Symposium on
Sustainable Development: Lesson Learned
Perspectives on a Resilient Future
Sustainable Development in Context
Ven. Phra Shakyavongsvisuddhi (Anil Sakya)
Deputy Rector for Foreign Affairs
Mahamakut Buddhist University
17 August 2015
At Sasin Hall, Sasin Graduate Institute of Business Administration
Chulalongkorn University
[This session will demonstrate that the temporal concept of sustainability has spiritual
roots that strengthen the appeal of the goals to which it aspires. From this understanding
it is but a small step to see that from either the secular or religious perspective what is
needed, going forward, is a re-alignment of values, be they personal or business. The
sufficiency economy offers a basis upon which to structure this re-alignment.]
Distinguished scholars and speakers, Former Prime Minister, The Netherlands, Honourable Guests,
Global and Thai professionals and executives in sustainability, and ladies and gentlemen.
It is indeed my most humble honour to have been invited to be in the presence of
distinguished expertise of sustainable development to deliver an opening address at this
very august gathering. I am truly grateful to the Caux Round Table, TSDF and Sasin for this
honourable invitation. Being among expertise on sustainable development I doubt about
my own presence here. I wouldn’t announce myself as an expert on the subject yet I am
requested to give an opening address. I just hope that you are not taking me as a symbol
of sacred blessing for this significant symposium! After all I was here for the first time as
a ‘blessing monk’ accompanying the late His Holiness the Supreme Patriarch at the
opening ceremony of this very institute.
Comparing with all distinguished scholars here who are the change agent of this modern
world I am just a simple Buddhist monk who have been living under Buddhist disciplines
for 40 years. In other words, I am alien to secular world which runs under the power of
greed and consumption. The only relevancy of my presence here with all distinguished
scholars would be the very word ‘sustainability.’ Because it is considered that life of a true
Theravada Buddhist monk is operated under the principle of a ‘holistic sustainability.’
Here I am going to share with you how I view concept of sustainability based on my own
way of living under precepts of Buddhist teachings. However, this does not mean that I am
going to deliver a Buddhist sermon or a religious dogmas!
Sustainable – a trendy word of the decade
No one would argue against me if I say this decade is a decade of sustainability. We have
been hearing about sustainable in every field till I feel sometimes that we have over used
the term sustainability in our daily life. Sometimes, I personally feel that I am allergic to
1
this term sustainable which really made me think hard before I accept the invitation to
speak today. I am getting allergic to it not because I am against the popular idea behind
sustainability. I see it as another fancy term to add on to our modern conversation. These
days if you don’t add the term sustainable into your business, plan, or policy and even
public speeches you become someone from the distance past. Of course, no one wants to
holds on to Flintstone age. Therefore, sustainability becomes our modern mantra of this
decade.
In was only 28 years ago that the United Nations World Commission on Environment and
Development released the report Our Common Future (1987). The report included what is
now one of the most widely recognised definitions of sustainable development:
“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
As a footnote, this is the same time that UNESCO proposed another solution for degrading
world by presenting another term of ‘cultural development.’ However, UNESCO’s term was
not successful as United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development.
Therefore, the concept of ‘sustainable development’ won over ‘cultural development.’
Sustainable development involves: a broad view of social, environmental and economic
outcomes; a long-term perspective, concerned with the interests and rights of future
generations as well as of people today; an inclusive approach to action, which recognises
the need for all people to be involved in the decisions that affect their lives. Sustainable
development is not just the responsibility of environmental specialists or communications
professionals. It requires contributions from people across all functions of an organisation.
But what does this mean? What are the needs of the present? Take a minute and jot down
five to ten needs that you have in your own life.
Have you listed any needs that conflict with one another? For example, if you listed clean
air to breathe, but also listed a car for transportation, your needs might conflict. Which
would you choose, and how would you make your decision? If within ourselves, we have
conflicting needs, how much is that multiplied when we look at a whole community, city,
country, and world? For example, what happens when a company’s need for cheap labour
conflicts with workers’ needs for liveable wages? Or when individual families’ needs for
firewood conflict with the need to prevent erosion and conserve topsoil? Or when one
country’s need for electricity results in acid rain that damages another country’s lakes and
rivers?
