Environmental Ethics of Indian Religious Traditions - Lecture Notes - indian Philosophy - Purushottama Bilimoria, Study notes of Indian Philosophy

Download Environmental Ethics of Indian Religious Traditions - Lecture Notes - indian Philosophy - Purushottama Bilimoria and more Study notes Indian Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity! Environmental Ethics of Indian Religious Traditions Purushottama Bilimoria An abridged version of this essay was published as 'Indian Religious Traditions'. In David E Cooper and Joy A Palmer (eds.) Spirit of the Environmentr Religion, Value and Environmental Concern. London and New York: Routledge, 1998, pp. 1-14 First presented at a symposium on Religion and Ecology during the American Academy of Religion Annual Conference, San Francisco, November 1997. Introduction O purifying Earth, you I invoke! O patient earth, by sacred Word enhanced Bearer of nourishment and strength, of food and ghee O earth, we would approach you with due praise! (Atharva Veda XII.1.29) Prologue This accompanying essay forms the descriptive background to the fieldwork report on a living environmental project that I wish to present to you. It deals with the range of challenging and entangled questions and issues that are the common stock-in-trade of contemporary thinking in environmental philosophy. However, some of the major questions will be presupposed and in part help guide the present inquiry’ although the aim here will by no means simply be to satisfy the modern mind in its quaint curiosity about traditional (Eastern) attitudes towards nature and the quest for alternative models of ecological discursive trends or pre-modern to the ‘postmodern’ predicament. (The specter of Orientalism has to be resisted here as well.) Moreover, it would be highly pretentious to say that the essay intends to offer solutions to the problem of the Environment. Rather, this is an exercise in what could be best termed philosophic historiography, i.e. an attempt at identifying certain patterns of ideas which may complement the history of environmental thinking. One should not be led to expect that a coherent doctrine of the environment of ‘ecosophy’ will emerge from this brief survey. Until all relevant archeological, oral, textual, background cultural and socio-historical resources have been brought together all such accounts can be little more than a quilt-work of interesting and subjective sub- commentaries. The Indian religious traditions are intertwined with equally disparate cultural, social, linguistic, philosophical and ethical systems that have developed over a vast history, compounded with movement of peoples, foreign interventions, and internal transformations in structures and identities experienced over time. How does one then begin to talk about environmental values and concerns in the Indian religious traditions? Well one can, albeit, randomly and selectively; and so this essay will be confined to tracing the contours of certain highlights and tensions in the traditional approaches to the question of the environment. Of special significance will be the Brahmanical- Hindu, Jaina, and Buddhist traditions, in their ancient to classical modalities, concluding with some contemporary responses to the supposed impact, or lack thereof, of traditional perspectives to ecological problems facing a rapidly modernizing South Asian nation- state, from Gandhi to Bhopal and after. Even before the Brahmanical order took firm root in greater India, there are records from incomplete archaeological findings, that suggest a major civilization of the Indus Valley (in a sprawling region encompassed by the Punjab, Sind, and present-day Pakistan and Baluchistan), which peaked around 3000 BCE, where a close symbiosis between nature and the Dravidic people appears to have been prevalent. (Wheeler, 1979: 1,84) The major cities of the Indus civilization, namely, Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, with their imposing civic edifices, mudbrick and timber dwellings complete with baths, extensive drainage and sewer systems, give the impression of being exceedingly carefully designed. The architecture as well as farming practices gave evidence to structural harmony with surrounding and climatic conditions that would optimally conserve natural resources, prevent deforestation, and also appease the gods who were little more than personified symbols of human dependence upon the energies of nature. Barely decipherable inscriptions and artifacts bear testimony to 1 the strong worship of a form of feminine earth divinity and of Siva, an ascetic yogic god. Some elements of the religious and cultural practices from the Indus period and other indigenous (especially aboriginal) communities continued into the subsequent Vedism phase, which began with an influx of Aryans or ‘Noble People’, a tribe of pastoral nomads from somewhere in Central Asia who settled on the plains of the Ganges in the northern part of the subcontinent around second millennium BCE. Their agrarian culture, so much dependent on the forces of nature, is reflected in the repertory of hymns, the earliest of which are known as Rgveda (= Rig Veda) . The oral tradition and the Veda would have to be among the earliest record of ruminations on nature in India. The Vedas (from Sanskrit veda, ‘what is known’) gradually grew into a huge canonical body of recited and memorized ‘texts’ that both eulogized and appeased the forces of nature and higher planes of beinghood depicted as gods. These were used in liturgical sacrifices and elaborate rituals supported by the chanting of sacred mantras or coded formulaic syllables, although their distinctive philosophical import remains largely hidden. I. Early Indian ethics and outlook on nature It is perhaps a remarkable feature of the Indian tradition that from its very early beginnings ethical ponderings were never too far off from the overwhelming awareness of nature, in as much as ‘forms of life’ were derivative of or entailed by a particular outlook on nature of which the human being, as other species or sectors of beinghood, was seen as a constitutive, at times lost, alienated or anomalous, perhaps even an outrageous or offending, part. In their moral judgements, the early Indian people placed on the side of the ‘good’, values such as happiness, survival, courage, health, joy, calmness, friendship, knowledge and truth; and on the side of ‘bad’ more or less their opposite or disvalues, notably, misery, suffering, sickness and injury, death, infertility, pain, anger, enmity, ignorance or error, untruth., (Bilimoria, 1991:44). These normative values were not restricted for human well-being alone, rather they were universalized for all sentient beings and inanimate sectors as well: spiritspheres, i.e. gods and the faithfully departed; the biosphere, i.e. animals and plants; and the broader biotic universe, i.e. inanimate realms comprising the elements, stones, rocks, earth-soil, mountains, waters, sky, the sun, planets, stars, and galaxies to the edges of the universe (this and other possible ones). The principle guiding this outlook was that the highest good is to be identified with the total harmony of the cosmic or natural order, characterized in the earliest religious texts as Rta (= rita), which we could render for now as the natural law: this is the creative purpose or telos that circumscribes all sentient behavior and every movement, from the stillness of the deep-sea water to the invisible vibration of the sub-atomic particle. The social and moral order is thus conceived as the correlate of the natural order. The vast universe was not strewn about in random chaos, but had an inner order, a unity with an inexorable law and purpose (Rta) that governs the working of both the macrocosm and microcosm (Dandekar, 1979: 15). This is the ordered course of things, the truth of being or reality (sat) and hence the ‘Law’. Rta determines the place, entitlement, function and end of everything. But Rta is too subtle for the undiscerning eyes, and its originary promulgation occurs mythically with the dismemberment of the Cosmic Person (Purusha) performed by the gods. From that cosmic sacrifice, Drops of oil were collected, Beasts of the wings were born, And animals wild and tame. From that horses were given birth, And cattles with two rows of teeth, Cows were born from that, And from that were born goats and- sheep. The moon was born from his mind; His eyes gave birth to the sun; Indra and Agni came from his mouth; And Vayu (the wind) from his breath was born. From the navel midair arose; the sky arose from his head; From feet, the earth; from ears, the directions. Thus they formed the wor1ds. (Rig Veda Purusa Sukta' X.90. 8,10,13,14; de Nicolas, 1976: 225- 226). 2 has an interest and purpose to fulfil in the larger scheme of things. It is this that makes each thing ‘sacred’ and therefore worthy of moral consideration, by human beings and the gods alike. Either way, the universe, whether as a whole or in each of its part, or both, accords respect, perhaps even some anxiety or angst, and deep regard for its beinghood, its mysterious origins, its inner workings, its regulative order, and its future state or telos with which indeed the existence, we11-being and future of the human and other species alike are inexorably connected. The act of sacrifice is an act also of "sacred-making" and a reminder that the universe begins with and is sustained by this wondrous act, and by which also ¡t comes to an end at the closure of the cycle of time "Everything is sacred by virtue of its own nature because energy pervades everything, thus the lofty tree is worshipped as well as the humble grass on which we sit and the one that helps ignite the fire: all and each one play their role in the cosmic symphony". (Vannuccí, 1993: 113). The ancient people recognized that they could neither control the whole of nature nor interfere unduly in its order and processes to seize control of all its varied functions; that if anything, they needed the cooperation of the benign and harsh elements alike, be these the ravaging sails of the wind, the bursting of the waters, the quake of the earth, the fire of the forests, the wild beasts and pests on the fringes of dwellings, the darkness of the night, the stubborn seasons, and so on. Only after understanding the system and much sacrifice, i.e. appeasing of the forces of nature and the spirits in command beyond, could they hope to benefit from the bounty and goods provided by nature, or design wheels and other instruments for extracting natural