Ahimsa

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ahimsa ( Sanskrit , f., अहिंसा, ahiṃsā , literally non-injuring) means non-violence - one of the most important principles in Hinduism , Jainism and Buddhism . It is a rule of conduct that prohibits killing or injuring living things or restricts it to an inevitable minimum. Linked to this is the idea that any act of violence creates bad karma and thus has a negative impact on the perpetrator's future.

There are very different views of how consistently Ahimsa can and should be implemented in daily dealings with the various forms of life and to what extent personal or collective self-defense is permissible. In this regard, differences of opinion have existed for millennia between religions and, within them, between different traditions and authorities based on ancient traditions. Therefore, Ahimsa can only be understood against the background of the religious and historical development in India.

Early history

The historical origin of Ahimsa is unknown. Some researchers suspect that the idea began as early as the third and early second millennium BC. BC, before the Indo-European Aryans appeared, was widespread among the peoples in the north of the Indian subcontinent. According to this view, Ahimsa was later adopted in a slow process by the Aryans, to whom this attitude was originally foreign. Also striking is the fact that the numerous archaeological finds from the cities of the pre-Aryan Indus culture hardly show any signs of military conflicts. However, evidence from many archaeological sites shows that they were hunted and that animals for slaughter were kept.

Vedic period

The historical Vedic religion is the belief of the Indo-Aryans, which has been practiced since the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. In the north of the subcontinent dominated. This is a forerunner or the oldest form of the religious directions for which the collective term "Hinduism" is used today. From this period, which usually ended around 500 BC. The Vedic literature, which became the normative authority for Hinduism, comes from the beginning.

Research into these sources has shown that ritual animal sacrifices with subsequent consumption of meat were common in Vedic times. There is no evidence to suggest that the Indo-Aryans in the 3rd and early 2nd millennium BC Practiced nonviolence towards the animal world. In particular, people liked to eat the beef, which was later strictly frowned upon in Hinduism. In Sanskrit , the language of the Indo-Aryans, the term goghna (cow slayer) was used as a synonym for "guest". This referred to the fact that the appearance of a distinguished guest compelled the host to slaughter a beef in honor of the guest. The obligation to provide such entertainment is specifically attested in a number of sources. At the courts of the rulers there was the office of govikarta (beef chopper , butcher).

The term ahimsa appears in the sources for the first time in the Taittiriya Samhita of Black Yajurveda (TS 5.2.8.7), where it refers to the fact that the victim himself does not suffer any harm. The oldest evidence for the word or for derived terms shows a neutral use as the opposite of himsa (violence), with no moral reference to a principle of non-violence. The earliest place where it is used in a moral sense for the non-killing of animals (with the victim) - pashu-ahimsa - is found in the Kapisthala Katha Samhita of the Black Yajurveda (Chap. 31.11), which was probably around the 8th century. Century BC Was written. Ahimsa is only attested to as a rule of conduct in the sense that later became common in Hinduism in the final phase of the Vedic epoch. The term appears for the first time in such a use in the Chandogya Upanishad, which is one of the oldest Upanishads and is dated to the 8th or 7th century. There, non-violence towards all living beings ( sarva-bhuta ) is required, except in the holy places ( tīrtha ), ie the places of sacrifice. Those who abide by Ahimsa are offered the prospect of liberation from the cycle of reincarnation . In this Upanishad, Ahimsa is also referred to as one of the five essential virtues.

Hinduism

In the sacred scriptures of Hinduism ( Shruti and Smriti ) the questions related to the validity and implementation of the Ahimsa principle are discussed in detail. Any subsequent discussion of the subject presupposes the authoritative authority of these texts.

Ahimsa and animals

Hinduism assumes that there is no essential difference between the soul that inhabits a human body and the soul of an animal. Therefore, as a binding rule of conduct, Ahimsa protects animals as well as humans. From this the inadmissibility of hunting, slaughtering and meat feeding is derived. On the other hand, however, the relevant religious literature leaves no doubt that the killing of animals and the consumption of meat were common in Vedic times; Such violence was allowed or even required from a religious point of view under certain formal conditions. To this extent there is a contrast between the authority of the scriptures, which represent an absolutely exemplary, but not non-violent past, and the demands of consistent Ahimsa in connection with the karma doctrine. The intensive examination of the problem of violence and karma is reflected in the sources.

