Buddhism states that all things are dependant in their origin upon other things. Pratītya-Samutpāda a central tenant of Buddhist belief, translates as dependant originating or dependant arising. It is not too dissimilar to the idea of cause and effect; things can only arise out of a prior condition. All physical and mental states affect the proceeding physical and mental states, they are products of their origin, and dependant in nature of what manifested them.
So for Buddhism, everything is inextricably interconnected. And we can extrapolate this to biological systems; living things are dependent on other living things, forming the complex network known as the biosphere. But this interdependence does not stop here. The notion of dependant originating implies that all things are not as fundamentally ‘different’ as we perceive them to be since they arise out of and resemble what caused them to exist. At a scientifically reductive level this is also true, human beings just as all flora and fauna are made of the same stuff, and subject to the same governing physical laws. Break down any living thing and you will see that it is comprised of the same atoms which hold us together. So, does it follow that Buddhism can lead to compassion and empathy for the environment that we share this intimate connection with?
Environmentalism is not really mentioned in the first emerging Buddhist scripture. But this has to be taken in the context with which it was written. At the time, communities were sporadically located among the jungle, in stark contrast to the now pockets of jungle that defy human urbanisation. So looking for textural justification of Buddhist environmentalism would be difficult, or at least for an explicit mention of it. But from the principle of Pratītya-Samutpāda, however, we can infer that a Buddhist environmental movement would make a lot of sense. If we can’t draw arbitrary lines in the sand about what separates us from everything else on Earth, then as we work to sustain ourselves, we should work to also sustain what gave rise to us, the environment.
For Buddhism, demarcating between yourself and the environment which created you would be drawing a false dichotomy. Where do we draw the line between where ‘I’ exist and where the external world exists? If you were to say ‘I’ end where my skin ends then are you implying that this is because you need your bodily extremities to exist. But we also need ‘external’ factors from ourselves to survive as much as we need our vital organs. Oxygen, water, sustenance, we all rely on these to get by just as much as our beating hearts. So to justify the degradation of the environment in terms of self-interest is a fallacy. Acting to preserve and sustain the environment is an act of self-interest just as much as it is an act of environmentalism.
Photo Courtesy of Nick Stringer