|
The Jain religion originated
more than twenty-five hundred years ago in India.
It developed a path of renunciation and purification
designed to liberate one from the shackles of
karma, allowing one to enter into a state
of eternal liberation from rebirth, or kevala,
which is roughly equivalent to the Buddhist concept
of nirvana. The primary method of attaining
this ultimate state requires a careful observance
of nonviolent behavior. Jainism emphasizes nonviolence,
or ahimsa, as the only true path that leads
to liberation and prescribes following scrupulous
rules for the protection of life in all forms.1
The origins of Jainism are somewhat
difficult to trace. The tradition holds that twenty-four
great teachers, or Tirthankaras, established the
foundations of the Jain faith. The most recent
of these teachers, Vardhamana Mahavira (also known
as the Jina) most probably lived during the time
of the Buddha. Recent scholarship suggests that
the Buddha lived in the fourth century BCE. However,
the traditional stories of Mahavira indicate that
he was born into a family that followed the religious
teachings of Parsvanatha, the twenty-third Tirthankara,
who possibly taught during the eighth century
BCE. Because virtually no archaeological ruins
can be found in India for the period from 1500
to 300 BCE, exact dates cannot be determined.
However, the first excavations of northern India
during the Hellenistic era (ca. 300 BCE) include
statues of Jain images. Furthermore, the earliest
Buddhist texts discuss Jainism in some detail,
suggesting that it was a well-established tradition
even before the time of the Buddha.
The records of Strabo (64 BCE to
23 CE), the Greek geographer, describe two prevailing
styles of religiosity in India at the time of
Alexander (ca. 330 BCE), as recorded by Megasthenes
(350–290 BCE): the Brahmanical traditions,
later described by the Persians as “Hindu,”
and the Sramanical traditions, which include Buddhism
and Jainism.2
The Brahmanical traditions emphasize the Vedas,
ritual, and the authority of a priestly caste.
The Sramanical traditions do not accept the Vedas,
advocate meditation rather than ritual, and look
to monks and nuns for religious authority. Buddhism
sent out missionaries from India who established
Theravada Buddhism in Southeast Asia, Mahayana
Buddhism in East Asia, and Vajrayana Buddhism
in Central Asia. Buddhism flourished in India
until the tenth century, when its influence waned.
Jainism did not establish a missionary
tradition but cultivated a strong laity. Like
Buddhism, it began in Northeast India but, possibly
because of drought in the third century BCE, many
Jains moved to the southern kingdoms of Karnataka
and Tamil Nadu, as well to the western parts of
India now known as Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Madhya
Pradesh. Eventually, two sects of Jainism arose:
the Digambaras, primarily found in central and
southern India, and the Svetambaras, who live
primarily in western India. The two groups agree
on the foundational Jain principles of karma
and nonviolence. However, they differ on their
biographical accounts of Mahavira, accept different
texts as authentically canonical, and hold divergent
views on renouncing clothing and on the potential
spiritual status of women. The Svetambaras, whose
name means “white clad,” contend that
monks and nuns can achieve the highest levels
of spirituality without renouncing their clothing.
They also believe that women hold the potential
to achieve the state of liberation, or kevala.
The Digambaras, whose name means “sky clad,”
hold that all clothing must ultimately be renounced
and that, because only men are allowed to take
this ultimate vow of renunciation, a woman must
be reborn as a man to achieve kevala. These
traditions arose in geographic isolation from
one another and developed into distinct schools
by the early centuries of the common era.
The Acaranga Sutra (ca. 400 BCE),
a text used extensively by the Svetambaras, is
the oldest surviving Jain manual, describing the
rules proclaimed by Mahavira to be followed by
his monks and nuns. One thinker, Umasvati, who
probably lived in the fourth century CE, developed
a philosophical approach to Jainism that both
Svetambaras and Digambaras accept. In a text known
as the Tattvartha Sutra, or Aphorisms
on the Meaning of Reality, he succinctly outlines
the Jain world-view, describing karma,
cosmology, ethics, and the levels of spiritual
attainment (gunasthana). Later philosophers, including
Haribhadra (ca. 750 CE) and Hemacandra (ca. 1150
CE) of the Svetambara tradition and Jinasena (ca.
