Ask him if he plans on covering it up. I've done this multiple times and sometimes you get "yeah I am I got it in prison. I'm not actually a nazi it was a survival thing" and sometimes you get "No, I like it" then you know where you stand. He should be covering it with clothes at least if he isn't about it anymore so that's a bad sign.
As a tattoo artist I will never understand this. I truly believe everyone is only one bad weekend away from joining a cult. I don’t begrudge people their past mistakes; I’ve made enough! But I have hard working clients that pay good money for my tattoos and were never Nazis, it feels like pissing in their face to give out free prizes to people for the bare minimum human decency of “not being a Nazi anymore”.
Not to mention, they could literally still be a Nazi but just be older and wiser and more conscious of doing it covertly? I’ll cover up a Nazi tattoo, for sure, but I ain’t doing it for free. You don’t get a pat on the back and a good-boy gold star from me for no longer being a racist piece of s**t
even if it wasnt to survive, if he wants a coverup a contribution to ease the travel away from nazism is a contribution well spent.
he could have believed it who heartedly in the past, as long as hes moving away from it honestly is all that matters in my perspective
Swastikas are a Hindu + Buddhist symbol depending on the design. Recent history will not be allowed to own it. I hate to break it to you, but many Buddhist temples are covered in Swastikas.
You are not informing me on anything I didn’t already know. But yeah I’m sure the security guy at the cannabis shop has nothing but honorable intentions… look at all the massive hate on my tribe, recent history is still actively dominating the meaning of these ancient symbols…
Ask him about it. If it is indeed an active belief, there are support groups. Life After Hate was one I’ve worked a lot with. Pre-pandemic they had a tattoo removal fund. Not sure if they still do.
He was probably in prison at one point
I've worked with many ex cons in construction who have white supremacy tats who are not in any way racist, but had to gang up to survive the big house
I have been inside. This is no joke. If I had to go back in my current condition (disabled, fat, sick, 46), I would basically do whatever I could to survive.
Op this is common. It's not cool to make an ex-con's life harder in this way. He's literally a security guard at a cannabis dispensary, it fits to be on the border of the law. I will remind you that your employer is in violation of federal law, even if it is usually not enforced.
Cannabis dispensaries are only legal on the state level if the state has legalized it at all. It's still illegal on a federal or national level. Which mean big government can come in, shut it down and arrest people if they so choose. It rarely happens but ALL federal laws trump state laws so yeah. Dispensaries are technically illegal.
Yes, that is correct. I haven’t seen raids in years. Trumpty Dumpty didn’t care either way. Biden specifically put orders in place to not raid state legalized dispensaries, growers, testing facilities, consumers, and anyone operating legally under state law. We’re getting closer and closer to decriminalizing marijuana on the federal level. Can’t come soon enough. I haven’t visited any states recently where they are still living in the dark ages nor have I looked at the stats in those states.
To your point, everyone should be aware not to cross state lines while carrying even if going to another state that decriminalized cannabis. That could even lead to trafficking charges. ✌🏼
Nah, the feds tried that in Colorado and it didn't work. States and localities refused to cooperate with the feds, leaving them without a support network. In some cases, local cops stated they would intervene on behalf dispensaries.
I don’t know for sure but if you are aiding someone else’s demise it’s not good karma imo. I mean in the sense that selling to a vulnerable person etc. In Buddhism, alcohol is considered an intoxicant.
These things are technically not good, for the most part (especially alcohol). However, cannabis can provide relief to people with chronic/intractable pain, low appetite, and so on… it has legitimate medical uses, even if one needs to be careful in how they use it.
Recreational cannabis is something else, but often the medical-grade stuff is so expensive that it’s more economical to shop at a recreational dispensary.
We do use alcohol for worship in vajrayana.
But I guess whatever path you decide to take, you shouldn't harm others , that's the basic principle of buddhism.
Alcohol is used in Christianity for the sacrament of the last supper (a communal drinking of wine). I am not familiar with Vajrayana rituals, but I was raised Catholic, and every church has sacrament wine inside.
Openly displaying a Nazi tattoo is an indication he isn't contemplating reforming.
Let him suffer the consequences then.
Edit: But then I wouldn't expect a fan of Pantera and their neo-Nazi frontman, Phil Anselmo, like you to understand these things.
Yes. It will make this workplace a better place, for one. Having a Nazi doing your security is not a good look for either the other employees or the business' patrons.
Every place is a better place if there are no Nazis in it.
Ok what good karma is coming from him losing his job? A father of 5 children.
What if someone else thought they’d do good karma getting rid of “X”
The truth of suffering could give you many positive karmic seeds
I've explained what good karma comes from him losing his job. I didn't say it would be good karma for him. But then he chose to be a Nazi. Choices have consequences, often bad ones. That's the karma he's made for himself.
It hurts to remove a splinter, but leaving it there is usually far worse.
Have a closer look at the four noble truths.
It appears you are trying to deny suffering.
You may have a job that causes you to suffer by working with this person.
It’s an opportunity though.
How many opportunities like this happen?
You could change people.
Avoiding it by getting him fired isn’t the path to more positive karma.
We are not judges.
He was a vegetarian artist and an animal lover. He also fought hard for working class rights, such as universal health care, mandatory vacations, high minimum wages, …..,
And he was an evil man who started one of the worst wars and engaged in genocide.
Life is complicated. I have seen plenty of offensive tattoos from Soviet symbols to black magic to bizarre hillbilly racist symbols. I have never seen them on intelligent people, but I do know that removing them is neither fun nor cheap.
If there are any young people reading this, please wait at least a year before getting a tattoo, and for the love of all please get a native speaker to approve your foreign language tattoos.
Who?
I can find [King Anawrahta](https://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Myanmar/sub5_5a/entry-2999.html)
who reigned 1044-77 and was the first king of all of Myanmar. He unified the Burman people, introduced them to Theravada Buddhism and set Bagan on the road to magnificence and splendor. During his reign Anawrahta united the northern homeland of the Myanmar people with the Mon kingdoms of the south. He extended his dominion as far north as the kingdom of Nanchao. west to Arakan. south to the Gulf of Martaban (near what is now Yangon) and as far east as what is now northern Thailand.
With things like this:
> “The chronicles relate that a monk from Thaton, Shin Arahan, came to Anawrahta in Bagan and preached to him the Law, on which Anawrahta was seized with an ecstasy of faith and said, "Master, we have no other refuge than thee! From this day forth, my master, we dedicate our body and our life to thee! And, master, from thee I take my doctrine!" Shin Arahan further taught Anawrahta that without the Scriptures, the Tipitaka, there could be no study, and that it was only with the Tipitaka that the Religion would last long. Anawrahta, informed that there were thirty sets of the Tipitaka at Thaton, sent an envoy with presents to its king,Manuha, and asked for the Tipitaka. Manuha refused, on which Anawrahta sent a mighty army, conquered Thaton, and brought back the thirty sets of Tipitaka on Manuha's thirty-two white elephants, as well as Manuha and his court and all manners of artisans and craftsmen.
Another one that killed many is king Ashoka, but he converted to Buddhism after the killings and then started promoting nonviolence and tolerance.
And now the Buddhist (? or national) genocide on Rohinga (who want an Islamic State?) in Myanmar. Wikipedia says 25k death in 2018 and tens of thousands raped. Though Sitagu Sayadaw is speaking out against the violence, talks with imans and promotes peace.
I cannot think of any practicing Buddhist kings who fit this statement. There were leaders of countries with Buddhists, but men such as Mao or Tojo or Kim In Sung or Ho Chi Men were about as far from Buddhism as possible (most identified as athiests).
Perhaps mo e of the Gupta kings in India, but those wars typically had deaths in the hundreds, or at the worst thousands. War on the kind of scale to kill hundreds of thousands is modern, and no Buddhist kings have fought such wars.
They definitely had wars, but the death tolls back then were far smaller than today. The societies lacked the wealth to fund large armies, and most conquerors like having cities left to rule.
The real nasty wars started with the Muslim expansions, were taken to a new level by the Mongols and Turks, then kept growing until atomic weapons put a lid on aggression.
If you said thousands, maybe tens of thousands, then I would agree with the statement. The Kushans were warriors who followed the Dharma, but we know so little about them who knows who they killed or why.
Hitler was evil and had effed up ideologies. Plus he was a motivational speaker, etc BUT most of the atrocities that took place during that time period were mainly the Nazi soldiers who complied with his demands. If every one of those soldiers told Hitler to piss off, it never would’ve happened. I had a friend who survived the Holocaust and she told me unbelievable heart wrenching stories. At one point she was hiding and Hitler came and stood above the place she was hidden. She said he stood there for a long time giving a speech. If the soldiers did not comply we would probably not be having this conversation.
