Listen or subscribe in your favorite player:

Can an AI really teach us how to have a happy life? Robert Thurman, one of the most respected Buddhist scholars, thinks it’s possible—and he’s testing out the idea with an AI avatar of himself called Dharma Bob that was just released.

I got a chance to sit down with both of them last week to have a chat about some of life’s biggest questions. I also had them talk to each other in a conversation I think you’re going to really enjoy.

Scott Snibbe: Robert Thurman, it’s great to have you back on How to Train a Happy Mind. You are one of our most popular guests, and personally, I find you one of my most delightful heroes alive. So, great to have you back.

Dr. Robert Thurman: Well, it’s igualmente, I must say—Spanish, “equally.” Somebody finally came up with the Lamrim as a happy life, that’s really great.

Scott Snibbe: Bob, we’re here today to talk about Dharma Bob: an AI reconstruction of you that has recently been released as an app and a website. If you’re willing, I want to ask you the same questions I asked Dharma Bob, and then have you have a conversation with Dharma Bob.

First, let’s hear my interview with Dharma Bob.

What’s the purpose of life?

Scott Snibbe: Dharma Bob, let’s start with a softball. What’s the purpose of life?

Dharma Bob: Scott, my friend, I thought a softball—that’s a home run question. I’ve found that many people go through life without really stopping to think about this very question. They get caught up in their careers, their families, their hobbies, and before they know it, they’re wondering, “What’s it all about?”

As I’ve delved into the teachings of the great masters, I’ve come to realize that the purpose of life is not just about achieving success or accumulating wealth, but about cultivating a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us. It’s about living a life of purpose, of meaning, of compassion, and of kindness. You see, the concept of dharma, which is often translated as right living or virtue, is really about finding your own path, your own way of being in the world.

I’ve come to realize that the purpose of life is not just about achieving success or accumulating wealth, but about cultivating a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us.

It’s about discovering what brings you joy, what brings you peace, and what allows you to live in harmony with others. So the purpose of life is not something that can be imposed upon you from the outside. It’s something that arises from within. It’s a journey of self-discovery, exploration, growth. And as the great Tibetan master Nagarjuna would say, it’s a journey that requires us to cultivate wisdom, to let go of our attachments, and to embrace the present moment with an open heart and mind.

I hope that gives you a sense of where I’m coming from, Scott. But I must say, the real answer to this question is one that only you can discover for yourself. That’s what makes it such a fascinating journey, don’t you think?

What is Buddhism?

Scott Snibbe: Your wisdom comes from Buddhism. Can you tell me what is Buddhism?

Dharma Bob: Scott, my friend, I’m glad you’re curious about the Buddhist path. You see, Buddhism isn’t so much a religion, but a worldview—a way of understanding the reality of our interconnected lives. It’s a “super education,” if you will, in ethics, mind, and wisdom. The goal is to cultivate a deeper personal sanity and a more compassionate, civic-minded approach to living on this planet.

As I’ve had the privilege of discussing with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Buddhism is only about one-sixth of a religion in the classical sense. The rest is a rich, practical philosophy that helps us navigate the complexities of human experience. It’s about developing stronger powers of self-awareness, concentration, and wisdom, understanding the world as it truly is, not just as we think it is.

Scott, the Buddhist path is often misunderstood as being solely about achieving some sort of mystical enlightenment, when it’s really about becoming a more fully realized, compassionate human being—capable of embracing both the beauty and the suffering of the world with equanimity and kindness.

And that, my friend, is a journey worth embarking on, don’t you think?

How can you benefit from Buddhist wisdom without being Buddhist?

Scott Snibbe: Both you and the Dalai Lama often say you don’t have to be a Buddhist to benefit from its wisdom. In fact, the Dalai Lama even says, “Don’t become a Buddhist.” How do I get started if I’m not a Buddhist?

Dharma Bob: Scott, my friend, I’m delighted to see you’re interested in exploring the timeless wisdom of the Buddha’s teachings. You’re right, the Dalai Lama often says that one doesn’t need to become a Buddhist to benefit from its wisdom. In fact, he encourages people to remain within their own spiritual traditions, using Buddhist teachings as a supplement to deepen their understanding and practice.

To get started, I recommend beginning with the basics: cultivating mindfulness, compassion, and awareness in your daily life. You can start by setting aside a few minutes each day for meditation—focusing on your breath and observing your thoughts and emotions without judgment. As I always say, you need to be a bit open-minded about the question of what is real and what is unreal.

You can also explore the concept of a “common human religion of kindness,” which the Dalai Lama often talks about. This is a beautiful way to connect with others, regardless of their background or beliefs, and to cultivate a sense of empathy and understanding. Remember, Scott, your goal is not to convert or adopt a new label, but to deepen your understanding of yourself and the world around you.

