Ahimsa: Difference between revisions

From Sarkarverse
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Added History. Still need one section on various interpretations and another section on Sarkar's explanation)
(→‎top: Broken ref fix)
 
(16 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{multiple issues|
{{Infobox Nonliterary Works
* The article does '''not''' contain the position of Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar on the subject (2013 October)
| image          =
* The neutrality of the article is disputed (2013 October)
| image_size    =
| alt            =
| caption        = <!-- titled displayed below that image -->
| abbreviation =
| short_description =
| alternative_names =
| in_other_languages = Non-violence {{grey|(English)}}<br/>अहिंसा {{grey|(Sanskrit)}}
| motto =
| logo =
| country =
| language =
| website =
}}
}}
 
'''Ahimsa''' ({{lang-sa|अहिंसा}}; [[Roman Sanskrit transliteration|Roman Saḿskrta]]: ahiḿsá; [[:wikipedia:IAST|IAST]]: {{IAST|ahiṃsā}}, [[:wikipedia:Pali|Pali]]:<ref name="Johansson2012">{{cite book|author=Rune E. A. Johansson|title=Pali Buddhist Texts: An Introductory Reader and Grammar|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=CXBmlQvw7PwC&pg=PT143|accessdate=8 August 2013|date=6 December 2012|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-136-11106-8|page=143}}</ref> avihiḿsá) is a term meaning benignity, non-injury. The word is derived from the Sanskrit root ''hiḿs'' – to strike. ''Hiḿsá'' is injury or harm. ''A-hiḿsá'' is the opposite.<ref>Mayton, D. M., & Burrows, C. A. (2012), ''Psychology of Nonviolence'', The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology, Vol. 1, pages 713-716 and 720-723, Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-1-4051-9644-4</ref><ref>Encyclopedia Britannica, see Ahimsa</ref>
[[File:SVmap_NonliteraryWorks.png|right|240px]]
[[File:Patanjali Statue.jpg|thumb|240px|Statue of Patanjali at Patanjali Yog Peeth, Haridwar]]
{{Yama-Niyama}}
Ahimsa is one of the cardinal virtues<ref name=evpc>Stephen H. Phillips & other authors (2008), in Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, & Conflict (Second Edition), ISBN 978-0123739858, Elsevier Science, Pages 1347–1356, 701-849, 1867</ref>, the first of ten principles in the ancient tantric/yogic system of morality, ''Yama-Niyama''. As such, it is also an important tenet of major [[:wikipedia:Indian religions|Indian religions]] ([[:wikipedia:Buddhism|Buddhism]], [[:wikipedia:Hinduism|Hinduism]], and [[:wikipedia:Jainism|Jainism]]). Over the years, Ahimsa has been interpreted in many different ways. In his book, [[A Guide to Human Conduct]], Sarkar analyzes the concept of Ahimsa and some popular interpretations of the term.<ref name=GTHC>{{cite book|last=Anandamurti|first=Shrii Shrii|title=A Guide to Human Conduct|year=2004|ISBN= 9788172521035}}</ref>
 
'''Ahimsa''' ({{lang-sa|[[अहिंसा]]}}; [[IAST]]: {{IAST|ahiṃsā}}, [[Pali|Pāli]]:<ref name="Johansson2012">{{cite book|author=Rune E. A. Johansson|title=Pali Buddhist Texts: An Introductory Reader and Grammar|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=CXBmlQvw7PwC&pg=PT143|accessdate=8 August 2013|date=6 December 2012|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-136-11106-8|page=143}}</ref> {{IAST|avihiṃsā}}) is a term meaning benignity, non-injury. The word is derived from the Sanskrit root ''hiṃs'' – to strike. ''Hiṃsā'' is injury or harm. ''A-hiṃsā'' is the opposite.<ref>Mayton, D. M., & Burrows, C. A. (2012), ''Psychology of Nonviolence'', The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology, Vol. 1, pages 713-716 and 720-723, Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-1-4051-9644-4</ref><ref>[Encyclopedia Britannica], see Ahimsa</ref>
 
Ahimsa is one of the cardinal virtues<ref name=evpc/>, the first of ten principles in the ancient tantric/yogic system of morality, ''Yama-Niyama''. As such, it is also an important tenet of major [[:wikipedia:Indian religions|Indian religions]] ([[:wikipedia:Buddhism|Buddhism]], [[:wikipedia:Hinduism|Hinduism]], and [[:wikipedia:Jainism|Jainism]]). Over the years, Ahimsa has been interpreted in many different ways. In his book, [[A Guide to Human Conduct]], Sarkar analyzes the concept of Ahimsa and some popular interpretations of the term.<ref name=GTHC>{{cite book|ref=harv|last=Anandamurti|first=Shrii Shrii|title=A Guide to Human Conduct|year=2004|ISBN= 9788172521035}}</ref>  


