Introduction
There is nothing mysterious about the faculty of idealization, whether in the individual or in the group. This faculty is not a sort of luxury, which man could do without, but a condition of his existence. If he had not acquired it, he would not be a social being, which is to say he would not be a man..

And, a few pages later, this judgment: We are going through a period of transition and mediocrity (.) But that state of uncertainty and confused anxiety cannot last forever. A day will come when our societies once again will know hours of creative effervescence during which new ideals will again spring forth and new formulas emerge to guide humanity for a time. Robert Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 1912.

Durkheim, neither a religious person nor an idealist, was a proponent of science positive. But for him, individual existence, or life, had to have a meaning, a sense-not simply to be worth living but to be life-, and society had to have a purpose, because it was composed of social beings with needs and aspirations. In his time, “meaning of life” and “purpose of society” were intensely debated questions-indeed they generated revolutions-while the “private” and the “public”- the individual consciousness and the collective consciousness-commingled.

Acknowledgement of the Complexity of Seeking Meaning of Life and Society.
There are no simple answers. Reference to the present state of transition, mediocrity, uncertainty and confused anxiety can be interpreted as substantiating the notion that the role of the public intellectual is to be aware of this current state of contemporary existence and to address its root causes. To bring about a more harmonious and sustainable society, the public critic should explore how best to attain a conjoining of private and public virtue so as to enrich private lives in society and render public policies more effective and equitable.

In light of the present conjuncture — increasing violence in and between societies, rising levels of mass poverty, widening income gaps, and mounting threats of environmental disaster in many regions of the planet– the call to enrich the prevailing technocratic and utilitarian perception of human activity and progress, and to give substance to an otherwise vacuous sense of meaning has become increasingly urgent. The ambition of the Circle is to inject fresh ideas and modes of thinking drawn from time honored philosophical, cultural and religious traditions into the international public discourse to stimulate the intrinsic spirit of humanity to seek more satisfying ways to raise the levels of humanity in society and improve the quality of life on the planet. There is increasing recognition that to conceive as essential the moral and ethical dimensions of life is to be realistic, not just romantic. To many public intellectuals, this represents a significant advancement in thinking about human needs and development.

The search for meaning and purpose is not about grand ideologies or social experiments in the name of God. It is “simply” a quest for sense and direction that can inspire human flourishing, social harmony, and life in equilibrium with nature. It is not teleological: it is in its largest sense about “being.” The decisive obstacle to this effort is that the prevailing strain of Western culture and commercialism seems to have broken away from its human, spiritual, and moral moorings. Ironically, this postmodern culture seems itself to suffer from a bleak entanglement of senseless connections, without obvious means to liberate itself from the bonds of brute materiality. The appropriate response to this crisis is reunion not only between the self and the world, but also between the heart and the mind.

There are many challenges to considering so weighty a topic as “meaning” in the wake the 20th century with its fill of large-scale social experiments. Many doctrines with precise beliefs concerning the purpose of society and the place of the individual have given sense to millions of people willing to de-center their locus of meaning to become instruments in an ideological system. In so doing they have bound the world in wars and massacres for a great part of that century. Moreover, the looming “clash of civilizations,” which threatens to engulf the 21st century in fear and terror in the names of Allah, Jehovah, and God is likely to drive reasonable and peace-loving people towards cold, rational, and atheist cultures

Other challenges include:

1. Anxiety in the minds of many, in particular the poor, that the promotion of an enriching philosophical approach to contemporary social problems will result in neglecting the basic fact that all people need a livelihood and the material rudiments to meet necessities for sustained and secure living. Thus this holistic approach cannot be blind to the need to improve conditions of living in most parts of the world.

2. Preoccupation with moral issues too often associated with conservative politics and religious fundamentalism. As a prerequisite to enriching the public discourse, there is need to dissociate the concepts of morality from conservatism, on the one hand, and of the spiritual from the private spheres of religion, on the other. As long as these prejudices remain there will be serious confusion between the means and the ends of society.

3. Treatment of the “meaning of life” in the prevailing discourse as a purely individual story, relevant only to the private sphere. In this view, the purpose of “society” is of no account. Society has no purpose except to try to facilitate human “happiness,” with little understanding of what constitutes it, nor concern that the concept should have some substance. The impoverishment of the terms moral and spiritual has drained society of any purpose other than encouraging self-enrichment in material and financial ways. Yet, “meaning of life” and “purpose of society” are essential dimensions of morality, private and public, and are therefore essential ingredients for a harmonious society.

Considering these introductory ideas, the meeting addressed three questions:

• What is the notion today of a continuum between private and public consciousness?
• What is the current relevance of questions concerning the meaning and purpose?
• What elements should be included in an enriched discourse on meaning and purpose?

The discussion on these questions was wide ranging and not so clearly focused on these agenda questions so the notes will be organized according to the main themes of the meeting that is purpose of society and meaning of human life, respectively.

Part I: Purpose of Society

The Common Good as the Purpose of Society
Seeking purpose in society is part of the quest to respond not only to the perceived distances between self, society, and the world, but also to break down the walls that isolate individuals in their radical subjectivity. It relates to the notion that morality shapes empathetic and sympathetic relationships to things and to other persons.

In the Western classical period societies had purpose. Individuals with their political natures were treated as one, woven together in the substance of the polis. Aristotle, the father of comparative politics, having examined the workings of over a hundred constitutions, characterizes as good, those governments that work selflessly for the happiness of all. In his idealistic conception of the res-publica, he considers life in the polis a fact of nature. “Political animals” are desirous of living with others according to their common good, in proportion as they severally attain to any noble measure of well-being. What is best for the citizen coincides with what is best for the state-the common good. The constituents of the best life are not the external things of wealth and power [though in moderation these are essential externalities,] but the virtues of intellect and character. The best state is happy and acts nobly. To be a human being is to strive to attain noble things; and there is no deed either of person or the polis that is to be separated from virtue and prudence. The courage, justice, and prudence of the state have the same presence and form as those virtues in individual human beings, who are called just, prudent, and sound. And, every citizen is given the opportunity to achieve excellence.

Perceptions of the Purpose of the Modern Society
In the contemporary global political economy, a prevailing feature is the expectation that governments serve primarily to ensure an orderly playing field for private interests and market forces, and, if called on, to provide security and social safety nets when the private sector is reluctant to act charitably or when outside forces challenge the security of the state. Moreover, it is fashionable to consider modern democratic governments much like economic systems with their resource inputs and outputs of goods and services. Political inputs are the aggregates of social and individual wants and the policy outputs are stated variously in terms of wealth, security, and deference; or in terms of the functions of extraction, distribution and regulation.

The reality of modern political power and imagination, which makes difficult the quest for harmony between and within societies, as well as between humankind and the natural environment, has much to do with the state to which society has advanced in science and technology. Such focus seems to preclude realization of projects and solution to problems that require imaginative, transcendent thinking, such as questioning where and why societies are moving in the directions they are going in matters of purpose and meaning.

