Download Buddhism and the earth : environmental thought in early Buddhist

^v-^4^
BUDDHISM AND THE EARTH:
ENVIRONMENTAL THOUGHT IN EARLY BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY
By
Petra (Tara) Sieg
THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
In the Department of Philosophy
©Petra (Tara) Sieg
BROCK UNIVERSITY
December 2004
All rights reserved. This
reproduced
in
whole or
work may not be
by photocopy
in part,
or other means, without permission of the author.
*1
Acknowledgements:
For Professor R. Raj Singh
who has been
and inspiration in
and Indian Philosophy
a great influence
my
studies of
Buddhism
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PREFACE
2
INTRODUCTION
4
CHAPTER
1:
EARLY BUDDHIST THOUGHT AND THE ENVIRONMENTS
L2
The Basic Concepts of Early Buddhist Thought:
The Theory of Karma and Causality:
1.3
Ethics
1.4
The Development of the Mahayana school:
/. /
and
the
6
16
Dhammapada:
19
25
CHAPTER 2: NAGARJUNA'S CONTRIBUTION TO BUDDHIST
ONTOLOGY:
Mulamadhyamakakarika: Empirical
2.
Reality in the
2.2
The Two Truths and Sunyata (Emptiness):
Nagarjuna's Logical Analytic:
Concluding Remarks:
2.3
2.4
CHAPTER
3:
vs.
Metaphysical
50
Karma and Evolution of our Earth
3.2
Causality,
3.3
Analysis of "Environment" in Original Buddhist Teachings:
4:
30
42
44
48
TOWARDS A GREATER UNDERSTANDING OF
"ENVIRONMENT"
CHAPTER
29
CAUSALITY,
KARMA AND THE ENVIRONMENT
59
62
73
4.
Ontology and Causality
Ti
4.2
Karma
80
86
4.
3
Buddhism and Deep Ecology: An Ecological Ontology
CONCLUSION:
BIBLIOGRAPHY
96
104
Preface
In this Thesis, an attempt has
been made to
illustrate
the
link
between the
philosophy of Buddhism and our contemporary view of the environment. For the
purposes of
this paper, the focus
emerged from
India)
has been primarily on early Buddhism (as
and some early development of
later
(most notably the Madhyamika school of Nagarjuna.) A
current environmental philosophies and ethical schools
making a comparative analysis of Buddhism and
thought.
Initially,
we
Mahayana Buddhism
brief
overview of some
was considered when
differing schools of
environmental
focus on the central Buddhist doctrine of causality; which
is
expressed by the wheel of pratitya samutpada (Dependent Origination) and
includes the Four Noble Truths. This cycle of pratitya
the ontology
in
Buddhism. This theory
is
samutpada bears the crux of
borne out of the realisation of the Four
Noble Truths. Most everything about the Buddhist philosophy can be derived from
concepts raised
in
the doctrine of the Four Noble Truths.
contribution of Nagarjuna to Buddhist thought,
emptiness {svabhava) of dharmas and
We
most notably
then explore the
in his
his four-fold logical analytic. Realising the
importance of the theory of emptiness (of svabhava) of dharmas,
that there
is
a necessary connection in the Buddhist teachings
concepts of the nature of
theories on the
reality (as non-substantial)
it
can be seen
between
all
the
and the elimination of dukkha
which includes an important and necessary relationship with the Earth and other
beings within samsara. Chapter Three explores
some
differing
environmental
theories and worldviews with a brief outline of the traditional western view of the
environment and how
this
environmental problems.
ethics
may have
contributed to
Some contemporary
some
theories
in
of our current
the
field
of environmental
and philosophy were introduced including those that could be grouped
into
biocentric, ecocentric
explore further the
and anthropocentric views. This chapter also lead us to
link
between Deep Ecology (as postulated by Arne Naess) and
Buddhism. The philosophy of Deep Ecology can be compared with Buddhism due to
the fundamental concepts of interconnectedness and Impermanence.
We
can also
extrapolate a theory of Buddhist Ecological Ontology based on concepts from early
Buddhist philosophy and Deep Ecology as well as
affinities
from other schools of
environmental thought.
The
final
chapter includes a comparative analysis of central concepts of both
Buddhism and Deep Ecology. Both of these theories can be considered eco-centric
world views with an emphasis on holism. In comparing both Deep Ecology and
Buddhism, we have seen that central to both the ancient wisdom of the Buddha and
the modern approach of Arne Naess, that
of a
permanent
itself.
self
Just as the
it is
important to avoid the extreme view
and ownership when considering other
Buddha emphasised karuna (compassion)
encourages us to see the value
in all life
forms.
life
forms and the planet
to others.
Deep Ecology
Introduction
Fundamental to the philosophy of Buddhism,
"unsatisfactohness" (dukkha)
in
the insight that there
is
the world and that
Buddhism
practice of the Noble Eight Fold Path.
it
is
can be eliminated through the
also maintains that the world as
we
experience and entities that exist are bereft of any substantiality. Instead existence
is
manifest through dependent origination.
permanent. However, inherent
in this
All
things are conditional; nothing
dependent existence
is
is
the
interconnectedness of all beings and their subjection to the cosmic law of karma.
deep compassion
Part of cultivating the Eight Fold path includes a
things, 'trapped' within this cycle of
empathy (karuna)
is
crucial to the
emphasis on karuna that shows
dependent
origination. This
for
Mahayana Buddhism
other
living
compassion or
Buddhist path to enlightenment.
itself in
all
It is this
with respect to the
theory of the boddhisatva (or Buddha-to-be) since the boddhisatva willingly
postpones his/her own enlightenment to help others on the same path. One of the
ramifications of the theory of
dependent origination
anthropocentric bias placed on
doctrine of non-self
Mayahana
humans over the
becomes an ontology
realization that a
is
the
that there
is
no
natural world. Paradoxically the
within Buddhism, culminating
common boundary
nirvana. Essential to this ontology
is
life
of
exists
in
the
between samsara and
dharma
or a moral
life.
Ethics
is
not
separated from ontology.
As
my
thesis
will
show,
this basic outlook of
Buddhism has implications toward our
understanding of the Buddhist world-view with respect to the current
human
predicament concerning the environment. While humans are the only ones who can
4
attain
"Buddhahood",
it is
follow the Eight fold path
because of our
understand what
ability to
all
entities
{dharmas), there
necessity to eliminate suffering and 'save the earth' because
we ALL
means
to
and act accordingly.
Because of the interconnectedness of
to suffer,
it
suffer. This
if
we
an ontological
is
allow the earth
can be understood as an ethical outlook which can be
applied to our interaction with and treatment of the natural environment or
environment
in
the broadest sense, not just trees plants rocks etc.
approach to samsara and
in
Buddhism due
to
its
all
within
is
has been argued that there
doctrine of "non-self". However,
argue that there does exist an
the nature of Being
It
it.
original ontology in
(samma marga)
it is
is
an
no ontology
a goal of this thesis to
Buddhism; that according to
it,
essentially neither "Being nor non-being nor not non-being"
as illustrated by Nagarjuna. Within this ontology
path'
It is
that
is
is
engrained an ethic or
fundamental to our being and
'right
this includes a
compassionate relationship to our environment.
In this dissertation
I
endeavour
to trace the implications that the Buddhist world-
view has for the environmental issues that assail us
explore questions such as: can the Buddhist
way
in
our age of technology.
of thinking help us
I
will
comprehend
and possibly resolve the environmental problems of our day and age? Are there any
current environmental theories which are comparable to or share
with the classical Buddhist doctrines?
early
I
will
elucidate
common ground
some fundamental
Buddhism from an environmental perspective as
well as identify
doctrines of
some
comparable modern environmental theories such as deep ecology and general
systems theory, that seem to share
much
to gain from a
in
the wisdom of classical Buddhism and have
deeper appreciation of Buddhism.
5
Chapter
Early Buddhist Thought and the Environment
The Basic Concepts of Early Buddhist Thought:
/./
The heart
in
1:
of Buddhist philosophy begins with the concept of Causality as articulated
the doctrine of pratitya samutpada (Dependent Origination), the Four Noble
Truths and the notion of karma.
The theory of pratitya samutpada
wherein he explicates the
existence
is
is
reality of
the Buddha's empirical observation of the world
our existence. The foundation of this cycle of
expressed by the Four Noble Truths which assert that
phenomenally wrapped up
dukkha (translated often as
in
existence
is
suffering or pain, but
is
all
perhaps better understood philosophically as "unsatisfactoriness"). Dukkha for
does not just
refer to physical pain
referred to by the existentialists.
it
and suffering but also the general angst often
It is
what compels
life
to exist, to continue
and to
end. Ultimately, dukkha leads to continuous rebirth and death through the cycle of
pratitya-samutpada (Dependent origination).
Because of the existence of many different schools and developments within and
after
what we may
principles to
all
call
early
Buddhism,
it is
often difficult to apply the
same
schools of Buddhist thought. However, certain fundamentals (such
as the Four Noble Truths) are
subtle interpretation.
Some
common
of the later
to
all
of the varying schools, differing only
developments of Buddhism (especially
China and Japan) incorporate elements of their
philosophy hence the differences
in
Buddhism
own
in
in
in
culture into Buddhist
different countries.
This thesis deals primarily with the philosophy of the orthodox texts from the
Theravada (or Hinayana) school as
well as
some
early
Mahayana developments. For
6
sake of
most of the Buddhism referred
simplicity,
to herein
will
be called "Early
Buddhism".
In this thesis, an
attempt
will
be made to address and trace an understanding of
the human/environment relationship within a Buddhist context. While the
development of the
field of
"environmental ethics"
phenomenon, and there was no
"environmental studies" discipline
specific
time of the Buddha, the relationship between
given a rigorous analysis and exposed
the Buddhist tradition.
the
ability to attain
It
in
how
enlightenment. This
or even whether,
practical
what
is
an
human and
made
we
in
the
the early texts of
In
had
a part of nature, but also
us different from other
the
in
the natural world was
manner
original
was accepted that we were
However, the problem faced by the those
is
a relatively recent
Is
field of
living beings.
environmental ethics today
accord a value to the so-called world of nature. In
terms then (and Buddhism
Is
often considered a practical philosophy),
the point of an ecological ontology or ethic
if
the environment
is
accorded
no significant value? From a Buddhist perspective, the value of the environment
could be considered almost irrelevant, since
all is
Impermanent
subject to suffering and decay and objectively valueless. That
there
is
(Pali
is
-
anicca),
not to say that
no reason to address current environmental problems, but
in
order to bring
the problems within the Buddhist context, our view of the environment must be
over and above a mere value based relationship with
"valueless" and
in
enlightenment
lies
the
ability to
It.
Ultimately everything
reality within
is
an 'environmental ontology'
in
-
"see things as they really are"
(bereft of substantiality and independent characteristics.) That
argued that there
Is
Is
why
It
can be
Buddhism; a fundamental
the doctrine of dependent existence and flux to which everything
is
subject.
Our
relationship to our
divorced from our existence at
environment
all.
To
exist
is
is
an effect of karma and cannot be
to exist
in
Nature. While
some
of the
Buddhist texts address the differences between animals and humans, the so-called
wilderness and the
the Buddha's
these would appear to be mere conventions, just as
mundane usage
enlightenment
to, in
is
everything within
Some may
civilised,
of the
term
"self".
To
cultivate
ones own
the end, cultivate a better world for everyone and
it.
ask whether
we even have environmental problems,
but
if
we
consider
the meaning of dukkha and the causally based foundations for Buddhist ethics and
then assess
logically
the condition of the Earth as a direct result of
can be argued that there
is
human
action,
it
indeed a moral and ethical dilemma with regards to our
environment. Our current environmental problems can be blamed on a constant
effort to sustain
our cravings and desires for worldly gains. This
or grasping which the
There
is
Buddha considers
to be the
is
the
Second Noble Truth
same
desire
(of craving).
no singular environmental issue that can take precedent over others since
the root of the environmental
crisis is
the same. However,
let
us consider
some
the most prevalent global environmental issues facing us today. These consist
•
large scale pollution
•
resource depletion
other forms of
•
life
(i.e.
(i.e.
of groundwater, land, air
of
of:
and surface water)
of the resources that sustain both
human
life
and
on Earth)
overpopulation which directly relates to a drain on available resources as well
as contributing to the extinction of other species and competition for these
resources.
8
some
This chapter aims to succinctly explain
canon and to introduce some of the
later
of the central topics
in
the Buddhist
developments of the Mahayana
For the purposes of this thesis, these fundamental concepts
will
tradition.
be considered
in
the context of environmental problems and the ethical questions which arise
regarding our current relationship with the so-called "Natural" world.
Buddhism
not afforded any substantiality or independent
Firstly,
the 'world'
reality.
Things do not exist a priori to our experiencing them. While Buddhism can
in
is
be considered empirical to an extent
the sense that things do not exist
in
independent of our experience, our experience helps to ground knowledge.
However, just because we experience something does not mean we have
knowledge of
Things do not exist independently of
it.
to the world and the things therein. That
is
why
it is
flux;
there
is
no substantiality
not exactly accurate to
describe Buddhism as empirical. Things cannot exist independent of our experience,
because ultimately things do not
The world as we experience
it is
exist!
not permanent. Our existence
in
the world
'stream of becoming' expressed by the theory of dependent origination.
phenomena
are causally conditioned; that
of causality.
The whole
never
The world
static.
and a world of constant
of existence
is
is
is
is
a
All
to say, nothing can exist independent
dependent upon certain conditions and
is
expressed as samsara; the cycle of dependent origination
flux
and impermanence.
It is
expressed succinctly
in
the
formula:
when A
is,
when A
arises,
when B
ceases,
when B
is
B
is
not,
B
arises,
A ceases
A
is
also not.
9
This cryptic logic summarises the truth of the conditionality of
to understand the formula
moments,
since
in
makes up samsara
things.
best
It is
terms of a continuum, rather than continuous
momentahness
Everything within this cycle
all
is
implies independence of each
moment.
dependent and causally connected. This
or the conditioned world
in
is
what
which we dwell.
This cycle of Dependent Origination (Sanskrit- pratitya samutpada) bears the crux
of the ontology
in
Buddhism. This theory
is
borne out of the realisation of the Four
Noble Truths. Most everything about the Buddhist philosophy can be derived from
concepts raised
When
in
the doctrine of the Four Noble Truths.
the Buddha set out on his "quest for enlightenment", he was faced with
certain predominant philosophies of his time which included early Hinduism
and
Vedanta with the notions of Atman/Brahman, karma and the realms of many gods.
Many
of the ascetics
and gurus of the time were exploring metaphysical questions
of immortality of the soul and rules governing the Universe. However, the
found none of
this to
be satisfactory for
his quest.
The answers
did not
Buddha
lie in
metaphysical inquiry since none of them addressed the question of suffering or
unsatisfactoriness
The
first
in
the world.
Noble Truth has been often considered the most important one, but
only the starting point from which the Buddha's ethical path arises.
the Four Noble Truths was the Buddha's
Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta
first
realisation of the doctrine of the middle
The doctrine
discourse, elucidated by him
of Samyutta-nikaya
in
the
Pali
Canon.
way (between extreme
it is
in
of
the
It is his
worldliness and
asceticism) as exemplified by the Noble Eight-Fold Path.
The
first
Noble Truth
is
as such:
10
"Now
O monks
(Sanskrit - bikkhus) is the noble truth of pain (nb. can
also be translated as suffering or unsatisfactoriness) (Sanskrit - dukkha):
birth is dukkha, old age is dukkha, sickness is dukkha, death is dukkha,
sorrow, lannentation, dejection and despair are dukkha. Contact with
unpleasant things is dukkha, not getting what one wishes is dukkha. In short,
the fives skandhas of grasping are dukkha." (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 274)
The
this,
skandhas
five
Buddha
to which the
refers are
what constitutes a
living
person;
they are relative concepts which are used to describe a person without resorting to
the substantialist notion of a permanent self entity. The skandhas (groups or
aggregates) are form
(i.e.
the body), sensation, perception or volition,
predispositions and consciousness.
Rather than proclaiming that existence
there
dukkha
is
dukkha,
this
it
is
dukkha, the Buddha states rather that
the world. Despite transitory happiness or freedom from
in
always returns.
Life
cannot exist without
it.
Often considered pessimistic,
would be a misunderstanding since the remaining Three Noble Truths address
the elimination of dukkha through the Eight Fold Path.
fact; that there
is
unsatisfactoriness
The Second Noble Truth states that
Now
in
It is
merely a statement of
the world.
this
dukkha has
a cause. It
is
as follows:
O bikkhus, is the noble truth of the cause of dukkha: that craving
which leads to rebirth, combined with pleasure and lust, finding pleasure
here and there, namely the craving for passion, the craving for existence and
the craving for non-existence." (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 274)
"
This cause
and that
this,
lies
this
within
cause
is
samsara (the phenomenal world or the cycle of existence)
tanha
(thirst or clinging) to
what
is,
by nature impermanent
and therefore cannot be grasped.
This truth
is
the fact that
especially relevant to our analysis of environmental problems
much
due
to
of the world's environmental issues are directly related to a
11
decision making process which often puts econonnic gain at the cost of
environmental
described
in
integrity.
more
The Buddha says that "craving leads
detail later in
is
the analysis of the cycle of pratitya samutpada.
The Third Noble Truth can be considered the
this
to rebirth". This
dukkha can be eliminated since
it
optimistic one.
It
essentially says that
has a cause which has been
identified.
this, O bikkhus, is the noble truth of the cessation of dukkha: the
cessation without a remainder of that craving, abandonment, forsaking,
"Now
release, non-attachment." (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 274-275).
This Noble Truth bears
Buddhism because
or else the
it
some
of the foundation for the ethical ontology within
illustrates that
It Is
necessary to cultivate a certain way of
dukkha could not be eliminated.
Ethics
life
and ontology are not separate
in
Buddhist philosophy, but rather they are a dynamic interaction which constitute the
ultimate realisation of being. That
cultivating a
to say, that by realising these truths
sense of equanimity to the fact that
causality, then
is
is
one naturally sees that what
It
transitory
all is
means
'to be'.
subject to dukkha and causality and that an ethical
by realising the interconnectedness of
This leads us to the Fourth and
cessation of dukkha and
is
final
all
way
of
and
and subject to
To be means that one
life
emerges from
this
phenomena.
truth which
Is
the Eightfold Path leading to the
often considered the ethical
"Way" or Dharma of
Buddhism.
"Now
this,
bikkhus, is the noble truth of the way that leads to the cessation
is the noble Eightfold Path, namely right views, right
of dukkha: this
intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right
mindfulness and right concentration." (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 275.)
It
should be noted here that the term "right" should not be considered
based context of objective morality of
right vs.
wrong, but rather
is
In
the value-
better
12
understood as "that which leads to results conducive to the elimination (or at least
reduction) of dukkha".
The Doctrine
of the Four Noble Truths
was expounded by him
middle way and
However,
it
is
at his first
is
the crux of the Buddha's philosophy and
sermon
at Benares. It
the foundation for the
often misunderstood as a nihilist or pessimistic philosophy.
would be more apt to say that
than a pessimistic portrayal of
unsatisfactoriness
is
in
are transitory. This
it is
a 'realistic' view of the world rather
reality. It is a basic truth
that there
the world and although of course there
is
is
suffering or
also happiness; both
is
the importance of the Buddha's teaching of the Four Noble
Truths.
The Four Noble Truths
there anything permanent
impermanence
is
show
also
in
that there
is
no substantiality to dukkha nor
the cycle of samsara. This notion of flux and
an important concept
Buddhism
in
for
the world.
in
It
also has
application to the world of natural science with regards to complexity theory,
quantum physics and emergent properties
apt to say that the whole
How
a logical foundation for
it is
the theory of dependent origination and constant change
some
then can
modern
to the
we
is
in
the science of cybernetics.
always far greater than the
sum
of
its
It
would be
parts.
apply the Buddha's profound realisation of the Four Noble Truths
"Eco-Crisis"? There
is
no question among most
scientists,
environmental philosophers and governments that our modern environment
under severe unprecedented
humankind
since
is
in
humans
stress. Nature
ways never before seen or
is
is
being transformed by the activities of
anticipated. While
are technically part of Nature and therefore
it
all
can be argued that
our actions are
13
natural, this
is
rather
responsibility for
deferring our actions to our desires and taking no
like
them.
