Environmental Buddhism by H.H. The 17th Karmapa

[Karma Yeshe]

Here is a very good essay oSpecial Section Essay by H.H. the 17th Karmapa.

As it is a bit long I am breaking up into sections

Part 1
Walking the Path of Environmental Buddhism
through Compassion and Emptiness
H.H. 17th GYALWANG KARMAPA, OGYEN TRINLEY DORJE
Camp: Gyuto Ramoche Temple, Sidhbari 176057, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, India, email dekila.chungyalpa@wwfus.org

I was born into a Drokpa (Tibetan nomad) family and
spent the first years of my life in the wild eastern part
of Tibet. We traveled with our animals from summer to
winter grounds, setting up our yak-hair tents at each site.
It was a simple existence andmy daily joy consisted of exploring
the nearby mountains with my pet goat. If I was
lucky, I would see wild animals such as nawa (Tibetan
argali, Ovis ammon hodgsoni) and shaba (white-lipped
deer, Przewalskium albirostris) at close range. Sometimes,
I would watch herds of kiang (Tibetan wild ass,
Equus kiang) running across the grasslands.
When I was 4 or 5 years old, there was a severe drought
and the local spring in our camp began to dry up. Because
I was considered an unusual child (although at that time,
nobody knew I would later be recognized as the 17th
Karmapa), our community requested my father ask me
to plant a sapling at the source of the spring. I remember
leading prayers with the aspiration that this tree would
help provide water for all living beings nearby. Although I
had no idea thatwhat I was doing was an “environmental”
act, or what watershed meant, my love for nature and
dedication to protect the environment sprouted from this
seed.

As I grew up and began studying Buddhist philosophy
and teachings, I discovered great harmony between Buddhism
and the environmental movement. The emphasis
on biological diversity, including ecosystems—in particular,
the understanding that animate and inanimate beings
are parts of a whole—resonates closely with Buddhism’s
emphasis on interdependence. The essence of Buddhism
lies in the union of compassion and emptiness: the deeply
felt dedication to alleviate the suffering of all living beings
and the understanding that everything is devoid of selfnature.
These two halves of a philosophical whole speak
particularly to the goals of the environmental movement.
Let me explain what I mean.

The most exalted example Buddhists use to explain
compassion is motherhood. Consider all that your mother
probably has done for you since the time you were
conceived—carrying you for 9 months, experiencing the
hardship of labor and birth, feeding and clothing you,
taking care of all your needs, and worrying about you
long after you reach adulthood. Most mothers never stop
caring unconditionally for their children. Regardless of
whether one believes in reincarnation or not, one can
suppose that all living beings are like mothers to us. The
food that appears in front of us at dinner was grown,
packaged, and prepared by people we probably do not
know. The clothes we are wearing were produced by
people we probably will never meet. Yet we are benefiting
from their hopes, dreams, and labor. Plants, animals,
and raw materials have all been used to provide us these
things. This is the interdependence that characterizes
life—no one thing exists by itself alone, or can survive
alone. We are all part of one world ecology and the world
is extremely compassionate to us.

Emptiness, in contrast, can be best explained by using
the example of the self. What do we imagine when we
think of the self? Exactly where does the self reside? Is it
in the heart or the brain? In the incoming breath or the
outgoing breath? In the movement of our limbs? In our
interaction or relationship with others? The self differs
greatly at ages 15 and 25. Because it is impermanent and
intangible, the self is empty of any inherent self-nature.
And, because this is so, our happiness, our sadness, our
successes, and our failures are also empty by nature. This
does not mean that we are nothing, but that we are constantly
moving, absorbing, and shedding. Consequently,
we need not experience great attachment to our experiences
and can develop equanimity regarding all phenomena.
To experience this freedom from the conviction of a
self and the self-importance it creates means that we can
dispense with the artificial distinction between self and
other and can be part of all phenomena everywhere.
How does this relate to the environment? According
to Buddhism, ignorance of the empty nature of self and
the rejection of compassion is the root cause of egotism,
anger, attachment, and greed. Ignorance is why human
beings have degraded the environment and are driving so
many species to extinction. Ignorance causes us to place
an excessive worth upon the self and anything related
to it; my family, my possessions, my country, and even
my race. Perceiving the diversity of the world through
the limited lens of self means we can impose grave harm
upon Earth without concern, because Earth has become
“other.”

