The conflicts of principle and perspective between the secular or Western and Hindu cultures presents interesting social/cultural and ethical dilemmas. We (in the Western world) see the poor water quality and pollution of the Ganges River as a problem, with a finite solution. However, the Hindu people consider the Ganges to be "God," which has a critical impact on their openness to adopt new practices and innately disqualifies several solutions that may be proposed to this problem. As we learned from the case study, while the Hindu people may fully understand pollution and its deleterious environmental impacts, to them, such principles do not apply to the Ganges. As a "God," the Ganges is capable of self-healing and does not require help from the people. As a result, before any intervention can be started, there is a setback - both a conflict of principle and a conflict of perspective. These conflicts ultimately impact the ability to develop an appropriate solution to the problem, as respecting the Hindu belief that the Ganges is "God" is critical to the solution's success. For example, if you were to consider water filtration to remove harmful sedimentation and waste - is it acceptable to filter "God?" Would the Ganges still be "God" after filtration? If you chose to limit the boats allowed on the water at any given time, does that create a barrier to religion for the millions of people who travel that way to get to prayer? If you opt not to treat the water in favor of the Hindu culture, are you harming the people of India who do not subscribe to the Hindu faith? From my perspective, the issues surrounding politics, health/environment, economics and technology are problems with definitive solutions (as we have solved many of them in the Western world); however, the significant social/cultural and ethical dilemmas in this case have a direct impact on these problems, which ultimately complicates their potential solutions.
That is an interesting way of putting it. In a lot of ancient cultures, rivers were given a lot of importance ritualistically because the people were aware that they were only sustained thanks to the river. All of the first civilizations recorded started around rivers whether it be the Euphrates in Mesopotamia, the Yangtze in China, or the Nile in Egypt. The Ganges River is similar and people have been practicing the same religion of Hinduism in an evolving form since then. Therefore, it's natural that a lot of myth comes from the river. I apologize for going religious, but in Hinduism God is in everything and things seen as continuing life are especially respected. For example, Hindus won't kill cows because the milk feeds their children. Similarly, I doubt Hindus would have any problem with filtering and preserving water that they respect so much. The issue is not that they do not want to clean the river but that they do not have the materials to do so and in some places are not aware that they should be doing so. I speak as someone whose grandmother's ashes were poured in the Ganges River. Sewage is the most important issue with the Ganges. People are not using the Ganges for domestic waste because it is religious but because of necessity. I do not think Hindu culture would be favored by not cleaning the water, but rather both people of and not of the Hindu faith do not want to be drinking dirty water. If anything, one article mentioned the lower social class living in such destitution and depression that they do not care to filter the water. But that is an issue of socioeconomic class and not religion. I know all these posts are well intentioned, but a lack of familiarity can lead to misunderstanding and exaggeration that I felt I should clear a bit. I apologize if I overstepped.
I certainly agree that this is a dilemma, and a very complex one at that. If it were "simply" a matter of pollution in a large river, finding solutions to clean and protect the river would be possible and much more achievable. However, the Ganges River is no ordinary river. As you so eloquently stated, it is not only a life source for the people of India, it there "God." It is something that is all powerful and has the ability to heal itself and its people. In order to bring about real change in the quality of the water the Ganges River, I believe a lot of cultural research needs to be done in order to fully understand what might be a viable option when approaching the dilemma of how to clean the Ganges.
I think that in order to combat this issue we need talk with members of higher rank in that faith (if there are). We can ask them what steps would the allow to be taken to help filter the water. For instance moving through the its path the water naturally filters itself. If we came up with a way to do natural filtration then we could potentially use that method. Also since alot of the pollution comes from rituals and ceremonies we can advise them to use safer alternatives. Paints that dont contain led, biodegradable material. If this were to be an issue that they change these methods then potentially the government should step in and change these products themselves with out telling the people. I know that this could lead to problems in the future, but for the instances what they dont know wont hurt them right?
I really like that plan, Marc! I think this way you would not only gain approval and insight into the way one might be able to help, but also a new perspective on what the elders would like to see changed. This way we can figure out the aspects of the cleanup that we can work with and make changes for the better along with what kinds of rituals we cant really touch if we don't want to offend. I don't agree with changing the products without telling the people though, I think the intent of deceiving even if for the greater good will come off as just that, deceiving. This would potentially hurt any future projects we as an organization would want to do and it would ruin peoples trust in outsider help. If we were wanting to change the pain we could say something along the lines with: "If the river is "God" let us give it the best materials and health we can and relieve any undue need for the river to clean itself." I feel like those narratives might be able to open the conversation a bit more.