==Etymology==
==Etymology==
Line 17: Line 24:


==History==
==History==
The concept of ahimsa first arose as an ethical precept in the indigenous tantric tradition of ancient India. Over time, the concept of ahimsa made its way into Vedic texts with varying interpretations. When the philosopher [[:wikipedia:Patanjali]] (circa 200-400BCE) systematized tantra into what is popularly known as ''Aśt́áuṋga Yoga'' (eight-limbed yoga) or ''Rája Yoga'' (the king of yogas), ahimsa was the first principle of his first element of yoga (Yama).<ref>Patañjali: ''Yoga Sutras'', Sadhana Pada 30.</ref>
{{Yama-Niyama}}
 
The concept of ahimsa first arose as an ethical precept in the indigenous tantric tradition of ancient India. Over time, the concept of ahimsa made its way into Vedic texts with varying interpretations. When the philosopher [[:wikipedia:Patanjali|Patanjali]] (circa 200-400BCE) systematized tantra into what is popularly known as ''Aśt́áuṋga Yoga'' (eight-limbed yoga) or ''Rája Yoga'' (the king of yogas), ahimsa was the first principle of his first element of yoga, ''Yama''.<ref>Patañjali: ''Yoga Sutras'', Sadhana Pada 30.</ref>
==Jainism==
{{Main|Ahimsa in Jainism}}
[[File:Jain hand.svg|thumb|right|150px|The hand with a wheel on the palm symbolizes the Jain Vow of Ahimsa. The word in the middle is "Ahimsa". The wheel represents the [[dharmacakra]] which stands for the resolve to halt the cycle of reincarnation through relentless pursuit of truth and non-violence.]]
In Jainism, the understanding and implementation of Ahimsa is more radical, scrupulous, and comprehensive than in any other religion.<ref>Laidlaw, pp. 154–160; Jindal, pp. 74–90; Tähtinen p. 110.</ref> Non-violence is seen as the most essential religious duty for everyone (''{{IAST|ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ}}'', a statement often inscribed on Jain temples).<ref>Dundas, Paul: ''The Jains'', second edition, London 2002, p. 160; Wiley, Kristi L.: ''Ahimsa and Compassion in Jainism'', in: ''Studies in Jaina History and Culture'', ed. Peter Flügel, London 2006, p. 438; Laidlaw pp. 153–154.</ref> Like in Hinduism, the aim is to prevent the accumulation of harmful karma.<ref>Laidlaw pp. 26–30, 191–195.</ref> When [[Mahavira]] revived and reorganized the Jain movement in the 6th or 5th century BCE,<ref>Dundas p. 24 suggests the 5th century; the traditional dating of Mahavira’s death is 527 BCE.</ref> Ahimsa was already an established, strictly observed rule.<ref>Goyal, S.R.: ''A History of Indian Buddhism'', Meerut 1987, p. 83-85.</ref> [[Parshva]], the earliest Jain [[Tirthankara]], whom modern Western historians consider to be a historical figure,<ref>Dundas pp. 19, 30; Tähtinen p. 132.</ref> lived in about the 8th century BCE.<ref>Dundas p. 30 suggests the 8th or 7th century; the traditional chronology places him in the late 9th or early 8th century.</ref> He founded the community to which Mahavira’s parents belonged.<ref>[[Acaranga Sutra]] 2.15.</ref> Ahimsa was already part of the "Fourfold Restraint" (''Caujjama''), the vows taken by Parshva’s followers.<ref>[[Sthananga Sutra]] 266; Tähtinen p. 132; Goyal p. 83-84, 103.</ref> In the times of Mahavira and in the following centuries, Jains were at odds with both Buddhists and followers of the Vedic religion or Hindus, whom they accused of negligence and inconsistency in the implementation of Ahimsa.<ref>Dundas pp. 160, 234, 241; Wiley p. 448; Granoff, Phyllis: ''The Violence of Non-Violence: A Study of Some Jain Responses to Non-Jain Religious Practices'', in: ''Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies'' 15 (1992) pp. 1–43; Tähtinen pp. 8–9.</ref> There is some evidence, however, that ancient Jain ascetics accepted meat as alms if the animal had not been specifically killed for them.<ref>Alsdorf pp. 564–570; Dundas p. 177.</ref> Modern Jains deny this vehemently, especially with regard to Mahavira himself.<ref>Alsdorf pp. 568–569.</ref> According to the Jain tradition either [[lacto vegetarianism]] or [[veganism]] is mandatory.<ref>Laidlaw p. 169.</ref>
 