The Buddha's fourth Noble Truth challenges such an
responsible for ending suffering
doesn't
in
attitude by nnaking oneself
the world. Just because
we can do
a thing,
mean we should.
creatures on the Earth can suffer or experience dukkha. Part of our current
All
environmental dilemma
life
is
that the Earth
is
'suffering'
and cannot heal the natural
support systems at a rate that can keep up with current rates of depletion and
destruction.
A fundamental concept
interconnectedness of everything
system invariably
in
is
that of the
Nature. An effect on one element of the earth's
in
affects another;
environmental science
sometimes not
for a very long time nor in the
immediate physical area, but the connections of
all
the workings of the Earth. For example, there
ever-increasing evidence to
is
suggest that the persistence of certain pollutants
the increase
in
cancer, especially
higher rates of deformed
fish
continued use of pesticides
in
in
in
women and
and cancers
in
in
natural systems are essential to
the environment contribute to
children. Studies
have shown
areas around nuclear power plants,
agricultural areas
have affected
fish
and aquatic
life
surrounding aquatic ecosystems, and weather systems have been altered
throughout the world by
"El Nirio" effects in
has been influenced by pollution and
local
the South Pacific Ocean which
climate anomalies
in
in
turn
heavily urbanised
areas of the planet.
Complex systems
summation of
often exhibit properties that are not produced merely by the
their basic
components. This emerging
field
of the science of
complex
systems further emphasises the interconnectedness and interdependence of
all
14
Emergent properties are such
things.
characteristics
in
an environment created by
the complex interaction of parts. For example, the patterns which
fractal
geometry or the resonance of sound waves producing an
These properties cannot
constituents. Science
exist
still
conditions. This
cannot
fully calculate
is
in
how these emergent
properties
that nothing exists independent of causes and
same fundamental concept
expounded by the Buddha
new sound.
entirely
independent of the complex interaction of the
what we can be sure of
arise, but
emerge from
of interconnectedness
is
also
the Theory of dependent origination.
Because nothing exists independently of anything else
an entity that exists independent of
all
it is
illogical
conditions for existence.
to conceive of
The Buddha does
not see any necessity to defer to a creator/God or other supreme being for any
reasons to explain the Universe. The world just "IS" and such dukkha
conditions of
there
is
it.
Part of this theory of
no human soul or
self
dependent origination
independent of the world.
We
is
five
one of the
also the fact that
are
made up
skandhas or aggregates which when related a certain way and acting
each other, form an individual person. These
is
in
of the five
relation to
skandhas can be described as:
matter, sensation, perception, mental volition, and consciousness.
mentioned here that these constituents which comprise the
five
It
should also be
skandhas should
not be considered as atomist or minute substances but rather causal conditions
which create an emergent entity
(i.e.
a person.)
As
in
complexity theory, our "self"
can be considered an emergent property to be considered independently
mundane
reality,
in
a
but really cannot exist apart from underlying causes and
conditions.
15
The Theory of Karma and Causality:
1.2
Another important concept
in
Buddhist philosophy
translated as action, law of cause
be written on
this topic alone,
&
the theory of karma; often
effect, or continuity.
While entire volumes can
can be understood best here as the natural law of
it
the Universe; succinctly postulated
Is
is
in
the scientific maxim: "for every action, there
an equal and opposite reaction". The concept of karma
entirely
new
texts and
is
in
Buddhist philosophy for
it
(kamma
often considered an outgrowth of the Vedic concept of rfa (which
karma does not mean any
not
had been part of the pre-Buddhistic Hindu
considered a causal law that governed the universe.) However,
that
in Pali;, is
critical
it is
was
to note
action. It refers to intentional action which then
leads to habits or predispositions (samskaras). This
is
why karma
is
fundamental to
the cycle of dependent origination.
It is
a natural law; to which everything
is
subject. This
is
especially important
considering our treatment of the environment. For even as our past
back
way
in
karma comes
the form of pollution, global climate change or extinctions, there
to affect
when
is
some
change though our actions. Karma does not amount to fatalism, since
previous actions can be "over-written" by
new
ones. Acting without desire or
malice, one's "karmic baggage" can be reduced by cultivating the noble eight-fold
path without regards to the
final
outcome, since the Buddha realises that Nirvana
not merely release from samsara but
rebirth effects of
the
Pali
also
freedom from tanha and from the
karma.
The Buddha explains
in
is
is
this in the
Maha-kammavibhanga
sutta of the
Majhima Nikaya
Canon:
"Now there is the person who has abstained from killing living beings here...
has had right view. And on the dissolution of the body, after death, he
reappears in the states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in
16
perdition, in (a) hell. But (perhaps) the evil
kamma
producing his suffering
was done by him earlier, or the evil kamma producing his suffering was done
by him later, or wrong view was undertaken and completed by him at the
time of his death. And that was why, on the dissolution of the body, after
death, he reappeared in the states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination,
^
But since he has abstained from killing living beings
has had right view, he will feel the result of that here and now, or in
his next rebirth, or in some subsequent existence." (Majjhima Nikaya 136, tr.
Nanamoli Thera)
in
perdition,
in hell.
here...
This illustrates that the responsibility for our actions
we have
predispositions which
we can change our karma
eight-fold path,
The ultimate goal
for the
the noble eight-fold path
only
skilful
Such
this possible. Since
must be performed
of
karma
and our world.
dukkha and only through
ultimately leads to dukkha,
to eliminate the need for further karma.
baggage or continued
is
not an option either since a choice has
not to act. Even inaction
is
a type of karma.
in
of flux.
who accumulates
of
irrelevant since
this
to better ourselves
actions do not lead to the accumulation of karmic
The question
it is
like
world and
is
the
karma
if
there
is
individual soul carries
it
to the next
life
its
is
fit
the
constantly
in
it.
Intimately related to the concept of karma,
individual or the theory of
been
constant state
would not
energy can neither be created nor destroyed and
just as fundamental to
still
no soul then becomes
a universal law that applies to everything in
To say that an
Karma,
case.
person, through knowledge of the
Buddha was the elimination
is
within ourselves. Although
samsara. Inaction
existence
made
actions
skilful
make up our
lies
is
that of the non-substantiality of the
anatman (non-self or
non-soul).
The Buddha chose
to
focus on the transitory nature of reality and hence his ontology of p rati ty
samutpada.
In the
Annatra Sutta, the Buddha
is
explaining this relation between
17
karma and the
the
individual to a
Brahman who
same person who experiences
of an eternal unchanging self
is
its
asl<s
results?"
"When
I
perform an action,
am
I
The Buddha explains that the idea
one extreme and that the person
is
someone
else
is
another extreme. He cites the cycle of pratitya samutpada to explain how karma
leads to existence as
we understand
it.
continued existence but that existence
The nature
of reality as the
This illustrates not only that
is
is
embedded
In his article
within
Buddha understood
all
leads to
both dependent and causally conditioned.
it
necessarily contained the
doctrines of impermanence, dukkha and non-self. This
which
karma
was
his
profound realisation
his teachings.
on Buddhist ontology, Kenneth Inada explains the importance of the
doctrine of non-self as
Buddhism
it
relates to the
body of the Buddha's teachings.
was early characterized by the so-called Three Marks,
impermanence {anicca), suffering {dukkha), and non-self
that is,
{anattaa).
Close examination will reveal that these marks actually refer to the
"contents" of the Buddha's enlightened state. In that state of existence,
he experienced the basic momentary nature of existence, the cessation of
the nature of suffering, and the uncompounded nature of the self. In
contrast, the unenlightened state shows up the exact opposite, that is,
the incessant quest for the permanent nature of things, the
interminable rise of the nature of suffering states, and the persistence of
personal identity or the self. Our common knowledge of things would
apparently sanction such states of being, seeing nothing wrong with those
features of permanence, suffering, and self.
This is conventional
understanding, and so the Buddhist is quick to respond that in
conventionality we do not really grasp the truly natural states of
existence, but rather go against those states by manipulating the natural
flow. It seems quite obvious that life is a process, a series of moments that
continue on and on until death overtakes. (Kenneth Inada, 263-264).
The Buddha
realised that the world
and
all
dharmas were
rather than successive substantial elements. While this
ontological foundation of the philosophy of Plato
logical for
part of a continuum
was considered the
and the atomists,
it
was
just as
the Buddha to formulate a philosophy of constant becoming. This
18
philosophy
ecological
not incompatible with the scientific theories of
is
systems theory as we
In the text of
see later
in this thesis.
Nagasena, (the Milindapanha) Nagasena
Theory of Anatman (or
illustrate this theory.
does a
will
'no-soul'.)
No one
pile of chariot parts;
He uses the example
chariot part on
only
in
quantum physics and
its
own
is
expounding the Buddha's
of the chariot to help
constitutes the chariot, nor
certain relation to other parts
and functioning as
such, does a chariot emerge.
"Even as the word of "chariot" means that members join to frame a whole;
So when the groups appear to view. We use the phrase "a living being"."
(Radhakrishnan, 284.)
This theory of
anatman can
unselfishness which by
will
be explored
in
its
also be helpful
in
developing an ethical path of
very nature would be beneficial to the environment. This
Chapter
4.
Ultimately,
it
can be seen that the concepts of
anatman, karma and pratitya samutpada are
all
part of the
same ontology and
are
really not so distinct.
1.3
and the Dhammapada:
Ethics
In order to consider the environmental implications of Buddhist philosophy,
must consider the
must
follow
in
Dharmapada
ethical foundations
ethical path
order to eliminate dukkha. This section offers a brief
or
Dhammapada
early Buddhist philosophy.
is
and teachings regarding the
It is
(Pali text title)
part of the
which
is
summary
Pali
understanding. While
it is
of the
Canon and
considered to be attributed directly to the Buddha or his closest followers.
in
one
an important ethical text of
Khuddaka Nikaya of the
concerned with the 'way' or the path one travels
we
It is
order to cultivate wisdom and
considered the ethical canon of Buddhism, ethical conduct
19
is
merely an important aspect of
tine
path to enlightenment. However, ethics cannot
Buddhism. The cycle of cause and
be divorced from ontology
in
reiatedness of
central to Buddhist ontology
all
things
is
and
necessarily part of the chain of causality.
The Dhammapada
of poetic prose and
work of
is
often considered a
insight into the Buddhist doctrine.
it
was
also
ethical
the inter-
conduct
also written
is
is
in
a form
art as well as important ethical
The Buddha not only offered an
directly coordinated with his teachings of the
samutpada, but
effect,
ethical path
Four Noble Truths and pratitya
done with bhakti or
Each chapter
total devotion.
is
devoted to particular aspects of existence; such as Happiness, the Buddha, Anger,
Craving and the Noble Eight-fold Path. These chapters
consequences of such actions
our existence
Dhammapada summarises
cessation of dukkha: abstain from
and
clarify
in
samsara. This relates to the
evil
the truths of the path leading to the
conduct, promote goodness and compassion
your mind. This practical application of the dharma
Dhammapada
is
the
and karma.
central doctrines of causality
Essentially, the
in
illustrate directly
illustrated in the
a direct result of the ontology of the Four Noble Truths
and
pratitya samutpada.
The Dhammapada
essentially translates as "the path of virtue". Since
concerned with actions or a "path" to enlightenment (making
to be a 'practical philosophy'), this code of ethics
practice
and to the
living of a
Part of the Eight-fold path
is
righteous
life
is
it
Buddhism
considered by
is
many
fundamental to Buddhist
free from the accumulation of karma.
concerned with
right action or doing
karma which does
not accumulate as karmic baggage. Although an individual "self" does not
accumulate karma, bad actions accrue bad results
in
the cycle of samsara.
20
r
Therefore, Buddhist ethics
non-violence, right action or "good
who harbour such negative thoughts "hatred
those
{Dhammapada
Buddhism
1.3, Sarvepalli
calls for
Ultimately
ethical
in this
all
life
is
in
the
transitory.
the actions of the one seeking
in
The
Dhammapada
foolish to 'cling' to
it is
canon follows
ethical
this
will
illustrates that
inevitably follow.
on the fact that the
By 'recommending'
one can overcome one's desires and
any particular thing,
ontology through
actions. Ultimately clinging to sense pleasures, excesses
unhappiness
reflect
Buddhist ontological position. Since nothing
directly related to the
world has any substantiality,
all is
never cease".
and become free from the cycle of dependent origination.
the prescribed actions
conduct
will
karma" for
Radhakrishnan, 292.)
sensual and emotional restraint
to live the righteous
since
call for
its
prescribed
and worldly things,
restraint, the
Dhammapada
cultivate equanimity
and
ultimately happiness/contentment.
This
is
exemplified
in
the Chapter on tanha (thirst or craving). Verse 14 states:
"Those who are slaves to passions follow the stream (of craving)as a spider
the web which he has made for himself. Wise people, when they have cut
this (craving), leave the world, free from cares, leaving all sorrow (dukkha)
behind." Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 319.
Giving into sense, one can
become
a slave to temptation. This can lead to
overconsumption and weakness.
"As the wind throws down a tree of little strength, so indeed does Mara
overthrow him who lives looking for sense pleasures, uncontrolled in his
sense, immoderate in eating, indolent and of low vitality"
(DP 1.7, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 292)
When
evil
addressing the problem of
evil in
the world, the
simply leads to more dukkha. There
is
Dhammapada
no need to defer to an
explains
evil entity
how
on
21
whom
to place 'blame', but merely by giving into desires, temptation, selfishness,
"devoid of self control" does
Evil
evil exist.
actions ultimately lead to
more
performed. "The evil-doer suffers
suffering by lamenting the evil actions
in this
world... seeing the evil of his
own
actions."
(DP, 1.15, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 293.)
more important the mere
Action
is
to live
one good day than
a
religious devotion in Buddhist ethics. It
is
better
hundred years of good intentions. Good karma can
outweigh the bad with proper bhakti. One must perform his/her karma with
devotion and freedom from worldly desires. To cultivate equanimity of mind
important
following the ethical path.
in
When one
can see the world "as
from passions and useless thoughts, then contentment
well
guarded
is
the bearer of happiness". (DP
III. 4,
A note should be made here about the concept
arises.
it
is
is",
very
free
"Thought which
is
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 295.)
of happiness
in
Buddhism.
Happiness does not refer to the mere feeling of joy upon doing something fun or
engaging
in
worldly delights. Its philosophical meaning refers to a profound
and thus a kind of freedom from
realisation in the truth
this realisation
and freedom that happiness
Buddhism. That there
free from
it,
even
is
dukkha
in this
worldly
in this
life.
arises. This
world does not
In considering
fetters of the world. It
is
is in
the positive insight of
mean
that one cannot be
what makes people happy,
Buddhist ethics recognises the allure of worldly riches and possessions. However,
regardless of
therefore
if
all is
you have Viches'
fleeting,
to material things.
The
in this life,
death treats everyone the same,
impermanent, transitory and
foolish
it
would be
foolish to hold fast
one thinks of 'ownership' of things and become
22
agitated and tormented.
When one
of things, then the truth
is
The concept
this
is
in
the
one
is
the 'guardian' or caretal<er
perceived.
of self-discipline
expressed
realises that
is
integral to the cultivation of the path of virtue
Dhammapada
section on "the Self". While the
not ascribe to the concept of a permanent
self,
the
Buddha
mundane understanding
and
did
of the
world was useful for him to prescribe right action for individuals. In the world of
experience,
it is
obvious that
we
exist as individual entities capable of
decisions and carrying out actions. This
way
was very important
to the
making
Buddha since the
to enlightenment has to be cultivated through the Eight-fold path of right
understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right
mindfulness and right concentration (concerned with meditation.) This
effort, right
can only be done by oneself, "no one can do
for the responsibility of one's actions will
It
for you".
become
world
is
in
Dhammapada
the
in
an ontological context,
is like
a "bubble" or a "mirage".
"Come, look at this world resembling a painted royal
sunk in it; for the wise there is no attachment to it."
(DP, XIII. 5, Sarvepalli Radhakhshnan, 305.)
cling.
Everything
is
is in
constant
flux,
there
is
Dhammapada
comes
to old
chariot.
The
foolish are
no permanent world to which to
constantly evolving. However,
when
understood that universal truth of the dharma remains.
the
an important aspect
dealing with the world illustrates the fact that
bereft of any substantiality and
Because everything
is
central to an ethic concerning the
environment. In continuing to address ethical conduct
the section
This
referring to concepts,
When
it is
addressing old age,
says "The splendid chariots of kings wear away; the body also
age but the virtue of the good never ages, thus the good teach each
other." (DP, XI. 6, Radhakhshnan, 304.)
23
As the Dhammapada progresses,
fool to
it
enlightened one. This shows
illustrates
evolution fronn being a
how Buddhism can be
Theravada Buddhism has often been
due
human
the
criticised
accessible to everyone.
as being inaccessible to the masses
to the concept of the arahant (saint or enlightened one.) Traditionally, the
arahant makes his/her own path and attains enlightenment, never to be born again
or exist
in
samsara.
All
that has to be
However, the Mahayana
done
is
done and there
is
no more to do.
tradition criticises this by formulating the bodhisattva
concept. (A bodhisattva or "potential" Buddha postpones his/her
for the
betterment of the world.) However,
Theravada school;
the culmination
Dhammapada
this
concept
albeit in a different form. In the
is
own enlightenment
not entirely absent
Dhammapada,
in
the arahant
the
is
the progression from fool to enlightened one while the
in
itself offers
the path to this
'level'.
There
is
no reason that an
enlightened one must 'give up' the world. The Buddha himself had attained
enlightenment and continued to spread the dharma
merely an arahant
we would
in
If
he was
the sense that he only experienced his "own" enlightenment,
not have the teachings he gave throughout his
Mahayana school
death.
until his
offers a Buddhist
metaphysics which
is
life.
However, the
addressed
in
the following
section.
24
The Development of the Mahayana school:
1.4
same
Indian philosophy does not contain the
that has
come
to establish itself in
between
religion
and philosophy
Western thought. Myth and popular
wisdom
intertwined with philosophy and
split
in
were
religion
the time of the Buddha and remains
today fundamentally linked. The law of karma then was adopted by the Buddha to
help explain causality and ethical conduct.
It
also helps to from part of the
ontological foundation for Buddhism. Everything
subject to cause
&
effect,
is
interconnected within samsara,
death and rebirth and moral rectitude. Nothing exists
permanently as an unending substance (the way Aristotle explains) but every thing
has
it
existence dependently. While popularly considered as the Buddha's
explain moral conduct, the concept of
philosophical examination by the
way
to
dependent origination undergoes
Mahayana school
of
Buddhism since
it
offers a
compelling metaphysical question. Mahayana does not refer to any one particular
sect of Buddhist philosophy but rather
variations of the Buddhist teachings.
is
an umbrella term for
The developments
in
many
different later
China and Japan, for
example, fused elements of their indigenous cultural philosophies with the "new"
Buddhist teachings being imported into their part of Asia. Schools such as the Pure
Land Buddhism of China and Tibetan Buddhism were created
rather than being imported from India. Therefore,
in
their
Mahayana covers
own
a
countries
wide variety
of schools and sects of Buddhist philosophy.
Our Mahayana focus
in this
thesis then,
is
on the Madhyamika school, generally
accepted as emerging from the works of Nagarjuna of the Second Century
AD and
imported into China. This school focuses on the concepts of the emptiness of
dharmas
(insubstantiality of things),
and the emergence of Buddhist
logic
and
metaphysics. In the Madhyamika, a kind of Buddhist metaphysics develops. While
25
the Buddha had considered metaphysical exploration as a question which did not
tend to the elimination of suffering, he was not entirely dismissive of such inquiry.
Generally, the
Mahayana school sought
original texts in a
sects within the
to clarify
way which addresses some
Mahayana are merely
and reinterpret the Buddha's
basic metaphysical questions.
different
methods
The
of this reinterpretation.
However, there are certain elements wherein both schools (the Theravada or
Hinayana school of early Buddhism and the Mahayana school) remain
fundamentally the same. Both recognise and accept Sakyamuni Buddha as the
Teacher, The Four Noble Truths are exactly the
Path
is
exactly the
same
in
same
in
both schools, the Eightfold
both schools, Dependent Origination
schools and both schools reject the idea of a supreme being
governed
well.
this world.
The theory
of
is
who
dukkha remains the same
in
the
same
in
both
created and
both schools as
These are the most important teachings of the Buddha and they are
all
accepted by both schools without question.
