Ars Disputandi

Volume 5 (2005)
ISSN: 15665399
Roger S. Gottlieb
WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC
INSTITUTE, USA
Zen Buddhism and Environmental
Ethics
By Simon P. James
Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004; 150 pp.; hb. 50.00; pb. 16.99; ISBN:
0754613674/0754613682.
[1]
This short, well-written, and highly intelligent book stands at the con-
uence of three important streams of contemporary intellectual and political life:
the application of sophisticated analytical methods to the exposition of Buddhism,
inquiries into the relationshipbetweenreligionandnature, andthe emergence of a
specically religious (both theological and activist) response to the environmental
crisis. James's goal is to show, as clearly and undogmatically as possible, that Zen
Buddhism possesses rich resources in its sense of the human-nature connection
to enable it, at least potentially, to contribute to the rise of contemporary religious
environmentalism.
[2]
James's strategy to accomplish this goal makes his book quite useful
for teaching, even at an introductory level, but also of value to readers with
more advanced knowledge. He begins with a brief but effective summary of the
essential elements of Buddhism, of its Mahayana school out of which Zen grew,
and then of Zen itself. Having noted that in the early years of contemporary
environmentalism Zen in particular and Asian religions in general were often
represented as necessarily less damaging and more sympathetic to nature than
Westernfaiths, he thenproceeds toexamine systematically anumber of arguments
to show that Zen is in fact not very helpful in this regard, either because it is
essentially without morality, or cannot conceive of nature itself having a value, or
because it is essentially politically passive.
[3]
Ranging over the history of Zen, and at times using more general Ma-
hayana sources, James effectively rebuts each of the charges. He shows that Zen
ethics, far from always being conceived of as a lesser stage of consciousness to be
transcended in enlightenment, is in fact often described as a necessary part or a
consequence of enlightenment. His linking of recent concepts of virtue ethics and
description of the central Buddhist virtue of compassion are clear and effective.
Similarly, his argument that a fully developed Zen consciousness can take seri-
ously the value of nature not as an independent entity standing over against a
human `self,' but as part of the eld of reality to which a Buddhist seeks to be open
does an excellent job of clarifying concepts which are often presented in a vague
and merely suggestive ways.
[4]
I was less satised with James's treatment of the political nature of Zen.
c November 1, 2005, Ars Disputandi. If you would like to cite this article, please do so as follows:
Roger S. Gottlieb, `Review of Zen Buddhism and Environmental Ethics,' Ars Disputandi [http://www.ArsDisputandi.
org] 5 (2005), paragraph number.
Roger S. Gottlieb: Review of Zen Buddhism and Environmental Ethics
He is right to argue, I believe, that there is really nothing absolutely inherent
in Zen to prevent political involvement. Clearly, Bodhisattvas (Buddhist saints)
could express their compassion on the barricades as well as in more private,
personal encounters. But as a matter of historical fact they have done so with
extreme rarity. It is only recently, with the rise of `engaged Buddhism,' (some of
whose founders James quotes approvingly) that Buddhismhas begun to resonate
with the prophetic, socially oriented calls to justice that is a hallmark of Western
religion. And, it should be noted, the initial response to engaged Buddhism by
the Buddhist establishment was in the main extremely negative. James thus
somewhat obscures the basic politically passive structure of Zen by arguing that
such a posture is not necessary. It isn't, but it certainly has been actual.
[5]
Finally, I would have liked James to explore, if only in passing, those
places where contemporary Buddhism plays important roles in environmental
struggles. Even if this is not specically Zen, the virtual absence of Zen Buddhism
inthe contemporary worldmeans that its possibilities shouldbe empirically linked
to the rest of world Buddhism. An exploration of the specically Buddhist basis
of the Sarvodaya movement in Sri Lanka, or current policies of the Mongolian
government, would have enabled James to make his case more persuasive.
[6]
But these cavils aside, I must stress that this book is a worthwhile
contribution to the literature, one which should raise the level of the discussion of
Zen and ecology in fruitful ways.
Ars Disputandi 5 (2005), http://www.ArsDisputandi.org