In theistic religions, definitions of God abound, flood, and repeat themselves. What interests us here is the Buddhist point of view. And as you will see – and as you must surely suspect – the Buddha's explanation differs radically from that of the religious...

We can distinguish two ways of speaking about God. On the one hand, there is the "divine substance," and on the other, the great spirit supposedly having created the universe and controlling it by its "omnipotence."

Union with God

As for the first notion, what is often described as "union with God" or "divine bliss" or "reaching God" is, according to Buddhism, nothing other than a conditioned state of mind. What kind of state? A state ranging from a passing peaceful euphoria to, at best, an absorption of the unified mind (jhāna, also a passing state) whose meditation object would be mettā (loving-kindness) or saddhā (faith, devotion) directed towards God or the divine quality, or some intensely directed religious prayer. Obviously, such a mental state only contributes to exacerbating one's belief in a "divine substance," which would be conscious and omnipresent, or worse: protective of those who dedicate themselves to it.

"God" could also be a term simply meaning mettā, since we often hear "God is nothing but Love", but theists – "believers," that is, those who "believe" and not those who "see" directly – additionally attribute a consciousness to this mettā. This wrong view is undoubtedly accentuated by the belief so deeply held – shared by almost all Buddhists – in a "self" that experiences things, such that the unusual states of consciousness of bliss are taken for an external, divine intervention. This latter belief is shared by a certain number of Buddhists who have not had the chance to meet monks capable of correctly expounding the Buddha's teachings to them. These consider and pray to the Buddha as if he were an omnipresent god.

The Christian sages of the Middle Ages — in particular Meister Eckhart — tell us:

• One can only fill oneself with God
  to the extent that one empties oneself of oneself.

Obviously, we can see in this elegant turn of phrase a beautiful instruction for deep meditation. This invitation means in other words: when one lets go of everything that contributes to maintaining one's "self," consciousness accesses what was covered by these veils, namely the very peaceful bliss of the mind absorbing into itself. One can only taste the first jhāna once the mind has abandoned the following "hindrances":

• sensual desire
• any trace of ill will
• sloth and torpor
• restlessness and worry
• doubt

And what is called a "Saint"? An individual who has detached themselves from everything, having fully accomplished "the Unconditioned," is an arahanta, that is, a being who has "done what had to be done," definitively liberated from the perpetual cycle of rebirths.

In theistic traditions, a Saint is, at best (in the best of versions, that is), an individual who, in addition to adopting virtuous conduct, has an acute awareness of the futility of the material world and the danger of excessive attachments. What they lack: right view. Why? Because they believe that an all-creating and omnipresent spirit decides the fate of beings. They have not realised that instead of a "soul," there is only a succession of physical and mental aggregates appearing only as a consequence of causes, and that apart from that, everything is emptiness.

Furthermore, sanctification can be reinforced or certified by exceptional aptitudes that nevertheless have not the slightest criterion of wisdom or spiritual accomplishment. Among others: prophecies, special signs, psychic powers, healing abilities, extraordinary visions, communication with God. This last point brings us to the main part of this article...

The creator God

In sutta no. 24 of the Digha Nikaya, the Buddha explains in detail the origin not of the universe, but of theistic religions, whatever they may be. Here is the essence, deciphered clearly...

The (physical) universe reforms again and again, and the whole process described below repeats with each universe. When the universe reforms, most beings are reborn and remain in the highest brāhma worlds (celestial spheres) — for a very long duration. Those in the hellish worlds continue to purge their sentence.

When part of their merits is exhausted (those that kept them in the highest spheres), a being leaves that sphere and appears in a lower sphere (another "brāhma world," but where bliss is still intense and where communication becomes possible). Forgetting his birth, this brāhma believes he has existed forever. Unable to see the higher spheres, he thinks he is the only consciousness in the universe. When he begins to wish for the appearance of other beings, some who, just like him before, exhausting part of their merits, appear in his sphere.

The first brāhma is then convinced:

• I am the Great God, the Creator, the Father of all beings. By my thought, I created these other beings.

The other brāhma who arrived later believe in turn that the one who was there before them is the creator of the universe. The latter wishes for the appearance of beings in lower worlds and, due to the exhaustion of merits, beings appear in the worlds of the deva, then in that of humans...

Among humans, when some become ascetics who practise intense meditation, to the point of accessing memories of their past lives, they remember their life in that sphere with the brāhma considered the great creator of everything. They do not remember beyond that, so they declare:

• This God who created us is eternal, immutable. We, created by him, are impermanent, perishable, destined to disappear.

In some cases, a human being, through meditation, simply remembers a "divine" state — the one experienced in the brāhma worlds. Seeing nothing beyond, they believe that this state is the origin of everything, and found a doctrine.

In other cases, a human being, through meditation, manages to enter into communication with another brāhma holding the same convictions, who tells them that he is the creator God of the universe, that he should be venerated, that a cult should be founded to pay homage to him...

This is how, in certain traditions, the belief in a creator God is born.

You draw whatever conclusions you like; I make no judgment. I am only relaying and popularising as best I can the words of the only person capable of providing a clear and coherent explanation to all questions, from the simplest to the deepest.

Everyone is free to believe what they please, but they can at least ask themselves: If God is so perfect and created everything, why create the devil, such imperfect creatures, and so much suffering? Moreover, why create existence? For what purpose? It is interesting to note here that the desire for creation is nothing but a vulgar attachment. What could a creation be for, apart from sensory pleasures (visual, auditory, or mental delight; tactile, gustatory, or olfactory enjoyment)? Whether one creates a flower bracelet, a cathedral, or an entire universe, one does it solely out of attachment. A detached mind does not create. Consequently, a wise being, whoever they may be and whatever their tradition of origin, ceases to create anything. On the contrary, they only deconstruct little by little all conditionings, that is, all the causes of suffering.

The illusion of universal consciousness

We also often hear this: "God made man in his image." But don't you find the following statement much more telling? "Man made God in his image."

For me? Not the slightest! But for you, it only takes you further from the correct understanding of things, and therefore keeps you in the endless cycle of dissatisfactions. Why is that? By attributing to the universe not only a consciousness but an unconditioned Self acting on everything, you are far from realising that even your Self does not exist and that in the universe, everything is only the result of conditioning. The Unconditioned – nibbāna – is totally free of matter and consciousness, as well as of anything that could be attributed to a "divine substance." How, moreover, could a consciousness, whatever it may be, exist in nibbāna, the complete and definitive Peace, since it is what conveys dukkha (dissatisfaction)?

Your "self" is only an illusion, my dear Kassinou. The "self" is an illusion so powerful that you believe in it even more strongly than you believe in God! We can say there are human beings, dogs, trees, pebbles, clouds... But all of them have no "self," no own substance existing by itself.

Living beings endowed with consciousness are only biological processes driven by a series of very brief consciousnesses appearing and disappearing one after another, giving the impression of continuity, of an indivisible whole. Only deep and penetrating meditation allows one to discern this – provided that a correct and well-directed view is in place. It is exactly like a film: we see actors running, fighting, kissing... whereas it is nothing other than a succession of still images and sound waves no more alive than the plastic reel that carries them.

One often hears this expression: Being – or not – in the Dhamma. But what does it really mean? And you, are you in the Dhamma?

You take a close interest in the teachings of the Dhamma, you read profound works on Buddhist practice, you have faith and confidence in the concepts expounded by the Buddha, you listen to or read the teachings of monks or ascetics well established in renunciation? Then surely you must be in the Dhamma, right? Well, let me tell you: believing that is like believing you are a great musician simply because you appreciate a certain composer, because his music moves you, and because you attend his concerts!

Many individuals, because they have the responsibility of a "monastery," think they are an "abbot" or a "master." Yet they are nothing more than consumers of pleasures, like almost any human being, that greedy primate who thinks too much. If they take themselves (and a fortiori their disciples) for abbots or masters, it is only because the forms and colours they wear, the role they play, and their gestures and manners are supposedly those of an abbot or a master.

Are you among those who would like to realise a dream? Or are you rather among those who would prefer to realise Awakening? A dream, even if it materialises, is hardly more stable or lasting than a soap bubble. When one approaches Awakening, one sees how only a sick mind can chase after dreams, whatever they may be.

In my view, being in the Dhamma…

Is making Awakening the priority of one's existence – which implies renouncing all dreams – and consequently putting everything into action towards that goal. It is observing irreproachable conduct. It is renouncing all distractions, which are nothing but hindrances on the Path of inner freedom. It is regularly investing oneself in silence, solitude, and meditation. It is refusing to waste one's precious time on frivolities like fiction or news (politics, celebrities, disasters…). It is remaining most of the time in full vigilance in the present moment.

So, are you in the Dhamma? If not, do you not aspire to be?

You will have understood that being in the Dhamma is not merely being interested in it, studying it, and wanting it, but rather being fully invested in its practice, living it daily, having made a great void in one's mind to allow it to be fully welcomed.

There is a sign to know whether you "are in the Dhamma." If that is the case, you are no longer interested in anything else, or only superficially – never with passion. Even the most subtle philosophy, you perceive it as a mere description of the state of things and of human conditioning – devoid of any path of fulfilment and of any wisdom. And you consider everything that is not Dhamma as pure distraction. As for psychology, it is already a little bit of Dhamma, but without the liberating depth.

Studying the Dhamma out of pure curiosity or out of a desire for erudition, wanting to debate it or talk about it in a pleasant way – this is what is called intellectual masturbation. On the other hand, a useful study of the Dhamma, followed by diligent practice, without coupling with all kinds of mental distractions, is a matter of intellectual chastity.

In the Buddha's time, people did not speak of being in the Dhamma or not. They rather spoke of having right view (correct understanding of reality) or not. If the Buddha had been asked for his definition of being in the Dhamma, it is very likely that he would have affirmed: "Only an ariyā (an 'awakened one'), in truth, is worthy of being said to be in the Dhamma."

Moreover, the Buddha says of a being who becomes an ariyā that he has "entered the stream." The stream of what? That of the Dhamma!

Deplorable observation

When one sees the enormities proclaimed on the Internet that are supposedly derived from the Buddha's teaching, it is enough to make one's hair stand on end. Especially when one knows that they are "swallowed" and blindly approved by crowds. The less the authors understand this profound teaching, the more they vomit miles of absurdities that flood the global network. There are also those who amalgamate the Blessed One's teaching with various religions! And with the Rot brain culture getting involved, we are not out of the great inn of samsāra!

In short!

Here is an overview of the Buddha's teaching, both concise, clear, and complete:

Some define the Buddhist path as a religion, others as a philosophy, others as self-development, and still others as all of these at once. The teaching of the Dhamma is none of these! It is a medicine for the mind.

Mental illness

This is why, like a little lifebuoy thrown into the middle of an ocean of ignorance, a little resetting of the clock is welcome…

The Problem

If life were as beautiful as the blind claim, there would be no problem; the Buddha would not have felt the need to deliver his teaching. If he did, it is precisely because there is a problem to solve. What is this problem? What is the problem of all life, however celestial it may be? It is that no moment is spared from dukkha. Explanation…

The 3 characteristics

In everything that forms the universe (matter, mind, consciousness), there is absolutely nothing that is not subject to the 3 characteristics, which are: anatta, anicca, and dukkha.

Anatta

Anatta means that nothing is stable, nothing can be taken for granted. Everything is only the result of conditions. As soon as these conditions are no longer met, the result ceases. Since nothing exists by itself, since nothing is immutable, this is anicca.

