by Matthieu Ricard
Happiness: A Guide to Developing Life's Most Important Skill›Customer reviews
Customer reviews
4.5 out of 5 stars
===
Betty C
5.0 out of 5 stars Meaning of Happiness
Reviewed in Australia 🇦🇺 on 12 August 2018
Verified Purchase
I found this book to be thought provoking, informative and philosophical. It is a book that needs to be re-read.
You do not need to be a buddhist or religious to appreciate this book. There is much wisdom in the book.
Helpful
Report
prakhar
5.0 out of 5 stars Wow 🤩
Reviewed in Australia 🇦🇺 on 19 January 2021
Verified Purchase
Fascinating insights
Helpful
Report
Frank Moore
2.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing
Reviewed in Australia 🇦🇺 on 2 September 2018
Verified Purchase
Cliches and predictable pop psychology.
Helpful
Report
llh
5.0 out of 5 stars Very well thought out
Reviewed in Australia 🇦🇺 on 6 December 2015
Great book, and full of insight that brings you back to the book. I highlighted many sections and come back the the book often when my emotions need it.
===
From other countries
Andrew Everett
4.0 out of 5 stars Inner Peace
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 1 January 2018
Verified Purchase
Matthieu Ricard gave up a career in cellular genetics at the Institut Pasteur to study Buddhism in the Himalayas. In this book he shares his wisdom about happiness drawing from thirty-five years of studying Buddhism and psychology.
“A change, even a tiny one, in the way we manage our thoughts and perceive and interpret the world can significantly change our existence. Changing the way we experience transitory emotions leads to a change in our moods and to a lasting transformation of our way of being.”
“Authentic happiness is not linked to an activity; it is a state of being, a profound emotional balance struck by a subtle understanding of how the mind functions. While ordinary pleasures are produced by contact with pleasant objects and end when that contact is broken, sukha—lasting well-being—is felt so long as we remain in harmony with our inner nature. One intrinsic aspect of it is selflessness, which radiates from within rather than focusing on the self.”
Suffering. “According to Buddhism, suffering will always exist as a universal phenomenon, but every individual has the potential for liberation from it… If our mind becomes accustomed to dwelling solely on the pain that events or people inflict on it, one day the most trivial incident will cause it infinite sorrow… In brief, we must: recognize suffering, eliminate its source, end it by practicing the path… So the way in which we experience these waves of suffering depends a great deal on our attitude.”
Ego. “Unlike Buddhism, very few psychological treatments address the problem of how to reduce the feeling of self-centeredness… For Buddhism, paradoxically, genuine self-confidence is the natural quality of egolessness. To dispel the illusion of the ego is to free oneself from a fundamental vulnerability… Genuine confidence comes from an awareness of a basic quality of our mind and our potential for transformation and flourishing, what Buddhism calls Buddha nature, which is present in all of us. Such recognition imparts peaceful strength that cannot be threatened by external circumstances or inner-fears, a freedom that transcends self-absorption and anxiety.”
“In what way is humility an ingredient of happiness? The arrogant and the narcissistic fuel themselves on illusions that come into continuous conflict with reality. The inevitable disillusionment that follows can generate… a feeling of inner emptiness. Humility avoids such unnecessary distress.”
Thoughts. “Learning to tone down the ceaseless racket of disturbing thoughts is a decisive stage on the road to inner peace… If we resign ourselves to being the perpetual victims of our thoughts, we are like dogs who run after every stick thrown for them.”
“When we feel anxious, depressed, cranky, envious, or emotionally exhausted, we’re quick to pass the buck to the outside world; tensions with colleagues at work, arguments with our spouse—anything… can be a source of upset. This reflex is far more than a mere psychological evasion. It reflects the mistaken perception that causes us to attribute inherent qualities to external objects when in fact those qualities are dependent on our own minds. Systematically blaming others and holding them responsible for our suffering is the surest way to lead an unhappy life. It is by transforming our minds that we can transform our world.”
Emotions. “If an emotion strengthens our inner peace and seeks the good of others, it is positive, or constructive; if it shatters our serenity, deeply disturbs our mind, and is intended to harm others, it is negative, or afflictive.” Ricard describes the five mental “poisons”: desire/greed, hatred, delusion “which distorts our perception of reality”, pride, and envy.
“The experience of introspection shows… negative emotions are transitory mental events that can be obliterated by their opposites, the positive emotions, acting as antidotes.” For example, anger can be neutralized by patience. Another method is liberation. Rather than getting overwhelmed by an emotion, you recognize that the emotion itself is just a thought. “The more you look at anger in this manner, the more it evaporates under your gaze, like white frost under the sun’s rays… One moment of anger can destroy years of patience.”