Buddhists believe ignorance is the reason human lives
are no longer in balance with nature. It is an unfortunate
fact that the temperature of the Tibetan Plateau is increasing
faster than most other places on Earth due to climate
change. I know there will be severe consequences for
Tibet’s vast grasslands, and it saddens my heart that this
may spell the end of the Tibetan nomadic lifestyle. Furthermore,
I am told the entire world is at risk if the global
average temperature rises more than 2 ◦C. Agriculture, in
particular, will be devastated. In India alone, this could
mean major losses of rice, wheat, and legumes, which
are the staples of the Indian diet.

The effects of climate change on the Tibetan Plateau
will not occur in isolation. Tibet is the birthplace for
Asia’s great rivers: the Indus, Ganges, Brahmaputra, Irrawaddy,
Yangtze, andMekong. Tibet is sometimes called
the Third Pole because it stores the most ice and water
after the Arctic and Antartic. If its water sources dry
up or become contaminated, there will be fateful consequences
for over a billion people. Because glacier melt is
increasing as temperatures increase, both floods and water
shortages will increase in the near future. Our shortsightedness
blinds us to the relation between our activities
and their longer-term consequences. The great push
for economic development in the last 50 years has been
possible due to rapid use of Earth’s fossil-fuel resources.
However, the hidden costs have been accumulating and
are borne mainly by those least able to protect themselves.
Sooner or later, all of us will have to pay the price.
The gap between the rich and poor is greater than it has
ever been; proponents of economic growth seem to have
forgotten the poor to benefit the wealthy. Furthermore,
biological diversity is greatest and environmental degradation
highest in many poorer parts of the world. Can
the economic development model protect or replenish
our precious natural resources? Can we borrow natural
resources and return them for future generations? If not,
we are robbing Earth of its riches and calling our actions
economic development.

The current world economy appears to be a fertile tree
of immense riches. We admire its many branches and its
shiny green leaves and believe it is the best tree in the
world. But we are looking only at its upper half because
the bottom half is underground. If we were to look underneath
the surface, we might find that the tree’s roots
are dying of mistreatment and neglect. It may only be
a matter of time before this condition affects the upper
half of the tree. Treating the branches and leaves is only a
short-term solution; until we ensure the roots are healthy,
we cannot guarantee a healthy tree. Therefore I greatly
appreciate the concept of sustainable development, defined
by the World Commission on Environment and Development
(1987) as “meeting the needs of our present
generation without compromising the ability for future
generations to meet their own needs,” After all, if the
concept of reincarnation proves to be true, we are the
future generation.

I find great joy and pleasure in the human spirit. The
power of an idea is profound. Consider the concept of
human rights: a simple idea that has overcome incredible
odds—totalitarian governments, war, and poverty—
to become a universal ideal. And yet, human rights was
simply a fledgling idea 100 years ago. I believe a similar
revolution in our thinking needs to take place in terms
of environmental protection, including conservation of
biological diversity. There should be rights for wildlife,
ecosystems, and even environmental services such as intact
water cycles.

[Karma Yeshe]

Here is Part 2 -

I gratefully support global treaties for the protection
of wildlife and ecosystems, agreements on common standards
of environmental safety, as well as ongoing efforts
to minimize man-made changes in Earth’s climate. At the
heart of each of these initiatives is the sincere motivation
of a few individuals who have dedicated their lives to
these causes. These individuals give me the most hope
because ifwe want to create change in the world, the process
must begin within ourselves. It is unrealistic to seek
the transformation of the rest of the world and expect
anyone to listen without living and being the example
first.

If there were such a role as a Buddhist saint of ecology,
I would nominate the great Indian scholar Shantideva,
who in the 8th century wrote in his Bodhicharyavatara
(Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life [1979]):
May all beings everywhere
Plagued by sufferings of body and mind,
Obtain an ocean of happiness and joy
By virtue of my merits.
In this verse, Shantideva chooses to dedicate his life to
alleviate the suffering of others because of his insight into
the interdependent nature of life. If we accept that we are
not isolated individuals but instead onewholemade up of
all life on Earth, we cannot remain indifferent to the suffering
and ills that occur here. With this understanding,
generating compassion for all living beings and turning
that motivation into action is the most ecologically aware
thing we can do.

