Abstract: During the last couple of decades, the world is witnessing a gradual rise in temperature with incessant occurrence of heat waves and haphazard climate change. Economic growth is inextricably linked to environmental crisis. Modern day economics is driven by anxiety, greed and competitive schizophrenia – the repercussion of which is severe environmental damage breaking down ecological equilibrium. The root of this anxiety lies in unrestrained appetite for fulfilment of materialistic demand. The paper instead of narrating Gandhian experiments with nature focuses on understanding Gandhian perception of swaraj in his negotiation with self-control and self-rule. The exhaustion of morality and natural resources have resulted in moral decay and ecological imbalance. The paper attempts to re-visit Gandhian swaraj and its decisive role in his eco-ethical enquiry for a sustainable future. Gandhi’s prudence regarding natural world and its interconnectedness with human habitat, the moral and practical obligation to maintain a healthy correlation between the two for the sustenance of both are analysed through the theoretical framework of swaraj.
Keywords: Mahatma Gandhi, Swaraj, self-rule, eco-ethics, deep ecology
Introduction: Mahatma Gandhi’s distinctive way, imprecise lexicon, unpretentious diction, simple yet contemplative thought-process and child-like conviction apparently on all walks of life have been the arena of serious deliberation among academicians all over the globe. For the layman and politicians he is either the most misunderstood man or an orchestrated demigod. The British considered him to be their most dedicated adversary, when the supposed nationalists cast doubt on Gandhi’s method of working. Revolutionaries condemned him to be an effeminate and meek pacifist while communists rejected his views as ‘a backward-looking petty bourgeois utopia’ (Chatterjee 2005: 98).
For Muslims, he was a devout Hindu submerged in Hindu mode of thought evoking a picturesque realm of ram-rajya, to Hindus, however, he was a traitor – a Muslim sympathiser responsible for the partition of India. A reactionary, pre-modern patriarch, a utopian quixotic – Gandhi was at the pinnacle of all possible opprobrium. As British poet Edward Carpenter once observed that the Outcast of one age is the Hero of another – ironically, Gandhi after his death is the most appropriated and appreciated figure in all textures of life.
For the human rights activists Gandhi is an apostle of individual’s inalienable rights. Peasants-artisans consider him to be one of them when the Dalit community believe Gandhi to be the precursor in championing their cause. For women and tribal he is the proponent of their entitlement rights, for thousands of non-violent peace brigade he is their inspiration. He is the face of Indian government’s welfare projects and also the peace messiah the world over.
Gandhi remains a paradox. He is a philosopher who never engaged in any ‘abstract theoretical speculations about the universe and man’ (Iyer 2003: 10). He is a religious man with a secular frame of mind. His ashram experiments proved that his religiosity is shaped not by any orthodox doctrinaire but moral and ethical imperatives. Gandhi tested all his theories on the test-bed of experiments just like a scientist. Continuous experimentation with acute finesse and prudence marked his ingenuity in his invention of radical and novel socio-economic and political undertaking. His rigid adherence to experimentation made him the most flexible man to fit into any field whatsoever. He can be brushed aside as a utopian or an idiosyncratic idealist but his field experiences made him the most pragmatic and far-sighted formulator of policies that targeted the disease at its root, Gandhian ecology is one such area that coalesced his theoretical inference with his practical experimentation that in a way conferred on him the epithet of ‘early environmentalist’ (Guha 2018: 224).
In this paper, I want to argue that instead of formulating any eco-ethical philosophy like deep ecology, ecofeminism or Green Theory, Gandhi identifies the cause of the problem that is threatening life-survival on earth. His diagnosis of the disease comes with certain prescriptive measures based on the rigorous experimentation on the ‘self’. Gandhian eco-ethical philosophy begins with the basic premise of swaraj or self-rule and proceeds towards the practice of it through Ahimsa i.e. non-violence that includes his vehement protest against vivisection and animal sacrifice. His undaunted faith on vegetarianism and nature cure are some of the unique aspects of his eco-ethics that brings human kind close to nature. His denunciation of western modernity’s pomp and grandeur along with its approach towards economy and medicine based solely on an apathetic – scientific temper that kills the humane sensibility are areas of deep concern for Gandhi. Hindu theology identifies the Shadripu – desire, greed, ego, attachment, anger and jealousy as the prime enemies of human mind. When the mind falls victim to these instincts, it not only annihilates human sensibility but also transforms human into beast driven by animal instinct. The spiralling effect of greed and desire to have more result in a vicious cycle of never-ending competitive schizophrenia. But the earth is not an unlimited repository of material resources. Thus Gandhi, through his axiomatic expression – the world has enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for everybody’s greed reminds us to impose a check on the soaring appetite of humankind for material pleasure.