Anxiety. “When trekking in the Himalayas, you often have to walk for days or even weeks. You suffer from the cold, the altitude, snowstorms, but since every step brings you closer to your goal, there is joy in making the effort to attain it. If you get lost and find yourself without bearings in an unknown valley or forest, your courage instantly vanishes; the weight of exhaustion and solitude is suddenly crushing, anxiety mounts, and every step is an ordeal. You lose the will to walk; you want to sit down in despair. Perhaps the anxiety that some people feel likewise comes from a lack of direction in their lives, from having failed to grasp their own inner potential for change.”
Inner freedom. “Inner freedom allows us to savor the lucid simplicity of the present moment, free from the past and emancipated from the future. Freeing ourselves from the intrusion of memories of the past does not mean that we are unable to draw useful lessons from our experience. Freeing ourselves from fear of the future does not make us incapable of approaching it clearly, but saves us from getting bogged down by pointless fretting… What’s the point of worrying about things that no longer exist and things that don’t yet exist?”
Psychology. “Despite the improvement in material conditions, depression is now ten times as prevalent as it was in 1960 and affects an ever younger sector of the population… Martin Seligman has theorized that ‘an ethos that builds unwarranted self-esteem, espouses victimology, and encourages rampant individualism has contributed to the epidemic.’ In his view, exacerbated individualism helps explain the huge increase in the rate of depression in Western societies, partly as a result of the ‘meaninglessness’ that occurs when ‘there is no attachment to something larger than oneself.’ Buddhism would add that it is also surely due to the tireless dedication of most of our time to external activities and goals, instead of learning to enjoy the present moment, the company of those we love, the peace of natural environments, and, above all, the flowering of inner peace that gives every second of life a new and different quality.”
“As for the correlations highlighted by social psychology, in most cases it is unknown whether they act as causes or as consequences. We know that friendship goes with happiness, but are we happy because we have a lot of friends or do we have a lot of friends because we are happy?”
Altruism. “The Buddhist perspective… holds selfishness to be the main cause of suffering and altruistic love to be the essential ingredient of true happiness. The interdependence of all phenomena in general, and of all people in particular, is such that our own happiness is intimately linked to that of others… This corroborates the research of psychologists showing that the most altruistic members of a population are also those who enjoy the highest sense of satisfaction in life.”
Optimism and Pessimism. “For an optimist, it makes no sense to lose hope. We can always do better… Take the current situation as a starting point (instead of wasting our time crying over the past and lamenting the present)… The optimist, even when she has temporarily failed, is free of regret and guilt feelings. She knows how to step back and is always ready to imagine a new solution, without bearing the burden of past failures. That is how she maintains her serenity.” Ricard points out that the pessimist is less productive because “he’ll devote little energy to a task he feels to be doomed from the start.”
Ethics. “Through the interplay of the laws of cause and effect, which Buddhism calls karma—the laws governing the consequences of our actions—ethics are therefore intimately linked to well-being.”
“The main thrust of this book has been to differentiate true well-being from pleasure and other counterfeit forms of happiness. Wisdom is precisely that which allows us to distinguish the thoughts and deeds that contribute to authentic happiness from those that destroy it. Wisdom is based on direct experience, not dogma.”
“Simplifying one’s life to extract its quintessence is the most rewarding of all the pursuits I have undertaken. It doesn’t mean giving up what is truly beneficial, but finding out what really matters and what brings lasting fulfillment, joy, serenity, and above all, the irreplaceable boon of altruistic love… Having a simple mind is not the same as being simple-minded. On the contrary, simplicity of mind is reflected in clarity of thought. Like clear water that lets us see all the way to the lake bottom, simplicity reveals the nature of the mind behind the veil of restless thought.”
56 people found this helpful
Report
5.0 out of 5 stars Compassionate, humanist translation of Buddhism into lucid modern day language with the help of social and natural sciences
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on 8 August 2015
Verified Purchase
Single most memorable passage(a little bit long, people, so skip to the review if you wish)
“The self obviously cannot be outside the body and the consciousness. If it were an autonomous entity independent of one and the other, it could not be of their essence. Is it simply the sum of their parts, their structure and their continuity? Is the concept of the self simply associated with the body and the consciousness in their entirety?
… The only way out of this dilemma is to consider the self as a mental or verbal designation linked to a dynamic process, to a series of changing relations that incorporate the perception of the outer world, sensation, mental images, emotions, and concepts. The self is merely an idea.
