All language subtitles for The.Dalai.Lama.Scientist.2019.1080p.WEBRip.x265-RARBG2_English

♪

[narrator] Eighty-five years
ago, in a remote corner of
Tibet,

a little boy was born to
a poor farming family.

One day, miraculously,

he was discovered

to be the reincarnation
of the 13th Dalai Lama,

and he was soon carried away
to the capital city of Lhasa,

to become the next political
and spiritual leader,

of the vast kingdom of Tibet.

But the little boy had a secret,

locked inside his heart.

Since my childhood,
I love technology.

If I had not become
the Dalai Lama

and I still remain
in my native place,

then eventually so I may be

engineer or electrician.
Since childhood,

always a curiosity.

Something, new things to see,

I always developed the question,

Why? Why? How?
How? Always happen.

I think real introducer
about technology

is some small toy,

small machines.

Then I play a few moments,

and then out of my curiosity

I always open, dismantle.

I think maybe fifty/fifty
chance to re-assemble.

Fifty failed.

And then, actually not
much interest for study.

I'm really very,
very lazy student.

I always prefer play.

One movie projector which
belonged to 13th Dalai Lama --

because it's now quite old so,

quite often you see, broke down.

Small dynamo,
produce electricity.

Then I begin to realize
AC, DC, how it works.

So then gradually,
you see, developed

interest about science.

I have a keen interest
about cosmology.

My telescope,

I used to use it to
look at the moon.

Then I found some
rock mountains.

Western side, shadow there.

East side, no shadow.

Moon, no light.

But light only from sun.

Clear.

One full moon night,

I arrange my telescope.

And I invited my tutors,

"Please look whether
light come from sun."

So they seriously watch,

and then agree, "Yes."

"Moon -- no light.
Light come from sun."

So then, 1954, when I
was in Peking, China,

we visit huge
hydroelectricity factory.

I have sort of keen interest

and then asking some
questions to those engineer,

or electrician,
electrician right?

About the differences of AC
and DC, and these things.

And then also you see
different sort of factories.

I think I was the only person

fully alert to see how it work.

The Communist Chinese
army entered Tibet

in 1950, and despite
the many months

that the young
Dalai Lama spent in

high level meetings in Beijing,

when he returned to Lhasa,

negotiations with Chinese
government leaders

soon began to fail,

and tensions started to rise.

In 1959,

rumors of a Chinese
government plot

to kidnap the Dalai Lama caused

300,000 Tibetan people

to surround the
Dalai Lama's palace,

creating a human
wall to protect him.

The Dalai Lama was
able to secretly leave

in the middle of the
night in a daring escape.

Four days later, the
Chinese army took action

to disperse the crowd
around the palace,

and fighting broke out in Lhasa.

This fighting soon
spread across Tibet,

and thousands died
in the aftermath.

Many Tibetan families
escaped from Tibet

to join the Dalai Lama in India,

where Prime Minister Nehru
had granted him land.

At the age of sixteen,
I lost my freedom.

At the age of twenty-four,
I lost my own country.

And yet, over time,

he was able to create
one of the most

successful refugee
communities in the world,

run by a democratically elected

Tibetan government in exile,

with the rebuilding
of the monasteries,

now in India,

and with the
preservation of Tibet's

unique Buddhist science,

philosophy,
spiritual traditions,

language and culture.

Gradually, the Dalai Lama began

to have opportunities

to begin meeting with
leading scientists.

David Bohm,

Von Weizsacker,

and some other,

great scientists.

These people become my friend,

and not only friend,

but Von Weizsacker
and David Bohm,

I consider my own
teacher of physics,

generally, and particularly
quantum physics.

But science is always
seen as measurement,

is that no longer true?

Well, science is whatever
people make of it.

You see, science has
changed over the ages,

and it's different now from
a few hundred years ago,

and it could be different again.

Now, there's no intrinsic reason

why science must
necessarily be measurement.

This is another
historical development

which has come about over
the past few centuries

that is entirely contingent
and not absolutely necessary.

And when Einstein produced
his special theory,

which The Times
newspaper of London

dismissed as being nonsense, um,

was he moving towards wholeness?

Yes. He definitely was.

As he moved eventually toward

a view of field theory
where everything

was one field, all
the fields merging.

So, it was a step
toward wholeness

although not, you know,
it was a limited step

but still it was the beginning.

David Bohm and
Carl Von Weizsacker

explained that the great minds

which created the current
field of quantum physics

at the turn of the century,

Einstein, Bohr, and others,

created their
groundbreaking theories

through thought
experiments alone,

not by carrying out
experiments in the lab --

thought experiments
which were similar

to those created
by leading scholars

in the various schools
of Tibetan science.

Physics, like quantum physics,

very similar

the Madhyamaka
philosophistic view.

Nothing exists objectively.

Wonderful.

After that visit,

the Dalai Lama met with a
new group of scientists.

I met His Holiness in '83 at
an international conference.

Immediately the charm,
his keen intelligence,

and totally unassuming,

just pure interest,

I was very touched by that.

And we were in the middle
of this conversation

and his assistants were
pulling him by the arm,

"Your Holiness, let's go."

And then he said, "Why don't you

come to Dharamsala

and we can continue
these discussions."

It was in February of 1985

that a phone rang,
"I'm Francisco Varela,

I'm calling from Paris.

I understand that you're
trying to put together

a science meeting
with the Dalai Lama."

I was a friend of
Francisco Varela's

and Adam Engle came down
to the Ojai Foundation

and met with us and we sat
under this big oak tree

and we discussed connection
between interests

that Francisco and I had

and what Adam and Michael
Sautman wanted to do.

And I remember really
clearly he said, "Adam,"

he said, "don't do physics,
do cognitive science."

It was a really good fit
between Adam and Francisco.

They had complementary skills

and so the whole
thing began to unfold.

It was very, very
extraordinary to watch it.

I mean it happened.

The most interesting things
that happen in evolution,

and therefore the most
useful things to explain

the diversity of life
are internal factors

rather than selective pressures.

Yes, it is true that if
the planet goes very cold

animals have to change.

But, how they change,

how they go about it,

is the result of
internal factors,

much more so than
external factors.

It is as if external factors

impose very broad constraints

but do not, cannot possibly

determine what will happen.

And I find this very
interesting because

it's an exact parallel
of what we saw

in perception that,
yes, we need light

and we need some
stimulation in the retina.

Those are the constraints.

But, what we see depends
on the internal factors

and the two together give rise

then to some kind of
a stable perception.

Well, here it seems to
be much the same thing.

The environment gives
some kind of constraint on

internal factors, then
species and evolution.

His explanation, very clear,

I think very precise.

Very helpful.

A person who have real authority

in certain scientific field,

at the same time,

personally practicing
Buddha Dharma,

that's I think quite rare.

So, you see, he can explain

with a more fuller
knowledge of both fields,

science and Buddhist philosophy,

so that's very useful, helpful.

Certainly.

There was actually
like a huge comet,

but of such dimensions
that the just the collision

evaporated the seas so the next,

what was it? I don't
know, many years.