Nevertheless, it would be misleading, to imply that modern Western societies and their political thinking are devoid of goals or purpose. Purpose is circumscribed by access to capital, natural resources, science, and technology. For Nature and many people, the dangerous side of western modernity is that economic progress is the measure of well-being, the foundation for happiness, even implicitly the purpose of life. The success of a government is measured in terms of changing levels of economic activity. Good citizens do their duties to society by participating in the market, through buying, selling, and producing efficiently. Frugality is the enemy of the modern economy, which requires continuous consumption for healthy functioning. Social well-being and happiness are assumed to derive from success in this competitive environment.

Individual Good and Common Good
Today, more than 2400 years after Aristotle wrote his treatise on Politics, to the larger world of indigenous peoples and to much of the political thinking of the South, the prevailing global approach to political and economic well-being emphasizes that the common good be regarded only in so far as it is derived from the average sense of the private good. For a significant segment of critics in the South this approach is Western oriented, time encased, and in decline rather than transformation. Far from the idealistic vision of Aristotle, this dominant approach traces its roots to the legacy of a particular interpretation of the Western Enlightenment. It is also partly reflective of Machiavelli’s earlier conviction that effective governments are amoral, their leaders concerned with matters of their own private power-how to get it and keep it.

These ideas presuppose that no individuals are smart enough to define the common good and that only in realizing the sum average of individual goods will a sense of the common good emerge. This occurrence is not automatic in reality but in utilitarian societies, where power is an individual good and is dependent on wealth and market success, it is the dominant political spin. In economic terms it reflects, among other ideas, Adam Smith’s concept of the “Invisible Hand” extracted from its complex formulation in The Wealth of Nations. His view holds that, ceteris paribus, each individual seeking his/her own good in the market will bring about, as if directed by some invisible hand, the greater good for society. Presently political candidates in the dominant societies express themselves largely in terms of promises to individual self-interests.

The consequences of seeking the common good through the sum accumulation of the expressions of private greed are problematic. For example, it was observed in a recent election by one of the participants, who, when going to vote, met a man who said he was voting for George Bush because he will get money back from the government. He did not appear to consider what kind of budgetary cuts would be needed and who would be hurt to make this return possible. The question this incident raised was: How do we raise the conscious of that person from “just me” to the community or to the global society? The participant concluded that this was not possible, one must give up on him and start with his children, instilling ideals in an early age through moral and ethical education. This approach to education is not popular in the dominant contemporary culture, however, where even the media is focused market considerations and education is geared to producing new generations of citizens for markets societies – competitively driven and rugged-individualist-oriented.

The success of public projects can be jeopardized by too much focus on the individual. How one approaches development projects in this context is significant for achieving success. Research directed to looking at success stories in reducing hunger and poverty, has produced evidence about what seems to work and what does not work. This body of experience is worth serious consideration. One thing striking about success stories is that the leadership of these programs worked differently from the leaders of failed programs. The former enjoyed pushing the initiative to the periphery, deriving their sense of individual good from the sense of collective advance. As that approach was taken, new definitions of the problems emerged, producing a new sense of individual satisfaction in discovering problems and solutions. Better understanding and redefinition of the issues, enabled new problem definitions and lead to new technological solutions to deal with them.

Markets have their frailties and their limitations. They are good at creating economic values but not ethical purposes nor are they meant to define the greater purpose of society. Those engaged in the market will do what it takes to make money without self-imposed constraints. Any such constraints would make them uncompetitive unless the other players adopted them as well. Uncontrolled, the drive for wealth and power in each player leads to increasing centralization in the market, which only works in the interest of all if it remains decentralized. Failure to control creeping concentration in the market leads to de facto authoritarian societies under the dictates and self-interests of the captains of industry. People do not vote for these people. The dangers and the realities of this situation were well articulated by John Kenneth Galbraith, in his latest book the Economics of Innocent Fraud.

Adam Smith’s writings in the Wealth of Nations must be read in conjunction with his Theory of Moral Sentiments. Now justification for one’s trust is marketized, not the other way around. Moreover, the market, as the place where free will and choice is exercised and the generation of wealth takes place for the greater good of society no longer exists. Today few markets are really free and perfect. Our century is dominated by imperfect markets governed to a great extent by multinational corporations- major institutions that are not democratic. In multinational corporations, the corporate board and the CEO are the unelected authorities with great influence over modern societies. As “head,” they are able to act with liberty in their own financial interest, while many suffer in the process.

One may argue that this advancing situation is the price society pays to have a free market and to have the vast array of creature comforts modern mega businesses now offer those who can afford them; and well that may be, but the greatest danger of this market society mentality is that the purpose of society is becoming reified in market terms. Schools, universities, medical services, religious institutions, international organizations, and the military,–even interpersonal relations are now being governed by market principles. Poverty is overlooked and the environment is trashed with oblivion. The purpose of society is to make money, a chimera that is never satisfied or proven to bring lasting happiness, peace, and satisfaction to the hungry soul.

Medicine and Healthcare: Illustration of Problems in Private versus Public Consciousness

Medicine from the time of antiquity has existed to heal and care for the suffering “other.” Recently, and increasingly since WWII, this profession has been infiltrated with a self-seeking market mentality that sees its practice as a way to self-enrichment and competitive entrepreneurship. This infiltration begins with the process of selecting students for medical school. At least since WWII, the selection of medical students in the US has been based on the competitive performance of candidates in their undergraduate academic careers. Medical schools have been looking to select “winners,” those students that excel in leadership, scholarship, and athletics.

But what society still needs from future doctors is not only competence, but also humanity and compassion in their medical specialty. These latter characteristics seem to be directly related to the profile of mainstream under graduate “winners.” As a result, there is contradiction between the qualifications sought in the recruitment of ideal candidates for medical school and the expectations of commitment and self sacrifice from medical practioners that reflected the legacy of the profession and responded to the effective needs of the ailing.

An indicator of their potential dedication to the service of the suffering was their average reply to the question whether they would be content to become nurses if they were not accepted into medical school. Few candidates generally reply affirmatively to this question. Of real concern is how this situation can be changed so that future doctors are not just competitively and technically competent but also have the compassion to reach and strengthen the heart and spirit of their patients. Unfortunately, the medical profession is stacked with faculty and students that are competitive winning personalities making such a transformation difficult.

The criteria for selecting candidates for medical schools is not the same for all countries. In Israel, for example, academic smartness weighs less in the scale than the ability to take care of people. Although this is not the criteria current in the US, there has, in the last five years, been some change in the level of humanity percolating through the vast amount of arrogance present in today’s system. Consideration is being given to candidates who demonstrate compassion by committing themselves to humanitarian fieldwork.

Aside from this recent positive development, there are further notable signs of marketing and commercialization of practice in the US. Criteria of efficiency are imposed by the private administrations and private insurance companies that have in recent years come to manage medical practioners and their relations with their patients- imposing, for example, time limits on patient visits with doctors. Uniform limits on consultations in managed medical care offices range from 2 to 8 minutes per patient. Otherwise, the market tainted medical practitioner sees patients as the source of billable hours or seeks to get them in and out of his/her office as quickly as possible.

There are strong arguments that favor the savant, technically competent-doctor over the kindly hand-holding family doctor of yore that lingers by the bedside. In cases of grave illness, affectionate care may not be the one that can actually save a life. But the psychological complexities of illness and patient/doctor relations obscure the seeming obviousness of even this choice. One solution is to take “winners” into the program and saturate them with ethical and moral training as part of the medical training.