… Buddhism therefore concludes that the self is just a name we give to a continuum, just as we name a river the Ganges or the Mississippi. Such a continuum certainly exists, but only as a convention based upon the interdependence of the consciousness, the body, and the environment. It is entirely without autonomous existence. ”
“How can I expect this understanding of the illusory nature of the ego to change my relationships with my family and the world around me? Wouldn’t such a U-turn be unsettling? Experience shows that it will do you nothing but good. … With no expectation of gain and no fear of loss, we are free to give and to receive. We no longer have the need to think, speak, or act in an affected and selfish way.
In clinging to the cramped universe of the ego, we have a tendency to be concerned exclusively with ourselves. The least setback upsets and discourages us. We are obsessed with our success, our failure, our hopes, and our anxieties, and thereby give happiness every opportunity to elude us. The narrow world of the self is like a glass of water into which a handful of salt is thrown – the water becomes undrinkable. If, on the other hand, we breach the barriers of the self and the mind becomes a vast lake, that same handful of salt will have no affect on its taste.
When the self ceases to be the most important thing in the world, we find it easier to focus our concern on others. The sight of their suffering bolsters our courage and resolve to work on their behalf, instead of crippling us with our own emotional distress. “ P91 – 90 - 94
[Happiness] is an interesting book – while it is definitely a book on Buddhism with a big dose of humanist viewpoint, one could easily say that it is more of a primarily humanist book with a big dose of Buddhist viewpoint. The structure of the book is as follows:
1. Happiness is arguably the one goal that everyone pursues. Absence of suffering is essential for happiness.
2. What conditions are needed for happiness/removing suffering?
3. Internal conditions are much more important for happiness than external ones.
4. What is the mechanism of those ‘internal conditions’ a.k.a the ‘self’?
5. How to deal with emotions that destroy happiness – Fear, Desire, Hatred, Envy etc
6. Sociology/Psychology/Neuroscience/Ethics of happiness
The author has a background in biochemistry, as he worked at the Institut Pasteur, Paris, under a Nobel Laureate, presumably at post-graduate(post-doctorate?) level. This attribute shows in his logical, reasoned and common sense approach that encompasses the entire book, peppered with quotes not from dusty ancient scriptures but rather from contemporary psychologists, philosophers, sociologists, neurologists, thinkers and novelists. The lucidity of his style is nicely demonstrated in the above quote, which in fact explains in clear non-philosophical language one of the principles from a mind-bogglingly difficult Buddhist philosophy book called [The Middle Way] by Nagarjuna - namely, "the self neither exists nor does not exist", rather like a point in the current of a river.(Such a fabulous metaphor!)
Of course it is not perfect – a part that particularly feels like a cop-out is the ethics section, where the author debates the merits of Kantian ethics vs utilitarianism vs their criticisms in the familiar ‘sacrifice of an innocent person for the good of a thousand other people’ scenario. Some of you may also cringe at what often feels like over-reaching scientific(?) conclusions based on experimental samples of n<5, but fret not – apparently those were only pilots, and further studies with a few hundred subjects are on the way. :-)
Another place that the author shines is the ‘trouble-shooting approach’ he takes for the uneasy sensation that Westerners(myself included, which shows the extent of my own Westernisation...) often get when they encounter Buddhism, illustrated perfectly in the following passage. (Again a little long, so please skip if you want) Although the concepts such as renunciation, non-self and acceptance are so often misunderstood(e.g. by me) and thus desperately in need of dispelling, these are also exactly the kind of questions that the Far Eastern Asians(such as myself) would shy away from asking their master due to their genetically-engraved deference, and the master would not explain because that’s not how they have been brought up.
“But how, you might ask, can I avoid being shattered when my child is sick and I know he’s going to die? How can I not be torn up at the sight of thousands of civilian war victims being deported or mutilated? Am I supposed to stop feeling? What could ever make me accept something like that? Who wouldn’t be affected by it, including the most serene of wise men? The difference between the sage and the ordinary person is that the former can feel unconditional love for those who suffer and do everything in his power to attenuate their pain without allowing his lucid vision of existence to be shaken. The essential thing is to be available to other without giving in to despair when the natural episodes of life and death follow their course.” (P66)
“Unlike Buddhism, very few psychological treatments address the problem of how to reduce the feeling of self-centeredness – a reduction that, for the wise man, extends all the way to eradicating the ego. This is certainly a new, even subversive idea in the West, which holds the self to be the fundamental building block of the personality. Surely, if I eliminate my ego I will cease to exist as a person. How can you have an individual without an I, an ego? Isn’t such a concept psychically dangerous? Isn’t there a risk of sinking into some kind of schizophrenia? Isn’t a weak or non-existent ego the clinical sign of a potentially forceful pathology? Don’t you need a fully developed personality before you can renounce the ego? These are the kinds of defensive reactions most Westerners have to such unfamiliar notions. The idea that one needs a robust ego comes from the fact that some people who suffer from mental problems are said to have a fragmented, fragile, or deficient sense of self.
