Sikhi And Environmentalism

[xHarinder_singh]

A person who loves God, automatically loves nature because God resides within His nature(baliharii kudrat vassiya, tera ant na jayee lakhiyaa). But these days I find very few sikh environmentalists. Very few sikh people who are actually interested in living a life close to nature, living a life without burning too much of fossil fuels.

I personally feel a pakka naam jappan vala sikh will automatically become an environmentalist, but I find it surprising that very few sikhs are concerned about the welfare of the environment.

[N30S1NGH]

Here are two very thought provoking articles written by tsingh on sikhawareness forum:

Sikhi and Ecologism: Vismād of the Nature Mystic

by Tirath Singh Nirmala

'This shocking state of affairs in the matter of the health of the soil of the country proves that the function of developing an awareness and sensitivity with reference to the eco-system, understanding, decision making attitudes and values oriented towards right action falls to the lot of the devotees of God, Bhagtas, the elite endowed with a creative spark who work constructively under the shadow of world famous holy places like Shri Darbar Sahib Amritsar.'

Bhagat Puran Singh Ji 'Plant or Perish' 1988

Introduction:

Within the next few pages I aim to briefly introduce the reader to the present spectrum of Green ideological and political positions. Then follows a critical analysis of the present modern Sikh approach to the environment and its origins. The final section provides a possible vision for the future of a form of Sikh Ecologism. Note that the sections on the Sikh position both historical and present are hypothetical and designed to provoke discussion.

Three books have provided vital source material for the brief survey of Green political and ideological thought. Andrew Dobson's superb ‘Green Political Thought’ (3rd Ed, Routledge 2000) is a brilliant introduction to the subject. Bill Devall's 'Simple in Means, Rich in Ends' is an inspiring text on the Deep Ecological movement and the philosophy of Arne Naess both in its abstract form and its practicality. Finally, E.F Schumacker's 'Small is Beautiful', although very much of its time and written from an environmentalist perspective, still provides a superb introduction to the inherent flaw of capitalist economic models.

To begin with, a clarification of terminology.

Distinction between ‘environmentalism’ and ‘ecologism’

Environmentalism is defined as;

‘(arguments) for a managerial approach to environmental problems, secure in the belief that they can be solved without fundamental changes in present values or patterns of production and consumption’

Ecologism is defined as;

‘holds that a sustainable and fulfilling existence presupposes radical changes in our relationship with the non-human natural world, and in our mode of social and political life’

One approach is more radical than the other. Dobson here maintains these two are as different from each other as liberalism and socialism and therefore need to be kept separate (in fact later he states that they are potentially axiomatically opposed to one another). Dobson's distinction of the two here is a rephrasing of Arne Naess' description of the 'shallow' and 'deep' Ecological perspectives from the early 1970s.

The shallow ecological perspective sees the value of the environment in its utility for human life. It is thus motivated to change current lifestyles and destruction of the environment as a means to prolong the human species; the environment as a means to an end. The deep ecological perspective sees the environment as inherently valuable in itself and asks of the individual to develop a non anthropocentric position with regard the value of the environment.

Green Thought as a Political Ideology

A political ideology is defined as having three fundamental components 1) an analytical map of society (meaning how to evaluate and understand it; Marx’s bourgeoisie and proletariat for example) 2) prescribes a society and the beliefs about the human condition that will sustain such a society, and 3) a plan of action for the attainment of such a society.

In a sense, considering the Ecological position as a self-contained ideology poses a challenge for making an integrated understanding with Sikhi, an independent ideology. However, the Sikh perspective is political in implication, which encompasses a sense of Ecologism. This thus blurs this description of what Dobson describes as ‘first order’ and ‘second order’ ideological descriptions and prescription. This raises a question: can Sikhi encompass ecologism if the latter is to be defined as a reaction to a particular context in social evolution, that of the dominant understanding of the nature of post-industrial society? This question shall be addressed later on.

Post-industrial society: competing definitions of how it should be

It is posed by Green theorists that there are presently two competing definitions of how post-industrial society should look. One popular, the other unpopular and prevalent in the Ecological movement.

1) Popular one = a technical, affluent, service society

2) Unpopular one = a decentralised, agrarian economy following in the wake of a failed industrialisation

(defined by Marien, 1977 – ‘Two visions of post-industrial society’ Futures)

A rejection of post-enlightenment modes of thought?

Jonathon Porritt and Nicholas Winner state

‘the most radical (green aim) seeks nothing less than a non-violent revolution to overthrow our whole polluting, plundering and materialistic industrial society and, in its place, to create a new economic and social order which will allow human beings to live in harmony with the planet. In those terms the Green Movement lays claim to being the most radical and important political and cultural force since the birth of socialism’ (1988)

It challenges early enlightenment ideas. The emphasis on human reason is construed to be the root cause of the ‘master of the universe’ approach to the environment. Harrison (1979) writes on this theme highlighting the view in the writing of the enlightenment period that the world was seen as a ‘benevolence’, as the most possibly suitable environment for man, and thus perfect for human dominion.

