CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST JURISPRUDENCE : EAST AND WEST

Vol. 49 2020 No. 2 ISSN 0522-0815 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL Faculty of Law Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221005, India 132 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST JURISPRUDENCE : EAST AND WEST ARTI NIRMAL* PRAKASH CHANDRA SHUKLA** ABSTRACT : The growing recognition of the relation between nature and man in recent years has led ecofeminism to emerge as a new aspect of feminist thought. It is a movemen t, a th eory th at a pp lies th e prin cip les an d approaches of feminism to both women and ecology. The paper seeks to study the changing dimensions of ecofeminist jurisprudence from the perspective of both East and West. It has been predominantly divided into two parts. Part one traces the conceptual development of ecofeminism based on Western ecofeminist texts. Its various dimensions and kinds conceptualized by the western scholars have been discussed here to set the background for arguments to be initiated in the next part of the paper. In the second part, ecofeminism in the Indian tradition has been foregrounded with special reference to the contributions of Indian scholars. Here, the emphasis is also on studying the links between 'feminine principle' and nature in ancient Indian tradition with respect to Hinduism, Buddhism, Sankhya philosophy, and various cultural p ra ctices. The pa per con clud es tha t ecofeminism in particular and environmentalism, in general, can gather more momentum if seen from a holistic perspective by recognizing the feminist and ecological concerns of people across the cultures. KEY WORDS : eco-feminism, logic of domination, spiritual feminism, prakriti (feminine principle), eco-sangha. I. INTRODUCTION Ecofeminism is a branch of feminism. It is a movement, a theory * ** Assistant Professor, Department of English, Banaras Hindu University, INDIA, [email protected] Additional District & Session Judge, Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh, INDIA. 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 133 that combines all principles and approaches of feminism to the relationship with both women and ecology. Although there are various schools of feminism- liberal feminism, socialist feminism, cultural or difference feminism, radical feminism, and postmodern feminism, they all focus on women’s status in society and attribute their subordinate and inferior position vis a vis men to patriarchy. 1 As in their understanding, it is the law that reflects, maintains, and legitimizes patriarchy; they compellingly and unequivocally argue that both law and human rights law have a bias and the mainstream law is ‘male stream law’. Ecofeminism is based on the premise that patriarchy is detrimental not only to women but also to ecology. 2 Although ecofeminism, both as a theory and movement has been studied by western scholars, their overall approach to this newly emerging branch of jurisprudence, ecology, women empowerment, gender justice3, and environmental protection is Eurocentric and based on the experiences of the European women. In India, however, certain scholars have presented their own interpretation of ecofeminism in the light of the experiences of Indian women. However, the indigenous scholarship on the subject could be seen only as a modest attempt to relate the western idea of ecofeminism to Indian conditions. The present paper seeks to explore and analyze the issues related to ecofeminism in terms of its origin and evolution, its basic tenets, the need to develop indigenous ‘ecofeminist jurisprudence’,4 1. 2. 3. 4. Denise Meyerson, Understanding Jurisprudence (Britain and NY: RoutledgeCavendish, 2007). “Gender and the Environment: What are the Barriers to Gender Equality in Sustainable Ecosystem Management? IUCN, Jan. 23, 2020. Avialable at: https:/ /www.iucn.org/news/gender/202001/gender-and-environment-what-are-barriersgender-equality-sustainable-ecosystem-management (Visited on Dec.18, 2020). For a partial list of literature on feminism see, H Barnett, Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence (London and Sydney: Cavendish Pub. Ltd., 1998); P. Cain, “Feminism and the limits of Equality” 24 Georgia Law Review 803 (1990); Katharine T. Bartlett and Rossane Keneddy (eds.), Feminist Legal Theory: Readings in La and Gender (NY: Routledge, 2018); CA MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law (Cambridge, Mass, and London, England: Harvard Univ. Press, 1987); MC Nussabaum, Sex and Social Justice (New York and Oxford: OUP, 1999); and EV Spelman, Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought (Boston: Beacon Press, 1988). See, Cynthia G Bowman, “Path from Feminist Legal theory to Environmental Law and Policy”, 22 (3) Cornell J of Law and Public Policy 641-647 (2013), available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cjlpp/vol22/iss3/3 (Visited on 134 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] and relate it to the environmental law5 and policies along with the notion of climate justice6. With the recognition of the importance of the relation between nature and man in recent years, ecofeminism has emerged as a new aspect of feminist thought in different forms, sets, and manifestations. The paper seeks to study the changing dimensions of ecofeminism from the perspective of both East and West. It has been broadly divided into two parts. Part one deals with the conceptual development of ecofeminism on the basis of Western ecofeminist texts. Its various dimensions and kinds conceptualized by the western scholars have been discussed to set the background for arguments to be initiated in the next part of the paper. In the second part, ecofeminism in the Indian tradition has been foregrounded with special reference to the contributions of some of the prominent Indian scholars. The purpose of discussion in this section is to highlight the links between ‘feminine principle’ and nature in ancient Indian tradition with respect to Hinduism, Buddhism, Sankhya philosophy, and various other cultural practices. In the Indian context, tradition conveys a wider concept, which includes beliefs, cultural ethos, doctrines, philosophy, and civilization. The paper concludes that ecofeminism in particular, and environmentalism, in general, can gather more momentum if also seen from the Indian perspective based on ancient Indian philosophy as well as cultural and civilizational ethos with regard to the conservation of nature as an integral part of day to day human life. 5. 6. Dec18, 2020). Also see, Douglas A Vakoch & Sam Mickey, Women and Nature? Beyond Dualism in Gender, Body, and Environment (NY: Routledge, 2016). For a partial list of literature on International Environmental Law see, P. Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (Manchester, 1995); V. P. Nanda, International Environmental Law and Policy (New York, 1995); P Birnie and A Boyle, International Law and the Environment (Oxford, 1992); A Kiss and D Shelton, International Environmental Law (London: Transnational Publishers Inc. and Graham & Trotman, 1991). For an introduction to Indian Environmental Law, see; Armin Rosencranz & Shyam Divan, Environmental Law and Policy in India: Cases, Materials, and Statutes (Oxford University Press, 2001); P Leelakrishnan, Environmental Law in India (LexisNexis Butterworth, 2005); SC Shastri, Environmental Law (3rd Edition, Lucknow: Eastern Book Company, 2008). B C Nirmal, “Climate Change, Sustainable Development and Indian Supreme Court” in in Manoj Sinha, Shivkumar and Furqan Ahmad (eds.), Environmental Law and Enforcement: Contemporary Challenges 245-283 (2016). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 135 II. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ECOFEMINISM As we know, Ernest Haeckel coined the term ecology in the 1860s to offer the principle of interdependence of each human and nonhuman component in the environment for existence and survival. Ecofeminists rest their discourse on this principle of interconnectedness and interdependence in ecology to advocate the necessity of a congenial relationship between men and women as well as nature. American environmentalist and scholar Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring (1962) was one of the early attempts to analyze the environment from women’s perspective and make the environment a public issue. Terry Tempest Williams7, a forerunner of ecofeminism, significantly focused on social and environmental justice, including ecology, women’s health, and culturenature relationship. In the West, however, ecofeminism found its currency in 1974 with the French feminist Francoise de Eaubonne’s book Le Feminisme ou la mort (Feminism or Death), who tried to engage with the primary question: is environment a feminist issue? Ecofeminism owes much to the environmental movements especially those run by the women in different parts of the world, viz. Chipko movement led by Gauri Devi in 1973 by the women in Gahrwal district of India who embraced trees to protect them from being cut and Appiko8 movement in Karnataka in 1983; the Green Belt Movement in Kenya headed by the Nobel Laureate Wangari Mathai in 1977; the Green Party movement in Germany in 1978; protest against nuclear power by nearly 2000 women in Washington; and the Russian women’s outrage that ‘men never think of life. They only want to conquer nature and the enemy’ 9 after the Chernobyl ca tastrophe in 1986. Similarly, in Sweden, feminists prepared jam from berries sprayed with herbicides to offer a taste to members of parliament; in Poland, women raised their voice against their government’s move to undermine women’s rights to abortion in 7. 8. 9. Terry Tempest Williams, The Secret Language of Snow (1984), Desert Quartet (1995), When Women Were Birds (2012), and Erosion (2019). See also, Aldo Leopold, “Land Ethic” (1949), a fundamental ecofeminist work. Appiko movement was initiated in the Uttara Kannada district of Karnataka in September 1983 for the conservation of forest. Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies, Ecofeminism 15 (Jaipur: Rawat Publication, 2010). 136 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] 2016; 10 and in 2017, Brazilian women farmers in Via Campesina’s Landless Workers Movement in Sao Paolo occupied an orange farm owned by a convicted rapist. These concurrent movements across the world signaled the emergence of a new discourse in the form of ecofeminism, which helped to discover that ‘backgrounding’ is one of the ways in which both nature and women have been devalued 11 and sexism, racism, and homophobia are forms of oppression that are directly linked to the oppression of nature. 12 The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm (1972) and the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro (1992) were not only two flagship international legal instruments in the direction of environmental protection but also pioneering events in recognizing the connection between the exploitation of the non human world and race, class, and gender. Most importantly, the World Women’s Congress for a Healthy Planet held in Miami in 1991, drafted the “Global Action for Women Towards Sustainable and Equitable Development.” The Agenda 21 adopted at the Rio Conference (1992) stressed the need to recognize the ecological value and to define ‘productivity’ as that which sustains life. In addition, it also emphasized the importance of ensuring women’s participation in ‘public life’ through the elimination of “constitutional, legal, administrative, cultural, behavioral, social and economic obstacles”. 13 Its vision statement ‘Women, Procreation a nd Environment’ added momentum to the ecofeminist movement and made it a matter of serious concern for the intellectuals and policy makers. It was in 2014 in Peru UN Climate Change Conference, that the United Nations declared that discussions on climate change should engage gender issues but Women, Environment and Development Organization (WEDO) was already talking about it. The 10. Christian Davies, “Women to Go on Strike in Poland in Protest at Planned Abortion Law ” The Gua rd ia n (October 3, 2 016 ). Avialable at : ht tps:// www.theguardian.com/world/2016.to-go-on-strike-in-poland-abortion-law (Visited on Dec. 22, 2020). 11. V Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature (London: Routledge, 1993). 12. N Moore, “Eco/Feminism, Non-Violence and the Future of Feminism”,10(3) International Feminist Journal of Politics 287, 282-298(2008). 13. Agend a 21 , 1992 . Available at : h ttps:// sustain abledevelopmen t.u n.org/ outcomedocuments/agenda21(Visited on Dec. 2, 2020). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 137 Brazillian activist and founder member of WEDO. Thais Corral actively participated in the Earth Summit (1992) and emphasized the need to restore the dignity of both women and nature against the dominance of market: “We want to restore the dignity of women and native which has been used and abused according to the logic of the market…we want to redefine wealth in an ecological framework, peace in a new meaning of people’s security and development in the fulfilment of basic human needs.” 14 However, the foundation for discourse on ecofeminism was laid down in 1980’s with the first conference on ecofeminism on “Women and Life on Earth: Ecofeminism in the 80s” held in Massachusetts which emphatically furthered this discourse. As noted before, easly ecofeminists examine the effects of gender categories in order to demonstrate the ways in which social norms exert unjust dominance over both women and nature. They thought that feminism and environmentalism might be combined to promote respect for women and the natural world. The effort was also made to question the long historical precedent of associating women and nature with traits such as chaotic and irrational, required to be controlled by the men, whereas men were more ordered and rational, thus capable of directing the use and development of women and nature. They were also of the opinion that this assumption yields a hierarchal structure that grants power to men and allows them to be instrumental in exploiting both women and nature. Thus, early ecofeminism assumed that solving the predicament of either constituent would require undoing the social status of both. Theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether, who was at the forefront of ea rly ecofeminism, stressed the need to document historica l connections between women and the environment. Her study of the intersections of feminism, theology, and ‘creation care’ led her to urge that, “Women must see that there can be no liberation for them and no solution to the ecological crisis within a society whose fundamental model of relationships continues to be of domination. They must unite the demands of the women’s movement with those of the ecological movement to envision a radical reshaping of the basic socioeconomic 14. Thais Corral, “Eco’92 Through Women’s Eyes”, Rosiska Darcy de Oliveira and Thais Corral (eds.), Terra Femina 92-98 (Brazil: Companhia Brasileira de Artes Graficas,1992). 138 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] relations and the underlying values of this society.” 