Since Alexis Wright’s novelistic oeuvre of “aboriginal-realism,” the term is frequently used in academic discourses, particularly in developmental and environmental studies. The term “aboriginal-realism” has become a new theoretical paradigm to understand and legitimize the Indigenous communities and their knowledge system. Wright herself perceived it as opposed to “magic-realism,” which sounds derogatory and has had a sense of colonial or outsider’s viewpoint, or Othering. The Aboriginal people are traditionally less concerned with knowing the world in an abstract, logical sense; instead, they prefer to live within it. From the perspective of aboriginal – realism, living in the world is more important than knowing it. Their ways of life are rooted in a holistic worldview where not only moral, spiritual, and material aspects are inseparable but economic activities, ecological relations, and community life are also deeply interconnected. This form of life can be understood in a form of relational and custodian ethics, a concept articulated by Mary Graham, which contrasts sharply with the detached rationality of modern science by arguing that modern science isolates facts from values, and knowledge from ethics and often reducing life into measurable categories.
Thus, aboriginal-realism bifurcated the experiences and knowledge between the colonizers and the colonized; also, this made a difference between belonging and non-belonging. In contrast to the modernist tendency to categorize and fragment reality, aboriginal-realism emphasizes Indigenous and place-based epistemologies which recognize the fundamental interconnectedness of all beings. This kind of understanding and worldview does not perceive nature as an object “out there” to be conquered or exploited, but as an active participant in a relational web of life. In such systems of thought, the boundary between the human and the non-human dissolves, giving rise to a relational ontology.1 Unlike aboriginal-realism, from the perspective of modern science these kinds of world views were perceived as superstitious and irrational, and were being kept aside from the mainstream discourses. Thus, in a sense, the term provided a de-colonial perspective to understand the rational and material relationships between culture, religion, economy, and other things of an Indigenous community. Furthermore, the term becomes instrumental in understanding the limitations of modern sciences for its hegemonic and reductionist nature. From the perspective of aboriginal-realism, being is prioritized over knowing.
Knowledge is not pursued for control or mastery, but as a means of sustaining harmony with the land, ancestors, and the cosmos. This experiential, intersubjective approach resists the compartmentalization of knowledge typical of modern science. Modern sciences, especially in their enlightenment form, are grounded in the belief that knowledge of the laws and mechanisms of nature enables progress and rational control over the world. Scientific modernity, while powerful, carries significant limitations – often reducing rich, lived realities into quantifiable data, stripping away cultural meaning, spirituality, and subjectivity. As Max Weber observed, this rationalization leads to the “disenchantment of the world,”2 eroding its mystery and sacredness. Scholars like Linda Tuhiwai Smith highlight how science has served colonial and extractive agendas, marginalizing Indigenous knowledge systems.3 Moreover, its instrumental view of nature as a resource to control has contributed to ecological crises — a consequence aboriginal realism challenges through its emphasis on relational stewardship and ethical coexistence. Modern science, as veteran eco-feminist Vandana Shiva proclaims, produced exclusion in two ways through the exclusion of “other ways of knowing,” and of “other knowers.”4
This essay offers a new vantage point to understand rural India through the lens of aboriginal-realism, an ontological and epistemological perspective that valorizes Indigenous and traditional local knowledge systems, lived experiences, and embodied social realities that coexist with natural and spiritual worlds. As an approach and framework, it challenges the modernist Eurocentric dominant developmental paradigms that often reduce rural life to a singular capitalist logic of backwardness and irrationality. It argues that rural realities are lived practices where we can find the integrated matrix of material, social, spiritual, and ecological dimensions. In fact, after the arrival of colonialism, India’s aboriginals, along with other rural populations, faced a rejection of their knowledge systems. This great transformation in their worldviews caused severe social and economic crises simultaneously, as Vandana Shiva and other scholars have emphatically claimed.
The recent global emphasis on Indigenous knowledge systems in environmental conservation and management underscores the critical importance of understanding India’s aboriginal ecological frameworks. These Indigenous systems, mainly found in rural areas are not mere repositories of practical environmental techniques but are deeply interwoven with cultural, spiritual, and communal practices that collectively embody a holistic worldview of human-nature relationships. This pragmatic integrative approach fosters sustainability by situating humans as intrinsic members of ecological communities rather than separate exploiters.
