Of interest to Eco-Buddhists and Unitarians
The Center for Buddhist Studies at Columbia University has posted a podcast by Mark Blum that should be interesting for Unitarian Universalists and Buddhist practitioners (and especially those who consider themselves in both camps).
I’m about three-quarters through the lecture, which I listened to during my delay at the Austin airport yesterday. Blum’s main thesis is that the sacralization of nature and aims of self-liberation through environmental work are more in line with American Transcendentalism (a la Emerson and Thoreau) than Buddhism, traditionally understood.
What is interesting in his lecture is his history of the interconnections between Unitarianism and Buddhism in the nineteeth century. Thoreau, for example, was responsible for the first translation of a major Buddhist text in America (a portion of the Lotus Sutra).
However, Blum argues that the understanding of our environment having a “Buddha-nature” and being viewed positively as a means of self-transformation is indebted to Transcendentalist ideas, which are ultimately culled from a reaction to Puritanism, an adaptation of German Romanticism and misunderstandings/applications of Indian philosophy in general, Hinduism in particular.
Of course, this is not to say that “eco-Buddhism”, as the movement affiliated with Joanna Macy and others has come to be known, is thus entirely illegitimate. Blum’s point is merely that, historically, environmental activism is not part of Buddhist concerns and that nature is neutral, primarily seen as a potential source of attachment. And human beings are, without a doubt, hierarchically higher than the realm of demons, hungry ghosts and animals. We are not simply one of many sentient beings seeking enlightenment, but the highest (next to the realm of angels).
There are, of course, scholars who would disagree with Blum, and I’m not historian enough to determine who is correct (my concerns, anyway, are generally philosophical, not historical). His argument, as I’ve heard it so far, though, seems convincing.
Arbitrary Chatter:
Aaron Boyden: Well, back when I was an... Aaron Boyden: The evaluation of historical... Loden Jinpa: thanks Richard: Thanks Colleen — let me just add... Loden Jinpa: >Finally, I just read the draft...