Chapter 9 Religious Spirituality and Secular Spirituality

Jean-François – Given the current spread of Buddhism in the West, an interesting aspect of today’s reality manifests itself in a very specific way.This is how Buddhism relates to certain philosophical writings of the new generation.I already mentioned Luc Ferry.I would also like to mention André Gunter-Sponweiler, who published a book two years ago called A Little Essay on the Great Virtue.This is a series of proposals of practical wisdom that approximates what we in France call the moraliste tradition.The author offers insights into human behavior, human psychology, and sometimes, unafraid of vulgarity, some practical advice on the everyday conduct of human life.This was a kind of revolution in the field of thought at the end of the twentieth century, for moralists have always been profoundly scorned by professional philosophers who see in their theories only a series of anecdotal and purely psychological observations.The great system-builders who dominated philosophy in my youth exiled the great moralists to the realm of secular literature.These, they say, are but incoherent opinions, empirical haphazard insights, incapable of forming any system.Now, however, it is seen that the public, still interested in "philosophical" books, has turned to writings which revisit these old prescriptions of the moralists, with great humility and practicality, as Animals make recommendations for the everyday actions of humans.

The most eccentric of modern moralists, E. M. Cioran, who was also a remarkable artist and designer, has been for forty years a marginal writer with a readership of two or three thousand.But then, around 1985, all of a sudden, everyone started mentioning him.Let me add that the great success of the Gunter-Sponweiler book in France is symptomatic.It shows the public's need for guiding principles, for someone to tell them how to live, how to rediscover the art of living, how to guide their own existence.These are questions our philosophy has long since ceased to answer.And Gunter-Sponweiler also makes references to Buddhism quite often, especially in the following sentence, which is interesting because it establishes a relationship between Buddhism and Christianity when it comes to compassion and kindness. An equal comparison, a comparison.I quote him: "Compassion is the great virtue of the Buddhist East. We know that kindness is the great virtue of the Christian West, at least in words. Does it have to be a choice? What's the point? Not mutually exclusive. But if we had to, I think we could say this: Kindness is better if we can be kind. Compassion is more attainable, it is kindly like kindness, and can lead us to Mercy. Or in other words, the revelation of Christ, the revelation of love, is more exciting, but the teaching of the Buddha, that of compassion, is more realistic.' Well, there are two opinions on this question. Gunter-Sponweiler is quite right in saying that mercy is the great virtue of the Christian West, "at least in words," because this Christian kindness used to be expressed in the massacre of the American Indians, or It was under the control of the Inquisition that led heretics to the fire, and the persecution of Jews and Protestants. Second Opinion: While admiring Buddhist notions of compassion, Gunter-Sponweiler, in his reflections At the end of , it seems to point out that, anyway, this is a slightly less than Christian benevolence. So, on this issue, what do you think, how do you define compassion in Buddhism?

① A Romanian essayist and moralist who settled in France and wrote in French, born in 1919-19.Author of "History and Utopia", "Sinking in Time" and so on. Mathieu – First of all, I would like to say a few words on the first aspect of your question.Why is there renewed public interest in books about practical wisdom advice?Perhaps to correct for the fact that wanting to be a better human being is a concern that is almost irrelevant to our educational system today.Modern education, especially secular education, is actually mainly for developing intelligence and accumulating knowledge.

Jean-François - Not a perfect success, even in this field. Mathieu - Wisdom is a double-edged weapon.It can do both good and bad, it can be used to build as well as to destroy.In the past, when religions had not betrayed their own ideals, they taught people to be good people, to practice love of neighbor, kindness, integrity, generosity, magnanimity, and so on.It would arouse public outrage if it were now demanded that such virtues should be taught in schools.People will answer you that these concerns are a personal pursuit, and that is the role of parents to instill human values ​​in their children.So among the new generations, the current generation of parents themselves come from schools where such things are no longer taught, very few of them know a religious education or spirituality. Pursue.People even say that love and compassion belong to religions!One is exempt from religion, but no one is exempt from acceptance and compassion.Religious spirituality should be distinguished from secular spirituality, which is simply about making us good people, developing human qualities that we are all capable of developing, religious or not.Without any spirituality, if not a chance reading, nothing and no one will teach young people what these human values ​​are and how to develop them.So, it's reassuring to note the renewed interest.