However, what Dobson warns of is the danger of reducing Ecologism to the same kind of counter reaction as Romanticism was to the Enlightenment. To counter this however it can be pointed out that, whereas the Romantics were heavy on individualism and poetic notions of nature, Ecologism is often gritty and factual about biological data. It does not fall into the reason vs. passion polemic.

When thinking of a Sikh Ecologism, should the ‘spiritual’ within Sikhi be considered a ‘romantic’ notion also using such a counter argument? Clearly not since a rejection of this reductionist approach of categorisation into 'reason' and 'passion' is necessary in the first place. Although the Sikh perspective is not driven by 'gritty factual biological data', it is certainly informed by spiritual values considered of paramount importance and validity by those who uphold them. Such principles are not the product of intangible mystical 'passion' or counter reaction to the increasingly materialistic understanding of the world.

Dobson holds that the root of this conflict arises from competing definitions of nature. One of an eternal material competition, violence, hierarchies and domination; the other of inherently valuable, containing the values of diversity, interdependence, tradition, equality. One emphasises the relationship between violence, male hierarchies and environmental control, the other emphasises the feminine, birthing, nurturing characteristics.

Political Ideologies: capitalism and communism

In a leaflet printed by Bhagat Puran Singh, the essay by a Hindu author celebrates the fall of communism and heralds the immanent end of capitalism also. In its place he envisions a newer more ecological world view and society. Such a position is held by many green political theorists also. Jonathon Porritt sees the ecological viewpoint transcending both and states;

‘the debate between the protagonists of capitalism and communism is about as uplifting as the dialogue between Tweedledum and Tweedledee’

‘Both are dedicated to industrial growth, to the expansion of the means of production, to a materialist ethic as the best means to meet people’s needs, and to unimpeded technological development…both insist that the planet is there to be conquered, that big is self-evidently beautiful, and that what cannot be measured is of no importance.’

Taking into context the Sikh perspective also, this statement could be extended into a rejection of the inherent materialistic, reductionist and determinist standpoints within both political models. Like the ecological perspective, what is sorely missing in both is that which ‘cannot be measured’, the mystical.

Criticism of both the rejection of class-differences and the refusal to tamper with or bring about change in society has been made of the Green political perspective here, labelling them right-wing political stances by left-wing political theorists. The fact that it sees the green position as a transcendence of capitalist and communist stances is criticised since it deflects from the immediate change needed to the status quo, thus inherently ignoring the class struggle and reinforcing the present capitalist model.

Roots of Ecologism

Although thinkers and nature mystics like Wordsworth and Henry David Thoreou date back to the 19th century, the birth of the modern political ecologism is considered to have begun in the 1970s with the Limits to Growth report in 1972. Combined with E.F. Schumacker’s book Small is Beautiful, impetus was given to a more serious discussion of the environmental limits to present economic models. Both works identified a need to change current models of human behaviour and attitude.

Philosophical foundations

Dobson highlights what is sadly a fake quotation (1) of a Native American chief from 1855;

‘(The White Man) is a stranger who comes in the night, and takes from the land whatever he needs. The earth is not his friend, but his enemy, and when he’s conquered it he moves on. He kidnaps the earth from his children. His appetite will devour the earth and leave behind a desert. If all the beasts were gone, we would die from a great loneliness of the spirit, for whatever happens to the beasts also happens to us. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the Earth, befalls the children of the Earth.’

The specific philosophical foundations of the modern Ecologist perspective are highly influenced by Arne Naess. His position is that the environment is an ends in itself, not to be used as a means to an end. Clearly this is an enlargement of the Kantian ethical position in its application of the Categorical Imperative to that without human sentience and reason. It is argued that even if there were no environmental disaster on the agenda, the argument would continue to be the same, requiring the same ‘metaphysical reconstruction’ (2) posited by Jonathon Porritt. It differs clearly from either communist or capitalist ideologies by extracting ‘value’ away from human centred activities, be it the producer based theory, or consumer based value. Value is therefore deemed to be imparted by ‘having been created by natural processes rather than by artificial human ones’ (Goodwin 1992). It is the protection and promotion of this ‘natural value’ that is considered the fundamental starting point of the ecological perspective.

The radical green approach rejects the empirical approach of breaking a thing up into subsections to quantify and analyse. Instead the approach chooses to develop a way of understanding the holistic interconnectedness of an issue or topic. This approach comes partly out of the advances in the area of the new physics as heralded by the likes of Fritjof Capra (3) and his highly influential works such as The Tao of Physics and The Turning Point.