In terms of religious history, three phases (with long transition periods) can be distinguished. Ahimsa was not discussed in the early Vedic period. In the last phase of the Vedic Age, the killing of animals began to be frowned upon and was restricted to ritual animal sacrifices and hunting. In a third phase, Ahimsa became more and more prevalent, the exceptions were increasingly frowned upon, but without an explicit break with the still sacred Vedic tradition. Nevertheless, there were still carefree meat eaters in the first millennium AD.

In some writings, meat food is not problematized, but assumed as normal. In the Dharmasutras (handbooks of religious precepts) written around the 5th or 4th century BC The rules on permitted and forbidden foods contain lists of edible and non-edible animals, along with special regulations for ascetics and hermits. Ayurveda medical treatises discuss and recommend meat consumption from a purely health point of view, without even mentioning Ahimsa. For example, the Sushruta Samhita (3rd or 4th century AD) recommends beef for a variety of ailments and during pregnancy, and the Charaka Samhita claims that meat is preferable to any other food during convalescence .

On the other hand, a number of very high-ranking scriptures prohibit slaughter (except in the sacrificial ritual). This point of view can be found in the Mahabharata and the Bhagavatapurana (May 11, 13-14) as well as in the Manusmriti (5.27-44), a particularly influential collection of religious regulations (Dharmashastra), which, however, contains contradicting information. These scriptures take the ahimsa point of view by strictly condemning slaughter and meat eating in principle. As an exception, however, they allow the consumption of sacrificial meat, as otherwise a contradiction to the absolutely binding, highest-ranking Vedic literature (Shruti) would arise. In the Mahabharata, warriors ( kshatriyas ) are allowed to hunt , but not forest hermits, who are obliged to strict ahimsa; for them the mere wish to kill an animal is an offense.

The sources thus reveal compromises between proponents of Ahimsa and meat-eaters: Hunting and slaughter were not prohibited, but were restricted and regulated. Proponents of a radical, invariable Ahimsa were not satisfied with this, but wanted to close all loopholes. The Mahabharata and Manusmriti (5.27–55) contain long discussions on traditional animal sacrifices and the question of their compatibility with Ahimsa. In the Mahabharata, both sides explain their positions in detail. In addition, a hunter and venison dealer defends his profession with many arguments; a reply from the other side is missing.

Much of the arguments used by Ahimsa followers relate to the dire karmic consequences of killing for the perpetrator before or after his own death. This includes the claim that whoever deliberately kills an animal will be eaten by an animal in a future existence. In addition, as a reward for Ahimsa, the attainment of supernatural abilities, spiritual bliss, release from the cycle of rebirth and safety from hell are promised. It is even said that whoever practices ahimsa is safe from any kind of danger.

The Manusmriti (10.63), the Arthashastra (1.3.13) and the Vasishtha Dharmasutra (4.4) stipulate that Ahimsa is binding for members of all castes . Followers of hunting and ritual slaughter could not directly contradict this. They felt compelled to present their activities as compatible with Ahimsa. They affirmed that the violence permitted by the scriptures was not really violence; the slaughter of sacrificial animals is not really a killing, but serves the welfare of the whole world. The sacrifice is even a boon for the sacrificial animal, which will thereby achieve a high rebirth; it is the natural destiny of some animal species to be sacrificed and eaten by humans; It is also common among animals that one eat the other; Agriculture also necessarily leads to the death of many animals that fell victim to the plow; Plants, like animals, are living beings and yet must be killed; every human being unwittingly constantly destroys living beings, which cannot be avoided; in addition, the hunt is a fair fight in which the animal has the chance to kill the hunter in turn.

plants

In principle, Ahimsa applies to all living beings ( sarva-bhuta ), because according to the Hindu view there is no fundamental difference between animals and plants. Nevertheless, in Hindu literature little attention is paid to the protection of plants. After all, the Manusmriti (11.145) forbids the arbitrary, unnecessary destruction of wild and useful plants. According to their rules, ascetic hermits ( sannyasins ) eat only a frutarian diet . H. of plant-based products such as fruits, which can be obtained without destroying the plant.

