Do Vedas/Smritis sanction genocide of non-believers (buddhists etc)?

Question

Among the most famous hagiographies of Adi Shankara is the Madhaviya Shankara Vijaya. This work has significant importance in advaita tradition.

https://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/sankara-vijayam.html

mAdhavIya Sankaravijaya - The mAdhavIya is probably the oldest available, and also the most authentic and widely known among the different Sankaravijayas today. It is certainly the most popular such text in the advaita tradition, and is also known as the sam.kshepa Sankarajaya. The popularity of this work derives from the fame of its author, mAdhava, who is usually identified with vidyAraNya, the 14th century maThAdhipati at Sringeri.

The Sanskrit version of this work can be found at -

https://archive.org/details/Shankara.Digvijaya.Satika

A slightly sanitized translation by Swami Tapasyananda (we will see why sanitization is done) is found at -

https://www.amazon.in/Sankara-Digvijaya-Swami-Tapasyananda-ebook/dp/B00BUV1H3W

According to the madhaviya shankara vijaya, Kumarila, the mimamsa scholar, is an incarnation of Skanda (son of Shiva) and Adi Shankara himself is an incarnation of Shiva. This is mentioned in first chapter.

According to the first chapter of this work (1.60-1.98), there was a king by name Sudhanvan (incarnation of Indra) who was a Buddhist. Kumarila arrives at the king's place, has arguments with Buddhists and defeats them. The king's belief in vedic dharma is established. At the instigation of Kumarila, the king orders his minions to kill all buddhists, including children and elderly, right from Rameswaram to the Himalayas. (This part is sanitized in the translation by the Swami). Some of the relevant Sanskrit text is given below -

Note the vrddhabAlakam at the end of first line. Every Buddhist right from children to elderly was killed. This perfectly fits the definition of genocide.

Here the translation continues -

He also threatened with dire punishment those officers who showed any hesitation in carrying out this order, however close he might be to him. Indeed; powetful rulers eliminate even friends and relatives, if they tum disobedient or hostile. Did not Parasurama kill his mother under such circumstances?

Thus, the text seems to be justifying the genocide of non-believers (Buddhists).

Adi Shankara himself does not seem to have any qualms in associating himself with this king. For the king was allowed to accompany Shankara during his tour of the country -

The king helps Adi Shankara in his tour by helping him defeat the kapalikas (another slaughter of kapalikas this time, but at least the kapalikas supposedly brought it on themselves as they were allegedly violent).

My question here is not whether these events are real. They may have been made up, exaggerated or blown out of proportion or partly real or who knows what. However, we see two stanuch followers of the vedas - (Kumarila and Adi Shankara focused on karma and jnana kandas of vedas respectively) - one instigating a king to commit genocide and other having no qualms in associating with such a king, according to this hagiography which is very popular in advaita circles.

If these staunch followers of vedas did not see anything wrong in the genocide of Buddhists (as per this Shankara vijaya), the natural question that arises is

whether the vedas and/or smritis themselves sanction genocide of non-believers like Buddhists? Is genocide of non-believers permitted according to Hindu texts?

Comment

Since one of the answers says that the madhaviya shankara digvijaya is not an important one: On the mAdhavIya Shankara Digvijaya's popularity, I have only quoted the website of advaita-vedanta.org. Another indicator of its popularity is its translation into local languages and distribution by Sringeri matha. Even the Sringeri matha website regards this work as very popular and widely accepted, most authentic -

https://www.sringeri.net/history/sri-adi-shankaracharya/biography/abridged-madhaviya-shankara-digvijayam/part-1

The Madhaviya Shankara Vijayam, the most popular and widely accepted account of Sri Adi Shankara’s life, describes the advent of Sri Adi Shankara thus..

https://www.sringeri.net/history/sri-adi-shankaracharya/biography

The Madhaviya is the the most authentic and widely known among the different Sankaravijayas today. It is certainly the most popular such text in the Advaita tradition, and is also known as the Samkshepa Sankarajaya. The popularity of this work derives from the fame of its author, Madhava, who is actually Jagadguru Sri Vidyaranya, the 12th Acharya of the Sriingeri Sharada Peetham.

