The Maitreya Principle

Maitreya Institute, San Francisco, April 3rd 1988

Good evening. Tonight’s subject is the Maitreya principle. I seems appropriate to talk about the Maitreya principle at Maitreya Institute.

The simplest way to look at the Maitreya principle is: Is there anything we all have in common? Is there anything different cultures have in common? Is there anything different age groups have in common? Is there anything people with different social backgrounds have in common? When we ask this question honestly, I think we’ll come to the conclusion that, indeed, we have something in common—loving-kindness. I don’t think you can find any society, any culture, any religion that doesn’t encourage us to develop loving-kindness. My conclusion, then, is that loving-kindness is the common interest of humanity.

How can we develop loving-kindness? How can others develop loving-kindness? And how can we communicate with each other through loving-kindness, based on the foundation of loving-kindness? When we ask these questions, it becomes rather specific. In Buddhism, these specifics are elaborated at great length. And I’m quite certain that if you study any authentic religion or culture deeply, the result of your study will be the principle of loving-kindness. But I, personally, learned about loving-kindness from Buddhism. And it’s because of Buddhism that I’m able to say something about loving-kindness.

In Buddhism, the principle of loving-kindness is applied to everything. Some Mahayana and Vajrayana practitioners might like to say that the Theravada aspect of Buddhism doesn’t have loving-kindness, but this isn’t true. Different schools of Buddhism place more or less emphasis on particular aspects of practice, because no one can do everything at once; it would be wonderful if we could, but unfortunately we can’t. Consequently, some schools put more emphasis on loving-kindness and others on some other aspect, but as far as my limited knowledge is concerned, everything in Buddhism is based on loving-kindness, one way or another.

To understand the fundamental principles of Buddhism, we must go back to the time of the Buddha, 2,500 years ago. The reason Prince Siddhartha left his palace is because he realized he could be of greater benefit to humanity by leaving than he could by staying. Please don’t make the mistake of thinking that Prince Siddhartha left the palace because ruling a kingdom was too much for him. No. His principle reason for leaving the palace was so he could better serve humanity.

After leaving the palace, Buddha practiced for many years, with much hardship. The hardship was there because if you want to get something significant done swiftly, you must make up for it. To achieve enlightenment in such a short period of time, Buddha had to work very hard. After many years of hard work, he attained liberation and became Buddha Shakyamuni.

Buddha’s attainment, in itself, was motivated by loving-kindness, and the path through which he attained that liberation is through the practice of loving-kindness. Finally, his activity was the manifestation of loving-kindness. Even now, after more than 2,000 years, we’re enjoying the results of his accomplishments. Buddha was just a human being, like any of us, yet we’re still benefiting from the teachings he contributed to humanity. That’s what loving-kindness really means, and that’s what loving-kindness does. Every word Buddha taught is the manifestation of that realization that was achieved through loving-kindness. For this reason, the essence of loving-kindness permeates every word he spoke.

Now, we can elaborate loving-kindness by saying compassion, loving-kindness, joy, impartiality. In Buddhism, these four constitute bodhicitta, or the mind of enlightenment. So, loving-kindness is one of the four major components of bodhicitta.

The application of loving-kindness as a teaching of Buddha has a history, a tradition, a lineage and a very precise and detailed explanation. There’s an answer for everything. All the questions that exist have been asked already. When we ask a question, we’re just repeating what someone else asked before us. Therefore, every answer has already been given. Because the questions have been asked, all the answers are there. Of course we can still ask questions. It’s good for us to ask questions. Otherwise, we never find the answer.

That’s one particular transformation. Now, let’s imagine that we’re just an ordinary person who never heard about Buddha, who never heard about Buddhism, who never heard about the principle of loving-kindness as part of the teachings of Buddha. In that case, outside of the context of Buddhism, what is loving-kindness? As a follower of Buddha, I have to say that the loving-kindness which is outside the context of Buddhism is no less than, or different from, the loving-kindness that Buddha taught. It’s exactly the same. Even the loving-kindness we see among animals is the same. What it accomplishes is the same. The loving-kindness that is taught by Buddha, the loving-kindness that is bestowed by fathers and mothers, the loving-kindness between friends, the loving-kindness that arises spontaneously inside of us, that we’ve discovered through our life experience—these are all the same loving-kindness.