Another concept which was elucidated by Nagarjuna
is
the theory of sunyata or
voidness/emptiness. This metaphysical concept grew from the early Buddhist
theory that
all
dharmas
existence and constantly
(things) are without substance, bereft of
in flux.
This
Mahayana Buddhism. However, while
it
is
becomes
it is
central
in
any permanent
the Madhyamika sect of
expanded upon
in
the Mahayana school,
not entirely a Mahayana concept. (Nagarjuna's philosophical contribution to
Buddhist thought as a metaphysician and logician
be addressed
in
is
extremely important and
will
the Second Chapter of this Thesis.)
26
For the Mahayana school, the world
is
accorded a kind of
relativist reality.
Nothing
has independent existence apart from interactions and the idea of things within the
causal chain. This metaphysical explanation of reality helps formulate the
cultivation of
dharmas
non-attachment since
it is
fundamental to
this doctrine that
(things, entities, existents) are free of substantiality.
It is
all
the goal of the
bodhisattva (or potential Buddha) to see things as "they really are" - free from
singular substance or independent reality. Ultimately the world and everything
are "ideation only". This
Mahayana
school,
is
particularly
most notably
in
emphasised
in
in
it
the Yogacara sect of the
the writings of Vasubandhu. This school emerged
as a kind of Buddhist psychology focusing on the practice of Yoga with a Buddhist
emphasis. The exploration of the writings of Vasubandhu concentrate on the theory
of consciousness-only or ideation only of
through the mind.
nothing
In the
is
It
phenomena and how
is
manifest
agrees with the fundamental doctrine of Buddhism that
substantial or unconditioned, but the focus
Mahayana
reality
is
more
psychological.
school, compassion and altruism are developed by the bodhisattva
to help free him/herself
and others from the
world and from dukkha. This
is
illusion of
the substantiality of the
important development since
in
doing so, the
bodhisattva cultivates compassion {karuna) to those less enlightened beings
(including animals)
ultimately
all
equal.
and considers the world
As
illustrated in
for
what
enlightenment
in
is:
non-substantial and
Vasubandhu's Mahayana Wmsaka, "seeing
that beings are weak, one with a heart of love and
for perfect
it
wisdom
is
to discipline oneself
order to benefit them." (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan,
339).
27
There
is
no need to impart values to the "external" environment since
"thing", but rather to cultivate
compassion
leading to the cessation of dukkha.
it is
not a
for everything within nature, thus
Chapter Two
will
address the contribution of
Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamikakarika to Mahayana Buddhism and the expansion of
Buddhist metaphysics, ontology and ethics.
28
Chapter 2:
Nagarjuna's Contribution
Because the Buddha's
to
Buddhist Ontology:
original sutras
were not systematically interpreted with
respect to specific issues of ontology and metaphysics, these philosophical
questions were developed
silence. While a
in later
Buddhism as theories
fundamental ontology
lies
inherent
the 4 Noble Truths and the Cycle of samsara, this
logical
deduction by the
2""^
in
is
to explain the Buddha's
the Buddha's description of
explored through analytical and
Century Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna
in his
Mulamadhyamika-karika (or the "Fundamental l^iddle-most Treatise".)
It
has often been debated as to whether or not Nagarjuna's philosophy amounted
to Buddhist metaphysics or empirical analysis, yet this
is difficult
to define since the
terms metaphysics and empiricism are themselves conventional Western philosophy
terms used
to define particular schools of
dualist philosophy of Platonic
Western sense
is
thought which developed out of a rational
and Aristotelian foundations. Metaphysics
concerned with that which
is
essentially
in
the
"above physics" or
outside the realm of the physical reality. While of course, Nagarjuna explores the
nature of what
is
reality,
he does so through a reinterpretation of the Buddha's
original teaching.
There can be no end to suffering or understanding of Nirvana without an
understanding of the ontological significance of causality. Nagarjuna attempts to
argue that the metaphysics of the substantialist schools of other Mahayana
Buddhist sects could not be adequate to explain the nature of
lies
within the Buddhist teachings
and through the "four
reality.
fold logic",
An ontology
Nagarjuna
formulates a kind of "Buddhist ontology of emptiness" implying that for dharmas to
be, they are necessarily devoid of substantiality
and hence 'empty'.
29
f'L
This chapter attempts to elucidate
some
of Nagarjuna's
arguments regarding the
fundamental concepts of Buddhist teachings. Each section of the Mulamadhyamikakarika addresses certain aspects of these teachings.
The Karika explores some
reiterates
of the
;-
.
-.
.
main concepts of the Buddha's teachings and
them through Nagarjuna's
logical analytic.
Nagarjuna's position was such that he critiqued the metaphysical musings which
were beginning
to
permeate the varying schools of
later
Buddhist thought. He
attempted to break down conventional philosophies and formulate a
logical
middle
way.
2.1
Reality in the
Mulamadhyamakakarika: Empirical
vs.
Metaphysical
In addressing Nagarjuna's philosophical position, this section
will
attempt to assess
the problems of metaphysics vs. empiricism with which Kalupahana takes issue
his analysis as well as explain the notion of the 'two truths' (conventional
ultimate) within the central concept of the
Madhyamaka
school.
We
will
in
and
consider
David S. Kalupahana's interpretation of the Karika with respect to the theory of two
truths as well as the concepts of sunyata (emptiness) and dependent origination
among
other relevant concepts discussed by Nagarjuna.
Kalupahana argues that Nagarjuna's
reality
is
empirically based
upon which our
actions and observation of truth depend.
"Nagarjuna was an empiricist par excellence. However, the fundamental
metaphysical assertion of most rationalists, and even the empiricists during
his day, was the cogito, the atman that sees itself before it comes to
perceive anything else." (Karika, 81.)
30
However, barring Kalupahana's assumption that the Buddha and Nagarjuna were
staunch empiricists,
starting point
dependent
it
would seem rather that the empirical view
is
merely a
from which to draw causal inferences about the ontological nature of
origination.
The
truth of
dependent
arising
becomes apparent through
witnessing change as an empirical perceiver rather than looking for a metaphysical
underpinning beneath non-changing phenomena. As Pandeya maintains
article
"The Madhyamaka Philosophy: A New Approach",
reality
is
in his
understood only
through the perceptions of objects relating to concepts. According the
Madhyamakas,
"They say that an efficacious reality is not a necessary condition or co-ordinating
factor for perception, because perception takes place even when there is admittedly
no such reality present, e.g., the perception of a double moon. Perception simply
entails a concept referring to something external. This something external need not
be actual". {Philosophy East & West V. 14, 8).
Therefore, there
no empirical Yeality' or any other sort of
is
a metaphysical view of
reality
permanence.
Essentially,
appearance
is
on which to base
(conventional)
and we act based on the data available to us through our senses. However,
we cannot know
if
there
is
an underlying
reality to
Nagarjuna's (and the Buddha's) critique of the
Nagarjuna would appear here to be an
Buddhist empiricism can be understood
not necessarily an
ontological truth
samutpada).
through a
"real".
reality
It
lens.
illusion,
(i.e.
but
it is
the object or not, hence
futility
of a "metaphysics of reality".
existentialist!
in
the sense that the world of experience
another 'type' of representation of an
the truth of emptiness of dharmas and of pratity
can also be limited by our sense perception somewhat
like
We
can be
However,
it
is
can act based on this empirical
reality
and
for us
it
cannot be proven to be either substantial or entirely
looking
illusory.
31
This again
is
where Nagarjuna takes the middle path and
where Nagarjuna addresses the issue of
substantiality
is
and
explored
Chapter 15
in
self nature.
In positing his middle view, he says "'Exists' implies grasping after eternalism.
'Does not
exist' implies
the philosophy of annihilation.
Therefore a discerning person should not rely upon either existence or nonexistence." (Karika, 234)
Empirical existence does not equal svabhava. Only the
"permanent" and
will
change and
flux
is
be illustrated throughout this chapter, the process
is
more
akin to the concept of the ding an sich.
Self-nature cannot be independent of causality since for something to have
independent self-nature
is
Nagarjuna uses
this logic
metaphysicians
who
contradictory; there can be no 'self-caused cause'.
throughout the Karika to
state that there
is
illustrate his point
against the
an 'unchanging inner core' to things
adhering to the substance and properties view of the rationalists.
According to Nagarjuna however, that
itself is
is
not logically provable and only change
"permanent".
Most of the Karika
is
an answer to the metaphysical musings of substantialist
schools of thought. Since
it
has often been argued by scholars of Nagarjuna that he
himself offers a sort of metaphysics of emptiness, that
as
is
what
is
is
offers his
own metaphysics,
I
offers ontological possibilities; that the nature of 'being'
all
being
much
in
question
the nature of reality for Nagarjuna. Perhaps rather than arguing
whether or not Nagarjuna
that
not so
is
dependent and based on mutually
would instead say that he
is
to be
empty
of Being;
relational causal connections.
32
The world may not be as we experience
the
reality,)
again
is
it
but can only be deduced 'so
(i.e.
far'
empirical reality
some
the Karika seeks to address
Buddhism
in
Nagarjuna's time. An attempt
not necessarily
through our consciousness which
dependent upon the relationship between the
Initially,
is
five
skandhas.
of the misconceptions that arose
is
made
distinction that arose in the substantialist schools.
to break
down the
in
dualist
The subject/object dichotomy
does not serve to prove existence or non-existence since neither has
priority
over
the other. Nagarjuna critiques the logic of 'opposites' or the Aristotelian law of
excluded middle since there
The seer
is
not necessarily an ontological duality
in
the world.
and seeing (the object) are mutually founded upon one
(of an object)
another and therefore exist
in
a
dependent relationship
a substantial sense without the other
only. Neither
would exist
in
and by refuting metaphysical questions
throughout the Karika Nagarjuna seeks to prove the non-substantial ontology
,
within the Buddhist teachings of
dependent
The format throughout the Karika
is
origination.
such that Nagarjuna seeks to show that the
either/or extremes do not prove anything and the middle path
one with regards
understand the
futility
an empirical) view of
in
the more logical
to understanding the truth of the Buddha's teachings as well as to
of metaphysical assumptions about the nature of reality.
Because a material form or substance
rupa early
is
reality,
the Karika
is
so important for a substantialist (or even
Nagarjuna examines the concept of the skandha of
.
Chapter Four, section 2 states;
"When
material form is [considered to be] distinct from the cause of material form,
it follows that material form is without a cause. Nowhere is there any effect without
a cause." (Karika, 141.)
33
Here Nagarjuna
is
emphasising the necessity of dependence of
Material form cannot be entirely distinct from
independent of
its
effect (this
cause and cause cannot be
cannot be demonstrated;
as an "uncaused cause"). Ultimately cause
The cause and
its
&
phenomena.
all
effect
i.e.
there
is
no such thing
cannot be separated.
effect are not completely different nor are they identical. Within the
process of dependent origination, they can be viewed as relationally equal and
mutually dependent thereby eliminating the need for distinct entities. The process
is
more
"real" than the thing-in-itself.
The question often
experiences change? The Madhyamika answer would be that there
which changes, but that the process of change
itself
the five skandhas) and constitutes reality of which
knowledge
is
epistemologically limited by what
what
arises then;
is
is it
that
no thing
forms material form (as well as
we
are empirically aware. Our
we can express
but there can be no
proof for the existence of substance, so Nagarjuna argues the Mahayana
that things are neither "real, unreal nor real unreal" but
what we know
is
maxim
that
all
things are dependently arisen.
The
early section of the Karika already contains within
it
the foundation for
Nagarjuna's entire thesis; that he rejects the metaphysics of substance and seeks
to illustrate that through his theories of
The separation
dependence and emptiness.
of cause and effect would be illogical since
something by merely asserting that the opposite
In
is
true.
Chapter Eight, the Karma Kanaka pariksa, Nagarjuna
Buddhist concepts concerning karma. The problem of
understood by realising that karma
is
one cannot refute
all-pervasive. It
tries to clarify
'rebirth'
is
some
and karma
is
basic
best
not merely the
34
,i
-»
transference of action passing from one 'person' to another; but rather a universal
reaction to an action.
The Buddha himself likened
one candle
rebirth as
lighting
another.
The epistemological
definition of
karma
is
redefined by Nagarjuna
in
order to
adhere to the Madhyamal<a principles of the "middle most way" between the
extremes of metaphysics and empiricism or
The theory
nihilism.
of
karma
is
analogous to the theory of dependent origination since both are part of the process
of universal change.
If
there
is
an underlying principle of 'permanence'
Buddhist universe; then surely
The problem
of
it
is
so-called person,
always greater than the
sum
of
any particular skandha which
is
is
When
no one skandha
its
the
karmic change.
"who" performs and
from the substantialist schools.
in
is
affected by the effect of
referring to the
karma
often arises
skandhas which make up a
more important than another; the whole
parts. Therefore,
is
karma does not accumulate on
consistent with the theory of anatta or non-self
in
Buddhism.
Metaphysics sets up an
a
way
"artificial"
of imposing order on
what appears
phenomena. However, according
between agent/actor and
that
is
more
absolute to explain reality of action and agent; as
superficially to
to Nagarjuna, there
action, in light of pratitya
Veal' than action and agent.
is
be two distinct
a necessary connection
samutpada.
The connection
is
It is this
connection
the ontological
foundation to reality rather than a metaphysical substance.
Our actions are
also
dependent upon samskaras (predispositions) rather than a
particular entity acting independently of the world
only the 'driving force' behind
karma but
around
it.
Samskaras are not
also the result of karma.
They both
affect
and are affected by karma.
35
In assessing the Karika , Nagarjuna's innportant statennent
contains within
it
about the nature of truth
the foundation of Buddhist ontology. "Independently realised,
peaceful, unobsessed by obsessions, without discriminations and a variety of
meanings: such
"All
is
the characteristic of truth" (Karika, 270)
dharmas are empty"; that
is
the realisation of the dependency of
all
things and
the truth of pratitya samutpada.
Kalupahana expresses the epistemological significance of
analysis of this Section
arisen
same
9-11
of the
phenomena and the theory
273)
coin". (Karika,
and therefore there
All
of
Atma
statement
in his
Pariksa. According to him, dependently
dependent origination are "two sides of the
things are explained through dependent origination
no annihilation or eternality of
is
this
entities. This
is
emphasised by
Nagarjuna (and reiterated by Kalupahana), that the Buddha chose not to subscribe
to the improvable metaphysics of eternalism
In Chapter eighteen
and absolutism or
{atma pariksa) wherein the nature of
Nagarjuna reiterates the Buddha's teaching that there
metaphysical
self;
only a
samutpada {Samsara)
mundane,
a world
is
The skandhas which make up the
necessarily
meant as
soul.
explored,
no substantial
where empirical truths are viewed as
we
act on
what appears
no proof for a permanent core to one's
permanent underlying
is
practical for functioning within pratitya
not necessarily substantial. Although
true, there
is
'self
nihilism.
"self" are
always
The idea of skandhas
practical but
to be substantial or
self.
in flux;
hence there can be no
constituting a person are not
a replacement for the concept of atman, but rather an
36
explanation for the obvious empirical reality that
we
are 'something' and can access
the world of our experience.
In section 2,
Nagarjuna attempts to
the notion of
self.
selfishness (since
This
is
Here he
illustrate
tries to eliminate
the middle
way
of
"appeasement" of
the ideas of mine-ness;
one cannot eliminate suffering while thinking
in
and
I
these terms).
part of his critique of the metaphysicians of the substantialist school.
Throughout
his
argument, Nagarjuna seeks to eliminate the subject/object
dichotomy regarding metaphysics or ontological explanation since such a division
an
artificial distinction
not reflected
critiques the idea of opposites
a law of excluded middle
in
the nature of the Universe. In section 11, he
and extremes;
since there
the descriptions
we
assign to
they are only as
we
describe them.
it.
is
for Nagarjuna's logic
no duality to the world as
Just as things are
Nagarjuna continues to refer back to the Buddha's
his
argument. Secton 12
arise, or
that
all
is
relevant to Buddha's
whether Buddhas do not
is
arise,
it
empty
does not contain
it is
empty
of
of independent reality;
original teachings
first
-
when proving
sermon; "Whether Buddhas
remains a fixed and necessary condition
things are transient".
Regardless of whether or not
remains a fact that
it is
what
we understand
the non-substantiality of the world,
it is.
Chapter 24 the arya satya pariksa,
is
an important chapter wherein Nagarjuna
explores the ontological significance of the 4 Noble Truths and
the emptiness of
all
it
how they
relate to
dharmas. (The concept of emptiness with be explored further
later in this chapter.)
37
In the early sections of the chapter 24,
Nagarjuna
that there can be no causality without substance.
is
critiquing the absolutist
He attempts
view
to illustrate that a
misunderstanding of the concept of emptiness as nothingness leads to the extreme
of nihilism. Oversimplification of the
first
Noble Truth (that there
adversely affect the understanding of Buddhist ontology. The
only
a starting point
although dukkha
is
"there",
it
too
(relative or conventional truth)
is
dependent and can be gotten
Two
Noble Truth
is
and can be understood
rid of,
Truths; namely samvriti satya
and paramartha satya (absolute or ultimate
would be incorrect to view these as opposites or
to both
first
dukkha) can
from which Buddhist teaching and philosophy begin and
Nagarjuna also elucidates the functions of the
It
is
in
duality.
truth).
Buddha's teaching refers
the context of both an everyday
'reality'
and one
not empirically available. In criticizing the substantialist metaphysicians, Nagarjuna
states;
"Those who do not understand the
distinction
understand the profound truth embodied
in
between these two truths do not
the Buddha's message"
(Karika Ch. 24, verse 9: Kalupahana, 333.)
It is
important to realise here that the distinction
dichotomy, but precisely the opposite. That
is
is
not meant to refer to a
what Nagarjuna
is
trying to say
referring to misunderstanding of the distinction. If each 'level' of truth
were
when
distinct,
that would violate the theory of dependent origination. Instead each truth embodies
elements of the other
dependent as
Nagarjuna
world
is
is
all
in
each and are ultimately indistinguishable and are as
other dharmas.
fighting the metaphysical
not necessarily
like that!
When
tendency to polarize concepts since the
referring to
Dukkha, one must
realise that
it
38
a.
is
also not a substance, but merely arises as part of
dependent
origination.
Samsara through the
To see Dukkha as impermanent and
'erasable'
is
cycle of
to
understand the Four Noble Truths.
14 Nagarjuna states;
In section
"Everything
for
whom
Is
pertinent for
the empty
Here Nagarjuna
dharmas. This
is
is
is
whom
emptiness
proper. Everything
is
is
not pertinent
not proper." (David Kalupahana, 337)
referring to the functionality of
referring to the fact that
all
emptiness with regards to
things are
empty
of substance or self
nature {svabhava) but not necessarily immaterial. Both the concepts of emptiness
and
'the
empty' are functions of the Buddhist ontology based on pratitya
samutpada. These concepts are inextricably
linked.
With regards to empiricism and ontological abstraction; neither
is
denied at the
expense of the other. The connection between the concept and the empirically
witnessed 'thing'
akin to the
is
more important than the
process
of
'thing' itself; since the connection
change (namely dependent
demonstrated by the statement; "A thing that
evident. For that reason, a thing that
is
is
origination.) This
is
not dependently arisen
non-empty
is
is
is
not
indeed not evident."
(Kalupahana, 341.)
In the later section of the chapter,
Nagarjuna critiques morality arguing that there
can be no moral absolute since even morality
is
a
dependent concept. However,
it
remains fundamentally linked to the cultivation of the Noble 8-Fold Path. Morality
and the ontology of emptiness are part of the same
origination.
As Nagarjuna states
in
section 40,
reality of
dependent
"Whoever perceives dependent
39
arising also perceives suffering,
arising, its ceasing
its
and the path [leading to
its
ceasing.] (David Kalupahana, 354.)
In
Chapter Twenty-Five, the samsara=nirvana equation
statement has undergone considerable scrutiny and
much
of the
Madhyamika teaching) as
nihilistic
understand the Madhyamika stance completely,
this
is
is
addressed. This
often misunderstood (as
or too cryptic. However,
it is
in
is
order to
necessary to re-emphasise that
philosophy does not subscribe to a dualistic mindset and concepts are not
defined
'black
in
and white' terms.
According to Kalupahana, this chapter
When
referring to concepts of
"Nagarjuna
is
is
an example of Nagarjuna's 'empiricism'.
permanent and
eternal,
Kalupahana states that
not prepared to equate freedom with such non-empirical existence."