Self-Defense, Criminal Law and War

The scriptures and religious laws of Hinduism advocate the use of force for self-defense against an armed attacker. They make it clear that ahimsa does not apply to criminals. There are no fundamental objections to the death penalty; rather, it is stated that an evildoer should be killed if he deserves to die. The king is obliged to punish criminals and, if necessary, to kill them; he should not spare his own siblings and children either.

Ahimsa as it is understood in the authoritative scriptures of Hinduism does not call for pacifism . War is seen as a normal part of human existence and a warrior's duty. In the second chapter of the Bhagavad Gita , Krishna rejects the pacifist ideas of Arjuna and puts forward various arguments in support of his position that it is Arjuna's duty to fight and kill in the upcoming battle. According to the scriptures, face-to-face combat is very meritorious, and fighters who die in battle go to heaven.

Modern times

In modern Hinduism, the ritual slaughtering approved in the Vedic scriptures rarely occurs. In the 19th and 20th centuries, prominent figures of Indian spirituality such as Swami Vivekananda , Ramana Maharshi , Swami Sivananda and AC Bhaktivedanta Swami emphasized the importance of Ahimsa.

Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) achieved a renewal and revival of the Ahimsa ideal. He applied his concept of nonviolence to all areas of life and especially to politics and popularized it through his example and his writings. He called his non-violent resistance movement against British colonial rule Satyagraha ("holding on to the truth"). With it he made a deep impression on public opinion in India and in Western countries. He became the internationally best known representative of Ahimsa and a role model for various civil rights movements. In Gandhi's view, the concept of ahimsa excludes not only physical violence, but also spiritual violence. This included bad thoughts and hatred as well as hurtful words, dishonesty and lies. He was convinced that renouncing violence does not weaken, but develops a strength in people through which the opponent can be overcome.

Sri Aurobindo criticized Gandhi's concept of Ahimsa as one-sided, limited and not generally applicable. He took a pragmatic, non-pacifist position, according to which it depends on the particular circumstances of the particular situation whether the use of force is justified or not.

Albert Schweitzer carefully studied the Ahimsa idea from a philosophical and cultural-historical point of view. By dealing with the Indian concept of non-violence, he developed his alternative concept of "reverence for life". He criticized the main religious and philosophical currents in India, in which he criticized that they had taught Ahimsa only or mainly as a negative principle of the mere omission of wrongdoing, instead of placing positive action (assistance) in the foreground.

yoga

Ahimsa is a binding norm of behavior for practitioners of classical yoga ( Raja Yoga ) according to Patañjali : It comes first among the five Yamas (abstentions), which make up the first stage of the eight-part yoga path. In the schools of Bhakti-Yoga the disciples who are devotees of Vishnu or Krishna are obliged to conscientiously observe the Ahimsa. Also in Hatha Yoga , according to the classic manual Hathayogapradipika (1.1.17), Ahimsa is a binding prescription. Ahimsa includes mental non-hurting.

Jainism

In Jainism , the implementation of Ahimsa is particularly consistent and comprehensive. Jains consider non-violence to be the most important virtue ( ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ ). This applies not only to monks and nuns, but to everyone. As in Hinduism, the goal is to prevent the accumulation of harmful karma.

When Mahavira in the 6th or 5th century BC When the Jain movement was reformed and reorganized, ahimsa was already an established, scrupulously followed rule. Parshva , the first leader of the Jains ( Tirthankara ), whom modern Western historians regard as a historical figure, lived around the 8th century BC. He established the community that Mahavira's parents belonged to. Ahimsa was already part of the "Fourfold Restraint" ( Caujjama ) vows made by Parshva's followers. In Mahavira's epoch and in the centuries that followed, the Jains emphasized their opposition to both the Buddhists and the Hindus, who they accused of negligence and inconsistency in the practice of Ahimsa. However, there is some evidence to support the assumption that the Jain ascetics, like their contemporaries, the early Buddhists, accepted meat dishes as alms unless the animal was specifically slaughtered for them. According to a traditional story, even Mahavira himself did this, at least when he was seriously ill. However, this is vehemently denied by today's Jains. In any case, the regulation generally followed today only allows lacto- vegetarianism or veganism for all Jains .