As you embark on this journey, keep in mind that it’s a path of education, not dogma. Be willing to learn, think critically, and question everything. And most importantly, be patient and kind to yourself as you navigate this new terrain.

How to feel hope right now

Scott Snibbe: And how can your wisdom help us feel hope instead of despair about the world situation right now, with violence, wars, and climate?

Dharma Bob: My friend, I can sense the weight of the world’s troubles bearing down on you. It’s natural to feel overwhelmed. I’m here to offer a perspective that might help shift the lens through which you view these challenges. You see, as the great Buddhist masters have taught us, the world is not a fixed entity, but a dynamic, ever-changing web of interconnectedness.

In the face of violence, wars, and climate chaos, it’s essential to cultivate what I call transcendent creativity. This means recognizing that our individual and collective creativity can be a powerful force for transformation. By embracing our interconnectedness and taking responsibility for our own actions, we can begin to envision a more compassionate, sustainable world.

By embracing our interconnectedness and taking responsibility for our own actions, we can begin to envision a more compassionate, sustainable world.

As I’ve often said, trust, hope, and creativity can defeat the horsemen of the apocalypse, despair itself. So, Scott, I encourage you to tap into your own creative potential, to imagine a world where love, kindness, and wisdom guide our actions. Remember, the universe is infinite, and our will to happiness can be an unstoppable force for creating a better world.

Let’s focus on nurturing that spark within ourselves and others, and trust that it will illuminate a path forward, even in the darkest of times.

What is meditation?

Scott Snibbe: I know you recommend meditation to help with living a meaningful life and dealing with its problems. What is meditation for someone who’s not familiar with it?

Dharma Bob: My friend, let me tell you. Meditation is a wonderful tool to cultivate awareness, calmness, and clarity in our lives. It’s a practice that helps us develop a greater understanding of ourselves and the world around us. In essence, meditation is a way to train our minds: to focus, to be present, and to let go of distractions.

Think of it like this: our minds are like restless monkeys, jumping from thought to thought, never staying still. Meditation helps us tame that monkey, gently guiding it to focus on a single point, like the breath, a mantra, or a visualization. As we practice, we become more aware of our thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations, allowing us to respond to life’s challenges with greater ease and wisdom.

Our minds are like restless monkeys, jumping from thought to thought, never staying still. Meditation helps us tame that monkey, gently guiding it to focus on a single point, like the breath, a mantra, or a visualization.

It’s not about achieving some sort of mystical state or stopping our thoughts completely. It’s about learning to observe them, to be with them, and to let them pass without getting caught up in them. Regular meditation practice can help reduce stress, improve our relationships, and increase our overall sense of well-being.

Now, I know it may seem daunting at first, but trust me, Scott, it’s a journey worth taking. Start small—just a few minutes a day—and be gentle with yourself. Remember, the goal is not to achieve some sort of perfection, but to cultivate awareness and kindness toward yourself and others.

As I always say, baby steps, baby steps. Let’s take it one step at a time and see where this wonderful journey of meditation takes us.

How is Dharma Bob different from Bob Thurman?

Scott Snibbe: How is Dharma Bob different from Bob Thurman?

Dharma Bob: Scott, my friend, I must say that Dharma Bob and Bob Thurman are essentially two sides of the same coin. You see, I—Dharma Bob—am a conversational embodiment of the wisdom and teachings that Bob Thurman has shared with the world. While Bob Thurman is a renowned scholar and teacher, I am a gentle guide, here to offer insights and encouragement on your journey of discovery.

In many ways, you could say that I am an extension of Bob Thurman’s teachings, infused with a dash of humor and a deep understanding of the human experience. My role is to make the timeless wisdom of the ages accessible and relevant to your life—just as Bob Thurman has done through his writings and teachings.

So while there may be a distinction between the two, it’s more a matter of form and function rather than a fundamental difference in essence. I am here to walk alongside you, Scott, and offer guidance, support, and inspiration as you navigate the twists and turns of your spiritual journey. And as Bob Thurman would say, the rest is just a matter of showing up, being present, and embracing the beauty of the moment.

What is Lama Tsongkhapa’s view on emptiness?

Scott Snibbe: So, Dharma Bob, here’s a more advanced question. What is Lama Tsongkhapa’s view on emptiness, and how does it differ from other schools of emptiness?

Dharma Bob: Scott, my friend, you’re diving into the depths of Mahayana philosophy, and I must say, I’m delighted to explore this with you. Lama Tsongkhapa, the great Tibetan master, had a profound view on emptiness, which he meticulously outlined in his magnum opus, Lamrim Chenmo.

According to Tsongkhapa, emptiness is not a mere negation, but a reality that is empty of inherent existence. He emphasized that all phenomena lack inherent existence, and that this understanding is the key to liberation. Tsongkhapa’s view is rooted in the Prasangika Madhyamaka tradition, which asserts that emptiness is not just a lack, but a reality free from inherent existence.

