Chapter 7 Action to the world and action to the self

Jean-François - I as a non-believer, if I do understand, according to Buddhism, the whole inner trame of our daily life is suffering, and in order to free us from suffering, It is necessary to get rid of this false sense that we are a substantial enduring entity, a self separate from the world and continuous in time.This illusory self is the root of greed, desire, ambition, jealousy, these factors cause our suffering.Liberation, then, consists in becoming aware of the illusory nature of the self.It follows from this very brief generalization that Buddhism is the exact opposite of a dominant tendency in the West.Although in the West, there are many philosophers, moralists, and religious leaders who often proclaim the beneficial effects of illusion, detachment, and temperance of the will to power, the general trend of Western thought is still around the two An essential and complementary axis is established.The first axis is the attainment of personal independence and individuality (indvidualite), personal judgment and the strengthening of the will as a conscious actor and decision-making center.The second axis is the action on the world.The West is a civilization of action. It acts on human history through the mediation of political art, and acts on the world through the mediation of the understanding of natural laws. It firmly believes that it can transform the world in this way and make the world obey the needs of people.I feel this is in conflict with the Buddhist ideal of preaching non-attachment.Is there not a utterly insurmountable opposition between these two attitudes?

Mathieu - First of all, when you mention that the inner connection of daily life is suffering, it should be said that the truth of suffering (the truth of suffering) stated by Buddha in his original sermon is a relative truth, not a description of things because the spiritually realized man enjoys a constant bliss and perceives the infinite purity of phenomena: all causes of suffering disappear in him.So why such an emphasis on pain?This is to realize, for the first time, the imperfection of the conditioned world.In a world of ignorance, pain is layered on top of one another: when one of our loved ones dies, another dies a few weeks later.Momentary pleasure turns to excruciating pain: We head out for a fun family picnic, but our child gets bitten by a snake.Reflection on pain is bound to motivate us to embark on the road of understanding.It is often said that Buddhism is a philosophy of suffering, when in fact, the further one goes along this path, the more this perception of suffering gives way to a happiness that pervades our entire being.Buddhism is the opposite of pessimism and insensitivity because, once suffering is identified, Buddhism clearly looks for its cause and works to heal it.The practitioner sees himself as a patient, Buddha as a doctor, his teachings as therapy, and spiritual practice as a healing process.

Jean-François - If Buddhism is a means of escaping suffering, wouldn't the West consider another way of doing so, which is to transform the external world and human society. Mathieu - There is a limit to the transformation of the external world, and there is a limit to what these external transformations can do to our inner well-being.The improvement or deterioration of external conditions, material conditions, certainly greatly affects our happiness, but in the end, we are not machines, happiness or misfortune is the spirit. Jean-François - Does Buddhism preach inaction towards the world?

Mathieu—not at all, but it holds that willing to act on the world without transforming itself can lead to neither a lasting nor a profound happiness in doing so.We may say that action towards the world is desirable, but inner transformation is indispensable. As for the enhancement of individuality that is encouraged in the West, it is indeed in opposition to Buddhism's desire to expose the "deception of the self" that appears so powerful and causes us so much pain despite having no existence of its own.At the outset, however, this sense of "I" must be stabilized in order to outline all its characteristics.For this we can say that in order to realize that the self does not exist, there must first be precisely a self.A person with an unstable, fragmented, elusive personality has little chance of being able to identify this sense of "I" in order to realize, in the second stage, that this feeling does not correspond to any real entity.So one has to start with a healthy, attuned "I" in order to be able to analyze it.We can shoot arrows at a target, but not at fog.

Jean-François - but here is an easy stage.Is it, as you say, that the ultimate goal is not to realize that the ego is a deception? Mathieu—yes, but one should not think that once the deception of the ego is exposed, one is in an inner nothingness, so that the destruction of individuality renders us neither able to act nor to communicate!People don't turn into an empty box.On the contrary, no longer at the mercy of an imaginary tyrant like Plato's shadow in the cave, our wisdom, our love for others, and our compassion can express themselves freely.The aim is liberation from the constraints imposed by attachment to the "I," not a paralysis of the will at all. This opening of the "eye of wisdom" increases the strength of our soul, our industry, and our ability to act justly and altruistically.

