Chapter 2 religion or philosophy

Jean-François - I have asked you some questions about your experience compared to the mission of the Western scientific researcher.Now I wish to know how your choice is determined compared to other religions and other spiritual doctrines.Because you turned to Buddhism, not because you were disappointed with any Western religion, but basically, you came from a non-religious cultural education.Your father and mother, although both of Catholic origin, were neither religious, and you received a secular, rationalist education in a scientific environment.The scientific environment, on the whole, is not particularly religious.Many Westerners turn to religions other than their own, such as Islam or Buddhism, because they despair of their traditional beliefs.And you, in short, you have transitioned from a religious indifference or weightlessness to Buddhism. ...but notice that I just said the word "religious" ... So, exactly, we have touched here one of the great interpretive problems of Buddhism.Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy?People are still debating this topic today.You relate your first association with the philosopher, who, though he did not speak to you—for you could not communicate in practically any language at that time—had such an enormous influence on you.This first experience reminded me of that of a Greek youth who, before he had any rudimentary conceptual knowledge, approached the body of a philosopher, but was already influenced by the force of his personality as an example.After considering this first experience, is this a refuge in a religious sense, or an insight in a purely philosophical sense?

Mathieu - First of all, let's talk about the first aspect of your question. I think it is a great luck for me to come to Buddhism with an innocent heart; Interest does not stir up any inner conflict, no sense of "rejection" from another religion or belief.Although I was raised in a free-thinking environment, I never had a negative attitude towards religion, and through reading I developed a keen interest in various great spiritual traditions such as Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Although I didn't personally participate in it as a religious practitioner.It was an encounter with a spiritual master that inspired my true devotion to the spiritual path.This is Kangyuer Rinpochen, a philosopher, who represents a perfection that I have not yet grasped in its entirety, although it is obvious to me.An encounter like this is hard to describe—one Tibetan would say it was "as difficult as a dumb person can describe the sweetness of honey."What gives him value is not a kind of abstract speculation, but a kind of direct experience, a kind of verification-it is better than a thousand words to get it from my own eyes.

Then, how do I discover and understand Buddhism bit by bit?Is this a religion?Is this a kind of wisdom, a kind of metaphysics?A lama replied humorously: "Poor Buddhism! It is rejected by religious people, who say it is an atheistic philosophy, a spiritual science; it is rejected by philosophers, who do not classify Buddhism as philosophy. , but associate it with religion. So Buddhism has no citizenship anywhere. But perhaps this is an advantage that allows Buddhism to build a bridge between religion and philosophy.” Essentially, I think It is said that Buddhism is a metaphysical tradition from which emanates a wisdom applicable to all moments of existence and in all circumstances.

If by religion one means an assent to a dogme which one accepts out of blind devotion without having to rediscover its truth for oneself, then Buddhism It's not really a religion.But if one considers one of the etymologies of the word religion, "that which is connected," then Buddhism must be connected to those supreme metaphysical truths.If by faith one means an inner unshakable conviction of the discovery of inner truth, Buddhism does not exclude faith.Faith is also wonder in the face of this inner transformation.On the other hand, the fact that Buddhism is not a theistic tradition also leads many people, say Christians, not to think of Buddhism as a "religion" in the usual sense of the word religion.Finally, Buddhism is not a "doctrine" because Buddha always said that people should examine his teachings, ponder them, but not accept them just out of respect for him.The truth of his teachings should be discovered through the series of stages leading to spiritual realization.The Buddha said that one should examine his teachings like a piece of gold.To know whether gold is pure, people rub it on a flat stone, hammer it, and melt it in a fire.The Buddha's teachings are like some road guides that lead one on the path to awakening, to ultimate awareness of the nature of the spiritual and phenomenal worlds.

Why is Buddha revered?He is revered not as a God, or as a saint, but as the ultimate philosopher, as the awakened personification.The word "Buddha" (bouddha) in Sanskrit means "one who has realized", that is, one who has grasped the truth. It is translated into the word sanguie used in Tibetan, which is composed of two syllables: sang means that he has "dispelled" all that veils knowledge, and that he has "awakened" from the night of ignorance; guie means that he has "unfolded" all that should be unfolded, that is, all spiritual and human quality.

Jean-François – you talked about the teaching of the Buddha.What kind of teaching is it actually?No original texts of the Buddha survive... Mathieu – Actually, more canonical teaching survives in Buddhism than in any other tradition.The Buddha did not write, but his sermons, the Buddha's Sayings, occupy more than three hundred volumes of the Tibetan canon. Jean-François—but is it really his? Mathieu—at a council held not long after his death, five hundred of his closest disciples—especially those who had spent most of their lives by his side—joined Arise to compile the summation of the Buddha's teachings.The Buddha's sermons or utterances—that is, the Soutra—are thus repeated by these superior disciples, while those who listen revise them as necessary.Know that oral tradition has always played an extremely important role in the transmission of knowledge in the East, and that, up to our time, Orientals are often endowed with amazing memories.This is not a story.I myself have heard several Tibetan masters and students recite hundreds of pages of documents from memory, pausing now and then to explain meaning, all with a fidelity and accuracy that always amazes me, and I am Understand scriptures from books!The Buddhist scriptures therefore begin in this way: "In such and such a place and such and such occasion, I heard the Buddha say this..." If we consider that the Buddha taught without interruption from the age of thirty until his death at the age of eighty-one. , and he talked about some of the same topics many times, as Buddhist teachers do today, it is reasonable to think that his close disciples who spent thirty or forty years by his side, remember A faithful version of the master's teachings, although this version does not match every word exactly.Those of us who have spent twenty years or so with Tibetan masters, without being born with some extraordinary faculties of understanding, can fairly faithfully represent the substance of this teaching.To these collections of words were added two hundred and thirteen volumes of commentary and commentary, written by the high sages and learned men of India in the centuries after the Buddha's death, and thousands of volumes written later in Tibet, This makes Tibetan classical literature the most abundant literature in the East after Sanskrit literature and Chinese literature.

