The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics

Andrew Linzey, Clair Linzey, Andrew Linzey, Clair Linzey

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429953118
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Ethics & Religion

The ethical treatment of non-human animals is an increasingly significant issue, directly affecting how people share the planet with other creatures and visualize themselves within the natural world. The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics is a key reference source in this area, looking specifically at the role religion plays in the formation of ethics around these concerns.

Featuring thirty-five chapters by a team of international contributors, the handbook is divided into two parts. The first gives an overview of fifteen of the major world religions' attitudes towards animal ethics and protection. The second features five sections addressing the following topics:

• 
  
  

• Human Interaction with Animals

• 
  
  

• Killing and Exploitation

• 
  
  

• Religious and Secular Law

• 
  
  

• Evil and Theodicy

• 
  
  

• Souls and Afterlife

This handbook demonstrates that religious traditions, despite often being anthropocentric, do have much to offer to those seeking a framework for a more enlightened relationship between humans and non-human animals. As such, The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics is essential reading for students and researchers in religious studies, theology, and animal ethics as well as those studying the philosophy of religion and ethics more generally.

Part I
Traditions

1
African Religions

Anthropocentrism and Animal Protection

Kai Horsthemke

Introduction: African Creation Myths and the Hierarchy of Being

This chapter investigates a few core aspects of African religions and explores how they impact positively and/or negatively on the treatment of animals. Before we proceed, however, two important questions need to be addressed. First, can we speak of African “religion(s)” at all?¹ Second, should the singular or plural be used? In response to the first question, it might be pointed out that African religions have, until recently, existed in fairly isolated parts of the world. They do not belong to the major “families” of religions such as those that originated in the Near East or to the so-called Eastern religions.² Unlike these religions, African religions (like African ethical traditions) emanate from small-scale communities and societies and are infused with values such as communalism (“communal social organisation”³ and ownership; application of “the communal spirit to life and work”⁴), fundamental preoccupation with the common good, harmony, and the “interconnectedness” of all life.⁵ Nonetheless, what they have in common is a predominantly monotheistic orientation. What they share is belief in either a single supreme being or a multitude of gods, belief in a realm of spirits (ancestral and nature spirits, as well as deities), and belief in the “sanctity of a unified society”⁶ – which, I submit, is sufficient for warranting the use of the word “religion,” in preference to the more neutral and general term “worldview.”

A further commonality that sets African religions apart from the well-known global religious traditions is the absence of any scriptures or sacred texts. Transmission of beliefs and values, sacred stories, wisdom, and law follows a strictly oral tradition: “the sources of study and observation include language, stories and oral history, proverbs and sayings of wisdom, myths and legends, and values and customs.”⁷ These commonalities then give rise to the question of whether we can legitimately refer to “African religions,” in the plural. I believe,⁸ if we want to avoid what might be called the fallacy of the collective singular, the use of the plural (“African religions”) to be preferable or more appropriate. Even though African commentators, unlike “Westerners,” appear to prefer the singular (and to use capital letters for “African Religion”⁹), the best way to avoid any essentializing moves and to acknowledge the immense diversity on this vast continent is to refer to “African religions.”

It should come as no surprise, for example, that a great diversity of creation myths have been transmitted over many centuries through the living, immediate medium of oral tradition. The Tswana myth of creation holds that our “first parents emerged [simultaneously, it would appear] as men with their wives, children, animals, cattle, sheep, goats and dogs.”¹⁰ Yet according to the Boshongo, also a Bantu tribe, the great god Bumba’s creation of some animals (such as the leopard, the crocodile, and the turtle) was preceded by creation of the sun, the moon, and the stars, but the creation of these animals itself preceded creation of some humans, one of whom, Yoko Lima, was white like Bumba. The Efik and Ekoi, in central and southern Nigeria, respectively, similarly believed that animals came before human beings. According to the former, the creator Abassi created two humans and then decided to not allow them to live on earth. His wife, Atai, persuaded him to let them do so. In order to control the humans, Abassi insisted that they eat all their meals with him, thereby keeping them from growing or hunting food. He also did not allow them to procreate. (What happened next comes as no major surprise.) The Ekoi, on the other hand, held that in the beginning there were two gods, Obassi Osaw and Obassi Nsi. After they created everything together, Obassi Osaw decided to live in the sky, and Obassi Nsi decided to live on the earth. The god in the sky produces light and moisture but also brings about drought and storms. The god of the earth nurtures and takes the people back to him when they die. One day a long time ago, Obassi Osaw created a man and a woman and found a home for them on the earth. They knew nothing, so Obassi Nsi taught them about planting and hunting to obtain food. The Yoruba¹¹ also held that creation of animals preceded creation of human beings and indeed held that animals such as a white hen, a black cat, and a snail played a significant role in the creation of humans.¹²