Through this paper, I want to show how Gandhi’s basic principle of ‘self-rule’ can restrain moral degradation and ensure habitable society based on mutual harmony, recognition and ahimsa (non-violence). This article attempts to understand Gandhi’s insight on Swaraj in his negotiation with self-control and self-rule – the fundamental remedy to address societal and ecological decay. The collapse of morality and destruction of natural resources have resulted in moral ruination and ecological imbalance. Therefore, this paper attempts to re-visit Gandhian swaraj and its decisive role in his eco-ethical enquiry for a sustainable future.
Gandhi never wrote any treatise on environmental ethics nor was he a systematic thinker on environment. In fact, environmentalism was not a burning issue during his lifetime. His much acclaimed booklet Hind Swaraj that he wrote during his return voyage from England to South Africa serves as the primary source for the proponents of environmentalism to project Gandhi as an environmentalist. But other than Hind Swaraj, Gandhi’s concern for nature and his belief in the unity of all beings is scattered in many of his writings and letters that speak of his alternative approach of a harmonious living that contradicts west’s avaricious life-definition. Gandhi’s environmental thought can be located in his theoretical conjecture and field experiments that he carried out in South Africa, India and on the ‘self.’ Gandhi conceptualised most of his essential formulations of satya, ahimsa, satyagraha, sarvodaya, swaraj and swadeshi before embarking upon his political responsibilities. India received a fully evolved, matured brain who would now test all his hypothesis in the Indian laboratory – the primary subject-matter being the practice of swaraj.
Swaraj and Eco-ethical philosophy
A general perception revolving the idea of swaraj denotes political swaraj i.e. independence from foreign yoke, thus Lokmanya Tilak’s famous slogan – swaraj is my birth right and I shall have it. Swaraj seems to be an object to be taken back. It is an objective reality. Political freedom, national government, constitution, citizenship, voting rights are some of the natural corollary of political swaraj and also the constituent elements of modern state structure which is no more than three-hundred years old dating back to Westphalian system. In Hind Swaraj, Gandhi’s exploration of swaraj implied two variants – the ‘swa’ (self) in political swaraj is the civic nation, while the ‘swa’ in individual swaraj is the citizen (Parel 2016: 74). However, behind the apparent meaning of swaraj as Home Rule, Gandhi unearths the deeper connotation of swaraj as self-rule. Here, in this paper, I want to show how Self-rule is the founding principle of Gandhian eco-ethical philosophy that begins with the experimentation on the ‘self’.
Swaraj is the kernel of Gandhi’s paradigmatic framework. His theorisation of satya, ahimsa, satyagraha, sarvodaya, swadeshi and even trusteeship ultimately aim at bringing swaraj at the individual level. According to Parel, it is even more basic than nonviolence (Parel 2016: 74). Gandhi not only brings to the table political swaraj or national self-determination but also evokes the Rig Vedic philosophy of ‘swa’ in Indian political theory, thereby introducing the theme of ‘private is political’ into the Indian knowledge system in a new avatar, altogether. Gandhi’s ethical individual is the political self who is the decision-maker. He is patient and humble. He is guided not by false vanity and egoism but by conscience of humanity that make him realise that he is not an alienated entity but a part of the supreme integrated whole. Gandhi says, “I believe in the absolute oneness of God and, therefore, also of humanity. What though we have many bodies? We have but one soul. The rays of the sun are many through refraction. But they have the same source. I cannot, therefore, detach myself from the wicked soul (nor may I be denied identity with the most virtuous)” (CWMG XXV). Gandhi’s individual finds peace in spiritual harmony and is not lured by the dazzling opulence of materialism. Swaraj or self-rule both at the individual level and also at the national level is to be attained through satya and ahimsa, undergoing the rigorous training of satyagraha. Ramchandra Gandhi in The Svaraj of India mentions ‘svā’ seeks to be the ruler, centre, source of all things; and this seeking is wisdom and not paranoia, health, i.e. svāsthya or self-situatedness and not sickness, sarvodaya and not selfishness, only in and through the truth of advaita, the truth that you and I are not other than one another – is the advaitin truth of India (Gandhi 1984: 461).
