Nonviolence has long been central to the religious traditions of India—especially Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. Religion in India has consistently upheld the sanctity of life, whether human, animal or, in the case of the Jains, elemental. There developed early in India an unparalleled concern for harmony among different life forms, and this led to a common ethos based on noninjuriousness and a minimal consumption of natural resources, in other words to compassion and simplicity. If Homo sapiens is to survive his present predicament, he will have to rediscover these two primary ethical virtues. ¶In order to understand the pervasive practice of nonviolence in Hinduism, one must investigate the meaning of life. Why is life sacred? For India’s ancient thinkers, life is seen as the very stuff of the Divine, an emanation of the Source and part of a cosmic continuum. The nature of this continuum varies in Hindu thought. Some hold that the individual evolves up through life forms, taking more and more advanced incarnations which culminate in human life. Others believe that according to one’s karma and saṁskāras, the process can even be reversed, that is, one can achieve a “lower” birth. Even those Indians who do not believe in reincarnation of an individual still hold that all that exists abides in the Divine. They further hold that each life form—even water and trees—possesses consciousness and energy. Whether the belief is that the life force of animals can evolve into human status, or that the opposite can also take place, or simply that all things enjoy their own consciousness, the result is the same—a reverence for life. ¶The human mind is exactly like a computer. Programs that go in are the beliefs. Their performance is the attitude, and the knowledge or the impetus that passes through both determines the output or the action. Children will learn the basic attitudes from their mothers and fathers by absorbing the beliefs that their mothers and fathers have placed into their subconscious mind, even prenatally. This is the first stage of writing the code, as a programmer would do in creating a new application. Later the child learns through observation, through seeing what the parents do and how they solve their problems, either reverently in the shrine room or hurtfully through arguments, contention, back-biting and getting one’s way through emotional blackmail. By the age of six, the program is finished, application complete, and beta testing begins. Children today face the world at this early age. Need we say more? Look at your own families. ¶Talk about peaceful means of dealing with problems, not allowing even your words to promote injury and harm. Let your words bring peace into others’ lives and hearts. Work on your own consciousness. Purify yourself so that you are free from anger, free from hatred, free from wanting anyone to suffer, either at your own hand or in any other manner. Don’t buy endangered plants, animals or products from exploited species, such as furs, ivory, reptile skin and tortoise shell. Volunteer your time to help groups who are sincerely working for a peaceful world. Learn more about other cultures and philosophies so your appreciation of them is genuine and deep. Work to strengthen your community and the people near you. Reduce stress in your life. Be joyful. Do all this and you will do much to bring peace and tranquility to your part of the world. This is what Mahatma Gandhi did, and look what a difference he made. ¶One person who lives ahiṁsā truly can be an instrument of peace for many. And you can make a difference, too, by affirming within yourself the vow not to injure others either physically, mentally or emotionally. Remember this one thing: peace and the choice to live the ideal of noninjury are in your own hands. ¶There is no longer a rural community or a national community. It is an international community. That change was well rooted in the planet a decade ago. When the Vietnam War stopped—the last big war of the twentieth century—that marked the beginning of the new era. People started using their minds to solve problems, and using their weaponry only for defensive measures. §
In Gandhian philosophy ahiṁsā means nonviolent action which leads to passive resistance in order to put a point across. Basically, he taught, don’t hit your opponent over the head. If he tells you to do something, stall and don’t obey and don’t do it and frustrate him into submission. And yet, on the other hand, when a gang of tribals came in and raped the women in a village, Gandhi said there should not have been a man left alive in the village. They should have stood up for the village and protected it with their lives. ¶So, to me, that means if an intruder breaks into your house to rape the women or steal things, you have the right, even the duty, to defend your own, but you don’t have the right to torture him. Ahiṁsā needs to be properly understood, in moderation. Ahiṁsā in the Jain religion has been taken to extremes. To explain nonviolence, you have to explain what violence is, as opposed to protecting