products, dictated by needs rather than want and greed. Rituals helped prepare plants, herbs, and other healing products to restore health and rectify breakdown of the Law. Strict equilibrium had to be maintained in the internal environment as it was the Law in respect of the external environment too. The ecological framework in a broad stroke was formulated in terms of the proportionate combination of matter (substance, atomic entities) and energy (variously imaged as the spirit, breath, speech, vibration, anima, pneuma). Competition over the resources of nature can deplete the energy levels and create an imbalance in the polar relations. The human being has no prelapsarian claim of dominionship over nature. A classical (Benthamite) model of utilitarianism which measures pleasure (or gain, benefit, the good) in terms human interests alone, could not have been thought of in this context even as a theoretical or formal possibility. The interest of the ‘deep whole’ or species in the broadest possible sense cannot be overlooked or unreasonably compromised. However, some competition within nature represented in terms of struggle and tension between and among individuated forces signifying matter and energy is not ruled out; indeed, this could be a healthy crisis point and provide incentive for growth and flourishing of the natural world and towards overcoming malignant matter, ‘evil’ spirits or bad omens that hinder progression. But competition with nature can lead to disastrous consequences as well. The later Vedas, especially the Ayurveda section, demonstrate profound knowledge of biodiversity, the inter-relationship between living species and the environment, the need to maintain natural dynamism, the right ways of handling plants and trees, native flora and fauna, or the price one pays for transgressing the ecological principles. The attitude was invariably one of mutual respect, reciprocity and caring for other (non-human) subjects of the land. Appropriate belief-states along with commensurate rituals were developed that reinforced and continued this symbiotic relationship. The symbolic ritual act of appeasing the ‘soul’ of the tree before removing it to clear space or land for human habitat or use, is indicative of the respect afforded to the natural world. Recycling was a highly valued practice in traditional India, recognizing certain trees and plants do not even as much as tolerate wastage of their fallen branches, twigs, seeds, and flowers (they may regenerate into another plant or be self-composted). Again, as Vannucci forcefully points out in concluding her own passionate study of the ecological moorings in the Vedas: "The ancient rsis (seers) put to good use the knowledge of nature gained through empiricism and experimentation as well as that borrowed from other cultures. By and What god, shall we sacrifice? (Rig Veda X. 12 1; de Nicolas, 226; cf. X 816) 5 Second, one too-often overlooks the negative effects of sacrifice, as this entails killing of animals, usually from the best of a breed, and sometimes this becomes a wide-spread practice as superstition sets into a culture. Third, it neglects the expropriations and amassing of power via Brahmanical or other upper caste privileges which in the past have led to the deprivation of the basic necessities of life and share in the goods of nature on the part of lesser groups, classes and sectors of the population, women included. Fourth, in the master-slave ideology that ensues, the exploitation of human labor extends to the exploitation of animal labor and competition for natural produce, which, as history has attested, results in wholesale colonization of vast tracts of natural landscapes. Fifth, in their eagerness to cultivate, to increase production and accumulate goods, rulers and landlords fall sort of careful planning and do not take adequate steps against despoilment and damages to natural surroundings; in other words, they have no environmental program as such. Sixth, the zeal for expansionism instigates rivalry and even warfare between neighboring kingdoms, provinces and states, causing much harm to the buffer forest zones and to each other’s settlements. Of this universe it is in truth the waters that were made first. Hence, when the waters flow, then everything here whatsoever exists is produced. (Satapatha Bráhmana VH.4.1.6) Respect, then, was shown and praises set aside for the terrain of what we might call 44raw" nature, such as the forest. Here is a hymn reflecting this sentiment directed to the forest, admitted1y by a lone wanderer, fearful of the power of the rickety sylvan and palmy wood around: Spirit of the forest, spirit of the forest, who seers to melt away, how is that you do not ask about a village. Doesn't a kind of fear grab you? Whoever stays in the forest at evening imagines: Someone is calling his cows; someone else is cutting wood; someone is crying out. The spirit of the forest does not kill - not if no one else approaches. She eats sweet fruit and lies down wherever she pleases. Mother of wild beast, untied by a plough, but full of food, sweet-smelling of perfume and balm - to her, the spirit of the forest, 1 offer my praise. The world as Eco-maya or pseudo-environmentalism By about 500 BCE the Vedas gave way to the Upanishads or the philosophical