The marketization of the health industry is also visible in research production and sale of drugs and pharmaceuticals. It has been observed that pharmaceutical companies have pulled back in their production of anti-biotics. One explanation is that patent protections are running out and there is not enough money in the production of these medicines. There is more market demand for cholesterol and blood pressure medications and therefore increasing research is pursued in these domains. Moreover, an authoritative observation is that doctors do not have to treat ear infections with anti-biotics. The stock is now going down for amoxicillin. Some original studies that prompted this change in treatment were based on fake data, even the news that it was fake data was suppressed. The results of this fake study are indicative, the production of the cure will be limited. According to market mentality it makes no economic sense to work on cures because losses of money are sustained on which are not big on the market. Pharmaceuticals, for example, do not work on vaccines. In short, the market value of person insinuates itself into worth of the individual. In the US, the medical industry determines how much a person is worth.

Compassion does not have to be about “touchy-feely” relationships, but doctors have to care about their patients at some point. Care encompasses observing patients and listening. How can this be done in an 8-minute visit? If compassionate care and love for the suffering is the service of medicine, modern societies have to prevent insurance companies and market mentalities from directing how medicine is practiced.

Recently, there was a meeting between Chinese and US Health Ministries. China was seeking new ideas for reforming its system. The meeting exposed how far these two cultures were from each other. The US starts with a private system and works to limit public interference. Toda, however, there is much demand for more public involvement to ensure equitable care for all citizens in the country. The Chinese begins with the public and sees how it might use the private. The priorities in China are first for clean water and good roads. Health is way down on the list. The greatest concerns of these people are about becoming sick, going to court, and sending their children to the university. There is a great disparity between the rich and poor in China, therefore this country must be very careful if it seeks to move to an American medical system.

Danger of the Obsolescence of Humankind
When economic growth becomes a dogma to be affirmed, it becomes a danger to humanity. In the US and some other industrialized countries, the drive for economic growth was mostly fueled by the drive for economic and military power. A point beyond power, that is dominance, has now been reached for the United States and some other countries in the North. The primary question is how the US and these other countries will treat growth in the future-growth for what? People cannot just become automatons of the market and buy indefinitely as the essence of the meaning of their lives- the purpose of their society being to promote this behavior. That would surely lead to emptiness and ultimately the loss of Nature.

Poverty One must reconsider poverty and social exclusion. Are the poorest able to participate in society? When social exclusion takes place people are in a state of extreme poverty. Wealth is better captured, not in terms of money, but in terms of awareness, intimacy, and community. When really wealthy people speak for themselves or each other, they talk about their hobbies, pets, children, nature-they add that to what wealth really is.

But, the forces fueling consumerism are lodged in the notion of the “private good” and are not easy to dislodge. The top people want to stay on the top. To do so executives must make “pay offs” to please their stake-holders, their employees, their customers, and their investors, in other words all those who could cause them problems. The concept of “pay off to stay at the top,” plays out differently in different contexts. In the political realm some can deal with this problem with secret police, etc. In a Western democracy the pay off to keep power is giving the biggest tax breaks to the upper levels of society. This phenomenon explains the existence of poverty in economically advanced countries.

There is thus need to look at how some practices, such as pay offs and debt driven consumerism, get institutionalized and expanded, caught in the web of individual desires to remain in power.

If consumerism is fueled by the self-interest of individuals in positions of power and who are determined to maintain that power, why are ordinary folk kept content with bread and circuses? The concert, i.e. that which is readily comforting to the people, drives out the complaint. It is basic to human nature that the close drives out the far: the familiar drives out the unfamiliar.

Now, the World Bank is facing difficulties. Despite all the assistance it has given to developing countries, the income gap between the two worlds of the North and the South is growing larger. In discussions with the World Bank, I have engaged officials on world affairs and development. As a friend, I have challenged the idea that economists have all the answers-for a Buddhist, the most important thing is good friendship. Recently three books with a broader view have been published by the World Bank. What has been made clear is that the poor sincerely desire foremost respect for their dignity and their own spiritual traditions. Today, the World Bank directly dialogues with representatives of different religions. The Buddhist perception of wealth and poverty is related to one’s spiritual, physical, mental, and social well-being. Next year there will be a big event that will bring together governments, intergovernmental organizations, and non-governmental organizations, to which the World Bank should be invited. The theme of the event will be social justice with compassion.

Views expressed by Sulak Sivaraska, distinguished Buddhist public intellectual

One has to look deeper and closer at what is going on in the most modern societies in the grips of corporate management and its political allies. One of the greatest dangers facing these societies is the apparent trend that would get rid of the human altogether. If this be the case then the question of meaning of life even at the individual level will soon be superfluous because society is arriving at the age of the post-human, where meaning itself is at risk in some of the cutting edge developments of the dominant culture such as genetic engineering. It is through modern technological change, the marketization of society, and the subordination of society to the dominance of the corporate management that humankind may be setting itself up for obsolescence.

What hope is there? Even if some contemporary intellectuals deem that the particular interpretation of the Enlightenment adopted by modern society seems to have run its course and decide to turn to the indigenous peoples for answers to its problems, the later will say to them that they are “stupid” because they, too, want to improve their own material situations in the way of the modern West. Yet, for those public intellectuals concerned about the ecology of the planet, global terrorism, unemployment, and poverty, the instrumental rational approach is not only limited but can even be a dangerous. The modern children of the Enlightenment can be too aggressive towards nature and to each other. Now modern societies are facing the consequences of the realization of the “individualism dream” that the utilitarian selective cultivation of Enlightenment ideas has wrought.

Reversing the Destructive Tendencies in Modern Society
How does society get out of this impasse? What prospects lie in the future? It would be unrealistic and foolish to consider that the world could or should go back to the mentality that preceded the 17th century, even that of the classical philosophers, and to abandon the Western Enlightenment and its other legacies related to civil society, dignity of the individual, human rights, reason, and so forth.

It is the particular interpretation of the Western Enlightenment that puts greatest emphasis on instrumentalism and material utilitarianism that must be revisited and enriched in consonance with the deepest readings of the wisest, most sincere, selfless, and idealistic philosophers from all corners of the planet. That is why, in this sophisticated time, there is urgent need to raise such fundamental questions of purpose of society and of meaning of life. How does one return to the notions of simplicity and frugality as cornerstones of a happy and satisfying life?

Given that there is no way for the dominant West to establish an ideal form of government such as Aristotle designed for the micro city states of ancient Greece, nor is it even desirable given that his ideal polis excludes women and slaves, who composed the bulk of the population. It remains unquestionable that the sense of meaning and purpose Aristotle attached to life, society, and government is instructive. The encountering of serious social inequities and environmental destruction in modern life appears to affirm his observation that reason requires strong character traits and magnanimity to control society’s self-centered emotional and acquisitive instincts. Without magnanimity in its members, society’s purpose is circumscribed by its material preoccupations and its survival may be jeopardized. In Aristotle’s view, moral education would be a key to future well-being in society. It must be added that even modern political leaders have some inkling of the values and virtues of such just and ideal forms of government, judging from their sometimes noble and lofty language.

