Non-Violent Approach Can Lead To Positive Political Changes
By His Holiness The Dalai Lama

The thousands of people who marched in the cities of Eastern Europe in recent decades, the unwavering determination of the people in my homeland of Tibet and the recent demonstrations in Burma are powerful reminders of this truth.
Freedom is the very source of creativity and human development. It is not enough, as Communist systems assumed, to provide people with food, shelter and clothing. If we have these things but lack the precious air of liberty to sustain our deeper nature, we remain only half human.
In the past, oppressed people often resorted to violence in their struggle to be free. But visionaries such as Mahatma Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. have shown us that successful changes can be brought about non-violently.
I believe that, at the basic human level, most of us wish to be peaceful. Deep down, we desire constructive, fruitful growth and dislike destruction.
Many people today agree that we need to reduce violence in our society. If we are truly serious about this, we must deal with the roots of violence, particularly those that exist within each of us. We need to embrace “inner disarmament,” reducing our own emotions of suspicion, hatred and hostility toward our brothers and sisters.
Furthermore, we must re-examine how we relate to the very question of the use of violence in today’s profoundly inter-connected world.
One may sometimes feel that one can solve a problem quickly with force, but such success is often achieved at the expense of the rights and welfare of others. One problem may have been solved, but the seed of another is planted, thus opening a new chapter in a cycle of violence and counter-violence.
From the Velvet Revolution in the former Czechoslovakia to the popular pro-democracy movement in the Philippines, the world has seen how a non-violent approach can lead to positive political changes. But the genuine practice of non-violence is still at an experimental stage. If this experiment succeeds, it can open the way to a far more peaceful world.
We need to embrace a more realistic approach to dealing with human conflicts, an approach that is in tune with a new reality of heavy interdependence in which the old concepts of ‘we’ and ‘they’ are no longer relevant. The very idea of total victory for one’s own side and the total defeat of one’s enemy is untenable. In violent conflicts, the innocent are often the first casualties, as the war in Iraq and Sudan’s Darfur crisis painfully remind us.
Today, the only viable solution to human conflicts will come through dialogue and reconciliation based on the spirit of compromise.
Many of the problems we confront today are our own creation. I believe that one of the root causes of these manmade problems is the inability of humans to control their agitated minds and hearts — an area in which the teachings of the world’s great religions have much to offer.
A scientist from Chile once told me that it is inappropriate for a scientist to be attached to his particular field of study, because that would undermine his objectivity. I am a Buddhist practitioner, but if I mix up my devotion for Buddhism with an attachment to it, my mind will be biased toward it.
A biased mind never sees the complete picture, and any action that results will not be in tune with reality. If religious practitioners can heed this scientist’s advice and refrain from being attached to their own faith traditions, it could prevent the growth of fundamentalism. It also could enable such followers to genuinely respect faith traditions other than their own. I often say that while one can adhere to the principle of “one truth, one religion” at the level of one’s personal faith, we should embrace at the same time the principle of “many truths, many religions” in the context of wider society. I see no contradiction between these two.
I do not mean to suggest that religion is indispensable to a sound ethical way of life, or for that matter to genuine happiness. In the end, whether one is a believer or a nonbeliever, what matters is that one be a good, kind and warmhearted person.
A deep sense of caring for others, based on a profound sense of interconnection, is the essence of the teachings of all great religions of the world. In my travels, I always consider my foremost mission to be the promotion of basic human qualities of goodness — the need for and appreciation of the value of love, our natural capacity for compassion and the need for genuine fellow feeling.
No matter how new the face or how different the dress and behavior, there is no significant division between us and other people.
When I first saw a photograph of Earth taken from outer space, it powerfully brought home to me how small and fragile the planet is and how petty our squabbles are. Amid our perceived differences, we tend to forget how the world’s different religions, ideologies and political systems were meant to serve humans, not destroy them.
When I traveled to the former Soviet Union in the late 1970s, I encountered widespread paranoia, even among ordinary people who feared that the West hated them so much that it was ready to invade their country. Of course, I knew this was mere projection.
Today, more than ever, we need to make this fundamental recognition of the basic oneness of humanity the foundation of our perspective on the world and its challenges. From the dangerous rate of global warming to the widening gap between rich and poor, from the rise of global terrorism to regional conflicts, we need a fundamental shift in our attitudes and our consciousness — a wider, more holistic outlook.
As a society, we need to shift our basic attitude about how we educate our younger generation. Something is fundamentally lacking in our modern education when it comes to educating the human heart. As people begin to explore this important question, it is my hope that we will be able to redress the current imbalance between the development of our brains and the development of our hearts.
To promote greater compassion, we must pay special attention to the role of women. Given that mothers carry the foetus for months within their own bodies, from a biological point of view women in general may possess greater sensitivity of heart and capacity for empathy. My first teacher of love and compassion was my own mother, who provided me with maximum love.