(David Kalupahana, 360)
However,
it
seems
that Kalupahana
is
oversimplifying Nagarjuna's "non
metaphysical" and non-substantial position as 'pro empirical' since Nagarjuna
considers the concepts of nirvana and samsara to be free from independent reality.
As he says
in
Sec. 10 of Chapter 25
"The teacher has spoken of relinquishing both becoming and other becoming.
Therefore, it is proper to assume that freedom [sic. Nirvana] is neither
existence nor non-existence."
(David Kalupahana, 361.)
Some
explanation of the nirvana=samsara equation
is
warranted here. Because the
Buddhist ontology deals with a non-substantial fluctuating world of becoming,
everything which
we deem
to exist has only relative or relational existence. This
is
40
the
same
for our world of experience as well as for that which lies outside of our
experience. Unlike Kalupahana's (as well as that of the ennpiricists') stance, that
empirical experience
world of samsara
is
the only
rather
is
way
more an
to knowledge, Nagarjuna's analysis of the
existential one.
Samsara and nirvana must
have a relationship with each other since ultimately they are dependent upon each
other. This relates to the
who
of
Mahayana concept
of the Bodhisattva; a potential
Buddha
can, with proper meditation and following the Eight-fold path, catch 'glimpses'
what could be construed of as nirvana;
free from the fetters of the
mundane
world and reaching a certain level of consciousness espoused by the Buddhist
practitioners. This
is
further evidence that Nagarjuna
was not only an
analytical
philosopher and logician, but also did his work with considerable bhal<ti towards the
Buddha and
his teachings.
Further to the relationship between samsara and nirvana,
upon each other which defines them; they are
like
it is
the very dependence
two sides of the same coin
intertwined within each other through dependent origination and l<arma. This
further reiterates that neither of
boundary of samsara
one must be
in
is
them
is
an absolute independent concept. The
the boundary of nirvana; the connection
is
important, but
the "here and now" (of samsara) to even realise the potential for
nirvana (hence the Noble Eight Fold path.) One's l<arma can be either conducive to
nirvana or not, but
of our existence
is
in
the "here and now"
we
are agents of action and the possibility
to eliminate duf<l<fia. Essentially, the elimination of dul<l<tia is
nirvana.
41
The Two Truths and Sunyata (Emptiness):
2.2
An important concept
in
the Karika
is
Nagarjuna's treatment of the
Two Truths
about the nature of dharmas. Paramartha satya refers to ultimate truth underlying
all
things while samvriti satya
relative truth.
'truth' of
upon
in
our
is
considered to be the ^everyday' conventional or
Because everything ontologically
mundane
existence
a relative relationship.
It
is
that things
affects the
devoid of substantiality, the
is
seem
way
in
substantial and
we can
act
which things are perceived and
thus affects our actions. However, the distinction between the
Two
Truths should
not be viewed as polar opposites or a difference between illusory reality or ultimate
reality since that
would assume a permanent substance behind the concept of
ultimate reality. Jay Garfield
sums
it
up succinctly
Arising and the Emptiness of Emptiness:
Why
did
in his
1994
article
"Dependent
Nagarjuna start with Causation?"
wherein he states;
a mistake to distinguish conventional from ultimate reality-the
dependently arisen from emptiness-at an ontological level. Emptiness just
the emptiness of conventional phenomena. To perceive conventional
"...it is
phenomena as empty
is
just to see
them as conventional, and as
dependently arisen. The difference-such as
and the ultimate
is
a difference in the
it
is-between the conventional
way phenomena
are
conceived/perceived. The point must be formulated with some delicacy, and
cannot be formulated without a hint of the paradoxical: conventional
phenomena are typically represented as inherently existent. We typically
perceive and conceive of external phenomena, ourselves, causal powers,
moral truths, and so on as independently existing, intrinsically identifiable,
and substantial. But though this is, in one sense, the conventional character
of conventional phenomena-the manner in which they are ordinarily
experienced-to see them this way is precisely not to see them as
conventional" (Jay Garfield, Philosophy East & West, Vol. 44 No. 2, 232)
is
This illustrates exactly the middle
nihilistic
non-substantiality.
way between such dichotomies
The way
to understand emptiness of
of substance and
phenomena
is
to
42
realise that they
must not be viewed from an either/or perspective. Emptiness
is
none other than pratitya samutpada.
To be empty
and
all
essentially
means
to be dependent. Nothing exists on
causal relationships are based on mutual dependency.
say that
all
things are unreal, since emptiness
is
its
own cause
not enough to
It is
not non-existence.
It is
more
that
things are not substantial entities with properties attached to them, rather things
are dependent upon each other within the chain of dependent origination.
Nagarjuna states
is
in
Chapter 24, Sec. 19 that a "thing that
not evident. For that reason, a thing that
(David Kalupahana, 341). This
substance remaining behind
all
all
is
is
non-empty
is
not dependently arisen
indeed not evident".
an example of the denial of a metaphysical
phenomena and an
things are dependent and relationally connected
When
is
affirmation of the doctrine that
in
order to be evident at
referring to an 'ontology of emptiness', obvious metaphysical questions arise;
how can
a thing
there be a nature of being
in itself?)
As mentioned
if
substance.
It is
there
earlier,
nature of things refers to the fact that
it
all
is
no substance (and hence no being as
must be understood that emptiness as the
things are
empty
of
svabhava or
not the opposite of being, but rather that the nature of things
be 'empty' since they are
absolute to a thing
is
that
all
it
undergoes change; subject to
is
flux
his
own unique
comparable to the
to
and conditioned
independent.
Nagarjuna analysed the concepts of the two truths as well as the nature of
through
is
subject to dependent origination. The only so-called
causality further emphasising the idea that nothing
logical analytic.
logic of that in
However,
his logic
is
reality
not to be taken as
the Western philosophical tradition. His critique of
the substantialist school of metaphysics has been explored
now
all.
in this
chapter but
we
turn our attention to the methodology of Nagarjuna's argument.
43
Nagarjuna 's Logical Analytic:
2.3
While Nagarjuna took the early teachings of the Buddha and expressed them
new Mahayana way
a
in
since he critiqued the developments of the sarvastivadins and
other "substantialist" schools of later Buddhism, he
still
remains true to the
original
teachings of the Buddha.
Although Kalupahana would
Mahayana
school,
I
like to
assert that Nagarjuna
is
not necessarily of the
would disagree, saying instead that he "adopts" the early
teachings of the Buddha into his Madhyamika interpretation.
Nagarjuna systematizes the Mahayana
logic in
the Karika Things' are reduced to
.
concepts (dharmas) and these concepts are without substance;
they are empty.
i.e.
Therefore, 'things' are only the physical manifestation of empirical reality;
only as real as they can function within our perception
in
made
samsara. Therefore things
have no permanence to them, since the concepts on which they are based are
'empty'
(i.e.
without substance); the only thing which remains
change; which
itself is
empirical reality
is
is
the process of
not really a thing, but a continuous process upon which
founded as a "practical"
reality.
Subject (perceiver) and object
("thing") are only empirical or conventional western metaphysical
for
mundane understanding; however, upon
that
all
share the
same process (dependent
terms which allow
closer logical analysis,
origination)
it is
and are not
discovered
distinct.
Nirvana cannot be realised through metaphysics but the question again arises;
not Nagarjuna's 'non' philosophy a kind of metaphysics
term? His
dialectic
may
not
the broadest sense of the
attempts to disprove the metaphysics of the substantialist
school, but he himself offers a logical
or
in
is
amount
argument
for the nature of reality which
may
to metaphysics.
44
f^^
The
four-fold logic
employed by Nagarjuna does not
which excludes the "middle". A cannot equal B
Nagarjuna seeks to
both
A and
illustrate that things
A as
not
logical analytic. This
(tetralemma,
1.
A
2.
exists. This
A does
is
known as
A and
conventional Aristotelian
in
empty
neither
3.
or
A nor
not
A and
still
follow a
argument
is
basically formulated as such:
would be analogous to an empirical assertion of the existence of a
i.e.
that there
is
something that corresponds to A.
not exist. This would be analogous to nothingness or emptiness
lies
somewhere beyond
A both does
exist
and does not
description or
exist. This is
levels of understanding; the polarisation of the
dualist thinking.
but
of substantiality and can be
conventional metaphysical understanding of the term
illusion
logic,
his "four fold logic" or Four-fold dialectic
Sanskrit, catus-koti). His
in
material thing;
well as not not
are
into conventional dialectic
fit
However when
(i.e.
human
the
in
voidness). Reality
is all
understanding.
analogous to the notion of different
two truths and representative of
referring to the so-called 'higher truth',
one
is
considered to be dealing with the ultimate or underlying truth behind the
convention.
4.
A
neither exists nor does not exist. (A
is, is
not and
is
not not.)
This rather cryptic assertion illustrates the nondual awareness of the conventional
understanding of logic as an
Such concepts as two-fold
truth
They are merely expressions
attain or express
"if
awareness
not
this,
then that" equation.
and emptiness themselves cannot explain
reality.
at the conventional level of language used to help
one
at the highest level of emptiness.
45
The Buddhist
logic follows a
more
dialectical or
debating style to
than the Western format of hypothesis and proof.
and
possibilities
and follows
a logic of refutation
It
structure rather
its
investigates causal relations
and argument not
entirely unlike
Socrates' dialectic. However, this logical methodology seeks to eliminate the usual
subject/object dichotomy which plagues conventional
wisdom
within the
mundane
world.
Part of the uniqueness of the
Madhyamika school
formulated avoiding the conventional Aristotelian
The Madhyamaka seeks
way
in
which arguments are
logic.
to neither prove nor disprove reality
extremes or dichotomies of
The only
the
is
based on avoiding
distinction.
thing which remains constant
is
change and the process of becoming as
posited by the Buddha.
He
further emphasises the notion of "sunya" or emptiness regarding
This
is in
direct
dharmas.
response to the theory of substantiality. Because everything
constant flux and the process
is
more
real
independent of conditions. Therefore,
all
An example
is
of Nagarjuna's
argument
than the
'things'
'thing',
there
is
must be empty of
formulated
chapters of the Karika wherein he seeks to
through the
all
in this
illustrate
way
in
no
is in
reality
substantiality.
most of the
one view and then disprove
it
logical formula.
For example, Chapter
1
begins
in this
fashion through the examination of causal
conditions:
1.
No existents whatsoever are evident anywhere that are
arisen from
themselves, from another, from both, or from a non-cause." (David
Kalupahana, 105.)
46
Nagarjuna then proceeds to offer each section
in
the
same format
as this to
counteract the substantialist metaphysicians' questions, culminating
in
the
conclusion:
14. An effect made either of conditions or of non-conditions is,
therefore not evident.
Because of the absence of an effect, where could conditions or nonconditions be evident?" (David Kalupahana, 116)
illustrating that
even causal conditions are not self-caused and therefore non-
substantial.
Dependence upon causal
Candrakirti's
factors
commentary as
in
Nagarjuna's ontology
illustrated
is
also explained
in
by R.C. Pandeya. (Pandeya, 11),
Candrakirti distinguishes between two kinds of relativity (general and specific)
order to
illustrate
in
the connection between and object or concept and knowledge
thereof.
The only
thing which
makes concepts understandable
is
the relation to other
concepts. Fundamental reality relies on concepts rather than things.
"An example of this type of dependence, very often repeated in their texts, is
that of big and small {diirgha and hrasva). It is clear that in itself a thing is
neither big nor small; it is only when we come to compare two things that in
relation to one the other is big or small as the case may be. Thus the concept of
bigness arises because there is a concept of smallness and vice versa. Similarly,
the entire furniture of our knowledge is nothing but a great fabrication of
mutually dependent concepts." (R.C. Pandeya, 10.)
This concept of relativity applies to the law of causality and Nagarjuna uses
it
to
explain the arising on concepts within dependent origination. Concepts cannot
'come
into being'
and disappear
into nothingness, since
even concepts are
relative
47
within this epistemological context.
2.4
Concluding Remarks:
When
assessing Nagarjuna's ontology
made
here about the relationship between the Madhyamika theories of reality and
modern
theoretical physics
nature of time and
a
in
modern context,
a brief nnention can be
and quantum theory, especially with regards
flux. Briefly stated,
the basic "substance" of the universe cannot
be broken down to a single element as was previously thought
physics; both energy and matter are ultimately
particles or
waves. A wave does not have to be
the space/time continuum, thus matter/energy
single substance. Matter/energy both
to the
is
and
is
in flux
in
is
in
Newtonian
and can be made up of both
one particular place or time
in
not necessarily reducible to a
not a
wave
or a particle and are
mutually dependent on each other.
An attempt has been made
in this
chapter to
illustrate
some
of the important
contributions to Buddhist ontology and logic from Nagarjuna's analytic of the
fundamental concepts
in
the Buddha's teachings and also of the Karika' s critique of
substantialist metaphysics. Realising the importance of the theory of emptiness (of
svabhava) of dharmas, the next chapter
will
of our environment and relationships within
turn
it
in
its
attention towards the concept
the context of this ontological
foundation.
While the ontological and metaphysical explorations
ethical
it
treatment of the world around us,
should
now be seen
teachings between
all
that there
is
if
seem
this section
far
removed from the
has been presented clearly,
a necessary connection in the Buddhist
the concepts of the nature of reality (as non-substantial) and
48
the elimination of
Dukkha
whicJn, as will
be discovered, includes an important and
necessary relationship to our treatment of the Earth and other beings within
samsara.
49
Chapter
Towards a Greater Understanding of "Environment"
3:
Buddhist Ontology and Contemporary Environmental Thought
3.1
This chapter
followed
attempt to define the concept of "environment" which
will
in this thesis,
from various schools of thought
in
the
is
being
of environmental
field
philosophy as well as a systems theory perspective and then to synthesise these
theories into the context of Buddhist terminology.
relationship
between humans and
phenomenon
in
it is
it
environment
is
of the
a relatively recent
the context of philosophical inquiry. During the time of the Buddha,
the environment
however,
their
The exploration
is
not something which was
made
explicit in
the original texts,
can be understood with regards to fundamental Buddhist concepts since
a requisite condition for existence.
From the
early texts,
some
of the
most
important theories are that of the concept of karma and the interconnectedness of
dharmas (through dependent
all
In order to address the
origination) within the realm of samsara.
fundamental
link
between Buddhist ontology, ethics and the
environmental problems facing the world,
'environment' as presented
in
we must understand
the Buddhist tradition
making. Although no
explicit reference
Buddhist texts, mention
It is likely
in
is
made
that the environment
is
made
of 'nature
be further explored later
and
political
environment"
in
decision
the
and the wilderness' and non-human
was not considered
in this
ethical
to "the
Buddhism, since everything (including ourselves)
will
vastly different from the
is
contemporary western view which drives much of our
that the definition of
external from the
is
wrapped up
chapter. Firstly, however,
in
some
human
life.
entity
samsara. This
current
environmental philosophies must be outlined.
50
The Western
utilitarian
'status quo' view of the
environment
is
born out of a European
philosophy emerging from Renaissance and then the rationalalist schools
and philosophy of Rene Descartes, Francis Bacon, Charles Darwin and other
thinkers
who emphasised the
thinl<ers of the
between Humanity and Nature. The
Renaissance who categorised Nature and sought to learn about the
world by breaking
that put
distinction
down
it
into
its
humans above Nature
religious tradition of
constituent elements, brought about a revolution
Judaism and Christianity
has dominion over God's Earth. However,
duality
it
in
which
man
is
the image of
God and
was Descartes who postulated the
between man and Nature. This contributed to the reduction of things to be
studied.
Immanuel Kant furthered
thought and reason
in
this reductionism
this
by categorising the faculties of
man. Consciousness and pure reason were attributed by
these thinkers and their contemporaries to
From
from the
a sort of hierarchy of morals. This arose
in
humans
only and not to other
life
forms.
arose our modern reductionist science which seeks to learn about the
whole of something from
humanity outside
it
its
looking
parts and which offers a detached view of Nature with
in
as
if
through a plate glass bubble. In keeping with
the Western Judaeo-Christian tradition,
divine spark which
made them
'better'
humans were supposedly endowed
than the lower animals. In the Victorian and
rationalist philosophies of 19'^
Century Europe, Nature was a force to be
subjugated;
that
it
represented
all
with a
was base and
primal and hence "lower",
in
humanity. Rational thought, morality, ethics and philosophical thought were
reserved for the "higher
life
form" that was the human being. Although Nature was
seen as a resource to be managed (and continues to be viewed that way especially
politically),
the traditional Christian view presented Nature as 'being put there' for
51
humans' use (although not
humans misuse. The
for
reason and divine spark originally extended to
man
belief in the faculties or
only and not to
woman.
This
is
part of the foundation for the Ecofeminist school of thought which sees the
connection between the domination and attempt to subvert Nature and the
domination and subversion of
women
in
Western
culture.
The post-modern view of
the environment emerges further from our scientific world-view. Everything must
be compartmentalised and explained through the
scientific
process of theorising;
testing the theory and drawing inferences or conclusions based on fact. There
leaves
little
room
view of
for ethical or ontological consideration in a systematised
something "out there" that can be managed or
'the environment' as being
otherwise manipulated by humankind but not necessarily identified with us.
On account
of the comparative nature of this thesis, a
western theories of environment
which
we experience
is
shall
find ourselves.
ourselves
in
is
to focus
Heidegger considered
it
upon
it
selected
a necessary condition for our experience although
considered beings "in the world"; that
Heidegger's Umwelt
is
is
We
life
as an existential realm
as an "Umwelt"
considered by Heidegger to be an external "thing".
it
some
as the so-called "natural world" and the habitat for other
which we
hoiA/ever,
of
be given. One way to define the environment
forms as well as our own. Another way
world.
summary
it
in
which
we
in
find
was not
as sentient beings are
to say, our existence
necessitates
a
not exactly akin to the natural environment,
served as the forum for human's experiences and interactions.
Environmental philosophy
important developments
is
in
a relatively recent area of study, but there are
the
most environmental theories
fit
field
which
into three
will
some
be summarised here. Simplified,
main categories; they are either
52
anthropocentric (human centred), bio-centric (centred on life-forms including
humans) or eco-centric (encompassing the
entire
ecosystem regardless of
humans). Buddhism can be compared to an eco-centric theory. This
explained
will
be further
later.
An anthropocentric environmental
Utilitarianism.
The value
humanity and to sustain
considered
trees, fish
in
in
is
one that can include a world view such as
the environment
lies in its ability
livelihood or happiness for the
to provide for
many.
It is
therefore
the best interest of humanity to preserve such natural resources as
and land to provide
policies are
ethic
based on such an
Many
for our needs.
ethic.
of our current environmental
However, from an ontological perspective,
this
world view does not consider the earth as a dependent and closed system from
which humanity cannot be divorced. This type of environmental theory has often
been considered "shallow" as opposed to "deep" environmentalism since
it
does not
address the fundamental relationship between humanity and the ecosystem.
Rationally and consistent with our
modern
considered as the totality of the Earth's
life
on
this planet
In the
it
down
world-view, the environment
support systems.
to
its
"Deep Ecology"
it is
constituent elements
tradition, the
usually viewed
in
its
parts are
it
in
a reduced form;
environment
is
considered as a whole; an
is
the foundation for
all
it.
all-
other
not viewed independently.
The Deep Ecology platform
footing' as
the foundation for
order to attempt to understand
encompassing system which contains subsystems but
systems and
It is
is
and encompasses that which we commonly consider "nature", the
biosphere and the ecosphere. However,
breaking
life
scientific
were from an
distinctly states that
ethical standpoint.
all
elements of nature are on 'equal
The non-human world has
intrinsic
53
value which must be recognised from an ontological standpoint. The founder of the
Deep Ecology movement, eco-philosopher Arne Naess, postulates
view he
when
Ontology",
calls a "Gestalt
considering where
a sort of holistic
humans
fall in
relation
to the natural world.
"We need
a gestalt ontology, to get rid of subject, object
between, the 'me-it' relationship.... to see the whole set.
about feeling rather than thinking." (Noel Charlton, 1)
Humans
call for
are not distinct from other
life
forms and the
animal rights, recognising inherent value
in all
and inanimate objects. The platform of Deep Ecology
and something
All is
one. This
in
is
ethical implications include a
of nature; including rocks
calls for a radical holistic
which seeks to integrate humanity into the natural sphere with no distinctions.
view
It
states:
l.The flourishing of
The value
human and non-human
non-human
of
life
forms
is
life on Earth has intrinsic value.
independent of the usefulness these
may have
for narrow human purposes.
