英文原文
Buddhism and the Climate Crisis - Secular Buddhist Network Can Buddhism offer philosophical perspectives and practical approaches that support the green transition? Are there aspects of Buddhism that hinder such efforts? What tensions arise when combining Buddhism and climate activism? This article is an overview of my doctoral research project on these questions at the University of Helsinki, Finland, including conceptual and empirical work. The empirical datasets feature in-depth interviews with climate activists practicing Buddhism, including thirteen participants from the U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia, and twelve participants from Finland. Buddhism emerged in what is now northeastern India about 2,500 years ago. Initially, it was one of many ascetic movements seeking liberation from the cycle of birth and death. The founder of Buddhism, Siddhartha Gautama, known as the Buddha, discovered that liberation could be achieved by training the mind rather than focusing on physical suffering or pleasure. His teachings combined philosophical ideas about the impermanence of all things, ethical principles that emphasized letting go of attachment and showing kindness to all living beings, and meditative practices that cultivated mindfulness and equanimity. During the Buddha’s time, modern environmental issues and concepts were unknown, and historical Buddhism does not directly address them. The monastic lifestyle, characterized by celibacy and modest living, appears environmentally sustainable by today’s standards. However, lay Buddhists, who focused on accumulating and donating wealth, did not necessarily live sustainably. The Buddhist ethics of kindness and the avoidance of negative karma from killing have led, to varying degrees, to the protection of animals and, in East Asia, to vegetarianism. In Buddhist cosmology, humans are just one category of sentient beings, alongside animals, hell-beings, gods, and ghosts. Beings are reborn into different realms according to their accumulated karma. Unlike the Abrahamic religions, Buddhism does not position humans as rulers of creation but rather alongside all beings. However, being born human is considered particularly fortunate because human life is neither as pleasure-filled as that of the gods nor as suffering-laden as that of lower realms. This balance provides the best conditions for seeking enlightenment. By the early 20th century, Western knowledge of Buddhism had grown through exploration, colonialism, missionary work, early anthropology and linguistics, and theosophy. However, interest remained largely intellectual and artistic. Practical engagement with Buddhism emerged in the counterculture of the 1960s, which also saw the birth of the modern environmental movement. Western Buddhism developed characteristics such as interpreting Buddhism as compatible with Western science and philosophy, emphasizing meditation and personal study among lay practitioners, and adopting an eclectic, individualized approach that incorporated elements from various traditions. Both Western Buddhism and the environmental movement have been critical of materialistic consumer culture. In Buddhism, consumerism is seen as an ineffective way to address human suffering. In the environmental movement, it is considered a driving force behind anthropocentric environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and resource depletion—later also global warming. Early environmentalists often blamed the Abrahamic