Dec 22, 2024 – English Dharma Q&A, Gyeolsa Practitioner Jaja Retreat, 100-Day Special Practice Meeting
Good morning. A new day has dawned at the Seoul Jungto Center.
From 8 AM, Sunim conducted a live Dharma Q&A session with English interpretation for foreigners. About 260 foreigners from around the world connected to the live broadcast as Sunim began the conversation.
After exchanging greetings, they first watched a video of the delivery ceremony of 6.36 million bars of soap to the Rohingya refugee camp, which took place two days ago.
Today, three people pressed the raise hand button and asked questions to Sunim. One of them sought advice on how to manage their feelings when they feel intimidated in front of successful people or those in high positions.
I Find It Difficult to Express Myself in Front of Successful People Due to Intimidation
“Confidence is self-assurance about a certain ability, but it’s not absolute; it’s relative. For example, let’s say there’s a person who is 180cm tall. Is this person tall or short? When compared to someone who is 190cm, we say they are short. However, when compared to someone who is 170cm, we say they are tall. So, is this person tall or short? They are neither tall nor short. They are just who they are. But when we compare them to someone else, we perceive them as either tall or short, and express it as such.
Our brains tend to mistake relative things for absolute ones if we consistently perceive them in a certain way. If you live with someone who is 190cm tall for several years, you might start to think that you’re not just comparatively short, but absolutely short. It’s because of this brain function that we develop inferiority or superiority complexes.
Most people tend to have inferiority complexes. This is because from a young age, when comparing ourselves to others, we perceive ourselves as short when compared to taller people, as poor students when compared to those who study better, and as poor tennis players when compared to those who play better. We keep perceiving ourselves in comparison to those who are better than us. If we compared ourselves to just one person, there would be things we’re better at and things we’re worse at. But because we compare ourselves to several people who excel in different areas, we end up perceiving ourselves as inadequate in everything. So, firstly, inferiority complexes arise from mistaking these relative perceptions for absolute ones.
Secondly, it’s about ‘what do I consider as important values?’ If I consider money as an important value, I feel slightly intimidated in front of someone who has more money than me. However, I feel somewhat superior in front of someone who has less money than me. If I consider social status as important, I show a submissive attitude towards those with higher status. Unconsciously, I display a sense of superiority towards those with lower status. However, if I’m not interested in a particular aspect at all, I neither feel inferior nor superior. For instance, if I’m not particularly interested in riding bicycles, playing Go or chess, I don’t really care whether someone is good or bad at these things. When you feel intimidated or arrogant towards someone, it’s evidence that you’re attached to that particular aspect. If you’re attached to money, status, tennis, or a certain skill, you become submissive when someone is better than you in that field, and arrogant when someone is worse. So, inferiority complexes can be seen as arising from what we value and are attached to.
These two factors combine to make us sometimes arrogant and sometimes submissive. I know nothing about tennis, so I’m not particularly interested whether someone plays well or poorly. I don’t develop either an inferiority or superiority complex about it. When you feel intimidated, you need to realize that you’re considering that thing as an important value and are attached to it. If you let go of that attachment, the problem is solved. Also, the reason you feel intimidated is that you’re mistaking something relative for something absolute.
In existence, there’s nothing superior or inferior; things just are as they are. However, our misperceptions lead to feelings of intimidation or arrogance. To use an analogy, imagine you’re sleeping in bed at night and dreaming that you’re being chased by a robber. Objectively, you’re in a comfortable bed, but psychologically, you’re being chased and feeling anxious. Being chased is real within the dream, but objectively, it’s not real. In the dream, the solution might be to hide or run away, but the fundamental solution is simply to wake up. Practice is not about running away or seeking protection; it’s about opening your eyes. Trying to solve the problem by earning more money, achieving a higher status, or becoming better at tennis is like trying to run away in the dream. No matter how much you run in the dream, when you look back, the robber is always chasing you. The way we try to solve problems in this world is similar to solving problems in a dream
Even if you succeed and earn a lot of money, you’ll see someone who earns more; even if your status improves, you’ll see someone with an even higher status; even if you master a skill or become good at tennis, you’ll compare yourself to someone who’s even better. So even if it seems solved temporarily, when you look back, it’s not solved again. This keeps repeating. Enlightenment is about waking up rather than choosing to run away in the dream. If you let go of your attachments to things that intimidate you, or realize ‘this is a relative comparison’ or ‘this is happening because I desire such things,’ you’ll become at ease.
