Religions and Nonviolence
(1) "The Indian sub-continent has always had a large variety of related
religious philosophies and practices flourishing, but it was not until the
19th century that the British classified them all together under the term
'Hinduism.'”
Dr. Huston Smith, author of The Religions of Man, points out that Hinduism,
like Buddhism, represents a *family* of different religious traditions.
(2) "There is a claim that 'Hin,' related to Himsa, means violence, and
'Du,' related to Dur, means 'far from,' so that 'Hindu' means 'far from
violence.' ...it is asserted by Hindus who believe that a true Hindu
practices thorough-going nonviolence."
I've never heard this before! I'm skeptical of such a claim, even if made by
devout Hindus.
(3) "Firmly establishing karma and reincarnation further rigidified the
caste system, with the idea that people had earned their current
circumstances by what they had done in past lives."
No, the twin doctrines of karma and reincarnation mean that one's caste or
status in society is a temporary material condition.
According to Hinduism's most sacred scripture, the Bhagavad-gita (5.18),
"the humble sages, by virtue of true knowledge, see with equal vision a
learned and gentle brahmin, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater."
(In the traditional Indian caste system, brahmins are considered the highest
group of humans, while "dog-eaters" are a group of humans deemed so inferior
that they are placed outside the caste system.)
Social ills such as racism, sexism, nationalism, caste-ism, and speciesism
arise because souls falsely identify with their temporary bodies. On the
spiritual platform, all are equal.
(Compare this to the Christian teaching: "In Christ there is no Greek or
Jew, slave or free" [Colossians 3:11].)
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada said: "In the Bhagavad-gita [4.13] it is
stated, catur-varnyam maya srishtam guna-karma-vibhagasah. 'These four
orders of brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaishyas, and sudras were created by Me
according to quality (guna) and work or activities (karma).' There is no
mention of birth (janma)."
A Western text, India: Yesterday and Today, also reports that "the four
orders... of Hindu society... were classes in the Western sense rather than
castes in the Indian manner."
(4) "Throughout Hindu history, there has been much advocacy for ahimsa in
lifestyles, and persuasion of others to do so. For example:
"Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (fifteenth to sixteenth centuries) . . . converted
many cruel people who later became compassionate beings. The story is told
that once Chaitanya Mahaprabhu heard that hundreds of cows and bulls were
killed every year to feed the Muslim ruler of his area. He was saddened
about the slaughter of innocent animals so he went to the court and met the
Muslim ruler to explain the significance of nonviolence. He said that cows
give us milk so they are like our mother. He said that bulls help to plow
fields to produce food grains so they are like our father. Killing these
cows and bulls to eat meat is like killing our mother and father and eating
their meat. The Muslim ruler was convinced by Mahaprabhu’s argument and
ordered no more killing of cows and bulls and became an ardent practitioner
of nonviolence. Mahaprabhu also converted many criminals and dangerous
bandits of his time into great devotees of the Lord. They became
compassionate beings. His way of nonviolence attracted thousands of
followers. (Shastri & Shastri, 1998, p. 82)"
Followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu are to follow Mahaprabhu's example, and
bring up the subject of vegetarianism with people of other faiths.
(5) "Note that this is the most basic and easiest form of nonviolence:
persuading others to participate. This is always the first thing to try, and
it serves as an ideal we all aspire to. It solves all kinds of problems
when it works, and it works quite a bit – there is more power in it than
many people realize. Were it to become universal, peace would be achieved.
"Nevertheless, many people refuse to be persuaded and do not merely ignore
the pleas to be nonviolent, but react with violence to those making the
pleas – horrific violence. In some cases, of course, the pleas are being
made not on behalf of others but by the victims themselves, so it is easily
predicted that being assertive rather than acquiescing will bring on more
violence against the victims."
