-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is hinduism a peaceful religion?
- Thread starter Starlight
- Start date
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
Can you please explain it. Do you mean hinduism in reality is not one religion but many different religions?
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
Are all the teachings peaceful?
Ashoka
श्री कृष्णा शरणं मम
I have no idea. Hinduism is an umbrella term for different faiths that all hold the Vedas as inspired. Some teachings are peaceful. Some may not be. I don't know any specific negative ones off the top of my head.
Ashoka
श्री कृष्णा शरणं मम
Yes and no. It's unified under the Vedas, but different sects believe different things. Some see Shiva as supreme, some see Krishna as supreme. Some see all of them, or none at all.
A common analogy is if you combined Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and then named that conglomerate Abrahamism, that that would, in terms of the diversity, be comparable to what is called Hinduism today. My view is that Hinduism would be even more diverse than the above example illustrates.
One of Hinduism's core teachings is ahimsa, and 90% of violence attributed to Hinduism is countering other more aggressive groups that made the first move. If India and Hinduism didn't stand up to many invasions it has seen, it wouldn't exist today.
I suppose it strives to be. Ideally. Arguably.
But there are traditions that are specific to the old “warrior class.”
Usually specifying what is and isn't considered honourable conduct. And cowardice was generally frowned upon in those traditions. Seeing it as a failure to live up to one’s duty. I think I remember reading (or watching) a passage from one holy book whereby an avatar was mourning the loss of someone dear to him. But he was thoroughly chastised by his friend and mentor for avoiding war. Claiming that it was his duty to fight and that not doing so brought shame and dishonour upon him and his family. I can’t remember the specifics off the top of my head, but I think it was somewhere in the Ramayana.
And there are sects that idolise the warrior forms of Brahman specifically. Though I suppose they’re not inherently looking for a fight.
You could argue Buddhism is more innately peaceful overall. But Hinduism does often preach pacifism, unless one’s hand is forced by circumstance
But there are traditions that are specific to the old “warrior class.”
Usually specifying what is and isn't considered honourable conduct. And cowardice was generally frowned upon in those traditions. Seeing it as a failure to live up to one’s duty. I think I remember reading (or watching) a passage from one holy book whereby an avatar was mourning the loss of someone dear to him. But he was thoroughly chastised by his friend and mentor for avoiding war. Claiming that it was his duty to fight and that not doing so brought shame and dishonour upon him and his family. I can’t remember the specifics off the top of my head, but I think it was somewhere in the Ramayana.
And there are sects that idolise the warrior forms of Brahman specifically. Though I suppose they’re not inherently looking for a fight.
You could argue Buddhism is more innately peaceful overall. But Hinduism does often preach pacifism, unless one’s hand is forced by circumstance
This is akin to asking "do vegetables taste good?" There are many philosophies, traditions, deities, and scriptures within Hinduism, just as there are many vegetables. There are some you might consider tasty, there are others you may not.
Hinduism is a dharmic path, which is to say its purpose is to align with duties, conduct, and virtues that align with the natural cosmic order.
That's exactly it. They may be closely related, but different deities can be worshipped, and different practices adhered too.
Here's a bit explaining the four main branches(and then there are numerous smaller branches within each of these):
Basics of Hinduism
Captcha
I can't think of any branch that directly encourages violence. Like @Vinayaka says, ahimsa is important in Hinduism. However, it is acceptable for one to defend themselves and others if necessary.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
It is peaceful except when its hands are forced by others. As for the warrior class, all nations have armies to safeguard their borders. Hindus society created a separate division for them, as they did for other professions. The family environment makes them better soldiers. Even now there are military families (not just from the warrior class) where generations have served in Indian army.
Yes. Hinduism is not out to make war against every other religion, Also, as others have pointed out, ahiṃsā, which can be translated into English as 'non-injury,' is a core virtue in Hinduism. As a virtue, it is part of dharma. From my perspective, ahiṃsā promotes peace. When we refrain from wrongly injuring other beings, there is more peace. Even when warriors must fight, there will be peace afterward in their country because the warriors' purpose is to maintain peace in their country. Knowing that a warrior class or profession is necessary, it is apparent that ahiṃsā is not pacifism or a total lack of injury, rather, it is the practice of non-injury in the form of minimal harm. After all, children must receive their vaccines, surgeons must cut flesh, and even green life must be injured in order for human beings to be nourished.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Sometimes.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Nice post, Mangalavara. In the ideal war situation, Hindus put down the arms at sunset, and could meet their adversaries in peace and love in the evening. The fight was for reasons. There should be no personal enmity. The warriors used to meet each other freely. Pandavas would go to Bhishma. That Arjuna killed Jayadratha after sundown at the instigation of Krishna in Mahabharata, though unavoidable, is considered a serious misdoing. Interested people can read about 'Jayadratha Vadha' (Killing of Jayadratha).
I would say it mostly is provided the Hindus dont perceive you to be proselytising.
In my opinion.
Thank you, Aup. I did not know this about Hindu warriors in the ideal war situation. Fascinating. I've always thought that if I were a warrior or solider, I would not feel enmity or animosity toward the enemy. To me, another solider, inspite of holding a different allegiance, would be someone I would have much in common with in nature, temperament, and calling. Plus, there is a kind of sanctity that warriors have that criminal gangs and the sort utterly lack. Although I am not the kṣatriya type, I admire it, which explains why my favorite avatāra is Rāmacandra.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
And there is a reason. IMV, just because they may be illiterate and poor, the Arahamic religions should not mislead people and teach them falsehood. It shows that they are interested only in numbers.
Why only the Abrahamic religions, why not murder anyone who teaches falsehood?
(This question is rhetorical, I do not consider it sound practice to murder those we consider liars).
In my opinion
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
What do you mean with sometimes?