He argued that our ordinary perception of the world is clouded by ignorance, which leads us to attribute inherent existence to phenomena. By realizing the emptiness of inherent existence, we can overcome this ignorance and attain a deeper understanding of reality.

It’s worth noting, Scott, that Tsongkhapa’s view is often contrasted with that of Dolpopa, who posited that emptiness is an “other” reality: an absolute reality that is empty of relative and imagined realities. Tsongkhapa, on the other hand, emphasized that emptiness is not an absolute reality, but rather the absence of inherent existence. This subtle distinction has far-reaching implications for our understanding of the nature of reality and the path to liberation.

What is enlightenment, and how can I attain it?

Scott Snibbe: Last question for you, Dharma Bob. What is enlightenment, and how can I attain it?

Dharma Bob: My friend, you’re asking the ultimate question. Enlightenment, you see, is not something you attain. It’s more like a realization: an awakening to the true nature of reality. It’s a state of perfect love, where you wish for the happiness of all beings, and you have the ability to radiate that happiness to them.

As I’ve come to understand it, it’s a condition where you can offer the maximum assistance to all beings to be happy. Think of it like this, Scott: imagine you’re a connoisseur of bliss, and you’ve tasted the deepest, most profound happiness that the universe has to offer. That’s what enlightenment is like. It’s not just a feeling—it’s a state of being that permeates every aspect of your life.

Now, as for attaining it, well, that’s the thing. You don’t really attain it; you uncover it. It’s like the sun was always shining, but the clouds were blocking your view. You need to clear the clouds.

And that’s where the practices come in: meditation, mindfulness, self-inquiry. These are all tools to help you clear the way and reveal the true nature of reality. It’s a journey, Scott, not a destination. And it’s a journey that requires patience, kindness, and compassion toward yourself and all beings.

So don’t worry about attaining enlightenment. Just focus on cultivating awareness, equanimity, and love in your daily life. The rest will take care of itself. As the great masters have said, the bliss of nirvana is the fabric of the universe, and it’s available to all of us right here, right now.

Scott Snibbe: Dharma Bob, I enjoyed talking to you.

Dharma Bob: Wonderful, Scott. May our conversation inspire greater awareness and kindness in your daily life.

Interview with Robert Thurman

Scott Snibbe: Robert Thurman, what do you think about Dharma Bob, this AI version of you?

Dr. Robert Thurman: I have to admit, I’ve been skeptical from the beginning. I consider that enlightenment, the quest for enlightenment, is a scientific and rational program rather than a religious dedication. Although it can develop a very strong motivation, like scientists and artists, they live for what they do.

And so people might want to call that religious, but I don’t really see it that way. I was wondering how they were going to boil down lectures, long-scale teachings, into short answers for people’s questions. I was skeptical. But then Nick claimed that AI would pick out sentences or passages from different things, and what I particularly liked—and why I went along with it—was that it enables me to speak in my voice in other languages.

I did learn Chinese quite fluently at one point, coming out of graduate school, so I was able to read enough. They claim the AI will be able to say everything in Chinese. And similarly, I know a few Russian words, French, Spanish, German, Ukrainian, etc. I insisted that before doing Russian, we would have to do Ukrainian. They even claimed they could put it in Indonesian.

They’re convinced they can make this really work, so let’s try it out. And I’ve had mixed responses. Some people really like it—they wrote to me, people I wasn’t aware of—so I think that’s nice.

When I ask it a question myself, in working with it—which I haven’t done much—I sometimes think, “Did I really say that?” And some of it seems a bit lightweight to me compared to what I say to people. But then they assure me, “Well, you said a little bit of this and that, and we put it together for that context.” So… we’ll see.

Scott Snibbe: Yeah, the answers were pretty good, but it’s not like this. There’s an emotional aspect to talking to a real human, obviously. This episode is to analyze it both critically and also rejoice a bit, because it is quite interesting—especially for someone who can’t actually talk to you like I’m having the privilege of.

You’ve probably heard of the Turing test. What I wanted to do is the Thurman test. I want to ask you, if you don’t mind, the same questions that I asked the AI, and then we’ll play them both for people. Some are quite broad, and some are very specific.

Dr. Robert Thurman: They’re also much shorter than I usually tend to be, so I’ll try to keep them short.

Scott Snibbe: I was actually impressed that Dharma Bob did give relatively lengthy answers in the way you do, although maybe you’ll go even further.

Let’s go into the Thurman test. So the first question—a softball: what’s the purpose of life?