Richness and diversity of life forms are values in themselves and
contribute to the flourishing of human and non-human life on Earth.
3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to
satisfy vital needs.
4. Present human interference with the non-human world is excessive, and
the situation is rapidly worsening.
5. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial
decrease of the human population. The flourishing of non-human life requires
such a decrease.
6. Significant change of life conditions for the better requires change in
policies. These affect basic economic, technological, and ideological
2.
structures.
7.
The
in
situations of intrinsic value) rather than adhering to a high standard of
living.
ideological
There
change
is
mainly that of appreciating
life
quality (dwelling
be a profound awareness of the difference between big and
will
great.
8.
Those who subscribe
have an obligation directly or
the attempt to implement the necessary changes.
to the forgoing points
indirectly to participate in
(Arne Naess, 29)
This eco-philosophy
is
ethically based, prescriptive philosophy
includes an ethical responsibility as part of
its
which
like
ontology. However, there
Buddhism,
is
great
54
^^
emphasis on the value of the natural world and
fronn the Buddhist perspective of
ecology philosophy and
its
this
Is
where
it
differs significantly
environment. Further examination of the deep
relationship to
Buddhism
will
be undertaken
In
the next
Chapter.
Another view which can be considered eco-centric
is
that of
Gala theory. This hypothesis considers the Earth as a
all
is
parts, Interacting in a
living
complex equilibrium maintaining a
the Earth. Within this school, the earth
with complex interacting parts
all
is
James Lovelock and
his
system, of which we are
life
support system that
viewed much as any other organism
of which are vital to the survival of the organism
as a whole. This leads us to another important philosophy regarding the
environment and that
is
one of the so-called "general systems theory".
An important development
This
field offers a
in
unique way
modern science
In
is
no single environment
rather, each facet of the world operates as a
for other
system, whatever
is
the study of complex systems.
which to view the human/environment relationship.
According to such theories, there
environments
is
for everything, but
system with some acting as
systems. General systems theory states that for any given
not part of that system
several environments; whatever
Is
is Its
environment. However there are
not one system
system. This relatively recent theory was
first
Is
the environment for another
postulated
in
the 1940s by biologist
Ludwig von Bertalanffy, to explain biological and so-called natural systems. In
attempting to formulate a unifying
scientific theory, this
theory reacts against
reductionism and illustrates the Importance of the relationships of entities and
systems to
their
environments (complete with the emergent properties which
55
evolve from these interactions), rather than the emphasis being on the parts
themselves.
This theory also
makes an attempt
to replace the traditional subject/object
dichotomy with one of systems and environments. Rather than merely
distinguishing the observer from the observed, the relationships
subsystems and
environments are considered more descriptive of the world
their
than individual components or
Basically, general biological
of a
it
is
entities.
systems theory refers to the interactions between parts
system or a system and
parts of the system,
its
environment. Regardless of the construction of the
the interconnection of parts that
the system rather than the summation of
its
make up
'stuff'
In order for a
of which the parts are
system to evolve,
to Bertalanffy. First a
it
made
in
"the
independent of the
follows 2 forms of adaptive behaviour according
system requires the characteristic of
different ways,
is
,
(i.e. particles, cells etc.)".
defined as "the tendency towards a characteristic
states and
the function of
parts. According to Bertalanffy
particular organisation of parts determines a system; which
concrete
between systems,
equifinality
final state
which
from different
based upon dynamic interaction
in
is
initial
an open system
attaining a steady state", (von Bertalanffy, Ch.2)
For a system to continue to evolve,
not
come from an
it
requires
some
sort of 'input', but this
does
outside source. Rather the concept of feedback allows for the
maintenance of a 'steady
state' of
complex order
in
the system. Bertalanffy
describes feedback as: "the homeostatic maintenance of a characteristic state or
the seeking of a goal, based upon circular causal chains and mechanisms
monitoring back information on deviations from the state to be maintained or the
goal to be reached." (von Bertalanffy, Ch.2)
56
A system
as
also 'self-regenerating' since
a system.
remains
for
is
it
can refer to
It
distinct
from
its
itself
it
continues as a system because
as well as to
its
environment, but
it
it
acts
always
environment. A system also always needs an environment
to continue to function as a system, but this
environment
is
never specific and
can change depending on the particular functions of the system.
Although von Bertalanffy and Luhmann are speaking of different systems (Luhmann
examined
social
systems while von Bertalanffy dealt with
biological
systems),
apparent that systems theories deal with the concepts of dynamism and
than emphasising individual
entities.
The systems become the
it is
flux rather
focal point for reality
rather than singularities. This follows the Buddhist emphasis on the wheel of
dependent
origination rather than
To categorise Buddhism
philosophy,
we can see
into
that
on the individual within samsara.
one of the three main schools of environmental
it is
eco-centric
in
regards to
world, but does not impart value to the environment
if
we
its holistic
view of the
consider that the
Buddhist definition of "the environment" can be considered to necessarily include
the fact that the environment
is
the existential
rather an existential manifestation of
it.
It is
life
support system of Samsara; or
the surrounding and condition for our
existence, for without the ecological and biological systems of the Earth functioning
as they do,
life
would not exist as we know
it.
Biocentricism emphasises a kind of
hierarchy of biological development; lending greater importance to
'developed'
life
forms. This philosophy often advocates animal welfare rather than
animal rights and does not necessarily recognise
Buddhism does seem
Alan Sponberg
more
intrinsic
to contain a kind of hierarchy of
in his article
value
in
rocks or trees.
compassion as postulated by
"Green Buddhism and the Hierarchy of Compassion",
57
(Western Buddhist Review, Vol
development leading
1.
Dec. 1994), but this refers
is
The Buddha nature
in all life;
exists
prevalent
development whether that be
is
not
by anyone, but
meant
is
in
it is
Western
is
based
tradition.
manifested at differing levels of
biological or cultural. This type of 'hierarchy' in
to be elitist or detrimental to the cultivation of the
reflective of the reality of differentiation
and species. Sponberg's hierarchy referred to
which
to the
to enlightennnent or consciousness rather than a value
hierarchy or elitism which
Buddhism
more
among
in his article is
different
Dharma
systems
the type of hierarchy
non-linear and conforms to the Buddhist cosmology of Dependent
Origination and causality.
"In the religions of Abraham (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) God is
intrinsically superior to humankind, as is the creator to his creation. Similarly
humankind, which alone was created
in
God's image,
is
intrinsically
and
(unalterably) superior to the animals and all the rest of creation as well. The
Buddhist taxonomy of life forms (including Buddhahood) presents a crucial
contrast. It too is thoroughly and incontrovertibly hierarchical in structure,
yet in a fundamentally different way. All of the levels in the Buddhist 'chain
of being' are both dynamic and interpermeable. A given life form moves up,
and often down, in this deadly serious cosmic game of 'chutes and ladders'.
The different levels in the Buddhist cosmology, while indicating spiritually
significant differences in awareness and consciousness, do not entail the
theocentric and anthropocentric perspective and privilege so familiar in our
own cultural tradition. They represent rather the range of progressively
greater degrees of awareness and ethical sensibility available to all life forms.
We might say that this is an ethically dynamic array of possibilities rather
than an ontologically static hierarchy of privilege and status." (Alan
Sponberg,
2.)
Both the systems theory and
holistic
views of the environment can be analysed
Buddhist sense although they differ radically
in
a
in
their concept of a unifying principle
regarding our world. Systems theory emphasises distinctions and boundaries
whereas a more
holistic
other systems operate.
view sees the environment as a
It is
more than
totality within
a kind of "super-system",
it is
which
all
the
58
foundation for
action, there
In
all
is
systems. However, neither denies the maxinn that
'for
every
an equal and opposite reaction.'
systems theory, an
system without
one system can produce a reaction
effect in
directly affecting
it.
In a
more
holistic view,
things under the sphere of the environment share
affected by changes
It Is
in
another
understood that
common needs and
can
all
all
be
the environment. Both theories then, lend themselves to the
in
Buddhist concept of karma.
Karma and Evolution of our Earth
Causality,
3.2
In order to understand the 'environment' in Buddhist terms,
it is
necessary to
address some of the core principles of Buddhist philosophy and how they relate to
the concept of the so-called natural world. Although systems theory and
environmental holism
Buddhism considers
regardless of
If
differ In their respective
all
sentient beings to be subject to the laws of nature
that 'nature'
encompassing world
views on the external environment.
Into
Is
viewed as an external system, or an
which
we
are
all
thrown.
We
all-
cannot necessarily offer an
exact comparison between a Buddhist definition of 'environment' and that of our
modern
scientific definition of
ecosystem nor can we
systems theory or deep ecology, but what
in
it is
subject to the
same
is
clear
is
find
an exact comparison with
that the world and everything
causal laws which define existence
in
the Buddhist
philosophy.
Buddhist causality stems from the chain of Dependent Origination. For everything
dependent upon everything else
interaction. It
Is
in
a dynamically evolving chain of
is
complex
not entirely accurate to describe Dependent Origination as a chain
of events since no singular event exists as an independent entity
in
time. Rather
59
each facet of being
is
dependent upon another mal<ing "Being"
sense equal to "becoming". There
all
things
we
can be said that we get the Earth that
the Buddhist world view.
in
deserve. To understand causality
Buddhist sense, one must realise that everything
linear fashion
in
in
the form of Mnputs and outputs'. Therefore, Buddhist causality
is
effect.
is
The wheel of samsara
continuously evolving based on complex interactions of
in
that
not the
is
the
in
causally connected but not
not merely as simple as cause =
Causality
the Buddhist
no constant and permanent being hence the
is
dynamic and impermanent nature of
It
in
same
karma supposes
thing as
is
dynamic and
karma and
karma but the two concepts are
causality. In order for
karma
the action to occur within the causal chain. That
being no longer accumulates karma. This
is
is
to accrue,
it
a
rebirth.
definitely related
is
why the Buddha
necessary for
or enlightened
important when considering the
Buddhist relationship with the environment and other sentient beings since good
karma can
affect positive
maintaining a vegetarian
change
in
lifestyle to
the environment. Even an action as simple as
minimize harm done to animals can accrue
good "environmental" karma since the
natural world
in
effect of
your karma
the form of reducing the need for the
killing
is
manifested
in
the
of animals, factory
farms, slaughterhouses and the processing of meat (which can lead to increased
pollution as
opposed to an all-vegetable
intensive and therefore minimises
To consider the environment
in
its
diet
which
is
generally less process-
impact on the Earth.)
Buddhist terms then,
it is
the world
in
which
we
find
ourselves as samsara; the conditions for our existence and what allows us to
experience relationships with
all
other beings for
whom
this
environment
is
the
60
same.
All
beings exist
environment.
When
in
samsara and are therefore affected by changes within
referring to the
Buddhist perspective of an
all
environment as a whole,
non-human
and fauna of the biosphere which make up
deep ecology considers human
is
life
capacity for understanding the
all
life
or, in scientific
other
life
on
to be no different from
not the case
same
considered to be subject to the
in
it
terms, the flora
this planet.
any other
Buddhism. While other
causal laws as humans, only
dharma and thus
However, as
biotic entities
life is
humans have the
for attaining Nirvana. This also
includes the ethical imperative for developing karuna to other
Logically,
keeping with the
in
encompassing samsara, the environment necessarily
includes other sentient beings and
within the ecosystem, this
their
would seem that much of the environmental
life
crisis is
forms
caused by
overproduction of pollutants, overconsumption and overpopulation leading to
resource degradation, but what
simple to solve
a logical sense.
at the root of
We just
management and decrease
with waste
difficult to
in
is
all
these problems would seem
need to consume
birth rates;
do? According to Buddhism the root of
but
all
less,
why then
action
is
always subject to them
performed,
it
in
are these things so
thirst,
Dependent
karma which can bring about various
results of course, do not necessarily manifest
efficient
tanha or desire,
clinging; a necessary condition for existence within the cycle of
Origination, but also leading to
be more
results.
These
themselves immediately nor are we
our current state of existence, but once an action
always produces an effect somewhere or sometime
in
is
the cycle of
existence. In an environmental context, tanha can lead to struggles of
power over
nature; which has dominated our Western technological mindset and industrial
development. With the need for more control, comes the need or desire for more
resources, sensory input and hence a greater exploitation of the Earth for these
61
desires. This cycle of
karma continues
leading to further degradation of the
resources upon which these actions are based.
This relatively simple concept
is
evident
in
the law of physics that for every action,
an equal and opposite action occurs somewhere
Karma however,
is
in
the universe.
not so simple as choosing to act
morally good or bad since
it is
not a moral law.
even the ignorant person who does not have
All
in
a
manner which you consider
action has repercussions
and
a moral standpoint affects the world
with his/her actions. Walpola Rahula succinctly expresses
karma as
a 'natural law'.
"(The theory of karma) is a natural law, which has nothing to do with the
idea of justice or reward and punishment. Every volitional action produces its
effects or results. If a good action produces good effects and a bad action
bad effects, it is not justice or reward, or punishment meted out by anybody
or any power sitting in judgement of your action, but this is in virtue of its
own nature; its own law." (Walpola Rahula, 32)
This illustrates that the current state of the environment with problems of pollution,
mass
extinctions of other species, overconsumption and overpopulation are directly
consequences of past karmas. There
order to affect positive change
in
adopt the Noble Eight-Fold Path
Buddha himself as
refuge - this
will
his last
is
no solution but to change our actions
our world.
in
It is
no different than choosing to
order to affect your
own enlightenment. The
words, told his followers to "make yourselves your
be your teacher when
I
am
gone. Transient are conditioned things.
Try to accomplish your task with diligence" (Mahaparinirvana-sutra,
3.3
Let us
in
).
Analysis of "Environment" in Original Buddhist Teachings:
now consider how the environment
referred to
in
or natural world
was portrayed and
the original Buddhist texts and teachings. While
little if
any, explicit
62
reference
is
made
in tine
the Buddha talks about
are important
in
what we connmonly
texts to
all
sentient beings,
is
'the environment' today,
non-human world and nature and these
considering an environmental ethic
of Buddhist ontology, the environment
call
in
Buddhism. Within the realm
not even an entity or an independent
system, but merely a convention for existential experience within samsara.
However,
it
functions as a system subject to physical laws which again correspond
to our existence
in
How
samsara.
then are
we
to define
and
something which,
affect
as Nagarjuna said, does not have independent existence?
The Buddhist 'environment'
non-human
not just the world of nature or
is
beings, although they form a causally connected dynamic part of
sentient
it.
non-human
While the Deep Ecology tradition professes
intrinsic
Buddhism states that dukkha
the world rather than value, but since
we
is
inherent
are integral to the world and causally bound with
interchangeable with the dukkha or our
life
in
value to
and the environment
is
is, I
existence.
the dukkha of the world
is
Hence the
own
the same. The place of humankind
can be considered anthropocentric
Nirvana, but that
own
it,
in
in
'value' of our
the environment
Buddhism since only human can
believe, a misunderstanding of the place of
Buddhist world view. Although
human can
necessarily "better' than other
life
life.
human
human
attain nirvana, the
forms or privy to "less dukkha".
experience dukkha and the laws of nature and karma apply to
all.
attain
All
is
in
the
not
forms of
life
So when we view
the environment from a Buddhist perspective, no value based assumption can be
made
with regards to
there
is
dukkha
in
it.
It is
the world.
the
It is
same
as the First Noble Truth which states that
not a pessimistic or negative (hence value-
based), statement but merely a statement of fact. The world
is;
hence dukkha
is.
63
The
fact that
fact that
humans can understand the Buddhist dharma
humans
are 'better' than other forms of
certain level of understanding which
makeup;
in
is
life,
not indicative of the
is
we can
but that
reach a
merely based on our biological and mental
other words, the arrangement of the skandhas which
make up
a
human
being.
An
analysis of selected texts
presented
Is
in
the following section.
mentioned here again that the Buddhist world view and hence
environment
is
radically different
the environment
is
portrayed
in
Buddhism does not emphasise
its
It
should be
treatment of the
from that of the West so an understanding of how
Buddhist texts
distinctions of
transitory and perhaps the only distinctions
in
will
have to presuppose that
phenomena.
Buddhism
dharmas are
All
lie in
the "levels" of
enlightenment but do not refer to a subject/object dichotomy between observer and
environment as postulated by Luhmann and sociological systems theory, but rather
emphasis
is
placed on the ontology of becoming and
how we
interact within
Samsara.
Since the entire body of Buddhist texts
is
extremely vast, certain relevant Sutras
have been selected which pertain to interaction with other beings, the
of the
Dhammapada, and an
ethical path
analysis of the theory of dependent origination and
no-soul. These particular elements of the Buddhist philosophy help to emphasise
how the environment and other
life-forms are viewed as part of the Buddhist
ontology.
How
can one
dukkha?
live in
harmony with the environment and
In the Buddhist world view;
all
still
attempt to eliminate
existence contains dukkha (this
is
the
First
64
Noble Truth), but we should re-emphasise the fact that there
no distinction
Is
between how one treats nature or other beings and how one should view fellow
human
The Dhammapada
beings.
incorporates
of dukkha.
how
It is
to live with
Is
what
the ethical path of Buddhist literature.
effect such ethical path
It
has on the elimination
important to mention that ethics and ontology are not
fundamentally distinct
in
Buddhist philosophy but
eliminate dukkha, the nature of
made
mistake should not be
life
order to attain nirvana and
in
necessitates a non-violent ethical ontology. The
to think that
Buddhism
Is
entirely prescriptive.
ontology of becoming and transitoriness presupposes that one,
The
can become
in fact,
free of dukkha, but this can only be achieved through adhering to the Noble Eight
fold Path;
which
is
both a prescriptive path as well as an ontological one. The
between ontology and ethics and the environment
link
further explored
in
the next
Chapter. For now, the so-called "Buddhist environmental world-view"
is
illustrated
is
through some examples of selected Buddhist texts and teachings.
The view
of
Since there
environment
is
ourselves, the
in
the Buddhist teachings
is
one of interconnectedness.
no specific mention of nature or other beings as
human
entity
is
other beings. The enlightened
"Buddhahood" but that
often referred to
in
is
not given greater place
human
is
in
distinct
from
the Universe than any
the only being capable of attaining
merely due to the
level of
consciousness as animals are
Buddhist writings as "dumb". However, that implies that
animals need our compassion (Sanskrit karuna) rather than domination.
entirely logical within
dependent origination that
consistent with the theory of
human
karma and
life
rebirth, the
entity can easily be reformulated Into that of
can take on
It Is
many forms and
skandhas which make up a
an animal entity
In
other
65
births.
The concept
of
karma
is
fundamental to Buddhism and
is
readily
adopted by
environmental theorists to help explain the interconnectedness of sentient beings
and our world. While Buddhism does not make any
the environment, since the world
considered to be substantial.
If
is
explicit reference to
accorded a kind of relative
we remember though,
that
we
reality
karma and
and
is
not
are considering our
world; our environment, to be the realm of our existential experience within
Samsara, we can see that
all
same environment and thus
suggest that karma
we
is
sentient beings; indeed
subject to dukkha.
It
the sole cause of our modern environmental problems, but
between karma and the current ecological
Within the
Pali
Canon
this
would be too simplistic merely to
further explore the notion of Buddhist causality,
link
bound up within
all life, is
(Tipitaka), there are
we can see
that there
is
if
a direct
crisis
many
Suttas which
utilise
animal and
nature imagery to explain certain elements of the Buddha's teachings. This further
emphasises the
link
teaching. There
is
between humans and the Natural world
in
the Buddhist
no moral judgement placed on the animals; the Buddha merely
describes their characteristics as they are limited by their desires and
of the
does not place the human
a position to take
less
in
in
advantage of animals or beings
developed state of mind. An important reference
trees
in
to live.
order to become free from dukkha, but
He emphasises development
mind
will
is
also
made
to forests
in
a
and
the Buddhist tradition. The forest serves as an important metaphor for
tranquillity, stillness of
mind and place
for insight
and enlightenment. The
fact that
the Buddha himself attained enlightenment underneath the shelter of a tree further
incorporates the natural environment into the very core of the Buddha's teachings.