The theme of the creator teaching human beings how to hunt also emerged further south. According to Zulu belief in South Africa, the Ancient One, known as uMvelinqangi (the one who first existed or appeared) or uNkulunkulu (the great-great one¹³), is the Zulu creator. He emerged from the reeds (uthlanga, meaning source¹⁴), and from them he brought forth the people and the cattle. He created everything – that is, mountains, streams, snakes, and so on. He taught the Zulu how to hunt, how to make fire, and how to grow food. He is considered to be the first man and is in everything that he created.¹⁵

A rather different picture emerged in Ethiopia: the creator god was Wak, who lived in the clouds and kept the vault of the heavens at a distance from the earth, having covered it with stars. He was a beneficent creator who did not punish. When man, after creation, tired of living alone, Wak extracted some of his blood, and after four days the blood became a woman, whom the man married. They had thirty children, but the man was ashamed of having so many, so he hid fifteen of them. Wak then turned those hidden children into animals and demons.¹⁶

In accordance with Fans (a Bantu tribe) belief, in the beginning there was nothing but Nzame. After creating the universe and the earth and bringing life to it, Nzame decided to create a ruler for the earth. So he created the elephant, the leopard, and the monkey but then decided that something “better” had to be created, a new creature in his own image, whom he called Fam (power) and to whom he gave dominion over the earth. Before long, the story goes, Fam became arrogant, mistreated the animals, and stopped worshipping Nzame. Angered, Nzame evoked thunder and lightning and destroyed everything that was, except Fam, who had been promised (and granted) immortality. After due deliberation, Nzame decided to renew the earth and try again. He applied a new layer of earth to the planet, and a tree grew on it. The tree dropped seeds that grew into more trees. Leaves that dropped from them into the water became fish, whereas those leaves that dropped on land became animals. It is believed that the old parched earth still lies below this new one: if one digs deep enough, it can be found in the form of coal. Nzame created a new man, one who would know the fate of death, and called him Sekume. Sekume fashioned a woman, Mbongwe, from a tree. These people were made with both gnoul (body) and nissim (soul). Nissim gives life to gnoul. When gnoul dies, nissim lives on. According to the myth, Sekume and Mbongwe produced many children and prospered.¹⁷

Regarding the origin of death, the San (Bushmen) believe that the moon, filled with compassion for humankind, sent the hare to tell people they did not have to die but could know the same kind of renewal that the moon itself repeatedly experienced. However, the hare bungled the message simply owing to his haste. Instead he told people, “Unlike the moon, who in dying is renewed, you, in dying, will not be renewed.” Since the spoken word was irrevocable, the message could not be changed. In great anger the moon hit the foolish hare on the mouth, splitting his lip. To this day, the split lip remains a testimony to the frustrated desire of a deity to bless humankind with the assurance of the renewal of life.¹⁸ Here, then, is a novelty: an animal is blamed for the human condition.

The Wahungwe of Zimbabwe believe, on the other hand, that the moon was the first man, called Mwuetsi and created by Maori. Maori gave Mwuetsi a ngona horn filled with ngona oil and told him he would live at the bottom of the waters. Mwuetsi objected and said that he wished to live on the land. Maori reluctantly agreed but said that Mwuetsi would surrender his immortality if he chose to dwell on the land. Before long Mwuetsi complained of loneliness, so Maori sent him a woman, Massassi (the morning star), to keep him company for two years. Each night they slept on opposite sides of a campfire, until one night Mwuetsi leapt over the fire and touched Massassi with a finger that he had moistened with the ngona oil. In the morning Massassi’s belly had grown huge, and she soon gave birth to plants and trees, until the whole earth was covered by them.

After two years Maori took Massassi away. Mwuetsi wept for eight years, at which time Maori sent him another woman, Morongo (the evening star), saying that she too could stay for two years. On the first night Mwuetsi touched her with his moistened finger, but she explained that she was different from Massassi, that they would have to oil their loins and have intercourse. This they did, that night and every night thereafter. Every morning Morongo gave birth to affable animals and thereafter to human boys and girls, who became full-grown by the evening of the very same day. Maori expressed his displeasure with a fierce storm and informed Mwuetsi that he was precipitating his death with all this procreation. Morongo, ever the temptress (there are clear parallels with the biblical creation story here), instructed Mwuetsi to build a door to their hut so that Maori could not see what they were doing. Mwuetsi did this, and again they had intercourse. In the morning Morongo gave birth to dangerous animals – snakes, scorpions, lions, and so on. One night Morongo told Mwuetsi to have intercourse with his daughters, which he did, thereby fathering the human race.¹⁹

According to the Yao (Malawi) myth of creation, in the beginning God was living exclusively with animals, before the existence of human beings. During this prehuman time the chameleon was a fisherman. One day when the chameleon went to inspect his fish trap, he was surprised to find it filled with strange creatures. They were humans, a man and a woman, who asked to be released. The chameleon decided ...