The Jains' understanding of ahimsa differs from that of the Vedic religion and Hinduism in the following ways:

  • It does not allow any special regulations for animal sacrifices and for hunting. Killing for the purpose of consumption is absolutely forbidden.
  • Jains also make an effort to avoid damaging plants on a daily basis. While they admit that plants must be destroyed for food purposes, they only consider such violence to be justified insofar as it is essential for human survival. They have special instructions for protecting plants.
  • Jains accept considerable inconvenience in order not to injure or kill insects and other small and microorganisms. In their view, damage caused by carelessness is no less than damage caused intentionally. Honey is strictly forbidden as its extraction is considered to be the use of force against the bees. Some Jains stay away from farming because plowing injures or kills many small organisms. However, arable farming is not generally prohibited and there are Jains who are farmers.

These principles are also known in Hinduism and Buddhism. There they are only observed by some ascetics or monks, whereas in Jainism they apply to everyone.

Regardless of their rigorous understanding of ahimsa, the Jains, like the Hindus, believe that violence is permissible in self-defense and that a soldier who kills enemies in combat is doing a legitimate duty. Jain communities considered the military necessary for their protection. There were rulers, military commanders and soldiers among the Jains.

Although in Jainism, theoretically, all forms of life are equally entitled to full protection from any kind of injury, Jains admit that it is impossible to fully realize this ideal in everyday life. Hence they recognize the existence of a hierarchy of living beings. Agile beings enjoy greater protection than immobile ones. Among the movable ones they differentiate those with only one sense (the sense of touch) and those with two, three, four or five senses. The more senses a being has, the better protection it deserves. Among the beings with five senses, those endowed with reason, humans, have priority.

In everyday practice, Jain lay people who have taken the "small vows" ( anuvrata ) are subject to less requirements with regard to the ahimsa than monks and nuns who are bound by their "great vows" ( mahavrata ).

Buddhism

In contrast to the Hindu and Jain sources, ahimsa is not used as a technical term in early Buddhist literature . The traditional Buddhist understanding of non-violence is less strict than that of the Jains. Its main features are:

  • Like the Jains, the Buddhists have always condemned ritual animal sacrifices.
  • In most Buddhist traditions, vegetarianism is not required. Monks and nuns, like lay people, are allowed to eat meat and fish if they can assume that the animal was not killed for their own sake.
  • Since the beginning of the Buddhist community, monks and nuns have been subject to the "Ten Precepts" ( Dasa-sila ). Lay people of all schools have always been encouraged (but not obliged) to adhere to the "Five Precepts" ( Silas ) - the Pañca-sīla . In both groups of rules, the first rule is the self-commitment not to kill any living being.
  • In contrast to the Vedic religion and Hinduism, early Buddhism neither expressly approved nor condemned violent methods of punishing evildoers and waging war for self-defense. Buddhist stories from the early days, however, point to exemplary successes in peaceful conflict resolution and the possibility of the conversion of robbers.