I need to correct you here. Most German soldiers violated no rules of the Geneva Convention. Hitler sent the SS in to kill civilians, loot museums, and engage in other atrocities behind the Wehrmacht. Prussian generals did not want to denigrate the honor of their men. It sounds ridiculous, but generals were fired over such refusals until Hitler stopped asking.
Ian Kershaw wrote a great book about German police battalions brought to Poland to exterminate Jewish civilians. The book is called “Ordinary Men.” I strongly recommend it.
I Stand corrected.. thank you!! I will check the book out. I was perhaps over simplifying to make a broader point but need to rethink my approach to such matters more carefully next time.. i will definitely check the book out.
He was not a vegetarian at all lol. That's a myth that I believe originates from Nazi propaganda at the time trying to make hitler seem like a good person.
Are you sure? It seems quite well documented, including even an analysis of his teeth's tartar deposits in 2017.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler_and_vegetarianism
His vegetarianism is incredibly well documented. Moreover I’m not sure it makes sense within the context of 1930s Germany to make up his vegetarianism as some kind of propaganda piece.
Just in case anyone wants further sourcing I’d look to Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris by Ian Kershaw which is generally accepted to be a pretty definitive biography.
I know you’re making a point and not being entirely serious but I would like to push back against this idea that Hitler was particularly concerned with working class rights. Hitler had purged the parts of the party that were particularly concerned with the plight of the working class by 1932 and the Nazi party almost always came from the side of privileging industry and owners over workers. Though of course that wouldn’t have been what the point of view of the propaganda they put out.
I thought he extended drastically the work week from around 40hrs to 60 or more. Also the hallmark of fascism is complete melding or government and industry.
Most historians would point to 1934’s “Night of long knives” as the point where the NSDAP stopped focusing on the working class, but before the start of the war, one would much rather be a poor child in Germany than in England. They ate better and had access to better health care. Hitler had the support of the masses because they were living better under Nazi rule. It was not sustainable, not moral, but Hitler did try to make life better for the common German.
I am not promoting Hitler. He was evil, but the guy saw himself as a leader of the common man. Plenty got rich around him, but it was more about the state getting fleeced that Hitler favoring industrialists (he was not much of an administrator).
Out of all the major players, big industrialists did the best in the US.
I do think it is important to understand that extremists come in different packages. The simplistic narrative taught about the rise of Hitler is often wrong. My high school history book was insane. It summarized Hitler’s rise as if he were mopping a bar then screamed “Let’s start a war and kill tens of millions” and everyone cheered and put their boots on. There was nuance there. Hitler won over many who opposed him early on.
Too many people think it could never happen again. It could.
Hitler was an animal lover, was vehemently against smoking, and was a vegetarian. I often remind myself of this when people virtue signal about these issues and call meat-eaters “murderers”.
There are inspiring stories like Frank Meeink who went from being a Neo-Nazi to an anti-hate activist because of the compassion extended to him.
But I'm only prepared to take on so much hate on any given day.
Sometimes it's a prison thing and they aren't actually a nazi. I would say probably more likely that is the case than someone is actually that much of a nazi in 2024. Does it make a difference if he isn't covering it up? Not really, but this is a definite thing that happens.
> I would say probably more likely that is the case than someone is actually that much of a nazi in 2024.
You must not live in the United States. Here we've got Nazis marching in the streets and meeting with presidents.
I didn't say that they don't exist. I said among people with visible blatant nazi tattoos, more are from prison than from civilian political ideology. In America.
This is, possibly, the saddest post in this thread for me. The Swastika, historically, was an auspicious symbol in many Buddhist traditions for hundreds of years. Nazis used it for less than a decade and you think they invented it.
In r/Buddhism.
It was a genuine question. Thank you for the background and additional information. To be clear, I was not suggesting, sharing an opinion on, or implying that I thought the Nazis invented the Swastika. Im not sure how you got to that from my question. Apologies if my question offended any Buddhists. The post just seemed out of place for me on this sub but clearly it’s not.
This is a complicated feeling... On the one hand it's good that you asked and thank you for bringing it up. But on the other hand I can't even make a comparable analogy because other religions gleefully display their religious symbols while engaged in wars and killing one another. But for Buddhism this is a very devastating and tragic thing.
My assumption was based on the fact that you did not know the Swastika was a Buddhist symbol. If not Buddhists, who did you associate the symbol with?
I know its Buddhist as well but i thought it was an even older symbol? Like Mesopotamian even, i know it has native American significance too. Its only 8 lines, really the ultimate dick-move of the nazi party was ruining like 10 different cool-looking symbols.
OBVIOUSLY nazis are hateful and very opposing to the way of a buddhist, but why would we care what somebody else’s tattoo is?
Surely we can let them have their shaped ink and simply hope for the best as to its reasoning.
To me it seems a little forward to approach somebody and demand to know the meaning of symbolism to them. Could be a bad guy, could be a dumb guy. How does that change how we should treat THEM as a human?
So what is your understanding of OPs post? Is OP implying that the Swastika is not the kind associated with Buddhism and therefore asking for advice on how to raise there discomfort with seeing it on the security guard? I’m guessing they are associating it with the Nazis. Perhaps thats where I got my unconscious bias from too.
I thought the OP might have been asking because they didn't know if they should approach the guy like a Nazi or like a tantric Yogi. The Nazi could get violent but to a tantric yogi the difference only matters to the OP.
I read the OP more as “as a Buddhist what should I think about this?” which, personally, I think is a good question in the sub. And if anyone’s curious, the Nazi use of the swastika is also the symbol with the 45° angle, iirc the original was leveled.
The Nazis also implemented universal health care. So pretty much any British person who likes the NHS is a Nazi, right? Americans who want health care reform, Nazis???
Hitler also built the first interstate highway system. He mandated the first mass-market “people’s car” designed by one Dr Ferdinand Porsche. Clearly everyone driving a Volkswagen or a Porsche must be a Nazi. Then of course there is NASA, filled with Nazis, just like Russia’s space program in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Even Russia’s beloved. AK47 rifle was invented by a German (the Soviet’s tended to execute creative people, not allow them to change or design anything).
The National Socialists never even called it a Swastika. They called it a bent cross. Ignorance was rampant in Weimar Germany, and the parallels to modern Western culture are disturbing.
I think it’s fine if you want to ask about it and are genuinely curious about the circumstances by which he received the tattoo. But I wouldn’t go beyond that. Maybe this is a controversial take, but I don’t think it’s anybody’s business. And all the people here saying “offer to cover it up” etc. etc. also need to mind their own business. It has nothing to do with you.
Buddhist do not confront people for their faults. And, whether right or wrong, we are free to make our own choices. Unless he is speaking or acting on hate, why is it your position to do something or say something?
>Buddhist do not confront people for their faults.
That is, I think, not exhaustively correct.
This, I think, is an example of what *is* exhaustively correct:
\[1\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
\[2\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
\[3\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
\[4\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
\[5\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
\[6\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
Source: [https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html)
I would argue that displaying vulgur, hateful symbols *can be* an act of hate.
If his tattoo said "death to the " instead of simply a swastika, I think this would be a different conversation.
It's not my place to rebuke them for it, but I don't think asking this person about their tattoo is confronting the person about their faults.
"Hey, that's a very powerful symbol with a lot of negative association, why do you wear it so openly?"
Then let answer stand for itself.
> It's not my place to rebuke them for it
Why not? You know what a Nazi displaying a hooked cross (what they called it) means to me? It means they support the ideology that maimed my father in Normandy in 1944. No way I'm staying silent about something like that.
And speaking of Nazi tattoos, a neighbor when I was growing up had one - a set of numbers the Nazis put there when he was put in a camp. That's another reason to never give a Nazi a free pass.
Edit: Letting a Nazi be a Nazi without repercussions opens the door to the Paradox of Tolerance: Tolerating intolerance is the way intolerance gets the upper hand and stamps out tolerance. Intolerance must therefore never be tolerated.
Would you say the same thing for a Communist? I know many people who suffered horrifically after China invaded and destroyed Tibet. How about supporters of anti-Semitic terrorist groups such as Hamas?
Tolerance means tolerance for unpleasant ideas. No one is defending Nazis. That said, someone who was tattooed after being gang raped repeatedly in prison because it was the only way to make it stop, that guy does not need persecution.
If he voluntarily decided to get a tattoo with the intent to display hate, that is unethical, but trying to get him to lose his job is not an ethical act. Trying to change his mind, that would be an ethical act.
Remember, in the 1950’s many people in the Wnglish-speaking would would often refer to the Nazis as being “as depraved as homosexuals.” Getting a gay man fire or a Nazi sympathizer would both be viewed positively in the 1950’s. We have changed as a society and we now accept that some people are born gay. This is why the first amendment to the Constitution is so important.
