PDA

View Full Version : Gun owning, India and Hinduism.



Adhvagat
08 March 2011, 08:50 AM
How does India treat this topic?

What about Hinduism? Would it be viewed as unecessary himsa?

It would also be nice to see the members' opinions on this.

Thank you.

Eastern Mind
08 March 2011, 04:57 PM
Vannakkam Pietro:

I don't own a gun. Do you? I believe the laws in India prohibit it as well, but I'm not sure. Our Indian members will let us know. Surely it goes against ahimsa. Self-defense? Well, maybe, maybe not. Certainly it would be self defense, not Self defense. I'm sure you can research it on line with gun laws +, but I'm with you in regards to hearing other member's POVs.

Aum Namasivaya

Adhvagat
08 March 2011, 11:43 PM
EM, besides Indian national policies and personal views, it would also be interesting to hear how varnashram dharma would go along with this... Would a brahmana need to impose violence to defend himself? Would a shudra need to carry a gun? Isn't this the kshatriya's duty (police) to defend them? However, we don't live in an organized varnashram dharma society today, there are dangers that didn't exist back then.

However, you put it very wisely. It's self defense, not Self defense. If a person has the karma of being injured or killed, it's not the gun that will change this. And the gun owning can even make this certain person injure or kill other by mistakes and incur in unecessary karmic reactions.

sm78
09 March 2011, 02:10 AM
However, you put it very wisely. It's self defense, not Self defense. If a person has the karma of being injured or killed, it's not the gun that will change this. And the gun owning can even make this certain person injure or kill other by mistakes and incur in unnecessary karmic reactions.

I may be wasting my vak with no purpose again, but I have to interject and strongly point out that karma theory is never to be taken and applied as an unavoidable fate or uncertainty for the future.

That is not the purpose. This is common man misinterpretation of a very positive and refreshing view of life, to something very morbid, negative and fatalistic. For centuries it has been misused just to explain misfortune, but more dangerously to avoid right action or action all together! This is like putting krishna's teaching on its head - which most krishna bhakts fond of doing.

Only implication of karma is "you reap what you sow, so ACT accordingly NOW!!!!!".

Not protecting oneself and the society is a sin. When the govt is unable to defend civil rights and grant protection to society as is the case with India in many places - it is absolutely necessary to have guns, which is of course denied by the government.

Dharma shastras are medieval obsolete & often oppressive set of rules which nobody follows except when have we see opportunistic quotes which can serve our viewpoint. No point referring to them. But vedas, itihasas and tantras make protection a most important topic and more often than not praise violence when the situation demands.

Ahimsa is mostly a hallucination (because it can never be practiced in the common sense it is used - even if you lock yourself in a sterilized room all your life) of common religions to further delude people. In certain contexts it makes perfect sense (like not eating meat, not hurting a man to steal his money or most importantly not even thinking something bad about any being). So Ahimsa as a state of mind and lifestyle is perfect and a natural outcome of compassion. But it makes no sense universally in the absolute literal sense like it is used most of the time…which has resulted hindus being persecuted for so long.

If something is good, it cannot lead to worst results – going by our favorite karma.

Traditional hindu scriptures are very contradictory on this matter, it praises rightful violence all the time, yet in the odd hymn or a philosophical discussion ahimsa often comes as the first point - without making the context clear. I don't know if the ancients were not sure, or if they are later interpolations, or if it is left to our own intelligence to interpret in correct context – because context must be very clear in that ancient society. Literal, universal ahimsa is never seen in any Hindu stories, nor it is praised. Mahabharata repeatedly brings out atma slagha or self affirmation (what we call rationalization today) as the worst quality and not himsha, of which Mahabharata is full of. Yet, ahimsa is often regarded as the highest value (but much later, not in vedas) - you go and solve the puzzle.

Thankfully tantra shastra - the greatest of all shastras according to abhinavagupta, has solved this puzzle for me, and ahimsa taken literally and without context, is completely a meaningless bogus hallucination.

Adhvagat
09 March 2011, 03:17 AM
Your vak presented me valuable views, for me it wasn't wasted at all.

Thank you.

Eastern Mind
09 March 2011, 08:00 AM
Vannakkam:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence

As I see it, the problem arises when confused people justify violence as the only means to an end, or have a good guy, bad guy mental disposition. For me for sure it is one very complex subject. Certainly I nor very few others are in any position to judge what is dharmic versus adharmic. Fortunately the law of karma is there.

