of Buddhism explain in great detail what wholesome mental factors are, what unwholesome mental factors are, how unwholesome mental factors are classified into primary afflictions and secondary afflictions, and what their attributes and related behaviors are.

These days, many studies related to this area, are carried on in universities, and I’ve had the opportunity to discuss these subjects with professors from several different universities. Although these studies propose to come up with explanations of the workings of the mind, their results are not as detailed and clear as what we find in Buddhism. So at this point, if one is to learn about the mind and mental factors, it is necessary to turn to Buddhism. Ultimately, through studying and practicing the Vajrayana, one will be able to discover and realize the nature of the mind. Specifically, if one masters the teachings of Dzogchen (Great Perfection), he or she will realize the nature of the mind without relying on any scientific analysis or other instruction, which is quite a unique feature offered by Buddhism.

Materialism versus Inner Happiness

Professor Gayley: Many people in the modern world think they can derive happiness from things that are outside of themselves, i.e. that they can buy material things to become happy. For example, many women seem to spend a lot of time worried or concerned about their own beauty or the latest fashion, but they don’t know what they feel inside. So I’d like to ask you a little bit about how you see Buddhism as a way to address this problem of materialism? It seems like people are looking in the wrong place for their happiness.

Khenpo Sodargye: In Buddhism, there are many different ways to relieve the various kinds of suffering. As you’ve said, one is unlikely to find happiness in the material world and so should seek happiness within. I think the best way to have contentment is to have as few desires as possible. In the past, the older and more devout people found it easy to feel happy as long as their basic life needs were guaranteed and they didn’t go cold or hungry. Many people led this kind of a simple and contented life, but these days, most young people in Tibet do not live this way. The Bhutanese people have the highest Gross National Happiness (GNH) index in the world. I think part of the reason is that the majority of Bhutanese are practitioners of Mahayana Buddhism. For most people, both young and old, it is quite common to worry about the loss of one’s beauty or material wealth, this worry then causes lots of suffering. The Buddhist teachings can actually help people relieve this kind of suffering.

I often tell people about the how the Buddhist teachings are integrated into the life of the Tibetan people. Although it’s not common among Tibetan women today, traditional women used to talk about their old age with optimism, describing how they were accepting their lost youth and coming old age with serenity and confidence. I think the key to this attitude is consistent meditation on impermanence. If this practice is done well, it can help one to more easily accept any change that happens either to oneself or to others.

A consistent practice of meditating on impermanence can help one internalize the reality that nothing is permanent, neither the beauty of one’s face or anything else in this world. Then, even if a close friendship should break apart or lovers should separate, one’s mind has the conviction that nothing is permanent, and so the pain that one feels will not be as great, or at the least, their thoughts will not lead them to commit suicide. This is the benefit of meditating on impermanence.

Buddhism vs Science: the Special Conceptions of the Body

Professor Gayley: Another question about the body: What can science learn about the body from tantra? In other words, because tantra has some very special ideas about the body, is there anything that science can learn from studying it?

Khenpo Sodargye: One thing about tantra, it has lots of information on the wisdom channels, which are mostly explained in the context of prana, nadis and bindus. This teaching remains almost unknown by modern science, although scientists do have some different explanations regarding the existence of some channels in the body. Additionally, the Buddhist sutras state that there are 21,000 microorganisms inside the human body, which corresponds closely to the findings of modern medical science. Also, when we sit in meditation, the vajra posture is similar to that of a pyramid and so it has great benefits to both the body and the mind. This is also substantiated by scientists in their study of the shape of Egyptian pyramids. Other than that, as far as I know, no specific scientific study can be found so far of the human body that relates in any way to what is taught in tantra.

The Proper Study Approach to Buddhism

Professor Gayley: These days there are a lot of experiments where meditators are being hooked up to machines to observe the effects of meditation. In this way, science is learning a lot from Buddhism. I’m curious if there is anything that Buddhism can learn from science?

Khenpo Sodargye: First, I think if a scientist is going to study Buddhism, he or she should undertake their study according to Buddhist instructions, like the exploration of the mind, of which Buddhism offers many different approaches. Amongst many who study Buddhism, whether they are scientists or students, when they encounter something that is incomprehensible to them, they tend to take it as legend or myth, which is quite a wrong conclusion. In fact, only with the proper method and attitude of study can they go deeply into Buddhism.

As for your question about Buddhism learning from science, I’d like to refer to the situation in both India and Tibet. In India, almost all the monastery or monastic colleges will offer some teachings based on scientific knowledge, such as in the fields of astronomy and geography, and so on. Also, in Tibet, for monks or nuns, as well as laypeople who come to a monastery to study, it is not enough for them to just learn about the nature of mind. In fact, I wrote a book called Buddhism and Science about ten years ago, in which I synthesized many of the ideas of both science and Buddhism, blended together in harmony. So, we are always learning from science.