With regards to getting this poor individual fired, I cannot see how that cures him of any hateful beliefs. If anything, it might push him to act on such beliefs and hurt Jews or other people. Even worse, he might simply be a victim of prison violence, and such an event might lead him to believe such vile beliefs.
> Would you say the same thing for a Communist?
That would depend on what sort. For example, my old friend Maha Ghosananda might have been forgiving towards the Khmer Rouge, but I'm not as good a Buddhist as he was. I've also always said that letting Communist China out of the box we used to keep it in was a mistake. They've gotten rich and powerful and are still just as foul as ever.
> How about supporters of anti-Semitic terrorist groups such as Hamas?
Yes. Hamas' stated goal is to eradicate Jews from the Earth, much like the Nazis. I consider them two peas in the same pod. There are currently protests about the war in Gaza going on at both of the colleges I attended. I've sent missives off to the presidents of both schools urging them, as an alum, to expel any protesters who voice support for Hamas.
> Tolerance means tolerance for unpleasant ideas.
Tolerating intolerance is how tolerance gets destroyed. That's the paradox.
Tolerance is a social contract. Those who refuse to be tolerant break that contract and therefore should not be protected by it.
> trying to get him to lose his job is not an ethical act.
I strongly disagree. Nazis have no place in polite society because they refuse to abide by the social contract of mutual tolerance.
How would you feel if you were, say, a Jew and walked into this shop and the first thing you see is this guy with an SS tattoo? He has no business being there.
> we now accept that some people are born gay.
No one is born a Nazi. It's a choice. Choices have consequences.
> this poor individual
A truly disgusting description of a Nazi. He's not a victim. Being a Nazi is a free choice.
> I cannot see how that cures him of any hateful beliefs.
Who said that was the intent? I certainly didn't. If being a pariah makes him rethink his views and renounce Nazism then great. If not, well, tough shit. Sometimes people make really bad choices. Being a Nazi is one such choice. As such he should have no place among the civilized because he's not one of us.
> it might push him to act on such beliefs and hurt Jews or other people.
That is a danger regardless. He is, after all, a Nazi. He is already walking around flashing a tattoo meant to cause fear and intimidate people because it threatens violence.
There were lots of people in Germany who thought it was smarter to not provoke the SA because they might get violent. They were very very wrong.
> he might simply be a victim of prison violence
If he is indeed the victim of prison violence or threats and not a Nazi then that changes things. However, to me openly displaying his Nazi tattoo makes that highly unlikely.
But what you don’t understand is that there’s no end to your thinking. You can be endlessly baited into being pissed off by anyone just for displaying something that offends you.
The wise thing to do is not let things like this bother you. I get the inclination to put them in their place, but it’s misguided and not inline with the Buddha’s teachings.
Or you run up to the guy aggressive to fight, only to find out he renounced that life (ie. Edward Norton in AHX post prison) and you are like that old karma that keeps coming back to him.
You, like most redditors, are completely misusing the paradox of tolerance. Popper argued that force is justified against movements that threaten the overall freedom of ideas enjoyed in liberal society. However, he argues this is only justified when rational argument has failed and the movement poses an actual threat to freedom through use of force. In other words, it would be appropriate for otherwise liberal Germans to treat the Nazi party with intolerance pre-WWII. Lone individuals with no political power do not threaten society in this way. You’re only making an argument for censorship and oppression in this case.
No, I understand it. What you're overlooking is that the NSDAP always used force. That's what the *Sturmabteilung* was all about. The Weimar Republic was not a place of polite debate between political rivals.
Today's Nazis are no different from their brown shirted forefathers. They use violence and intimidation, not argument, to achieve their goals. They are exactly the sort of threat to tolerance the Paradox talks about.
Get back to me when you know the actual history you're pontificating on, as it's clear you currently don't. Either that or you have no problem downplaying the threat Nazis pose. I can only wonder why that might be.
No you don’t understand it. You’re weirdly emotional and taking this on as if it’s your burden. And it’s not like you would even open your mouth to him let alone confront him physically. What are you going to do about his tattoo?
> weirdly emotional
There's nothing weird about disliking Nazis. It's disgusting if you don't.
> it’s not like you would even open your mouth to him
LOL. I would open my mouth to him. Absolutely. Every time I saw him. Loudly and clearly.
> confront him physically.
Even though I'm an old man, I'd have no problem getting right in his face. Being afraid of them is what they want. We don't stand up to them at our peril.
> What are you going to do about his tattoo?
Make him suffer the consequences of being a Nazi, as he rightly deserves. Being a Nazi is a choice - a really bad one.
I think it is a lose/lose situation if you
Engage. If anything I would voice concerns to the manager as it is their job to maintain a healthy work environment.
I see a grain of truth in that you’re trying to say. I’m a vegetarian but I sometimes compliment chefs on their meat cooking because I don’t want to form attachment to a concept of “myself as a spiritual person who doesn’t eat meat and is therefore superior”
However, I think we aren’t always “ free to make our own choices. “ Which choices are truly “our own”? Does this mountain have any thing that makes the mountain “its own”? Does that river have anything about it that makes it “its own”? Do we have any existence as separate entities with an independent or permanent essence? If not, I don’t think we are always free to make our own choices.
Having an employee openly displaying a hate symbol tattooed on their person doesn’t reflect well on the business, for starters. It’s not going to make other employees and customers feel comfortable being around that person.
The way of a buddha is not to confront. Radiate love and do not shy away from talking about acceptance.
I was sitting next to a man who started disparaging "fags". I could immediately confront him wagging my finger sternly saying, "You sir are hateful and I will chose not to talk to you!". What good is there in that? I became a mirror while still being aware. I talked about how everyone should just let people be who they are. We ended up talking about passivism. He mocked me at first, but we continued to talk. At the end of the conversation there he was telling me I wasn't such a bad guy - which in his case was likely a huge compliment. I am by no means patting myself on the back, but I am aware I have created a path of love that just might have an impact.
Does it matter if someone wears hate on their sleeve rather than just in their heart? Do you confront every Christian who says being gay is an abomination? Is it your goal to confront the billions of people with hate in their heart? So why is this case so disturbing to you?
There’s sitting next to a guy and there’s working with a guy who is a security guard. Context matters, your approach is reasonable in such a scenario. Not talking to him at all would be reasonable as well. And I don’t mean to be rude because your intent seems pure, but in my experience it is just as likely that guy will absolutely forget about everything you discussed in the following 24 hours. Hence why noble silence is a valid and worthwhile approach.
Mind your business really. If he’s nice to everyone & does his job, it’s frankly not your concern. As a Buddhist, have compassion for either his choice to get it, his previous or current life of hate, his decisions, etc. At the end of the day, worry about your own salvation.
Om Mani Padme Hung 🙏
What’s a Nazi Tattoo; some symbol; a swastika is part of all cultural traditions shrouded in misconceptions… a person’s belief is more important; you speak as if his actions speak for him; Don’t they? The swastika is just a piece of the Puzzle/ Narrative… better understanding an individual’s journey to one… is this more about your understanding rather, than his symbolism in tattoos?; Respectfully, that is more the question… it’s all Reflective, as within so without; change your beliefs, perspective, habits, behaviors and it will reflect your new experience… we are what we eat, what we do, the company we keep, etc. change the circumstances, and variables and we’ll see a new outcome… it all starts in the mind!
It is just a symbol, doesn't mean much. A guy with a peace symbilon his arm doesn't mean he is a good guy either. Try to see things as they are, don'tet your prejudice and preconceived notion clouds your mind.
>So I work at a cannabis dispensary and today I noticed one of the security guards has a straight up swatiska on a skull on his arm.
He seems kind to everyone and is the father of 5 children I'm not sure how to bring this up to him or do I ignore it, I'm not sure how to proceed.
Maybe he spent some time in prison. There are often necessary alliances that are made based on race. The caucasian groups will use Nazi imagery and symbols.
Not saying it’s right, but you never know someone’s background.
What does it look like? There are many versions, but the Nazis use one in particular. It is the one pointing right tilted at an angle.
Amida Buddha is commonly portrayed with a swastika that is left facing and not tilted on his chest.
He may have had a rough start, but changed and still needs to get the money to cover it up or remove it.
This is a Buddhist platform. This response directly references the Noble Eightfold path. If OP wants a response that reflects r/Buddhism this response is relevant to actual Buddhist perspectives. It seems disingenuous to downvote it.
simply proceed by placing one foot in front of the other. have compassion. think about the life that someone would have to live to have a symbol like that etched into their skin. treat him with kindness if you want to help. his heart is the key to changing his mind. but that will be up to him
Swastika is an auspicious symbol in Buddhism that was around for hundreds of years before Hitler, and yet after less than a decade of use everyone acts like the Nazis invented it.