For Gandhi, as Parel states, swaraj is self-rule which can be attained only through a disciplined rule from within. Independence is not conditioned by any moral consideration, it is license to do whatever one wants. But “Swaraj is a sacred word, a Vedic word, meaning self-rule and self-restraint, and not freedom from all restraint which ‘independence’ often means” (Gandhi 2021: 16).
Self-rule can be realized only through the judicious co-ordination and control of senses, by the mind and soul. Here, Gandhi solely relies on his understanding of Bhagwad Gita that vividly explains the working of the senses and realisation of the self through the supreme soul. Self-rule is the ultimate form of freedom, the soul is now free from inherent weakness of passions that intrudes into the way of man’s self-realisation. However, Gandhi is not in favour of elimination of passion because it will ultimately turn man into a machine. Passions, rather play a crucial role in human life without which life gets stagnant. But it cannot be the prime mover as instead of enabling factor it will hinder freedom. Gandhi says, “The more we indulge our passions, the more unbridled they become” (Gandhi 2018: 50).
As Parel elaborates – sense, mind and soul play their appropriate role. Sense is the emotional attribute that help human being to sustain through physical and psychological requirements. The soul addresses the ethical and spiritual requirements. The mind is the fulcrum that coordinates the entire mechanism. Thus, mind is the determining factor that decides whether an individual will be swayed by passion only or attain spiritual realisation. Mind therefore needs to be disciplined, which is however a daunting task. Gandhi states “… the mind is a restless bird; the more it gets the more it wants, and still remains unsatisfied” (Gandhi 2018: 50).
According to Gita, “when a man surrenders all desires that come to the heart and by the grace of God finds the joy of God, then his soul has indeed found peace” (Bhagawad Gita 2:55). Gandhi is not in favour of absolute denunciation of passion as it enables man to enjoy life, but puts primacy on a proper balance among the sense, mind and soul. A spiritual awakening will guide what to do and what not to do and will proceed towards the final move to attain swaraj as self-rule. Spiritual arousal empowers the mind to become morally strong enough to withstand the intemperate domination of passion and greed (Parel 2016: 85).
Hind Swaraj published in Gujarati in 1909 and in English translation in 1910 in Johannesburg is referred to as a text that cries out loud against industrialism, western modernity and civilisation, western medicine, science and technology, railways and the press. This tiny booklet portrays severe condemnation and indignation towards modernity’s pomp and grandeur. The book identifies the ills of Indian society and its peoples and attempts to remedy the situation through political self-rule or swaraj.
Underneath the simple and naïve disclosure of Gandhi’s indictment towards western civilisation, he delves deep into the human psyche with the aim to conduct a surgery of the soul. He says, “He is a true physician who probes the cause of the disease” (Gandhi 2018: 47). Today’s environmental crisis and moral ruination are caused mainly by man’s rampant desire for wealth and pleasure that he ultimately succumbs to the vortex of never-ending desire. From desire, greed arise that leads to indulgence resulting in competition and violence to seize the desired thing converting human soul to predator leading to vulnerability that ultimately make individual weak and morally bankrupt.
Gandhi remained so much firmly entrenched to the message of Hind Swaraj that years after when he was asked to review the message of the book, he would only change a single word in spite of the fact that circumstances, both domestic and external had undergone drastic transformation. He was farsighted enough to locate the root of the disease. He asks,
How do these diseases arise? Surely by our negligence or indulgence. I overeat, I have indigestion, I go to a doctor, he gives me medicine, I am cured. I overeat again, I take his pills again. Had I not taken his pills in the first instance, I would not have suffered the punishment deserved by me and I would not have overeaten again. The doctor intervened and helped me to indulge myself. My body thereby certainly felt more at ease, but my mind became weakened…Had the doctor not intervened, nature would have done its work, and I would have acquired mastery over myself. (Gandhi 2018: 48).