15 Other ecofeminist texts such as Susan Griffin’s Women and Nature (1978), Mary Daly’s Gyn/Ecology (1978), Carolyn Merchant’s The Death of Nature (1980), G. Gaa rd’s Eco-feminism: Women, Animals, Nature (1993), Val Plumwood’s16 Feminism and the Mastery of Nature (1993), Mary Mellor’s Feminism and Ecology (1997) further strengthened the understanding of ecofeminist thought in the Western canon. American feminist theorist Ynestra King17 adds force to ecofeminism through her article “What is Ecofeminism?” that appeared in The Nation. She stressed: “Ecofeminism…(sees) the devastation of the earth and her beings by the corporate, warriors, and the threat of nuclear annihilation by the military warriors as feminist concerns… it depends on multiple systems of dominance and state power to have its way.” 18 Later, in 1993 Greta Gaard and Lori Gruen also published an essay “Ecofeminism: Towards Globa l Justice and Planetary Health” 19 a nd outlined an ‘ecofeminist framework’ to argue how the four factors-materialism, patriarchy, dualism, and capitalism have caused a ‘separation between nature and culture’. Scholars namely Annette Kolodny 20 and Donna Haraway21 also enrich the discourses on ecofeminism. III. PERSPECTIVES OF ECOFEMINISM Feminists in general, and ecofeminists in particular, explore various 15. Rosemery R Ruether, New Woman/New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation 204 (Boston: Beacon Press, 1975, 1995). 16. V Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature (London: Routledge, 1993). See also, “Ecofeminism: An Overview and Discussion of Positions and Arguments”, 64 (1) Australasian J of Philosophy 120-138 (1986), tandfonline. 17. Y King, “The Ecology of Feminism and the Feminism of Ecology”. In Judith Plant (ed.), Healing the Wounds (Philadelphia and Santa Cruz: New Society Publishers, 1989). Also see, Y King, “Engendering a Peaceful Planet: Ecology, Economy, and Ecofeminism in Contemporary Context”, 23 (3/4) Women’s Studies Quarterly, Rethinking Women’s Peace Studies 15-21 (Fall-Winter, 1995). 18. Y King, as qtd. in Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies (eds.), Ecofeminism (Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 1983). 19. Greta Gaard & Lori Gruen, 2 Society and Nature 1-35 (1993). 20. Annette Kolodny, The Lay of the Land: Metaphor as Experience and History in American Life and Letters (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North California, 1975). 21. Donna Haraway, Primate Visions (London: Routledge,1989). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 139 dimensions to understand how the relationship between human and nonhuman world or women-nature and man’s world exists. Karen J Warren recognizes the eight kinds of “woman-nature connections.” 22 - historical, conceptual, empirical and experiential, symbolic, epistemological, political, ethical, and theoretical broadly based on the linguistic, historical, sociological, epistemological, and political factors. The linguistic perspective believes that language plays an important role in problematizing both nature and women. For example, there is a tendency of ‘animalizing women and feminizing nature to authorize their inferior position.’ 23 According to ecofeminists, expressions such as Mother Nature, womb of the Earth, barren land- infertile woman etc. are often used in people’s conversation to signify this. On the other hand, the historical perspective views the separation of culture from nature as an outcome of the scientific revolution. Merchant, 24 for instance, in her study reminds us how in the ancient Greek belief system, ‘mining the earth’s womb’ was strictly prohibited. Nature was supposed not to be seen as a resource but as a sustainer. The socioeconomic perspective states that it is true that both men and women mediate between nature and culture, but it is also a truth that they don’t do so equally. M. Mellor argues that the system of predominantly male ownership of the means and forces of production results in a male-biased allocation and distribution of a society’s economic resources that systematically disadvantages women economically and exploits nature. 25 The epistemological perspective concerns how gender influences conceptions, knowledge, the knower, and methods of inquiry and justification. According to this, women have a better knowledge of nature and their ecology, but they remain ‘invisible’. And finally, the political perspective deals with political ideas and values such as freedom, democracy, solidarity, rights, equality, duty, participation with respect to ecological issues. It views that the ecological crisis results from a 22. Karen J Warren, “Introduction to Ecofeminism”, Michael E. Zimmerman et al. (eds.), Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, 253267 (Prentice Hall, 1993). 23. Carol Adams, The Sexual Politics of Meat (USA: Bloomsbury, 2015). 24. Carolyn Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1980). 25. M Mellor, Feminism and Ecology (NY: NY Univ. Press, 1997). See also, M Mellor, “Feminism and Environmental Ethics: A Materialistic Perspective”, 5 (1) Ethics and the Environment 107-123 (2000). 140 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] Eurocentric capitalist patriarchal culture built on the domination of nature, and domination of women by men. IV. SCHOOLS OF ECOFEMINISM As opposed to the traditional ecocentric, the technocentric attitude of humans towards nature is responsible for the control and domination of nature and women. It is characterized by science and economic rationality and nurtures the logic of domination. The critics of different schools of ecofeminism perceive this logic of domination over woman and nature from different perspectives-liberal, socialist and radical (cultural and spiritual). The first school of ecofeminism is liberal ecofeminism which originated from the ideology of liberalism, which promotes individual freedom and equity. Liberal feminists explain the oppression of women as a result of a lack of equal rights. Likewise, liberal ecofeminists seek redistribution rather than restructural policy changes. It plays an important role in challenging the structure of the State and broadening the environmental agenda. Here, the objective coincides with the objectives of reform environmentalism to alter human and nonhuman relations through new laws and regulations. Unlike liberal ecofeminism, the Socialist/ Marxist ecofeminism studies the cause of women’s and nature’s oppression by linking it with production and capitalist relation to the domination of nature as well as women by men. This ecofeminist theory argues that capitalism reflects only patriarchal or paternalistic values. It implies that the effects of capitalism have, on the one hand, not benefitted women and, on the other, harmfully dissected nature from culture. 26 They address the contradictions between production and reproduction and consider that radioactivity, toxic chemicals, and hazardous wastes that threaten the biological reproduction of the human species, could be seen as assaults on women’s bodies and those on their children. Such influences also cause chronic and genetic diseases, often resulting in birth defects in children for which the mother is directly held responsible. This form of ecofeminism is also called ‘materialistic ecofeminism’ as it relates the exploitation of women and nature to patriarchy in terms of production and consumption. Carolyn 26. Terran Giacomini et al., “Ecofeminism Against Capitalism and for the Commons”, 29(1) Capitalism, Nature and Socialism 1-6 (2018). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 141 Merchant, therefore, in The Death of Nature (1980) notes that the strength of socialist ecofeminism is a critique of capitalist developments in which reproduction and ecology both are subordinate to production. In Earthcare also she discusses many other examples of the relations between environmentalism, feminism, and domesticity. 