NATURE-CULTURE

7.4

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

Discuss specific ways in which the natural environment shapes, and is shaped by, religious beliefs and practices.

Our religious beliefs shape how we engage with the natural world. Some religions posit that humans transcend nature and are given license to dominate and exploit the natural world. Others see humans as merely co-dwellers in the natural world, alongside and interconnected with other inhabitants of nature. Thus, religions can inspire environmental stewardship when nature is viewed as a sacred part of creation, or encourage depletion and destruction of the natural world in the service of mankind.

APPEASING THE FORCES OF NATURE

One of the main functions of many religions is the maintenance of harmony between a people and their physical environment. Thus, religion is perceived by its adherents to be part of the adaptive strategy (one of the cultural tools needed to survive in a given environment); for that reason, physical environmental factors, particularly natural hazards and disasters, exert a powerful influence on the development of religions.

adaptive strategy

The unique way in which each culture uses its particular physical environment; those aspects of culture that serve to provide the necessities of life—food, clothing, shelter, and defense.

Environmental influence is most readily apparent in animistic faiths. In fact, an animistic religion’s principal goal is to mediate between its people and the spirit-filled forces of nature. Animistic ceremonies are often intended to bring rain, quiet earthquakes, end plagues, or in some other way manipulate environmental forces by placating the spirits believed responsible for these events.

Rivers, mountains, trees, forests, and rocks often achieve the status of sacred space, even in the great religions. The Ganges River and certain lesser streams such as the Bagmati in Nepal are holy to the Hindus, and the Jordan River has special meaning for Christians, who often transport its waters in containers to other continents for use in baptism (Figure 7.25). Most holy rivers are believed to possess soul-cleansing abilities. Hindu geographer Rana Singh speaks of the “liquid divine energy” of the Ganges “nourishing the inhabitants and purifying them.”

Figure 7.25 Holy water from the Jordan River. This water is taken from the Jordan River, at the site where Jesus is believed to have been baptized by John the Baptist. It can be purchased and used in rituals. (Courtesy of Patricia L. Price.)

Mountains and other high places likewise often achieve sacred status among both animists and adherents of the great religions (Figure 7.26). Mount Fuji is sacred in Japanese Shintoism, and many high places are revered in Christianity, including Mount Sinai. The great pre-Columbian temple pyramid at Cholula, near Puebla in central Mexico, strikingly mimics the shape of the awesome nearby active volcano Popocatépetl, which towers to the menacing height of nearly 18,000 feet (5500 meters). Some mountains tower so impressively as to inspire cults devoted exclusively to them. Mount Shasta, a massive snowcapped volcano in northern California, near the Oregon border, serves as the focus of no fewer than 30 New Age cults, the largest of which is the “I Am” religion, founded in the 1930s (see Figure 7.26, below). These cults posit that the Lemurians, denizens of a lost continent, established a secret city inside Mount Shasta.

Figure 7.26 Two high places that have evolved into sacred space. Left: The reddish sandstone Uluru, or Ayers Rock, in central Australia is sacred in Aboriginal animism. Right: Snowy Mount Shasta in California is venerated by some 30 New Age cults. Why do mountains so often inspire such worship? (Left: Hans-PeterMerten/Getty Images; Right: iStockphoto/ Thinkstock.)

296

Animistic nature-spirits lie behind certain practices found in the great religions. Feng shui, which literally means “wind and water,” refers to the practice of harmoniously balancing the opposing forces of nature in the built environment. A feature of Asian religions that emphasizes Tao, the dynamic balance found in nature, feng shui involves choosing environmentally auspicious sites for locating houses, villages, temples, and graves. The homes of the living and the resting places of the dead must be aligned with the cosmic forces of the world in order to assure good luck, health, and prosperity. Although the practice of feng shui dates back some 7000 years, contemporary people practice its principles. Figure 7.27 depicts a high-rise condominium in Hong Kong’s Repulse Bay neighborhood that incorporates feng shui principles in its design. The square opening in the building’s center is said to provide passage to the bay for the dragon that dwells in the hill behind the building, allowing the dragon to drink from the waters of the bay and return to its abode unencumbered. Some Westerners have also adopted the principles of feng shui. Office spaces as well as homes are arranged according to its basic ideas. For example, artificial plants, broken articles, and paintings depicting war are thought to bring negative energy into living spaces and so should be avoided.

Figure 7.27 Condominium in Hong Kong. The square opening in this building is supposed to allow for the passage of the dragon that resides in the hill behind. (Courtesy of Ari Dorfsman.)

297

Although the physical environment’s influence on the major Western religions is less pronounced, it is still evident. Some contemporary adherents to the Judeo-Christian tradition believe that God uses plagues to punish sinners, as in the biblical account of the 10 plagues inflicted on Egypt, which forced the Israelites into the desert. Modern-day droughts, earthquakes, and hurricanes are interpreted by some as God’s punishment for wrongdoing, whereas others argue that this is not so. Environmental stress can, however, evoke a religious response not so different from that of animistic faiths. Local ministers and priests often attempt to alter unfavorable weather conditions with special services, and there are few churchgoing people in the Great Plains of the United States who have not prayed for rain in dry years.

