Editor’s Foreword
Eco-spiritual Perspective
C
oncern for Ecology does not mean just worshipping the nature. The Chāndogya Upanishad (6.3.3,4,7) calls the five elements ‘devatas’, which Ananda Coomaraswamy insightfully translates as ‘angelic powers’. In that sense these elements have a function to fulfill in the universe like the role of angels in the Catholic Christian tradition. In the Southern Saiva tradition these five elements are said to be attributes of Lord Shiva. In fact, there are five temples dedicated to Lord Shiva in Tamil land representing the five elements: Kālahasti near Tirupati for wind; Cidambaram for space; Kāncīpuram for earth; Tiruvannāmalai for fire; and Tiruvānaikāval for water. They are not without deep spiritual significance. Tirumantiram (a 12th Century Saiva text) tells us that Shiva dances in all the five elements. The dance here is a metaphor for the Divine Presence. But ecology insists that we listen to the five elements. Raimon Panikkar prefers to use the word ecosophy, which suggests a wisdom of which we are not the owners. Bernard of Clairvaux, almost a century before Francis of Assisi, wrote: “The woods and stones will teach you what cannot be heard from the masters”. Nature is alive, and we have to listen to it. According to Panikkar, ecosophy contests modern science in threefold ways. First, knowledge implies the threefold activity by which Man is a human being: to discern, to make the right choice, and to put it into practice. This knowledge has a saving power. The ideal of wisdom, sapientia, jñāna still conveys this triple power; whereas modern science is mere calculus, fascinating and useful as it may be, but it has no saving power any longer. Secondly, modern science is based on a method of quantification and experimentation, and therefore needs an external control. But the sage “knew” that any knowledge “touches” the known thing, that is, in communion with reality. Ecosophy does not approach
4
Cenkāntal u DECEM BER 2020
living beings as inert and inanimate “matter”, it respects their spontaneity while acknowledging the hierarchical order of reality. Matter herself is alive. The very notion of life is not limited to the life of plants and animals. Thirdly, modern science is neither neutral nor universal, which are the core claims of colonialist belief. If life means to know and to share, in a human way, ‘the wisdom of the Earth and the mysteries of the Real in order to grant people a full participation in the adventure of Reality, then we do not need most of the data and skills with which modern science stuffs our brains and hearts.’ Panikkar’s whole contention is that if techno-science has become an indispensable specialty, then we are at the mercy of those specialists. ‘This syndrome simply repeats the centuries of domination of a privileged caste over the rest of humanity. The traditional societies recognized a hierarchical order, and thus the power of the elite was believed to have a divine sanction as in the case of kings, priests, brahmans, and the like. Now the might of the scientific caste today wields a power over life and death immensely superior to any other caste of any other period of human memory.’ Even at this time of corona pandemic, a visit to any modern hospital or military base is enough to grasp what this power is like. ‘It is one thing to be interindependent, it is quite another thing to be totally dependent (in bondage).’ This issue focuses on the environmental concerns within geographical zone of today’s Tamilnadu, the East coast, the Western Ghats etc., the Jesuit contribution to the study of this area, and a few reflections on the eco-spiritual perspective from the Hindu, Christian and Muslim traditions. The graceful contributions of the writers for this Bulletin are gratefully acknowledged. Anand Amaladass S. J. (amaladass24@gmail.com)
