This essay explores how the principles of ahimsa and reverence for life provide a foundation for animal welfare in the thought of Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer, respectively. This exploration unfolds through a consideration of the contextual background of both thinkers, the scope of life to which they apply their respective principles, and both the ethical ramifications and limitations of this application. Within this common framework, the author delineates the striking commonalities and the significant disparities between Gandhi and Schweitzer. This (...) comparison opens a common space within which ecologically-minded Hindus and Christians can dialogue, augmenting each other's positions by drawing on respected thinkers in their traditions. It also provides an opportunity, within the tensions highlighted at the intersection of Gandhi and Schweitzer's thought, to further construct a foundation for animal welfare in contemporary discussions. (shrink)

Several contemporary philosophers have charged that there is a conceptual tension between nondualistic types of mystical awareness--an awareness of some particular conception of the divine as an all-pervasive unity within which there are no distinct substances--and the social character of morality. However, some nondualistic mystics have conceptualized enlightenment not only as being compatible with moral virtue--specifically, compassion and care--but as providing a foundation for it. I here offer a conceptual model for this grounding, at least according to Dōgen Zenji and (...) Meister Eckhart. Briefly, the model suggests that some forms of nondualistic mystical awareness are accompanied by the mystics' prudential concerns extending to include the well-being of "others" under their scope. Finally, utilizing this model, I suggest possible responses to two common arguments for the claim that nondualistic mysticism is essentially amoral. (shrink)