Talk:Ahimsa/Archive 1

message: It's definitely not Ahinsa. I speak Kannada, and the word for pain is 'himse' (ಹಿಂಸ), and much of the vocabulary is derived from Samskrtam. So, you make the connection. Firebreeze 06:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the way, non-violence is certainly at the core of Buddhism. It makes such up such a large proportion of Buddhist philosophy. To say otherwise would be to not actually have read what Buddha wrote.
In Devanagari it is written as ahinsa (अहिंसा), despite the pronunciation and spelling in English being ahimsa.(http://www.shabdkosh.com/en2hi/ahimsa)
===Philosophy, not religion===
A rather large error has occured on this page. Ahimsa is said to be a religious concept. This is not true. While certain religions such as Buddhism or Hinduism may live by Ahimsa it is not limited to religious aspects. Ahimsa is a philosophy. It is a way of living your life, not a religious concept. And while the initial coining of the term and its meaning may have originially been thought of by Jainism that does not mean these religions have a sense of ownership to it. I think it is still important to include historical information pointing to these religions as being some of the first to think of or practice this philosophy so long as their is the distinction that it is not exclusively tied to these religions or religion in general. I personally think this topic is only a stub because there is so much more to Ahimsa than is on here. Perhaps we can all read up on it and discuss it in here to make this a much more accurate and full article. TheAnimus 21:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahinsa or Ahimsa 

message: A rather large error has occured on this page. Ahimsa is said to be a religious concept. This is not true. While certain religions such as Buddhism or Hinduism may live by Ahimsa it is not limited to religious aspects. Ahimsa is a philosophy. It is a way of living your life, not a religious concept. And while the initial coining of the term and its meaning may have originially been thought of by Jainism that does not mean these religions have a sense of ownership to it. I think it is still important to include historical information pointing to these religions as being some of the first to think of or practice this philosophy so long as their is the distinction that it is not exclusively tied to these religions or religion in general. I personally think this topic is only a stub because there is so much more to Ahimsa than is on here. Perhaps we can all read up on it and discuss it in here to make this a much more accurate and full article. TheAnimus 21:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Philosophy, not religion

message: There were 19th Century translations of Buddhist, Hindu and Jain scripture all of used the term ahimsa. Addhoc 22:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahimsa brought to the west by Gandhi? 

message: My (admittedly limited) understanding of Buddhism is that taking the life of any creature is to be avoided. Pests, for example, are regretfully killed if necessary but preventing the situation in the first place is encouraged. The short section given to Buddhism doesn't really give that aspect the attention I think it deserves. I don't feel authorititive enough about this area to edit the article itself. Ferdinangus (talk) 09:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhism 

message: This article has been tagged for a cleanup since February 2006, so it's time to do it now. I intend to finish it in a few days. The new version will be based on academic studies and will include an introduction to the history of the concept. 89.59.17.235 16:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I have completed the new version of the article (as announced above), added all the lacking references, and made the non-profit organization AHIMSA into a separate article/stub as someone suggested above. Now that the references are complete, I suggest to change the "start class" rating in the WikiProjects Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism.
The separate article (stub) on the non-profit organization was declined. Perhaps a registered user can create it. The text would be:
AHIMSA (organization)
AHIMSA is the acronym for the Association of Humanitarian Information and Mobilisation for the Survival of Animals, or in French Association Humanitaire d'Information et de Mobilisation pour la Survie des Animaux, based in Quebec, Canada. It is a non-profit organization that has been in existence since 1987.AHIMSA (in French) Its name refers to the religious concept of ahimsa (nonviolence), especially as applied to animals. In name and purpose AHIMSA meshes well with the word's meaning. The Association aims to defend, promote and support the interests, the needs and the rights of animals. AHIMSA informs about and encourages peaceful behavior toward animals and nature. 89.49.161.39 23:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Version 

message: :Image:Jainism logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
— Save_Us_229 18:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Jainism logo.png 