Jean-François - I am satisfied with your statement about "spirituality of the world", because I just want to answer you that, in my opinion, secularization (laicite) is not against moral education.Secularity refers to the neutrality of an education that is not affiliated with any dogma, be it religious or political.Far from being exclusive, it requires, on the contrary, a moral education centered on respect for the law and for others, that is, the social contract and the good use of liberty, in short, what Montesquieu calls The so-called republican morality.Recently, the concept of worldliness has been distorted.But how does Buddhist compassion compare with Christian benevolence?

Mathieu - The concept of sympathy typically reflects the difficulty of expressing Eastern thought in Western language.In the West, the word "sympathy" sometimes conjures up images of a condescending pity, one that presupposes distance from the sufferer.And in Tibetan, nyingje, people translate it as "sympathy", which means "the master of the heart", that is, the person or thing that should rule our thoughts.According to Buddhism, compassion is the desire to heal all forms of suffering, especially the causes of suffering such as ignorance, hatred, enmity, etc.This sympathy is referenced on the one hand to the suffering person and on the other to knowledge.

Jean-François - Do you think compassion is similar to kindness? Mathieu - Kindness is an expression of compassion.The practice of this gift is certainly a fundamental Buddhist virtue.We divide talent into many forms, material gifts, i.e. food, money, clothing; talents "against fear" designed to protect those in danger and save the lives of other beings; and finally educational The genius which gives beings the means of breaking free from the shackles of ignorance.These forms of endowment are always practiced in Buddhist countries, so there are cases where some benefactors give all their property to the poor.In Tibetan history there are many instances where some people, inspired by this ideal of benevolence, gave their lives in order to save the lives of others.This corresponds to the kindness of Christianity.Furthermore, in order to finally eliminate suffering, it is necessary to reflect on the source of suffering, so that people realize that it is ignorance that gives rise to war, revenge, obsession, and everything that makes beings suffer.

Jean-Francois - What's the difference between compassion and love? Mathieu - Love is a necessary complement to sympathy.Compassion cannot exist, let alone develop, without love.Love is defined as the wish, the wish that all beings find happiness and a cause for happiness.Here, the love we are talking about refers to the unconditional and complete love for all beings without distinction.Love between a man and a woman, and love for our relatives and friends, is often possessive, exclusive, limited, and mixed with selfish emotions.People want at least as much as what they give.Such a love may seem deep, but it can easily fade away if it doesn't match our expectations.In addition, the love one gives to one's loved ones is often accompanied by a sense of distance, even malice, from "outsiders," from those who might pose a threat to us and our loved ones.True love, true sympathy extends to our enemies, but love and sympathy mixed with attachment cannot embrace those we consider enemies.

Jean-François – So the concept of love is also important in Buddhism, not just in Christianity? Mathieu - it is the root of the awakening path.But true love should not be concentrated, limited to one or a few specific beings, and stained with one-sidedness.Furthermore, it should be completely disinterested, expecting nothing in return.So one of the main subjects of contemplation is to fill our hearts with this generous feeling of love, beginning with the thought of someone whom we love deeply; We feel only a neutral emotion; finally, we include in our love all those whom we regard as enemies.This is true love.Knowing that someone has ill intentions for us cannot affect genuine sympathy, which is based on the deep understanding that this "enemy" wants happiness and fears pain exactly like we do.