THE IMPACTS OF BELIEF SYSTEMS ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS

Every known religion expresses itself in food choices, to one degree or another. In some faiths, certain plants and livestock, as well as the products derived from them, are in great demand because of their roles in religious ceremonies and traditions. When this is the case, the plants or animals tend to spread or relocate with the faith.

For example, in some Christian denominations in Europe and the United States, celebrants drink from a cup of wine that they believe is the blood of Christ during the sacrament of Holy Communion. The demand for wine created by this ritual aided the diffusion of grape growing from the sunny lands of the Mediterranean to newly Christianized districts beyond the Alps in late Roman and early medieval times. The vineyards of the German Rhine were the creation of monks who arrived from the south between the sixth and ninth centuries. For the same reason, Catholic missionaries introduced the cultivated grape to California, in an example of relocation diffusion. In fact, wine was associated with religious worship even before Christianity arose. Vineyard-keeping and winemaking spread westward across the Mediterranean lands in ancient times in association with worship of the god Dionysus.

Religious taboos can even function as absorbing barriers, preventing diffusion of foods, drinks, and practices that violate the taboo. Mormons, who are encouraged to avoid caffeine, have not taken part in the American fascination with coffee. Sometimes these barriers are permeable. Certain Pennsylvania Dutch churches, for example, prohibit cigarette smoking but do not object to member farmers raising tobacco for sale in the commercial market.

Some religions set forth very specific guidelines for food preparation and consumption. Jews, for instance, are forbidden from consuming animals deemed “unclean,” including shellfish, pork, and insects. Meat and milk must not be stored, prepared, or consumed together, which leads observant Jewish households to have two sets of dishes, two sinks, and even two ovens and refrigerators. Kosher food—food that is fit for consumption by observant Jews—allows only meat slaughtered by a trained individual using a sharp knife, drained of blood, and deemed disease-free. Muslims are commanded to consume only halal, or permissible, foods. Pork and alcohol are prohibited, while halal livestock should be fed with “clean” food that is free of animal by-products. Many non-Jews and non-Muslims view the kosher and halal certifications as an indication of wholesomeness, and seek such foods out for health rather than religious reasons. Indeed, the top three reasons given for purchasing kosher products were food quality, safety, and healthfulness; religious reasons ranked sixth (Rashtogi, 2010). But in the Netherlands, animal rights activists have deemed halal practices unacceptable because they do not stun an animal prior to slaughter, and have banned halal meat to the consternation of some who see this as a backlash against Muslim immigrants to this country.

298

The case of India’s sacred cows provides an intriguing example of how religious beliefs shape the role of animals in society, in this instance avoiding the use of cows as food while emphasizing the animal’s sacred as well as practical functions. Although only one out of every three of India’s Hindus practices vegetarianism, almost none of India’s Hindu population will eat beef, and many will not use leather. Why, in a populous country such as India where many people are poor and where food shortages have plagued regions of the country in previous decades, do people refuse to consume beef? There are several quite legitimate reasons. First, the dairy products provided by cow’s milk and its byproducts, such as yogurt and ghee (clarified butter), are central to many regional Indian cuisines. If the cow is slaughtered, it will no longer be able to provide milk. Second, in areas of the world that rely heavily on local agriculture for food production, such as India, cows provide valuable agricultural labor in tilling fields. Cows also provide free fertilizer in the form of dung. Finally, the value of the cow has been incorporated into Indian Hindu beliefs and practices over many centuries and has become a part of culture. Krishna, an incarnation of the major Hindu deity Vishnu, is said to be both the herder and the protector of cows. Nandi, who is the deity Shiva’s attendant, is represented as a bull.

Think for a moment about what you consider appropriate to eat. Perhaps beef is part of your diet, but would you eat horse meat? What is so different about a cow and a horse? Has the scare about mad cow disease or other beef contamination incidents affected your consumption of beef? Has the threat of so-called bird flu curtailed your poultry intake, or swine flu your pork consumption? How about dog or cat meat? What makes certain animals pets in some cultures and dinner in others? Through this sort of questioning, you may come to realize that practices that seem second nature—such as what you will and will not eat—are, in fact, the result of long histories that are very different from place to place.

ECOTHEOLOGY

Ecotheology is the name given to a rich and abundant body of literature studying the role of religion in habitat modification. More exactly, ecotheologians ask how the teachings and worldviews of religion are related to our attitudes about modifying the physical environment. In some faiths, human power over natural forces is assumed. In others, nature is a sacred creation that should be respected and protected by humans as an ethical component of the faith’s practice.

ecotheology

The study of the influence of religious belief on habitat modification.

The Judeo-Christian tradition also teaches that humans have dominion over nature, but it goes further, promoting the view that the Earth was created especially for human beings, who are separate from and superior to the natural world. This view is implicit in God’s message to Noah after the Flood, promising that “every moving thing that lives shall be food for you, and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.” The same theme is repeated in the Book of Psalms, where Jews and Christians are told that “the heavens are the Lord’s heavens, but the Earth he has given to the sons of men.” Humans are not part of nature but separate, forming one member of a God-nature-human trinity.