However, even if you understand these mental processes after hearing my explanation, you haven’t actually experienced it yourself. So you’ll still likely feel intimidated in front of that person unconsciously. That’s why you need to keep practicing. Every time you feel intimidated, practice recognizing ‘this is like a dream.’ If you consistently do this, you’ll gradually improve.” 
“I have lived my life placing more importance on things like personal interests and hobbies. In today’s society, though, it feels like we’re trying to categorize and quantify everything. Take the bell curve, for example, which is often used in sciences, mathematics, and engineering. The curve shows that most people fall in the middle, with fewer outliers on either side. The point where the majority of people are is considered the “norm,” or what’s considered “normal.” But as you’ve pointed out, there seems to be no true reference point for what’s normal. Then, is it more about tradition or convention?—what’s commonly accepted or practiced in a certain context.”
“Yes, that’s correct. Let me explain with an example. Suppose we plot the grades of 30 students in a local area on a graph. If we place the student with the average score of 70 in the middle, we’ll find that many students are distributed around this point. Moving to the right, we’ll see better-performing students, up to those scoring 90 points. To the left, we’ll see students scoring as low as 50 points. Now, let’s take the top 30 students from across the country who could be considered exceptional in their local areas and form a new class. In this new class, we’ll observe the same phenomenon. There will still be a student ranking first and another ranking 30th. In this situation, a student who was first in their local area might end up ranking 30th in this national group. This student may experience severe feelings of inferiority psychologically. This is because they’ve lived their entire childhood with the standard of always being first, making it extremely difficult to accept being 30th in the class. However, objectively speaking, their academic ability remains the same whether they rank 30th in a national group or first in a local group. In other words, the feeling of inferiority is purely psychological.”
In the past, society was based on bloodlines, so people were discriminated against simply for being female or of lower social status from birth. At that time, people’s psychology was suppressed by social class. However, while gender and class discrimination have largely disappeared today, children are now constantly evaluated by their academic performance at school. When their grades drop, children start to develop an inferiority complex from a young age, much like people used to feel inferior due to their social class in the past. We think class discrimination has disappeared in modern times, but psychologically there isn’t much difference between then and now. This is because schools rank students by grades, and abilities are quantified everywhere, so when someone’s scores are low, they feel as if they lack ability. In terms of developing a psychological inferiority complex, it’s the same now as it was in the past. In other words, the school education system has created a new class system.
Just as in the past when princes and nobles were born into privilege and accepted it as natural, nowadays people have been brainwashed to accept that those with high grades or degrees from prestigious universities deserve high incomes. This phenomenon has been accelerated by neoliberalism. The idea that individuals with superior abilities should have more is psychologically the same as thinking in the past that those of higher social status should enjoy more privileges. For this reason, as the gap between rich and poor continues to widen, there is a high possibility that new popular resistance movements will intensify in the future.
In the past, discrimination based on social class was considered natural, but gradually the recognition that it was unjust spread. Today, however, no one thinks it’s unfair for those who win in competition to have more. The mental brainwashing can be seen as even stronger than the class system. Accepting things like “It’s because I’m not good at studying” or “It’s because I lack ability” creates an even stronger mental conditioning than a slave accepting “I’m a slave.” Nevertheless, we live under the illusion that we are completely liberated from inequality today. In reality, old notions have simply been replaced by new ones, but we are not free from ideas that rationalize discrimination.
“Thank you so much for this detail, Sunim.”
The questions continued. After an hour and 40 minutes of conversation, the live broadcast ended at 9:40 PM.
After a short break, from 10:30 PM, Sunim recorded the New Year’s Day opening ceremony Dharma talk for next January 1st. Since Sunim will be staying in a remote village in Bhutan with poor internet connection for the next two weeks, it was decided to record the New Year’s opening ceremony Dharma talk in advance.
Following this, Sunim also recorded the opening ceremony Dharma talk for the “Introduction to Buddhist Practice” program, a training program for Jungto Dharma School students. After an hour of recording, he left the broadcasting studio at 12:30 PM.
In the afternoon, Sunim packed for his 50-day overseas trip starting tomorrow. There was a lot to pack for such a long journey.
From 3:30 PM, Sunim returned to the broadcasting studio to participate in the Online Gyeolsa Practitioners’ Jaja Retreat, giving a Dharma Q&A and a closing Dharma talk. The Gyeolsa Practitioners gathered at main temples across the country for a full day of Jaja practice.
After repenting according to the 40 precepts, each participant requested Jaja from their group members.
“If you have any doubts after seeing and hearing my words and actions, or if you have anything to say for the sake of my practice, I request Jaja for my benefit.”