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 609f .; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 131-133.
  2. ↑ Om Prakash: Economy and Food in Ancient India , Part 2: Food , Delhi 1987, pp. 42, 44f., 47-53; Hanns Peter Schmidt: The Origin of Ahimsa . In: Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou , Paris 1968, pp. 625–655, here: 627.
  3. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, pp. 572–597; Koshelya Walli: The Conception of Ahimsa in Indian Thought , Varanasi 1974, pp. 113-145.
  4. ↑ Panini 3.4.73. Cf. Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 574; Colin Spencer: The Heretic's Feast. A History of Vegetarianism , London 1993, p. 75; Om Prakash: Economy and Food in Ancient India , Part 2: Food , Delhi 1987, p. 101.
  5. ↑ Shatapatha Brahmana 3.4.1-2 [1] ; Aitareya Brahmana 3.4.6; Vasistha Dharmasutra 4.8; Shankhayana Grhyasutra 2.15.1.
  6. ^ Wilhelm Rau: State and Society in Old India , Wiesbaden 1957 (habilitation thesis from 1952), pp. 110–112; Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 611.
  7. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 1 f.
  8. ↑ Chandogya Upanishad 8.15.1; English translation: Hanns Peter Schmidt: The Origin of Ahimsa . In: Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou , Paris 1968, pp. 625–655, here: 631.
  9. ↑ Chandogya Upanishad 3.17.4.
  10. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, pp. 572–577, 598f., 601–603, 617–619.
  11. ↑ Baudhayana Dharmasutra 2.4.7; 2.6.2; 2.11.15; 2.12.8; 3.1.13; 3.3.6; Apastamba Dharmasutra 1.17.15; 1.17.19; 2.17.26-2.18.3; Vasistha Dharmasutra 14.12.
  12. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, pp. 617–619.
  13. ↑ Sutrasthana 46.89; Sharirasthana 3.25.
  14. ↑ Sutrasthana 27.87.
  15. ↑ Mahabharata 3.199.11f. (3,199 is 3,207 after another count); 13,115; 13.116.26; 13.148.17.
  16. ↑ Mahabharata 13.115.59f .; 13.116.15-18.
  17. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 592 f.
  18. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 572-577 (for the Manusmriti ) and p. 585-597 (for the Mahabharata ); Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 34-36.
  19. ↑ Mahabharata 12,260 (according to another count, 12,260 is 12,268); 13.115f .; 14.28.
  20. ↑ Mahabharata 3,199 (3,199 is 3,207 according to another count).
  21. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 39-43.
  22. ^ Hanns Peter Schmidt: The Origin of Ahimsa . In: Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou , Paris 1968, pp. 625–655, here: 629, 643–645.
  23. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 589; Hanns Peter Schmidt: The Origin of Ahimsa . In: Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou , Paris 1968, pp. 625–655, here: 634f., 640–643; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 41 f.
  24. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 590.
  25. ↑ Manu Smriti 5.39 and 5.44; Mahabharata 3,199 (3,207).
  26. ↑ Manu Smriti 5.32; 5.39f .; 5.42; 5.44; Mahabharata 3.199 (3.207) and 14.28.
  27. ↑ Manu Smriti 5.30; Mahabharata 3.199.5 (3.207.5).
  28. ↑ Mahabharata 3.199.23f. (3.207.23f.)
  29. ↑ Mahabharata 3.199.19 (3.207.19).
  30. ↑ Mahabharata 3.199.23f. (3.207.23f.).
  31. ↑ Mahabharata 3.199.28f. (3.207.28f.).
  32. ↑ Mahabharata 13.116.15-18.
  33. ^ Hanns Peter Schmidt: The Origin of Ahimsa . In: Mélanges d'Indianisme à la mémoire de Louis Renou , Paris 1968, pp. 625–655, here: 637–639.
  34. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 97.
  35. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 96, 98-101.
  36. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 96, 98 f.
  37. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 91-93.
  38. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 93.
  39. ^ Kerry S. Walters, Lisa Portmess (Ed.): Religious Vegetarianism , Albany 2001, pp. 50-52.
  40. ↑ Arthur Osborne: Ramana Maharshi and the way of self-knowledge , Munich 1959, p. 92 f.
  41. ^ Sivananda: Sure Ways for Success in Life and God-Realization , 10th edition, Sivanandanagar 1970, pp. 154–158. Cf. Sivananda: Ahimsa - not hurting .
  42. ↑ Kerry S. Walters, Lisa Portmess (Ed.): Religious Vegetarianism , Albany 2001, pp. 56-60.
  43. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 116-124.
  44. ↑ Koshelya Walli: The Conception of Ahimsa in Indian Thought , Varanasi 1974, p XXII-XLVII; William Borman: Gandhi and Non-Violence , Albany 1986, p. 11 f.
  45. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 115 f.
  46. ↑ Albert Schweitzer: The world view of the Indian thinkers . In: Albert Schweitzer: Gesammelte Werke , Vol. 2, Munich 1974, pp. 499–503, 518–527, 601–603, 632–634.
  47. ↑ Patañjali: Yoga Sutras , Sadhana Pada 30.
  48. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 87.
  49. ↑ James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 154-160; Kul Bhusan Jindal: An epitome of Jainism , New Delhi 1988, pp. 74-90; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 110.
  50. ^ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, p. 160; Kristi L. Wiley: Ahimsa and Compassion in Jainism . In: Peter Flügel (Ed.): Studies in Jaina History and Culture , London 2006, p. 438; James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, p. 153 f.
