The Monk and the philosopher 2016
Follow the Authors
Jean-François Revel
Follow
Matthieu Ricard
The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
by Jean Francois Revel (Author), Matthieu Ricard (Author)
4.5 out of 5 stars 247 ratings
Jean Francois-Revel, a pillar of French intellectual life in our time, became world famous for his challenges to both Communism and Christianity.
Twenty-seven years ago, his son, Matthieu Ricard, gave up a promising career as a scientist to study Tibetan Buddhism -- not as a detached observer but by immersing himself in its practice under the guidance of its greatest living masters.
Meeting in an inn overlooking Katmandu, these two profoundly thoughtful men explored the questions that have occupied humankind throughout its history.
Meeting in an inn overlooking Katmandu, these two profoundly thoughtful men explored the questions that have occupied humankind throughout its history.
- Does life have meaning?
- What is consciousness?
- Is man free?
- What is the value of scientific and material progress?
- Why is there suffering, war, and hatred?
Their conversation is not merely abstract: they ask each other questions about ethics, rights, and responsibilities, about knowledge and belief, and they discuss frankly the differences in the way each has tried to make sense of his life.
Utterly absorbing, inspiring, and accessible, this remarkable dialogue engages East with West, ideas with life, and science with the humanities, providing wisdom on how to enrich the way we live our lives.
Review
Utterly absorbing, inspiring, and accessible, this remarkable dialogue engages East with West, ideas with life, and science with the humanities, providing wisdom on how to enrich the way we live our lives.
Review
"The wonderful thing about this book is that it shows how fruitful open-hearted dialogue can be. Although these two men have pursued their humane concerns and their quest for knowledge by different means, I believe they both reveal that it's not so important whether life has meaning, but whether we give meaning to the life we live." -- His Holiness The Dalai Lama
"The Monk and the Philosopher is an intellectual banquet -- an enlightening and lively encounter that explores man-kind's most profound questions." -- Daniel Goleman, author of Emotional Intelligence
From the Back Cover
Jean Francois-Revel, a pillar of French intellectual life in our time, became world famous for his challenges to both Communism and Christianity. Twenty-seven years ago, his son, Matthieu Ricard, gave up a promising career as a scientist to study Tibetan Buddhism -- not as a detached observer but by immersing himself in its practice under the guidance of its greatest living masters.
Meeting in an inn overlooking Katmandu, these two profoundly thoughtful men explored the questions that have occupied humankind throughout its history.
Does life have meaning? What is consciousness? Is man free? What is the value of scientific and material progress? Why is there suffering, war, and hatred? Their conversation is not merely abstract: they ask each other questions about ethics, rights, and responsibilities, about knowledge and belief, and they discuss frankly the differences in the way each has tried to make sense of his life.
Utterly absorbing, inspiring, and accessible, this remarkable dialogue engages East with West, ideas with life, and science with the humanities, providing wisdom on how to enrich the way we live our lives.
About the Author
Utterly absorbing, inspiring, and accessible, this remarkable dialogue engages East with West, ideas with life, and science with the humanities, providing wisdom on how to enrich the way we live our lives.
About the Author
Jean-Francois Revel, a member of the Academie Francaise, was born in 1924. He studied and taught philosophy but abandoned university teaching to concentrate on writing. He was editor for many years of the influential political weekly L'Express. His books, including the best-seller Without Marx or Jesus and How Democracies Perish, have gained worldwide recognition.
Matthieu Ricard lives in the Shechen Monastery in Nepal. Born in France in 1946, he received his doctorate in molecular biology from the Institut Pasteur in Paris. In 1972 he decided to forsake his scientific career to better concentrate on his Buddhist studies, which he had begun years earlier. He has published Journey to Enlightenment, a book of photographs about his teacher, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche (one of the most eminent Tibetan masters of our times and a teacher to The Dalai Lama), as well as translations of many Buddhist texts. He often accompanies The
Publisher : Schocken Books Inc (1 January 1900)
Customer Reviews:
4.5 out of 5 stars 247 ratings
Jean-François Revel
See more on the author's page
Follow
Matthieu Ricard
Matthieu Ricard is a Buddhist monk who had a promising career in cellular genetics before leaving France to study Buddhism in the Himalayas 35 years ago. He is a bestselling author, translator and photographer, and an active participant in current scientific research on the effects of meditation on the brain. He lives and works on humanitarian projects in Tibet and Nepal.
Top review from Australia
Sally
5.0 out of 5 stars “Amazing”Reviewed in Australia 🇦🇺 on 23 August 2018
Verified Purchase
Amazing read loved it
Top reviews from other countries
Marcos Luz
5.0 out of 5 stars Indispensable for lifeReviewed in Brazil 🇧🇷 on 7 January 2022
Verified Purchase
This book is one one of a kind, totally indispensable for life. There’s no way to live the same life (go back) after read the entire book. The dialogue between the Philosopher and the monk (dad and son) has so much excellent information that - for quite a while, I’ve got myself without air for some days...(time to breathe, rethink something in your life) before coming back to this book. Five stars for sure.
Report
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars It is deep in both western and oriental philosophyReviewed in Mexico 🇲🇽 on 7 March 2017
Verified Purchase
I am interested in budhism and this book answer many important questions that I had about that type of phylosophy. It also offers a critical point of view with very interesting arguments on each topic they speak about in the book. Awesome. I love this book.
Report
MattyS
5.0 out of 5 stars Great Book, answers so many questionsReviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on 25 August 2013
Verified Purchase
The book is a great and thought provoking read. I have become lost in the translation of the Western Literature on sale. That said, I have found a link and topical debate between father and son on a massive topic in my world.
I have to confess that I was also apprehensive ordering from the US. I liked the service from the Marketplace seller. Great packaging and speedy delivery albeit over the Atlantic. Will be ordering from them again, thanks.
One person found this helpfulReport
Amazon Customer
4.0 out of 5 stars ExcellentReviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on 2 August 2020
Verified Purchase
Very informative
Report
PeterDz
4.0 out of 5 stars Nonetheless a recommended read.Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on 9 January 2016
Verified Purchase
A fascinating book a little divergent and factually inaccurate and confused and confusing at times. Nonetheless a recommended read.