A simple reading of the extract gives its readers an easy depiction of how the doctors assist us in getting rid of our ailments which in turn induces us to further indulge in the same vice we were in as we know doctors and hospitals are there to relieve us from pain. The significance behind this basic statement however is a profound message Gandhi is hinting at: the technological imprisonment of mind. Modern science and technology colonise human consciousness. Gandhi is rejecting medical profession in particular and western modernity in general because of its intrinsic proclivity to set definition of well-being, health and prosperity. As Esha Shah most aptly points out – the modern medicinal qua technological mode of thinking constitutes a conception of humanness and human wellbeing that Gandhi is disturbed about. Shah describes this rationalising and essentialising force inherent in technology in Heidegger’s term as enframing (Shah 2019: 124).
Gandhi had been dubbed as a pre-modern who was against technology or machine. He was not. When challenged with the question on whether he was against machine his reply was – how can I be when I know that even this body is a most delicate piece of machinery? The spinning wheel is a machine; a little toothpick is a machine. What I object to is the craze for machinery, not machinery as such (Gandhi 1938: 8). Gandhi was against this obsession of technological supervision where every phenomenon from human world to biosphere, bacteria to even their genome come under the surveillance and disciplinary mode of technology to be manipulable, maimed and taken ‘care of’ and disposed of, mutated and transformed. The significance of ways and means is yet another salient theme of Hind Swaraj. A technology is a fluid mechanism. Whether it will be used for a beneficial purpose or with malevolent intention depends on its user. For example nuclear technology can be used for peaceful purpose but it can also destroy life on earth. Even many a times the scientist who discovers a phenomenon is not sure of its end value: it may prove to be a blessing or a curse. Thus, means and ends are inseparable and therein lies no dichotomy. Gandhi here evokes the rule of the self where this ‘self’ is an ethical soul driven by prudence. “For me it is enough to know the means. Means and end are convertible terms in my philosophy of life. We have always control over the means but not over the end” (Iyer 2018: 362). Gandhi appreciated Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose, P.C. Roy for their achievements “They cultivated it (science) for the sake of it…their researches have been devoted in order to enable us to come nearer to our maker” (Bhattacharya 2019: 6). But science and technology that has been the maker of modern civilization and has converted human soul to mere machine is the area of Gandhi’s prime concern. “…now it is possible to take away thousands of lives by one man working behind a gun from a hill…This is civilization” (Gandhi 2018: 29). The purpose of modern civilisation and its scientific endeavour is enhancement of resources for business, utilitarian aim to render bodily pleasure and most importantly enslavement of the ‘self.’ The western modernity that Gandhi criticised way back in 1909 is taking into custody the entire existential domain what Jurgen Habermas most aptly termed as “colonisation of the lifeworld” by “the system” (Heath 2012: 74). Gandhi is critical of this colonisation of mind. Technology structures and influences our mode of thinking. Under the guise of human wellbeing, medical science converts human beings to mere test-subjects reducing them to guinea pig. But it does it with its own rationality. It creates such a knowledge system and institutionalised mode of functioning, that turns human being to a trivial body brimming with diseases and mal-functioning. Dehumanization is happening as individual mind is losing control over the self. To get rid of this “cognitive enslavement” (Bilgrami 2003: 4160), Gandhi invokes the ‘svā’ in us. As Tridip Suhrud observes, “For Gandhiji, the essential character of ‘modern civilisation’ is not represented by either the Empire, or the speed of its railways…nor by the vivisection of modern Western medicine. The essential character of ‘modern civilisation’ is represented by the denial of a fundamental possibility. This denial is of the possibility of knowing oneself” (Suhrud 2019: 15-16). The underlying message of Hind Swaraj thus is that we will not attain swaraj with the mere withdrawal of the British – “this is not the swaraj I want” (Gandhi 2018: 16). Gandhi’s swaraj is far broader, inclusive and radical that emphasises the rule of the self and self-control over passionate urges. It is from the awakening of the ‘svā’ in individual self, emanates Gandhi’s famous aphorism – world has enough for everybody’s need, but not enough for everybody’s greed is an “exquisitely phrased one line environmental ethic” (Guha 2018, 227). Gandhi’s theorisation and life-experiences together represent eco-ethical enquiry, which ecologists, all over the world emulate and turn into for a prudential estimation of ecological balance. Apart from his rigorous analysis and exploration of ‘swaraj’, Gandhi’s environmental philosophy is structured along and cultivated thoroughly by his ethics of ahimsa (non-violence).