Hinduism is not some fixed book religion like new Abrahamic ones with a given one-two scriptures to follow and written heavens later. Hinduism is ancient dharma based on the spiritual laws of nature/Prakriti and is highly dynamic just like the creation itself with every being precious, as a sudden body lost in futile killings is waste of time of body's soul and of nature in long term, because source of creation is one.There is only protection of Dharma like killings in Mahabharata or adopting complete non-violence,peace during Buddha's time,spiritual future evolution of majority is to be seen. — , Jan 17 '20 at 16:20
There is nothing like non-believer, its better to be non-believer and following new religion, than being tamsik yet accessing sacred Vedic mantras and spiritual Siddhis for misuse and harming innocents like Duryodhana and Kamsa did despite being Sanatani. — , Jan 17 '20 at 16:25
The content of the question is too long and thus hiding the question proper. That is why I had edited your question content @yAdRcchika — Srimannarayana K V, Jan 20 '20 at 13:42
The Veda, to be precise, the Rig Veda contains spiritual aspects, albeit containing historical facts here and there. So how can you expect the Veda to contain sanction of genocide of non-believers? The Veda did mention about followers of other faiths and finally coming back to the core spirituality and getting WISDOM @yAdRcchika — Srimannarayana K V, Jan 20 '20 at 13:51
It may be, but it may also be false. Many hagiographies by Buddhist scholars such as the Ashokavandana clearly show bias towards Hindu kings. For example, it says Ashoka persecuted many Jains and Ajvikas, yet cave edicts show he patronized them. Hence, I don't know the nature of this work. Was it a later one or a record of the king's orders? — Haridasa, Jan 09 '24 at 12:30

score 4 · Answer 1 · answered Jan 19 '20 at 16:01

4

Do Vedas/Smritis sanction genocide of non-believers (buddhists etc)?

No, but they sanction the deportation of non-believers, including Buddhists:

Manusmriti 9.225 - Gamblers, dancers, cruel men, men belonging to heretical sects [pāṣaṇḍas], men addicted to evil deeds, dealers in wine,—these the King shall instantly banish from his town.

The word used for men belonging to heretical sects is pāṣaṇḍas, which means followers of non-Vedic religions. This includes Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Christians, Muslims, and Jews. According to Hindu scripture, followers of these religions must be immediately deported from any Vedic kingdom.