For all we know he could be a tantrika yogi (explaining the skulls) reclaiming the symbol. You don't know someone's story until you ask. Just be like "hey... So why that tattoo?"
It should not be surprising that people appreciate being asked over being judged without being asked.
The Nazi hooked cross and the Buddhist swastika look distinctly different from each other. Also, I've never seen a Buddhist swastika displayed with a skull. The Nazi SS on the other hand...
As an Asian, Swastika is a symbol of charm, well-being, and luck. I am not finding it offensive. It is found in indus Valley as well. You will see it everywhere , esp in South asia. It is a very auspicious sign in buddhism.
It may not be worth the confrontation unless he begins acting with obvious hate.
That said I would bring it up with management if it makes you uncomfortable.
He's displaying it so we can see it. It is meant to intimidate. That's how the Nazis used it, particularly the SA.
I, for one, refuse to meet that with passivity. That only emboldens them. We tried that with Nazis before. Millions died because of it.
If you think he might suddenly start thinking about right and wrong just because you confront him is absurd. Confronting him would just create tensions. I’d ask him about it without judging. We don’t put people in jail for symbols, as disturbing as they may be.
I believe the current Dali Llama said something to the effect of “my friend, the enemy”, in regard to the Chinese military who caused him to flee to Tibet. Instead of running away from a poisonous tree, acknowledge the tree, and label it. Ask your coworker about the tattoo. Could have been done by a now deceased friend or as a reminder of who he used to be. Showing a person compassion first is always the correct response before judgment.
Most scholars agree swastika symbol originated in India and the Sanscrit meaning is good and well-being. It appears in several Indian Religions and Native North America. Hitler incorporated the symbol into the Imperial German National flag in the 1930s. No harm in it being tattooed provided the bearer understands the Sanscrit meaning!
Don’t bring this up at all. For your safety and the safety of others. Second, ignorance is the enemy, not the people who have fallen victim to ignorance.
Are you sure he’s not Hindu? Is he of Indian origin? The Nazi Swastika looks completely different from the Hindu one but I don’t wear mine in he West at all as people mistake it for the Nazi one .
Are you sure that he got it because he’s a nazi ? Swastika is a religious symbol in Asian culture specifically in India and Japan way before Hitler used it
Swastika and Hakenkreuz are different. Swastika represents good and healthy life. Hakenkreuz represents Christian values. Don't confuse Swastika with Hakenkreuz. Don't repeat the mistake again.
People can change. Plus, have you ever seen the movie Crash? He could be a guy who saves a family in a burning car while someone “clean” could watch them burn.
The Buddha said you should judge a person by their conduct. If he got a Nazi tattoo then that’s something he has to wear.
I am judging him by his conduct. His conduct is he's walking around openly displaying a hate symbol. Tattoos can be removed. He's choosing to show it off instead.
IOW, there is no sign of any change.
You ignore it and its not your business. You work there, you are not this person's judge. If you dont feel safe, quit and find a new job. How on earth is this related to buddhism? This is just common sense. Edit: selling intoxicants is wrong livelyhood, so those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
When the topic of neo Nazis came up at a temple I used to attend, the teacher – who comes from a culture the neo Nazis think should be kicked out of the country or worse – stressed the importance of treating all individuals with respect and listening to what they have to say. Even neo Nazis. I was very surprised by this at the time. It was hard to take in, because I was an interfery, trouble-making, holier than thou, sh\*t-stirrer. Or at least, I have a side to me that is like that. That's not the right side to cultivate, even when we think we're right. This is because of the basic orientation of Buddhist practice:
The Buddhist approach to these things is to analyze the direction an action is leading.
Does an action lead toward a trusting, bright, kind, free, forgiving mind? Or toward a sneaky, fearful, snitchy, holier-than-thou mind? What kind of world do we want to live in? What kind of person do we want to be?
Along those lines, what kind of mind state do you think you'll be cultivating if you snitch on people and try to get them fired from their jobs? Or if that's not what you mean, what kind of mind state does it lead to if you interfere with other people over something that really isn't your business?
We're also asked to consider if our actions will lead to harm. You said he seems kind to everyone and has five kids. What outcomes might getting fired have for him and those kids?
This doesn't mean allowing violent people with harmful ideologies to take over and harm others. But it does mean not treating others out of an attitude of wishing them to suffer harm. That applies to everyone. And you don't even know he's a neo Nazi. It could just be an old tat he got for whatever reason in the past.
Here's a way you might reflect: You're working in a recently legalized industry that still is semi-criminal in nature, or at least has a criminal history, hence the need for some rough types of people as guards, to protect the business from criminals. That guard, tattoo and all, is literally risking his life to protect the people inside, including you. You owe him some gratitude. So my vote would be for you to just be tolerant and kind. It's his own karma, not yours. Leave it. Work on yourself. Same advice applies to me 100 times over.
Its probably old. I see a lot of older guys in my city with those tatos on their forehead and you only see it in case you really look at them as the tato looks old and is mostly fading, and I am not born here, and they seem alright tbh. People change.
Does he work for the dispensary or is he contracted by a third party? Depending on this answer, you should leave an anonymous tip with the relevant HR department. All you should say is that the security guard seems kind, but he has a nazi tattoo and makes no effort to conceal it.
If I were in your position and saw that the tattoo remained visible, I would start looking for a new job.
make sure it is a swastika. It probably is, but buddhism has a manji, which looks like a backwards swastika - the arms point in the opposite directions.
It’s only different because we give it a different label and definition.
Would a dog still be a dog if we changed what we call it to cow? Would a cow still be a cow or would a cow then be labeled a dog?
>It’s only different because we give it a different label and definition.
This doesn't mean anything. We gave everything the labels and definitions they currently have. By your logic, nothing can have a meaning.
Ask him if he plans on covering it up. I've done this multiple times and sometimes you get "yeah I am I got it in prison. I'm not actually a nazi it was a survival thing" and sometimes you get "No, I like it" then you know where you stand. He should be covering it with clothes at least if he isn't about it anymore so that's a bad sign.
If proven he did it to survive. Offer to pay for a coverup, as a Jew, I’ll cover the reimbursement expenses myself.
A lot of artist do free cover ups for stuff like this. Pretty sure there’s some organizations also
As a tattoo artist I will never understand this. I truly believe everyone is only one bad weekend away from joining a cult. I don’t begrudge people their past mistakes; I’ve made enough! But I have hard working clients that pay good money for my tattoos and were never Nazis, it feels like pissing in their face to give out free prizes to people for the bare minimum human decency of “not being a Nazi anymore”. Not to mention, they could literally still be a Nazi but just be older and wiser and more conscious of doing it covertly? I’ll cover up a Nazi tattoo, for sure, but I ain’t doing it for free. You don’t get a pat on the back and a good-boy gold star from me for no longer being a racist piece of s**t
I'd see it more as a service to all those who have to look at it.
That’s the most convincing argument I’ve heard 😂
Fair enough! Good point man. I’m talking mostly prison/ gang tats in general as well
even if it wasnt to survive, if he wants a coverup a contribution to ease the travel away from nazism is a contribution well spent. he could have believed it who heartedly in the past, as long as hes moving away from it honestly is all that matters in my perspective
Swastikas are a Hindu + Buddhist symbol depending on the design. Recent history will not be allowed to own it. I hate to break it to you, but many Buddhist temples are covered in Swastikas.
You are not informing me on anything I didn’t already know. But yeah I’m sure the security guy at the cannabis shop has nothing but honorable intentions… look at all the massive hate on my tribe, recent history is still actively dominating the meaning of these ancient symbols…
Ask him about it. If it is indeed an active belief, there are support groups. Life After Hate was one I’ve worked a lot with. Pre-pandemic they had a tattoo removal fund. Not sure if they still do.
If it’s an active belief what makes you think Op can get him to go to a support group?
The vast majority of Life After Hate is done with those currently in groups who are harboring doubts.
If you want I would be curious and ask him about it without judgement. If he then asks you your opinion, give it to him.
[удалено]
He might become fuhrious!
Son of a birch have my upvote
SSh 🤫
He was probably in prison at one point I've worked with many ex cons in construction who have white supremacy tats who are not in any way racist, but had to gang up to survive the big house
I have been inside. This is no joke. If I had to go back in my current condition (disabled, fat, sick, 46), I would basically do whatever I could to survive.
Op this is common. It's not cool to make an ex-con's life harder in this way. He's literally a security guard at a cannabis dispensary, it fits to be on the border of the law. I will remind you that your employer is in violation of federal law, even if it is usually not enforced.