Ahimsa
We cannot have ecological movement unless the principle of non-violence becomes central to the ethics of human nature (Mohan-mala: A Gandhian Rosary 1997)
Gandhian philosophy is an ethical philosophy. The question of morality reigns supreme in Gandhian epistemological enquiry. The normative exploration of ‘what ought to be done’ is the basic question of any ethical enquiry. It is a philosophical understanding that studies moral questions of right and wrong. Environmental ethics is therefore an ethical discourse on environment. It advocates normative evaluation that structures human-non-human – nature interaction. According to Roger J.H. King, “environmental ethics proposes to help reconstruct our moral relationship to the non-human world” (King, 1996: 82).
For Gandhi, awakening of human conscience is the arousal of ‘svā’. In Ethical Religion, he states that conscience is the voice of God. In 1919 he writes, “there are times when you have to obey a call which is the highest of all, i.e. the voice of conscience…” (Iyer 2018: 120). Gandhian ethics is guided by this voice of conscience. It is conscience that reveals the oneness of being. The Gita says, “By hundreds and then by thousands, behold, Arjuna, my manifold ecclesiastical forms of innumerable shapes and colours” (11:5). In his interpretation of the Gita, Gandhi finds the voice of the supreme Atma (soul) that speaks in thousand voices. “The whole universe, with its manifold divisions, was gathered there in Him – like a tree and its leaves…The root contains the whole world of the tree, and the leaves represent that world divided into many forms. Arjuna could clearly see manifested within the universal form all of creation with its unlimited and variegated details, from the powerful Brahman to the humble blade of grass” (Gandhi 2015a: 232).
The teachings of the Gita instilled in Gandhi the message of harmony, he came to realise very soon in his life about the interrelatedness and inter-dependence of life on earth. Even before the deep ecologists were engaging in debates regarding interdependence of human and non-human world, a sustainable society, creation and protection of bio-region, Gandhi’s mind has already started formulating ways before landing in India in 1915. He drew his inspiration of ecological sustenance and developed empathy towards all beings from his early encounter with religious precepts of the Gita, Koran, Bible, Jainism and Patanjali Yogasutra. In fact, ahimsa param dharma is one of the cardinal messages of these religions. Ahimsa means non-injury. Broadly speaking, it stands for harmlessness and refraining from any harmful deeds, activity or thought. Even desire to harm or cause injury is similar to violence. Thus, for Gandhi even thought should be free from violence. Contrary to the west’s conceptualisation of individual, Gandhi’s individual is one among the many. Complete focus on self-interest and individual benefit is equivalent to himsa. “For the sake of a mistaken care of the human body, they kill annually thousands of animals. They practice vivisection. No religion sanctions this. All say that it is not necessary to take so many lives for the sake of our bodies” (Gandhi 2018: 48).
Vivisection and animal sacrifice: Vivisection was an area that invited Gandhi’s vehement disapproval. He despised the inhuman slaughter of innocent animals for the sake of scientific development and human survival. Scientific discoveries stained with the blood of the innocents is nothing but an act of dereliction. Gandhi remarks, “that our dominion over the lower order of creation is not for their slaughter, but for their benefit equally with ours. For I am as certain that they are endowed with a soul as that I am” (CWMG XXIX 1968: 326). Tom Regan, the American philosopher and animal rights activist argues that “inherent value … belongs equally to those who are experiencing subjects of a life”. He emphasizes that this is a theory about the inherent value of “individuals” and that “reason” – not sentiment, not emotion – reason compels us to recognize the equal inherent value of these animals and, with this, their equal right to be treated with respect (Curtin 1996: 69). Thus, Gandhi was farsighted enough to reflect on the concern of animal rights way back in 1925-26. Gandhi was not only against vivisection but also against animal sacrifice for even religious purposes. In the name of religion sacrificing innocent animal was a sinful act and it must stop. With reference to the Kalighat temple in Kolkata, Gandhi says “Whenever I am in Calcutta the thought of the goats being sacrificed haunts me and makes me uneasy…I sometimes writhe in agony when I think of it” (CWMG XIX 1966: 290). Gandhi enlarged the ambit of ahimsa to embrace all creation. The universe according to him is a coherent integrated system that binds together human and non-human creation. Human beings are simply an integral part of the assemblage of beings. Thus, to unleash violence against other forms of life is an immoral act and to quote Gandhi “I reject everything that contradicts the fundamental principles of morality” (Gandhi 2014: 24). He conceived of God in all creations. “The man who eats to live, who is friends with the five powers, earth, water, ether, sun and air and who is a servant of God, the Creator of all these, ought not to fall ill” (Gandhi 2021: 136).
