Apr 10, 2025 – Emergency Religious Leaders Meeting, Regional Leadership Graduate School Entrance Ceremony, Scripture Lecture, Buddhist Social Studies Course Lecture 10
Hello. This is the 53rd day of Venerable Pomnyun Sunim’s 100-Day Dharma Talk. Today, there will be a scripture lecture and a Buddhist Social Studies Course lecture.
After completing his morning practice and meditation, Sunim headed to the Jungto Social and Cultural Center at 7 AM. An emergency meeting was scheduled with the Religious Leaders for National Reconciliation and Peace to discuss current national issues.
Ministers, priests, bishops, and religious officials arrived one by one at the basement dining hall. After enjoying a meal carefully prepared by The Peace Foundation staff, they moved to the foundation’s meeting room to continue their discussion.
During their previous meeting, they had extensively discussed the need for constitutional amendments to prevent political conflicts and national division caused by the excessive concentration of power in the presidency, and to achieve national unity. Sunim first reported on the progress made since then and explained why today’s emergency meeting was called.
“Since our last meeting, I’ve met with various individuals. The Speaker of the National Assembly has formed a special committee for constitutional amendment, and the ruling and opposition parties have agreed to a one-point constitutional amendment to reduce some presidential powers. The agreement is to make a targeted amendment that distributes presidential authority so that the Prime Minister and cabinet ministers bear more responsibility, while leaving broader amendments for after the election. Most social leaders, constitutional scholars, and politicians believe that such a limited amendment is entirely feasible.
Constitutional Amendment Promises Never Kept
Promises to amend the constitution after presidential elections have never been kept. When a new term begins, each president has their own national reform agenda and postpones constitutional amendments. Then, when they propose amendments midway through their term, the opposition party resists due to the lame-duck effect. Because of this pattern, we haven’t had any constitutional amendments in the 38 years since the 1987 direct presidential election amendment.
The current situation is similar. While all other candidates are promising to amend the constitution, the one person most likely to be elected says they won’t. If the prime minister were to be recommended by the National Assembly, it would mean the Democratic Party of Korea would be making the recommendation since they currently hold the majority, so they have nothing to lose.
If we continue without even an one-point constitutional amendment, the next president will likely not complete their term either. This isn’t just an individual problem; it’s largely a systemic issue. We must amend the constitution now to prevent such misfortunes from repeating in our constitutional history. Eliminating forces sympathetic to rebellion has nothing to do with constitutional amendment. We can address the elimination of rebellion-sympathizing forces separately while proceeding with constitutional reform.
In this situation, should we as a religious group announce our convictions as they are? Or should we abandon our demand for constitutional amendment?”
The religious leaders freely expressed their opinions. Most argued that regardless of political movements, they should demand prompt one-point constitutional amendment to eliminate the harmful effects of the imperial presidency. However, some suggested waiting a bit longer, believing that eliminating forces sympathetic to rebellion should be the priority. Despite an hour of discussion, they couldn’t reach a unanimous agreement.
Since the religious leaders’ group makes decisions by unanimous consent, they decided not to issue a statement in the name of the group. Instead, they agreed that individuals could express their positions if necessary, and then concluded the meeting.
After seeing the religious leaders off, Sunim headed to the Dharma Hall on the third floor.
Sunim gave a scripture lecture starting at 10:15 AM. About 120 people were present, and approximately 560 people connected via online livestream. After the audience requested the Dharma teaching with three bows, Sunim ascended to the Dharma seat.
Today was the tenth session of the Diamond Sutra lectures. In the previous session, Sunim had covered up to Chapter 17 of the Diamond Sutra. Today, he continued with the explanation from Chapter 18 through Chapter 23.
“This passage means that although we call it ‘mind,’ the mind of the past, the mind of the present, and the mind of the future have no substance and therefore cannot be grasped. Enlightenment is not about having a foolish mind that becomes enlightened; rather, it’s about realizing that there was never a mind to be called foolish in the first place.
This perspective is even more clearly revealed in Seon Buddhism. A disciple came to a master seeking the way to peace of mind. The master asked:
“How is your mind right now?”