When we see two people who are getting along and seem to be happy, why are these two getting along? Why are they so happy? Because they have loving-kindness toward each other. When we see problems between people, between groups, what is happening there? Loving-kindness is lacking between one or both parties, or one or both groups. The lack of loving-kindness sows the seeds of disharmony, of difficulty. Therefore, loving-kindness plays an important role in everything.

There’s one small, but important, difference between loving-kindness from a teaching like the teaching of Buddha and loving-kindness that arises spontaneously, however. The loving-kindness that we practice on our own is more vulnerable to error. We might get it wrong. We might think we’re going to Canada, but after two-hundred miles and three months of walking, we end up in Mexico. That can happen. Even if we’re tremendously sincere, there’s no guarantee. We can still make mistakes. So, when we follow a profound teaching, there’s less chance for error. Of course, teachers can make mistakes, and we can misunderstand the teaching. That can also happen. But, generally speaking, there’s more direction, and this protects us from making too many mistakes. Aside from that, there’s no difference. All expressions of loving-kindness are the same.

As a Buddhist, I wanted to use my life meaningfully by teaching the words of Buddha. It’s what I know, it’s what I have, and I can only give what I have. But I also see the other side. Every individual and every existing culture, education and religion has so much to offer. It isn’t just traditional Buddhism that has something valid to offer. Of course, traditional Buddhism contains very precious teachings. I don’t think traditional Buddhism lacks anything. Indeed, I can think of nothing meaningful that isn’t contained in the traditional teachings of Buddha. But this doesn’t mean only Buddhists have it. I sincerely believe that every culture, every religion, every discipline has something meaningful to offer. If I haven’t seen it, it means I haven’t taken the time. And if I don’t understand, it means my intelligence isn’t open. Perhaps I’m being stubborn and don’t want to admit that someone else has the same thing I have. That sense of insecurity and jealousy is in us. We shouldn’t have them, but we do. I admit that I have them too. I don’t know how severe I have them, but I have them. That’s why I’m here. I’m not enlightened. But I believe that all of humanity has so much to contribute. But what we all have in common is loving-kindness.

At the beginning of my talk I said I felt good talking about the Maitreya principle at Maitreya Institute. I’ll say a little bit about Maitreya Institute here. I didn’t start Maitreya Institute because I wanted to be famous. And in fact, in order to establish Maitreya Institute, I sacrificed a lot. You shouldn’t forget that. And after it was established, some people asked, “Does Tai Situ think Buddhism isn’t enough?” Forget about that. And forget about thinking I started Maitreya Institute to gain fame. Not at all. Nor did I create Maitreya Institute because I had nothing to do. Believe me—I have plenty of responsibility. If I think negatively, I’m buried maybe two-hundred feet under the ground with all the projects and responsibilities on my head and on my shoulders. I can hardly breathe. Therefore, it isn’t that I have nothing else to do. Then, why on earth did I start Maitreya Institute?

In my experience, I saw that there was great benefit when people realized they had something in common. It’s like a switch would get turned on. When we’re able to say “We have something in common,” so much changes immediately. Therefore, I wanted to be able to share a little bit of that which I have with those who are ready to receive it, those who are like a balloon that’s almost ready to pop. It’s filled, but what’s left is to pop.

People who are open, kind, compassionate, but still into their own trip, are trapped within a thin shell that doesn’t allow them to merge. I felt that Maitreya Institute could bring together people of different disciplines who are aiming towards the same goal, but without the unnecessary burden of having to promote their own path as better than others, which is the opposite of trust. So many conditions for ego exist even in good people. In fact, the worst problem that good people have is thinking they’re better than others. To break through that would mean a lot for them.