It was purely in
terms of clouds.

That meant that you know
the dramatic impact of life,

at that point, life
virtually was abolished.

Who stayed?

As I mentioned yesterday,
our little friends.

They were untouched.

We might wipe ourselves
out of the planet,

with atomic bombs,

and that probably wouldn't
end life on the planet.

So, in fact, from that point
of view you can reverse

the tree and put
the bacteria on top.

They are the best.

We are very so/so

because in fact we have made
our environment so fragile.

So, the result --

I mean these serious
discussion with scientists,

then it became clear, this kind

of discussion with
scientists is mutual benefit.

And then after it was over,

I looked at His Holiness again

and I said, "well you
want to do it again?"

And he said, "yes."

On the day of the
second meeting,

we got a call from Oslo, Norway.

The Dalai Lama had just
won the Nobel Peace Prize.

...and I will call on you
as you raise your hand.

We're open for questions.

Why do you think you were
chosen for this prize?

And don't be humble.

I think as I mentioned earlier

I think last thirty years,

become refugee,

you see,

desperate situation.

Yet, I follow

strictly, with my
own, how do you say,

according to my own principle --

non-violence.

I think that is the main reason.

Later on,

I learned that some
of his advisors

had said, "you have to cancel

this science conference,

because this is a
great opportunity."

But, he refused to do so.

His commitment was
to the scientists.

Here he was,

he'd just won the Nobel Prize,

and he was still
perfectly present,

calm,

steady,

impressive.

The vast majority of
scientists were skeptical.

Now when I first sat
down with the Dalai Lama,

it was actually
quite surprising.

See, I had the
stereotyped vision

of an Asian spiritual master

as kind of floating on a cloud.

They're going to
be transcendent.

Eyes half closed,

occasionally saying
perhaps inscrutable things,

but, here I'm sitting
down across from him,

I had this feeling I was
across from a wrestler,

intellectually.

He was taking my ideas
and he was grabbing them,

and testing them.

Now, I would like to show

experimental evidence
for the atom.

Are there techniques,
like a microscope,

or some technique
which will allow

us to see even a single atom.

Now, until very recently
this was impossible.

But, within the last ten to
fifteen years we now have

very interesting evidence.

There's a laser which comes in

shines on the atom,
illuminates the atom.

And then the light is given off.

And we can see it.

You see a tiny, tiny
pinpoint of light

from this single atom.

So this looks --

It is through the telescope?

Or through a microscope?

No, it's with the naked eye.

Naked eye.

It's so bright --

it's so bright.

Yeah, it's very small

but extremely bright.

Does it move?

No, it's localized in
a very small region

a very, very small region.

It's an ion trap.

He would ask something

and throw something back at me

and back and forth.

He's like this,
he's got his arms

a little bit outside,

and he's going,

"Hum. Hum."

Hum.

Isn't it the case that
the atoms are always

in a constant dynamic flux?

You can ask, "Is it possible

when one comes to an
absolute zero temperature,

and you can go no further,

are the atoms completely still?

Classically, the
answer would be yes,

in classical physics.

In quantum mechanics, it
turns out the answer is no.

Because, quantum
mechanically the atoms

must always have a small motion.

This is --

Yeah.

This is an
experimental fact now.

You can watch the
motion decrease

until you reach a threshold

and then it flattens out

and the motion
continues at that level

no matter how cold you go.

Um, in terms of the Big Bang,

doesn't there need
to be something

to kind of ignite the Big Bang?

If it really is a bang of sorts,

then there needs to be something

that ignites that Big Bang.

But, if prior to the
Big Bang there is,

it is absolutely cold, then how

could there be any ignition?

How could it be
anything to catalyse?

I expected somebody who
was kind of disconnected

from reality

and in a spiritual fog.

What I found was a person
completely present.

Surprising.

Since over thirty years,

we develop serious discussion

with many scientists,

mainly from America.

Five fields -

cosmology,

quantum physics,

psychology,

neuroscience,

then biology.

The dialogues focused
in detail on cosmology.

George Greenstein

who is a colleague of
mine at Amherst College.

When thinking about the
origin of the universe,

we have a lot of
facts that we know,

but they lead us to a
gigantic question --

we do not know how to
deal with all matter

occupying exactly
the same space.

And, we also do not
know how to deal

with all matter having
infinite energy.

Was the big bang creation,

or was it simply a stage in
the evolution of the universe?

Did the universe exist
prior to the Big Bang

and pass through this state

and then come into
the current state,

or was the universe
created at that instant?

So, what do you mean
by creation here?

I mean, prior to the Big
Bang there was nothing.

After the Big Bang,
there was a lot.

So, would you say something

that has caused the
event is a creation?

If you say that

the universe is,
comes from a cause

would that be
considered a creation?

I want to ask you that question.

A third possibility --

the universe existed,
contracted to a bounce,

expanded, stopped,
contracted to another bounce,

and this way endlessly.

An endless series of cycles.

Beginning-less.

So to relate this story

in that you told us
the different options

that speculations
that physicists have

come up with, the
Buddhist position

seems to be much closer
to the third option

where there is this
constant expansion

and shrinking and then
coming into being again.

This repeated dissolution

and the origination
of the universe.

One thing that we
need to bear in mind

is that this idea in a
repeated kind of dissolution

and origination of the universe

does not necessarily
suggest that

the same kind of
universe will come

into existence over
and over again.

And also same sort
of elements as well.

So, you can envision

a new universe with whole sets

of new properties and elements

that may not be the same

as the one that existed before.

And here of course
from the Buddhist

point of view, karma
has a role to play.

point of view, karma
has a role to play.

One thing I would like
to mention, however,

is that the idea of our planet

being the center
of the universe,

this anthropocentric,
was never in the picture.

From the Sutras,

they speak from the beginning

of billionfold universe.

Ours is a small unit.

A thousand of those
being a secondary unit.

A thousand of those
secondary units

being a tertiary unit,

that means a
billionfold universe.

They speak of universe

being like curtains of lights.

Like horses spouting fires.

Wheels of light.

All these beautiful images

that you seem to be already

looking the Hubble Telescope.

But still, the
idea that there was

almost infinite
possibilities, universes.

And I know for
beginning-less also

there is another thing --

there must have been life.

There must have
been consciousness

in all those billion universe.

So, in a way, our Big Bang

is a very, very
small part of history

from that perspective.

His Holiness says that,

he has a hundred percent support

for Matthieu when he contrasts

the problems, the concept,

the imagination problem
versus the logical problem,

with respect to beginning

and beginning-lessness.

So, the idea that

we can imagine...

it's easier for
imagination when we say

that there is a beginning.

But, logically, we
have more problem,

but it's harder to
imagine when you say,

"it's beginning-less",

but logically that seems to be

more in tune with the reason.

The knowledge

about cosmology, Big Bang,

these things,

in principal,

Buddhist sort of
cosmology explanation,

quite similar.

The dialogues also focused
on Quantum Physics.

What you see here
is a little laser,

which emits light.

These particles go in
one after the other,

one after the other, okay?

There's a contradiction here.