During the last 100 years, over 95% of the world’s
wild tigers (Panthera tigris) have vanished. As human
needs have continued to expand, we have taken
more and more from nature and left less and less for
other animals. However, the magnificent tiger has almost
completely disappeared due to consumer demand for its
skin and body parts. We are driving a species to extinction
simply because we believe wearing its skin makes us
look wealthy or that consuming tiger parts will make us
healthier. Doing such a thing is essentially non-Buddhist
and uncompassionate—not only for the tiger, but also
for ourselves, because this act is bound to have negative
karmic consequences for us.

Compassion for the “other,” whether people, animal
species, trees, or other plants, and for Earth itself, is the
only thing thatwill ultimately save us human beings.Most
people are primarily concerned about their work,wealth,
health, or family. On a daily basis, they probably feel they
have more urgent things to worry about than their environmental
footprint. Of course, paying attention to this
issue would mean having to make inconvenient choices
and changes in their lives. I am not so different. Although
I had considered giving up eating meat for many years,
I became a complete vegetarian only a few years ago.
Somebody presented a short documentary that showed
how animals suffer before and during the act of killing.
Watching it, I could feel the fear felt by the animals. Like
a thunderclap, I became aware that these living beings
were suffering so greatly simply to satisfy my habitual
preferences. Eating meat became intolerable for me at
that moment, and so I stopped.

The question that remains is when will the intolerable
moment occur for all of us? Will we allow the sea to
rise and cover the Pacific islands and the Himalayas to be
reduced to bare rock?Willwe let amazingwildlife species
become extinct and simply fade to a story that is told in
future generations? Should thriving forests be turned into
farmlands tomeet our unending demands? Should we live
with ever-growing mountains of garbage because we are
unable to manage the effects of consumerism?
For society to successfully address the environmental
challenges of the 21st century, we have to connect these
challenges to the individual choices people face on a
daily basis. We cannot simply address the political and
scientific aspects of problems such as climate change,
intensive extraction of natural resources, deforestation,
and wildlife trade. We must also address the social and
cultural aspects of these problems by awakening human
values and creating a movement for compassion, so that
our very motivation in becoming environmentalists is to
benefit other living beings.

To do this, the first and most important task is to empower
everybody to protect the environment. I come
from a region of Tibet that is considered backward by
people who live in Lhasa, let alone in the West. My family
lived in conditions that many would think very harsh
and undeveloped. And yetmy father, who never attended
school, knew from his own father that if you want to
protect a spring, you should plant trees. I think we will
find that indigenous people, who live closest to nature,
are often our greatest allies in trying to protect it. If we
are to save Earth, each one of us must play our part.
We must break through barriers and build bridges. After
all, who are we trying to save Earth for if not for all
of us?

Second, it is crucial that we find ways to minimize our
energy intake or at the least, find safe alternatives to coal,
oil, and gas. One of the easiest things to do would be to
make solar energy and other safe alternative energy technology
cheaper. My main monastery in Tibet, Tsurphu,
is fortunate because it is located near natural geothermal
springs that we use for energy. Now that I amin India,we
are attempting to make all our Karma Kagyu monasteries
here self-sufficient in terms of energy use. It would be
wonderful to be able to say with certainty that we Buddhist
monks and nuns are not contributing to the world’s
environmental problems. Maybe, someday, all countries
will also measure themselves by this standard.

Third, I invite all scholars and practitioners to help
protect the Tibetan Plateau, which provides the water
for much of mainland Asia. Because water in this region
does not have a price tag yet, we take this most precious
resource and its fount for granted. Already, the Yarlung
Tsangpo (Brahmaputra) is under grave threat from dams
and the Sengye Tsangpo (Indus) no longer reaches the
sea. As the Third Pole, Tibet is highly vulnerable to climate
change and what happens there matters greatly to
the rest of mainland Asia.

Fourth, we should collectively reassess what we mean
by success, whether it is economic growth, development,
or personal affluence. The current model for economic
growth is simply unattainable for the vast majority of the
world, who struggle to live from day to day. If we were to
give equal worth to values such as sharing, compassion,
and peace, as we do to wealth and social status, each one
of us would strive for a success that naturally includes a
community. We must explore wholesome and practical
alternatives to common understanding of what development
and success means, which all of us can equally
aspire toward.

