The Value and Use of the Universe

More than a store of resources

The universe includes everything that exists; the Earth and its natural environment are part of it. When considering its value, Hindus can ask both what it provides and why it deserves respect in its own right.

A forest, for example, supplies timber and supports people's livelihoods. These are practical benefits. But many Hindus would argue that its trees and animals also deserve care because of their connection with the divine. This gives nature intrinsic value: worth beyond its usefulness or selling price.

A commodity is something that can be bought, sold or used for material benefit. The important distinction is between using resources and treating the universe merely as a commodity. The latter means valuing it only for what humans can take from it.

Why the universe has religious value

Brahman is the ultimate spiritual reality in Hinduism. Many Hindus understand Brahman as present throughout the universe. On this understanding, nature is not simply lifeless material available for human exploitation: respecting the natural world expresses respect for the divine.

Other Hindus emphasise the universe as God's creation, sustained by God and deserving care. Hindu traditions differ in their understanding of God, but these beliefs can support a shared responsibility towards nature.

The Earth also sustains life by providing food, water and other necessities. The teaching ‘The Earth is our mother and we are all her children’ expresses a relationship of dependence and gratitude. Many Hindus associate the Earth's nourishing power with the divine feminine, or Devi. A mother is not valued only for what can be taken from her; this image encourages care rather than unlimited consumption.

The world has spiritual value too. It is where people fulfil duties, serve others and develop spiritually. Hinduism Today describes the whole world as an ashram: a place of spiritual learning. Seeking spiritual liberation therefore need not mean despising the physical world or regarding it as worthless.

How beliefs guide the use of nature

Ahimsa, the principle of non-harming, encourages concern for living beings. Cutting down a forest can destroy habitats and harm animals as well as affect people. A Hindu applying ahimsa would consider these consequences rather than judging the project only by its profit.

Dharma means religious and moral duty. Responsibilities towards the world and living beings can make environmental protection a religious obligation, not simply a personal preference.

Karma means that actions have consequences for a person's spiritual future. This encourages responsibility for choices such as wasting resources or damaging the environment. There are practical consequences too: people depend on nature, so pollution and resource depletion can harm the communities doing the exploiting as well as others.

A response that strongly resists exploitation

Some Hindus place particular emphasis on simple living and limiting consumption. ISKCON's environmental teaching argues that everything belongs to God and should be used in God's service. People should take only what they need without taking away what others require.

From this perspective, treating nature merely as a commodity encourages greed. Development that enriches a few while damaging the resources on which many depend is especially objectionable. Profit cannot justify avoidable harm to living beings or disregard for the divine.

This approach supports protecting trees and animals, reducing waste and restraining demand for unnecessary luxuries. Its strength is that it recognises obligations which a market price may ignore: the wellbeing of living beings and the religious value of nature.

A response that allows responsible material use

Other Hindus may place greater emphasis on people's duties within family and community life. Hinduism supports the legitimate pursuit of wealth alongside moral and spiritual responsibilities. Resources provide food, homes and livelihoods, so using them is not automatically wrong.

This can support farming, trade and development when they meet genuine needs. However, it does not mean that any profitable activity is acceptable. Resource use remains subject to dharma and ahimsa: its purpose, scale and consequences matter.

The building of Neasden Temple provides a concrete example of combining use with care. Wood was used in construction, and 2,300 trees were planted in Devon to compensate. This illustrates an effort to replace resources rather than assume that their religious value prevents every use of them.

Weighing the two responses

The strongest argument for using nature as a commodity is that material resources sustain people and enable them to fulfil their responsibilities. Refusing all resource use would make ordinary life impossible. The strongest objection is that reducing nature to its economic usefulness overlooks its sacred value and can encourage harmful exploitation.

The disagreement is therefore often about how much use is justified and under what conditions, rather than a simple choice between using nature and leaving it untouched. A justified Hindu conclusion could accept responsible use for genuine needs while rejecting the claim that the universe is merely a commodity. Its usefulness does not remove its religious value or people's duties towards it.