How do we decide whose needs are met? Poor or rich people? Citizens or immigrants?
People living in cities or in the countryside? People in one country or another? You or your
neighbour? The environment or the corporation? This generation or the next generation?
When there has to be a trade-off, whose needs should go first?
People concerned about sustainable development suggest that meeting the needs of the
future depends on how well we balance social, economic, and environmental objectives-or needs--when making decisions today. Isn’t that sustainability we are talking about?
What social, economic, or environmental needs would you add to the puzzle?
Many of these objectives may seem to conflict with each other in the short term. For
example, industrial growth might conflict with preserving natural resources. Yet, in the
long term, responsible use of natural resources now will help ensure that there are
resources available for sustained industrial growth far into the future.
2
Studying the puzzle raises a number of difficult questions. For example, can the long term
economic objective of sustained agricultural growth be met if the ecological objective of
preserving biodiversity is not? What happens to the environment in the long term if a large
number of people cannot afford to meet their basic household needs today? If you did not
have access to safe water, and therefore needed wood to boil drinking water so that you
and your children would not get sick, would you worry about causing deforestation? Or, if
you had to drive a long distance to get to work each day, would you be willing to move or
get a new job to avoid polluting the air with your car exhaust? If we don’t balance our
social, economic, and environmental objectives in the short term, how can we expect to
sustain our development in the long term?
What sustainable development dilemmas do you and your family face in your everyday
lives?
I am sure that we can’t run away from this bombarding concept of sustainability in our
age. Many have already well developed the idea and considered to be the sacred mantra of
this age. As a result, they respectfully place it on an altar and worship it as a modern
philosophy. This simply means they are good at praising and talking not applying it to the
business and life. Isn’t that what we call philosophy? Feeling good and good for quoting
but far away from making it happen in life. For example, I am sure that we all are familiar
with ‘Sufficiency economy’ a wise wisdom from His Majesty King of Thailand to solve a
modern bad economy. But we praised and respect His Majesty’s good wishes so much that
now we place it on the altar and we respectfully renamed it as ‘philosophy of sufficiency
economy.’ All national policies and every business sectors claim that their policies and
business are guided under the philosophy of sufficiency economy by His Majesty. I
questioned this practice do we really mean it or put sufficiency economy into action? Of
course, the term is there as a ‘sacred mantra’ in everything what government or
corporation claim they do. We are respectfully taking a good advice from His Majesty King
to be a philosophy although the King himself never presented it as a philosophy in his royal
speeches and uses. We hardly “walk the talk” of sustainable living and promoting the
development of healthy communities.
Therefore, indeed in general terms I do have a problem with the modern uses of the term
‘sustainability.’ Let me draw some problems from its widely used definition.
Undoubtedly, this is the economic age and accordingly the idea behind sustainability is
economy. In this age of environmental loss and degradation, the main concern of modern
economy suddenly shifted to environment. Consequently, we gave birth to neologism like
‘green economy.’ Suddenly, it became a fashionable term to use adjective ‘green’ for
everything. To go with the trend, there even came a Buddhist book entitled ‘The Green
Buddha.’ Or green Buddha became another synonym of sustainability. I am lucky that I
don’t have to wear a green robe instead of a saffron robe!
What I understand of modern sustainability is a simple marriage between ‘development’
and ‘environment’ on one hand and ‘economy’ and ‘ecology’ in another hand. The crucial
point of this is how do we master environment and ecology as a vital factor of development
and economy?