Jean-François—This "worship of me," as Maurice Barres puts it, this worship of egoism, is an end opposed to Buddhism.Western civilization, on the contrary, attaches great importance and high value to strong individuality.In all fields it is a few distinguished individuals who have stamped their stamp on particular epochs of Western civilization.In a classic work, The Culture of the Italian Renaissance, published in 1860, the German-speaking Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt described the Italian Renaissance in this way— —which is rightly regarded as a very great moment of Western civilization-attributable to men of strong character, whether cultured monarchs like Frederick of Urban, or Leonardo A genius artist like Da Vinci.If Burckhardt influenced Nietzsche, it was not by chance.Likewise, among the icons of the West, at their best and at their worst, there are heroes of action.The great Alexander, Julius Caesar, Christopher Columbus, Napoleon I, are all more admired than Saint François of Assisi.Of course, people also admire those great philosophers, great artists, and great writers, but there is a kind of reward for practitioners, people who change the world, and organizers who reform society.I feel that in this tone there is something in contrast to the spirit of Buddhism.And today, when the two modes of feeling meet again, what can we expect from this contrast, given the fundamentally different orientations of the two mental outlooks?

①French writer and political activist, author of "The Worship of Self" and other books. ②The Duke of Urbino, Federico da Montefeltro, was born in 1442 and died in 1482. Mathieu - Merely having a strong personality, if we understand personality as an intensification of the ego, unfortunately seems to me a very questionable criterion of success.Hitler had a very strong personality! Jean-François - alas, yes! Mathieu - So, a decision that is irreversible, impossible to suppress, is not a positive quality in itself.Everything depends on the motives driving the decision. Jean-François - this is a very valuable rebuttal!

Mathieu - Strong individuality should not be confused with the power of the soul.The philosophers I have met had an untamable psychic force, and we might say that they had a personality that was very impressive, and that they radiated a personality that would be appreciated by all who met them. Perceive the radiance of the forces of nature.But the big difference is that it is impossible to discern the slightest trace of the ego in it, and I am talking here of the ego that inspires egoism and egocentrism.Their soul strength comes from an awareness, a tranquility, an inner freedom, all expressed outwardly through an unshakable firmness.

Jean-François—Of course, but there are two sides to this desire for action inherent in Western thought.One is the aspect of death, which did produce Hitler, Stalin; the other is the aspect of life, which produced Einstein, Mozart, Palladio, Tolstoy or Matisse.This latter class gives truth and beauty to the world.The common feature, however, is that the vast majority of Western thinkers always have, to some extent, the desire to make their ideas come true in action.In it Plato created a constitution because he wanted to reform society.Descartes said that human beings should make themselves "masters and owners of nature".Rousseau created the concept of the social contract.Karl Marx founded praxis, the expression of thought in action, because action is the highest standard of truth for a doctrine.So, let me come back to my question.Buddhism conceives of living in the world as a prison from which one should emerge by breaking out of the cycle of rebirth.On the contrary, for Westerners, people are alleviating human suffering by transforming the world and reforming society.Is there an insurmountable contrast here?

①That is, Andrea di Pietro dalla Gondola, an architect in the late Italian Renaissance, who was born in 1508 and died in 1580.He designed a large number of buildings throughout his life, which had a very important influence on the architectural theory of later generations. His style deeply influenced the design of churches, theaters, palaces, and villas.It is regarded as a master of the synthesis of Greek and Roman classical architectural art.Author of "Four Books on Architecture". ② German: practice. Mathieu - If a prisoner wants to free his fellow prisoner, he must first break his own chains.This is the only way.We must gain strength to act rightly.An artist should begin by discovering his artistic roots, gaining mastery, developing his inspiration and being able to project it out into the world.The philosopher's steps are similar, even if the purpose is not the same.The spiritual path begins with a period of withdrawal from the world, like a wounded deer seeking a secluded and quiet place to heal its wounds.And here, those wounds are the wounds of ignorance.To help beings prematurely is to cut the wheat while it is still like grass, like a deaf musician playing a beautiful piece of music that he cannot hear.To be able to help living beings, there must be no distinction between what one teaches and one's own being.A novice practitioner feels a great desire to help others, but usually does not have the mental maturity to do so.Yet when there is a will, there is a path, and the power of this altruistic desire will one day bring its fruit.Miralaipa, one of the greatest hermits in Tibet, once said that for twelve years he lived a solitary hermit life in a cave, not a single moment of contemplation, not a single prayer he did not contribute to all living beings happiness.

