During my last visit to Dharma Drum Retreat Centre in Pine Bush, New York, I was introduced to Dena Miriam the head of the Global Peace Initiative of Women based in Manhattan. We discussed the world crisis and I promised her a copy of my new book, World Crisis and Buddhist Humanism, as soon as it appeared. In due course I sent a copy to her and received an invitation to attend the Conference of the GPIW in Copenhagen timed to coincide with the global Climate Change conference there in December and at which leaders of the world's religions were being asked to prepare an advisory document for presentation to the statesmen and politicians. Very sadly my back condition prevented me from taking up this invitation - a great disappointment, but I decided to send a brief statement of my views, which could be circulated among the representatives of religions gathered there. This is what I had to say.
Message to Honoured Venerable Teachers and Participants in the Global Peace Initiative of Women Conference in Copenhagen, December 2009
It occurs to me that a brief statement of personal views concerning this meeting and the planetary condition may be helpful and be a small contribution to discussions. I send it therefore with good wishes to all fellow participants.
As the late Venerable Chan Master Sheng Yen's first Western Dharma heir, I have read through his various contributions as co-chairman of international meetings of religious leaders. He always sought to find an interfaith perspective that brought representatives of contrasting faiths together. I have oriented my thinking about this meeting from this viewpoint. I feel that if religious leaders are to influence the approach of political leaders to climate change and our global ecological dilemma, it will be essential to formulate a common viewpoint to which all at this meeting can agree. Any partiality towards one religion rather than another must inevitably contradict an essential interfaith perspective seeking to represent a global opinion.
It follows that world religious leaders need to adopt a somewhat contrite attitude of humility because it is strife between various religious fundamentalisms that underlies so much of today's warfare and regional killing that in turn prevent progress on global ecological problems. Generally, religions have done remarkably little to address this situation adequately. It is essential that comparisons between religious theologies and metaphysical interpretations of the origin and nature of the cosmos in which we dwell be set-aside in our discussions. Even the most advanced scientific comprehension of the universe can do no more than stress the mystery and wonder of it all. By contrast, however, the world religions have much in common when it comes to exploring the ethical basis of human life. Here we have the real possibility of outlining a global interfaith position that can provide politicians with guidance.
One of the tragedies of modern life is that the important perspectives arising from the European "enlightenment' of the nineteenth century have become distorted through the emergence of economic greed. The principles of democratic government, free elections, open debate in the media, the implementation of human rights, gender equality and the rights of women and the creation of international fora such as the United Nations are all basic to human happiness and political development. Unfortunately, economic theory, controls of finance and the political will sustaining such important principles have all failed. Instead, we have had economic collapse largely through corruption and greed, developed states becoming richer often at the expense of developing nations, the destruction of local industries and vernacular cultures and the over-exploitation of valuable landscapes essential to climatic stability. Indeed, the entire economic process seems little more than a "greed machine" favouring the wealthy - individually and collectively. Economic theories with known benefit to all nations have too often been ignored. Even developing nations, such as China and India, use the same defective financial tools. The ruination and pollution of rivers and natural environments in China and the great gap between rich and poor in India testify to this. The widespread denial of gender rights is chronic. All this can only be due to a failure to seek out policies that are good both for humanity and the planet and an absence of any adequate spiritual understanding of what the "good" may comprise.
Philosophically, one may argue that Cartesian theory in both science and in some Christian theology is responsible for much of this decay through creating dualisms between humanity and divinity, one religion and another, observer and observed, economics and ecology, right and wrong in contradiction to the currently emerging scientific focus on a holism revealing the complex interactions of all causes and conditions in world affairs that may only be understood through systemic analyses. Such dualisms have a very long history mainly in the West and in the Middle East.
The work of Lovelock and others in developing the Gaia hypothesis reveals the way in which our planet functions through the co-dependence of numerous systemic processes that include socio-cultural effects on climate. There is no doubt whatsoever that without strong political action our climate system is breaking down in a way that will bring chaos to our current world civilisation. This civilisation, brilliant though it is in scientific achievements, none the less lacks any socially adequate ethical structure to combat the corruption and decay now so evident. Traditionally it has been the responsibility of religions to provide the values and ethics that ensure well-being. For the world religions to overcome their differences and combine in bringing about an international and interfaith system of values is critical to our current situation. Are they up to it?