On the one hand we have
individual particles,

which can go through
one slit only at a time.

On the other hand, we have
the stripes which indicate

that there are waves which
go through both slits.

How can something
go through one slit

and through both slits
at the same time?

This is now a very
important point,

which is new in modern physics,

is that the

observer/experimentalist
decides which

of the two features,
particle or wave, is reality.

So, the observer has a very
strong influence on nature.

There is no reason why in
this run of the experiment

you get this result.

And this is really the
first time in physics

that you see
something like that --

that we see events

for which we cannot build
a chain of reasoning.

Some people even say
that what we observe

in the individual quantum event

is a spontaneous
act of creation.

So, with this I think I
have finished my exposition

of the quantum physics
of individual particles.

And as the next one,

I would like to go through
the quantum physics

of two or more particles,

which also has its own

deep, deep, uh,
mysteries for us.

The notion which
we use to describe

connectedness of two particles,

the name is entanglement.

So, the idea is that
these two particles

even if they are separated
over very large distances,

they always remain one system;

they are not really separated.

So, when you're talking about --

dependency here, the
fact that what happens

here on one side
seems to be dependent

on what happens
on the other side,

we're not talking in terms
of causal dependence, are we?

That is a very deep question.

A little illustration --

suppose you have two dice
and then at some time

you throw a die and your
friend throws a die.

And it turns out that
even as both of them

are completely random they
always keep the same number.

How can that be?

So the idea is that
these two particles,

even if they're separated
over a very large distance,

they're always, they
always remain one system.

They're not really
separated in a deep sense.

I'm sorry, are you implying that

the entire universe is
internally entangled?

Well that is a nice idea,

but I would not want to
take a position on that

because as an experimentalist

I would not know
how to prove that.

His Holiness was saying,

probably someone
who can prove it

will have to be able
to live very long

to see the whole thing.

Exactly. They would
need a lot of money.

They continued to meet.

You might ask whether
everything is the same

or whether something has
changed in quantum physics,

and there are actually
two important changes.

One change concerns a
technical thing happening.

And I know that Your Holiness,

you love technology,

so, I will mention that,

that is the fact
that based on these

fundamental questions
which we discussed already,

people are developing
a new technology

for information and that
is really a big surprise.

Now, this is a
picture which tries

to indicate the
entanglement of many qubits.

Each blue point is
supposed to be a qubit

and you have many
connections here.

Now, if I measure one qubit

then it changes the whole state.

It does not only change
the one I look at,

it changes all the other ones.

When I measure another one,

another qubit, and
that changes the rest.

And I keep going

and if I keep going
the right way,

in the end I have
the solution I want.

This is a completely
new way of thinking

about computation, it is
different from any computation

people have been talking about.

So, in a sense it's
a first technical application
of wholeness.

I think this sort of
subject is very important.

In any case is it those
subjects which often,

you see, create more confusion

that itself is showing
it's more complicated.

So really worthwhile,
a further discussion.

And I think a discussion between

scientists or
specialists in this

particular field and Buddhist,

I prefer young scholars.

They are your team.

Yes. My team, my team, yes.

Now the second point
which happened,

which was actually
in part encouraged

if not inspired by our
earlier discussion,

is some new ideas
which we are developing

on the conceptual foundations
of quantum mechanics.

We are simply asking,
maybe knowing,

maybe knowledge
is as fundamental,

or maybe even more
fundamental than reality.

We can very well handle these
kind of paradoxical situations,

we have been talking
about, mathematically,

and we can confirm
them in experiments

with very high precision.

But, we still do not know
conceptually what is going on.

Why is the world so strange?

And, what I want to see some day

before I pass away
that someone explains

to me why it is so strange.

So, I want to, so
I want to learn

new concepts and
this is a place,

and there were some new
concepts brought out

in your discussion which
are very interesting

for me, and where I
have to think more

and where I hope
I learn something

which might even be relevant
in helping to understand

some of these
phenomena in physics.

So here I will insist
on the critique

of the idea of
intrinsic existence

and of the idea that they
have intrinsic properties.

So to begin with, science
made a momentous step

forward as soon as it

understood that
certain explanations

have to be given in
terms of relations,

rather than in terms
of absolute properties.

First example, the
Schrodinger cat.

You have a box,
and inside the box

the bottle contains poison.

You have a big piece
of radioactive material

that has the
probability one half

to disintegrate.

The state of the piece
of radioactive material

is in the superposition
between being disintegrated

and not being disintegrated.

And according to
quantum mechanics,

the cat should be half
dead and half alive.

But this sounds absurd,

because when you open the box

and see in the box
it is not the case,

you see either a dead cat
or a cat which is alive.

So, there is a paradox.

And, can I just say,
maybe we should add

that there is no
cruelty involved here,

because this is a
thought experiment.

Thank you, John. Yes
this is perfectly right

and I must say I've personally
gone to Schrodingers' house.

I've seen in his house
that he had many cats

and so he loved cats.

So hopefully not
experimented on cats.

Yes, fortunately it's
a thought experiment.

Experimenting on cats.

No.

Never!

Perhaps you remember,

we met six years
ago at Stanford,

and we had a discussion
with a few other people

for morning and lunch

and that was a very
important event in my life.

And since coming here
I've learned a great deal.

I hope to start by
addressing this question

about the nature of matter

and the nature of life.

Now, the single most
important thing we know

is that the world
is made of atoms.

This is a picture of iron
atoms put on a surface

of a piece of metal.

Each of these little
bumps is one atom.

You have to get it very,
very cold for them to stay.

So, maybe it's too cold to move?

Frozen.

Atoms are made of other
particles such as electrons

around the outside.

This is very strange.

Our current understanding
of these particles

is they have no size --

infinitely small,

and we describe the particle

in terms of these field
lines, these fields.

If the atom were the
size of the earth,

the size of this electron

would be smaller
than one millimeter.

So we know it must
be smaller than that.

Now, how do we know that?

We actually take electrons

and we throw them
at another electron.

And if the electron had
size, these particles

of electrons would bounce
from them differently

than if the electron
was just a point.

And we can mathematically
predict which is which

and what we see --
no size, just point.

Whether there is anything,

that is, do they provide
any kind of obstruction

to an incoming entity.

And my impression from
what you just said is yes,

and that is you can
collide two electrons

but they collide as if
they were pure points

rather than having any type
of spatial dimensionality.

You are absolutely correct.

When we speak of simply
the existence of things

in our shared world,

when you posit this,
what is actually

the nature of the electron
itself independently

of its own parts, that type
of ontological analysis,

you don't find it.

So, then you are left
with a couple of options,

again you can either say, well,
these elementary particles

and so forth all these
things that we identify,

they do things.

So to say as they're
doing things and things

are done to them that they
don't exist is foolishness.

Every property that I
know of -- it depends.

So when we say the electron

has these intrinsic properties,

we don't say it has
an intrinsic property,

we're not going to talk about
the electron as a being.

It also includes
the interaction,

we have to include
the interaction.

Because that's the observation.

Because in order to even
observe the electron

we need some interaction.

So in that respect,

I don't think it conflicts
with the Buddhist philosophy.