820 CE) and Virasena (ca. 800 CE) of the Digambara
tradition, developed an extensive literary corpus
that includes stories, epics, philosophical treatises,
and poetry. During the Mogal period, Jinacandrasuri
II (1541–1613), the leader of the Kharatara
Gaccha (a subdivision of the Svetambara sect)
achieved great influence at the court of Akbar,
convincing the emperor to protect Jain pilgrimage
places. Akbar even prohibited animal slaughter
for one week per year under Jinacandrasuri’s
urging. In contemporary times, Jain have become
very influential in the areas of publishing, law,
and business. They continue to work at integrating
their philosophy of nonviolence into the daily
life of India.
The Jain community has also participated
in an extensive diaspora, with several tens of
thousands living in various parts of the world.
Jain business families settled in East Africa
several decades ago. After Indian independence,
some Jains settled in Great Britain, with a great
influx from East Africa during the expulsion of
all South Asians from Uganda under the rule of
Idi Amin. In Kobe, Japan, Jains participate in
the diamond trade. Jains began migrating to North
America after the changes in immigration law in
1965, inspired by the Civil Rights movement. These
new immigrants have built temples and organized
several networks and organizations for maintaining
Jain identity, including the Jaina Associations
in North America (JAINA), which sponsors semiyearly
conventions. These gatherings have included presentations
pertaining to current issues, such as environmentalism.3
The common concerns between Jainism and environmentalism
can be found in a mutual sensitivity toward living
things, a recognition of the inter-connectedness
of life-forms, and support of programs that educate
others to respect and protect living systems.
For the Jains, this approach is anchored in a
cosmology that views the world in terms of a cosmic
woman whose body contains countless life souls
(jiva) that reincarnate repeatedly until
the rare attainment of spiritual liberation (kevala).
The primary means to attain freedom requires the
active nonharming of living beings, which disperses
the karmas that keep one bound. Jains adhere
to the vows of nonviolence to purify their karma
and advance toward the higher states of spiritual
attainment (gunasthana). For Jain laypeople,
this generally means keeping to a vegetarian diet
and pursuing livelihoods deemed to inflict a minimum
of harm. For Jain monks and nuns, this means the
need to avoid doing harm to all forms of life,
including bugs and microorganisms (nigoda).
Contemporary environmental thinkers
in the developed world, particularly within the
last decade of the twentieth century, have come
to emphasize the interconnectedness of life as
the foundation for developing an environmental
ethic. On the policy level, the Endangered Species
Act of the United States extends protection to
even the smallest aspect of life, emphasizing
the microphase as the key to ecosystem protection.
Taking a different approach, Norway has developed
a comprehensive approach to assess the impact
of one action on the broader network of relationships
within a given biome.4
Both approaches grapple with the age-old problem
of how to balance the needs of the one and the
many when working toward the highest good.
Drawing from her own relationships
with trees, ecologist Stephanie Kaza has proposed
an approach to the natural world that engenders
feelings of tenderness, respect, and protection.
She writes:
The relationship between person
and tree, arising over and over again in many
different contexts and with various individuals,
is one subset of all human-nonhuman relationships.
. . . I want to know, What does it actually
mean to be in a relationship with a tree? Acknowledgment
of and participation in relationships with trees,
coyotes, mountains, and rivers is central to
the philosophy of deep ecology. . . . In the
course of studying mountains and rivers in depth,
one sees them explode into all the phenomena
that support their existence—clouds, stones,
people walking, animals crawling, the earth
shaking.5
By participating in the close observation
of individual life processes, in this case using
the tree as a starting point, one begins to see
the network of relationships that enlivens all
forms of consciousness. By gaining intimacy with
a small part of the whole, concern for the larger
ecosystem arises. Each piece, no matter how small,
contributes to the whole. To disrupt the chain
of life at any link can result in dire consequences,
as seen in the release of radioactivity in Chernobyl,
the great industrial accident in Bhopal, the depletion
of the ozone layer over the polar caps, and the
extinction of various species of plants and animals.