Jean-François - No doubt about it, but this altruism is more understanding than action. Mathieu, the great philosophers of Tibet, had a huge influence not only on their disciples, but also on the whole society.Their powerful personalities are perceived in an entirely positive way by those who live around them.If I refer to the sage with whom I lived the longest, Hyyntser Rinpochen, who spent almost nineteen years of his youth in solitary retreat, visiting his spiritual master only occasionally.Then, when he was thirty-five years old, his master said to him, "Now is the time to convey this knowledge and this experience to others." Tired of teaching until death.Hyentse Rinpochen would not wait for daylight to get up and spend hours in prayer and meditation.It was nearly eight o'clock in the morning when he stopped his retreat to receive a large number of visitors, who had gathered outside his door.Depending on their needs, he gives them spiritual guidance, actionable advice, some teachings, or just a word of blessing.Sometimes for months on end, he taught all day long, either to a dozen or thirteen people or to thousands.Even after such a very fulfilling day, he answered personal requests and taught a person or a small group until late at night.He does not deny any request.Such a person has a very strong influence on the society that surrounds him.He is even the center of society. Jean-François—this attitude is, in any case, incompatible with the attitude of Western scholars and even with that of Western artists.The actions of Western scholars and artists are not limited to teaching others what they understand!What distinguishes the artist in the West is not the belief that the self is a phantom, a deception, but precisely that the artist is uniquely creative precisely because his self is a unique so that this creativity of his is capable of inventing in literature, in painting, in music, things that no one else, even in his position, could have conceived.So, if you agree, in the West, everything converges on two clear goals: the first goal, to increase self-value as much as possible, which is contrary to the teaching of Buddhism, because this value-added in the West is not a simple stage designed to subsequently transmit a knowledge to others.The second goal is to use the discoveries of this inventive ingenuity in political, economic, artistic or cognitive action, and to apply these discoveries to reality.I think this is a fundamental difference in positioning. Mathieu - In Buddhism, self-enhancement corresponds to making the best possible use of the extraordinary potential provided by human life; and self-creativity is the use of all necessary means to achieve awareness.On the contrary, a self-obsessed self whose added value pushes the individual to want desperately to invent something peculiar, to do something different, is seen as a childish exercise.This is especially true in the realm of thought.As for adding value beyond the self's original state, it is to put your hand in the fire and hope it will be cool.Dispelling the psychological attachment to the reality of the self is necessarily accompanied by a destruction, but what is destroyed is pride, vanity, obsession, irritability, hostility.This dispelling allows kindness, humility, and altruism to flourish freely.By ceasing to cherish and protect the self, one gains a wider and deeper view of the world.It is said that the philosopher is like a fish swimming with eyes wide open; he moves through the world of phenomena with eyes wide open and knowing.Attachment to the self leads people to be self-centered, to value themselves more than others, to respond solely based on whether this self likes or dislikes, and to create a "reputation" for themselves.Such an attitude greatly limits the scope of our actions.A man freed from self-centered feelings, his action towards the world is very expansive.You have said that the help of these philosophers is limited to teaching, but this teaching is the cure of various causes of suffering.Therefore, it is more basic than those