Finally, I believe that the very future of life on Earth
depends on those of us who are privileged to live more
simply. To live simply is to be compassionate to yourself
and to the world. A life full of material goods and barren
of compassion is quite unsustainable from an ecological
and karmic point of view. Of course, advertisements are
always telling us that the path to happiness lies in purchasing
the goods they sell. How is it that the advertising
convinces us even when we are skeptical of its message?
Our attachment to our own happiness, possessions,
family, and self creates a lack of perspective that makes
us susceptible. However, if we can be mindful of the
emptiness of self, we can create a space for choice rather
than habitual consumerism. We don’t have to live a life
that is sold to us—we can make the brave choice to live
simply.

At the root of all religions are the same basic principles.
Live simply. Act with compassion. Be kind to one
another. Nowhere does any religion say that we should
destroy the very thing that gives us life. So, I feel quite
confident saying that from a religious point of view, we
Conservation Biology
Volume 25, No. 6, 2011
Dorje 1097
must conserve all life and protect Earth. For my own
part, I take inspiration from Lord Buddha’s teachings, at
the heart of which is the instruction that we work to
benefit all living things and cease to harm them, and His
Holiness the Dalai Lama who has said that the key to
human survival is universal responsibility.

Shantideva’s Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life
(1979) continues to be closely studied by Mahayana and
Vajrayana Buddhists today. The Bodhicharyavatara lays
out the path to Buddhahood through the cultivation of
compassion and the insight into emptiness in the form of
enlightened verses and gives inspiration to all who wish
to renounce their own desires and ambitions in order to
benefit all living beings.
As the 17th Karmapa, I am confident that such Buddha
activity can be directly translated into environmental
protection.With this vision, we now have over 40 Kagyu
monasteries and nunneries across the Himalayas implementing
environmental projects to address issues such
as forest degradation, water shortages, wildlife trade,
climate change, and pollution, with guidance provided
by nongovernmental organizations, including the World
Wildlife Fund. We know that this is but a small drop in
the ocean and the challenges we face are more complex
and extensive than we can tackle alone. However, if each
one of us were to contribute a single drop of clean water
toward protecting the environment, imagine how pure
this vast ocean could eventually be.

Acknowledgments
I thank J. Stanley, D. Goleman, and D. Chungyalpa for
their valuable contributions to this essay.

[Karma Yeshe]

Here is the Link -

www.khoryug.com

[tjampel]

Thanks Karma Yeshe---such wise words by a great being! My own teacher (of a different lineage) told us that, when he had the good fortune to have a private audience with HH the 17th Karmapa, he felt a sense of absolute certainty that he was in the presence of an enlightened being. I've never heard him state that about any other being, (except his own teacher.

I'm fortunate to have attended a teaching of His Holiness. He has a kind of intensity and compassionate energy, a real drive to inpsire those who hear him to take action (through spiritual practice and otherwise) that comes through in every word he utters. His banning of meat at Kagyu monasteries is a very bold step, and I'm aware of his involvement in environmental causes and am encouraged that other Buddhist leaders may come to realize that it's possible to engage in serious practice and, simultaneously, be engaged in these kinds of activities.

[Esho]

Hi Karma Yeshe,

Thanks for bringing this concern here. I am very sensible to this issue. I can't add anything more because it has been clearly exposed.

Environmental issues are not easy for mankind because it threatens deeply the lack of awareness that many people has toward environmental degradation.

The ecological pressure over the ecosystems, that has been set by the lifestyle of many, is at the root of this problem. While the few struggle to keep that lifestyle or to make it grow, the many struggle to reach that same -obscene- level of wealth and material prosperity.

There are two main issues:

Is mankind going to understand that it is not possible to keep this struggle toward material prosperity in an endless way?

If this happens, when? Because maybe we are near to reach the point of no returning and the lesson that lies ahead will be really tough.

This is the symptom of a very unhappy mankind that is sunk in the vehement desire of sensual satisfaction of body and mind.

[Aloka]

I took Refuge with the 16th Karmapa when I was very young, not that long before he died from cancer.

It's very commendable that public figures who get attention from the media should support environmental and wildlife issues .

I seem to remember the 17th Karmapa launched that website about two years ago - and at the time, I was happy to see that he was speaking out for tiger protection amongst other things.

:hands:

[Karma Yeshe]

Hi Karma Yeshe,

Thanks for bringing this concern here. I am very sensible to this issue. I can't add anything more because it has been clearly exposed.