I’m not saying that I, personally, broke through that as much as I wish, or as much as I should, but I did break through it just a little, and it did a great deal for me. I still have millions of balloons to break, but already I can feel great benefit from realizing, for example, that Jesus Christ was a bodhisattva. Whether he’s a Buddha or not, I don’t know, but he’s definitely a great bodhisattva. Knowing this changed me a lot. Can you imagine—many people don’t know, or they doubt, that Jesus is a bodhisattva. Sometimes I hear some people talk about Christianity seemingly in a sincere way, but I can tell that they’re really trying to make Jesus look bad. That offends me.

Understanding that Jesus in a great bodhisattva in no way undermines, and actually strengthens, my Buddhism. It’s a confirmation of what Buddha is and what he taught. Buddha goes beyond all the limits. When I learn the positive side of any culture, any religion, it gives me a clearer idea of what limitless really means. When I know nothing but just what I belong to, then limit and limitless are nothing more than words in a book. If I only talk to people that think the same way I do, my limitlessness becomes rather mechanical. But when I go beyond what I know, I go deeper into the understanding of limitlessness.

I have an example. A stranger once asked me, “Do you enjoy yourself?” I thought for a moment, and all I could say was, “Do I have any choice?” Because I’d rather enjoy myself than not. Then he asked, “I mean, do you have any problems?” I said, “I don’t have any problems. Of course, there are lots of things to do. You can’t just sit there and wait for everything to fall into your lap—but other than that, I don’t have any problems.” Then he said, “I think I’m not making myself clear. Maybe what you and I mean by problem is different. What do you mean when you say problem?” I told him, “Well, maybe you’ve never had a problem. When you’ve had a real problem, you know what a problem is.”  Then he asked, “What do you mean?” I told him, “A real problem is when you’re sick, when you have nothing to eat, when you have no place to stay, when somebody tries to beat you and kill you. Those are real problems.” Then he said, “I see. I’ve never been in one of those situations.” He was a lucky person. I was very happy for him.

The point I’m trying to make is that when you see another dimension, your understanding is increased. Being open can help you make valuable leaps in your important journey. For this reason, I attempted to introduce this principle through Maitreya Institute, and so far, everything seems to be going in the right direction. I’m very happy about it.

As Buddhists, and as people who try to apply loving-kindness in our own lives and try to assist others to develop loving-kindness, I think it’s very important for us to practice loving-kindness as much as we can. It’s easy to talk about it, and even to become involved in activities that help generate it. We might even learn about loving-kindness, and encourage others to practice it, and yet still not practice loving-kindness ourselves. It sounds hypocritical, it sounds terrible, but there’s no point denying it, since it’s a possibility. Therefore, besides doing everything we can externally, we practice loving-kindness within ourselves. It has to be beyond any limitation. Ultimate limitlessness is something, but relative, tangible limitlessness is something else. I’m talking about relative, in-hand limitation.

So, how can we practice loving-kindness in our lives, with as little limitation as possible? Number one, we have to be loving and kind to ourselves. That’s where it starts. And how can we be loving and kind to ourselves? Since we all have shortcomings, we find reasons not to like ourselves, not to be kind to ourselves, not to be loving to ourselves. But ultimately, each of us is perfect, each of us is pure. There’s nothing that each of us doesn’t have. That’s the first thing you have to understand if you’re a Buddhist. That’s the principle of Buddhism. We call it Buddha nature. Each of us is ultimately Buddha. Ultimate negativity doesn’t exist in Buddhist principle, so, ultimately, we’re each prefect.

Of course, you’re probably asking, “If that’s true, then why such and such and so and so?” Those things are relative, not ultimate. Relatively, we have shortcomings. Relatively we have anger, ignorance, attachment. Each of us has tons of negativity, but this is all relative. That’s the definition of positive and negative. The place for the positive is ultimate. The place for the negative is relative. Of course, sometimes things are relatively positive. That also happens. But as you overcome negativity, what’s left is the positive. Therefore, each of us is ultimately precious, ultimately pure. For that reason, we should respect ourselves, we should be loving to ourselves, we should be kind to ourselves. And when we recognize our own ultimate true nature, then we recognize that same ultimate true nature in others.