A Continuum from Private to Public Consciousness Through Global Awareness
While there may be more global awareness in the modern societies than one commonly realizes, and there is certainly expanded access to global news through Internet, there is still need for more global awareness expressed in the public press and TV accessed by the masses. Consistent with today’s market society ideology, the tendency is to concentrate on producing news that will sell to a particular market. For example, for most of the winter and spring of 2004, single story headliners on gay marriage and abuses of a minority of Catholic priests dominated the US news media, while people were dying by the thousands in different quarters of the world and war was raging in the Middle East. Ordinary people in some modern Western societies have very little idea about what is actually happening around the globe, or that there is even a world out there of any significance except as a market, a source of cheap labor, or a potential danger for one’s contented existence.

Just because an event does not happen on one’s own soil does that mean that one should not care about what is going on in other quarters of the world. Because when one’s country is attacked for the first time by outsiders, it is to late to ask “why us?” Such a reaction is as ignorant as asking “why me” when one develops a cancer? This is a lesson in the need for global awareness-understanding that one is part of a greater whole and that one must live in empathy with it to avoid such surprises and to be able to deal with them effectively when they occur.

With respect to the Internet, there is a great lack of training in how to appreciate the flood of information accessible to the masses in an increasing number of places around the planet. The problem for the public is how to deal with the gate-keepers of information in the market society.

Global awareness has to be introduced at a very young age. There is a view that sees need to get children at an early age and to teach them to understand the conceptual frameworks that will be invaluable in graduate school. While there is tremendous inequality in access to higher education, in the lower grades all children should be given the opportunity to develop their tremendous potential for imagination and the fantasy. Sense-perception must be encouraged-stories come from what is observed. Here all children have equal potential, differences are determined by access to experiences of reading and traveling and how teachers tap this potential from early on. Simply, the parents who tell stories and expose their children to the world around them play essential roles in developing the imagination and power of fantasy of the child.

In China and many other places around the world self-cultivation and education is first relayed by parents-the first teachers. Education, which tells a child to do just what it wants do, not caring what others think, is considered western style. The traditional eastern education informs the child that he/she must be aware of the “other’s” existence and the “other’s” need, and that they can not live without the “other’s” help. This is, in fact, another kind of selfishness; one does a favor and thinks about how one is better for that. One needs to explore the problems in each approach to education and find some common ground between the two approaches.

A Continuum from Private and Public Consciousness Through Mutual Understanding and Referencing
The relationship between the individual and society is a complex one and open to many different interpretations. Some think first in terms of private and how the passage to the public takes place, others think first in terms of public approaches and how this leads to the private. Behind these are basic differences. The continuum is broken if there is absorption of the public by the private, as is occurring now in some of the most modern societies giving de facto sovereignty to the market. Absorption of the private by the public to some small degree evokes the idea of the sacrifice of the self for the good of the other or the community as a whole.

As interpreted in the West, where individual freedom is foremost as a political principle, the private individual should be free to follow his/her conscience in verbal action and otherwise as long as he/she does not hurt another. The moral guide to this Western perspective is the Biblical Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” From an Eastern perspective this Rule is arrogant, since it presumes that what is good for one must be good for the other. The Confucian principle is “Do not do unto another what you do not want done to yourself. Moreover this idea is completed with the principle that one finds one’s own good in service to the “other.” The world needs to find the balance between the two.

In Buddhism, the sense of the continuum must begin with the perfection and virtue of the individual, specifically in terms of inner peace. This inner peace is the foundation of a harmonious society. In Christianity, the continuum is reached through sacrifice and altruism. These views clash with the dominant culture, which promotes fulfillment of the self. Yet even enlightenment traditions do not reject the idea that only through the “gift”-the giving of the self, can one acquire happiness. The self must, however, be free in which to give.

A most important question is: “How does one move from respect to mutual reference?” One scholar tried hard to urge his colleagues to take India as a case of mutual reference. They said they had respect for India, but would have nothing to do with this country. Scholars have to mutually reference and recognize India so that they might engage themselves in useful learning. Any society that takes a unilateral approach, becomes more of a teaching than learning society. By comparison, there is the idea that as a Muslim, conversation with a Christian is not only beneficial for mutual learning but cause for celebrating the event of learning from them: this is mutual referencing. And the benefits are enormous. Without the introduction of Buddhism to China, the later would not have evolved from its first to second epoch. Now, without Western learning, Confucians cannot move into their third epoch. Mutual reference and learning-these steps are so complicated.

In considering this topic, it is useful to consider that the individual, as a private person vis a vis the public consciousness, can work simultaneously on several levels where serving oneself and seeking to serve the “other” is the option and common thread binding all levels. At each level there are trade-offs between what one gives and hopes to get in this exchange. At the basic level there is the individual and its own thoughts as related and reflective of the immediate surroundings. At the next level is the private family in relation to the neighbors and community in which it resides. Then there are private institutions such as shops, hotels, restaurants, clubs and so forth playing a role in the town, village, city, or state. Then there are major corporations, privately owned but so powerful their management interacts with the larger bodies of governments that rule the sovereign state. And finally privately held multinational corporations that deal at the regional and global level that are beyond the sovereign reach of any public body government or intergovernmental organization at the same time. On each level, one never leaves the private domain, but being part of all is absolutely necessary but is not without challenges.

The fact for many is that individuals who put themselves at the service of a public cause have more satisfaction or happiness in their lives than those who are unwilling to submit themselves thereto, however, the quality of the cause and its sometimes, negative consequences must be taken into consideration. If the cause is an objective of the state, any kind of concern for the individual may be counterproductive to the unified goal of the state. To avoid dangers of excessive state control, distinction should be drawn between what is profoundly personal but not private. It is possible to have a strong personal experience without it simply being private. The distinction between an authentic self-realization and doing things for one’s self-interest is also very important.

Social service can be easily corrupted. The Californian debate over the purpose of higher education is an example. If the state’s vision of what is needed is very narrow, i.e., one should forget about studying any subject not of immediate relevance to the job market in the state. This approach is detrimental to self-realization. Therefore, some see the necessity of choosing between education for social service or education for self-realization. Others see the two as interrelated, in the more authentic sense of the deeper-self as the center of individual being. Without the involvement of the deeper-self, social service is easily corrupted.

In this context the concept of rootedness is very important. To move with public spiritedness via privatize interest to community interest, i.e.-moving beyond parochialism and nationalism to internationalism and beyond anthropomorphism to cosmocentrism- is not a matter of losing the sense of rootedness. If the notion of rootedness is undermined, one risks the consequences of abstract universalism and runs the danger of totalitarianism which occurs when one moves from all private concerns to embrace the cause of the state. Thus the seemingly contradictory demands of the self and of the society on all levels must be combined for fruitful action.

In sum, the continuum of the private and public consciousness is complex, multidimensional, and difficult to comprehend meaningfully. Efforts to do so risk over-simplification.

Balancing Public and Private Sectors of Society
There is recognition by many people in all market driven societies that there is need for an effective public mechanism to complement the market mechanism. The market mechanism functions well as a manner for exchange of goods and services. An effective mechanism for collective action is much more difficult to find in a society that prioritizes the individual in all conditions and at all costs-denigrating at the same time the notion of taxation and government. While communism and central planning are universally discredited as alien to human nature, some Western European countries, including France, the Netherlands, and the Scandinavian countries have found very workable balances between the public and private sectors. The need for this balance is reflected in the new European Constitution.