Jean-François - richest in Buddhist themes you would say? Mathieu - not only that.It is true that Tibetan literature is entirely devoted to Buddhist education and the traditional sciences inserted into it—medicine, grammar, linguistics, astronomy, etc., but this does not prevent it from being the third largest literature in the East in terms of richness and capacity.Until recent years, there was no "fiction" about Tibet...the reality was enough to keep people busy. Jean-François - Yes... But if one applies the criteria of the historical method to the study of Buddhism, as in France, for example, Alfred Fauche in his "Based on Indian scriptures and The successors of the Buddha seem to display a great imagination, as they did in the book "The Life of Buddha".An apostolic biography is conceived of his singular birth: he emerges from his mother's right flank, and ten months before birth he is fully formed in his mother's breast, etc.As in all too-good-for-nothing biographies, the Eastern imagination seems greatly embellished, so that it is difficult to rediscover the true historical substance of the Buddha's teaching.You will reply that Socrates is the same thing, we only know his thought indirectly.It is not clear what came from Socrates himself and what was added by Plato or Chromatophane in the accounts of his disciples.But these were contemporaries of Socrates.In addition we have Aristophanes, which is an interesting check, because he was the enemy of Socrates.And in the case of Buddha, the sense of miraculous deeds peculiar to the Indian imagination seems to have made it difficult to give a strict definition of Buddha's true teaching.

① Athens comedy poet, for many comedies to satirize Socrates. Mathieu – First of all, as I said a few minutes ago, what the Buddha taught was established by his contemporaries.Again, the miraculous deeds you speak of do not affect the subject of the teaching itself; it concerns those miraculous biographies of the Buddha, which were written over the centuries.In fact, the Buddha's teachings addressed some philosophical or metaphysical topics—the nature of existence, ignorance, the causes of suffering, the self as independent entities (entites independents) and the non-existence of phenomena, the law of causality, and so on.Such subjects are unlikely to be glorified by miraculous deeds!

Jean-Francois - So let's get back to this question: Is Buddhism a philosophy or a religion?Or philosophy and religion?What strikes me is that, by and large, Buddhism has a beloved image in the West, a respect it enjoys in the West that didn't start yesterday.What people see in Buddhism is always a purified doctrine that can be accepted by the critical spirit and Western rationalism, and at the same time add a moral and spiritual attribute to the critical spirit and Western rationalism.It is an attribute of intelligence, and even something more substantial, that is not at odds with those standards developed in the West since the age of what is called "Enlightenment Philosophy" and eighteenth-century rationalism, and modern The scientific spirit is incompatible.However, when people come to Asia, this pure image is severely tested.A person like me is astounded, I might even say thrilled, by the sheer amount of appearances in Buddhist practice.These appearances, I can only conclude that they belong to superstition, such as prayer banners, prayer wheels, belief in reincarnation (eeincarnation).For example, the day before yesterday in your monastery in Kathmandu, we saw the introduction of a three-year-old child who was recently "confirmed" as the reincarnation of your late master.

Mathieu - the reincarnation of Hyantse Rinpochen. Jean-François - when did he die? Mathieu - 1991. Jean-François - the child was born in...? Mathieu - 1993. Jean-François - OK! …Then, what procedures do people follow to decide that Rinpochen should be reborn in this child? Mathieu – In most religions the continuation of consciousness after death belongs to the teaching of tacit revelation.In Buddhism, it is believed that the mindfulness experience of some people is indeed extraordinary, but their number is enough to make people listen to their testimonies, and this has been the case since the Buddha.First, understand that what people call reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the transmigration of any "entity", and has nothing to do with metempsycose.The Buddhist concept of rebirth cannot be understood as long as one continues to reason in terms of substance and the like rather than in terms of 'fonction' or 'continuite'.It is said, "No thread passes through the pearls of the necklace of regeneration." It is not the identite of a "person" that passes through successive regenerations, but the regulation of the flow of consciousness.

