JUST WAR AND HINDUISM

INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND ARMED CONFLICT

WRITE- UP TO BE SUBMITTED TO

RAJIV GANDHI SCHOOL OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

LAW
IIT KHARAGPUR

SUBMITTED BY
NAME- ANANYA DAS
ROLL NO- 22IP62003

AT
RAJIV GANDHI SCHOOL OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
LAW
IIT KHARAGPUR
(2022)
 JUST WAR AND HINDUISM

“You may not be interested in war but war is interested in you”

— Leon Trotsky1

A body of literary materials including politics, statecraft, law, criminology, ethics, religion,
and military strategy is the foundation of traditional Hindu approaches to combat. These texts
provide intricate insights on the nature of "Just Wars" from Indic views.

HINDU CODE OF WAR- DHARMA YUDDHA AND KUTA YUDDHA

Dharma's core idea originally meant upholding law and order within the wider cosmic order
in order to maintain safety and security. The law of righteousness known as dharma governs
interactions between an individual, their family, their community, and their government.
Dharma, according to Roller, “used in a legal sense, . . . refers to the laws and traditions
governing society, informing every citizen of the rules governing social life.”2 The social
order of the society in ancient times was ruled by Dharma. The social order developed
through the Srutis, Smritis and especially the great popular epics such as the Mahabharata
and the Ramayana is also viewed within the context of this larger cosmic order. 3 Wars fought
in accordance with these and other rules of the laws of war were considered to be 'Dharma
Yuddha' or just wars. Wars fought with deceptive means, crafty methods, under charms and
spells of Maya and Indrajal, and using lethal and deadly weapons were described as Kuta
Yuddha.4

The Hindu concept of right and wrong is based on a collection of sacred scriptures and divine
revelations as embodied in the four Vedas (of which the Rigveda is presumed to have been
written about 2,500 BC),5 and other religious texts known as Dharmasastras include some
108 or so Upanishads,6 there are 18 Puranas, some 100 Up-Puranas, plus a few Smritis. In
Hinduism, a fair war is one that is waged against bad characters of the time, whether they be
domestic or international, rather than necessarily other nations or members of other faiths.
1
Cited by Ian Roxborough, Thinking About War, (Sociological Forum. Vol. 19, No. 3, September, 2004): pp.
505-530.
2
John M. Koller, The Indian Way, (1982) 62.
3
The Vishnu Purana: A System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition (1972), translated from the original Sanskrit
by H.H. Wilson.
4
Standish Grove Grady, Institutes of Hindu Law; Or, The Ordinances of Menu (3rd edn., 1869) 137.
5
See for a very enlightening analysis of the history, content and context of the Vedas, H.D. Griswold, The
Religion of the Rigveda (1971
6
See for English translation of some parts of the Vedas and the Upanishads, R.C. Zaehner, Hindu Scriptures
(1966).
When Ravana forcibly abducted Rama's wife Sita, the legendary battle between Rama, a
Hindu ruler, and Ravana, the demon king, as told in the Ramayana, began. The Kauravas and
Pandavas, who were fighting to uphold dharma and justice, personified injustice in the battle
of Kurukshetra. Lord Krishna pushes his devotee Arjuna to engage in combat and explains
just war in the Gita. When Arjuna shows reluctance to engage in combat to eliminate his own
relatives who have joined the evil Duryodhana camp, his cousin and the Crown Prince,
Krishna advises him to do so: “considering your specific duty as a Ksatriya, you should know
that there is no better engagement for you than fighting on religious principles; and so, there
is no need for hesitation.”7 In contrast to wars fought to advance Hinduism or stop the
expansion of other religions, the Hindu concept of a just war was one fought in line with the
laws of war to protect dharma and justice. This is due to the Hindu philosophy's long-
standing commitment to the ideals of harmony and fraternity among all people. There is a
verse in the Atharva Veda (VII.52), which suggests that the Vedic scholars meant to include
people other than themselves in their thoughts since, in their opinion, the divine spirit within
the strangers and themselves was the same. 8 Whenever the Hindu Puranas speak of a war,
they are referring to a defensive war, not an offensive one. The norm in Hindu thinking has
been abstention from the use of force; the institution of war has been perceived as an
exception fought in defence of hearth and home and of Dharma. 9 The modern idea of a "just
war" waged to maintain the rule of law is quite close to this idea.