Buddhism Is More Than a Science

Professor Gayley: Is there anything that you learned in science that has made you change your view about Buddhism in any way?

Khenpo Sodargye: Actually, no. I’ve read many books on science, for example, on quantum mechanics and also on psychology, and as a result, I’ve come to see that science mainly focuses its study on the material dimension of reality for the purpose of bringing more convenience to our daily life. By virtue of this limitation, it fails to reach a deeper level of the understanding of people’s inner world. Buddhism, however, provides profound teachings on the mind—such as the knowledge of the Middle Way and Buddhist logic—at a level far beyond the intelligence of ordinary people, the study of which makes one recognize how superficial one’s own wisdom is.

As for myself, I’ve been studying Buddhism and science for many years, and the more I learn, the more I feel that Buddhism really is the science of science. In this, I’m not praising myself or praising Buddhism because I’m a Buddhist. I simply have steadfast beliefs from the depths of my heart, that, without any doubt, whenever I have questions related to one of the teachings, I can easily dispel my doubts with the help of other related scriptures.

Khenmo: Female Dharma Masters in Tibetan Buddhism

Professor Gayley: It’s very exciting that now in Tibetan areas, female monastic scholars are emerging for the first time. You’ve mentioned that there are now 54 Khenmos, and I’m curious about how a Khenmo gets trained and what influences they might have on other places in Tibet? Are Khenmos graduating from Larung Buddhist Academy and teaching at nunneries elsewhere?

Khenpo Sodargye: Traditionally speaking, Khenpo or Khenmo is a title given to those who teach the Dharma; they are like male or female university professors. In fact, the title means more or less the same thing. In our academy, a Khenmo doesn’t just have a title but is truly qualified to teach the Dharma. Currently we have 50 Khenmos, whose wisdom may be at various levels, but all of whom have been studying and practicing in our academy for more than 12 years, which is the minimum prerequisite of time that one must study before taking the Khenmo examination. In addition to this, to be qualified as a Khenmo, one needs to pass an oral test, a written test, and a recitation test, all of which primarily focus on the Buddhist teachings along with some worldly knowledge. The title of Khenmo then, is an academic recognition within the system of Buddhist education.

So what is the daily work of the Khenmos? Normally, a Khenmo has about 200 or 300 students, and her main responsibility is to teach them the Dharma. Presently in Tibet there are fewer female monastic communities than male ones. Larung Gar and Yachen Gar have the largest community of nuns but there are not as many in other monasteries. In some monasteries that have nuns there are no female teachers available, so, from time to time, a Larung Gar Khenmo will go and give them teachings.

Historically, in Tibet, there have been very few females who gave Dharma teachings and initiations to Buddhist followers, and this situation that has not yet changed much. To remedy this, His Holiness Jigme Phuntsok Rinpoche, asked Jetsunma Mumso to give initiations to those with faith, as a way to enhance people’s view of gender equality, not to mention that Jetsunma herself is more than qualified by her own merits. At Larung Gar, all of us, including khenpos, tulkus, lamas and nuns, have received initiations from her and relied on her as our Vajra Guru.

So given the situation that there are now many more Khenmos giving Dharma teachings, and that Jetsunma Mumso is honored with such a high status, today’s female teachers are widely acknowledged and well respected and have a much greater influence than ever before. Still, it must be said that when compared to the influence of a Khenpo, some inequality still persists.

Restoring Bhikkhuni Ordination

Professor Gayley: Currently, in the Buddhist world, there’s a widespread movement to revive the full bhikkshuni order. I’m curious about where Khenpo and Larung Gar stand on this. Are you in favor of restoring full ordination for nuns?

Khenpo Sodargye: Professor Janet Gyatso from Harvard University has also paid much attention to this. Khenpo Rigdar in our academy, whom you know, is very proficient in Vinaya, the study of Buddhist precepts, and is researching how to restore the full bhikkshuni ordination in our academy.

Basically though, I don’t think the academy is ready to adopt the full bhikkshuni ordination from the Han region in the next few years. There might be a way to restore the full bhikkshuni ordination from the bhikkshu ordination tradition and then pass that ordination to other nuns, but this is an issue that affects the entire Buddhist community and is not something that can be stipulated or planned by us alone. We are still researching many issues that need to be clarified regarding the possibility of being able to acquire the ordination. Certainly, we’ll try our best to restore the full bhikkshuni ordination, but the outcome still remains unclear at this point.