The disciple answered:
“My mind is extremely anxious.”
The master said:
“Bring me that anxious mind. I will pacify it for you.”
The disciple tried to produce his anxious mind. But no matter how hard he looked, he could not find anything to present. So he said:
“I cannot find anything to bring forth.”
Then the master replied:
“I have already pacified your mind.”
This story is about the Dharma transmission to Huike (慧可), the Second Patriarch of Seon Buddhism who received the Dharma from Bodhidharma. The Third Patriarch Sengcan also received the Dharma in a similar context. When a disciple said, “Please absolve me of my sins,” the master replied, “Bring forth your sins.” When the disciple answered, “I cannot bring them forth,” the master said, “I have already absolved all your sins.” This means that there is no inherent nature to what we call sin. In Buddhism, this is expressed as “Sin has no inherent nature; it arises from the deluded mind.” This means that sin has no substance of its own but only arises following the ignorant mind.
When You Realize the Mind Is Inherently Empty, All Suffering Disappears
When you realize that the mind is inherently empty, you can be free from all bondage. The phrase “The past mind cannot be grasped, the present mind cannot be grasped, the future mind cannot be grasped” means that everything we call “mind” has no real substance. It has no substance, so it cannot be held onto no matter how hard we try. Yet, you constantly cling to the past, thinking, “You did this to me back then!” and ruminating on it. What about the present? You cannot empty your mind because you’re always thinking, “I must do this!” or “I must do that!” And the future? You worry, “What will happen tomorrow?” with many concerns about what lies ahead. However, when you understand that all phenomena are empty, you realize that the mind arising in the past, present, and future is also empty. Therefore, there is nothing that can be called the mind of the past, the mind of the present, or the mind of the future.
Let’s say there is a mountain. One day, two people—one living in a village to the left of the mountain and one living in a village to the right—met. The person from the left village, pointing to the mountain, said, “I went to the East Mountain yesterday.” The person from the right village replied, “Why do you call it East Mountain? It’s West Mountain!” And so they began to argue. The person from the left village calls it East Mountain because the sun rises from that mountain, while the person from the right village calls it West Mountain because the sun sets behind it. As they argued, one of them made his case like this:
“First, shall we look at historical records? In our village records, that mountain is documented as East Mountain. Second, shall we ask the villagers? Don’t they all call it East Mountain? Third, shall we go out and observe directly? The sun rises from that mountain, so it is indeed East Mountain.”
He’s arguing that his position is correct based on three criteria: historical evidence, testimony of the majority, and direct observation. But what about the person from the other side? He also claims that his position is correct based on the same three criteria. Each has their own conviction. That’s why this dispute cannot be easily resolved. Whether viewed historically, by majority opinion, or through personal experience, each believes they are right. This is precisely the obstinacy of sentient beings.
However, once you step outside your own neighborhood, you can immediately understand. While it’s difficult to comprehend no matter how much explanation you receive within your neighborhood, as soon as you step outside, you can see clearly. “I thought it was the East Mountain, but from here it’s not.” “I thought it was the West Mountain, but from here it’s not.” This is how realization happens. Then you no longer insist, “It’s the East Mountain!” or “It’s the West Mountain!” Your self-attachment disappears.
Teachings for Those Who Cling to the Idea of Enlightenment
It would be good if it ended with the disappearance of self-attachment, but usually a second problem arises. When you realize that what you thought was the East Mountain is not the East Mountain, and what you thought was the West Mountain is not the West Mountain, you begin to wonder, “Then what mountain is it?” In Chinese, saying that it’s neither the East Mountain nor the West Mountain is expressed as “non-east-non-west mountain” (非東非西山). Originally, this meant that the mountain is neither the East Mountain nor the West Mountain, but now “non-east-non-west mountain” becomes the essence of the mountain. “Ah, this mountain is the non-east-non-west mountain!” becomes the truth. From this position, those who claim “It’s the East Mountain!” or “It’s the West Mountain!” seem ridiculous. You might think, “I have realized the truth, but you still don’t understand.” This attachment to the idea that the truth is “non-east-non-west mountain” is called “dharma-attachment.” It means you’ve created a notion of enlightenment and are now attached to it.