treatises which elevated metaphysical knowledge over and above the sacrificial mentalite- and instrumental ritualism of the earlier Vedas. The Socratic dictum, 'knowledge is virtue' rang through here as well. However, the Upanishads also evolved a worldview in which a supreme principle, Brahman, characterized as the Self of all beings, is given the highest or transcendental prominence (paramarthika). In fact, Brahman as the indivisible, undifferentiated, ultimate reality of which no greater can be conceived or reached by 'word', becomes the presupposition or precondition for all other thinking, intellectual, moral and social. This mataphysical view came to be called Vedanta and its most extreme expression resulted in the denial of the reality of the manifest world, and all things and relations within them. This was especially marked in the monistic-monastic Advaita system of thought promulgated by the tenth century Hindu philosopher, Adi Sankara. But what does this mean in ecological terms? Eliot Deutsch advanced this intriguing answer: "Vedánta would maintain that this means the recognition that fundamentally all (Rig Veda X.146 1,4,5,6; O’Flaherty 1983: 242 However, there are reservations about the traditional account. First a general point. It should be pointed out that despite the rhetorical strokes that sweep across the entire universe or cosmos, much of the ecological concerns and activities were confined to the more or less perceptible reaches of the surrounding or local ambience. At the farthest edges of the dwelling villages and agricultural terrains lay dense tracts of forest and jungles which were almost impenetrable (except by indigenous tribes, thugs or an attacking army), beyond which one had little recourse to be concerned about how the ‘alien’ groups organized their lives, tilled their land, or disposed of the departed, and so on. The chief imperative was to get one’s own house, as it were, into some semblance of order and harmony; the universal appeal or applicability may follow later, gods willing. 6 life is one, that in essence everything is reality;... that Brahman, the oneness of reality, is the most fundamental ground of all existence." (Deutsch, 1970: 4). Being free, the self of the individual can behave as if unattached and without destructive intentions. So Deutsch concludes that "paradoxically, when nature is seen to be valueless in the most radical way, ¡t can be made valuable with us in creative play." (Deutsch, 1989:264; Jacobsen, 1996: 225). However, other writers derive different message from the doctrine of ontic illusionism, creative or otherwise. Lance Nelson wonders that if the world is considered not to be real than what is the motivation for maintaining or respecting it, and so he concludes: '[In Advaitic liberation experience, the world is not reverenced but rather tolerated until ¡t passes completely away.' (Nelson, 1991: 285; Jacobsen, 1996: 222). Moreover, if Arthur Danto (1972: 99) is right in his observation that here all we have is an ethically bankrupt, quietistic and mystically-grounded morality, then even the high virtues of self-restraint, overcoming passions and emotions, self- sacrifice (for the sake of the Self), etc., provide very little inspiration for a sustained environmental thesis. Still, the basic Vedic insight of the organic unity of all things is emphasized in terms of the one-ness of Being. Is this not sufficient for a 'holistic' out1ook? Here again it has been pointed out, by Baird Callicot, that there are different ways in which one can speak- of "oneness". (Callicot, 1989: 110). He thus contrasts the classical Indian view with, for instance, the late nineteenth-century German idealist tendencies and contemporary ecology. The basic characteristic of the Indian classical thinking of the unity of things is that it is substantive and essential and the experience of it is homogeneous and oceanic. While in the latter discourses, the oneness of nature is systemic and internally relational; that is, borrowing here a phrasing from Freya Mathews, 'all things are constituted by their relation with other things' (Mathews, 1988: 354). In other words, in this monistic account, the undifferentiated Being ultimately does not tolerate difference and therefore the multiplicity of living organisms, considered these to be ephemeral or ultimately identical with the one reality that stands out alone without qualia. The metaphysical doctrine of the complexity of internal relations and the relation of the self to nature without erring towards facile reductionism in either direction is a sine qua non of much of contemporary ecology, and strongly so. However, it should be apparent that the Advaita Vedánta metaphysics of indivisibility of being is not exact1y representative of the Vedic worldview (its polyentheism and interdependence of entitive parts and plurality of life forms would rule that out); nor is it necessarily a logical entailment of the more panentheistic Upanisadie out1ook. The academic popularization of Advaita Vedánta, despite its glaring blindness to the subject-position of the "other" (Bilimoria, 1996), has hindered more than ¡t has helped arrive at a fair appraisal of classical Indian environmental concerns. We shall therefore briefly comment on the classical Dharma