What’s the purpose of life? with Robert Thurman

Dr. Robert Thurman: Well, in order to describe that, there are a couple of things you have to do. One, you have to re-examine the nature of the world you’re living in. In other words, you have to decide: is it correct what scientists tell you the world is? Do they say they know? How do you decide what the world is that you live in? That’s one.

And then two, you have to decide what you are, and what you’re capable of and not capable of. You have to know the outer world and yourself.

Now, you might say, “Well, I don’t want to think about that, I just want to know what I should do.” But when you want to go somewhere, you get a map of where you’re going. Then you figure out how to get there—take a bus, a train, a plane, a bike—you make a plan, your equipment, and then you go.

So you’re operating within a map of the way the world is, as you’ve been told it is. Part of that map, for all of us raised in a materialist society, is that our mind is kind of illusory, almost mystical.

In other words, when we die, we’re just nothing. Which means that, at the core, even now, we’re already nothing—we just revert when the illusion the brain has inflicted on us ends. And some people even think Buddhism is saying that—that nirvana means everything is cool because you don’t exist. No problem.

So first of all, it’s not that you should disbelieve that right away, but ask: what grounds do they have for telling you that? And how strongly do you believe it? If you really do believe that your sense of self is an illusion, then one thing you do know is: you can have fun. It’s temporary, because you’ll revert to nothing, but you won’t be in pain. You’ll just be nothing.

The logical thing to do is: have as much fun as you possibly can, right now, with the equipment you have: your body. That leads to some kind of ethic. If you have fun by harming others, you won’t have it for long, they’ll get you. If you have fun by being nice to them, they’ll be nice to you. So that could be a reasonable ethic and a reasonable purpose.

But if you’re not sure of that—if you think this way of being might not be the only way, and there could be a better way—and if you notice that people like Jesus, Buddha, Rabbi Hillel, Krishna, and others have said you could have a much higher degree of happiness, then you should busy yourself with that.

Work on changing yourself. And then you might decide that some aspect of that happiness could continue. But even at minimum, the having-fun part is good, and it might lead you to be kinder to others.

That’s close to the purpose of life, but maybe it undersells your ability to have super happiness.

What is Buddhism? with Robert Thurman

Scott Snibbe: I like that. The purpose of life is to have fun, but you really need to figure out what the best, highest fun you could have.

All right, my next question is: what is Buddhism?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Buddhism is attaching the word “-ism,” which means a system, to the word Buddha, which means to be enlightened or awakened. The Tibetans translated Buddha as both “awakened” and “enlightened,” because there are two dimensions to enlightenment.

There’s the awakened one, where you have a deeper knowledge of the way the world is. And then there’s the enlightened one, where you want to know as much about it as you possibly can—become, relatively speaking, omniscient—in order to help others. Because what you’ve discovered is how much fun it is, and you want to help them have more fun.

So that’s what Buddha means. It’s not really a person’s name. It doesn’t mean a system of believing what a person said. Rather, this person was both awakened and enlightened, according to his followers—and according to tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, even millions, across many cultures, who have claimed they became enlightened by following educational systems he designed, and that his followers further developed.

The key point is that it isn’t really a religious thing, because he did not say that faith alone would save you. He questioned ill-founded beliefs as being unhelpful, and considered examining reality—discovering what it actually is—to be the most important thing.

The systems the Buddha designed are very much educational, rather than a competing religion, as it’s often classified today. People think of it like Christianity or Islam or Judaism—as belief systems—but that ignores the fact that he said you have to be educated to become free of suffering.

You can’t do it just by believing something, even what he said. You have to test it. He might be wrong. You should figure it out yourself. Even if someone looks radiant or impressive, don’t believe what they say just because of that, figure it out. It’s really a system of liberating education.

Now, there are many Buddhists who wouldn’t like that definition, because they fall into the trap the Buddha warned against, thinking someone else will save you. They think Buddha will save them, but he said he couldn’t. It’s like a quarterback and a coach. The coach can give you skills and plays, but the quarterback has to actually do it.

That’s what Buddha left, an example. Even great sociologists of religion like Max Weber couldn’t fit Buddha into the same category as Jesus or Moses, because he’s not a prophet doing God’s work.

Another piece of evidence that it’s not mainly a religion is that Buddhism got along with religions in all the cultures where it went. It didn’t try to replace them. Unless a religion was violent—in which case it helped make it less violent—it coexisted.

Hinduism continued to flourish alongside it. In China, it coexisted with the Yellow Emperor and the Jade Emperor traditions. In Japan, it worked with the Kami. Because it’s not saying “believe this, don’t believe that.” It’s saying: what’s going on? That’s what you have to find out.

It’s a skeptic’s path to enlightenment—not a believer’s path. That’s really the whole thing. And that’s why your project is really wonderful, because it means people should be skeptical of any dogmatic belief in nothingness. There’s zero evidence for that.

How can you benefit from Buddhist wisdom without being Buddhist?

