Buddhism and the Environment

I attended/helped organize a panel discussion last night on “Science, Religion, and the Environment.” In retrospect I think it could have been called “Christianity and Environmental Philosophy,” as three out of four of the panelists were Christians, and the fourth was a naturalist/secularist Environmental philosopher. All of the panelists are wonderful people, and the event as a whole was very well received. I had earlier been encouraged to try to interject a question relating to Buddhism and Environmentalism, but the discussion never really lent itself to it. So here I’ll mention briefly three points which came to mind, first an observation on Christianity, second a philosophical note about Buddhism, and finally a bit of Buddhist scripture.

During the discussion it became evident that Christianity can provide three distinct models of nature appreciation. The first would suggest that nature doesn’t really matter, what matters is getting right with God (see “Left Behind” books). Second is a model of stewardship: God gave us the earth and we need to look after it well. And third is a model of God’s immanence (His very Being in the earth and everywhere else commands our respect) or at least the notion of our discoving God through our relationship with nature.

The third model is the one most heavily pushed by contemporary Christian Environmentalists, including John Hart, one of the panel members. Dr. Hart wrote What Are They Saying About Environmental Theology? & has worked extensively with Native American traditions, which may play some roll in the development of this view. Holmes Rolston III, author of Genes, Genesis and God: Values and their Origins in Natural and Human History seemed to lean more toward the second view, arguing that it is only from religion that we can find reason to value nature. Albert Borgmann, who recently came out with Real American Ethics: Taking Responsibility for Our Country expounded a fourth view, that we should view nature as a sort of gift bestowed upon us by God, and that we are responsible (individually and communaly) for recognizing the goodness of that gift. Ned Hettinger suggested that science eliminates God’s causal role in nature and that just being a good person is what is important, with religion or without. My own observation is that Christianity itself doesn’t give clear guidance about how to (or even if we should) care for nature, thus we must go elsewhere for that guidance., the panel’s non-Christian,My question, where I to ask one, would have been something like this: According to Buddhism, humankind’s problems arise from the false notion of self (asmi-mana in Pali), out of which is said to follow a need for protection, the pursuit of pleasures, the urge to possess, and the quest for security, all of which are insatiable, leading to our current consumption crisis. How can Christianity (or other philosophies) address humanity’s egotistical tendencies and the damage this leads to in the environment?

Finally, I’ll end with a verse from the Dhammapada (v.99):