Religious Spaces and Biodiversity in Contemporary Myanmar

Cheryl Swift,Anders Blomso,Julia Davis,Christina Mecklenburg,Jason A Carbine,Rosemary P Carbine,Marissa Ochoa

doi:10.16995/ane.314

Cheryl Swift, Anders Blomso + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.16995/ane.314

Copy DOI

Abstract

Drawing together methodologies and analytical frameworks from religious studies and environmental science and related fields, this paper discusses the possible role of Buddhist sacred spaces in conserving biodiversity in Myanmar. Faculty and students worked together to analyze relationships between sacred spaces, religious practice, and biodiversity. We explored whether there was any evidence for an emergent or present Buddhist eco-ethic in Myanmar that fused religious spaces and places with environmental protection, and if so, how it might resonate with Buddhist environmentalism in other areas of the world, such as in Thailand, in the Tibetan regions of China, and elsewhere.1

Highlights

The Setting of This StudyAs scholars, activists, and others have long explored, some religious traditions contain conceptual, ritual, and spatial resources that approach nature not as an instrumental commodity but as having intrinsic value and agency
As research unfolded over the course of the two short-term study-abroad trips in January 2017 and January 2019, we developed a series of additional guiding questions, such as: How is nature depicted at the sacred places? Do the sacred spaces function to preserve biodiversity? Do the sacred spaces function to replace lost biodiversity? How are the symbols at the sites representative of/connected with the natural world? Do the temples represent or distill patterns found in nature? Where do we see religious symbols, practices, spaces in Myanmar used explicitly for an ecological ethic? To restate this last question, is there any evidence of a dynamic, religious-based
We had anticipated that urban sacred spaces might have lower overall diversity, if those urban sacred spaces were important to preserving biodiversity, they should share a pattern similar to rural spaces

Summary

Introduction

The Setting of This StudyAs scholars, activists, and others have long explored, some religious traditions contain conceptual, ritual, and spatial resources that approach nature not as an instrumental commodity but as having intrinsic value and agency. Sometimes combines foundational religious beliefs (e.g., the Four Noble Truths, Nirvana, suffering, Noble Eightfold Path, compassion), ethical and ritual practices (e.g., ritual consecrations), and spaces (e.g., forests, mountains, and water) to promote sustainability as well as the intrinsic value of nature and environmental protection. “Not engaging in abusive relations,” interpreted through an environmental lens, can cover many examples of cruelty and disrespect for non-human beings. Nonharming extends to all beings—not merely to those who are useful or irritating to humans. This central teaching of nonharming is congruent with many schools of eco-philosophy which respect the intrinsic value and capacity for experience of each being. This central teaching of nonharming is congruent with many schools of eco-philosophy which respect the intrinsic value and capacity for experience of each being. (Kaza 2006, 191)

Objectives

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion