A few years ago, I stumbled on a book titled The Monk And The Philosopher among the new arrivals section at a bookstore. The title immediately caught my eye, and as I read the back cover, I knew that there was no way I could get myself to leave the shop without that book.

The Monk And The Philosopher is a dialogue between father and son, the father (Jean Francois Revel) being a Western philosopher, while the son (Matthieu Ricard) a biologist turned Buddhist monk. It is an exchange of world views and beliefs, and a debate of the fundamental issues of life, death and everything in between. The book is based on discussions during a ten day father-son meeting in Katmandu, written by the father, but checked, edited and approved by the son - it's a collaboration, a celebration of accepting our differences, and a wonderfully captivating read.

The reason this setting appealed to me so was that I saw a striking similarity to my own relationship with my little sister, who had just recently become a Buddhist. My world view, on the other hand is fairly close to that of the philosopher father, as I too am a naturalist and a sceptic by nature, questioning and challenging all that is taught as the "infallible truth".

My sister and I are like night and day - it's hard to find siblings with such differing personalities. Yet early on we found a single point of common ground; we were both fascinated by philosophy and the fundamental questions. Neither of us were content at leaving beliefs unquestioned.

That common ground has spawned countless of discussions and challenging, fascinating debates between us, and I think both of our world views developed and evolved though different, still irrevocably intertwined as a result of those discussions.

So understandably, I was intrigued as I saw the book - I was already dying to learn more about Buddhism to see how close the teachings of this religion were to what I perceived as my sister's thoughts - the thoughts we had shared in our discussions. That is why this book felt as if it had been written just for me. I suspect that this very same curiosity, possibly only stronger, was what motivated Revel to have this fascinating, open minded exchange of ideas with his son.

I was indeed pleased to note that the tone of the book reflected the same spirit of discussion and mutual learning that was familiar to me from my discussion with my sister. If you are expecting a family feud with chairs flying and tears flowing... well, that just isn't what you're getting. Instead, what you'll find is a father that is genuinely interested in getting inside his son's head, and a son who wants to allow that, and wants to find the common ground in between his father's differing views. The tone is warm, loving in a quiet, unspectacular way - a way that might strike some people as almost detached. The result is a captivating, thought provoking book.

This despite the circumstances that could be very difficult to handle for many parents - having a child of different religion than you yourself. Matthew Richard was raised to question values that many take for granted and to think for himself rather than blindly accept what was taught to him. Thus it was no surprise that he chose a life of science, got a degree in biology, and had a promising career ahead of him as a researcher. What must have been a surprise to his family was that just as his career was about to begin, he left it all behind and moved to India, were he has lived and worked as a Buddhist monk for more than two decades.

The Monk And The Philosopher is a book about the issue of the two world views - of a meeting of east and west. It concentrates on illuminating Buddhism, and finding similarities and differences to Western thinking. It focuses more on the Monk's views, with the philosopher eager to understand his son's chosen path. The issues discussed include, among other things, the role of science, politics, utopias, the differences in Western and Buddhist philosophy and the differences in the approach to ethics.

There is some emphasis on the Buddhist idea of mortality, the idea of re-incarnation. I was absolutely intrigued by this dialogue, regretting only that I couldn't get my say in between... often I found my self thinking "but what about...", wishing that the father would ask some specific question I had in mind. Sometimes I got my wish, sometimes I didn't - nevertheless, I learned quite a bit about Buddhism, and found that it indeed was probably what my sister was seeking. Personally, I share Revel's view in that there is most probably no afterlife - just as other afterlife scenarios, I found the Buddhist metaphysics a bit implausible, seeing a few holes in the "Big Picture". I would have had a couple of tough questions for Matthew, that were unfortunately left unasked...

That was the only flaw of the book as far as I can see - I think that Revel could have challenged his son's metaphysical beliefs much more adamantly. Also he let his son get away with a bit of anecdotal evidence... Perhaps that was because of his emphasis in understanding his son, and not necessarily going too deep into a debate.

What Revel concluded from the discussion - and I found myself agreeing, was that Buddhism is more of a collection of philosophical teachings with an emphasis on metaphysics, than a religion. Buddhism is anti-dogmatic - unlike other world religions, it does not require you to blindly believe something, in fact, it forbids you from believing something out of respect for authority:

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."
-Buddha

That perhaps explains some of the reason why a someone like Matthew, raised as a sceptic, would end up a Buddhist, instead of a Christian, or a Muslim, for example. I got the sense that the realisation that Buddhism is anti-dogmatic was a great relief to the father - as it was to me too, thinking of my sister.

What Matthew emphasised also was that Buddhism is also not an "aggressive" religion, it does not approve of proselytising. Like Revel, I found a lot that I could agree with in Matthews depiction of Buddhist ideals. In addition to the appreciation of independent thinking, the ethics of Buddhism, governed by the idea of "alleviating suffering", and "practicing what you preach" are very agreeable.

I sincerely recommend the book to anyone interested in philosophy, in Buddhism or in the fundamental questions of life and death, regardless of your personal world view. In addition to being a learning experience, I believe that for many readers this book might open up some venues of thought that they haven't explored before, and perhaps even help them re-examine the beliefs that they have always taken for granted.

Recommended: Yes