What happens when there is no attachment to enlightenment? When someone comes and says, “That mountain is the East Mountain,” you don’t argue or judge that they are wrong or unenlightened. Instead, you think, “This person must have come from the eastern side of the mountain,” and welcome them warmly. The more you listen to them and converse with them, the better you understand where they are positioned.
Seeing Only the Finger That Points to the Moon, Not the Moon Itself
When I explain using metaphors like this, you might feel like you understand everything. But when asked with a different example, you might not understand again. In Seon (Zen), there is a story: Someone asked a master, “Which way should I go to reach Seoul?” The master replied, “Go east.” A disciple who was serving the master thought, “I learned something today. The way to Seoul is east.” The next day, another person came and asked the master the same question about the way to Seoul. The disciple was eager to answer “east,” but the master replied, “Go north.” The disciple was delighted, thinking, “Ah, there are two ways to Seoul!” The following day, yet another person asked the master about the way to Seoul. This time, the master answered, “West!” Like this disciple who doesn’t understand that there is no fixed dharma and seeks a definitive answer, no matter how hard you try to predict the master’s answer, you cannot. This is because the direction given depends on where the person asking the question has come from. If you only follow the master’s answers without considering the person asking, you’ll wonder, “Why does the master say this one time and that another time?” This approach is precisely what is meant by “seeing only the finger that points to the moon, not the moon itself.”
When we call someone foolish or a sentient being, it’s not because there is some inherent quality of foolishness within them. Rather, it’s simply because they don’t understand the current conditions. Just as the path to Seoul from here might be east or west depending on where you are, that person is merely in a state of ignorance in their current situation. However, if you don’t realize this truth, you create another perception by thinking, ‘This person is a sentient being.'”
After this, Sunim continued the lecture by reciting chapters 18 through 23 of the Diamond Sutra together with the participants to the rhythm of the moktak wooden instrument, reflecting on its meaning before concluding the lecture.
The participants gathered in groups for mindful sharing, while Sunim moved to the dining hall on the first basement floor to have lunch with the members.
In the afternoon, Sunim attended the establishment ceremony and entrance ceremony of the Regional Leader Graduate School at the invitation of Professor Park Jin-do, Professor Emeritus at Chungnam National University. Professor Park is an expert in rural development and also specializes in Bhutan. Last year, he accompanied Sunim on a field trip to Bhutan to explore sustainable development projects.
At 2:50 PM, Sunim arrived at the AT Center in Yangjae-dong, where the entrance ceremony for the Regional Leader Graduate School was being held. He exchanged warm greetings with Professor Park Jin-do and scholar Do-ul Kim Yong-ok.
At 3:00 PM, the first part of the establishment ceremony began. The Regional Leader Graduate School was established to achieve self-reliant growth and resident-led innovation in local communities. Its goal is to overcome the limitations of centralized growth policies and to nurture practical, community-oriented leaders who can address and solve local issues themselves. To achieve this, eleven civic organizations, including the Regional Foundation, have collaborated to operate a free one-year non-accredited educational program. The curriculum offers 200 hours of education through essential and special lectures in various fields including philosophy, politics, economics, and local resource management.
After the MC reported on the progress and explained the purpose of the establishment, Jang Su-myeong, a professor at Korea National University of Education and the president of the Regional Leader Graduate School, gave welcoming remarks. This was followed by congratulatory speeches from Kim Sang-gon, former Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs; Kim Young-sook, Chairperson of the Korea Village Association; Heo Su-jong, Chairman of Jeongup Saemgol Agricultural Cooperative; and Park Jin-do, Chairman of the National Gross Happiness Transition Forum. After the congratulatory speeches, Sunim took the stage to offer words of encouragement.