Pro-choicers have similarly said that the mission of the pro-life movement
should be *education* rather than arm-twisting: to convince the majority of
Americans to extend rights to the unborn. Anti-abortionists don't seem to
appreciate or understand friendly moral persuasion. All they seem to
understand is coercion, force, and violence: bombing clinics, killing
doctors, etc.!
(6) "Ritual human sacrifice to please, placate, or bargain with divinity was
practiced early on but stopped being prevalent millennia ago. As a fringe
activity and primarily to the goddess Kali, individual instances in India
are still making the news and are legally treated as murders.
"Ritual animal sacrifice was found in the Vedas but disapproved in the
Upanishads. It is currently not common and is especially frowned on by those
with vegetarian practice, but does happen, primarily goats sacrificed to the
goddess Kali."
What, then, are we to make of the ancient practice of sacrificing animals?
In his purport (commentary) on the Bhagavata Purana 5.26.25, A.C.
Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada writes:
"The word dambha-yajñeṣu in this verse is significant. If one violates the
Vedic (Hindu) instructions while performing yajña (sacrifice) and simply
makes a show of sacrifice for the purpose of killing animals, he is
punishable after death (in hell). In Calcutta there are many slaughterhouses
where animal flesh is sold that has supposedly been offered in sacrifice
before the goddess Kālī. The śāstras (scriptures) enjoin that one can
sacrifice a small goat before the goddess Kālī once a month (the original
intent of animal sacrifices in the world religions is to curtail, limit, and
restrict the killing of animals). Nowhere is it said that one can maintain a
slaughterhouse in the name of temple worship and daily kill animals
unnecessarily. Those who do so receive the punishments (in hell) described
herein."
Bhagavata Purana 7.15.24, Purport:
"By practice, one should avoid eating in such a way that other living
entities will be disturbed and suffer. Since I suffer when pinched or killed
by others, I should not attempt to pinch or kill any other living entity.
People do not know that because of killing innocent animals they themselves
will have to suffer severe (karmic) reactions from material nature. Any
country where people indulge in unnecessary killing of animals will have to
suffer from wars and pestilence imposed by material nature. Comparing one's
own suffering to the suffering of others, therefore, one should be kind to
all living entities."
In his excellent A Guide to the Misled, Rabbi Shmuel Golding explains the
orthodox Jewish position concerning animal sacrifices: "When G-d gave our
ancestors permission to make sacrifices to Him, it was a concession, just as
when He allowed us to have a king (I Samuel 8), but He gave us a whole set
of rules and regulations concerning sacrifice that, when followed, would be
superior to and distinct from the sacrificial system of the heathens."
Some biblical passages denounce animal sacrifice (Isaiah 1:11,15; Amos
5:21-25). Other passages state that animal sacrifices, not necessarily
incurring God's wrath, are unnecessary (I Kings 15:22; Jeremiah 7:21-22;
Hosea 6:6; Hosea 8:13; Micah 6:6-8; Psalm 50:1-14; Psalm 40:6; Proverbs
21:3; Ecclesiastes 5:1).
Sometimes meat-eating Christians foolishly cite Isaiah 1:11, where God says,
"I am full of the burnt offerings..." These Christians claim the word
"full" implies God accepted the sacrifices. However, in Isaiah 43:23-24,
God says: "You have not honored Me with your sacrifices... rather you have
burdened Me with your sins, you have wearied Me with your iniquities." This
suggests, as Moses Maimonides taught and Rabbi Shmuel Golding confirms
above, that "the sacrifices were a concession to barbarism."
With the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD, the
sacrificial system of the Hebrews came to an end. Since the killing of
animals outside of sacrifice was forbidden (Leviticus 17:3-4), many Jews
gave up meat-eating altogether. Meat consumption virtually died out at the
time. In the Talmud (Tracte Babba Bathra 60b), Rabbi Yishmael is quoted as
saying, "From the day that the holy Temple was destroyed, it would have been
right to have imposed upon ourselves the law prohibiting the eating of
flesh."