message: Hello. I will be doing the review for this article. There are a few things that really jump out at me when looking at the article, so here are a few things to fix:
*The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD. For an article this size, it should be about 2 or 3 full paragraphs, and it should adequately summarize all the main points made in the article.
--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Refs in middle of sentences after , or ; are excepted as shown in the example in Wikipedia:REF#Footnotes.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of that rule. I was referring, specifically, to #17, 37, 39-42, 47, and 52. They are either in the midst of a sentence or before the , or ;. Nikki311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ref 39-42 are kept in mid of sentences because they are refs for each Indian spiritual leader, if moved to the end of the sentence, it would be confusing which ref refers for which person.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

text:  Can the reviewer please list them. Thanks.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem: the last paragraph of the lead, the only sentence under Hinduism (before Non-human life), first and third paragraphs under Modern times, and the last paragraph under Jainism. Also, the Buddhism section would be better in paragraph form, as opposed to a list. It is okay to have one or two short paragraphs (sometimes that can't be avoided), but it is best to fix as many as possible. Nikki311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

text:  I think "Modern times" is just fine it is at the moment, divided 3 paras: 1. leaders, background 2. Gandhi 3.'reverence for life' philosophy.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

text: don't any, which will emcompass all religions involved. Suggestions are welcome.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know any either. It is fine without one. Nikki311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Okay. Good work. I've done a quick copy edit, and now everything seems to be in order. I'll pass the article. Nikki311 23:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA on hold 

message: I'm not sure what you mean with this edit summary: . The statement in it is not correct. Please give the Lamotte quote and we can settle it that way.
Also the Vinaya is not relevant in the "war" subsection. There are no "punishments" for laypeople. Mitsube (talk) 23:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent dispute 

message: Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles . Please cite a reliable source for all of your information.  Abecedare (talk) 23:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Dear Abecedare, please do not either add subjective opinions and revisionist propaganda about explicit and clear clauses in the Hindu text known as the Bhagavad Gita or at least do a better and more consistent job of policing the propagation of the aforementioned. I am referring specifically to the 'weasel-worded' sentence 
"The apparent conflict between ahimsa and the just war prescribed by the Gita has often been resolved by resorting to allegorical readings."
The above statement uses weasel words such as 'apparent'; really? how is it apparent when the definition of Ahimsa is itself subject to interpretation depending on what faith/philosophy one belongs to? The statement uses the imprecise terms 'often been'; really? how 'often'?    'often' by whose standard?    'often' relative to what?   'often' to what percentage of the Hindu population? In addition, the term 'resolved' used in the context of this statement is extremely controversial as it presents a subjective opinion as a final and objective fact. Perhaps the allegorical readings have resolved differences in the definition of Ahimsa for some individuals using symbolic interpretations but it has not been resolved in this manner for most Hindus or even for those individuals who resort to allegorical readings.. 
I would submit that the offending statement should be reworded to the following:
The apparent conflict between pacifistic interpretations of Ahimsa and 'Just-War' prescribed by the Gita has been resolved for some individual's by resorting to allegorical readings.
-- which would make the offending statement far less unprofessional/opinionated and more factual/objective in its character.
I provided objective sources, whereas the  'editor' who reverted my changes (a self-professed buddhist [according to his/her profile]) is perhaps ignorant about the subject matter (with respect to Ahimsa as it relates to Hinduism & the Gita). The offending statement listed above, i.e. about "allegorical readings" , is an editorialization about some revisionist individual's opinion about what they believe ahimsa 'should-be' - Not what the Gita states is true Ahimsa - I provided quotations from the original text of the GITA as to what the real statements the GITA makes about True-Ahimsa (i.e. doing your duty, even if that means killing other humans in self-defense, but using violence as a last resort and never against the innocent) and False-Ahimsa (cowardly pacifism). My original submission was not "original research", but simply quoting the direct statements in the Gita about its views regarding Ahimsa. 70.83.175.116 (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent dispute August 2009 

message: The article makes several references to "Ahinsa".  It is not obvious whether these are  misspellings or not.  Google's cache of the main page actually has a correctly-spelled version - so it looks rather like vandalism. "The term ahimsa appears in the Taittiriya Samhita of the Yajurveda" 82.45.45.100 (talk) 20:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahinsa 