The Jain concept of Ahimsa is characterized by several aspects. It does not make any exception for ritual sacrificers and professional warrior-hunters. Killing of animals for food is absolutely ruled out.<ref>Laidlaw pp. 166–167; Tähtinen p. 37.</ref> Jains also make considerable efforts not to injure plants in everyday life as far as possible. Though they admit that plants must be destroyed for the sake of food, they accept such violence only inasmuch as it is indispensable for human survival, and there are special instructions for preventing unnecessary violence against plants.<ref>Lodha, R.M.: ''Conservation of Vegetation and Jain Philosophy'', in: ''Medieval Jainism: Culture and Environment'', New Delhi 1990, p. 137-141; Tähtinen p. 105.</ref> Jains go out of their way so as not to hurt even small insects and other minuscule animals.<ref>Jindal p. 89; Laidlaw pp. 54, 154–155, 180.</ref> For example, Jains often do not go out at night, when they are more likely to step upon an insect. In their view, injury caused by carelessness is like injury caused by deliberate action.<ref>Sutrakrtangasutram 1.8.3; Uttaradhyayanasutra 10; Tattvarthasutra 7.8; Dundas pp. 161–162.</ref> Eating honey is strictly outlawed, as it would amount to violence against the bees.<ref>[[Hemacandra]]: ''Yogashastra'' 3.37; Laidlaw pp. 166–167.</ref> Some Jains abstain from farming because it inevitably entails unintentional killing or injuring of many small animals, such as worms and insects,<ref>Laidlaw p. 180.</ref> but agriculture is not forbidden in general and there are Jain farmers.<ref>Sangave, Vilas Adinath: ''Jaina Community. A Social Survey'', second edition, Bombay 1980, p. 259; Dundas p. 191.</ref> Additionally, because they consider harsh words to be a form of violence, they often keep a cloth to ritually cover their mouth, as a reminder not to allow violence in their speech.
 
In contrast, Jains agree with Hindus that violence in self-defense can be justified,<ref>''Nisithabhasya'' (in ''Nisithasutra'') 289; Jinadatta Suri: ''Upadesharasayana'' 26; Dundas pp. 162–163; Tähtinen p. 31.</ref> and they agree that a soldier who kills enemies in combat is performing a legitimate duty.<ref>Jindal pp. 89–90; Laidlaw pp. 154–155; Jaini, Padmanabh S.: ''Ahimsa and "Just War" in Jainism'', in: ''Ahimsa, Anekanta and Jainism'', ed. Tara Sethia, New Delhi 2004, p. 52-60; Tähtinen p. 31.</ref> Jain communities accepted the use of military power for their defense, and there were Jain monarchs, military commanders, and soldiers.<ref>Harisena, ''Brhatkathakosa'' 124 (10th century); Jindal pp. 90–91; Sangave p. 259.</ref>
 
Though, theoretically, all life forms are said to deserve full protection from all kinds of injury, Jains admit that this ideal cannot be completely implemented in practice. Hence, they recognize a hierarchy of life. Mobile beings are given higher protection than immobile ones. For the mobile beings, they distinguish between one-sensed, two-sensed, three-sensed, four-sensed and five-sensed ones; a one-sensed animal has touch as its only sensory modality. The more senses a being has, the more they care about its protection. Among the five-sensed beings, the rational ones (humans) are most strongly protected by Jain Ahimsa.<ref>Jindal pp. 89, 125–133 (detailed exposition of the classification system); Tähtinen pp. 17, 113.</ref> In the practice of Ahimsa, the requirements are less strict for the lay persons who have undertaken ''anuvrata'' (Lesser Vows) than for the [[Jain monasticism|monastics]] who are bound by the [[Mahavrata]] "Great Vows".<ref>Dundas pp. 158–159, 189–192; Laidlaw pp. 173–175, 179; ''Religious Vegetarianism'', ed. [[Kerry S. Walters]] and Lisa Portmess, Albany 2001, p. 43-46 (translation of the First Great Vow).</ref>
 
==Buddhism==
Unlike in Hindu and Jain sources, in ancient Buddhist texts ''Ahimsa'' (or its [[Pāli]] cognate {{IAST|avihiṃsā}}) is not used as a technical term.<ref>Tähtinen p. 10.</ref> The traditional Buddhist understanding of non-violence is not as rigid as the Jain one, but like the Jains, Buddhists have always condemned the killing of all living beings.<ref>Sarao, p. 49; Goyal p. 143; Tähtinen p. 37.</ref><ref name="Lamotte, Etienne 1988, p. 54-55">Lamotte, pp. 54–55.</ref> In some Buddhist traditions vegetarianism is not mandatory. In these traditions, monks and lay persons may eat meat and fish on condition that the animal was not killed specifically for them.<ref>Sarao pp. 51–52; Alsdorf pp. 561–564.</ref> For some monks, specifically monks of some Mahayana traditions, the eating of meat is strictly forbidden. Laypeople are also encouraged to eat vegetarian.
 