All the others are a matter
of the observation it has,

which means it intimately

is connected with the
rest of the world.

I don't see a conflict,
quite frankly.

I think it may be
worthwhile to explain

about basic structure
of Buddha Dharma.

Now, I speak in
Tibetan. Translate.

After the Buddha's
enlightenment,

the Buddha was reluctant to
actually give a teaching.

There is a beautiful
passage in the scripture

which says that,
"Because I fear that

no one will understand, I
shall remain non-speaking

and remain in the forest."

All the teachings of the Buddha
have been really presented

from the point of view
of the two truths,

and he who does not
understand the two truths

cannot understand the essence
of the Buddha's teaching.

So what we are talking
about here is the two

One is the ultimate
level of reality which

is the emptiness where
nothing can be found.

But there is also
another level of reality

which is the conventional
relative level

on which causes and effects
and everything functions.

And this ability to
distinguish between two levels

of reality and two truths

and understanding
existence in terms of

these two becomes
very important.

In other words Buddha
is saying that it's not

but things don't exist
in the way in which

we tend to assume they do.

They don't exist as
they appear to us.

This is what quantum physics
have also discovered;

as they go deeper into
their understanding

of what makes up the physical
world, they don't find anything.

So they have come to realize
that there is nothing

that supports the objective
reality of the material world

that we assume.

In some sense what
the quantum physics

have come to is
very similar to what

Buddhism has also come to.

And the assumption behind
all of this is that

it should be findable.

Once you mentally deconstruct

what makes up what seems like
an solid thing in front of you,

you'll come to recognize that
nothing stands there as the true

referent to which you can
point and say, this is it.

So therefore Buddha says
that the form is empty.

And then the question arises,
does that mean nothing exists?

Then the second
presentation is made

which is that emptiness is form.

So you cannot accord a
hierarchy of existence

to the matter and mind, both are
devoid of intrinsic existence,

but they do both exist on
the basis of designation

and causes and conditions.

So they have
dependent origination

but they don't have
intrinsic existence.

The scientific dialogues

covered the field of
cognitive science, as well.

Emotion which is
based on ignorance,

such as strong anger, hatred

and also attachment.

One of my American
friends, one scientist,

Aaron Beck, he mentioned,
when we develop anger,

the object which we feel angry
at appears very negative,

but actually, ninety percent
of that negative-ness

is mental projection.

What we find is that when
we get a negative image

of somebody else and
it stays on and on,

we start to attack
the other person.

But actually we're
attacking the image.

By attacking this
image of the person

we're actually injuring a person

who may be nothing
like the image.

So the more we have
the negative image

of the person,

the more we're
going to attack him.

But it's always the
image that we're having

that is bothering us,

not the real person.

So we talked about
delusion before,

in a way a lot of hatred
is based on a delusion.

But it's also between countries,
nations, ethnic groups.

They tend to have
kind of an image,

a mental image of
the other people

as some way subhuman.

Let's say when the Germans
would have pictures

of the Russians
during World War Two

they'd show the Russians
as looking like beasts,

wild beasts.

Then of course the
people found it's okay

to shoot wild beasts

because they're not
human beings anymore.

So I think a similar
Buddhist concept,

all these negative emotions

are based on ignorance
or misconception.

Your Holiness if we just
depart for one moment,

you mentioned about the
broad perspective before,

and I think much
of the unhappiness

that individuals have

is because they
lose perspective.

And I thought I'd
give you an example.

There was some time ago

I was asked to consult
about a professor of physics

and he thought that he had
made a very great discovery

which might give
him the Nobel Prize.

And, um, he got passed over.

He did not get the Nobel Prize

and so he was depressed.

And so I said,

"Well, how important a part
of your life was this prize?"

And he said, "A
hundred percent."

So I asked him, I said,

"Do you have a family?"

And he said, "Oh yes."

And I said, "Well, how important
is your family to you?"

So he said, "My wife
-- twenty percent."

And I said, "Do
you have children?"

And he said, "Yes, I
have three children."

And I said, "How important
are they to you?"

And he said, "Oh, I guess
they're about forty percent."

And then I said, "Do you get to
see your children very much?"

He said, "Well no. I've
had so much time working

on my physics
project that I really

haven't spent much
time with them."

And I said, "How do
you feel about that?"

And then he started to weep

and I said, "Why
are you weeping?"

He said, "It reminded me
when I was growing up,

that's just the way
my father was to me.

And so now I suddenly realized

what I am missing out on,

my father missed out on it,
and I'm missing out on it

and of course my children
are missing out."

So, I said,

"Now how important are
your children to you now?"

And he said, "eighty percent."

Anyhow, he left the office

and he wasn't
depressed any more.

Oh, very wise. Wise.

I think that
method, that method,

that we call exactly
analytical meditation.

Oh, really?

Yes.

Sometimes, I express
that compared

to ancient Indian psychology,

particularly
Buddhist psychology,

modern psychology looks
like the kindergarten level.

Well, I'm a secularist.

The only reason I
met the Dalai Lama

was because of my daughter.

And I knew that
if you got invited

to his palace in Dharamsala

you got to bring
a single observer.

And I thought what a kick
this would be for my daughter.

And so although I thought
this was just another

one of the Bay Area
fads, I figured, okay,

I'll make an exception. I'll go.

We start with Paul Ekman,

Professor of
Psychology and Director

of the Laboratory
for Human Interaction

at the University of California

medical school in San Francisco.

But what you really
should know about him

is that he is a
master of the face

and of emotions, and
of reading emotions,

and he has more
than thirty years

of world class research.

For inexplicable reasons,

he and I really connected.

I felt like I'd known
him all my life.

And that the function of emotion

is to get us moving, active,

very quickly, without
having to think.

But many, many,
most of the things

we become emotional
about are things

we have learned in the
course of growing up.

And the issue which
I will get to later

is can we unlearn some of them.

So what I have been
doing is trying

to distinguish many
different important states,

the emotions, the moods,
resentment, hatred.

One of the reasons why we have

so much difficulty once
we become emotional

is that the emotion
itself enslaves us.

There is what I would like
to call a refractory period,

that is a period in
which new information

doesn't enter or if it enters
it is, interpretation is biased.

Now a refractory period
may be only a few seconds,

or it may be much longer.

As long as it's occurring
we can't get out of the grip

of that emotion.

I want to say that after um,

spending more than thirty-five

years studying emotion,

I am impressed about how
little we still know about it.

When we met and tried to think,

what do we mean by
destructive emotions,

we came up with the definition:

emotions that harm
self or others.

Your definition is

extremely subtle.

Your definition of
destructive emotions

is what disturbs the
calm of the mind.

Yes.

I'm Buddhist.

My ultimate goal is Buddhahood.

This is my business.

How can we educate our emotions,

by what means, without
becoming Buddhists?

Yes, that's right.

[speaking in Tibetan]

[translator] So therefore,
there's a possibility

here that even
though the grasping

at the intrinsic reality
of self or whatever it is,

the object, has arisen,

one could prolong the
causal sort of process

between that
instance of grasping

and the actual arisal
of the affliction.

