What do you think?
Rate this book
El infinito en la palma de la mano. Del Big Bang al despertar
Un diálogo entre la ciencia moderna y la filosofía budista.
La ciencia y la espiritualidad cada vez tienden más puentes de acercamiento mutuo, y este libro es una buena muestra de ello.
Matthieu Ricard , monje budista de origen francés con formación científica en biología, y Trinh Xuan Thuan, astrofísico de origen vietnamita fascinado por las perspectivas filosóficas que abren los nuevos descubrimientos científicos, conversan y comparan sus puntos de vista sobre el tiempo, el espacio, la materia, la conciencia, la ética o el espíritu.
¿ Existe un principio organizador en el universo ? Si las ondas y las partículas son aspectos complementarios de la materia, ¿dónde está la realidad? ¿Se preocupan los científicos por los fundamentos filosóficos de la ciencia que practican ? ¿ Qué opina del karma un científico ? Estas, y muchas más, son las preguntas que hallan su respuesta en esta obra. Como resultado del diálogo, emerge ante el lector una visión sorprendente del universo que no es ni totalmente materialista ni totalmente religiosa. Un universo equilibrado entre la necesidad y el azar. El astrofísico propone una teoría del cosmos como la manifestación de un principio organizativo; el budista propone un mundo sin una causa inicial única, pero en armonía gracias a la coexistencia de los fenómenos meramente físicos y la mente consciente.
Tras El monje y el filósofo, Matthieu Ricard dialoga ahora con un astrofísico de origen vietnamita sobre el universo, el tiempo o la naturaleza de la realidad.
Para los budistas, el sufrimiento proviene de la ignorancia y, por ello, están muy interesados en los descubrimientos de la ciencia. Como dice el Dalai Lama: «Tomar conciencia de los descubrimientos científicos no cuestiona nuestras creencias, sino que las pone al día».
Aunque ciencia y espiritualidad -como disciplinas del conocimiento- puedan seguir existiendo la una sin la otra, el ser humano precisa de ambas para comprenderse plenamente.
397 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
525 people are currently reading
6716 people want to read
About the author
Matthieu Ricard
228 books817 followersMatthieu Ricard, a Buddhist monk, trained as a molecular biologist before moving to Nepal to study Buddhism. He is the author of The Monk and the Philosopher (with his father, Jean-François Revel); The Quantum and the Lotus (with Trinh Thuan); Happiness; The Art of Meditation; Altruism: The Power of Compassion; A Plea for the Animals; and Beyond the Self: Conversations between Buddhism and Neuroscience (with Wolf Singer). He has published several books of photography, including Motionless Journey and Tibet: An Inner Journey, and is the French interpreter for the Dalai Lama.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 151 reviews
October 17, 2012
This is one of the most important books I have ever read in my life. The correlation between quantum physics and Buddhism is astounding and was very eye-opening for me. It really helped me to gain a new perspective on life, and helped me get over some of the disconnect a lot of North Americans can feel every day, simply from how our society is set up. I would recommend this book to anyone and everyone that wants to feel a little more connected with everything.
September 30, 2025
Buddhism And The Discussion Between Science And Religion
The nature of the relationship, and the compatibility, between the scientific and the religious outlook continues to fascinate scientists, religious people, and philosophers. Most of the many books on this subject deal with religion in general terms or concentrate on Western theistic religions (primarily Christianity and Judaism.)
"The Quantum and the Lotus" is a fascinating discussion of Buddhism and science told through articulate and intelligent exchanges between Matthieu Ricard and Trihn Xuan Thuan. Ricard earned a PhD in chemistry in France before leaving a promising career to become a Tibetan Buddhist monk. Thuan is a Vietnamese who became enamored of science at an early age and is a world-renowned astrophysicist and writer.
The most important sections of this book are the introduction, which sets the problem, and the conclusion. Science does not satisfy the spiritual needs of man -- his need to end suffering, understand himself, and the nature of his world -- to find meaning. How is it possible to find religious meaning in a world where science seems to be the only source of knowledge?
In his introduction, Ricard argues that science and Buddhism approach reality in different ways. He finds Buddhism non-dogmatic, willing to accept scientific findings and based on an introspection into the human condition with Buddha as a guide. Thuan agrees that human beings need spirituality as well as science.
The book's fifteen chapters discuss with impressing erudition specific scientific issues and how Buddhists might view them. We get discussions of the "big bang" theory of quantum mechanics, the nature of time, computers and thought, and the nature of consciousness, among other topics. For a book cast in the form of a discussion, the references are copious.
There is a great deal of discussion of Buddhism's focus on indeterminacy and change and its relation to science. Also, Ricard focuses of the deep and difficult Buddhist teaching of dependent arising. He tries to argue that this teaching shows the untenability of scientific (or metaphysical) realism -- the view that science describes an independently existing reality.
Ricard also takes issue with theism and here he gets something of a disagreement from Thuan who believes in a Spinozistic concept of God (which needs explaining) and is something of a scientific realist.
Thuan offers the following wonderful summation: "Made of stardust, we share the same cosmic history as the lions on the savannas and the lavenders in the fields. We are all connected through time and space, and thus interdependent".(page 280)
Some of this book is highly technical and Ricard, is spite of himself is over dogmatic in places. This is still a wonderful book. It teaches a "secular spirituality" in the words of Ricard and may be read with benefit by those with no particular commitment to Buddhism.
Robin Friedman
The nature of the relationship, and the compatibility, between the scientific and the religious outlook continues to fascinate scientists, religious people, and philosophers. Most of the many books on this subject deal with religion in general terms or concentrate on Western theistic religions (primarily Christianity and Judaism.)
"The Quantum and the Lotus" is a fascinating discussion of Buddhism and science told through articulate and intelligent exchanges between Matthieu Ricard and Trihn Xuan Thuan. Ricard earned a PhD in chemistry in France before leaving a promising career to become a Tibetan Buddhist monk. Thuan is a Vietnamese who became enamored of science at an early age and is a world-renowned astrophysicist and writer.
The most important sections of this book are the introduction, which sets the problem, and the conclusion. Science does not satisfy the spiritual needs of man -- his need to end suffering, understand himself, and the nature of his world -- to find meaning. How is it possible to find religious meaning in a world where science seems to be the only source of knowledge?
