Hinduism
Hinduism refers to a wide range of religious philosophies/traditions that began in India roughly 5,000 years ago. While Christianity and Islam trace their roots to a founder, Hinduism does not (Walsh, 2007).
Hinduism is God centered and was formed by the gods, unlike Christianity and Islam, which were founded by messiahs on earth (Basu, 2002). The almost 900 million Hindus (originally meaning those who lived on the other side of the Indus River) around the world, representing the third largest religious group, receive their religious scripts/laws through a collection of Vedas or sruti (revealed knowledge), or sacred texts, which were revealed to sacred individuals known as Rishis, and from evolved/remembered knowledge, or smrti sastra (Dalal, 2006). Unlike Christianity and Islam, which are based heavily on one book (the Bible or the Qur’an), Hinduism is not based on a book but is a way of living (Hawley, 2001). The basic principle is that man is divine and this divinity is immanent in all creations, inanimate or animate. Realizing this divine nature of man brings everlasting joy. Unlike Christianity and Islam, which are monotheistic (worship of one God), Hinduism is polytheistic (worship of many gods) (for a more in-depth description of Hindu beliefs and practices, see Ahuja, 2008; Basu, 2002; Dogra, 2006; Habib, 2007; Jagannathan, 2005; Mathur, 2004).Hinduism and the Bhagavad Gita. Although Hinduism is not based on any book, but is rather a way of living, many sacred texts contain revealed knowledge from the gods or from R ishis, namely, the Vedas. As the Vedas are vast, many Hindus and scholars consider the Bhagavad Gita (commonly called the Gita) to be an important guide to Hindu teaching and philosophy. The text, possibly written between the fifth and second centuries BCE, as part of the Mahabharata, tells the tale of a conversation on a battlefield between Lord Krishna and Prince Arjuna (Hawley, 2001).
As Prince Arjuna expressed moral confusion over waging war against his family, Krishna explained that Arjuna’s purpose in life (atma) was to be a prince and a warrior. Throughout their discussions on the battlefield, Krishna explained Yogic (forms of mental discipline) and Vedantic (based on the Vedas) philosophies (Minor, 1986; Vivekananda, 1998). The text includes both sruti and smrti Vedic elements, which, along with the Yogic and Vedantic elements, leads many Hindus and scholars/historians to claim this text as a concise guide to Hinduism.Within the Gita, Krishna taught Arjuna how to know the self, the nature of God, how to attain liberation, and how to handle emotions and tough situations. The numerous life and spiritual lessons given to Arjuna are passed down to Hindus today. While Krishna encouraged Arjuna to thoroughly investigate all sides of an issue, he pointed out that he must take planned/intelligent action (3: 4-5). Along this line, Krishna emphasized wise action during interactions with others in situations such as conflicts (4: 18).6
The truly wise person (the jnani, the yogi, the Sthithaprajna, or Illumined One) is the one who recognizes inaction in action, and action in inaction. He or she sees that where there is apparent action taking place at the worldly level, there may be true inaction within the individual; likewise, where there is no apparent worldly action taking place, there may be considerable action occurring on the inner level.
This advice can and is often applied to Hindus in conflict situations. It is typical for many Hindus to analyze the actions and inaction that take place during conflicts in order to ascertain the best course of action (Sen, 2005). The decision of what path to take in a conflict situation is influenced more by what is best for the community (Kapoor, Hughes, Baldwin, & Blue, 2003) and is based more on logic than on emotion compared with other religious groups, such as Christians and, particularly, Jews (Sen, 2005).
Krishna later told Arjuna that to be truly happy, one must not only take action but also avoid emotions such as desire and anger:
Desire and anger are counterparts, Arjuna.
Anger is your response to the frustrations of unfulfilled desires. When you control or transcend desire and anger (which arise in your body, not your A tma) you will have found true, lasting happiness. (5: 23)When individuals take an emotional approach to deal with a conflict, the emotions can affect the conflict management and resolution (Bodtker & Jameson, 2001). Thus, transcending emotions in a conflict will lead to more effective conflict management and resolution (Guerrero & La Valley, 2006). Moreover, Krishna made it clear that conflict is inevitable and not against God: “Although they are indeed brave, nevertheless smite them, for they are already doomed. Fight and you will win. Killing them is not contrary to dharma [righteousness]” (11: 34). The assertion that conflict is inevitable runs across cultures and religions and is recognized widely in scholarship (e.g., Blake & Mouton, 1964; Conrad, 1991; Hocker & Wilmot, 1991; L. L. Putnam, 2006; Rahim, 1983).
The Hindu beliefs that conflict is an inevitable action and that conflict should be analyzed for a logical and not an emotional resolution were exemplified in Gandhi’s rhetoric of nonviolence and cooperation with others. Gandhi promoted mutual toleration of all viewpoints. This toleration may help explain why Sen (2005) asserted that many Hindus approach arguments and conflicts with what appears to many Westerners (e.g., U.S. Americans) as a logically aggressive and highly argumentative manner. Sen argued that Hindus are perceived as argumentative because they are trying to understand the root of the difference in order to reach a mutual understanding—not to dominate/control the situation—because to do nothing would be inaction.
In summary, this section examined how the three largest religious groups in the world (Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism) conceptualize conflict based on historical teachings and texts and how these groups’ religious texts and/or beliefs propagate conflict communication behavior.
Fundamentalist Christians are more likely to look to the Old Testament for guidance in conflicts. This philosophy for many Christians will lead to more dominating conflict behaviors as decisions and consequences should have an either/or outcome. For nonfundamentalists, who are more likely to regard the New Testament as the foundation of Christianity, life is not as much an either/ or dichotomy (right or wrong; Croucher, 2011b; Pojman, 2005). Thus, conflicts are more likely to be handled in a compromising or collaborative manner, as encouraged by Jesus Christ himself. For Muslims, the Qur’an encourages forgiveness, patience, and other similar principles. Thus, it is common to find many Muslims preferring to compromise or even avoid conflict all together (Croucher & Cronn-Mills, 2011). In Hinduism, the four Vedas teach Hindus several ways to live life. In particular, virtues such as action over inaction, logic over emotions, and the realization that conflict is inevitable are key to living life in a proper manner. The Hindu approach to conflict and arguments can be misunderstood, as many Hindus approach such situations with logical vigor to reach a common ground and compromise (Sen, 2005).