[speaking in Tibetan]

[translator] In terms of really
a precise analysis of what takes
place,

let's say in the
first instance of apprehending a
flower,

the very first instant
you simply apprehend

the flower without reification.

You're simply apprehending
the flower itself.

In the next instant...

And that is a valid cognition.

But normally speaking,

in the second instant then
there's the reification

of the flower.

As soon as that reification
of the flower takes place,

then you're into
a false cognition.

And so His Holiness
concludes here

it is to be seen
whether you can find

the precise neural correlate
of the mere apprehension

of the flower, versus
the very next instant

of the reification
of the flower.

And so it would be
very interesting

to see whether by
studying the brain,

you will be able to
discern the difference

between a valid cognition
and an invalid cognition.

In addition, the
dialogues focused on the

Neurobiology -- oh wonderful.

I think if we
properly sort of study

these and get some knowledge,

I think it can serve seven
billion human beings.

The Dalai Lama invited
me to come meet with him

because he was
interested in catalyzing

serious neuroscientific
research on the mind

and brains of
Tibetan practitioners

that spent years
cultivating their minds.

And in fact on that
momentous day in 1992,

he was quite stern in a way,

and challenged me and he said,

"You've been using the
tools of modern neuroscience

to investigate depression and
anxiety and stress and fear.

Why can't you use
those same tools

to study kindness
and compassion?"

And for me it was a wakeup call.

I didn't have a very
good answer other than,

that it's hard.

Scientific collaboration

and research began in earnest,

even though neuroscientist
Francisco Varela

became seriously ill.

And a conference on neuroscience

was organized in
the year of 2000

for the presentation
of their results.

I wanted to tell you,

you know, Francisco
got very ill in 1997

with the cancer and
then after that he had

to make the decision to
have the transplantation

of the liver.

He had to decide
to die or to live.

And at that time he was thinking

that he did not want
to do the transplant.

Then he received a fax
from you where you said,

"You must do everything
to get healthy

and keep working and
practicing and doing science."

And he said,

"this is a message to me

to make the right
decision, to live."

And he made the right decision.

Thanks to you.

Strong feeling of reunion.

Thank you.

One of my oldest
friends. Great scientist.

Your Holiness,

this afternoon or now,

what I'd like to
turn to is the theme

of the meeting on
destructive emotions,

and talk about some antidotes

to destructive emotions
and how we can think about

those antidotes in
neuroscientific terms.

And one question
which we have pursued,

whether meditation
will have effects

in a long term way on
this area of the brain.

A more formal experiment

that we have recently completed

with Jon Kabat-Zinn,

who presented to Your Holiness

at a previous Mind
& Life meeting.

Jon Kabat-Zinn

has been developing methods to

use mindfulness meditation

in a large variety
of populations,

including medical patients,

employees in the workplace;

he conducted the
training himself.

We wanted to explore the extent

to which these factors of

brain activity can be changed

in normal lay people.

The logic in this experiment

was to see whether
antidotes to stress,

meditation,

can have a beneficial effect

on the immune system.

So, at the end of the
study, the participants

got the vaccine.

The finding that we
are actually the most

excited about because
it's so unusual

and it has never been
demonstrated before,

and that is when
we vaccinated them

with the influenza vaccine,

we actually find that

the meditation group shows

a stronger response to
the influenza vaccine

compared to the control group.

We will be repeating
this study with

measures using MRI

which allow us to look
deep within the brain

so that we can actually
look at the amygdala.

We are energized with vigor

and zeal to pursue this

in the future and we hope to

continue this kind
of collaboration.

Um, Your Holiness, like
my colleagues before,

just a little, a little,
thought before we begin.

It seems to me truly wondrous

that I am here again
with you once more.

We have done experiments
with audition,

with memory,

with conflict of
attention between

visual and auditory.

The answer is always the same --

the transitoriness
of mental factors,

it is like they
come and they go.

And what we have here

is a correlate in
this green stuff.

That was for me
the big discovery,

that the brain
actively undoes itself,

so it creates like gaps,

where you know the transition

from one moment to the next

is actually marked.

So, you have recognition

and then action, but
they are punctuated.

It's like you know saying,

perception, comma, action.

You don't just put
them in a flow,

in a continuum.

This is again what
we were talking

about the other day --

that time lasts a

little bit, and
in fact it lasts,

here you can see
the first moment

of time of the recognition

is about a third of a second,

then another same,
similar moment

when you do an action,

which is pushing the button.

This is systematic.

We've seen this in all kinds
of different conditions.

His Holiness is interested
to see whether you agree

that this corroborates a
point of Buddhist psychology,

and that is in the first moment

it is purely visual perception

which is not conceptual.

And the second moment,

whatever that moment
whatever the duration

of that moment happens to be,

then the conceptual mind

apprehends, this is this.

Absolutely.

You cannot compress a
moment beyond typically

normal conditions
150 milliseconds.

Even if It's something
almost immediate,

it's about 150 milliseconds.

This moment of arising
is another whumph.

So the brain works
by these whumps.

And whatever it is,

whether it is visual
perception of the field,

whether it is the
close your eyes

and you have a mental image,

it is the same thing.

Now to really conclude,
Your Holiness,

my point is that this
was done with somebody

who is not really
highly trained,

but we, know what we want to do

is to take highly trained people

like meditators who can actually

go into much more finer detail,

what was the moment
of experience?

And for example,

we want to work
with the monasteries

in Dordogne in the
south of France,

and in May, for example,

we hope to have
Matthieu come to the lab

and do these kinds
of experiments.

So, if we can find differences

even with ordinary people,

then with more expert
people we should

be able to really go
into much finer detail.

So with that thought
I wanted to conclude,

because this is where, to me,

there's a true possibility
of collaboration,

not just in principle

but in a very concrete sense.

Thank you very
much, Your Holiness.

Francisco Varela, Richard
Davidson and others

invited scientifically
trained Matthieu Ricard,

who had received a PhD
in Molecular Genetics

before he became a monk,

to help them craft the
experimental design.

All this scientific
sort of research work.

Oh wonderful.

Now you bring into
the laboratory

somebody like Matthieu,

complete stable mind,

no distractions, no thoughts.

So when the stimulus
comes, he's always ready.

And the results are
completely different.

Meditators who are experienced,

are masters of precisely

being able to become aware of
what happens in their minds.

And these first person
methods are a radical

departure from
classical science.

One is disembodied, impersonal.

The other one is fully
embodied, totally situated.

So here we have an occasion

to really bring very
much into the hard core

of research in science
that idea. Why?

Because it is interesting
for science, the question

of how to study consciousness.

Both of them can
give us knowledge.

In both of them,

you can have good science.

They found certain
sort of knowledge,

oh wonderful,

is not just speculation,

but they actually found through,

or proved through, experiment.

This is an image of her brain,

if we split the brain
in half, like that.

Now we are going to do
a demonstration for you,

Your Holiness.

So you can, you can see
actually that the areas

are much more extensive
during mental activities.

Yes, yes, that's right.