Report
===
https://philosophynow.org/issues/122/The_Monk_and_the_Philosopher_by_Jean-Francois_Revel_and_Matthieu_Ricard
The Monk and the Philosopher by Jean-François Revel & Matthieu Ricard
Lachlan Dale explores some of the philosophical implications of Tibetan Buddhism.
The Monk and the Philosopher is an exploration of Tibetan Buddhist belief and practise, and an attempt to understand the religion’s growing popularity in the West. The book is in the form of a series of conversations between Jean-François Revel, a French intellectual known for his defense of liberalism and wariness of the totalitarian tendencies of religion, and his son Matthieu Ricard, who in the early 1970s abandoned a promising career in molecular genetics to study Tibetan Buddhism in Darjeeling.
For Revel, his son’s decision to choose Eastern wisdom over the fruits of Western liberalism must have come as a shock. So on top of his desire to understand the appeal of Tibetan Buddhism in the West, Revel also wanted to better understand his son.
Moreover, the disagreements between father and son roughly mirror the split between Eastern and Western forms of knowledge, making this book an excellent critique of Tibetan Buddhism for the philosophically-minded Westerner.
In recent decades Buddhism has enjoyed considerable growth in Western countries, in part due to a growing body of research confirming the effectiveness of mindfulness and meditation. These techniques have been demonstrated to reduce stress and anxiety, improve memory, and enhance cognitive flexibility. Psychologists also report an increased capacity for empathy and compassion, while neuroscientists note the increased density of grey matter in the hippocampus of long-term meditators. As a result, these techniques are often transplanted into a secular context. This troubles purists like Ricard, who believe the practises must remain rooted in a Buddhist program of spiritual development. When combined with visualisation, repetition of mantras, and the study of sacred texts, these techniques are said to allow an individual to directly grasp the fundamental nature of reality, including the unity of all phenomena, the transitory nature of existence, and the illusion of the self.
The ultimate goal of Tibetan Buddhism is not merely to reduce anxiety, but to reach nirvana.
Ricard denies that this is an alternate metaphysical realm, instead understanding it as a state ‘beyond suffering’ in which one can directly contemplate absolute truth and “experience an unchangeable state of bliss and perceive the infinite purity of all phenomena” (p.150).
He argues that Buddhists do not seek to flee this world, but merely to no longer be enslaved by it: “Dissolving the mind’s attachment to the reality of a self does go hand in hand with annihilation, but what’s annihilated is pride, vanity, obsession, touchiness, and acrimony. As that attachment dissolves, the field is left clear for goodness, humility, and altruism. By no longer cherishing and protecting the self, you acquire a much wider and deeper view of the world” (p.156). On the surface this seems a perfectly noble, secular, aspiration. However some aspects of Tibetan Buddhist doctrine prove more problematic to Western thinking.
Buddhist 1
Tibetan Buddhist spirit
Karma versus Free Will
Take the issue of free will. While Ricard is happy to acknowledge that humans exist within an immense web of interdependence, and are subject to causation, he denies that physical laws drive the causative process, believing instead that karma – a universal moral governing-force deeply linked with a belief in reincarnation – is the ultimate driver.
In other words, in this moral causal process, the universe ensures that your past deeds are paid back good for good and evil for evil, if not in this life, then in a future incarnation. The form of an individual’s rebirth depends on the karma they’ve accumulated over past lives. Depending on your balance of good deeds versus evil deeds, you may return as a human, animal, or insect. (Traditional Tibetan Buddhist cosmology also holds that you can be reborn as a god or demon in another realm, although Ricard doesn’t mention this.) Moreover, Tibetan Buddhists believe that when an individual dies, the person’s consciousness lives on in a non-material plane called bardo to await rebirth. But although a non-material basis for consciousness is merely against current scientific orthodoxy, the concept of karma also carries troubling moral implications. By Ricard’s orthodox Buddhist interpretation, everything that happens to an individual is the result of past action. When his father gives the example of a small child whose short existence is racked with disease and misery, Ricard explains that “Whatever happens to us, [Buddhism] teaches, is never just by chance. We’ve created the causes of our present suffering ourselves” (p.127). This denies the possibility of an innocent victim, and is as unsettling as a Christian’s rationalisation of an innocent suffering as ‘part of God’s plan’.
The doctrine of karma also holds implications for euthanasia. When asked what Buddhism recommends for someone in great pain at the end of their life, Ricard replies that the pain provides an opportunity for spiritual growth: “since suffering is the result of our past negative actions, it’s better to pay off our debts while we have available the help of spiritual practice… neither euthanasia nor suicide are acceptable.” (p.269)
Although we might be tempted to draw parallels here to Viktor Frankl’s view that suffering provides opportunity for the creation of personal meaning, Ricard’s perspective has a troubling corollary: if all suffering is self-caused, and to avoid pain is to merely postpone it, then an embrace of suffering is spiritually mandated. Such romanticisation of suffering leads Revel to protest on ethical grounds. It creates worries for me, too. How should we regard compassionate acts that reduce someone’s suffering? Are they tampering with the law of karma or otherwise inhibiting the spiritual growth of the individual? Unfortunately, these questions are not addressed.
Deeper contradictions, such as how humans can possess free will in the face of karmic determinism, are also left unexplored by Revel. Focus instead shifts onto the Tibetan Buddhist conception of consciousness.
The Problem of Consciousness
Ricard persists in defending what he terms the ‘law of the conservation of consciousness’ – which is a quasi-scientific framing of the claim that consciousness can never be lost or destroyed, and therefore lives on after death.
Revel unpacks this idea for the benefit of the readers. He explains that there are two primary philosophical positions when it comes to the nature of reality. The first is monism, which claims there is a single fundamental reality or substance in the universe. While historically some monist philosophers have argued that reality is ultimately composed of god or spirit, modern monists are more often physicalists, who claim that everything in the universe is matter/energy. This position holds that consciousness can be explained in terms of the functioning of the brain. The physicalists claim that although we don’t yet understand the precise mechanics of consciousness, we can use Occam’s Razor to reject any hypothesis that adds to the physical laws of the universe. The second position is dualism, which argues for another principle in addition to matter, thus positing a division between mind and matter, or body and soul. By claiming that consciousness persists after death in a non-material form, Ricard seems to be arguing for dualism, thus breaking away from the majority of the scientific community.