27 Merchant opines that the goal of socialist ecofeminism is to develop sustainable, nondominating relations with nature and create an “egalitarian socialist state, in addition to re socializing men and women into non sexist, non racist, non violent, antiimperialist forms of life.” 28 In the late 1980s, a new branch of ecofeminism began to emerge which was radical in nature. Radical ecofeminism branched later into two dimensions: Nature ecofeminism and Spiritual ecofeminism. Nature ecofeminism noticed that nature and women both had been attributed negative traits whereas men with positive qualities, and therefore, they discard any validity of such associations and see a womanly power in the phenomenon of nature. These ecofeminists also discern a deep and intimate relationship between women and the environment, allowing them to be more sensitive to the sanctity or degradation of nature. They study a biological connection between women and nature by referring to the common processes of menstruation, childbirth, and lactation. In her book Radical Ecology (1992), Merchant refers to “spiritual ecofeminism” and says that it “celebrates the relationship between women and nature through the revival of ancient rituals centered on Goddess worship …” 29 It values intuition and human-nature interrelationships. Karen J. Warren, too, observes that women’s oppression is rooted in women’s reproductive roles and the sex/gender system: “Patriarchy oppresses women in sex-specific ways by defining women as beings whose primary functions are either to bear and raise children (i.e. to be mothers) or to satisfy male sexual desires (i.e. to be sex objects).” 30 Thus, “the challenge 27. Carolyn Merchant, Earthcare: Women and the Environment (NY: Routledge, 1995). See also, S Alaimo, Undomesticated Ground: Recasting Nature as Feminist Space (NY: Cornell University Press, 2000). 28. Carolyn Merchant, Science and Nature: Past, Present and Future 105 (NY: Routledge, 2017). 29. Carolyn Merchant, Rad ical Ecology: In Search for a Livable World (NY: Routledge, 1992). 30. Karen J Warren, “ Fem inism and E colog y: Ma king connections”, 9(1) Environmental Ethics 3-20 (1987), doi:10.5840/enviroethics19879113 (Visited on Dec. 22, 2020). 142 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] to feminists, environmentalists, and environmental ethicists…is to overcome metaphors and models which feminize nature and naturalize women to the mutual detriment of both.” 31 Radical ecofeminism highlights the ways in which both women and nature have been associated with negative or commodity attributes, whereas men have been seen as capable of establishing order. The division of characteristics encourages the exploitation of women and nature for cheap labor and resources. Thus, for radical ecofeminists, the liberation of both women and the nonhuman world lies in the dismantling of patriarchal systems and the end of male control over the body of women and the earth. Spiritual ecofeminism is also known as cultural ecofeminism as it considers the spiritual connections between women and nature through worship, intuition, rituals, ethics of care, and compassion. It suggests reviving nature worship and paganism. Remarkable studies have been made by Riane Eisler, Carol Adams, and Charlene Starhawk in this field. For Russian theorist Starhawk, it is an earth based spirituality that recognizes that the earth is alive, and that we are an interconnected community.32 Spiritual ecofeminism is not linked to one specific religion but is centered on care, compassion, and non-violence. These scholars often refer to the worship of Gaia,33 the goddess of nature and spirituality in Greek mythology (Mother Earth). Radical ecofeminism also promotes the ethics of care and personal accountability, which further broadens the agenda of environmental organizations. According to Spretnak, ecofeminists “experienced the exhilarating discovery …(of) the sacred link between the Goddess in her many guises and totemic animals and plants, sacred groves, womblike caves, in the moon-rhythm blood of menses, the ecstatic-experiencing of knowing Gaia, her voluptuous contours and fertile plains, her flowing waters that give life.” 34 Thus, 31. Id. 30 32. Starhawk, “Power, Authority and Mystery”, in Gloria Feman Orenstein and Irene Diamond (eds.), Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism 73-86 (California: Random House,1990). 33. Also called Ge is the ancient Greek goddess signifying mother earth who brought forth this world and the human race from the void and chaos. Spretnak identifies Gaia as a powerful feminist and ecological symbol, which was later reinforced by Lovelock, who gave the scientific concept of homeostasis (restoration of equilibrium) by which nature restores its equilibrium. 34. Charlene Spretnak, ‘Ecofeminism: Our Roots & Flowering’, in I Diamond and G Orenstein (ed.), Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism 5 (Random House, California, 1990). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 143 spirituality is perceived as a source of both personal and social transformation. V. ECOFEMINISM IN THE WEST AND ITS LIMITATIONS As already noted, ecofeminist discourse gained much currency in the West by the 90s and offered an alternative way of dealing with the issues related to the subordination and exploitation of both women and nature, but it has also been the target of critics for various reasons. For Stacy Alaimo, “It is crucial that we interrogate the grounds, purposes, and consequences of linking environmentalism and feminism, by analyzing specific articulations within particular places and contexts.” 35 Scholars have also critiqued some of the leading assumptions of ecofeminism, such as- essentialism, theory- practice dualism, excessive focus on the mystical connection between women and nature, and its confinement to gender and ecology. Cecile Jackson, for example, examines the women and environment linkage and observes that ecofeminism is “ethnocentric, essentialist, blind to class, ethnicity and other differentiating cleavages, ahistorical and neglects the material sphere.” 36 This view, in a way, promotes patriarchal stereotypes of what men want womenfolk to be rather than deconstructing it. Such notions “freeze women as merely caring and nurturing beings instead of expanding the full range of women’s human potentialities and abilities.” 37 American political writer Janet Biehl in Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics, also underlines the problems in ecofeminism and calls it selfcontradictory in certain ways, “Some ecofeminists literally celebrate the identification of women with nature as an ontological reality. They thereby speciously biologize the personality traits that patricentric society assigns to women. The implication of this position is to confine women to the same regressive social definitions from which feminists have fought long and hard to emancipate women.” 38 Considering 35. Stacy Alaimo, “Ecofeminism without Nature? Questioning the Relation between Feminism and Environmentalism”, 10(3) International Feminist Journal of Politics 299-305 (2008). tandfonline. 36. Cecile Jackson, “Women/Nature or Gender/History? A Critique of Ecofeminist ‘Development’”, 20 (3) The Journal of Peasant Studies 398, 389-419 (1993). 37. Janet Biehl, Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics 15 (South End Press: Boston, 1991). 38. Id. 37, p. 3 144 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] women as custodians of a feminine principle further alienates men from their responsibility towards the planet. Noel Sturgeon too, studies and critiques ecofeminism on the grounds of “essentialism” and ‘theory/practice dualism’. Regarding ecofeminism being essentialist, she argues that “environmentalism and feminism are profitably merged” 39 and for the theory/practice issue, she writes, “An analysis of ecofeminism that problematizes the divide between theory and practice is particularly interesting because of the way in which ecofeminism itself both recreates and confounds this dualism.” 40 It has been seen as a highly utopic discourse by Lucy Sargisson, who attacks ecological feminism for failing to realize its full potential. 41 Elizabeth Carlassare adds another dimension to the essentialist debate while writing, “I explore a related tension within ecofeminism between the use of essentialism by cultural ecofeminists on the one hand, and the use of constructionism by social and socialist ecofeminists on the other.” 