Suchergebnisse

Indijski vladar Aśoka (273/269.–232. pr. Khr.) ostavio je znatan korpus natpisa na širokome prostoru svojega carstva o načelima svoje vladavine. Njegovi su pretci osvojili gotovo čitavu Indiju i područja današnjega Afghanistana i dijela Irana. On je vodio samo jedan rat u Kaliṅgi za istočnu obalu Indije. Strašne posljedice toga rata jasno je opisao na vlastitim natpisima. Potom je obustavio ratovanje i odlučio osvajati svijet načelima (buddhističke) pravednosti. Održavao je diplomatske odnose sa susjednim državama i imao poklisare u svim helenističkim kraljevstvima. Četrdesetak godina gradio je drugačiju Indiju i slao misionare da grade drugačiji svijet. Njegove su misli o ratu, miru, pravednosti i brizi za sva bića jedinstvene u povijesti politike. Loza je Aśokina vladala još pedesetak godina poslije njega, otprilike do 185. g. pr. Khr. Potom je na vlast u dijelu carstva došla brahmanistička loza Śunga (185.–73. pr. Khr.), a sjeverozapad su stali osvajati grčki vladari iz Baktrije, a zatim i neki iranski i drugi narodi. Śunge su vjerojatno zaslužni za neku vrst brahmanističkoga preporoda i vjerojatno je da je za njihova vladanja zaokružen narativni dio velikoga ratničkoga epa Mahābhārata. Možda je u to vrijeme ispjevan i bitan dio misaonoga spjeva Bhagavadgītā u okviru toga epa. U njem se raspravlja koliko je rat grijeh, i u kojem slučaju je dužnost, a nije grijeh ratovati. Tu se brahmanistički nazor prepoznatljivo upušta u polemiku s buddhističkim (ne spominjući ga imenom). U kontekstu takve polemike između buddhizma i brahmanizma (a i jinizma) formulirale su se neke od najznatnijih ljudskih dilema u odnosu na rat, nasilje, pravdu i nenasilnost, i stvorili su se obrisi etičkih pogleda na ljudsko djelovanje i život uopće, koji nas i danas jednako mogu potaći na razmišljanje i zauzimanje stava prema životu i drugim ljudima i živim bićima. I buddhizam i brahmanizam razvili su svoje temeljne pojmove o ljudskoj obvezi da se djeluje iz dužnosti bez obzira na vlastitu korist, s krajnjom svrhom da se ostvari opće dobro i održi svijet. Na taj su način izrazili svojevrstan kategorički imperativ da se djeluje u skladu s idealnim općim zakonodavstvom (dharmom, bilo u buddhističkome ili brahmanisičkome smislu), a indijski su ga mislioci izrazili na takav način dvije tisuće godina prije Kanta. Razlika između brahmanističkoga i buddhističkoga shvaćanja ipak je u tome što po brahmanističkome shvaćanju treba toj svrsi težiti djelujući samozatajno iz dužnosti, bez obzira na moguće nanošenje patnje drugima, dok po buddhističkome shvaćanju tu svrhu treba ozbiljiti upravo iz milosrđa koje nas navodi na najveće napore da bismo ljude i druga osje- ćajuća bića spasili od patnje i tjelesne i duševne propasti. Mnogi buddhistički i jinistički nazori i vrijednosti bili su ipak s vremenom prihvaćeni i u hinduizmu. ; The Indian emperor Aśoka Maurya (273/269 – 232 BC) left behind him an important corpus of inscriptions, describing the leading principles of his rule, which were disseminated over the vast territory of his empire. His ancestors conquered almost the whole of India and of contemporary Afghanistan, as well as parts of Iran. He waged only one war in Kaliṅga in order to incorporate the eastern coast of India into his realm. He described the horrible consequences of this war very openly in his inscriptions. He decided to stop waging wars therafter, and to "conquer" the world by means of righteousness in accordance with Buddhist principles. He cultivated diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries and had ambassadors in all the Hellenistic kingdoms. He invested fourty years of his rule in efforts to shape a different India, and sent missionaries to shape a different world. His thoughts on war and peace, on righteousness and care for all sentient beings are unique in human political history. The dynasty of Aśoka, the Mauryas, ruled some fifty years after his death, until 185 BC. After this, the Brahman dynasty of the Śuṅgas (185 – 73 BC) rose to power in the eastern part of the former empire. The northwestern part of the empire was conquered by the Greek rulers of Bactria, and later by Iranian peoples like the Parthians and the Scythians, and other invaders. It is very likely that we have to thank the Śuṅgas for a Brahmanist revival, and the narrative part of the great heroic epic the Mahābhārata was most probably completed during their rule. It is also possible that an essential portion of the famous philosophical and religous poem Bhagavadgītā, which was incorporated into this epic, was composed during the same period. The poem discusses under which circumstances war is a sin, and under which circumstances it is a duty to fight. The Brahmanical or Hindu world¬view here polemically opposes the Buddhist one without naming it explicitly. Some of the most salient dilemmas concerning war and peace, violence and non¬violence, duty and compassion found their expression within the context of the polemics between Brahmanism or Hinduism and Buddhism (and Jinism as well), and ethical views concerning human activity and life in general, which emerged on these grounds, can incite us even today to take our stand with regard to life and to other people and sentient beings. Both the Buddhists and the Hindus formulated their basic concepts of human obligation to act out of duty without regard to personal utility with the ultimate aim of promoting universal good and maintaining further existence of the world. This amonuts to the categorical imperative to act in accordance with what would be an ideal universal legislation (dharma, either in the Buddhist or in the Brahmanist sense), as it found its expression in India two thousand years before Kant in Europe. However, the difference between the Brahmanical and Buddhist conception is that, in the Brahmanical world¬view, this aim should be attained through the self¬denying fulfilment of our duty, irrespectively of the potential pain inflicted on others, while in the Buddhist view, this aim should be achieved through compassion that urges us to invest the greatest efforts to protect other people and sentient beings from pain and physical and spiritual ruin. However, many Buddhist and Jinist views and values were, through the course of time, also incorporated into the Hindu world¬view.