Since the beginnings of the Buddhist community, monks and nuns have had to commit themselves to the [[Five Precepts]] of moral conduct.<ref name="Lamotte, Etienne 1988, p. 54-55"/> In ancient Buddhism, lay persons were encouraged, but not obliged, to commit themselves to observe the Five Precepts of morality ({{IAST|Pañcasīla}}).<ref>Lamotte pp. 69–70.</ref> In both codes the first rule is to abstain from taking the life of a sentient being ({{IAST|Pānātipātā}}).<ref>Lamotte p. 70.</ref> Buddhist monks should avoid cutting or burning trees, because some sentient beings rely on them.<ref>[http://www.awker.com/hongshi/mag/82/82-10.htm 從律典探索佛教對動物的態度（中）]. Awker.com. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref>
 
===War===
Unlike the Vedic religion, ancient Buddhism had strong misgivings about violent ways of punishing criminals and war. Neither was explicitly condemned,<ref>Sarao p. 53; Tähtinen pp. 95, 102.</ref> but peaceful ways of conflict resolution and punishment with the least amount of injury were encouraged.<ref>Tähtinen pp. 95, 102–103.</ref><ref>Kurt A. Raaflaub, [http://books.google.com/books?id=FMxgef2VJEwC&pg=PA61 ''War and Peace in the Ancient World.''] Blackwell Publishing, 2007 , p. 61.</ref> The early texts condemn the mental states that lead to violent behavior.<ref>Bartholomeusz, p. 52.</ref>
 
Non-violence is an over-riding concern of the [[Pali Canon]].<ref>Bartholomeusz, p. 111.</ref> While the early texts condemn killing in the strongest terms, and portray the ideal king as a pacifist, such a king is nonetheless flanked by an army.<ref name="Tessa Bartholomeusz 2002, page 41">Bartholomeusz, p. 41.</ref> It seems that the Buddha's teaching on non-violence was not interpreted or put into practice in an uncompromisingly pacifist or anti-military-service way by early Buddhists.<ref name="Tessa Bartholomeusz 2002, page 41"/> The early texts assume war to be a fact of life, and well-skilled warriors are viewed as a necessity for defensive warfare.<ref>Bartholomeusz, p. 50.</ref> In Pali texts, injunctions to abstain from violence and involvement with military affairs are directed at members of the [[sangha]]; later Mahayana texts, which often generalize monastic norms to laity, require this of lay people as well.<ref>Stewart McFarlane in Peter Harvey, ed., ''Buddhism.'' Continuum, 2001, pages 195–196.</ref>
 
The early texts do not contain just-war ideology as such.<ref>Bartholomeusz, p. 40.</ref> Some argue that a [[suttas|sutta]] in the ''Gamani Samyuttam'' rules out all military service. In this passage, a soldier asks the Buddha if it is true that, as he has been told, soldiers slain in battle are reborn in a heavenly realm. The Buddha reluctantly replies that if he is killed in battle while his mind is seized with the intention to kill, he will undergo an unpleasant rebirth.<ref>Bartholomeusz, pp. 125–126. Full texts of the sutta:[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.003.than.html].</ref> In the early texts, a person's mental state at the time of death is generally viewed as having an inordinate impact on the next birth.<ref>Rune E.A. Johansson, ''The Dynamic Psychology of Early Buddhism.'' Curzon Press 1979, page 33.</ref>
 
Some Buddhists point to other early texts as justifying defensive war.<ref>Bartholomeusz, pp. 40–53. Some examples are the ''Cakkavati Sihanada Sutta'', the ''Kosala Samyutta'', the ''Ratthapala Sutta'', and the ''Sinha Sutta''. See also page 125. See also Trevor Ling, ''Buddhism, Imperialism, and War.'' George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1979, pages 136–137.</ref> One example is the ''Kosala Samyutta'', in which King [[Pasenadi]], a righteous king favored by the Buddha, learns of an impending attack on his kingdom. He arms himself in defense, and leads his army into battle to protect his kingdom from attack. He lost a battle but won the war. King Pasenadi defeated King [[Ajatasattu]] and captured him alive. He thought that although this King of [[Magadha]] has transgressed against his kingdom, he had not transgressed against him personally, and Ajatasattu is still his nephew. He released Ajatasattu and did not harm him.<ref>Bodhi, Bhikkhu (trans.) (2000). The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. Boston: Wisdom Publications. ISBN 0-86171-331-1.</ref> Upon his return, the Buddha says, among other things, that Pasenadi is "a friend of virtue, acquainted with virtue, intimate with virtue", while the opposite is said of the aggressor, King Ajatasattu.<ref>Bartholomeusz, pp. 49, 52–53.</ref>
 