material remedies, which can only relieve temporary manifestations of suffering!But this does not exclude other courses of action.In Tibetan civilization, architecture, painting, and literature have an unusual prosperity!For example, Heyentse Rinpochen wrote twenty-five volumes of poems, a treatise on contemplative living, and a book of the lives of saints.When he ordered our monastery to be built in Nepal, he was surrounded by nearly fifty artists—painters, sculptors, goldsmiths, tailors, and so on. Jean-François - Attention!I think there is a misunderstanding among us about what people call "action on the world".You describe the influence a philosopher can have over his fellow man.But let's be specific.When I say that the West is a civilization of action, what I think of is the transformation of the world through the understanding of the laws of the world.I think of technological inventions, the invention of the steam engine, the use of electricity, the invention of the telescope, the microscope, the use of nuclear energy for good and for bad.This is both the atomic bomb and the electricity generated from the nuclear.It all comes from the West.So, when one speaks of actions upon the world, one does not mean merely a spiritual influence upon one's own kind, but a real transformation of the physicality itself which surrounds our universe, which would have been utterly unimaginable five centuries ago. Appliances, the creation of tools that fundamentally changed human existence.If I understand correctly, for Buddhism, this kind of action towards the world is ultimately superfluous?It never developed such an action anyway. Mathieu - Let me repeat an idiom I have already quoted, that the efficacy of the West is a great contribution to a small need. Jean-François - Little Needs!This sentence is too fast! Mathieu - In a way, yes.The happiness that comes from improved living conditions resulting from technological progress should not be ignored.Nay, everything that contributes to human happiness is welcome.But experience has shown that such advances solve only minor problems—moving faster, seeing farther, climbing higher, descending lower, and so on. Jean-François - and living longer, curing more diseases... let's take another concrete example.From 1900 to today, in the country adjacent to where we are now—India, the average life expectancy has changed from 29 to 53!Clearly, then, we may say that if a man is so unfortunate that he has no interest in living long, in which case it would be better for him to die at twenty-nine than at fifty-three !And for the man who enjoys the benefits of these scientific discoveries, his life is both longer and more bearable.This introduces a property that was not present in ancient philosophy.Not getting sick, not dying at the age of twenty-nine, this is also a way to escape pain!In the West, the concept of happiness includes, among other things, the prolongation of human life, the ability to alleviate illness more effectively, the ability to travel fifty kilometers without having to walk in mud for two days, and other such smaller aspects of my life, such as not dying of appendicitis at the age of ten, which would probably be my case were it not for the invention of modern surgery and modern aseptic methods.If this Western form of happiness is of no use, why is it so fanatically imitated and adopted by the East? Mathieu - The path of justice is often the path of the middle.Let us live a long life by the progress of medicine, and make proper use of this long life by virtue of spiritual values!The question is not to belittle the importance of material progress that can help alleviate suffering!The East is grateful to the West for the advancement of medicine and the increased duration of life; something that all people in the world can benefit from.On the other hand, a civilization which turns almost exclusively to this kind of action towards the world is manifestly lacking something essential which material progress cannot bring about, since this is not its mission.The proof is that this