After completing the Jaja practice, the Gyeolsa Practitioners gathered again. They freely asked Sunim questions about points that arose during the Jaja process.
One of them asked how practitioners should view the situation where politicians, after the December 3rd martial law incident, seem to be protecting only their own party’s interests rather than representing the will of the people, which made them very angry.
I’m Angry at Politicians Who Only Protect Their Own Party After the December 3rd Martial Law Incident
“People have different thoughts and values. So it’s not problematic to think ‘From my perspective, that behavior is wrong.’ However, we shouldn’t move towards thinking ‘That person is objectively wrong.’ This doesn’t mean we can’t think ‘In my view, such behavior is inappropriate for a member of parliament.’ That belongs to the realm of individual freedom. But whether we speak or not, there should be a premise of ‘from my perspective.’ If we think ‘That behavior is wrong’ as if it’s objective, we become angry. Then we demonize the other. Even saying ‘I’m speaking based on the law’ is actually just our own perspective. Some argue based on individual circumstances, while others argue based on the law. All of these are just personal standpoints.
The other day, when Sunim’s comments about the December 3rd martial law incident from a religious leaders’ meeting were published in ‘A Day in the Life of Sunim,’ there were an unusually high number of opposing comments. Nearly half of the comments disagreed with Sunim’s thoughts. Some even contained insults. When political views are expressed, many opposing opinions emerge.
‘I cannot accept Sunim’s view that it was not a situation that warranted martial law.’
‘Even if society wasn’t chaotic or disorderly, the opposition party’s legislative dictatorship made it impossible for the president to run the country, paralyzing state affairs. So imposing martial law was justified.’
‘It’s politically biased for the wise Sunim to not say a word about the opposition’s legislative dictatorship that necessitated martial law, and only criticize the ruling party and the president regarding this incident.’
These comments were posted with their own logic. These people are talking based on the situation, not on the law. From their perspective, they might think that way. However, while the opposition’s actions are called legislative dictatorship, they are all actions based on the law. It’s the exercise of rights guaranteed by law for members of parliament. And the president’s use of veto power is also an action based on law. You might think it’s unfair, but they are all exercising rights based on the law. Therefore, while it can be criticized, it cannot be grounds for impeachment. We cannot say ‘The frequent use of veto power is grounds for impeachment.’
However, it is illegal for the military to invade the parliament, attempt to arrest members of parliament, or for the police to block parliamentarians’ access. Even under martial law, such actions should not be taken. Regardless of whether the situation warrants martial law or not, such actions are against the law even if martial law is declared.
There are two main points of contention here. First, whether the situation warrants martial law or not. In other words, there’s a debate about whether martial law is legal or illegal. This can lead to legal arguments. Second, even if the situation calls for martial law, using the military to control the parliament is clearly unconstitutional. I think this shouldn’t be much of a debate for those who know the law. People unfamiliar with the law might say, “If the members of parliament don’t listen, the military should just round them up,” but this is clearly illegal from a legal standpoint. Using the military to deny the constitution in this way is called a “coup d’état.” Another term for it is “insurrection.” Since it appears to be a clear violation of the law, there’s a 100% chance that the impeachment will be upheld by the Constitutional Court. However, the law can sometimes be interpreted in different ways, like “hanging on the nose or hanging on the ear.” Currently, the Constitutional Court only has six members, so if even one of them opposes for whatever reason, the impeachment could be rejected, and South Korea would fall into great confusion again. If the public accepts the result, that would be fine, but given the current public sentiment, they won’t accept it at all. This could lead to further intensification of conflicts. However, generally speaking, the reasons for impeachment are much clearer than in the case of President Park Geun-hye’s impeachment. This time, there seems to be little room for debate. Therefore, even ruling party members should agree to impeach a president who has committed illegal and unconstitutional acts to quickly resolve the confusion, and then discuss amending the constitution to prevent recurrence. Anyone who defends unconstitutional actions can be said to be unqualified to be a member of parliament.
However, while this incident may make you angry, as a practitioner, you should not justify getting angry. Of course, if you think it’s unfair and want to fight for improvement, that falls under personal freedom.
However, those who oppose impeachment do not judge based on the law but rather on vague thoughts. They believe that because the election was fraudulent, they cannot recognize the National Assembly, and that the opposition party’s majority in the National Assembly was achieved through a rigged election. That’s why they tried to control the Election Commission first. They also prevented the lifting of martial law from passing in the National Assembly. Instead of following legal procedures, they tried to obstruct by mobilizing the military and violently breaking the law. Because their thoughts and actions are so biased, the series of events that have occurred so far have shown a completely different aspect from what we consider common sense. However, those people can only see it that way because that’s all they see. But we don’t view that as desirable.