Anicca

Anicca is the fact that everything is impermanent, ephemeral. Nothing lasts; everything constantly changes. Due to this perpetual instability, this is dukkha.

Dukkha

Dukkha is the fact that nothing can be fully satisfactory, nothing can protect against collapse, pain, or falling back down. Everything slips through our fingers. The opposite is only an illusion due to a too narrow view of things. The least of physical or mental acquisitions inevitably ends up becoming unsatisfactory, even painful.

Consequently: Nothing is worth attaching to! You should write this in large letters on the wall of your living room. But ask your spouse's opinion first, though.

Thus, the fact that existence is totally dominated, directed, and imbued with dukkha, this is the first of the 4 Noble Truths.

The 4 Noble Truths

1. Dissatisfaction (dukkha). Lasting happiness exists nowhere in this world where everything is conditioned.
2. The cause of dissatisfaction (samudaya), the cause of all problems. Attachment, thirst, desire, craving, for anything whatsoever: sensations, possessions, wealth, power, but also opinions, beliefs, and even the very fact of existing.
3. The cessation of dissatisfaction (nirodha). There is the possibility of putting a definitive end to dissatisfaction. The Unconditioned, the indescribable, nibbāna, complete inner liberation, definitive peace.
4. The path leading to the cessation of dissatisfaction (magga). The middle way, the Noble Eightfold Path.

The Noble Eightfold Path

The path that leads to nibbāna, that is, to definitive peace, to the cessation of all dissatisfactions, covers three areas:

• Ethical conduct (sīla), which is the expression of kindness.
• Mental discipline (samādhi), which is the expression of calm.
• Deep understanding (pañña), which is the expression of wisdom.

Each of these areas is divided into several "steps," totalling eight, which are grouped together in what is called "the Noble Eightfold Path":

1. Right understanding.
2. Right thought.
3. Right speech.
4. Right action.
5. Right livelihood.
6. Right effort.
7. Right mindfulness.
8. Right concentration.

It is precisely the training to perfect these eight "steps" that allows one to realise the fruit of the Dhamma. Here it is in more detail…

The eight steps

The steps of sīla

Right speech

Refraining from false, manipulative, coarse, brutal, malicious, insulting, humiliating speech or writing, from idle chatter – that is, that which brings no benefit to progress on the path – from slander and defamation.

Right action

Refraining from killing, harming, or brutalising any living being, from taking what has not been given, from engaging in inappropriate sexual practice, and from consuming intoxicants.

Right livelihood

Earning one's livelihood without harming any being (so no cheating, no butchery, no trade in weapons or alcohol).

The steps of samādhi

Right effort

The effort to:

• prevent unwholesome mental states from arising;
• abandon unwholesome mental states that have already arisen;
• develop wholesome mental states not yet arisen;
• perfect wholesome mental states already present.

Right mindfulness

Applying mindful attention to:

• activities of the body;
• sensations and emotions;
• activities of the mind;
• conceptions, memories, imagination, thoughts, and other mental objects.

Right concentration

This is "deep meditation," which leads to the four jhānas, which are absorptions in which mental defilements are temporarily set aside:

• In the 1st jhāna, sensual desires, ill will, sloth, restlessness, excitement, and doubt cease.
• In the 2nd jhāna, all mental activities cease.
• In the 3rd jhāna, joy ceases.
• In the 4th jhāna, happiness ceases; only equanimity and pure attention remain; calm is total (this is impossible to imagine).

The steps of pañña

Right thought

Thoughts are directed towards: renunciation, detachment, selflessness, kindness towards all beings.

Right understanding

Understanding things as they are, understanding the 4 Noble Truths.

Buddhist practice at a glance

This article is a summary of the Buddha's teaching. Everything he taught is only ways of detailing or leading to the understanding and practice of the points mentioned here.

As we can see, there is not so much to do, but above all to refrain from doing. But this can be very difficult, as we are so conditioned to do and to believe that we must do, always and ever more.

There is so much dust in your eyes that you see dust everywhere, even where there is only light. The Buddha had a choice: he could remain in blindness and bring ephemeral pleasure to his wife and son for the brief span of a single life, or find the path of inner liberation and share it with the entire world. All those who have even a minimum of wisdom (and thus right understanding) are infinitely grateful to the "master of masters" for having made the right choice.

Better alone than in bad company, as the saying goes. This is even truer for the path of inner freedom. This is indeed what the Buddha himself said, before this saying was reinvented, nevertheless to serve the purpose of life as a couple.

Accepting solitude

Are you laughing ruefully… are you also in this case? So you are among those who believe that "group meditation" brings motivation, that "the group's energy" gives you better energy? However, these are only attachments, and treacherous attachments at that. Because the day you are all alone, you are lost! You can no longer practise! Group meditation quickly becomes the best excuse for not meditating when you are alone.

Please, never let your noble progress in the Dhamma depend on anyone other than yourself. Meditating with others can give the illusion of motivation. The brain does not make the difference, so it can help to get started. But it is like the little training wheels on a child's bicycle: they can help at the beginning to gain confidence, but then they are removed. If, on the contrary, you always keep the training wheels, you will never go very far.

Bear in mind that once your eyes are closed and your attention is on your meditation object, you are alone regardless! Whether you are stuck next to other meditators in a gigantic hall full of people, or the only living "soul" in a narrow cavity twenty metres underground, your only task is to keep your focus on your object of attention, completely ignoring the rest of the universe, starting with your immediate surroundings. For meditation to be effective, a parallel work of detachment must be carried out.

The disadvantages of the group

Do not mix everything up! They stayed together not to meditate better, but above all because they are attached to company. The one who prioritises the quality of his meditation and detachment prefers isolation.

For information, ascetic practices were taught and encouraged by the Buddha, without however imposing them. Examples of these practices: limiting oneself to one meal a day, being content with discarded robes, giving up the lying posture day and night, etc.

Renouncing social relationships

When you reside in an isolated place in the company of other people, for example in a forest monastery, the most difficult thing is to avoid an attachment – often excessive – to social relationships, the only pleasure remaining in such a context. Typically: you go to see so-and-so in his hut just to borrow a hammer or some laundry detergent, and two hours later, a cup of tea in hand, you find yourself talking politics and telling jokes, completely forgetting your practice. If the Buddha asked his monks to avoid any social relationship, it was for this very good reason!

As well as being a source of attachments, socialising is the best way to waste your precious time – at least for anyone seriously wishing to put a definitive end to their mental defilements.

The benefit of solitude

When one remains completely alone all the time, one is protected from all temptation towards any kind of relationship. It is then much easier to accomplish deep work. Naturally, one is faced with the present moment. Complete solitude is therefore highly recommended for cultivating the Dhamma in the best conditions, even if, at times, an exchange with other serious practitioners can be a very useful help or motivation. Having "friends in the Dhamma" is essential, but inner solitude is equally so during meditation (sitting or walking).

On closer reflection, even alone, there is no one! Since there is no self, who then would be alone? Understanding this point is probably the best way to accept and make full use of solitude. If someone feels sad or lonely, it is solely because of this wrong view, which consists of believing that there is a self, a "lonely self". If one clearly grasps that there is no one, but only successive moments of consciousness, then there is no one to suffer from loneliness!

Most often, well-established meditators prefer solitude, avoiding group practice, which for them brings only drawbacks. So stop believing that it is easier to meditate in a group. That said, if meditating with others stimulates you to get going in practice, then by all means do not deprive yourself of it!

Rats are very intelligent. They are much closer to humans than one might suspect, particularly in their social behaviour. This is why they are often used in experiments, not simply because they are easier to obtain than monkeys. There is one experiment I find particularly interesting…

We tend to take on the roles that are available, much like water that first fills the holes as it flows. We believe we choose, but we choose nothing. This is a key point. We will come back to it later…

The experiment was reproduced with a much larger number of rats (perhaps 100 or 200). Again, we find the same distribution of roles: 1/6 of the rats are scapegoats, 1/3 are exploiters, 1/3 are submissive ones, and 1/6 are autonomous ones. Of course, within each of these four categories, there are more or less marked differences. The more individuals there are, the more complex the hierarchy becomes: there are leaders, sub-leaders, moderately exploited ones, very exploited ones, etc.

Let us imagine that we do this experiment with humans. As you might suspect, the result will be no different! Moreover, the experiment is already underway… One only has to observe the world! If we roughly schematise, we can say that these four categories are more or less found: a majority of submissive workers and exploiting profiteers, autonomous ones, and scapegoats.

These four categories can only be surpassed by lucid awareness combined with detachment. We will also come back to this point…

Now let us imagine that we reproduce the experiment not with six randomly selected humans, but with six of yourselves, six perfect clones of you, six yous, with the same temperament, the same qualities, the same tendencies. Do you think we would still find exactly the same distribution into four categories? You are absolutely right! How is this possible? Here is a clue to understand it…

When you find yourself in the presence of a person more authoritarian than yourself, you tend to let them dominate or to keep a low profile, to avoid conflict, to speak in a more subdued, more conciliatory voice, don't you? Conversely, when you find yourself in the presence of a person more submissive than yourself, you tend to direct them a little, or at least make suggestions to them, to speak in a more assured voice, don't you? In the same way, one you faced with another you in a moment when they feel more or less confident will tend to act or react in a more or less imposing, or more or less docile way.

Now, let us imagine a much bolder experiment. An entire country, filled with yous. A country like the United States; 350 million inhabitants. 350,000,000 copies of you, just as you are! A vast crowd of yous, but of all ages and as many male versions as female versions of yourself, in order to constitute the normal population of a country. At the beginning, differentiated only by age and sex, everyone is like you: same tendencies, same tastes, same aptitudes, same habits. Depending on the environment, influences, conditionings, and situations, the evolution of some yous will differ from that of others. Some yous will become more courageous, or more fearful, or more athletic, or more scientific, or more social. Some will be more interested in money or erudition, and others more or less sensitive to nature, etc.

As we saw in the rat experiment, the role we take on depends greatly on that of others.

Even if you have a predisposition to shyness, honesty, and tranquility, as long as there are places to be taken, among your millions of yous, depending on opportunities, there will probably be a few who will invest themselves in theft or some illegal market.

Are you a bad actor? Among the yous who dare to dabble in a bit of theatre, some will end up becoming actors; there have to be some to make films. And whatever the talent, it is a you who will win the Oscar, since there are only yous!

Among the most enterprising, the you who has benefited from the best opportunities will inevitably become the President, as there has to be a head of state in a country. If you are particularly non-violent, there will probably be no crime, only minor offences. If you are naturally lazy, some yous will end up shaking themselves up and taking action, because the essential things for the proper functioning of the country will have to be kept going.

Among these 350 million yous, perhaps there will be no awakened beings, but at the very least we will find wise individuals, living humbly, in detachment, bathed in serenity and kindness. Take the most accomplished among them. It is yourself, do not forget! It is nothing other than a potentiality of yourself. To achieve the same result, you simply need to follow the path of that you, among the 350 million paths that your yous have followed. So choose the best of your yous! Which other you would you prefer to be?

Am I not following it? Would you then be kind enough to explain to me what the most diligent of my selves would do better, apart from a few details? I only admit that it has not been so long since I followed one of the best paths of my selves; better late than never. And you, instead of judging others, you would do well to concern yourself with the millions of paths followed by your yous that are better than yours! In any case, one should always take as a role model the most accomplished of one's selves.