answered Jan 19 '20 at 16:01

Ikshvaku

22,130
2
39
116

5

Interesting. As per Narada Smriti vide Dharmokosha P-870 laid down thus: पाषण्डनैगमश्रेणीपूगव्रातगणादिषु । संरक्षेत्समयं राजा दुर्गे जनपदे तथा ॥ Meaning : The king should afford protection to compacts of associations of believers of Veda (Naigamas) as also of disbelievers in Veda (Pashandis) and of others. Will need to find the verse in Narada smriti. I got the above from the following link - https://dharmawiki.org/index.php/Raja_Dharma_(%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%83) – Artist Formerly Known As CSD Jan 20 '20 at 09:02
@Carmensandiego Oh wow interesting. – Ikshvaku Jan 20 '20 at 18:58
@Ikshvaku Interestingly enough, the position of the Manusmriti is more extreme then the position of Christianity, Judaism, and some schools of Islam regarding infidels. Most Christian as well as most Jewish theologians believe that infidels should be allowed to live in the state, and those of the Hanafi and Maliki schools of Islam believe that infidels should be allowed to live in a Muslim state. – Terjij Kassal Dec 28 '22 at 19:58
@Ikshvaku Are there any medieval scholars supporting this view in their writings? – Terjij Kassal Dec 28 '22 at 20:02
@TerjijKassal Manusmriti doesn't say to kill infidels though. – Ikshvaku Jan 04 '23 at 00:27
@Ikshvaku Neither do the vast majority of Christian and Jewish theologians, as well as Muslims of the Hanafi and Maliki schools. – Terjij Kassal Jan 04 '23 at 04:18
@Ikshvaku Are there any medieval Hindu scholars saying that non-Hindus should be expelled? – Terjij Kassal Jan 19 '23 at 17:52
@TerjijKassal I'm not aware of any. Also, the Narada smriti says heretics should be protected by the king. So if we reconcile the manusmriti verse and the narada smriti verse, we can understand that heretics should generally be protected, except when they try to undermine and subvert the dominant Hindu religion, at which point they can be expelled. – Ikshvaku Jan 21 '23 at 14:42
@Ikshvaku If the Manusmriti says that non-Hindus should be expelled, why aren't there any medieval scholars arguing for their expulsion? – Terjij Kassal Jan 21 '23 at 19:23
@TerjijKassal It's technically not arguing for the expulsion of non-Hindus, but "pashandis" specifically. A pashandi is a heretic, and many Hindu sects consider other Hindu sects heretical pashandis. Some Shaiva kings have persecuted Vaishnavas in their kingdom. I think some scholars have argued for expulsion of buddhists in ancient times. – Ikshvaku Jan 22 '23 at 03:08
@Ikshvaku What are the names of those scholars who said to expel Buddhists and where did they say it? – Terjij Kassal Jan 22 '23 at 04:58
@TerjijKassal "What are the names of those scholars who said to expel Buddhists and where did they say it?" - See the original post. They give citations. But some people don't find the text itself to be credible. – Ikshvaku Feb 11 '23 at 00:53
@TerjijKassal "Also, you should remember that in pre-modern times, some groups of Hindus might have had access to only the Narada smriti, and lacked access to the Manu smriti, or the other way around." - Manusmriti and Narada smriti aren't the only two dharma shastras. There are several dozen dharma shastras, and the Manusmriti is the most popular and authoritative, so all Hindu scholars would know about it all throughout India. And all our historical records show that Hindus were aware of every single dharma shastra. – Ikshvaku Feb 11 '23 at 00:56
@Ikshvaku As the other answerers have explained, the text in the original post doesn't explicitly advocate for expulsion of Buddhists, but merely portrays it. – Terjij Kassal Feb 11 '23 at 02:15
@TerjijKassal What do you mean "merely portrays it"? And where have others explained it? – Ikshvaku Feb 14 '23 at 03:10
@Ikshvaku The story claims that the king killed the Buddhists after they lost a challenge. It does not argue for the expulsion of Buddhists. – Terjij Kassal Feb 14 '23 at 17:06
@TerjijKassal It says this, "At the instigation of Kumarila, the king orders his minions to kill all buddhists". This answers your question, "What are the names of those scholars who said to expel Buddhists?" The name of the scholar who said to expel Buddhists, according to this text, is Kumarila. – Ikshvaku Feb 15 '23 at 15:20
@Ikshvaku Before the challenge, the king promised to expel who ever would lose the challenge. Since the Buddhists lost the challenge, they got expelled. But if the Hindus lost, they would have been expelled instead. – Terjij Kassal Feb 15 '23 at 18:45
@TerjijKassal Ah ok, I didn't know that context. – Ikshvaku Feb 18 '23 at 14:02
@Ikshvaku Also, there is little point in distinguishing between expulsion and genocide, because in practice, they usually look similar. Any effective expulsion inevitably ends in the death of thousands of civilians, because people try to resist getting expelled. – Terjij Kassal Feb 20 '23 at 03:36
@TerjijKassal "because people try to resist getting expelled." - then this would be the government fighting an armed rebellion that is violating a governmental order, which is quite different from indiscriminate slaughter of a demographic of civilians, which is genocide. – Ikshvaku Feb 20 '23 at 13:02
@Ikshvaku But inevitably the government would kill even civilians in order to quell the rebellion. That almost always happens whenever a government tries to expel a religious or ethnic minority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing – Terjij Kassal Feb 20 '23 at 16:46
@TerjijKassal I hope and trust that kshatriya kings would not order that. Apastamba sutra - "The law of the aryas forbid the slaughter of those who have laid down their arms" – Ikshvaku Feb 20 '23 at 18:37
@Ikshvaku In practice, it never works out that way. – Terjij Kassal Feb 21 '23 at 03:18
@TerjijKassal It never works out that way in kali yuga, but in previous yugas, it did work out that way. If you read the puranas and itihasas, you won't see any mention of people being massacred/genocided unless it's being done by asuras or blatantly evil people. And even within kali yuga, you don't hear of very many incidents in the secular historical record of Indian kings committing genocide and massacres like the Turks, Mongols, Muslims, Europeans, etc. – Ikshvaku Feb 21 '23 at 14:03
@Ikshvaku That's because Indian kings didn't usually try expelling religious minorities, and whenever they did try, it was always accompanied with massacres. – Terjij Kassal Feb 22 '23 at 02:37
@Ikshvaku Virtually every Hindu before 1900 would have disagreed with your statement that all 18 Smritis were always available. Are you saying that they were all wrong and that you alone have found the truth? – Terjij Kassal Apr 14 '23 at 06:33
@TerjijKassal "18 smritis" do you mean the 18 puranas? And I never said they were always available everywhere, I only said they had other texts besides the Manusmriti, which isn't the primary dharma shastra in south India (Apastamba and Yajnavalkya are big). And we know dozens of various smriti texts were actually available to Pandits because they cite those texts. – Ikshvaku Apr 18 '23 at 18:38