Understanding their claims and agreeing with their actions are entirely different matters. When dealing with such issues, if we objectively think it’s wrong, we run the risk of concluding, “Let’s lock them all up!” Without recognition and understanding of those different from us, we ultimately move towards hatred and resentment. Because hatred and resentment lead to killing and eliminating the other party, we must always solve problems peacefully. As practitioners, we should view things based on acknowledging our differences and understanding that ‘from their perspective, it could be that way.'”
“Thank you.”
The questions continued. When there were no more questions, the Gyeolsa Practitioners asked Sunim for a closing Dharma talk. Sunim spoke about the perspective that Gyeolsa Practitioners should always keep in mind.
“Today, the Gyeolsa Practitioners and Dharma Teachers of Jungto Society have successfully completed the Jaja and Posal. Your body and mind, and the practice community of Jungto Society, have thus attained purity. I hope that Jungto Society will be well-managed by these pure individuals and Sangha.
You must not lose sight of the fundamental goal of ‘Why did we establish Jungto Society and engage in these activities?’ However, unlike the founders, it’s a general phenomenon that the founding spirit tends to fade among those who join later. As time passes, the focus shifts solely to achieving and expanding certain goals. Newcomers, immersed in this atmosphere, lose the opportunity to learn the purity and frugality present at the start of Jungto Society. As a result, the focus becomes solely on ‘How can we expand efficiently?’ and work becomes central. Eventually, even in the Sangha, there’s a tendency for those who are good at work or have talent to be selected as capable individuals and take on important positions. As the focus shifts to operational efficiency, typically after just three generations, the characteristics that differentiated us from existing Buddhism at the time of founding disappear, and we become not much different from other organizations. Through this, we can understand why the religions and organizations we criticized had to change that way.
How to Maintain the Founding Spirit of Jungto Society for a Long Time
Therefore, we shouldn’t criticize existing organizations too harshly. We shouldn’t be arrogant thinking we’re better than them. From a broader perspective, this process of change itself is human nature, so it’s impossible to completely eliminate side effects. However, we can extend what would last 30 years to 50 years, and what would last 50 years to 100 years. This is precisely the role of you, the Gyeolsa Practitioners and Dharma Teachers.
Just as constant awareness is needed in individual practice, each of you must maintain good awareness for the operation of Jungto Society and become its owner. While adapting to the changes of the times, we must be cautious not to be influenced by authoritarianism and consumerism internally. Especially the Gyeolsa Practitioners and Dharma Teachers should always carefully observe these changes to ensure we don’t lose our foundation. Only then can the founding spirit be maintained for a long time.
To achieve this, Gyeolsa Practitioners and Dharma Teachers must adhere well to precepts and principles. Observing precepts and principles is very important. However, if those in higher positions strictly adhere to principles, it can create a rigid atmosphere as it trickles down. Therefore, adherence to principles should be accompanied by freedom and flexibility to avoid becoming authoritarian like the military. Dharma Teachers should always observe and examine the field to ensure that principles are followed gently. While it’s important to follow principles, maintaining flexibility ensures we don’t lose touch with the public. Since the administrative organization is one that must adhere to principles, Dharma Teachers should play a role in preventing rigidity while following principles. Always listen to the difficulties of members, hear them out, and continuously show interest in softening any rigidity.
Thank you for your hard work this year. Starting the day after tomorrow, meditation and the winter retreat will begin. I hope you spend the end of the year well through personal dedication and rest. Let’s start the new year together at the New Year’s ceremony on January 1st.”
After reciting the Four Great Vows, Sunim concluded the Jaja retreat at 5:30 PM.
As the sun set, from 7:30 PM, Sunim held an online meeting with members of the Special Practice Committee who are preparing for the 100-Day Special Practice program scheduled for the first half of next year.
The meeting addressed key issues such as whether to broadcast sutra lectures and Social University programs live to regional centers, and whether the Haeundae Jungto Dharma Center would conduct all programs identical to the Jungto Social and Cultural Center. After a Q&A session on these points, the meeting concluded with a review of promotional poster designs, ending just after 9 PM.
Tomorrow, Sunim will have an early morning meeting with the Seoul lay Sangha before heading to Incheon Airport. There, he will give a Dharma Q&A lecture for Incheon International Airport Corporation employees. In the afternoon, he will board a flight from Incheon Airport to Bhutan via Delhi, India. For the next two weeks, Sunim is scheduled to visit all villages in the Zhemgang region of Bhutan.
“