A complicated set of dietary laws and ritual slaughter evolved to replace
the sacrificial system as a means of atonement for killing God’s innocent
creatures. The process of slaughter is strictly regulated. The procedures
are described in the Talmud. The slaughterers must be specially-trained,
God-fearing, observant Jews. The knife used in killing the animals must be
sharper than a razor, with no indentation.
The killing involves cutting the esophagus and the trachea, severing the
jugular vein and carotid arteries. This is intended to cause virtually
instantaneous unconsciousness. The only pain the animal is intended to
experience is the cutting of its skin—a pain minimized by the sharpness of
the knife. "Humane slaughter," an oxymoron, is the intention behind such
ritual killing.
In "Kashruth and Civil Kosher Law Enforcement," Sol Friedman explains the
meaning behind ritual slaughter: "In Judaism, the act of animal slaying is
not viewed as a step in the business of meat-preparation. It is a deed
charged with religious import. It is felt that the flame of animal life
partakes of the sacred, and may be extinguished only by the sanction of
religion, and only at the hands of one of its sensitive and reverential
servants."
On the one hand, it would seem that talmudic law discourages killing animals
and eating their flesh, by surrounding the practice with all sorts of
prohibitions and taboos. Conversely, one could also argue that the dietary
laws facilitate flesh-eating by ritually undoing a moral wrong—the killing
of a living creature—with acts of atonement to make eating the corpses of
animals fitting for a holy people; a people worshipping a God who has mercy
on everything that lives.
The inconsistency in Judaism’s sanctioning the slaughter of animals while
worshipping a God who has mercy on all His creatures is dealt with in Rabbi
Jacob Cohen’s The Royal Table, an outline of the Jewish dietary laws. His
book begins: "In the perfect world originally designed by God, man was meant
to be a vegetarian." The same page also quotes from Sifre: "Insomuch as all
animals possess a certain degree of intelligence and consciousness, it is a
waste of this divine gift, and an irreparable damage to destroy them."
During the 1970s, Rabbi Everett Gendler and his wife studied talmudic
attitudes towards animals, and came to "the conclusion that vegetarianism
was the logical next step after kashrut—the proper extension of the laws
against cruelty to animals." After becoming a vegetarian, a rabbinical
student in the Midwest said, "Now I feel I have achieved the ultimate state
of kashrut."
In their book, The Nine Questions People Ask About Judaism, Dennis Prager
and Rabbi Telushkin explain: "Keeping kosher is Judaism’s compromise with
its ideal vegetarianism. Ideally, according to Judaism, man would confine
his eating to fruits and vegetables and not kill animals for food."
“The dietary laws are intended to teach us compassion and lead us gently
[back] to vegetarianism.”
---Rabbi Shlomo Raskin
“A higher form of being kosher is vegetarianism.”
---Rabbi Daniel Jezer
“If you do not eat meat, you are certainly kosher… And I believe that is
what we should tell our fellow rabbis.”
---Rabbi Shear Yashuv Cohen, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Haifa, Israel
It can similarly be argued from biblical tradition that Jesus did not come
to abolish the Law and the prophets, but only the institution of animal
sacrifice.
Jesus repeatedly spoke of God's tender care for the nonhuman creation
(Matthew 6:26-30, 10:29-31; Luke 12:6-7, 24-28). Jesus taught
that God desires "mercy and not sacrifice." (Matthew 9:10-13, 12:6-7; Mark
2:15-17; Luke 5:29-32) The epistle to the Hebrews 10:5-10 suggests that
Jesus did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets (which Paul, and not
Jesus, regarded as "so much garbage"), but only the institution of animal
sacrifice, as does Jesus' cleansing the Temple of those who were buying and
selling animals for sacrifice and his overturning the tables of the
moneychangers in the Temple. (Matthew 21:12-14; Mark 11:15-17; Luke
19:45-46; John 2:14-17)
Jesus not only repeatedly upheld Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:17-19; Mark 10:17-22;
Luke 16:17), as did his apostles (see chapters 10, 15, and 21 of Acts), he
justified his healing on the Sabbath by referring to commandments calling
for the humane treatment of animals.
When teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath, Jesus healed a woman
who had been ill for eighteen years. He justified his healing work on the
Sabbath by referring to biblical passages calling for the humane treatment
of animals as well as their rest on the Sabbath. "So ought not this woman,
being a daughter of Abraham... be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath?"
Jesus asked. (Luke 13:10-16)
On another occasion, Jesus again referred to Torah teaching on "tsa'ar
ba'alei chayim" or compassion for animals to justify healing on the Sabbath.
"Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will
not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?" (Luke 14:1-5)
Jesus compared saving sinners who had gone astray from God's kingdom to
rescuing lost sheep. He recalled a Jewish legend about Moses' compassion as
a shepherd for his flock.
"For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost. What do you
think? Who among you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does
not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is
lost until he finds it?
"And when he has found it," Jesus continued, "he lays it on his shoulders,
rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and
neighbors saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which
was lost!'
"I say to you, likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who
repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance...there is
joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."
(Matthew 18:11-13; Luke 15:3-7,10)
"The compassionate, sensitive heart for animals is inseparable from the
proclamation of the Christian gospel," writes the Reverend Andrew Linzey in
Love the Animals. "We have lived so long with the gospel stories of Jesus
that we frequently fail to see how his life and ministry identified with
animals at almost every point.
"His birth, if tradition is to be believed, takes place in the home of sheep
and oxen. His ministry begins, according to St. Mark, in the wilderness
'with the wild beasts' (1:13). His triumphal entry into Jerusalem involves
riding on a 'humble' ass (Matthew 21). According to Jesus, it is lawful to
'do good' on the Sabbath, which includes the rescuing of an animal fallen
into a pit (Matthew 12). Even the sparrows, literally sold for a few
pennies in his day, are not 'forgotten before God.' God's providence
extends to the entire created order, and the glory of Solomon and all his
works cannot be compared to that of the lilies of the field (Luke 12:27).
"God so cares for His creation that even 'foxes have holes, and the birds of
the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.' (Luke
9:58) It is 'the merciful' who are 'blessed' in God's sight and what we do
to 'the least' of all we do to him. (Matthew 5:7, 25:45-46) Jesus
literally overturns the already questionable practice of animal sacrifice.
Those who sell pigeons have their tables overturned and are put out of the
Temple (Mark 11:15-16). It is the scribe who sees the spiritual bankruptcy
of animal sacrifice and the supremacy of sacrificial love that Jesus
commends as being 'not far from the Kingdom of God.' (Mark 12:32-34)
"It is a loving heart which is required by God, and not the needless
bloodletting of God's creatures," concludes Reverend Linzey. "We can see
the same prophetic and radical challenge to tradition in Jesus' remarks
about the 'good shepherd' who, unlike many in his day, 'lays down his life
for the sheep.' (John 10:11)"
Mohammed did not directly forbid the killing of animals for food, but he
taught that such killing should be done as humanely as possible. "If you
must kill," he conceded, "kill without torture." The laws governing the
"humane slaughter" of animals for food in Islam are similar to those found
in Judaism.
a) The knife must be "razor sharp," to cause as little pain to the animal as
possible;
b) The knife should not be sharpened in the presence of the animal about to
be killed;
c) An animal must not be slaughtered in the presence of other animals;
d) In order to prevent harm to an animal that may still be alive, it is
forbidden to skin or slice an animal carcass until it is cold, i.e., when
rigor mortis has set in;
The Koran clearly evokes compassion and mercy towards animals. Islamic
mystics, such as the Sufis, regard vegetarianism as a high spiritual ideal.
One contemporary Sufi master, Bawa Muhaiyaddeen, explains, "If you
understand the ‘qurban’ (ritual slaughter and Islamic dietary laws) from
within with wisdom, its purpose is to reduce this killing. But if you look
at it from outside, it is meant to supply desire with food, to supply the
craving of the base desires..."
