Replies to Le Cow Quote Du Jour # 90

[Guest guest]

--- Pancaratna ACBSP <Pancaratna.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

wrote: > > By the middle or end of November I may be

going to

> Hyderabad. There we

> > have got 600 acres of land to develop a farm

> project. We have got one very

> > nice temple in Hyderabad City. As we are doing in

> Mayapur and many other

> > places, I want to develop self-sufficient centers

> with cloth and food

> > production by the devotees locally and save time

> as much as possible to

> > devote themselves to chant Hare Krishna.

> >

> > >>> Ref. VedaBase => Letter to: Syama Sundarji --

> Vrindaban 15 November,

> > 1976

>

> Dandavad. Prabhupada kijaya!

>

> This quotation is typical of the many places Srila

> Prabhupada correlates

> self-sufficiency with the ability to "save time as

> much as possible to

> devote themselves to chant Hare Krishna".

>

> However, my observation is that the simple,

> self-sufficent, lifestyle

> requires a lot of physical work - much more than the

> standard 40 hour work

> week which modern society has achieved.

>

> Even if you consider the extra commuting time (which

> in any case could be

> used for chanting Hare Krishna, if one uses public

> transportation) it seems

> to me that modern technology is capable of enabling

> more leisure time for

> spiritual life than the kind of life it seems Srila

> Prabhupada is describing

> when he speaks of "self-sufficient centers".

>

> Of course, there are myriad other advantages of a

> simpler, less technology

> centered life. However, it is hard for me to

> understand how this sort of

> life provides more leisure time to be used for

> chanting Hare Krishna.

>

> I am interested to know how others understand Srila

> Prabhupada's statement

> here.

>

> Your servant,

> Pancaratna das

 

 

Nice to hear from you Pancaratna dasa,

 

I would like to comment on this one. Having studied

Agroforestry, which is the "scientific" version of

Permaculture many things become apparent. I have had

many friends work in first and third world development

throughout the world, as well as myself having lived

on "rainbow" type self-sufficient communities and

other things. Such experiences plus a scientific

approach with the basic understanding of sustainable

development and new scientific paradigm of holism and

challenging professionalism, plus having read

Prabhupada and been a brahmacari in the temple, lead

to my approach.

 

As I see it the contradiction between Prabhupada (&

Ghandian) self-sufficiency and our present reality can

be summed up in the lack of realisation of:

 

1) The extent of exchanges with the $ world economy

and the extent of absorption in its material luxuries:

= Market Ecomomics compared to Peasant Economics.

 

2) The skills to take what is provided from nature to

meet basic requirements: = Indiginous Techical

Knowledge (ITK).

 

3) The community within which one lives relating to

points 1 & 2, and also to the need for social

belonging: = Social Containment.

 

For instance if one is working in a third world farm

community they have a peasant economy working with

their ITK within their social groupings. They could be

fairly primitive in their search to meet basic needs

(Pygmies in Central Africa) or fairly complex

(Pre-industrial pre-conquest Indian rural society).

The point here is that they are living this simple

life, there is a fair amount of free time on their

hands, they have few possessions, their work is

seasonal, and much of their time is social - sitting,

talking, joking, an easy life yet with limited (to us)

resources.

 

Often in development work the idea is to increase the

three pillar of sustainability - environmental, social

and economic factors. In reality much is done to

destroy old patterns and introduce new ones, most

often related to increasing economic exchanges.

I have a friend who worked for a EU sponsored project

in the islands of the mid pacific. By injecting

coconut palms with artificial fertilizers more

coconuts were produced which led to more export sales

and more hard currency for the island villagers. So

what happens - they stop fishing so much, buy canned

foods, alcohol and prostitutes - all destroying the

very fabric of their pre-market economy. This is not

an unusual cenario and is a now registered part of

development professionalism, which in its own turn is

leading to new paradigm professionalism. The latter

will more likely concentrates on true needs-based

assessment and a more equitable shift in the three

pillars towards environmental and social needs, not

just increasing incorporation into a world market.

 

The problem with ISKCON in their interpretation of

Prabhupadian self-sufficiency (as I see it - being

trained as a development professional) is in their

lack of all the three aforementioned points.

We are coming from a market economy, trying to go

towards a peasant economy. Too many of our exchanges

deal with hard currency for "luxuries" of basic

services of water, gas, electricity, sewerage, phones,

cars, petrol, medical care, education, holidays

(pilgrimages) - in fact all those bills that require a

basic $30,000 a year family income.

 

Also, point 2 of our indiginous technical knowledge is

very poor. We do not come from a self-suficient

community so the knowledge has not been passed down to

us. Those of us who come from farming backgrounds come

from the intensive farming community not organic

farming or even home gardens - agroecology,

agroforestry or permaculture (all the latter being the

same). Therefore the complexities of taking products

for a multi-tiered diverse agroforest with pasture and

grain lands is not known to us - we have to learn it.

 

Also, point 3 of social containment is not there. An

indiginous community has been built over many

generations - hundreds and thousands of years. We come

from fragmented, often urban communities, where, as in

the commoditisation of market exchanges compared to

peasant exchanges, our social exchanges are too

commoditised to exchanges between employer and

employee, that between lovers, friends, aquaintances,

where an internet chat group can be the social

engagement of the day. Religious groups such as ISCKON

develop relationships, but if these are not cemented

in daily working and living contact, where family and

friends have long term (towards generational) moral,

reciprocal contacts, then the relationships are

commoditised into usurial behaviour - the free and

easy exchange of goods, services, friends, "family" -

in fact everything.

 

So, because of the above points that is why we find it

easier to become developed professionals, to pull in

$30,000 a year wages, instead of living the simple

life. It does not have to be that way. My opinion is

that the ISKCON devotees need a serious reality check

with their principles and how they relate to day to

day reality of their lives - this is what I mean when

I talk of "acknowledged sold-outness". If you are on

this conference then you are likely to have access and

use all the material "luxuries" aforementioned, which

entirely traps one in the market world.

 

To extricate one from the rat race needs a plan. If I

did not have a child I would now go back to a peasant

community in Italy or Spain or India, though the

latter would be more difficult as I am not a resident.

Also, the last point raises another valuable point -

how far do external limiting factors, such as

government, limit us from our idealised poverty. If

one lived on 10 hectares of land and produced all your

own needs - like the first Yankee settlers, or to an

extent the Amish, etc, - would the government allow

it. Could one set up a community on the outskirts of

London or in or on the edge of the national parks with

no electricity, gas, mains water, etc.

 

That is why one must approach this whole issue with a

very critical and reality-based mind. The ideal may be

one thing but the reality another. The ideal maybe

XYZ, but the reality is ABC. Therefore when I put my

Protection Farms model, I am saying "here is MNO".

It's not XYZ, neither is it ABC - but it takes us down

the path.

 

Harkering on in a reactive way about present farming

and social systems is useless. Talking about the ideal

is useless unless a plan is in place that takes us

there. But this plan needs a dose of slap-in-your-face

reality. Whilst resource exploitation for ones

profitable material needs only draws condemnation from

this forum, it becomes obvious to me that this forum

lacks the maturity to forment a reality-based plan to

get things realy moving. Whilst farms live in poverty,

forever making a loss, forever at the whims of charity

there is little way success will be achieved.

 

Yours - trying hard to logically defeat a poor

paradigm conceptualisation,

 

Mark Chatburn

 

__________

 

Get your free @.co.uk address at http://mail..co.uk

or your free @.ie address at http://mail..ie