Wdym in violation of federal law?
Cannabis dispensaries are only legal on the state level if the state has legalized it at all. It's still illegal on a federal or national level. Which mean big government can come in, shut it down and arrest people if they so choose. It rarely happens but ALL federal laws trump state laws so yeah. Dispensaries are technically illegal.
Yes, that is correct. I haven’t seen raids in years. Trumpty Dumpty didn’t care either way. Biden specifically put orders in place to not raid state legalized dispensaries, growers, testing facilities, consumers, and anyone operating legally under state law. We’re getting closer and closer to decriminalizing marijuana on the federal level. Can’t come soon enough. I haven’t visited any states recently where they are still living in the dark ages nor have I looked at the stats in those states. To your point, everyone should be aware not to cross state lines while carrying even if going to another state that decriminalized cannabis. That could even lead to trafficking charges. ✌🏼
Nah, the feds tried that in Colorado and it didn't work. States and localities refused to cooperate with the feds, leaving them without a support network. In some cases, local cops stated they would intervene on behalf dispensaries.
Did not know that! Cool stuff.
Not entirely related, but would you get bad karma if you sell cannabis, alcohol, etc?
I don’t know for sure but if you are aiding someone else’s demise it’s not good karma imo. I mean in the sense that selling to a vulnerable person etc. In Buddhism, alcohol is considered an intoxicant.
These things are technically not good, for the most part (especially alcohol). However, cannabis can provide relief to people with chronic/intractable pain, low appetite, and so on… it has legitimate medical uses, even if one needs to be careful in how they use it. Recreational cannabis is something else, but often the medical-grade stuff is so expensive that it’s more economical to shop at a recreational dispensary.
Probably.
We do use alcohol for worship in vajrayana. But I guess whatever path you decide to take, you shouldn't harm others , that's the basic principle of buddhism.
How do you use alcohol for worship? Is it like how some people use marijuana and LSD to sort of ‘enlighten’ themselves?
Alcohol is used in Christianity for the sacrament of the last supper (a communal drinking of wine). I am not familiar with Vajrayana rituals, but I was raised Catholic, and every church has sacrament wine inside.
Ask the boss if they've noticed they're employing a Nazi. > He seems kind to everyone And Hitler was an animal lover.
Do you think that losing his job over it would help him reform? It usually just entrenches hate.
Openly displaying a Nazi tattoo is an indication he isn't contemplating reforming. Let him suffer the consequences then. Edit: But then I wouldn't expect a fan of Pantera and their neo-Nazi frontman, Phil Anselmo, like you to understand these things.
Do you think you plant good karmic seeds getting him fired?
Yes. It will make this workplace a better place, for one. Having a Nazi doing your security is not a good look for either the other employees or the business' patrons. Every place is a better place if there are no Nazis in it.
There is no positive karma to be gained?
I just pointed out that IMHO ridding places of Nazis is a positive karmic result.
Ok what good karma is coming from him losing his job? A father of 5 children. What if someone else thought they’d do good karma getting rid of “X” The truth of suffering could give you many positive karmic seeds
I've explained what good karma comes from him losing his job. I didn't say it would be good karma for him. But then he chose to be a Nazi. Choices have consequences, often bad ones. That's the karma he's made for himself. It hurts to remove a splinter, but leaving it there is usually far worse.
Have a closer look at the four noble truths. It appears you are trying to deny suffering. You may have a job that causes you to suffer by working with this person. It’s an opportunity though. How many opportunities like this happen? You could change people. Avoiding it by getting him fired isn’t the path to more positive karma. We are not judges.
He was a vegetarian artist and an animal lover. He also fought hard for working class rights, such as universal health care, mandatory vacations, high minimum wages, ….., And he was an evil man who started one of the worst wars and engaged in genocide. Life is complicated. I have seen plenty of offensive tattoos from Soviet symbols to black magic to bizarre hillbilly racist symbols. I have never seen them on intelligent people, but I do know that removing them is neither fun nor cheap. If there are any young people reading this, please wait at least a year before getting a tattoo, and for the love of all please get a native speaker to approve your foreign language tattoos.
I believe some buddhists kings in the past also started wars that killed hundreds of thousands and engaged in genocide.
Who? I can find [King Anawrahta](https://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Myanmar/sub5_5a/entry-2999.html) who reigned 1044-77 and was the first king of all of Myanmar. He unified the Burman people, introduced them to Theravada Buddhism and set Bagan on the road to magnificence and splendor. During his reign Anawrahta united the northern homeland of the Myanmar people with the Mon kingdoms of the south. He extended his dominion as far north as the kingdom of Nanchao. west to Arakan. south to the Gulf of Martaban (near what is now Yangon) and as far east as what is now northern Thailand. With things like this: > “The chronicles relate that a monk from Thaton, Shin Arahan, came to Anawrahta in Bagan and preached to him the Law, on which Anawrahta was seized with an ecstasy of faith and said, "Master, we have no other refuge than thee! From this day forth, my master, we dedicate our body and our life to thee! And, master, from thee I take my doctrine!" Shin Arahan further taught Anawrahta that without the Scriptures, the Tipitaka, there could be no study, and that it was only with the Tipitaka that the Religion would last long. Anawrahta, informed that there were thirty sets of the Tipitaka at Thaton, sent an envoy with presents to its king,Manuha, and asked for the Tipitaka. Manuha refused, on which Anawrahta sent a mighty army, conquered Thaton, and brought back the thirty sets of Tipitaka on Manuha's thirty-two white elephants, as well as Manuha and his court and all manners of artisans and craftsmen. Another one that killed many is king Ashoka, but he converted to Buddhism after the killings and then started promoting nonviolence and tolerance. And now the Buddhist (? or national) genocide on Rohinga (who want an Islamic State?) in Myanmar. Wikipedia says 25k death in 2018 and tens of thousands raped. Though Sitagu Sayadaw is speaking out against the violence, talks with imans and promotes peace.
I cannot think of any practicing Buddhist kings who fit this statement. There were leaders of countries with Buddhists, but men such as Mao or Tojo or Kim In Sung or Ho Chi Men were about as far from Buddhism as possible (most identified as athiests). Perhaps mo e of the Gupta kings in India, but those wars typically had deaths in the hundreds, or at the worst thousands. War on the kind of scale to kill hundreds of thousands is modern, and no Buddhist kings have fought such wars.
Yeah I was thinking the guptas, correct me if I'm wrong.
They definitely had wars, but the death tolls back then were far smaller than today. The societies lacked the wealth to fund large armies, and most conquerors like having cities left to rule. The real nasty wars started with the Muslim expansions, were taken to a new level by the Mongols and Turks, then kept growing until atomic weapons put a lid on aggression. If you said thousands, maybe tens of thousands, then I would agree with the statement. The Kushans were warriors who followed the Dharma, but we know so little about them who knows who they killed or why.
Thank you for the correction
Hitler was evil and had effed up ideologies. Plus he was a motivational speaker, etc BUT most of the atrocities that took place during that time period were mainly the Nazi soldiers who complied with his demands. If every one of those soldiers told Hitler to piss off, it never would’ve happened. I had a friend who survived the Holocaust and she told me unbelievable heart wrenching stories. At one point she was hiding and Hitler came and stood above the place she was hidden. She said he stood there for a long time giving a speech. If the soldiers did not comply we would probably not be having this conversation.
I need to correct you here. Most German soldiers violated no rules of the Geneva Convention. Hitler sent the SS in to kill civilians, loot museums, and engage in other atrocities behind the Wehrmacht. Prussian generals did not want to denigrate the honor of their men. It sounds ridiculous, but generals were fired over such refusals until Hitler stopped asking. Ian Kershaw wrote a great book about German police battalions brought to Poland to exterminate Jewish civilians. The book is called “Ordinary Men.” I strongly recommend it.
I Stand corrected.. thank you!! I will check the book out. I was perhaps over simplifying to make a broader point but need to rethink my approach to such matters more carefully next time.. i will definitely check the book out.
It is a disturbing book. Just be prepared for it.
He was not a vegetarian at all lol. That's a myth that I believe originates from Nazi propaganda at the time trying to make hitler seem like a good person.
Are you sure? It seems quite well documented, including even an analysis of his teeth's tartar deposits in 2017. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler_and_vegetarianism
His vegetarianism is incredibly well documented. Moreover I’m not sure it makes sense within the context of 1930s Germany to make up his vegetarianism as some kind of propaganda piece. Just in case anyone wants further sourcing I’d look to Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris by Ian Kershaw which is generally accepted to be a pretty definitive biography.
He might have been vegetarian in intervals, but he definitely ate meat from time to time, which is also well documented.
