Book Review – A New Buddhist Path: Enlightenment, Evolution and Ethics in the Modern World by David R. Loy
In this age of widespread environmental deterioration, discussions about the global effects of unbridled consumerism often turn to religion for inspiration and solutions. David Loy’s new book “A New Buddhist Path: Enlightenment, Evolution and Ethics in the Modern World” (Wisdom Publications, 2015) examines how Buddhist philosophy provides a foundation upon which to develop an environmental ethic. He is a teacher in the Sanbo Zen tradition of Buddhism and an academic professor. As the author of several books on Buddhist thought, he presents this philosophy in a format attractive to a wide audience. His ideas in “A New Buddhist Path” make an enthusiastic appeal for the Buddhist worldview as a basis for environmental conservation theory.
Loy first defines obstacles to the expansion of Buddhism in the modern world. He highlights the need for humankind to incorporate religious thought as a means to deal with the perils and advantages inherent to contemporary circumstances. Loy (p. 1) suggests that “the introduction of Buddhism to the West may well prove to be the most important event of the twentieth century”. The subsequent discussion is divided into ‘Path’, ‘Story’ and ‘Challenge’. ‘Path’ argues that followers of Buddhism often have two basic interpretations of their practice, each of which is unsatisfactory because of the emphasis on transcendence. ‘Story’ addresses the relationship religions have with the idea of evolution, and accentuates the need to incorporate empirical observation with religious theory. In the final segment entitled ‘Challenge’, Loy stresses how social reconstruction requires personal reconstruction – anything else simply empowers the ego. He proposes that the quintessential path to freedom may be found in the bodhisattva ideal.
Loy contends that Buddhist practitioners often resort to the noble path as either ensuring arrival at an ‘other’ place, or developing a mindset that fosters psychological transcendence of immediate surroundings. Either way, each approach fosters a false sense of detachment that only reinforces a sense of self and separateness. He contrasts these two methods of transcendence to the idea of ‘immanence’. Immanence implies resorting to mindfulness as the end goal, rather than the means to an end. The author maintains that transcendence actually reinforces the delusion of a separate self, which in effect is the source of our greatest suffering. Although not an idea new to Buddhist thinkers, he emphasises that the crux of Buddhist practice is the continual deconstruction of the self. Ultimately, one realises that the world is to be experienced as it is in the present moment.
The author argues that the framework of an environmental ethic could be grounded in the realisation of the non-duality of non-separateness. All beings are understood to share suffering and well-being. He (p. 86) proposes that we are “what the whole universe is doing right here and now”. Emptiness and groundlessness become the field of unlimited potentiality. In fact, the universe itself is an entity that actively seeks self-awareness through continuous transformation. He implies that Buddhist awakening may involve the realisation that one’s own true nature is no different from that of the entire universe. It would then follow that because all things are impermanent products of the same creative process, they are equal. There is no progress or decline. All things are neutral manifestations of the cosmos.
As a Buddhist practitioner myself, I can relate to Loy’s insights into the subliminal ‘purpose behind the practice’ and the results of this duplicity. I also agree with the need for science and religion to inform each other. I wonder, however, if Loy’s presentation of non-duality overshadows the said objectives of the bodhisattva path. Since nothing has any intrinsic existence and therefore no value, could it be that nothing really matters? How could this aspect of the Buddhist worldview motivate beneficial action towards other sentient beings and the environment? Why engage in environmental discourse in the light of an essentially valueless existence? The conundrum of nihilism in Buddhist theory is a complex and sticky issue, one that must be understood contextually. I appreciate the author’s enthusiasm for Buddhism as a viable avenue for an environmental ethic. The book is a thought-provoking contribution to modern environmental discourse in its reframing of certain existential premises of Buddhist thought. Still, the ideas presented in “A new Buddhist Path” could be enriched with practical examples of how the bodhisattva’s understanding of emptiness and the universe’s process of self-actualisation are relevant to an environmental ethic in ‘real’ terms.