So, again, how do we take care of this? One way or another, we are taking care of it. We’re either taking care of it well, or we’re taking care of it badly. Nothing goes into nothing. Everything works. If I drop this cup, it will break. If I don’t eat, I’ll go hungry. Whatever I do, positive or negative, has its own condition, cause and result. For that reason, instead of being negative to ourselves, we’re positive to ourselves, because negativity brings more negativity, and positivity makes things better. It’s quite simple. That’s why we should be positive. That’s why we should be loving and kind to ourselves and others. We have to. It’s what we call “skillful means.” And to that basic, fundamental knowledge, we add a little wisdom. That wisdom allows us to be very helpful—not just helpful, but very helpful.

I have a good example of somebody who tried to be kind, but not being skillful, brought harm instead. It’s actually a rather silly example, but it’s okay to be silly once in a while. A couple of weeks ago, I received an overseas telephone call from a woman whose mother was terribly ill and couldn’t hold down any food. This had been going on for over a month, so the woman was desperate. I asked her, “Why didn’t you call a doctor? Why did you call me?”

She said “I want you to pray.” I told her that, of course, I would pray. Then I asked her what she was feeding her mother. She told me that since the mother couldn’t digest anything, they were afraid to give her hot food, so they were giving her all cold food.

That puzzled me and I asked, “What kind of cold food do you give her?”

She said, “Cold chicken soup and cold milk.” Can you imagine? Even I would get sick if I ate cold chicken soup.

So I said, “I think the solution is quite simple. Maybe you called the right person after all. After tomorrow, heat them up.”

 I spent five minutes of my time talking to her, but I’m happy after all, because I think it helped. So, we try to be helpful to ourselves and others by loving-kindness, but there’s no guarantee. We have to apply wisdom to know exactly how to go about it. We have to have the skillful means. So, wisdom and skillful means are fundamental to showing loving-kindness to ourselves and others.

Before I stop talking and answer any questions you have, I’d like to say a few more words. I’m often asked about the concept of emptiness, and since I feel that loving-kindness and emptiness are very closely connected, I’d to talk about it for a few minutes.

First, how does loving-kindness work? Why does loving-kindness work? We know that it’s beneficial, we know that it works, but how does it work? That’s the emptiness. Everything is just interdependent manifestation. Ultimately, nothing is there that isn’t interdependent manifestation. Hundreds of books have been written about emptiness. People can spend 20 or 30 years studying nothing but emptiness. But the simplest and most fundamental thing you can say about emptiness is that it is nothing more than interdependent manifestation. For example, we can be in the absence of loving-kindness, or we can also be in the presence of loving-kindness. In the absence of loving-kindness, we face lots of suffering, we create lots of suffering for ourselves and others. In the presence of loving-kindness, we experience joy in our own life, and we help others experience joy in their lives. We gain happiness, and we’re able to provide happiness for others. Because of emptiness, there’s a space for loving-kindness.

I have found that there is a general lack of information about emptiness. People think emptiness means nihilism, that nothing is here. That isn’t true. Everything is here. I’m talking, you’re listening. All of this is here. Emptiness simply means that everything is here because of interdepen­dent manifestation. If everything was more than interdependent manifes­tation, there would be no space for anything else. So emptiness means that what’s here isn’t more than interdependent manifestation. Two sentences describe emptiness clearly and simply: “There’s nothing that isn’t interdependent manifestation; therefore, there’s nothing that isn’t emptiness.”

Okay, I’ve been talking, you’ve been listening. Now maybe it’s my time to listen and your time to talk. And I’ll try to answer any questions you’d like to ask.

Is Maitreya Buddha a person who’ll be coming into this world, or is it a principle for all of us who are practicing Buddhism to actualize?