… This confuses ego and self-confidence. The ego can attain only a contrived confidence built on insubstantial attributes – power, success, beauty and physical strength, intellectual brilliance, the opinions of others – and on whatever we believe to constitute our ‘identity’, our image, as we see it and as others see it. When things change and the gap with reality becomes too wide, the ego becomes irritated, freezes up, and falters. Self-confidence collapses and all that is left is frustration and suffering.
For Buddhism, paradoxically, genuine self-confidence is the natural quality of egolessness. To dispel the illusion of the ego is to free oneself from a fundamental vulnerability. The fact is, the sense of security derived from that illusion is eminently fragile. Genuine confidence comes from an awareness of a basic quality of our mind and of our potential for transformation and flourishing, what Buddhism calls Buddha Nature, which is present in all of us. Such recognition imparts peaceful strength that cannot be threatened by external circumstances or inner fears, a freedom that transcends self-absorption and anxiety.” P84-85
This book does not explain the doctrinal structure of Buddhism in any detail.(for that, read [The Heart of Buddha’s Teaching] by Thich Nhat Hanh.) It is not a meditation manual.(for that, read [Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond] by Ajahn Brahm. It does, however, have a few pages on various meditation methods and inspiring examples such as the survivors of Auschwitz camps or Tibetan doctors who survived Chinese political prisoners camp.) However, for me [Happiness] is a book that translates those themes into the modern language, supported by modern social and natural scientific research, which thus inspires us to strive towards happiness for everyone from an almost non-denominational stance. Although as a Buddhist I get a little irritated when I see those "blasted Americans" :-D brandish about the new-fangled 'mindfulness technology' as something barely related to Buddhism, I think it is ultimately the way forward, especially if we want 'happiness for all'. After all, isn't it what humanism is about? And also, Buddhism IS a collection of wisdom and methods to become happy.(as long as you don't think too hard about its claims on reincarnation...) All in all, I am sure Siddhartha would not mind at all.
59 people found this helpful
Report
Priya
5.0 out of 5 stars Profound and deeply intrigued to read more of his books...
Reviewed in India 🇮🇳 on 25 April 2023
Verified Purchase
The book opens up to the thoughts and clarifies in a precise manner.Highly recommend the author..
Report
Camilo Echeverri Gonzalez
3.0 out of 5 stars Good ideas, but I really did not enjoy reading
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 11 August 2021
Verified Purchase
What I’d like to remember:
- 3.5 stars
- I did not enjoy reading the book. And yet as I go through my “highlights” on Kindle, there are SO MANY good ones…. So, while I am not sure how to square the contradiction, i know for sure this book shares the feeling with “The Monk and the Philosopher” which I also found painful to read and had to “force” myself to continue reading (also despite having interesting ideas). So, I guess I can say that I don’t like how he writes, even though I think he has a lot of really good things to share and say.
- I like that He shares a lot of Buddhist (mostly) ideas and principles that (no surprise) can help cultivate happiness (see quotes below but also many more on the book) and I think these are worth coming back to:)
- Now to the “negative”: again, Its hard for me to say why exactly I did not enjoy it but below some hints/thoughts/feelings that I think can explain my experience:
- 1) His rhythm and threading (??) is just off (whatever that means). I never felt like I had a running thread and continuation on a single book, but rather every time I opened it it felt almost like I did not NEED any of the “content/background” that I had read before, and could almost continue is if I was reading a new book or article (kind of like when reading a textbook). May be he could have made the book shorter (and less repetitive) and focused on better flow than more content?? (No idea if this is a solution)
- 2) Buddhism has the solution to anything and everything: and sure may be it does, but it does not need to be a “hard sell” (btw I can’t say for sure right now if this is a reflection of this book, The Monk and Philosopher or both!)
- 3) same as on the other book, he seems to use this space (the book) to make a political statement about China and Tibet. Without any comment to the merit of the arguments, I just don’t think think this is the right place to make them.
- 4) He talks about “some/lots of people” in a very Trumpian way: that is to make a point he references an anonymous and undefined group of people who would support what he is saying. But is this really a good proxy of a large number of people? For example he talks about how for some people being happy is almost distasteful: who are these people? For example the below sounds like an exaggeration or simple over generalization: “Friends of mine who lead cultural tours in Asia have told me how their clients can’t bear the least gap in their itinerary. “Is there really nothing scheduled between five and seven?” they ask anxiously.”