Presently the Swedish model is receiving considerable attention. Success is attributed to acceptance of the concept of social solidarity. They have also accepted a higher level of taxation and redistribution of income essential to this success. Such would not be possible if there was not a feeling for the well-being of the other in the heart of the people, or at least a recognition of the idea. This idea was articulated thousands of years ago by Confucius, in which one’s own success and well-being is dependent on that of others.

Until recently the term, “private” never has had a very positive connotation in East Asian culture. In Asian society, strong government is still taken for granted and considered necessary although times are changing. Strong government in the best sense is one with comprehensive responsibility for stability and even education. All the major universities are public universities. Private universities never have had the prestige of the public ones. Here it is very difficult for people to understand why the market is private and the government public. They question, why every aspect of life in the West is concerned with this issue of individualism and market forces. In the East, the view is that the more powerful is a person, group, or nation, the more obligated they should feel to the well-being of the whole society. Human rights should therefore be linked to responsibility. If one uses human rights arguments without linking them to responsibilities of the elite to the whole, there is great difficulty promoting or realizing a “good society.” In a society where responsibility is central, the government can be deeply involved in every aspect of life. Singapore is an extreme case, where the government is deeply involved in all economic activity. There is a wide spectrum from Singapore to Japan. China is a more complex story today.

Different perceptions of individual and public interests are also linked to a country’s past experience. Traditionally in China, the question was not seen as an either or situation-the individual and the community must engage each other like yin and yang-neither the community nor the individual can survive without the other. Then, from 1949-79 the concept of “individual” disappeared altogether, the concept of person was represented as part of the whole i.e. by the government or the party. In the 1990’s, people came to realize that they were individuals with self-interests who must speak out for themselves.

There was once a hero in China called Laifum, a “hero” because he always thought of everyone else. People in the 1990’s said that Laifum was dead. They wondered if they needed this kind of hero anymore. Individualism was now justified, and people worked for themselves.

Currently, there is much debate about a modern renaissance in the way of the liberal’s interpretation of the Western enlightenment. Many talk about individual interests. The injection of western ideas in modern China finds expression in new social behaviors. For example, in Shanghai, individuals were observed leaving their jobs “at will” to go to another factory in their neighborhoods because they would earn higher wages. This seeking of private interest is also seen as a novelty in contrast to the herd experience of the cultural revolution.

For many other people, this phenomenon raises the question of whether there is a meaning to life or a purpose to society, to be thought about, other than the reality of individuality. There are still many people who consider this new philosophy very dangerous since its full acceptance, leads to collapse of society or market despotism. This development also renders very difficult the introduction of the notion of an internalized private morality, whereas public morality was easily taught. Thus, there is still need to study Maoism, which many feel is derived from Confucianism.

The reality in modern China is that the notion of self-sacrifice for public good is not completely dead, nor is the hero who considers everyone else before him or herself. Recently an eleven year-old boy student who served his city as a fire fighter died in a rescue operation trying to save someone from engulfing flames. As reward for his service he was declared a national hero. However, at the same time, the government declared that in the future no children should be allowed to engage in firefighting. The government’s reaction was found by some to be confusing. How does one use the child as an object lesson to others in self-sacrifice if the government later declared such activity out of bounds for other children heroes. But, it is important to note that the government did not forbid the adulation of the child hero, but firefighting by children. Now children should be taught to use their imagination to find other ways of giving to the community.

In light of the above is it possible in a post-modern culture to give content to notions of Man as a “social being,” “collective consciousness,” and “collective purpose”? Is love and respect for nature one of the entries into a harmonious relationship between the private and the public consciousness? If there are issues that should capture the human race, ecological issues should do this. The only people who have a real sense of ecology are the indigenous people. While tribal consciousness is not good for society, that which is common to all of us, is the environment. It will be suicide not to address this overarching problem of sustainability.

Receptivity of some of the best Western minds to Chinese thought in different moments of modern history: after WW I; after WWII, and Post 1968.

After WWI, the Institute of Chinese Philosophy was established in Frankfurt. Jung and Heidegger were the top intellects interested in Eastern philosophy.

Interest in Eastern thought waned after WWII when the most brilliant Western minds were obsessed with problems of the modern West, their vision of Enlightenment ideals so riveting that there was little effort to try to obtain a point of view from other societies to help solve the problems of the time. Very few great scholars of this period were comparativists. Habermas, Derrida, and Foucault did not see need to look towards the East.

May 1968, marked an interesting turning point. Demonstrations in Paris and in other major centers in the West against traditional education and politics reflected in a new wave of interest inter alia in Chinese thinking. For many intellectuals on the left, to be engaged meant one must be Marxist and Maoist. At this very interesting moment many believed China had achieved an admirable level of social development on its own in accordance with its principles. Economic man motivated by self-interest to maximize his own profit in a free market adjudicated by law was rejected: Mao had created a new man, totally selfless, serving the people through an ideal transformation of the human spirit. This “ideal” collapsed as a huge figment of imagination during China’s worst modern moment, the Cultural Revolution.

One also needs to think whether the purpose of society is not only to help people survive, but also, to flourish. A number of steps need to be taken for society to be truly functional, not just sufficient. The question of human security is not about national defense, but the experience of security as human beings.

Tolerance of others is a minimum requirement. For peace and harmony in society and between societies, mutual recognition is a next step. Events in the Middle East reveal that there is limited mutual recognition and respect between Western societies and the Middle East. Respect only comes after one recognizes and respects the existence of the “other.” The existence of the “other” can never be wished away. This wish is the dark side of colonialism. Only through respect can one avoid interfering in the lives of others.

Other Answers to the Present Global Crisis and the Rediscovery of Purpose in Society
Programs to develop new styles of leadership: In the 1980’s initiatives in some prestigious business schools were taken to develop a new style of leadership that would not involve greed. Today while these programs have not been totally abandoned, they have proven very difficult to implement. In these schools one meets students who have a whole life experience of market competition and individual self-seeking behind them. While hope to shift the middle ground is always great, it is an uphill battle. Nevertheless in their classes, students can come to realize that values they have learned at home apply to business. In other words they realize that what they learn is relevant here and that there are opportunities to have impact.

But these august universities and business schools have to make their own ethical reforms to be credible messengers of “another way.” Harvard University was recently the sight of demonstrations against very low salaries paid to its blue color workers as compared to the 35 million dollars a year that it pays to its portfolio managers.

Tapping other dimensions of human nature is achieved by getting beyond the easy, familiar drives and by persevering until the new driving preoccupation becomes the most familiar and natural. One such approach is to bring out the spiritual side of human nature in a practical way, for example through work in a Peace Corps or other voluntary service for the less fortunate. Many examples e.g. students, through vacation alternative programs, etc, and professionals engaged voluntarily in social service gain whole different outlooks on life by virtue of this giving of self.

