Ethics and Imagination
We share this planet with millions of other beings. To live as if this were the case is not easy.
Jayaprabha explains
The sullen killing continues.The killing of the largest creatures in the
world,
It is unthinkingly supposed
That the rest of life will not be shriveled in
the process.
Large creatures disappear.
Life becomes smaller.
Blind dwarves
Crawl on top of corpses of slaughtered giants
To see further into their impending solitude:
Gentle visionary giants
Most fully appreciated when dead
Are reassuringly unreal.
Heathcote Williams, Whale Nation.
The night is fresh and cool —
Staff in hand I walk through the gate.
Wisteria and ivy grown together along the winding mountain path;
Birds sing quietly in their nests and a monkey howls nearby.
As I reach a high peak a village appears in the distance.
The old pines are full of poems:
I bend down for a drink of pure spring water.
There is a gentle breeze, and the round moon hangs overhead.
Standing by a deserted building
I pretend to be a crane softly floating among
the clouds.
Ryokan
What we see in the world, and the way we interact with it is deeply influenced by our thoughts and beliefs about the world Our thinking is itself conditioned by the limits of our awareness and understanding, not only of the world, but also of ourselves.
For a whaler, no doubt, whaling can be exciting; and there is a living to be made. Nevertheless, the whalers standing so proudly atop their catch seem to be telling us that they are not just killing whales for material gain, but also for the thrill of self-aggrandizement. By conquering a king of beasts they see themselves as being greater, as somehow incorporating the great beast’s power into their own. And yet, by seeing themselves and the whale in this way, they are surely missing the point. In his poem, Heathcote Williams proceeds to suggest that whales are kings in their own realm not simply because they are the largest and most powerful creatures there, but because they do not use their power as medium of destruction.
The poem has a romantic air to it, yet it is really making a point that relates to humankind. With so much power at our finger tips, it is our ability to withhold violence, at the prompting of our more compassionate nature, that could make kings in our realm. Our capacity for compassion sets us apart from the animals. And yet, by its very nature, compassion generates no alienation through power — and therefore no real Ryokan separation.
Through his enjoyment of and identification with nature, Ryokan engenders a feeling of affection for everything that surrounds him. Ryokan’s horizons are expanded by the aliveness that he sees, making him more alive. There is no separation between himself and the world he walks in. Nature, which includes not only wisteria and the mountain path, but also the village, the howling monkey, and the imaginary crane, is Ryokan. There is no question here of needing to conquer for life to be meaningful.
If it is to become something meaningful and alive, the Buddhist principle of abstention from harming living beings — or the development of universal love (metta) — requires a This is a fundamental premise to be grasped if we are to move away from a mercenary approach to animals. To identify with other beings as our companions — if only because we are prepared to recognize that they experience pain — paves the way for some kind of communication with them.
Ryokan’s poem illustrates this feeling of companionship. He and nature are one. The more we are able to identify with other people, animals, and nature in general as being part of ourselves, the more positive action we will take towards their well-being.
But we do need to know the facts. Our society does much to keep its consumers ignorant of the unpleasant realities behind the market-place. In order to avoid becoming ignorant accomplices to so much suffering we must make an effort to gather information on the activities that go against our principles. By asking Is this the world I choose to live in?
we throw some of the responsibility back onto ourselves. This, of course, will highlight our own involvement in the status quo (which supports our present life-style). Some cruelty-free products, for example, are more expensive than conventional ones. Are we prepared to pay the price of our beliefs?
We also have a responsibility to try to experience strong, positive emotions. Were they to allow themselves to experience their feelings of identification and compassion for the whale, those whalers would inevitably be faced with a conflict between their profession and their natural affinity with the whale. We can only change things if we ourselves are prepared to change.
Something which may prevent us from taking greater responsibility is the idea that we are powerless to do anything. Unless we know how to move towards an actively compassionate lifestyle, all our knowledge about suffering might leave us feeling angry, depressed, and impotent-until we become insensitive to the messages that our knowledge bears. It is important that we are realistic about what we can achieve; by being compassionate towards ourselves we will avoid the trap of trying to ‘take on the world’ and then dropping into an impotent heap of disillusionment when we fail.
Our first step will probably be something quite personal to us. It may be to explore the possibilities of becoming a vegetarian, or to discover the positive alternatives to some of the harmful products we use. We might decide to give lectures informing others of alternatives; or if we don’t have the time ourselves we might support some of the organizations that are doing something constructive on our behalf. For each individual the steps will probably be different.
Whatever it is, the first step may seem very hard. But through each step, we change and are changed by the path we take. As on any path, our perspective will shift as we move along. With each step we will extend our knowledge and increase the scope for further action, feel less impotent, and see more clearly what the next step could be. As Carl Jung says, One form of life can only be abandoned if another is taken up.
When we have a clearer vision of the kind of world we want to live in then it is more likely to come about. By making a definite effort to visualize some of the more positive alternatives, guided by the principle of non-harm, we might ‘draw’ ourselves into the future changes more easily. At any rate, by thinking of the future in this way, we will at least see more clearly the obstacles that need to be addressed, and find a way to overcome them. This willingness to develop a new and positive vision is the crucial factor. We know about factory farming. We know about experimentation on intelligent higher animals. We know about the hunting and killing of whales and dolphins. We know about the abuse of the environment on a global scale which is destroying or threatening animals and humans alike. What seems to be lacking is a vision of a positive alternative, and a path to it. Imagining this path is the first step, the rest will come if we follow it through.
Once we know about and open our hearts to the existence of suffering it is not possible to remain neutral. If we ignore it, we are in danger of cutting off our compassionate nature. If we respond we will have to be prepared to be changed by the action we take. Compassion requires action. Seeking out knowledge whilst cultivating loving-kindness will naturally lead to change. It may begin with dreams of how we would like the world to be, but if we do not act, our love and imagination will run dry. Love in its purest form is revolutionary: it takes us beyond our limited experience of ourselves and our opinions to a feeling of identification and affection for all life. Although natural to our humanity, its realization requires that we take more responsibility for our thoughts and actions. This way we truly become great. Our ability to identify with life does not have to rely on fixed opinions. How we respond to life affects not only the world but also our mental and emotional state. However we see the world we live in, we are inexplicably but undoubtedly related to it. We are the world we live in.
Acknowledgements:
Although many people have helped me in thinking about these questions, I want to thank especially two authors: Stephen Clark for his The Moral Status of Animals and The Nature of the Beast, and Mary Midgely for The Beast and Man and Animals and Why They Matter.