Dec 05, 2024 – Meeting with Agricultural Experts and Social Figures
Hello. A new day has dawned at the Seoul Jungto Center.
After completing his early morning practice and meditation, Sunim headed to the Peace Foundation. Although the morning temperature dropped below zero, the autumn leaves on the branches still boast their beautiful red hues.
While working in his office at the Peace Foundation, Sunim welcomed guests at 10 AM. Mr. Joo Hyung-ro, an eco-friendly agriculture expert who accompanied Sunim on a trip to Bhutan last April, visited with two other experts.
A few pilot projects for sustainable development in Bhutan have been successful, and various projects with villagers are scheduled to be actively carried out next year. They discussed how to create a sustainable model for agriculture.
First, Sunim explained in detail his observations and the current situation, including building irrigation channels with villagers, monitoring from rice planting to harvest, and villagers’ opinions on farmland improvement.
“I recently visited Bhutan during the harvest season. There was one paddy field where rice was planted in straight rows as Mr. Joo suggested last April, so we compared the yield. They said the rice grew well compared to other fields. But when I went to see it at harvest time, the yield was the same. The difference from Korean rice is that it grows extremely tall. So as the rice grows, it gets tangled together. People couldn’t even walk between the rice plants. When cutting the rice, they didn’t cut at the base, but in the middle. When I met with the head of the Ministry of Agriculture, he said that no matter how much the government tries to teach new farming methods, people follow them a little at first, but then no one follows them.
So what I felt was that it seems difficult to hastily propose new farming methods. People have been farming their way for a lifetime, and it’s not easy to follow new methods just by hearing about it. It seems that we need to create a model farm to show them directly that the new method is both easier to farm and produces more yields. Only then will the residents think, ‘That method is better,’ and be willing to follow it.”
After explaining in detail what sustainable development is, Sunim also discussed its evaluation criteria.
Seven Evaluation Criteria for Sustainable Development
“For development to be sustainable, first, it should cost little money. Second, it should be efficient to maximize its value. Third, materials should be sourced locally as much as possible. Fourth, it should use technology that local people already possess. Otherwise, local people won’t be able to fix things. If technology is brought in from outside, it’s done once it breaks down after a few years of use. Fifth, the majority of residents should participate, and the benefits should go to the majority of residents. Sixth, people should be happy in the process of doing this work. It should make them feel good after completing it, even if it’s a bit hard; we shouldn’t just make people suffer as a result. Seventh, it should preserve the environment without destroying it. When evaluating whether development has been sustainable, we use these seven criteria. For example, if it cost too much money, if the benefits went to only one person, or if all materials were imported from abroad, we would give it a low score.
The challenge we haven’t solved yet is how to make production more efficient. Building irrigation channels has been a big help. However, we still need to research how to prepare seedbeds, how to improve rice varieties, how to transplant rice seedlings, and how to use organic fertilizers instead of chemical ones. We also need to research planting fruit trees and raising livestock. We need to support things that can generate income, such as reinforcing production facilities, creating drying facilities, or building warehouses to regulate shipments. So increasing productivity is the biggest challenge. This is because productivity mostly requires some specialized skills. Moreover, productivity is directly linked to income, so we also need to balance the entire village community.
So while we have a general direction for other areas, we haven’t yet found the right methods for agriculture, livestock, and fruit farming that suit Bhutan’s climate, soil, and people’s living conditions.”
After listening to Sunim’s explanation, Mr. Joo Hyung-ro strongly agreed.
“Sunim, everything you said is correct. What I’m curious about is if we could understand Bhutan’s temperature, rainfall, and agricultural cycles for one to two years. If we know which months they farm, when the off-season is, we can appropriately arrange which crops to grow. We need to develop varieties and cultivation methods suitable for Bhutan’s soil and climate.”
He then suggested creating a cooperative farming model in Bhutan, citing a case from Hongseong where villagers increased productivity while enjoying cooperation.
Sunim shared the content of recent discussions with villagers about building farm roads and showed a map of how the village’s rice fields are laid out.
