* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Buddhism and the earth : environmental thought in early Buddhist
Buddhist cosmology wikipedia , lookup
Buddhist cosmology of the Theravada school wikipedia , lookup
Buddhist texts wikipedia , lookup
Gautama Buddha wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism and violence wikipedia , lookup
Karma in Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Early Buddhist schools wikipedia , lookup
Nirvana (Buddhism) wikipedia , lookup
Buddhist art wikipedia , lookup
Noble Eightfold Path wikipedia , lookup
Dhyāna in Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Sanghyang Adi Buddha wikipedia , lookup
Persecution of Buddhists wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism in Vietnam wikipedia , lookup
Dalit Buddhist movement wikipedia , lookup
History of Buddhism in Cambodia wikipedia , lookup
Four Noble Truths wikipedia , lookup
History of Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Buddha-nature wikipedia , lookup
Decline of Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent wikipedia , lookup
History of Buddhism in India wikipedia , lookup
Silk Road transmission of Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism and Hinduism wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism and sexual orientation wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism and psychology wikipedia , lookup
Greco-Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Buddhism in Myanmar wikipedia , lookup
Enlightenment in Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Triratna Buddhist Community wikipedia , lookup
Women in Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Buddhist ethics wikipedia , lookup
Pre-sectarian Buddhism wikipedia , lookup
Buddhist philosophy wikipedia , lookup
^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