Vegetarianism and nature cure: Gandhi inherited vegetarianism from his family and vaisnava culture. In his childhood days, except for one aberration, he abstained from meat eating because of family compulsion. Vegetarianism was at that point of time was not in congruence with his logic. As it was his firm conviction that meat eating Englishmen are strong than Indians because meat provide them strength and vigour. And Indians are meek and passive in front of them. It was his stay in England when he realised the virtues of vegetarianism after going through Henry Salt’s A Plea for Vegetarianism. Gandhi’s encounter with Jainism, Buddhism, readings of the Gita and family traditions instilled in him the vices of animal sacrifice. However, later in his life, he converted a simple vegetarian diet that he followed out of vows and inheritance into a well-planned dietetics to be situated in front of western modernity’s belief system. He himself demolished his childhood optimism that meat-eating is equivalent to masculinity and strength. In fact, this was the perception that spread overwhelmingly. Gandhi’s interaction with vegetarian society in England and his own deep introspection assisted him to turn the entire notional pyramid upside down. As Mitra observes, that more his experiences with swaraj or self-rule matured and advanced towards sophistication, the logic of meat eating – strength – masculinity crumbled down. “…he became increasingly disinterested in the question of physical strength. Mental fortitude was paramount in his scheme of things, harnessed by discipline, prayer and compassion” (Mitra 2021: 145). Gandhi’s orientation towards vegetarianism was nourished and nurtured by his mental capacitation of self-rule guided by empathetic disposition towards nature and natural well-being.
Not only Gandhi relied mainly on natural diet but also depended on nature’s healing power. In his Autobiography, Gandhi clarifies how with growing simplicity in life he dejected medicines and started relying on nature-cure. From Just’s Return to Nature, Gandhi learnt about earth treatment as well as fresh fruits and nuts as the natural diet of man. He says, “I did not at once take to the exclusive fruit diet, but immediately began experiments in earth treatment, and with wonderful results” (Gandhi 2015b: 249).
Gandhi and Deep Ecology: We find a striking similarity of Gandhian conceptualization of ‘oneness of being’ with Arne Naess’s idea on Deep Ecology. Naess, in an essay published in 1972 conceptualized the idea of Deep ecology that is founded on an ethic call the biospheric egalitarianism that situates human being on the same platform with other species of the earth. Deep ecology is based on normative principles that advocates radical reduction of the world’s population, abandonment of the goal of economic growth in the developed world, conservation of biotic diversity, living in small, simple and self-reliant communities. According to Naess, natural diversity possesses intrinsic value that demands respect to live and blossom. (Cooper 2004: 213). Deep ecology focuses on mystification and indulges in idolization of natural habitat.
Gandhian method of treatment of issues is marked by paradoxes. His concern for environment was thus no exception. He was never amazed at the interplay of natural forces or interface of seasons. Wilderness never inspired Gandhi to engage in a romantic rendezvous with the enigmatic spirit of nature neither it inspired him to write thesis on biospheric egalitarianism. He remained conspicuously silent on experiencing the essence or smell of the soil on which he took miles of lonely journey. Inquisitiveness about the mystery of nature hardly stirred Gandhi’s pragmatic mind. His approach was more mundane. But Deep Ecology’s perspective was more or less aesthetic. Contrarily Gandhian approach was conscientiously pragmatic. Deep ecology in their analysis hardly struck at the root of the problem – i.e. the overwhelming surge of human greed. Gandhi, on the other hand targeted the cause of the problem with possible antidote.