In his introduction, Ricard argues that science and Buddhism approach reality in different ways. He finds Buddhism non-dogmatic, willing to accept scientific findings and based on an introspection into the human condition with Buddha as a guide. Thuan agrees that human beings need spirituality as well as science.
The book's fifteen chapters discuss with impressing erudition specific scientific issues and how Buddhists might view them. We get discussions of the "big bang" theory of quantum mechanics, the nature of time, computers and thought, and the nature of consciousness, among other topics. For a book cast in the form of a discussion, the references are copious.
There is a great deal of discussion of Buddhism's focus on indeterminacy and change and its relation to science. Also, Ricard focuses of the deep and difficult Buddhist teaching of dependent arising. He tries to argue that this teaching shows the untenability of scientific (or metaphysical) realism -- the view that science describes an independently existing reality.
Ricard also takes issue with theism and here he gets something of a disagreement from Thuan who believes in a Spinozistic concept of God (which needs explaining) and is something of a scientific realist.
Thuan offers the following wonderful summation: "Made of stardust, we share the same cosmic history as the lions on the savannas and the lavenders in the fields. We are all connected through time and space, and thus interdependent".(page 280)
Some of this book is highly technical and Ricard, is spite of himself is over dogmatic in places. This is still a wonderful book. It teaches a "secular spirituality" in the words of Ricard and may be read with benefit by those with no particular commitment to Buddhism.
Robin Friedman
August 25, 2009
I really enjoyed this read. Lately, the discussions in my Buddhist class have inspired me to brush up on my physics/neurobiology knowledge. When we talk about the mind and Emptiness, there's a lot of assumptions that people throw about the classroom - not realising that these assumptions don't agree with the current findings of modern science. I wanted to clear up my own doubts and confusion. The Quantum and the Lotus really revived my love of science & philosophy. Both have a lot to offer and anything that makes us question our mundane thoughts/routine is a blessing indeed! I really recommend this for anyone curious about the Buddhist philosophy of Emptiness. It's a good foundation for any of the tricky thoughts that will naturally come up as soon as you start poking at the subject of Emptiness.
July 21, 2009
Of all the books I've read about Buddhism and science (most especially Physics) this may be the most useful and accessible. I was delighted to sit in on the conversation between this monk and physicist to see both their differences and the profound similarities in their understanding of reality.
Ricard is a penetrative thinker and he can strongly present the Buddhist view. At times I felt like Thuan, while certainly extremely competent as a physicist, may not be up to Ricard's philosophically astute standard.
When all is said and done, I find Ricard's arguments most convincing, but still remain far from convinced that consciousness cannot be grounded completely in the brain. This makes me a naturalist; not necessarily the typical materialist he would argue against. The notion that consciousness co-arises with matter is impressive, but that it can exist in a dis-embodied state goes further than the evidence allows -- in my opinion.
Ricard is a penetrative thinker and he can strongly present the Buddhist view. At times I felt like Thuan, while certainly extremely competent as a physicist, may not be up to Ricard's philosophically astute standard.
When all is said and done, I find Ricard's arguments most convincing, but still remain far from convinced that consciousness cannot be grounded completely in the brain. This makes me a naturalist; not necessarily the typical materialist he would argue against. The notion that consciousness co-arises with matter is impressive, but that it can exist in a dis-embodied state goes further than the evidence allows -- in my opinion.
Read
December 22, 2007My kind of philosophical discourse...the intersection of buddhism and science. As told by a buddhist monk and an astrophysicist. Highly recommended. I read a lot of it in the car today on a massive road trip, and I have to admit, it helped put some of my recent life changes into perspective. The part on time actually blew my mind, and re-encouraged me to get my future tattoo.
August 28, 2016
Awkwardly pretentious title aside, the framework for this book is the one of your typical Western philosophy manual, heavy on citations despite the always-fashionable dialogue style and with catchy, though not very informative, chapter titles. Some spare thoughts:
- The book is a dialogue between Science and Buddhism, but if they find a common ground (as they do) is because most of the focus is on ontology. The first 3 chapters are centered around good old Leibniz's question “Why is there something rather than nothing?” and they build up to the core part of the book, a rather inspired comparison between Western philosophy, post-quantum-mechanics-and-relativiy Physics, and Buddhism ontology.
- These chapters contain one of the best explanation of “Interdependence” (and emptiness) I ever found, mostly because it’s framed in terms of Physics facts rather than weird analogies involving fires and dreams and whatnot, like in most Buddhism textbooks.
- The chapters about (but actually against) Material Realism and Reductionism are a real, disturbing pleasure to read. They’re also the ones with nearly complete agreement between the two authors.
- The chapters discussing “Time” and “Causation” is where Thuan (the physicist) really shines and I thoroughly enjoy them.
- The Cartesian-dualism chapter covers an always-fascinating topic, even more so given that the answers from Neuroscience (consciousness is an emergent trait of complex systems) feel plausible but is actually really hard to justify; and if the Buddhist one (the stream of consciousness theory) follows more logically from the premises it’s simply too much to believe in. But at least I understood where the odd idea of reincarnation cycles comes from! And yes, it still feels pretty odd.
- The chapter on Epistemology (which once again boils down to: do abstractions exist ontologically?) is yet another one where Buddhism is (surprisingly?) more coherent that all our Platonic-inspired philosophy/science, and that’s an awkward feeling because I really like Plato anyway.
All in all it could have been a bit shorter (the final three chapters are of little use, and the double conclusion doesn't add much); however, it still makes for an interesting read and a good reference book.
- The book is a dialogue between Science and Buddhism, but if they find a common ground (as they do) is because most of the focus is on ontology. The first 3 chapters are centered around good old Leibniz's question “Why is there something rather than nothing?” and they build up to the core part of the book, a rather inspired comparison between Western philosophy, post-quantum-mechanics-and-relativiy Physics, and Buddhism ontology.
- These chapters contain one of the best explanation of “Interdependence” (and emptiness) I ever found, mostly because it’s framed in terms of Physics facts rather than weird analogies involving fires and dreams and whatnot, like in most Buddhism textbooks.
- The chapters about (but actually against) Material Realism and Reductionism are a real, disturbing pleasure to read. They’re also the ones with nearly complete agreement between the two authors.
- The chapters discussing “Time” and “Causation” is where Thuan (the physicist) really shines and I thoroughly enjoy them.