Therefore, under popular definition of sustainability it emphasises on how do we
‘compromise’ the needs of the present and future generations? Please focus on the term
‘compromise.’ An English dictionary defines it simply as ‘settlement of a dispute by
concessions on both or all sides.’ In another word, it is ‘to make a mutual promise.’ In this
case promise what? We promise that we will consume less for the benefit of our future
3
generations. Sounds perfect! But is that possible at all with unlimited human greed? I see
that sustainability is dealing with impossible because from a western approach human
needs and greed is natural. Human is master of everything in this world. Every resources
in this world is there for human consumption. Therefore, the most we can do is to
‘compromise’ our natural greed.
I personally can’t accept this as Buddhism sees this world from totally different
perspective under the law of interdependence. Human is not the master of this earth.
Human is a small part of this global earth and we live under the law of interdependency.
We are human because there is another human being to interact with. Our life is supported
equally by environment and it is human task to keep environment intact for sustainability
of humanity and the world. Therefore, I don’t see the holistic, integrated and balanced idea
behind the popular idea of sustainability. Popular sustainability misses the ability of
human being in training oneself not to be a part of the problem. Buddha said human desire
should be studied and restrained not to compromise with it. Therefore, we have to reflect
our views and perceptions. We have to change the way we see and utilize the planet. We
have to learn and train how to fix our desire in the first place rather than compromise with
our desire against others.
Making sustainable development a human culture
On the contrary, I am so glad that this phenomena is changing gradually by hardworking
and new understanding of Caux Round Table and other working partner agencies.
To be honest, I love the way the organizer of this symposium phrases the importance of
the sustainability for modern world in the proposed agenda. Let me repeat here once again:
‘Sustainable Development will further demand activation of ethical perspectives, giving new scope
to values-based consideration of personal meaning and rectitude in our lives. Sustainable
Development must become second nature to us all. Sustainability will become more than a
philosophy; it will become our habitual behavior and a way of thinking about creation and our role
in the future evolution of life systems, societies, and culture. It will flourish best where our minds
are clear and alert, and when our judgments embrace all that surrounds us.’
Upgrading the knowledge of sustainable development as a philosophy is one of my fears
always haunt me when I speak of sustainability or even another popular concept of
sufficiency economy. Personally, I do not want to see it as a philosophy but a practical
solution of the facing problems. This reminds me of the virtues of Dhamma which most
Buddhists often chants without proper understanding. It goes Svakhato bhagavato
dhammo… which simply means the ‘Dhamma is indeed visible here and now, immediately
effective, inviting one to come and see, leading onwards, and to be realized by the wise
each for himself.’
I would like to see the development of sustainability is the same manner just as the virtue
of dharma where the subject of sustainability is clearly visible here and now in theory and
practice (sanditthiko). It should have nature of universality. No boundaries of culture, time,
religion and geographical differences (akaliko). It should be the subject of critical analysis
where we can invite anyone to explore about it. No dogmas (ehi passiko). However, if we
keep on debating about it most of the time it would be falling under the category of a
philosophy. Therefore, everything about sustainability must encompass with the nature of
pragmatism i.e. able to put in action (opanayiko). Lastly, sustainability should encompass
the quality that could be realized by each and every one who leads one’s life with
4
sustainability (paccatam veditabbo vinnuhi). In this way, we don’t need to convince anyone
to live a life of sustainability but invite them to try and see for themselves the pro and con
of sustainability. The people will realize by themselves. Therefore, I see the concept of
sustainability as a truly modern mantra or it is indeed a secularization of the Buddhist
Dharma itself.
Unfortunately, so far it became just like a good Buddhist chanting which turned to be a
sacred mantra for most people who even hardly try to know what they were uttering when
they chant it. Sustainability is falling on the same trap! Everyone has their own way of
interpreting the sustainability and may use it in their daily conversation even without
knowing what they are talking about.
Your distinguished scholars!
You would be surprised if I tell you that the modern secular concept of sustainability and
sustainable development has been part of a daily conversation in Buddhist societies from
the ancient time.
In Pali conversation, when you were greeted with ‘how are you?’ the typical answer is
‘khamaniyam or yapananiyam’ or sometimes use both ‘khamaniyam yapananiyam.’
