Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism and the Environment

[xiaojiang216]

各位好：

I've been interested in studying the syncretism of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism (often referred to collectively as 三教) and especially how they (separately and perhaps collectively) envision an ideal relationship between man and nature.

I know that roddy has mentioned chinadialogue.net on the forums before, but here is an article in English and Chinese that might introduce you to the topic if you're not familiar with it. There are other related articles on the site as well. I've had mixed responses when discussing this with Chinese people, and thought it would be interesting to see what people on this forum think.

How do you think the ideal relationship between man and nature compares in Confucian, Buddhist, and Daoist thought, and do you think these teachings can be used to promote harmony between the two? Or, is this a holistic and oversimplified approach that is putting forth a "misguided" interpretation? Below I've included some passages that might help start a discussion (of course, we could also talk about concepts that are not necessarily a part of these teachings):

Confucianism 儒 and 天人合一

“通天、地、人曰儒，通天、地而不通人曰伎。” 《楊子法言 · 君子卷第十二》

“仲尼祖述堯、舜，憲章文、武；上律天時，下襲水土。辟如天地之無不持載，無不覆幬，辟如四時之錯行，如日月之代明。萬物并育而不相害，道并行而不相悖，小德川流，大德敦化，此天地之所以為大也。”《中庸》

“五畝之宅，樹之以桑，五十者可以衣帛矣；雞豚狗彘之畜，無失其時，七十者可以食肉矣；百畝之田，勿奪其時，數口之家可以無飢矣；謹庠序之教，申之以孝悌之養，頒白者不負戴於道路矣。七十者衣帛食肉，黎民不飢不寒，然而不王者，未之有也。”《孟子 · 梁惠王上》

“天有其時，地有其財，人有其治，夫是之謂能參。舍其所以參，而願其所參，則惑矣。”《荀子 · 天論》

Buddhism 释 and 佛性

“我及眾生皆有佛性，世界萬物都有佛性，其性遍造、遍變、遍攝。世人不了大教之體，唯雲無情不雲有性，是故須雲無情有性。”《金刚錍》

“諸罪當中，殺罪最重；諸功德中，不殺第一。”《大智度論》

Daoism 道

and 道法自然

(not necessarily 大自然)

“四時之氣，天之按行也，而人逆之，則賊害其父；以地為母，得衣食養育，不共愛利之，反賊害之。”《太平經》

“故道大，天大，地大，王亦大。域中有四大，而王居其一焉。人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。”《道德經》

[gato]

This comment following the article is interesting.

http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4045-Ecological-wisdom-of-the-ages

愿其为真

这是一个非常讨喜的愿景，可从历史上看来，却似乎不是如此。如果你看了Mark Elvin的大作——《大象的撤退》（The Retreat of the Elephants),一本关于过去两千年中国环境历史的书籍；那么，你便很难拒绝这样一个结论——传统中华文明如同今日中国文化一样，对于环境皆具有毁 灭性的影响。我不认为这是一个价值上的问题：中国宗教信仰，像许多哲学以及宗教系统一样，教导人们尊重自然并与之和谐相处。但一个不断膨胀的国家必将产生 惊人的消耗，这与传统智慧有着很大冲突，尽管，国家的需求最终总是在冲突中取胜。如果传统中国与自然和谐相处的话，那为何中华文明的摇篮——黄河河曲，为 何会在工业时代到来之前就变成沙漠？为何中国森林的系统性退化发生的时间远在工业时代到来之前，或是根本无法和西方资本主义扯上关系？我觉得该是时候结束 这些伤感的叨絮，并认认真真看看历史了。

I wish it was true

This is a very pleasant vision, but history does not bear it out. If you read Mark Elvin's masterpiece, The Retreat of the Elephants, an environmental history of the last 2000 years, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that traditional Chinese civilisation was a destructive of the environment as today's China. I do not think this is a question of values: China's religious beliefs, like most systems of philosophy and religion preach respect and harmony with nature. But the demands of an ever expanding state are in conflict with this traditional wisdom and the demands of the state always win. If China traditionally lived in harmony with nature, why is it that the cradle of Chinese civilisation -- the great bend of the Yellow River, turned to desert, long before the industrial era? Why was China systematically deforested long before the industrial era or Western capitalism had anything to do with it? I think it is time we stopped repeating these sentimental cliches and took a serious look at history.