lack Western society feels and pursues with a sometimes clumsy frenzy all forms of wisdom borrowed from the East or from the past.This lack is evident in the turmoil into which so many minds are thrown, in the violence that dominates cities, in the egoism that governs human relationships, in those who live alone in retirement apartments. In the sad resignation of the elderly who end their lives, appears in the despair of those who commit suicide.If spiritual values ​​cease to enlighten the society, material progress becomes a façade to cover the useless emptiness of life.To live longer is, of course, to enjoy an increased chance of giving meaning to existence, but if this chance is neglected because of the mere desire for a long and comfortable life, the value of human existence becomes utterly unnatural .There have been some tremendous advances in the study of the aging process at the cellular level.One can now double the life span of nematodes and flies in the laboratory.So, if one day, people can double or even triple the life span of human beings, it is not inconceivable.This prospect underscores the need to give life a meaning.Otherwise, it is possible for people to live two hundred years in depression or three hundred years in bad mood.Again, the destructive aspects of technological progress have been developed as fully as their beneficial aspects, and in some cases, as in pollution, have even outstripped the beneficial aspects. Jean-François - Clearly, industrial civilization, born out of a technocratic society, is a huge factor in pollution.But at the same time, we are creating anti-toxins against this pollution that could not have been conceived in the past.Because it is now, in industrial society, that people struggle most with pollution.This has even become one of the main industries of industrial society! Mathieu—fragile consolation! Jean-François - and it is precisely the underdeveloped societies that protest against implementing environmental protection measures that they claim hinder their development. Mathieu – Unfortunately, they are not capable of protecting the environment.They are caught between a savage industrial development and the inability to temporarily alleviate its side effects.In India and Nepal, people have to fix a car or truck that emits horrible smoke for a full two decades before they can afford to buy a new one. Jean-François - But let me come to a more fundamental point.I fully subscribe to all the criticisms one can make of the negative aspects of technical civilization.What's more, in the West, this kind of criticism has been put forward by many writers from Jean-Jacques Rousseau to Aldous Huxley, and it is also called the spirit of May 1968 in Europe or the sixties. The "counter culture" of the United States in the 1990s was proposed.I may also mention an unjustly underrated thinker in Europe, Jacques Ellul, whose "Technology or the Stake of the Century" was a huge success in the United States in the 1960s. For The Technological Society.He expresses those critiques you just raised.But the question I want to ask you, who have both Eastern and Western cultures, is: at the moment when Buddhism spread to the West, can we roughly draw the main line of a compromise, in which, Will the East absorb some of the West's values ​​and vice versa? ①British poet, journalist and novelist, born in England in 1894 and born in Los Angeles, USA in 1963, is the grandson of naturalist Thomas Huxley. Mathieu - There is no need to work out a "compromise" which means that both parties give up some of their own values, instead of taking advantage of all that is good in material progress while keeping everything in its right place.Who doesn't want the advancement of medicine and healthcare?This shared interest represents what I just spoke of as the "compromise path" that Buddhism has always agreed with.A doctor, say, who, by learning more and more about the Buddhist principles of altruism, will only delve into the meaning of his mission.However, one should not fall into such extremes that all energies are