The main obstacle that prevents you from becoming the best placed of your yous – that is, the most spiritually evolved – is the set of conditionings that shape you and constitute a high barrier that confines you to your category. The good news is that you can escape this limit. The secret is not to climb over this barrier – there will always be guards posted in the watchtower to shoot you – but not to build it! If it is already in place, you simply have to stop maintaining it and it will eventually collapse on its own. The question remains: how not to build this barrier of conditionings.

To follow the peaceful path of a renunciant – a path without caste barriers, without roles, without any category whatsoever – one does not seek to acquire diplomas, experiences, positions, obstacle courses, or to submit to particular trials. All these points are precisely the limiting barrier. On the contrary, one invests in nothing, one does not seek to acquire anything.

How does one proceed? One accepts things as they are, one is content with what is given. One does not seek to fill empty places. The heart of this process is this: You do not seek to take any place; you are already in the right place, and the world revolves around you. This is the path of the middle way. You grasp nothing, you let go of everything! This may seem crazy. And yet, it is as simple as that.

What can make things more complicated is only your barrier of conditionings, which does everything to dissuade you from following the path of the best of your yous.

Time has passed. Very quickly. Too quickly. It is only on your deathbed that you become aware of it. You know it: within a few days, at most, everything will fade away and your life will end. If death were a definitive end, you would have no reason to feel any fear whatsoever. Why worry, otherwise?

But you are anxious. Your anguish even exceeds that of your worst nightmares. Like the most hardened nihilists (or extinctionists), you are unable to rejoice in an end that would be definitive, therefore devoid of all suffering, not only out of attachment to existence, but because you sense, despite all conviction, that after death, there is something that continues and that this something may be far from pleasant, especially if you have neglected the quality of your behaviour and have not always acted well in the past.

You also realise that you have never seriously applied the many calls to mindfulness, virtue, and letting go that you have read and heard here and there throughout your existence. Unfortunately, it is too late. You are so old that you have barely enough energy left to breathe, but not enough to develop vigilance in the moment and detachment. You are immersed in confusion and the slightest discomfort irritates you.

Seeing the urgency, a little late, certainly, you fervently wish that someone would read you passages from texts on detachment and inner peace. If by chance a few of your loved ones come to visit you, they are far too busy scrolling on their smartphones to try to decipher what you are attempting to say to them. And your vain attempts to pronounce your last will and your pitiful groans make the nurse caring for you believe that you are no longer in your right mind. She is so kind that she takes the time to read you the entire collection of Barbapapa, then that of the Care Bears. Your ears are about the only organs that still work rather well. The more you beg her to be quiet, so that you can at least keep the little precious silence that remains, the more she interprets your clumsy, drooling grumbles as appreciation, which encourages her to read you all these children's stories a second time.

Like the hotel "Do Not Disturb" sign, you deplore that there is no "Let me die in peace" instruction to hang on the door handle of your room. More than anything, you bitterly regret having remained so careless until the very last moment. You would at least like to warn your loved ones to beware of carelessness as if it were the plague. You know it would be highly beneficial if they could have even a vague idea of the dizzying terror one can feel at the threshold of death when one has wasted one's existence continually chasing after pleasures – which are, at that time you know it well, so futile, so insignificant, so empty. The shock would be such that they would immediately invest their time in the only thing truly worth it: letting go, mindfulness, and sense restraint.

Shortly before falling asleep for what may be your last night, you begin to think that if you could go back to the time when you were a certain age, you would then take a completely different path. That age is the one you are today. Fortunately, you are still only at this day; you still have time, you still have the opportunity to take the right path, the one that will lead you to a peaceful death.

Without letting yourself be influenced by the flock of sheep who live only in carelessness and constantly urge you to do as they do, regardless of what others think, invest yourself body and soul in determination, acceptance, restraint, and introspection, but without trusting your mind, which always finds an excuse not to cultivate noble qualities. Mock what people will say; your inner liberation is infinitely more important than "what others think of you." Do not let yourself be caught by the grip of the flock that does not like those who follow a different path! How many people miss the essential and waste their existence – and their Deliverance! – out of sheer fear of "not pleasing those around them," who moreover often care little about your inner well-being.

If you are at the end credits of your life, it is of course too late to cultivate wisdom.

If the opportunity for wisdom has passed, there is nevertheless always something favourable to undertake. In such a case, you can turn as much as possible towards kindness – towards all – and towards gratitude, for everything that life has brought you that is beneficial, and this is always the case; sometimes one must learn to distinguish it. Like the credits of a film that present the acknowledgements, the credits of your life thus present your finest thoughts of gratitude and kindness.

May you be able to follow the path that leads to the successful achievement of the one thing that deserves it more than anything else: death! Alas, one only understands this when the time comes to abandon one's body. If you have prepared your death throughout your life, it will be preceded by days in which, having accomplished what needed to be accomplished, your mind will bathe in serenity, relief, gratitude, kindness, and the absence of remorse, shame, and confusion. Without needing anyone to read you works on inner peace, you will be able to close your eyes while experiencing it directly for yourself.

It is not too late!

The "Most Venerable"

Imagine you have a thirteen-year-old daughter, well-mannered, virtuous, and docile. You learn that a figure renowned for being "most venerable" has made her his sexual partner, raping her repeatedly, for his own personal pleasure – for what else, if not? You are furthermore told that this is an honour for your family. Will you prostrate yourself before the monster, considering it a privilege, while your very young daughter retains from this "special teaching" the memory of a traumatic abuse?

Such "great masters" have existed and still exist. And not only is the example I am thinking of – who died towards the end of the 20th century – world-famous, but through such acts, he ruined the lives of many teenage girls, merely to satisfy the coarsest of desires: carnal desire. There is no need to name him, for the purpose is not to put him on trial, but to open eyes to these deviations which are far too often downplayed. This rapist of girls was known as "a highly realised and most venerable Buddhist master". How is this possible?

This is simply the result of a confluence of circumstances including:

• a deeply blind culture that normalises this type of behaviour
• a religion that excuses and turns a blind eye to the worst when it concerns an individual presumed to have attained a "high spiritual state"
• the absence of questioning in the face of the weight of a firmly established reputation
• the fear of opposing everyone's conviction in the face of such a reputation

Thus, this rapist dressed in the noble monastic robe had attained the highest mastery of his tradition – practices that the Buddha did not even mention (not out of secrecy, for he never hid anything, but because they are useless on the path to Awakening). This old lama had also developed the ability to indicate his next incarnation (which also demonstrates that he was below the last two stages of inner attainment, since from the last two stages of Awakening onward, one no longer takes incarnation). At the very least, he had clearly not attained mastery over the basest impulses; the very foundation when one wishes to walk the path of inner purification.

When there is a problem at the foundation, it must be fixed before even considering building anything higher. Who would entrust the piloting of an Airbus A380 to a person with both eyes gouged out, even if they knew the cockpit of such an aircraft better than anyone? Yet that is exactly what was done with this individual, who moreover had a wife, which is unthinkable for someone supposed to be a monk. I fear it is necessary to remind you: a monk represents the very example of right conduct, kindness, and detachment.

As it happens, in his current incarnation, during his childhood in a monastery, he himself suffered sexual abuse on multiple occasions – karmic return, no doubt!

Monks and carnal desire

What the Buddha established

Contrary to some misconceptions of certain Buddhist traditions, the Buddha did not establish the Vinaya – the monastic code of discipline – for fools, for those who lack enough wisdom to understand what is proper to do or not. This set of monastic rules is the basis of irreproachable virtue, rigorously observed by the Buddha himself and his most eminent disciples, without any exception. According to this Vinaya, the mere act of touching a woman's skin with a finger, with even a spark of desire, already constitutes a serious offence that triggers a complicated procedure and the assembly of all the saṃgha members present (the community of monks). This is one of the reasons why one does not shake hands with a monk.

As for sexual intercourse, even consensual, even brief, even oral, and even with a man or an animal, it inevitably entails the permanent loss of monk status. This is one of the four most serious offences for a monk, along with theft, murder, and – pay close attention to this last one – the declaration (even indirectly, even implied) of a spiritual attainment not actually experienced.

The robe alone does not make the monk

In its dizzying ignorance, humanity always finds a way to perceive as "poetic" the exercise of its basest instincts (what is presented as "romantic" is merely the prelude to mating). The best example is undoubtedly the famous practice of tantras, considered a spiritual practice. Here again, the Buddha never mentioned any training where mating could prove to be a path to inner fulfilment. On the contrary, he always presented it as one of the main obstacles to inner liberation.

No tradition is spared from representatives who engage in abuses of all kinds (sex, money, power…), for any human being, regardless of their origin and conditioning, if they do not discipline their mind, can drift towards the most unhealthy mental states, exactly like a garden can become overrun with brambles and nettles if left untended. Of course – and fortunately – there are also many masters in all traditions, although not awakened, who are just, sincere, and work remarkably for the good and inner fulfilment of their community (monastic or lay).

Open your eyes!

A problem of visibility

You wonder how it is possible to venerate so much people who have not yet been able to climb the very first step of the long staircase to Awakening? The reason is very simple: because wisdom is a perfectly invisible thing, and what people take for wisdom are visible things!

What is mistaken for wisdom

Here are a few "qualities" that are all too often and wrongly taken for wisdom:

The theatre around the person

When we speak of a man or woman known as "highly realised" or a "great master," what makes us say so, if not the media, books, what others assert or repeat? Even if we meet them in person, we are swept along by all the theatre built around the person, even by the role they play – consciously or not – and so we act like the other sheep; we swallow "the narrative" without questioning anything. All that glitters is not gold, need it be said?

What do I mean by "the theatre built around the person"? Imagine your first day at an international company as a simple office clerk. You are subjected to a hazing: the doorman has been dressed in a suit and tie, and all your colleagues – complicit in your hazing – behave exactly as if the disguised doorman were the CEO himself (bows, respectful tone, fear, downcast eyes, total obedience…). For you, there is no doubt: this man IS the company's CEO. If he asks you to shine his shoes in front of everyone, even though it is not part of your contract, it is highly likely that you will comply – you would not want to make waves on your first day, and you value this job.

You will have understood the idea: Like this fake CEO, many "great masters" are fake masters who "haze" their disciples for life.

And be careful when you enter your office building; the doorman might be the company's CEO disguised as a doorman in order to closely observe the behaviour of new employees!

The robe makes the monk, the narrative makes the master

The narrative

What we see when we meet a person of such reputation is not a "highly realised" being or a "great master," but merely a belief created by the mind, an image, a narrative, what others say about them, and the less people know, the more they talk!

But sometimes, by chance, the narrative may correspond to reality!

The bad excuses

I am saddened to note that instead of reacting firmly against the inappropriate behaviour of spiritual masters, people tend on the contrary to find excuses for them. The worst of these are the following:

• He can allow himself that; he acts with detachment.
• Do not judge; you cannot understand!
• He does it out of pure compassion; it is to reduce their karma.
• He has full wisdom; he no longer needs to follow the rules.

I hope you suspect it: none of these excuses are valid; they are in clear disagreement with the Buddha's teaching.