When pressed for evidence for the survival of consciousness after bodily death, Ricard recounts the testimony of Buddhist teachers who claim to be able to recall past lives, and experiences of the afterlife. Since he has known these teachers for decades and has never known them to hurt or deceive anyone, he feels it reasonable to accept their accounts on face value.
Unsurprisingly, Revel rejects this line of defense. In the scientific world, testimony of this kind can never stand in for empirical evidence. As he says, “Someone can very well be perfectly sincere and have never tried to deceive anyone, and still be subject to illusions…” (p.49). Although Ricard protests against this, he cannot escape Revel’s assertion that “Tibetan Buddhism attempts to build a science of the mind on a completely unproven theory” (p.114).
Buddhist 2
Towards a Secular Buddhism
In the final section of the book Revel theorizes about why Buddhism is becoming increasingly popular in Western countries. He suggests that in the 20th century many people in the West abandoned philosophy as a source of individual wisdom because it became a highly technical and specialised endeavour divorced from the concerns of the wider population. This created a moral vacuum which has been filled by various utopian political projects, including the totalitarian systems of communism and fascism, resulting in atrocities on an unimaginable scale. In this context, Revel views Buddhism’s rise as an indication that people are becoming interested in developing their inner life and personal system of ethics rather than finding meaning through collective ideologies.
Notably, Revel’s analysis disregards the influence of the dominant ideology of the West, consumer capitalism, which seems to promise inner development and personal fulfillment through the accumulation of possessions. For Revel to ignore the effect of the most influential political ideology in the world while blaming declining morality on Marxists and Hegelians seems absurd to me. It is perhaps indicative of his personal political bias. When contrasted with the work of a contemporary philosopher such as Peter Sloterdijk, Revel’s comments seem simplistic. Sloterdijk’s argument is that a complex process of ‘de-spiritualisation of ascetic practises’ is underway, in which aspirations for self-improvement and self-transformation have been transferred from spiritual to secular channels, such as sport, art, and entrepreneurialism.
In his closing remarks, Revel expresses an appreciation for Tibetan Buddhism as a system of philosophy, but notes that its metaphysical beliefs will limit its appeal to a non-religious, materialistic Western audience. And although Ricard is eager to claim that Tibetan Buddhism constantly purges itself of superfluous teachings, this book demonstrates that its task of separating myth from practice is far from complete. It was the unsubstantiated and unquestionable belief in reincarnation that caused the writer Stephen Batchelor to walk away from Tibetan Buddhism and begin his search for ‘Buddhism Without Beliefs’. His work on the demythologization of the historical Buddha and the establishment of a framework for secular Buddhism is recommended for further reading.
Taken as a whole, The Monk and the Philosopher is a captivating read. Both speakers are sharp-minded and highly knowledgeable about their fields, and the friction of their intellectual sparring yields many insights to enjoy. For those after an engaging introduction to Tibetan Buddhism coupled with a healthy dose of secular skepticism, look no further.
© Lachlan R. Dale 2017
Lachlan Dale is a writer and musician. He is currently undertaking a Masters of Creative Writing at the University of Technology, Sydney.
• The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life, by Jean-François Revel and Matthieu Ricard, Schoken Books Inc., 2005, 384 pages, £12.94 pb, ISBN: 978-0805211030
===
A Biologist-Turned-Buddhist and His Philosopher Father on the Nature of the Self and the True Measure of Personal Strength
“You first need to have an ego in order to be aware that it doesn’t exist.”
BY MARIA POPOVA
For the past few centuries, Western philosophy has maintained that human beings are driven by enlightened self-interest — a view predicated on the needs and desires of a solid self. Meanwhile, Eastern philosophies and spiritual traditions have long considered the self an illusion — a view with which modern science has recently begun to side.
These contradictory conceptions of the self as a centerpiece of identity and success, per the Western view, and as an illusion, per the Eastern one, are what French philosopher Jean-François Revel and his biologist-turned-Buddhist son, Matthieu Ricard, explore in their extraordinary conversation, published as The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life (public library).
What makes the conversation particularly compelling is the unusual pairing of perspectives — it is not only an intergenerational dialogue between a father and a son who both possess enormous intellectual potency, but a dialogue between Western philosophy and Eastern spirituality with a strong emphasis on science. The scientific perspective, in fact, comes not from Revel but from Ricard, who gave up a promising career as a molecular biologist — he had worked with Nobel laureate Jacques Monod — to move to Nepal and study Tibetan Buddhism. Doubly significant is Ricard’s route to Buddhism: Raised in the strongly secular home of two prominent French intellectuals — his mother, Revel’s wife, was the painter Yahne Le Toumelin — he grew up with only an intellectual curiosity toward religion and turned to Buddhism not out of disappointment with Western faiths but out of what his father calls “a state of indifference to any religion, a kind of religious weightlessness.”
Matthieu Ricard (right) with his father, Jean-François Revel (Photograph: Raphaelle Demandre)
So in 1999, when Revel traveled to Ricard’s home in Kathmandu and the two sat down for this remarkable intellectual encounter, it was the philosophical rather than the religion dimensions of Buddhism that took center stage as the father and son contemplated such immutable human concerns as free will, the meaning of life, the value of scientific progress, and the pillars of the good life. As they speak, each addresses the other as much as he is confabulating with himself, which results in a masterpiece of the art of conversation at its most elevated and ennobling — an exchange of dynamic contemplation between and within minds, driven not by the self-righteous slinging of opinions but by a deep commitment to mutual understanding and to enriching the shared pool of wisdom.
One of the most pause-giving dimensions of the conversation deals with this notion of the self and its illusory nature. When Revel takes issue with the Buddhist concept of reincarnation, pointing out its mystical and scientifically ungrounded suppositions, Ricard emphasizes its metaphorical and philosophical importance over its literal interpretation. Embedded in that notion, he suggests, is the key to unmooring ourselves from the tyranny of the self in the here and now:
It’s important to understand that what’s called reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the transmigration of some “entity” or other… As long as one thinks in terms of entities rather than function and continuity, it’s impossible to understand the Buddhist concept of rebirth.