Believing that the Earth was given to humans for their use, early Christian thinkers adopted the view that humans were God’s helpers in finishing the task of creation, that human modifications of the environment were therefore God’s work. Small wonder, then, that the medieval period in Europe witnessed an unprecedented expansion of agricultural acreage, involving the large-scale destruction of woodlands and the drainage of marshes. Nor is it surprising that Christian monastic orders, such as the Cistercian and Benedictine monks, supervised many of these projects, directing the clearing of forests and the establishment of new agricultural colonies.

299

Subsequent scientific advances permitted the Judeo-Christian West to modify the environment at an unprecedented rate and on a massive scale. This marriage of technology and theology is one cause of our modern ecological crisis. The Judeo-Christian religious heritage, in short, has for millennia promoted an instrumentalist view of nature that is potentially far more damaging to the habitat than an organic view of nature in which humans and nature exist in balance. Yet there is considerable evidence to the contrary. For example, the Orthodox Church in Russia is working to create wildlife preserves on monastery lands. The Patriarch of Constantinople, leader of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, has made the fight against pollution a church policy, declaring that damaging the natural habitat constitutes a sin against God. The Church of England has declared that abuse of nature is blasphemous, and throughout the monotheistic religions, the green teachings of long-dead saints, such as Christianity’s St. Francis of Assisi, who treasured birds and other wildlife, now receive heightened attention. In 1986 the Assisi Declarations united representatives of five of the world’s major religions-Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism-in Assisi, Italy, to discuss how faiths could work together to honor the sacredness of nature and stop its destruction.

Some fundamentalist Protestant sects herald ecological crisis and environmental deterioration as a sign of the coming Apocalypse, Christ’s return, and the end of the present age. Thus, they welcome ecological collapse and, obviously, are unlikely to be of much help in solving the problem of environmental degradation. Other conservative Protestants, however, have adopted conservationist views, inspired by biblical admonitions such as the Flood story from the Old Testament, in which Noah saves animals by bringing them onto the ark. This story is viewed by some fundamentalists as a call to protect endangered species. An ecotheological focus underlies the multidenominational National Religious Partnership for the Environment, which includes many evangelical Protestant members. The hope is to mobilize the Christian Right against wanton environmental destruction in the same way in which they oppose abortion.

British religious studies scholar Emma Tomlin (2009) notes that “non-Abrahamic religions tend to be depicted as having more resonance with environmentalist thinking. For instance, eastern religions or Native American traditions are often seen as intrinsically oriented towards environmental protection.” But is this correct? In fact, real-world practices do not always reflect the stated ideals of religions. Both Buddhism and Hinduism protect temple trees but demand huge quantities of wood for cremations (Figure 7.28). Traditional Hindu cremations, for example, place the corpse on a pile of wood, cover it with more wood, and burn it during an open-air rite that can last up to six hours. The construction of funeral pyres is estimated to strip some 50 million trees from India’s countryside annually. In addition, the ashes are later swept into rivers, and the burning itself releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to the pollution of waterways and the atmosphere. The use of wood, and its placement on the ground, provide an important symbolic connection between the body and the earth. It does not, however, lead to efficient burning; on average, 880 pounds (400 kilograms) of wood are required to cremate a single corpse. A “green cremation system” is currently under development by a New Delhi-based nonprofit organization. By placing the first layer of wood on a grate, and placing a chimney over the pyre, wood use can be reduced by 75 percent. Although traditional Hindus balk at the notion of breaking with conventional practice, severe wood shortages and the escalating cost of wood will likely make green cremations an increasingly popular option in the future.

Figure 7.28 Wood gathered for Hindu cremations at Pashupatinath, on the sacred river Bagmati in Nepal. These cremations contribute significantly to the ongoing deforestation of Nepal and reveal the underlying internal contradiction in Hinduism between conservation as reflected in the doctrine of ahimsa and sanctioned ecologically destructive practices. (Cormac McCreesh/Gallo Images/Getty Images.)

300

As this example illustrates, the idea of a link between godliness and greenness is a global one. In the years following a conference in Italy in the mid-1980s—which brought together environmentalists and religious leaders representing Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism—some 130,000 projects have arisen linking the green teachings some see as inherent in these faiths to the ecology movement.

Ecofeminists have also entered this debate. They point out that the rise of the all-powerful male sky-deity of Semitic monotheism came at the expense of earth goddesses of fertility and sustainability. In their view, because the Judeo-Christian tradition elevated a sky-god remote from the Earth, the harmonious relationship between people and the habitat was disrupted. The ancient holiness of ecosystems perished, endangering huge ecoregions. The Gaia hypothesis possesses an ecofeminist spirit, in which the Earth is seen as a mother figure who reacts to humankind’s environmental depredations through a variety of self-regulating mechanisms (Figure 7.29).

Figure 7.29 Earth-friendly license plate. (UIG via Getty Images.)

Gaia hypothesis

The theory that there is one interacting planetary ecosystem, Gaia, that includes all living things and the land, waters, and atmosphere in which they live; further, that Gaia functions almost as a living organism, acting to control deviations in climate and to correct chemical imbalances, so as to preserve Earth as a living planet.