Surprisingly, the Pali term khamaniyam means ‘bearable’ which is an initial etymological
meaning of sustainable. Whereas yapananiyam means sufficient for supporting one’s life.
Therefore, in a Buddhistic way, when you were asked ‘how are you?’ the answer is unlike
our popular phrase ‘I am fine. Thank you.’ But, the response would be ‘I am sustainable.’
It reflects the balance of physical and mental situation of a human. It simply says, I am at
ease mentally and sustainable in living. Or in other words, I am a happy. Isn’t it ultimate
goal of human life? To be happy?
However, according to Jigmi Y. Thingley, former Prime Minister of Royal Government of
Bhutan clearly stated that ‘this “happiness” has nothing to do with the common use of that
word to denote an ephemeral, passing mood ― happy today or unhappy tomorrow due to
some temporary external condition like praise or blame, gain or loss. Rather, it refers to
the deep, abiding happiness that comes from living life in full harmony with the natural
world, with our communities, and with our culture and spiritual heritage, and from
knowing and trusting that we care for the common good ― in short from feeling totally
connected with our world.
And yet our modern world, and particularly its economic system, promote precisely the
reverse ― a profound sense of alienation from the natural world and from each other.
Cherishing self-interest and material gain, we destroy nature, degrade our natural and
cultural heritage, disrespect indigenous knowledge, overwork, get stressed out, and no
longer have time to enjoy each other’s company, let alone to contemplate and meditate on
life’s deeper meaning. Myriad scholarly studies now show that massive gains in GDP and
income have not made us happier. On the contrary, respected economists have
demonstrated empirically that deep social networks are a far better predictor of
satisfaction and wellbeing than income and material gain.
It is significant that the term Gross National Happiness was first coined in direct contrast
with Gross National Product ― literally as a sharp critique of our current materialist
obsession and growth-based economic system. And it is even more significant that the
statement was not made in relation to Bhutan alone, but as a universal proclamation ―
true for the world and for all beings.
5
The time has come to build a new economic system that truly reflects that universal
consensus. It will be an economic system that is no longer based on the dangerous illusions
that limitless growth is possible on our precious and finite planet or that endless material
gain promotes wellbeing. Instead, it will be a system that promotes harmony and respect
for nature and for each other, that respects our ancient wisdom traditions and protects
our most vulnerable people as our own family, and that gives us time to live and enjoy our
lives and to appreciate rather than destroy our world. It will be an economic system, in
short, that is fully sustainable and that is rooted in true, abiding happiness and wellbeing.
Sustainability is the essential basis and pre-condition of such a sane economic system. But
an economy exists not for mere survival but to provide the enabling conditions for human
happiness and the wellbeing of all life forms. The new economy will be an economy based
on a genuine vision of life’s ultimate meaning and purpose ― an economy that does not
cut us off from nature and community but fosters true human potential, fulfilment, and
satisfaction.’
Therefore, when you announced that ‘You abide by values of sustainability’ in a
Buddhist interpretation it covers the whole life style not only your health or economy. If I
put it into context you have to be sustainable in perception, thought, speech, action,
economy, diligence, conscience and determination. Simply, it is known as the Buddhist
Noble Eightfold path. It is also known as the Middle Path the very root of the sufficiency
economy. In other words, to act towards sustainable development indeed is to lead a life
as a Buddhist! However, not in a religious sense but a universal practical way.
For a record, Buddhism never limited its copyright only to Buddhists. Once the Buddha
was asked: Is that possible for other faith believers to reach Nirvana? Buddha’s answer was
simple. He says whoever leads a life according to the Middle Path regardless of their faiths
they surely can reach Nirvana, the ultimate sustainable happy life.