According to Theravada commentaries, there are five requisite factors that must all be fulfilled for an act to be both an act of killing and to be karmically negative. These are: (1) the presence of a living being, human or animal; (2) the knowledge that the being is a living being; (3) the intent to kill; (4) the act of killing by some means; and (5) the resulting death.<ref>Hammalawa Saddhatissa, ''Buddhist Ethics.'' Wisdom Publications, 1997, pages 60, 159, see also Bartholomeusz page 121.</ref> Some Buddhists have argued on this basis that the act of killing is complicated, and its ethicization is predicated upon intent.<ref>Bartholomeusz, p. 121.</ref> Some have argued that in defensive postures, for example, the primary intention of a soldier is not to kill, but to save, and the act of killing in that situation would have minimal negative karmic repercussions.<ref>Bartholomeusz, pp. 44, 121–122, 124.</ref>


According to [[Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar]], the doctrine of Ahimsa does not state "kill not" but rather "love all". Buddha said ''"Love all, so that you may not wish to kill any."'' This is a positive way of stating the principle of Ahimsa. The Buddha's Ahimsa is quite in keeping with his [[middle path]]. To put it differently, the Buddha made a distinction between a principle and a rule. He did not make Ahimsa a matter of rule. He enunciated it as a matter of principle. A principle leaves you freedom to act; a rule does not.<ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_buddha/04_02.html#03_02 The Buddha and His Dhamma]. Columbia.edu. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref>
==Various interpretations of Ahimsa==
[[File:Sthanakvasi monks.jpg|left|thumb|220px|Some Jain monks wear a mask over their mouth]]
In both [[:wikipedia:Jainism|Jainism]] and [[:wikipedia:Buddhism|Buddhism]], both circa 500BCE, ahimsa is a key ethical principle. In Jainism, it is the first and main ethical principle. Jain renunciates reject the use of force even when it is required for self-defense. They are often seen wearing a mask over their mouth to avoid the unintentional ingestion of flies. And they have also been known to pour sugar into anthills.<ref name=GTHC/> Buddhists observe a somewhat less strict interpretation of ahimsa. For example, unlike Jains, not all Buddhists are vegetarian.


===Laws===
In modern times, the concept of ahimsa has taken on a new meaning, in large part due to the teachings and activities of [[:wikipedia:Mahatma Gandhi|Mohandas Gandhi]]. According to Gandhi, ahimsa means ''non-violence''. This is perhaps the most extreme interpretation of ahimsa, given the fact that even Jains and Hindus accept the use of violence in self-defense.<ref>''Nisithabhasya'' (in ''Nisithasutra'') 289; Jinadatta Suri: ''Upadesharasayana'' 26; Dundas pp. 162–163; Tähtinen p. 31.</ref><ref>Jindal pp. 89–90; Laidlaw pp. 154–155; Jaini, Padmanabh S.: ''Ahimsa and "Just War" in Jainism'', in: ''Ahimsa, Anekanta and Jainism'', ed. Tara Sethia, New Delhi 2004, p. 52-60; Tähtinen p. 31.</ref>
The emperors of [[Sui dynasty]], [[Tang dynasty]] and early [[Song dynasty]] banned killing in Lunar calendar 1st, 5th, and 9th month.<ref>[http://www.bya.org.hk/life/hokfu/new_page_3.htm#34 卷糺 佛教的慈悲觀]. Bya.org.hk. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://www.drnh.gov.tw/www/page/c_book/b14/試探《護生畫集》的護生觀.pdf 試探《護生畫集》的護生觀 高明芳]</ref><ref>[http://flwh.znufe.edu.cn/article_show.asp?id=2788 唐《開元二十五年令•雜令》研究]. Flwh.znufe.edu.cn (2007-02-28). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> [[Wu Zetian|Empress Wu Tse-Tien]] banned killing for more than half a year in 692.<ref>[http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-AN/an2414.htm 「護生」精神的實踐舉隅]. Ccbs.ntu.edu.tw. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> Some also banned fishing for some time each year.<ref>[http://www.cclw.net/gospel/asking/dmz10w/htm/02.htm 答妙贞十问]. Cclw.net. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref>