In the Hindu world that there are four techniques of dispute: sama (conciliation), dana
(placating by gifts), bheda (dissension threat), and danda (force). The last may be employed
only after the other have been exhausted. Manu advises a king to employ the first three
techniques before resorting to war (danda) to settle a dispute with a foreign power. 10 Wars in
ancient India increased in frequency as the largely pacific Vedic age gave way to the Puranic
era. The Ksatriyas appear to have been drawn into battle by their thirst for conquest and their
conduct of the Rajasuya rite. Sastry states that “the early Aryans were essentially an athletic
and aggressive people, with all the devotion and deep religious fervour of a martial race.”11
However, there were some laws of war that had to be followed when waging war. A monarch
7
The Gita, 2.31, from English translation of the Gita in A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Bhagavad-
Gita As It Is (hereafter ' Bhagavad-Gita') (1986) 115-116.
8
Pratima Bowes, The Hindu Religious Tradition: A Philosophical Approach (1977) 39.
9
Abinesh Chandra Bose, Hymns from the Vedas: Original Text and English Translation with Introduction and
Notes (1966).
10
See Standish Grove Grady, Institutes of Hindu Law; Or, The Ordinances of Menu (3rd edn., 1869) 137.
11
Alladi Mahadeva Sastry, The Bhagavad Gita: With the Commentary of Sri Sankaracharya (translation from
the original Sanskrit into English) (7th edn., 1977) 10-11.
or king that disregarded the rules of battle had no place in the universe of honourable and
successful kings. If other kings recognised a Hindu ruler who desired the title "Chakrabarti
Maharaj," he was permitted to employ force against them; otherwise, no military expedition
was permitted.

RULES TO BE OBSERVED IN BATTLEFIELD

The Manusmriti, which is presumed to have been written in its presently available form in
about 880 BC12 includes a whole chapter 'On Government; or. On the Military Class'. It is in
this chapter that we find the following rules on the laws of war:

Let no man, engaged in combat, smite his foe with sharp weapons concealed in wood, nor
with arrows mischievously barbed, nor with poisoned arrows, nor with darts blazing with
fire;

Nor let him in a car [he perhaps meant a chariot] or on horseback strike his enemy alighted
on the ground; nor an effeminate man; nor one, who sues for life with closed palms; nor one,
whose hair is loose and obstructs his sight; nor one who sits down fatigued; nor one, who
says, 'I am thy captive';

Nor one, who is at sleep; nor one who has lost his coat of mail; nor one, who is naked; nor
one who is disarmed; nor one, who is a spectator, but not a combatant; nor one, who is
fighting with another man:

Calling to mind the duty of honourable men, let him never slay one, who has broken his
weapon; nor one, who is afflicted with private sorrow; nor one who has been grievously
wounded; nor one, who is terrified; nor one who turns his back.

Thus, has been declared the blameless primeval law for military men; from this law a king
must never depart, when he attacks his foes in battle.13

With regard to the provisions relating to the aftermath of a war, the Manusmriti advises the
victorious king that “having conquered a country, let him respect the deities adored in it, and
their virtuous priests; let him also distribute largesses to the people, and cause a full
exemption from terror to be loudly pro claimed. When he has perfectly ascertained the
conduct and intentions of all the vanquished, let him fix in that country a prince of the royal
12
This date given by Sir William Jones is perhaps more accurate than other dates given by other scholars. See
William Jones, 'Preface' to Grady, Institutes of Hindu Law., op.
13
Slokas 90-93 and 98 of the Manusmriti. See English translation of the original text in Grady, op. cit., 135-136
(italics omitted).
race, and give him precise instructions. Let him establish the laws of the conquered nation
and declared in their books; and let him gratify the new prince with gems and other precious
gifts.”14

Modern international law's primary goals are to lessen the effects of conflict and make it as
humane as possible, but Hindu law included a third goal—fair play in combat—as a
requirement.