Ramchandra Guha in an article published in Environmental Ethics in 1989 offers a critique of Deep ecology’s obsession with biocentrism. According to Guha, deep ecology offers to shift the environmental movement from an “anthropocentric” to a biocentric perspective. The anthropocentric-biocentric distinction is accepted as axiomatic by deep ecologists. Moreover, deep ecology is obsessed with the preservation of unspoilt wilderness and restoration of degraded areas to a more pristine condition. Guha argues that deep ecology’s preoccupation for preservation of biotic integrity at the cost of the needs of humans is problematic. They obfuscate two fundamental areas of concern i. overconsumption by the industrialized world and by the urban elites in the Third World and ii. growing militarization. Both these factors massively cause ecological impairment. Moreover, obsession with wilderness is not a practical proposition for third world country like India which is a densely populated agrarian economy where its inhabitants share a closely knit, finely balanced relationship with nature. Deep ecology fails to address the problems of the poor who have direct interaction with nature and also are directly hit by environmental damage. Issues such as fuel, fodder, water shortage, soil erosion, air and water pollution have not been adequately addressed by deep ecologists (Guha 1989). Way back in 1929, Gandhi opined in Young India “what is good for one nation situated in one condition is not necessarily good for another differently situated. One man’s food is another man’s poison” (CWMG XLI 1970: 220).
Gandhian approach to ecology was neither anthropocentric nor biocentric but a superb combination of both where human needs would be fulfilled without any damage to the environment. Unlike the deep ecologists, Gandhi was not an extreme anti-anthropocentrist. He was practical enough to recognize that of all the living species in this world, the human species was the most powerful. He therefore called for human stewardship in maintaining the rhythms of all forms of life (Chattopadhyay 2006: 125).
A reflection of the deep ecological thinking of living in small, simple and self-reliant communities find a place in Gandhian economy which was based on moral foundation of minimisation of wants and utilisation of natural resources. His village-based cottages exemplified an eco-friendly habitation with well-ventilated rooms and hygienic environment. Maintenance of hygiene and mental health along with physical well-being was Gandhi’s prime area of concern. He associated sustainable forestry and emphasised on afforestation in arid and semi-arid areas. He was against chemical fertilisers and advised for the use of organic manure that improve soil fertility and increase crop production.
His ideal village actually portrayed a bio-region sans deep ecology’s obsession with preservation of wilderness’. Gandhi’s eco-friendly village based economy has the capacity to survive on its own in tune with nature’s rhythm.
Gandhi’s deep plunge into his field experiments in India convinced him of the inefficacy of industrialisation along western lines. Simply importing modern techniques and precepts of western civilisation into Indian soil would be a disaster. Gandhi’s objection was both on pragmatic and moral levels. Machine has a positive role to play when hands are limited. But in a labour-surplus country like India, where hands are waiting for work, machine is a sin. According to Gandhi, there are thousands of peasants, artisans, tribal and women who are skilled workers and also informed with scientism in their respective fields are brazenly side-lined and turned into ‘a nation of idlers’. Both the rapidity and rabidity of machine and assembly-line production turns this huge knowledgeable human resource into machine (Sahasrabudhey 2018: 177). Machine has displaced thousands of workers and has turned them into a band of tramps whom the political establishment in order to win elections have converted into vote-banks offering freebies. “My Ahimsa would not tolerate the idea of giving a free meal to a healthy person who has not worked for it in some honest way, and if I had the power, I would stop every sadavrata where free meals are given. It has degraded the nation and it has encouraged laziness, idleness, hypocrisy and even crime” (Gandhi 2021: 63-64). Large-scale industrialisation has resulted in unbridled competition, exhaustion of both natural resources and human calibre.
Conclusion: Gandhian visualisation can be brushed aside as utopian but as Guha mentions Gandhi himself had an uncanny knack of combining a utopian vision with shrewdly “practical means” (Guha 2018: 226).
Amidst AI revolution that replicates human brain, technological innovation, pomp and grandeur, Gandhian conceptualisation of an ‘ideal type’ village with simple lifestyle, simplistic habits, elementary needs seem absurd and delusional. Gandhian approach invites derision and bewilderment. A man who wants to take us back to primitive mode of living with ethico-religious obligation and talking about morality is simply to be discarded. The paradox lies here. The world is talking about “small is beautiful”, sustainable development, climate change and ecological sustenance. Environmental organisations, national governments and NGOs are engaged in continuous deliberation to make the world habitable for future generations.