Promoting individual creativity. The power to create comes when individuals open themselves to new scientific ways of knowledge. The artist finds the discipline of self-mastery necessary when creating a masterpiece. Only by getting rid of the “I” and opening oneself to experience can ideas come. To respond, there must be mastery of the tools, of course, but inspiration is a gift and no creative person can explain how this happens. A composer sits day after day and listens and no may notes come. But she continues to wait patiently and expectantly until it comes. Victor Hugo is said to have risen early in the day to meet the muse.

The Wisdom in Alternative Viewpoints
It is instructive to consider the priceless contributions the indigenous people . In general it is recognized that indigenous people have a global community sense. Individual good versus common good in traditional society is not a choice they confront.

Others cultures of global south including that of the Chinese, Muslims, and Buddhists offer ideas that break out of some of the limitations imposed by the selective legacy of Western Enlightenment marshalling against the notion of a good society. The question is how receptive is the West to these non-Western ideas.

From the perspective of a Chinese scholar, the market society requires wisdom derived from different cultures. The example of the policy chosen by the former Prime Minister of China, Zhu Rong Ji was used by this scholar to convey this different approach. In response to the financial crisis of the 1990’s, Zhu Rong Ji refused to devaluate the Chinese currency, not for economic reasons but because of the Confucian moral principle that “people should not do unto others what they do not want others to do unto them.” Several years ago, the then-President Clinton gave a speech on the stage of Qinghua University, from which Zhu Rong Ji had graduated. As the backdrop to the stage one could read the characters of the wisdom selected from the Book of Changes, which reflects the spiritual tradition of this university; ” You strengthen yourself constantly, you thicken your moral spirituality, and you can support everything in nature.”

The following are remarks made at the Triglav meeting by special guest, Buddhist Activist, Sulak Sivaraska:

Buddhism and politics: The political tendency of nations is to be ethno-centric. For the benefit of peace this tendency must change so that other’s view points are regarded as more important than one’s own. Majorities may be wrong. One needs good friends to tell one when one is wrong. The Buddha was the first to bring democracy into the world. His liberty was from greed, hate, and religion. Many Buddhists have not been practicing what they have been preaching but I am trying to do this by building up activities at the grass roots, training the common people and myself.

Socially engaged Buddhism-draws its roots from ancient teachings of the Buddha, who transformed Buddhism into a type of welfare state. Most, historically Buddhist countries have fallen on very hard times, the question of human rights is very disturbing to them because it is understood as encouraging selfishness rather than selfless responsibility to the other. Many religious leaders have tried to reformulate ancient teachings to address problems of globalization. In the face of endemic structural violence, the new challenge for Buddhism is to use its teachings to cultivate world peace. Many people are now drawn into these discussions. The Siam network tries to raise issues that connect Thai people with others around the world.

Part II: Meaning of Life

The struggle to liberate the individual from the grip of public authorities and powers-be they religious or secular-has been a feature of the Western civilization for several centuries. Now this struggle is reaching the global level.

Within this logic, there is the “private sphere” and the “public sphere,”-but perhaps ultimately there will only be the private sphere, as society is reduced to providing for the security of individuals and private institutions. If society is abolished as a consequence, is there any legitimacy in seeking to identify a purpose for society? Is then, the only legitimate question that of the meaning of an individual’s life? And, must issues of spiritual and moral enrichment be approached only from an individual perspective?

The following text was shared by participants to initiate discussion on this topic.

Excerpts from “The Challenge of the World” By Vaclav Havel

From Introduction to the book, Is There a Purpose in Nature? How to Navigate Between the Scylla of Mechanism and the Charybdis of Teleos, edited by Ivan Havel.

Humankind is well aware of the varied spectrum of threats looming over its head. We do know that the number of people living on our planet is growing at a soaring rate and that within a relatively short time we can expect it to number tens of billions. We do know that it will be almost impossible to feed so many people. We do know that the already deep abyss separating the planet’s rich and poor could deepen further, and dangerously, because of this rapid population growth. We do know how difficult it will be for people of various nationalities and cultures to coexist, crowded so dramatically together; and we know how many different kinds of conflicts such a situation can prompt.

It is also a commonly known fact that modern humankind has been destroying the environment on which its existence depends, that it is ever more rapidly exhausting non-renewable sources of energy and other riches of this planet, that its activities are contributing to global warming, to the build-up of the greenhouse effect, to the enlargement of the holes in the ozone laver, and that it is disturbing the balance of all ecosystems. We all know, too, about the danger into which humankind is hurling itself by developing, producing and proliferating nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction in general, And finally, we all know about the current, and the expected future rise of social problems: crime, drug abuse and various forms of human alienation and frustration in the event of the further concentration of people in large agglomerations destroying natural human communities and bonds. Any one of us could certainly go on listing similar threats for a long time. Hundreds of books have been written about these threats; some have even become topics of expensive global summits.

I see a large, yet typical, paradox for our era in the fact that although contemporary humanity has been aware of these dangers, it does almost nothing to confront or avert them.

Does not every schoolchild today know that the resources of this planet are limited and that if they are exhausted faster than they are recovered, this would mean we could not but be doomed? And still we continue in our ways and, moreover, we do not even seem perturbed Quite the contrary. Rising production, and therefore also consumption is seen as the main sign of the success of a state, and not only of poor states where such feelings could be justified, but also of wealthy ones cutting off the branch on which they are sitting by their ideology of stupidly indefinite and senseless growth.

It seems to me that what is critical now is not to point out again and again such horrors that may be lying in wait unless our global civilization changes its essential direction.

Today the most important thing is to study the reasons why humankind does nothing to avert the threats about which it knows so much, and why it allows itself to be carried onward by some kind of perpetual motion – basically unaffected by self-awareness or a sense of future options and, as it seems, virtually incapable of being affected.

It would be unfair, of course, to deny the existence of numerous projects designed to avert this danger or to limit it, as well as the fact that a lot has been done for the implementation of such projects. However, all attempts of this kind have one thing in common – they do not touch the basic trends of development from which the threats stem, but merely regulate their impact using technical or administrative instruments. [The world is still better off for these projects.]

What then is the substance of the matter? What indeed could change the tendencies of today’s civilization?

It is my deep conviction that the only option is for something to change in the sphere of the spirit, in the sphere of human conscience, in the actual attitude of man towards the world and his understanding of himself and his place in the overall order of existence. It cannot suffice to invent new machines, new regulations, new institutions. It is necessary to understand differently and more perfectly the true purpose of our existence on this earth, and of our deeds. Only such a new understanding will allow the development of new models of behavior, new scales of values and objectives in life, and through these means finally bind a new spirit and new meaning to the specific regulations, treaties, and institutions.

Read in its full context, Havel’s message of spiritual renaissance is very important to today’s society. Havel is a product and disciple of the ideals of the western enlightenment-a person for whom freedom and reason are very important, but he does not see reason in apposition to transcendent ideas. Rather reason must be ballasted by transcendent moral and spiritual values. A spiritual renaissance, as he conceives it, can help to define and direct reason and awaken a sense of responsibility to the planet, which faith alone cannot do. The North, since the European Enlightenment, has had a tradition of separation of reason and faith and of the spirit and of the intellect, the former in both cases considered rational and the later irrational-the rational and irrational playing to two different registers. This dichotomy is alien in Eastern and traditional indigenous cultures. Such a renaissance can help build bridges East and West.