This Buddhist notion of sustainability should be a foundation of universal secular
sustainable development, a synonym of sufficiency economy. As His Majesty the King of
Thailand once clarifies: ‘Sufficiency Economy is a principal that stresses the middle path
as an overriding principle for appropriate conduct by the populace at all levels. This
applies to conduct starting from the level of the families, communities, as well as the level
of nation in development and administration so as to modernize in line with the forces of
globalization. Sufficiency means moderation, reasonableness, and the need of selfimmunity for sufficient protection from impact arising from internal and external
changes. To achieve this, an application of knowledge with due consideration and
prudence is essential. In particular great care is needed in the utilization of theories and
methodologies for planning and implementation in every step. At the same time, it is
essential to strengthen the moral fiber of the nation, so that everyone, particularly public
officials, academics, businessmen at all levels, adheres first and foremost to the principles
of honesty and integrity. In addition, a way of life based on patience, perseverance,
diligence, wisdom and prudence is indispensable to create balance and be able to cope
appropriately with critical challenges arising from extensive and rapid socioeconomic,
environmental, and cultural changes in world.’1
1
Unofficial translation. A working definition compiled from remarks made by His Majesty the King on
various occasions and approved by His Majesty.
6
Sufficiency Economy
The Sufficiency Economy can be summarized in the following way. The Sufficiency Economy
is an approach to life and conduct which is applicable at every level from the individual through
the family and community to the management and development of the nation. It promotes a
‘middle path,’ especially in developing the economy to keep up with the world in the era of
globalization. Sufficiency has three key principles: moderation; wisdom or insight; and the
need for built-in resilience against the risks which arise from internal or external change. In
addition, those applying these principles must value knowledge, integrity, and honesty, and
conduct their lives with perseverance, toleration, wisdom, and insight.
The key spirit of Sufficiency Economy, the ‘middle path’ is not a mere philosophical ideology
but it is reflected in all aspect of human life i.e. social, political, economic, and psychological
and so on. The pragmatism of the middle way in our daily practice simple means ‘reasoned
moral self-discipline’.
Relating to economy, it is obvious that the world economy is heavily polarized to certain
extremism. Consequently, we are suffering from the economy which does not concern in
‘reasoned moral self-discipline.’ In layman term, the key of economy is human desires which
are of two types i.e. ‘unlimited desire’ (i.e. aim for material desire) and ‘disciplined desire’ (i.e.
aim for a quality life).
Capitalist economy which devours the world economy at present is subservient to ‘the
institution of unlimited desire.’ Thus the mainstream economy only focuses on ‘efficiency in
production.’ It is a kind of extremism leading to competition, snatching, exploitation, human
fight, suffering, social violence, and destroy peace and prosperity. The consequence is an
extremity (always in a worst direction). It lacks valve to keep it on to the middle way.
The Sufficiency Economy is the type of economy with ‘reasoned moral self-discipline.’ It is
an economy based on disciplined desire. It is an economy based on compassion for others and
environment. It is an economy based on sustenance of mankind and the earth. It is an economy
allows you to enjoy life in happiness and well-being with moderation simply by neither
encouraging you to force your mind to a certain extremity nor to please your desire to a certain
extremity. It is a well-balanced life – a well-balanced economy. This economy is eco-friendly
and leading to happier life. The key concept is the wise moderation in consumption, ideology,
life-style and so on – the true life of the middle way. Therefore, the sustainable economy talks
about the ‘efficiency in consumption’ rather than ‘efficiency in production.’
The sufficiency economy is an alternative economy producing not only individual mental
happiness but a well-balanced economic growth of business as well. Sufficiency Economy does
not reject either economic theory or economic progress. Neither does it denounce globalization,
as some have tried to interpret. Instead, the middle way the King of Thailand speaks to a
lifestyle governed by moderation and resilience.
On 26 May 2006, the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan presented a Human Development
Lifetime Achievement Award to King Bhumibol Adulyadej. He said,
‘His Majesty’s ‘Sufficiency Economy’ philosophy … is of great relevance to
communities everywhere during these times of rapid globalization. The philosophy’s
‘middle way’ approach strongly reinforces the United Nations’ own advocacy of a
people-centred and sustainable path toward human development. His Majesty’s
development agenda and visionary thinking are an inspiration to his subjects, and to
people everywhere.’