- The Cartesian-dualism chapter covers an always-fascinating topic, even more so given that the answers from Neuroscience (consciousness is an emergent trait of complex systems) feel plausible but is actually really hard to justify; and if the Buddhist one (the stream of consciousness theory) follows more logically from the premises it’s simply too much to believe in. But at least I understood where the odd idea of reincarnation cycles comes from! And yes, it still feels pretty odd.
- The chapter on Epistemology (which once again boils down to: do abstractions exist ontologically?) is yet another one where Buddhism is (surprisingly?) more coherent that all our Platonic-inspired philosophy/science, and that’s an awkward feeling because I really like Plato anyway.
All in all it could have been a bit shorter (the final three chapters are of little use, and the double conclusion doesn't add much); however, it still makes for an interesting read and a good reference book.
May 27, 2009
Matthieu Ricard is a Buddist monk of the Tibetan tradition who serves as the Dalai Lama's official French translator. Trinh Xuan Thuan is professor of astronomy at the University of Virginia. This book is framed as a conversation between the two about the areas where Buddhism and science converge, as well as where they part ways.
"The Quantum and the Lotus" is steeped in theory and philosophy, but guides the reader through most of the concepts adroitly via examples that are enumerated as part of the dialogue. This "Socratic" method helps keep the material interesting and understandable, though it may lead the reader into a false complacency by allowing the authors' questions substitute his/her own.
In general, the authors are frank in their discourse, and critical of each others' assumptions. There are a few points where this scrutiny appears to drop off a bit, especially on the side of the scientist. Every chapter also ends with the monk giving the final word on the subject at hand, which may be a slightly biased way of presenting the conversation. The book makes up for this in part by placing the scientist's final conclusions after the monk's, though it must be noted that even here he finishes with an uncritical statement in favor of Buddhist spiritualism that is not sufficiently explored in the body of the book.
The two men definitely have some profound ideas to impart, and whether one agrees with their conclusions or not, the questions are definitely worth spending some time pondering.
"The Quantum and the Lotus" is steeped in theory and philosophy, but guides the reader through most of the concepts adroitly via examples that are enumerated as part of the dialogue. This "Socratic" method helps keep the material interesting and understandable, though it may lead the reader into a false complacency by allowing the authors' questions substitute his/her own.
In general, the authors are frank in their discourse, and critical of each others' assumptions. There are a few points where this scrutiny appears to drop off a bit, especially on the side of the scientist. Every chapter also ends with the monk giving the final word on the subject at hand, which may be a slightly biased way of presenting the conversation. The book makes up for this in part by placing the scientist's final conclusions after the monk's, though it must be noted that even here he finishes with an uncritical statement in favor of Buddhist spiritualism that is not sufficiently explored in the body of the book.
The two men definitely have some profound ideas to impart, and whether one agrees with their conclusions or not, the questions are definitely worth spending some time pondering.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 26, 2011
I was quite eager to read this book, but I found it hard to follow because of the conversational way it was written. I have issues with when the Buddhist Mr. Ricard says things along the lines of "why limit science to things than can be rationalized and proven with mathematics?" That is the definition of science. Anything claiming to be science yet does not meet those criteria is either pseudo science, conjecture, or a lie. It is akin to calling a turkey-burger a hamburger. They might look similar but they are completely different. (I wish I weren't so hungry at the moment, I might have come up with a better analogy.)
Aside from that, I assume that either I am too indoctrinated with western thought patterns, or I am too dense to fully comprehend the Buddhist conceptsand because of that I had a hard time accepting many of the "truths" revealed in this book.
I felt the physicist, Mr. Thuan, led most of the conversations and hardly let the Mr. Ricard elaborate of some things.
Overall I felt that this book of quantum mysticism attempted to claim that Buddhists have had it right all along, which I personally believe that no one has it all figured out yet. It is an interesting coincidence that the Buddhist way of thinking parallels much of modern physics concepts, but to attempt to claim that the western world is finally seeing the same things the Buddha spoke about is not cool.
Aside from that, I assume that either I am too indoctrinated with western thought patterns, or I am too dense to fully comprehend the Buddhist conceptsand because of that I had a hard time accepting many of the "truths" revealed in this book.
I felt the physicist, Mr. Thuan, led most of the conversations and hardly let the Mr. Ricard elaborate of some things.
Overall I felt that this book of quantum mysticism attempted to claim that Buddhists have had it right all along, which I personally believe that no one has it all figured out yet. It is an interesting coincidence that the Buddhist way of thinking parallels much of modern physics concepts, but to attempt to claim that the western world is finally seeing the same things the Buddha spoke about is not cool.
May 17, 2019
Couldn't finish.
This was written as a conversation between a Physicist and a former scientist who rejected western society to become a Buddhist monk.
The Physicist, T. Thuan, was a good read. He was clear, explained concepts well and behaved like a professional.
The monk, M. Ricard, came across as having an agenda to discredit and/or take credit for scientific work. My view is he used any unknowns (a scientist isn't going to spout unknowns as facts) as the anvil for his hammer.
I'm exaggerating here, but it felt like Ricard was the internet troll who negates an entire debate because his opponent used the wrong form of to/too in her answer. 'Don't know what happened during the first 45-trillionth of a second of the Big Bang? Buddha said emptiness is neverending, science is completely wrong!' 'Quarks can phase change? Buddha contemplates duality of consciousness, he discovered sub-atomic particles, not scientists.'
Each time I came to his paragraphs, I couldn't filter relevant information from his screeching.
This was written as a conversation between a Physicist and a former scientist who rejected western society to become a Buddhist monk.
The Physicist, T. Thuan, was a good read. He was clear, explained concepts well and behaved like a professional.
The monk, M. Ricard, came across as having an agenda to discredit and/or take credit for scientific work. My view is he used any unknowns (a scientist isn't going to spout unknowns as facts) as the anvil for his hammer.
I'm exaggerating here, but it felt like Ricard was the internet troll who negates an entire debate because his opponent used the wrong form of to/too in her answer. 'Don't know what happened during the first 45-trillionth of a second of the Big Bang? Buddha said emptiness is neverending, science is completely wrong!' 'Quarks can phase change? Buddha contemplates duality of consciousness, he discovered sub-atomic particles, not scientists.'
Each time I came to his paragraphs, I couldn't filter relevant information from his screeching.
August 20, 2019
The Quantum and the Lotus documents dialogues between a Buddhist monk (a former biochemist) and an astrophysicist.
A major theme is illustrating Buddhists' concept of emptiness and interdependence through discussions on quantum mechanics, chaos, artificial intelligence, consciousness, etc. An argument for why meditating on emptiness benefits modern humanity is made.