Writer Steven Rosen observes: "Vegetarians have no problem with Koranic
dietary laws. Scriptural food laws, then, appear to be a deliberate burden
upon meat-eating believers. They, and not their vegetarian brothers, must
observe very strict dietary laws that serve only to curtail a flesh-eating
regimen."
Rosen states further, "As in Judaism, sacrificial animal slaughter is a
detailed process for Muslims. And the whole procedure… is meant to minimize
the killing of animals."
(7) "The Vedas declare liberation (mukti) to be the universal ultimate goal,
and slavery is contrary to this. A sutra from the Maha Nirvana Tantra
(Method of Great Liberation) says: “the human body is the receptacle of
piety, wealth, desires, and final liberation. It should therefore never be
the subject of purchase; and such a purchase is by reason of my commands
invalid.
"However, using 'debt bondage' and similar mechanisms as a way of forcing
labor or sex has occurred throughout Indian history, as elsewhere, and is
currently an urgent problem for nonviolent activists to address."
In his 1969 book, Aryatarangini, Hindu historian A. Kalyanaraman writes that
in comparison to other parts of the world, slavery was virtually
nonexistent. There did exist various forms of indentured servitude, he
admits, but none as brutal as in the West.
(8) "In the wide range of Hindu thought, the teaching of ahimsa would
preclude war, but those in the warrior caste, the Kshatriyas, were
duty-bound to practice it as protection of others. Rules of war are set in
the Rig Veda 6-75:15, with those breaking told they will go to hell. Several
of the normal just-war rules are in place with the idea that sincere dialog
for peace should be practiced where it can be."
The Bhagavad-gita (Hinduism's main scripture) was spoken on a battlefield,
and the Gita itself is contained in the Mahabharata, ancient India's epic
poem of heroism, tragedy, and divine intervention, in which it is clearly
indicated that war is fought only as a last resort, when all attempts at
peace have failed. According to the Mahabharata, Lord Krishna Himself went
to the opposing party, the Kauravas, to propose a peace plan!
(Secular scholar Dr. Martin A. Larson notes that according to Hindu,
Buddhist, and Pythagorean doctrine, hell itself is actually a kind of
purgatory, as it is a place where souls are temporarily punished before
being reborn as a plant, animal, or human being. There is no eternal
damnation, according to the reincarnationist religions.)
(9) "There is no hierarchy in Hinduism to decide the matter, and there are
arguments about whether or not Hinduism supports the death penalty. Jagdish
Muni summarized it this way:
"'The scriptures speak both for and against the system of capital
punishment. The scriptures give the ruler or the government the power to use
capital punishment. However, the saints and mahatmas do not believe in
capital punishment. They believe in reforming people. There are a large
number of instances in which saints have reformed criminals, in some cases
so much so that the reformed people themselves became saints. (Muni, 2006).'
"India still has the death penalty, but the Indian Supreme Court has ruled
it should be in only rare cases and there are few executions occurring."
Presidential candidate John Kerry similarly said in 2004 that he was opposed
to the death penalty except for terrorists.
Hayagriva dasa (Professor Howard Wheeler) reports a conversation between
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and Mr. McIntyre, a Wheeling, WV lawyer
who has been helping Hrishikesh dasa obtain ministerial status in order to
avoid the draft call in Vietnam. He describes Mr. McIntyre as "liberal," but
by today's standards, Mr. McIntyre would be considered a conservative
Democrat:
"Mr. McIntyre is young, active, liberal, and already prominent in the local
law field. He has read Prabhupada's Bhagavad-gita.
"Prabhupada explains varnashrama-dharma (the Vedic social system, or class
system). Brahmanas, he points out, are never meant to fight. That is the
work of kshatriyas, warriors like Lord Krishna's disciple Arjuna. By
fighting, Arjuna could attain perfection, but not by pursuing the dharma of
a brahmana (priest). Each caste has its own work. Now Hrishikesh has just
received his brahminical thread, so he must ask for exemption from the
battlefield.