7
Therefore, the Sufficiency Economy is a set of tools and principles that help communities,
corporations and governments manage globalization – maximizing its benefits and minimizing
its costs – by making wise decisions that promote sustainable development, equity, and
resilience against shocks. As such, the Sufficiency Economy is a much needed ‘survival
strategy’ in a world of economic uncertainty and environmental threats.
“We believe that Sufficiency Economy principles are applicable around the world, especially
for rapidly-developing countries that are experiencing some of the same pressures as Thailand,”
said Joana Merlin-Scholtes, UNDP Resident Representative and UN Resident Coordinator in
Thailand. “This is a set of tools that can be used by governments, civil society and individuals
to work towards sustainable growth, environmental protection and a better quality of life for
all.”
Sufficiency economy is a practical way of living toward sustainable development because
it deals with 3 basic principles: learning to know when it is sufficing, learning to live by
rationale and reasonableness, and learning to live with immunity.
Learning to know when it is sufficing is to know when the need is satisfied. This is how to
stop making unnecessary excess while at the same time not to under-spend. One invests
and spends in accordance with one’s ability to do so without overdoing or underdoing.
Learning to live by rationale and reasonableness is to reason or rationalize before one
takes the action. One invests and spends in accordance with one’s own ability because one
has ensured oneself of and satisfied oneself with a reasonableness test. One is to resist
being led by greed and unbounded desire for higher and higher profits.
Learning to live with immunity is to ensure that once one has spent or invested, any
unexpected or unanticipated incident in the future can still be adequately covered.
This is a clear example of living one’s life based on the Buddhist middle path in real
practical term. His Majesty’s sufficiency economy shall be what the world is looking for in
a global search to devise the governance that could prevent further economic crises that
derive from excess and greed, unreasonableness and the unbounded desire to maximize
beneficial returns. His Majesty’s sufficiency economy is what the world is looking for to
make sure that sustainable development will be achieved in a meaningful way for our
future generations.
The Buddhist Middle Path: ‘Sufficiency Economy’
Buddhism is summarised under the term ‘the Middle Path.’ Canonically, it is the middle
way between two false views: indulgence and asceticism. However, the middle way is not
a mere philosophical ideology but it is reflected in all aspect of human life i.e. social,
political, economic, and psychological and so on. The pragmatism of the middle path
simply means ‘reasoned moral self-discipline’ or to have mindfulness and awareness of the
body which neither ignores it nor try to force fully master it. Simply, it is neither to force
nor to please one’s mind or desire. Therefore, the middle path can apply in any
circumstance of life.
Most importantly, this idea of well-balanced life is not a religious driven life style.
Therefore, it goes beyond religious affiliations. In fact, the Buddha never claimed that his
teachings were his brand of invention at all. His teachings are basically ‘pointing out’ of
the existed truth of the world and human nature. The benefit of this ideology can be
experienced by the practitioner himself without ‘a belief.’
8
After all, the ‘Buddha’ means ‘to realize’ not ‘to belief.’ Therefore, the sufficiency economy
is an alternative economy producing not only individual mental happiness but a wellbalanced economic growth of business as well. There is a clear example from the study of
the ‘gross national happiness’ (GNH) of Kingdom of Bhutan that it not only produces
happier society but desirable growth of ‘gross domestic product’ (GDP) as well. In fact, the
core of GNH is another version of ‘the sufficiency economy’. Therefore, morally wellbalanced economy is not relevant to religious adherents but human wisdom to produce a
win-win situation between mankind and global resources. It is the showing of compassion
and having responsibility for our own generation and future generations to come. It is a
type of economy that does not encourage one to be selfish and self-centred so that we
won’t steal and exploit what belongs to our future generations.
Another Buddhist value of ‘contentment’ should be a crucial ingredient of sustainability
although it is difficult to grasp and always misunderstood. Contentment is a satisfaction
with what you get. It is the neuro-physiological experience of satisfaction and being at ease
in one’s situation. In a Buddhist sense, it is the freedom from anxiety, want or need.