message: The content is noteworthy as the other statements. I agree with you that Babasaheb Ambedkar is an important voice, but what I could not understant is that why this matter do not belongs here. If you want a discussion on it, then why deleting it?.........Ranjithsutari (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Ranjith, the idea is that this article is written using academic sources. Ambedkar is more of a religious figure. Does that make sense? Mitsube (talk) 00:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Mitsube, I'm sorry to say that your idea is Absolutely nonsense!!! OR I could not understand your sense of Academic sources on this article. What if Ambedkar is more or real of religious/political/philosophical/Historical/Revolutionary figure, this content is noteworthy because there is a touch of optimism in every word................Ranjithsutari (talk) 19:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambedkars' Voice 

message: I don't seem to find a complete reference in any of the footnotes for a source that seems to be heavily relied upon. Forgive my ignorance but what is "Tähtinen" and perhaps the first citation of this could be more complete for those of us who are trying to start research on this? Thanks in advance. --Thiebes (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tähtinen? 

message: I'm surprised the following isn't included in the Buddhism/War section somehow:
---
"I proclaim, Simha,
the annihilation of egotism, of lust, of ill-will, of delusion.
However, I do not proclaim the annihilation
of forbearance, of love, of charity, and of truth. [12]
"I deem, Simha, unrighteous actions contemptible,
whether they be performed by deed, or by word, or by thought;
but I deem virtue and righteousness praiseworthy." [13]
And Simha said:
"One doubt still lurks in my mind
concerning the doctrine of the Blessed One.
Will the Blessed One consent to clear the cloud away
so that I may understand the Dharma as the Blessed One teaches it?" [14]
The Tathagata having given his consent, Simha continued:
"I am a soldier, O Blessed One,
and am appointed by the king
to enforce his laws and to wage his wars.
Does the Tathagata who teaches kindness without end
and compassion with all sufferers,
permit the punishment of the criminal?
and further, does the Tathagata declare
that it is wrong to go to war for the protection
for our homes, our wives, our children, and our property?
Does the Tathagata teach the doctrine of a complete self-surrender,
so that I should suffer the evil-doer to do what he pleases
and yield submissively to him who threatens to take by violence what is my own?
Does the Tathagata maintain that all strife, including such warfare
as is waged for a righteous cause, should be forbidden?" [15]
The Buddha replied:
"He who deserves punishment must be punished,
and he who is worthy of favor must be favored.
Yet at the same time he teaches to do no injury
to any living being but to be full of love and kindness.
These injunctions are not contradictory,
for whosoever must be punished for the crimes which he has committed,
suffers his injury not through the ill-will of the judge
but on account of his evil-doing.
His own acts have brought upon him the injury
that the executor of the law inflicts.
When a magistrate punishes, let him not harbor hatred in his breast,
yet a murderer, when put to death,
should consider that this is the fruit of his own act.
As soon as he will understand that the punishment will purify his soul,
he will no longer lament his fate but rejoice at it." [16]
And the Blessed One continued:
"The Tathagata teaches that all warfare in which man tries to slay his brother is lamentable,
but he does not teach that those who go to war in a righteous cause
after having exhausted all means to preserve the peace are blame-worthy.
He must be blamed who is the cause of war. [17]
"The Tathagata teaches a complete surrender of self,
but he does not teach a surrender of anything
to those powers that are evil, be they men or gods or the elements of nature.
Struggle must be, for all life is a struggle of some kind.
But he that struggles should look to it
lest he struggle in the interest of self against truth and righteousness. [18]
"He who struggles in the interest of self,
so that he himself may be great or powerful or rich or famous,
will have no reward, but he who struggles for righteousness and truth,
will have great reward, for even his defeat will be a victory. [19]
"Self is not a fit vessel to receive any great success;
self is small and brittle
and its contents will soon be split for the benefit,
and perhaps also for the curse, of others. [20]
"Truth, however, is large enough
to receive the yearnings and aspirations of all selves
and when the selves break like soap-bubbles,
their contents will be preserved
and in the truth they will lead a life everlasting. [21]
"He who goeth to battle, O Simha,
even though it be in a righteous cause,
must be prepared to be slain by his enemies,
for that is the destiny of warriors;
and should his fate overtake him
he has no reason for complaint. [22]
"But he who is victorious
should remember the instability of earthly things.
His success may be great,
but be it ever so great the wheel of fortune may turn again
and bring him down into the dust. [23]
"However, if he moderates himself
and, extinguishing all hatred in his heart
lifts his down-trodden adversary up and says to him,
'Come now and make peace and let us be brothers,'
he will gain a victory that is not a transient success,
for its fruits will remain forever. [24]
"Great is a successful general, O Simha,
but he who had conquered self is the greater victor. [25]
"The doctrine of the conquest of self, O Simha,
is not taught to destroy the souls of men, but to preserve them.
He who has conquered self is more fit to live,
to be successful, and to gain victories
than he who is the slave of self. [26]
"He whose mind is free from the illusion of self,
will stand and not fall in the battle of life. [27]
"He whose intentions are righteousness and justice,
will meet with no failure,
but be successful in his enterprises
and his success will endure. [28]
"He who harbors in his heart love of truth
will live and not die,
for he has drunk the water of immortality. [29]
"Struggle then, O general, courageously;
and fight thy battles vigorously,
but be a soldier of truth
and the Tathagata will bless thee." [30]
http://reluctant-messenger.com/gospel_buddha/chapter_51.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.226.161 (talk) 08:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simha's Question concerning Annihilation 