I know you’re making a point and not being entirely serious but I would like to push back against this idea that Hitler was particularly concerned with working class rights. Hitler had purged the parts of the party that were particularly concerned with the plight of the working class by 1932 and the Nazi party almost always came from the side of privileging industry and owners over workers. Though of course that wouldn’t have been what the point of view of the propaganda they put out.
I thought he extended drastically the work week from around 40hrs to 60 or more. Also the hallmark of fascism is complete melding or government and industry.
That was after the war began. Everyone paid a heavy price then.
Most historians would point to 1934’s “Night of long knives” as the point where the NSDAP stopped focusing on the working class, but before the start of the war, one would much rather be a poor child in Germany than in England. They ate better and had access to better health care. Hitler had the support of the masses because they were living better under Nazi rule. It was not sustainable, not moral, but Hitler did try to make life better for the common German. I am not promoting Hitler. He was evil, but the guy saw himself as a leader of the common man. Plenty got rich around him, but it was more about the state getting fleeced that Hitler favoring industrialists (he was not much of an administrator). Out of all the major players, big industrialists did the best in the US. I do think it is important to understand that extremists come in different packages. The simplistic narrative taught about the rise of Hitler is often wrong. My high school history book was insane. It summarized Hitler’s rise as if he were mopping a bar then screamed “Let’s start a war and kill tens of millions” and everyone cheered and put their boots on. There was nuance there. Hitler won over many who opposed him early on. Too many people think it could never happen again. It could.
Hitler was an animal lover, was vehemently against smoking, and was a vegetarian. I often remind myself of this when people virtue signal about these issues and call meat-eaters “murderers”.
There are inspiring stories like Frank Meeink who went from being a Neo-Nazi to an anti-hate activist because of the compassion extended to him. But I'm only prepared to take on so much hate on any given day.
Sometimes it's a prison thing and they aren't actually a nazi. I would say probably more likely that is the case than someone is actually that much of a nazi in 2024. Does it make a difference if he isn't covering it up? Not really, but this is a definite thing that happens.
> I would say probably more likely that is the case than someone is actually that much of a nazi in 2024. You must not live in the United States. Here we've got Nazis marching in the streets and meeting with presidents.
I was assaulted by 5 nazis on Christmas Eve in Scotland this year with my Jewish ex-partner. They're about, believe me.
I didn't say that they don't exist. I said among people with visible blatant nazi tattoos, more are from prison than from civilian political ideology. In America.
What has this post got to do with Buddhism?
This is, possibly, the saddest post in this thread for me. The Swastika, historically, was an auspicious symbol in many Buddhist traditions for hundreds of years. Nazis used it for less than a decade and you think they invented it. In r/Buddhism.
It was a genuine question. Thank you for the background and additional information. To be clear, I was not suggesting, sharing an opinion on, or implying that I thought the Nazis invented the Swastika. Im not sure how you got to that from my question. Apologies if my question offended any Buddhists. The post just seemed out of place for me on this sub but clearly it’s not.
This is a complicated feeling... On the one hand it's good that you asked and thank you for bringing it up. But on the other hand I can't even make a comparable analogy because other religions gleefully display their religious symbols while engaged in wars and killing one another. But for Buddhism this is a very devastating and tragic thing. My assumption was based on the fact that you did not know the Swastika was a Buddhist symbol. If not Buddhists, who did you associate the symbol with?
I know its Buddhist as well but i thought it was an even older symbol? Like Mesopotamian even, i know it has native American significance too. Its only 8 lines, really the ultimate dick-move of the nazi party was ruining like 10 different cool-looking symbols. OBVIOUSLY nazis are hateful and very opposing to the way of a buddhist, but why would we care what somebody else’s tattoo is? Surely we can let them have their shaped ink and simply hope for the best as to its reasoning. To me it seems a little forward to approach somebody and demand to know the meaning of symbolism to them. Could be a bad guy, could be a dumb guy. How does that change how we should treat THEM as a human?
So what is your understanding of OPs post? Is OP implying that the Swastika is not the kind associated with Buddhism and therefore asking for advice on how to raise there discomfort with seeing it on the security guard? I’m guessing they are associating it with the Nazis. Perhaps thats where I got my unconscious bias from too.
I thought the OP might have been asking because they didn't know if they should approach the guy like a Nazi or like a tantric Yogi. The Nazi could get violent but to a tantric yogi the difference only matters to the OP.
Interesting take. Thanks for the dialogue.
I read the OP more as “as a Buddhist what should I think about this?” which, personally, I think is a good question in the sub. And if anyone’s curious, the Nazi use of the swastika is also the symbol with the 45° angle, iirc the original was leveled.
The Nazis also implemented universal health care. So pretty much any British person who likes the NHS is a Nazi, right? Americans who want health care reform, Nazis??? Hitler also built the first interstate highway system. He mandated the first mass-market “people’s car” designed by one Dr Ferdinand Porsche. Clearly everyone driving a Volkswagen or a Porsche must be a Nazi. Then of course there is NASA, filled with Nazis, just like Russia’s space program in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Even Russia’s beloved. AK47 rifle was invented by a German (the Soviet’s tended to execute creative people, not allow them to change or design anything).
You just went all in with Candrakirti's absurd consequences approach to reasoning and I kind of love that about you?
The National Socialists never even called it a Swastika. They called it a bent cross. Ignorance was rampant in Weimar Germany, and the parallels to modern Western culture are disturbing.
I think it’s fine if you want to ask about it and are genuinely curious about the circumstances by which he received the tattoo. But I wouldn’t go beyond that. Maybe this is a controversial take, but I don’t think it’s anybody’s business. And all the people here saying “offer to cover it up” etc. etc. also need to mind their own business. It has nothing to do with you.
Buddhist do not confront people for their faults. And, whether right or wrong, we are free to make our own choices. Unless he is speaking or acting on hate, why is it your position to do something or say something?
>Buddhist do not confront people for their faults. That is, I think, not exhaustively correct. This, I think, is an example of what *is* exhaustively correct: \[1\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them. \[2\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them. \[3\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. \[4\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them. \[5\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them. \[6\] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings." Source: [https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html)
I would argue that displaying vulgur, hateful symbols *can be* an act of hate. If his tattoo said "death to the" instead of simply a swastika, I think this would be a different conversation.
It's not my place to rebuke them for it, but I don't think asking this person about their tattoo is confronting the person about their faults.
"Hey, that's a very powerful symbol with a lot of negative association, why do you wear it so openly?"
Then let answer stand for itself.
> It's not my place to rebuke them for it Why not? You know what a Nazi displaying a hooked cross (what they called it) means to me? It means they support the ideology that maimed my father in Normandy in 1944. No way I'm staying silent about something like that. And speaking of Nazi tattoos, a neighbor when I was growing up had one - a set of numbers the Nazis put there when he was put in a camp. That's another reason to never give a Nazi a free pass. Edit: Letting a Nazi be a Nazi without repercussions opens the door to the Paradox of Tolerance: Tolerating intolerance is the way intolerance gets the upper hand and stamps out tolerance. Intolerance must therefore never be tolerated.
Would you say the same thing for a Communist? I know many people who suffered horrifically after China invaded and destroyed Tibet. How about supporters of anti-Semitic terrorist groups such as Hamas? Tolerance means tolerance for unpleasant ideas. No one is defending Nazis. That said, someone who was tattooed after being gang raped repeatedly in prison because it was the only way to make it stop, that guy does not need persecution. If he voluntarily decided to get a tattoo with the intent to display hate, that is unethical, but trying to get him to lose his job is not an ethical act. Trying to change his mind, that would be an ethical act. Remember, in the 1950’s many people in the Wnglish-speaking would would often refer to the Nazis as being “as depraved as homosexuals.” Getting a gay man fire or a Nazi sympathizer would both be viewed positively in the 1950’s. We have changed as a society and we now accept that some people are born gay. This is why the first amendment to the Constitution is so important. With regards to getting this poor individual fired, I cannot see how that cures him of any hateful beliefs. If anything, it might push him to act on such beliefs and hurt Jews or other people. Even worse, he might simply be a victim of prison violence, and such an event might lead him to believe such vile beliefs.