On the issue of ethics, as mentioned earlier a pseudo-Kantian approach was developed, namely by Arne Naess, publicly discussed as early as 1972 in which he distinguishes between the ethical standpoints of ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ ecology. In a sense it is this distinction which underpins Dobson’s later division into ‘ecologism’ and ‘environmentalism’. Shallow ecology sees the natural world as a means to an end, the longevity of the human species. The deep ecological standpoint sees the natural world as inherently valuable within itself, and therefore rejects any ‘shallow’ attempts to argue the case for change in our approach to the environment by using consequentialist arguments. Part of the inspiration for this ecological ethical position comes from the work of Peter Singer, the infamous theorist from Australia. Singer made the case for Animal Rights by broadening the utilitarian perspectives to include animals as sentient beings. He does not however extend it to the environment unlike Deep ecologists. James Lovelock’s Gaia Theory no doubt contributes here with its argument that the earth is very much a sentient living organism.

Danger of Misanthropy

A contradiction then arises which Bookchin attempts to deal with. There is the danger of humans being measured equivalently with mice or ladybirds within the ethical decisions that arise. Certain extreme Animal Liberation groups and Ecologists like the Earth First! movement in the US have clearly taken an equivalent position if not further that the protection of such species outweighs the ethical weight of human life and pain. Such misanthropy has caused both negative press and criticism of the underlying ecological principle of rejecting anthropocentrism. However, if there were to be a hierarchical ethical value system with humans at the top, how does this change anything? Clearly this involves a relative dimension of anthropocentrism. Taking an otherwise position is self-contradictory because of the reality of the human condition. (this is where I feel Sikhi or at least spirituality and mysticism per se have a role to play). Hayward introduces the term ‘speciesism’ and ‘human chauvinism’ as a means out of this misuse of anthropocentrism.

The Flaw of Practicality

‘Social life is essentially practical. All mysteries which mislead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice’

Karl Marx

The 'mystical' is thought to be the route by which theory fails to address the practical. This is given by Dobson as the limitation of ecophilosophy, that it fails to address the practical and social reality. Until it does so it remains relatively ineffective and confused. I agree with this, but disagree that the mystical by its nature avoids the practical, certainly not in a religious context anyway. It very much engages with the practical as Swami Agehananda points out in his 'Light at the Center'. It inherently motivates and informs much of the social and practical decisions of what he terms the 'professional mystic'.

As the quotation above states, it is the lack of practicality and unity on this area that opens up a can of worms. The darker side of the Green political ideology reveals itself here. For example, certain ecological groups have expressed views in the past on issues of immigration, structure of society, individual freedom, population control that have invariably played into the hands of the right wing agenda. On the latter, most argue that the global population needs to be reduced as the resources available cannot sustain it. Immigration should be limited and instead there should be a decentralisation to smaller local communities. Such communities should be small self-supportive communes. The means by which to realise this practically would have to come from an authoritarian government enforcing these models on a society that is conditioned into individualist liberal democracy. It is as fraught with potential exploitation and naïve idealism as the communist models enforced in China and Russia. Not only are there inherent flaws within each of the above practicalities, collectively they invoke a sinister reality that at once seems to entice authoritarianism and exploitation.

The Role of Spirituality

Numerous articles and books have been written on the spiritual dimension to the ecophilosphy. Although Dobson and others date the origin of the modern ecological movement to the 1970s, sources of inspiration for this aspect of the deep ecological perspective can be found going all the way back to the origin of civilisation. Whether it be the Christian of spiritual poverty, or Buddha's ethics regarding mindfulness and compassion. Whether it be Henry David Thoreou's highly influential diary of his time spent living in the forests in 'Walden' or the interconnectedness of the Zen master's koan teaching. Within spirituality exists some guidance on the appropriate ethical and inspirational relationship the disciple must develop to the environment. However, we must not be naïve here. Ecologists argue that the historical western teleological exploitation of the world's resources not only derives from the Enlightenment but precedes it with Christian interpretation of certain passages of the Bible. The quotations describe two positions; one of the planet being in mankind's stewardship, the other of creation as God's provision for man to be consumed and dominated over. Both lead to a position of considering the environment in terms of its utility for humans thus the anthropocentric position. Since both quotations derive from the Old Testament, the position can be enlarged to the three Semitic traditions while acknowledging that it is really only Christianity that has experienced being part of an Imperial Industrialisation process.

In stark contrast to this, numerous other traditions including those commonly referred to as the 'Eastern traditions'4 generally harbour an alternative stance. Such traditions provide the inspiration for Ecologists such as Capra and Bahro. Within each is found to varying degrees the means to what Porritt termed the 'metaphysical reconstruction' or what Naess and Devall termed discovering the 'Ecological Self'. Rather than direct social and political change being required, internal reorienting is posited as the means to bringing about the real change that is necessary.