Environmental issues are not easy for mankind because it threatens deeply the lack of awareness that many people has toward environmental degradation.

The ecological pressure over the ecosystems, that has been set by the lifestyle of many, is at the root of this problem. While the few struggle to keep that lifestyle or to make it grow, the many struggle to reach that same -obscene- level of wealth and material prosperity.

There are two main issues:

Is mankind going to understand that it is not possible to keep this struggle toward material prosperity in an endless way?

If this happens, when? Because maybe we are near to reach the point of no returning and the lesson that lies ahead will be really tough.

This is the symptom of a very unhappy mankind that is sunk in the vehement desire of sensual satisfaction of body and mind.

What is also interesting to me is how do we tease out the man made enviromental impacts that might be able to be corrected from normal climate change? Humans grew up on what is essentaly a middle aged basicly well behaved planet and this will not continue to be the case.

Our sun is growing brighter.
Earths magnetic field that protects us from steller radiation will weaken and fail.
the yellowstone super volcano or other supervolcanos will erupt.
A comet or other large object will hit Earth.
Gamma ray bursts and other realitivly commen events will one day hit us.

Even if we are able to deal with cleaning up our own mess so to speak a wide range of other threats are going to remain and this is where I think we sometimes take our eye off the ball because we tend to think that these type of events will not occur for quite some time. However these and other mass extiction events can occur at any time.

[Esho]

What is also interesting to me is how do we tease out the man made environmental impacts that might be able to be corrected from normal climate change?

Yes. This is the argumentation used by industry to keep doing what they do.

For example, following that line of reasoning, we can keep building hotels all along the seashores downgrading wetlands and reefs, endangering the welfare of future generations, because all that, one day, will disappear due to impermanence.

[Karma Yeshe]

Yes. This is the argumentation used by industry to keep doing what they do.

For example, following that line of reasoning, we can keep building hotels all along the seashores downgrading wetlands and reefs, endangering the welfare of future generations, because all that, one day, will disappear due to impermanence.

I dont mean to imply that no action should be taken, in essence we have a problem on two fronts, one man made and one caused by nature. Our long term survival depends on an awarness and willingness to engage both fronts equaly.

[Esho]

I dont mean to imply that no action should be taken,

Oh I know that Karma Yeshe. I don't say you support this but that it is the favourite argumentation industry has gave against global environmental regulations.

When I worked in the southern part of Mexico, the Mayan villagers, worked toward some good ecological tourism developments which main concern was to get some money to help themselves to improve and to keep healthy the wetlands.

Scientific data about the degradation of ecosystems points toward humans not natural processes. We have disrupt in many areas the natural resilience of ecosystems so to cope with disruptions.

This is not the place and I do not have at hand the information but the levels of ecosystem degradation seen today are all them about human activity and not about a kind of "fate" to reach such deterioration.

For example, there is a wrong idea the the Mayan Culture of the Classical Period disappeared because a natural catastrophe. There is not scientific data, neither in science nor in archaeological recordings, to support that idea.

What was scientific supported data is that the Mayas, themselves, deteriorated so deeply the tropical forests due to the pressure of the rising population of that successful period of development.

Findings like this along mankind evolution can be found in many scientific sources.

I highly recommend this book:

"The Ecology of Freedom" by Murray Bookchin

It gives some good insight about the topic.

;D

[Karma Yeshe]

Oh I know that Karma Yeshe. I don't say you support this but that it is the favourite argumentation industry has gave against global environmental regulations.

When I worked in the southern part of Mexico, the Mayan villagers, worked toward some good ecological tourism developments which main concern was to get some money to help themselves to improve and to keep healthy the wetlands.

Scientific data about the degradation of ecosystems points toward humans not natural processes. We have disrupt in many areas the natural resilience of ecosystems so to cope with disruptions.

This is not the place and I do not have at hand the information but the levels of ecosystem degradation seen today are all them about human activity and not about a kind of "fate" to reach such deterioration.

For example, there is a wrong idea the the Mayan Culture of the Classical Period disappeared because a natural catastrophe. There is not scientific data, neither in science nor in archaeological recordings, to support that idea.

What was scientific supported data is that the Mayas, themselves, deteriorated so deeply the tropical forests due to the pressure of the rising population of that successful period of development.