Jean-François - Does reincarnation not exist in Buddhism?I always thought I understood that the transfer of the soul is a fundamental tenet of Buddhism.Shouldn't one attain what is called Nirvana, a state where one no longer has to be reborn into another being? Mathieu - Before clarifying the concept of "reincarnation without soul reincarnation", I want to answer your questions in order.You have just verified that Buddhism is understood in the West as an intellectually acceptable metaphysics.The main reason, I think, is that Buddhism addresses some of the fundamental concerns that concern all living beings (etre vivant), and that its most fundamental teachings are neither exoticized nor overwhelmed by the sort of cultural factors that might surprise you. influences.Buddhism analyzes and disassembles the mechanisms of happiness and suffering.Where does the pain come from?What is its cause?How to heal them?Gradually, through analysis and mindfulness, Buddhism traces back to those underlying causes of suffering.This is a study that interests everyone, Buddhist or not. ①That is, in the process of reincarnation, no soul is engaged in the act of reincarnation—that is, as mentioned above, although there is a string of pearls, there is no thread passing through the pearls. Jean-François - Please define what you call suffering. Mathieu – Suffering is a state of deep dissatisfaction, which is sometimes combined with physical pain, but which is first and foremost a spiritual experience.Obviously, different people feel the same things in opposite ways, either pleasurable or unpleasant.Suffering arises when the "I" we cherish and protect is threatened, or when it doesn't get what it wants.The most intense physical pains can be felt by us in very different ways depending on our mental state.Also, the usual goals of existence, such as power, possessions, sensual pleasures, fame, can bring some temporary satisfaction, but they are never a source of lasting satisfaction, and sooner or later they will turn into dissatisfaction (mecontentement).These temporary gratifications never lead to a lasting abundance, a peace of mind that cannot be harmed by external circumstances.If we spend our whole lives chasing worldly goals, we have as little chance of attaining a true happiness as a fisherman throwing his net into a dry river. Jean-François—In Epicureanism and Stoicism, there is such a saying, and these are the terms. Mathieu – This state of dissatisfaction is characteristic of the world of conditions (monde condtionne), which, by its very nature, offers only ephemeral satisfactions.In Buddhist parlance, one would say that the world or cycle of rebirth, samsara, is saturated with suffering.But this is by no means a pessimistic view of the world, just a validation.The next step is really to find a remedy for this pain.For this it is necessary to know the cause of suffering.First Buddhism concludes that suffering is born of desire, attachment, hatred, pride, jealousy, lack of discernment, and all that is called "negative" because it disturbs the human spirit and sinks it into a state of confusion and insecurity. and "blurring" psychological factors.These negative emotions are born of the idea of ​​an "I" that we cherish and want to defend at all costs.This attachment to the self is an action, but the object of this attachment, the "I," does not have any real existence, it does not exist anywhere or in any way as an independent and enduring entity.It exists neither in nor outside of the parts that make up the individual, namely, body and mind, nor in their aggregate.If one proposes that this ego corresponds to the union of these parts, it is tantamount to admitting that it is but a simple label affixed by the understanding to a provisional union of various interdependent constituents.In fact, the self does not exist in any of these components, and as soon as these components are separated from each other, the concept of self itself disappears.Not revealing the deceit of the self is ignorance, the temporary inability to recognize the true nature of things.It is this ignorance that is the ultimate cause of suffering.If we can dispel our misconceptions about ourselves and our trust in the solidity of phenomena, if we realize that this "I" has no existence of its own, why should we be afraid of not getting what we want, of accepting what we want? Unwanted stuff? Jean-François - This part of the analysis is common to Buddhism and much of Western philosophy.Common, we shall say, to the wisdom of