yourself. Is it violent to own a dog who would put his teeth to the throat of a vicious intruder? I don’t think it is. If nonviolence is to be something that the world is going to respect, we have to define it clearly and make it meaningful. ¶Not all of Earth’s one billion Hindus are living in a perfect state of ahiṁsā all of the time. Sometimes conditions at hand may force a situation, a regrettable exception, where violence or killing seems to be necessary. Hindus, like other human beings, unfortunately do kill people. In self-defense or in order to protect his family or his village, the Hindu may have to hurt an intruder. Even then he would harbor no hatred in his heart. Hindus should never instigate an intrusion or instigate a death; nor seek revenge, nor plot retaliation for injuries received. They have their courts of justice, punishment for crimes and agencies for defending against the aggressor or the intruder. Before any personal use of force, so to speak, all other avenues of persuasion and intelligence would be looked into, as Hindus believe that intelligence is their best weapon. In following dharma, the only rigid rule is wisdom. My satguru, Siva Yogaswami, said, “It is a sin to kill the tiger in the jungle. But if he comes into the village, it may become your duty.” A devout Hindu would give warnings to scare the tiger or would try to capture the tiger without injury. Probably it would be the most unreligious person in the village who would come forward to kill the tiger. ¶Many groups on the planet today advocate killing and violence and war for a righteous cause. They would not agree with the idea that violence, hiṁsā, is necessarily of the lower nature. But a righteous cause is only a matter of opinion, and going to war affects the lives of a great many innocent people. It’s a big karmic responsibility. Combat through war, righteous or not, is lower consciousness. Religious values are left aside, to be picked up and continued when the war is over, or in the next life or the one after that. It is said that in ancient India meat would be fed to the soldiers during military campaigns, especially before combat, to bring them into lower consciousness so that they would forget their religious values. Most higher consciousness people will not fight even if their lives depend on it. They are conscientious objectors, and there have been many in every country who have been imprisoned or killed because they would not take up arms against their brother and sister humans. This is the strictest expression of Hinduism’s law of ahiṁsā. §
One of the most famous of Hindu writings, the Bhagavad Gītā, is often taken as Divine sanction for violence. It basically says that for the kshatriya, or soldier, war is dharma. Lord Kṛishṇa orders Arjuna to fight and do his kshatriya dharma in spite of his doubts and fears that what he is about to do is wrong, despite his dread of killing his own kinsmen. Arjuna says, “If they whose minds are depraved by the lust of power see no sin in the extirpation of their race, no crime in the murder of their friends, is that a reason why we should not resolve to turn away from such a crime—we who abhor the sin of extirpating our own kindred? On the destruction of a tribe the ancient virtue of the tribe and family is lost; with the loss of virtue, vice and impiety overwhelm the whole of a race. …Woe is me! What a great crime are we prepared to commit! Alas that from the desire for sovereignty and pleasure we stand here ready to slay our own kin! I would rather patiently suffer that the sons of Dhritarashṭra, with their weapons in their hands, should come upon me and, unopposed, kill me unresisting in the field.” ¶Kṛishṇa gradually convinces Arjuna to fight, beginning with the following argument. “Death is certain to all things which are born, and rebirth to all mortals; wherefore it doth not behoove thee to grieve about the inevitable. …This spirit can never be destroyed in the mortal frame which it inhabiteth, hence it is unworthy for thee to be troubled for all these mortals. …Thine enemies will speak of thee in words which are unworthy to be spoken, deprecating thy courage and abilities; what can be more dreadful than this! If thou art slain, thou shalt attain heaven; if victorious, the world shall be thy reward; wherefore, son of Kunti, arise with determination fixed for the battle. Make pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat, the same to thee, and then prepare for battle, for thus and thus alone shalt thou in action still be free from sin” (from Chapter 1, Recension by W. Q. Judge, Theosophical University Press). ¶Hindus for a long time have taken this text as justification for war and conflicts of all kinds, including street riots and anarchy. It is indeed unfortunate that this particular composition has been championed to represent Hinduism rather than the four Vedas. At the turn of the twentieth century, the Bhagavad Gītā was not yet a popular book in America and Europe, but the Upanishads and Vedas were. When I was growing up in Hinduism, at about fifteen years of age, the Gītā was being slowly