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Jan 20 '20 at 15:34

0

I give below some Mahabharata verses on how to treat others. There is no injunction to commit genocide. As a general rule 'historical' facts mentioned in ancient texts need to be crosschecked with other sources. Do Buddhists accuse Shankaracharya of mixing with a King who allegedly killed all Buddhists in all of India? Most historians will reject such hyperbolic claims in any ancient hagiography.

Vidura on how to treat others

That which is antagonistic to one’s own self, should never be applied in respect of another.

[Mahabharata, Udyoga Parva, Section 39]

Bhishma’s advice

Bhishma said, ‘Knowing how painful it is to himself, a person should never do that to others which he dislikes when done to him by others.’

Mahabharata Santi Parva Section CCLX

Highest Morality

Tuladhara said, ‘O Jajali, I know morality, which is eternal, with all its mysteries. It is nothing else than that ancient morality which is known to all, and which consists of universal friendliness, and is fraught with beneficence to all creatures. That mode of living which is founded upon a total harmlessness towards all creatures or (in case of actual necessity) upon a minimum of such harm, is the highest morality.’

(Mahabharata Santi Parva Section CCLXII)

answered Jan 20 '20 at 15:34

Pradip Gangopadhyay

37,405
3
54
124

'There is no injunction to commit genocide' - The same Mahabharata also says about the Kalki avatar: "And he will be the Destroyer of all, and will inaugurate a new Yuga. And surrounded by the Brahmanas, that Brahmana will exterminate all the mlecchas wherever those low and despicable persons may take refuge" – Say No To Censorship Jan 20 '20 at 17:32
1

@sv. That is not an injunction to humans to genocide mlecchas, it is saying lord Vishnu will genocide mlecchas at the end of kali yuga. What is permissible for gods is not always permissible for humans. – Ikshvaku Jan 20 '20 at 18:44
'What is permissible for gods' - until I hear otherwise (this is not enough) have to assume the same rules apply to devas. Also, if you think about it, gods (that take birth as humans) are supposed to set good examples to humans; not violate them and expect special treatment. @Ikshvaku – Say No To Censorship Jan 21 '20 at 00:06
1

@sv. Why is that not enough? That is a statement by Vyasa that says that devas do not have to follow the same rules as humans. And anyways different devas have different jobs. Shiva destroys the universe, Vishnu kills demons, etc. It is perfectly fine for Shiva to kill everyone and destroy the universe at the end of times. – Ikshvaku Jan 21 '20 at 00:46
@Ikshvaku apples and oranges? actions of formless gods cannot be compared with human incarnations which are bound by rules of dharma shastras. – Say No To Censorship Jan 21 '20 at 01:08
1