The traditions noted work on two levels. In traditions such as the Native American, Aboriginal, Bon, Paganistic and Shamanistic for example, it is vital to recognise and interact with an inherently autonomous and influential surrounding environment. This environment has influence over both our physical and spiritual selves. Being 'out of tune' with the environment is considered dangerous and foolish. In a sense the ideal relationship is of a reverence for the sacredness of the environment, and at the same time a harmonious interrelationship. This harmony is sustained traditionally through mindfulness and ritual sacrifice. At a more mystical level it is expected that the aspirant deconstructs the sense of Self, recognising the inherent nature within. Whether this nature is considered 'Void' or 'Brahman', both are considered absolute truth and end in a reorienting in response to the sense of interconnectedness.

Sikhs and Agriculture

I hold that the looming environmental crisis in Punjab is arguably as much a product of the religious reforms at the end of the 19th century as it is of the post-colonial ideas of capitalist industrialisation. It is a product of the axiomatic change in the gender construct that derives from the imposition of post-enlightenment colonial ideas upon land and body.

With the fall of the British Empire's exploitation of India's natural resources, Punjab soon underwent it's 'Green Revolution'. The ethos of maximising productivity for short term gain while ignoring the consequences for long term sustainability was taken to its logical extreme. Not surprisingly, Punjab presently cannot maintain the quick cash crops farmers are trying to produce. Ironically historically, the traditional Punjabi diet was itself dictated by local agriculture. Fields were not of the one-crop variety seen today, but rotational by season such that within one field different pulses were harvested in different seasons, requiring little water and maintenance.

Is this present situation just a consequence of economic models being out of kilter with the Punjab geographical context or is there more going on here? How could generation upon generation of farming know-how disappear so quickly? Surely such a fundamental change of tradition was unparalleled in agricultural history.

Harjot Oberoi in his application of Foucalt's method of geneaology to the period of Sikh reformation highlights the implications of the post-enlightenment discourse. The ideas that formed central assumptions of the British perspective and thus likewise the narrative of its educational institutions included the separation of reason from passion, of superstition from empirical validity, etc. It is worth reiterating here that there is a direct link between the prevailing Zeitgeist of a people and its interaction with the environment through agriculture. All the green theorists discussed above hold firm to the view that the environmental problems of modern society are internal not external.

To my mind it would seem that the imposition of such post-enlightenment assumptions onto Punjabi cultural norms and values could not have been easy and would have been rejected outright. Such a change could only be brought about internally to create this whole-hearted embrace of modernist cultural norms. As can be seen in Sikh history, religious authority is inherently entwined with political power. Whether it be through the institution of Sarbat Khalsa, the quasi-religious sentiments and patronisation of the Maharaja system or the current Akali politics of today, authority has been held by those who utilise religious authorities. Therefore it is clear that the fundamental change in worldview seen within Punjab undoubtedly stemmed from the Singh Sabha movement and its whole hearted adoption of the imported British Imperial values.

The question then arises as to how the success of the reformists translated into attitudes to the environment. To begin with we must look at some of the implications of the reform on religious principles. Clearly when delineating a self-contained set of universal religious principles (as was the challenge for the Singh Sabha tradition) a process of negation must occur. In other words, the Singh Sabha scholars define religious boundaries by contrasting Sikhi with what they believe it is not. The fundamental principles on what 'is' and 'isn't' derive from the methods of reading history provided by British educational institutions. This 'method of reading history' is inherently culturally biased to the British model.

Part of the critique provided by the Singh Sabha scholars is a rejection of 'superstition' that was seen to pervade the Panth. Superstition followed from British Protestant ideas of what constituted the 'superstitious' in religion. Consequently pilgrimage, the Divine Feminine, and te sacredness of the environment were construed as 'superstitious' (not least for their similarity to 'Hindu' practice which posed a threat for this new unique model of Sikh belief). Not surprisingly the implication of this is that writings and traditions of the Gurus that emphasised similar ideas were either rejected or removed. Sri Dasam Granth which contains many writings regarding the Divine Feminine has ever since been relegated to the status of superstitious spurious compositions.

The Divine Feminine is conveyed through such compositions as Chandi Di //, Chandi Charitra, Uggardhanti Bani, Akal Ustat, Charitr Pakhyan, among others. Through these compositions the Guru highlights the nature of the Devi, or rather the Shakti of the Shakta. This shakti is the expression of the causal principle that pervades everything. Hence the Devi is the means to manifestation.

jgqR mwiq iDAwieXM ] su jYq pqR pwieXM ] 4

They mediated on the mother of the universe;

for conquering the demon Mahishasura

The reading and meditation on these compositions whether by the Sikh, or by the religious authority figure to which the Sikh was attached, maintained the sacredness of the physical environment within the Sikh consciousness at that time.