antiquity.It is found that in France it was developed by Montaigne and later by Pascal with a will to justify Christianity. Mathieu—Perhaps it is precisely because of this initial simplicity of Buddhism that the Western world felt similar to its teaching and was able to dive into it at once. Jean-François - It seems to me that what lures some Western philosophers into Buddhism is the intention to achieve a certain serenite.I don't want to use the word "apathie" in its negative sense.To use a pedantic word, this is what some schools of psychology call ataraxie.Unmoved, according to the Stoics, is the unshakable state to which the philosopher should attain, that is, to be free from unexpected influences, good or bad, that arise in everyday reality. Mathieu - It is important not to confuse tranquility with indifference.One of the hallmarks of a firm spiritual practice is its insensitivity to external conditions, either favorable or unfavorable.People compare the spirit of a practitioner to a mountain that the wind cannot shake: it is neither tormented by difficulties nor ecstatic with success.But this inner equanimity is not indifference or indifference.With this equanimity comes a genuine inner ecstasy and a spiritual openness that brings an altruism that stands up to any test. Jean-François - This is the common factor of all wisdom.We even think we hear descriptions of the Stoics.Besides, the ideal of wisdom is to provide the philosopher's reader or listener with the secret of this wisdom, and it is not uncommon for Buddhism to gain some authority in the West precisely in a scientific age when all philosophies have abandoned this ideal. Surprising.But apart from this wealth common to all wisdom, the temptation of Buddhism seems to be to go a little further... It is the melting of the ego (moi) in an indetermination. Mathieu - not at all to be extinguished in an amorphous uncertainty, but to be soberly aware that this "I" has no existence of its own and is the source of all our evil.In this respect Buddhism offers a rich arsenal of methods for achieving the inner peace that comes from relaxing attachment to the self.One is not content to describe psychic events, but to transform them, to "liberate" them.Before I come to these methods, I would like to say a few words about the ego, about attachment to the ego.Attachment to self is the first expression of ignorance and the cause of disturbing emotions.Buddhism does offer a very detailed analysis of the concept of the ego, of the way people understand themselves as a "person" and external phenomena as some solid "entity."The real root of all these disturbing emotions is our understanding of our human body, our understanding of our "I" as a being that exists independently of itself in the stream of our thoughts or in our physical body. entity.But if this ego exists, where is it?in the flesh?in the heart?in the head?Is it scattered throughout the physical body?It is easy to see that this "I" does not exist in any part of the physical body. Jean-François - I feel like I'm back in the days when Western philosophers were thinking about where the soul rests in the body.Descartes placed the soul in the pineal gland, the pituitary gland.Is this question naive?A sense of self exists, although it does not have to reside in any part of the body for it. Mathieu - that's why the next step is to consider whether this "I" is present in our psyche, in our stream of consciousness.This stream can be broken down into past thoughts, present thoughts and future thoughts.This "I" cannot be the sum of all these moments, because the sum does not exist in any of these particular moments.The thought of the past is dead, it no longer exists.So how can the ego belong to what is mere memory?The future has not yet been born, so the ego cannot be in a future that does not exist.Only now is left.In order to exist, the "I" of this entity should have some definite characteristics.But it has neither color nor shape nor fixed place.The more people look for it, the more they can't find it!The ego is thus nothing but a label attached to an apparent continuity. Such a procedure enables one to lessen attachment to the concept of the "I," seen as an all-powerful entity that leads us to want that which is desirable and to reject that which is not.This sense of a separate "I" usually causes a break between "I" and "others."From this alternation of attraction and repulsion arise countless disturbing thoughts and emotions, which manifest themselves in words and deeds and cause us pain.Through direct experience, through analysis, especially through meditation, it is a very liberating process to discover that