Aum Namasivaya

BryonMorrigan
09 March 2011, 08:27 AM
Many years ago, I was a soldier in the Army, and carried a gun...but never fired it at any one.

A few years ago, I worked as a private investigator, and carried a gun...but never fired it at any one.

Now, I don't see the point. I enjoy target shooting, but even when I had a rifle for such occasions, I kept it so locked up (and away from the kids!) that it would have been useless to even try to go for it in a self-defense scenario.

Now swords...are a different story. If anyone were to attempt to break into my house and hurt my family, there are swords hanging on the walls all over the place, and I'd ensure that such a person would find himself quickly dispatched.

Besides, there are other uses for swords (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_y12HGx1ps).

However, let's face it: Such scenarios are highly unlikely. In the USA, we have this fear-driven ideology that..."you better have a gun, 'cause someone is gonna break in and murder your family!" But realistically, you're much more likely to be killed in a car accident or natural disaster.

PARAM
09 March 2011, 10:52 AM
I do not have any gun in my life except toy guns when I was child.
But I think Hindus need them, Hindus are soft target because of false Ahimsa.
Anti Hindus always praise the Ahimsa of Hindus just to make them weak.


Even before partition of India, there where armed Hindu - Sikh areas in every step of Pakistan, but accepting Gandhian philosophy of Ahimsa to make Muslim feel themselves secure behind Hindus, made them weak and defenseless. What is the need of such Ahimsa if we cannot protect ourselves; if this is to give boost to anti Hindus, then it is better to become a Kshatriya instead of a Brahmin.

Alise
09 March 2011, 12:06 PM
Namaste,

My view is pretty simple, why own something you will not use? :)

But seriously,
person [who can defend himself] can use martial arts instead.
for person, like me, who can't defend himself, no gun would ever help.

But using gun for something else than defense? That's not ahimsa anymore.

Have a wonderful day,
~Alice

charitra
09 March 2011, 12:33 PM
Namaste,

My view is pretty simple, why own something you will not use? :)

But seriously,
person [who can defend himself] can use martial arts instead.
for person, like me, who can't defend himself, no gun would ever help.

But using gun for something else than defense? That's not ahimsa anymore.

Have a wonderful day,
~Alice

Namaste Alice,

girls are more prone for attacks and hence they better learn martial arts as you said. Taser guns or stun guns, that deliver shock but dont kill, are available in some nations. The important factor is mental preparedness for an attack, that needs sadhana or practice :) .

Believer
09 March 2011, 05:09 PM
Besides, there are other uses for swords (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_y12HGx1ps).Sword became part of my kitchen knife set ever since the great Samurai warrior/Deli owner John Adam Belushi showed me how to cut a sandwich with it. ;)


However, let's face it: Such scenarios are highly unlikely. In the USA, we have this fear-driven ideology that..."you better have a gun, 'cause someone is gonna break in and murder your family!" But realistically, you're much more likely to be killed in a car accident or natural disaster.Seriously though, with an Indian mindset of the 60's (pre gun culture in the Indian movies), I did not like the idea of people owning guns in the US, but then I saw how far apart they live from their closest neighbors in many of the suburban areas or in the countryside; and that changed my mind. If it is okay for people here to own guns for self protection, it must be okay in India and elsewhere too.
-

NetiNeti
30 March 2011, 10:46 AM
I own a shotgun to protect my home. I hope to never use it. I see no issues in owning it. The weapon would only be used in dire situations as a last resort.

charlebs
01 April 2011, 10:27 AM
there's crazy people everywhere, but owning a gun is more dangerous than ever meeting someone who is indeed a psychopath. psychotes and psychopaths can be approached in a way that comforts them, do not just lock them up. just look them strict in the eyes and smile. raise your hand and ask who they are, they won't tell.
ask if there's a trouble. by distilling your rational fear you can inspire peace into them.

no one is truly immune to love. even demons need someone to look upto. I am from the nuthouse and people all hope I'm some kind of avatar just because I told them everything there is to know about hinduism, buddhism, islam and christianity. :D

they all calmed down but they really fear me, so I give them Valerian. I have to do this secretly because the doctors are money greedy dutch folk who won't accept homeopathic cures.
I sometimes really hate Holland.

Rationalist
03 April 2011, 11:18 AM
Yes, I believe you have a right to bear arms but only to protect your sovereignty in situations that require it.