Contentment is the goal behind all goals because once achieved there is nothing to seek
until it is lost. In another words, contentment simply means a well-balanced life or a life
of middle path. There are three types of contentment:
1. Contentment with what one gets and deserves to get
2. Contentment with what is within one’s strength or capacity, and
3. Contentment with what is befitting
From a Buddhist perspective, it is clear that contentment does not mean to suppress the
human urge to gain physical wealth, mental happiness and so on. Contentment is the
mental pacifying process as a result of extremism. It is not to be content for causes but
consequences. This is clear from the Buddha’s advises on division of one’s rightfully earned
money: ‘On one part he should live and do his duties towards others, with two parts he
should expand his business, and he should save the fourth for a rainy day.’ Therefore,
Buddha never asks a businessman to be content in investment but he encourages
sustainable investment. Therefore, contentment is wisdom and source of a well-balanced
life.
In fact, the idea behind sustainability or ‘sufficiency economy’ is to be mindful of all
foreseeable and unforeseeable consequences of human actions. ‘Sufficiency economy’ is
not anti-globalisation, anti-mega-projects and anti-liberal market policies at all as some
may think in that way. On the contrary, sufficiency economy encourages us to wisely
ruminate on over all aspect of globalization, megaprojects and liberal market policies
instead of just aiming at one dimensional consequence. Sufficiency economy produces a
well-balanced physical and mental development. After all, the essence of man is the
integration of body and mind therefore the development should be based on balanced
consequence of both physical comfort and mental happiness. A proper application of
sufficiency economy teaches us to be responsible for projects and policies whether it is a
global, national, organisational and individual.
How do we achieve sustainability?
In order to get to sustainability we think we should start it from our ethics. As a result, we
have developed everything to ethics. These days we hear about environmental ethics,
business ethics and social ethics etc. These subjects are taught widely in university courses.
9
Hoping that if we have proper ethics to lead our life we can get to the sustainable lifestyle.
In this process the problem is our understanding of the ethics itself. In the past ethics were
derived from moral and religious grounds. Once religions fail its role in the society the
ethics loss its grips from religions. We encourage secular ethics but still have a nature of
divine order. Unfortunately, we considered our greed, hatred, conceit etc. as part of human
nature. Therefore, to restrain this human nature we create ethics. Restraining means we
are forcing against our own will. Therefore, most ethics become theory rather than
manifesting it in our behaviour. It becomes a matter of compromise between human greed
and sustainability which conflict in itself. Accordingly, the outcome is always
unsustainability.
On the contrary, while a Buddhist perspective consider greed, hatred, conceit etc. as part
of human nature as well but see it as rectifiable human nature. Nature of humanity is able
to be trained and able to ‘reimagine’ for perspectives on a ‘resilient future.’ In other word,
we can reimagine our conditions, limitation, needs, and greed. With ability of ‘reimagine’
we can then set up our ethics for action with full awareness and willingly. Not against the
grains like most ethics we are familiar with. We changed ethics to our virtues and wisdom
so they become part of ‘new us’ in this age of sustainability.
Therefore, it is very important for us to understand our world. It is said that we first had
an agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago. Slowly, only around 250 years ago we had an
industrial revolution. But we are now at the turning point of the 3rd revolution i.e.
sustainable revolution. The 3rd revolution requires the re-alignment of human perception
as we are an interdependent creature in this world. We don’t own animal, environment
and natural resource for human sake alone. I just hope that we could re-align it and can
revolutionise smoothly.
Re-alignment of values
The 3rd revolution of human world is only possible with an inner revolution of human
perception to develop it as a new foundation of sustainable development. Therefore, how
do we develop sustainably for the sustainable revolution age?
I would like to outline here four Buddhist foundations of perception for building a
sustainable world:
1. Buddhism sees that everything in this earth is existed nature and it operates
according to the law of causality. Human is just part of this natural law of causality.
Human beings are part of nature just like any other creatures or environment.