Professor Gayley: Everyone is really hoping the bhikkshuni order can be restarted so that women can embody the full range of Buddhist teachings.

Terma: a Mechanism for Innovation

Khenpo Sodargye: It is very nice that you are studying terma. As far as I know, there are only a few scholars in the Chinese Han regions who focus on this area. I’m wondering about your process of study and what you have achieved. What is the aim and motivation for your study? Of all the possible areas of study, I am curious why you chose to study terma.

Professor Gayley: First of all, I want to say that this is very interesting for me, as those of us in academia, are accustomed to interviewing others, but not to having them interview us. I’ll try to answer as best I can.

I think terma is very important in religious studies because it offers revelation, and actually offers a mechanism within Tibetan history for the Buddhist teachings to always remain fresh; in other words, it’s a mechanism for innovation. Sometimes people have this idea that tradition has to be very fixed and static, and yet terma shows that tradition needs to be constantly adapting and that religion has mechanisms for this constant adaptation so as to remain pertinent to what is needed right now, in this very time, which to me is very interesting and significant.

Translating H.H. Jigme Phuntsok Rinpoche’s Works

Khenpo Sodargye: I have learned that you are also translating some works of H. H. Jigme Phuntsok Rinpoche. As his disciple, this makes me feel so much joy and gratitude. I’m wondering how long it will take for you to finish the translation and what your motivation for this project is?

Professor Gayley: I became interested in Khenpo Jigme Phuntok’s advice to Tibetans because he’s very insistent on combining the ancient with the modern; that is, combining traditional teachings with what is happening today in terms of social concerns. He has also expressed a lot of pride in Tibet, the Tibetan people and Tibetan history, and so I became very interested in what he has to say in terms of both how he is trying to galvanize Tibetans today to rise to the challenge of rapid social change and what he has to say about Buddhism and science. So those are the reasons behind my translation project.

I started in 2005, with just the very first 20 or 30 pages, and though it has been on hold for a while, I will to come back to it this year and expect that it will take me another 3 or 4 years to complete, because I have so many other things going on with teaching and other projects.

Buddhism Class in American Universities

Khenpo Sodargye: As a professor, you put a lot of effort into studying Tibetan Buddhism and you also speak Tibetan so well, which is really amazing to me. As a professor, when you engage in Buddhist practice, do you have any personal experiences or insights that make you happy and joyful?

Professor Gayley: Well, it’s interesting that in America we have this division between the academic study of Buddhism and actually practicing meditation in one’s own life, So it’s very interesting that one can do both but without the two overlapping. When I teach in the classroom, I can’t ask the students to meditate or teach them to meditate because in this country, we have “separation of church and state,” or, in other words, there are laws that forbid the teaching of religious practices in state sponsored schools. So as this is a state sponsored school, I’m not allowed to do this. Sometimes I take my students up to the Great Stupa of Dharmakaya and then, because it’s a field trip, they can practice meditation and learn meditation in the stupa. Otherwise, it’s like two separate domains. As an individual, I can do both, but mixing the two is not allowed.

Generally speaking, our students are very interested in Buddhism. When I teach a class on Buddhism, there’s always a waiting list. So, it is clear that many students are interested, and I think that they are interested for their own benefit. Still, in the classroom, you can lecture about Buddhist philosophy, engage them in learning the Buddhist view, which is all well and good and they enjoy it very much, but one cannot teach them how to practice.

Khenpo Sodargye: Personally, I think this is all right. For either Tibetan or American students, it is very essential to provide them with systematic instructions on Buddhist theory. I’ve visited quite a number of schools and it’s always great to see that so many professors are studying Tibetan Buddhism. However, I have seen that in some cases, they explain some of the elements of Tibetan Buddhism as though they were rooted in legend. I’m not sure if this is the case at your university, but I have heard that this was happening in some German universities, although I didn’t see any evidence of it on my visit there.

I have also learned that in the U.S., the history of Buddhism is sometimes taught by teachers as though it were a legend rather than a history of what actually took place. If the teachers teach it this way, then students may believe it for the rest of their lives, while in fact, there’s quite a big difference between myth and history. As such, I hope that a more accurate and authentic history of Buddhism can be taught, even if students do not intend to seriously learn and practice Buddhism in the future. I feel this is very important.

Professor Gayley: I agree. I also find that when we talk about Buddhist philosophy, the students’ minds seem to be very engaged and transformed by what they are learning. Even simple topics like impermanence or selflessness, are very interesting to them because many of them have never considered or contemplated these sorts of things before. By virtue of this, Buddhist philosophy really does affect them quite a bit, in a way that is as effective as it is provocative.