Violence, moderated by social and legal concerns, is allowed and practiced by hindu-s.
Non-violence (ahimsA) and Violence
- The veda-s exhort non-violence (ahimsA), in general, as far as possible.
- This rule is overridden by other special rules which *require* violence and even non-vegetarianism.
Vegetarianism
- Vegetarianism is considered a great ideal.
- But meat eating is not prohibited entirely.
- pa.nca pa.nca nakhaa bhakSyaa brahma kSatreNa raaghava | shalyakaH shvaavidho godhaa shashaH kuurmaH ca pa.ncamaH || 4-17-39 “Raghava, five kinds of five-nailed animals, viz., a kind of wild rodent, a kind of wild-boar, a kind of lizard, a hare and fifthly the turtle are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriya-s. [rAmAyaNa 4-17-39]
- suraaghaTasahasreNa maamsabhuutodanena cha | yakshye tvaam prayataa devi puriim punarupaagataa || 2-52-89 [FB]
Sanctioned violence
- Complete non-violence is impossible. Given that, it is better to embrace “appropriate” violence. Eg: Arjuna’s advice to YudhiShThira in mahAbhArata here MT.
- Protecting the good and punishing the bad requires violence, of course.
- Animal and human sacrifice and protection are considered in separate pages.
- ALso, hinduism is not for good people alone.
- rAvaNa was also reputed to be a shiva-devotee (same with several other rAkShasa-s).
Ascetic violence
- Yogi-s and ascetics did serve as warriors and mercenaries.
- “European travelers of the period frequently describe yogis who are “skilled cut-throats” and professional killers. “Some of them carry a stick with a ring of iron at the base,” wrote Ludovico di Varthema of Bologna in 1508. “Others carry certain iron diskes which cut all round like razors, and they throw these with a sling when they wish to injure any person.” A century later the French jewel merchant Jean Baptiste Tavernier was describing large bodies of holy men on the march, “well armed, the majority with bows and arrows, some with muskets, and the remainder with short pikes.” By the Maratha wars of the early nineteenth century, the Anglo-Indian mercenary James Skinner was fighting alongside “10 thousand Gossains called Naggas with Rockets, and about 150 pieces of cannon.”” - WD14
- Mahadji Shinde, a rival leader of the time, was convinced that Anupgiri had attacked him with a painful case of boils through his “magical arts.” Nor was Anupgiri necessarily a champion of Hindu interests: “Far from thinking of themselves as the last line of defense against foreign invaders, armed ascetics in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and early nineteenth century served any and all paymasters,” writes Pinch. Though he sometimes fought with the Hindu Marathas, at other times Anupgiri worked for the Mughal emperor. - WD14
A note on ethics:
- Violence (alongside empathy) is inherent in our nature. “One of the defining aspects of life is biological conflict: it can be established that life as we know it would not exist without biological conflicts: existence is literally: “red in tooth and claw”. Hence, killing and getting killed are part of life& there is no way out of it. Animal life for most part depends on eating other organisms be they plants, other animals or any other lineage of organism. In course of evolution herbivores evolve into carnivores and herbivores from carnivores. We can say that the common ancestor hominid apes included meat in their diet and hunted. The evidence suggests that meat is valued by hominids as a special diet beyond their routine plant-derived fare – high in nutrients. Hence, with the origin of religion meat was a “costly” offering to the gods. Given this prior, I don’t see animal sacrifices as easily dying out in a natural religion. That said I do think kindness and empathy are generally virtues. However, being paralyzed by virtue is not good for a being or a group either: Enemies have to be killed if you don’t want to be killed. You have to kill if you need to feed yourself. Hence, my personal opinion is that killing “within reasonable limits” is always going to be there and need not be a cause for condemnation. Where those limits are certainly open for debate and discussion and have changed in course of the evolution of H tradition.”- MT18
- “Then there are considerations relating to public health. Eating other animals which are closer to us phylogenetically are likely to transmit pathogens and parasites.Having blood and carcasses lying around could be a public health concern irrespective of the pathogens borne by the consumed animals. Hence, this calls for caution and regulation in non-vegetarian rituals.”- MT18
- A person who does not condemn “halal butcherings, Thanksgiving slaughter, western slaughterhouses, etc., and the serving of meat in restaurants” does not have the moral authority to condemn animal sacrifice. [US Slaughter statistics here.]
- The separation of spiritual and mundane does not exist for hindu-s; and there is no fundamental reason why murder (when it has to be committed) should not be enmeshed within spirituality and ritual.
- Vegetarianism requires less resources, and is better for the planet. Veganism is even less harmful. [PETA article]