Jean-François - So what is the difference between Buddhist compassion and Christian benevolence? Mathieu - the kind of love for neighbor described in the "Bible" corresponds exactly to the love of Buddhism.And, in theory, this is also common to all those great religions.In Buddhism, two other virtues are associated with love and compassion.One is to be pleased with the good qualities and happiness of others, and to wish this happiness to continue and increase. This joy in the face of the happiness of others is the antidote against envy.The other is impartiality and equanimity, extending love, compassion, and kindness to those dear to us as well as to strangers and our enemies.If we weigh our own happiness against that of an infinite number of beings, it is clear that the importance of the former is insignificant compared with the importance of the latter.It is also important to realize that our pleasure and pain are closely linked to the pleasure and pain of others.We can experience in everyday life the difference that exists between those who are wholly concerned with themselves, and those whose spirit is always turned to others.The former type of people are always uncomfortable and dissatisfied.Their narrowness of mind damages their relationships with others, and it is difficult for them to get anything from others.They kept knocking on doors one after another, but no one answered.On the contrary, the man or woman who has an open spirit and cares little for himself is always concerned with the happiness of others.He possesses a power of soul that his own problems barely affect him, and others give him care even though he doesn't ask for it.

Ultimately, as I have already mentioned, Buddhist love and compassion are inseparable from wisdom—knowledge of the nature of things—and its goal is to liberate others from the ignorance that is their misfortune. cause.It is this intelligence, this intellect that gives compassion all its strength. Jean-François – Are people going to counter that all of this is not very specific?In our time, there is a concern about so-called social problems such as inequality, crime, drug use, abortion, the death penalty, and so on.Even leaving aside the death penalty, which by definition is an irreparable punishment, do prisoners have to be thrown in jail or have to be re-educated?The question you just raised when talking about education: should education be compulsory or should it be based solely on the wishes of the students? Mathieu - The question of education is: should students be taught what they want to hear or what they really need to hear?The former case is a convenient solution, while the second case is a responsible attitude. Jean-François – Finally, all questions about social security, unemployment, violence, the integration of immigrants into the environment of the country of residence, inter-ethnic conflicts in modern great powers.Does Buddhism think about these questions and have some answers? Mathieu – Western society has more ways of masking the pain that arises from various external conditions, but it seriously lacks the ways of building inner happiness.It also lacks a point of reference for those specific issues that concern survival and society, because spiritual principles are less and less able to illuminate our streetlights.Regarding birth control, Buddhism believes that life is the most precious treasure we have.Every human life is extremely precious because it is like the boat that can steer us towards understanding.But when this precious life becomes too much, it poses a problem for humanity as a whole, because the resources on earth are not enough for billions of people to live a decent life.The only solution is to stop the population expansion by controlling births.What Buddhism advocates is a kind of "nonviolent" birth control, that is, the use of all available contraceptive methods. Jean-François - birth prevention? Mathieu - Do everything possible to avoid excessive birth rates non-violently. Jean-François—but that would disapprove of abortion. Mathieu—Buddhism defines the act of killing as "taking the life of a living being, or of a living being in the process of being formed."This is a logical consequence of the idea of ​​rebirth, since from conception the consciousness from the previous life is already present, albeit in a very rudimentary, almost imperceptible form.In some cases, miscarriage can be presumed innocent when the mother's life is in danger, or when it is known that the child is going to be born with some horrific defect; This is permitted for reasons of egoistic personal comfort, such as parents not taking steps, having children bores them, and so on.What should be developed is effective contraception to avoid resorting to abortion. Jean-François - I would add that the overpopulation debate no longer makes sense in the developed world, where falling birth rates have fallen below the limits of population renewal.The only arguments to be discussed are those of individual liberty, freedom of choice.But let's talk about another social problem - the death penalty, which has been solved in most modern Western countries.Hardly any country retains the death penalty anymore.Even in the United States, only a few states retain the death penalty, although some states have just reinstated it.And the general suppression of crime, the suppression of organized crime.In the face of organized crime, one cannot think only of nonviolence.How do people fight the Mafia without using violence, without putting criminals in jail, without making them incapable of committing crimes? Mathieu - Nonviolence is by no means the same as weakness!The aim is to do whatever it takes to reduce the suffering of others.It