As seen in the above example from
Stephanie Kaza, an important impetus for environmental
activism comes from the close observance and consequent
appreciation of the external world. As our ecosystem
becomes impoverished, humans take notice and respond.
Ultimately, this concern for nature can be seen
as a form of self-preservation, as the earth is
the only context for human flourishing. Similarly,
according to the Acaranga Sutra, Mahavira
was moved when he observed nature at close range,
noticing that even the simplest piece of a meadow
teems with life:
Thoroughly knowing the earth-bodies
and water-bodies and fire-bodies and wind-bodies,
the lichens, seeds, and sprouts, he comprehended
that they are, if narrowly inspected, imbued
with life. . . .6
In a contemporary echo of this realization,
James Laidlaw records the conversion moment of
a woman who subsequently decided to become a Jain
nun:
the decision came one morning
when she walked into the kitchen. There was
a cockroach in the middle of the floor, “and
I just looked at it and suddenly I thought,
‘Why should I stay in this world where
there is just suffering and death and rebirth?”’7
Seeing the life and spirit of a
lowly insect inspired this woman to pursue a lifelong
commitment of harmlessness to all beings. Benevolence
to souls other than one’s own leads to self-purification
and the transcendence of worldly entanglements.
The ethics of nonviolence as developed by the
Jains looks simultaneously inward and outward.
The only path for saving one’s own soul requires
the protection of all other possible souls.
Jainism offers a worldview that
in many ways seems readily compatible with core
values associated with environmental activism.
While both uphold the protection of life, the
underlying motives governing the Jain faith and
those governing environmental activism do differ.
First, as various authors in this book will point
out, the telos or goal of Jainism lies beyond
all worldly concerns. The Jain observances of
nonviolence, for instance, are not ultimately
performed for the sake of protecting the individual
uniqueness of any given life-form for its own
sake. The reason for the protection of life is
for self-benefit, stemming from a desire to avoid
accruing a karmic debt that will result in later
retribution against oneself. The result may be
the same; a life might be spared. However, this
is a by-product of a desire to protect and purify
oneself through the avoidance of doing harm. In
the case of some environmental activists, aggressive,
direct action might be undertaken to interfere
with and stop the destruction of a natural habitat
in a way that might be seen as violent, such as
the monkey-wrenching techniques used by EarthFirst!8
This would not be acceptable to a Jain.
In this volume the following questions
will be posed: How does traditional Jain cosmology,
and its consequent ethics, view the natural world?
Is this worldview compatible with contemporary
ecological theory? How might a Jain ethical system
respond to the challenges of making decisions
regarding such issues as the development of dams,
the proliferation of automobiles, overcrowding
due to overpopulation, and the protection of individual
animal species? Can there be a Jain environmental
activism that stems from a traditional concern
for self-purification that simultaneously responds
to the contemporary dilemma of ecosystem degradation?
In the chapters that follow, this
topic will be pursued from a variety of perspectives.
The voices included in this volume reflect a wide
spectrum of approaches. Several scholars born
and trained in the West take a critical look at
the real prospects for Jain advocacy of environmental
protection. Jain scholars from India, on the other
hand, see actual solutions in Jain philosophy
for correcting ecological imbalances through a
reconsideration of lifestyle and active application
of ahimsa. Perhaps the closest analogue
to environmental activism within historical Jainism
can be found in the tradition of animal protection,
as found in the many hundreds, if not thousands,
of shelters, or pinjrapoles, located in
and near Jain communities in western India.9
Modern initiatives, some of which are mentioned
in this book, include tree-planting prgrams at
pilgrimage sites. Dr. Michael Fox of the Humane
Society and the Center for Respect of Life and
Environment has re-energized an animal shelter
inspired by Jain values in South India.10
By combining the ancient practice of animal protection
with considered reflections on how traditional
Jain observances of non-violence might counter
the excesses of the modern, industrialized, consumer-oriented
lifestyle, the Jain faith might provide a new
voice for the development of ecofriendly behaviors.