message: isn't the pāli pronunciation the same as in sanskrit for ahimsa? PadmaPhala (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  pāli name 

message: The current article, and the version of this article before I edited for the first time, uses a reference from sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln. That dictionary defines ahimsa as "not injure anything." (see: http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/monier/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0125-ahalyA.jpg)
I have read 10 encylcopedias and about 20 journal papers / books for definition of ahimsa. I find ample support for 'cause no injury' and 'do no harm', but I am unable to find any other support for the word anything. I can read Sanskrit as well as European languages that have translated vedic Sanskrit literature - there too, as yet, I have found no support for the word 'anything'. I find some support for the definition: 'cause no injury to living beings'. If someone is aware of additional reliable respected source that supports the word 'anything', please post a link here. If not, I propose we strike out the word 'anything', and replace sanskrit-lexicon citation with two more broadly accepted/cited reliable sources for the definition of ahimsa.
This may sound technical, but 'anything' is an important word. Every human action causes change to something - whether it is farming, cooking, writing, carving a stone or whatever. It matters whether the secondary and tertiary sources mean 'anything' which can include non-living matter such as stone, or only 'living beings'. Peace, Lisa.davis (talk) 03:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Lisa, thank you for heads up. According to sources Ahimsa is a term meaning to do no harm (literally: the avoidance of violence – hiṃsā). The word is derived from the Sanskrit root hiṃs – to strike; hiṃsā is injury or harm, a-hiṃsā is the opposite of this, i.e. non harming. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 09:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Agreed, the sourcing is not ideal, feel free to fix it. I've learned the meaning of the word from Nagler's online course on the subject, but I am hardly an expert. Nagler though provides detailed etymology for the word, during his course, so you can dig it if you want. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 20:34, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Lisa, I would prefer to restore non-violence (which could be easily sourced), as English meaning. Hope you don't mind. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

text: The changes, look good to me. Also liked Ahinsa clarification in etymology. Peace, AgadaUrbanit (talk) 21:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition in the lede 

message: Some subsections of this article, such as Non-human life, use a lot of primary sources. Is this original research? Perhaps, someone can cite second sources, that are reliable secondary or tertiary sources, in Non-human life subsection, for example, to help improve this article. If secondary and tertiary sources cannot be found, this section needs to be revised to reflect scholarly consensus, and avoid the impression that parts of this article is a personal essay.
While a direct quote from a primary source is sometimes useful and necessary (such as definitions or origins of a word), in most cases secondary and tertiary sources need to be relied upon for encyclopedic articles, or at least included as well to help verification. I hope someone will try to add second sources, or rewrite such subsections from secondary/tertiary sources. Meanwhile, I will check into wikipedia policies on content sourcing, then continue reading and verifying the cited sources. Peace, Lisa.davis (talk) 23:07, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary sources in parts of Non-human life and some subsections 