directed in the sole direction of material progress.The West has somewhat allowed itself to take this gamble.Its pursuit of material comfort and wealth is excessive.A Tibetan proverb says: "When a person has one of two things, he thinks he has both. This is opening the door for the devil." Actions rather than actions against the outside world come first. There is an interesting example of this choice.In the nineteenth century, there lived a Tibetan Leonardo da Vinci, a philosopher named Lama Mipan.In his notes one finds plans for flying machines and all kinds of exotic inventions.However, he burned most of his sketches, explaining that instead of devoting his life to inventing machines and getting bogged down in a lot of external busyness, he should devote himself to inner transformation.It is true that for two centuries the West has devoted most of its efforts to inventing technologies for harnessing and dominating the forces of nature.People have been able to go to the moon and have greatly increased life expectancy.At the same time, and throughout the past centuries, Tibetan civilization has been devoted to contemplative living, to developing a very practical understanding of the ways of mental functioning and ways of getting rid of suffering. While the West produces antibiotics that save human life, Tibet works to give existence a meaning.The ideal of medicine is to enable everyone to live with all teeth intact for a hundred years or even longer!The purpose of the spiritual path is to remove all traces of pride, jealousy, hatred, greed, etc. in the stream of consciousness, and to become a person who does no harm to others.Our Western society has ceased to focus on this pursuit, it feels it is beyond its reach.Why don't we combine both approaches?There is nothing against a philosopher taking advantage of medicine or flying an airplane, but he would never place these conveniences on the same level as spiritual pursuits.We can connect the spiritual and temporal things intellectually and positively, while always being aware of their respective importance. Jean-François – So, you feel that it is possible to have a synthesis, not just a mutual tolerance.You think the Buddhists in the west, or the Tibetans, the Japanese, the Vietnamese, etc. who immigrated to the west, might not just be a respected tribe that's a little bit different, but help people transform from the inside- —albeit slowly and imperceptibly—the ideas and manifestations of Western society, which does not abandon the main track it has followed for two and a half millennia? Mathieu - why not?All of course depended on the interest shown by the West in Buddhist principles.It is Buddhist thought that can help fill a gap, not Buddhist culture.The Western world doesn't need five-meter Tibetan horns, no matter how exotic they may be.In contrast, the search for knowledge, which eradicates suffering, is relevant to any living being. Jean-François – you mean that one is not forced to accept the cultural environment in which Buddhism was born and developed in the East just to be a Buddhist? Mathieu - What I mean is: the essence of Buddhism is not "Buddhist", it is all-encompassing, because it deals with those basic functions of the human spirit.Buddhism holds that each person should start from where he is and use a method corresponding to his nature and personal abilities.This variability, this rich possibility may be beneficial to the West, and Buddhism does not abandon its basic value because of this, nor is it to adapt Buddhist teachings, but to enable people to understand the essence of Buddhism, which is fundamentally There's no need to be adapted as it fits into those deepest anxieties of everyone, everywhere. Jean-François - Then you think that the interest in Buddhism in the West will be stronger than a fad, and the fad will rush to the limit very quickly.In your view, it has a kind of coexistence with the general attitude of the West towards existence. Mathieu - I think that, unlike a fashion, it recognizes a particularly sober expression of the problems