66
An important concept
living
beings
The concept
to that of
who
are
in
all
Buddhism
is
that of karuna or compassion extended to
subject to the cycle of dependent origination and Samsara.
of metta, or loving kindness further
empathy with
meditation since
ail
invites
it
all
beings. This
is
expands the notion of compassion
an important aspect for Buddhist
equanimity and understanding as a staring point to an
ontological understanding of the relationship
between humans and
all
other beings.
In the Sutra on "loving l<indness", Sutta Nipata 1.8, Karaniya Metta Sutta section
4.&
5,
the Buddha states:
beings there may be — feeble or strong (or the seel<ers and
the attained) long, stout, or of medium size, short, small, large, those seen
or those unseen, those dwelling far or near, those who are born as well as
those yet to be born -- may all beings have happy minds."
"Whatever
living
This emphasises the fact that the
human
entity
is
no different from other beings
in
terms of being subject to dukkha and Dependent Origination. This emphasis on
interconnectedness places Buddhism
nature and non-human
life
a unique position to deal with elements of
in
forms. Rather than exercising control over nature, the
Buddhist world view asserts that
entities are interchangeable;
of nature
all
is
subject to the
is
the role of the
implies a compassionate relationship to nature and
all
relationships
Dhammapada. The
in
forces and
no particular being or state of the world
and hence the minimizing of dukkha
ontology of the
same
in
human
turn
is
in
is
permanent
the world. This
reflected
ethical precepts of this text are
in
the ethical
fundamental to
samsara; not just between people but between people and
all
sentient beings.
Many
of the verses
in
the
Dhammapada
use nature metaphors to teach the ethical
path of the dharma. The Buddha illustrates a profound understanding of the
workings of nature without making any moral judgement of
it.
The teachings
also
67
illustrate that
when
the workings of nature do not upset the balance of
referring to cultivating equanimity
From the
"flowers" as a metaphor.
life.
For example,
and focus of mind, the Buddha refers to
translation by Radhakrishnan;
"Even as a bee gathers honey from a flower and departs without injuring the
flower or its colour or scent, so let a sage dwell in his village" (DP, IV, 6.)
Here the Buddha
profound understanding of the workings of nature and
illustrates a
uses this as a metaphor for the actions of the sage. Action can and should be done
without harm.
The theory
of
It is
Dependent Origination has an important influence on how the
environment or even the world
the world
is
what one needs without causing undue harm.
possible to attain
itself is
perceived
in
Buddhist contexts. The fact that
conditioned, subject to change and flux and of no real substantiality
implies also that
it
can be influenced by our actions and that there
is
an
interconnectedness between our actions and the format/makeup/state of the world.
That
is
we
to reiterate that
actually get the
environment we deserve. For the Earth
greed and battle over
offers resources for our sustenance
and
these resources just as the world
conditioned by our interaction with
In the
Samyutta Nikaya
Origination
is
explored
conditions of existence.
cycle of
XII,
in
it.
Verse 44 of the Sutta Pitaka, the theory of Dependent
various contexts;
When
Dependent Origination
experience
is
this in turn leads to
how the same
referring to the World, the
is
clinging leads to
Buddha
all
reiterates that the
responsible for the state of the world (as
we
it.)
The Blessed One
"And what is the origination of the world? Dependent
there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three
is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling
as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition
comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition
comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From
birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain,
on the eye
said:
& forms
68
distress,
When
&
despair
come
into play. This
is
referring to treatment of other beings (for
the origination of the world."
example animals,) the Buddha
invokes compassion and empathy for them and emphasises a philosophy of ahimsa;
Chapter 10 of the
Dhammapada
(the Rod) verses, 129-132 states thus:
tremble at the rod, all are fearful of death.
Drawing the parallel to yourself, neither kill nor get others to
All tremble at the rod, all hold their life dear.
Drawing the parallel to yourself, neither kill nor get others to
"All
kill.
kill.
Whoever takes a rod to harm living beings desiring ease,
when he himself is looking for ease, will meet with no ease after death.
Whoever doesn't take a rod to harm living beings desiring ease,
when he himself is looking for ease, will meet with ease after death."
This
is
another example wherein the Buddha
illustrates
the need for compassion to
other beings.
When
formulating an environmental ethic from Buddhist principles,
to understand
how the Buddhist philosophy
is
it is
important
conducive to a sustainable
environmental world view. The principle of Dependent Origination and the
experiential reality
being,
in
which
we
find ourselves
impermanence rather than permanence and soullessness rather than the
substantialist foundation to being.
concepts, as has been seen
to be opposites are
and
emphasises becoming rather than
it is
this
in fact
in
However,
for a
complete understanding of these
Nagarjuna's philosophy, these concepts which appear
"two sides of the same coin." They are essentially empty
emptiness which provides the ground for our understanding of the
interconnectedness between
experiencing reality
in
humans and the
earth.
We
exist as beings in the world
the middle of these extremes. For the enlightened one, the
69
distinctions melt
reality. In his
away yet the
empirical and the conceptual remain as elements of
essay entitled "Environmental Problematics
in
the Buddhist Context",
(Philosophy East and West, Volume 37, no. 2), Kenneth Inada explores the
ontological and experiential significance of our relationship with the environment in
the Buddhist context. He refers to our experience with the world
in
sense as somewhat akin to Heidegger's Being-in-the-world. Being
sense does not refer to a particular entity or Being
in
an ontological
in
the Buddhist
the substantialist sense but
rather something grounded on emptiness and flux. Part of the environmental
problem
lies in
the fact that humanity cannot see 'beyond
itself.
The need
for
an
environmental ethic necessitates an addressing of the ontological elements of
Buddhism. The duality
impermanent
etc.)
is
in
Buddhism
(i.e.
between
self
and non-self, permanent and
only an existential duality; not ontological. Inada calls the
underlying reality the "parity principle" invoking Nagarjuna's samsara=nirvana
equation.
All reality is
based upon
this principle
which essentially brings to the fore
the emptiness of either extreme (of empiricism or conceptual reality.)
Inada succinctly sums up the Buddha's teachings on interdependence:
depletion and destruction, we must have a
importantly, a new vision of things. Here the
original insight of the historical Buddha could come into
play.
Rather than
taking
off on
some metaphysical
flight
to explain
experience, the
Buddha concentrated on man's experiential nature and came up with a
startling
insight: a vision
of the open unity, clarity, and continuity of
existence. To involve man's nature is, then, to involve at once his more
extensive and unlimited relationship to his surroundings. In other words,
man is not alone but thoroughly relational, and the grounds for a relational
nature
must be found within man's own nature and not in something
external, to which he must react on a one-to-one basis." (J. Baird Callicott,
243).
"In order to stop this
wanton
new understanding and, most
70
How
then does this affect our relationship with the environment
in
a Buddhist
context? Both the core concepts of Dependent Origination and soullessness help
provide the answer.
The theory
of anatta (Sanskrit
anatman),
is
one
a central
to Buddhist philosophy.
This also has an important impact on the view of the place of the
the natural environment.
illogical to call this
It
implies that since there
world "ours" to do with as
we
is
human
entity in
nothing permanent,
wish. Even the body
is
it is
subject to
the force of nature and cannot be divorced from Dependent Origination. Regarding
the soul, the Buddha asks "(But)
painful
and subject to change as
is it fitting
"this
is
to consider
mine, this
am
what
is
impermanent,
this
is
my
I,
soul?"
{Samyutta Nikaya, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 280.)
This unique position lends Buddhism to a relationship with the natural world which
is
neither one of reverie nor of control, but rather interconnectedness and
compassion
for
all
living things. It
necessitates a cultivation of non-attachment
from clinging to the resources and accumulation of material things which drives
much
of the destruction
and depletion of our Earth's
life
support system and natural
resources. True altruism and the extension of compassion to
a theory of
non
self;
it is
all
beings depends on
almost imperative for a true philosophy of non-
attachment and selflessness which would seem to be needed
in
order to address
pressing environmental problems. The attachment to the idea of the self as "mine"
and the substantialist view that there
reality
is
a
permanence underlying our
has lead to the exploitation of the earth as
as "outside" of the
human
it
experiential
has been considered something
entity.
71
Humans have
placed themselves culturally apart from nature, yet this
being can be separate from Dependent Origination or
incorporates this ontology of becoming into
all
his
Is
illusory.
karma and the Buddha
teachings which
in
turn help to
The
create a Buddhist environmental world view consistence with these teachings.
very dynamic nature of samsara
actions within
it
affect the entire
itself
implies an interconnectedness
system.
How
with
Deep Ecology
is
explored
in
in
which
the environmental world view
shaped from the Buddhist ontology of becoming as
No
well as
some
all
is
further comparison
the next chapter.
72
Chapter
We
4:
explored
Causality,
in
Karma and the Environment
Chapter Three, the
differing schools of Environnnental
respect to Buddhism and attempted to link
each world view.
Some
some
environment.
I
will
impermanence are
of the fundamental concepts of
of the different philosophical approaches towards Nature
and the environment were also surveyed. In
doctrine of causality
this
Chapter, the central Buddhist
be explored and linked to the dynamic nature of the
will
attempt to show that the cycle of dependent origination and
crucial to
understanding our place
relationship to our environment. This Chapter
will
a comparative study of the philosophy of
links to certain
4.1
concepts
common
in
the world and our
also further
The
of a Buddhist ontology critically linked to causality.
is
expand on the theory
latter part of this
Chapter
Deep Ecology and Buddhism, making
to both world views.
Ontology and Causality
When we
consider the Buddhist world view and
with the natural environment,
phenomena nor does
ontology.
What
it
it
the world. The world
is
is
it
relates to our interaction
the unique nature of Buddhist
not one of substantialist
even conform to the conventional understanding of
means
becoming. Everything
how
we must understand
ontology. The Buddhist philosophy of "being"
to 'be'
in
the Buddhist sense,
constantly
itself is
in
is
that
a state of flux with no
all
being
an existential condition for our being, but
the form of the theory of dependent origination, which
in
easily be
made
in
for the illogic of a
a theory of becoming, the
permanent
entity (as
actually
to
it is
adhere
neither
his world
view
a sense, can be
considered the cornerstone of Buddhist ontology. However, while
that there can be no ontology
is
permanence
permanent nor an absolute ontological ground. The Buddha explains
in
thought with
it
can be argued
argument can
was seen
in
just as
the logic of
73
> ,':
•rri:
Nagarjuna.) While there
form of being
in
is
not necessarily any permanent entity, there
is still
a
the world which constitutes the ontology of Buddhism. This
ontology also necessarily includes an ethical component, for to *be'
in
the Buddhist
sense means to be susceptible to karma which relates to ethical or unethical action.
comprehensive analysis of the
In order to fully discuss the Buddhist ontology, a
theory of dependent origination
from which
all
is
warranted. This
is
the central core of Buddhism
other important Buddhist doctrines spring. The Four Noble Truths,
the philosophy of non-self and the ethical path of the
from the ontology embedded
in
Dhammapada
all
emanate
the theory of dependent origination. Interestingly,
the philosophy of Buddhism implies an interconnectedness of
all
dharmas and the
theories which constitute this system are also intimately related.
The
following sections of this chapter
examples from selected texts
will
of the Pali
attempt to analyse and give some
Canon
to help illustrate the Buddhist world
view of an ontology of becoming. By exploring the important theory of pratitya
samutpada along with the concepts
of
anatman and the Four Noble
better understand what constitutes the realm of Buddhist ontology.
Origination
is
the base upon which the
dharma
is
supported and
its
Truths,
we can
Dependent
understanding
helps to illustrate the profound relationship between this theory of constant change
and our natural environment. One of the core problems regarding our relationship
to our environment,
is
the belief or wish that the world
substantial thing which appears to
change 'on the
is
a
permanent, boundless
surface', but remains
fundamentally unchanged. This Platonic world view has lead us to consider the
Earth as a vast limitless source of resources, power and sustenance. This has led us
to use the Earth as a large
dump,
believing that
it
will
be able to absorb
all
the
74
waste and continue to function as both a source and a
Unfortunately, this
we
not the case, as
is
sinl< for
are beginning to see
our needs.
in
acute
environmental problems such as pollution, climate change and resource depletion.
A
shift in
world view to a more dynamic vision such as illustrated
dependent origination
is
helpful
if
we
in
the cycle of
are to understand our current environmental
predicament.
What then does the theory
samutpada and the
of pratitya
anatman and the Four Noble Truths have
environment"? While
would appear the
it
free him/herself from the
dukkha that
is
to offer for an "ontology of the
final
not
is
meant
all
soils
it
does not
a 'bad' thing, since the First Noble
is
is
dukkha
in
sentient beings are subject to
such as rocks and
world,
in this
to be understood as a negative assertion; merely as
statement of fact - that there
However,
release of Nirvana would allow one to
inherent
necessarily imply that the Earth or nature
Truth of dukkha
related theories of
do not
in
the world;
it
it is
part of existence.
but the non-sentient aspect of nature
themselves create dukkha nor are they imbued
with any negative aspects. In fact, according to Buddhism, they do not hold any
substantiality at
experience and
all
is
since the world as
constantly
we experience
The world, as
in flux.
a condition for that
it is
well as the beings therein, are
karma and dependent
all
subject to the universal causality that
is
The doctrine
the profound realisation of the Buddha of the
of pratitya
nature of the Universe.
samutpada
It is
and
ethical
first
explicated this doctrine
components
of
is
the foundation upon which
all
origination.
ontological, existential
Buddhism are based. The discourse where
is
found
in
in
the Buddha
the Samyutta-nikaya. In the Sutra to
75
Kaccana, the Buddha explains how
all
phenomena
are interdependent and no thing
exists free from conditions.
That things have being, O Kaccana, constitutes on extreme of doctrine; that
things have no being is the other extreme. These extremes, O Kaccana, have
been avoided by the Tatagatha, and it is a middle doctrine he teaches:
On ignorance depends karma;
On
On
On
On
On
On
On
On
On
On
karma depends consciousness;
consciousness depend name and form;
name and form depend the six organs of sense;
the six organs of sense depends contact;
contact depends sensation;
sensation depends desire {tanha);
depends attachment;
attachment depends existence;
existence depends birth;
birth depend old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief and
despair. Thus does the entire aggregation of misery (dukkha) arise. But on
the complete fading out and cessation of ignorance ceases karma;
On the cessation of karma ceases consciousness;
On the cessation of consciousness cease name and form;
On the cessation of name and form cease the six organs of sense;
On the cessation of the six organs of sense ceases contact;
On the cessation of contact ceases sensation;
On the cessation of sensation ceases desire;
On the cessation of desire ceases attachment;
On the cessation of attachment ceases existence;
On the cessation of existence ceases birth;
On the cessation of birth cease old age and death, sorrow, lamentation,
misery, grief and despair. Thus does this entire aggregation of misery
{dukkha) cease. (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, 278-279).
While
desire
initially
it
may appear
that this formula
best understood as circular with no
first
is
dependency of
existential
(entities).
this causal cycle.
is
is
our existential world
cycle of
samsara
incorrect. It
is
in
which
we
nothing that exists which can escape the
The above twelve-fold chain can be seen as an
example of a general theory of dependent
The
is
cause but rather an existential formula
which corresponds to samsara. Since samsara
experience pratitya samutpada, there
linear in form, that
is
both the world as
origination of
we experience
all
it
dharmas
and our
experience of the twelve fold chain in the world. Thus, the twelve-fold chain
76
above applies to human
illustrated
penetrates everything that
The theory
is
is in
entities specifically,
being, or
more
ontologlcally significant since
it
whereas pratitya samutpada
appropriately,
adhere and
call
it
illustrates that
there
is
becoming.
does not profess to be based upon a
single entity or thing. Rather than an ontology of Being,
becoming. Buddhism
in
it is
an ontology of
no one extreme to which one can
an ontology. While the Buddha did not assert to have a definitive
metaphysical explanation for the Universe, his assessment of the cause of dukkha
and the cessation of dukkha incorporate
a world view which
avoiding extremes. The doctrine of dependent origination
The Buddha
ontological
tried to avoid
not one of extremes.
metaphysical assertions that things or beings had
permanence or (the other extreme) that
devoid of any existence at
is
comprises a method of
all.
being just as easily as there
is
There can be no sense
no sense
in
beings and things were
all
in
asserting that there
asserting that there
is
is
complete non-
being; hence the Buddha's assertion of the middle doctrine between extremes.
This
may seem
illogical
nature of Being, but
in
since the definition of ontology necessitates a study of the
the Buddhist philosophy, becoming, for
purposes equals Being. The nature of Being
transitory, subject to
was seen
This
is
in
in
change and dependent.
all
the Buddhist sense
All
being
is
empty
intents
and
that
it is
is
of substantiality (as
Nagarjuna's ontological elucidation of sunyata.)
a very important assertion of the
Buddha's teachings.
reflect certain
All
subject to the
is
reflected throughout the
the ethical and descriptive Sutras throughout the
Dharma
fundamental truths within the theory of dependent origination upon
which the Buddha based
substantiality
Buddha and
is
his teaching.
The
fact that
all
dharmas are
reflected as well in the theory of non-self; that the
same
causal forces as
all
other dharmas
in
bereft of
body
is
also
the Universe.
77
The Buddha denied the existence of a permanent soul as
illogical
proof than the other extreme of nihilism. He uses the example of
referring to the belief of an underlying soul to the
human
with no
fire
more
when
entity. In the discourse to
Vaccha the wanderer {Majjhima Nikaya 72), the Buddha explains that he knows the
truth pratitya
samutpada underlies the
truth of no-soul.
The Buddha says;
"The Tathagata, O Vaccha, is free from all theories; but this, Vaccha, does
the Tathagata know; the nature of form and how form arises, and how form
perishes; the nature of sensation. ..the nature of perception. ..the nature of
predispositions. ..the nature of consciousness and how consciousness arises
and how consciousness perishes. Therefore say I that the Tathagata has
attained deliverance and is free from attachment.. .concerning an ego or
anything pertaining to an ego. ..have been given up and relinquished." {AggiVacchagotta Sutta, Radhakrishnan, 290)
Vaccha
world
questioning whether or not there
is
eternal or not.
is
is
existence after death and whether the
These are questions which the Buddha avoided by positing
a
middle way which did not bother with metaphysical theories. He explains to Vaccha
the simile of the
does the
since
it
fire
burning,
fire
all
when
go when
does not
Just as the
fire
"fit
it
goes out? The question, however, does not make sense
the case".
depended on
existence
is
The Buddha asks Vaccha where
referring to the soul.
It is like
fuel of
asking "what colour
is
dependent on certain conditions
for being in the world.
of the Pali
Canon
(the Discourse on
one of the Sutras which explores the significance of the theory of
Dependent Origination and No-soul.
It
also illustrates the relationship
Buddhist causality and origin of the world. While
the world, the separation of
when
silence?".
grass and sticks and oxygen to continue
The Maha-nlddana Sutta from the Digha Nikaya
Causes)
is
humans and other
referring to the causal chain of
it
does not mention other beings
sentient beings
dependent
between
is
in
quite irrelevant
origination. All beings are subject
78
to the
same
causal forces and
this chain
it is
which keeps
all
beings bound up
in
Samsara.
The Buddha
reported to have said:
is
come aging and death.' Thus it has been
the way to understand how from birth as a requisite
condition come aging and death. If there were no birth at all, in any way, of
anything anywhere -- i.e., of devas in the state of devas, of celestials in the
state of celestials, of spirits in the state of spirits, of demons in the state of
demons, of human beings in the human state, of quadrupeds in the state of
quadrupeds, of birds in the state of birds, of snakes in the state of snakes, or
of any being in its own state — in the utter absence of birth, from the
cessation of birth, would aging and death be discerned?" {Maha-nidana
Sutta)
'From
said.
birth as a requisite condition
And
The Buddha's
is
disciple
This illustrates
cycle of
this
how
forced to answer "No."
that continuing rebirth
in
the realm of samsara perpetuates the
dependent origination regardless of the type of arrangement of the
skandhas; whether
in
origination applies to
it
is
except for a
world and
is
fully
human
the form of
all
or animal; the cycle of dependent
sentient beings. There
who no
enlightened Buddha
free from attachments to
it
five
is
no being who can be exempt from
longer accumulates
or delusions about
karma
in this
it.
As evidenced by the theory of dependent origination, the theory of Buddhist
causality does not presuppose a
arise.
first
The Buddha himself explains
cause of a "root" from where
this in the
all
phenomena
Discourse on the Root or
Fundamentals (Mulapariyaya Sutta, trans. Thanissaro Bhikkhu).