introduced in America and became an embarrassment in metaphysical circles throughout the country, as something to explain away. “How could a religion based on ahiṁsā and such high ideals promote as a major scripture a story based on ruthless internecine war and violence?” Arjuna could be considered history’s first conscientious objector. ¶Mystical seers, both Hindus and Western teachers, at that time, in an attempt to justify the Gītā as scripture, explained that Kṛishṇa represented Arjuna’s higher self, and Arjuna himself was his lower self, or the external ego. Kṛishṇa encouraged Arjuna to kill out attachments to family, friends and foes, to become a yogī and realize Parabrahman. Teachers attempted to satisfy the minds of their followers that, in fact, the Bhagavad Gītā was an allegory of man’s struggle within himself toward the highest realizations. Unconvincingly, contemporary swāmīs and astute commentators tried to justify God Kṛishṇa’s urging his devotee to kill his friends, his relatives and his guru, that all would be well in the end because the soul never dies. I was never satisfied with this and found no alternative but to reject the book altogether, despite its many lofty chapters. I agree fully with those awakened Indian swāmīs who have called it kolai nul, the “book of carnage,” a book that gives divine sanction to violence. ¶The Bhagavad Gītā was also known at that time as a historical poem, not a divinely revealed scripture at all. It is smṛiti, specifically Itihāsa, meaning a man-made history, a poem excerpted from the Mahābhārata epic. But all that aside, no matter how it is interpreted, whether it is revered by millions of Hindus or not, let us not be mistaken that the Bhagavad Gītā gives permission for violence. The Mahābhārata itself says, “Ahiṁsā is the highest dharma. It is the highest purification. It is also the highest truth from which all dharma proceeds” (18.1125.25). An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is definitely not a part of true Hindu doctrine.§
In every country there is the army, the navy, air force, police, the protectors of the country, the collective force of citizens that keep a country a country. This is dharma. In protection of family and nation, in armies and police forces which give security, it is indeed dharmic for kshatriyas to do their lawful duty, to use necessary force, even lethal force. But for this collective force of protectors, of peacemakers, of peacekeepers—which includes the law courts and the central administrative authorities who oversee the courts, the armies, the navies, the air force—would the priests be able to function? Would the businessmen be able to acquire and sell their goods? Would the farmers be able to plant their crops and harvest them? Could the children play fearlessly in the streets and countryside? No. The answer is obvious. ¶Those who take law into their own hands in the name of dharma, citing their case upon the Mahābhārata, are none but the lawbreakers, anarchists, the arsonists, the terrorists. The Mahābhārata gives no permission for anarchy. The Mahābhārata gives no permission for terrorism. The Mahābhārata gives no permission for looting and diluting the morals of society through prostitution, running drugs and the selling and buying of illegal arms. The Pāṇḍavas, the heroes of this ancient epic, were not rabble rousers. They were not inciting riots. Nor were they participating in extortion to run their war. Nor were they participating in the sale of drugs to finance their war. Nor were they participating in prostitution to win their war. Nor were they participating in enlisting women to help them fight their war. Nor were they having children learn to snare their victims. ¶Yes, dharma does extend to protecting one’s country. But does it extend to taking a country from another, or to stealing lands? Were the Pāṇḍavas trying to do this? No, of course not. They were only protecting the status quo to remain sovereign over their kingdom. Let us not presume to take the Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa as permission to do whatever one wants to do, for any cause whatsoever. Simply because it is said in certain Hindu texts that Kṛishṇa lied, stole some butter and dallied with the maidens does not give permission to the ordinary person to lie anytime he wants to, steal anytime he wants to or be promiscuous anytime he wants to and perhaps make all this a way of life. This definitely is not dharma. It is lawlessness, blatant lawlessness. In the modern age, to create a nation or even a business enterprise upon the death of another, upon lands confiscated, stolen, illegally acquired, usurped from another’s realm, is definitely not Hindu dharma, and this is not Mahābhārata.§