of existence.Buddhism is compatible with everyone's inner desires, and this is the general attitude of prioritizing "having" over "being", which is not very healthy in Buddhism's view, but Buddhism can help to change it.It is therefore crucial to rebuild a ladder of values ​​that gives priority to the search for inner happiness. Jean-François - Another question must be considered, a less extensive one: this is the question of Buddhism versus Western religions in the "territory" of various Western religions, which in fact also It is Christianity which is divided into many variants, including Orthodox Church. If one day some Orthodox countries also come into contact with Buddhism. Mathieu - In the former Soviet Union, there was such a contact a long time ago, where Buddhist Buryats and Mongols lived side by side with Orthodox Russians. ①A branch of the Mongolian ethnic group on the shore of Lake Baikal in Siberia, whose population is distributed in the Mongolian People's Republic and the Buryati Autonomous Republic of the Russian Federation in the Soviet Union at that time. Jean-François – and Judaism and Islam, because now, Islam is kind of a Western religion.In France, for example, Islam is the second largest religion in the country.There are more Muslims than Protestants and Jews.Personally, I ask this question with complete detachment, because, although born into a Catholic family, I am not a believer at all.I ask this question, first of all, inspired by a kind of cultural curiosity.Western religions recognize a physical soul, the former who can aspire to immortality in another world, and a God, to whom prayers are sent to intervene in this life and accept us in the next.Buddhism, on the contrary, recognizes neither the material soul nor God.That being the case, is there a danger of conflict, or at least a rivalry, between Buddhist currents and representatives of these established religions? Mathieu - There is no reason for such competition.To make a sound, you have to clap with two hands!So if, on the one hand, people do not want to enter into competition, on the other hand, competition stops by itself. Jean-François - not quite.Some of these companions will respond as competitors and will be uncomfortable with your influence, even if you don't want it to spread. Mathieu - everything depends on the openness of their spirit.Buddhism does not try to convert anyone.The fact that more and more Westerners feel an affinity for Buddhism may irritate some, but the danger of conflict is minimal, because Buddhism has always taken care to avoid all discord, all friction, and to promote mutual respect .I had the honor of entering the Abbey of Great Chartreuse.We are told that since the foundation of the abbey in the eleventh century not more than twenty persons, apart from monks, have been admitted to the abbey. ① Chartres is more than 100 kilometers southwest of Paris. It is the first place in Europe to resume the study of Plato and Aristotle's philosophy.Theologians began to create "Scholastic Philosophy" here in the eleventh century, and in the twelfth century formed the famous Chartres school with the dominant idea of ​​"religious power is higher than royal power". I said to a lama who was going to Grenoble to meet the scientific community and to give a lecture at the university, as we sat on the high-speed train to Grenoble, the Behind the mountain, there are some monks living a hermit life in tranquility.This aroused his interest at once, and he asked the mayor of Grenoble if he could see the monks.A messenger was sent to the Grand Chartreux monastery, to which the abbot replied that he would be happy to meet the lama, if not for some publicity motive.To avoid journalists, the mayor of Grenoble pretended to arrange a lunch for the lama at his estate; however, instead of going to his house, we boarded a helicopter that took us— - the lama, one of his monks and myself as interpreter - placed in the mountains, a few hundred meters from Chartres. The abbot and a monk were waiting for us at the door.For an hour that passed quickly, we talked in a small room.The topic of the talk was all about contemplative life, about the way monks do hermitage, what prayer times do they have in Chartres and in Tibet, what do people do when a monk dies, how prayer turns into pure contemplation, etc. Wait.They found that the patterns of monastic life on both sides were very similar.