Meaning and Typology of Violence

Dr Surendra Verma’s paper examines the meaning and typology of violence and asks whether Johan Galtung’s categories of violence have relevance for Jainism. Galtung distinguishes between direct and indirect, intended and unintended, manifest and latent, and personal and structural violence. Verma notes that these distinctions are important from the perspective of peace studies but that his paper focuses on two questions: whether Galtung’s definition suits the Jain world‑view (Weltanschauung) and whether his dimensions correspond to the types of violence described in Jain scriptures. Verma emphasises that Jainism is a way of life that places a high premium on non‑violence. Before exploring violence, he searches for the Jain understanding of human nature. The Bhagavatī‑sūtra recounts a dialogue in which Mahavira tells Gautama that the nature of the self is Samatva (equanimity) and that realisation of this identity is the ultimate goal. Samatva has many shades: it denotes equality, harmony and even perfection. Verma argues that violence in Jain thought is not simply physical harm but any action or thought that disrupts the innate harmony of the self. When the self identifies with the ‘not‑self’ or the ‘other’, it violates the rule of equanimity and thereby commits violence. This understanding broadens the concept of violence to include psychological and structural dimensions and makes it compatible with Galtung’s typology. The paper concludes that the cause of difference between potential and actual is itself a form of violence; the solution lies in cultivating equanimity, self‑control and non‑attachment. By highlighting the convergence between Jain philosophy and contemporary peace studies, Verma shows that Jain insights can enrich modern discussions on violence and peace.

AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.