Talk:Ahimsa/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Result: Delisted. Legitimate concerns, no opposition or improvements made; 49 editors viewed the GA Reassessment page, and matters raised in the reassessment were not addressed. These matters will remain valid until the next GA Review, whereupon they must be addressed first. --Whiteguru (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starts GA Reassessment.
The reassessment will (hopefully) follow the same sections of the Article. --Whiteguru (talk) 01:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment

Ahimsa Archive 1

Observations

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

It is noted that the spelling of this term (Ahimsa) has been challenged in the archived talk page.
ethicization is not a word. Use ethical analysis.

Already fixed by another user..245CMR.•^👥📜 07:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

Reference 1 does not take the reader to a Pali language dictionary/grammar guide.
Reference 130 is a bit vague, referring to Connected Discourses of the Buddha. A page number is not cited. How is this reference relevant?

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):

Reference 7 does not refer to Ahimsa. It refers to vratas. It may be better to find a more direct reference?

Done Changed to different source..245CMR.•^👥📜 07:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 9 page 271 explains the etymology of Bhaarath (and similar spellings). It does not refer to either of Mahavira or ahimsa.
Reference 13 makes reference to Just War theory. This is a 1971 citation, the Just War theory has been discarded by philosophers and theologians. "Shot to pieces" is the current terminology around Just War. So a 50 year old citation is not effective in this time and place. Here is an interesting and relevant reference: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23561598?seq=1. This is based on this: https://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2018/11/an-appeal-to-abolish-war/ (and makes reference to our unwillingness to kill. )
Reference 14 tells - inter alia - modern Just War discourse does not even prohibit the air launch of missiles on ground targets. Consider a re-evaluation of ahimsa in the light of modern threat to humanity might be included this section. The diminution of Just War has to be referenced.
References 19 and 22 are excellent references with regard to the depth of exploration of ahimsa in Jainism and philosophical considerations for human activity.
Reference 44 is found here
The section on war might make reference to kshatriyas and their varna dharma?
Other scholars[45][46] conclude that the scriptures of Hinduism suggest sentences for any crime must be fair, proportional and not cruel. This is a bit vague and does not consider the prescriptions given in Kautilya's Artha Shastra, for example.
Reference to Charaka Samhita is getting into medical issues and prescriptions for healing. The highest form of life is human life; other forms of life are subordinate to human life, yet, all life is animated by the atman. Prescription of meat for convalescence and recovery from illness is not a form of himsa. Consider.
What is missing here is application of ahimsa to various varna and stages of life. Kshatriya by virtue of their position and role in society are obliged to protect the community and defend the community; it is their varna-dharma (svadharma) to go to war, and if needful, kill. Apodictic prescriptions on himsa clearly apply to Brahmins. Sudras and those who do heavy manual labour are advised that meat-eating provides necessary strength for the undertaking of duty, ud-yoga. The merchant caste (Vaishya) involved in laborious works may also have need for strength-imbibing foods. There are other issues in terms of dosha and guna with regard to individuals and eating of meat. Getting into eating of meat and defending ahimsa to extremes is missing the proper form and purpose of this article.
Links to Vegetarianism in Jainism and Ahimsa in Jainism are noted.
Jainism section is a very tight summary of Ahimsa in Jainism and well scribed. Good finish with Gandhi.
Ahimsa is not directly addressed in Engaged Buddhism and only obliquely in one of the precepts. Suggested drop this link.
this citation:~ In Pali texts, injunctions to abstain from violence and involvement with military affairs are directed at members of the sangha; later Mahayana texts, which often generalise monastic norms to laity, require this of lay people as well. is somewhat oblique. The referenced text speaks of the social virtues of a righteous householder and not extension of the sangha to the laity. While the path is open to all, the higher stages are more likely to be achieved in the sangha. Consider that the text does not state that this is a requirement for the lay state also.
The reference to Ambedkar and link is an excellent place to finish this discussion on Buddhism and War.
Criticisms of Buddhism and violence are meritorious. Myanmar military actions against Karen Christians and Muslims go against ahimsa.
Buddhism and violence is becoming a more and more troubled issue, particularly recently with the coup by Tatmadaw in Myanmar, who, presumably, are observant Buddhists. United Nations news raises the issue of 782 deaths thus far in this action. Consider reference 127, which interestingly, does not address the warrior caste taking the functions of the ruling caste.
The sub-heading Laws following War in the Buddhism section of this page appears to bring Chinese dynasty, proscriptions and Empress Wu into the discussion on ahimsa. Is this directly relevant in the light of the Four Buddhist Persecusions in China? The Huichang Persecution of Buddhism was initiated by Tang Emperor Wuzong. The Song Dynasty tells that Chinese Buddhism had waned in influence. We also have Wu Zetian used her political powers to harness from Buddhist practices a strategy. This subsection on Laws is not an in depth discussion on the principles of Ahimsa as presented in Hinduism, Jainism and only references Buddhism in non-killing. It is doubtful that this section is relevant and ought to remain.
Reference 152 is an excellent inclusion, building a multifaith perspective on non-violence.
External link, Jain, Pankaj (2013). "Practicing Ahimsa: Nonviolence toward Humans, Animals, and Earth" is a broken link and likely permanent dead link. Archive.org does not find this.

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:

Ethics and religious teachings are presented without bias.

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:

Page was created on 3 December 2001
Last 90 days page views = 39,180 views; Daily average 431 views
Total edits: 1,682
Editors: 845
Page has 272 watchers
Of the top 10 editors of this 20 year old page, 2 are active, possibly only 1.

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Lord Mahavir Gold.jpg = the copyright holder of this work, releases this work into the public domain
Ahinsa.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
திருவள்ளுவர் கலைப் படைப்பு.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
Ahimsa Jainism Gradient.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
Spirit Peace Walk 03.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

Overall:

This article gives a good coverage of ahimsa in faith systems: emergence in Hinduism, vrata in Jainism and the Noble Eightfold Path in Buddhism.
Philosophical reflections on Just War need some reconsideration.
Killing as part of caste duty, duty of the ruler, duty of protection of the community in the modern state needs more clarity of expression rather than thesis - antithesis as given in some sections of this article.
Matters raised above may be attended to. --Whiteguru (talk) 02:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article fails GA Reassessment and is delisted. --Whiteguru (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Replies after delisting

@Whiteguru: Hi, I will slowly change the things..245CMR.•^👥📜 07:40, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed version [1]

@245CMR: This is a closed reassessment page; you are not supposed to make edits here. What I suggest you do is start a new section on the talk page, and place your comments there. The reviewed version link belongs on your own sandbox page, not here. Please you do one thing, don't edit this reaseessment. It is a closed document. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]