  51. ↑ James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 26-30, 191-195.
  52. ^ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, p. 24 suggests the 5th century; the traditionally accepted year of death is 527.
  53. ↑ Śrīrāma R. Goyal: A History of Indian Buddhism , Meerut 1987, pp. 83-85.
  54. ^ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, pp. 19, 30; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 132.
  55. ^ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, p. 30 suggests the 8th or 7th century; the traditional chronology puts Parshva in the time around 800 BC. Chr.
  56. ↑ Acaranga Sutra 2.15.
  57. ↑ Sthananga Sutra 266; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 132; Śrīrāma R. Goyal: A History of Indian Buddhism , Meerut 1987, pp. 83f., 103.
  58. ^ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, pp. 160, 234, 241; Kristi L. Wiley: Ahimsa and Compassion in Jainism . In: Peter Flügel (Ed.): Studies in Jaina History and Culture , London 2006, p. 448; Phyllis Granoff: The Violence of Non-Violence: A Study of Some Jain Responses to Non-Jain Religious Practices . In: Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 15, 1992, pp. 1-43; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 8 f.
  59. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, pp. 564-570; Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, p. 177.
  60. ↑ Viyahapannatti , Shataka 15th
  61. ^ Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, p. 568 f.
  62. ↑ James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, p. 169.
  63. ↑ James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 166f .; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 37.
  64. ↑ Raj time Lodha: Conservation of vegetation and Jain Philosophy . In: Prem Suman Jain, Raj Mal Lodha: Medieval Jainism: Culture and Environment , New Delhi 1990, pp. 137–141; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 105.
  65. ↑ Kul Bhusan Jindal: An epitome of Jainism , New Delhi 1988, p. 89; James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 54, 154f., 180.
  66. ↑ Sutrakrtangasutram 1.8.3; Uttaradhyayanasutra 10; Tattvarthasutra 7.8; Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, pp. 161 f.
  67. ↑ Hemacandra, Yogashastra 3.37; James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, p. 166 f.
  68. ↑ James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, p. 180.
  69. ↑ Vilas Adinath Sangave: Jaina Community. A Social Survey , 2nd Edition, Bombay 1980, p. 259; Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, p. 191.
  70. ↑ Nisithabhasya (in Nisithasutra ) 289; Jinadatta Suri, Upadesharasayana 26; Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, pp. 162f .; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 31.
  71. ↑ Kul Bhusan Jindal: An epitome of Jainism , New Delhi 1988, pp. 89f .; James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 154f .; Padmanabh S. Jaini: Ahimsa and 'Just War' in Jainism . In: Tara Sethia (ed.): Ahimsa, Anekanta and Jainism , New Delhi 2004, pp. 52–60; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 31.
  72. ↑ Harisena, Brhatkathakosa 124 (10th century); Kul Bhusan Jindal: An epitome of Jainism , New Delhi 1988, pp. 90f .; Vilas Adinath Sangave: Jaina Community. A Social Survey , 2nd edition, Bombay 1980, p. 259.
  73. ↑ Kul Bhusan Jindal: An epitome of Jainism , New Delhi 1988, pp. 89, 125-133 (detailed description of the classification system); Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 17, 113.
  74. ↑ Paul Dundas: The Jains , 2nd edition, London 2002, pp. 158f., 189-192; James Laidlaw: Riches and Renunciation. Religion, economy, and society among the Jains , Oxford 1995, pp. 173-175, 179; Kerry S. Walters, Lisa Portmess (Eds.): Religious Vegetarianism , Albany 2001, pp. 43-46 (English translation of the first of the Great Vows).
  75. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 10.
  76. ↑ Karam Tej Singh Sarao: The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism , Delhi 1989, p. 49; Śrīrāma R. Goyal: A History of Indian Buddhism , Meerut 1987, p. 143; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, p. 37.
  77. ↑ Karam Tej Singh Sarao: The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism , Delhi 1989, p. 51f .; Ludwig Alsdorf: Contributions to the history of vegetarianism and cattle worship in India , Wiesbaden 1962, pp. 561-564.
  78. ↑ Etienne Lamotte: History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Śaka Era , Louvain-la-Neuve 1988, p. 54 f.
  79. ↑ Etienne Lamotte: History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Śaka Era , Louvain-la-Neuve 1988, p. 69 f.
  80. ↑ Etienne Lamotte: History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Śaka Era , Louvain-la-Neuve 1988, p. 70.
  81. ↑ Karam Tej Singh Sarao: The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism , Delhi 1989, p. 53; Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 95, 102.
  82. ↑ Unto Tähtinen: Ahimsa. Non-Violence in Indian Tradition , London 1976, pp. 47, 95, 102 f.