Maitreya Buddha is the name of a particular Buddha. Our present Buddha is Buddha Shakyamuni, and Maitreya Buddha is a Buddha who is yet to come. In sutra, it says, “Bodhisattva Maitreya will become Buddha Maitreya in about twenty thousand centuries.” So, the teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni will last for a long time to come. When the sound, taste, and aroma of the teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni are gone, Maitreya Bodhisattva will attain enlightenment and teach again. He was predicted by Shakyamuni Buddha in sutra as one of a thousand Buddhas.

Rinpoche, sometimes we’re forced to commit harsh acts, from destroying an insect, to disciplining a child or preventing child abuse, to defending a country. Can you talk a little about the role of loving-kindness and compassion in relation to motivation?

We do our best to avoid harmful actions and intentions towards others, always, but this doesn’t mean there’s no space for loving-kindness, even in the worst situation, like a war. Even a soldier fighting his enemy can show loving-kindness. I can’t say exactly how, because I’m not in that situation, but as a practitioner, if I must be involved in a negative situation, I’m sure I’ll find a way to show loving-kindness.

Could you talk about the connection between loving ourselves first and the principle of loving-kindness in putting others before ourselves in the Mahayana principles.

There’s a common belief that showing loving-kindness towards others means disregarding ourselves. There’s an element of truth to this, of course, but no one can show true loving-kindness to others without first showing loving-kindness to themselves. Even a bodhisattva who appears to put others before himself or herself has gone through all of these steps in past lives.

Rinpoche, do you expect Tibetan Buddhism to be one of the foremost exponents of Buddhism in the United States, or do you expect it to be some other sect in Buddhism?

I have no desire for Tibetan Buddhism to take over all North American Buddhism. It makes no sense to me to think like that. But right now, Chinese Mahayana is the largest. Just look at Chinatown in San Francisco. Almost all of the Chinese there are Buddhist. So, right now, Chinese Mahayana is the largest. I believe Vietnamese Buddhism is second. But these differences don’t mean very much. They’re just a different language, a different culture.

I don’t think most people know how many types of Buddhism there are. It is massive. If I had the traditional costume from each Buddhist tradition, I could fill a huge museum. There are that many differences. But it doesn’t mean very much to me, honestly speaking. These differences exist because Buddhism is an old religion, and in olden days, customs and lifetimes were quite different even among neighboring towns in the same country, because people didn’t travel very much. Sometimes even the language was different. Even now, I meet people in certain parts of world, like the Himalayan regions, who haven’t traveled beyond one-hundred miles. Therefore, even though there is only one Buddhism, there are many Buddhist traditions. There’s nothing wrong with this. It’s actually quite good. These cultures are so old, their traditions have been refined by hundreds of generations and have gone through lots of filtration.

Rinpoche, you mentioned impartiality as one of the elements of bodhicitta. Could you elaborate on it?

Impartiality means that our loving-kindness, our compassion, our joy won’t take any particular aim. It’s impartial. It’s for all sentient beings. It has to start somewhere, so it starts with family and friends and extends out to everyone.

How do people move from a lack of loving-kindness toward self and others into love for self and others? What steps do we take?

As far as Buddhism concerned, we practice. It’s quite simple. We learn, we pray, we contemplate. Then we carefully and skillfully apply what we’ve learned. That’s just common sense. But something came into my mind. I’ve noticed that, in the West, when people find themselves in the presence of loving-kindness, they become very emotional. They cry, they become vulnerable, delicate. That can become a problem. We have to be sensitive, of course; we shouldn’t be like a rock that cannot hear anything, cannot feel anything. We shouldn’t be like that. But when we’re over-sensitive, that, in itself, becomes a problem. Therefore, this is something to be aware of. We shouldn’t encourage our sensitivity, vulnerability and emotionality. We allow our sensitivities to manifest, but with caution.

How is dzog chen practiced in Tibetan Buddhism?