Vaclav Havel posits need for a spiritual renaissance in modern affluent secular societies, pock marked with poverty, short on spiritual values and guided by a philosophy grounded in materialism. Havel’s call has many supporters but runs into many difficulties. First, many people acting on the basis of fundamental religious beliefs are “blowing people up” as a reaction against secular scientific rationality and prevailing world reason promoting personal well-being through acquisitiveness, sensualism, and rent-seeking. They see scientific knowledge and research being directed to meeting the market society’s ideological goals. For many others, the Age of Faith represents the Dark Ages, which long ago ceded to the Enlightenment. Those agreeing with Havel, see the Age of Reason running aground on the reefs of its own excesses.

The notion that there is a lot going on in the world is indicative of a great richness in most cultures.

The following remarks further summarize the statement made by special guest Sulak Sivaraska, who introduced himself to the Circle as a socially engaged Buddhist and believer in the Dali Lhama.

World peace is not possible unless each person cultivates peace within him or herself. Therefore we all must cultivate peace within ourselves, but this step alone is insufficient and limited. To have peace within we must understand the structure of violence in the world. A Buddhist cannot hate the oppressor. To be skillful in conflictual situations is to be non-violent; not to become enraged at the “other” even those construed as the enemy.

On enemies: One should not consider people to be enemies and one must be open to dialoguing with all people including one’s so-called enemies. This does not mean that evil does not exist and one should have no sense of evil. The real enemies are within us; greed, hate, and illusion. Cleansing our minds to be less selfish, and to be more forgiving, loving, and kind is the way to overcome these inner and sole enemies. By contrast to hate selfishly is bad because it means one cannot think clearly. A Tibetan monk when being tortured feared most to loose compassion for the person punishing him.

Self-reliance, contentedness, generosity, and mindfulness are essential to the spirit.

The self consists of bodily feeling, thought processes, and consciousness. If one takes the self too seriously one becomes so selfish. The less selfish one is the more one can do. The less selfish person understands charity much better. One needs good friends to work together with, who will tell him/her what neither would wish to hear. One should bring such good friends together to share things at the grass roots. One should be unselfish in this doing and try to change society through such meetings of good friends.

The concept of God in Buddhism: God is something transcendent, mysterious; God is the Great Light or the Everlasting Light; God, whose substance is Love and Compassion, an entity beyond words. One can move towards God through selflessness and mindfulness-this Great Light can seem to appear in meditation. This Light however is beyond the conveyance of human language and therefore one cannot use an intellectual or rational approach to It.

Rational and other forms of knowing: There are many important ways of knowing. Rationality is important to think properly in worldly contexts but sometimes it is necessary to learn to stop thinking in this way. The most important element in life is breathing, not thought. Today humankind does not take good care of breathing. One stops anger by deep breathing. If one engages in much deeper breathing one can go beyond the intellectual approach to life and can perceive events that occurred before he or she was born or after dying. These forms of spiritual intuition and revelation are important ways of knowing.

There are many forms of rationality that are communicative. Embodied knowing is another form of knowing and it is very important. This internalization of experience transforms the person. In classical Western tradition, theory and practice are separated. In Eastern thought, theory is more aligned to practice. Exercising the spiritual senses in thinking goes beyond common conceptions of rationality but it is not an irrational mode of thinking. The best scientists think in these ways. Einstein used his brain but also his affections-he was not just cerebral. In the West there is need to bring back the heart to human thinking and society. The separation of heart and mind does not exist in Eastern thought, since humans think with the affective dimension as well.

Buddhism and technology: Prior to promoting any human invention, Buddhists would consider how it is to be useful and how it might be harmful. Would it be appropriate for the next seven generations? Or, just for the rich?

Seeking Meaning on the Many Roads to a Renaissance of the Human Spirit
Certain regions of the dominant West are now suffering the ferment of religious fundamentalism and revival. It has been too comfortable with its so-called dominant culture which many feel is a spiritual and moral vacuum and is leading to catastrophe. Some even welcome it, but not as a way to greater meaning in life but to escape moral corruption and vacuity.

To achieve a greater meaning in terrestrial life, one must do away with the notion that there is only one superior form of rationality in the world, which should be dominant. Market rationality is fine as one form of rationality among others, but very dangerous for humanity and nature if the bartering penchant in human nature takes over all other instincts-and thus society and life. A most serious problem with the market for the individual and for society is the phenomenon whereby the market value of the individual insinuates itself into the worth and meaning of individual life. If the market is the only the reference for the young, everything’s worth and value is subject to that. This is a very present danger given the amount of time an average child is exposed in western societies to commercial television programs and other electronic media driven by advertising.

In the West, a renaissance of the human spirit should bring about a new synthesis of the spirit and the intellect. This approach should avoid the pitfalls of competing spiritual beliefs. This means avoidance of negotiating different religious tenets, which is an endless contest of competing beliefs according to which individual negotiators are inspired. Such negotiations lead to intolerance and distrust. The example of the debate between the evolutionists and the creationists is instructive. Rather than a contest about the truth, a more productive approach is to teach the basic premises of each school. One could, for example, explore evidence and methods of both perspectives and consider how each defines the world humanity inhabits and seek to discover how each vision can be useful for society.

Historical Approach
Over the past few years there have been initiatives to understand the evolution of the world’s wide variety of expressions of spirituality. Ewert Cousins has undertaken the responsibility for editing 25 volumes on world spirituality. Each volume has been written by people within the spiritual tradition discussed. These volumes seek to explain the transformations of consciousness that have created and are transforming the great religions of the world. One volume also addresses the meeting of different spiritual traditions in the past, the present and the future.

But what does all this history and intermingling mean? Is modern society predominantly secular and humanist? Can religions be expunged by atheism in a modern material world? Or are they so impregnated in cultures that they cannot really be lost? Is the struggle between science and religion only a western struggle? Surely the world has evolved greatly as shown in the fact that it is only addressing these questions and holding festivals of faiths and meetings of parliaments of world religions. But it is all not so clear.

The world is in the middle of a spiritual renaissance but does not know it. Today there has been so intermingling of traditions that it is hardly noticeable to practitioners. Gandhi for example used ideas from the New Testament of the Bible to transform the Hindu caste system. It can be said that in a great sense the world is already very pluralistic-East and West share many spiritual concerns. Two hundred years ago none of the things we are experiencing today would have happened, no Buddhist in western meeting rooms, no festivals of faiths, and so forth.

Many question however the essence and the depth of the “meeting of religions.” The idea of mutual understanding and getting together is curious. For example, the divinity of Christ is an impossible problem to get around for peoples who are not Christians in the traditional meaning of the term. Rather one has to restore the idea of unity in diversity. To do that one cannot take a western sentimental approach, but must go deep into each religious tradition to find the place where they meet. A superficial papering over of doctrinal differences will not amount to much.

In the light of this argument, it is important to point out that the people involved should not expect resolution of doctrinal issues, but what should motivate them is that this is not really the big issue, it is community that is at stake not concurrent doctrines and the world community should move forward in the midst of diversity. The goal is to learn how to have a human community wherein different spiritual visions can play. One where there is respect for other religions. The more communication, the more likelihood of knowing what is meaningful will increase. There should not be a naïve kind of optimism about this harmony in divergence but human spirit has come a long way and the human race cannot live without hope.