this "I" has no real existence.I think this type of analysis appears salutary to many Westerners, not to mention that it is followed by the incredible technology that enables one to act on thought so as not to be its slave.But we'll come back to that topic. Jean-François - Ho!I really want to learn more about these technologies... Mathieu - People theorize that there are eighty-four thousand ways of approaching (approches) or entering into Buddhism!This number means that practically everyone can start from where he is.To climb Mount Everest, one can start from the traffic jams on the outskirts of Paris, or from the verdant fields of Nepal: the goal is the same, but the form of travel is different.Likewise, on the spiritual path, each person sets sail from the point he or she is at, with one nature, some inner condition, one intellectual construct, some different belief...everyone can find a A "sur mesure" way that enables him to act on thought and free himself little by little from the pegs of disturbing emotions, and finally understand the ultimate nature of the spirit. ①The old name of Mount Everest by Westerners. Jean-François - Although the method is not everywhere the same, this feature is one of many features of a certain tradition in Western philosophy.How to impose a principle on one's own mind is one of the great themes of ancient philosophy.Modern philosophy has more ambitions to recognize the method of mental activity than to modify it. Mathieu - Buddhism combines the knowledge of the functioning of the mind - it has contributed some whole treatises on this - with the knowledge of the ultimate nature of the mind.This kind of realization has a liberating effect on being attached to "I".The fanning (eventail) for this purpose is effective and varied.An initial approach consists in using some antidote against disturbing emotions: people develop tolerance against anger, disengagement against desire, and analysis of causal mechanisms against lack of discrimination.Hatred can only breed hatred if people let their emotions go, say, hatred.Individual and national histories have well shown that hatred has never settled any disputes. Jean-François - it depends for whom... In the old game of violence and crime, there are unfortunately some winners.As for the removal of hatred, one finds it in the Gospel. Mathieu - that's right!From a spiritual perspective, it is interesting and normal to find such harmony with various Western traditions.But let's talk about hate again.For example, a man beat us with a club in a fit of rage.Nobody gets mad at sticks, that's obvious.Shall we be angry with those who wrong us?If one thinks about it, one finds that the man is burned with the torches of anger whose origin is ignorance.He had completely lost control of himself.In fact, this person is an object of sympathy, just like a patient, a slave.People really can't hate him.All in all, the real enemy is anger itself, for which no mercy is allowed. Jean-François—yes, but here, you kind of forget the practical side... It is possible that before you have time to make this glorious inference, the man beats you up and puts you in transition from birth to die!So…… Mathieu - Of course, the best way is to avoid confrontation, either by neutralizing the aggressor, or by running away from him, which does not exclude the use of all appropriate means and necessary force, but never with hate.In the deepest part of your heart, maintain an invincible compassion and an inexhaustible patience.This is not to passively put ourselves at the mercy of those who abuse us, nor is it to attempt to destroy them by force, as there will always be other attackers.It is to discover that the chief enemy, which should be struck without mercy, is the desire to injure others.This is what should be understood, and it is possible, to be understood by others. Jean-François - wait!You are about to unfold the entire Buddhist doctrine to me!I'm afraid this is going to be a little too long...we'll get to that later...but I sense you haven't answered my aversion to superstition. Mathieu - we'll talk about that now, but first allow me to finish the picture.The use of anti-toxins is a useful but limited method, since there are an infinite number of disturbing emotions, so that an equally infinite number of anti-toxins must be used against them.The second approach thus consists in striving to grasp the essence of ideas and to go back to their source itself.For example, a powerful hateful thought that we feel is very strong, like a knot in our chest, and mess up our behavior.But if we watch it carefully, we see that it wields no weapons, neither crushing us like a boulder