Manusmriti also mentions the punishment for violators violating the rules of warfare-

 Admonition and censure

 Imprisonment
 Mutilation
 Death15

INFLUENCE OF HINDU LAWS OF WAR ON MODERN WARFARE

With the advent of Mughals and Britishers in India, by the end of colonial rule and the time
when India became independent, India lost its influence and relevance in the international
domain. During the 1950s, India had just started to recover from the colonial exploitation and
so it was not possible for India to influence the rules of warfare in international level. Indian
leaders started following the western principles of governance which is evident from our
Indian Constitution which had been taken from various constitutions all across the globe.

“The world would be a better place to live in if the modern laws of war based on the Geneva
Conventions” if the Hindu laws of war, some of their regulations, were to be adopted. For
instance, only equals should engage in combat, even during "just" or defensive battles. A
warrior with cutting-edge, contemporary weapons shouldn't go after others without them.
Similar to this, according to Hindu laws of battle, no one should be attacked if their weapon
has been destroyed, their bowstring has been severed, or their chariot has been lost. This
suggests that anyone lacking sufficient fighting gear shouldn't be attacked. However, it was
claimed that American soldiers massacred numerous fleeing and unarmed Iraqis on the way
to Basra during the 1991 First Gulf War. The extensive aerial bombardment carried out by
the Americans in Afghanistan during the Afghan War in 2001 would have been forbidden

14
Supra Note 11.
15
S. Laad, Classical Hindu and Islamic Approaches to punish and treat offenders,
https://www.coursehero.com/file/21658565/Classical-Hindu-and-Islamic-approaches-to-punishment/ (2014)
(accessed on 6 November 2022).
under Hindu law. This is due to the fact that it is obvious that a conflict between unequals is
taking place when fighter jets drop hundreds of bombs from thousands of feet above the earth
on people who lack access to such weapons. States shouldn't be permitted to circumvent the
law and fight a war that violates the norms of both jus ad bellum and jus in bello, however,
instead of establishing new laws to address the difficulties presented by the new global
scenario. The goal of the international community is to make war illegal, to conduct it as
humanely as possible, to lessen the effects of conflict on people, and to avoid needless
damage. In conclusion, the cases of recent wars show that the international law of war still
needs to be developed to a great extent in order to achieve the goals of the international
community just outlined. The international community can benefit from this process by
referencing the more compassionate Hindu laws.

Even though India has not been able to have an impact on current international law, there are
some rules that are comparable to ancient Hindu laws.

 Manu, for example, said it was prohibited to kill “persons walking on the road, not taking
part in the conflict, or mere travellers, or those who are engaged in eating and drinking, or
pursuing their special avocations or activities, or running diplomatic errands, and of course
the Brahmins, unless they are engaged in war.” This may be traced back to the August 12,
1949, Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,
Part I dealing with the General Provisions, and in particular Article 4 outlining the concept
of protected persons.
 Many prisoners were slain by sword even during the Vedic era. In the event that there
were female prisoners of war, they were respected and forced into union with the
conqueror's chosen spouses. They were led back to their homes if they declined the offer.
According to the epic code, some qualities of fair combat include hospitality, respect for
refugees, the rule not to forget an act of kindness or damage, and refusing to fight when
provoked. This and Part II, General Protection of Prisoners of War, of the Geneva
Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, particularly
Article 14 respecting respect for the person of the prisoner, are extremely similar.
 Ancient Indian laws of war distinguished clearly between civilians and combatants in
accordance with the concept of distinction. The same concept is included in Article 48 of
both the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and the
Protocol I Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, both of
which protect civilians from military operations.
 Even though Ravana was fighting an unfair war in the Ramayana, Rama prohibited
Lakshmana from deploying an arsenal that might have been used to eliminate the whole
enemy race, including those without weapons (Adharmayuddha). This is a wonderful
example of how humanitarian principles are upheld. This is quite similar to Chapter VI,
Part III, Section II, and Article 42 of the August 12, 1949, Geneva Convention Relative to
the Treatment of Prisoners of War.