India’s rich array of Indigenous traditions encapsulates place-based models of sustainability that have evolved through centuries of continuous engagement with specific ecosystems. These traditions involve adaptive, context-sensitive knowledge that encompasses biodiversity conservation, sustainable resource use, and ecosystem stewardship, often transmitted through oral histories, rituals, and communal governance structures. Such knowledge systems demonstrate realistic resilience and dynamism, adapting to environmental changes while maintaining cultural continuity. Importantly, these Indigenous practices emphasize reciprocal relationships with the environment, aligning with the concept of “kincentric ecology”5 where all life forms are regarded as relatives, promoting ecological balance and safeguarding biodiversity.
Recognizing and integrating India’s aboriginal ecological wisdom into broader conservation and development agendas not only validates Indigenous sovereignty and knowledge holders but also facilitates more effective, equitable, and culturally resonant environmental governance.
Aboriginal-realism holds ontological pluralism – referring to the coexistence of multiple realities, which are equally recognized and valid within the kaleidoscope of the rural context. In rural India, gods, spirits, ancestors, and natural forces such as rivers and mountains are not only entities and metaphors but are also the active agents shaping the life worlds of the community. This ontological pluralism is contrasted with the modern dualism (nature vs. culture, material vs. spiritual), and it demands to open a more nuanced understanding of realism where the real includes seen and unseen forces. For instance, farmers during agricultural practices invoke Bhoomi Devi (goddess-land) and other associated gods to explain agricultural successes and failures by acknowledging the reality that has been mixed with ecological and spiritual causality without contradiction. This symbolizes the core of aboriginal-realism, a view that reality is thick and embedded in communal life and cosmology.
We remember the days when our elders would ask us to bring some tulsi leaves, a medicinal and sacred plant in India, from the courtyard garden during the nighttime puja ceremony. And we usually pick or pluck the leaves without snapping our fingers. Our elders would scold us and argue that the plants are in slumber, so don’t pluck them without letting them know first. According to the Sanskrit text, Vayu Purana, picking Tulsi leaves without bathing renders one’s worship ineffective. Leaves or soft mañjarīs should be plucked carefully with the right hand while chanting:
tulasy amṛta-janmāsi sadā tvaṁ keśava-priyā
keśavārthaṁ cinomi tvāṁ varadā bhava śobhane
English translation:
Oh Tulasi, born of nectar and ever dear to Keśava, I collect your leaves for His worship. Please bless me with success.
We learned that being is prioritized over knowing in the sense that knowledge is not pursued for control or mastery, but as a means of sustaining harmony with the sprit, ecology, and the cosmos. Decades later, when we started to understand the natural environment, we came to understand the “scientific” rationale of their words and understood the fact that we are a part of and dependent on nature – the Tulsi leaves require a reciprocity of care. Nature’s existence decides the existence of the human being, not we are who decides the fate of nature.
Another aboriginal reality in practice today occurs in Darbhanga, a district of Bihar. During the period of the rainy season, people are prevented from the consumption of fish on the ground of spirituality and religiosity, while the region is well known for its fish production and consumption. Prima facie, this seems to be a credulous practice, but in actuality, by avoiding the consumption of those fishes, they avoid eating polluted and non-edible fish that are tainted by massive floods or rains. Monsoon floods often pollute water bodies with sewage and industrial waste, making fish unsafe to eat due to potential contamination. Fish during this time may thus be diseased or low in quality, posing health risks. This period also marks the breeding season for many fish species, and abstaining from fishing helps preserve their reproductive cycle, supporting ecological balance and sustainability. Avoiding fish consumption during the rainy season, though often seen as a religious or spiritual practice, has strong scientific reasoning behind it. Thus, this culturally rooted practice serves as an effective traditional method of environmental and public health protection.
The negative depiction of the mythological beliefs in the above-mentioned cases was due to the colonial legacy; nevertheless, the larger part of the society never erased their traditional bonding with nature. For them, lived experiences are central; they feel the reality with their soul. Due to the cultural politics of capitalism and state initiatives, modern science tried to engage sensitively, without outright rejecting or dismissing traditional practices or rural worldviews. It attempted to interpret rural life not just with cold, objective analysis, but with a sense of compassion and cultural appreciation. However, despite this intent, it had only limited success, possibly due to deeper cultural differences, methodological limitations, or an inability to fully grasp lived rural realities. It often marginalizes or erases the rural worldviews and promotes one-size-fits-all modernization.