2. Being a part of natural law of causality what human acts does have direct
repercussions to other parts of natural law. Equally any changes in nature does
have direct impact upon human life both internally and externally as well as on
relationship between human and nature.
3. Unlike other creatures human is a creature of ‘evolvability’ who can be fully tamed
or developed. Accordingly we prescribe many ethical practices for human to
develop. Ethics is an education through which we develop our quality of intact
humanity. We can develop ourselves to be a noble human being who can attain true
independence and happiness.
4. One potentiality of a well-developed human being is able to change unsustainability
to interdependence, integrated and well-balanced sustainability.
10
Once we use those Buddhist principles or worldviews as foundation for building a
sustainable society we can clearly see the difference between western notion of sustainable
development and Buddhist notion of sustainable development. While western sustainable
development merely emphasises on external factors of economy, environment and society
the Buddhist sustainable development look at holistic, integrated and balanced factors of
human development to go hand in hand.
This human cum sustainable development is only possible through the full process of
human development. It can be developed by relating wisdom and ethics through mental
qualities. In another word, how we relate a human with society, self and spirituality. In
another words the Middle Path.
Be the Buddhist Middle Path or temporal sustainable development both have its
foundation on triad development: ethics or sīla, mental qualities or Samādhi, and wisdom
or paññā.
In a pragmatic formula, to achieve a Buddhist sustainability one needs to accomplish
sustainable speech, action and economy (i.e. ethical development or sīla) as a basic
foundation in order to develop sustainable effort, mindfulness and determination (i.e.
mental development or Samādhi). This will enhance our spiritual development by
developing a sustainable perception and intention (spiritual development or paññā). In
another word, the sustainable development is in fact no other than the Buddhist Noble
Eightfold Path through which one achieves the perfection of life and perspective on a
resilient future.
“The Middle Path” is a quality in between three values of sufficiency economy. They are
moderation, self-immunity and reasonableness. In another words, it is the very triad of
Buddhist heart of sīla, samādhi, and paññā. Sīla is moderation, Samādhi is self-immunity
and Paññā is reasonableness. In other words, moderation is compassion (society), selfimmunity is self and reasonableness is spirituality. The very formula of 3s: society, self and
spirituality.
This type of Buddhist sustainability is then can truly call full sustainable development
amidst the nature of unsustainability. This is what we call a Nirvana or happiness. That is
why Buddhist attitude of sustainability start with daily greetings of ‘how are you?’ and you
would confidently reply ‘I am sustainable.’
As a reminding note, I would say that Buddhist happiness is another synonym of
sustainability. Etymologically, sustainable was first used in 1610s to mean ‘bearable.’
Similarly, Buddhist happiness or sukha also etymologically means ‘bearable’ or ‘feeling of
ease.’ Unlike western notion of happiness which lies on external factors rather than inner
factors. Etymologically, English term happiness is derived from the term hap in the late
14th century which simply means luck or fortune which lies outside of self. Therefore, in a
western term we always pursue for happiness and we hardly become happy!
Therefore, a Buddhist happiness is indeed the quality we develop as a human being to able
to tolerate and adjust oneself to new conditions all the time without going through any
pain and enforcement. It is not kind of happiness conditioned under any compromises but
it is a sustainable happiness one attain via well-balanced human action.
Buddha, therefore, compares a well-developed sustainability to a type of relationship
developed between self and society as a bee consumes nectar out of flower. The Buddha
says: ‘as a bee — without harming the blossom, its colour, its fragrance — takes its nectar
and flies away: so should the sage go through a village.’ (Dhammapada 49)
11
This self-beneficial relationship without harming opposites should be the crucial essence
of sustainability. This model of interdependency should be promoted between human and
environment as well as all creatures who share this planet with us. This is the heart of
Buddhist sustainability or in other word a Buddhist approach of sustainable development.
Let us build a culture of saying ‘I am sustainable’ in speech, action and thought every time
we greet each other with the phrase ‘how are you?’
Thank you for your kind attention.
12