‘The Good Heart’: A Buddhist Perspective on the Teachings of Jesus
A review of ‘The Good Heart’, by the Dalai Lama; Wisdom Publications, 1996.
At the 1994 John Main Seminar—named for the contemplative monk and author of Word into Silence—the Dalai Lama gave a series of talks on the teachings of Jesus. His aim was not to claim the superiority of this or that faith, nor to give an authoritative Buddhist ‘take’ on Christianity. Instead, he intended to explore points of commonality and contrast, foster understanding, and throw light on human values like compassion and forgiveness by approaching them from the standpoint of two great religious and philosophical traditions.
The book takes the shape of a seminar. Each chapter centres on a passage from the Gospels, including snippets from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Dalai Lama reads and reflects on each, then shares his immediate impressions and interpretations. He then opens up the floor to Christian scholars, who respond to his remarks. This gives us the sense of being part of the interfaith dialogue. And it is all very friendly. The Dalai Lama shares his thoughts; the Christian scholars provide context and offer challenges in a warm, inquisitive spirit. It reads like a conversation between friends exploring not just faith but human goodness.
The Dalai Lama reads and reflects on each, then shares his immediate impressions and interpretations.
Perhaps the chief theme of The Good Heart (and I suppose the title gives it away) is that compassion is a universal value, a core part of the teachings of both Jesus and Buddhist philosophy. The Dalai Lama, a long-standing champion of compassion, stresses that we need to be compassionate if we are to live a meaningful life. He connects Jesus’s urge to love thy neighbour with karuna (‘compassion’) and mētta (‘loving-kindness’): the parable of the Good Samaritan beautifully captures compassion unbounded by social constructs, such as nationality, race or religion. ‘True compassion,’ he says, ‘arises out of understanding and is a universal responsibility.’ In his essay on meditation, Pablo d’Ors describes coming to this understanding:
Thanks to meditation I have continued to discover that there is not I and world, but that world and I are one same, sole thing. The natural consequence of such a discovery—and I do not think one has to be very sharp to guess this—is compassion towards every living being; you do not want to do harm to anything or anyone because you notice that you would harm yourself if you did so.
One reason why George Orwell abandoned the life of the imperial policeman was because he was certain he would become brutalised, that is, that he would be harmed by his own experience to such a point that he would stop being sensitive to the suffering of others.
It is not hard to follow a book like this. Accessibility is not the most important thing in the world, but it does matter here, and the Dalai Lama’s gentle, simple style makes Buddhist teaching ‘accessible’. He uses everyday language, concrete examples, and anecdotes from his own life, at once making abstract spiritual concepts comprehensible, relatable and grounded. Whatever your background, reader, you will be able to see your own beliefs reflected here. Importantly, like Thomas Merton, the Dalai Lama does not push his views, attack those of others or clumsily attempt a complete synthesis of two distinct traditions, even if they have much in common.
He uses everyday language, concrete examples, and anecdotes from his own life, at once making abstract spiritual concepts comprehensible, relatable and grounded.
This is not say that there is no attempt at all to settle or bridge differences in doctrine. The Dalai Lama is pushed to consider if there are Buddhist parallels with sin, salvation or a creator-god. He concedes these concepts are not central to Buddhism, which lacks a chief god or focus on divine salvation. But he acknowledges that these are deeply meaningful ideas for Christians and expresses an appreciation of their depth and beauty. Rather than dismissing them, he views them as part of a different path to similar ethical and spiritual goals.
I think it was James Orr who said that ‘contrast clarifies’, and one advantage of setting two systems of belief against one another, even in a spirit of understanding, is to throw light on what makes them unique. One brought up in the Christian tradition might quite easily see depth and richness in Eastern faith traditions, but not in his own. The opposite is likely true, too. Interfaith dialogue can brings out the best in both traditions, as it does here. What we find is that at the heart of Christianity and Buddhism—I appreciate that there are many strands of Buddhism—is an aim to inspire more selflessness, kindness and understanding, a compassion rooted in a recognition of common humanity, not in tribal loyalty. Reading this, we are invited to look past labels and see the good heart, as it were, that united us all.