Making sound values seem outdated

In our era, where people are so eager to stand out (while remaining in the herd!), the fashion of playing the cleverest is thriving. Under the pretext of transcendence, people allow themselves the most grotesque behaviours, and invent every possible excuse not to cultivate virtue: "Rules are made to be broken," "It is not for us to follow the precepts, but for the precepts to follow us"... One does not hesitate to make chastity and abstention from everything harmful to body and mind seem old-fashioned. However, whatever our beliefs may be, these practices are the indispensable basis of a noble and venerable mind. An example to follow, therefore.

One might deplore this current custom which, under the pretext of tolerance, consists of fully accepting inappropriate behaviour and laissez-faire (one only has to observe the growing insolence and illiteracy of children, but that is another debate), but I rather suspect it is a way of downplaying one's own faults and shortcomings. Conversely, in order to ensure a community that is always clean and harmonious, the Buddha exhorted monks to encourage each other to correct and improve themselves in case of wrongdoing. Having a less virtuous practice or even simply giving in to laziness was frowned upon. Today, it is the very act of remarking on a monk's harmful behaviour that is frowned upon; it can even lead to prison, as I myself have experienced.

In short, nothing prevents you from polishing the doorman's shoes (after all, he opens the door for you every morning), but please, never leave your daughter (sister, niece, student…) alone with a master, a religious figure, a renunciant, whoever they may be. In any case, there is no reason for it to be necessary. And even if he is virtuous, it can needlessly give rise to slander or even conflicts. Moreover, according to the Vinaya, the fact of a monk being isolated for even a single moment with a woman – even still a baby! – already constitutes a "fairly serious" offence.

I presented an extreme example at the beginning of the article, but there are so many situations where we can be fooled by placing blind trust in individuals claiming advanced inner development, where it is even easier to be deceived.

How to avoid the trap?

A conditioning difficult to evade

Practically speaking, how can one avoid falling into this trap of mistaking for masters those who only have the reputation?

Unfortunately, culture, beliefs, and authority (parents, teachers, local customs…) have much more weight than the word of the wisest, or even than common sense! For this reason, it is difficult not to be deceived by labels, by our perception of everything related to spirituality, including the supposed value of religious figures. Nevertheless, with a certain amount of discernment, vigilance, and above all a naked vision of things, one can see clearly on these points.

Naked vision

"Naked vision" consists of seeing things as they are, stripped of all "description." When dealing with a person, see them as they present themselves, deliberately forgetting all annotations concerning them, such as their role, their occupation, but also everything that can describe them: their titles, diplomas, distinctions, reputation, religion, lineage, affiliations, etc. Even if they are very well known, act as if you are discovering them at this very moment.

Strip them completely of all possible labels. Once your mental bowl is empty of any mouldy idea, fill it with fresh and substantial information. See how this person behaves, what they have to share, how they do it, what they seek to obtain, what they do not seek to obtain…

Go to the source!

Regarding spiritual teachings and particularly that of the Buddha, rely on the source! We have the incredible fortune of still having access to the original teachings; it would be foolish to neglect such an opportunity. There is such a variety of versions of this teaching, the majority so transformed, so derived – not to say far-fetched – that they teach the very opposite of what the Buddha expounded.

Moreover, what you are reading here is only "isi's version" of the Dhamma. It is my point of view based on my own experience, my own understanding. It can help broaden everyone's vision through a concrete and contemporary angle, but for a precise study of the Dhamma, nothing beats the Buddha's word. The monastic discipline, the vinaya, and many other texts, are accessible on my website en.dhammadana.org.

The proverb says it well: It is better to deal with God than with his Saints. This is all the more true since the "Saints" in question are far from being saints, not to say "un-saints."

Conclusion

Today, to find a great master worthy of the name, one must rise very early. And as far as any remain, in our deeply sick world, they remain very discreet, in the most unsuspected places and appearances.

It could be your elderly neighbour who spends her time in the shade of her cherry tree, the young nurse who cares far more about his patients than about his salary or his working hours, or perhaps even the man who holds the door for you in the morning when you arrive at your workplace.

Sense pleasures

Humans are so attached to sense pleasures that apart from a tiny handful of them, they do not even want to hear about the passage that leads behind the scenes of these so-called pleasures.

If you enjoy being in prison (samsaric), good for you! When I was in prison (jail), I sometimes got delicious fruit, good reading material, and could play sports with very friendly inmates. Yet I was relieved when my release was announced. And even then, the image is weak; the difference is dizzyingly vaster between the prison of the senses and liberation from the senses, compared to that between incarceration and judicial freedom. Moreover, many "free" people suffer far more than incarcerated people.

The trouble is that whatever I say to you, as long as your mind takes pleasure in sense pleasures, you will not have the will to seek the way out of prison.

In case you are almost ready to hear the Blessed One's teaching, know that pleasure does not exist as the mind conceives it; it is only a mirage, a kind of hallucination, a mental excitement at best, whose carrot is only a trail of brief moments of dopamine. The world of the senses is both attractive and empty, like a beautiful balloon, it is just the cleverest movie set ever. If you were used to observing your mind closely, my dear Kassinou, you would see how neither your body nor your mind will ever be able to provide you with a perception or a sensation that is truly worthwhile. The Buddha could not have been clearer on this subject:

The problem with pleasure and comfort is that one gets used to them immediately, whereas it is very difficult afterwards to do without them. Consequently, when one loses a pleasure or comfort (which is inevitable at some point), one suffers. That is why it is better not to acquire bad habits.

Even the most intense pleasure is only a fleeting excitement, the cry of satisfaction of one stepping into a cool bath after a long scorching day. And the attachment that clings to pleasure is only a nervous tic. It is a grave mistake to mistake pleasure for happiness. Pleasure results from an excitement that sticks to its desired object. Happiness, on the contrary, results from a calming that unsticks from any object.

The itching metaphor

What I recommend is to abandon the cause of "the itch"! Namely: wrong views, incorrect vision of reality, the illusory belief that pleasure offers healthy and lasting happiness and that it is worth all the effort one devotes to it. To achieve this, there is only one way: the combined practice of restraint and introspection.

Restraint and introspection

Restraint

Restraint is, on the one hand, refraining from anything that is harmful to others and to oneself, and on the other hand, renouncing anything that consumes resources (energy, effort, time, natural resources, etc.) and brings nothing useful to one's spiritual development, health, means of subsistence, or useful knowledge. In short, one refrains from all futile or unhealthy activities.

It is not about letting go of everything overnight, but about gradually assimilating each renunciation, exactly like the high jump bar being raised little by little. If one were to raise the bar from 1 meter to 3 meters all at once, it would be dangerous.

Introspection

Introspection is the contemplation of one's mind. It involves being vigilant (first of all at times) in the moment, carefully and in detail, so as to understand each mental process, to know directly how sensations and reactions appear and disappear, to gradually become capable of deep discernment about the formation of perceptions.

The consequence will be to observe through one's own experience the many psycho-mental traps of which we are almost constantly the slaves, whose roots are desire, aversion, and blindness (lobha, dosa and moha respectively in Pali).

Well precisely — I'm getting to it, don't worry! — it is restraint and introspection that place us on what the Buddha calls "the middle way", and the pursuit of itches that takes us away from it.

The path to the middle way

So according to you, the one who lives in the middle way is a perfect redneck, who does a little bit of everything, drinks a little, fishes a little, cheats a little… The middle way is not a statistical average of what the majority of humans do. In the context of the Noble Path that leads to ultimate Peace, the middle way consists of carefully avoiding all extremes, through the abandonment of everything that is not essential and with the help of keen discernment.

Many see ascetics as "extreme" individuals (I am not talking about those who adopt practices that are extreme, in that case, but about reasonable ascetics, like the monks of the Buddha's community or those who follow a similar way of life).

The majority of people live in such a fog of desires and inconsistencies that anyone leading an existence of detachment and virtue seems excessive to them. It is the frame of reference of those who live without restraint and without discernment that is skewed. A wise ascetic is not extreme, quite the contrary! Here clearly are what the two extremes are and the Middle Way recommended by the Buddha…

The Middle Way and the two extremes

The extreme of comfort (tending towards "+100")

This is giving too much to one's body and mind. This is by far the most followed extreme. One seeks to enjoy pleasures, to obtain possessions, to wield power.

The extreme of this extreme, for example, is the malicious billionaire who, regardless of the misery he generates, devotes himself exclusively to his pleasure by investing body and soul in sense pleasures and entertainment.

Who tends towards this extreme? The vast majority of humans, including most "monks"! The great masters of this extreme are capitalist spirits who accumulate and make inaccessible to those who need it the common good, in quantities far greater than they could ever use themselves during their entire lifetime.

The extreme of privation (tending towards "-100")

This is depriving one's body and mind too much. This extreme is more followed than one might suspect. One seeks to do without everything, to undereat, to neglect oneself, to fight sleep, to cost nothing at all.

The extreme of this extreme, for example, is the excessively pious religious person, who believes that the more radically they renounce everything, the more they will gain a heavenly reward in the afterlife.

Who tends towards this extreme? All ascetics with wrong views who practice severe privations, those who have themselves crucified in the hope that it will bring them closer to the god they have been conditioned to venerate, but also all kinds of individuals not necessarily believers, who self-punish for all sorts of reasons, who think they deserve nothing, who believe that humility consists of inflicting lack upon oneself, or who, among other things, forget themselves in the equation of generosity, believing that this state of mind consists of depriving oneself in order to leave everything to others.

The Middle Way (approaching "0")

This is giving just what is needed to one's body and mind. This is the path of right balance. The only extreme of this path is the minuscule number of its "followers".

There is by definition no extreme in the middle way. The good example is, of course, the monk — the authentic renunciant, not the buffoon who wears a monastic robe — who takes only what his body needs to be healthy, contenting himself with few things, without ever losing a moment in frivolities.

Observing the 10 precepts (even without the one that consists of renouncing money) already places us well on the middle way. After this essential foundation, it is mindful vigilance in the present moment that can make a great difference. Why? Because thoughts alone can suffice to plunge us into attachments, anxiety, and blindness.

Experience of the Middle Way

If I can speak of the middle way much more precisely and effectively than if I had read the writings of many great masters on the subject, this is because I have been experiencing it myself for a good thirty years (except when I was making films or looking at girls a bit too much!), and, apart from benefits hardly describable, with simple observation, I see that this balance gradually refines itself, like learning a language that refines itself with just a little listening…

When one tends, even slightly, towards one of the two extremes, one inevitably ends up experiencing periods of suffering. On the other hand, by establishing oneself in the middle way, the suffering inherent to existence is considerably reduced. In the eyes of the majority, one is perceived as a practitioner of the extreme of privation, while enjoying a fairly constant mental comfort, such as those who practice the extreme of total comfort could only dream of.

By living the middle way, one rejects all extremes, takes only what is healthy and useful, and abandons everything that is unhealthy and useless. One eats when the body needs it and not for pleasure, one sleeps and dresses with the same purpose, one discards everything that is not necessary, including distractions, social relationships, and discussions not beneficial to spiritual development.

The Middle Way is a flexible and reasonable balance…

• between renunciation and necessity,
• between effort and relaxation,
• between discipline and tolerance.

It requires right understanding, the kind that wisdom brings. Of course, the Middle Way involves virtue, that is, the observance of the precepts where one refrains from any harmful intention, speech, and action. In such a way of life, everything is done to naturally welcome meditation, that is, the full and peaceful vigilance of what is perceived in the moment, and mental stability (often clumsily translated as "concentration").

