Hi Roisin Elder,

I am not sure you are right in saying Buddhism is not proselytising. If it wasn't proselytising, then King Ashoka's ambassadors of peace to Ceylon, Thailand, Burma and the later spread of Buddhism to China, Tibet, Bhutan, Korea and Japan never occurred. Its obvious the Buddha said, 'monks and nuns, go out for the benefit of the world, go out for the salvation of the world, to teach compassion to the suffering'. If, in our time, this does not happen, except in small doses as we see in the engaged Buddhism movements, this is not because of poverty but because of a lack of global intention.

Perhaps Buddhism has become so corrupt, nationalized and hypocritical that its teachings no longer actually work, or no longer actually work as they were originally intended. If so, this would explain the diffidence Buddhists feel to spreading their ineffectual teachings. If they worked, on the other hand, what would stop you from reaching out to the suffering? Since the world is so obviously suffering, and when the obviousness of this suffering is more obvious than
before as graphically displayed on television 24/7.

Poverty was never an excuse before. It should not be an excuse now. Why don't these Buddhist appeal to the rich, convert the rich, start monasteries everywhere, reach out, go out and do stuff, stop counting beads and start knocking heads together to change the world pacifically. Stop calling yourselves Tibetans, be human beings with a message and praxes to help suffering humanity, your brothers and sister across the world.

But you won't do it, because you are caught in your own self-adulatory activities, and your compassion has no more range than a bullet from a pistol. This is why nuclear ballistic missiles will continue to rule the world and you will do nothing but count your beads and whirl your prayer wheels...

Reply to Keni Lynch: Why don't Tibetan Monks do social outreach programmes abroad

I seems to me that are two main reasons why Tibetan Buddhist monks (and Nuns) don't tend to participate in social global outreach programmes:

The first is that they are refugees in a foreign country themselves, the Tibetan communities are generally terribly poor. They have no national status (no nationality, therefore no passports), are unable to own land, they have barely any work, in one of the poorest countries in the world. They themselves rely heavily on the political goodwill of teh Indian Government, and foreign aid. It is extremely difficult for the monasteries and communitites to do more than basically survive. On the other hand, NGO's (etc) are set up by well trained, well funded people from developed, wealthy countries. (Also don't forget, the people who run NGO's etc are very well renumerated for their valuable work, it's not PURE altruism).

The second reason is that Buddhism is not a proselytising religion. This may seem strange to Christian, Muslim or other monotheistic religions, but it really doesn't lend itself to the missionary type of work associated with trying to "save" people in the religious or colonial sense. Within Buddhism the monasteries were traditionally the "powerhouses" of spiritual work, and the monks and nuns would help those who asked them. That would be all the lay people in a Buddhist country. According to Buddhist belief and experience of the nature of the mind and spirit, this spiritual life of a monastic practitioner is ultimately the work of pure altruism.

The Buddhist practices and studies of "the mind" are now attracting a great deal of serious scientific research from eminent scholars at respected Universities in the USA and elsewhere. Try Googlng "Dalai Lama, Mind and Life Conferences" as a starter, you'll find many interesting links as to how their ancient knowledge may have very useful things to offer every human being on the planet, without necessaily lifting a spade.

I hope this information may help to broaden your viewpoint a little.

Nice words... I wished he would talk about the social programs you run though. Are they global, and if not, why not?
The American Peace Corps, as well as numerous AID organizations, NGOs, UNESCO etc seem to be on the news constantly when they seem to have a much humbler set of criteria for what helps (human rights for example). When I see Buddhist monks today talking about compassion and oneness while they do nothing for the world, my heart sinks. Why aren't you global? In Africa, for example, or even South America spreading the peace and love you so believe in. When they don't see you doing anything, cynics will only think you are weak hypocrites, deceiving the gullible with empty words.

Rinpoche u r only noe to serve for the innocent people who are in this samsara. i really love u n respect u la.

Rinpoche u r only noe to serve for the innocent people who are in this samsara. i really love u n respect u la.

Lovely... I very much enjoyed his talk.

What a strong and wonderful perspective on the world.