The Xingtian Temple in Taipei on Tuesday introduced a new policy banning the burning of incense and food offerings. The decision has drawn mixed reactions, with some temple visitors disagreeing with it, saying they do not know what they will do now, while others support the move in light of environmental concerns.
Burning incense is a longstanding traditional ritual in Taiwan and many other countries. Lighting candles and burning incense are said to have a calming effect on worshipers. As the smoke rises, some believe that their prayers rise with it to the heavens. At some temples, devotees race to light the first stick of incense at auspicious events in the hope that the gods will notice and bestow particularly good luck on them.
Some other temples have said they are not following Xingtian Temple’s move, as they wish to respect tradition, the freedom of worshipers and the small businesses in the communities surrounding the temples.
However, Xingtian Temple’s move has also found favor, especially among those who support a green lifestyle and environmental protection. Burning incense and ghost money creates huge volumes of smoke and releases a lot of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, which are said to advance global warming as well as a variety of other substances, including carcinogens such as benzene. The practice also puts respirable particles into the atmosphere and cause pollution, which is bad for worshipers, temple staff and people living in neighboring areas. Popular temples with large numbers of worshipers have been affected by carbon emissions, blackening columns, walls, ceilings and even statues and figurines of deities, making restoration work difficult.
Modern residential habits have changed, and temples and residential areas are now mixed together, making it difficult to maintain buffer zones between temples and houses. Burning incense and ghost money spews black smoke, destroying air quality in neighboring areas, while ashes and embers spread, posing a fire hazard and potentially bringing losses to temples and surrounding areas.
When religious ceremonies are held at temples, the volume of incense and ghost money burned by the large numbers of devotees far exceeds the capacity of the burners, so temple staff arrange for the items to be burned offsite. However, this approach negates the original intention of the offering, which is for the devotees to express their wishes directly to the temple deities. Xingtian Temple is in central Taipei, and the feeling is certain to be very different from what it would be if the items were removed to a temple in a rural or mountainous area.
Religious ceremonies are one link in the chain for freedom of religion. It is not easy to change thousands of years of tradition, and Xingtian Temple worshipers have different views about the change. It is only to be expected that some find it hard to accept the temple’s decision. However, such changes are not made overnight, and building acceptance requires a long period of communication and adaptation.
In the past, incense and offering tables were needed to communicate prayers to gods, and sacrificial offerings were made and ghost money burned to link heaven and earth. Without incense and ghost money to burn, devotees will go in search of other mediums to connect with gods.
While temples should respect tradition and the desires of devotees, they should also pay attention to the interaction between religion and the environment, and adapt as lifestyles change.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the