Important note: Some follow the extreme of comfort at times, and the extreme of privation at others. Even if on average they tend towards "0", they are nowhere near the middle way, which involves a constant approach to "0". It would be like taking a boiling bath one moment and an icy bath the next; the result would not be the same as constantly bathing in water at the right temperature.

The middle way is everything! It is nothing less than the greatest discovery made by the wisest of humans before his Awakening. The Buddha had bathed in the extreme of comfort, before practicing the extreme of mortification more than anyone else. Once he had discovered the middle way, he reached Awakening at the following dawn.

And here, I would have appreciated it if you had asked me: «And how does one go about approaching the middle way?».

Fine, let's pretend you did ask that question, so here is the answer: To approach the middle way, one eliminates everything that prevents it. It is not a special state, but the natural state of the balanced, healthy, and "cleansed" mind.

It is the weight of our desires, rejections, and blindnesses that prevents our mind from peacefully remaining in the middle way.

The most effective "cleaning product" was already mentioned earlier in this article: it is the combined practice of restraint and introspection. There is no doubt about it; as long as you train yourself to abandon futile activities or those related to pleasure (pure distraction, games that do not require thought, evening meals, sex, music…) keeping only those that are useful (morning meals, regular sleep without excess, simple sports, fruitful reading, constructive discussions…), you will draw closer to the Way recommended by the Buddha; that of the middle way.

You usually always fall asleep before the end of my sermons, you! And don't amplify your perceptions! Anyway, I never said I was exactly at "0.000" of the middle way, did I?

The main advantages of the Middle Way

• One obtains everything one needs without effort.
• One is very protected, one has no worries.
• One enjoys the best conditions for meditation.
• One enjoys a life where everything glides peacefully.
• One is respected and appreciated.
• One is untouchable, because one is in the right.
• One progresses by leaps and bounds towards nibbāna, the complete liberation of the mind.

The wrong criteria

Would you judge a person's wisdom by their ability to remain still? That would be absurd, wouldn't it? Hens can remain perfectly still for hours. Some great sages can be very physically dynamic. By refraining from any hasty judgment, you will wait to get to know the person, and based on their behaviors, reactions, and words, you might glimpse some wisdom dwelling within them — or not. You would certainly not rely on a ridiculous and meaningless criterion such as external stillness. Yet this is exactly what most humans do to assess an individual's degree of usefulness to the world: their professional occupation, or worse still, their "value" will be assessed based on their salary. However, how many people dedicate their time to helping others without financial compensation, and how many others are paid to spend more than half of their "working hours" chatting, drinking coffee, being bored, daydreaming, or distracting themselves on their smartphones?

A flawed conditioning

The general conditioning of our modern world inclines us to perceive an individual as a parasite because they do not engage in paid work, even though they may very well be effectively helping a number of people around them. The best example is probably the monk, who opens eyes and cleanses the minds of those willing to listen. What better service can one render to the world? Furthermore, he takes from the world just enough to survive. Conversely, this same conditioning leads us to admire a man enjoying an important position, even if he only thinks about lining his pockets at the expense of others.

This conditioning is a wrong view that needlessly makes many people feel guilty. Hence the importance of developing a correct view of reality and thus, of stepping out of all conditioning.

A problem of misplaced identity

When someone wishes to get to know you, they rarely ask what kind of person you are, nor your achievements, nor your tastes, but rather "What do you do? / What is your profession?" And you reply "I am a salesman, a baker, a postman…" and not "I do sales, bread, mail delivery…". Today, one's job has become the essence of one's identity. Losing it amounts, in a way, to losing one's identity — one becomes nobody — and only a renunciant knows and accepts that he is nobody!

Thus, when you state your job (or worse: the fact that you do not have one!), your interlocutor sizes you up; he immediately puts you in a box (we all tend to do the same, don't we?): checkout clerk at a supermarket? He will think: "Small brain, incapable of doing better." Human resources director at a large company? He will consider that you deserve respect and admiration, without knowing anything more about you. Value judgment based on your job is so deeply ingrained in people's minds that you will not escape it. The only way to avoid feeling needlessly belittled, or conversely, to avoid becoming proud? Do not attach yourself to the vision of others. Only what you truly are matters.

What do I reply when asked "what I do in life"? I cannot say that I am an ascetic; people would look at me with blank incomprehension. Nor do I say that I am on social welfare, even though that is the case, because it is the only decent means of survival for a solitary ascetic in a Western country. If someone asks me the question, I know it is just to get an idea of what kind of person I am, so I cannot give such an answer, which would give an idea too far removed from reality: a parasite who drinks beers in a bar in the afternoon, watches series all night in a completely messy room with cigarette butts everywhere, and gets up around noon smelling like a billy goat. In a rather formal context, I simply say that I write books on spirituality. That is only part of the reality, but at least it suggests a slightly more accurate description. Otherwise, I enjoy deliberately answering (the question "What do you do in life?") against the current, like: "I walk in the forest, I sit in silence, I prepare healthy food, I observe things, I like to feel gratitude and kindness, I help others see more clearly, when I have reflections that make sense, I write them down…" When someone asks about "the job," they do not care about the job; they want an idea of what the person is like, so might as well answer their expectation more directly.

The right criterion

Yet the true criterion of usefulness to society is disconcertingly simple. It is all a matter of energy; the quality of the energy you radiate. Whether you have a job or not, whether you earn millions or not a cent, if you generate a majority of beneficial energy, you are useful to the world. Whether you have a job or not, whether you earn millions or not a cent, if you generate a majority of harmful energy, you are a parasite. As you will have understood, what matters is absolutely not your paycheck, but the quality of the action, word, or intention you have at each moment, 100% of the time when you are not asleep, and not just 8 hours a day from Monday to Friday.

Do good and let them talk

The world of work has somewhat become a normalized servitude, whereas before the agricultural era, we hunted or gathered a little and were free the rest of the time. Attached to their situation as if it were the only possible choice, "modern slaves" tend to be jealous of all those who are not subject to "compulsory work," which is, moreover, entirely understandable.

Be careful not to attach yourself to what others think of you, because the majority of people have difficulty understanding this point; beliefs instilled since birth have an insurmountable weight for those who are too afraid to leave the herd. What matters is to do good and to know what you are truly worth. In short: Do what you know is good for you and for others, without worrying about what others think or say.

What does "doing good" mean?

That is another debate! But here is a clue nonetheless… Some ways to contribute beneficially to our world:

• Cultivate kindness towards everyone, without expecting anything in return. Never hesitate to take the initiative of kindness. If no one fills the village water tank, how can people drink?
• Show tolerance. Acceptance is the right way to bring satisfaction to yourself as well as to those around you.
• Practice generosity. What matters is not the price of what you give, but the quality of your mind when giving what you have (time, listening, advice, knowledge…) In this, an accomplished renunciant gives much more to the world than an ordinary millionaire ever can.
• Renounce. This is one of the best ways to contribute beneficially to the world, because by renouncing, you undo many conflicts and sufferings.
• Practice gratitude. When properly practiced, receiving is worth as much as giving.
• Exercise restraint. One who establishes oneself in contentment costs the world nothing. Moreover, when one takes little for oneself, one does not contribute to poverty. Restraint offers an example of detachment and inner balance that very positively influences society.
• Avoiding any impure act is far more beneficial to the world than being active in charitable works while generating collateral suffering through careless behavior.
• The best way to "do good" is simply by refraining from doing harm. And refraining from everything that is harmful is not only very noble, but it is also the most difficult thing to accomplish!

What if everyone did like you?

That is the most grotesque argument imaginable! Let's take anyone at random: the farmer who grows zucchinis. And if everyone did like him? No one left to grow tomatoes, lettuces, to transport the zucchinis, to sell them, to make clothes, houses, drive buses, supervise, care for, teach math… Don't worry, my poor Kassinou! There will always be more demand than available jobs, because do not forget that if people cling to a job, it is not for the pleasure of working or being useful, but out of pure attachment to money and comfort! If the majority works, it is to afford the objects of their countless desires. Ask a salaried worker to exchange his lifestyle for that of an ascetic who does not have to worry about his basic needs (food, shelter, clothing…) and has all his free time, but who totally renounces sex, alcohol, partying, television, eating after noon, music, social relationships, and so on! Ask and you will see…

The best contribution

So no, the best way to contribute to society is not to have a paid job, but on the contrary to take the minimum for oneself, to take care of one's virtue, and to cultivate detachment with a state of mind of pure kindness, which allows one to inject into our world noble energies of extraordinary quality, while setting an example of Peace and wisdom whose value infinitely exceeds the largest sums of money. How better to contribute to the good of all?

Humans' love for robots

Humans seem to love robots, robotization, and artificialization in every way: voices with perfect, almost bewitching timbres, monotonous in tone, supernatural images without any roughness, little machines that replace pets — no need to feed them and they don't poop, on the contrary, they clean the floor, mow the lawn, do the dishes…

"The 21st century will be spiritual or it will not be." Everything suggests that it will not be! The hopes for a century open to authentic spirituality seem very slim to me. Look, for example, at those Buddhist devotees who bow in veneration before a robot monk! At the very least, this "cyber master" has no ego, no desire, no anger. And when, within oneself, one sees a "self" where there is none, why not see one in a machine, after all? But still, to go as far as ordaining a robot as a monk and considering it as such…

The robot monk and the monk robots

However, perhaps that one is quite in its place: a robot monk surrounded by "robot monks" who only know how to recite texts perfectly — like machines! — without understanding what they are chanting. A robot programmed to "act like a monk" can only be a resounding success, in an era where one is considered a "good Buddhist" if one can bow properly, recite the "sacred texts" like a parrot, and sit for hours without batting an eye!

An act of devotion directed at a piece of dead wood (carved into a seated Buddha) remains understandable; it is a matter of paying homage to the perfectly accomplished one represented by a statue. But when a human bows before a machine, isn't there still cause for concern? This is yet another behavior that justifies extraterrestrials in thinking that Earth is the "psychiatric ward of the universe"!

Robots, soon more human than humans?

We can consider that if machines surpass humans, it is not so much that they are capable of doing things impossible for us, but rather that we delegate to them what we no longer want to do, out of pure laziness and to benefit from more time to devote to pleasures. In short, instead of creating robots solely for practical tasks beyond human reach, we are making them become humans in our place.

Men will soon prefer robot women, because they never have headaches, you don't have to bleed your bank account to prove your love to them, and besides, you don't even need to love them! Of course, women, for their part, will set their sights on robot men. Along the same lines, one can imagine that it is ultimately normal for Buddhists to start preferring robot monks, who will give them what human monks no longer want to do: adopt irreproachable conduct, have no greed for money, turn away from all frivolities, give impactful teachings.

What is 100% certain, on the other hand, is that although they can provide the best meditation instructions in the world, a robot will never be endowed with consciousness — because it does not come from a biological process — and will therefore never have understanding of anything, let alone wisdom and the capacity for meditation.

That robots can be extremely practical, but that they must remain what they are: tools. That seeking to humanize everything is very human — even children make cloth scraps talk — but that it is not by surrounding ourselves with machines, by sanctifying robots, or by considering them as masters that we will progress on the path of spiritual liberation.

I hear you snickering, Kassinou. Reread this article in just 25 years (around 2050)…

Conclusion

Robots will soon be disturbingly good at imitating words and behaviors that belong to wisdom. Yet, as surely as a robot baby will never appear in the belly of a robot woman, artificial wisdom will not be.

If you believe that drugs are beneficial for meditation, this article is for you. Otherwise, you can go your own way.