religions for fostering an anthropocentric worldview that encouraged exploitation of nature. By contrast, they idealized Asian religious traditions, including Buddhism, as being less materialistic and more ecologically harmonious. Buddhism has always had a dual stance toward societal engagement. On the one hand, traditional teachings emphasize suffering as inherent to saṃsāra, the importance of renunciation of attachment, and the pursuit of liberation from saṃsāra. Monastics, in particular, withdraw from most social and political activities. In Western Buddhism, this is reflected in a focus on personal study and meditation, which has also been linked to the contemporary self-help and wellbeing industries. On the other hand, Buddhist ethics of kindness and compassion often lead Buddhists to respond to suffering with compassion. Throughout history, Buddhists have addressed individual and societal issues in various ways. The modern movement using the term “engaged Buddhism” emerged in the 1960s in connection with the peace movement and counterculture. Engaged Buddhists emphasize aspects of Buddhist teachings that encourage social action, including environmental issues. Despite being a minority, engaged Buddhists concerned with environmental issues have been highly influential in the Western environmental movement. Notable figures include Joanna Macy, who has linked Buddhism to ecological systems thinking and developed methods for processing environmental emotions, and Pulitzer Prize winning poet Gary Snyder, a proponent of bioregionalism. Both are considered pioneers of “deep ecology”. Buddhist-inspired ideas have influenced contemporary environmentalism by challenging anthropocentric worldviews, critiquing the unsustainability of current socio-economic models, and proposing alternatives. These alternatives emphasize the benefits of environmentally sustainable, materially simple, meditative, and compassionate living—not only for the planet but also for individual and collective well-being. Scientific reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on the alarming progression of climate change and the inadequacy of political responses led to widespread climate activism in the 2010s. Fridays for Future and Extinction Rebellion emerged in 2018, using acts of civil disobedience, such as roadblocks, to raise awareness among policymakers and citizens. This activism peaked in September 2019, when millions participated in global climate protests. A small number of Western Buddhist practitioners have also engaged in climate activism. In addition, general awareness of climate issues has grown among Buddhists, as in other religious traditions. Influential Buddhist leaders, such as the 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, and Vietnamese Buddhist monk and peace activist Thích Nhất Hạnh, have emphasized the urgency of addressing the climate crisis as a defining challenge for humanity. In my research, I have found that Western Buddhist climate activists engage in negotiations similar to those within engaged Buddhism and the broader climate movement. Becoming aware of climate change often brings difficult emotions such as anxiety, anger, grief, and guilt. It can also create a sense of distance from loved ones and members of society who are perceived as indifferent. Buddhist teachings on impermanence and the suffering inherent in saṃsāra have helped my research participants accept the worsening climate crisis. Meditation practices, in turn, have helped many