“I sincerely congratulate you on today’s establishment and entrance ceremony of the Regional Leader Graduate School. However, to be honest, I’m a bit concerned. It won’t be easy to promote regional development when local communities are gradually disappearing. Additionally, when multiple organizations collaborate on such initiatives, they often tend to be less successful. Furthermore, operating without charging tuition could lead to financial difficulties. So there are not just one, but three reasons why this might not work. But sometimes, when there are many reasons something shouldn’t work, things actually turn out well. (Laughter)
The reason I’m telling you this is because if you know the difficulties in advance, it becomes less challenging when you actually face them. That’s why I believe this gathering today will definitely be a starting point for success.
Can We Be Happy While Reducing Consumption?
I have been involved in many activities to create a sustainable new lifestyle model where people can be happy while reducing consumption. Since this seemed impractical in Korea, I turned my attention abroad. In the past, I mainly focused on relief work – building schools where there were none, providing food aid to those starving, offering assistance after earthquakes or floods, and conducting relief activities worldwide wherever help was needed. However, I realized that relief work alone couldn’t provide fundamental solutions. Instead of just offering temporary assistance, I wanted to create a sustainable lifestyle model. After exploring various countries, Bhutan caught my attention because it emphasized Gross National Happiness and preserved its environment and traditional culture. Fortunately, I met someone from Bhutan and visited the country at their invitation. However, the reality of Bhutan was different from what I had expected. At that time, Bhutan had a population of about 800,000, but 150,000 of them were living abroad. The reason was that all education from elementary school was taught in English. Additionally, all children received internet education, so when they grew up, they left to find jobs overseas. Even government officials were leaving the country. When I told the villagers, “We need to build our community ourselves,” they responded, “Even our governor went to Australia.” Things were so dire that the King of Bhutan had to triple the salaries of government officials.
Bhutan is also experiencing rapid urban development as people migrate to major cities. However, in rural areas, there is no population influx, resulting in an aging population and underdeveloped regions. This seems to be a global phenomenon. Even in a quiet, secluded country like Bhutan, these winds of change are blowing. Therefore, through dialogue with local residents, efforts are being made to ensure minimum living standards by first improving living conditions. Starting with solving water supply issues, building toilets, and repairing kitchens, the projects have expanded to paving roads and creating irrigation systems. Fences have also been installed to protect crops from wildlife. After improving these basic living conditions, the focus has shifted to preserving nature and traditions. By working together with local residents on these activities, a sustainable development model is gradually being created. By persuading people with the message, “Let’s make our region better with our own hands!” positive momentum is now building in the right direction.
May Sustainable Ways of Living Become Our Future
For development to be sustainable, first, it must be low-cost. This is because low-cost solutions can spread more widely. Second, communities must be developed together using local materials and techniques. Third, the environment must be protected to ensure a positive cycle that encompasses the natural ecosystem. We are carrying out our projects based on these few principles.
I thought it would be difficult to create a sustainable living model in our country. But the fact that you are trying to create it here is truly something I never imagined. I am grateful and respectful that Professor Park Jin-do and Mr. Do-ul are taking the lead. I hope that sustainable ways of living will become our future. It’s important to create a successful model, even if it’s small in scale. I hope your first steps will lead to a successful model.”
After the encouraging remarks, Sunim watched a video featuring the resolutions of 35 new students, then took a commemorative photo with everyone in front of the stage.
After a short break, Mr. Do-ul Kim Yong-ok gave a passionate lecture on “A New Paradigm for the Korean Peninsula.” Following this, the faculty, curriculum, and new students were introduced, concluding the entrance ceremony. Sunim remained until the end of the event, exchanged greetings with the participants, and then promptly left the venue.
Passing by Yangjaecheon Stream with its cherry blossoms in full bloom, Sunim returned to the Jungto Social and Cultural Center at 6 PM for dinner.
As the sun set, at 7:30 PM, Sunim gave the 10th lecture of the Buddhist Social Studies Course in the basement auditorium of the Jungto Social and Cultural Center. In the previous session, we learned about “Buddhism and Democracy.” Today, Sunim began the lecture with the subject “How to View the Presidential Impeachment Issue from a Perspective of Middle Way.”
“Today, we will apply what we have studied so far to reality. We will examine how to view the presidential impeachment issue, which is currently being raised as a sensitive topic, from the Buddhist perspective of the Middle Way.