42 Critics like Susan Prentice also criticize the essentialist approach of ecofeminism which according to her fails to yield any historical change in society. She also questions the sole role of women in caring for nature and contends that men too can develop the same ethics of care for nature as women. 43 Further, the role of capitalism and colonialism in the oppression of women and nature has also been largely ignored by ecofeminists. Essentialism is also seen reflected in this discourse when women are presented as a homogeneous category. To illustrate this, the study of Indian scholar Bina Agarwal would be useful wherein she informs that in South Asia, the adverse effects of environmental degradation largely affect the poor women, not women in general. She advocates “ feminist environmental” 44 perspectives, rooted in material reality and perceives 39. Noel Sturgeon, Ecofeminist Natures: Race, Gender, Feminist Theory and Political Action 7 (London: Routledge, 2016). 40. Supra 39, p. 7 41. Lucy Sargisson, “What’s Wrong with Ecofeminism?” 10(1) Environmental Politics 52-64 (2010). 42. Elizabeth Carlassare, “Destablizing the Criticism of Essentialism in Ecofeminist Discourse”, 5 (3) CNS 50 (September 1994). 43. Susan Prentice, “Taking Sides: What’s Wrong with Ecofeminism?”, Women and Environments, 9-10 (Spring 1998). 44. Beena Agarwal, “Engendering the Environmental Debate: Lessons from the Indian Subcontinent” 8 CASID Distinguished Speaker Series, 38-44 (Michigan State University, 1991). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 145 the relation between women and nature structured by class, caste, race, production, reproduction, and resource distribution. The most recent argument to address the heterogeneity of the subject in ecofeminism comes from the study of A. E. Kings, who finds that ecofeminism limits itself only to gender and the environment. Kings examines the changing nature of ecofeminism and the inherent limitations of its intersectionality. 45 Thus, we observe several points of contradiction in ecofeminism in the West, but its merits are such that they cannot be overlooked. The movement cum discourse has been successful in drawing the attention of activists, scholars, resea rchers, and policymakers worldwide to recognize environment and ecology as a gender issue. VI. ECOFEMINISM IN INDIAN TRADITION The discussion made in the previous section of the paper sets a background to study ecofeminism in the Indian context in this part. The presence of ‘feminine principle’ in Nature has long been recognized in Indian tradition and belief system. Beginning with a reflection on the feminine principle in Hinduism in general, the discussion proceeds to mention the way Sankhya philosophy comprehends the same on the basis of prakriti (feminine principle) – purusha (masculine principle) dualism. Ecofeminism in India doesn’t stand the way it has been argued in the West, but the fact cannot be denied that ideas and concepts analogous to it find expression in various Indian cultural and intellectual traditions. Buddhism is again an integral aspect of Hinduism, and hence has been mentioned here to understand how Buddhism recognizes women-nature linkage and proposes the concept of Eco-Sangha. The later part of this segment concentrates on identifying the ways women and nature relate with each other in Indian cultural practices, beliefs, customs, and rituals through religion, spirituality, and folk art. Before concluding the discussion, a detailed deliberation has been made on the modern Indian ecofeminist discourse developed by the scholars Vandana Shiva, Bina Agrawal, Ramchandra Guha, and others. As mentioned earlier, ecofeminism in countries like India rests more 45. A E Kings, “Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminism” 22(1) Ethics and the Environment 63-87 (Spring 2017). Available at: doi:10.2979/ ethicsenviro.22.1.04 (Visited on Dec. 26, 2020). 146 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] on the conception of the integrality of man and nature as components. To be specific, a verse in Yajurveda46 not only suggests a cosmic model of peaceful coexistence and sustainable development but also deconstructs efficiently the ‘logic of domination’ fostered by patriarchy, capitalism, and colonialism. According to the Indic philosophy, all human and non human elements are believed to coexist peacefully not only on this planet earth but in the entire cosmos. Thus, to better understand the issue and find a viable solution, it is necessary to see ecofeminist discourse comprehensively, and that could be possible only if it is analyzed from the perspective of both East and West. As we know, Hinduism is not just a philosophy or a sect; it is not a sectarian principle or a set of activities; it is a way of being human and a process of building a civilized human society. Hinduism emphasizes concord, unity, and harmony between and among all: between humans and nature, man and woman. A verse in Atharva Veda suggests, “Let us have concord with own people, and concord with people who are strangers to us…. May we unite in our minds, unite in our purposes, and not fight against the divine spirit within us.” 47 The idea of peaceful coexistence wherein none is dominant or inferior is central to Hindu philosophy. According to Paul Younger, “Society is not the slave of divine purpose, but it is part of larger order and its behavior should never become an occasion for the disruption of the vegetables, animals or heavenly realms.” 48 This view very well advocates the need for the protection of all living creatures in this world- humans and non humans, feminine and masculine- and contains the seed of modern day concepts- ‘sustainable development’ and ‘protection of environment’. 49 The ancients remarkably recognized the importance of harmony between man and nature and 46. In Yajurveda (36: 17), Ô odÙeew: Meeefvlejvleefj#eB Meeefv le:/he=L Jeer Meeefvlejehe: Meeefvlejes<eOeÙe: Meeefvle:~/ JevemheleÙe: MeeefvleefJe&Ões osJee: MeeefvleyeÇ&ÿe Meeefvle:,/meJeË Meeefvle:, MeeefvlejsJe Meeefvle:, mee cee MeeefvlejsefOe~~/Ô Meeefvle: Meeefvle: Meeefvle:~~ 47. Abinash Chanda Bose (Trans.), Hymns from the Vedas 216-17 (1966). 48. Paul Younger, Introduction to Indian Religious Thought 35 (Westminster Press,1972). 49. B C Nirmal, “Environmental Protection in Hinduism”, Reading Materials, National Workshop on Role of Religion, Indian Culture and Traditions in Environmental Protection (22-23 June 2002, Law School, Banaras Hindu University). Also see, B C Nirmal, “An Ancient Indian Perspective of Human Rights and Its Relevance”, 43 (3) Indian Journal of International Law, ISIL 445-478 (2003). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 147 ensured that it is practiced in man’s everyday life. Various texts and evidence prove that the Indic concept of nature and human relationship is very different from Western thinking. Contrary to the Western model, which is highly individualistic and atomistic, the Indian concepts focus on the combined action. Mathew Ritter also argues similarly while saying, “the absolute, universal and egalitarian character of western rights of the Individual is simply not consonant with the character of human rights through dharmic action.” 50 If we look at the tenets of Hinduism and Indian philosophical tradition, we notice that analogous to Sankhya dualism, in Hindu mythology too, the masculine and feminine principles have been recognized particularly while conceptualizing Gods. There are different concepts and forms of Gods in Hindu mythology. One such form is androgynous ardhanarishwara (composite of Shiva- male and Parvati-female) besides male and female deities. There is a concept of formless and genderless deity Brahman (universal absolute, supreme self as oneness in everyone). Similarly, in Shaktism, God is conceived as essentially female, and Shakti (feminine principle Prakriti) is worshipped. Moreover, In Indian mythology, each masculine God is partnered with a feminine deity to make him complete. The Vedic age too invoked and praised both male as well as female deities. Most of the deities worshipped during this age were pagan or nature gods. The ancient text Rigveda mentions Usha (goddess of dawn) as the most worshipped goddess of that time to whom nearly twenty hymns have been dedicated. Early Vedic texts also mention female gods, Prithvi (earth), Aditi (mother of gods), Saraswati (river, nourishment), and Nirrti (death) as prominent deities. Whereas, Indra (rain, lightening), Agni (fire), Varuna (law), Dyaus (sky), Savitr (sun) were major male deities, Max Muller observes in his account that both male and female deities in Vedic time were revered equally: “neither superior nor inferior; almost everyone is represented as supreme and absolute.” 