Environment and Religion
“Humanity is waging war on nature. And we need to rebuild our relationship with it.” These were the opening words of a speech given by United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres at the UN’s first ever summit on the biodiversity crisis at the 75th General Assembly on 30 September 2020.[1] In the course of his remarks, Guterres exhorted, “We have to change course and transform our relationship with the natural world. By living in harmony with nature, we can avert the worst impacts of climate change and recharge biodiversity for the benefit of people and the planet.” Guterres’ call for humans to reform our behavior and transform our relationship with nature took place in the context of a global coronavirus pandemic that had by then infected over 30 million and killed over one million people, and amid an alarming environmental crisis that showed little signs of subsiding. One million species are endangered or under the threat of extinction, and the Earth’s web of life is being severely impacted by climate change, deforestation, and other ways of depleting nonrenewable natural resources.
The issue raised by the UN Chief,
however, cannot be addressed from a purely scientific, economic or sociological
perspective, weighing benefits and losses in terms of sustainability
development goals based on anthropocentric needs and wants. Indeed, the
language of relationship between human and nature by Guterres is juxtaposed
with more immediate human concerns as indicated in other parts of the remarks:
Biodiversity and ecosystems are essential for human progress and prosperity. They are central to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and implementing the Paris Agreement on climate change. Yet, despite repeated commitments, our efforts have not been sufficient to meet any of the global biodiversity targets set for 2020. Much greater ambition is needed — not just from Governments, but from all actors in society.
Let me be clear: degradation of nature is not purely an environmental issue. It spans economics, health, social justice and human rights. Neglecting our precious resources can exacerbate geopolitical tensions and conflicts. Yet, too often, environmental health is overlooked or downplayed by other Government sectors.
No doubt, matters of practical human concerns are important, and they are
usually what motivates and forces us to confront a dilemma even if we would
rather turn a blind eye in hope that it would eventually somehow “miraculously
disappear,” to paraphrase a certain world leader’s response to the coronavirus
pandemic that caused global devastation in 2020. Beside
the practical approaches to addressing the environmental crisis, the more
philosophically minded have tended to raise philosophical and ethical questions
about what rights ought to be accorded to nature and what limitations should be
placed on humans based on recognition of these rights. Such considerations over
the last five decades have become an essential part of the discourse in
environmental ethics, and cannot be ignored even when one confronts the dilemma
from fields outside of secular ethics.
However, it is also important to approach this dilemma from the
perspective of spirituality – one informed and inspired by religious faith. In
the new era full of scientific and technological development, religion
continues to have an important role in all aspects of modern life, and people
of faith are not only stakeholders in the project of life, but are called to live
out their human vocation and destiny in noble ways beyond economic
calculations, social negotiations and political compromises. This does not mean
that we do not give importance to practical considerations such as those
expressed by the UN Chief or philosophical questions raised by environmental
ethicists. I believe all these matters must be given due attention as part of
the overall global discourse on resolving the environmental crisis. However, I
believe that in this respect, religion and the environmental spirituality that
it inspires can infuse purely mechanical calculations or purely theoretical
propositions with directions for praxis that makes real contributions to
achieving human-nature flourishing and well-being.
The Buddhist scholar monk Bhikkhu Bodhi asserts:
If any great
religion is to acquire a new relevance it must negotiate some very delicate,
very difficult balances. It must strike a happy balance between remaining
faithful to the seminal insights of its Founder and ancient masters and
acquiring the skill and flexibility to formulate these insights in ways that
directly link up with the pressing existential demands of old-age. It is only
too easy to veer towards one of these extremes at the expense of the other:
either to adhere tenaciously to ancient formulas at the expense of present
relevance, or to bend fundamental principles so freely that one drains them of
their deep spiritual vitality. Above
all, I think any religion today must bear in mind an important lesson impressed
on us so painfully by past history: the task of religion is to liberate, not to
enslave. Its purpose should be to enable its adherents to move towards the
realization of the Ultimate Good and to bring the power of this realization to
bear upon life in the world. (Bikkhu Bodhi, 1994)
The sentiment of Bhikkhu Bodhi which I quoted above serves as directions which religious traditions can contribute to contemporary issues plaguing society, especially that of the environmental crisis. Although there been countless books, academic articles, conferences and symposiums addressing the topic of religion and the environment, there is still a need for ongoing voices for multiple reasons. First, as long as the environmental crisis continues to be a reality in the world, there can never be silence even if what is now said has already been said before. The environmental crisis did not develop overnight, and it would not be resolved in a short time. Persistence on the part of those who recognize the problem and tirelessly address it is essential to its mitigation and hopefully eventual remedy. In addition, old voices can be renewed, reinvigorated, and re-presented in new social contexts where both the speaker and the listener approach the issue with different understanding and sensibilities. Thus, even if the content of the message is not new, how and in what circumstances it is presented may make all the difference. As religion and the environment can impact each other, at the same time be impacted by technological and social developments, ongoing engagement in the discourse in an interdisciplinary and interreligious manner promises to be beneficial to the ultimate goal of achieving flourishing and well-being for both nature and humanity. Therefore, ongoing work in environmental spirituality must explore the following questions:
· How can a person who adheres to a religion develop a spirituality that is conducive to promoting environmental well-being?· What elements of one’s religious tradition are able to inform such an environmental spirituality?