How to View the Presidential Impeachment Issue from a Middle Way Perspective
Everyone has different opinions. However, since we form one community, we have something we’ve agreed upon. That is the Constitution. As citizens of the Republic of Korea, we are guaranteed the right to freely express our opinions within the framework of this Constitution. If we violate laws while staying within this constitutional framework, we commit crimes and are punished. However, if we deny the Constitution and step outside its framework, we are rejecting the constitutional order of the Republic of Korea, making us not simply criminals but ‘anti-state forces.’ Here, anti-state forces differ from anti-government forces. If you oppose the current government, you are an anti-government force, but if you deny the national identity of the Republic of Korea, you become an anti-state force.
The Middle Way in Buddhism does not refer to a compromise between two extremes. Rather, it refers to the correct perspective that avoids bias toward either side. Buddhism teaches that “all values are relative, not absolute.” It emphasizes universality that most people can accept while acknowledging differences. From this perspective, I will examine the current situation.
The incident began on December 3rd last year, and its conclusion is set for June 3rd. In other words, the martial law imposed on December 3rd, which denied the constitutional order, will be fully resolved on June 3rd, the presidential election day. Therefore, from June 4th, South Korea’s national governance will resume normally. During this process, we experienced martial law and the impeachment of the president. The remaining tasks are constitutional amendment and the presidential election. First, let’s examine whether the martial law was an illegal act or a legitimate exercise of presidential authority within the framework of the law…”
Sunim continued to explain how to view the legality of martial law, the conflict over impeachment, constitutional amendment, and the presidential election from a Middle Way perspective.
After speaking for two hours on various issues, Sunim took questions from the audience. Three people raised their hands to ask questions on the spot. One of them fully agreed with Sunim’s lecture but expressed concern that the constitutional amendment discussions might be exploited for partisan politics. This person also asked about the extent to which those involved in the rebellion should be punished.
Will Constitutional Amendment Discussions Be Exploited for Partisan Politics?
“If someone has broken the law, they must all face legal judgment. For example, even if someone is a chief prosecutor, they don’t have the authority to exempt their sibling from punishment if they’ve broken the law. However, they might have some influence in determining whether their sibling should be detained during the investigation process. It might be frustrating to observe from the outside, but there’s no way to prevent them from doing this within the framework of the law when they’re on the same side.
The cancellation of former President Yoon Seok-yeol’s detention was due to procedural flaws in the law, not for any other reason. That was used as an excuse to release him. When discussing the law, people tend to accept what’s favorable to them while reluctant to acknowledge that the opposing party or criminals also have rights guaranteed by law. Every citizen of South Korea can use the law to defend themselves.
Until a trial is concluded, one cannot be called a criminal. Why did former President Yoon Seok-yeol refuse to talk with the opposition party leader? It was because he considered him a criminal. This was based merely on allegations, even before the trial had concluded. Your question about how one can sit at the same table with those who supported the rebellion actually stems from the same mindset.
The questioner’s demand to immediately arrest and investigate those with important duties during martial law is legally challenging. Regardless of who it is, legal procedures must be followed. It is said that First Lady Kim Keon-hee should be arrested immediately, but going through prosecutorial investigation and trial takes considerable time. That’s why the saying “the law is distant, but fists are close” exists. When President Trump unilaterally imposes tariffs, are people quiet because it’s the right action? It’s because claiming Trump violated international law is futile. That’s why countries are negotiating practically to minimize their losses.
Currently, the most important thing in politics is winning the next election. So why debate issues other than the election? It’s to use them as advantageous tools for the election. Calling to “imprison the leaders of rebellion” might gain more public support, so it becomes an issue. Similarly, politicians opposing impeachment are also using it as a form of election campaign. Many politicians aren’t genuinely against impeachment but have chosen to oppose it as a strategic advantage for the next election.
From this perspective, I expect the People Power Party will soon propose constitutional amendments. They need to advocate for constitutional reform to gain public support. When that happens, we cannot criticize them for using the constitutional amendment issue to their advantage. In a competitive situation, we cannot say it’s acceptable for us to exploit an issue but not for our opponents. We’ll likely see unusual presidential campaign promises soon, such as “If I become president, I’ll shorten my term and amend the constitution” or “I’ll open the door to the 7th Republic of Korea and step down.” If someone makes such promises, they’ll receive tremendous attention from public opinion. Ultimately, the achievement of presidential impeachment could work advantageously for certain individuals.