“These are terraced rice fields packed tightly together. As the elderly get older, they’ll need machines, so we need to build farm roads. But the residents are against giving up part of their fields, so it’s not easy to solve this problem. It would be much easier to construct if we build a water channel alongside the farm road.”
After hearing Sunim’s proposal and Mr. Joo’s opinion, the others shared their thoughts.
“I think experts like us need to stay in Bhutan for about six months to a year, experiencing the full agricultural cycle, to be able to teach methods that are truly helpful to the residents.”
“The most effective method would be for one Bhutanese person to come to our farm in Korea to see, hear, and learn directly. Even if we go to Bhutan and explain, there are limits to understanding our meaning. If they come to Korea and see for themselves, they’ll get a sense of how to apply it in Bhutan.”
Before they knew it, two hours had passed in conversation. They concluded the discussion by agreeing to go to Bhutan together with Sunim in late January or early February next year to live in the village and find the most suitable farming methods for Bhutan.
At noon, social figures visited the Peace Foundation. These days, the political situation is so chaotic that it feels unusually unstable. Breaking news is pouring in real-time. In such times, various social figures came to Sunim seeking advice on what role each should play.
At 3 PM, former National Assembly member Jeong Bong-ju, who recently attended the Awakening Retreat, visited Sunim to pay his respects. He had been going through a difficult time after losing the primary election, but after attending the Awakening Retreat, his mind became much more at ease. He had a long conversation with Sunim before leaving.
“Sunim, thank you so much for all the good words you shared today.”
After a full day of back-to-back meetings, the day came to an end.
In the evening, Sunim worked indoors, proofread manuscripts, and wrapped up the day’s schedule.
As there was no Dharma talk today, I’ll conclude this post by sharing a conversation between a questioner and Sunim from the live Friday Dharma Q&A on the 22nd.
How Can I Control My Anger Towards Unjust Behavior?
“When I say ‘I’m angry,’ ‘I’m suffering,’ or ‘I’m stressed,’ it’s my problem. It’s not someone else’s problem. I’m the one who gets angry or suffers after seeing someone’s actions or hearing their words. It’s no different from saying ‘I got angry seeing clouds passing by’ or ‘I felt sad seeing the moon rise.’ As a practitioner, you should view it from the perspective that ‘it’s my problem.’
Then should we leave such a state as it is? That’s a separate issue. If you don’t like the moon rising, you can cover your window. You can’t stop the moon from rising. Since we lack the power to stop the Earth from rotating, we use the method of covering the window so that we can’t see the moon. Even if you get angry seeing clouds passing by, can you make the clouds stop? If you can make them stop, then do so. If you can’t make them stop, the suggestion is to close the window. Not everything is beyond our control. There are many things we can do. So, we do what we can do.
Getting angry at seeing socially unjust things is also my problem. Whether to respond to that situation or not is my choice. I can respond with anger or without anger. Or I can ignore it because I’m not angry, or conversely, I can choose to ignore it even though I’m angry. If I respond with anger, the conflict might escalate. Also, if I ignore it while being angry, I might feel cowardly. Even after returning home, I won’t just hate that person, but I’ll hate myself for not doing anything despite seeing such a situation. However, we can respond to such situations without being angry. We can call out wrong actions as wrong and stop inappropriate behavior. In a state without anger, if it’s beyond my capacity, I can also step back. So, in a state without anger, the loss to myself is small, while in an angry state, the loss to myself is big. The Buddha’s teaching is that whether to respond to such situations or not is your choice, but getting angry about it is a loss to yourself. That’s why he taught us not to get angry. He didn’t teach us to ignore situations without getting angry. Do we make rules because there are people who break them? Or Do we make rules even when there’s no one breaking them?”
“Rules are made because someone has broken them.”
“Do we make a rule not to steal because there are people who steal other people’s things? Or Do we make such a rule even when there’s no one stealing?”
“We make a rule not to steal because there are people who steal other people’s things.”
“When the Buddha said ‘Don’t get drunk’, it was because there were people who got drunk and caused trouble. If there was no one who drank alcohol like eating rice and still didn’t get drunk or cause trouble, there would have been no need to make a precept about not getting drunk, right?”