[speaking in Tibetan]

Well, actually, in dreaming,
the brain is very active.

And that has been studied
with these techniques,

and there is activation in
all of the sensory areas.

So actually, that's very true.

With the MRI we get
spatial resolution,

so very fine spatial resolution.

With the EEG we get
time resolution,

things that are very fast.

With this we're after
chemical resolution

and chemical selectivity.

That's the real advantage
of using this particular

imaging versus something else.

We can be very selective

about the chemistry
that we look at.

Then the instrument
itself, also wonderful,

very sophisticated,

oh wonderful.

Must be very expensive.

Unexpectedly,

just months before they were
to meet again in person,

Francisco Varela's health
failed him for the final time.

He lost his long struggle
with liver cancer.

He became terminally ill.

Our last conversation,

not face to face,

but through modern technology,

through video,

from Madison to Paris, isn't it.

That's very moving.

Good morning

my dear friend.

And in some sense
I also consider

you as a spiritual brother.

I was with Francisco when
the Dalai Lama called.

He could no longer move.

He could no longer talk.

But he was watching
so strongly the screen

with the Dalai Lama
speaking to him,

that I thought he was going
to dive into the screen,

as if it were a swimming pool.

He was in the screen with him.

And it was a very,
very moving moment

for everyone who was there.

So I wanted to express my,

uh, deep feeling to you,

as a human brother.

And your contribution

in science --

I think you made,

especially in neurology

you made great sort
of contribution.

And then also in our work,

some kind of dialogue

between science

and Buddhist science of mind,

and also some other field,

I think you made
great contribution.

So we never forget that.

Until my death,

I will remember you.

One year later Francisco's
wife and son met

with the Dalai Lama,
in remembrance.

How old are you?

Ten.

So, before you
come to this world,

I already know your father.

So great, really great.

The Dalai Lama told me

that he always has this
photo of Francisco with him,

and that he takes it with him,

whenever he travels,

wherever he goes,

to this day still.

And then, the Dalai
Lama reaffirmed

his personal commitment
to driving forward

the collaboration
between Buddhist science

and western science,

in the years ahead.

In 2003,

the Dalai Lama opened

up his conversations

with scientists to the public,

with a groundbreaking conference

at one of the most prestigious

scientific research
universities in the world --

MIT [Massachusetts
Institute of Technology].

In 1998,

we added collaborative research

to our mission.

And by that what we had in mind

was a true collaboration

between Buddhism and science,

where scientists and Buddhists

would stand shoulder to shoulder

and design the
scientific protocols,

recruit the subjects,

execute the research,

analyze the results together,

and publish together.

All of our public meetings

have been co-sponsored

by major research universities,

starting with MIT

and then with Georgetown

and Johns Hopkins
Medical Institute,

Emory, the Mayo Clinic,

the University of Zurich,

that really has
gotten credibility

and acceptance.

I'm going to explain

a few things

about how mental
imagery is being used

as part of a,

an effort of personal
transformation.

I'll be talking
about introspection

and mechanism in mental imagery,

but let me start off
by pointing out that

I have to be extremely humble.

Um, that was

a fantastic talk we just heard,

and it reminded me of

how little we know

in the scientific community,

just how narrow

and focused we've been.

Hopefully we're starting
to build a brick

that can contribute to the wall

but we really must be modest.

So with that preface.

Let me talk about

what we've discovered --

The Dalai Lama spoke

before an overflow
crowd of 14,000

at the annual meeting

of the Society for Neuroscience,

despite a petition started by

some Chinese neuroscientists

to ban him from speaking.

And in 2014, the Dalai
Lama was invited to speak

at one of the world's foremost
medical research centers,

the National
Institute of Health,

where he was greeted
with a standing ovation.

I don't think I can recall

ever seeing this
auditorium this full,

and I've been at NIH
for twenty years.

So that says something
about the person

who is sitting to my left,

who I think all of
you want to hear from,

His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

His Holiness saw a demonstration
just a few minutes ago,

of a thirteen year old
girl with cerebral palsy

who is in our
rehabilitation lab,

with some very high tech

analyses of how
her motor problems

connect with what's
going on in the brain,

and how training
on the elliptical

and some other
things they're doing

is improving her
leg's functioning,

and maybe reprogramming

the motor part of her brain.

The controller is here,

so controller damaged,

and then this
movement difficult.

So now I learned,

training here, can
change the controller.

Ultimately, scientific
research should

bring some benefit to humanity.

The company or concerned people

who made this,

I really very much appreciate.

And you, now you see,

can tell them how
useful this is.

And then,

I think in Europe,

I think comparatively
better, better facilities.

But look at Africa.

Yeah.

Many poor people.

And then less
developed countries,

the suffering is immense.

During the 21st
century scientists,

technologists really

develop wonderful
sorts of inventions.

So you can see, you can touch.

Cold hand.

That's this device here.

You see how the
Vagus nerve here.

Yes. And it works?

Great sort of result, out
of scientific research,

and technology also.

Wonderful.

Wonderful.

[narrator] The Dalai Lama
collected a prestigious
award today

for his unique
contribution in engaging

with multiple
dimensions of science.

The John Templeton Foundation

stated that for decades

the Dalai Lama has focused

on the connections

between the investigative
traditions of science

and Buddhism, specifically

by encouraging
scientific reviews

of the power of compassion

and its potential to address the

world's fundamental problems.

The Templeton award,

which was established

over forty years ago,

claims to be the world's largest

yearly monetary award.

The Dalai Lama

says that he
intends to donate it

to help impoverished
children in India,

and also to fund further

scientific research
and investigation.

The Dalai Lama continued
to collaborate with

including Richard Davidson.

If it weren't for
these dialogues,

I think I wouldn't have
found some key insights.

It's been deeply
important and meaningful.

And I think that it
will transform science.

Neuroplasticity simply
means that the brain changes

in response to experience
and in response to training.

Most of the time the brain
is changing unwittingly.

Recent evidence suggests that

the average American
adult spends

forty-seven percent of her

or his waking life,

not paying attention
to what they're doing.

Now what you see,

here, is the expression

of high amplitude
gamma oscillations.

These gamma oscillations

when they are seen
in normal human

beings are typically very brief,

less than one
second in duration.

But we observe them
continuously at high amplitude

in these long term
meditation practitioners.

These are oscillations
which are associated

with states of
focused attention,

as well as periods of insight
when different elements

of a percept

or an idea come together

in a kind of momentary insight.

Then you see a burst of gamma.

Now, this is very interesting --

we have for the very
first time a technology

which allows us to actually
look at epigenetic changes

in human brain tissue.

We can take a blood cell,

and we can convert that cell

into a pluripotent stem cell.

We can then turn it into

any other kind of
cell in the body.

And one of the things
that we can do, in a dish,

is that we can turn
it into any kind

of neuron that we find
in the human brain,

and then we can look
at the gene expression

in that neuronal stage.

And so this is going to usher in
a whole new era of investigation

that enables us to look with
much greater specificity,

at the brain, than ever before.