[xiaojiang216]

Thank you gato, I had not noticed that comment before and think it makes a very good point. While I certainly agree, I would argue that some Western religions do not always preach respect and harmony with nature, and that a distinction should be made between such traditions and others such as Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism.

An article written by Lynn White called "The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis" comes to mind, arguing that according to Judaism and Christianity, God created Earth for man's benefit and rule. So there still are several differences among traditions that are interesting to look at. Also, do you think that Confucian, Buddhist, and Daoist teachings could be revisited and used to promote environmental awareness in China?

[raydpratt]

One of my reasons for learning Chinese is to be able to read China's ancient literature, particularly Daoist literature, for the sake of getting a native-language understanding of the literature surrounding soft-style martial arts, also called internal styles, like Tai Chi, Xing Yi, and Ba Gua Zhang. My interest began over thirty years ago when I met and briefly studied under an internal martial arts master, Sifu Cheuk Fung. See, http://www.yichuankungfu.com/

In one training session, he told me to push on his curved, outstretched arm and to bend it. I tried, and failed. He then told me to try again, but to take one hand and to feel his arm. I did so, and despite all my superior weight, height, and perhaps even my superior muscular strength (that would be hard to judge against an arm that cannot be bent), I not only could not do so, but his arm was as soft and loose and untensed as a sleeping baby.

So, my interest in Daoism, and even pre-Daoist texts mentioned by Sifu Cheuk Fung, such as the I Ching, and a 3,000 year old medical text by the Yellow Emperor, is based on my experience with the reality that these teachings have something substantial, unusual and real to offer that is not religious. Let me repeat that: "not religious." The skills that can be achieved are the product of work. study, and practice.

I would hazard to guess that the poetic and nature-related language reputedly used in these ancient texts was a way to point to the experiences being studied and experienced without resorting to special terms that no one else but the practicioners of these arcane arts would be able to understand.

So, I do not subscribe to the notion that revitalizing a blend of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism as religion would lead to a special respect for the environment by the world and China. I would rather say that the reasons for respecting the environment would be the same as my reasons for respecting and wanting to learn Daoist internal arts: self-interest.

Self interest is a rational event, not a religious one.

[xiaojiang216]

raydpratt - Thank you for your comment. I study martial arts myself and have also witnessed the technique you described with the outstretched arm.

I agree with you that there are many "non-religious" teachings that can be achieved through study of Daoist texts. However, I would say that there are many other ways (religious and/or philosophical) in which such teachings (Daoist or Confucian) have been interpreted. The various schools of Daoism, such as the Celestial Masters (天師), Supreme Clarity (上清), and Luminous Perfection (靈寶) Schools, are examples of this. Many of the practices within these schools are individualized, which seems to complement your comment about self-interest.

My use of the terms "teachings" and "traditions" are intended to encompass the religious, philosophical, and many other interpretations of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism. Because these teachings can be interpreted in so many different ways, I believe that examining the relationships between man and nature within them does not require us to look at them strictly as religion or philosophy.

[raydpratt]

Very interesting, thank you. Having seen one true master, I find it hard to even find a practitioner with similar but lesser skill, so I am happy to hear that you have seen and know of the "unbendable arm." I have seen what may be lesser skill, or less used skill, in a master who could slowly and inexorably pull me off balance. I find it fascinating because the mechanics don't make any sense from a western, mechanical engineering point of view. I'm a Christian, so I will not be approaching Daoism religiously, but I recognize that Daoism and esoteric Buddhism have achieved physical skills and insights that are science, not miracles.

For example, as a Christian I would never actually try to use the I Ching for divination, but I would recognize the value of a very ancient psychoanalysis that blends the power of the left and right hemnispheres of the brain, the artistic and the rational, by starting with a question, throwing coins, yarrow sticks, or chicken bones, and then artistically exploring the resulting hexagram and general interpretations as applied to the beginning question. The only value of believing in the divination is that the practitioner would engage in the artistic and rational exploration seriously. That's my take, right or wrong.

I would hazard to guess that the I Ching is a very deep book, but, again, I would not approach it religiously. However, I would approach it.

