- Jun 18, 2007
- 3,263
- 771
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Hinduism teaches that you should not harm any living creature. Man should live his life according to his dharma. However, if dharma is threatened and wickedness starts to arise, then it must be fought against.
So then we are agreed - Hinduism does not teach pacifism / non-violence. It teaches that aggressive war and needless killing is wrong (good!) but it doesn't teach that all violence is wrong.
I don't get the point that you are trying to make here: Orthodox Christianity allows fighting in a "just war" and is not totally pacifist, so why are you bringing up this point?
Because I think you misrepresented Hinduism in an effort to make it sound more palatable to a Western ear and I wanted to clarify for accuracy. Like I said in my last post, this wasn't meant to judge Hinduism one way or another - just to make sure we were being accurate with regards to it.
I never said Christianity was pacifistic. Catholicism has "just war theory" - you don't find that in Orthodoxy. We certainly DO have a history of empires that use war a great deal (Byzantium and Russia come to mind); so you won't find me calling pacifism holy tradition. Pacficism certainly IS a permissable belief of both Hinduism and Orthodoxy (one is not required to support war / violence), as there have been numerous Hindu and Orthodox heroes / saints who were pacifists.
Finally - there is a tu quoque falacy embeded in your comment here. Even if Orthodoxy preached war and Hinduism preached war, IF war is wrong, then both are wrong. It's not enough to say "Well - YOU DO IT TOO!!" and expect that to convince me that the thing in question is right. It just makes us both hypocrites.
Hope that clarifies!
And it was a Buddhist nation that bombed your US Naval Base at Pearl Harbour during WW2.
So we are to equate the actions of nations claiming to follow a certain religion WITH THE RELIGION ITSELF? Do you really want to go there?
I mean, I have no great love of Buddhism (though I do respect it a great deal) - and technically, Japan is Shinto with a Buddhist twist (mostly Zen and Pure Land at that). By WWII, Japan was barely even religious. It remains one of the most secular societies on the planet.
But that's beside the point. Buddhism, in its doctrine, is pacifistic. Sometimes people assume that ALL eastern religions are pacifistic. It just isn't true. Hinduism isn't; Confucianism and Taoism aren't... I just want accuracy.
Such situations will most likely never arise in the average Hindu's life. So he should do his best to refrain from killing other living creatures.
Doesn't change the overall teaching and history of the religion. Calling Hinduism non-violent is misrepresenting its holy texts and history. It sounds really nice when trying to win a discussion on an internet forum, but it just isn't true. You can say it discourages aggression and killing, and teaches the respect of life, but you HAVE to qualify it (as you now have) by saying that it encourages violence if it is necessary to preserve or follow dharma.
And for those of you who are still wondering about the caste/varna system, here is an extensive explanation of it.
Thanks!
In Christ,
Macarius
Upvote
0