Findings like this along mankind evolution can be found in many scientific sources.

I highly recommend this book:

"The Ecology of Freedom" by Murray Bookchin

It gives some good insight about the topic.

;D

While there are many ways to prevent or reverse eco system damage due to human activity there are other massive planet wide shocks that we are simply not ready to deal with. Just a few weeks ago a small asterod passed between the Earth and moon. There are many factors that could have altered its course to cause an inpact with the Earth. The damage that would have been caused by this would have been hidious and yet it would have been just a small impact in cosmic terms.

In addition the Earths enviroment has been subject to massive change billons of years before humans came along, (Ice Ages, Toxic atmosphere, rise and fall of O2 levels as the result of the evolution of plant life etc) and will be subject to equaly massive change in the future. Specific eco system failure can be traced to human activity but we do not yet have the means to protect ourselves aganst large scale events.

In a sense it is a bit like winning the battle but loseing the war. Salvaging a coral reef damaged by polution and overfishing is a wonderful thing and yet will be of no use in combating long term natual climate change. This is where I think there is a bit of a blind spot among many people.

All the Best

[Esho]

In a sense it is a bit like winning the battle but loosing the war. Salvaging a coral reef damaged by polution and overfishing is a wonderful thing and yet will be of no use in combating long term natual climate change. This is where I think there is a bit of a blind spot among many people.

Ecological concerns and the entire science of Ecology is grounded in a sort of "here and now" when actions have to be taken. Ecology do not go further because randomness and uncertainty.

Ecology science and its practical approach to ecosystems are not about climate predictions. Ecology works with relationships in real time and has solutions for the present problems.

Again, I insist that the idea of "losing the war" has been the pennant of industrial development policies.

Another good reading about this:

"Thermodynamics and Ecological Modelling" edited by S. E. Jorgensen.

Any way, IMO, to work toward keeping healthy environments is the best investment we can have. Many things can be done but this threatens the lifestyle of many and needs a shift onto awareness of it and this throws them out from their mind comfort zone.

[tjampel]

In the early 2000s, in the United States, Vice President Cheney literally brought in a bunch of polluters and oil industry lobbyists and asked them to rewrite regulatory policy. No wonder that so few progressive initiatives have come from the United States on this score since the 90s. We're starting to see a change in that, if only at the regulatory level (car emissions are finally being reduced about 1/3 for fleets over the next 15 years or so); however there's no chance of anything being done at the legislative level in this sad excuse for "World Leader". That won't change until people here wake up and see what's happening; only seeing their farms turning to dust, their seaside homes underwater, etc. will get their attention, I'm afraid and it will be very late in the game by then.

I can only hope that the worldwide tourist industry and agribusiness, who stand to lose many Billions as global warming accelerates, become as powerful and successful an advocate of measures to slow and potentially reverse climate change as big oil, manufacturing, and the rest of the lot have been at fighting them. But then again, who knows; they may see it as an opportunity to market the Aleutian islands and Greenland as temperate and (previously) unspoiled vacation spots. ...and I suppose agribusiness, too, might just start growing mangoes and bananas here, and we'll get our starch from cassava. The pursuit of profit always seems to trump that of a livable planet.

Naturally, the people living in democratic industrialized countries, in theory, have the power to move each and every one of them towards a course of action which will definitely reduce greenhouse gasses and restore the fragile balance to our environment. As long as they continue to value their current ability to obtain ephemeral samsaric pleasures over the ability of multiple species (including a good chunk of ours) to survive long term, nothing will change.

Every act by every public figure, whether it's Al Gore or HH the 17th Karmapa to change the way people see and understand what's happening to the planet and to spur them to take action to prevent disaster is something to rejoice about.

[ratikala]

what can I say ,


is a wonderfull esay ,

and yes we each need to do our bit by practiciing fewness of wishes;D

namaskars :hands: ratikala

[Esho]

In the early 2000s, in the United States, Vice President Cheney literally brought in a bunch of polluters and oil industry lobbyists and asked them to rewrite regulatory policy. No wonder that so few progressive initiatives have come from the United States on this score since the 90s. We're starting to see a change in that, if only at the regulatory level (car emissions are finally being reduced about 1/3 for fleets over the next 15 years or so); however there's no chance of anything being done at the legislative level in this sad excuse for "World Leader". That won't change until people here wake up and see what's happening; only seeing their farms turning to dust, their seaside homes underwater, etc. will get their attention, I'm afraid and it will be very late in the game by then.