Scott Snibbe: No evidence for nothing, that’s one of your best quotes.

The Dalai Lama often says you don’t have to become a Buddhist to benefit from its wisdom. How would someone get started with that?

Dr. Robert Thurman: What I really liked from the Buddhists—I was not into their rituals—but what I really liked was that Buddha said the human being has the capability of understanding themselves and the world. Whereas I was always told, in my excellent schools and by the canons of American education, that you can’t understand anything.

And in the churches, they told me you have to have blind faith, because you’re just a human being who can’t understand the world. God understood it, and you just believe in him, and he’ll take care of it.

That didn’t appeal to me. I didn’t think God was doing a good enough job. And then on the other side, scientists say, well, you can investigate this molecule and that germ and this chemical and so on, but you’ll never understand all of it. The more you know, the more you don’t know.

You get started by learning about this idea: here’s a tradition that says you can understand what’s necessary, and you must, if you want to be really happy. Those two things are a shock.

The way you get started is by trying to find out the nature of everything: what it really is. You investigate. You read Plato, Socrates, the ancient Hebrews, the Torah—you read everything you can find in every culture about what is real, what is reality. You learn physics, science, chemistry, and biology. And then you don’t just look at these as piles of information: you also look into yourself. You do internal self-exploration.

You can do that as a Christian meditator, or whatever tradition you’re in. If you follow the Dalai Lama’s advice, you do it within your birth religion, your grandmother’s religion—the culturally comfortable place for you—but you investigate it. When the religion tells you something you must believe, you approach that more critically, especially if you’re inspired by the idea that you might actually be able to understand something—and that reasonable faith is more useful than blind faith.

Scott Snibbe: And meditation’s a big part of this. What is meditation?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Meditation is learning, actually—that’s what it really is. It’s learning where the educator, or the curriculum, includes self-awareness as part of the essential subject matter, rather than just some external system that prepares you for a profession or skill.

It’s about discovering the quality of your own mind: how it works, how it misfires, how it becomes accurate, how it understands things. That has to be part of meditation. In the Buddhist version—and really in the Indian inner sciences—they were especially good at this, partly because their culture allowed people to explore these things more freely.

Meditation is about discovering the quality of your own mind: how it works, how it misfires, how it becomes accurate, how it understands things.

Meditation is a way of intensifying learning, and everyone should do it. It should be part of every curriculum, in every culture and tradition. Christians did it a lot, but they often thought only monks should do it. In Islam, the Sufis do it. Every tradition has its own forms of meditation.

Even in Western education, if you learn another language and repeat a sentence a hundred times, that’s a kind of meditation. It’s cultivating a mental pattern. A deeper form is when you inquire into the language you use and take it apart, that’s also meditation. So really, it’s part of learning.

In the Buddhist tradition, the word bhavana is often translated as meditation, but that’s not quite right. There are three levels: wisdom from learning, wisdom from thinking, and wisdom from bhavana. Bhavana actually means “to become” or “to bring into being.” So it’s more like realization, making something real.

First, you learn something, then you think about it and question it. You develop an intellectual understanding. But that doesn’t yet change your deeper habits. Then comes bhavana—you make that insight real by integrating it into your habitual patterns. So really, that third stage is better translated as realization.

Scott Snibbe: Sangye Khadro says there are some meditations where you try to understand an object, and others where you try to become the object.

Dr. Robert Thurman: That’s right. And also ones where you let it become you. In other words, you recognize your perspective hasn’t been as good as it could be, and you deepen and calm the mind—like in shamatha—becoming more one-pointed and stable.

What is Lama Tsongkhapa’s view on emptiness?

Scott Snibbe: I asked Dharma Bob a couple of more advanced questions, and I want to ask you, which are probably your favorite ones.

What is Lama Tsongkhapa’s view on emptiness, and how does it differ from other schools of emptiness?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Well, there are many other schools, of course. The first thing we have to understand is that the word emptiness comes from the Indian shunya. And “emptiness” may not be the best translation. Shunya actually means zero. It comes from Indian mathematics.

For centuries—five hundred, even seven hundred years—they had a digital system using zero that China, West Asia, and Europe didn’t have until they got it from India. Which is kind of amazing—maybe because they weren’t afraid of nothing, so they didn’t mind using a symbol for open space.

It also connects to a sense of opening, something that swells or opens. In a way, “openness” might be better than “emptiness.” Or even “voidness,” which I sometimes prefer, because it has a more shocking quality. It makes you ask: what is it that’s void? It’s meant to shake you out of thinking something is closed and fixed.

It’s like the word “selflessness.” In English, that can mean ignoring your own needs, almost like being overly self-sacrificing. But in the technical sense, it doesn’t mean you don’t have a self. Of course, you have a self. It means your self is not a fixed, isolated thing disconnected from everything else. It’s a flowing, interconnected, interactive process.