The King [[Bayinnaung]] of Burma, after conquering the [[Bago, Burma|Bago]] in 1559, the Buddhist King prohibited the practice of [[halal]], specifically, killing food animals in the name of God. He also disallowed the [[Eid al-Adha]] religious sacrifice of cattle. Halal food was also forbidden by king [[Alaungpaya]] in the 18th century.
==Sarkar on ahimsa==
According to Sarkar, principles of morality must take into account both action and intent. When there is an unavoidable conflict between the two, intent becomes primary. So Sarkar notes with respect to ahimsa that violence (or the use of force) is both natural and unavoidable. Hence, ahimsa cannot be reasonably interpreted to mean the non-use of force.<ref name=GTHC/>


There were bans after death of emperors,<ref>[http://www.bya.org.hk/life/Q&A_2006/Q&A_bya/128_Q.htm 第一二八期 佛法自由談]. Bya.org.hk. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://www.gz.xinhuanet.com/zfpd/2007-07/06/content_10506416.htm 贵阳南明-生态文明城区]. Gz.xinhuanet.com (2007-07-06). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> Buddhist and Taoist prayers,
Life feeds on life. So, for example, our choice is to drink purified or unpurified water. In both instances, we end up killing microbes, either outside or inside our body. Hence, with respect to food, Sarkar endorsed a gradation rule, similar to that of the Jains, whereby food is selected with an effort to maintain a healthy body and mind by taking sustenance from entities with the least self-awareness. When it is possible to remain healthy by subsisting on grains, vegetables, fruits, dairy products, nuts and the like, then there is no justification for killing animals or even fish to eat their flesh.<ref name=GTHC/>
<ref>[http://www.bfnn.org/book/books2/1187.htm 虛雲和尚法彙—書問]. Bfnn.org. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/7/1/10/n1585679.htm 五朝祈安清醮三重全市茹素三天祈福]. Epochtimes.com (2010-11-18). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> Health concerns<ref>[http://news.dayoo.com/china/gb/content/2001-03/04/content_79160.htm 比利时出现口蹄疫欧陆如临大敌]. News.dayoo.com (2001-03-04). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://www.022net.com/2005/11-5/431555153298272.html 吉林启动禽流感应急预案 长春活禽市场全关闭]. 022net.com (2005-11-05). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://morning.scol.com.cn/2004/08/24/200408245533044456146.htm 阆中古城首接“禁屠令”]. Morning.scol.com.cn (2004-08-24). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> and natural disasters such as after a drought in 1926 summer Shanghai<ref>[http://www.shtong.gov.cn/node2/node4/node2250/node4427/node5560/node9566/index.html 灾异]. shtong.gov.cn</ref> and
a 8 days ban from August 12, 1959 after the August 7 flood ([[:zh:八七水災|八七水災]]), the last big flood before [[the 88 Taiwan Flood]].<ref>[http://tw.classf0001.urlifelinks.com/css000000039996/cm4k-1241576509-4891-3610.doc 組員:余秉育]{{dead link|date=June 2011}}</ref><ref>[http://www.plela.org/Cmapwork/link/crona1.htm 道安長老年譜]. Plela.org. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> There was a 3-day ban after the death of [[Chiang Kai-shek]].<ref>[http://www.duilian.cn/News/wangkan3/200701/163.html 陈立夫]{{dead link|date=June 2011}}</ref>


People avoid killing during some festivals, like the Taoist [[Ghost Festival]],<ref>[http://www.sx.chinanews.com.cn/2008-08-18/1/69009.html 农历中元节]. Sx.chinanews.com.cn. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref> the [[Nine Emperor Gods Festival]], the [[Vegetarian Festival]] and many others.<ref>[http://www.mxzxw.cn/zwhgz/wszl_16_23.htm 明溪县“禁屠日”习俗的由来]</ref><ref>[http://www.godpp.gov.cn/ctjr_/2006-01/09/content_6004064.htm 滇西独特的禁屠护兽节]. Godpp.gov.cn (2006-01-09). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=「四月六、七、八日禁屠三天」的玄機！！|url=http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/8454/bir3.html|work=|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5kmDTvREW|archivedate=2009-10-24|deadurl=yes}}</ref><ref>[http://www.chinesefolklore.org.cn/web/index.php?Page=2&NewsID=3016 建构的节日：政策过程视角下的唐玄宗诞节]. Chinesefolklore.org.cn (2008-02-16). Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref><ref>[http://economy.guoxue.com/article.php/2184 我国古代生态保护资料的新发现]. Economy.guoxue.com. Retrieved on 2011-06-15.</ref>
According to Sarkar, morality does not suppress the natural instinct for survival. So, with respect to self-defense, Sarkar argues that combat against an aggressor (''átatáyii'' in [[Samskrta]]) is not just acceptable but even noble. Sarkar notes that [[:wikipedia:Krishna|Krsna]] encouraged the [[:wikipedia:Pandavas|Pandavas]] to do battle with the [[:wikipedia:Kaurava|Kaoravas]], because they were aggressors.<ref name=GTHC/>
 