@sv. If they incarnated to set an example to humans, then they will act like humans. – Ikshvaku Jan 21 '20 at 01:18
@sv the story about kalki is a legend and is not an injunction. Mahabharata is not asking jivas to go on a killing spree. – Pradip Gangopadhyay Jan 21 '20 at 16:54
@PradipGangopadhyay By legend you mean: "A traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated"? So you think the Kalki avatar is not going to happen? I agree it's not an injunction but a fundamentalist could easily interpret it as one and take matters into their own hands. – Say No To Censorship Jan 21 '20 at 18:12
@sv. "a fundamentalist could easily interpret it as one and take matters into their own hands. " - Yet, all of the mass genocides in history were carried about by mlecchas; whites, asians, and Muslims, mainly because the Old Testament literally enjoins genocide of infidels. – Ikshvaku Jan 22 '20 at 19:01
@Ikshvaku No it doesn't. If you're talking about the Canaanites, they had to be purged as they were enslaved by the Nephilim, who were descended from demons. – Terjij Kassal Dec 27 '22 at 02:43
@PradipGangopadhyay You are begging the question here. You are arguing that committing genocide would violate the Golden Rule, but you merely assume that and do not prove it, – Terjij Kassal Dec 28 '22 at 20:04
@TerjijKassal "No it doesn't", - 'and destroy them all. This is ordered by your God'. – Ikshvaku Jan 03 '23 at 23:41
@Ikshvaku It's talking about specific groups of non-Jews. It's certainly not talking about ALL infidels. – Terjij Kassal Jan 04 '23 at 04:16
@Ikshvaku Those tribes that were destroyed in the Bible were destroyed because they were lead by Nephilim, demons in human form. – Terjij Kassal Jan 19 '23 at 18:04
@TerjijKassal ok – Ikshvaku Jan 21 '23 at 14:44
@TerjijKassal But why kill the women and children? In Hindu scripture, when a tribe or kingdom is being destroyed, only the male warriors are killed. Even in wars between devas and asuras (demons), the devas don't wipe out the entire population of asura men, women, children, etc. – Ikshvaku Feb 10 '23 at 02:12
@Ikshvaku Those tribes warred against Life itself, and thus were utterly destroyed. The women and children were completely under the control of Satan, like the men. – Terjij Kassal Feb 10 '23 at 03:12
@Ikshvaku Also, can you name or quote the ancient scholars that advocated for the expulsion of Buddhists? – Terjij Kassal Feb 10 '23 at 03:13
@Ikshvaku Since God is Life itself, he has the right to take the life of any of his creatures. Hindus and Christians and Muslims agree on this. – Terjij Kassal Feb 10 '23 at 21:17
@TerjijKassal "Since God is Life itself, he has the right to take the life of any of his creatures." - I agree, but in this case, God himself would be doing it. But nowhere in Hindu literature has God ordered a king to wipe out some population of people. – Ikshvaku Feb 11 '23 at 00:57
@Ikshvaku Yes, but in Christianity, they consider that God wiped out the Canaanites himself, using Israel as his instrument. – Terjij Kassal Feb 11 '23 at 02:12
@Ikshvaku Also, are you saying that there are asura children? I though they didn't have lifestages. – Terjij Kassal Feb 11 '23 at 02:17
@TerjijKassal Yes, in the Patalas, the daityas, danavas, etc. have children. Prahlada the son of Hiranyakashipu was a daitya. – Ikshvaku Feb 14 '23 at 03:14
@Ikshvaku I'm not denying that some asuras are the children of other asuras, it's just that I thought that asuras didn't have life stages in the sense of maturing from child to adult. – Terjij Kassal Feb 14 '23 at 16:58
@TerjijKassal So you think they are permanently children??? What?? They are born from sex, then they became young children, then adults..... Prahlada became an adult. Why would you think they are permanently children, or permanently adults?? – Ikshvaku Feb 15 '23 at 15:22
@Ikshvaku I thought they were born fully formed. – Terjij Kassal Feb 15 '23 at 18:45
@TerjijKassal Nah. Indra was fighting the Daityas and was either about to kill pregnant Diti, or was about to strike her womb with a lightning bolt to kill the fetus Prahlada. Narada intervened and told Indra that this Asura, even though the son of Hiranyakashipu, will be a great Vishnu devotee. And then Narada recited the stories and glories of Vishnu to Diti while she was pregnant with Prahlada. Prahlada was hearing all this in the womb and was born as a great devotee. So from this we can see they go through natural stages of life. – Ikshvaku Feb 18 '23 at 14:02
@SayNoToCensorship A Mleccha usually is termed barbarian and foreign in nature, also the Kalki avatar has many different versions of the tale. – Haridasa Jan 09 '24 at 12:27
@SayNoToCensorship Also the very text you show states multiple reasons for Mlecchas. It states their lawlessness and fondness for breaking rules. You have to look at it as a collection of different traits the Rishis saw and not cherry pick ie one or the other. – Haridasa Jan 09 '24 at 12:49