I do not mean to reinforce in any way the traditional view that a woman’s place is confined to the home. I believe that the time has come for women to take more active roles in all domains of human society, in an age in which education and the capacities of the mind, not physical strength, define leadership. This could help create a more equitable and compassionate society.
In general, I feel optimistic about the future. As late as the 1950s and ’60s, people believed that war was an inevitable condition of mankind and that conflicts must be solved through the use of force. Today, despite ongoing conflicts and the threat of terrorism, most people are genuinely concerned about world peace, far less interested in propounding ideology and far more committed to coexistence.
The rapid changes in our attitude toward the Earth are also a source of hope. Until recently, we thoughtlessly consumed its resources as if there were no end to them. Now not only individuals but also governments are seeking a new ecological order. I often joke that the moon and stars look beautiful, but if any of us tried to live on them, we would be miserable.
This blue planet of ours is the most delightful habitat we know. Its life is our life, its future our future. Now Mother Nature is telling us to cooperate. In the face of such global problems as the greenhouse effect and the deterioration of the ozone layer, individual organizations and single nations are helpless. Our mother is teaching us a lesson in universal responsibility.
The 20th century became a century of bloodshed; despite its faltering start, the 21st century could become one of dialogue, one in which compassion, the seed of nonviolence, will be able to flourish. But good wishes are not enough. We must seriously address the urgent question of the proliferation of weapons and make worldwide efforts toward greater external disarmament.
Large human movements spring from individual human initiatives. If you feel that you cannot have much of an effect, the next person may also become discouraged, and a great opportunity will have been lost.
On the other hand, each of us can inspire others simply by working to develop our own altruistic motivations – and engaging the world with a compassion-tempered heart and mind.
Editors Note:The 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is the spiritual leader of Tibet. Since 1959, he has been living in Dharamsala, in northern India, the seat of the Tibetan government in exile.
P.Nathan said,
October 25, 2007 @ 10:32 am
It maybe that the Dalai Lama is the only real buddhist in the world.
None like him exist, even in sri lanka said to be the home of “pristine buddhism” !
He really appears to practise what the Lord Buddha taught.
There was not a hum from our ‘devout’ buddhists when China invaded and subjugated Tibet from 1949 to 1951, commiting neumerous atrocities in the process.
The lankan state ignored the rape of tibet.
In the early 70’s Sirimavo was enraptured by the chinese offer to buld the BMICH in memory of her late husband – the cost of which, china recouped many times over in arms deals later on.
But I doubt that his words will find any response in the present day sinhala buddhist psyche.
Rohan said,
October 25, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
An excellent message for peace. Something that must be read by all leaders of nations. They create the biggest problems for humanity.
The message that you cannot cease hatred with hatred, and that it can be done only with love and compassion is very clear.
Suresh M said,
October 25, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
His Holiness Dalai Lama is a true Buddhist practitioner. Often, he even had kind words for his Chinese occupiers.
Unfortunately, our three main Buddhist monasteries practice Sinhala Buddhism. They instigate hatred against all minorities, including Sinhala Christians.
ZG said,
October 26, 2007 @ 6:05 am
If one read the many books that has been published on the teachings of this grate man, no matter what religion he/she belongs to, they will appreciate the value of life, the real meaning of it. It is a shame that we as a country have never supported the people of Tibet, due to our blindness despite calling our selves protectors of budhism. Sri lankans only put on the cap of “protectors of Buddhism” when they want to intimidate others…. shame of the majority of people who yet stand in silence for this hypocracy of not only sri lanka but the whole intenraitoanl community who have bitrayed tibet and real teachers like the Dali Lama. As one said, we all will be enemies of the earth, not because we have committed crime but because we have tolerated them.
A.Azmin said,
October 28, 2007 @ 8:38 am
it is really truth
dias said,
October 29, 2007 @ 6:15 pm
An ultimate truth that is practicably impossible to implement within the errorneous human systems we have created fo ourselves – be they the situation in the middle-east or Sri Lanka.
Nevertheless, experts in conflicts resolutions should take Dalai Lama’s advise as the most most fundamental basis when developing hollistic solutions to conflicts.
As for the comment with regard to “he must be the only good Buddhist in the world” – I defer to disagree as I have perosnally met a handful of highly enlightened Buddhist monks in the USA – all from North American and Eurpean backgrounds though practicing Theravada Buddhism in California. Do a google on “Abhayagiri” and “redwood” and you’ll find a link to a monestary in the redwoods of California where the priests even go on the age-old tradition of pinda-pathe (sp?) – carrying bowls for food in the town of Ukiah in California. These priests – I can assure – are REAL.
Nik_the_greek said,
November 22, 2007 @ 5:32 am
Very good! I am proud of Dali Lama!!!!
NAKALAKAS!! (Is my name(not really))