Herein the Buddha explains that
as was a
common
understanding
all
among
conditioned and conditioning at the
so
it
phenomena does not
same
the substantialist schools. Everything
time. There
would be just as speculative to envision a
circular.
The Buddha
also explains
how
spring from a singularity
first
Is
no proof that time
is
is
linear
cause as to consider time as
things must be viewed as they are; without
79
any attributes associated
witii
them. For example, when one considers something
be "mine", with that feeling comes attachment and desire and often emotions which
between someone and the world. When viewed with
affect the interaction
equanimity, a thing becomes merely a conditioned element of becoming as opposed
to an independent thing. This relates again to the conditionality of
origination. This
is
dependent
another example where the Buddha's standpoints
and support each other. When the Buddha explains
in this
Sutra
how
all
inter-relate
the
enlightened one realises the nature of the world.
worthy one, rightly self-awakened -- directly knows
earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things
about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things
coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in
earth. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering
& stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has
"The Tathagata
come
-- a
is
aging
&
death. Therefore, with the total ending,
fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata
has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you.
{Mulapariyaya Sutta, trans. Thanissaro Bhikkhu)
into being there
However, the terms "delight" and "stress" would seem more aptly translated as
attachment and unsatisfactoriness since they refer to tanha and dukkha
Sanskrit.
the
This example illustrates the non-attachment to world things of the
Tathagata. He understands the dynamic nature of things and that
which
cling to that
is
not substantial.
this selflessness, realises
4.2
in
it is
illogical to
He does not view things as 'owned' and with
the arising and ending of dukkha.
Karma
With respect to
relationship
human
existence,
we cannot
overlook the importance of the
between karma and dependent origination when explaining Buddhist
80
ontology. More than just a doctrine of flux and change;
dependency and
flux are Inter-related
all
the aspects of karma,
as part of the Buddhist world-view.
Karma
is
not a distinct feature of Buddhist ontology but rather an integral component of the
theory of dependent origination. As
karma produces
the Buddhist standpoint,
upon the
cycle of samsara, but
we have seen
earlier, of course,
according to
further rebirth and continuance of the
realisation of 'things as they are'; as described
above, one can reduce the clinging to this world and assigning conditions or
attributes to things thereby negating
an important concept
ethics to which
we
in
any inherent value
a thing. (This
in
becomes
understanding the Buddhist approach to environmental
shall return in
the next chapter.)
This "seeing things as they are" as described
refer to a complete denial of
abandoning of the idea of
in
the Mulapahyaya Sutta does not
emotions or feeling
in
the world, but rather an
permanent and independent
a
self
which
is
not subject to
the laws of the universe.
The doctrine
of the Four Noble Truths, as explained
also springs from the foundation of pratitya
in
Chapter One of
samutpada and
this thesis,
further constitutes the
Buddhist ontology of becoming. Succinctly the Buddha realised that dukkha
condition of existence,
all
things are transitory, tanha
and that the Eight Fold Path
corollaries to the theory of
and the desire to
is
the
way
is
is
the
the main cause of dukkha
"out" of dukkha. These realisations are
dependent origination since the transitoriness of things
cling to this
existence or
some aspect
the theory of dependent origination as well as
in
of
it
are contained within
the Four Noble Truths.
81
We
can see from these central doctrines of Buddhism that the world of samsara
which
This
we
find ourselves
is
comprised of transitoriness, conditionality and dukkha.
often difficult for the Western reader to accept, but as
is
we have
as valid logically as any philosophy of substance and perhaps more so
how the
consider
in
seen,
is
just
when we
Modern physical science, which
physical universe operates.
attempts to explain the workings of nature and empirically measure the laws of the
Universe, also follows that nothing
in
the Universe
is
independent. Just as the
discovery that the atom was not the singular element to which
reduced, science also bases
events
in
a single
things could be
upon the law of intimately causally connected
itself
the space-time continuum. Even
element of matter,
all
if
the physical universe were reducible to
would only pertain to the realm of matter and
this likely
not of energy and the force of nature.
Here again a
It is
a
parallel
can be drawn to the Buddhist concept of karma.
fundamental law of physics that for every action, there
opposite re-action. The
same can be
should not be misunderstood that
linear time, but
all
said for the Buddhist notion of karma.
karmic events are sequential
a disturbance or action
Without reducing the concept to mere science
concept of karmic causality aptly
possible reactions can occur.
was
could see
a
in
way
how our
to break
in this
in
fiction,
immediate
like
a
the space-time continuum.
it
can however,
illustrate this
way. For every action, any number of
They are causally
down
It
on any section of the web causes
reaction or resonance elsewhere or at another time
there
an equal and
must be understood that time and space are interwoven
complex web wherein
if
is
barriers
linked through karma. For example,
between
actions could effectively
all
the possible
realities,
we
change the Universe. The Buddha knew
82
this
and therefore understood that even though a person
past karma,
Fold Path.
it
sl<ilful
a "product" of his or her
actions and following the Noble Eight
have argued before that based on karma, we get the environment we
I
deserve. That
actions and
doctrine of
can be changed through
is
it
is
to say, that the state of the world
also up to us to "clean
karma
is
it
up".
is
However,
a direct result of our past
this
deterministic or fatalistic; (of which
is
it is
not to say that the
often incorrectly
considered.)
According to Thanisarro Bhikkhu
deterministic because
it is
not
in his article
entitled
Karma karma cannot be
,
linear.
For the early Buddhists, karma was non-linear. Other Indian schools believed
that karma operated in a straight line, with actions from the past influencing
the present, and present actions influencing the future. As a result, they saw
little room for free will. Buddhists, however, saw that karma acts in feedback
loops, with the present moment being shaped both by past and by present
actions; present actions shape not only the future but also the present. This
constant opening for present input into the causal process makes free will
possible. This freedom is symbolized in the imagery the Buddhists used to
explain the process: flowing water. Sometimes the flow from the past is so
strong that little can be done except to stand fast, but there are also times
when the flow is gentle enough to be diverted in almost any direction.
So you can see that karma can be affected throughout the space-time continuum.
Just because something
same
is
in
happened
the here and now.
in
the past does not
karma
in
is
will
be the
future but
to say; there are
elements
current events, but current events are not necessarily exactly
determined by past events. While B always follows A, B
same manner each
time. This
is
parallel
can be
may
not follow
a result of the complexity of the
and the complex karmic interactions which occur within
Here another
the result
A past karmic event does not determine the
part of the "program" that "writes" the future. That
of past
mean
made
with
in
the exact
system of samsara
it.
quantum physics
to better understand the
83
relationship
between karma and nature. Complex systems (including computer
systems) can operate based on a form of causality;
i.e.
the feedback loop. This
cause-effect interaction determines the state of the system and can also be altered
by
it;
hence
can be
it
made
is
not necessarily
in
a predictable state at any
using an analogy of a thermostat.
The temperature
regulated by the thermostat which senses the current
its
heat output accordingly. This
is
like
of the
room
room temperature and
is
alters
essentially a feedback loop which both
determines the temperature of the room and
operate
one time. An example
is
determined by
it.
Karma can
such a feedback loop with cause and effect continuously affecting each
other.
One can change
karma by changing the data that
one's
"causality loop". In other words, the "feedback" which
is
is
input into the current
sent to the system can be
altered by our choices such as the choice to follow the Noble Eight Fold path; hence
reducing our karmic baggage and effecting altering the future. From a moral
standpoint, your worth
since you can change
is
measured
in
your present actions rather than the past,
how you
act on past actions
a form of
karma that does not
(i.e.
what you
learn
from your
mistakes.)
The Eight
since
it
fold path
is
lead to continuing rebirths
does not Include desire or clinging to the result of
be considered non-fruit-producing karma. To put
some events
in
good example
in
This
into a physics
is
what would
example again,
space-time do not affect the "regular" space-time continuum. A
is
that of an individual entity which has been put into stasis.
individual in stasis
non-event
it
itself.
An
would have a quantum weight of zero which corresponds to a
space time. Although the action (or entity) exists,
it
does not create a
84
result since
a
quantum
it
exists as a
non producing event.
probability of zero,
produces action which bears a
not produce a
it is
'fruit'. It
i.e.
It
exists as a physical entity but with
no effect on the space-time continuum
fruit. If
it is
a non-event
in
until
space time, then
it
it
does
can only have an effect on the space-time continuum when
subject to the normal laws of the universe.
A Buddha
is like
an entity
in
stasis;
having no effect on the continuing perpetuation of samsara.
According to Buddhism, karma performed
fold
of
accordance with following the Eight
in
path does not accumulate results since the path leads directly to the cessation
karma and
rebirth. It
state of the world
in its
is
the desire for the results of our karma that continues the
state of dukkha. This can be directly attributed to the
current environmental problems which at the
current social and economic problems as well.
interrelationship of
same time
It is
obvious both through the
samsara and the cycle of dependent
well as the interrelationship
intertwined and any effect
between environmental and
in
one 'sphere'
will
in
origination
and karma as
social issues that
have resonance
the continuing desire or clinging to the result of one's
karma, leads to continuing suffering both
are directly related to
own
in
all is
another; therefore
or socially collective
the environmental sphere and the
social/economic sphere. This profound ontological doctrine of the Buddha has
ramifications on
how we view the world and our environment as
view ourselves. This,
in
turn, has implications for
well as
how we
an environmental ethic derived
from such a doctrine of interconnectedness, impermanence and dependency which
will
be explored
in
the next part of this chapter.
85
4.
3
If
we
Buddhism and Deep Ecology: An Ecological Ontology
are to understand the environmental implications of the philosophy of early
Buddhism,
it
helps to
make
a comparative analysis with
what arguably can be
considered a like-minded world view. The philosophy of Deep Ecology can be
compared with Buddhism due
and impermanence.
We
to the fundamental concepts of interconnectedness
can also extrapolate a theory of Buddhist Ecological
Ontology based on concepts from early Buddhist philosophy and exploring
with other schools of environmental thought including
In formulating a rigorous
Deep Ecology.
comparison between the ecophilosophy of Deep Ecology
and the ontological characteristics of Buddhism,
central characteristics of each world view
emerge from these
affinities
in
philosophies. Both early
it is
helpful to explore
order to see
how
some
of the
a 'green ontology' can
Buddhism and Naess' deep ecology can
be considered ontologies; they both offer a way of defining the world beyond mere
descriptiveness and empiricism.
What
it
means
to "be"
and the way the world
are
is
both intimately linked within a framework of action. Within the philosophy of deep
ecology, Arne Naess emphasises the importance of a gestalt ontology. That
is
to
say, he attempts to return to the reality of lived experience or the immediate, free
from conceptions of absolutes and permanence. The whole
interaction of processes rather than
component
Buddhist conception of samsara. Everything
in isolation.
Even
if
is
parts. This
is
seen as a dynamic
is
not unlike the
interconnected and nothing can exist
something appears as an independent being on the surface,
this
86
is
at best a "helpful fiction" which allows us to interact in this world, but
fundannental
reality
is
reality.
Chapter
in
not
To both the Deep Ecologist and the Buddhist, fundamental
much more dynamic than
As mentioned
it is
3,
substantial.
the deep ecology theory was postulated by Norwegian
philosopher Arne Naess as an ecological ontology. Naess wished to emphasise a
new way
of viewing the world - as a
whole rather than a conglomeration of parts
which did not affect each other. His response was against what he termed "shallow
ecology"
i.e.
the environmental approach of the status quo embodied by disciplines
such as engineering and the policy makers
isolation
issues,
from human
we need
to go
activity. In
who tended
to view the 'environment'
in
order to address fundamental environmental
beyond the is/ought
distinction so prevalent in conventional
environmental ethics and approach the problems from an ontological perspective.
According to Naess, to compare the
way the world
is
with what ought to be done
who wished
a categorical mistake. This echoes of Nagarjuna
is
to eliminate the
either/or dichotomy of conventional formal logic.
Like Naess, the
Buddha was
offering a
new way
of viewing the world;
in
particular
the problem of dukkha. Both the philosophy of deep ecology and the world view
postulated by the Buddha could be considered radical alternatives to a conventional
world view which
is
on the surface
is
is
presented to us through
strictly
not necessarily indicative of
phenomenological means. What
reality.
This
is
true both for the
Buddhist world view and environmental issues. Shallow environmentalism would
see only the 'surface'.
87
The difference between the shallow and the deep views
similar to the distinction
between the conventional
{samvriti satya) as presented
in
early
time
self or conventional truth
Buddhism and the
However,
ultimate truth {paramartha satya)
it is
of the environment are
reality of selflessness or
important to keep
Buddhism and the contemporary theory of deep ecology are
in
history.
They cannot be deemed
to exist
their understanding of 'the environment'. It has
Buddha
we can
did not refer explicitly to the
still
in
mind that
reflective of their
on equal footing with respect to
been mentioned
earlier that the
environment as we understand
extrapolate from his standpoints regarding the
human
it
today, but
entity
and the
world.
In his philosophy of
'shallow'
Deep Ecology, Naess
illustrates
how
the differing views of the
and the deep correspond to different ontologies which
in
turn affect our
relationship with our environment.
The
'shallow' ecologist looks merely at the
rather than formulating a
new world-view.
environmental problems. Naess' approach
views the world
in
order to deal with the
symptoms
It is
of environmental degradation
a reactive
calls for
approach to dealing with
an actual change
in
the
way one
same environmental problems. Such
problems become not just ecological "problems" but actual ontological conditions.
He characterises the shallow ecology movement as the
"fight against pollution
resource depletion. Central objective: the health and affluence of people
developed countries". (Chi.
p. 3,
the
Philosophical Dialogues )
In contrast to such an approach, the
symptoms
in
and
Deep Ecology movement does not address the
of environmental decay, but formulates a
new way
of viewing the
88
environment
but
like
in
what he
calls
the "gestalt ontology." This
Buddhism, also offers a way of
Fold path
life
Buddhism, Deep Ecology has
In
based on
is
not only a world view,
this ontology. Like the Eight
practical active steps
one can take
in
order to apply theory to practice.
Naess summarises the eight salient characteristics of the Deep Ecology movement
which
differ
from shallow environmentalism of the policy makers. These are
practical as well as ontological
insists that
and are deliberately somewhat vague, since Naess
way
people discover for themselves the ideal
web
within the integrated
of
A summary
life.
of the
to realise their positions
Deep Ecology movement
follows:
1.
Deep Ecology
rejects the
humans-within-environment model
relational total field image.
within
That
is
to say that
complex relationships rather than
individual entities.
The
relationship
more important than the things themselves.
between things
is
Naess says "An
intrinsic relation
without the relation,
between two things A and B
A and B
are no longer the
same
is
such that the
A and
practice,
some
suffering
for food), but there
and to
for
limit
is
a realisation that
our value to
humans
(i.e.
all life is
so that
one
life
implies that although
in
indigenous peoples hunting
dependent on each other
only actually diminishes the quality of
life
humans.
Principle of diversity
in
may be necessary
It
B,
thing. (Ch.l p. 3)
Ecological egalitarianism: this concept applies to the fact that no
form has any more "right" to exist than another.
3.
favour of a
organisms are seen as "knots"
relation belongs to the definitions or basic constitutions of
2.
in
diversity both
in
and symbiosis:
this principle
emphasises that value
the biosphere and social spheres.
It
lies
reinterprets the
89
axiom "survival of the
cooperate
4.
in
fittest" to
of
life,
"the sense of ability to coexist and
complex relationships" rather than "either you or me"
the Anti-Class position:
ways
mean
order to
in
fully realise
the interdependence of
the exploitation of different groups must be eliminated
of the previous three principles. Since the exploited
from the exploited, both
5.
Pollution
group
in
all
favour
lives differently
limit their individual self-realisation
and Resource depletion must be seen as symptoms of a larger
problem rather than *the* problem.
6.
Complexity rather than complication: ecosystems are arranged
patterns but that does not
This position emphasises
mean
ways
of
it
complex
that they are complicated and unworkable.
which include division of labour as
life
opposed to fragmentation of labour
No. 4
in
(this point is also a corollary to point
favours complex economies based on a variety of
means
of living
i.e.
agrarian and small industrial, manual labour and intellectual labour).
Gandhian
principles of decentralised
point which brings us
7.
Local
autonomy and
economies of scale would
fit
into this
to...
decentralisation:
in
order for people to even begin to
develop a Deep Ecology of their own, their control over their immediate
environment must be
local.
Dependence on influences from
afar and
recourses which are not readily available weaken the structure of a
region. Even pollution problems can be addressed
exercised since increased local
when
local
local control
is
autonomy reduces energy consumption.
(Nina Witoszek, 4-7)
90
These important features are the foundation upon which the Deep Ecology
movement
as a practical philosophy rest. However, Naess also refers to the
development of
a particular eco-philosophy
based on the principles of the Deep
Ecology movement. This normative system he terms "ecosophy" and his particular
ecosophy, he names Ecosophy T (T' for Tvergastein, the
cabin
in
Norway.) This
is
Naess'
own
name
particular 'ecosophy' based on the ontological
foundation of the Deep Ecology movement. Each person
his/her
own ecosophy based on Naess's theory
nothing exists independently and
In
comparing the
come
when we
capable of realising
of relational thinking;
realise that,
to Naess' concept of "Self-realisation".
a
"norm"
the concept from what
is
referring to a
known
in
we
The concept
fundamental
&
that
realise ourselves.
Deep Ecology, we
of "Self-realisation"
social
system. He derives
in
It is
not the
same
is
thing as
the Vedantic or Brahmanic tradition, but rather
to identify with nature rather than see
it
as a separate thing or outside
realm. In a Buddhist sense, this can be understood as extending karuna to
living
is
David Rothenberg, 85). However, this
the starting point for his concept of Self-realisation.
'becoming one with the atman' as
i.e.
the history of philosophy as "the Universal Self,
the atman or the absolute" (Arne Naess
way
is
practical aspect of the Buddhist path to that of
what Naess terms
a
of his mountain
all
other
beings trapped within samsara. Self-realisation need not include the concept
of a universal 'self
the goal of his
the absolute sense. For Naess, self-realisation
own ecosophy and
understanding that
actually part of
subject to the
in
one
all
is
the culmination of a
life
is
lived with
essentially
the
things are not just fundamentally interrelated but are
entity; that
same laws
is
the planet Earth. Everything
of Nature.
When one
realises this,
is
all
impermanent and
one has achieved
Self-
91
realisation.
on
it,
some
However,
Self-realisation
like
is
the Mahayana concept of the path to nirvana with nobody
also a
non tangible
sort of desire or striving to reach
it,
'goal'.
yet
in
Conventionally, a goal implies
a truly altruistic Buddhist or
ecologically benign world view, there is no goal, merely the path.
If
we
finally
compare the
a Buddhist philosophy,
ethical
and ontological paths of both
we can see
a
deep ecological and
that certain fundamentals are
critical
to each
school of thought. As has been seen throughout this thesis, the elements of
causality,
impermanence, the
samutpada are the
reality of
the Four Noble Truths and pratitya
basic foundations for Buddhism.
characteristics include similar conclusions
in
a
Deep Ecology's major
more contemporary sense
decidedly practical (with regards to environmental problems that
These are as
•
•
approach.
follows:
Gestalt ontology: seeing the whole as an inextricably linked gestalt
subject to the
same laws
Importance of
intrinsic value: i.e.
and of
itself
of
they
may
impermanence and
'use'
them
flux as everything else
everything that exists has value
regardless of whether value
humans. Humans have no
•
is,)
with a
is
being ascribed to
right to exploit other
life
it
by
forms, although
for basic survival
Self-realisation: in Buddhist terms, this
conventionally understood self
is
means
realising that the
nothing but a convention; not
independently Veal', and then realising that
all
dharmas are
interconnected. Self realisation implies realising that everything
samsara, or
in
in
the case of Deep Ecology,
all
is
beings are fundamentally
one
92
b
As has been seen, both the philosophy of Deep Ecology, just as Buddhisnn, offers an
I
ontology with an ethical component
If
we continue
innplicit in
the ontological world view.
to cling to selfish notions of ownership
and
individuality apart
from
The Buddha often
nature, then increased environmental problems are inevitable.
spoke about the importance of not holding to the view of a permanent unchanging
self.