[…]
Since Buddhism denies the existence of any individual self that could be seen as a separate entity capable of transmigrating from one existence to another by passing from one body to another, one might well wonder what it could be that links those successive states of existence together… It’s seen as a continuum, a stream of consciousness that continues to flow without there being any fixed or autonomous entity running through it.
Illustration from ‘The Magic Boat’ by Tom Seidmann-Freud, Sigmund Freud’s niece.
Ricard likens this concept to “a river without a boat descending along its course” and is careful to point out a common misconception: Although Buddhism denies the existence of the individual self, it doesn’t deny individual consciousness. He explains:
The fact that there’s no such discontinuous entity being transferred from one life to the next doesn’t mean that there can’t be a continuity of functioning. That the self has no true existence doesn’t prevent one particular stream of consciousness from having qualities that distinguish it from another stream. The fact that there’s no boat floating down the river doesn’t prevent the water from being full of mud, polluted by a paper factory, or clean and clear. The state of the river at any given moment is the result of its history. In the same way, an individual stream of consciousness is loaded with all the traces left on it by positive and negative thoughts, as well as by actions and words arising from those thoughts. What we’re trying to do by spiritual practice is to gradually purify the river. The ultimate state of complete clarity is what we call spiritual realization. All the negative emotions, all the obscurations that render the underlying wisdom invisible, have then been dissolved.
Echoing the great Zen teacher D.T. Suzuki’s assertion that “the ego-shell in which we live is the hardest thing to outgrow,” Ricard argues that this recognition of individual consciousness is central to the dissolution of the ego-shell:
It’s not a question of annihilating the self, which has never really existed, but simply of uncovering its imposture. Indeed, if the self did have any intrinsic existence we’d never be able to bring it from existence into nonexistence.
[…]
A nonexistent self can’t really be “abolished,” but its nonexistence can be recognized. What we want to abolish is the illusion, the mistake that has no inherent existence in the first place… whatever we judge to be disagreeable or harmful. But as soon as we recognize that the self has no true existence, all these attracting and repelling impulses will vanish… The self has neither beginning nor end, and therefore in the present it has no more existence than the mind attributes to it.
Ricard, who has since written about the secret of happiness, considers how our natural, everyday experience of the “I” mutates into the illusion of the self, from which all of our suffering stems:
There’s a natural feeling of self, of “I,” which makes you think “I’m cold, I’m hungry, I’m walking,” and so forth. By itself, that feeling is neutral. It doesn’t specifically lead to either happiness or suffering. But then comes the idea that the self is a kind of constant that lasts all your life, regardless of all the physical and mental changes you go through. You get attached to the idea of being a self, “myself,” a “person,” and of “my” body, “my” name, “my” mind, and so on. Buddhism accepts that there is a continuum of consciousness, but denies any existence of a solid, permanent, and autonomous self anywhere in that continuum. The essence of Buddhist practice is therefore to get rid of that illusion of a self which so falsifies our view of the world.
Illustration by Mimmo Paladino for a rare edition of James Joyce’s Ulysses. Click image for more.
When his father probes how one is expected to effect positive change in the world without a sense of personal agency — another common critique by those who misunderstand the foundational philosophies of Buddhism — Ricard responds:
The wish to allay others’ suffering, which may inspire a whole lifetime’s work, is an admirable ambition. It’s important to distinguish between negative emotions, like desire, hatred, and pride, that solidify still further our self-centered outlook, and positive ones, like altruistic love, compassion, and faith, that allow us to free ourselves little by little from those negative and self-centered tendencies. Positive emotions don’t disturb our mind, they reinforce it and make it more stable and more courageous.
In a sentiment that calls to mind David Foster Wallace on the dark side of ambition, Ricard makes an important distinction between the two types of ambition:
Positive ambition — the pursuit of others’ well-being by all possible means, the fervent wish to transform oneself — is one of the cardinal virtues in Buddhism. In fact, Buddhists nurture one main ambition without any limits, that of removing the suffering of all living beings throughout the whole universe. That sort of ambition stops you succumbing to inertia and makes you strong-minded and determined. So the distinction between the positive and negative, selfless and self-centered sides of ambition is important. You could say that ambition is positive if its aim is to help others. That’s the simplest definition. Conversely, ambition is negative if achieving it is detrimental to others, and an emotion is negative if it destroys your own and others’ inner peace.
He illustrates this with a verse from the eight-century Buddhist sage Shantideva:
All the joy the world contains
Has come through wishing happiness for others.
All the misery the world contains
Has come through wanting pleasure for oneself.
Is there need for lengthy explanation?
Childish beings look out for themselves,
While Buddhas labor for the good of others:
See the difference that divides them!
With that great Eastern capacity for holding paradox and fusing contradictory concepts into a unity of wisdom, Ricard argues that shedding the ego-shell actually requires first fortifying our ego — more than that, he suggests, true altruism is the product not of selflessness but of a strong sense of self:
Buddhism’s goal of uncovering the “imposture of the ego,” this ego that seems so powerful and causes us so much trouble while having no existence in itself. Nevertheless, as a first step it’s important to stabilize this feeling of a self in order to distinguish all its characteristics. You could say, paradoxically, that you first need to have an ego in order to be aware that it doesn’t exist. Someone with an unstable, fragmented, amorphous personality has little chance of being able to identify that powerful feeling of “me,” as a prior step to recognizing that it doesn’t correspond to any real entity. So you need to start with a healthy and coherent self to be able to investigate it. You can shoot at a target, but not in fog.
[…]
But it’s important not to think that once the imposture of the ego is unmasked you find yourself in a state of inner nothingness, to the point that the destruction of the personality renders you incapable of acting or communicating. You don’t become an empty container. It’s quite the opposite. When you’re no longer the plaything of an illusory despot, like the shadows in Plato’s cave, your wisdom, love for others and compassion can be freely expressed. It’s a freedom from the limitations imposed by attachment to a self, not at all an anesthesia of the will. This “opening of the eyes of wisdom” increases your strength of mind, your diligence, and your capacity to take appropriate and altruistic action.