Mahatma Gandhi triggers an epistemological inversion of the ontological reality. If machine is modern, spinning wheel is the alternative; if meat-eating ensure masculine strength, vegetarianism is the feminine will-power; if controlling and taming nature is prowess, nature-healing is the possibility, if technology is progress, khadi is independence. Gandhi’s esoteric underpinnings of a sustainable green economy and his vehement criticism of modern civilisation have radical implications for present-day environmental crisis. His self-disciplined eco-ethical individual who resides in consonance with ecological pattern of life, guided by the ethos of ahimsa and compassion, is the one who rules oneself gaining complete swaraj.
References:
Bhattacharya, Amitabha. (2019). “Not against Science”. The Statesman. March, 17.
Bilgrami, Akeel. (2003). “Gandhi, the Philosopher.” Economic and Political Weekly, 38(39). (September, 27).
Chatterjee, Partha. (2005). “The Moment of Manoeuvre.” In Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse, New Delhi: OUP.
Chattopadhyay, T. (2006). “Man and Ecology in Marx and Gandhi.” Kolkata: Mitram.
Cooper, David E. (2004). “Arne Naess.” In Fifty Great Thinkers on the Environment, edited by Joy A. Palmer, London and New York: Routledge.
Curtin, Deanne. (1996). “Toward an Ecological Ethic of Care.” In Ecological Feminist Philosophies edited by Karen J. Warren, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (1938). Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (2014). Hinduism: According to Gandhi. New Delhi: Orient.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (2015a). The Bhagawad Gita: According to Gandhi. New Delhi: Orient.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (2015b). The Story of My Experiments with Truth: An Autobiography. Delhi: Rajpal.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (2018). Hind Swaraj. Delhi: Rajpal.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (1966). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. XIX. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Trust.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (1967). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. XXV. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Trust.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (1968). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. XXIX. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Trust.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (1970). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. XLI. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Trust.
Gandhi, Mahatma. (2021). “The Meaning of Swaraj.” In Mahatma Gandhi, India of My Dreams, Delhi: Rajpal.
Gandhi, Ramchandra. (1984). “The Svaraj of India.” Indian Philosophical Quarterly, XI (4). October.
Guha, Ramchandra. (1989). “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique,” Environmental Ethics, 11, Spring 1-3, https://www.uky.edu/~rsand1/china2017/library/Guha.pdf
Guha, Ramchandra. (2018). “Mahatma Gandhi and the Environment Movement.” In Debating Gandhi: A Reader, edited by A. Raghuramaraju, 223-230. New Delhi: OUP.
Heath, Joseph. (2012). “System and the Life world.” In Jurgen Habermas: Key Concepts, edited by Brabara Fultner, New Delhi: Rawat publications.
Iyer, Raghavan. (2003). The Moral and Political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi, New Delhi: OUP.
King, Roger J.H. (1996). “Caring about Nature: Feminist Ethics and the Environment.” In Ecological Feminist Philosophies edited by Karen J. Warren, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Mohan-mala. (1997). A Gandhian Rosary, 93-94, Ahmedabad: Navjivan Publishing House, https://earthcharter.org/wp-content/assets/virtual-library2/images/uploads/EARTH%20CHARTER%20&%20GANDHI%202010.pdf
Mitra, Debashish. (2021). “The relevance of dietetics in Gandhian Philosophy: Mapping the trajectories of his experiments.” Kolkata Society for Asian Studies, 7(2). December.
Parel, Anthony. (2016). Pax Gandhiana: The Political Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, 74-93. New Delhi: OUP.
Sahasrabudhey, Sunil. (2018). “The Machine.” In Debating Gandhi: A Reader, edited by A. Raghuramaraju, 223-230. New Delhi: OUP.
Shah, Esha. (2019). “Ethics of Technological Modernity: Reading Hind Swaraj towards Critiquing Craig Venter’s Synthetic Biology.” In Re-reading Hind Swaraj: Modernity and Subalterns, edited by Ghanshyam Shah, 123-139. New Delhi: Routledge.
Suhrud, Tridip. (2019). “Reading Hind Swaraj.” In Re-reading Hind Swaraj: Modernity and Subalterns, edited by Ghanshyam Shah, 14-20. New Delhi: Routledge.