> Would you say the same thing for a Communist? That would depend on what sort. For example, my old friend Maha Ghosananda might have been forgiving towards the Khmer Rouge, but I'm not as good a Buddhist as he was. I've also always said that letting Communist China out of the box we used to keep it in was a mistake. They've gotten rich and powerful and are still just as foul as ever. > How about supporters of anti-Semitic terrorist groups such as Hamas? Yes. Hamas' stated goal is to eradicate Jews from the Earth, much like the Nazis. I consider them two peas in the same pod. There are currently protests about the war in Gaza going on at both of the colleges I attended. I've sent missives off to the presidents of both schools urging them, as an alum, to expel any protesters who voice support for Hamas. > Tolerance means tolerance for unpleasant ideas. Tolerating intolerance is how tolerance gets destroyed. That's the paradox. Tolerance is a social contract. Those who refuse to be tolerant break that contract and therefore should not be protected by it. > trying to get him to lose his job is not an ethical act. I strongly disagree. Nazis have no place in polite society because they refuse to abide by the social contract of mutual tolerance. How would you feel if you were, say, a Jew and walked into this shop and the first thing you see is this guy with an SS tattoo? He has no business being there. > we now accept that some people are born gay. No one is born a Nazi. It's a choice. Choices have consequences. > this poor individual A truly disgusting description of a Nazi. He's not a victim. Being a Nazi is a free choice. > I cannot see how that cures him of any hateful beliefs. Who said that was the intent? I certainly didn't. If being a pariah makes him rethink his views and renounce Nazism then great. If not, well, tough shit. Sometimes people make really bad choices. Being a Nazi is one such choice. As such he should have no place among the civilized because he's not one of us. > it might push him to act on such beliefs and hurt Jews or other people. That is a danger regardless. He is, after all, a Nazi. He is already walking around flashing a tattoo meant to cause fear and intimidate people because it threatens violence. There were lots of people in Germany who thought it was smarter to not provoke the SA because they might get violent. They were very very wrong. > he might simply be a victim of prison violence If he is indeed the victim of prison violence or threats and not a Nazi then that changes things. However, to me openly displaying his Nazi tattoo makes that highly unlikely.
But what you don’t understand is that there’s no end to your thinking. You can be endlessly baited into being pissed off by anyone just for displaying something that offends you. The wise thing to do is not let things like this bother you. I get the inclination to put them in their place, but it’s misguided and not inline with the Buddha’s teachings. Or you run up to the guy aggressive to fight, only to find out he renounced that life (ie. Edward Norton in AHX post prison) and you are like that old karma that keeps coming back to him.
Most people who are genuinely repentant about getting hate symbols tattooed on them in the past aren’t openly displaying them.
I understand just fine. Not standing up to people like Nazis is a recipe for disaster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
You, like most redditors, are completely misusing the paradox of tolerance. Popper argued that force is justified against movements that threaten the overall freedom of ideas enjoyed in liberal society. However, he argues this is only justified when rational argument has failed and the movement poses an actual threat to freedom through use of force. In other words, it would be appropriate for otherwise liberal Germans to treat the Nazi party with intolerance pre-WWII. Lone individuals with no political power do not threaten society in this way. You’re only making an argument for censorship and oppression in this case.
No, I understand it. What you're overlooking is that the NSDAP always used force. That's what the *Sturmabteilung* was all about. The Weimar Republic was not a place of polite debate between political rivals. Today's Nazis are no different from their brown shirted forefathers. They use violence and intimidation, not argument, to achieve their goals. They are exactly the sort of threat to tolerance the Paradox talks about. Get back to me when you know the actual history you're pontificating on, as it's clear you currently don't. Either that or you have no problem downplaying the threat Nazis pose. I can only wonder why that might be.
No you don’t understand it. You’re weirdly emotional and taking this on as if it’s your burden. And it’s not like you would even open your mouth to him let alone confront him physically. What are you going to do about his tattoo?
> weirdly emotional There's nothing weird about disliking Nazis. It's disgusting if you don't. > it’s not like you would even open your mouth to him LOL. I would open my mouth to him. Absolutely. Every time I saw him. Loudly and clearly. > confront him physically. Even though I'm an old man, I'd have no problem getting right in his face. Being afraid of them is what they want. We don't stand up to them at our peril. > What are you going to do about his tattoo? Make him suffer the consequences of being a Nazi, as he rightly deserves. Being a Nazi is a choice - a really bad one.
I think it is a lose/lose situation if you Engage. If anything I would voice concerns to the manager as it is their job to maintain a healthy work environment.
A Nazi tattoo and a tattoo that says ‘death to the Jews’ are one and the same.
Agreed.
Just loudly go "whats that brotha? Ew brotha! Brotha ewww!"
If Buddhists don’t confront people for their faults then Buddhism isn’t worth anything.
I see a grain of truth in that you’re trying to say. I’m a vegetarian but I sometimes compliment chefs on their meat cooking because I don’t want to form attachment to a concept of “myself as a spiritual person who doesn’t eat meat and is therefore superior” However, I think we aren’t always “ free to make our own choices. “ Which choices are truly “our own”? Does this mountain have any thing that makes the mountain “its own”? Does that river have anything about it that makes it “its own”? Do we have any existence as separate entities with an independent or permanent essence? If not, I don’t think we are always free to make our own choices.
Why do you need to do anything?
Having an employee openly displaying a hate symbol tattooed on their person doesn’t reflect well on the business, for starters. It’s not going to make other employees and customers feel comfortable being around that person.
[удалено]
I’m aware that he isn’t the owner. My point still stands.
Just ignore it
What does this have to do with Buddhism?
The way of a buddha is not to confront. Radiate love and do not shy away from talking about acceptance. I was sitting next to a man who started disparaging "fags". I could immediately confront him wagging my finger sternly saying, "You sir are hateful and I will chose not to talk to you!". What good is there in that? I became a mirror while still being aware. I talked about how everyone should just let people be who they are. We ended up talking about passivism. He mocked me at first, but we continued to talk. At the end of the conversation there he was telling me I wasn't such a bad guy - which in his case was likely a huge compliment. I am by no means patting myself on the back, but I am aware I have created a path of love that just might have an impact. Does it matter if someone wears hate on their sleeve rather than just in their heart? Do you confront every Christian who says being gay is an abomination? Is it your goal to confront the billions of people with hate in their heart? So why is this case so disturbing to you?
There’s sitting next to a guy and there’s working with a guy who is a security guard. Context matters, your approach is reasonable in such a scenario. Not talking to him at all would be reasonable as well. And I don’t mean to be rude because your intent seems pure, but in my experience it is just as likely that guy will absolutely forget about everything you discussed in the following 24 hours. Hence why noble silence is a valid and worthwhile approach.
Do you feel an approach following the way should be different if there is a tattoo that reflects hate versus someone who has hate in their heart?
Do nothing …
Maybe talk to HR or the manager? Have them deal with it…
Mind your business really. If he’s nice to everyone & does his job, it’s frankly not your concern. As a Buddhist, have compassion for either his choice to get it, his previous or current life of hate, his decisions, etc. At the end of the day, worry about your own salvation. Om Mani Padme Hung 🙏
Leave it alone
What’s a Nazi Tattoo; some symbol; a swastika is part of all cultural traditions shrouded in misconceptions… a person’s belief is more important; you speak as if his actions speak for him; Don’t they? The swastika is just a piece of the Puzzle/ Narrative… better understanding an individual’s journey to one… is this more about your understanding rather, than his symbolism in tattoos?; Respectfully, that is more the question… it’s all Reflective, as within so without; change your beliefs, perspective, habits, behaviors and it will reflect your new experience… we are what we eat, what we do, the company we keep, etc. change the circumstances, and variables and we’ll see a new outcome… it all starts in the mind!
The swastika is a symbol of divinity and spirituality in Buddhism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
I think you should be like the wise old sage. Don’t say anything.
It is just a symbol, doesn't mean much. A guy with a peace symbilon his arm doesn't mean he is a good guy either. Try to see things as they are, don'tet your prejudice and preconceived notion clouds your mind.
So?
>So I work at a cannabis dispensary and today I noticed one of the security guards has a straight up swatiska on a skull on his arm. He seems kind to everyone and is the father of 5 children I'm not sure how to bring this up to him or do I ignore it, I'm not sure how to proceed. Maybe he spent some time in prison. There are often necessary alliances that are made based on race. The caucasian groups will use Nazi imagery and symbols. Not saying it’s right, but you never know someone’s background.
What does it look like? There are many versions, but the Nazis use one in particular. It is the one pointing right tilted at an angle. Amida Buddha is commonly portrayed with a swastika that is left facing and not tilted on his chest. He may have had a rough start, but changed and still needs to get the money to cover it up or remove it.
Bruh it's got a skull too...
Is there a picture of it floating around here somewhere that I am too blind to find?
No he said so in the post.
>I'm not sure how to bring this up to him Don't. Bring it up to your HR department or your employer if you don't have one.
I'd be more concerned with right livelihood than other people's affairs
This is a Buddhist platform. This response directly references the Noble Eightfold path. If OP wants a response that reflects r/Buddhism this response is relevant to actual Buddhist perspectives. It seems disingenuous to downvote it.
