Ecological Foundations: Self Realisation in Indian Philosophy

Chaos theory suggests that “if a butterfly flutters its wings in some corner of the world, then it can lead to a hurricane in the other corner of the world”. To simplify we can say that even a minute or a small change can prove to be irrevocably obvious for a certain event in the larger scale of reference. Apparently, this is true when we talk about environmental issues of the current time. To exemplify, over consumption of water at some places, may lead to absolute water shortage in others. This also signifies that the environmental crisis is a global crisis. The solution for such a perpetual crisis shall begin to resolve from self, which can then be extended to local and then at the global level. If we relate ourselves to the butterfly effect, it would mean that every little thing we do, has an effect on the universe. Hence, the responsibility of saving earth from a catastrophe lies on each and every individual. But responsibilities come with a self-realisation that can not be imposed. Deep Ecology is a one such movement which argues for self-realisation and further stresses that the self should be understood as deeply connected with and as a part of nature not disassociated with it. The term Deep Ecology was coined by a Norwegian Philosopher, Arne Naess. He was in fact the first to put the question of self-realisation at the centre of environmental philosophy. His philosophy of life aimed for ecological wisdom and harmony, and stressed on the concept of self-realisation i.e., extension of oneself and realisation of oneself in everything. This particularly reminds us of his connection with Indian Philosophy as he himself confirms about his attraction to the sense of self found in the Hindu Advaita Vedanta. Naess gave eight tenets for his deep ecological perspective, which are as follows:

1. Both human and non-human life have intrinsic and inherent value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes.

2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realisation of these values.

3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity, except for satisfying vital needs.

4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantially smaller human population. The flourishing of non-human life also requires a smaller population.

5. Present human interference with the non-human world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

6. Policies that affect basic, economic, technological and ideological structures must therefore be changed. The resulting state of affairs must be deeply different from the present one.

7. The ideological change will be mainly that of appreciating life quality rather than increasingly adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between bigness and greatness.

8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly for trying to implement the necessary changes.

Although, Naess draws his sense of self-realisation from various sources like, Eric Fromm, Sigmund Freud, William James, Baruch Spinoza, Mohandas Gandhi and J.S. Mill, this article focuses on the idea of self-realisation which can be traced in the Vedāntic texts such as the Upaniṣads, which is analogous to Naess’ idea of Deep Ecology. Also, it becomes important to note that the eight foundational principles mentioned by Naess do not completely align with the Indian philosophical aspects. It will therefore discuss a selective tenet out of eight, the reflection of which could be traced in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad.

The Upaniṣads describe to us our life, our spirit, which was the same yesterday, is the same to-day and will be the same forever, and speaks heavily on the idea of Self.

The Fourth Brāhmaṇa of the second chapter in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad mentions the very famous conversation of Yājñavalkya and Maitreyī on the absolute Self. As Yājñavalkya was renouncing the stage of being a householder, a gṛhastha and entering that of the vānaprastha, he was supposed to make a materialistic settlement between Maitreyī (his second wife) and Kātyāyanī (his first wife). During this Maitreyī asks Yājñavalkya, “yan nu ma iyam, bhagoh, sarvā pṛthivī vittena pūrṇā syāt, kathaṁ tenāmṛtā syām iti”, which means, “If, indeed, Venerable Sir, this whole earth filled with wealth were mine, would I be immortal through that?” This intriguing question was brilliantly answered by Yājñavalkya where he explicates the meaning of Self and says “ātmā va are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo nididhyāsitavyah: maitreyi ātmano vā are darśanena śravaṇena matyā vijn̄ānenedaṁ sarvaṁ viditam”. The appropriate translation of it is: “O Maitreyī, it is the Self that should be seen, heard of, reflected on and meditated upon. Verily, by the seeing of, by the hearing of, by the thinking of, by the understanding of Self, all is known.”

Through this conversation one can deduce that Yājñavalkya refers to knowing Self as “ātmā jñanā” which holds profound influence in Indian Philosophy. Rooted in Indian spiritual tradition, ātmā jñanā emphasizes the journey of understanding one’s true nature and realising the interconnectedness of all living beings.

Radhakrishnan in his The Principal Upaniṣads also provides a commentary at the end of the conversation which mentions the idea that all objects of the world, earthly possessions, romantic delights, everything that we do, provides opportunities for the realisation of the Self.

This is reflective of the second tenet of Naess’ Deep Ecology where he says that richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realisation of these values. In the context of Deep Ecology, self-realisation encompasses the awareness of one’s interconnectedness with nature but also the recognition of inherent value and rights of all living entities. Indian Philosophy, with its emphasis on self-realisation and the unity of all life, provides a profound framework for understanding and embracing the core principles of Deep Ecology. It promotes a holistic worldview where humans are not separate from nature, rather they are an integral part of the intricate web of life, fostering a deep sense of responsibility and reverence for the natural world.

References:

1. Sen, Prabal Kumar, editor. The Relevance of Indian Philosophy to Contemporary Western Philosophy. Ramakrishna Mission Institute, 2022.

2. Radhakrishnan, S. The Principal Upaniṣads. 36^th ed., Harper Collins, 2022.

3. Callicott, Biard J. “Notes on Self-Realization: An Ecological Approach to Being in the World.” Worldviews, vol. 21, no. 3, 2017, pp. 235-250. Brill, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26552290