A Return from Quantity to Quality

To be printed as an Op-Ed this week in the Bhutan Observer:

What is it about Gross National Happiness that has made it so attractive internationally, in some ways even more than in Bhutan itself?  What is it that has drawn the attention of the world to this remote kingdom in the Himalayas?  What makes the GNH approach to development so interesting, attractive, and unique?

There are a few key aspects of GNH that separate it from other approaches and measures of development.  GNH certainly focuses more on equity in development, and its attention to sustainability is far more comprehensive than any other approach.  But what really makes GNH unique and indeed transformative is 2-fold; though one might note that these two aspects of GNH are like two sides of the same coin, at least in a country like Bhutan that still retains much of its traditional culture.  These aspects are culture and community participation, and the religious/spiritual dimension that GNH posits as essential not just to development, but to happiness.  It is here that other definitions of development have, thus far, fallen short.  It is this that makes GNH a truly unique development paradigm.

Afro Yak is very happy to be in Bhutan

Many would argue against the need to consider the cultural and spiritual dimensions of development.  In the world of modernity, with its Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment values, culture and religion have often been seen more as hindrances than aids to development.  Now, while this antiquated mind-set has in many ways been disproven, it still affects many of the assumptions upon which the international development agenda is based.  But as Bhutan seeks to guide the creation of a ‘New Development Paradigm,’ it seems to me that if these dimensions are not included, we will not truly be able to alter the current development trajectory.

As long as we continue to define development solely in material terms, as long as we continue to define ourselves solely in relation to our physical bodies and environment, we can only continue to seek happiness and well-being in the material world.  But as long as we do so, we are destined to go deeper and deeper into materialism and environmental crisis.  As long as we continue to ask from the world around us questions about what life is for, we will only get answers that lead to further material expectations, further greed, and further devastation.  Until we acknowledge that there is more to human being than what we can see and touch, we are doomed to continue the mistakes that have led to the global challenges we currently face. 

GNH is likely the only existing development paradigm that is comprehensive and holistic enough to truly address these issues, and brave enough to define human beings as more than just physical bodies.  It is only brave solutions that will get us out of the crises we face, and that can truly lead to a new paradigm that is not based solely on empirics, measurement, and materialistic definitions. 

I believe that this is the reason that GNH is so popular and attractive to so many.  Whether or not Westerners would frame it in this way, there is something within GNH that people are drawn to, something attractive at a level beyond the material, something that points to a higher purpose, and a higher source of happiness, than the current materialistic paradigm.  I pray that this is not forgotten as GNH is translated into a New Development Paradigm.

Blooming happy rhododendrons

What can the GNH approach to development contribute internationally then?  Already it is being translated into a universally-applicable ‘New Development Paradigm,’ and this is a positive step.  But in the effort to translate it out of the Bhutanese context, the religious and cultural dimension risks being lost.  While the Buddhist context of GNH certainly needs to be universalized to make it accessible internationally, this does not mean removing the religious dimension in favour of something scientific and empirical, viz. the concept ‘psychological wellbeing’ that seems to be replacing the idea of Happiness.  I would hasten to point out that these are hardly the same thing, that it is reductionist to attempt to replace a spiritual concept with a materialistic one.  

The main difference between these two approaches is that psychological wellbeing, while it may have a role to play, in itself can only address the symptoms of a problem, while the religio-spiritual paradigm that Happiness represents seeks to get at its root.  No one goes to a psychologist to address concerns that they will have in the future.  This is the role that only a healthy and holistic religious or spiritual paradigm can play.  And no true and meaningful solutions can be found as long as we continue to only address the symptom.  As long as we insist on doing so, we will never really achieve a new paradigm.  

What can be done then?  How can GNH be translated into something applicable on a universal scale?  My response to these questions is 2-fold.  Already I’ve touched on the need to recognize the non-material dimensions of humanity.  To do so, those dimensions of the GNH index that attempt to recognize and quantify these dimensions of human being should not be lost in the translation of GNH into a global New Development Paradigm.  Universal equivalents of ancient and proven concepts like karma and meditation, such as virtue and prayer, need to be acknowledged and considered as real and meaningful measures of human development, otherwise the New Development Paradigm risks not being new in any meaningful way. 

 

Butter lamps for happiness

The second, and equally important response is that the sufficiency dimension of the GNH index be kept and promoted.  It must be remembered that MORE does not equal BETTER.  The world, particularly the Western world, needs to be reminded that endless quantification will not make us happier: indeed, today the opposite may be true.  It is precisely this multiplication and quantification that is destroying the very environment in which we live, and upon which all happiness is dependent.  Only an approach to development that considers the qualitative dimension of human being can truly provide a new paradigm for understanding who we are, and what development is really about.

To me, these are the great lessons of GNH for the world, as well as a great gift from the ‘developing’ world to the ‘developed’ world.  I pray that they are not lost in the attempt to create an NDP that is accessible to all.

