Is war ever justified?
Is war ever justified? Especially if Hinduism’s core teaching is ‘non-violence’ (ahimsa)? This is the big question in Prince Arjuna’s mind which sparks the entire Bhagavad Gita teaching. This doubt came to Arjuna as he stood in his chariot on the battlefield with Lord Krishna & the 2 armies in front of him ready to fight.
This choice is similar to a doctor who is faced with a patient whose arm has gone black with gangrene. The doctor now has 2 options: (1) Cut the poisoned arm off to save the person; (2) Don’t cut the arm off and let the person die. Which option should the Doctor choose? Both choices are not pleasant. Clearly in either choice, the Doctor cannot totally avoid violence (harm) to the patient of some sort. Therefore, the principle of non-violence at a physical level cannot be absolutely followed here, it’s simply impossible.
So practically speaking, we can see that not every situation in life is black and white. i.e. Choose violence or non-violence. No – life is not that simple unfortunately. So this ‘black and white’ categorical view of Dharma is not realistic or pragmatic. Life choices can be complex, and require considering many different factors. To decide what is Dharma involves a lot of thought, analysis, calmness of mind, wisdom, and compassion.
So back to our question – what should the Doctor do? Which choice is the most ‘Dharmic’ in keeping with the value of non-violence and compassion? The answer is hopefully clear to all of you: The Doctor must cut the patient’s arm off to save him from dying. It’s better the patient loses an arm, rather than lose his life. In other words – it is less violent to the patient to cut his arm off. It’s much more violent to the patient to allow him to die. Sacrifice the smaller thing, for the bigger thing. Always think of the bigger picture when it comes to Dharma. Hence in this instance, cutting the arm off is fully justified. It is Dharma. It is not Papa Karma. In fact it is Punya Karma. Cutting the patient’s arm off is an act of compassion. It is done out of love for the patient. Not out of hate or bad intention. So now we have a ‘violent’ action like cutting someone’s arm off, being an act of compassion! Do you see how it’s not so black and white! Do you see how we cannot simply say “all violence is wrong”? It all depends on context, on the relative choice, and on the intention behind the action (if it’s compassionate).
In exactly the same way, the War being waged by Arjuna needs to be examined in light of the context, the other options available and the intention behind the War. Only then we can judge if it’s right or not.
In this case Arjuna and his brothers tried all non-violent means to avoid war – diplomacy, discussion, compromise, persuasion (sama, dana, bedha, etc) with the enemy (Kauravas). Arjuna and his brothers are great followers of Dharma, which means they have a strong value for non-violence (ahimsa paramo dharmah). Hence why they tried every possible option to avoid conflict. They cared deeply about the society and to allow the Kauravas (who are criminal in behaviour – arson, kidnap, theft, etc.) to rule the kingdom would inflict a lot of pain on the society.
Unfortunately, all these non-violent methods to avoid war failed, and so war was the last and unavoidable resort. Arjuna and his brothers, as princes and warriors (ksatriya), had a duty to protect the society from injustice and harm. Therefore out of compassion for the society, with no other option available, they decided it was justified to go to war. It was a very carefully considered decision made out of love for the society and out of a value for Compassion, not hatred.
So it was 100% the correct Dharmic decision for Arjuna and his brothers to go to war, in this particular context. In a similar way, we must all be alert, compassionate, and carefully consider all factors when making any decision – keeping Dharma in mind.
Om Tat Sat
Aditya