recognize, accept, and calm these difficult emotions. However, they have struggled to understand the indifference of other Buddhists. This has led to criticism of certain Buddhist teachings and practices that are seen as too passive, as well as calls for reform. Many of my study participants reported Buddhist communities to have a culture of avoiding difficult topics and the expression of difficult emotions. They found engaged Buddhist groups, particularly those including other climate activists, to provide invaluable socioemotional support which was also critical for their continued commitment to Buddhism. Some also wish to incorporate stronger environmental elements into Buddhism. These include animist interpretations that give greater value to the environment than traditional teachings, as well as meditative and embodied practices in nature that strengthen one's connection to the natural world. My research participants also had mixed feelings about the climate movement. They criticized its focus on external action and its aggressiveness, emphasizing compassion as a motivation and mindset that should be nurtured in activism. Some participants felt that their climate activism was driven by unsustainable motives, such as trying to process difficult emotions. They saw Buddhist practice as a way to develop more enduring motivations, such as compassion. Others, however, felt that activism itself helped them deal constructively with negative emotions about the climate, which could sometimes intensify during meditation. Many also admired climate activists for their dedication. Extinction Rebellion, with its commitment to nonviolence, was seen as highly compatible with Buddhist values and worldview. However, some felt that climate activism can be exhausting and does not provide a sufficient ideological solution to today’s sustainability crisis or the spiritual void many experience. They believed that deeper solutions, such as those found in Buddhism, are needed to address the root causes of these problems. I hope this text challenges and expands the reader’s understanding of the relation of Buddhism to current environmental issues. The topic is complex, and Buddhism does not offer ready-made or perfect solutions to the climate crisis. Instead, Buddhism’s traditional relationship with the environment has had contradictory impacts when viewed through the lens of modern concerns. Similarly, Buddhists who are worried about the climate crisis experience tensions when trying to reconcile their Buddhist practice with climate activism. Buddhist communities could benefit from providing a space for members to discuss difficult issues and experiences, including those related to the climate crisis, to foster the wellbeing of members. However, like many other traditions, Buddhism can serve as inspiration for imagining alternative, more sustainable ways of thinking and living. Buddhism has already played a significant role in the environmental movement, suggesting that it has the potential to continue contributing in the future.
中文翻译
