It seems that Burger King decided that Carl’s Jr had a good thing going using (Padma) Lakshmi to advertise hamburgers, so they ran an ad in Spain using Padma Lakshmi to advertise … Ham Burgers with the tag line “The Snack is Sacred.”
I don’t know about you, but even as a non-Hindu I found this pretty offensive. Lakshmi is the Goddess of wealth and learning, and they’re using her image in an ignorant way to promote a pretty cheap foodstuff. I mean, if you’re going to be offensive and use a Hindu Goddess to sell a meat product, why not go all the way and get your forbidden foodstuffs right? Hindus are most offended by beef and Muslims are most offended by pork. It’s like they couldn’t even be bothered to tell their non-Christian religions apart, even though Spain was ruled by Muslims for hundreds of years.
Of course, when news got out, a holy ruckus was raised, and BK issued a rare apology:
“We are apologising because it wasn’t our intent to offend anyone,” said spokeswoman Denise T Wilson. “Burger King Corporation values and respects all of its guests as well as the communities we serve. This in-store advertisement was running to support only local promotion for three restaurants in Spain and was not intended to offend anyone. “Out of respect for the Hindu community, the limited-time advertisement has been removed from the restaurants,” she added. [link]
At BK, we offend you our way.
Even the Koran says it was a polytheistic temple; the only dispute is over whether visiting merchants from the sub-continent had installed gods/left inscriptions.
yes, all polytheism is the same… next stop? krishna niti by the same p n oak. enjoy.
“At least in the South, it is Saraswati who is the goddess of learning, and Lakshmi is our lady of wealth. But, in any case, even as a non-classist, I found this statement pretty offensive. Can rich people not shop at Walmart?”
And I’m offended by your claim that this is universally true among Hindus in the South. So there.
“I havent read Tolle, but I found this statement hilarious given that the Gita itself “plagiarized” from Buddhism in order to blunt its competitive edge, or should I say assimilation?”
I found your statement hilarious given that Buddhism “plagiarized” much from Upanishadic thought, or should I say “modified” it.
“Prior to Buddhism/Jainism, Hindus were eating beef, but they copied the Buddhist/Jain’s compassion. I personally think that the Hindus copied these practices that you refer to.”
Actually, this is a disputed idea-Doniger seems to believe that it was hardly compassion on the part of the Buddhists, but rather as a simple way or differentiating from vedic sacrifice. Compassion wasn’t the primary motivation at all. Or so they say. Even within the Rig Veda, there are references to local inhabitants who have characteristics of sramanic practitioners.
Not a single historian has actually come up with a convincing explanation of why the cow eventually acquired a reverential status after being eaten with gusto, particularly given that panchaganya was considered purifying.
You must lead a charmed existence to be so easily amused. I don’t see the difficulty in saying that Buddhism plagiarized/assimilated/took/[insert favorite pejorative/compliment] from early (pre-Buddhist) Upanishads.
The original statement was about the Gita and Buddhism, which was what I specifically responded to. Sadly, zee seems to be otherwise occupied since such time as the links have been posted, which is why I assume he/she has been unable to respond to them. But I do hope zee gets to see them, of course, after responsibly verifying that I have not changed the Google search engine or haXX0r3d zee’s machine to change the entire world view that zee can see.
Oak‘s routine is hilarious! I had heard of Krishnaniti = Christianity before, but it is only from these links that I learn that:
Take the term Islam itself. That is the Sanskrit term “Ishalayam” meaning the Temple of God
At that stage being bereft of the uniform Vedic teaching (of the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Ramayan and Mahabharat) humanity broke-up into a number of cults such as Romans i.e., Ramans (followers of Rama); Chrisnans (followers of Chrisn) now malpronounced as Christians; Samaritans (followers of Smrutis such as Manusmruti); Stoics i.e., Staviks (those believing in meditation); Essenese (followers of Isan, the father-god Lord Shiva); Palestinians (followers of Pulastin); Judaists i.e., Yedu’s of Lord Krishna’s clan; Sadduceans (i.e., Sadhujan meaning monks) and Malencians (i.e., Mlenchhas meaning those who lapsed into undisciplined behaviour). That in the broad outline is World history from the very first generation of human beings to our own.