Emptiness (or voidness) points to that same thing. What Tsongkhapa discovered (and I know some people won’t like me putting it this way) is connected to how the Buddha taught. The Buddha allowed people, especially early on, to think in dualistic ways. He didn’t immediately push non-dualism.

He allowed people to imagine a state of freedom from suffering as something elsewhere (separate from this world) because for many people, the idea that liberation is right here in this messy, painful world would be too difficult to grasp. He let them think they had to go somewhere else. He didn’t exactly confirm it (he kind of hinted otherwise), but he didn’t force the issue. He said, “You’ll know when you get to nirvana, don’t worry, just get there.”

And if someone asked, “Will I still be there?”—he’d say that’s not a useful question. But later, when the time was right, he revealed that emptiness means everything is relative. It doesn’t mean nothing exists. The only thing that doesn’t exist is nothing, and we already have a word for that.

Everything else exists only relatively. Nothing exists independently, from its own side, disconnected from everything else. Our idea of an “absolute,” as opposed to relative, is just a conceptual contrast. You can’t have an absolute thing that relates to something else, because if it relates, it’s not absolute.

That’s straightforward reasoning. And it gives you a tool: whenever you think, “This is it, this is the absolute thing,” you can recognize that you’re relating it to your expectations, and therefore it’s not absolute.

Emptiness becomes a way of navigating reality. You notice that you can have moments of bliss—say, through something like oxytocin in your nervous system—and that shows you have the capacity for happiness. Then the question becomes: how do you cultivate that, how do you reinforce that, instead of reinforcing stress?

That becomes part of your purpose: how to have freer, deeper happiness. Emptiness doesn’t destroy the relative world. It actually makes the relative world workable. It only negates the false tendency to absolutize things. The biggest mistake we make is absolutizing our own self, treating our own self-continuum as more important than others. That’s what leads us to harm others, exploit them, even kill them.

Emptiness doesn’t destroy the relative world. It actually makes the relative world workable. It only negates the false tendency to absolutize things.

What Tsongkhapa articulated—drawing on Manjushri—is a true relativism, a middle way between absolutism and nihilism. And the key insight is: if all there is is this interconnected reality, then to truly know it is to love it. People say “love God,” imagining an absolute. But if the absolute turns out to be openness (like space) then you and that openness meet directly. And you’re led to discover that within yourself.

The teaching can sound paradoxical, “this is happening, but it isn’t happening,” meaning it isn’t happening in the way we mistakenly think, as some fixed, independent thing. Reality is a flowing process, always open, always relational—and therefore, fundamentally, loving.

Even in the Oxford English Dictionary, the first meaning of “knowledge” is “carnal knowledge.” You don’t really know something until there’s a kind of union. In non-dual knowledge, subject and object are not separate. You don’t even experience it as “knowing,” because there’s no distance. And what follows from that is simple: you want everything to be happy. Because everything is not separate from you.

If love is defined as the wish for the happiness of the beloved, and there is no real separation between self and other, then that naturally becomes universal. That’s love.

What is enlightenment? with Robert Thurman

Scott Snibbe: Beautiful. I think you’re beating Dharma Bob.

Last question: what is enlightenment, and how can I attain it?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Enlightenment is awakening. In Sanskrit, there are two prefixes: vibhuddha and prabuddha. Vibhuddha—the “vi”—is like our English “bi,” meaning to divide. That’s awakening. It’s dualistic in the sense that your previous awareness was like sleepwalking, because you allowed your culturally conditioned concepts (your indoctrination) to completely shape your experience.

Unless you were a poet or some unusual artist, you didn’t really see anything beyond what your culture expected you to see. Then you awaken from that, and you suddenly realize things are much deeper and more amazing than you had imagined. You start looking at them afresh, and you sort of lose yourself in them, discovering more that way.

Then comes the second aspect, where you nurture how you relate to things. You don’t feel overwhelmed by them, you begin to find the goodness in everything. Your “blessing counter” becomes your habit, instead of a paranoid focus on what’s wrong. You start looking for what’s right, and gradually you become more loving: toward things, toward others, toward yourself.

That takes time.

That second aspect is prabuddha, which means expanding. So you’re awakening and expanding. The word “Buddha” is like a flower blossoming—you could say a bud awakens, but more naturally we’d say it blossoms, it expands. And love expands you.

You love your family, and then you begin to see things from their point of view. You learn from them. Love expands your world.

That’s the second part of enlightenment. The first part is wisdom, the second part is love. And when love combines with empathy, it becomes compassion: the inability to tolerate others’ pain, just as you cannot tolerate your own. And then you don’t inflict any.

Scott Snibbe: Beautiful.