nor burning us like fire.In fact, everything started with a tiny thought, which grew little by little until it was as big as a thundercloud.Summer clouds appear so large and solid from a distance that one could sit on them.But if people enter it, there is nothing, they cannot be touched.In the same way, when one looks at a thought and goes back to its source, one finds nothing palpable.At that very moment, the thought disappeared.This is what is called "liberating minds by contemplating them for what they are, by realizing their vacuum." A mind so "liberated" will not set off a chain reaction; it will be like a flying bird Like a bird in the sky, it disappears without leaving a trace. Jean-François - This optimistic vision belongs to a common tradition of reassuring wisdom. Mathieu - there should be no misunderstanding.Although it can appear so simple in the first contact, the liberation of the mind is not an optimistic illusion, nor is it some secret formula with neither foundation nor result.The techniques it uses are the result of a thousand-year-old "science of mindfulness" created at the expense of hours of hard work by monks every day for twenty or thirty years of their lives.Without taking the first few steps in the field of experience to see what is going on, some people will inevitably doubt all kinds of knowledge gained through less familiar methods.Each science has its own tools: without a telescope, one cannot see the craters on the moon; without the practice of mindfulness, one cannot see the essence of the spirit. Now, let's talk about your question about superstition and reincarnation.Buddhism speaks of a continuum of existence: everything is not limited to the present life.We have known other states of being before birth and will know other states of being after death.All this of course leads us to a fundamental question: Is there an immaterial consciousness separate from the physical body?We cannot talk about reincarnation without first analyzing the various relationships between the physical body and the spirit.Moreover, since Buddhism denies the existence of an individual "I," conceived as a separate entity capable of migrating from one state of existence to another, from one body to another, one follows Consider what connects these successive states of existence. Jean-François - this is incomprehensible. Mathieu – This is a continuum, a perpetually ongoing stream of consciousness, but without a fixed and independent entity passing through it. Jean-François - a chain of reincarnations without any identified entity regenerating?It's getting more and more obscure... Mathieu - We can compare this to a river without any boats flowing down it, or to the fire of a lamp which lights a second lamp which in turn lights a second Three lamps, and so on, until the end of this chain, whose flames are neither the same flame nor different flames. Jean-François - Simple Metaphors... Mathieu—We should therefore first analyze the modern and ancient notions of the relation between the mind and the body. Jean-François—yes, this, this is one of the great themes—…but I was just thinking about certain appearances, like the appearance of prayer flags.In the most purified religions, or those most free from superstition, prayer is something very personal.Therefore, the idea that some mechanical object that one makes to spin - a prayer wheel - or a flag that unravels bit by bit in the wind, is a substitute for prayer seems to me the lowest, the zero. pray!I don't see how a doctrine as perceptive as Buddhism can encourage such beliefs! Mathieu—Actually, these habits are far from superstition.They merely reflect the richness of the ways Buddhism employs to engage the mind incessantly.One uses all the elements of nature—the wind that billows a flag, the heat of a lamp that turns a prayer wheel, the rocks engraved with prayers, the rushing water that pulls the blade of another prayer wheel—as a reminder, So that every activity, every element of nature, everything that comes before our eyes, is an inspiration to inner prayer, to altruism.When a Tibetan printed these flags and let them flutter in the wind, he thought, "Wherever the wind that passes over these prayers blows, may the beings there be freed from suffering and May they be liberated from the cause of happiness, and may they know the cause of happiness and happiness.” He repeated the Voeu du bodhisattva. … Jean-François - bodhisattva, this is... Mathieu—this is a person who is walking towards the realm of Buddha and perfection for the happiness of others.His wish is not a self-centered wish.He is not thinking, "If only I could be delivered from suffering, from the turmoil of ordinary life, from the vicious circle of samsara." It is an altruistic vow that arises out of love for all beings (etres).