Editing Nonviolence (section)

=====Self-defence, criminal law, and war=====
The classical texts of Hinduism devote numerous chapters discussing what people who practice the virtue of Ahimsa, can and must do when they are faced with war, violent threat or need to sentence someone convicted of a crime. These discussions have led to theories of just war, theories of reasonable self-defence and theories of proportionate punishment.<ref name=balkaran2012>Balkaran, R., & Dorn, A. W. (2012). [http://www.sareligionuoft.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/JAAR-Article-Violence-in-the-Valmiki-Ramayana-Just-War-Criteria-in-an-Ancient-Indian-Epic-.pdf Violence in the Vālmı̄ki Rāmāyaṇa: Just War Criteria in an Ancient Indian Epic] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412060315/http://www.sareligionuoft.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/JAAR-Article-Violence-in-the-Valmiki-Ramayana-Just-War-Criteria-in-an-Ancient-Indian-Epic-.pdf |date=2019-04-12 }}, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 80(3), 659–690.</ref><ref name=klos1996>[[Klaus K. Klostermaier]] (1996), in Harvey Leonard Dyck and Peter Brock (Ed), The Pacifist Impulse in Historical Perspective, see ''Chapter on Himsa and Ahimsa Traditions in Hinduism'', {{ISBN|978-0-8020-0777-3}}, University of Toronto Press, pages 230–234</ref> [[Arthashastra]] discusses, among other things, why and what constitutes proportionate response and punishment.<ref name=robinson2003>Paul F. Robinson (2003), Just War in Comparative Perspective, {{ISBN|0-7546-3587-2}}, Ashgate Publishing, see pages 114–125</ref><ref>Coates, B. E. (2008). Modern India's Strategic Advantage to the United States: Her Twin Strengths in Himsa and Ahimsa. Comparative Strategy, 27(2), pages 133–147</ref>

;War
The precepts of Ahimsa under Hinduism require that war must be avoided, with sincere and truthful dialogue. Force must be the last resort. If war becomes necessary, its cause must be just, its purpose virtuous, its objective to restrain the wicked, its aim peace, its method lawful.<ref name=balkaran2012/><ref name=robinson2003/> War can only be started and stopped by a legitimate authority. Weapons used must be proportionate to the opponent and the aim of war, not indiscriminate tools of destruction.<ref>Subedi, S. P. (2003). The Concept in Hinduism of 'Just War'. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 8(2), pages 339–361</ref> All strategies and weapons used in the war must be to defeat the opponent, not designed to cause misery to the opponent; for example, use of arrows is allowed, but use of arrows smeared with painful poison is not allowed. Warriors must use judgment in the battlefield. Cruelty to the opponent during war is forbidden. Wounded, unarmed opponent warriors must not be attacked or killed, they must be brought to your realm and given medical treatment.<ref name=robinson2003/> Children, women and civilians must not be injured. While the war is in progress, sincere dialogue for peace must continue.<ref name=balkaran2012/><ref name=klos1996/>

;Self-defence
In matters of self-defence, different interpretations of ancient Hindu texts have been offered. For example, Tähtinen suggests self-defence is appropriate, criminals are not protected by the rule of Ahimsa, and Hindu scriptures support the use of violence against an armed attacker.<ref>Tähtinen pp. 96, 98–101.</ref><ref>Mahabharata 12.15.55; Manu Smriti 8.349–350; Matsya Purana 226.116.</ref> Ahimsa is not meant to imply pacifism.<ref>Tähtinen pp. 91–93.</ref>

Alternate theories of self-defence, inspired by Ahimsa, build principles similar to theories of just war. [[Aikido]], pioneered in Japan, illustrates one such principles of self-defence. [[Morihei Ueshiba]], the founder of Aikido, described his inspiration as Ahimsa.<ref>[http://www.sportspa.com.ba/images/dec2011/full/rad8.pdf The Role of Teachers in Martial Arts] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412060316/http://www.sportspa.com.ba/images/dec2011/full/rad8.pdf |date=2019-04-12 }} Nebojša Vasic, University of Zenica (2011); Sport SPA Vol. 8, Issue 2: 47–51; see page 46, 2nd column</ref> According to this interpretation of Ahimsa in self-defence, one must not assume that the world is free of aggression. One must presume that some people will, out of ignorance, error or fear, attack other persons or intrude into their space, physically or verbally. The aim of self-defence, suggested Ueshiba, must be to neutralise the aggression of the attacker, and avoid the conflict. The best defence is one where the victim is protected, as well as the attacker is respected and not injured if possible. Under Ahimsa and Aikido, there are no enemies, and appropriate self-defence focuses on neutralising the immaturity, assumptions and aggressive strivings of the attacker.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20060116174614/http://www.aiki-extensions.org/pubs/conflict-body_text.pdf SOCIAL CONFLICT, AGGRESSION, AND THE BODY IN EURO-AMERICAN AND ASIAN SOCIAL THOUGHT] Donald Levine, University of Chicago (2004)</ref><ref>Ueshiba, Kisshōmaru (2004), ''The Art of Aikido: Principles and Essential Techniques'', Kodansha International, {{ISBN|4-7700-2945-4}}</ref>

; Criminal law
Tähtinen concludes that Hindus have no misgivings about death penalty; their position is that evil-doers who deserve death should be killed, and that a king in particular is obliged to punish criminals and should not hesitate to kill them, even if they happen to be his own brothers and sons.<ref>Tähtinen pp. 96, 98–99.</ref>

Other scholars<ref name=klos1996/><ref name=robinson2003/> conclude that the scriptures of Hinduism suggest sentences for any crime must be fair, proportional and not cruel.