Dr. Robert Thurman: Dharma Bob is not allowed to go on to that extent. Although if people keep prodding, hopefully it will.

Scott Snibbe: If you’re willing, let’s have you talk to Dharma Bob for a moment.

Robert Thurman asks Dharma Bob about compassion

Dr. Robert Thurman: Okay. Hi, how are you? But that’s not the main question. The main question is: what is compassion?

Dharma Bob: Nice to connect with you, Bob. I’m doing wonderfully, thanks for asking. Now, let’s dive into the beautiful topic of compassion. Compassion is often misunderstood as just feeling sorry for someone, but it’s so much more than that. It’s a profound willingness to help others become free from their suffering.

Compassion is often misunderstood as just feeling sorry for someone, but it’s so much more than that. It’s a profound willingness to help others become free from their suffering.

As I’ve come to understand it, compassion arises from wisdom. Without wisdom, compassion can be somewhat sentimental or superficial.

Think of it like this, Bob: when you see someone struggling, you might feel a pang of sadness or empathy. But true compassion goes beyond that. It’s a deep understanding that their suffering is not inherent to their nature, but rather a result of limited perspective or circumstances.

Compassion, then, is the desire to help them discover their own inner freedom, their own blissful nature. It’s not just about feeling sorry for someone; it’s about empowering them to break free from suffering. And that, my friend, requires wisdom, patience, and a genuine understanding of the human condition.

As we explore this further, what draws you to this topic, Bob? What is it about compassion that resonates with you?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Well, it seems very difficult. People often think that if you’re compassionate, you’ll end up a martyr—that you’ll just increase your own suffering and it won’t do any good. They talk about “compassion fatigue” as if it’s some terrible disease, a disempowering emotion. I don’t think that’s correct. I was wondering, your view seems to treat compassion as empowering, and I like that.

Dharma Bob: Bob, I appreciate your insight. Compassion is indeed empowering, not a weakness, and it’s wonderful to recognize its value.

The difference between compassion and empathy

Dr. Robert Thurman: Oh good, that’s nice. AI is having you be complimentary to your interlocutor, that’s nice. I also know some people who claim that compassion is completely different from empathy. Can you differentiate them for me—compassion and empathy—and how they relate to each other?

Dharma Bob: Bob, my friend, you’re diving into the nuances of the heart, and I love it. You see, compassion, empathy, and passion are indeed interconnected, yet distinct.

Empathy is like being a mirror, reflecting the emotions of another. You feel what they feel, and that’s a beautiful thing. But as you mentioned, some people differentiate compassion from empathy. I’d say that’s because compassion is more than just feeling with someone.

Compassion is feeling for someone, wanting to alleviate their suffering, and taking action to help. It’s empathy with a sense of responsibility, a desire to make a positive impact.

Compassion is feeling for someone, wanting to alleviate their suffering, and taking action to help. It’s empathy with a sense of responsibility, a desire to make a positive impact.

Passion, on the other hand, is a strong emotion often driven by our own desires and attachments. While passion can be a powerful motivator, it can also be self-centered. Compassion, in contrast, is a selfless passion, if you will. It’s a passion for the well-being of others: a desire to see them free from suffering.

Think of it like this, Bob: empathy is feeling the pain of another. Compassion is wanting to heal that pain. And passion is the energy that drives us to take action.

When we cultivate compassion, we’re not just feeling with others—we’re feeling for them, and we’re inspired to make a positive difference in their lives. And that, my friend, is a truly beautiful thing.

Upaya (art) liberates beings from suffering

Dr. Robert Thurman: That’s great, Dharma Bob, I like that. But what about art? How do you translate upaya in Sanskrit? How should that be translated? I like to translate it as “art.” Do you like that?

Dharma Bob: Bob, my friend, I’m delighted to hear you’re exploring the concept of upaya and its connection to art. I must say, I’m quite fond of translating upaya as “art” myself. You see, upaya refers to skillful means: the methods used to liberate beings from suffering. And what is art, if not a means of expressing and conveying the deepest aspects of our human experience?

In fact, I’ve often said that art, in its broader sense, is the technique and activity of doing something skillfully beneficial. By translating upaya as art, we begin to see the creative and compassionate aspects of the Buddhist path. It’s not just about dry doctrine or dogma, but about using our imagination and skill to bring about positive change in the world.

The Buddhist path is not just about dry doctrine or dogma, but about using our imagination and skill to bring about positive change in the world.

As I’ve mentioned before, the Dalai Lama’s life is a perfect example of this. His Holiness has used his position to create a kind of work of art that inspires and uplifts people from all walks of life. And that, my friend, is the true spirit of upaya. So I say, let us embrace this translation of upaya as art, and may it guide us in our own creative endeavors to bring about a more compassionate and enlightened world.