"Mr. McIntyre agrees. 'For all intents and purposes, he's a monk.'
"Prabhupada begins discussing Vedic law, which was set down thousands of
years ago in the Manu-samhita.
"'There it is stated that a murderer should be condemned to death so that in
his next life he will not have to suffer the karma of his sins. Therefore
when the king hangs the murderer, he is benefitting him.'
"Mr. McIntyre points out that throughout history, official violence has been
the standard way of administering justice. 'An eye for an eye.'
"'But that isn't real violence,' Prabhupada corrects. 'The soul cannot be
killed. For the administration of justice, so-called violence is permitted.
Of course, we cannot kill whimsically. Personally, we don't have the right
to kill even an ant. And in any case, that is no work for brahmanas. Now
this business in Vietnam is simply dog eat dog. No religious principle is
involved. This is typical Kali-yuga fighting.'
"Mr. McIntyre says that many Americans consider the war in Vietnam to be in
the pursuit of justice and therefore honorable.
"'And what is this pursuit of justice?' Prabhupada asks. 'We call justice
karma. You don't have to pursue justice. It is automatically there. Do good,
you reap good results. Do evil, you suffer. We don't have to inflict the
suffering. Material nature will do that effectively enough. Of course, to
maintain order, the state must administer justice to the people -- reward
and punishment. But the state is fallible. Perhaps a criminal goes
unpunished, or they punish the wrong man...
"'...It is impossible to escape the fruits of karma. Live like a dog, and
for your next life, nature gives you a dog's body. Eat meat, next life a
tiger's body. Sex life? All right, become a pigeon or rabbit. Chant Hare
Krishna, you get an eternal blissful body like Krishna's. So you may pursue
justice, but actually justice is already there.'"
Capital punishment, therefore, is NOT "vengeance," but rather *justice*: it
is more merciful than life imprisonment, as a murderer will be absolved of
the karma and not have to suffer for it in the next life.
On the issue of capital punishment, some Hindus are wary of imperfect humans
attempting to administer perfect justice. My friend Anantarupa dasa said on
the issue of capital punishment that he doesn't think we humans should be
doing what the Yamadutas (servants of Lord Yama, who punishes sinners in
hell) will be doing.
(Again, secular scholar Dr. Martin A. Larson notes that according to Hindu,
Buddhist, and Pythagorean doctrine, hell itself is actually a kind of
purgatory, as it is a place where souls are temporarily punished before
being reborn as a plant, animal, or human being. There is no eternal
damnation, according to the reincarnationist religions.)
(10) "Infanticide and feticide have been practiced throughout the history of
Hinduism. Targeted primarily against girl babies, both are still widespread
in India today. Ultrasound technology allows for ascertaining gender before
birth, and advertisements for the technique advise it as a cost saving over
paying a dowry later. Though sex-selection in abortions is illegal while
abortion for other reasons is allowed, and infanticide is currently illegal,
the practice of eliminating baby girls is widespread enough to cause a
severe gender imbalance in the population. This happens despite the fact
that several Hindu texts understand abortion as killing a human being, and
Mohandas Gandhi said, 'It seems to me clear as daylight that abortion would
be a crime.' (Gandhi, 1980, p. 150).
Hindu scriptures and tradition have from the earliest of times condemned the
practice of abortion, except when the life of the mother is in danger.
Hinduism teaches that the fetus is a living, conscious person needing and
deserving protection.
Hindu scriptures refer to abortion as garha-batta (womb killing) and bhroona
hathya (killing the undeveloped soul). A hymn in the Rig Veda (7.36.9, RvP,
2469) begs for protection of fetuses. The Kaushitaki Upanishad (3.1 UpR,
774) draws a parallel between abortion and the killing of one's parents. The
Atharva Veda (6.113.2 HE, 43) remarks that the fetus slayer, or brunaghni,
is among the greatest of sinners (6.113.2).