Another consequence of the reform was not only a rejection of what was construed as 'superstitious' but what was seen as 'irrational'. Within the post-enlightenment narrative, passion and madness were both considered weak effeminate qualities. Not surprisingly a similar approach was taken by Singh Sabha scholars. As a consequence the Sikh 'Diwanay' tradition of mystics variously described as 'intoxicated', 'ecstatic' or 'mad' also disappeared. It is interesting to note that it is in this state of divine ecstasy that Guru Nānak Dev describes another model for interaction with the environment. In Rāg Asa he states;

ivsmwdu nwd ivsmwdu vyd]

wonderful, esoteric sound - wonderful, spiritual knowledge

ivsmwdu jIA ivsmwdu Bydu]

wonderful, life - wonderful, multiplicity

ivsmwdu rUp ivsmwdu rMg]

wonderful, the forms – wonderful, the colours

ivsmwdu nwgy iPrih jMq]

wonderful, the naked bodied creatures moving about

ivsmwdu pauxu ivsmwdu pwxI]

wonderful, wind – wonderful, water

ivsmwdu AgnI Kyfih ivfwxI]

wonderful, the fire playing the excessive game

ivsmwdu DrqI ivsmwdu KwxI]

wonderful, earth – wonderful, it’s resources

The consequence of perceiving the environment in purported 'rational' and 'non-superstitious' terms ends with the denigration of the traditional sacredness and reverence with which those in agriculture approached the land.

As Francisco Luis highlights in his essay on the gender issues in the Sikh tradition, the process of reform generates the definition of a new masculinity. It is perhaps not surprising that as the new masculinity appears, a detachment with the understanding of the sacred feminine within the land is necessarily critiqued and removed. Taking a psychoanalytic perspective it explains the psychological implications of this new model. The conflict this new masculinity generates requires the repression of any sense of 'femininity' and 'weakness' within the male psyche. This sense of inadequacy leads to a sense of violent dislike which finds expression in unconscious attitudes to the environment. Its expression is the desire to dominate, to control, to demonstrate this sense of machismo through violent action on the very landscape itself. Not surprisingly this is what is found in the modern Sikh understanding of the natural world.

A Sikh Ecologism

Clearly there are both similarities and differences between the present Green Ecological position and Sikhi. As was highlighted earlier, both are considered ideologies. The question is to what extent are they competing ideologies? It can be seen that in terms of the criteria for an ideology, the present deep ecological perspective is reached as a consequence rather than a principle of the Sikh narrative on society. It is important to recognise that this still allows the possibility of the Ecological assessment of society and plan of engagement to be wholly adopted as a consequence of adopting a lifestyle imbued with Sikh religious values.

On the issue of anthropocentrism in the Sikh tradition, it is possible to argue that the Sikh's pursuit of brahmgyān requires the individual to adopt a Deep Ecological position. The detachment required translates into a rejection of self-serving social interactions, instead looking to the inherent scope for compassion and service. It is not possible to maintain a 'means to an end' approach to not only people but resources. Furthermore, the state of the more spiritually advanced devotee is to begin to recognise the divine in every experiential object including the self. The implication here is that the individual again rejects any hierarchical notion of value since each and every experience is with that same sacredness. To distinguish between experiential objects is to fail to realise this state of awareness.

There are however differences also. In the field of Sikh ethics it would be naïve to argue that there is not a hierarchy with regard to pain and suffering. The motivation of the Guru was to defend the weak. This does not however mean that one cannot adopt a less anthropocentric perspective. Furthermore, utilising the notion of dharma, what is righteous and one's duty is fluid depending upon the context. Within the present era it would seem that one's duty is to value and work to protect the environment. Whether this is done out of a shallow or deep ecological motivation is difficult to generalise, but it is possible for both to apply equally. A heightened awareness of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji's teachings about the nature of the Devi or Shakti would also enable a greater everyday understanding of the sacredness of the natural environment. A challenge however is to hold what can be termed an overly Advaitist perspective, in which the whole experiential universe (including the natural environment) is considered mere solipsism and thus 'maya' or the 'illusion' alone. This illusion would then be considered something to be detached from and unaffected by. Thus any motivation to protect it is in a sense a product of and means to further ensnarement in its apparent importance and reality. The consequence of this approach could be a highly defeatist attitude to environmental destruction. Such an approach is not in keeping with the Guru's understanding, as demonstrated above.

Clearly the deep ecological perspective of Arne Naess can be identified as a by-product of the deeper Sikh spiritual practice. A shallow ecological perspective seems wholly in keeping with the less mystical ethical stipulations of everyday Sikhi also.

_________________________

Footnotes:

1 = Quotation from Bunyard and Morgan-Grenville 1987, it turns out to have been faked in the 1970s.

2 = What he means by this is a fundamental change at the root understanding of the self and its position in the world of experience, that when reconstructed encapsulates the deep ecological perspective.

3 = Fritjof Capra himself is involved in with magazine ‘Resurgence’ which along with Satish Kumar, promotes a deep ecological perspective.