CONCLUSION

When there is no common ideological enemy to fight, different forms of crusade fascinate the
Middle East countries and other parts of the world. Zimmer claims, “the theories of politics
evolved in Indian antiquity may be by no means out of date. They [may] have remained
unnoticed [but their low-profile] … does not mean that they could be of no use or interest to
the modern mind”.16 This work has shown that Hindu frameworks of warfare are not
“doctrinal relics, the hardened deposits of past debates. Such traditions are also a resource
for future debates and moral choices – choices and debates that will, in turn, reshape our
multivocal heritage”.17 It is sufficient to mention that religious traditions from around the
world continue to influence current international affairs. Hindus in India, who number one
billion, are projected to have a big impact on future international relations and military
alliances. India's growing economic and military power must thus not be disregarded. The
book's chapters taken together show that just war ideals are firmly ingrained in India's robust
culture and that they have a lot to offer the 21st century debate on warfare. India's military
philosophy combines kindness with realpolitik in a unique synthesis, informed by its
persisting religious principles, political slyness, and traumatic experiences with colonialism
and religious communalism. It will be interesting to see whether India's long-standing ethical
traditions on war will remain subservient to contemporary international treaties or whether its
sophisticated traditions of dharma yuddha and ka yuddha will reassert themselves as the
country's military juggernaut rises once more in the twenty-first century. These deeply
ingrained Hindu traditions imply that India has the intellectual and tactical resources required
to put together religious or secular arguments for just conflicts. Such traditional norms could
be used as an excuse for aggressive behaviour in the name of dharmic principles. This work
has demonstrated the various ways that Hindu concepts of fair war have been theorised,

16
Heinrich Zimmer, Philosophies of India, (1951). Princeton University Press; Heinrich Zimmer, Myths and
Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization, (New York, N.Y.: Pantheon Books Inc) (1946).
17
Terry Nardin, The Comparative Ethics of War and Peace in Nardin, Terry (ed.) The Ethics of War and
Peace: Religious and Secular Perspectives (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1996) 245-264.
articulated, rationalised, and imbued with a sanctifying ethos. In order to gain a foresighted
grasp of India's potential future military course in the twenty-first century, it would be
advisable to learn about India's traditional Hindu fighting paradigms.

REFERENCES

 Standish Grove Grady, Institutes of Hindu Law; Or, The Ordinances of Menu (3rd
edn., 1869) 137.
 Heinrich Zimmer, Philosophies of India, (1951). Princeton University Press; Heinrich
Zimmer, Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization, (New York, N.Y.:
Pantheon Books Inc) (1946).
 Abinesh Chandra Bose, Hymns from the Vedas: Original Text and English
Translation with Introduction and Notes (1966).
 Alladi Mahadeva Sastry, The Bhagavad Gita: With the Commentary of Sri
Sankaracharya (translation from the original Sanskrit into English) (7th edn., 1977)
10-11.
 Pratima Bowes, The Hindu Religious Tradition: A Philosophical Approach (1977) 39.
 The Gita, 2.31, from English translation of the Gita in A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
Prabhupada, Bhagavad-Gita As It Is (hereafter ' Bhagavad-Gita') (1986) 115-116.
 Terry Nardin, The Comparative Ethics of War and Peace in Nardin, Terry (ed.) The
Ethics of War and Peace: Religious and Secular Perspectives (Princeton: Princeton
University Press 1996) 245-264.
 Surya P Subedi, The Concept in Hinduism of “Just War” (8 Journal of Conflict &
Security Law 2003) 339.
 Cited by Ian Roxborough, Thinking About War, (Sociological Forum. Vol. 19, No. 3,
September, 2004)
 Mahesh S. and Bhumika Mukesh Modh, ‘International Humanitarian Law: An
Ancient Indian Perspective’ [2011] SSRN Electronic Journal
<http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=1738806> accessed 6 November 2022.

………………………