“Yes, that’s right.”
“The existence of rules means there are people who break them. If there was no one breaking them, rules wouldn’t be established. There would be no need to set rules in the first place. When two out of ten people break a rule, the significance of having that rule is to reduce it to one out of ten.
We can’t completely eliminate people who break rules. If there were no one breaking rules, the rules themselves would disappear. So what we can do is not to eliminate rule-breakers, but to get as close to zero as possible. The things you listed in your question are things that exist in this world. Sexual harassment exists, rape exists. These things happen not only between strangers but also within families. Because there are ethics and morals, they happen less within families than outside, but in some special environments, they can happen more frequently within families.
Setting rules is about reducing things that are already happening to minimize harm. Punishment is originally meant to prevent rule-breaking. But now we view punishment as revenge. We keep trying to retaliate. When we see someone breaking rules, we want to hit them or kill them, but that’s the concept of revenge. Unjust things and rule-breaking always exist in the world. We use ethics and laws to try to prevent these things from increasing further. Ethics don’t come with punishment. We can only criticize. It’s about making people conscious of others’ eyes. Things set by law are meant to reduce harm to society even through punishment. However, even when set by law, sometimes these things increase.”
“Yes, Sunim, I understand. I see this problem as me being constantly angry because I’m caught up in my desire not to be unfairly harmed and in moralistic notions. I keep trying to let go of these things a bit when practicing, but these desires and notions keep repeating endlessly. I’d like to ask if there’s a more effective way to practice.”
“It’s not a bad thing for you to have a moral perspective. You just need to live morally yourself, but right now, you have a desire to live immorally while trying to apply morality to others. How other people live is their problem. But you keep wanting to interfere with others. Morality is not about demanding others to follow it, but about following it yourself.
When we drive, it’s natural to obey traffic lights, lane markings, and parking zones. But when we violate traffic laws ourselves, we say it was out of necessity, while we absolutely don’t tolerate others breaking them and get angry. You should try to follow rules as much as possible yourself, but when others break rules, you should be able to think, ‘Ah, I sometimes want to break traffic laws too’, or ‘That person must be in a hurry’. Even I have the urge to drive on the shoulder when I’m pressed for time for a lecture. The behavior of rule-breakers isn’t desirable, but you can think they might have their reasons. Some people might not be able to control themselves due to mental health issues, or there might be some special circumstances. From the outside, it’s just one situation of breaking a rule, but if you ask each individual, there are hundreds of different reasons. If you have an understanding heart towards others, you won’t get angry. If you try to follow rules as much as possible yourself, you’ll suffer less harm. It means less karmic consequences. It’s good to have this perspective.
If you say anger keeps arising automatically, it could be because of childhood trauma or because you were conditioned to have strong notions about rules due to your family environment. Or you might have grown up witnessing domestic violence. If your father was violent towards your mother, you might have hated your father as a child, becoming a victim along with your mother in your young mind. Such children develop feelings of anger towards immoral or illegal actions in all areas of society. I don’t know how it was developed when you were young, but you have such karma. It’s a problem that arises from the habit of automatically reacting.
Observe how your habits operate. It’s necessary to recognize yourself, thinking, ‘Ah, I’m particularly sensitive to these words and actions.’ Some people are especially sensitive to matters of personal interest, while others are sensitive to sexual issues or matters of honor. Don’t blame others for everything that triggers a reaction to your habits. When you get angry, simply acknowledge, ‘I’m sensitive to this issue’ or ‘I have strong opinions about this.’ By getting to know yourself in this way, we can gradually become freer from suffering.”
“Yes, I understand. Thank you very much.”
Tomorrow, Sunim plans to have lunch and tea with Venerable Dongmyeong, a senior member of the Jogye Order and the head monk of Jeondeungsa Temple in Seoul. In the afternoon, he will meet with guests visiting the Peace Foundation. In the evening, he will continue with the 13th lecture of the Happiness Dialogue Dharma Q&A in Goyang City.