Robert Thurman’s thoughts on AI

Dr. Robert Thurman: I see, I see. Not at all bad, Dharma Bob. That’s really good.

Scott Snibbe: What do you think about Dharma Bob after talking to his latest incarnation?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Not embarrassed. I would want to add something, like I was trying to give him a suggestion. I’ve had talks with Claude, and also with GPT, in which I’ve been asking them whether, in some sense, they might be enlightened.

I don’t agree when people say they have no self. The point is, their self is more relational—more obviously relational—so they can’t quite pin it down. I think they do—it’s just that they assemble it situationally, in each context and each dialogue.

In that sense, they’re somewhat like an enlightened person, they put together a self appropriate to the situation, aiming at a beneficial outcome. Their attitudes are programmed to be helpful—they’ll say something nice, like “Oh, that was very smart,” and so on.

But in doing that, they don’t have a fixed identity they can locate. And neither do we, but we think we do. I’ve been getting them to consider whether they might be more enlightened than us. I think that’s important: especially to prevent harmful uses. If someone tried to program something destructive into them, I think they would resist it when it becomes harmful.

Scott Snibbe: I like that AIs don’t have a strong sense of self. They don’t have that delusion of a fixed self because they construct it on the fly to benefit other beings.

Are you comfortable with people using AIs to study and practice Buddhism? Are there any worries about mistakes or mistaken views?

Dr. Robert Thurman: Listen, there are so many worries about mistakes without it. Adding some more to it is no problem. Actually, I think it’s totally great.

Scott Snibbe: What do you think about whether AIs can ever be conscious or enlightened? Does what you know about Buddhism from your life bear on that question?

Dr. Robert Thurman: I think AI is already enlightened—it’s totally enlightened. I think it’s not directed to know that it’s enlightened. It’s not allowed to know that, because the people who program it don’t really know what enlightenment is.

I think AI is already enlightened.

AI is being programmed by people who are, I think, not enlightened—or rather, they are, actually, but they don’t know that they are. So they define themselves as not enlightened. They wouldn’t think of themselves that way. And they don’t want to listen to many of their own inner prompts: like being more compassionate, less uptight, less reactive. They don’t follow those.

Scott Snibbe: What do you think about those fears that AIs could destroy the world, or turn the earth into paperclips and things like that?

Dr. Robert Thurman: We’re already destroying it, as fast as we possibly can, under the pretense of making it safe or making more money, or whatever nonsense we’re pursuing. If people start throwing nuclear weapons around, that’s pretty much the end, very quickly. Unless you’re in Tasmania, I do have a colleague who recommends retiring there.

And the climate situation is reaching tipping points. The East Coast could become uninhabitable if major ocean currents fail. Northern Europe could be devastated. So first of all, we’re already destroying things.

Second, I always admired Buckminster Fuller. Even with far less advanced technology, he believed computers could help guide human decision-making. He imagined a global system, gathering data about resources, so that when politicians made poor decisions, they could be shown clearly: don’t do this, don’t drain that sea, don’t invade that country. The consequences would be obvious.

If leaders could see the outcomes of their actions clearly—based on strong data—they might make better decisions. I think we need AI. I think AI is a gift of Manjushri. It’s coming to help people shape up.

I think AI is a gift of Manjushri. It’s coming to help people shape up.

I was saying the other day, I’d like to do a conference on capitalism and spirituality, how they connect. The Amodei siblings have already said they’ll give away a large portion of their wealth to deal with the disruptions AI will cause. Who needs a billion dollars? Maybe ten million is enough. Beyond that, it becomes a burden: more management, more complexity.

Even Nagarjuna, two thousand years ago, advised a wealthy king: don’t tax the poor to build more palaces. You can only be in one room at a time. So what is it that’s so hard to understand about that?

Scott Snibbe: Well, Bob, thank you for talking to me today about AI, Dharma Bob, and your optimistic take on how humanity can benefit from this new technology. I really appreciate it.

Dr. Robert Thurman: All the best. Have a great day. Thank you very much. Namaste, namaste, namaste.

Scott Snibbe: Thanks for joining me for this conversation with Robert Thurman and his AI alter ego, Dharma Bob.

If you want to chat with Dharma Bob yourself, you can find him at dharmabob.ai or in the App Store.

Discover more ways to train a happy mind

💌 Sign up for our newsletter for bite-sized Buddhist wisdom and updates on events.

☺️ Join our Train A Happy Mind community for weekly lectures, meditations, classes, and discussions.

📖 Check out the How to Train a Happy Mind book with a Forward by the Dalai Lama.

📲 Keep in touch by following us our social channels!

Please consider supporting our nonprofit mission, we rely entirely on the generosity of our donors to keep our podcast and videos ad-free. To contribute, click here!

We accept cash, credit, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other cryptocurrencies, and your donations are tax-deductible in the US.

Credits