The book has been divided into
four sections, followed by an appendix and a bibliography.
The first section examines Jain theories about
the nature of the universe, which then provide
the context for developing an ecological interpretation
of the tradition. The second section raises some
challenges to the possibility of developing an
ecofriendly Jain ethic. The third section, written
by Jain practitioners, asserts that Jainism, with
its emphasis on nonviolence (ahimsa), is
inherently sensitive to and practically responsive
to environmental needs. The fourth section discusses
the adaptation of ecological ideas among select
members of the contemporary Jain community, largely
among its diaspora adherents.
In the first chapter, Nathmal Tatia,
who passed away shortly after the conference on
Jainism and ecology took place in the summer of
1998, suggests that virtually all the religious
traditions of the world “contain aspects
that are not anthropocentric” and then introduces
key aspects of Jain philosophy. Noting that neither
Jainism nor Buddhism contains a creating or controlling
God, he emphasizes compassion as the key for the
protection of life. Tatia suggests that the Jain
advocacy of vegetarianism and protection of animals
provide a possible remedy for the current ecological
crisis. He provides a synoptic view of how the
application of traditional Jain ethics can help
one enact environmentalist values.
Philosopher John Koller probes the
Jain theory of many-sidedness (anekanta)
as an antidote to the one-theory approach that
drives the development machine and has led to
environmental degradation. Jains traditionally
seek to understand any situation from as many
angles as possible, as exemplified in the famous
story of the six blind men and the elephant. One
feels the tail and “sees” a snake. Another
feels the ear and “sees” a fan, and
so forth. Each can claim a “truth,”
but no one, at least before the experience of
kevala, can claim to see totality. By
utilizing a multiple-perspective approach to environmental
issues, Koller suggests that Jains will be better
equipped to cope with such ethical dilemmas as
the use and abuse of trees and oceans.
Kristi Wiley begins her chapter
with an assessment of the discipline of environmental
ethics as it has evolved in Western academia.
Noting the shift from anthropocentrism to biocentrism,
Wiley sees some commonalities between the moral
considerations of Jainism and systems ecologists.
Her careful interpretation of indigenous Jain
biology and elemental theory lists in detail the
karmic effects of negative interactions with one’s
environment. She makes the important distinction
between beings with consciousness (samjni)
and those without consciousness (asamjni),
which provides some basis for using plants and
the elements as resources for human sustenance.
Wiley also emphasizes the central role played
by the nuns and monks who serve as the conscience
of the Jain tradition, advocating protection for
even those beings who lack awareness, such as
plants and the living bodies contained within
earth, water, fire, and air.
The second section poses challenges
to the conventional assumption that Jainism by
its very nature contains all the precepts of environmentalism.
It begins with an essay by John Cort, who suggests
that a great deal of work needs to be accomplished
before the Jain tradition can honestly claim to
be ecofriendly. Noting that the environmental
crisis is a recent development, he suggests that
environmental thought and activism might help
inform how Jains define and realize their commitment
to ahimsa. In particular, he discusses
the Jain “value of wellbeing” as providing
a counterbalance to the Jain emphasis on liberation,
noting that “Jain ethics . . . are highly
context-sensitive” and hence adaptable according
to time and place. He compares and contrasts ecofeminism
and the role of women in Jainism, and suggests
that social ecology must be taken into consideration,
noting that the project to reforest Jain pilgrimage
sites has had a negative effect on low-caste herders
whose livestock have become restricted from foraging.