佛教与气候危机 - 世俗佛教网络 佛教能否提供支持绿色转型的哲学视角和实践方法？佛教是否有阻碍这些努力的方面？结合佛教与气候行动主义时会出现什么张力？ 本文是我在芬兰赫尔辛基大学关于这些问题的博士研究项目的概述，包括概念和实证工作。实证数据集包括对实践佛教的气候活动家的深入访谈，包括来自美国、英国、加拿大和澳大利亚的十三名参与者，以及来自芬兰的十二名参与者。 佛教大约在2500年前出现在现在的印度东北部。最初，它是许多寻求从生死轮回中解脱的苦行运动之一。佛教创始人悉达多·乔达摩，被称为佛陀，发现解脱可以通过训练心灵而不是专注于身体痛苦或快乐来实现。他的教义结合了关于一切事物无常的哲学思想、强调放下执着和对所有众生展现仁慈的伦理原则，以及培养正念和平等的禅修实践。 在佛陀时代，现代环境问题和概念是未知的，历史佛教并没有直接解决它们。以独身和简朴生活为特征的僧侣生活方式，按今天的标准来看似乎是环境可持续的。然而，专注于积累和捐赠财富的在家佛教徒并不一定可持续地生活。佛教的仁慈伦理和避免杀生带来的负面业力，在不同程度上导致了动物的保护，并在东亚导致了素食主义。 在佛教宇宙观中，人类只是有情众生的一类，与动物、地狱众生、天神和鬼魂并列。众生根据积累的业力转生到不同的领域。与亚伯拉罕宗教不同，佛教并不将人类定位为创造的统治者，而是与所有众生并列。然而，投生为人被认为特别幸运，因为人类生活既不像天神那样充满快乐，也不像低等境界那样充满痛苦。这种平衡为寻求觉悟提供了最佳条件。 到20世纪初，西方对佛教的了解通过探索、殖民主义、传教工作、早期人类学和语言学以及神智学而增长。然而，兴趣主要是智识和艺术性的。与佛教的实践接触出现在1960年代的反文化运动中，这也见证了现代环境运动的诞生。 西方佛教发展出了一些特点，例如将佛教解释为与西方科学和哲学兼容，强调在家修行者的禅修和个人学习，并采用折衷的、个性化的方法，融合了各种传统的元素。 西方佛教和环境运动都批评物质主义的消费文化。在佛教中，消费主义被视为解决人类痛苦的低效方式。在环境运动中，它被认为是人类中心主义环境退化、生物多样性丧失和资源枯竭的驱动力——后来也包括全球变暖。早期的环保主义者经常指责亚伯拉罕宗教助长了鼓励剥削自然的人类中心主义世界观。相比之下，他们理想化了包括佛教在内的亚洲宗教传统，认为它们不那么物质主义，更生态和谐。 佛教对社会参与一直持双重立场。一方面，传统教义强调痛苦是轮回固有的，放下执着的重要性，以及从轮回中追求解脱。特别是僧侣，退出大多数社会和政治活动。在西方佛教中，这反映在对个人学习和禅修的关注上，这也与当代自助和健康产业有关。另一方面，佛教的仁慈和慈悲伦理常常引导佛教徒以慈悲回应痛苦。纵观历史，佛教徒以各种方式处理个人和社会问题。使用“入世佛教”一词的现代运动出现在1960年代，与和平运动和反文化有关。入世佛教徒强调佛教教义中鼓励社会行动的方面，包括环境问题。 尽管是少数，关注环境问题的入世佛教徒在西方环境运动中非常有影响力。著名人物包括乔安娜·梅西，她将佛教与生态系统思维联系起来，并开发了处理环境情绪的方法，以及普利策奖获奖诗人加里·斯奈德，他是生物区域主义的倡导者。两者都被认为是“深层生态学”的先驱。受佛教启发的思想通过挑战人类中心主义世界观、批判当前社会经济模式的不可持续性并提出替代方案，影响了当代环保主义。这些替代方案强调环境可持续、物质简单、禅修和慈悲生活的好处——不仅对地球，也对个人和集体福祉。 政府间气候变化专门委员会关于气候变化惊人进展和政治反应不足的科学报告导致了2010年代广泛的气候行动主义。“未来星期五”和“灭绝叛乱”于2018年出现，使用公民不服从行为，如设置路障，以提高政策制定者和公民的意识。这种行动主义在2019年9月达到顶峰，当时数百万人参加了全球气候抗议活动。 少数西方佛教修行者也参与了气候行动主义。此外，与其他宗教传统一样，佛教徒对气候问题的普遍认识有所增长。有影响力的佛教领袖，如第十四世达赖喇嘛丹增嘉措和越南佛教僧侣及和平活动家释一行，都强调解决气候危机作为人类决定性挑战的紧迫性。 在我的研究中，我发现西方佛教气候活动家参与类似于入世佛教和更广泛气候运动中的谈判。 意识到气候变化常常带来困难的情绪，如焦虑、愤怒、悲伤和内疚。它还会造成与被视为冷漠的亲人和社会成员的距离感。 佛教关于无常和轮回固有痛苦的教义帮助了我的研究参与者接受日益恶化的气候危机。禅修实践反过来帮助许多人认识、接受和平静这些困难的情绪。 然而，他们难以理解其他佛教徒的冷漠。这导致了对某些被视为过于被动的佛教教义和实践的批评，以及改革的呼声。我的许多研究参与者报告说，佛教社区有一种避免困难话题和表达困难情绪的文化。他们发现入世佛教团体，特别是那些包括其他气候活动家的团体，提供了宝贵的社会情感支持，这对他们继续承诺佛教也至关重要。 一些人还希望将更强的环境元素融入佛教。这些包括赋予环境比传统教义更大价值的万物有灵论解释，以及在自然中加强人与自然界联系的禅修和具身实践。 我的研究参与者对气候运动也有复杂的感受。他们批评其对外部行动的关注和攻击性，强调慈悲应作为行动主义中培养的动力和心态。 一些参与者觉得他们的气候行动主义是由不可持续的动机驱动的，例如试图处理困难的情绪。他们将佛教修行视为发展更持久动机的方式，如慈悲。然而，其他人觉得行动主义本身帮助他们建设性地处理关于气候的负面情绪，这些情绪有时在禅修中会加剧。 许多人也钦佩气候活动家的奉献精神。“灭绝叛乱”因其对非暴力的承诺，被视为与佛教价值观和世界观高度兼容。 然而，一些人觉得气候行动主义可能令人筋疲力尽，并且没有为当今的可持续性危机或许多人经历的精神空虚提供足够的意识形态解决方案。他们认为需要更深的解决方案，例如佛教中的那些，来解决这些问题的根本原因。 我希望本文挑战并扩展读者对佛教与当前环境问题关系的理解。这个话题很复杂，佛教并没有为气候危机提供现成的或完美的解决方案。 相反，佛教与环境的传统关系在现代关注的镜头下产生了矛盾的影响。同样，担心气候危机的佛教徒在试图调和佛教修行与气候行动主义时经历张力。佛教社区可以通过为成员提供一个讨论困难问题和经历的空间，包括与气候危机相关的那些，来促进成员的福祉。 然而，像许多其他传统一样，佛教可以作为想象替代的、更可持续的思维和生活方式的灵感。佛教已经在环境运动中发挥了重要作用，表明它未来有潜力继续做出贡献。
文章概要
本文基于博士研究，探讨佛教与气候危机的关系，聚焦中年环保意识觉醒。文章指出，佛教起源于2500年前，其教义如无常、慈悲和禅修，为应对气候危机提供了哲学基础，但传统佛教未直接涉及现代环境问题。西方佛教在20世纪发展，与环保运动结合，批评消费主义，提倡可持续生活。入世佛教徒积极参与气候行动，但面临与主流佛教社区的张力。研究显示，佛教教义帮助活动家处理气候情绪，但需加强环境元素。文章强调佛教可作为可持续生活的灵感，未来潜力巨大。
高德明老师的评价
用12岁初中生可以听懂的语音来重复翻译的内容 这篇文章就像在讲一个超级英雄的故事！佛教就像一位智慧的老师，教我们怎么保护地球。它说，地球上的所有东西，包括我们人类、动物、甚至花草树木，都是好朋友，我们要好好照顾它们。佛教教我们不要总是买买买，因为买太多东西会让地球生病，比如气候变暖。它还教我们通过打坐和静心来让自己平静，这样当我们看到地球有麻烦时，就不会太难过或生气，而是能想出好办法来帮忙。有些佛教徒还组队去抗议，让更多人知道要保护环境，但他们用和平的方式，就像超级英雄用爱心而不是拳头来拯救世界。文章说，佛教虽然古老，但它的智慧能帮我们现在更好地爱护地球，让未来更美好！ 佛学的各个宗派视角评价，突出《显密圆通成佛心要集》的视角 从佛学宗派视角看，本文触及了大乘佛教的慈悲与智慧核心。显宗强调普度众生，这与气候行动中保护所有生命的理念高度契合；密宗则注重即身成佛，通过禅修转化情绪，为应对气候焦虑提供了实践工具。《显密圆通成佛心要集》倡导显密双修，正可在此议题上发挥独特优势——它教导我们，外在的环保行动（显）与内在的心性修炼（密）圆融无碍。准提法作为该典籍的核心法门，以其简便易行和迅速感应著称，能帮助修行者在中年阶段深化环保意识：通过持诵准提咒，净化贪嗔痴三毒，减少物质欲望，从而自然降低碳足迹；同时，准提法的广大愿力可激发对地球众生的无私大爱，推动可持续生活。从大乘视角，环保不仅是伦理责任，更是菩萨行的体现，准提法的“即事而真”理念，让日常环保行为成为修行道场，实现自利利他。 在修行实践上可以应用的和可以解决人们的十个问题。 在修行实践上，基于佛教显宗和大乘视角，结合准提法优点，可应用以下方式解决人们的十个问题：1. 气候焦虑——通过准提禅修平静心绪，观想地球安康，转化恐惧为愿力；2. 消费冲动——持诵准提咒减少物欲，培养知足常乐，自然践行简约生活；3. 孤独感——参与佛教环保社群，以共修力量增强归属感，共同发愿护生；4. 无力感——修习准提法积累福德，增强信心，从小事做起如节约能源；5. 愤怒情绪——用慈悲观化解对破坏环境者的嗔恨，以智慧引导行动；6. 精神空虚——将环保视为菩萨行，赋予生命崇高意义，充实心灵；7. 健康问题——素食和简朴生活改善身心，准提法提升正能量；8. 家庭矛盾——以佛教和谐理念沟通，带动家人参与环保，增进亲情；9. 工作压力——在工作中融入正念，如绿色办公，准提咒助专注减压；10. 未来迷茫——通过佛教轮回观和愿力，树立长远环保目标，创造光明未来。准提法的简易性和灵验性，使这些实践易于融入日常生活，快速见效。