Revel contrasts this with the West’s “cult of the self” and our civilizational emphasis on “the strong personality” as a hallmark of success, questioning whether there can be a common ground between cultural and philosophical traditions so diametrically opposed in this regard. But Ricard, once again, meets the problem with semantic lucidity that melts away the apparent conflict:
If by personality you mean exacerbation of the ego, simply to have a strong personality seems to me, unfortunately, a highly dubious criterion of success. Hitler and Mao Tse-tung had very strong personalities.
Illustration by André François from ‘Little Boy Brown’ by Isobel Harris. Click image for more.
Echoing Bertrand Russell’s famous assertion that “construction and destruction alike satisfy the will to power, but construction is more difficult… and therefore gives more satisfaction to the person who can achieve it,” Ricard adds:
It’s important not to confuse strong individuality and strength of mind. The great teachers I’ve been able to meet had indomitable strength of mind. You could say they had very impressive personalities, and that they radiated a sort of natural strength that everyone who met them could perceive. But the big difference was that you couldn’t find the slightest trace of ego in them. I mean the kind of ego that inspires selfishness and self-centeredness. Their strength of mind came from knowledge, serenity, and inner freedom that were outwardly manifested as an unshakable certainty. They were worlds apart from Hitler, Mao Tse-tung and the like, whose powerful personalities arose from an unbridled desire to dominate, and from pride, greed, or hatred. In both cases, we’re faced with immense power, but in the first that power is a flow of constructive altruism, while in the second it’s negative and destructive.
The Monk and the Philosopher is a remarkable read in its totality, addressing with enormous depth and dimension such aspects of the human experience as happiness, suffering, education, ethics, and love. Complement it with D.T. Suzuki on how Zen can help us cultivate our character and Jack Kerouac’s Zen-inspired meditation on the self illusion and “the golden eternity,” then revisit Albert Einstein and the Indian philosopher Tagore’s historic conversation entwining Eastern and Western perspectives with great mutual curiosity and goodwill.
===
The Monk and the Philosopher Quotes
The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life by Jean-François Revel
1,586 ratings, 4.15 average rating, 136 reviews
The Monk and the Philosopher Quotes Showing 1-8 of 8
“the mind plays the essential role in satisfaction and dissatisfaction, happiness and suffering, fulfillment and failure. The mind is behind every experience in life. It is also what determines the way we see the world. The mind is the window from which we see ‘our’ world. It only takes the slightest change in our minds, in our way of perceiving people and things, for that world to be turned completely upside-down.”
― Jean-François Revel, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
2 likesLike
“Consideremos, por ejemplo, la omnipotencia, pues un creador ha de ser onmipotente: o bien el creador no decide crear, y en ese caso pierde su omnipotencia, pues la creación se hace sin el concurso de su voluntad, o bien crea voluntariamente y ya no es todo poderoso, porque crea bajo la influencia del deseo de crear.”
― Matthieu Ricard, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
1 likesLike
“So the pattern of our emotions is determined by the way we perceive reality.”
― Jean-François Revel, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
1 likesLike
“it’s a metaphysical choice that science makes when it states that with the help of our concepts we can discover the ultimate nature of a phenomenal world that exists independently of our concepts.”
― Jean-François Revel, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
1 likesLike
“Per poter aiutare gli altri, bisogna che non vi sia più alcuna differenza tra ciò che si insegna e ciò che si è.”
― Jean-François Revel, Il monaco e il filosofo: Laicità e buddismo a confronto: un dialogo tra padre e figlio sul senso della vita
0 likesLike
“People who've been on the left for a long time no longer have a coherent doctrine for transforming society, and so they've seized hold of humanitarian action and the environment in order to continue tyrannizing their peers.”
― Jean-François Revel, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
0 likesLike
“Buddhism affirms that the ultimate nature of phenomena is emptiness and that emptiness carries within it an infinite potential of manifestation.”
― Matthieu Ricard, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
0 likesLike
“But the dominant idea today among scientists is that such dualism infringes the laws of conservation of energy by supposing that a nonmaterial object can influence a material system.”
― Jean-François Revel, The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
===
The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life
Jean-Francois Revel
,
Matthew Ricard
4.15
1,586 ratings136 reviews
Rate this book
Jean Francois-Revel, a pillar of French intellectual life in our time, became world famous for his challenges to both Communism and Christianity. Twenty-seven years ago, his son, Matthieu Ricard, gave up a promising career as a scientist to study Tibetan Buddhism -- not as a detached observer but by immersing himself in its practice under the guidance of its greatest living masters.
Meeting in an inn overlooking Katmandu, these two profoundly thoughtful men explored the questions that have occupied humankind throughout its history. Does life have meaning? What is consciousness? Is man free? What is the value of scientific and material progress? Why is there suffering, war, and hatred? Their conversation is not merely they ask each other questions about ethics, rights, and responsibilities, about knowledge and belief, and they discuss frankly the differences in the way each has tried to make sense of his life.
Utterly absorbing, inspiring, and accessible, this remarkable dialogue engages East with West, ideas with life, and science with the humanities, providing wisdom on how to enrich the way we live our lives.
Follow
Jean-François Revel was a French politician, journalist, author, prolific philosopher and member of the Académie française since June 1998.
He was best known for his books Without Marx or Jesus: The New American Revolution Has Begun, The Flight from Truth : The Reign of Deceit in the Age of Information and his 2002 book Anti-Americanism, one year after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In the latter book, Revel criticised those Europeans who argued that the United States had brought about the terrorist attacks upon itself through misguided foreign policies. He wrote thus: "Obsessed by their hatred and floundering in illogicality, these dupes forget that the United States, acting in her own self-interest, is also acting in the interest of us Europeans and in the interests of many other countries, threatened, or already subverted and ruined, by terrorism." In 1975 he delivered the Huizinga Lecture in Leiden, The Netherlands, under the title: La tentation totalitaire (The Totalitarian Temptation).
Follow
February 6, 2017
This book is the first Western introductory Buddhism book I've read that speaks clearly to me.
