Today, our Department of Jainology, in collaboration with the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication at JAIN (Deemed-to-be University), organized a guest lecture by Dr. Surendra Singh Pokharna on the theme:
“Need for Non-violence and Non-possession to Save the Environment and the Earth from Sixth Extinction.”
The presentation was not merely an academic lecture. It was an appeal to humanity. It was an attempt to connect ecology with ethics, science with spirituality, and environmental destruction with the violence hidden within human consciousness.
The lecture documented years of work done to promote the International Day of Non-Violence declared by the United Nations on October 2. It spoke about environmental collapse, extinction, greed, overconsumption, and the urgent relevance of Ahimsa and Aparigraha in the modern world.
Yet, what disturbed me most was not the presentation itself, but the reaction that followed.
As the session ended, remarks were made openly that the presentation was “not engaging” and “not useful” for students. What became visible in that moment was something deeply ironic: while discussing Ahimsa, verbal violence quietly entered the room.
This made me reflect — do we really understand Ahimsa at all?
Most people reduce Ahimsa merely to physical non-violence. But Jain philosophy has always treated violence at much subtler levels:
violence through speech,
violence through intention,
violence through ego,
violence through humiliation,
violence through dismissal,
violence through intellectual insensitivity.
Words can wound more deeply than weapons.
Publicly devaluing someone’s sincere effort, especially a senior scholar who dedicated years to a cause, reflects a subtle form of Himsa that modern intellectual culture often normalizes.
Today’s educational atmosphere increasingly values stimulation over contemplation.
If something is not entertaining enough, visually fast enough, emotionally stimulating enough, it is quickly dismissed as “irrelevant.”
Attention has become more important than reflection.
But philosophy does not always entertain the senses. Sometimes it disturbs them.
Real intellectual inquiry demands patience, silence, depth, and the willingness to sit with uncomfortable truths.
Environmental collapse is not an entertaining topic. Non-possession is not a marketable idea in a consumption-driven world. Ahimsa is not easy because it demands restraint not only in action, but also in speech, thought, criticism, and ego.
The problem is not that people disagree. Critical engagement is necessary in academia. The real issue is how criticism is expressed and from what inner state it emerges.
Is criticism emerging from intellectual sincerity?
Or from impatience, irritation, superiority, and the hunger for immediate engagement?
Modern culture is increasingly driven by sensory satisfaction:
quick stimulation,
fast visuals,
performance,
visibility,
applause,
relevance through attention.
But the hunger of the senses is endless. Intellectual hunger is different. It requires humility. It requires the ability to listen even when something does not immediately gratify the mind.
Ahimsa begins precisely there.
It begins when we stop treating people as instruments for our entertainment.
It begins when we learn to disagree without disrespect.
It begins when speech becomes compassionate without losing honesty.
It begins when criticism becomes constructive rather than dismissive.
Jain philosophy never separated truth from compassion. Satya without sensitivity becomes cruelty. And sensitivity without truth becomes superficiality. True Ahimsa is the balance of both.
Perhaps the greatest environmental crisis today is not outside us but within us — the restlessness of human consciousness, the inability to listen deeply, and the addiction to constant stimulation.
If humanity wishes to save the Earth from destruction, it must first learn how to stop destroying each other through speech, ego, indifference, and unconscious behavior.
Ahimsa is not merely a slogan for conferences. It is a discipline of consciousness.
And unless we understand it at that depth, we may continue speaking about peace while unconsciously practicing violence every day.
Drop your thoughts below!