traditions, before turning to the related Buddhist and Jaina responses. II. Broadly classical Following the pattern of pre-classical religiosity, Hinduism developed a strong moral ethos (dharmasamsantah) which to a large extent superseded the earlier (Vedic) view from the heavens (or of the gods) by a view as if, "from nowhere", that is, from no one particular subjective position (whether divine or human). Here the moral concept of dharma emerges as a much more abstract, authoritative and autonomous notion, but with the same normative strength that the ontological and cosmological conceptions had earlier served. The universe is seen as a most meaningful and principled moral order: human beings have a responsibility, indeed a duty, to help sustain this world thus rendered morally significant or ‘deep’ (the Sanskrit root ‘dhr’ means to sustain, uphold, support.) The difference with similar sentiments built around the idea of Rta as an ‘eternal order’ or alternatively as fixed principles is that here the moral content is deepened, in that it is much more concrete and better defined, it is the normative, at times legalistic or systematic, issuing in elaborate proscriptions, precepts and rules, ordinances and statutes, which are written down in the great many texts, including personal ethical or moral manuals as well as social and political treatises, such as The Dharmasastras, Arthasastras and the Mahabharata. Dharma comes to designate a variety of moral terms -, norm, virtue, righteous, duty, responsibility, entitlement, justice, truth (in conduct), - and there 7 18). One such general fact with which the Buddha began his teachings is that there is suffering, for such is the human condition and the surrounding state of affairs confirms this truth, not least the contingency of existence (birth and death) and the impermanence of all things, good and bad, big and small, here as elsewhere. The appropriate moral response is to minimize suffering and pain as best as one can and to overcome suffering or unsatisfactoriness, both by understanding the causes of such existential and other ailments, and by alleviating the suffering of all forms of life. Its ethic covers human behaviour in relation to all living beings and it underpins certain basic virtues, particularly of the benevolent kinds, more specifically, compassion, love, kindness, sympathy, empathy, equanimity and joy in the other’s happiness. It is said that human beings are capable of infinite amount of compassion, generosity and gratitude, and that all creatures, great and small, should be the subject of our moral sensibility (Dalai Lama, 1996). The Buddhist codes of ethics is similar to the Jaina ethics, with much emphasis placed on self-control, abstinence, patience, contentment, purity, truthfulness and right attitudes. The treatment of animals and plants in accordance with these principles finds ample references in Buddhist texts, from the earliest monastic codes to the development of Ch’an or Zen Buddhism in China, Korea and Japan. Nature as a whole is not looked upon as antithetical to human needs; rather, everything in nature is capable of making a contribution towards overcoming suffering and the final spiritual end which human beings strive toward. The Buddha’s teachings include tales of acts of generosity on the part of animals towards human beings, and the reciprocal compassion which humans are advised to direct towards other life forms. Buddhist societies evolved with this moral self-consciousness, and the great emperor Asoka, after his conversion to Buddhism, institutionalized care and welfare towards animals, as the following edict tells us: Here no animal is to be killed for sacrifice... Formerly in the Beloved of the God’s kitchen several hundred thousand animals were killed daily for food; but now at the time of writing only three are killed - two peacocks and a deer, though the deer not regularly. Even these three animals will not be killed in future. ... the Beloved of the Gods has provided medicines for man and beast... medicinal plants.... [R]oots and fruits have also been sent where they did not grow and have been planted along the roads for use of man and beast. (Sources of Indian Tradition, 1988: 144-5) The verses demonstrate that rights and protection of certain liberties of animals have been recognized in Buddhism. Many Buddhist monasteries across East Asia as well banned the cooking of animal flesh as this involves the killing of animals, with or without direct intentionality of consumption. Buddhists environmentalists are active in modern-day Sri Lanka in their efforts to preserve the lush beauty of the island state from despoilment through extensive technological development and the ravages of an ethnic war that has escalated there in recent decades. They too can be said to be continuing a practical environmental ethic fostered centuries ago after Buddhism was brought to Sri Lanka. Likewise, the arrival of Buddhism in Tibet in the seventh century engendered a nation-wide program for the preservation of the heavenly-natural oasis that remained a mysterious land for much of the outside world. The ruling Lamas proscribed injuring and killing of animals, big and small. The moral practice of showing respect for all nature became a way of life for the Tibetans. Even