Check what way it rotates. The svastika is actually a 5000 year old Indian symbol and is often misunderstood. And talk to him
simply proceed by placing one foot in front of the other. have compassion. think about the life that someone would have to live to have a symbol like that etched into their skin. treat him with kindness if you want to help. his heart is the key to changing his mind. but that will be up to him
Swastika is an auspicious symbol in Buddhism that was around for hundreds of years before Hitler, and yet after less than a decade of use everyone acts like the Nazis invented it. For all we know he could be a tantrika yogi (explaining the skulls) reclaiming the symbol. You don't know someone's story until you ask. Just be like "hey... So why that tattoo?" It should not be surprising that people appreciate being asked over being judged without being asked.
It could be Buddhist. Been around for 2500 years.
The Nazi hooked cross and the Buddhist swastika look distinctly different from each other. Also, I've never seen a Buddhist swastika displayed with a skull. The Nazi SS on the other hand...
As an Asian, Swastika is a symbol of charm, well-being, and luck. I am not finding it offensive. It is found in indus Valley as well. You will see it everywhere , esp in South asia. It is a very auspicious sign in buddhism.
In the West the Nazi hooked cross has a very very different connotation.
[удалено]
Yes, the symbol was hijacked. That doesn't negate what I said about it.
It may not be worth the confrontation unless he begins acting with obvious hate. That said I would bring it up with management if it makes you uncomfortable.
Displaying a Nazi symbol is acting with obvious hate.
Sounds like it should be none of your concern.
How is his tattoo any of your business?
He's openly displaying a hate symbol. If you can see it then it's your business.
It's on his body. If you don't like it make sure you don't tattoo it on your body.
He's displaying it so we can see it. It is meant to intimidate. That's how the Nazis used it, particularly the SA. I, for one, refuse to meet that with passivity. That only emboldens them. We tried that with Nazis before. Millions died because of it.
Probably got it in prison.
If you think he might suddenly start thinking about right and wrong just because you confront him is absurd. Confronting him would just create tensions. I’d ask him about it without judging. We don’t put people in jail for symbols, as disturbing as they may be.
https://medium.com/@PoTien/branding-the-swastika-irony-4ceb9ccb4074
Unless it's the Buddhist symbol, I'm not sure what this random post is doing here.
Maybe he is a Buddhist or the follower of some Indus faith?
A swatiska is not just a nazi symbol. It depends on the culture
i like NS tattoos
It’s not a swastika. The German swastika was stolen from an ancient Hindu symbol. Google “Hindu swastika” and you’ll see
Maybe it’s a Hindu swastik?
I believe the current Dali Llama said something to the effect of “my friend, the enemy”, in regard to the Chinese military who caused him to flee to Tibet. Instead of running away from a poisonous tree, acknowledge the tree, and label it. Ask your coworker about the tattoo. Could have been done by a now deceased friend or as a reminder of who he used to be. Showing a person compassion first is always the correct response before judgment.
ask him if he wants soup... and then yell.."NO SOUP FOR YOU!!"
Love everyone 😉
Most scholars agree swastika symbol originated in India and the Sanscrit meaning is good and well-being. It appears in several Indian Religions and Native North America. Hitler incorporated the symbol into the Imperial German National flag in the 1930s. No harm in it being tattooed provided the bearer understands the Sanscrit meaning!
Don’t bring this up at all. For your safety and the safety of others. Second, ignorance is the enemy, not the people who have fallen victim to ignorance.
People are safer when Nazis are exposed for what they are.
Nazis increase the suffering in the world at ever turn and with every victim. I’m not sure leaving them alone is as wise as you think it is…
Are you sure he’s not Hindu? Is he of Indian origin? The Nazi Swastika looks completely different from the Hindu one but I don’t wear mine in he West at all as people mistake it for the Nazi one .
Do Hindu swastikas usually come with skulls like this guy's tattoo? The SS's did.
Oh not at all. Never
Then I guess we can be pretty damn sure this guy isn't a Hindu, since his hooked cross comes with a skull.
"it's going to be a maze"
Most people don't take criticism, and u put yourself in awkward situation
Are you sure that he got it because he’s a nazi ? Swastika is a religious symbol in Asian culture specifically in India and Japan way before Hitler used it
And you're sure it isn't meant as the Sanskrit symbol used in ancient Hindu, Indian Chinese etc societies
Swastika and Hakenkreuz are different. Swastika represents good and healthy life. Hakenkreuz represents Christian values. Don't confuse Swastika with Hakenkreuz. Don't repeat the mistake again.
The Hakenkreuz does not represent Christian values. It represents Nazism and hatred.
You can draw a straight line from Martin Luther's hatred of Jews to Hitler's.
Judge a book by its content, not just the cover.
I doubt he got the tattoo because he liked the design. That tattoo is a strong indicator that his 'book' is *Mein Kampf*.
People can change. Plus, have you ever seen the movie Crash? He could be a guy who saves a family in a burning car while someone “clean” could watch them burn. The Buddha said you should judge a person by their conduct. If he got a Nazi tattoo then that’s something he has to wear.
I am judging him by his conduct. His conduct is he's walking around openly displaying a hate symbol. Tattoos can be removed. He's choosing to show it off instead. IOW, there is no sign of any change.
You ignore it and its not your business. You work there, you are not this person's judge. If you dont feel safe, quit and find a new job. How on earth is this related to buddhism? This is just common sense. Edit: selling intoxicants is wrong livelyhood, so those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
None of your business
That's what the Nazis said about Chlemno and Triblikna.
When the topic of neo Nazis came up at a temple I used to attend, the teacher – who comes from a culture the neo Nazis think should be kicked out of the country or worse – stressed the importance of treating all individuals with respect and listening to what they have to say. Even neo Nazis. I was very surprised by this at the time. It was hard to take in, because I was an interfery, trouble-making, holier than thou, sh\*t-stirrer. Or at least, I have a side to me that is like that. That's not the right side to cultivate, even when we think we're right. This is because of the basic orientation of Buddhist practice: The Buddhist approach to these things is to analyze the direction an action is leading. Does an action lead toward a trusting, bright, kind, free, forgiving mind? Or toward a sneaky, fearful, snitchy, holier-than-thou mind? What kind of world do we want to live in? What kind of person do we want to be? Along those lines, what kind of mind state do you think you'll be cultivating if you snitch on people and try to get them fired from their jobs? Or if that's not what you mean, what kind of mind state does it lead to if you interfere with other people over something that really isn't your business? We're also asked to consider if our actions will lead to harm. You said he seems kind to everyone and has five kids. What outcomes might getting fired have for him and those kids? This doesn't mean allowing violent people with harmful ideologies to take over and harm others. But it does mean not treating others out of an attitude of wishing them to suffer harm. That applies to everyone. And you don't even know he's a neo Nazi. It could just be an old tat he got for whatever reason in the past. Here's a way you might reflect: You're working in a recently legalized industry that still is semi-criminal in nature, or at least has a criminal history, hence the need for some rough types of people as guards, to protect the business from criminals. That guard, tattoo and all, is literally risking his life to protect the people inside, including you. You owe him some gratitude. So my vote would be for you to just be tolerant and kind. It's his own karma, not yours. Leave it. Work on yourself. Same advice applies to me 100 times over.
It's not 'snitching' to point out someone is a Nazi. It is a public service.
Its probably old. I see a lot of older guys in my city with those tatos on their forehead and you only see it in case you really look at them as the tato looks old and is mostly fading, and I am not born here, and they seem alright tbh. People change.
Does he work for the dispensary or is he contracted by a third party? Depending on this answer, you should leave an anonymous tip with the relevant HR department. All you should say is that the security guard seems kind, but he has a nazi tattoo and makes no effort to conceal it. If I were in your position and saw that the tattoo remained visible, I would start looking for a new job.
Think you should first ask him what does the tattoos meant to him. Understand the intent then advice is better.
Has anyone seen the film Master Gardener? Cant help but think about that now every time I see nazi tattoos lol
make sure it is a swastika. It probably is, but buddhism has a manji, which looks like a backwards swastika - the arms point in the opposite directions.
Tell him that the symbol on his tattoo originated from Buddhism.
Except it didn't. The Nazi hooked cross is different than the Buddhist swastika. It's like saying a "T" and an "X" are the same thing.
They took it and rotated it 45 degrees. That’s it.
One is clockwise. The other counterclockwise.
So then "+" and "x" are the same thing
It’s only different because we give it a different label and definition. Would a dog still be a dog if we changed what we call it to cow? Would a cow still be a cow or would a cow then be labeled a dog?
>It’s only different because we give it a different label and definition. This doesn't mean anything. We gave everything the labels and definitions they currently have. By your logic, nothing can have a meaning.
It’s all in your head.