Aboriginal-realism asserts that rural lived rationalities and economies, grounded in local knowledge and socio-spiritual norms, are not “irrational” as modern science may suggest. For example, traditional housing techniques applied by local peoples and architects demonstrate superior climatic responsiveness that modern architects may overlook, signifying epistemic realism anchored in place-based knowledge rather than abstract expertise.6 In the case of developmentalism, a study shows how and why a tribe of Jharkhand resists developmental projects, through everyday acts of refusal. The local community’s resistance emerges from their relational bond with land and ancestors. Their small, daily, and persistent actions challenge state-driven development and extraction, not just politically but ontologically.7 This calls for epistemic humility: a recognition that science, while valuable, is not universal.
Tribal and Aboriginal perspectives offer alternative epistemologies that are not “pre-modern,” but grounded in living knowledge — knowledge that is ethical, situated, and deeply connected to the world. There is less possibility of knowing these local realities from an outsider’s perspective. In addition, the need for discussing and understanding the aboriginal practices and actions local doesn’t mean the negation of reality, but this is all about plurality. To deconstruct homogenous colonial legacies, there is a need to institutionalize local knowledge through empirical and existential interference. Here aboriginal-realism provides a deep insight regarding the issue. In a larger part of rural India, lived realities are celebrated by local people; unfortunately, they are misunderstood or overlooked in public policies. There are folk stories, which guide the moral structure of the society; there are folk poetry, which whispers in the spirit of the communities. There are stories of trees and songs of animals and birds; they relate themselves with the wider natural world. Producing realities of knowledge must be rational but at the same time it must be relational and reciprocal. The scientific analysis must respect the system of belief of a community, which binds the community to the larger natural world. We conclude that aboriginal-realism sees the rural as a dynamic space where tradition and modernity co-evolve and inform one another, offering a non-dualist realism that is both critical and constructive.
Aboriginal-realism as a perspective offers a profound framework for understanding rural India’s social, ecological, and spiritual fabric as an integrated reality. Recognizing and engaging with aboriginal-realism is crucial for ethical development, policy-making, and scholarly inquiry into India’s rural societies, rendering visible the real lived worlds of millions that are often obscured by Eurocentric, deficit-based narratives.
1 Here, the rise of relational ontology is used to refer to a way of being in which existence is co-constituted through mutual dependence and care.
2 The disenchantment of the world and the concept of the “iron cage” was given by Max Weber to describe the consequence of rationalization in modern society.
3 The seminal work of Smith (2021) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (3rd ed.), serves to highlight the importance of centering Indigenous knowledge and science, promoting cultural sensitivity.
4 For more discussion, see Shiva’s (1998) book Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India; also reviewed by Subudhi and Keyoor (2019) “Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development.”by Vandana Shiva. North Atlantic Books. In Journal of International Women’s Studies: Vol. 20(7). https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol20/iss7/29
5 Kincenteric ecology refers to the ecological assemblage of human and non-human as a part of extended family. For more refer Salmón, E. (2000). Kincentric Ecology: Indigenous Perceptions of the Human-Nature Relationship. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1327–1332. https://doi.org/10.2307/2641288
6 “Epistemic realism” here refers to knowledge that is realistic, grounded, and tested in actual conditions—as opposed to “abstract expertise,” which may rely on universal models that don’t always fit local contexts. Science, when attentive to context, can validate and learn from such vernacular wisdom. Traditional housing techniques, developed through generations of lived experience, trial and error, and long-term adaptation reflect a deep, place-based understanding of climate and environment – often applying scientific principles like ventilation and thermal regulation without formal training.
7 See Kumar, Dhiraj ( 2024) Political Ecology of Everyday Resistance and State Building: A Case of the Ho of Jharkhand, Routledge.
Dhiraj Kumar obtained an MPhil degree from Pondicherry Central University and a PhD from the National Institute of Technology, Rourkela, India. At present, he serves as an Assistant Professor in the Sociology section at MMV, Banaras Hindu University. He has widely published in reputable international journals and has contributed to edited books. He authored a book, titled “Political Ecology of Everyday Resistance and State Building: A Case of the Ho of Jharkhand,” published by Routledge.
Keyoor Pathak is an Environmental Sociologist & Assistant Professor at Department of Sociology, University of Allahabad, India. He completed Post-Doctorate from Council for Social Development, Hyderabad. He has published many research papers in the journal of international repute, and book chapter in international publication house. Also, he frequently writes columns on developmental and environmental issues for national magazines and portals in India.
Photo credit: Holy Basil (Ocimum Sanctum) http://www.haveyoueverpickedacarrot.com/2010/08/holy-basil-tulsi-dont-leave-home.html