though Tibetan Buddhist metaphysics continued the influential Indian Buddhist doctrine of the absence of self-nature or intrinsic existence of properties and substances alike, proclaiming thus the ‘emptiness’ of all things, its moral framework paradoxically gained strength from this stand-point, on three counts, as follows. i) Moral properties such as those of the good, compassion, and loving kindness or respect, by no means absolute, have solid presence (contingently supervenient on ‘emptiness’, of course), in as much as human interaction and communication or ethical life generally presuppose these properties. ii) A pluralistic ontology that has fair regard for members within it without privileging any particular species easily gets translated into a non-anthropocentric respect for biodiversity. 10 iii) The religious-soteriological ‘end’ requires certain self- motivated ethical practices and norms, including restraint on desires, meditation on the limits of the ego-self, altruism based on the moral properties of reverence and deep (but not condescending) compassion for all living and non-sentient beings. In other words, the normative constructs for monks, nuns, lay people, farmers and nomads too, underscored concern for the environment. The Buddhist ethic of living in harmony with the earth accordingly pervaded all aspects of the Tibetan culture. Perched on the ‘roof-top’ of the world or on an altitude shared with the Himalayas, Tibet’s environment was recognized as being crucial to the stability of ecological environs and crop cycles in much of neighboring Asia. For instance, the ten or so major rivers that wind through Asia feed off the river valleys and smooth glacial ice-scapes of Tibet; the monsoons sweeping through South and Southeast Asia rely on Tibet’s abundant natural vegetation and dense forests. It’s wildlife and natural animal sanctuaries maintained a natural equilibrium and contributed in different ways to the enrichment of the environment, providing manure for controlled husbandry and organic re-vegetation, as well as fuel (from yak dung), and so on. (Oxley 1996: 1,2) However, after the Chinese occupation of Tibet around 1950, the situation has dramatically altered: massive deforestation, land erosion, pollution of rivers, depletion of resources, excessive killing of animals, and general degradation of the environment appear to have become the norm. The information is sketchy, video-recordings or testimonies smuggled out of Tibet are not always reliable. But official Chinese obfuscation adds to the suspicion. Observers lament that the sanguine spirit of Buddhism is being crushed in Tibet and claim that the environmental damages will continue until as such time as the patrons of Buddhism, namely Tibetans with their refugee spiritual- temporal head, the Dalai Lama, are returned full cultural control and self-determination of the country. This shows the faith that some people have in at least one field of traditional wisdom, in regard to the environment. IV. Concluding remarks Traditional Hindu, Jaina and Buddhist environmental values and concerns have continued to influence the discourse and aligned practices of environmentalism in much of South Asia. One of the most successful and well-noted applications of the Indian ethic of non- injury emerged with the nonviolent struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi in the first half of this century. Gandhi was adamant about the need for such an ethic in our treatment of animals as in our behavior towards each other and towards other human beings. (Gandhi, 1959: 34-35). He followed a strict regime of vegetarianism (bordering on vegan practice, except that he accepted goats milk). Unlike Jainas however whose practice of ahimså could be best described as a form of passive self-restraint, Gandhi turned ahimså into a dynamic force, informed by truth (satya), that proactively engages in the promotion of nonviolence and achieves its various social-political goals through activities grounded in nonviolence, which becomes the outward symbol of the inner truthforce (satyågraha). A spectacular environmental movement, called the Chipko (from an Indian vernacular term meaning ‘cling on to’, which describes an unrelenting embracing of the trees to prevent environmental destruction through human intervention) was directly influenced by Gandhian environmental awareness programs and led by Gandhian sarvodaya (welfare-for-all) workers on the principle of nonviolent resistance. (Weber, 1988: 24). Nevertheless, Gandhians by no means believed in complete biospheric egalitarianism and permitted small-scale or modest introduction of ‘soft’ technology supplemented heavily with hand-crafting and cottage industries localized to village economy. Another case which drew worldwide attention where similar nonviolent resistance tactics have been used to raise awareness of environmental concerns is the Narmadå Dam project in south Gujarat. Environmentalists have constantly argued that damming the river would cause immense damage to surrounding landscape which would also lead to the dislocation of masses of tribal people who have lived in the vicinity with good regard for their environment for countless many generations. The intensive protests provoked the World Bank to withdraw