[OneEye]

You may be interested in the work Edward Shaughnessy has done on the I Ching. He's primarily a philologist and uses a philological approach to the book, but also has training in religious studies. I haven't read his work on the I Ching specifically, but in Zhou dynasty philology he's one of the best in the world.

[raydpratt]

Thank you. I researched a little, and apparently Shaughnessy was the first to translate the 200-ish B.C, silk versions of the I Ching, so his work is obviously important for an English reader. However, given the actual physical abilities of the internal martial artists, who are essentially Daoists, I worry about a western cultural translation that may miss what may be the real significance of the words. So, I definately want to learn to read the I Ching in Chinese. Nonetheless, a good English translation would probably help me understand the Chinese better.

If I am going to consult western sources, I sort of need someone who is crazy enough to believe in the I Ching and yet who is intelligent enough to stay within reason. I just watched a You Tube video at

where a translator and user of the I Ching, Stephen Karcher, goes into what looks like a psychotic babble-fest about how contemplating the I Ching symbols and meanings will transform the heart and mind. He is clearly a believer of sorts, but his writing elsewhere admits that he takes the Confucianist view that when the I Ching is used for divination, it will probably be right about half the time (randomly), but that it will always be right about how you are situated in the matter. In other words, the I Ching isn't about what will actually happen in the future; but, rather, it's all about you and your questions about the future. Karcher claims that internalizing the I Ching in a deep way will transform you in a deep way. Given the testimonials and the test of time, I would hazard to guess that it is a deep book with the power to bring out our latent ability to bring out a deeper understanding of ourselves and others with an essentially random and artistic process.

[li3wei1]

I don't think there's anything special about the I Ching. The same thing happens with tarot cards, or any other set of vague but evocative symbols that can be randomly manipulated. The 'power' or 'ability' isn't in the set of symbols, but in the receptive mindset of the person using them.

[OneEye]

Yeah, and from what I know of the subject, the Daoism that's around today is far removed from its original form. Not only that, but the book was around long before Daoism, and as far as I understand, was reinterpreted by Ruists/Confucianists first, and then later by Daoists.

I'd recommend looking into the current scholarly understanding of the text and its history before you go ascribing too much power to it. Shaughnessy's chapter on the I Ching in Michael Loewe's Early Chinese Texts (pp. 216-28) would be an outstanding place to start. He goes into issues like textual criticism, authenticity, different versions, important commentaries, translations, relevant modern studies and research aids, etc.

[raydpratt]

Thank you. My interest in the I Ching comes from the respectful tone used by the martial arts master whom I referred to earlier, Sifu Cheuk Fung, when he discussed the I Ching. The conversation started with his discussion of a popular version of the I Ching that came out at the time, around 1978-ish, that had a lot of artsy pictures and calligraphy, but which Sifu Cheuk Fung referred to as "very irresponsible" as to its textual quality. If I remember correctly, the I Ching is the source of the later Daoist doctrine that 'the one became two, and the two became three: heaven, earth, and man; and the three became 10,000 things.' So, yes, the I Ching predates Daoism, but was nonetheless incorporated by Daoism (if I remember correctly).

In our class conversation, I agreed with 'the one became two, and the two became three, heaven, earth, and man, and the three became 10,000 things,' because I had learned how to stop mentally naming or categorizing my sense impression sources in meditation techniques that I had learned as a teenager from a book called Getting There Without Drugs, by Buryl Payne. In other words, we mentally create the 10,000 things.

What I want from the I Ching is a deeper and more intuitive understanding of yin and yang, and change, as used in internal martial arts technique. If it also will help me become more attuned to the dynamics of any change, so much the better, but my interest is very specific to internal martial arts where I have seen and felt "effortless power" as an actual, practical skill. Sifu Cheuk Fung is also an herbalist and a bone doctor who can set broken bones without a cast, so he is a very classically trained Chinese martial artist, and I trust his judgment that the I Ching is important.

I will of course look at the materials you suggested -- thank you. (My only disagreements with Daoism as a Christian is that Daoism seems to worship the creation, not the creator. Nonetheless, given Sifu Cheuk Fung's actual, demonstrable skills, I see Daoism as a science, not a religion. And, like western science, Daoism is right about the world.)

[xiaojiang216]

Hi again,

I was in a bookstore yesterday and happened upon a book called The Devouring Dragon: How China's Rise Threatens Our Natural World by Craig Simons. Out of curiosity, I found a few brief passages that touch upon this topic of 儒、释、道 and the natural environment.