51 Another scholar R. M. Gross, however, reflects on the nature and depiction of Indian deities, both male and female, and writes, “while masculine Gods are 50. Mathew A Ritter, “Human Rights: The Universalist Controversy…” 30 California Western International Law Journal, 71-90 (1999). 51. Max Muller, in William J Wilkins (ed.), Hindu Mythology: Vedic and Puranic, 8 (Calcutta: London Missionary Society Calcutta). 148 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] symbolically represented as those who act, the feminine Goddesses are symbolically portrayed as those who inspire action.” 52 Thus, both prakriti and purusha complement each other without dominating one and another. According to Sankhya philosophy, prakriti is the ultimate cause of the world of objects. It cannot be its counterpart purusha or the self because it is neither a cause nor an effect. Further, “Being the ground of such subtle products of nature as mind and the intellect, prakriti is a very subtle, mysterious and tremendous power which evolves and dissolves the world in a cyclic order.” 53 Prakriti (matter, nature, feminine force) evolves the world of objects when combined with the Purusha (the self, masculine principle). The evolution of the world cannot take place due to the self alone because it is inactive. Based on dualistic realism Sankhya theory suggests liberation as the ultimate goal of life. Rege compares Samkhya dualism with Cartesian dualism, which dominated Western thought during the Enlightenment. 54 According to this dualism, ‘the basic ontological division is between the mind (consciousness) and material things (extension and motion).’ 55 Vandana Shiva utilizes this philosophy of Sankhya school in her ecofeminist discourse and says that “women in India are an intimate part of nature, both in imagination and in practice.” 56 She draws ideas from the Indian philosophical tradition, which studies the world in the light of Prakriti (Nature or feminine principle, which is both animate and inanimate) and Purusha (masculine principle or spirit). Prakriti (Nature or primal matter) is active and productive force of the cosmos, it is the Shakti (power) that creates the world in conjunction with Purusha: “ontologically, there is no divide between man and woman, because life in all its form arises from the feminine principle.” 57 52. Rita M Gross, “Hindu Female Deities as a Resource for the Contemporary Rediscovery of the Goddess”, 46(3) Journal of the American Academy of Religion 269-291(1978). 53. S C Chatterjee and Dhirendramohan Datta, An Introduction to Indian Philosophy 242 (Rupa Publications, 2007). 54. M P Rege, “Sankhya Theory”, (March 23, 2013). Available at: speakingtree.in (Visited on Dec. 30, 2020) 55. Chhaya Datar, Ecofeminism Revisited 114 (Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 2011). 56. Vandana Shiva, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development 38 (New Delhi: Zed Books, 2002). 57. Id. 56, p. 40 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 149 Now turning to the discourse as women- nature connection in Buddhism, Rita M. Gross has made a remarkable study of ecological vision in Buddhism with respect to the third world women in her article “Buddhism and Eco-feminism: Untangling the Threads of Buddhist Ecology and Western Thought.” 58 Although, Buddhism has much potential to deconstruct gender, yet it has failed to draw the attention of the Western scholar to take cognizance of this otherwise rich philosophy due to the present age which is governed by the “religion of market;” the global religion based on consumerism. 59 Buddhist philosophy informs that ‘greed’ is the sole cause of all suffering. Ecofeminists too focus on “their” greed and “my” resulting suffering. Similarly, in collaboration with Reuther in the book Religious Feminism and the Future of the Planet: A BuddhistChristian Conversation, Gross has initiated a discussion on the possibility of ‘Buddhist Eco-feminism’. 60 Besides, Stephanie Kaza, a practicing Buddhist, a professor of Environmental Studies, and a feminist herself, contributed an article “Acting with Compassion: Buddhism, Feminism and the Environmental Crisis” (1993) to explore the postulates of Buddhism and feminism pertaining to the ecological crisis. Kaza writes, “Both Buddhism and feminism provide critical tools for examining deeply the roots of anti relational thinking that support environmental destruction. Both insist on the thorough review of all aspects of the conditioned mind that perpetuate mental and physical patterns of domination.” 61 The principle of interrelatedness is the fundamental law in Buddhism, 58. Rita M Gross, “Buddhism and Ecofeminism: Untangling the Threads of Buddhist Ecology and Western Thought”, 24 (2) Journal for the Study of Religion 17-32 (Special Issue: Transforming Feminisms: Religion, Women, and Ecology, 2011). Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24764282 (Visited on Dec. 26, 2020). See also, Rita M Gross, “The Suffering of Sexism: Buddhist Perspectives and Experiences” 34 Buddhist-Christian Studies 69-81 (2014). 59. Loy David, “The Religion of the Market” in Harold Coward and D. Maguire (eds.), Visions of a New Earth 30 (State University of New York, 1999). 60. Rita M Gross and R R Reuther, Religious Feminism and the Future of the Planet: A Buddhist- Christian Conversation (London: Bloomsbury, 2001). See also, Sarah Katherine Pinnock, “Review of Religious Feminism and the Future of the Planet: A Buddhist-Christian Conversation”, 23 Buddhist-Christian Studies 155-157 (2003). Available at: doi:10.1353/bcs.2003.0029 (Visited on Dec. 22, 2020). 61. St ephanie Kaza, “Acting with C ompassion: Buddhism, Fem inism and Environmental Crisis”, in Carol Adams (ed.), Ecofeminism and the Sacred 56-57 (NY: Continnum, 1993). 150 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] which defines the world as ‘a mutually causal web of relationship, each action affecting the other’. Ecological feminism too develops its principles on the idea of interconnectedness. Further, the three jewels of the Buddhist tradition- the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha offer much to understand the web of women, ecology, and Buddhism. Here, Buddha can be seen as a teacher who enables us to learn from our experiences of the surrounding environment; Dharma is the truth of teachings in the form of experiences and perceptions. Each object of nature in the environment has a deep truth of reality, building interdependence, and the Sangha is the monastic community of Buddhists, which signifies community life: ‘eco-sangha’. 