It is also important to know
that there are three major

periods of increased
plasticity in the brain --

one is right around birth;

the second is around
the onset of schooling

between the ages of
five and seven years;

and the third is
around adolescence.

These are periods where the
brain is radically reorganized,

and these are all
opportunities for intervention.

The Dalai Lama
also worked closely

for many years with other
scientists, like Paul Ekman.

In 2016,

they launched
their comprehensive

map of human emotions.

If I heard you
correctly, Your Holiness,

you are talking about
a map of emotions.

Yes.

We human beings,

this marvelous intelligence,

either you see becomes
a source of happiness,

or a source of worry.

You have all the facilities,
but at the same time

can be very, very
unhappy person.

We met every week
for almost two years,

trying to figure out

how can we use graphics

to give us insight
into our emotions?

How can we map them?

The process of creating the map,

of answering the questions
that he kept raising

about how to do it,
how it should be shown,

made me think about
emotions in a way I hadn't

thought of up until then,

after fifty years
of studying emotion.

Because of emotions we may
starve ourself to death,

because of emotions we
may take our own life,

but the fundamental
drives are puny compared

to the power of emotions
which override them --

they are what drives life.

We must, sort of, utilize

a deeper level of our ability

to think,

to tackle our emotions.

The scientific dialogues
continued, and they covered

molecular biology and genetics.

What I'm going to
talk about essentially

is how parents

alter the activity of genes

in the brain and how
that influences the way

their children
respond to stress,

and in particular what
I'd like to talk about,

and that component that
may be somewhat new,

is how it is that the influence
of parents can persist

potentially over
the entire lifespan.

The idea is,

that as I mentioned,
parental care alters

the activity of
genes in the brain,

and that these effects
are very specific.

Then the second
component of this --

these parental effects actually
involve a form of plasticity.

But this plasticity
is different.

It doesn't involve
connections between neurons.

The modifications actually occur

at the level of the gene itself.

And that there is an
organization of the chemical

environment in which
the gene operates,

and that is the effect

that then sustains
itself over the lifespan.

They began to collaborate.

And what was so

impressive I think was
the overlay between

Buddhist philosophy

and cognitive
behavioral therapy,

and what I wanted to
do was to try to bring

that into a particular context.

What we're understanding is
that many forms of illness

and disease is shaped
first by events that occur

early in life.

And second, it is shaped by

various forms of
family experience.

And I'd like yourself and
members of the audience

to simply imagine
life as a child,

growing up in a family with

drug abuse, unemployment,

financial stress,

and physical and sexual abuse.

And emotionally they
then become people

who are very
sensitive to threat.

For these children their
anger is not wrong.

It is very adaptive.

We've created an environment

in which the child
must normally be angry.

And one of the problems
that we face in medicine,

in particular in psychiatry,

is how do we reach
out to those children.

How do we deal with
that form of anger?

Of course, you know, related
to this is the question

which His Holiness
was saying that he has

been often asking
and interested,

that as a result of
changes at the brain level,

there is a
manifestation of changes

at the psychological
and emotional level.

Yes, that's uncontentious.

But can one also imagine

the reversal process,

where as a result of
a thought process,

change in the thought process,

one could see a change on
the brain level, as well.

The optimism here is
that these can occur,

and that the
dialogue involved in

cognitive behavioural therapy

or in Buddhist philosophy

can, there is the prospect,

of changing at the level
of the gene itself.

There is the prospect.

I think a lot of our problems,

not necessarily created
by technology itself,

but by anger, hatred, fear.

I had the honor to spend
a week in Dharamsala

at the invitation
of His Holiness

for a remarkable meeting,

"The Nature of Life",

and it was a truly
remarkable experience.

It was a discussion
we were having to do

about embryonic stem cells.

And it was offered

from the Buddhist perspective

that the Abhidharma
mentions that

through the meeting of two
regenerative substances

of the mother and the father,

consciousness enters and the
being then becomes sentient.

From which you might
reason that the being

becomes a sentient
immediately at fertilization,

and that there would therefore
be very serious problems

with working with such a cell.

And that was the opening
position, the opening thought.

And as more scientific
discussion went back and forth

about this point,
it emerged that yes,

but if you took embryos
and separated the cells

you got two people, not one.

And if you implanted an
embryo it was no guarantee

that you would even
get a single person,

you might get none,

because most embryos
spontaneously abort.

And so maybe it wasn't so
simple. And maybe in fact --

and it was just a remarkable

moment for me as a scientist

hearing the Buddhists and
His Holiness discussing this.

Maybe, in fact,

there was a different
interpretation there,

and maybe there was no
negative karma associated

with experimentation
at that point.

I think our

knowledge about consciousness,

as time goes, time passes,

I think will increase,

this is my feeling.

Right now in the west, people

are trying to write about

the ethical questions
in genetics.

And I hope that the
monks here and yourself

don't feel like
you have to wait.

I know several of
the monks have said,

"Well, I have so much to
learn and so much to learn."

You also have so much to teach.

Still a lot of things
to further develop.

So combination of
discussion, you see,

helps to extend knowledge,

and the field of
scientific research

also now can expand.

The Dalai Lama supported
opening the field

of contemplative neuroscience

to a new generation.

I'm a neuroscientist,
and I did my PhD

and postdoctoral work
at Emory University.

And they suggested that I go to
the Summer Research Institute.

And then following
on that I was able

to get a grant to
do a research study,

a neuroimaging
study on meditation,

and so that really
launched my career

into a different direction.

The Summer Research Institute is

really instrumental
in this whole field.

They bring in a lot of the
senior researchers and scholars,

and a lot of the younger
graduate students and postdocs

that are coming up,

and the idea is to really
foster our development.

Young scientists who attend

the Summer Research
Institute are eligible

to apply for a
$20,000 Varela grant.

More than sixty-three million in
follow on grant research funding

in the field of
contemplative neuroscience

has been raised as a result.

If you put out a request
for papers to a conference,

who should be allowed to speak?

You know, if you're
a young person

and you're just getting
your feet wet you may

actually be making a fool
of yourself when you get up

and give your poster paper
or your presentation,

but actually that's part
of growing into the field.

There's a nurturing that
you can do of a community

through inclusion
in a conference.

Amishi's lab was awarded

a Varela Grant in 2006.

Hello, everyone. Can
you hear me? All right.

Can you see my face? OK.

The Dalai Lama's intervention
allows me to take very seriously

the wisdom that comes
from the Buddhist texts.

Even in the conversation
I had with him directly

during this meeting,

it was clear that

this terrain he knows well.

And in some sense my
results were so familiar

to him that he almost
thought there were obvious.

That's sort of shocking
because it's taken us

about seventy years of
attention research in

the field of cognitive
neuroscience to really

come to a clear answer to
some of these questions.

And to him it was what he
predicted and it's what

he was happy to see, but
he wasn't surprised by it.

It's definitely helped me
feel like I have a whole

other goldmine of
thought to lean on

for motivating hypotheses
in our studies.

So Buddha himself,
you see, made clear --

all my followers,
monks, scholars,

should not accept my
teaching out of faith,

but rather a thorough
investigation and experiment.