Acknowledging the long history of Jainism as a
social catalyst, Cort looks forward to the development
of a “distinctive Jain environmental ethic.”
Paul Dundas suggests that in the
history of Jainism some attitudes toward nature
may have been less than ecofriendly. He describes
the dualistic and pluralistic nature of Jain philosophy,
which divides the world into living and nonliving
entities, with each living entity (jiva)
responsible for its own fate. Dundas states that
within this worldview nature in and of itself
has no “autonomous value.” Value lies
in the human application of nonviolence to attain,
as noted earlier in this introduction, the release
of all karma and the eventual severance
from all materiality, including “nature.”
To apply purely monastic values to the issue of
ecological degradation simply does not work, argues
Dundas, citing various ethical tales about elephant-eating
ascetics, brutal horse tamers, and well diggers,
each of which seems to contain, at best, an ambiguous
environmental ethic. He cautions that one must
exert care in attempting to match a “traditional
soteriological path” to “fit the requirements
of a modern, ultimately secular, Western-driven
agenda.”
My own chapter suggests that the
Jain community could benefit from examining its
worldview and ethics in light of some contemporary
theorists in the area of religion and ecology,
specifically Brian Swimme, Thomas Berry, and David
Abram. Each of these three has highlighted the
dynamic aspects of living processes, displaying
a sen-sitivity to life somewhat similar to that
found in Jainism. David Abram has emphasized in
particular the role of the senses in determining
and defining reality, taking an approach comparable
to the empiricism emphasized in Umasvati’s
Tattvartha Sutra, the Buddhist Abhidharma
schools, and the Hindu schools of Samkhya and
Yoga. The Jain worldview that sees the universe,
from earth-bodies to human beings, as suffused
with life accords with the thought of Thomas Berry,
who has stated that the world is a “communion
of subjects, not a collection of objects.”
Furthermore, the Jain assertion that even the
earth itself feels our presence is strikingly
resonant with the observations of Brian Swimme.
The pan-psychic vision of Jainism is compared
and contrasted with contemporary Western scientific
and philosophical insights, with the suggestion
that these two fields be brought into closer dialogue
with one another.
Padmanabh S. Jaini, one of the world’s
leading scholars of Jainism, summarizes fundamental
Jain teachings and then seeks to explore how Jainism
might respond to key issues of development and
economics. The current drive toward industrialization
and consumerism in India violates many essential
Jain precepts, particularly non-possession (aparigraha).
By examining traditional lifestyles and occupations,
as well as Jain attitudes toward wealth in general,
Jaini suggests that a balanced approach to development
can be pursued.
In the third section of the book,
Jain practitioners suggest that Jainism already
has developed a working environmental ethics.
As such, this section represents an emic, or insider’s,
view of Jainism. It includes three essays that
might fit more within the genre of a sermon than
an academic paper, but which nonetheless make
an important contribution to this emerging discourse.
These chapters point to new directions to be taken
within the practice of Jainism, grounded in the
earlier tradition.
Sadhvi Shilapi, a prominent Jain
nun, raises up the voice of Mahavira, the great
Jain Tirthankara of twenty-five hundred years
ago, to suggest how Jains can and should respond
to the problems of industrialization, population
growth, and human exploitation of nonhuman life-forms.
Quoting from the Acaranga Sutra, the oldest
text of the Svetambara Jain tradition, she suggests
that Mahavira’s sensitivity to plants and
the elements themselves can serve to inform the
Jain response to resource limitations. She also
emphasizes the need for tree planting in rural
areas of India, an initiative taken by her own
religious community, Veerayatan, in Bihar.
Bhagchandra Jain consults a wide
range of Jain literature from both the Svetambara
and Digambara schools to compile a masterful argument
for the respect of all life-forms. He notes the
extensive literature within Jainism devoted to
forest protection and emphasizes the ecological
aspects of behavior recommended for Jain laypersons.