As a cognitive scientist, I'm interested in Buddhism for reasons both intellectual and spiritual. For example, here are some of the intellectual-level topics I want to address in a study of Buddhism:
— What position does Buddhism take on consciousness and the "hard problem?" How does the Buddhist story of consciousness integrate with reincarnation belief?
— What are the consequences of removing the illusion of "self" for psychological science? How much is our theory blinded by this illusion?
— How will a self-labeled Buddhist react to claims about the parallels between it and ancient Western philosophies (e.g. Stoicism)?
In reading Buddhist teachers (at least, those who write in English), these questions are rarely properly addressed. One of the two following things is bound to happen:
1. (mostly in intro books) Authors focus on the more easily understandable and less philosophically heavy tenets of Buddhism. See e.g. some books on "mindfulness" or the Buddhist "books" which are more like collections of lists.
2. Authors attempt to address these questions at some level, but their responses are often muddled by imprecise metaphor and contradictory claims.
The discussions between Revel and Ricard are the first I have found which really address the intellectual issues, at least in a sort that speaks on Western terms and in a scientifically grounded way.
Mathieu Ricard is a trained scientist, and his father, Jean-François Revel, is a philosopher. The two share a foundation in Western dialectic, which is what makes this book so unique and informative. Revel certainly doesn't pull any punches, and his son is always understanding and prepared with a thorough answer.
The discussion is often quite philosophically rigorous, and the topics covered include some of the big questions I listed above. That rigor is for better and for worse, of course. I found the chapters on topics in philosophy of mind fascinating, but they were pretty jargon-heavy and might not be useful or interesting to someone without a cog-sci background. The discussion was pretty light on other topics—for example, the two did not attempt to elaborate Buddhist ethics and the full meaning of "suffering." I can't evaluate the discussions on metaphysics since I have zero experience in this sort of discourse, but they were interesting at the very least!
(See Ladan's review for a few nice quotes which hint at the theoretical breadth of this book — consciousness, metaphysics, morality, etc.)
---
For me, this was a great initiation into the more formal theoretical background of Buddhism.
The only substantial disappointment was in some of Ricard's rhetoric. While he is clearly willing to play ball in the discussions and face up to tough questions, he often seems to lapse into a sort of stereotypical Buddhist-monk behavior, drawing vague pictures with metaphor and example rather than keeping the common ground of the discussion. I was frustrated to find, in the middle of some of the most rigorous discussions, responses from Ricard which seemed at best opaque and at worst (though I doubt it) question-dodging.
I highly recommend this book to fellow cognitive scientists, and more generally those curious about some of the theory underlying Buddhism. Don't forget to keep up a daily meditation along with your reading! :)
3.5 stars, rounding up.
philosophy
====
dario herenu
112 reviews · 13 followers
Follow
January 29, 2012
To my taste, it is (dangerously) close to the ideal book. Ideas that trigger more reactionary ideas, philosophy, the all-powerful hard sciences, the intertwining of Western and Eastern thought and what generates and degenerates in that mess. The dialogue between father and son, between a philosopher and a scientist and later a Buddhist monk, the atheism of one and the detachment of the other, the builder of ideas and the disarmer, the brilliant intellectual and the ancient wisdom of the other, Western ignorance for all the oriental of one and the acceptance of the other on the suchness of all the objects that surround us (it is not all samsara in this life).
The book is very simple. A dialogue in which both are exposing their opinions, their points of view and perhaps the best: both assume the limits that exist even today in science and religion (although I do not believe that Buddhism is a religion per se, Siddharta Gautama He never demanded that they believe in his word: indeed, that they dare to question it) to give answers to human beings.
Strangely, the monk is the one who has generated the biggest surprises for me. At times, his holistic vision of the human ethos is superhuman.
To the point that on a certain page (in passing data: between pages 105 and 111) it obliterates -in just one paragraph- the corpus of a religion. Centuries of hermeneutics, orthodoxy, miracles, chastities, monastic cloisters, revealed truths, dogmas, are literally useless if we confront them with those 112 words.
Among the best books I have read in this life.
And probably in the next one.
9 likes
Like
Comment
Kstangl
19 reviews
Follow
August 29, 2012
The concept is promising: a Buddhist monk justifies why he left a promising scientific career in France to become a monk in Tibet to his well-connected father, all under the guise of an intellectual discussion on religion and rational secularism. And both men are extremely well-educated, bright and articulate. My heart just wasn't in it. Try as I might, I just couldn't get past the father's irritating, narrow-minded elitism. The son offers wonderfully clear explanations of Buddhist tenets, but I couldn't help but be annoyed by his wholesale dismissal of Western spirituality. He complains he didn't find spiritual role models among his family and friends - and then proceeds to drop a dazzling array of names in the arts and intellectual elite. Did it ever occur to him that he might look in churches and monasteries rather than cocktail parties? This refusal to investigate our own (Western) spiritual traditions and the insistence on claiming the traditions of others worries me: an odd sort of cultural imperialism. And didn't the Dalai Lama specifically recommend that we look at what our own traditions have to teach us?
gave-up-on
9 likes
2 comments
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Jacob Elder.
Jacob Elder
5 reviews · 12 followers
Follow
March 3, 2016
I had some difficulty determining how I felt about this book by the end. It began with so much potential and was really an interesting way of introducing Buddhist teachings and ideologies through a Western lens. I began thoroughly engaged and immersed in the efforts of the son (or the monk) to properly convey his understanding of Buddhist wisdom to a skeptical and scientific community.
However, as the book went on I became a bit disenchanted with some of the patterns. As the father begins to press with some of the most challenging questions regarding Buddhism, especially about the metaphysical aspects of the practice, his son prevaricates the questions and returns to seemingly the same suggestions time and time again. It felt like it became redundant, as the father often only scratched the surface, and didn't press the son further when a truly challenging or difficult topic to address arose. While I was excited about the book at the beginning, it became tiresome as it went on, due to the father's lack of insistence upon pressing further on the most compelling questions and what felt like rather weak answers by the son towards his father's inquiries (especially in the metaphysical discussion).
All in all, it's a decent read. I feel it could be shortened, as there was quite a lot of redundancy in the son's questions and it lost it's intrigue when the son returned to similar answers many times over. Nevertheless, it's an interesting introduction into Buddhism for the Westerner who has an affinity for science and empiricism, and a penchant for skepticism.