Yet, a great many people in West have little clue of their own spiritual history let alone that of the rest of the world. Thus, a first step in a spiritual renaissance to be taken in the West is to know what spiritual forces are at work in the rest of world. The West may be the last to discover that there are other people in the world that have dignity and demand respect for their cultures, spirituality, and ways of Life. Islam, for example, has spread across the Fertile Crescent while many in the modern West have not really recognized the great intellectual, spiritual, and cultural resources of this region. This myopia is striking and very destructive. Thus it is very important that decision-makers in the West take a different view of global history to become familiar with the history of the world spiritually, not just its history of political economy. The biggest task of the so-called western world is to join the rest of the world.

China’s long history has been marked by a rich and diverse legacy of study of world belief systems and cultures. The concept of “religion” to describe the phenomenon of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism has not existed in China until very recently. Religion is a new concept coming into currency with modernity in China. The diversity of faiths has heretofore been treated as cultures, since each type can be regarded as a phenomenon of human civilization in particular in its earlier history. Faiths are rich sources of different expressions and styles of culture, such as evidenced in paintings, music, architecture, moral principles and even social laws.

Islamic thinking has been developing in China for 1300 years. Like Buddhism it has merged with Chinese traditional thought in turn enriching the spiritual framework and way of thinking of Confucianism. As a result, another school of Confucian thought emerged: Yangmingxinxue. There are a number of Chinese Muslim scholars who, over the course of history, have produced a number of books. They interpreted Islamic doctrine, annotating it with concepts of Confucian philosophical theory and terminology. These books have been seen as attempts of these scholars to develop ideals for the Chinese feudal society and to justify the existence of Islam.

Present research on comparisons between Islam and Confucianism-has philosophical, cultural and religious facets. This type of study today could mark the way towards establishing a special theory of civilization by way of analysis of how Chinese thinkers chose and combined ethics from Buddhism and Islam with traditional Confucian thought. The significance of this work is that it might respond with some solutions to the challenges of globalization and the incumbent clashes of civilization.

Modern Muslim intellectuals respect their religious beliefs and are at the same time seeking opportunities for a Renaissance of Islamic culture. Although they are appalled by the present situation in the Middle East, they underscore the importance and richness of the period of Islamic flourishing from the 8th century until the 13th century. Its most famous scholars included Al Farabi, founder of neo Platonism, Avicenna (Ib Cina), and Averroes (Ibn Rushir). The last famous philosopher was Ibn Heldone, regarded as the founder of the philosophy of history. Arabic and Islamic cultures played a significant role in facilitating the Enlightenment that followed in Western Europe. Presently Arab and Islamic intellectuals, most of whom are from Egypt, for example Zaki Nagib Mahmud and Muhamed Abbas Agged are the forerunners of the new cultural project aimed at reforming the traditional culture and moving it successfully through the modern transition.

Spiritual Renaissance and Secular Humanism
Does religion have a monopoly on spirituality, organized or not? Most people do not think so, if they ever did. Fewer than 20 percent of the population in the Netherlands, for example, belong or even attend a church but many more people have deep spiritual values.

In considering progress in the awakening to the voice of the human spirit, it is important to take into account spiritual and ethical values rooted in humanism as well as those spiritual values rooted in religion. Examples of spiritual values rooted in humanism are compassion and respect for the “other” that impel, for example, emphasis on poverty reduction and gender equality on international policy agendas. But there is a great deal of friction in the human rights versus religious values discourse.

Humanist derived values can clash with so called spiritual values rooted in religious tenets. For example, while secularism is pressing for gender equality, religious pundits are emphasizing the special role of women symbolized by the purdah, which are being worn more extensively in Egypt and other countries in the Middle East, then they were in earlier periods of history-raising the importance of religion. There is no doubt that gender equality is not a priority in these countries while in the West it is high on the policy list. How religions are able to handle these issues is an important debate. How does one persist in adhering to a religious value of one’s own faith even if contradicting what one only accepts from a humanist point of view? In the quest for a spiritual renaissance it is important to look to the humanists who treasure and carry forward precious values independent of religion and also to listen to what they are telling the world.

In the debate between humanist and religious rooted values it should be remembered that the clothes people wear and the possessions they have do not determine what kind of persons they are. Clothes still have deep meaning in Islam and for some deep and meaningful traditions to stay alive, they must preserve their vitality. Externalities are symbols that facilitate dealing with complex phenomenon.

Poverty eradication is another very complex issue that transcends the issue of insufficient materiality and must be seen in larger contexts. Simplicity and frugality may be indicators of deeper spiritual values not to be under-esteemed. Our times call for learned and penetrating analysis of what religion and spirituality represent. There is great ferment in Judaism, Islam and Christianity as well as in other philosophical and religious traditions and this is a time of great opportunity.

Renaissance of traditional wisdom: A quiet renaissance of this spirit is unofficially being undertaken in China, which is evident in the political language being expressed in China. In reading speeches of the Prime Minister one can easily perceive in them the influence of Confucianism. But government officials do not want to admit the importance of this renaissance. But in China today there is recognition of the need for traditional wisdom to solve current problems in the country.

Confucianism engages the continuum of self, of community, faith, and reason. For China, it is important to study Confucianism and renew it, as a kind of Chinese renaissance, a developed Confucianism-“Reason of Heaven.” This renaissance also poses new challenges because of the present introduction of rule of law into society.

Emphasis must be put on notions of respect, reciprocity and mutuality, and tolerance. Respect is the highest ideal, reciprocity is neutral as it benefits all mutuality, and tolerance is somewhat negative motivation.

“A man who has faith in humanity, while seeking to be established himself, tries to enable others to be established too, while desiring success in everything for himself, he helps others to succeed in everything too.” The wisdom of Confucius

Final Word
A renaissance of traditional wisdom would be welcome in all cultures. Each society has their own strategies for solving different problems and challenges. A market society is unacceptable. Humanity urgently needs to turn to its time honored sources of wisdom. Life embraces culture as well as material supply and the prudent and wise exercise of power. The market economy offers many things but as a mere mechanism it rests on moral values and sentiments. It needs to be oriented by a broader look at the wonders of the world.

A renaissance of the human spirit should embrace a new synthesis of scientific reasoning and spiritual values. In this renaissance, values should inform reason. Values such as love and compassion should enlarge the capacity to direct how we use our reason.

Spiritual renaissance also means recognizing moral absolutes that transcend judgment and must inform decisions. Faith seeking understanding means people are not of the Promethean species. The ultimate source of their origin is unknown and according to some of the world’s greatest physicists cannot be known. Humankind must use reason in the service of understanding this aspect of the human condition, as Einstein allowed himself in his cosmic religious feeling. Life’s meaning is in mentalness not in materialness or King Midas’s fantasy. There is sense in thinking that people cannot participate in a spiritual renaissance unless they begin to feel some humility about their place in the universe.

Contributed Papers

• Guiding Purpose and Meaning of Life (PDF)
  Barbara Baudot
• The Rule of Law in China (PDF)
  Zhang Qi
• Islam in China (PDF)
  Yihong Liu