Beyond Ego:

The failure of modern Sikhs to address environmental and global issues

Pavan Guru Pani Pita Mata Dharat Mahat

Divas Raat Do Dai Dayaan Khaile Sagal Jagat

Wind is the Guru, Water the father and the great earth the mother

Night and Day are the two nurses in whose lap the whole world plays

Origin of the Ego-Species

Guru Maharaj is very clear that the ego is the trickiest of all trickeries and that maya, which arises from it, holds the self in bondage. Listening to the wisdom of the Guru, the individual crosses safely over the ocean of experience, the bhavsāgar.

Modern science has its own language for ego. We know that our genetic inheritance is out of kilter with the environment within which we exist, driving us to consume as much sugar and fat as possible, pushing us toward sexual infidelity, ensuring we maintain one-up-manship by any means whether physical, financial or psychological. Within its own logic, the nature of existence is for self-preservation and self-replication. Within a psychological sense, we repeat behaviours which offer selfish reward or gain, the id as Freud would have it, underpins our selfishness as the baser, more immature aspect of our psyche.

All this is nothing new. The Gurus teach about the same dilemma within human existence. The term within Gurbani for this baser instinctual behaviour is haumai or hankaar, self-serving actions and thoughts that exist as an competing philosophy on the purpose of existence; selfish genetic reproduction.

It is clear that this manifests itself within economic models as fervent capitalism, inevitably culminating with multi-national corporations accountable only to their own agendas, feeding on the sustained slavery of the weak and exploitable. Consequently such global manifestations of man’s ego have caused the rapid decline and destruction of the ecosystems as a side-product. Our health is faltering, the world is suffering and the future is being jeopardised. Our unchecked consumerist tendencies are simply unsustainable. The greed society indoctrinates us into seeking is killing everything including ourselves. There is no need for me to quote you statistics. These are readily available everywhere (although strangely, few within these monuments of ego seem willing to act on them). This is all sadly predictable.

Yet what is to my mind doubly sickening, far less predictable, is that those who claim to be actively fighting against these inherent drives, those who wish to combat the unrelenting ego, stand just as guilty in this whole vicious cycle of destruction.

How can it be that our tradition that’s fundamental aim spiritually is the deconstruction of the false self, and has as a social aim the end oppression and slavery, not produced any significant efforts at tackling these pressing global issues?

Surveying Sikh press, prachār, literature, internet discussion and youth activity our tradition is so caught up in itself that it criminally fails to recognise the greater issues, the greater injustices, the greater failure of our own consumerism and exploitation. While we sit around engaging our egos in bickering about what is a Sikh, and which bana looks best, we continue sleepwalking towards the point of no return; the point at which the world simply will not be able to recover from.

A Sikh surely is driven to end exploitation, to end poverty, to end suffering of the weak. A Sikh surely should be striving to counter greed and avarice within themselves, yet many have no comprehension of the consequences of their decisions on the environment and the world’s resources. Who then is a Sikh? Is this really the truthful living Guru Ji lauds so highly? Is it not questionable whether anyone is truly following Sikhi?

The root of this ignorance

Is it the lack of critique about the value we place on modernisation and on industrialisation? Clearly the elder generation still hold the Green Revolution as a success. Punjab however is on the brink of an agricultural disaster from having central and local government supported programs enforcing yields and methods on land to which it is not suited.

Perhaps it is the lack of specific guidance on modern relevant ethical living? Very little information is produced by Sikhs on ethical living in a heavily consumerist and modernised society. The maryadas people hold deal with the religio-socio context, but never broader ethical issues. However, as shall be demonstrated, if one applies Sikhi effectively to everyday life it is impossible to sustain an unethical wasteful lifestyle.

Could it be the consequence of a perspective which holds the environment as being in our ‘stewardship’? While this may well hold true for Semitic theological perspectives, it does not for Sikhi in which we ‘exist’ only through ignorance not through creation.

Could it be the reverse, a resignation arising out of a doctrine that holds the reality around us as total illusion? If this were the case it would make Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s actions inconsistent with Sikh doctrine. Sikhi manifests the importance of actively challenging injustice and ending suffering.

Could it be that all religions have little to offer on this issue? Within other traditions greater efforts have been made to raise awareness of these issues. Satish Kumar, once a Jain monk, has given so much to the world through his actions and writing. Within the Buddhist tradition there have been sustained efforts by the likes of the Dalai Lama, the Pure Land tradition overseas and the Zen tradition. Among Christians there has been much work and support for charity work and fair trade. For example a church in which I have given talks in interfaith meetings in my city has events, talks and advertising for Fair Trade products along with charity work. Why then should it be that Sikhs have so little to their name other than Bhagat Puran Singh’s tree sanctuary?

