S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 8 - 2 Fa l l 2 0 2 2 4 7 Samuel Bendeck Sotillos and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. In fact, nothing must be excluded from our heart’s compassion, as Isaac the Syrian (c. 613–c. 700) powerfully instructs: “The burning of the heart unto the whole [note: of] creation, [note: for] man, [note: for] fowls [note: birds] and [note: for] beasts, [note: even for] demons and [note: for] whatever exists” (1923, 341). In the Islamic tradition, there are pronouncements in the Qurʼān about maintaining equilibrium with the created order “that you transgress not in the balance” (55:8) and how human behavior supports inner and outer equilibrium: “Do no mischief on the earth, after it hath been set in order” (7:56). The whole of reality abides in the Divine to keep the earth stable: “Do you not see that to God bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens and on earth, the sun, the moon, the stars, the hills, the trees, the animals, and a great number among humanity?” (Qurʼān 22:18). It is also said that “[t]here is nothing that does not glorify Him in praise” (Qurʼān 17:44). Yūnus Emre (1238–1320), a Turkish poet and Sufi mystic, speaks about invocation of the Divine Name that reverberates throughout the created order: “The rivers all in Paradise / Flow with the word Allah Allah, / And ev’ry loving nightingale / He sings and sings Allah Allah” (quoted in Schimmel 1982, 150). No matter how dire outward circumstances may be, the Prophet Muhammad urges individuals to apply their ecological awareness to tangible acts: “It is a blessed act to plant a tree even if it be a day before the end of the world.” (quoted in Nasr 2004, 143). Due to the limitations of mainstream psychology, some have suggested alternative approaches – such as ecopsychology, environmental psychology, and climate psychology – in an attempt to address the loss and destruction of biodiversity, including a rise in concomitant anxiety and depression. Roszak (2001, 14) explains that all traditional forms of sacred psychology are essentially anchored in ecology and the Spirit: Once upon a time, all psychologies were ‘ecopsychologies’. Those who sought to heal the soul took it for granted that human nature is densely embedded in the world we share with animal, vegetable, mineral, and all the unseen powers of the cosmos. Just as all medicine was in times past understood to be ‘holistic’ – a healing of body, mind, and soul – and did not need to be identified as such, so all psychotherapy was once spontaneously understood to be cosmically connected. It is peculiarly the psychiatry [note: and psychology] of modern Western society that has split the ‘inner’ life from the ‘outer’ world – as if what was inside of us was not also inside the universe, something real, consequential, and inseparable from our study of the natural world. Contemporary approaches largely ignore the fact that “ecology needs psychology [note: and] psychology needs ecology” (Roszak 2001, 323). In fact, any psychology that does not include a deep-rooted connection with the environment, including all sentient beings, is fundamentally flawed, and cannot be considered a true “science of the soul.” The reason that mainstream psychology does not include an ecological perspective has to do with the reductionistic science on which the discipline has been constructed (which is none other than the legacy of the Enlightenment project). With that said, ecopsychology (including humanistic and transpersonal psychology) has asserted similarities between modern science and the traditional wisdom of indigenous and shamanic peoples (or indeed with any of the world’s religions); this does not, however, indicate that their points of departure are the same as those of the First Peoples. Additionally, any parallels found between them do not rectify the many errors of modern science and do not demonstrate that they are on the same level. Contemporary psychology and psychiatry recognize, to some degree, the threats that climate change presents to public health and mental well-being. Although they maintain that individuals struggling with mental illness are disproportionately affected by climate change, they do not appreciate the spiritual dimension of this dilemma. The notion of “biophilia” has been proposed to account for the innate relationship between human flourishing, geographical location, and the environment (Wilson 1984, 85). In contrast, solastalgia designates a form of emotional or existential distress produced by ecological change and uncertainty (Albrecht 2005, 41–44). There have been a host of conditions attributed to the impacts of climate change. A key term used is “eco-anxiety” (Albrecht 2011, 43–56), yet we also find “eco-angst” (Goleman 2009, unpaginated), “eco-distress” (Windle 1992, 363–6; Kevorkian 2019, 216–226), “environmental distress” (Higginbotham et al. 2006, 245–254), “eco-paralysis” (Albrecht 2011, 43–56), and “eco-guilt” (Mallett et al. 2013, 9–16). These are noteworthy developments within the discipline of psychology and psychiatry; however, any measures advocated by these modern disciplines are extremely limited due to their lack of an ontological foundation that allows for a way of knowing that is rooted in metaphysical wisdom. Although use of the word “anxiety” may imply references to diagnostic categories
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=