Not sure how that is at all on topic?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The swastika
- Thread starter Jonathan Ainsley Bain
- Start date
Not sure how that is at all on topic?
And many, probably most, westerners recognize that the swastika means something completely different to Hindus.
That doesn't change what it means to them. So using it in a temple, even if it is in North Carolina, is gonna be different from hanging it on somebody's house right next door.
Tom
I was responding to a post directing me to "get over my sensitivities ".
Tom
How does caste and sacredness of cows relate to sensitivities?
The second option. We make way too many concessions to Nazism already.
They're cultural stuff that are irrational and resistant to change. Taboos rather like the swastika thing.
Tom
Kartari
Active Member
Hi jeager,
Look, of course it was used as such by the Nazi regime.
That is not the point here. The point is that the swastika was appropriated from its more benevolent religious roots in Hinduism and several other religious traditions in the world. For the earlier users of the swastika for whom it has more positive connotations, it is unfair to say the least to tell them to stop using their legitimate holy symbols just because one malevolent and genocidal regime had once used it. Is it not better for people to understand the true roots of the symbol, and for Hindus and others to reclaim what was stolen from them rather than let a bunch of dead Nazis continue to hold onto a stolen symbol?
If the Nazis had appropriated your Christian cross instead of the swastika, would you be insulted by the sight of a cross? Would you still argue that the cross is a "symbol that represents the slaughter of millions" etc.? Or would you instead wish to reclaim the symbol for Christianity, informing others of its true meaning before the evil regime appropriated it?
Also bear in mind that nobody is advocating using or displaying the Nazi flag, but rather the swastika. You seem to have conflated the two.
Look, of course it was used as such by the Nazi regime.
That is not the point here. The point is that the swastika was appropriated from its more benevolent religious roots in Hinduism and several other religious traditions in the world. For the earlier users of the swastika for whom it has more positive connotations, it is unfair to say the least to tell them to stop using their legitimate holy symbols just because one malevolent and genocidal regime had once used it. Is it not better for people to understand the true roots of the symbol, and for Hindus and others to reclaim what was stolen from them rather than let a bunch of dead Nazis continue to hold onto a stolen symbol?
If the Nazis had appropriated your Christian cross instead of the swastika, would you be insulted by the sight of a cross? Would you still argue that the cross is a "symbol that represents the slaughter of millions" etc.? Or would you instead wish to reclaim the symbol for Christianity, informing others of its true meaning before the evil regime appropriated it?
Also bear in mind that nobody is advocating using or displaying the Nazi flag, but rather the swastika. You seem to have conflated the two.
I still don't see the relevancy to the topic. It seems like you've randomly taken a jab at Hinduism.
Sorry if it came across that way. What I meant to do is illustrate the fact that every culture has it's irrational bits. The swastika evokes strong and ugly responses here. Westerners aren't going to change to suit Hindus any more than Hindus are going to condone beef.
Tom
Something else to point out as a westerner.
It might be different if the Nazis and their logo were entirely consigned to the dustbin of history. But they are not.
Weak, ignorant and pathetic as they are, there are still more white supremacists using the swastika as a symbol of their hatefulness in the USA than Hindus.
Sad fact, but true.
Tom
It might be different if the Nazis and their logo were entirely consigned to the dustbin of history. But they are not.
Weak, ignorant and pathetic as they are, there are still more white supremacists using the swastika as a symbol of their hatefulness in the USA than Hindus.
Sad fact, but true.
Tom
So you're saying the Western condemnation of the swastika is similarly irrational to Hindu condemnation of beef eating? And also making no distinction between being pro-caste and being anti-beef as regards their reasonableness?
Ok. But now you've brought up this idea that the sacredness of cows is irrational. I'll try to ignore that..
I think a better point is that condoning beef and responses to the swastika are very different topics. One is a religious belief and one is about how society views and responds to a symbol.
You also said that people won't change their views on the swastika. I disagree. With time, education and exposure, the meaning of the symbol in Western cultures could also change.
I think the Hindu attitude towards beef is somewhat more irrational than the western attitude towards the swastika. But, they are both somewhat irrational.
The difference is that the swastika is still a symbol of hate here.
Tom
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
It's not just Hindus, but also all of the Far East. And they're the majority! As a USian it won't come naturally to you to respect other nations, and as an unbeliever it won't come naturally to you to respect religious believers, but I certainly wouldn't have a hissy fit if our local Buddhist centre flew a swastika flag.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I don't agree with, but can understand and respect the idea of abstaining from meat, but choosing one sort of meat to be more taboo than others seems completely arbitrary and thereby irrational.
The case system is also completely arbitrary, not to mention discriminatory and oppressive.
The thing is, most people who state the above have no clue why Hindus abstain from eating beef. It isn't a random decision.
Let me be more clear.
It won't change soon. Not that it will never change.
Actually, I think it already has. When I grew up it was a symbol of evil, in an extremely pervasive way. Today, not so much. More and more people like me recognize that it is an ancient symbol and wasn't invented by Hitler. But I was a teenager in the 70s before I first learned that.
Tom
Me too????
"attitude" towards beef?
Did you mean beliefs about cows or some such?
Inquiring minds don'cha'know.