temporarily its share of promised funding. In the 1950s and 1960s when India undertook massive damning projects in collaboration with Russian and Western industrial conglomerates, modelled on TVA, it is claimed that on a conservative count these caused dislocations of thousands of people from their long-standing habitat. Over the fifty years since such projects began some 50 million 11 people have been affected, resulting in both eventual dispersal and disappearance of distinctive tribal groups as well as the local knowledge (public scholarship of sorts) about ways to preserve the environment and retain the wild-life, aquatic culture and green belts around the riverbeds and vicinity. The grass-roots movements were not as successful as they might be today, since modernity's persuasive grip on the public was much stronger than it is today. Ironically, even the elite (in locations as far away as Columbia, New York) tend to heed to Gandhi's very prophet mutterings on the ravages of technology on the environment. And this message and mission is carried on most unassumingly without any textual florish by Sunderlal Bahuguna, the founder and key figure of the Chipko movement; more riskly by Medha Patker; and more textually by Vandana Shiva and Ramchandra Guha. There are numerous other grass roots groups and movements that invoke traditional wisdom and practical ethics in their expression of resistance to and concerns for radical transformations of the local environment. There is great apprehension that these interventions serve the technocratic interests of upper classes, the middle- managerial classes or the national, or as it is increasingly the case, multinational corporates and mega-media tycoons who have no understanding of or sympathies for local conditions, customs, habits, attitudes and the underpinning cosmologies or philosophies. Rural development and alternative technology programs have been helping villagers and farmers to construct, for instance, free-standing smoke- less ovens, mudbrick dwellings, and to utilize non-toxic organic fertilizers in well-irrigated farmlets for their produce. Schools and colleges are established with the help of non-government groups (NGOs) to explore and promote safe ecological practices. Tribal groups have been encouraged to preserve the wild bushland, to curtail excessive use of wood for fire-cooking, and to develop new kinds of technology for dealing with local conditions while resisting the technologies and wares brought in by eager profit-driven urban and corporate enterprises. However, despite the great wealth of wisdom and inspiration afforded by traditional teachings and cosmological blueprint that underscores strong ecological values, a number of writers and critics on India have mild to strong reservations about the relevance of such traditional approaches. This cleavage surfaced in the aftermath of the Bhopal incident in 1984. The Union Carbide chemical plant which had been ill-maintained for some years, unleashed thousands of tons of poisonous fumes and chemicals in the atmosphere which killed and irreversibly handicapped many thousands of people. As with Chernobyl, the enormity of the Bhopal catastrophe could not have been imagined by traditional wisemen, and so one questions whether tradition, including perhaps Gandhian minimalist industrial program, could have ever alerted and therefore prepared society for such an environmental holocaust. The naturalistic fallacy notwithstanding, if the facts were not there facing them in their eyes, what motivations or triggers would the ancients have had for pondering on correlate values that would be necessary to contain or deal with the facts? The world has changed and the challenges of industrialization, modernity, globalization and a rapidly expanding liberal economy, present us with very different set of circumstances and contexts that require quite different sorts of responses on the environmental front. Are there any resources left within the traditional framework to combat the modern consumer model which has all but disrupted the traditional agricultural practices and all kinds of unities? asks one of the best- known Indian women activists and environmentalists. (Shiva, 1998) But Shiva for one does not underestimate the contribution traditional or pre-modern sensibilities can make towards fostering a ‘post- modern’ response in the terms of an integrated, holistic view of both humans and their environment. (Shiva, 1988) Shiva more recently supported a nation-wide campaign against ‘plant variety’ rights claimed by Western multinationals under intellectual property and international patenting accords, to which countries like Indian, several South American states and Australia, have been persuaded to become signatories. This latter move is seen by environmentalists as acting against biodiversity and the right of each people to control and maintain their local ecosystems within the means and wisdom afforded by traditional or customary practices and modern-day urban pressures. Still, there are critics, such as Ram Chandra Guha and Chapple, who suggest that a too-one-sided focus on traditional patterns of ecological thinking and attitude detracts from the need of the hour, which is an active and practical initiative for addressing local and 12