Satish Kumar, founder and educational
director of Schumacher College in England, relates
the concept of ecology to the simple lifestyle
observed by his own mother, which included strict
vegetarianism, pilgrimages to sacred mountains,
constant observance of barefootedness, minimalization
of possessions, conservation of water, and close
adherence to an ethical code grounded in nonviolence.
In the concluding section, Anne
Vallely examines the tensions between traditional
and contemporary Jainism, particularly in its
current globalized form. She notes the trend by
some Jains to identify themselves as ecofriendly.
She then examines what she terms to be a newly
emerging sociocentric ecological worldview within
the Jain community. Diaspora Jains, particularly
in North America, have brought about a distinctive
form of Jainism that emphasizes “the values
of vegetarianism, animal welfare, meditation,
and active promotion of interfaith activities.”
Though the inspiration of each of these can be
seen as having its roots in Jain thought and practice,
they are being played out in a far more public
arena than that traditionally observed by the
inward Jain ascetics.
The volume concludes with an appendix,
The Jain Declaration on Nature, prepared
by L. M. Singhvi, a member of the Indian Parliament
and former high commissioner from India to the
United Kingdom. This was originally published
as a small booklet in 1992. This document has
helped stimulate the discussion of environmental
values in the Jain community worldwide and serves
as an example of what Anne Vallely refers to as
the newly emerging sociocentric expression of
Jainism.
The interface between Jainism and ecology remains
a complex issue, and it is important to recognize
some of the pioneers in this emerging discussion.
Though he was not able to participate in the Harvard
conference, the work and commitment of Michael
Tobias must be acknowledged. Tobias, who received
his doctorate in the history of consciousness,
has worked for several decades as a writer and
filmmaker dedicated to environmental causes. In
1988 he released the film “Ahimsa,”
which elegantly portrays several Jain leaders
and extols the religion as the great champion
of animal rights and nonviolent living. He wrote
a book titled Life Force: The World of Jainism
that serves as a written companion to the
film, and he contributed the chapter on Jainism
to Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim’s
Worldviews and Ecology.11
Though not trained as a scholar of Jainism, Tobias
nonetheless recognized a commonality between his
own environmental interests and the Jain worldview.
He remains a sought-after speaker within the extensive
network of Jain conferences and proclaims himself
to be a Jain.
The work of Satish Kumar,
both with his journal Resurgence and the
curriculum that he has developed at Schumacher
College, indicates his willingness to blend together
social activism and a Jain-inspired commitment
to nonviolence. Kumar left the life of a traditional
Jain monk to join the land redistribution movement
of Vinobha Bhave (1895–1982), and later journeyed
as a peace activist on foot from Delhi to Moscow
to Paris in an attempt to stop nuclear proliferation
in the 1960s.12
He has most recently joined forces with Dr. Atul
K. Shah to produce the journal Jain Spirit:
Advancing Jainism into the Future, which is
published six times each year and distributed
internationally. Each issue includes articles
and photo essays that reinforce an eco-friendly
view. Most of the articles in the “Environment”
section of the magazine are by environmental activists
such as David Ehrenfield, Joyce D’Silva,
and Donella Meadows and serve more to educate
Jains about contemporary trends in the field of
ecology than to articulate a distinctly Jain vision
of environmentalism. Kumar has attempted a synthesis
of spirituality and activism, inspired in part
by his childhood and young adult years as a monk
in Acarya Tulsi’s Svetambaras Terapanthi
movement, which includes ten special vows that
were formulated in 1949, including “I will
always be alert to keeping the environment pollution-free.”
As Anne Vallely notes in her
chapter, some modern Jains, particularly in North
America, see involvement with environmental causes
and animal rights activism as a logical extension
of their faith. However, how authentic is this
tradition? Is it, as Vallely suggests, a revision
of asceticism? Can the observance and advocacy
of vegetarianism and ecological sensitivity substitute
as a new form of asceticism? Can Jainism truly
survive without the living presence of monks and
nuns to chide and inspire the more worldly lay
community?