Besides emptiness, Buddhists view on peripheral topics are exhibited. For example, one finds Euclid-style argument on the properties of the Creator and elementary particles; a significant portion is a discourse on hidden metaphysical assumption of scientific methods.
I think both the breadth and depth of the discussions have reached an interesting level. In reading this book I learn about the core concepts in Buddhism, and how various ideas are connected with meditation practice. Unfortunately I don't find arguments on the Creator convincing - it is a quaint attempt, but the rigor is ultimately limited by language and it is too easy to make mistakes.
A major theme is illustrating Buddhists' concept of emptiness and interdependence through discussions on quantum mechanics, chaos, artificial intelligence, consciousness, etc. An argument for why meditating on emptiness benefits modern humanity is made.
Besides emptiness, Buddhists view on peripheral topics are exhibited. For example, one finds Euclid-style argument on the properties of the Creator and elementary particles; a significant portion is a discourse on hidden metaphysical assumption of scientific methods.
I think both the breadth and depth of the discussions have reached an interesting level. In reading this book I learn about the core concepts in Buddhism, and how various ideas are connected with meditation practice. Unfortunately I don't find arguments on the Creator convincing - it is a quaint attempt, but the rigor is ultimately limited by language and it is too easy to make mistakes.
July 30, 2022
Interesting discussion between a physicist and a Buddhist. Though really, both people are Buddhists and scientists. In general, I think the physicist had more compelling and logical points. Lots of discussion about interdependence and balancing between nothing and something, which is used to explain much of the physical world by the Buddhist.
October 14, 2023
In the course of a long conversation between Ricard, the Buddhist, and Thuan, an astro physicist, the points where religion and science intersect are many and often surprising.
In response to a question by Thuan, Ricard explains what Buddhism means by “enlightenment.” It is a state of supreme knowledge, combined with compassion. It’s knowledge not in the sense of accumulating data, but an understanding of existence.
In a sense, science in its attempts to explain natural phenomena also seeks is own form of enlightenment which would be an understanding of the universe. That would come about, if there could be a unification of the theory of relativity, which describes the infinitely large, and quantum mechanics which describes the infinitely small. So far, that is an immense stumbling block which may never be overcome.
From a Buddhist perspective, that could well prove impossible as individual objects end up disappearing because of the nonreality of different entities. The idea of impermanence is essential to Buddhism. Science, or physics in this case, is intent on describing phenomena that is permanent and proceeds according to inherent laws. Buddhism has nothing against this effort, it’s just that its aim to lessen our attachment to the reality we see before us. Attachment to the reality of things means thinking they have the power to make us happy or miserable. In the end, many Buddhist thinkers have concluded that none of our concepts can adequately deal with reality. This is one area of divergence between science and Buddhism.
If none of our mental concepts can get at the heart of reality, then what is it?
Ricard answers with a paradox. “The secret of understanding reality lies in the union of emptiness and appearances. When things are empty, they appear, when they appear, they are empty.” This reality can only be grasped directly, not through rthe rational mind. Quantum physics in describing sub-atomic patterns, while it locates the existence of particles and waves whose actions occur in apparent contraction, can only do this through the medium of mathematics, not verbally.
One particularly interesting area of discussion is the nature of human consciousness, consciousness that works out the theories I’ve mentioned. Ricard suggests that Buddhism contains an element of a universal consciousness, and it is in this area that notions of “reincarnation” and “rebirth” arise. Consciousness could be roughly compared to a radio wave which transmits information but without itself being evident. Thuan tends to be skeptical, pointing out that the “ego”, the sense of self in our minds, is created internally by neural networks in the brain with no need for any kind of external consciousness.
It’s a particularly interesting book because of the ongoing dialogue, with room for disagreement and questioning, neither side becoming rigid or adamant in its beliefs.
In response to a question by Thuan, Ricard explains what Buddhism means by “enlightenment.” It is a state of supreme knowledge, combined with compassion. It’s knowledge not in the sense of accumulating data, but an understanding of existence.
In a sense, science in its attempts to explain natural phenomena also seeks is own form of enlightenment which would be an understanding of the universe. That would come about, if there could be a unification of the theory of relativity, which describes the infinitely large, and quantum mechanics which describes the infinitely small. So far, that is an immense stumbling block which may never be overcome.
From a Buddhist perspective, that could well prove impossible as individual objects end up disappearing because of the nonreality of different entities. The idea of impermanence is essential to Buddhism. Science, or physics in this case, is intent on describing phenomena that is permanent and proceeds according to inherent laws. Buddhism has nothing against this effort, it’s just that its aim to lessen our attachment to the reality we see before us. Attachment to the reality of things means thinking they have the power to make us happy or miserable. In the end, many Buddhist thinkers have concluded that none of our concepts can adequately deal with reality. This is one area of divergence between science and Buddhism.
If none of our mental concepts can get at the heart of reality, then what is it?
Ricard answers with a paradox. “The secret of understanding reality lies in the union of emptiness and appearances. When things are empty, they appear, when they appear, they are empty.” This reality can only be grasped directly, not through rthe rational mind. Quantum physics in describing sub-atomic patterns, while it locates the existence of particles and waves whose actions occur in apparent contraction, can only do this through the medium of mathematics, not verbally.
One particularly interesting area of discussion is the nature of human consciousness, consciousness that works out the theories I’ve mentioned. Ricard suggests that Buddhism contains an element of a universal consciousness, and it is in this area that notions of “reincarnation” and “rebirth” arise. Consciousness could be roughly compared to a radio wave which transmits information but without itself being evident. Thuan tends to be skeptical, pointing out that the “ego”, the sense of self in our minds, is created internally by neural networks in the brain with no need for any kind of external consciousness.
It’s a particularly interesting book because of the ongoing dialogue, with room for disagreement and questioning, neither side becoming rigid or adamant in its beliefs.
January 11, 2019
I am certainly no physicist and though familiar with many concepts explored in this fascinating book I did get a bit lost from time to time. The parallels between Buddhist teachings and the understanding now emerging from quantum physics is astonishing. That the nature of perception and reality explored over 2,000 years by Buddhist scholars is now being substantiated experimentally should be cause for the western world to at least begin to call into question the beliefs and assumptions that have been the drivers of that culture for hundreds of years. Beliefs and assumptions that while they have yielded wonders have also seen the desolation of our planet and the isolation and despair of the majority of our populations. It may be too late for our society, now dominated by the forces that have reaped the benefits of corruption, greed and selfishness that lie at the core of our civilization, but there must be room for all of us as individuals to question and then to deny, defy and opt out of the mess to something better. I hope so, otherwise there is nothing left but the counsels of despair.