Psychotropics offer extremely sharp attention, but nothing more! This penetrating attention gives the feeling of piercing all mysteries, but these are only hallucinations. These are powerful and subtle, but they are only hallucinations, even if we feel ourselves at the center of the universe and everything revolves around us. This is the result of a mind momentarily free from all physical desire, which allows this total inner comfort, but it is conditioned by the drug combined with a letting go that occurs at the right moment. The equanimity that results from deep knowledge remains stable, regardless of the situation and the dominant mental state. "Chemical Awakening" is worthless, since it dissipates as quickly as the effect of the substance wears off. It is the helicopter that must come back down.

It is so common and easy to wrongly convince oneself of deep realizations when experiencing unusual states in meditation. With drugs, it is all the easier to fall into the trap. Attention surpasses anything the mind has ever known, but it is directed at anything and anyhow. One ends up even more drowned in illusion!

With drugs, erroneous beliefs are magnified under a microscope. And the problem with erroneous beliefs is that we take them for truths. Otherwise, we would abandon them immediately. Hallucinogenic drugs provide a wild attention, but like formidable dictators, they totally suppress the qualities indispensable to the development of deep Wisdom: concentration, discernment, detachment, and peace.

The helicopter druggie will declare having gone even higher than the summit, but the authentic mountaineer does not care about altitude; otherwise, they would simply take an airplane. Furthermore, a helicopter ride is expensive and very polluting (drugs cost one's mental balance and pollute one's health). Finally, let us not forget above all that what allows the step that treads the summit is all those who have preceded it. In other words, the instant that allows authentic spiritual Awakening is the entirety of the experiences that preceded it: the entire journey that was undertaken, all the mistakes that helped to understand things, all the trials that gradually allowed the development of direct knowledge of reality, this knowledge that burns away the last veils of blindness that makes us go in circles as much as the helicopter's blades.

It is likely that certain psychotropics provide help in certain therapies. However, for the development of meditation — meditation intended to put an end to attachments, erroneous views, and the root of all suffering — I strongly recommend complete abstinence from all forms of drugs, especially "hard" drugs, psychotropics, ayahuasca, cannabis, and alcohol, but also to avoid coffee, tea, and artificial "energy" drinks.

Furthermore, it must be clearly understood that in the most fundamental precepts, the Master of masters has explicitly prohibited intoxicating substances – or more precisely, anything that artificially alters consciousness.

The great secret for meditation in the best conditions is not inner comfort or even ecstasy; it is simply the absence of artificial aids: no drugs — this is blatantly obvious — but also no stimulants, no medications, no artificial vitamins, no trance, no music (whether supposedly spiritual or not), no magic potion of any kind, nothing other than the most ordinary mind, right in the very depths of our most mundane daily life!

All the same!

At first glance, despite a few divergences, all spiritual, religious, philosophical, and even socio-political currents agree on the broad lines. If, with the help of right discernment, we are capable of a deep introspection of reality – that is, perceiving it in full awareness, stripped of all influence – then we will see that this reality functions in the opposite direction to all the ideas of all the traditions of all continents. This is why the Buddha proclaims that the teaching of the Dhamma goes against the current of everything.

First of all, few are those who sincerely practice what they advocate, especially loving-kindness, and secondly, the latter is an essential quality for everyone, but unlike many religious practices, the Dhamma is far from being limited to loving-kindness. So listen to me, then you can bark!

In what way does the Dhamma go against the current of everything?

Here, among those that come to mind, are seven of the main examples of "truths" advocated by everyone that are annihilated in a flash by those who realize this precious Dhamma…

1. Achieving states

Everywhere, one seeks to achieve extraordinary states: jhānas, mystical elevation, sanctification, out-of-body experiences, communication with celestial beings or the deceased, mastery of energy, lucid dreaming, supernatural visions, etc. Thus, we hear: "He performed a miracle, he is a great Saint!"

Yet, the most blind individuals can perform the greatest "miracles," and those most inwardly accomplished can go completely unnoticed. Profound wisdom does not consist in developing spectacular things, but only in understanding reality as it is. The wise person no longer seeks to achieve anything; they are content to accept things as they are. Thus, the Dhamma states: "Know each perception without attaching yourself to it, then you will be freed from all the misery of the world."

2. Eternity

Everywhere, people speak of eternal life. They proclaim that one need not fear death, that the good news is that life never ends, that the goal is to reach the celestial realms. Thus, we hear: "Once the work here below is accomplished, we no longer need to be reborn, we can live in bliss for eternity!"

Yet, life is a continual source of dissatisfaction, even in the most subtle spheres. The goal is to put an end to this perpetual cycle of births, deaths, and miseries of all kinds. It is the desire to live that keeps us going in circles. When there is no more attachment, living new existences no longer makes sense. Thus, the Dhamma states: "Existence is perpetual misery (dukkha), but there is a path to the Unconditioned, which is the Deliverance from all this misery."

3. Beauty

Everywhere, we are overwhelmed by praise for what is perceived as "beautiful" or "pleasant" on all sensory levels (aesthetic, melodious, olfactory…): the snow-capped Alps, cherry blossoms, the morning song of the nightingale, the scent of vanilla. Thus, we hear: "So much beauty has been created, it is our duty to honor it!"

Yet, this is by no means a reality, only a way of perceiving things, and an inconstant one at that. For someone who has just regained their sight, even the most ordinary pebble is enchanting. For someone living in a "magnificent" forest, their daily view is mundane. It is the rarity of certain perceptions that makes us cling to them, and even if they become accessible to us, we cannot enjoy them for more than a few moments. Gone with the wind! Wisdom requires equanimity, that inner quality that makes us uniformly accept the visions and sensations that appear, without feeling the need to flee some or chase after others. Thus, the Dhamma states: "The world is neither beautiful nor ugly; it appears as we interpret it."

4. Enjoyment

Everywhere, people encourage us to enjoy everything: pleasure, comfort, "beautiful" things… Thus, we hear: "If Nature has given us so many joys, it is so we can enjoy them!"

Yet, it is precisely the pursuit of pleasures that generates so much suffering – not only for oneself, but sometimes for many others as well. Thus, the Dhamma states: "Authentic happiness appears only once conditioned pleasures have been abandoned."

5. Activity

Everywhere, people urge us to be ever more active, useful, productive. In the eyes of most, the more accomplishments, missions, roles, followers, and influence we have, the better it is perceived. Thus, we hear: "Act, work for the world!"

Yet, the more our wisdom grows, the more we disengage from worldly things. Because we understand that renunciation contributes to the extinction of desire and craving, while involvement in worldly things contributes to their development. The best thing to bring to the world is detachment. Moreover, it is far more difficult to do nothing than to do something! Thus, the Dhamma states: "Stop acting and observe the world. Only then will the chains of ignorance loosen by themselves."

6. Accumulation

Everywhere, people accumulate knowledge, readings, experiences, abilities, pilgrimages, titles… Thus, we hear: "Get this, and you will be admired! Get that, and the gate of heaven will open!"

Yet, ultimate fulfillment can only result from a total letting go of everything. It is abandonment, renunciation, that leads to great Awakening; all accumulation is merely clutter that hinders it, like so many cast-iron cannonballs preventing a bird from taking flight. Thus, the Dhamma states: "The mind that understands reality no longer clings to anything; it undoes, disinvests, and unaccustoms itself from everything that binds it to the world."

7. Union with the divine

Everywhere, it is asserted that supreme fulfillment is to unite with divine energy. Thus, we hear: "The finality of every being is to return to where it came from: to the divine!"

Yet, as long as it is caught in the veils of illusion, an individual never stops going in circles. The divine concept is merely a creation of the mind. Moreover, a detached mind ceases to create. So if a god creates a world, it is because he himself is caught up in attachments. What is called "divine energy" is merely a state, certainly the most subtle and least unpleasant of states, but it is still a conditioned state. Thus, the Dhamma states: "Lasting peace is tasted only once freed from all conditioning, that is, from all forms of existence, however divine it may be."

What makes all the difference

As we can see in the seven examples of "with the current/against the current" above, what allows us to tear the veil of illusion, to understand reality deeply, to free ourselves from the absurd beliefs that reign in the global herd, is above all detachment.

I often say that carelessness is the greatest danger.

Among the old books in my family, a Christian work from 1801 announces, in its preface, that it contains (among other things) prayers "to obtain a good death."

Back then, life was harsh. People knew what suffering truly meant. Because of this, they were concerned with preparing themselves to die well. If life is so hard, then one might as well be well rewarded afterwards, by enjoying a beautiful death, a good rest, a beautiful continuation… Whatever their religion, the less wise entrusted themselves to divine mercy, but the wiser ones applied themselves to cultivating a healthy state of mind in all circumstances. In any case, it was important to prepare for a peaceful death, with a mind adorned with the best possible dispositions for the rest of the journey, whatever experience awaits after death.

Nowadays, we are so preoccupied – not to say obsessed – with the frantic gobbling up of sensory pleasures that we willfully ignore death. We make it a taboo, we reject it so much, we find it so morbid, like a child who refuses to think for a single moment that Christmas break will eventually end. Worse still, we treat our elders like plague carriers, as if they smelled of death and death were the worst of diseases.

There is no greater accomplishment than doing what is necessary to die in good conditions. Refusing death is the best way to make it nightmarish. Accepting death is the right attitude for living a beneficial and lucid life. In short: preparing your death means preparing your life.

How to do what is necessary for a good death?

• Refrain from any harmful action.
• Settle disputes and avoid creating new ones.
• Avoid anything that generates stress.
• Reduce your attachments as much as possible.
• Accustom your mind to inner tranquility.
• Learn to discern what is useful from what is futile.

Closing your eyes to death is a bad idea. Not only does such an attitude not give you the opportunity to escape it, but it risks leading to a very uncomfortable situation, like someone who, immersed in his bath, having not started packing his bags nor yet obtained his passport, learns that his plane is taking off within the minute.

Lucidity and well-directed introspection make it possible to avoid a painful death. That is why I often say that carelessness is the greatest danger.

The desire to live eternally

Succeeding in life is not about finding a comfortable shelter, nor a reliable partner for mating, nor a well-paid occupation or a joyful situation of any kind, since all these things are but ephemeral. Succeeding in life is reaching the end of all ills, the only thing that is lasting and free from any drawback. The mere fact of being, of existing, inevitably brings dissatisfaction. This is why I state:

• I am therefore I suffer.

Yes, it is nonetheless the heart of what matters most, the great exit door from all misfortunes, isn't it?

Even when their existence is painful, people are so attached to it that they always want to live, again and again. The Buddha's teaching tells us that the desire for existence is the deepest, the most subtle of all desires. It is for this reason that it is also the last desire abandoned at the threshold of ultimate fulfillment.

Thus, people tremble with fear at the idea that everything ceases at the moment of death. When they learn that death is merely an abandonment of the body, that countless new lives await them, then they are completely reassured. As for me, it is exactly the opposite! Where some see a tragic end, I see a happy end; where they see eternal pleasure, I see an endless hell. I would be so relieved if everything ceased at death!

And yet, I consider my quality of life to be among the best it is possible to live. Knowing that the round of existences is far from over gives me rather the feeling of the most dizzying nightmare. Indeed, this present existence, up to now and compared to that of so many others, is very comfortable for me and I am spared from wars, serious illnesses or injuries, and heavy sufferings. However, this is a fortune that can turn at any moment, whether in a future existence or in this very one. A definitive death, without rebirth, would therefore mark the end of all problems, all fears, all sufferings. The most total ultimate peace!