is necessary to disable the criminal by some appropriate means.But that does not make retaliation and punishment inspired by hatred and brutality legitimate.Compared with life imprisonment, which prevents criminals from re-harming others, the death penalty looks like an act of revenge.Sentencing a person to death is a serious act.The problem is to eliminate a human being.What is important, however, is that the individual concerned is able to continue living with the possibility of changing and reforming his behaviour.I am sure that even in the most dangerous of criminals there exists a little opportunity for reform and improvement.By keeping this man alive, we are giving him the opportunity to accomplish the transformation that all of us are capable of. In 1996, in Arkansas, USA, a prisoner was executed twelve years after his sentence.During these twelve years he was terrified of his crimes and wished to devote the rest of his life to the service of others, to make as much as possible the harm he had caused.He also took a vow of spiritual practice while in prison.He finally made his pledge heard on a local radio station by phone, announcing: "I have become another man. Accept my atonement! Don't kill me. We think we live in a humane society." But this is not the case. The government should officially view the death penalty as a form of revenge. It is clear that capital punishment cannot serve as a punition exemplaire designed to reduce crime.” He asked: “Why do you always Executing people in the middle of the night when no one else knows? If you're not doing it inhumanely, if you don't feel guilty, why don't you execute us in broad daylight, in front of the TV cameras?" Governor of Arkansas , a past priest refused to grant him a pardon and moved the date of execution forward by a month, so that the prisoner would not have another chance to make his words heard. Jean-François – I think there is a fairly general consensus on this.The United States, the only major democracy that retains the death penalty - albeit in a handful of its states - is widely criticized today.In the 1970s, the death penalty was "suspended" across the United States for a number of years by a Senate resolution, and the Senate later allowed it to resume in some states.In Europe it has practically disappeared.Today, the death penalty exists only in those totalitarian countries, such as some African countries, Malaysia, Singapore, Iraq, and of course, Iran.However, in those right-wing quasi-totalitarian countries, the problem of the death penalty has been solved.However, there is still a discussion about preventing and punishing crime.One cannot always put oneself in the shoes of a person who has committed a misdemeanor or a felony.It is also necessary to look at the problem from the standpoint of the victim, which means keeping people as safe as possible from the threat of repeat offenders.This is especially true when one is fighting terrorist groups and organized crime to protect society.In this regard, it is rather difficult to consider strictly non-violent solutions. Mathieu - Not that it's unhealthy and unrealistic to have more compassion for the criminal than the victim.The purpose is just to prevent an evil being from continuing to do harm. Jean-François - When this is an evil organization, it must be non-violent! Mathieu - The purpose of non-violence is precisely to reduce violence.This is not a passive approach.The key is to value the pain involved.Perhaps the best solution is to incapacitate in one way or another those who inflict significant harm on others without adding other forms of violence.A dog that bites should be restrained by force; it is muzzled, and if it is still dangerous, it is kept in confinement until it dies.But when he's old, toothless, and sleeping peacefully in a corner, people don't put a bullet in his head under the pretense that he bit fifteen people ten years ago. Jean-François - The question raised here is not the question of the Nuremberg trials, which were indeed of great educational value; but the question of the execution of criminals of the Nuremberg trials.At that time, the vast majority of criminals were executed.Another trial for war criminals involved in the Bosnian conflict is currently taking place in The Hague.I believe that none of these criminals will be sentenced to death, much less executed, which is not possible even under the legislation of the respective countries concerned.Today, crime is organized in nature.It's a political crime, it's some terrorists like the armed Basque Fatherland and Freedom Party, or the IRA, or the Sikh separatists like the Sikh separatists in India a few years ago.This is also the organized crime of the Mafia in Italy, Russia or Colombia.That is, gangs who, either out of interest or fanaticism, believe they have the right to commit crimes.Then it is not enough to improve this or that person.It was a great victory for the Italian police when the Sicilian Mafia leader Toto Rina was arrested in Palermo, but, thirty seconds later, Toto Rina's The position of mafia leader was replaced by someone else.So, the real adversary is the organization, not this or that individual.Society, therefore, tends to continually weed out criminal organizations for profit or political influence, or both.And society has few better means of dealing with them than using violence to protect itself.It's an anti-violence. Mathieu – Organized crime is ultimately just a party of criminals.Making criminals no longer have the ability to do harm is just to cover up the disease and conceal the disease.But if we want to heal its roots, it is precisely those individuals who must be transformed, who must be helped to transform themselves.