In the modern diaspora context,
traditional monasticism, rigorously practiced
by monks and nuns in India, has not taken root,
nor does it seem to be a likely option, given
the relatively small numbers of Jains living outside
India and the logistical difficulties of providing
the donor support sanctioned by the Jain lay community.
However, some Jain monastics (and former Jain
monastics), such as Muni Sri Chitrabhanu, Acharya
Sushil Kumar, Sadhvi Shilapi, and Satish Kumar,
have helped promulgate Jain teachings outside
of India, and many nuns in training (samanis)
from the Terapanthi community have lectured throughout
the world. Numerous lay Jains participate in regular
practices of fasting and other austerities, particularly
the Paryusana fast observed in late August. The
many Jain centers and temples throughout North
America and the United Kingdom have developed
extensive weekend educational programs for children
(patsalas), camps, retreats, and web sites
to educate their members (and others) about the
faith. Many of these activities include mention
of the environment from a Jain perspective.
This volume points to the dynamic
nature of the Jain faith and its willingness to
engage in discussion on this modern social issue.
Not unlike nearly any other religious tradition,
it remains to be seen if the Jain worldview and
ethic can inspire an effective ecological vision.
Can Jainism adopt a sociocentric environmental
point of view without compromising its core values?
Hopefully, this collection of essays will help
advance this discussion.
1 For information
on the history, philosophy, and practice of Jainism,
see Padmanabh S. Jaini, The Jaina Path of Purification
(Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1979); Paul Dundas,
The Jains (London: Routledge, 1992); Alan
Babb, Absent Lord: Ascetics and Kings in Jain
Ritual Culture (Berkeley, Calif.: University
of California Press, 1996); and John E. Cort,
Jains in the World: Religious Values and Ideology
in India (New York: Oxford University Press,
2001).
Return to text
2 The
Geography of Strabo, trans. Horace Leonard
Jones (New York: Putnam, 1930) 101.
Return to text
3 See Marcus
Banks, Organizing Jainism in India and England
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992). See also Peace
through Non-Violence: Eighth Biennial Jaina Convention
Souvenir Volume (Chicago, Ill.: Federation
of Jain Associations in North America, 1995);
and Bhuvanendra Kumar, Jainism in America (Mississauga,
Ontario: Jain Humanities Press, 1996).
Return to text
4 See
David Rothenberg, “Individual or Community?
Two Approaches to Ecophilosophy in Practice,”
in Ecological Prospects: Scientific, Religious,
and Aesthetic Perspectives, ed. Christopher
Key Chapple (Albany, N.Y.: State University of
New York, 1994) 83–92.
Return to text
5 Stephanie
Kaza, The Attentive Heart: Conversations with
Trees (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1993)
10–11.
Return to text
6
Acaranga Sutra 1.8.1.11–12; from Jaina
Sutras, Part 1, The Akaranga Sutra.
The Kalpa Sutra, trans. Hermann Jacobi
(1884; New York: Dover, 1968).
Return to text
7 James
Laidlaw, Riches and Renunciation: Religion,
Economy, and Society among the Jains (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1995), 157.
Return to text
8 See “Earth
First! And Global Narratives of Popular Ecological
Resistance,” in Ecological Resistance
Movements: The Global Emergence of Radical and
Popular Environmentalism, ed. Bron Raymond
Taylor (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New
York Press, 1995) 11–34.
Return to text
9 Deryck
O. Lodrick, Sacred Cows, Sacred Places: Origins
and Survivals of Animal Homes in India (Berkeley,
Calif.: University of California Press, 1981).
Return to text
10 See
the web site for the India
Project for Animals and Nature.
Return to text
11 Worldviews
and Ecology, ed. Mary Evelyn Tucker and John
Grim (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1994).
Return to text
12 See
Satish Kumar’s autobiography, Path without
Destination (New York: William Morrow, 1999).
Return to text
|