I can only hope that the worldwide tourist industry and agribusiness, who stand to lose many Billions as global warming accelerates, become as powerful and successful an advocate of measures to slow and potentially reverse climate change as big oil, manufacturing, and the rest of the lot have been at fighting them. But then again, who knows; they may see it as an opportunity to market the Aleutian islands and Greenland as temperate and (previously) unspoiled vacation spots. ...and I suppose agribusiness, too, might just start growing mangoes and bananas here, and we'll get our starch from cassava. The pursuit of profit always seems to trump that of a livable planet.

Naturally, the people living in democratic industrialized countries, in theory, have the power to move each and every one of them towards a course of action which will definitely reduce greenhouse gasses and restore the fragile balance to our environment. As long as they continue to value their current ability to obtain ephemeral samsaric pleasures over the ability of multiple species (including a good chunk of ours) to survive long term, nothing will change.

Every act by every public figure, whether it's Al Gore or HH the 17th Karmapa to change the way people see and understand what's happening to the planet and to spur them to take action to prevent disaster is something to rejoice about.

Agree.

Thanks tjampel,

:hands:

[Karma Yeshe]

Its also very sad that such important causes like the Enviroment need celebs to endorse them.

A few years back the girl from "Heros" was put front and center for a while because of her Save the Whales campain and just today Matt Damon was on CNN because of his Program to ensure that children thruout the world have clean water to drink.

While certainly worthy causes its not like people dont know about the suffering around them. But all too often we wait until a famed face is smilieing at us ffrom the TV before we act.

How very sad

[Esho]

Its also very sad that such important causes like the Enviroment need celebs to endorse them.

Yes. But...

If Kaarine tells people about the importance and fragility of wetlands, maybe just one or tow people -at most- will understand. But if a celebrity -politician, actor, writer, scientist, athlete, religious leader, philosopher, rock star, etc.- tells that, for sure more then one or tow will put their eyes in the subject and awareness will arise, helping to develop environmental conscience.

I know it is sad.

But due to the lack of awareness about our environment, sometimes it is needed that some famous people push a little the issue into the mind of the many.

;D

[Esho]

Other "easy to be started" readings about the subject:

"Energy and the Ecological Economics of Sustainability" by John Peet.

"Environmental Science: The way the world works." by Bernard J. Nebel & Richard T. Wright

About anthropological survey with environmental concerns and developmental conflicts:

"Neanderthals, Bandits and Farmers" by Colin Tudge.;D

[Aloka]

'Waking Up' - a short talk from Jetsunma Tenzin Palmo



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKoIK6pQMzY

[andyrobyn]

Lots of suggested there kaarine ? I don't know Kaarine - about a concept of rational society ... wonderful and benign ? , is there some method by which people will awaken ? , how to collective us all wake up ? like Jetsunma Tenzin Palmo, questions rather than answers

[Esho]

Lots of suggested there kaarine ?

Well, just some good readings about ecology and environmental sciences. Nothing more that that.


I don't know Kaarine - about a concept of rational society ... wonderful and benign ?

I am not completely sure. Maybe a biases of a personal lifestyle.


, is there some method by which people will awaken? , how to collective us all wake up ?

Not sure, but I think education can offer some help.


like Jetsunma Tenzin Palmo, questions rather than answers

Yes. It happens.

;D

[tjampel]

Part of what we need to see is action which fundamentally changes the dialog. It's true that if it's driven by celebrity and attractive because Bono is promoting it (or any other famous person), then the actual meme which drives human behavior is never changed; so I agree, that's very sad.

We have seen the Occupy Wall St. movement actually succeed in changing the discourse, in refocusing the American psyche (and to some degree the world psyche as well) on income inequality, on the obscene concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, and in the policies pursued by governments, which promote and protect the rich and powerful-- instead of budget deficits and other measures that will only inflict more pain upon those least able to absorb it.

It took direct action, not even focused action, no celebrities, no political party organization behind it---just the visible embodiment of frustration, pain, outrage against policies that are clearly and obviously wrong.

I was a high school student in the early 70s when the environmental movement was just ramping up; I was part of a group of environmental activists then; we used to do things like rowing around in boats collecting water samples from outflow pipes of polluters, and lobbying state senators in our state capital. That movement had a huge impact on both state and the federal government and, in fact, it was under the Nixon administration, that the Environmental Protection Agency was established (1970), tough legislation and regulations for businesses seeking to engage in activities which had the potential to harm the environment were put in place or began to germinate, including NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act (1969)), Clear Water Act, Clean Air Act, and the beginnings of auto emissions regulation (CAFE) standards.

Suddenly everyone who had never uttered a word about the environment was all for protecting it. What starting this movement? Well, many things but sadly, it did take a major environmental disaster (Love Canal---a housing development built on a toxic waste dump) to help things reach critical mass. Once the American people realized that there were toxic waste dumps all over the country and that cleaning them up was incredibly expensive and that the health effects were devastating, there was a drastic change in how we felt about protecting the environment.

I hope it doesn't take the equivalent of Love Canal with regard to global warming; if it does then we will have probably come too far down the road to reverse it in time. So, if young people around the world realize that the future of the planet is directly tied to this issue; if they let their voice be heard loudly and clearly, then the dialog in this area can also be shifted.

I realize that in many places there already is a far more enlightened environmental policy that in my home country. I hate to have to apologize, once again, for the USA's behavior. I hope that the environmental wing of the Occupy movement (and there is a significant one) continues to demonstrate, and take other peaceful actions to raise awareness and ultimately change the dialog.

Lastly this is a religious issue as well as a moral and ethical one. Our duty is not only to ourselves to relieve suffering. Nonharm encompasses both compassion and love (as well as the more obvious avoidance of making things worse for sentient beings). Acting as skillfully as we can so as to avoid mass starvation 50 or 60 or 100 years hence IS engaging in non harm.

[Esho]

Totaly agree tjampel,

The books I recommended to Karma Yeshe are a very small sample of the scientific side of this concern.

Known as Environmental Sciences, they are working hard with the environment protection issue from ecology of Biosphere Reserves and Core Ecological Regions, to the very complicated issue of recycling.

Many levels of participation are being addressed: social organization, domestic ecological regulations, law regulations, education at all levels and economical considerations contained in the emerging science of Environmental Economics.

Fortunately the bad idea of Environmentalism has started to leave old reactionary image to an emerging more scientifically organized movement from government level to domestic one.

Here another excelent reading list:

Resource Economics: An Economic Approach to Natural Resources and Environmental Policy by Alan Randall.

"Between Two Worlds" Lynton Keith Caldwell

Unfortunately just in Spanish Language, and among many other books:

Ciencias Sociales y Formación Ambiental (Social Sciences and Environmental Formation) by Enique Leff and Victor M. Toledo

Tropical Extensive Grazing had undergone a deep shift about its concern with methane emissions, soil contamination and a better approach to environmental degradation.

"Holistic Resources Management: Bases and Principles for the Tropics" by Kirk L. Gadzia.

From the research field of Adaptive Complex Systems

"Revolutions, Epidemics and Ecosystems: Some Dynamical Analogies" by Joshua Epstein in "Non Linear Dynamics, Mathematical, Biological and Social Sciences. Santa Fe Studies in The Sciences of Complexity.

And a classic essay and really great seminal book:

"The Entropy Law and the Economic Process" by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen.

Alan Touraine adress some issues about the sociology of Social Movements here:

"Pourrons-nous vivire ensamble? Egaux et Differents"

But the real issue is the awareness of each individual toward ecosystems conservation. There is the success of this difficult task and its concern for his personal lifestyle.

;D

[tjampel]

Totaly agree tjampel,

The books I recommended to Karma Yeshe are a very small sample of the scientific side of this concern.
...

;D

Thanks for these wonderful resources and for your participation in this forum!

tj

[Esho]

Thanks for your appreciation Tjampel.

;D

[Karma Yeshe]

Thanks for all of the responses.

While all of the issues and resources that have been left on this thread are good and relevent I still think that much of the time long term events tend to be overlooked and will one day bite us if we do not look ahead.

It is not a qquestion of fate or maybes, simply a scientific understanding of what has happened and what will happen to Earth.

http://dsc.discovery.com/earth/wide-angle/mass-extinctions-timeline.html

[Esho]

Solutions needs scientific understanding and social concern. Both. Good will is not enough as a unique approach.