November 4, 2016
Is there such a thing as reality — a unique, hard, objective, scientific reality? This question is central to the book.
Matthieu Ricard trained as a scientist, but left this life to become a Buddhist monk. Trinh Xuan Thuan was brought up in the Buddhist tradition, but went on to become an acclaimed astrophysicist.
The entire book is in dialogue form, alternating between the two authors. Their conversations are based on scientific facts and on Buddhist texts and accounts. The level of discourse is high: it is assumed the reader is conversant in the basic principles of science and philosophy, and is willing to think.
The necessary politeness and the requirement to 'respond' to what was said is perhaps a slight drawback, adding unneeded words. It is also an advantage, if a reader belongs to either 'camp', as it allows their respective champion to voice doubt or give a response to a raise question.
Matthieu Ricard trained as a scientist, but left this life to become a Buddhist monk. Trinh Xuan Thuan was brought up in the Buddhist tradition, but went on to become an acclaimed astrophysicist.
The entire book is in dialogue form, alternating between the two authors. Their conversations are based on scientific facts and on Buddhist texts and accounts. The level of discourse is high: it is assumed the reader is conversant in the basic principles of science and philosophy, and is willing to think.
The necessary politeness and the requirement to 'respond' to what was said is perhaps a slight drawback, adding unneeded words. It is also an advantage, if a reader belongs to either 'camp', as it allows their respective champion to voice doubt or give a response to a raise question.
October 20, 2022
A great book for anyone grasping for language that accurately reflects the nature of reality, and finds the language of mathematically-rooted science to be naive, narrow, and incomplete. Over the last 100 years science has shown, via quantum mechanics, that the long-standing Western belief in an independent material world is an illusion. Buddhism has understood and described this fact for thousands of years. It’s rather charming to observe Ricard patiently explaining the nature of reality to Thuan, who is admirably game here. Loved the dialog format as it helped ground these highly abstract ideas, and showed the clear mutual admiration between the two writers.
January 18, 2012
Absolutely loved this book! While I didn't necessarily agree with everything presented here, it's a great dialogue between two of my current interests - science and Buddhism. An excellent read. This book made me want to be a better person.
January 25, 2019
Oh Augusta baby that was so dense and hard to get through. I ultimately enjoyed it pushing me to think about quantum physics and meditation, amoung many other scientific theorems and philosophical principles. But it is not for the faint of heart.
May 18, 2019
I have been reading many books recently exploring quantum physics, consciousness, Vedanta and fundamental questions. So-called "Science" and so-called "Spirituality" alignments, complementarity and conflicts.
This book has been an important segment of this exploration. Definitely recommended.
This is a very fascinating discussion for me because usually, you would see people debating or discussing things but each of them is only exposed to one side of the topic. For example in the case of science and spirituality, a scientist who has never lived a life of a monk or a monk who has never done modern science. But this book is interesting, it is a discussion between 1. a scientist (astrophysicist) who was born in a Buddhist family and was exposed to Buddhist traditions since childhood and 2. a scientist (molecular biologist) who left life in modern science and became a Buddhist monk. This makes it a very important discussion as both subjects are exposed to both sides and can appreciate and discuss with a very open mind.
This reminded me of "shaastraarth" in early Bharat where two parties/subjects with debate/discuss over a subject matter but have to be genuinely exposed to other's perspective first instead of shouting at each other (like modern time debates) without knowing and doing an unbaised study of other's perspectives. Not that this book is a direct example of "shaastraarth" but the background of parties reminded of that.
This book has been an important segment of this exploration. Definitely recommended.
This is a very fascinating discussion for me because usually, you would see people debating or discussing things but each of them is only exposed to one side of the topic. For example in the case of science and spirituality, a scientist who has never lived a life of a monk or a monk who has never done modern science. But this book is interesting, it is a discussion between 1. a scientist (astrophysicist) who was born in a Buddhist family and was exposed to Buddhist traditions since childhood and 2. a scientist (molecular biologist) who left life in modern science and became a Buddhist monk. This makes it a very important discussion as both subjects are exposed to both sides and can appreciate and discuss with a very open mind.
This reminded me of "shaastraarth" in early Bharat where two parties/subjects with debate/discuss over a subject matter but have to be genuinely exposed to other's perspective first instead of shouting at each other (like modern time debates) without knowing and doing an unbaised study of other's perspectives. Not that this book is a direct example of "shaastraarth" but the background of parties reminded of that.
August 8, 2020
I gradually stopped reading this book. I think I was halfway through but I can't stand it. As another reviewer wrote below, I too found the physicist clear but the monk pretentious. Sorry Matthieu!
May 7, 2018
This is pretty much what you'd expect. The only unexpected thing for me was the Q/A format.
April 25, 2020
Insightful discussions on science and spirituality.
July 6, 2019
This one was a doozy.
I went into it not knowing a lot about the philosophical underflows of Buddhism, and quite literally nothing concerning quantum physics. Except I watched the Ant-Man movies and its in there, does that count?
I’m really curious about them both, and felt compelled to learn about them, due to the fact I’m living in countries where Buddhism is the main religion, and living in a world where quantum physics is becoming more prominent thought about. Also, its such an interesting approach: two individuals at the top of their respective games, dialogue back and forth over deep topics of mutual interest. One is a Vietnamese (Buddhist cultural background) astrophysicist teaching at the University of Virginia, the other was a research scientist in cellular genetics and became an all-out follower of Buddhism, living in the Himalayas, Bhutan and Nepal. They met at a research conference in a country in Europe I didn’t even know existed (!! Andorra? okay) and walked around the Pyrenees mountains talking about philosophy and science and had a great time and turned it into a book. I dig it.
The topics hit all the bases of critical philosophical consideration: aims and purposes; origin; time; consciousness; roles of reason and nature; after-death destinations...as well as scientific considerations, such as the vastness of space, the minuteness of quarks and atoms, and the overlap of mathematics and beauty. I learned a tremendous amount about current scientific ideas and historical Buddhism, and I really enjoyed being challenged. It was a slow read for me, due to its density and my unfamiliarity, but it did flow quite well.