These verses, along with others, are listed on the Dancing With Siva Lexicon
Page at
http://planet-hawaii.com/~htoday/HimalayanAcademy/Publications/HinduLexicon/DWSLexicon.html.
In modern times, India's greatest apostle of nonviolence, Mohandas Gandhi,
has written: "It seems to me clear as daylight that abortion would be a
crime."
Mohandas Gandhi, All Men Are Brothers, Autobiographical Reflections (New
York: Continuum, 1980), 150.
The international periodical Hinduism Today acknowledges: "Across the board,
Hindu religious leaders perceive abortion at any stage of fetal development
as killing (some say murder)...and as an act that has serious karmic
repercussions." For example, Swami Kamalatmananda of the Ramakrishna
Monastery in Madras, India, has said: "No human being has the right to
destroy the fetus. If having a baby is economically and socially
problematic, one can very well take precautions to avoid such unwanted birth
rather than killing the baby. Precaution is better than destruction."
Hinduism Today, March 1986.
Swami Kamalatmananda's words are the closest endorsement of contraception
from a recognized Hindu spiritual master.
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada wrote to a Canadian heart surgeon, Dr.
Wilfred Bigelow, in 1972:
"Contraception deteriorates the womb so that it no longer is a good place
for the soul. That is against the order of God. By the order of God, a soul
is sent to a particular womb, but by this contraceptive he is denied that
womb and has to be placed in another. That is disobedience to the Supreme.
For example, take a man who is supposed to live in a particular apartment.
If the situation there is so disturbed that he cannot enter the apartment,
then he is put at a great disadvantage. That is illegal interference and is
punishable."
Our material desires keep us bound to the physical world, forcing us to
accept material bodies, life after life. According to the Bhagavad-gita
("The Lord's Song"), the solution to this existential dilemma is to do all
as an offering to the Lord, rather than for our own personal sense
gratification, and in this way, we're liberated from the cycle of repeated
birth and death.
Similarly, in a room conversation with a Jesuit priest in Melbourne,
Australia in 1975, the following exchange took place:
Srila Prabhupada: "So sex life is not bad, provided it is under the
religious system."
Jesuit priest: "I thought you were saying sex in itself is bad... There have
been people in the history of the world, like the Manicheans..."
Srila Prabhupada: "No, just you can have sex for begetting nice children but
not for sense gratification."
Jesuit priest: "But suppose they can't have children. Would you say they can
still have sex?"
Srila Prabhupada: "No. That is not allowed. That is illicit sex. If you
cannot produce children, and still have sex, that is illicit sex."
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and Mother Teresa are perhaps the only
spiritual leaders who have equated contraception with abortion. This either
indicates how "spiritually evolved" they are, or how out of touch with
reality they are. Out of respect for Srila Prabhupada, I'll say I'm not sure
which it is!
That being said, birth control has been in place in India for decades. Over
thirty years ago, there were contraceptive ads appearing in Indian
newspapers (albeit, aimed only at *married* couples!).
Gandhi was celibate, religious, studying the Bhagavad-gita, opposed birth
control (and was at odds with Margaret Sanger over this one!), and wanted
India to remain an agrarian nation of 700,000 villages, etc.
Nehru, by contrast, was an extremely shy aristocrat, but through public
speaking became a skilled orator and politician. He wrote several books
while imprisoned by the British, he encouraged industrialization and the
emancipation of Indian women.
He advocated birth control programs, made Hindu marriage monogamous,
established divorce procedures, outlawed the practice of dowry, and
introduced laws that gave daughters an equal share in family estates. He
despised the superstition, ritualism, and mysticism in religion.
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada is India's greatest scholar,
philosopher, cultural ambassador, author, and spiritual leader. His
teachings on the subject of abortion are very clear:
"They are killing the baby in the womb. How cruel! In this age of unwanted
population, man is losing his compassion. When you kill a living entity,
even an ant, you are interfering with its spiritual evolution, its progress.