6 people found this helpful
Report
Mal Smith
5.0 out of 5 stars My Desert Island Book!
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on 27 July 2012
Verified Purchase
I've read several books on happiness but have found no more effective and convincing guide than this. Many other authors fall into "the Texas housewife" fallacy. Research shows that the average housewife is quite happy - but Ricard asks what happens if something goes wrong, if she loses her job or her child dies. Then he points to ways to overcome grief, or a reduced lifestyle - skillful ways to be, or become, happy in any situation. This advice is for everyone, not just the Texas housewife.
Part of the Texas housewife fallacy is the idea that you can only be happy if you have an excellent marriage, loadsa money, zippy social life, and so on. I'd often wondered if such authors had ever considered the wise hermit in the cave. We've all heard he's the happiest man. Well, Ricard actually is that man!(There are MRI results that prove it, although he is too modest to claim that title.)
Fans of Aristotle may now be grumbling about such brain centred results - saying happiness is flourishing. But this makes happiness seem like something only a superwoman Texas housewife can have! Not only a good job, and a great marriage, but she must also be a leader in the community. Ricard undermines Aristotle, with Buddha's help, and shows that happiness is, indeed, all in the mind, it's 'feeling good', it's 'joie de vivre'. The hermit can have joie de vivre. Anyone, with the right mentality, can 'feel good' most of the time. There is the caveat that people must be alive to the suffering of others, though; there is no retreat into solipsism. Ricard has taken the bodhisattva vow. Writing this book is, probably, part of living up to that.
Ricard frequently uses examples from Western Culture, as well as Buddhism, to illustrate his points. He's the son of a famous Parisian philosopher, and is an excellent position to do this. For instance, early in the book, he points to Glenn Gould, Bobby Fischer, and Baudelaire. He says he didn't want to be like them (wouldn't we all agree!) We might pause and think, but, hey, these guys are at the pinnacle of Western Culture! But are they happy?
Later in the book he undermines the negative side of bigger, stabler, cultural figures, like Kant and Aristotle. This is all done with the lightest touch and in a language anyone can understand. At one point, he even demolishes Bach (!) Maybe "demolish" is a bit strong - he praises Bach for producing beautiful music, but points out that we can only listen to even this music for a short time without becoming bored. We need something else to make us happy most of the time - like the skills taught to us by the Buddha and his followers.
3 people found this helpful
Report
A
5.0 out of 5 stars Wish I could give this 10 stars!
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on 18 October 2016
Verified Purchase
I am a Christian but I loved this book. My perception was that he was explaining where some ideas he mentions are coming from but he was not pushing Buddhism. I took it more as psychology and how our ego (which is really non-existent bc it's only a thought in your mind) ((which isnt the mind also ephemeral? There's no "hard copy" existence of a mind!)) takes over thus producing anger (if we are feeling threatened, fearful, insecure), envious (vs happy) for the other, prideful, agitated, etc. If we truly want to be happy and at peace within, we need to ask ourselves : is this thought/feeling life-giving or life-draining? Most "suffering" thoughts (he calls them toxic) are life-draining, right? So, "letting go" of these life-draining thoughts (replacing them with life-giving thoughts) thru meditation and practice, is the way to true peace and happiness.
(For a more thorough explanation and how-to on meditation, also order his "Why Meditate?" 2010).
As an example, for me, one thing that really makes me mad, upset, pissed off, about my DH is that he is almost always late for everything!
I get the pets settled, the house closed up, me ready and then have to wait and wait and wait. It's VERY embarrassing to me when others are
waiting for us... I feel this is a very disrespectful way to be. Keeping people waiting when you have been given the time (clock time) to leave/meet. This happened while I was reading this book, and I took one of the exercises on anger to heart and practiced it.... It worked...
I found that, yes he was being disrespectful to me and the others but that it was my mind, my SELF, my ego that was producing the anger within me. I could choose to let my thoughts control me and drain me, or I could choose to let go of my insecurity of how others think of his insensitivity themselves (bc it was not MY fault we were late) and therefore only think life-giving thoughts (being with our friends). I felt SO much better, then!
This is a biggie for me. And like the author states, it takes practice practice practice to come to inner peace and happiness. (Obviously I have a ways to go on this bc I did ask myself: does he CHOOSE to be rude and make ppl wait on purpose? No. And do the others get peeved about waiting for him? Maybe, but that again is on them and their "practice" and journey thru this life.)
I can't recommend this book highly enough!
38 people found this helpful
Report