· How can particular religious traditions motivate and sustain an environmental spirituality that does not derail from its tradition, yet at the same time, is able to respond to the present situation?
· How does a religious environmental spirituality manifest itself in ethical actions and activities relating to the environment?
· How can religious systems make a unique contribution to the overall global discourse on environmentalism itself?
· How can a religious environmental spirituality enrich and inform purely secular environmental ethics?
Scientific surveys and empirical experience confirm that religion continues to play a prominent role in the life of people in the world, which makes it wise to encourage an environmental spirituality founded upon scientific facts and positively informed and motivated by their faith. In this context, the term “spirituality” is applied to all religious systems, including nontheistic traditions like Buddhism and Confucianism. One might find term “spirituality” applied to Buddhism to be an oxymoron because Buddhism denies the existence of a “spirit” or a “self.” However, “spirituality” in its modern academic usage does not necessarily connote the presence of a “spirit” or a “soul” as understood in Western Christianity, but can also refer to a more general state or experience of inner well-being and transformation. Because of this, spirituality as a discipline can be applied to a variety of religious systems as well as non-religious contexts. The Dalai Lama says that spirituality goes beyond religion, which is “concerned with faith in the claims to salvation of one faith tradition or another, an aspect of which is acceptance of some form of metaphysical or supernatural reality, including perhaps an idea of heaven or nirvana.”[2] On the other and, spirituality is “concerned with those qualities of the human spirit – such as love and compassion, patience, tolerance, forgiveness, contentment, a sense of responsibility, a sense of harmony – which brings happiness to both self and others.”[3] Therefore, the Dalai Lama asserts that what is needed is not a “religious revolution,” but a “spiritual revolution” where “there is a “radical reorientation away from our habitual preoccupation with self” and a turning “toward the wider community of beings with whom we are connected, and for conduct which recognizes other’s interests alongside our own.”[4] Having said that, the Dalai Lama does not deny that spiritual “qualities, or virtues, are fruits of genuine religious endeavour and that religion therefore has everything to do with developing them and with what may be called spiritual practice.”[5]
Therefore, environmentalism emanating from
religious traditions is not just a series of theological propositions or dogmas
to be adhered to in order to resolve the environmental crisis, but a foundation
that inspires and impels individuals toward building more harmonious
relationship with others, including nature. Indeed, founders of what we refer
to as religious traditions are not just religious leaders, but are also models
of spiritual perfection. Thus, it is not
surprising that Bhikkhu Bodhi refers to the Buddha as a “spiritual leader”
(Bhikkhu Bodhi, 2006) and the five Buddhist qualities of faith, energy,
mindfulness, concentration and wisdom as “spiritual qualities” (Bhikkhu Bodhi,
1998, Five). In a
similar manner, the prominent Confucian scholar Tu Weiming refers to Confucian
practices as a “spiritual humanism” that holds import and meaning in terms of
our relationship with others, from self to the cosmos.[6] In
highlighting the spiritual dimension of the religious traditions in promoting
environmental well-being, we ground the discussions more deeply in the inner
experience and understanding of ultimate reality that affects our relational
lives with other people and the environment.
[1] Antonio Guterres, “Remarks to the United Nations
Biodiversity Summit,” United Nations (30 September 2020),
https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/sgsm20298.doc.htm.
[2] Dalai Lama, Ethics for the New Millenium (New York:
Putnam, 1999), epub edition.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Tu Weiming,
“Ecological Implications of Confucian Humanism,” http://msihyd.org/pdf/19manuscript_tu.pdf, 78.
No comments:
Post a Comment