The world religions are each deeply concerned with the "Sacred" but espouse contrasting positions regarding its nature. From an interfaith perspective, the prime character of humanity's sense of the sacred must focus on the home that provides the basis for well-being. Such a home needs to be safe, protected from destructiveness, supportive of life, family and economic welfare, including insurance for the future but not essentially or specifically a place for wealth creation. The home may also include places of worship following whatever the local religion may be. The home necessarily depends on the local environment and eventually on the whole of the planetary system of which it is both part and contributor. It is this planetary system that is overwhelmingly threatened by the current "greed machine" and its supporting politics. The planet itself is the basis of the sacred but this is widely ignored through exploitation and greed. Without planetary care humanity's survival and certainly the integrity of current world civilisation is severely threatened. There is no current evidence that humanity could establish a home elsewhere. It s overwhelmingly the duty of the world religious leaders to insist on the protection of humanity's sacred home, its beauty through which our cultures are meaningful and to promote the selfless love that underlies both.
It is a remarkable fact that although theologies of various kinds are commonly in dispute, and defensive belief the basis for aggressive conflict, the world religions share preceptual systems of values, ethics and vows that show very close agreement. There is common emphasis on values that reject war, aggression and killing, espouse principles of financial honesty,truthfulness in debate and speech, compassion and assistance for the poor and the sick, gender equality and the rights of women, love in sexual relations rather than lust, and clarity of mind free from distortion by alcohol and other drugs. Christian compassion, Buddhist wisdom, Islamic care for those in poverty are all well known. The Taoist view that the 'mandate of heaven' will be withdrawn from an Emperor if his governance does not support the poor and unfortunate is especially instructive. We can see today how the 'mandate of heaven' is being withdrawn from world politicians because of their failure to control greed, pollution, ecological exploitation and strife. Given this common ethical inheritance, present day World leaders should be able to formulate a set of interfaith principles providing a preceptual philosophy that politicians may be persuaded to follow if they are to develop a worldview that moderates the rapidly approaching tragedy.
Perhaps we need to remind ourselves that rising sea levels can flood vast areas of low lying land (Bengal for example and many small islands) as well as some modern cities: that water shortage can bring starvation and deadly thirst to thousands; that intense heat can create deserts and uninhabitable waste lands and that all this is predictable by careful research. The result would be overwhelmingly large migrations of people invading lands that are more fortunate, causing war and killing maybe on a vast scale. Social and political chaos would be inevitable and the probable appearance of tyranny led, as usual, by desperate if perhaps sometimes well-intentioned tyrants.
Specific recommendations are a matter for discussion but we can point to some essential needs.
1. The gross greed of bankers and vast transnational corporations needs an immediate legal curb. The short-termism and institutional selfishness needs to be firmly addressed. Perhaps 80% of all current executives' bonuses should be taxed and used to fund climate related projects.
2. Negotiation to yield global agreements concerning climate warming that are workable and a system of consistent monitoring for the next century or more.
3. Compensation from rich developed nations to developing nations called upon to slow or shift their emphasis on development in response to climate warming.
4. Political reform in the direction of democracies of truth rather than spin, together with balanced representation of gender in world affairs with especial attention to the welfare and contributions of women.
5. The development of UN supported treaties limiting land disputes through skilled negotiation and the adoption of reconciliation where huge crimes are in process.
6. Reform of economic theory to prevent the destruction of local cultures and agriculture brought about by market driven policies lacking any human concerns.
In conclusion, this meeting calls upon religious leaders to create a preceptual system aimed at restoring care for our sacred planet. The ethics for this can be based in the precepts of major religions restated to suit the contemporary world on a global scale. Within that context, special focus may be directed at the six prime targets suggested. The details of such a statement for onward transmission to world politicians will constitute the work of all assembled at this conference in Copenhagen. Compassion, tolerance and diligent persistence will be required.