Show more
6 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Nuno R..
Nuno R.
7 books · 59 followers
Follow
October 30, 2018
A work of intelectual honesty, of inter-cultural respect and of father-son love. Through these pages, Jean François-Revel does not hold back any of his hard questions about spirituality and religion, nor does his son Matthieu Ricard try to dodge them. The result is a frank, deep talk, about some of the most fundamental questions that humans have studied and meditated about for thousands of years. All in a reunion of two sharp minds, that took place near the high mountains that are now the home of the son, a monk that became one of the voices of Tibetan Buddhism worldwide and has been called "the happiest man in the world".
_non-fiction
interview
philosophy
...more
4 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Jon Boorstin.
Jon Boorstin
7 books · 55 followers
Follow
June 14, 2015
This is a fine investigation of Buddhist philosophy by an eminent French humanist and his son, a Buddhist monk with a phd in biology. They know what a proof is. Beautifully balanced and fair minded, with an ear for the resonances between different schools of thought. Should we strive for personal success, or is that striving a snare and a delusion? What is success, truly? And how to be truly fulfilled? These two men love each other and respect each other's views. Honest and illuminating.
4 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Ladan.
In
69 reviews
Follow
February 6, 2009
"If man is no more than his neurons, it's hard to understand how sudden events or deep reflection and the discovery of inner truths could lead us to completely change the way we see the world, how we live and our capacity for inner joy. Any such major upheaval would have to be accompanied by an equally deep and sudden major restructuring of the complex circuits of neurons that determine our habits and behavior. If, on the other hand, consciousness is a nonmaterial continuum, there's no reason why it shouldn't be able to undergo major changes quite easily, and much more flexibly than a network of physical connections formed during a slow and complex process."
"What we're talking about here is the idea of a permanent Creator entity, sufficient in itself, without any cause preceding it, creating things as a voluntary act... Let's take all-powerfulness for instance. A Creator would have to be all-powerfful. Either the Creator doesn't 'decide' to create, in which case all-powerfulness is lost, for creation happens outside his will; or he creates voluntarily, in which case he can't be all-powerful, either, as he's creating under the influence of his desire to create... Can a Creator be a permanent entity? No, because after creating he's different from how he was before he created. He's become 'he who created'."
"Colors, sounds, smells, flavors, and textures aren't attributes that are inherent to the objective world, existing independently of our senses... What is the true nature of the world as it exists independently of ourselves? We have no way of knowingm because our only way of apprehending it is via our own mental processes. So, according to Buddhism, a 'world' independent of any conceptual designation would make no sense to anyone. To take an example, what is a white object? A wavelength, a 'color temperature', moving particles?... None of those attributes are intrinsic to the object, they're only the result of our particular ways of investigating it. Buddhist scriptures tell the story of two blind men who wanted to have explained to them what colors were. One of them was told that white was the color of snow. He took a handful of snow and concluded that white was 'cold'. The other blind man was told that white was the color of swans. He heard a swan flying overhead, and concluded that white went 'swish swish'. The world can't be determined by itself. If it was, we'd all perceive it in the same way. That's not to deny reality as we observe it, nor to say that there's no reality outside the mind, but simply that no 'reality in itself' exists."
"If spiritual values stop being an inspiration for a society, material progress becomes a sort of facade that masks the pointlessness of life. Of course, to live longer is to profit from an increased opportunity of giving meaning to life, but if you neglect that opportunity and just aspire to a long and comfortable existence the value of human life becomes altogether artificial."
3 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Eugénio Outeiro.
Eugénio Outeiro
1 book · 2 followers
Follow
August 14, 2012
The monk, Matthieu Ricard, shines from the first page. The philosopher, Jean-François Revel, knows how to ask the right questions so that the end result is a very deep view of Buddhism in general, and of the Tibetan tradition in particular.
I think the book manages to perfectly show the common points between philosophy, as more theoretical knowledge, and Buddhism, as knowledge based on contemplative practice, which serves as the basis for all its knowledge. It is curious to see, in this sense, how the philosopher does not understand, and insists on the little that convinces him, Buddhist metaphysics.
I don't give it five stars just because, from a more vital point of view, I think it lacks heart. Or, in other words, I found myself drawn to reading the book, among many other attractions, because it was a conversation between a father and a son, and yet the conversations, carried mainly by the hand of the philosopher, completely overlook real people, flesh and blood and with feelings, who participate in them.
From a more earthly point of view, it must be said that the liberal ideology of the philosopher, and the occupation situation in Tibet, give rise to criticisms of communism which, while being fair with regard to the concrete situation, are often extrapolated free of charge (by the philosopher) to the entire world left. I admit that this was not pleasant for me.
3 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Leland Beaumont.
Leland Beaumont
4 books · 31 followers
Follow
December 16, 2012
The relationship between father and son is always complex. Fathers want the best for their sons, and sons balance a natural tension of wanting to learn from father, and live up to his father’s expectations, while exploring all that is new and exciting in the world. It is a respectful yet powerful tension between old and new, experience and novelty, obedience and autonomy, belief and curiosity, advice and adventure. This tension is richly realized throughout the remarkable dialogue created by these two brilliant men. The monk shares and explains what he learns from his years of conscientious practice of the Buddhist traditions. The philosopher critically analyzes what the monk presents and compares it to the philosophical traditions of the West while struggling to learn from his son.
The philosopher-father begins by asking the monk-son why he decided to leave a promising career as a molecular biologist to commit himself completely to the Buddhist practice. “In short”, he answers, “science however interesting wasn’t enough to give meaning to my life.” Based on the limited exposure he had to the contemplative lifestyle through extraordinary documentary films by Arnaud Desjardins, he saw that the monks were the most sincerely happy people he knew of, and he wanted to explore and experience their authentic lifestyle for himself. “I had the impression of seeing the living beings who were the very image of what they taught.” He goes on to say, “here were beings who seemed to be the living examples of wisdom.” He met the Tibetan Buddhist lama, Kangyur Rinpoche and eventually studied with him for years until the teacher’s death in 1975. He went on to study with Khysntse Rinpoche for 12 more years and was ordained as a monk in 1979. The younger monk seems wholly content with his decision.