62 The role of the community has been appreciated by Starhawk too when she says, ‘Community permits the individual to give energy…community as a whole creates sustained movement’.63 Thus, Women’s voice within the Buddhist tradition has the power to empower all beings for the well being of others. VII. WOMEN AND NATURE IN INDIA: CULTURAL PRACTICES After giving a brief account of the Indian philosophy of what we call ecofeminism today, an attempt will now be made to show the presence of recognition of women-nature linkage in Indian cultural traditions. Before we proceed, we wish to explain that religion, beliefs, and culture are intertwined and together constitute the civilizational ethos of a society or community. Feminism or ecofeminism as such seems to be a foreign concept for India to address its issues but its manifestation in different forms can be observed in other cultural and intellectual traditions too. Irrespective of the view, whether it succeeded or failed in the West, the fact cannot be denied that these discourses stimulated the other parts of the globe to locate such native contexts and ideas that may address the problems of women in their societies in an effective manner. In India, too, though there has been no such movement akin to ecofeminism of the West, yet the Indian women have always been interacting with nature and their environment intimately. Besides communicating with nature for 62. Stephanie Kaza, supra 61. See also, Amanda C LaPointe, “Feminine Dharma: Buddhist Women and Duty to the Earth”, Afficio Undergraduate Journal (Winter 2011). 63. Starhawk, “Power, Authority, and Mystery: Eco-feminism and Earth-Based Spirituality” in Gloria Feman Orenstein and Irene Diamond (eds.), Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism (Random House, California,1990). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 151 daily needs, they engage themselves significantly with nature during the performance of religious, cultural, and spiritual rituals. As mentioned before, Hindus regard all living creatures as sacred, and women play a crucial role in observing this. Maria Mies makes an interesting observation of how women in India, in particular, and the Third World, in general, connect their tradition with nature. She asserts that the poor women in villages know that the earth is sacred, a living being that guarantees their survival and also the survival of other creatures. Their survival and sustenance are directly proportional to the nature’s health. Hence, the Indian women in their cultural practices too synchronize with nature and their environment. Nature has been entwined with Hinduism since the Vedic era. Besides nature deities, various animals such as cow, snake, bull, monkey, tortoise, and plants namely neem peepal, tulasi, banyan tree, sun, and river, are also observed sacredly in India. These non human creatures of the nature are worshipped by Indians since time immemorial, and in the worship, women play an active role. Women are mostly the carriers of these traditions and practices. In addition to this, women actively interact with nature while performing various cultural, religious, and spiritual rites particularly at the time of birth, wedding, and death. Most of these rites are performed near rivers or ponds and sacred trees. Women in India also observe ritualistic festivals with nature as an integral part of their day to day life and festivity. Tracy Pintchman in the book Guests at God’s Wedding: Celebrating Kartik among the Women of Benaras (2005), has beautifully recorded the kartik celebration of the Assi Ghat by women in Varanasi (India).64 Folk forms such as kajari, chaiti, faag, saanjh parati sung by the rural women of India (particularly in the eastern Uttar Pradesh) have a direct relation to the nature and changing season. Folk song forms such as kajari (while celebrating the season of rain), ropani or savanahi (at the time of sowing paddy), chaita (while reaping the crop of wheat) are sung on various occasions by the rural women of India with intense folk expressions. Besides, tree and animal worship in India is also very popular among Hindus.65 Peepal tree is considered as the “tree of enlightenment” 64. Tracy Pintchman, Guests at God’s Wedding: Celebrating Kartik among the Women of Benaras (Albany: State University of NY Press, 2005). 65. S M Edwardes, “Tree-Worship in India”, 1(1) Empire Forestry Journal 78-86 (March 1922). Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42594484 (Visited on Nov. 17, 2020). See also, “Sacred trees and plants in Hinduism”, Available at: speakingtree.in (Visited on Nov. 20, 2020). 152 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] and is worshipped by the Indian women to be blessed with child. It has been considered sacred in Skanda Purana too, and cutting it is a sin. Similarly, Banyan tree symbolizes trimurti- Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, and is worshiped by women in India on various occasions. The highly revered flower Lotus, a symbol of purity, is related to Brahma, Gayatri, and Lakshmi. Tulasi, coconut (wish fulfilling tree), and neem trees are considered holy and associated with goddess Durga (Sheetala); whereas, mango is taken as the symbol of love, fertility, and highly auspicious. Nanditha Krishna’s book Sacred Animals of India 66 explores the customs and practices that led to the worship and protection of animals and connect Nature with Humans, particularly women. Nature also holds great significance for tribal communities that carry much reverence for nature’s objects and preserve them. In their cultural and religious practices too, they mostly worship female deities and maintain matrilineal society. Maneka Gandhi, 67 remarkably mentions tribal deities, most of them are female and nature born. For example, Nagnechya Maa (Hindu deity worshipped in Nagana, Rajasthan) is a snake goddess. Manasa Devi is also a folk goddess of snakes, worshiped mainly in Bengal and north-eastern India, to prevent and cure from the snake bite, chickenpox, fertility, and prosperity. Baglamukhi68 (West Bengal), Kamakhya69 Devi (Assam), Rajarappa70 Devi (Jharkhand) are a few other significant female deities. As is evident from the discussion of the prototype of ecofeminism in ancient Indian tradition and cultural practices, the connection between women and nature was not only recognized in ancient India but was also manifested in several other forms. The practice of worshipping nature and female deities along with the male Gods needs to be given due account when scholars attempt a further theorization and reconstruction of 66. Nanditha Krishna, Sacred Animals of India (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2008). Also see, Nanditha Krishna, Hinduism and Nature (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2017); David L. Haberman, People Trees: Worship of Trees in Northern India (USA: OUP, 2013). 67. Maneka Gandhi, Brahma’s Hair: The Mythology of Indian Plants 47 (New Delhi: Rupa & Co., 2007). 68. one of the tantric Hindu deities who rides on Bagula (crane) bird and is associated with wisdom and concentration. 69. Seated in Guwahati of Assam, she, too is a seedh peetha popularly known as kamrupa-kamakhya. Dedicated to Saktism’s ten mahavidyas, she is an important Hindu tantric deity of desire also described in Kalika Purana as ‘mahamaya’ – great goddess of illusion. 