As the book went on, I became more aware of the overall framework of each thinker and his respective background, and to be honest, I became less impressed with Ricard’s presentation of Buddhism as it continued. Many times I was weary and exasperated at his answers. After Thuan would bring up a topic or a question, his arguments or explanations went like this: (1) agree that Buddhism also recognizes this (2) inflate the term’s definition to make it broad and vague (in my mind, this practically already invalidates his point) (3) argument by analogy from something in nature, (very rarely referring to research, experiments, etc) (4) demanding that we “reconceptualize” what “this concept” means (diluting the essence of specific scientific discourse), and finally, and most maddeningly of all, continually emphasizes that “Buddhism rejects the notion of objective reality (p156),” our ideas are just “examples of attachments to solid reality and just a concept (p167),” “the only undeniable knowledge is pure awareness, which is free from concepts, conceits and representations (p194),” and that although Buddhism has spent considerable energies examining the laws of nature, “these laws have no inherent existence (p209).” In short, he goes to remarkable lengths with logical and linguistic gymnastics to make his worldview relevant to science, only to explicitly reject the aims of science and even the very nature of existence. Of course, the end goal and ultimate ground of all is simply nothingness anyway, but you can see how it would be maddening to read 300 pages of this. Around chapter 12, it came to me that Buddhist sorta rhymes with doofus. In addition to his shallow argumentation and aimless endeavors in explanation, I also noticed many many instances where he criticized the astrophysicist for using examples, which he declared were simply “perceptions with no real being,” and then went on to use extremely rare instances to try to “prove” his point - for example, people who claim to have had past lives, to prove reincarnation, to which the scientist responds: “this is a hard subject to study because most cases turn out to be frauds.” LOL.
At the same time, the scientist, who maintained a very fair, curious and open-minded disposition the entire time, constantly referred to former theories, important experiments, research results, scientific outcomes and mathematical concepts to introduce and support his points. These were regularly discounted by the Buddhist, who claimed they were only concepts or that science would change or that this and that and whatever. It was truly amazing, because “in practically every instance where a new discovery has led physicists into uncharted waters, they have found that mathematicians have beaten them to it (p217).” When Ricard objects to the very usage of mathematics with an embarrassing incredulity , Thuan retorts that “there’s nothing odd about the fact that what we conceive corresponds to what we perceive.” I really felt like he was arguing with a stubborn 12-year old for large parts of the book, who would demand that you “think like him, or you’ll just never get it.”
I came into this having a relatively high view of Buddhist ethics (there’s a pun in there), and being quite a bit inclined towards it as a whole. I’ve had good experiences with monks in Vietnam as well as new agey yoga types from California and hostels throughout the world. However, I had my doubts about it as it deepened. These were, unfortunately confirmed to me throughout the book. On top of that, some aspects seemed very negative. During the section on ethics, he very openly concedes that although its ultimate aim is universal compassion, one must first perfect themselves, then they can allow their light to affect others - in the conclusion and his example, it is a very passive state, and is even contrasted with the intentional international relief work done by practicing Christians. As a Christian, I believe that we are made more perfect by helping others, not as a prerequisite to helping others. To me, this lends itself more to the idea of interconnected harmony anyhow, which is ironically the aim of Buddhism. In addition, Christianity is often criticized for focusing on guilt and shame in individuals, and offering redemption from that. But Buddhism seems to more, and worse. When describing the goal of freedom, he states that there are three stages, and the final stage is “ freedom is to have your thoughts stop running together and dragging your mind down into delusion...the final stage is perfect mastery from the freedom of thoughts which can no longer do you any harm.” To me, this indicates that individuality is dangerous and perceiving your personal uniqueness is seen as very negative. This is consistent with Buddhism’s goal of avoidance of the Ego - any sense of personhood. Like, I really do kind of vibe with this in a number of ways, and just want to be one with the waves and the starts and the darkness and the depths of it all, but on the other hand, I truly believe each individual is created for purpose and with their own dynamic contribution to the life and harmony around them. So I honestly see Buddhism as a dangerous idea to buy into in the long run. And then, at the end of it all, the ironic conclusion of Buddhism is that even once one has reached this state of total removal from concepts and earthly contents, “he’s free not to be born again. But through compassion, he seeks rebirth. So as long as people suffer in the cycle of rebirths, the enlightened being will continue to reincarnate to guide them lovingly along the path of liberation.” So even once you made it, you don’t make it! So no one makes it! This is far different than typical Christianity’s vision, where “the gates of hell are locked from the inside” and the door of heaven is opened to all who knock. In this philosophical framework, it seems that not only do individuals matter, so do their intentions and actions.
I really and truly came into this book very interested and open-minded and I did learn a tremendous amount. However, my impressions afterward came out very unfavorable to the Buddhist belief system, and more than ever, I am convinced that there are fundamental differences between my thinking of the world that I cannot reconcile with it, nor am I enthusiastic to support. I recognize it has honorable ethics (as most religions do), but its philosophic framework is very shoddy and shallow. On the other hand, I finished with a very favorable impression of the Vietnamese astrophysicist and the findings of modern scientist. So much is beyond my comprehension, but I was humbled and amazed to learn about all that we as a species are learning about and excited about the future.
Two things were funny to me: based on each of their own admissions, there is still no strong idea behind the very beginning of the universe, and there is still no adequate explanation or definition of consciousness. These two things, along with other concessions and questions made by the scientist throughout the book, actually gave me more reason to believe in Christianity. Despite not living like a good one most of the time, I still feel like it answers the most meaningful questions of life in the most comprehensive way. I think Christianity’s main problem is being afraid of engaging other worldviews and simultaneously seeking common ground while standing up for its special characteristics, which in my opinion, offer solutions that they do not. Of course, all things must be done in charity, humility and harmony.
I would rate this book a 5 for the concept, a 2 for the monk, and a 5 for the scientist. We’ll give it a 4 average, okay? But really numbers are just reflections of individuals’ consciousness, and do not necessarily correspond to an actual reality anyway, so if you’re a Buddhist, don’t be trippin about the score, right?
I went into it not knowing a lot about the philosophical underflows of Buddhism, and quite literally nothing concerning quantum physics. Except I watched the Ant-Man movies and its in there, does that count?