Most of this discussion is focused on Confucianism - the "dominant philosophy" in China "which stresses order both among people and between society and the natural world." The top-down, 'harmony through hierarchy' approach of Confucianism "applied to the natural world as well, and Confucians actively sought to manage, use, and control nature" (45). He then makes reference to Mark Elvin's book Retreat of the Elephants, which the comment from chinadialogue.org that gato found mentions. In Elvin's view, "the Chinese were driven by a desire for the rational mastery of the world."

As for Daoism and Buddhism, Simons writes that they have "largely existed on China's fringe" in a similar way that modern environmental movements have not compelled all Westerners to follow a simple material lifestyle (45). He mentions the influence of Daoist thinking on the creation of the term 自然, "being so of itself", and its modern use to mean "natural".

At the end of this particular chapter, Simons offers a sound summary: "To understand China's modern environmental crisis, one needs to grasp those historical roots: Confucian ideology both bolstered the belief that the natural world should be controlled to serve man and created a top-down political system with weak support for civil society--the checks on power provided by democratic elections, a free press, an active government sector, and the rule of law. Mao Zedong sharpened those historical forces by nurturing a revolutionary zeal that often ignored and silenced science and common sense. And China's post-Mao era has greatly increased the speed of environmental damage and pushed it far beyond the nation's borders" (48).

I hope I did not quote too much, but if you're interested in a preview of the book, you can find one here. Thanks!

[ecohansen]

Howdy.

If y'all haven't already encountered the series, I strongly recommend "Confucianism and ecology," "Buddhism and Ecology," and "Daoism and Ecology" from Harvard University Press. They're all collections of solicited papers by different scholars, so each book has very strong and very weak sections, but overall they're very worthwhile. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/collection.php?cpk=1057

A few quick thoughts on environment-related subjects in Confucius' Analects:

1: Study of the natural world can reveal universal truths, and the natural world should be honored and respected. This can be seen in passages like the following:

10:24 At a sudden change, the birds rose into the air, soaring then perching in a flock. The master said: "The hen pheasants by the mountain bridge! What timeliness! What timeliness!" -- [the disciple] Zilu bowed to the birds, but with three sniffs, they flew off.

12.2 The master said: Go out into the world as if greeting a magnificent guest!

6.21 The Master said, "The wise find pleasure in water; the virtuous find pleasure in hills. The wise are active; the virtuous are tranquil. The wise are joyful; the virtuous are long-lived."

17.1 The master said "I wish to be wordless." Zigong replied: "If you never spoke, then what would the disciples have to pass on?" The Master said "does Tian (heaven/nature)speak? yet the seasons turn and the creatures of the world are born. Does tian speak?"

2: In Much of Book 18, and elsewhere, Confucius seems to agree that the most virtuous personal lifestyle is that of the secluded hermit. This personal purity, however, must be balanced against the need to attempt to improve the world.

18.6 has been translated several ways but I favor Hinton's interpretation. I don't have it in front of me, but Confucius' final statement in the passage goes something like: the master sighed, saying "I cannot flock with the birds and beasts. If I abandoned my disciples, who would teach them? If the world followed the Dao [and didn't need me to correct it], it would be easy for me to live apart."

3: The modern environmental movement's antimaterialism would earn Confucius' approval, as per passages like the following:

The Master said, "With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and my bended arm for a pillow;-I have still joy in the midst of these things. Riches and honors acquired by unrighteousness, are to me as a floating cloud."

4: The Rites that Confucius followed seemed to have a basic respect for the dignity of animals, requiring that they be hunted in fair and respectful ways:

7:27 When the Master went fishing, he did not use a net; when he hunted, he would not shoot at a perched bird.

5: However, Confucius sees both human wellbeing and the preservation of Li (Rites) as more important than the wellbeing of individual animals:

The stable being burned down, when he was at court, on his return he said, "Has any man been hurt?" He did not ask about the horses.

3:17 Zi Gong wanted to do away with the sacrifice of the sheep on the first of the month. Confucius said, “Ci, you love the sheep; I love the ceremony.”

Anyway, those were a few initial thoughts. I'd love to see this thread revived, and see some commentary by people with better Daoist and Buddhist backgrounds than I have.