If the Democratic Party fails to use the task of constitutional amendment to their advantage, the People Power Party will use it to theirs. Most presidential candidates will likely campaign on promises to shorten the presidential term and amend the constitution. Many within the Democratic Party also advocate for constitutional reform. Some are entering the primary knowing they will lose, but aim to pressure the leading candidate. As a result, the People Power Party is likely to unite around constitutional amendment, while the Democratic Party may become divided. In this scenario, the current 40-60 support ratio between the ruling and opposition parties could shift back to 50-50 at any time.
Former President Yoon Suk Yeol consistently made irresponsible statements blaming the opposition party for obstructing progress. If he truly cared about the nation, he should have met with opposition leaders to make concessions and compromises. Instead, he attempted to illegally impose martial law, which led to his impeachment. To prevent such unfortunate situations in the future, we need constitutional amendments that distribute the president’s excessive powers. This institutional safeguard would minimize damage to citizens even if someone with authoritarian tendencies becomes president.
That’s why we should demand constitutional reform especially during election periods like now. Instead of just watching passively while thinking we’re being used, we should actively take advantage of the situation. That’s why the Speaker of the National Assembly proposed creating a special committee for constitutional reform to implement an one-point amendment. Even now, there’s ample time to amend the constitution. If the timeline is tight, we can change the referendum law to shorten the announcement period. Where there’s a will, there are plenty of ways. Conversely, if someone doesn’t want to do it, they can make all kinds of excuses. So when someone makes excuses about constitutional reform, you can simply conclude, “They don’t want to do it.”
Promises to amend the constitution after being elected president have almost no chance of being fulfilled. Based on past experience, it’s obvious they won’t do it. Therefore, we must do our utmost to pressure for a referendum on constitutional reform in this election, and if that fails, we should at least secure a promise to do it later. When the competition becomes neck and neck toward the end of the election, candidates might promise to amend the constitution later. Even if they don’t keep that promise later, it’s important to secure it.
If you truly believe constitutional reform is important, you should use the election period to apply pressure. Shouldn’t we pressure them by saying that not amending the constitution will be disadvantageous in the election? When I think about the future of South Korea, I believe constitutional reform is more important than who becomes president.
Based on the nature of power as we’ve seen so far, there’s a high possibility that once elected, officials won’t pursue constitutional reform. This isn’t about individuals but rather the inherent nature of power that makes it difficult for anyone to take action. But should we just leave it alone? No. Just because we can’t prevent war, should we not try to prevent it? Of course not. We must stand from the perspective of doing our utmost to prevent war.
Constitutional reform is also necessary to reduce the risk of war. When national affairs are in chaos, the risk of war increases. When a country is divided and fragmented, external enemies are more easily tempted to attack. When we achieve political stability and establish peace between North and South Korea, along with cooperation with Japan, we can minimize losses amid competition between the giant powers of the United States and China. As citizens of the Republic of Korea, especially as leaders, we must continue to research various methods for peace. Constitutional reform should be approached with a view toward the entire nation and its people, not just the immediate small power at hand. What I’m saying is that we should open a path where everyone can live together.”
“Thank you. I understand well.”
Today’s session focused on learning about Buddhism’s Middle Way philosophy through the lens of current social issues in Korean society. The lecture concluded with an announcement that the next session would cover the topic “Buddha: Seeker of Truth or Revolutionary?” exploring Buddha’s life.
Participants gathered in groups for mindful sharing. Sunim returned to the Jungto Center to conclude his day.
Tomorrow will be the 54th day of the 100-Day Dharma Talk. In the morning, Sunim will conduct a Dharma Q&A session for the daytime group in the main hall of the Jungto Social and Cultural Center basement, followed by an evening Dharma Q&A session for the evening group. Afterward, he will travel to Dubuk Jungto Retreat Center.