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 153 ecofeminism to put it on a strong and stable pedestal and make it more socially acceptable than before. VIII. MODERN ECOFEMINIST DISCOURSE IN INDIA The modern concept of ecofeminism in India has been chiefly articulated as a reaction to the experiences of modern industrialized society. Indian scholars namely Vandana Shiva, G. S. Arora, Amartya Sen, Ramchandra Guha, Madhav Gadgil, Bina Agarwal, Krishna Kumar, Gita Sen, Shobhita Jain, Madhu Khanna, and others have made a substantial contribution to the understanding of Woman- Nature linkage with respect to development, ecology, culture, and capitalism in the context of India and Third World Women. They situate the women of India in the backdrop of environmental degradation and examine their relationship to agricultural technology, workforce, hunger, sanitation, poverty, production, and reproduction crisis. Environmentalist Medha Pateker (a key figure in Save the Narmada Movement) and Indian literary veterans Mahashweta Devi, Kamala Markandeya, and others have also expressed their ecofeminist concerns in their ways. Given the constraint of time and space, it is not possible in this brief paper to discuss the contribution of all the above mentioned Indian scholars. As Vandana Shiva’s contribution to the discourse on global ecofeminism has been recognized far and wide, it would perhaps be appropriate to confine this discussion to some of her prominent propositions. Shiva has the credit to base her arguments on Asian experiences of colonialism and western modernization. Her books Staying Alive (1988) and Ecofeminism (1993 co-authored by the German scholar Maria Mies) offer an Indian perspective on ecofeminist discourse. The western canon of theorization somehow overlooked the Third World scenario both in terms of women and nature. Shiva, in her first book, stresses the need for a more sustainable and productive approach to agriculture, which can be achieved through reinstating the system of farming in India that is more centered on engaging women. She observes that the violence to nature, which seems intrinsic to the dominant developmental model, is also associated with the violence to women who depend on nature for their sustenance and also of their families and 154 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] societies.71 She advocates against the prevalent ‘patriarchal logic of exclusion’, claiming that ecological destruction and industrial catastrophes threaten daily life, and the maintenance of these problems has become the responsibility of women. 72 She also questions the assumption of ‘women and tribal and peasant societies embedded in nature to be unproductive not because they don’t contribute to economy or material production but because it is considered that ‘production’ can take place only when mediated by technologies, even if it is at the cost of life. Development, done in this way, therefore is maldevelopment because it is devoid of the feminine, the conservation and the ecological principle.’ 73 Shiva and Mies examine empirical evidence by linking women, children, and people of color with various health- risk factors associated with environmental degeneration as a result of pesticides and other pollutants. They offer a skeptical view of modern science as objective while mentioning how the medicalization of childbirth and the industrialization of plant production have altered the very process of childbirth, which was natural to women’s life. 74 Shiva critiques modern science and technology as a Western, patriarchal, and colonial project, which is inherently violent and perpetuates violence against women and nature. Pursuit of this development model means a shift away from the traditional Indian philosophy, which perceives nature as a ‘feminine principle’, from which all life takes birth. Unfortunately, the development model embraced by us has reduced both women and nature to ‘resource’ meant for consumption and utilization. She notices that the Third World women are not merely victims of the developmental process but also a strong force with the potential to bring a radical change in this system worldwide. She highlights the role of women in the Chipko Movement of Uttarakhand to protect forests. The 70. located in the Ramgarh district of Jharkhand, this Chhinnamasta (headless) goddess is considered a tribal goddess and an important tantric deity. 71. Vandana Shiva, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development xvi (New Delhi: Zed Books, 2002). 72. Vandana Shiva, Empowering Women, June 2004, wordpress.com (Visited on Nov. 29, 2020). 73. Vandana Shiva, supra 71, p.4. 74. Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies (eds.), Ecofeminism, Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 1993, Indian Reprint, 2010). 2020 (2) CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF ECOFEMINIST... 155 women’s role in this movement has been highlighted also by Shobita Jain who says, “They [women] were able to perceive the link between their victimization and the denuding of mountain slopes by commercial interests. Thus, sheer survival made women support the movement.” 75 However, Shiva’s views have been criticized also largely on account of her focus on the rural women of northwest India and lesser concern for the class, caste, race, religion, and other factors that define Indian society as well as women to a great extent. Reactions are also against her labeling of modern science and technology as Western. Reflecting upon the role of women in the Chipko Movement, Janet Biehl comments that it was not all in all women’s project but was motivated by a Gandhian social development movement. Ramchandra Guha, a well known Indian scholar, too remarks on this movement’s essentialist perception by calling it “one in a series of protest movements against commercial forestry.” 76 IX. CONCLUSION Ecofeminism has received both encomium as well as criticism from scholars and academics of the world and has been stringently attacked for its essentialism. Despite a few limitations, one cannot deny that it is one of the most celebrated discourses even today as it relates to ecology, and ecology is essential for our sustainable development. It is a celebration of the diverse ways in which we may act for the welfare of society by promoting peaceful coexistence. It creates a progressive dialogue and ensures equal participation of both men and women in achieving the goals of sustainable development. 77 It is a pluralistic inclusive philosophical 75. Shobita Jain, “Standing up for trees: Women’s Role in the Chipko Movement”, 36(146) Unasulva 12-20 (1984). See also, Irene Dankelman and Joan Davidson, Women and Environment in the Third World: Alliance for the Future (Earthscan Publication Ltd. London, 1988). 76. Ramchandra Guha, The Unquiet Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant Resistance in the Himalaya 174 (Delhi: OUP. 1989). See also, R Guha “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique”, 11(1) Environmental Ethics 71-83 (1989). 77. UN Sustainable Development Goals-Agenda 2030. Available at: https:// www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html (Visited on Oct. 11, 2020). See also, B C Nirmal, “Sustainable Development, Human Rights and Good Governance”, in JL Kaul et al. (eds.), Human Rights and Good Governance 1-31(2008). 156 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 49] doctrine that helps draw the attention of the policymakers for a radical change in regulations towards establishing a synergetic relationship between the human and non human world. To dismantle the ‘logic of domination’ there is a need to recall and revive that oppression against both human and non human world could be brought to an end; sociopolitical-environmental justice can be made a reality; love, harmony, and care can be ensured only if we believe in our cosmic model of peace and ecological wellbeing suggested by the Indian philosophical and cultural tradition. If appropriate measures are adopted in the light of Indic philosophy, its ancient belief systems, and cultural practices in which man’s approach to nature has been eco-centric, and man is believed to be just a component of a great cosmic structure, a healthy society can become a reality. The Indian concept of the feminine (prakriti) and masculine (purusha) force does not see them antithetical to each other; instead, it considers them correlatives. In a broader sense, the Indian concept of vasudhaiva kutumbakam 78 perceives all humans and non humans as one family. In the same spirit, the present study underlines the importance of ecofeminism from a holistic perspective, which reflects a confluence of civilizations. To achieve this end, ecofeminism needs to be studied from the perspective of ancient Indian tradition and all cultures and civilizations across the globe.  78. GoejÛeefjleeveeb leg JemegOewJe kegâ šgc yekeâced~~ The original verse appears in Chapter 6 of Maha Upanishad VI.71-73. Also found in the Rig Veda. The verse suggests magnanimity of the heart of those who consider the world as ‘one family’.