Page #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ TWO DEFINITIONS OF AHIMSA Dr. Unto Tahitnen University of Jyvaskyla, Finland There are two different ideas of ahimsa in Indian thought. We may name them "Sramanic" and "Vedic". The former is for instance mentioned by SandilyaUpanisad.] It means not to cause suffering to any living being at any time either by mental, vocal or bodily activities. The Jainas, Buddhists and Yogins approve the idea of ahimsa in this sense. The point is that any intentional act causing harm or suffering to any living being is to be named as "himsa". Therefore also ahimsa as a concept is applied to all living beings. However, the moral tradition based on the originally Vedic sources is different. In the Chandog ya-Upanisad we find an important Vedic statement regarding the meaning of ahimsa. He who practises ahimsa towards all creatures, except at holy places (tirtha), does not return to this world again.2 "Holy places." refers here to the place of animal sacrifice. Manu says that the himsa prescribed in the Vedas should be construed to mean ahimsa, because moral duties spring out from the Vedas. 8 This Vedic conception of non-violence appears in a clear form also in the Mahabharata: the violence done to an evil-doer (asadhu-himsa) for maintaining wordly affairs (loka-yatra) is ahimsa.4 This appears to mean that "violence to an evil-doer" is bracketed into the concept of ahimsa. The Vedic conception af ahimsa is hence not universal. It means "refraining from causing harm to a living being in the way not enjoined by the Vedas". We can draw the (rather surprising) conclusion that according to the Vedic concept of ahimsa killing an enemy in a war, executing a criminal or killing an animal in a sacrifice are indeed all acts of "ahimsa" provided they are performed according to the commands of the authorative scriptures. Thus there are two different definitions of ahimsa. The term when used does not simply mean the same in all contexts. There are other differences of opinion also. The Vedic idea is motivated by social concern, whereas the sramanic idea refers to an individual motivation. The Jainas have very laboriously dealt not only with ahimsa but also with the meaning of himsa. Himsa, to them, means the hurting of life-principles (prana-vyaparopana) due to the passionate activity pramatta-yoga). Another later 71 -561 -
Page #2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ Jain text says that himsa is any injury whatsoever to the material (dravya) or conscious vitalities (bhava-rupa) of life caused through passionate activity (kasayayoga).6 Even when there is injury to life, it cannot be considered himsa if the person is not motivated by any kind of passion and carefully follows the code of right conduct. On the other hand, if one acts out of ignorance motivated by passions, violence takes place irrespective of whether another being is killed or not." Further, some texts treat ahimsa as "internal purification". A Jain text says that the absence of attachment (raga) and other passions is ahimsa.8 Renunciation of both types of possession, external (bahya) as well as internal (abhyantaraaparigraha), is also said to be ahimsa.9 These references point out a concept of ahimsa in which purity of mind is the predominant moral characteristic. Thus the Thus the bramanic or ascetic ahimsa differs from the Vedic concept of ahimsa. The supporters of the former have ardently opposed the Vedic idea of ahimsa. The Yoga-Sastra by Hemacandra makes a covert reference to Manusmrti and some other brahmanic writings as "himsa-sastras" (sciences of violence).10 While referring to Manu and Jaimini, he acidly states that "these dulls, having given up the dharma based on restraint, morality and compassion meant for the welfare of the universe have declared even himsa as a duty.11 It is better to be a poor materialist (carvaka) who is an open heretic rather than a demon in disguise like Jaimini, preaching the Vedas. 1 2 However, the critics of the Vedic idea of ahimsa are not confined to Jainism. Also within the 'orthodox" thought there are representatives of the sramanic ideas. The Samkhya-Karika opposes scriptural means sanctioned by the Mimamsa system for terminating suffering only temporarily, and not completely either, because it involves impurity (avifuddhi) in the form of himsa, destruction of moral merit (ksaya) and surpassability (atif aya) in the result. 18 Impurity is ascribed to the killing of animals as well as the destruction of the living sprouts for purposes of completing sacrifices such as soma or others. 14 A later but authentic commentator on the Samkhya-Sutra says that the scriptural means of the Mimamsa are in truth equal to the wordly means because they are full of sin caused by himsa, and the result is also only a temporary good (vinasi-phala), and is unequal to that experienced hereafter. The critic adds that there is no proof of limiting the scope of the general statement na himsyat sarvabhutani (not violating all the living beings).15 The above references demonstrate that the peak of criticism of the Vedic ahimsa is directed against the approval of exceptions to the universal principle. In this criticism the Jainas, Sarkhya, Yoga and the Buddhists appear to take the same side. 562 -
Page #3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ References 1. Sandilya-Upanisad 1.I, 2. Chandogya-Upanisad 8.15.1. 3. Manusmrti 5.44 4. Santi-Parva 15.49. 5. Tattvartha-Sutra 7.13. Sravakacara by Amitagati 6.12. 6. Purusartha-Siddhyapaya 3.43. 7. Ibid, 3.45-46. 8. Ibid, 3.44. 9. Ibid, 3.118. 10. roga-Sastra 2.37, also slokas 33-36. 11. Ibid, 2.40. 12. Ibid, 2.38. 13. Samkhya-Karika 2 14. Vacaspati Misra on Samkhya-Karika 2 15. Vijijanabhiksu on Samkhya-Satra 1.6. lekhasAra ahiMsA kI do paribhASAyeM DA0 anTU TAhiTanena, jIvaskelA vizvavidyAlaya, phinaleNDa bhAratIya vicAradhArA meM ahiMsA ke saMbandha meM do prakAra kI vicAra-dhArAyeM-zramaNa aura vaidika-pAI jAtI hai| jaina, bauddha aura yoga ke samAna zramaNa vicAradhArA meM kisI bhI prANI ko mana, vacana aura kAma se kisI bhI prakAra ke kaSTa na pahu~cAne kI pravRtti aura kriyA ko ahiMsA kahate haiM / isa dhArA kA srota zAMDilya upaniSad meM pAyA jAtA hai / vaidika vicAradhArA ko chAndogya-upaniSad meM batAyA gayA hai / isake anusAra tIrthasthAnoM ko chor3akara anyatra ahiMsA kA abhyAsa kiyA jAtA hai / manusmRti aura mahAbhArata meM bhI kahA gayA hai ki burA kAma karanevAle ke prati kI gaI hiMsA bhI ahiMsA kA hI eka rUpa hai| ahiMsA ke saMbandha meM yaha vaidika mAnyatA sArvabhaumika nahIM hai| isakA kAraNa yaha hai ki yaha mAnyatA sAmAjika pariveza se saMbaMdhita hai jabaki zramaNa-mAnyatA vyaktigata caritra para AdhArita haiM / jainoM ne hiMsA-ahiMsA para parizramapUrvaka vicAra kiyA hai| unhoMne ise bhAva-pradhAna mAnA hai / yaha antaraMga ke zodhana kA eka upAya hai| rAga, dveSa, parigraha (antarvAhya) Adi ke tyAga se ahiMsA prakaTa hotI hai / ye saba mAnasika pravRttiryA haiM / phalataH jainadharma meM mana kI zuddhatA naitikatA kA pramukha lakSaNa mAnA gayA hai| jainoM ne vaidika ahiMsA kI mAnyatA kI kAphI AlocanA kI hai / isakI AlocanA sAMkhya, yoga aura bauddha bhI karate haiM / unakA kathana hai ki 'na hiMsyAt sarvabhUtAni' kA koI apavAda nahIM honA cAhiye / -563 -