I’m really curious about them both, and felt compelled to learn about them, due to the fact I’m living in countries where Buddhism is the main religion, and living in a world where quantum physics is becoming more prominent thought about. Also, its such an interesting approach: two individuals at the top of their respective games, dialogue back and forth over deep topics of mutual interest. One is a Vietnamese (Buddhist cultural background) astrophysicist teaching at the University of Virginia, the other was a research scientist in cellular genetics and became an all-out follower of Buddhism, living in the Himalayas, Bhutan and Nepal. They met at a research conference in a country in Europe I didn’t even know existed (!! Andorra? okay) and walked around the Pyrenees mountains talking about philosophy and science and had a great time and turned it into a book. I dig it.
The topics hit all the bases of critical philosophical consideration: aims and purposes; origin; time; consciousness; roles of reason and nature; after-death destinations...as well as scientific considerations, such as the vastness of space, the minuteness of quarks and atoms, and the overlap of mathematics and beauty. I learned a tremendous amount about current scientific ideas and historical Buddhism, and I really enjoyed being challenged. It was a slow read for me, due to its density and my unfamiliarity, but it did flow quite well.
As the book went on, I became more aware of the overall framework of each thinker and his respective background, and to be honest, I became less impressed with Ricard’s presentation of Buddhism as it continued. Many times I was weary and exasperated at his answers. After Thuan would bring up a topic or a question, his arguments or explanations went like this: (1) agree that Buddhism also recognizes this (2) inflate the term’s definition to make it broad and vague (in my mind, this practically already invalidates his point) (3) argument by analogy from something in nature, (very rarely referring to research, experiments, etc) (4) demanding that we “reconceptualize” what “this concept” means (diluting the essence of specific scientific discourse), and finally, and most maddeningly of all, continually emphasizes that “Buddhism rejects the notion of objective reality (p156),” our ideas are just “examples of attachments to solid reality and just a concept (p167),” “the only undeniable knowledge is pure awareness, which is free from concepts, conceits and representations (p194),” and that although Buddhism has spent considerable energies examining the laws of nature, “these laws have no inherent existence (p209).” In short, he goes to remarkable lengths with logical and linguistic gymnastics to make his worldview relevant to science, only to explicitly reject the aims of science and even the very nature of existence. Of course, the end goal and ultimate ground of all is simply nothingness anyway, but you can see how it would be maddening to read 300 pages of this. Around chapter 12, it came to me that Buddhist sorta rhymes with doofus. In addition to his shallow argumentation and aimless endeavors in explanation, I also noticed many many instances where he criticized the astrophysicist for using examples, which he declared were simply “perceptions with no real being,” and then went on to use extremely rare instances to try to “prove” his point - for example, people who claim to have had past lives, to prove reincarnation, to which the scientist responds: “this is a hard subject to study because most cases turn out to be frauds.” LOL.
At the same time, the scientist, who maintained a very fair, curious and open-minded disposition the entire time, constantly referred to former theories, important experiments, research results, scientific outcomes and mathematical concepts to introduce and support his points. These were regularly discounted by the Buddhist, who claimed they were only concepts or that science would change or that this and that and whatever. It was truly amazing, because “in practically every instance where a new discovery has led physicists into uncharted waters, they have found that mathematicians have beaten them to it (p217).” When Ricard objects to the very usage of mathematics with an embarrassing incredulity , Thuan retorts that “there’s nothing odd about the fact that what we conceive corresponds to what we perceive.” I really felt like he was arguing with a stubborn 12-year old for large parts of the book, who would demand that you “think like him, or you’ll just never get it.”
I came into this having a relatively high view of Buddhist ethics (there’s a pun in there), and being quite a bit inclined towards it as a whole. I’ve had good experiences with monks in Vietnam as well as new agey yoga types from California and hostels throughout the world. However, I had my doubts about it as it deepened. These were, unfortunately confirmed to me throughout the book. On top of that, some aspects seemed very negative. During the section on ethics, he very openly concedes that although its ultimate aim is universal compassion, one must first perfect themselves, then they can allow their light to affect others - in the conclusion and his example, it is a very passive state, and is even contrasted with the intentional international relief work done by practicing Christians. As a Christian, I believe that we are made more perfect by helping others, not as a prerequisite to helping others. To me, this lends itself more to the idea of interconnected harmony anyhow, which is ironically the aim of Buddhism. In addition, Christianity is often criticized for focusing on guilt and shame in individuals, and offering redemption from that. But Buddhism seems to more, and worse. When describing the goal of freedom, he states that there are three stages, and the final stage is “ freedom is to have your thoughts stop running together and dragging your mind down into delusion...the final stage is perfect mastery from the freedom of thoughts which can no longer do you any harm.” To me, this indicates that individuality is dangerous and perceiving your personal uniqueness is seen as very negative. This is consistent with Buddhism’s goal of avoidance of the Ego - any sense of personhood. Like, I really do kind of vibe with this in a number of ways, and just want to be one with the waves and the starts and the darkness and the depths of it all, but on the other hand, I truly believe each individual is created for purpose and with their own dynamic contribution to the life and harmony around them. So I honestly see Buddhism as a dangerous idea to buy into in the long run. And then, at the end of it all, the ironic conclusion of Buddhism is that even once one has reached this state of total removal from concepts and earthly contents, “he’s free not to be born again. But through compassion, he seeks rebirth. So as long as people suffer in the cycle of rebirths, the enlightened being will continue to reincarnate to guide them lovingly along the path of liberation.” So even once you made it, you don’t make it! So no one makes it! This is far different than typical Christianity’s vision, where “the gates of hell are locked from the inside” and the door of heaven is opened to all who knock. In this philosophical framework, it seems that not only do individuals matter, so do their intentions and actions.
I really and truly came into this book very interested and open-minded and I did learn a tremendous amount. However, my impressions afterward came out very unfavorable to the Buddhist belief system, and more than ever, I am convinced that there are fundamental differences between my thinking of the world that I cannot reconcile with it, nor am I enthusiastic to support. I recognize it has honorable ethics (as most religions do), but its philosophic framework is very shoddy and shallow. On the other hand, I finished with a very favorable impression of the Vietnamese astrophysicist and the findings of modern scientist. So much is beyond my comprehension, but I was humbled and amazed to learn about all that we as a species are learning about and excited about the future.