Swami Vishwananda · Answer 3 · 2020-01-18T09:59:59.183

Contrary to your statement, the Digvijaya is not an important work. It also does not exist as a single manuscript, or author. Swami Tapasyananda states in his Introduction to his book you referenced:

Introduction

Problems Connected With a Biography of Sri Sankara

An Introduction to an English translation of Madhava Vidyaranya's Sankara-digvijaya, known also as Samkshepa sankara-vijaya, requires in the first place an explanation of why it is undertaken. We are presenting this translation not because we consider it a proper biography in the modern sense, but because there is nothing better to offer on the life and achievement of Sri Sankara...

The trouble does not actually lie with these scholars [modern scholars who have tried writing life sketches of Sankara] or the accounts they have given of Sankara's life. It lies in the fact that there is an absolute dearth of reliable materials to produce a biography of the modern type on Sankara, and the 'scholarly writer', if he is to produce a book of some respectable size, has no alternative but to fill it with discussions of the various versions of the dates and of the incidents of Sankara's life that have come down to us through a series of literature known as the Sankaravijayas, which vary very widely from one to another in regard to most of these details...When he was born; where he met his teacher; where he wrote his commentaries; what were the routes he took in his all-India journeys for preaching and teaching; who were all his opponents and where he met them; how and when he came across his disciples; what temples he visited or renovated; what Maths he founded or whether he founded any Math at all; where he passed away--all these ae matters on which conflicting or widely differing views are expressed in the different traditional books concerned with him known as Sankara-vijayas.

[and further] The translation given in this book is of Sankara-dig-vijaya or Sankshepa-Sankaravijaya by Madhava-Vidyaranya. It is, however, to be remembered that this is only one of the following ten Sankara-vijayas listed on page 32 of T.S.Narayana Sastri's The Age of Sankara [list of the ten then given]...

[and further regarding the work done by Madhava-Vidyaranya] Ever since it was first printed in Ganapat Krishnaji Press in Bombay in 1863, it has continued to be a popular work on Sankara and it is still the only work on the basis of which ordinary people have managed to get some idea of the great Archarya, in spite of the severe criticism against it by several scholars.

This is only a few of Tapasyananda's comments. The lengthy Introduction goes into much detail as to the elements of how events conflict with some historically known events, elements of fanciful mythology, and conflicts between different dig-vijayas, and questions whether even Madhava-Vidaranya was the author. The book should be read as a poem.

Finally to answer your other question, the vedas do not address 'other' religions. The sanatana dharma is from the vedas. The concept of 'religion' or 'religions' is a concept that came afterwards.

Regarding the importance of madhaviya shankara digvijaya, I have made an addition in my question addressing this point. — , Jan 18 '20 at 10:58
Tapasyananda may not place importance on it, but the four Shankaracharya Mathams place great importance on it. They think that it accurately describes the events of Adi Shankaracharya’s life. — Keshav Srinivasan, Jan 19 '20 at 16:13

Do Vedas/Smritis sanction genocide of non-believers (buddhists etc)?

3 Answers3

Linked