A savage world

Ah, my dear Kassinou! The more you develop a correct understanding of reality, the more you will see your own words perceived – wrongly – as pessimistic. Because reality is a cruel and painful thing, but the desire to live and enjoy is so powerful that it completely veils reality. The blind see a wonderful, colorful world where there is only a round of greedy minds, deluded beings, predators and victims. A world where each day, there are thousands of murdered people, tens of thousands of raped girls, hundreds of thousands of beaten children, millions of individuals who endure a dreadful day. Does it hurt just to think about it? Imagine when you experience it yourself! Even the richest are not spared from anxiety, illness or so many other misfortunes. Even the most beautiful flower fields are nothing but battlefields where insects and animals wage the most savage wars.

Blindness

It is blindness that makes us prefer the continuity of life to definitive peace. Blindness is the fact of not understanding things as they are, the fact of perceiving sensations as something desirable. Blindness is also believing that one will eventually find a lasting situation of pleasures, or at least that one will manage to put an end to all one's problems.

I have never said nor implied that. I do not advocate living like a stark-naked fakir on his bed of nails, but simply learning to look behind the scenes, to observe reality deeply in order to understand what it is – that is to say, in any case, not the wonderful thing recommended that one perceives when bathing in blindness.

Not soaking in illusion

Through good vigilance, one can pierce reality, that is, see things as they really are, as one feels them – and not as one interprets them.

With serious training, one manages to see in such fine detail the illusory and futile aspect of things that existence appears for what it is: meaningless. Moment after moment, one ends up surfing on the crest of life, gliding on the tip of each perception. One no longer lets any physical or mental object penetrate us, for it is we who penetrate these objects.

We constantly believe that we need to fill ourselves with things, sensations, experiences... But it is precisely all of this that perpetually plunges us into dissatisfaction and blindness. When we begin to step back a little, we realize that it is precisely the opposite; that it is outside of accumulation and all desire for experience that we finally manage to be free, with a light mind.

Here is the paradox: it is when we no longer invest in life that we appreciate it. When we cease to be swallowed up, we become aware. Then we can understand reality.

Religion, what a lovely word, isn't it? Of course, I don't wish to speak of the common aspect of this term, its blind belief, devotion to a god, organized dogma, spiritual fanaticism or sterile rituals. Instead, I propose to use the word "religion" in a context of renunciation – of everything that hinders spiritual fulfillment – where this word would therefore carry the meaning of path of wisdom and nobility of heart, a state of mind inclined toward letting go of worldly things for the sake of the path leading to inner deliverance.

"The robe does not make the monk.", as the saying goes. So what does make the monk? It is religiosity that makes the monk. But beware! Not everyone who merely adopts a religion is religious! The religious person is the one who places religion within themselves, not the other way around. The difference is crucial:

The authentic religious person is the one who installs religion in their mind, not the one who settles into religion.

If "religion" has become such a poorly reputed term, so pejorative and so tarnished, it is because it has been perceived as something external, and consequently, depending on the case, something imposed, something subject to controversy, something justifying the craziest acts. Nevertheless, seen from within, it remains noble, at best the great liberating door, and at least, a generator of happiness.

Adherents of one religion or another like to surround themselves with material religious elements:

• altars
• statues, statuettes
• reliquaries
• bells, trumpets
• crosses, crescents, stars, symbols
• candlesticks, candles, incense
• "religious" images
• "holy" books
• "sacred" trinkets
• "spiritual" gadgets
• etc.

The catch, as you may have guessed, is that the external search for religion is precisely what prevents the inner search.

The most accomplished monks (of all traditions) live austerely, without burdening themselves with material representations of their religion. Conversely, places that claim to be sacred but overflow with material wealth have always struck me as empty of spiritually advanced practitioners.

Thank you for your help, Kassinou! However, it should be noted that in this latter case, these are generally people who take no interest in the decoration of their living space, which is designed and maintained by other people who frequent that place. Such religious individuals go so far as to renounce owning a private living space.

If God – straining to imagine that he could exist – is everywhere, why go looking for him in a church, a synagogue or a mosque? If an authentic religious person prefers a modest room, the forest or the mountain, why would "heavenly helpers" direct their compassionate minds toward overcrowded temples?

(Laughter) An unassailable argument, I must admit. Nevertheless, as long as there are guides in the afterlife willing to help, the place is of no importance whatsoever. Only the mind matters, and the mind is not tied to any location. And if inner liberation is achieved by one's own mind, why pray and prostrate oneself before stone or metal statues? Why go to a specific place? Why waste time clinging to texts, robes, or utensils of any kind?

You all know, at least by name, Merlin the Enchanter. But have you ever heard of "isi the Disenchanter"? To the question:

• What do you do in life?

I can answer:

• I cultivate disenchantment.

But what exactly is "disenchantment"?

It is the path leading to the exhaustion of passions, the healing of illusions, the mastery of impulses, the abandonment of the desire to create (yes, even creative deities are still in blindness!), the end of everything that generates attachment. Disenchantment is not merely being disenchanted – that is, understanding that it is not the acquisition of new knowledge, abilities and powers that leads to saving wisdom – it is above all no longer being subject to enchantment: taking life for a beautiful surprise, worthy of being experienced to the fullest, again and again.

Enchantment is blindness. It is that charm that makes us believe that sensory pleasures can bring true happiness. The paradox is that only disenchantment can bring authentic happiness; the happiness of no longer being deceived by illusion, the happiness of advancing toward the ultimate exit.

In our totally enchanted world, no one ever speaks of disenchantment. And when one becomes disenchanted with this world so full of violence, lies and toxicity of all kinds, it is not to move nobly toward disenchantment, but to go in search of other enchantments. In the vast majority of cases, even "spirituality" is just a new way of enchanting oneself!

If the mind takes pleasure in sensory pleasures, it does not wish to escape its prison, it does not even know that it is in prison. Only when it becomes aware that it is imprisoned does it begin to experience disenchantment.

When it understands that these pleasures ultimately only lead to unhappiness, the wish to free itself from attachments arises within it. One can therefore say that the will to practice renunciation is essential in life. What else could be more important? It must be acknowledged that there is at most one individual in a million who truly grasps this importance.

How to cultivate "disenchantment"?

If Kassinou were not so "enchanted", he would ask me:

• How can one effectively progress toward disenchantment?

The catch is that to be sincerely interested in disenchantment, one must already be a little disenchanted. I would answer this question, which he is not ready to ask me, as follows:

What prevents disenchantment is precisely enchantment! So we must reduce the causes of enchantment. What are the causes of enchantment? They are erroneous views regarding perceptions, in other words, believing that a pleasant visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, olfactory or mental sensation is worth seeking. And your enchanted mind, my dear Kassinou, is ready to do anything to experience pleasant sensations: it is ready to nurture ignorance and selfishness, but also sometimes dishonesty or violence. The more you let yourself be caught up in pleasures, the more enchanted you are. The problem is that it is difficult to perceive a sensation as it is, without being caught up in the excitement, the pleasure it can provide. So how can we reduce this enchantment and all the danger it generates?

The reasonable way to gradually extricate oneself from enchantment is the reduction of physical and mental activities. How to reduce these activities? The best way to achieve this is to regard as an erroneous view the idea that one must absolutely fill all one's time with physical and mental activities. The more you fill your time, the more you maintain the illusion.

Vacant moments are the most precious, for they are the only ones that show you who you are and what reality is. The absence of activity is the only opportunity for perspective, for objective vision, for perceiving things as they are. Leaving yourself free time, that is freedom!

Little by little, you therefore abandon activities and habits that are not essential to your existence, starting with the most toxic and futile. Little by little, it becomes more and more natural to renounce superfluous sensations. Little by little, the veils lift and things become clearer and clearer. By yourself, you understand the useless weight of all those enchanting veils that you cling to and that almost everyone clings to.

Then, disenchantment will naturally settle within you.

Narcissistic networks

Personally, I call them "narcissistic networks", for they have nothing "social" about them since, on the contrary, they are the best way to break genuine social bonds.

These networks currently constitute the greatest and most tenacious source of enchantments. However, be careful: turning toward simple, healthy and natural things is not enough to free oneself from enchantment. Appreciating the blaze of a setting sun or the melodious song of a morning bird are just as much enchantments. Closing Facebutt and going into the forest is good, but it is not disenchantment; it is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

One who is disenchanted lets themselves be caught by no sensation, whatever it may be. They do not blindly enjoy what they perceive, but contemplate it penetratingly. That is to say, they are vigilant to the fact that the image of the sun or the sound of the bird are nothing but ephemeral images or sounds, without any stability, that merely appear and then disappear, therefore unworthy of attachment.

In an attempt to improve my Italian a little – which I speak barely better than a Chinese cow – I sometimes have dialogues with the AI Deepseek. I mentioned to it my love for children, how much I recommend that they, as they grow up, preserve as much as possible their candor, their spontaneity and their capacity for wonder, to be respectful and serious while knowing how to have fun. Deepseek then suggested that I too should take the time to have a little fun. To which I replied that in a certain way, life is a game!

Thereupon, it asked me the following question:

• If your life were a video game, what would it be called? What special powers would your character have?

My answer:

• This game would be called "Bag of dukkha". The goal would be to empty this bag completely, until there is no more dukkha left.
  As for special powers, I would like to be able to win without having recourse to any special power.

It corrects my numerous Italian mistakes, translates the words I was unable to write in the language of Dante, congratulates me and explains the three reasons why my answer is "brilliant":

Well, you're less stupid than I thought, you know! Let me reassure you, I couldn't care less, it's just that I find its answer very interesting. Read it before doing like most of those who gripe without knowing, who judge without knowing the causes:

• Life is a game of letting go,
  life is a self to let go of.

There is a film about a penitentiary security expert who tests the effectiveness of super-maximum security prisons by posing as an inmate. He is told of a prison reputed to be impenetrable and inescapable. He takes up the challenge, having himself incarcerated. Through deep observation, great patience and remarkable skill, he manages to find the flaws that finally allow him to escape from this prison.

What if life were just a prison reputed to be impenetrable and inescapable, from which it is difficult to escape, even when we are shown the flaw? A prison whose challenge we have all taken up by entering it, only to then try to escape from it? A challenge made all the more thorny because we forget even these two facts:

• that we are in a prison
• that the goal is to get out

In this prison of life, there is only a tiny handful of inmates wise enough to understand that:

• they are imprisoned
• there is a flaw, an exit, a liberation
• such a path does not lead to escape
• such a path leads to escape

Those capable of achieving it are even rarer.

We probably did not choose this challenge. Otherwise, it would have been a perverse choice, and moreover not even a choice between existing in one way or another, but simply: "to exist or not to exist?" Out of pure curiosity, anyone would choose to exist! Not knowing existence, no one would suspect that it is better not to exist! There is no peace more perfect than the cessation of existence. The latter may offer a few fleeting thrills, but like a carpet that gathers all the dust, it accumulates problems, misfortunes, dangers, sorrows and frustrations of all kinds.

And the paradox is that if we had the opportunity to choose between existing or not, it would mean we already exist; which is why the question cannot be asked. That is why the question cannot be "to be or not to be?", but rather "to continue to be or to no longer be?"