Zhabdrung, Vajrayana, and Development in the Kingdom of Bhutan

When Padmasambhava initiated the unique form of Buddhism that came to be known as Vajrayana, or Tantric, or simply Tibetan Buddhism, in the 8th century, this unique and fascinating branch of the Mahayana took root in Tibet and the areas under its cultural influence, including Bhutan, or Drukyul, land of the Dragon people.  Padmasambhava is locally known as Guru Rinpoche, and features largely in pretty much every temple and monastery I have seen here.  He is considered the ‘2^nd Buddha’, though so is the only figure that rivals him, the 17^th century Ngawang Namgyel, or Zhabdrung.  More on him to come.

Tatksang, or Tiger's Nest, way up the side of the mountain

Guru Rinpoche visited Bhutan a number of times, including stopping to meditate at the place where the famous Tiger’s Nest monastery now is, high up on the side of a cliff-face, in a rather inaccessible area.  It was easy for Guru Rinpoche to get there, he was riding on the back of his consort who had transformed herself into a flying tigress: thus the name of the monastery.  Tiger is one of the four protector animals of Bhutan, along with dragon, garuda and snow-lion.  I visited the Tiger’s Nest monastery last weekend, and it is truly stunning, a triumph of the human spirit, and something that seems almost inconceivable by today’s standards that prioritize size, quantity and, it would seem, ugliness, over beauty, subtlety, and the ability to literally hang off a mountain side in such a way that the world beyond seems to be peaking forth into this one.

One notable aspect of development is that is often thought to be a distinctively modern phenomenon.  And it is true that life in Bhutan in the near millennia between Guru Rinpoche and the Zhabdrung was likely relatively unchanged.  People farmed, and prayed, and meditated, and did what people do in the absence of modern technology.  They lived their lives.  There were periods of political upheaval, and periods of peace surely (these tend to be forgotten by history).  Many Tibetans made their home here during this period, especially the Drukyul who came to be increasingly persecuted by other Vajrayana lineages.  This period is not all that well known though, as so many of Bhutan’s historical documents have been lost, mainly through fires (Sadly, this trend continues, one of the country’s most important dzongs burnt down only last year, and a national day of mourning was declared).

Prayer flags on the way up to Tatksaing, truly the place is blessed.

 With the rise of the Zhabdrung, certain important developments took place in Bhutan, establishing what would become the modern nation.  For one, the institution of the dzong was transformed: he was the one who established the unity of the political and religious bodies in the country, and put them under one roof, literally, by uniting the two institutions within the dzong system.  Simtokha dzong was the first to contain both, it is in Thimphu, not far from where I sit.  Zhabdrung established a number of these around the country, while battling the Tibetans under the Dalai Lamas who were trying to expand their rule over the Druk people of Bhutan.  They failed to do so, but only after centuries of trying.  The Bhutanese certainly had the power of the dragon on their side.

Further developments occurred under the Zhabdrung, who in many ways is the grandfather of the Bhutanese nation.  He established the dress code that still exists strongly today.  He laid the groundwork for the modern nation.  He instituted the tsechus with their amazing dances that continue to this day.  He codified an early system of law, established taxes in the form of grains, meat, paper, timber and clothing.  He also created a system of compulsory labour that is responsible for the remarkable amount of buildings, especially dzongs, temples, and infrastructure like bridges.  He also separated religious administration from the political, even creating an elected post to lead the latter, known as the desi.

Paro Tsechu, goes back to the time of the Zhabdrung.

The Zhabdrung’s reincarnations ruled the country in various ways over the centuries, though where they are today is another story.  He united a fragmented people, and gave them the strength to resist the Tibetans who, despite certain assumptions about a connection between peace and Buddhism, were pretty hard-core warriors.

This may not seem like development in the modern sense, because really it isn’t.  In some ways, I just want to talk about history and religion here, the latter of which permeates everything here, for the most part.  But because development doesn’t include modern technology doesn’t mean it’s not development: one must remember that the notion that development equals material and financial growth is a modern aberration, and one that threatens to ruin the planet and human wellbeing.  One might wonder how that became the definition of development.  But real development is holistic, and touches on the depths of human being beyond the body and mind.  Real development is aware of the fullness of our surrounding, be it environmental, psychological, or spiritual.  Without it we drown in the materialism that now permeates our surroundings and threatens to destroy the very planet upon which we stand.  

Bringing it back to GNH, which is deeply rooted in this Vajrayana tradition that the Zhabdrung and Guru Rinpoche helped establish here in its unique way, real development is about Happiness (or Peace, or unity with the Divine, or something along those lines, depending on your belief system, assuming it is not simple materialism as is so often the case these days).  So, to the extent that Bhutan does indeed stay true to its GNH goals (a major proposition these days, and one that I wonder about in many ways), development remains rooted in these older traditions, with their deep connection to the environment, meditation, ritual and prayer, and really a different understanding of what it means to be human than many of us have now grown used to.  

If only we could all remember what it means to ride a tiger, and the spirit and ingenuity it takes to build a monastery in a place high up on the mountain side, we might recall that many of the goals of development that we’ve grown accustomed to, and assume to be normative, are in fact perverse and degrading to who we really are beneath our iphones, funny clothing, distorted assumptions, and various professed ideologies and –isms.  Real development does not throw us out of balance with our physical or spiritual environment, it seeks to unite us to them, and maintain the harmony with them that is essential.  The evidence for this is the beauty that results that seems almost inconceivable to modern eyes, Tiger’s Nest is truly a perfect example.

Tatksang hanging on the cliff face.