{{clear}}


==References==
==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}


==Bibliography==
[[Category:Uncategorized from December 2014]]
{{Refbegin}}
*{{cite book|author=Alsdorf, Ludwig |title=Beiträge zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und Rinderverehrung in Indien|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=N2SkkgAACAAJ|accessdate=15 June 2011|year=1962|publisher=Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur; in Kommission bei F. Steiner Wiesbaden}}
*Bartholomeusz, Tessa [http://books.google.com/books?id=0toLUwD6WgUC&printsec=frontcover ''In Defense of Dharma.''] RoutledgeCurzon 2002 ISBN 0-7007-1681-5
*Jindal, K.B.: ''An epitome of Jainism'', New Delhi 1988 ISBN 81-215-0058-3
*Laidlaw, James: ''Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains'', Oxford 1995 ISBN 0-19-828031-9
*Lamotte, Etienne: ''History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Śaka Era'', Louvain-la-Neuve 1988 ISBN 90-6831-100-X
*Sarao, K.T.S.: ''The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism'', Delhi 1989
*Schmidt, Hanns Peter: ''The Origin of Ahimsa'', in: ''Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou'', Paris 1968
*Tähtinen, Unto: ''Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition'', London 1976 ISBN 0-09-123340-2
{{Refend}}
 
==External links==
{{commons category|Ahimsa}}
* [http://www.vedabase.net/a/ahimsa Ahimsa quotations from Puranic scripture] (vedabase.net)
* [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/varun-soni/celebrating-gandhi-at-the_b_746320.html?view=print Gandhi, Hinduism and Non-Violence at the United Nations] by Varun Soni
 
{{Indian Philosophy|collapsed}}
 
[[Category:Buddhist philosophical concepts]]
[[Category:Ethical schools and movements]]
[[Category:Hindu philosophical concepts]]
[[Category:Jain philosophical concepts]]
[[Category:Pacifism]]

Latest revision as of 20:02, 28 March 2017

Ahimsa
In other languages Non-violence (English)
अहिंसा (Sanskrit)
Location in Sarkarverse
SVmap NonliteraryWorks.png

Ahimsa (Sanskrit: अहिंसा; Roman Saḿskrta: ahiḿsá; IAST: ahiṃsā, Pali:[1] avihiḿsá) is a term meaning benignity, non-injury. The word is derived from the Sanskrit root hiḿs – to strike. Hiḿsá is injury or harm. A-hiḿsá is the opposite.[2][3]

Statue of Patanjali at Patanjali Yog Peeth, Haridwar

Ahimsa is one of the cardinal virtues[4], the first of ten principles in the ancient tantric/yogic system of morality, Yama-Niyama. As such, it is also an important tenet of major Indian religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism). Over the years, Ahimsa has been interpreted in many different ways. In his book, A Guide to Human Conduct, Sarkar analyzes the concept of Ahimsa and some popular interpretations of the term.[5]

Etymology

The word Ahimsa - sometimes spelled as Ahinsa[6][7] - is derived from the Sanskrit root hiṃs – to strike; hiṃsā (or hiḿsá in Sarkar's Roman Sanskrit) is injury or harm, a-hiṃsā is the opposite of this, that is benignity or non-jury.[6][8] According to Sarkar, "Ahiḿsá means not inflicting pain or hurt on anybody by thought, word or action."[5]

There is a debate on the origins of the word Ahimsa, and how its meaning evolved. Mayrhofer as well as Dumot suggest the root word may be han which means kill, which leads to the interpretation that ahimsa means do not kill. Schmidt as well as Bodewitz explain the proper root word is hiṃs and the Sanskrit verb hinasti, which leads to the interpretation that ahimsa means do not injure, or do not hurt. Wackernagel-Debrunner (and Sarkar) concur with the latter explanation.[9][10]

History

Yama-Niyama
Yama (Restraint)
Ahiḿsá (Benignity) Thinking, speaking, and acting without inflicting pain or harm on another
Satya (Benevolence) Thinking and speaking with goodwill
Asteya
(Honesty)		 Not taking or keeping what belongs to others
Brahmacarya (Ideation) Constant mental association with the Supreme
Aparigraha (Frugality) Non-indulgence in superfluous amenities
Niyama (Regulation)
Shaoca (Cleanliness) Physical and mental purity, both internal and external
Santośa (Contentment) Maintaining a state of mental ease
Tapah
(Sacrifice)		 Acceptance of sufferings to reach the spiritual goal
Svádhyáya (Contemplation) Clear understanding of any spiritual subject
Iishvara Prańidhána (Dedication) Adopting the Cosmic Controller as the only ideal of life and moving with ever-accelerating speed toward that Desideratum
Intent is primary, but both intent and action should conform if possible.