message: I noticed the spelling of ahimsa is misspelled with an "n" through much of the article. Either someone wiki bombed the article, or there is an alternate spelling. Just bringing this up as I am interested in accuracy in articles. If the spelling with "n" is a correct alternate spelling, it would be useful if a reference in the beginning of the article showed as such.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.63.101.90 (talk) 19:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: AgadaUrbanit (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahimsa spelled as ahinsa through much of article. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ahimsa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090801035330/http://www.duilian.cn:80/News/wangkan3/200701/163.html to http://www.duilian.cn/News/wangkan3/200701/163.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:52, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleting this and related links, as it has nothing to do with Ahimsa. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ahimsa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141216064046/http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/HimalayanAcademy/SacredHinduLiterature/weaver/content.htm to http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/HimalayanAcademy/SacredHinduLiterature/weaver/content.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article states:
Ahimsa is a multidimensional concept,John Arapura in K. R. Sundararajan and Bithika Mukerji Ed. (1997), Hindu spirituality: Postclassical and modern, ; see Chapter 20, pages 392–417 inspired by the premise that all living beings have the spark of the divine spiritual energy; therefore, to hurt another being is to hurt oneself. Ahimsa has also been related to the notion that any violence has karmic consequences. 
Now, what about 'passive ahimsa' as practiced by a number of non-ideological vegans, without the 'metaphysics' of the (spiritual) teaching as often presented by religions advocating ahimsa? 
Apart from the 'metaphysics' of the (spiritual) teaching, a meta-ethical question is about the ethical normativity of ahimsa. Isn't ahimsa often advocated on consequentialist grounds? MaynardClark (talk) 16:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Ahimsa without Ontology

message: Ahimsa should be described as a Jain concept not Hindu.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.97.221.147 (talk) 07:50, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: @172.97.221.147: Welcome to wikipedia. Please review wikipedia content policies, particularly related to verifiability in reliable sources and WP:WWIN. You are free to hold whatever wisdom/ prejudice/ opinions you have, but for any edits you propose or make, you must respect these content policies. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't dispute Jainism's claim to uniquely teach ahimsa on Jainism's own terms, but many Hindu teachers and historians teach that Jainism emerged historically from Hinduism - while may Jains claim to be 'the world's oldest religion'! MaynardClark (talk) 16:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahimsa is not a Hindu concept 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ahimsa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110408135457/http://www.sanskrit.org/www/Hindu%20Primer/nonharming_ahimsa.html to http://www.sanskrit.org/www/Hindu%20Primer/nonharming_ahimsa.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "The word Ahinsa—sometimes spelled as Ahinsa" Well that's not helpful.  Someone got a little overzealous with the search and replace.  So let's talk about that.  I don't claim to be an expert, and I don't know which one is "right."  But I do know that "Ahimsa" is the article title, and yet the word, spelled that way, only appears five times in the article text.  The other instances, almost a hundred in total, are all spelled "Ahinsa."  Yet in the References and Bibliography sections, "Ahimsa" outnumbers "Ahinsa" twelve to zero.  If "Ahinsa" is correct, there should be a source for it, and the article title should be changed, with a redirect from "Ahimsa."  Either way, the spelling in the article should match the page title and references. Topher714 (talk) 14:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahimsa vs. Ahinsa 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ahimsa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100419081500/http://www.beasyouare.info/beasyouare.html to http://www.beasyouare.info/beasyouare.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070225222717/http://vedabase.net/a/ahimsa to http://www.vedabase.net/a/ahimsa
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The file  on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the . Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 06:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: according to the "five precepts" page, ahimsa is not the first one of them as stated at the beginning of the article. it is more like their inspiration.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iska (talk • contribs) 03:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  precept