I have often been asked how it is that some people work for peace and others seem always to work for contention. There are two kinds of children or souls that are born on this planet and are spoken of in our Vedas and other scriptures. Some come to Earth from up down and others from down up. This means that the children who come to Earth from up down come from a place in the inner world of higher consciousness, and the children who come to Earth from down up come to Earth from a place in the inner world of lower consciousness. We call the place of higher consciousness the Devaloka and the place of lower consciousness the Narakaloka. The Devaloka is a heaven world and the Narakaloka is not. ¶The Narakaloka exists wherever violence and hurtfulness take place, whether in the inner or outer world. We see such things in action on television. On the astral plane the terrible deeds perpetrated by Narakaloka people are much worse than in the physical world. Children who are born into Earth consciousness from the Narakaloka will not respond to meditation, yoga or any kind of quieting controls. They are strangers to self-discipline and enemies to their own parents. The parents of these offspring do have a challenge, to be sure, and are bound by the karmic implication of neglect to face up to it and make every effort to reform, lift up and thus enhance the learning of the young souls whose forces of deception, anger and resentment are stronger than their responsibilities to parents and society. Many such parents wisely direct their difficult offspring into agriculture, farming and nurturing nature, thus allowing them to blend with the forces of nature and rise into higher consciousness as they learn from the slow processes of nature. Some well-meaning but mistaken families demand of them a high education and suffer the results of their upbringing for a lifetime. ¶In contrast, children who are born into Earth consciousness from the Devaloka do respond to meditation, yoga and all kinds of methods of self-control. These are the gentle people. Self-control and personal advancement are the reasons they have taken a birth. There are ways to tell the difference between these two types of people. The mere fact that someone becomes penitent would show us that he is really a Devaloka person. This is because Narakaloka people don’t become penitent. There is another way to tell the difference, and that is by looking into the eyes of the person. Narakaloka people generally have dull or sullen eyes, whereas Devaloka people have bright, clear, wide-open eyes. The former come from the world of darkness, the latter from the world of light. It is difficult to tell the difference at times, because the Narakaloka people are very cunning, and they will try to appear in the way they feel they should to measure up to your standards. They must be tested. ¶Peace will only come when the Narakaloka people are lifted up and made to obey the new standards in the world, standards which must be set by the Devaloka people. It is when the Devaloka people are in charge that peace will truly come; it can come in no other way. So, if the Devaloka people really desire to have peace on Earth, they should not be shy but take charge. §
The problems of conflict reside within this low-minded group of people who only know retaliation as a way of life. To antagonize others is their sport. They must be curtained off and seen for what they are. Improvement has to come through their own self-effort. But they are always overly stimulated by doing so many mischievous acts and misdeeds that self-effort toward any kind of improvement is never even thought of. Yet, they must learn from their soul’s evolution, and their own mistakes will be the teacher, for they are in the period of their evolution where they only learn from their own mistakes. ¶People of the lower nature cannot be made peaceful. They are not open to persuasion. They are sovereign in their own domain. There are many doors into lower consciousness, and if the Devaloka people get too involved with people of a lower nature, they may have violence awakened within them. Lower-consciousness people are always looking for recruits to bring into their world. This sounds like a sad story, but it is true nonetheless. You see it happening around you every day. ¶It would, of course, be wonderful to think that all people in this world are on the same level—and certainly they are in the deepest sense. But our sages and ṛishis, and wisdom itself, tell us that we cannot expect the same of everyone in this birth. By recognizing the differences in each soul’s maturity, we also recognize the process of reincarnation, which gives us young souls and old souls. ¶People ask me from time to time, from the Hindu point of view, how to curtain off the lower-nature people. My answer is that people are curtained off from each other through their beliefs and the attitudes that they hold. Believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that a person is of the lower nature and is incorrigible in this life would create the attitude of avoiding his company, not antagonizing him, and this is the best protection. Societies all over the world are trying to control these people who have come to Earth from the world of darkness. This is one of the great concerns of all governments. ¶However, the problem is not only with people of the lower nature, it is also with people of the higher nature. They tend to be lazy. The more conscious a person is, the more responsible he or she should be. Therefore, the people of the higher nature should carry most of society’s responsibility and not leave it to others. If the high-minded people really want peace, they have to all get to know each other and then join hands in love and trust and work together. In every religious organization on the Earth an emphasis to help people is put forward as a duty and a fulfillment. Many of the groups reach out for membership and bring people from the Narakaloka into their midst. It is not long before the lower-natured people turn their once-sincere and happy religious community into a devil’s playground. They always begin by pitting people within the group against each other. If that is successful, then they pit their religious organization against another one. So, you can see that the Devaloka people have to join together, break down the barriers between themselves, work together, love and trust one another and protect their groups from this kind of intrusion. This is the first big doing. Once this is done, the rest will take care of itself quite naturally. ¶National and international peace movements are beneficial in that they keep the decision-making governments of the world aware of what the people want. They help the higher-consciousness people to become acquainted and to forge new principles for a global dharma. §
I was once asked for my insights on applying ahiṁsā in the business world. Ahiṁsā in business is taught in a reverse way on American television: Titans, The West Wing, Dynasty, Falcon Crest, Dallas, LA Law—popular shows of our time. Their scriptwriters promoted hiṁsā, injuriousness, in business—“Save the Falcon Crest farm at any cost, save South Fork, save the corporation.” Now the national news media reports attempts to save Microsoft, save the tobacco industry, save the hand gun manufacturers. The fight is on, and real-life court battles have taken the place of TV sitcoms which have long since been off the air. In both the TV and the real-life conflicts, whatever you do to your competitor is OK because it’s only business. The plots weave in and out, with one scene of mental and emotional cruelty after another. ¶The Hindu business ethic is very clear. As the weaver Tiruvalluvar said, “Those businessmen will prosper whose business protects as their own the interests of others” (Tirukural 120). We should compete by having a better product and better methodologies of promoting and selling it, not by destroying our competitor’s product and reputation. Character assassination is not part of ahiṁsā. It reaps bad benefits to the accusers. That is practiced by many today, even by Hindus who are off track in their perceptions of ahiṁsā. Hindus worldwide must know that American television is not the way business should be practiced. As some people teach you what you should do and other people teach you what you should not do, the popular television programs mentioned above clearly teach us what we should not do. The principles of ahiṁsā and other ethical teachings of Hinduism show us a better way. ¶Many corporations today are large, in fact larger than many small countries. Their management is like the deceptive, deceitful, arrogant, domineering king, or like the benevolent religious monarch, depending on whether there are people of lower consciousness or higher consciousness in charge. Cities, districts, provinces, counties, states and central governments all have many laws for ethical business practices, and none of those laws permit unfair trade, product assassination or inter-business competitive fights to the death. Each business is dharmically bound to serve the community, not take from the community like a vulture. When the stewardships of large corporations follow the law of the land and the principles of ahiṁsā, they put their energies into developing better products and better community service. When the leadership has a mind for corporate espionage, its energies are diverted, the products suffer and so does customer relations. The immediate profits in the short term might be gratifying, but in the long run, profits gained from wrong-doings are generally spent on wrong-doings. ¶Ahiṁsā always has the same consequences. And we know these benefits well. Hiṁsā always has the same consequences, too. It develops enemies, creates unseemly karmas which will surely return and affect the destiny of the future of the business enterprise. The perfect timing needed for success is defeated by inner reactions to the wrong-doings. A business enterprise which bases its strategies on hurtfulness cannot in good judgment hire employees who are in higher consciousness, lest they object to these tactics. Therefore, they attract employees who are of the same caliber as themselves, and they all practice hiṁsā among one another. Trickery, deceitfulness and deception are of the lower nature, products of the methodology of performing hiṁsā, hurtfulness, mentally and emotionally. The profits derived from hiṁsā policies are short-term and ill-spent. The profits derived from ahiṁsā policies are long-term and well spent.§