Two things were funny to me: based on each of their own admissions, there is still no strong idea behind the very beginning of the universe, and there is still no adequate explanation or definition of consciousness. These two things, along with other concessions and questions made by the scientist throughout the book, actually gave me more reason to believe in Christianity. Despite not living like a good one most of the time, I still feel like it answers the most meaningful questions of life in the most comprehensive way. I think Christianity’s main problem is being afraid of engaging other worldviews and simultaneously seeking common ground while standing up for its special characteristics, which in my opinion, offer solutions that they do not. Of course, all things must be done in charity, humility and harmony.
I would rate this book a 5 for the concept, a 2 for the monk, and a 5 for the scientist. We’ll give it a 4 average, okay? But really numbers are just reflections of individuals’ consciousness, and do not necessarily correspond to an actual reality anyway, so if you’re a Buddhist, don’t be trippin about the score, right?
January 12, 2019
The fact that science is ever approaching but never truly reaching reality is exactly what buddhism advocates. The quantum and the lotus reveals this beautifully.
January 20, 2023
Quantum and the Lotus is a book written by a Buddhist monk and an astronomer. The book includes dialogue between two people—one is from the field of Buddhism, and another is from the field of science. They talked about different things like the origin and the end of the universe, the interdependence of the phenomenon, Reincarnation, the EPR experiment, Quantum entanglement, the impermanence of nature, Foucault’s pendulum, limitations of science, the long life of the proton, how Buddhism can inspire people to live a good life, etc.
This book includes some enriching conversations between the monk and the scientist. It was a difficult read for me because sometimes I couldn`t get the gist of what they were talking about. Surprisingly, it was the monk whose writings I couldn`t comprehend! The scientist, on other hand, kept telling interesting stories about science which made me entranced. While the Buddhist monk seemed stubborn to his ideas, the scientist seemed to be pragmatic and often re-examined his own ideas. I did skip some sections that included the writings of the monk and read all the words of the scientist with delight.
There were many interesting conversations in this book. The one I found really enlightening was about the atrocities human conducted in the name of science, e.g.; the Unit 731 experiment, the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male (which was basically about the advancement of untreated syphilis), the Sterilization campaign of Swedish Government, Experiment conducted by Nazi on Jews people, and about the Atom bomb in Japan. I also learned that even in today’s world big pharmaceutical companies like Glaxo had threatened the government of South Africa by saying it will stop providing medication for treating AIDS if companies in SA try to develop their own medication at a lower price, which seems incredulous to me! Besides this, the conversation on the origin of the universe was really interesting. Some of the facts like; if there was a slight change in the physical constant at the big bang then life would not have occurred and the universe would have been barren, dark energy is preventing the big crunch from happening, neutrons would eventually be transformed into a proton by emitting electron and antineutrino if it was liberated for only 15 minutes, etc. made my mood. Some interesting information that I gathered from the monk`s side was about the reincarnation of Santi Devi.
The first thing to keep in mind before reading this book is that the book doesn`t provide any information in dept. It sort of gives an overview of different topics and fails to provide detailed information, which makes it a difficult read. While reading this book, I often felt like an intruder who didn`t understand a thing after invading the conversation of two people. The fatal flaw of this book is that it doesn`t seem to care if the reader will understand the essence.
This book includes some enriching conversations between the monk and the scientist. It was a difficult read for me because sometimes I couldn`t get the gist of what they were talking about. Surprisingly, it was the monk whose writings I couldn`t comprehend! The scientist, on other hand, kept telling interesting stories about science which made me entranced. While the Buddhist monk seemed stubborn to his ideas, the scientist seemed to be pragmatic and often re-examined his own ideas. I did skip some sections that included the writings of the monk and read all the words of the scientist with delight.
There were many interesting conversations in this book. The one I found really enlightening was about the atrocities human conducted in the name of science, e.g.; the Unit 731 experiment, the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male (which was basically about the advancement of untreated syphilis), the Sterilization campaign of Swedish Government, Experiment conducted by Nazi on Jews people, and about the Atom bomb in Japan. I also learned that even in today’s world big pharmaceutical companies like Glaxo had threatened the government of South Africa by saying it will stop providing medication for treating AIDS if companies in SA try to develop their own medication at a lower price, which seems incredulous to me! Besides this, the conversation on the origin of the universe was really interesting. Some of the facts like; if there was a slight change in the physical constant at the big bang then life would not have occurred and the universe would have been barren, dark energy is preventing the big crunch from happening, neutrons would eventually be transformed into a proton by emitting electron and antineutrino if it was liberated for only 15 minutes, etc. made my mood. Some interesting information that I gathered from the monk`s side was about the reincarnation of Santi Devi.
The first thing to keep in mind before reading this book is that the book doesn`t provide any information in dept. It sort of gives an overview of different topics and fails to provide detailed information, which makes it a difficult read. While reading this book, I often felt like an intruder who didn`t understand a thing after invading the conversation of two people. The fatal flaw of this book is that it doesn`t seem to care if the reader will understand the essence.
August 30, 2012
For great minds that question the integration of moral ethics and logical science, this would be an extremely interesting read for you. The Quantum and the Lotus provides deep insight from both perspectives, in a way that makes it as relatable as two friends discussing something over lunch rather than the traditional research report. The discussion brings up many arguments that all kinds of views would bring up in a debate room, except everything is answered and there is no violent debate. Quite stimulating if you're even just feeling like learning more about the current views of science and Buddhism in the world today, you should pick this up, especially if you're young. If you're young, I believe it'll motivate you to go online or to the library and learn some more about the world.
February 24, 2011
A very fascinating read and perfect for the inquiring mind that enjoys balancing spirituality and science. Although it took me a while to read, because it's a bit left-brained, I absolutely loved it.
November 21, 2012
Peter Edwards: Another book I am interested in reading is The Quantum and the Lotus by Matthieu Ricard and Trinh Xuan – they discuss the meaning of life from the viewpoint of a biologist and a Buddhist monk.
May 20, 2016
This book dives deep into the biggest questions of life. Discussions are held in a direct and honest fashion, and stimulates the reader to truly ponder the progression of the universe, life, and beyond. It is literature like this that makes one wiser. This book will forever be a repeat read!
July 19, 2016
A thought-provoking and inspiring dialogue between two people with more in common than at first meets the eye. The book covers a large range of topics, sometimes heavy and at other times humorous. Very grateful to have been gifted this book by a dear friend!
January 11, 2010
A great dialogue between a scientist turned monk and a buddhist turned scientist. A long and sometimes slow read, but very profound in its treatment of some very deep and important topics.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 151 reviews