Tibetan Buddhism has eight major lineages, all of which are rooted in India. Various individuals who studied with masters in India then brought the teachings they received into Tibet by crossing the Himalayas. That was a very big deal in those days—more difficult than going around the world ten times nowadays. Because these teachings came to Tibet at different times, and went to various parts of the country, eight lineages were established. Tibet was originally pretty big. What you see on maps these days is about half of it. I don’t know what happened to the other half. In any case, teachings such as dzog chen are common to all eight lineages, but are practiced differently by each of them. For example, the Nyingma lineage uses the term dzog chen, but Kagyu lineage uses the term chak chen for the same teaching. Sometimes chak chen practitioners say dzog chen uses too many big words, and sometimes dzog chen practitioners like to say that the terminology of the chak chen is too fundamental. Well, that’s okay. That’s just part of being human. It makes things work.

Rinpoche, when I realized that emotion wasn’t necessarily a part of loving-kindness, I started making changes around that realization, and started working with relationships differently. But the people around me are giving me some problems because of these changes. Can you give me some suggestions how to deal with this?

We’re always a little naive at the beginning of any situation. Naiveté exists, so there must be a place for it. That place is at the beginning. Let’s say we see a flower for the first time in our life. When we see it, we’ll say, “This is wonderful. This is beautiful.” We’re naive about it. But when we become more familiar with it, the thrill, the wonder and the naiveté go away. We’re more knowledgeable about it, more mature about it. I personally think this is good, because we have to grow up. We can’t stay in one place. We have to go forward.

You say you related with people on an emotional basis, and then, after some time, you become wiser and started treating them with concern and care rather than with emotion. You realized that emotional reactions are superficial, and thin, but the other people in your life feel bad about it. It sounds to me like those other people haven’t grown up yet. Some people develop very slowly. Since you have more insight, and you’re no longer naive, for their sake, you might try, skillfully, creating a little bit of drama now and then. That will help them grow. But the drama must be skillful. Being skillful means that even if you know something isn’t necessary, if doing it is the only way to help someone understand something, for their sake, you sacrifice. In Tibetan culture, we say, “We play dumb.” Sometimes, playing a little dumb for the sake of others will help them.

Could you please say a little about the taking and sending practice, how, as a practitioner, it could be done correctly, so it could be more than an exercise of the mind, but actually relieve the suffering of others.

Just by sending positive thoughts, positive energies, to others and taking their negative thoughts and negative energies away from them. Actually, how much your practice helps others depends on your level of sincerity. The principle of being effective is always there, isn’t it? Probably the most effective way to influence someone is to take a stick and swat them on the knee. Since it will hurt them, they feel assured that you’re really doing something. But if you just sit there and send loving-kindness and absorb their negativities, they might feel that nothing’s happening, that you’re just bluffing. One is physical and one is mental.

For the mental one, you need more skill. And if the other person is given a role to play, the practice will be more effective, quicker. While you are sending and taking, they are also sending and taking. That’s the way it works. If you’re the only one doing it, it’s a little harder. But, even if they don’t feel anything, and you don’t see anything, if you do it, it’s much better than not doing it. So, you have to carry on until you master it.

Mastering something means knowing how to do it. When we know how to do it, then we become master of that particular subject. But first we have to understand what it is, then we have to know how to do it, then we have to do it. Depending on how much we do it, that much we become accustomed to it. And depending on how much we become accustomed to it, that much we become master of it. So, we have to carry on to be effective, and it will take time.

I think it’s time for us to excuse ourselves. I’ll ask venerable lamas to pray with me. I’m sure you’ll join.

[Closing prayers]

[Transcribed and edited by Stephanie Harolde]

Return to Top

Sherab Ling, Himachal Pradesh, India
Web pages © Sherab Ling
All contents © Tai Situ Rinpoche, unless
    another author, creator, speaker or artist is specified
Web design by Sherab Ling Foundation (UK)
Comments may be sent to  webmaster@sherabling.org
 
      For additional contact information, click on the contacts link.