Today we have the great
privilege of exploring

what is one of the
greatest mysteries of all,

the nature of consciousness,
the nature of the mind.

Professor Christof Koch,
who's a professor of biology

and engineering at Caltech.

He is also the chief scientist

at the Paul Allen Institute

for Brain Science, a
remarkable new initiative.

Your Holiness, I have
the great responsibility

of representing 2,300
years of Western thought

on this in one hour.

This tradition reaches
back all the way

to the Greeks in
Western thought.

It's this tradition that
stresses the empirical

You can think about
things but ultimately

you have to test
them against reality,

and your theories
including theories of

consciousness have
to be testable,

otherwise they are not
scientific theories.

When I spent a week with
His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

I was struck by how
often he talked about

the need to reduce the suffering
of all conscious creatures,

not just all people.

That highly organised
matter such as my brain,

such as your brain, such as
the brains of other creatures,

comes with conscious experience.

I was struck by particular
types of meditation.

You can have what Buddhists
call a naked awareness,

pure experience,
sheer experience,

when you're conscious,
so you're not asleep,

you're conscious, but
there's no content,

there's no desire, no dream,

no fear, no ego,

no sensory messages,

but you're still conscious.

Pure consciousness,
very interesting.

[narrator] More and more there
was strong and

growing support for the concept

of allowing young
Buddhist scholars

who had mastered these
techniques of controlling

their own minds to also

be trained as
scientists themselves.

I think now more
than ten years we

start selected monk students

and in a special sort
of class for science.

I will just make a brief outline

how we are overseeing

many of the science initiatives

that are taking place

due to the guidance
of His Holiness.

The science for the monks

is an initiative
since the year 2001.

That was followed by the

secular science leadership.

The leadership program
came into being because

we felt that was important
not only to give the basic

science education but
also to create a network

of science teachers or
others who do the fieldwork

in different monasteries.

Many science teachers,

they very much impressed.

These monk students

do not know English,

do not know math, mathematic.

But their way to
thinking, to analyze,

you see, very sharp.

In 2006,

when Your Holiness invited us

to collaborate with the library,

of Tibetan works and archives,

to develop this program,

it was a great honor
for Emory University .

Certainly a program like this is

its aim is not only

to impart modern
science education

for the Tibetan monks and nuns,

but His Holiness' vision

here is to prepare

the future contemplative
collaborators with

the science so that

new knowledge can be formed

which can have a

tremendous benefit for
the humanity at large.

And then monk students

themselves also gradually,

they really found

not only just interest

but something very useful.

Extensive science curriculum

has been created and translated.

Many Tibetan monks
have been trained

over years at Emory University

to become science teachers

for the project,

and new science centers
have been created

at all of the leading
Tibetan monasteries in India.

For the first time

in two thousand years,

a dramatic change has been made

in Tibetan monastic education.

Science has officially become

a required course of study.

And if we can implement
knowledge from

Buddhist science and
Buddhist philosophy,

then we can create
a collaboration

of knowledge which can

have a very positive outcome.

Although the outcome

may not appear immediately,

in the long run

they will be great results and

great progress.

And I see it as a contribution

to the future generations,

and, ah, humanity as a whole.

The Dalai Lama also
encouraged the development

of new scientifically based
education curriculum for youth.

A conference was
held in 2018 for the

presentation of
some model programs.

And so your office extended
an invitation to individuals

around the world to think
about building curricula

that have an ethical
dimension to them.

And this is where Jennifer
Knox and her colleagues

in the group at Emory
have been doing some

really fundamental work.

Their program is
called, the SEE Program,

social, emotional,
and ethical learning.

Three focuses of inner focus
and emotional intelligence,

other focus, social
intelligence,

and outer focus,
systems intelligence.

Many individuals who
are in our culture

have experienced trauma

and so without developing

some fundamental skills of

regulating the nervous system,

the students are not

often able to even

move into a meditation
and the breath

can often be a trigger

for that former trauma.

So we've built in
an entire chapter

based on building

skills of resilience.

Scientifically based
on the breakthroughs

that have been
made in the fields

of cognitive science,

epigenetics,

and neuroscience

over the past thirty years,

the SEE program teaches

effective coping skills,

strategies that can used
to regulate emotion,

and strategies to gain focus.

Now the modern knowledge,

education,

not adequate to
bring happy society.

We create some
problem, disagreement,

then the solution,

we put the responsibility
of the solution on gun.

Totally wrong.

The SEE program
has been translated

into twelve different languages

and in April of 2019

the Dalai Lama launched

the program worldwide.

This is our thirtieth dialogue.

Thirty occasions where we
have sat with His Holiness,

scientists,
philosophers, scholars

and contemplatives,

investigating the
relationship between

Buddhist science
and modern science.

We also want to acknowledge

your dear friend
Francisco Varela

whose vision

made it possible
in a very powerful

way for all of us to be together

and to greet Amy Varela.

Where are you Amy?

Who is president of the
board of Mind & Life Europe.

Creating bridges
through dialogue

is not a quick

and straightforward process.

To participate in
a true dialogue,

you must bring to it

the whole of yourself.

You must expect that
building a bridge

may be slow, difficult,

even threatening at times.

Its essence is in its dynamical

and open nature,

which is a necessary condition

for something really new

to emerge from it.

And the active ingredient

in the production of
something radically new

is personal commitment.

Absolute presence

through compassion
and friendship.

Gentle bridges, a
true dialogue between

the Western and the
Buddhist traditions

for investigating

the nature of reality.

The Dalai Lama
continued to push for

the expansion of dialogue with

other scientists from many

other parts of the world.

From Africa,

to Japan.

With Russian scientists,

and with Chinese scientists.

Now we are going
to have one meeting

with Chinese scientists.

This is first time.

So there is real potential

Now here we are a few people.

But we are representing
billions of people. OK.

And that's, not academic,

but world passing
through some kind of

crisis of emotion,

that emotion will not go,

go away by prayer

but training our mind.

In order to train our mind,

we should have fuller knowledge

about the whole system

of our emotion and mind.

We will certainly
welcome you in Taiwan

and we are initiating
continual discussions

in Taiwan sometime.

Thank you.

On his eightieth birthday,

the Dalai Lama
publicly reaffirmed

his commitment to stand

shoulder to shoulder
with scientists

as they tackle the
toughest issues

facing humanity.

I'm a simple Buddhist monk,

but at the same time

eventually I become very
close with scientists.

In our training,

reason become very important.

So this scientific way,

it compels us.

Now think,

how to utilize their
sort of findings,

translate into action.

New ideas.

New way.

Scientists really showing,

I think, genuine interest in

trying to make a better world.

So this is the sign of progress.

So therefore, remain a
little bit skeptical.

Then, skepticism brings doubt.

Doubt brings investigation.

Buddha stated,

all my followers,

monks, scholars,

should not accept

my teaching out of
faith, out of devotion,

but rather thorough
investigation

and experiment.

Through that way,

once you're convinced,

then you accept my teaching.

So, this is quite, sort
of, scientific way.

So, therefore,

my body,

this person,

half Buddhist monk,

half scientist.

♪