The value of nature in Indian (Hindu) traditions

Abstract

AbstractMany authors claim that certain Indian (Hindu) texts and traditions deny that nature has intrinsic value. If nature has value at all, it has value only as a means tomokṣa(liberation). This view is implausible as an interpretation of any Indian tradition that accepts the doctrines ofahiṃsā(non-harm) andkarma. The proponent must explain the connection betweenahiṃsāand merit by citing the connection betweenahiṃsāandmokṣa:ahiṃsāis valuable, and therefore produces merit, becauseahiṃsāis instrumentally valuable as a means tomokṣa. Ahiṃsāis a means tomokṣa, however, because it produces merit. Hence the explanation is circular. Additionally, this view entails that morality is strictly arbitrary – it might just as well be thathiṃsā(harm) produces merit, andahiṃsāproduces demerit. An alternative interpretation that avoids these problems states that the value ofahiṃsāderives from the intrinsic value of the unharmed entities.