痛苦的静观：“此刻我不能减轻众人的各种各样痛苦；但愿我能达到那种认识，以能够帮助他们将自己从痛苦的原因中解救出来。”人们就是这样利用一些外部支持，为的是我们所见所闻的一切帮助我们记牢这种利他主义的态度，且变为对思考的一种支持：大自然本身这时就成了一本教科书。一切都激励我们朝向精神实践。这也是不忘佛陀教导的一种非常合人情的方式。 让-弗朗索瓦——你是不是肯定，对于普通佛教徒而言，这种概念表示什么东西？他就不会极简单地认为经轮代替他祈祷？ 马蒂厄——我相信即使不是所有的西藏人都详细地认识教义和象征意义，他们使经轮转动并不是要使他们平常的心愿，也就是与健康、富有、成功有关的心愿得到实现。他们在精神上有积聚一种“功德”的观念。人们所说的功德是指一种有助于消除消极心理因素的积极心理因素。因此我相信，他们心中的主导思想是通过“功德的积累”来改善和净化他们思想的流，增强这种向认识延伸的积极的流。正是为了这个，人们匍匐在地，恭敬地围绕圣迹转圈和向寺院献贡灯火。 让-弗朗索瓦——在天主教义里，在教堂里点燃一支蜡烛包含着一种很迷信的想法，即这一支蜡烛能为我们求得一位圣徒的、童贞圣母的或者就是上帝的恩惠，以实现一个愿望。迷信正是到了如此地步，所以我们常常注意到一些既不是实践者甚至也不是信教者的人在造访教堂时献贡一支蜡烛。 马蒂厄——这些习惯是一些外部支持，它们有助于信教者将自己与一种内在真理连接起来。通过经验，我知道虔诚的西藏人在献贡成千的酥油灯——蜡烛的等同物——时，是意识到灯光象征着驱除暗昧的认识。一个虔诚的人在献贡这些灯时做的祈祷也许是：“愿认识的光在我心中也在所有人的心中出现，在这一生和在所有的来生中。”就是那些普通的人也意识到这种象征意义。当他们念诵曼陀罗（mantras）时也是如此。 让-弗朗索瓦——请给曼陀罗下个定义。 马蒂厄——从词源上说，“曼陀罗”（mantra）表示“保卫心灵者”，这并不是说抵御任何一种灾害，而是抵御心灵的不专注和混乱。一个曼陀罗是一句短的话语，人们重复它许多遍，打个比方，就像东正教徒们的心中祷告伴以对耶稣的名字的持久复述。这种重复念诵的技术在所有的精神传统中都有。 让-弗朗索瓦——这并不是它们精神性方面的最高的表象。 马蒂厄——为什么不？复述有助于平静心灵的表面活动，并使人能看到这个心灵的本质。 让-弗朗索瓦——我们姑且认为这样罢。但我们再回到灵魂迁徙的问题或者说是转世的问题上来。你举了一个没有船的河的例子……在这个想法里，我感到惊讶的首先是这个不具人格的河的概念，这条河由一个个体流通到另一个个体，而这些个体又可能是人或动物…… 马蒂厄——……或者还是别的形式…… 让-弗朗索瓦——或别的生命形式，而佛教实践的目的即是达到自我在涅槃中的解散；也就是说，如果我明白了的话，即精神因素的完全失去个性。那么，在这些条件下，人们又如何能够宣布说某个确定的个体——也就是一个高度特殊化的人格——在另外的某个特定的个体中再生或转世了？既然地球上有六十多亿的人，还有不知多少百亿的动物等等，因此便有同样多的河在流……要找出这条或那条河在先前的化身死亡之后流进的具体的、具有个性的临时构成状态，我觉得是一件全然不可能的事……除非求助于一些与神奇事迹同等的魔术的或主观的认同原则，而这些都不是很能令人信服的。 马蒂厄——在个人不被视为独立的实体的范围内，这些不同的河是不具有人格的。在这里转移的不是一个不连续的实体，而是功能的连续。这样一种实体本身并不存在，但一条特殊的意识之流不会因此就不具有一些自己独有的品质。河面没有漂浮的船，这并不妨碍这条河载满沉淀物，被造纸厂污染，或是清洁透明。河流在一个特定时刻的状态是其历史的画像和结果。同样，个体的意识的流载满了积极或消极思想的结果，以及从这些思想中产生的行动和言语在意识中留下的痕迹。精神实践的目的是渐渐地净化这条河。洁净的最终状态是人们所称的精神实现。一切消极的情绪，一切遮蔽认识的幕这时都分解了。并不是要消灭“我”，因为它从未真正地存在过，而仅仅是揭穿它的骗局。事实上，如果这个“我”具有一个固有的存在，人们永远也不能够使之从存在过渡到不存在。 让-弗朗索瓦——因此你想取消某种事物，它从出发点就是不存在的。 马蒂厄——人们不能“取消”一个不存在的自我，但人们能认识到它的不存在。我们想要取消一个幻象。错误是它并不存在。举个例子来说：当人在昏暗中看见一根杂色的绳子并将它当成一条蛇时，他有一种恐惧的感觉。他也许想要逃走，或用一根棍棒将蛇弄远。但如果有人点燃了灯火，他立即就看到这根本不是一条蛇。事实上，什么也没有发生：他没有“毁灭”蛇，因为它从来就不存在。人们只不过是驱除了一个幻象。只要“我”被理解为一个很真实的实体，人们就倾向于招引一切他认为是可爱的、有利的事物，并且排斥一切他认为是不可爱的或有害的事物。一旦人们认识到“我”没有任何真实的存在，所有这些招引和排斥便消失了，完全像把绳子当成蛇的恐惧的消失一样。“我”既不拥有起源亦不拥有终结，因此，它在当前除了心理赋予它的存在，再无别的存在。简而言之，涅槃不是一个熄灭，而是对事物的本质的最终认识。 让-弗朗索瓦——如果事情是这样，自我的这个幻象又是怎样并为什么构成的？ 马蒂厄——存在着一种对于自我、对我（je）的自然感觉，它使我们想：我冷，我饿，我走，等等。这种感觉就其本身而言是中性的。它并不特别地倾向幸福或是痛苦。但随后而来的是这种想法，即认为，我们的自我是一种“恒量”（constante），它不顾我们所经受的肉体上的和知识上的种种变化而在我们的一生中永久保持着。我们眷恋着这种对自我的观念，对我们的“人身”观念，我们想“我的”身体、“我的”名字、“我的”精神等等。佛教谈的是意识的一种延续，但否定在这个延续中有一个牢固的、持久的、独立的“我”存在。佛教实践的本质因此便是驱除这种认为有一个“我”的幻象。 让-弗朗索瓦——但我再来谈我的问题。人们怎样才能确认一些特殊的意识之流？ 马蒂厄——我们仍然举河的例子，可以设想，人们能够通过检查河流所运载的冲积物、矿物、植物等等的性质而在下游一百公里处，在第一个观察点，认出这条河。同样，如果某个人有着能够直接领会存在者的这些意识之流的能力，人们便认为他能够认识到一个特殊的意识之流的那些特征。因此，问题便是：既然这些意识之流是非物质的，人们能不能开发观察它们的才能？ 让-弗朗索瓦——此刻，对于我来说，你的解释加厚了这个谜，而不是驱散了它。 马蒂厄——我们正面对着一个方法论的问题。从科学的观点出发，人们会说，一个经验，如果能被其他的研究者重新制造出来，就是有价值的。前提是，所有的人都掌握着同样的研究方法。在体育运动领域，人们完全赞成在一系列的紧张训练之后，一些运动员发展了一些超常的品质。如果人们对一个从未听说过奥林匹克运动会的人说一个人能够跳两米四十公分的高度，他会叫喊说这是个纯粹的玩笑。现在，所有的人，甚至最无知的人，还包括那些像我一样只能跳一米十公分高的人，都能在电视里或在现实中，看见一个能跳两米四十公分的冠军。固然这是艰苦努力的成果，但当涉及到精神的训练时，要想认识到这种训练的结果，并承认人能够到达一种与运动员的肉体控制同样非凡的精神控制的程度，就更加困难。 让-弗朗索瓦——是的。可是所有的人都能证实一个运动员跳了两米四十公分高或是在不足十秒钟内跑了一百米。 马蒂厄——因为什么？因为他们看见这事！ 让-弗朗索瓦——是的。 马蒂厄——但如果这是看不见的，他们就只好通过训练自己来证实这事了，由一开始跳一米十公分，然后跳到一米八十公分，最后，如果他们有非凡的天赋，跳到两米四十公分。 让-弗朗索瓦——如果这事是不可见的，这也就等于是凭言语来相信这个冠军了。 马蒂厄——在科学的领域里，人们总是被引导凭言语来相信许许多多的发现和数学计算，而自己不必有丝毫的直接经验。人们接受它们的有效性，因为他知道有相当多可敬的学者已经独立地证实了这些假设并获得了同样的结果，别的学者如果愿意为此辛苦，也能证实它们。要想全凭自己得出这些结论，就必须投身于一段长时间的初学期。至于一种不是物理上可测量的，或可为视觉、听觉等感受的现象，人们可以或是通过一些间接的证明，承认其有效性，例如人们肯定烟的存在表示有火的存在，或是因为人们有一些牢固的理由以相信一个证据的有效性。在某些情况下，人们可以根据言语而相信某个人，而并不因此就显得盲目轻率。人们可以检查其完整性，并且，作为最后的帮助，人们可以自己投身于内心改造的道路。在亲身经验之外，我们还掌握有什么别的方法以估价对意识的诸多细微表象的认识呢？意识的本性既无形状，无质量，又无颜色，它不是可精确计量的。不依靠亲身经验等于就是先验地否定了能够产生一些超常品质的精神训练的一切可能，并将认识的领域限定在可见的或可测的世界里！这也就是主张真实的任何标准都必须是在一切时间、一切地点，并惟独是在物质的领域里，为所有的人能力所及。 让-弗朗索瓦——在你所作的这番推论里，有两个面。我们再来举与跳高作的比较，首先有这个事实，即如果人们不能看到运动员跳了两米四十公分高，他就不会相信这是可能的。其次，是这个事实，即相信一旦这个运动员消失了，跳两米四十公分高的能力将会出现在一个新生儿身上。人们可以通过一些特殊的方法将他挑选出来…… 马蒂厄——（笑笑）这当然不是我所要说的意义。跳高运动员的例子仅仅是表明，运动员的那些非凡才能被人们承认，是因为所有的人都能亲眼看到。 让-弗朗索瓦——但在精神的领域，人们也总是承认这一点的。人们总是承认，通过劳动、训练、练习，是可能发展一些智力（facultes intellectuelles）或一种超出一般的智性技巧。在不顾巨大的虚伪而宣称平均主义的现代教育中，人们不怎么赞成这点。人们知道得很清楚不是这么回事。人们知道得很清楚有一些在智能方面不寻常的人。人们也知道得很清楚这种不寻常的特点，如果不受到紧张训练和日常实践的培养，将是一事无成的。而且人们还知道得很清楚，即使是通过传授，它也不是能从一个个体转移到另一个个体的。 马蒂厄——我将要努力作同样的推论，然而，是在静观科学的方面，并不仅仅是在“智力商数”的方面。我想最终达到这样的事实，即从外部判断那些在其整整一生中发展了一些超常精神品质的人的意图，是非常困难的。要直接领会这些品质，就必须自己已发展了它们，这就意味着整个一生充满着对于精神的既分析又静观的劳动。另外，身体能力上的差别，就像在跳高的例子中所说的，是属于量的等级；而在精神的领域里，差别则是属于质的等级。西方对于静观科学几乎不感兴趣。在现代心理学的创建者之一威廉·詹姆斯的著作中，有一样东西使我震动。我记得他这样说：“我曾试图在一些时刻中使我的思想停止。显然这是不可能的。它们立刻又重新出现。”这种断言使成百的西藏隐修士发笑。他们用了多年以控制自己的精神后，能够在很长时间里处在一种不受心理联合（associations mentales）约束的觉醒状态中。 