Gurbani and the environment

Gurbani at its core provides us with the means to realise ourselves and thus become liberated from the chains of illusion. As such, the more particular minutiae of ethical and environmental considerations must be understood through the application of the Guru’s teaching to lifestyle. Guru Gobind Singh Ji clarified for his Sikhs that one must perform one’s duty to truth within the context one lives in. Within Gurbani we find references to the natural environment as metaphors; Kabir’s blissful evocation of the blossoming earth and sky in Raag Basant, Guru Nanak Dev Ji enlarging the whole cosmos as the manifestation of the energetic celebration of its source in the Aarti shabads.

Even within the simple maxim of naam daan ishnaan, proportion is given to charity; the application of the fruits of our meditation to everyday action. From the meditation arises an increased awareness of the consequences of our actions on the environment around us. In striving to become less egotistical we must practice humility and moderation. Can this really be reconciled with careers in industries that function along capitalist models?

Those of us who have taken amrit gave our head to the Guru for the protection of dharma and to defend the weak but in our everyday living, do we consume products produced unethically, fail to recycle, aid the exploitation of farmers by not buying fair trade, buy products and thus sustain a market for foods which cause great pollution through being imported by air? These actions to my mind produce only hypocrisy.

A Khalsa; an individual who sacrifices their own interests for the sake of others, the upholder of truth, fighting to protect dharma. Surely it is not too hard to recognise that in this age the individuals who have given up their comfortable lives and have risked themselves in standing up to these powerful foes for the good of everyone are not the boys in blue who sit in warm Gurdwaras in the UK tucking into langar, but the likes of Greenpeace through their active protests against environmental exploitation and destruction*.

So therefore, what is the need of the moment? What is the dharm yudh we should be engaging in? Who are the real oppressors who need to be tackled? Even the smallest actions can have some positive effect.

For those of you who hold to more ‘puratan’ values, clearly Guru Gobind Singh Ji in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib and Sri Sarbloh Granth Sahib propounds the greatness of the divine feminine, the shakti, the energy of manifestation. This Mata is dharat mahat, is the cosmos, that of treh-guna. We should ensure she is respected for it is through this that the Shabad Guru exists.

These are only words. What is needed right now is your actions and attitudes to change, and for you to actively support projects and campaigners in these fields.

* Anyone interested in the spiritual aspects of the ecological movement should read up on the Deep Ecological philosophy of Arne Naess. Bill Devall is a good starting point on this.

the meditation arises an increased awareness of the consequences of our actions on the environment around us. In striving to become less egotistical we must practice humility and moderation. Can this really be reconciled with careers in industries that function along capitalist models?

Those of us who have taken amrit gave our head to the Guru for the protection of dharma and to defend the weak but in our everyday living, do we consume products produced unethically, fail to recycle, aid the exploitation of farmers by not buying fair trade, buy products and thus sustain a market for foods which cause great pollution through being imported by air? These actions to my mind produce only hypocrisy.

A Khalsa; an individual who sacrifices their own interests for the sake of others, the upholder of truth, fighting to protect dharma. Surely it is not too hard to recognise that in this age the individuals who have given up their comfortable lives and have risked themselves in standing up to these powerful foes for the good of everyone are not the boys in blue who sit in warm Gurdwaras in the UK tucking into langar, but the likes of Greenpeace through their active protests against environmental exploitation and destruction*.

So therefore, what is the need of the moment? What is the dharm yudh we should be engaging in? Who are the real oppressors who need to be tackled? Even the smallest actions can have some positive effect.

For those of you who hold to more ‘puratan’ values, clearly Guru Gobind Singh Ji in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib and Sri Sarbloh Granth Sahib propounds the greatness of the divine feminine, the shakti, the energy of manifestation. This Mata is dharat mahat, is the cosmos, that of treh-guna. We should ensure she is respected for it is through this that the Shabad Guru exists.

These are only words. What is needed right now is your actions and attitudes to change, and for you to actively support projects and campaigners in these fields.

* Anyone interested in the spiritual aspects of the ecological movement should read up on the Deep Ecological philosophy of Arne Naess. Bill Devall is a good starting point on this.

[xHarinder_singh]

<< Surveying Sikh press, prachār, literature, internet discussion and youth activity our tradition is so caught up in itself that it criminally fails to recognise the greater issues, the greater injustices, the greater failure of our own consumerism and exploitation. While we sit around engaging our egos in bickering about what is a Sikh, and which bana looks best, we continue sleepwalking towards the point of no return; the point at which the world simply will not be able to recover from.

A Sikh surely is driven to end exploitation, to end poverty, to end suffering of the weak. A Sikh surely should be striving to counter greed and avarice within themselves, yet many have no comprehension of the consequences of their decisions on the environment and the world’s resources. Who then is a Sikh? Is this really the truthful living Guru Ji lauds so highly? Is it not questionable whether anyone is truly following Sikhi? >>>

Thats great.