That living entity must again take on that same life form to complete its
designated life term in that body. And the killer must return to pay for
damages."
Hayagriva dasa, The Hare Krishna Explosion (San Francisco: Palace Press,
1985), 43.
Elsewhere Srila Prabhupada has written:
"You are killing innocent cows and other animals--nature will take revenge.
Just wait. As soon as the time is right, nature will gather all these
rascals and slaughter them. Finished. They'll fight among themselves. It is
going on. Why? This is nature's law. Tit for tat. You have killed. Now you
kill yourselves.
"They are sending animals to the slaughterhouse, and now they'll create
their own slaughterhouse....This is nature's law. It's not necessary that
you be sent to the ordinary slaughterhouse. You'll make a slaughterhouse at
home. You'll kill your own child--abortion. This is nature's law.
"Who are these children being killed? They are these meat-eaters. They
enjoyed themselves when so many animals were killed, and now they're being
killed by their mothers.
"People do not know how nature is working. If you kill, you must be killed.
If you kill the cow who is your mother, then in some future lifetime your
mother will kill you. Yes. The mother becomes the child, and the child
becomes the mother."
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, "Slaughterhouse Civilization," Back to
Godhead 14:9 (Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 1979).
Abortion and war are the karma for killing animals! The pro-life and peace
movements will never succeed until we first shut down the slaughterhouses.
No practicing Hindu, believing in karma and reincarnation, will ever take
"meat-eating pro-lifers" nor "meat-eating pacifists" seriously! Educating
others about animal issues IS pro-life activism.
(11) "As with early Christians like Origen dealing with the violence of the
Old Testament, Gandhi saw allegory. The battlefield is actually the human
body where the struggle over right and wrong continues, as we all experience
daily. In this case, there is another instance of this interpretation:
Abhinavagupta , well-known Indian scholar and scripture commentator, born
around 950 C.E."
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada criticized Mohandas Gandhi for
interpreting the Bhagavad-gita allegorically. He said that the Bhagavad-gita
and other ancient Sanskrit texts are meant to be taken literally; that there
really IS a place in Northern India called Kurukshetra where the battle
occurred; that Krishna really IS an incarnation of God who spoke the
Bhagavad-gita to His disciple Arjuna in 3138 BC; that Krishna WAS exhorting
Arjuna to fight...
...even devout pacifists must acknowledge the need for a police force to
protect innocent citizens from the criminal element! And the Vedas say
violence in self-defense is acceptable.
(12) "Vivekananda referred to Jews escaping to India from the destruction of
the Temple, which occurred in 70 C.E. The Cochin Jews (named after the
Indian kingdom to which they fled) also have legends of a previous wave of
Jews coming to India as traders as far back as the days of King Solomon,
500s B.C.E. Other small waves of immigrants came and settled in other areas.
The Jewish community in India has always been quite small, but all signs are
that it has gotten along well with its neighbors and never suffered the
anti-Semitism prevalent in other areas of the world."
The phrase "always been" is anti-semitic, but the Anti-Defamation League
reports that India has a long history of religious tolerance, and it's the
only country where Jews were never persecuted.
(13) "Sikhism arose out of the two streams of Hinduism and Islam, having a
series of gurus that took what they understood to be the best and most true
during a historical period in an area when the Hinduism and Islam were
co-existing but frequently in conflict. They are currently concentrated in
the Punjab district of India and actively participate in the life of the
country."
Sikhs are closer to Hindus than to Muslims, and even in past decades,
interfaith marriages between Hindus and Sikhs were common. Devout Hindus
claim the recent strife between Hindus and Sikhs is due to politicians
stirring up conflict. "You will find the bigger piggies, stirring up the
dirt..." sings George Harrison.
Go on to: Religious Identity / Secular Politics
Return to: Articles