让-弗朗索瓦——威廉·詹姆斯是那位编造出词组“意识流”（stream of consciousness）的美国作家。事实上，当你对我说佛教隐修士已经能够停止他们思想的流时，谁证明它？对他们，不也必须凭言语来相信吗？ 马蒂厄——为什么不？这种能力没有任何不寻常的东西。即使是一些不怎么有天赋的人都能在他们多年的实践中产生这方面的体验，只要肯花力气就够了。并不是要堵塞思想，而仅仅是要停留在一种清醒在场的状态中，或者说是清澈的状态、意识的状态之中，推论的思想（pensees discursives）在这种状态中自己平静下来。 让-弗朗索瓦——在这里，“平静”的意思是什么？ 马蒂厄——这意思是说推论思想的轮停止转动，各种思想停止了无休止的相互束缚。 让-弗朗索瓦——那么，终究还是有一个思想、一些心理再现（representations）。 马蒂厄——有一个清醒的在场（presence）、一种清楚意识的状态，最通常是不受心理再现约束的。这不再是一个线状的思想，而是一种直接的认识。且看人们如何描述这样的训练。当人开始试图控制思想时，他感到最为困难。各种思想就如同从悬崖上落下的瀑布一样；人们甚至觉得这些思想比平常还要多——这并不是意味着真的有更多，而是说人们开始意识到它们的数目。接下来的阶段如同一条河，水流的通过有时迅疾，有时较为平缓。这个阶段对应于这样一种状态，在这种状态中，精神保持着平静，除非它被外部事件所刺激。终于，精神变得就像风平浪静天气时的一片海洋，推论思想的褶皱时不时地从其表面经过，但在深处，它从来也未被搅乱。人们因此而达到意识的一种状态，人们称此状态为“清澈的意识”，在这种状态中精神是彻底透明的，不会总是被推论思想所牵引。 让-弗朗索瓦——威廉·詹姆斯大概不会对这一点提出异议。我相信所有的心理学家和所有的哲学家一直就承认：在受控制的、被集中于一个确切客体的、被指导的思想的状态，与无纪律的思想的状态及不受指导的观念联合（associations didees）之间存在着区别，而不受指导的观念联合正是精神分析学家企图从其病人身上获得的观念联合。但这说的并不是意识的一种全然中断。 马蒂厄——当然不是意识的中断，然而是推论思想、观念联合的一种临时中止。 让-弗朗索瓦——这些思想和观念联合被什么所代替？ 马蒂厄——被一种处于纯洁状态的意识状态所代替。 让-弗朗索瓦——那么，这种清澈的意识有一个客体？ 马蒂厄——不，这是一种没有客体的纯清醒状态。通常，这个纯意识是与对一个客体的感知连接在一起的，因此我们认识不到它。它离我们近，但我们看不到它。我们只理解被其客体修饰了的意识。然而，通过任由概念、记忆和希望在精神的明亮的空虚中一边形成一边自行消亡，是有可能直接体验到这种纯粹的清醒在场的。首先，为了平静精神，人们锻炼自己进行所谓的在“一个惟一点”上集中心思，它以一个外部客体为支持，例如一尊佛像，或以一个内部的客体为支持，如一种如同同情一样的思想或一个已被形象化了的意象。但人们接着就到达了一种透明、明亮和清醒的清醒状态。在这状态之中主体和客体的二分法（dichotomie）不复存在。当一种思想时不时地突然出现在这个清醒在场当中时，它自行就解开了，不留任何痕迹，就像一只在天上不留任何飞行痕迹的乌一样。但是像威廉·詹姆斯所做的那样，试图在一些时间里、阻止思想的流，还是不够的。这要求一种能持续多年的个人锻炼。 与在山洞里和山中的隐修院里度过十七年隐居生活的我的精神导师赫延采仁波钦一样，有众多的哲人将自己的一生都贡献给静观。在他们之中，某些人达到了一种对精神的非凡控制。对他们的证据如何给予信任？间接地，通过判断他们个人的各个侧面来实现。我们要说，没有无火的烟。在这些大师中的某些人身边，我度过了二十年，他们断定存在着一种非物质的意识，并且认为感知另一个存在者的意识之流这样的事是可以设想的。这些人，我从来没有听见他们说谎，他们从没有欺骗过任何人，在他们身上我从没有发现丝毫对他人有害的思想、言语和行动。所以我觉得，合乎情理的是对他们给予信任，而不是下结论说他们在讲笑话。同样，在佛陀说死亡只是生命的一个阶段，意识在死亡之后依然延续时，我们并没有能力亲身感知这个意识，但是鉴于佛陀的一切可证实的言语和一切教导都像是真实的和合理的，因而更可能的是，他表达了真理而非相反的东西。佛陀的目的是为众生照路，而不是使他们迷路；是帮助他们离开自己的磨难，而不是将他们沉入磨难之中。 让-弗朗索瓦——不论你说什么，这是一个信任的问题，而不仅仅是一个验证。 马蒂厄——根据佛教，有三个标准许可人们将一种断定视为有效的：由直接经验所作的证实，不可否定的推断，以及值得信赖的证据。所以这里涉及的是第三类。但我们再来说说这些认出赫延采仁波钦那样一位已故哲人的意识之流的西藏师傅。这些来自沉思体验的确认使他们能够说已故师傅的意识之流在哪个存在者身上继续进行着，这完全就像人们能够说，阿西兹的圣弗朗索瓦的精神影响在这个或那个儿童身上继续进行着，如果这种事也存在于基督教中的话。 让-弗朗索瓦——是的，但我认识一些教士或一些俗人，他们有着你刚刚描述的所有道德品质，但他们相信卢尔德的奇迹或是在葡萄牙的法蒂玛的圣母显灵①，而我将这一切都视为纯粹的魔术幻影。有的人完全能够既彻底诚实或从不想要欺骗任何人，但又给自己制造幻象。 ①卢尔德为法国上比利牛斯省之首府，一八五八年，一个农村女孩贝尔纳代特·苏比卢讲述自己多次看见童贞圣母在马萨比耶尔山洞现形。此后，该山洞即成为著名朝圣地。法蒂玛为葡萄牙埃斯特莱马杜尔省的城市，一九一七年，三个牧童宣称看见圣母在伊利亚洞（Cova di Iria）上方向他们现形。此地后来也成为常被造访的朝圣地。 马蒂厄——在我向你谈到的这种事中，并不涉及奇迹事件，而是涉及众多大师在数个世纪里经受的内在体验：这是有区别的。 让-弗朗索瓦——啊，不……某个硬说见证了卢尔德的奇迹的人，这就不是一个解释的问题！他坚信自己是面对一个事实。再说，他完全能够有着最大的忠诚、最伟大的道德品质，并且决不想要欺骗你。 马蒂厄——但我们再来说说赫延采仁波钦的确切事情。他最近的弟子和同伴之一，生活在离加德满都二百公里的山中的一位精神大师，给我们寄了一封信，说在一连串的梦和清楚地出现在他精神中的幻象里，他接受到了一些有关赫延采仁波钦的转世灵童父母的名字和我们应去寻找灵童的地点的确切指点。 让-弗朗索瓦——那么人们有证据表明他不可能知道那新生儿的双亲的名字，而他又完全准确地说出了他们名字吗？ 马蒂厄——他没有任何理由知道那位父亲和那位母亲的名字。事实上，那男孩的父亲自己是个喇嘛，人们只知道他的职衔。在西藏人居住的地区，没有人用他或他妻子的姓氏来称呼他们。至于这些名字的准确性，当这封信被送达我们寺院的主持时，我就在场，并巳我就是第一批读信的人之一。应当明白，我说到的这位师傅当时是在找寻他自己的师傅，也就是这个世界上他最尊敬的人的转世化身。其目的不是找到一个随便什么代替者以占据寺院的首席，而是要确认出一位哲人的精神延续，希望这位后来者将获得某些使他能够像他的前任一样去帮助所有存在者的品质。 让-弗朗索瓦——那么，作为对这番有关弄清佛教是宗教还是哲学的谈话的总结，我要说，你刚刚作的描述并不能够让人分辨清楚。两者都有一点，即确实有一个信仰的因素在其中。因为即使人们同意你刚给予的解释——而对我来说，它们并没有说服我——依然还是存在一个信仰的因素，一个对于某些个体及对他们的证据的现成信任的因素。你应该承认，这不属于理性证明的范围。 马蒂厄——确实如此，但这并不是一种盲信，并且我觉得接受教条式的断定远比接受一些基于精神体验和精神实现的证据要困难得多。 让-弗朗索瓦——啊！这个，确实是的！ 马蒂厄——事实上，在日常生活中，我们不停地深受着种种思想和信仰的影响，我们将它们当成真实的，这是因为我们承认教我们的那些人的技能——他们懂得这些，这行得通，因此这应该是真实的。信任由此而来。但我们中的绝大多数人应该说都不具备能力以亲自证明科学真理。往往是这些信仰，如将原子设想为一颗围绕原子核并沿轨道运行的微小的固体粒子这种信仰，在科学家们自己抛弃它们之后很久，还在继续深深地影响人们的头脑。我们乐于相信别人对我们说的话，只要这东西与已被人们接受的一种看法相符就行，而将不符合这个看法的一切都视为可疑的。在静观接近这种事情中，许许多多的与我们同时代的人对于精神真理抱有疑问，其原因就是他们没有将这些真理用于实践。许多事物，在人们明白了它们如何发生，或是在人们体验过它们之前，就是这样被认为是超自然的。正如西塞罗所说：“不能发生的东西从来也没有发生过，能够发生的东西就不是奇迹。” 让-弗朗索瓦——但我还要谈谈这个事实，即在你刚谈过的那些事件中，有一种非理性信仰（foi irrationnelle）的因素。 马蒂厄——说“一种信任的因素”也许更正确，这种信任是建立在许多可观察的因素的基础上的。在这些大师身边生活了多年之后，我从他们那里得到的最大的教育之一，就是他们与他们所教的东西是完全一致的。你曾向我提及某些教士的神奇经验。在基督教中固然曾有一些像阿西兹的圣弗朗索瓦这样非常伟大的哲人，但我不认为每个教士、每个司铎，即使他们是诚实正直的实践者，都达到了精神完善。在西藏，百分之二十的人口是在修会里，而就在所有这些实践者中，这个世纪以来，也只有大约三十个哲人据说是达到了这种精神完善！正是通过总体上判断他们的存在，人们才得出结论，即这些哲人，在提供有助于人们认出一位精神继承者的指导时，知道自己说的是什么。他们为什么要骗人？他们绝大多数人像隐修士一样生活，既不求说服任何人，也不求表现自己。再说，为了显示佛教惩罚欺骗达到何等地步，我要补充说，违背寺院规矩的四个重大过失之一即是自称已达到了一个高级的精神水准，不管是哪一种。而在那个新生儿童身上认出了赫延采仁波钦的哲人恰好就是寺院法规的最堪为榜样的执掌者之一。他任命过成千个和尚，如果他自己破坏了他的誓愿，他就不能够授予人这些职位。因此人们有理由认为，他是由于对事业的完全认识和完全诚实，才公开他的想像，为的是再找到他自己的精神师傅。 让-弗朗索瓦——我不怀疑他的诚实！我揭露自动说服（auto－conviction）的现象。这种现象为人所熟知，并且存在于别的许多领域中。许多人自动说服自己相信了极权主义的有效性，而且常常是绝无私利的。如果那些巨大的极权制度——我根本没有将佛教与它们相比，佛教是完全相反，我仅仅是从自动说服的角度上说的……如果那些巨大的极权制度只是被一些白痴和坏蛋保卫着，它们就坚持不了五分钟！悲剧是，一些有着高级知识的人，一些非常伟大的学者，如弗雷德里克·约里奥—居里或者甚至是阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦，在第二次世界大战之后，成了极权主义的同路人。别的忠诚于极权主义的人，为它牺牲了自己的生命，放弃他们自己的幸福和私人的感情。所以说，一个相信某一事物的人，他的绝对诚实从来就不构成一个确凿证据。这个验证使佛教的一个方面保持了完好，而佛教对于代表着一种西方理性主义传统的我而言，仍然是属于不可证实的宗教信仰，而不是属于哲学、属于理性智慧。 马蒂厄——我相信，在我们接下来的谈话中，当我们谈到肉体与精神的关系时，相当多的要点将为我提供证据，我希望如此。 让-弗朗索瓦——这也正是我希望的。