These days everyone has enough time to bash fellow sikhs based on jatha-ism, but very few people have time to do something for the environment. Global Warming and Peak Oil are going to ruin the world in the very future, but I hardly find sikhs being much interested about these subjects.

[N30S1NGH]

<< Surveying Sikh press, prachār, literature, internet discussion and youth activity our tradition is so caught up in itself that it criminally fails to recognise the greater issues, the greater injustices, the greater failure of our own consumerism and exploitation. While we sit around engaging our egos in bickering about what is a Sikh, and which bana looks best, we continue sleepwalking towards the point of no return; the point at which the world simply will not be able to recover from.

A Sikh surely is driven to end exploitation, to end poverty, to end suffering of the weak. A Sikh surely should be striving to counter greed and avarice within themselves, yet many have no comprehension of the consequences of their decisions on the environment and the world’s resources. Who then is a Sikh? Is this really the truthful living Guru Ji lauds so highly? Is it not questionable whether anyone is truly following Sikhi? >>>

Thats great.

These days everyone has enough time to bash fellow sikhs based on jatha-ism, but very few people have time to do something for the environment. Global Warming and Peak Oil are going to ruin the world in the very future, but I hardly find sikhs being much interested about these subjects.

isnt that your first post is a rant itself without any objectivity.. atleast articles gives you objectivity with sources for its comments...only few handful people may be doing something before but thats not the case today, we are living abroad remember there is one dedicated day everyone shuts off light, few canadian gurdwaras comply with it and shut off their lights..few apples may be bad but not all of it. Nevertheless, i agree with you first comment, thats why to further reinforce posted those two articles to back it up with the sources so it just doesnt seem like a typical rant.

[xHarinder_singh]

At present, the punjab's drinking water has become very very poisonous. The budha naala which mixes with sutlej and beas has made the water going to malwa side(fardikot, ferozepur) poisonous and has destroyed many many families.

I feel it is the duty of sikh jathebandis or individual devoted sikhs to do something about it. I feel environmentalism is a subset of sikh way of life and its sad that we are paying very less importance to it. Every sikh shud be an environmentalist.

Recently, I met a gursikh who is trying to do something about the budha nalaa stuff. He told me that environmentalism is a type of bhagti for him. Working for the welfare of the nature, plants, animals and human beings gives his spiritual life a huge boost.

[S1ngh]

Education is the key and its very important to have a program of preserving nature be implemented in school system and thats the only way to take care of Punjab Nature.

[xHarinder_singh]

Education is the key and its very important to have a program of preserving nature be implemented in school system and thats the only way to take care of Punjab Nature.

At present, the person in Punjab who is seriously doing something for the environment is Sant Balbir Singh Seecheval Jee and I dont think he learnt all this from his school/college. A sikh shud love nature and that shud make him an environmentalist. A person who doesnt love nature, how can he love God ? Nature is a form of God and only a person who is japping Naam can love nature.

[S1ngh]

Its not possible everybody in Punjab to become like Balbir Singh Seechewal. We had our great Bhagat Puran Singh jee who led his life of several decades as bhagat, helper and environmentalist but still ppl at large didn't learn anything from him or his institution. The only way to reach to the mass majority of punjabis is thru schooling.

[Singhstah]

Living a gursikhi lifestyle one would naturally be a green person, if the whole world was full of gurmukhs there would be no problem. Gursikh lifestyle is use little, eat little, overall simple lifestyle = less waste, less carbon footprint.

Naam japo and the radius around you for miles will be pure

[xHarinder_singh]

Living a gursikhi lifestyle one would naturally be a green person, if the whole world was full of gurmukhs there would be no problem. Gursikh lifestyle is use little, eat little, overall simple lifestyle = less waste, less carbon footprint.

Naam japo and the radius around you for miles will be pure

Dear Veer, I feel that the people in Punjab who are living an environmental friendly life are the poor bihari people,lol. On the other hand, punjabis(amridharis and non amritdharis) have to take the responsibility of polluting punjab's environment. The "green" revolution was/is one of the main cause of environmental degradation and majority of farmers are sikhs. Then USA is No. 1 environmental terrorist and emits the maximum green house gases but thats where most punjabis(amritdharis and non amritdharis) want to live.

We have almost reached a point of no return in Punjab. People like Baba Balbir Singh Seechewal are fighting a lone battle and HUGE credit shud be given to Baba jee. I feel there is an urgent need for all sikhs to do the following :

1. adopt natural farming practices even if it results in less income.(thats where santokh is needed which very few people have).

2. walk/ use bicycle to travel distances in the range of 5-10 kilometres(many well-off goraas all over the world are doing this and the "gurmukhs" need to learn from such manmukhs, lol)

3. start gardening. Sikhs living in cities can have urban gardens and reduce the dependence on industrial agriculture.

4. start wearing simple khaadi clothes. Textile industry is one of the main culprits in water pollution.

5. Completely give up PLASTIC products. PLASTIC IS EVIL.