This false view leads to craving and ultimately greed and increased dukkha.
can also be shown that holding to such a view of a permanent
exploitation of the environment. In the Sabbasavasutta, the
holding a "wrong view" of a
a discussion of
permanent and unchanging
what 'cankers' (or hindrances) stand
self also leads to
Buddha speaks
self. In this
the
in
It
way
of
Sutra, there
is
of a clear
understanding of the nature of the self and fostering non-attachment. The Buddha
says;
if
a person thinks
period? Now, what
was
"Now, was
I in
having been what, what did
(I.B.
Horner, 11) This
is
I
in
a past period?
a past period?
I
Now was
Now how was
become.. .Now what
I
in
in
a past
a past period.
become
will I
not
I
in
Now,
a future period?"
part of the 'wrong view' of holding fast to an eternal
underlying self which ultimately leads to clinging and therefore dukkha. The sutra
continues;
"(Or) a wrong view occurs to him thus; 'Whatever
is
that experiences and knows, that experiences here,
that are lovely and depraved,
not subject to change, that
it is
will
the self for
me
this self for
now
that
is
me
that speaks,
there, the fruition of deeds
permanent, stable, eternal,
stand firm unto the eternal."
(I.B.
Horner, 11).
93
From
a Buddhist, as well as an ecological standpoint, such a conviction
There
is
human
self,
nothing that
is
not subject to change or the laws of nature'.
infrastructure etc., the nature of the Universe
thing that could be
from a Buddhist perspective, the individual
the Five skandhas. This logic also
fits in
and
we
an
is
referring to a 'self both
viewed as complex entity made up of
biological
If
we
look at the
system of a human, we see
becomes much greater than the sum
of
its
parts.
This
is
to
refer both to the 'ecosystem' as a singular entity (the "environment")
a biological
conception of a
In
is
When
to time. This
complex interaction of parts and energies and processes which
constitute a whole that
say, that
dynamic and hence, the only
with an ecological model.
ecosystem of either an environment or the
a
is
permanent would be something not subject
absurdity which the Buddha would not entertain.
is
Much as the
has tried to engineer pernnanent solutions with regards to the
civilization
that each
is illogical.
system as a 'person' (or animal
etc.). This is akin to
the Buddha's
'self.
comparing both Deep Ecology and Buddhism, we have seen that central to both
the ancient wisdom of the Buddha and the modern approach of Arne Naess,
it is
important to avoid the extreme view of a permanent self and ownership when
considering other
life
forms and the planet
itself.
Just as the
Buddha emphasised
karuna to others. Deep Ecology encourages us to see the value
in all life
Both Deep Ecology and Buddhism encourage people to work with
to see the
means
"Buddha nature" within
Self-realisation), but as
all
things. (In the case of
we have
means and
Deep Ecology,
this
seen, environmental problems do not need
technical or political solutions, but fundamental shifts
strives to
skilful
forms.
in
ontology.
The Buddhist
end dukkha, while Deep Ecology also began from an urgent need to stop
94
environmental destruction.
It is
entities are subject to pratitya
clear that
upon the profound
samutpada, that we
will
work
realisation that
all
to prevent the
destruction of nature.
95
Conclusion:
have explored, from a Buddhist perspective, how humanity
In this thesis,
I
interacts with
its
environment and what are the root causes of the current
environmental problems.
theories and doctrines
in
We
have considered that there are several important
the vast body of Buddhist works which can be applied to
an analysis of the causes of environmental problems.
We
have also concluded that
the central doctrines of causality (as expressed by the theory of pratitya-samutpada
or
Dependent Origination) and karma
offer
some important frames
of reference,
from a Buddhist perspective, for an analysis of the environmental situation we
ourselves
We
in
find
today.
have also considered the ontological foundation provided by the Four Noble
Truths gives us an opportunity to formulate an environmental ethics based not on
motivated self-interest, but rather on compassion and empathy.
the
illusion of self-nature
permanence
existence, according to Buddhism.
of such actions.
human
karma which
in
turn forms our samsaric
The constant urge
to satiate desires
The Buddhist concept
consistently argued that the central
that of causality and this
is
whether
real
species to act without taking into account the result
of Causality also provides a point of
departure for comprehending the reckless abuse of Nature
is
discussed that
or substantiality {svabhava) and the clinging to ideas of
lead directly to certain
or imagined, drive the
We
theme throughout the
important
In
in
our times.
I
have
early Buddhist doctrine
the understanding of environmental
problems from a Buddhist perspective.
Since, according to Buddhism, there
merely change
itself, this
where they do not
exist.
is
implies that
We
no substance which
it is
illogical
have seen how
is
subject to change;
to look for a "self" or "thing"
clinging to such an idea of a self or
96
substantiality affects our relationship to our environment.
We
separate ourselves
from the Earth when we think that way, and from a Buddhist, as well as an
ecological standpoint, such a conviction
There
is illogical.
subject to change or the Maws of nature'. Much as the
to engineer
permanent solutions with regards
nothing that
human
civilization
is
not
has tried
to the self, infrastructure,
governments
etc.,
that could be
permanent would be something not subject
the nature of the Universe
is
is
dynamic and hence, the only thing
to time. This
is
an
absurdity which the Buddha would not entertain.
The Buddha
also spoke of
unchanging
self
how there
and therefore
exists apart from causality.
appellation for the
also
fits in
It
it
could be no evidence of a permanent
would be
illogical
arrangement of the
five
ecosystem of either an environment or the
is
a
system
we
(i.e.
that such a thing
'self
is
merely an
skandhas as a human being.
This logic
we
look at the
in
Chapter Three,
biological
system of
a
if
human
entity,
we
complex interaction of parts and energies and processes which
constitute a whole that
say, that
assume
becomes obvious that the term
with an ecological model. As explored
see that each
to
becomes much greater than the sum
refer both to the 'ecosystem'
(i.e.
of
its
parts. This
is
to
the environment) and a biological
a person or animal) as a singular entity. This
is
akin to the Buddha's
conception of a 'self.
Another important concept explored throughout
doctrine of causality which
is critical
complexity of Buddhist causality
is
this dissertation is
the central
to forming a Buddhist Environmental ethic.
embodied
in
The
the theories of non-self. Dependent
Origination (the manifestation of the causal chain of existence) and karma.
97
The theory
of
Dependent Origination
Buddhism which
to the
is critical
illustrates the doctrine of causality in
development and understanding of an
ethical
relationship to our environment.
We
have seen
on universal
earlier
flux
how, according to Buddhism, everything that exists depends
and interconnectedness. There would be neither anything to
perceive nor a perceiver were
it
not for the cycle of dependent origination. This also
has important implications for the formation of an environmental ethics theory, for
ours
is
a universe
how our very
in
which nothing
existence
is
external from dependent origination. Consider
dependent on the conditions of the earth
is
to support
life.
Things exist merely as inter-related phenomena, not as independent substantial
things.
My
thesis also argues that
samutpada toward
we can
apply the Buddhist causal ontology of pratitya
a better understanding of the issues
and grounds of our
environmental situation today.
Buddhism maintains that
there
is
all
conditioned things are impermanent and of course
no such thing as a "non-conditioned" thing, since
that anything can exist independent of other things.
we cannot
divorce
it
from the environment.
conditions created by past
It is
karma and thus the
it is
illogical
When we speak
to
of an entity,
not possible, yet due to
clinging nature
in
assume
human
human, we
try to
dissociate ourselves from, and disregard our environment through motivated self
interest.
Arguably, the
extinction,
critical
environmental problems of pollution, deforestation, species
overconsumption of natural resources and overpopulation
clinging to the idea of the self, self
promotion and
selfish desires. If
all
we
stem from
analyse
why
98
pollution occurs
on a large scale,
we can see
that, in general,
it is
due mainly
large-scale industrial processes and autonnobiles. These things exist
drive a nnainly capitalist
self-interest.
The
contrary to the ideas of a capitalist
capitalist
capitalist
economy
Altruism (a noble characteristic
between environmental
economy
is
order to
economy based on consumption and manufacture
materials into saleable goods.
and
in
(which most of the world
profit.
order to survive
in
is in),
and
the Buddhist teachings)
The reason
in
is
for
is
goods and services. Such goods and services appeal mainly to
often a trade-off
such a drive
in
the
then traded for
desires of
fulfilling
the five skandhas (human beings). For example, one needs a shelter to
is
is
a conventional capitalist society
one must earn wages which
soon, only a certain kind of shelter
of raw
thrives on competition
economy and hence, there
sustainability
because
in
itself
to
but
live in,
acceptable and the desire for more and more
increases exponentially. As desire increases, so does consumption and hence
environmental impact.
Bear
in
mind, there
capitalist,
is
no value judgement placed on such a system, but the
consumption driven
origination
lifestyle is
very
similar to the chain of
when we compare how each causes
our current environmental
crisis is
continuing dukkha.
dependent
We
can say that
comparable to a sort of "Eco-dukkha". For
desire and selfishness which lead to overconsumption and pollution the
leads to dukkha. In such a scenario, the ancient
wisdom
of
same way
it
Buddhism can be both a
reminder and a an antidote to inspire moderation or "the middle way" which
its
it is
is
but
central doctrine.
The problem
of overconsumption
stems from the same root of tanha, or desire
for
the satisfaction of sense desires. The old adage "the more you have, the more you
99
want" sums up succinctly both the Buddhist position and that of the ethic to cut
back on overconsumption. In the conventional
consumption, human being
capitalist
convinced that happiness
is
things and only by accumulating such material wealth
human measured by
society (or ones-self.) This
is
is
economy which
is
to be found
in
drives such
material
your worthiness as a
akin to a "wrong view", for the
increased accumulation of material goods often leads to just the opposite effect.
Pleasure derived from such goods
therefore leads to the desire for
consumption
in
is
always fleeting and never permanent and
more and more. This
in
turn, leads to increased
the economic machine and greater strain on the 'carbon sink' that
the earth becomes. The ecosystem cannot withstand the increase
since
it
in
consumption
cannot 'recycle' the waste at a rate faster or equal to the rate at which
produced. Therefore
we end up
with a pollution problem; the
individual can get into 'moral difficulty'
is
it
same way an
merely by accumulating goods and
forgetting the eight-fold path.
In addition to
overconsumption, overpopulation
is
which stems from the same root as dukkha. While
advocate a complete halt to
all
another environmental problem
it
equitable.
We
not be necessary to
procreation, from a Buddhist as well as an
environmental standpoint, to practice restraint both
desire for large families,
may
we can make our time
in
in
terms of consumption and
samsara more sustainable and
have also explored the Buddhist concept of karma and how actions
relate to forming an environmental ethic. If
with our environment, this
is
we
are to understand our relationship
probably the most important aspect to deal with
In
forming an environmental ethic.
100
In addition to exploring the early doctrines of
causality and karma,
we
also
Buddhism with the
made comparisons and
introduced
central
themes
of
some
contemporary environmental philosophies which include similar themes. In our
attempt to
illustrate
the relevance of a philosophy of interconnectedness and flux to
environmental thought, the environmental theories of general systems theory,
Deep Ecology, the Gala hypothesis, ecocentricism and biocentrism, Darwin's
biological
determinism, ecofeminism and
some
of the conventional western
approaches to nature were examined. Each of these theories offers various ways
which the environment
is
viewed by humans.
environmental ethics, that
we
realise
we
It is
essential
when
exploring
are not just considering the
envision their environment and their place
in
it,
but
how we view
in
way humans
the world
in
general. As argued, each of the above-mentioned contemporary environmental
theories offer a world view, not merely an environmental ethic.
General systems theory emphasises the interaction between systems and attempts
to
come up
with a unifying theory which avoids scientific reductionism by
concentrating on emergent properties and behaviour of systems rather than
reducing components to their smallest possible state. The Gaia hypothesis
theory which explores the possibility that the Earth
like
any other
biological
a living
a
system much
organism. The theories of biocentrism and ecocentricism
place emphasis on different
biological
itself is
is
components of the ecosystem; biocentrism emphasises
organisms while ecocentricism (of which Deep Ecology can be considered
a part) places
emphasis on entire ecosystems complete with
all
the living
101
components and can be considered
a holistic philosophy. Ecofeminism essentially
addresses the
problem of the subjugation and exploitation of Nature as being linked to the
oppression of
and
women
problems by
traditional
women.
It
historic
attempts to address some of the injustices to both Nature
through an analysis of contemporary and
critiquing the
historical
environmental
male dominated language, behaviour and action of
environmental policies and thought.
Brief introductions
were made
to
some
of these important environmental schools of
thought, with a later comparison and focus on the philosophy of Deep Ecology as
posited by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess.
Ecology and Buddhism was undertaken and
A comparative
some
of the
analysis of
common themes
Deep
of
interconnectedness, holism and flux were considered. The contemporary
environmental theories were compared to the philosophy of Buddhism and
connections were
made between
both Buddhism and
holistic
the differing schools of thought. Fundamental to
environmental theories are the central concepts of
interconnectedness, change and causality which emphasises the
link
between
humanity and the environment.
Essentially, the ultimate goal of this thesis
was
to explore
between ecological ontology and Buddhist thought. That
means
world
to be a 'being
itself;
in
and emphasise the
is
to say, that
what
link
it
the world' necessarily implies an inherent connection to the
to the causal threads that bind us
all
together and that nothing
is
not
subject to the wheel of dependent origination. This implicit causal and physical
102
connection
living
is
directly related to
things also subject to the
In the end,
we
an ethical path of compassion and ennpathy for
same
all
causal laws.
are nothing without our environment, and as the Buddha taught,
are nothing without the causal chain linking us
all
we
and everything irrevocably.
103
Bibliography
Works
Cited:
Carl B. Becker, Ed. Asian
and Jungian Views of
Ethics.
London, Greenwood
Press. 1999.
J.
Essays
in
& Roger
Ames
eds. Nature in Asian Traditions of Thought:
Environmental Philosophy. Albany; State University of New York
Baird Callicott
T.
Press; 1989.
Charlton, Noel: A Compilation of
Internet
page at URL:
Deep Ecology Information.
WWW
<http://www.lancs.ac.uk/users/philosophy/mave/guide/deepecol.htm>
(current as of Sept. 2004.)
Curtin, Deane. "A State of Mind Like Water: Ecosophy T and the Buddhist
Traditions" in Beneath the surface
critical essays in the philosophy of deep
ecology Cambridge, Mass. Eric Katz, Andrew Light, and David Rothenberg
eds. MIT Press, 2000.
:
Ronald Epstein. The Inner Ecology: Buddhist
San Francisco State University. Internet
Ethics
and Practice May 2002,
.
WWW page at URL:
<http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/Inner%20Ecology.htm>
L. Garfield, "Dependent Arising and the Emptiness of Emptiness:
Nagarjuna start with Causation?" Philosophy East and West.
Volume 44, Number 2 April 1994, pp. 219-250.
Jay
Horner,
I.B. (Tr.)
The Book of the
discipline (Vinaya-pitaka)
London:
Why
Pali
did
Text
Society, 1963.
Inada, K. "Environmental Problematics in the Buddhist Context" Philosophy
East and West Volume 37, no. 2, April 1987, 135-149
.
Inada, K. "the Range of Buddhist Ontology" Philosophy East and West.
Vol. 38, No. 3. July 1988, 261-280.
104
Ku
Naaanuna: the Philosophy
Kalupahana, David
J.
State University of
New
Lovelock, James; Gaia:
University Press, 1987.
of the Middle
Way. Albany;
York Press. 1986.
A new Look
at Life on Earth
.
Oxford: Oxford
Victor Mansfield; "Time in Madhyamika Buddhism and Modern Physics"
Pacific World Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies 1996.
September 2002. Internet
page at URL:
The
,
WWW
<http://www.lightlink.com/vic/time.html>
Naess, Arne. Ecology, Community and Lifestyle Cambridge University Press,
1989.
,
Narada Maha Thera, The Buddha and His Teachings. Singapore Buddhist
Meditation Centre. 1973.
Madhyamika Philosophy: A New Approach"
Philosophy East & West Volume 14, 1964. pp. 3-24
R.C. Pandeya, "The
Radhakrishnan S. and Charles A. Moore, eds. A Sourcebook
Philosophy.
Princeton New Jersey, Princeton University Press: 1957.
The Dhammapada.
Tr. S.
in
Indian
Radhakrishnan, Madras; Oxford University
Press: 1950.
Rahula, W. Gems of Buddhist Wisdom Buddhist Missionary Society, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia: 1996.
.
Rahula, W.
What the Buddha Taught. New York: Grove
Press, 1959.
Reichenbach, "The law of karma and the principle of causation"
Philosophy East and West. Volume 38, no.4, October 1988, 399-410.
Bruce
R.
105
Rothenberg, David. Conversations with Arne Naess:
University Of Minnesota Press, l^inneapolis 1993.
Is It Painful to
Think?
"Green Buddhism and the Hierarchy of Compassion" by Alan Sponberg,
Western Buddhist Review Vol 1. Dec. 1994.
Internet
page at URL:
<http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/voll/green_buddhism.html>
.
WWW
Thanisarro Bhikku, "/Carma; "Theravada Text Archives.
<http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/karma.html>
The Dhammapada Tr. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1997.
Internet
page at URL:
<http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/dhp/index.html>
WWW
"Majjhima Nikaya"Tr. Nanamoli Thera, The Buddha's Words on Kamma: Four
Discourses from the Middle Length Collection ed. Khantipalo Bhikkhu,
Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1993.
,
Bertalanffy, Ludwig. General Systems Theory: Foundations,
Development, Applications New York: Braziller, 1968.
Von
,
Warren, Henry Clarke. Buddhism
1963.
in
Translations
.
New
York,
Atheneum;
Nina Witoszek and Andrew Brennan Eds. Philosophical Dialogues: Arne Naess
and the Progress of Ecophilosophy. Lanham MD, Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers Inc., 1999.
Ed. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to
Radical Ecology. (T"^ Edition^. New Jersey, Prentice Hall 1998.
M.
Zimmerman,
106
SiJi
Additional Works Consulted:
B.
Thomas
Berry,
The Dream of the Earth (San Franciso:
Sierra Club Books,
1990.)
Michael G. Barnhart, "Ideas of nature
and West Vol.47 No. 3,
.
in
an Asian context" Philosophy East
(pp. 417-432)
Christopher Belshaw, Environmental philosophy reason, nature and
concern (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001)
:
J.
Baird Callicott
,
Beyond the land
philosophy (Albany, N.Y.
ethic
:
more essays
State University of
:
New York
in
human
environmental
Press, cl999.)
Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (New York: Collier Books, 1962.)
Our Dharma
O.P. Dwivedi, Environmental Ethics:
Delhi:
to the
Environment (New
Sanchar Publishing House, 1994.)
Bruce V. Foltz, Inhabiting the earth Heidegger, environmental ethics, and
the metaphysics of nature (Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1995)
:
,
Lori
Gruen and Dale Jamieson Eds. Reflecting on nature: readings
in
environmental philosophv (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994)
Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time
(New York: Harper & Row, 1962.)
tr.
John Macquarrie
& Edward Robinson
David J. Kalupahana, Causality— the central philosophv of Buddhism
(Honolulu
University Press of Hawaii, 1975)
:
Aldo Leopold,
A Sand Countv Almanac (New
York: Ballantine, 1966.)
107
Luhmann,
Niklas
Ecological
Communication,
(Chicago: Chicago University Press,
tr.
Jolin
Bednarz
Jr.
1989.)
Bruce Morito, Thinking Ecologically: Environmental thought, values and
Policy (Halifax: Fernwood Publishing, 2002.)
.
Joanna Macy, JoannaMacy.net
Internet
page at URL:
http://www.joannamacy.net/
Home
page, March 2004
WWW
Richard Sylvan and David Bennett, The greening of ethics (Cambridge,
White Horse Press, 1994.)
John Seed
et. al.
(Philadelphia:
Thinking like a mountain towards a council of
Society Publishers, 1988.)
:
all
UK
beings
New
Mathis Wackernagel & William Rees, Our Ecological Footprint (Gabriola Island
B.C.: New Society Publishers, 1996.)
Alex Wellington, Allan
in
Greenbaum and Wesley Cragg,
Eds. Canadian Issues
Environmental Ethics (Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1997.)
Karen Warren, Ecofeminist philosophy a western perspective on what
and why it matters (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000)
:
it is
.
Woods, If Only Things were different: A Model
Society (WoodsWorks: Victoria, 1992.)
Elizabeth
for a Sustainable
Access to Insight: Readings in Theravada Buddhism June 2004,
page at URL:
Internet
<http://www.accesstoinsight.org/>
WWW
108