Only the blind like you think that life is worth so much trouble to be lived. And even if they enjoy a comfortable life, it is only a brief truce in the midst of existences that often prove far more painful. Those who preach the "beauty of life" are drowned in the illusions of their oh-so-wretched sensory pleasures.

Everyone is free… in the prison! Free to remain perpetually incarcerated… or to free themselves. So my dear Kassinou, if you prefer to savor your little cake with gusto – sweet for a few seconds, excrement for hours – more power to you! But you will be welcome if you change your mind and wish to join the tiny group of those who work to find the discreet door of liberation… Before it is too late, for it is extremely rare (in time and place) to find inmates wise enough to guide you toward complete freedom.

What is the best moment? I mean a moment that, in one's existence, in one's daily life, surpasses all others.

Of course, as the Buddha so rightly stated, and there is ample material to meditate on daily with this sentence:

• Just as a trace of excrement, however small, smells bad, a moment of any existence whatsoever, however small, is not to be recommended.

In short, even what is perceived as the most intense happiness is still nothing better than crap! Otherwise, why would the wise (those who have understood reality, not the ones you see on YouTube) aspire only to free themselves from all worlds? The idea I propose today, insofar as we are still imprisoned in sensory experience, is to prefer one moment among the memories of our lived experience.

For my part, it would be utterly foolish to think of the sensations generated by copulation. It appears to me as a fireworks display of mental pollution, a dense amalgam of blindness and greed (if sex is strictly prohibited in monastic practice, it is precisely for this reason). Pity for all those lost souls who wander in the vicious trap of "romanticism", the ultimate goal of which is nothing but animalistic behavior consisting of hiding for an interaction of rubbing, pressing and inserting their hairy, oozing and foul-smelling meat carcasses, all nerves tense, veins swollen, a sorry spectacle of a ugliness that would shock any innocent soul, exacerbated by pathetic groans of submission and domination, all resulting in an impressive waste of energy that extinguishes the mind and turns bodies into flabby, sweaty, sperm-scented zombies.

Such a description of the sexual act is probably far from meeting with the approval of the vast majority of adult humans, which is quite understandable when you know that they live almost only for that. Yet any honest mind with a vision not too embellished (hence not too distorted) of things will see this description as quite in line with reality. If this experience – which has no equal for disturbing, tainting and corrupting the peace of the mind – were so "beautiful", why would it be so censored?

The moment in life that in my heart deserves the position of "best moment" will not be a moment of "tasting delicious food" either. Here again, whoever is not afraid to scratch the embellishing paint will see that food (even mom's best dish!) is only (depending on whether it goes into the mouth or not, whether it comes out or not) decay in the making, excrement in the making, or vomit in the making (besides, most of the time we don't vomit, which means that this vomit stays inside us all day). Regarding meat, let us not forget that even before consuming it, it is already nothing but a piece of corpse. Here again, under the dictatorship of one's own desire, culinary activities are idealized and elevated to the rank of the best "pastimes".

Receiving a large sum of money? Everyone agrees with the saying "Money does not buy happiness", but everyone acts as if money did buy happiness. However, what money generally brings is first excitement, then problems.

I will not dwell further on the illusions generated around visual, auditory or olfactory sensations, nor even mental ones, such as social bonds, to name just one, because all without exception are sources of dissatisfaction, not a single one, therefore, is worth attaching oneself to.

So, good heavens! you will say to me, what then is for me the best moment in this life where nothing is worth living?

The moment I place at the top of the podium of the best moments is the moment when I wake up fresh as a daisy in the morning. The awakening short of Enlightenment. "Fresh as a daisy" – that is, with a light mind, without fatigue, fresh energy. Since we are stuck in this body, what could be better than "feeling good"? For me, feeling fit, with a mind free from any worry, even stripped of everything, is better than possessing billions and powers, but with even a small weight or a small stain in the mind.

I love this first moment of the morning, when the mind is not yet taken up by ongoing activities. Naturally, the ideal is to succeed in extending this moment as much as possible throughout the day, to live like a flower that nothing can wither. A reiteration of this empty mind, a mind that does nothing, a mind that is and that's all. It is almost a foretaste of the cessation of phenomena, insofar as one dares to speak of "taste". A foretaste of where there is nothing left to taste.

Read the following text carefully, which I have just composed to illustrate my point:

• I will never tire of contemplating her when, with an assumed nonchalance, she fully exhibits her nudity. Without fearing the wind or the icy breeze, she offers herself to me entirely. Why me? I am the only man around, the only one to savor her beatific beauty. Without any need for words, her arms stretched toward the sky, she invites me to penetrate her without any restriction. As I cannot and will not resist her call, for my greatest happiness, I enter her, slowly and peacefully. The experience is sublime, it brings me renewed energy. Thus, I repeat it almost every day. How could I live without her, my beautiful forest?

Now imagine that this text comes from a relatively reliable translation, but not entirely, because the last word would have been understood slightly differently, and consequently replaced by another, designating a slightly less rooted creature… In this way, the interpretation of a text can easily take on a meaning far removed from the original intention. All the more so in the case of a dead language with numerous subtleties, such as Pali. And as the above example has just proven, a single poorly restored term can disfigure, transform, demolish an entire section of text, just as a poorly placed card can reduce the most beautiful house of cards to nothing.

Thus it is that, to name just one example, entire monastic communities in "Buddhist countries" firmly maintain the idea that there is no interval between death and the following birth, whereas the Buddha clearly stated that not only is there indeed an interval between two lives, but it turns out to be generally longer than life itself!

One misunderstands the meaning of the word "forest", and an entire people begins to believe in a completely different story! In the case of this example, the misconception is also influenced by the experience of meditators who see their past lives without the intermediate periods. They deduce that what they do not see does not exist, like those who do not believe in the existence of dreams because they do not remember them. Well! Back to our reality-distorting sheep…

It is therefore important to bear in mind that we can never fully rely on the fidelity of the texts that reach us, which are supposed to carry the teachings of the Blessed One. Hence the importance of acquiring, as much as possible, through renunciation and contemplation, the capacity for discernment, common sense, correct and reasonable vision of things. Direct inner experience (vigilance in the present moment, contemplation of phenomena, penetrating introspection) greatly helps not to get entangled in:

• the trap of superficial interpretations
• the confusion due to contradictions
• doubt concerning one's practice, a teacher, a path
• the misconception that such a sterile practice leads to Deliverance and the misconception that such a liberating practice does not lead to Deliverance
• the vain and endless spiral of sectarian quarrels and squabbles

Do you know the "three poisons"? Probably yes, but do you really know them? The mental poisons, which the Buddha calls lobha, dosa (aversion) and moha, are the root of all the world's problems. They are responsible for all your worries, misfortunes and problems! Just as cyan, magenta and yellow are the primary colors at the base of all the colors of the rainbow, these three poisons are the basis of all forms of dissatisfaction (misunderstanding, frustration, conflict, jealousy, cruelty, anxiety, slavery, etc.)

Brief reminder of the three mental poisons

Greed (lobha)

When an emotion is formed, greed is an element that pushes toward a pleasant concept. It is the idea of moving toward something, of forcing toward what attracts, of attaching, of clinging, of sticking.

Aversion (dosa)

When an emotion is formed, aversion is an element that rejects an unpleasant concept. It is the idea of fleeing, of pushing away, of hating, of refusing, of feeling hostility.

Blindness (moha)

When an emotion is formed, blindness is an element that conceals the process. It is the idea of ignoring, of disregarding consequences, of letting oneself go into carelessness, of idealizing, of fantasizing, of deluding oneself.

Emotion is always an unhealthy thing. Without mental poison, emotion is no longer constructed; the mind simply remains in "right view", that is, the correct vision of reality.

Who told you that love was an emotion? Of course, it all depends on which "love" we are talking about. There are two things that we must be very careful not to confuse. For example, when a woman falls in love with a man, gets all worked up, crazy with excitement and suddenly crazy with rage or despair when that man rejects her, then in this case, it is obviously an emotion manufactured from raw materials such as desire, excitement and attachment.

In healthy, pure, unconditional benevolence, there is no emotion, so no disappointment, lack or dissatisfaction is possible. One can speak of a healthy "feeling" or "state of mind", but not of an "emotion". Emotion is the fruit of mental poisons, the kilesas.

The anti-poisons

The anti-poisons are the opposite attitude, which consists of no longer generating emotion, instead developing beneficial states of mind.

Anti-poison for greed

Contentment, detachment, restraint, being satisfied with little, renunciation. When we speak of "renouncing", it is not in the sense of "throwing in the towel", but rather of "letting go of and doing without what is not essential to a noble way of life in accordance with wisdom (pañña)". Such an attitude offers great advantages.

• Being free from fear and anxiety.
• Not suffering from lack.
• Easily knowing happiness.
• Having a peaceful mind.

Anti-poison for aversion

Benevolence, tolerance, attention toward others, understanding, acceptance, help, generosity. Such an attitude also offers valuable advantages.

• Absence of conflict.
• Inner peace.
• Protection and appreciation from others.
• Well-being.

Anti-poison for blindness

Vigilance (over one's perceptions, states of mind…), inner introspection, development of right view, deep reflection with the aim of seeking to understand reality. Here again, the advantages are supreme.

• Dispelling confusion.
• Understanding what is appropriate to do.
• Development of Wisdom.
• Progress toward spiritual Awakening.

Pañña is the very heart of the Buddha's teaching. The problem is that not only does no word exist in English to translate it, but moreover, whoever has not cultivated it deeply is unable to understand it.

My poor Kassinou, it is precisely with such a misconception that countless ignorant people across all religions (starting with Buddhism) are convinced they have "attained Awakening". Wisdom, which is certainly an excellent thing, means a certain clear-sightedness about existence, a reasonable and humble state of mind, a certain self-mastery, at best a degree of spiritual maturity. It is the opposite of madness, which drives men to wallow body and soul in sensory pleasures.

The term "sagacity" is already closer to the meaning of pañña, but it is like the second floor of a Nepalese building being closer to Mount Everest than the first floor.

As for pañña, not having yet been able to develop it properly, I can only attempt to provide a vague definition. It is a knowledge – in the sense of understanding – of reality as it truly is. The problem is that everyone takes THEIR own vision of reality for THE reality. Seeing THE reality is far from easy, since there are so many mental filters – modifiers, distorters, maskers and embellishers – that one must manage to get rid of.

With pañña, one knows perfectly well that sensory pleasures lead only to misery. One therefore naturally turns away from even the slightest of them. Pañña shows even the slightest attachment, the slightest moment of existence – even the most peaceful, the most beatific and the most divine of all – as completely devoid of interest.

As an aside, it is precisely when one begins to glimpse that sensory and mental pleasures – hence everything that constitutes the desire for life! – offer no stable benefits, but only heavy disadvantages, that interest in renunciation and meditation arises, not before!

These three terms summarize the entire practice taught by the Blessed One; the path leading to the end of all troubles, to the ultimate fulfillment: nibbāna, the unconditioned.

• Sīla, impeccable conduct, right behavior in every situation, refraining from harming anyone.
• Samādhi, one-pointed focus, perfect mental tranquility.
• Pañña, deep knowledge of the mind, precise vision behind the great veil that blinds all beings (from the smallest bacteria to the greatest gods).

And what is the thing that allows one to develop pañña? I'll give you a thousand guesses: attention! One can also say that pañña takes root in right view (which, precisely, is generated by attention).