The concept of ahimsa first arose as an ethical precept in the indigenous tantric tradition of ancient India. Over time, the concept of ahimsa made its way into Vedic texts with varying interpretations. When the philosopher Patanjali (circa 200-400BCE) systematized tantra into what is popularly known as Aśt́áuṋga Yoga (eight-limbed yoga) or Rája Yoga (the king of yogas), ahimsa was the first principle of his first element of yoga, Yama.[11]

Various interpretations of Ahimsa

Some Jain monks wear a mask over their mouth

In both Jainism and Buddhism, both circa 500BCE, ahimsa is a key ethical principle. In Jainism, it is the first and main ethical principle. Jain renunciates reject the use of force even when it is required for self-defense. They are often seen wearing a mask over their mouth to avoid the unintentional ingestion of flies. And they have also been known to pour sugar into anthills.[5] Buddhists observe a somewhat less strict interpretation of ahimsa. For example, unlike Jains, not all Buddhists are vegetarian.

In modern times, the concept of ahimsa has taken on a new meaning, in large part due to the teachings and activities of Mohandas Gandhi. According to Gandhi, ahimsa means non-violence. This is perhaps the most extreme interpretation of ahimsa, given the fact that even Jains and Hindus accept the use of violence in self-defense.[12][13]

Sarkar on ahimsa

According to Sarkar, principles of morality must take into account both action and intent. When there is an unavoidable conflict between the two, intent becomes primary. So Sarkar notes with respect to ahimsa that violence (or the use of force) is both natural and unavoidable. Hence, ahimsa cannot be reasonably interpreted to mean the non-use of force.[5]

Life feeds on life. So, for example, our choice is to drink purified or unpurified water. In both instances, we end up killing microbes, either outside or inside our body. Hence, with respect to food, Sarkar endorsed a gradation rule, similar to that of the Jains, whereby food is selected with an effort to maintain a healthy body and mind by taking sustenance from entities with the least self-awareness. When it is possible to remain healthy by subsisting on grains, vegetables, fruits, dairy products, nuts and the like, then there is no justification for killing animals or even fish to eat their flesh.[5]

According to Sarkar, morality does not suppress the natural instinct for survival. So, with respect to self-defense, Sarkar argues that combat against an aggressor (átatáyii in Samskrta) is not just acceptable but even noble. Sarkar notes that Krsna encouraged the Pandavas to do battle with the Kaoravas, because they were aggressors.[5]

References

  1. ^ Rune E. A. Johansson (6 December 2012) Pali Buddhist Texts: An Introductory Reader and Grammar Routledge p. 143 ISBN 978-1-136-11106-8 retrieved 8 August 2013 
  2. ^ Mayton, D. M., & Burrows, C. A. (2012), Psychology of Nonviolence, The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology, Vol. 1, pages 713-716 and 720-723, Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-1-4051-9644-4
  3. ^ Encyclopedia Britannica, see Ahimsa
  4. ^ Stephen H. Phillips & other authors (2008), in Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, & Conflict (Second Edition), ISBN 978-0123739858, Elsevier Science, Pages 1347–1356, 701-849, 1867
  5. ^ a b c d e f Anandamurti, Shrii Shrii (2004) A Guide to Human Conduct ISBN 9788172521035 
  6. ^ a b Sanskrit dictionary reference
  7. ^ Standing, E. M. (1924). THE SUPER‐VEGETARIANS. New Blackfriars, 5(50), pages 103-108
  8. ^ A Hindu Primer, by Shukavak N. Dasa
  9. ^ Henk Bodewitz (in Jan E. M. Houben, Karel Rijk van Kooij, Eds.), Violence Denied: Violence, Non-Violence and the Rationalization of Violence in South Asian Cultural History, ISBN 978-9004113442, Brill Academic Pub (June 1999), see Chapter 2
  10. ^ Walli pp. XXII-XLVII; Borman, William: Gandhi and Non-Violence, Albany 1986, p. 11-12.
  11. ^ Patañjali: Yoga Sutras, Sadhana Pada 30.
  12. ^ Nisithabhasya (in Nisithasutra) 289; Jinadatta Suri: Upadesharasayana 26; Dundas pp. 162–163; Tähtinen p. 31.
  13. ^ Jindal pp. 89–90; Laidlaw pp. 154–155; Jaini, Padmanabh S.: Ahimsa and "Just War" in Jainism, in: Ahimsa, Anekanta and Jainism, ed. Tara Sethia, New Delhi 2004, p. 52-60; Tähtinen p. 31.
Retrieved from "https://sarkarverse.org/index.php?title=Ahimsa&oldid=51696"