院长神父甚至开玩笑说：“要么就是基督教静修士与西藏静修士在一千年前就有了接触，要么就是他们从天上接受了同样的祝福！”这是一场既愉快又有启发意义的会见。他们说着同一种语言，也就是静观生活的语言。随后，这位喇嘛问我们是不是能够在小教堂里进行冥想，于是，我们做了一刻钟的冥想。然后他仔细观看了装饰有美丽乐谱的祈祷书，于是告辞。 后来他告诉我说，这次访问是他在法国停留期间最有趣的时刻。在精神实践者之间，人们没有感觉到任何障碍。他们互相完全理解。因而我认为，惟独在那些忽视静观生活并且采取一些宗派主义的理智观点的人中，才会发生破裂。 让-弗朗索瓦——关于你们对大夏尔特勒修道院的造访的这番叙述非常有趣，也非常令人鼓舞。然而，在修道群体之外消除人类行为中普遍的宗派主义观点，将是一项艰苦的工作。希望你们能够成功。 马蒂厄——这位喇嘛走到任何地方，都请求组织者邀请当地所有宗教的代表。因此在法国，当我们去到格勒诺布尔、马赛。图卢兹等地时，我们与市长和省长会见时见到的首要人物，总是一位主教、一位拉比①、一位伊玛目②，或是一位东正教神父。一见面，这位喇嘛就握住他们的手，僵局便打破了。他认为那些好像将各宗教相互隔离的沟壑只是由于缺乏交流。 ①犹太教的教长。 ②伊斯兰教的教长。 让-弗朗索瓦——这有点乐观。这位喇嘛的态度值得钦佩。不幸的是，各种宗教，还有各种哲学，在世界历史上，更为经常地表现出的是他们宗派主义的一面，而不是他们交流与宽容的主张。 马蒂厄——在许多世纪之中，是一种日益贫乏的对于宗教的理解，引导着某些民族将宗教用于一些压迫和征服的目的。基督本人所主张的，除了对邻人的爱什么也没有。就个人而言，我不认为他会赞同十字军东征和宗教战争。 让-弗朗索瓦——但是有一个问题你没有回答。在我看来，对于大夏尔特勒修道院的这番访问，事实上，最终强调的是佛教的理想，即修道生活（vie monacale）。也许不是隐修生活（vie eremitique），因为我认为隐修生活是一种不定居的生活，是不是？ 马蒂厄——在西藏，一个僧人就是那个放弃了俗世和家庭生话的人。而寺院则是一些开放的团体。许许多多的俗人来到这里会见精神师傅并听他们的教导。相反，一个隐修士则彻底献身于静观生活，并单独地或是与一小群隐居者一起生活在最为隐蔽的地方，在山中或在森林里。隐修士不论是不是僧人，通常都要发誓在隐居中生活三年、五年或者更长时间，除了与他一同隐居的人，不会见任何人。还有一些隐修士，他们从一所隐修院去到另一所隐修院，而不固定住在任何地方。 让-弗朗索瓦——那么，不管是修道生活还是隐修生活，在我所知道的很少的佛教经典中，并且通过我在旅行中——包括在你的帮助下所作的在大吉岭、不丹或是此地、尼泊尔的旅行，还有我自己在日本作的那些旅行——所见的，似乎修道生活和隐修生活归根到底都是佛教智慧的理想。这是不是限制了它将自己融入一种文明的各个方面的能力？比方我们这种文明，就本质而言，是世俗的文明。这会不会在这里使佛教成为一种出于次要志愿的现象？ 马蒂厄——选择修道生活或者隐修生活乃是表示我们的整个精神都转向了精神实践。当我接受修道入教仪式时，我感到一种巨大的自由感：我终于能够将生存的每一个时刻都用于做我希望做的事情了。但是，在弃绝俗世的克己生活与西方人的日常生活之间存在着各种可能的渐变。佛教的思想完全可以强烈地影响我们的精神并带给我们一些巨大的益处，而我们并不要放弃我们的活动。在西藏，修道生活非常发达，有百分之二十之多的人口是在修会里。我同意，人们难以料想这种情况在西方会是什么样！然而，我不认为这一表象在我们西方国家就构成了理解佛教的障碍。人们完全可以通过每天只用几分钟或一个小时进行静观实践，而拥有一个非常丰富的精神生活。 让-弗朗索瓦——怎么将这个与每天的日常活动协调起来呢？ 马蒂厄——我们将“沉思”与“沉思后”区分开来。沉思不是仅仅坐一些时刻以获得一种幸福的安静，而是一种分析和静观的步骤，它有助于人们理解精神的功能和本质，把握事物的存在的模式。人们所称的沉思后，乃是避免重新采取完全和先前一样的各种习惯；就是要懂得在日常生活中运用在沉思中获得的理解，以获得一种更大的精神开放，更多的善良与忍耐；总之，为的是成为一个更好的人。这也正是在西藏的世俗社团中发生的一切。世俗社团与修道社团、精神师傅们相依为命。它以这种启发滋养自己，以过好每天的生活。 让-弗朗索瓦——可是西方的哲学和宗教，在原则上，也提供了一种在投身于行动和时代中的同时，又按照自己选择的哲学或宗教而生活的可能性。有许多宗教人士在他们的宗教之外，又是国务活动者、作家、艺术家、哲学家、研究家。柏拉图的梦想是哲学家国王，在他看来这是良好的城邦统治的保障。如果正如佛教所肯定的，世界只是一个幻象、一连串没有实在性的图像，自我也是一样，则做一个企业的领导、政治领袖、科学研究者又有什么意义呢？这毫无用处！这样做是使自己成为一个骗人的幻象的帮凶。 马蒂厄——在一个隐修士看来，说实话，俗世的各种活动几乎没有什么意义。但是，我想在此明确解释“幻象”一词在佛教中的意义，这在西方似乎是难以理解的。对于靠这个幻象而生活的我们来说，世界是能够有多实在就有多实在的。正如冰只不过是固体化了的水一样，我们赋予这个世界的牢固性并不是它的最终实在性。世界的这种虚幻的本质并不能使因果规律变得可抗拒。物理学家们也许会说电子不是一些小炮弹，而是能量的集中化。这种肯定丝毫也没有减少发展医学、缓解痛苦和解决日常困难的必要性！即使自我只是一场骗局，即使外部世界并不是由具备本身存在的实体所构成，通过一切可能的手段以医治痛苦，使用一切可能的手段以增大幸福，这也是完全合理的！同样，那个认为我们不过是由一些最终会还原为能量的微粒构成的学者，不会因此就对幸福和痛苦无所谓。 让-弗朗索瓦——再说一遍，我对这种理论与康德学说的相同感到惊讶：现象不是事物本身，而是我们的实在性。你已经回答了我的问题。我要向你提最后一个问题，我承认，它有点似是而非，但是，我在佛教的注释家和历史家的著作中注意到，这最终还是个经典性的问题。如果积极的自我、自我对于现实所能有的影响都只是一个幻象，则道德责任会怎么样？我什么都不是，所以我就不负责任。我认为，这样就在作为伦理、作为道德的佛教与作为形而上学的佛教之间出现了一个矛盾，我希望这个矛盾仅仅是表面性的。 马蒂厄——佛教实践包括三个互补的方面：观看、沉思和行动。“观看”，这对应着对于各种事物的、现象世界的和精神的最终本质的形而上学透视和研究。一旦这种观看确立了，“沉思”就是要习惯于这种观看，并通过精神实践将它纳入我们的意识之流，以使这个观看变为一种第二本性。“行动”，则是通过观看和沉思获得的内在认识在外部世界中的表达。关键是要将这种认识运用和贯彻在所有场合。就是在这个时刻，伦理或者道德受到重视。当人们明白世界的虚幻本质时，这个伦理没有变得失效过时。认识的眼睛已经睁开的人更加清楚更加细致地感知因果机制，并且知道应当采取什么或是避免什么，以在这条道路上继续进步并给他人带来幸福。 让-弗朗索瓦——对不起！如果我作为“我”什么也不是，我就不是个有道德的施动者。如果我不是个有道德的施动者，我又怎么能为我给他人造成的伤害负责呢？ 马蒂厄——如果将你引述的康德的思想倒装过来，人们可以说：“自我本身没有任何存在，这就是我们的实在性。”我们在前面将无“我”的意识之流比作一条没有船的河流。根本没有牢固的持久的自我在这条河流中像船一样地航行。但这并不阻止这条河的水能被氰化物毒化，或是依旧像山中的瀑布一样纯洁、透明、令人解渴。所以说，没有个人的本体（identite）这一事实，丝毫也不阻止每个行动都有一个结果。 让-弗朗索瓦——是的，可是请注意！道德责任并不来自一条不可避免的因果联系。恰恰相反，当一个行为者与他的行为后果之间存在一种关系，而他的行为又不是什么不能够避免的东西时，道德责任的观念便出现了。在这个时刻，施动者在行动的许多可能性之间有着选择。 马蒂厄——这正是羯磨的理论所说的：在种种行为中和引发这些行为的种种动机中有一个选择，而一旦行为完成，因果律就是不可避免的了。印度教哲学以一种相似的论据反驳佛教说：如果没有自我，则那个承受行为后果的人便不再是同一个人。那么，避开坏事完成好事又有什么意义？而对此，佛教以一个寓言回答说：有一个人正在凉台上用餐，由于不小心，他让一支火把落下。火烧着了他家的茅草屋顶，并且渐渐地，大火吞没了整个村子。他被起诉，他回答法官们说：“我没有责任：我就着光用餐的那火不是烧毁村庄的那同一个火。”但他恰恰是纵火者。所以，即使没有了被理解为独立实体的个体自我（moi individuel），我们现在的存在依然来自我们的过去，因此就有一个对行为的报偿。最重要之点是连续性，而不是本体。一个消极行为不会带来幸福，正如一颗毒芹的种子会长出毒芹，而不是椴树。所以，一个积极的或消极的行动必有一个相应的结果，最终导致幸福或不幸，这一事实就为人们是完成这一行动还是避开它进行辩护，哪怕进行这番体验的人并不拥有一个持久的自我。