news details |
|
|
| The Story of Ecological Awareness | | | Mahasweta Chaudhuri
THE divine and the mundane apparently look like opposites, the former representing the spiritual and the latter material good. It seems, apparently again, that since salvation is the ultimate goal of most Indian schools of thought, worldly good cannot constitute their priority aim since renunciation rather than material enjoyment is the ultimate good.
Ecological awareness and active principles for conservation of Nature are incongruous with general Indian philosophical thinking or at least some scholars think so. Concern for others, society and the future generations seem to be not the primary ideal for classical Indian thought to guide life.
It is true that social consciousness in the modern sense may not be found, but awareness of Nature was a major feature in ancient Indian thinking. Conservation was effected in a different way. Indeed the awareness is initially found in the primitive awe of natural elements and in the various forms of propitiation of the natural elements like sun, wind or sea as divine power.
Be that as it may, the primitive awe later changed into a sense of reverence and gradually found a legitimization by philosophical ideas. It is possible to relate the development of ecological awareness in Indian thought initially to religion and then to philosophical arguments on the way to understand the modern ecological theories which are no more grounded on any religious or philosophical principles but can be understood on merely political/moral terms.
To indicate the religious background, three main varieties of traditional religious precepts contribute to the Indian approach to environmental issues. These include tribal and folk insights into eco-systems that ascribe divinity to Nature ~ earth, river, forest, rain, sea and even animals. The Brahmanical approach views human beings as part of the cosmos and its creator. The other factor is the anti-Brahmanical system (Buddhism, Jainism etc.,) that renounces material enjoyment and thus advocates non-violence and minimization of worldly possessions.
There is, however, a general problem, as pointed out earlier, for any Indian thought: if material things are renounced and personal moksha is the deemed goal, how can one justify one’s duty to protect nature? Moreover for a domestic man (grihi), if the family is his main responsibility, any exploitation of Nature in the name of family support can be justified. This issue can be understood adequately with reference to the concept of Abhyudaya (prosperity/fulfillment) which is a fuller concept than moksha and satisfy many of the worldly goals of human life. Moreover this kind of analysis can satisfactorily dispel many misconceptions particularly prevalent among western scholars about Indian ethos and ecological awareness.
To trace how the traditional concepts of Nature in the Indian tradition might have inspired an eco-friendly attitude among Indians through the ages, some concepts like the notion of dharma (social and familial duties) and mahabhuta (five elements) can be mentioned to grasp the underlying ecological awareness. There are ample principles in the Arthashastra and Dharmashastras to justify protection of Nature as a duty and a systematic ecological theory can be developed from them.
The social and political treatise embedded in these texts point towards a clear attitude to environment and a close relationship between Nature and the human being. Not only philosophical texts, but literature and epics, also can rightfully vindicate a traditional insight into ecological awareness.
The role of the forest, the sacred grove and the simple ashrama life (contrasted with the urban life of luxury and merriment) are also found in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, folklores and historical anecdotes to show ample evidence for sacralization of Nature in general and preservation of forests as top priority for a king.
Another approach to environment can be found in the ‘little tradition’; it refers to the grammar of rites and rituals. It is often referred to as the ‘embedded ecology’ which means a form of home-bred ecology that lends a sensitivity to one’s immediate bio-system, worshipping some of them and worshipping with some of them. Madhu Khanna in an article has given examples of Durga puja and its natural ingredients to elaborate the symbiosis with Nature (Hinduism and Ecology, edited by Chapple and Tucker, Oxford India 2000). This relation, however, is severed by the invasion of western science/modernism and threatened more by mass consumerist culture.
In Christianity God is the creator of Nature; so instead of respecting it with awe, western culture champions the cause of winning it over. Francis Bacon for example, visualized new science as a power over Nature conquering ‘her’; Nature is the ‘hand maid’ of science. The metaphors ‘conquest’, ‘chaining’ etc., reek of domination over Nature as a cognitive value to pursue. The gender ascription had aroused the annoyance of feminist thinkers for good reason.
The awareness of Nature and its conservation came much later in the West after the negative impact of industrialization. In the Indian tradition, even agriculture was considered to be an assault on Nature and long gaps were allowed between crops so that the earth regains its natural health. Similarly after giving birth, cows were milked only after a reasonable gap so that the calves got enough nutrition and the mother her rest period. All these traditionally tolerant customs disappeared with the advent of modern commercial farming and dairy systems.
The single example of ascription of divinity to Ganga can show how we visualized a river as the source of life (literally called “mother’ by many) to a million places and their inhabitants throughout its long course to the sea. In recent years, the demand of modernity invaded the serenity of the Gangotri area with several dams/barrages being constructed for hydroelectricity. This will not only spoil the serene grandeur of the Himalayan region, but will ultimately ruin the flow of the river, raise its height leading to floods and soil erosion particularly in the area where the river meets the sea. Gangavataran, Gangasagar and other such festivals over the years were not only religious rites but celebration of conservation by respecting the river which is the source of sustenance to millions for ages.
The approach of both Gandhi and Rabindranath to environment occupies a unique place in between the ancient religious/philosophical and the modern socio-political approach which does not necessarily rely on a particular religious or metaphysical doctrine. The Gandhian notion of ahimsa that advocates minimal consumption, self-reliance and non-interference with traditional life by big development projects and Rabindranath’s call for going back to Nature are both minimalist and in tune with the values of the modern green movement. Gandhi’s famous motto ‘there is enough in the world for our need but not enough for our greed’ immortalizes the basic tenet of all ecological movements.
Although many of the modern ecological movements are actually influenced deeply by the Gandhian ideology, these movements can be justified by arguments which are independent of any particular ideology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
