The India Climate Observatory

Commentary, action and research on climate and development in India

Between contemplation and climate

by Leave a Comment

Whether or not the USA, Europe, the Western world, the industrialised Eastern world (China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), adhere to or not their paltry promises about being more responsible concerning the factors that lead to climate change, is of very little concern to us. We have never set any store by international agreements on climate change.

This year will see the twenty-third conference of parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and for 23 years the world and India have listened to lofty tales about simple science. In these 23 years, neither has reckless consumption been halted nor has the economic model that encourages such reckless consumption been questioned by the conference of parties. As long as they do not, inter-governmental agreements are useless.

That is why we find unnecessary and pointless the hand-wringing that has taken place about the decision of the government of the USA to exit what is called the ‘Paris Agreement’, the December 2015 document agreed to and signed by practically every country which has some fuzzy paragraphs about low-carbon economy, innovation, technology, energy and finance – all of which have very much to do with the hold of the finance capitalists and the global technocrats over the international systems of our time.

President number 45 of the USA is neither wiser than nor baser than the wisest of basest of any of his predecessors: the American political system has to do entirely with the desire to dominate other countries. Number 45’s manner may be irksome, but through him speaks the American finance capital, its bloatsome defence industry and its insensate technology industry.

We do not expect the chiefs of the Western countries, the so-called major powers of the European Union, and their allies such as Japan and Australia to do any less. They are no different. We do not think any of them, their armies of bland advisers, their bankers and the brigades of industrialists great and petty who crowd their corridors of governance have read, much less reflected, on the lambent wisdom of our civilisation.

Many centuries ago, in the section of the Digha Nikaya, or Collection of Long Discourses, called Samannaphala Sutta, or the Fruits of the Contemplative Life, it was written that there are those who are addicted to debates and shout: “You understand this doctrine and discipline? I’m the one who understands this doctrine and discipline. How could you understand this doctrine and discipline? You’re practicing wrongly. I’m practicing rightly. I’m being consistent. You’re not. What should be said first you said last. What should be said last you said first. What you took so long to think out has been refuted. Your doctrine has been overthrown. You’re defeated. Go and try to salvage your doctrine; extricate yourself if you can!”

And this is how we view what are called climate negotiations, between the experts of countries. We care not for the arguments of number 45 of the USA, for what many in the world in the last week have protested as being absurd – it undermines economy, it takes away jobs, it is unfair, it is disadvantageous to us, and so on – is what they cheer and support their own countries for in areas where they stand to gain, such as trade (to sell cheap and useless goods), technology (to enslave and control), finance (to spin webs of debt), processes of modernisation (to homogenise cultures so that ever more ‘markets’ come into being).

We in India need no such instruction. But we must guard against our philosophies being swept away by these agreements, these grand comities of nations, the barrage of numerics and scientifics that are invented to display to us what a threat we are should we not emulate the West and its ways. We must guard against our own who prefer the baubles of post-industrial society to the intellectual and spiritual riches of our civilisation, and who seek to infest India with the same technological and ‘modern’ wares that so entranced the West and doomed its folk. This has very little to do with climate and its change and very much more to do with our Indic sciences and their worth, our conduct and our duty to Punyabhoomi Bharat.

– Rahul Goswami

An 8th century moral for climate dialogue

by Leave a Comment

ICP_20150904_pic

Prime Minister Narendra Modi employed an event from the life of Sri Adi Shankarachaya, the late 8th century spiritual master, to emphasise the importance of dialogue in finding ways to deal with climate change and also problems that are international in scope, such as conflict and the need for environmental consciousness.

Modi said this at the inauguration in New Delhi of ‘Samvad’, the Global Hindu-Buddhist Initiative on Conflict Avoidance and Environment Consciousness. Amongst those who listened to his address were: the Most Venerable Sayadaw Dr Asin Nyanissara, Founder Chancellor of the Sitagu International Buddhist Academy in Myanmar; Her Excellency Mrs Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, the former President of Sri Lanka; Minoru Kiuchi, State Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan; and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.

The Prime Minister said that the themes chosen for the symposium – avoiding conflicts, moving towards environmental consciousness and free and frank dialogue – “may appear independent but they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are mutually dependent and supportive”. Calling climate change a pressing global challenge, the PM said a response to climate change calls for collective human action.

“The Buddhist tradition, in all of its historical and cultural manifestations, encourages greater identification with the natural world because from a Buddhist perspective nothing has a separate existence,” he said. “The impurities in the environment affect the mind, and the impurities of mind also pollute the environment. In order to purify the environment, we have to purify the mind.”

He pointed out that ethical values of personal restraint in consumption and environmental consciousness are deeply rooted in Asian philosophical traditions, especially in Hinduism and Buddhism which along with other faiths such as Confucianism, Taoism and Shintoism have undertaken greater responsibility to protect the environment. “Hinduism and Buddhism with their well-defined treatises on Mother Earth can help examine the changes in approach that need to be made.”

Modi said that the present generation has the responsibility of holding in trust the rich natural wealth for future generations. “The issue is not merely about climate change; it is about climate justice,” he said. He spoke of the need to shift from an ideological approach to a philosophic one. “The essence of philosophy is that it is not a closed thought, while ideology is a closed one. So philosophy not only allows dialogue but it is a perpetual search for truth through dialogue.”

Advocating dialogue which produces no anger or retribution, Modi said that one of the greatest examples of such dialogue was the one between Adi Sankaracharya and Mandana Mishra, a debate whose significance has educated and edified many generations of Indians. The PM related that Adi Sankaracharya wanted to establish through dialogue and debate with the highest authority on ritualism that rituals were not necessary for attaining ‘mukti’, whereas Mandana Mishra wanted to prove that Sankara was wrong in dismissing rituals.

“This was how, in ancient India, debates on sensitive issues between scholars avoided such issues being settled in streets. Adi Sankara and Mandana Mishra held a debate and Sankara won. But the more important point is not the debate itself but how was the debate was conducted. It is a fascinating story that will ever remain one of the highest forms of debate for all times for humanity,” he said.