“Suffering is the result of ignorance,” he learned, and “ignorance, in essence is belief in a truly existing self and in the solidly of phenomena”. However skeptical at first, observing the perfect being of his teacher convinced him of this truth and inspired him to absorb himself in the practice. He went on to learn that negative emotions arise from the notion of a self, the “me” that we all cherish, however, “attachment to the self is a fact, but the self that is the object of that attachment has no true existence; it exists nowhere and in no way as an autonomous and permanent entity.” Destructive thoughts, such as hatred, are “liberated by looking at their nature”, recognizing that thoughts have no substance, and releasing yourself from the illusion of their grip.
To dissolve a thought, begin by breaking the flow of thoughts for a few minutes. Just remain in awareness of the present moment, free of any conscious thoughts. As thoughts reappear, begin to examine the nature of discursive thoughts, looking for their source and substance, until you reach a state of ‘not found’ where thoughts vanish without leaving a trace. With the thought dissolved you can enter a state of inner simplicity, clear mindfulness, and awareness absent of any concepts. The monk attests that “working on oneself inwardly in this way gets rid of hatred, desire, jealousy, pride, and everything else that disturbs the mind.”
The extraordinary introspective skills and beliefs of Buddhist monks are the results of years of conscientious practice guided by “contemplative science.” The philosopher is skeptical, and refuses to accept evidence that is not materially observable by anyone wishing to see for himself. The monk compares the feats of Buddhist contemplatives to the skills of an Olympic athlete, who after many years of training, can jump 8 feet high. Certainly the ability to jump that high is extraordinary, and greatly exceeds the ability of any untrained athlete. We would not believe this was possible if we could not go to a track meet or watch coverage on TV and see extraordinary athletes repeating this amazing skill. The skills of highly trained monks are equally extraordinary, but not observable by others. However we can consider reliable testimony by many credible practitioners who have no reason to mislead or deceive. “A statement can be accepted as valid”, the monk argues, “when there are substantial reasons for believing the person making it”. In addition, we can directly observe the serenity of these expert practitioners.
“Action on the world is desirable”, the monk tells his father, “while inner transformation is indispensable.”, “This opening of the eyes of wisdom” he says referring to dismissing the illusions, “Increases your strength of mind, your diligence, and your capacity to take appropriate and altruistic action.” This requires a strong mind, an unshakable certainty, and a radiant personality, without the slightest trace of ego, selfishness, or self-centeredness. “If a prisoner wants to free his companions in misfortune, he must first break out of his own chains”, the monk assures us, “It’s the only way to do it”. The philosopher asks, “Do you mean that the only way to attain lasting peace in the world is the reform of the individuals?” The monk replies, “To think otherwise is surely utopian.” “In any case,” the monk elaborates, “the first thing is to make peace within oneself — inner disarmament; then peace in the family; then in the village; and finally in the nation and beyond.”
“Western efficiency is a major contribution to minor needs” the son proposes to his skeptical father, “What Buddhism could help to change is the overall attitude that consists of giving priority to ‘having’ over ‘being’. It’s a matter of establishing a new order of values, giving priority to the quest for inner well-being.” Buddhism provides a vision of tolerance, open-mindedness, altruism, quiet confidence, a science of the mind through which all people, including westerners, can find their own inner peace. Buddhism simply offers to share an experience with anyone who wishes. The point isn’t to convert people but to contribute to their well-being.
A disturbing chapter describes the Chinese invasion, occupation, and on-going destruction of Tibet, its people, and its culture since 1950. Millions of Tibetans were slaughtered, and 6,150 monasteries were destroyed nearly annihilating this unique and most peaceful culture. Despite this genocide the strong will of the Tibetan people still survives. The Dalai Lama lives in exile with about 100,000 Tibetans who still seek a peaceful return to their homeland. He often says, “Tibet has no petrol for engines, like Kuwait, but it does have petrol for the mind which should justify other countries coming to its rescue.” He points out the advantages to be gained in making Tibet a buffer state, a haven of peace in the middle of major Asian powers. He passionately advocates for support from the most powerful nations and patiently awaits their action.
The monk offers us many more pearls; each explored in much more depth in the book:
Truth is strong enough by itself to convince, and should never be imposed by force.
The goal of nonviolence is specifically to diminish violence. It’s not a passive approach.
Evil has no more existence than a mistake; it is only an incorrect perception of reality.
The great virtue of sin is precisely that it doesn’t have any true existence. There’s therefore no negative action or thought that can’t be dissolved, purified, or repaired.
The idea of man’s true nature can be understood as a state of balance, while violence is a state of imbalance.
It’s obvious that unless a sense of responsibility develops in all the individuals sharing this planet, it’ll be very difficult to apply any democratic ideals.
Enlightenment is the discovery of the ultimate nature of both oneself and phenomena.
Mastery of oneself, like so many other qualities, is only something of true value when it’s based on the right motivation and metaphysical principles.
What Buddhism calls meditation is a gradual discovery, over years of practice, of the nature of the mind and how mental events appear in it.
It doesn’t make much sense to think that because a truth is an ancient truth it’s no longer worth bothering about.
In spiritual practices the difficulties come at the beginning, and in worldly practice the difficulties come at the end.
Without wisdom, reason will just argue about human happiness without ever actually bringing it about. Education needs to be more than just the accumulation of knowledge; it should really be education on how to be.
In the end each man gains a deeper understanding and appreciation for the other’s beliefs, but neither abandons his chosen path.
2 likes
Like
Comment
Profile Image for Chris.
Chris
73 reviews · 1 follower
Follow
July 15, 2021
It is the second time I read this book, the first time was about 7 years ago. Back then a lot was above my cap, now I only had to fit a few pieces. I loved this discussion between the Western philosopher and the Eastern monk. Recognizable too. I sometimes found the philosopher's criticism of Buddhism very justified and I thought that the monk did not always respond satisfactorily. He stuck with his dogmas. With imagery and arguments that I have sometimes literally read with other monks. All in all, they came to a nice compromise and this strengthens my conviction that Buddhism really is a way that would make the Western world a more pleasant place to live.
2 likes
===