Another pearl of wisdom is, of course, that Taj Mahal = Tejomahalay. This man’s life is GGM! I wish I had his gift for multilingual punnery, but without the tinfoil hat, of course.
“Zainab, Don’t count on my knowledge, but no, I don’t think it’s a similar practice–my understanding is that Christian baptism is a sort of initiation into the religion, not true of the (main) strands of Hinduism, as far as I know.”
before you go off, donning the cloak of nutters like oakie, i’d recommend actually living as a devout hindu (of any sort) for a while. That you likely do not know how to go about doing so should not prove to be a problem.
Nayagan, So, am I to understand that you deny that Romans = Ramans = followers of Rama?
You’re no fun, no fun at all! 😉
Y’all just need to join ISKCON. That will settle all of this.
Also, not to forget the two main categories of males: Bra men, which is a colloquial rendition of Brahman, and Ass men, which, courtesy of lisps, has become known to us as Atman.
“The original statement was about the Gita and Buddhism, which was what I specifically responded to.”
wow you really have no clue whatsoever to what you’re even responding too. But I suppose actually reading people’s comments gets in the away of being a reactionary. In fact, I doubt you’ve even read the links you’ve posted too. Zee’s comment was a little extraneous, but given that there was discussion on perceptions of hinduism in the west, it wasn’t unwarranted. Given Tolle’s own background in India, the language he uses in the book, it does seem odd that he never actually mentions the Gita. Not enough to “irk” me as it did Zee, but it is very reasonable to wonder if there was some underlying motivation on his part in refraining from mentioning it and wether its due to how Hinduism is perceived by many westerners and whether that would turn people off.
But more to the point, even after some 10 posts in the this thread, you seem to be incapable of expressing why it pisses you off that some hindus don’t like seeing this ad.
Very perceptive observation! I don’t need to. I am that good.
Well said. I hope to see Hindus, not just in Spain, but also in the US and India, leading dharnas, protesting and refusing to use Sri Lakshmi brand flour, Vishnu crackers, and Sree Krishna sweets. I find these downright disgusting.
Where did I say it pissed me off?
I really see no reason to be offended. We can have “Ganesh Paan & Tobacco Shop” and “Laxmi Beedi”. Why not a Saraswati burger?
One could argue that tobacco isn’t prohibited by the religion. That’s not exactly true. It’s an intoxicant and there are prohibitions against intoxicants. So, really, if it wasn’t for the internet, nobody would have really cared about this advertisement.
And I thought this Orlando Sentinel editorial cartoon of Dr. Manmohan Singh smoking what appears to be a cigar or cheroot was offensive…
P.S. Click on cartoon tab 2.
Rob, you are not going to get brownie points for stating the obvious. I would like to see how you, in your infinite wisdom, can deny that American Indians are descendants of the “real” Indians, as evident from their chanting “um,um,um,um” while dancing around the campfire, the chanting being an Americanized derivative of “Om, Om, Om” and the fire having deep roots, of course, in the Aryan tradition of havan. There is even a recent, 20th century evidence of their anthropoligical connection to Bharat. Their immense success with casinos is directly attributed to the murti of Goddess Laxmi that they brought over from desh in 1500BC. If you don’t believe that, you have obviously never played teenpatti on Diwali night.
BTW, What’s the deal with the idols of Kaaba that Mr.Muhammad of Arabia personally destroyed ?. Is there any description of the idols he destroyed. That could give us clues on whether there are really links between the idols we see in India and the Kaaba.
I don’t see anything wrong with the ad. Looks like these protests are for folks who have a lot of time in their hands.
Some nice points Floridian; of course, the conclusion was evident from the get-go–I mean, Indian = Indian; even more obvious than Ro(a)man = follower of Rama! 😉
I am sure Shiv Ji would be laughing uncontrollably, and Indra Dev would have spilled his cup of Soma rasa at that statement, Alok.
Really, the objections against the advert are inexplicable.The image is as innocent as a picture of the virgin Mary on a pack of condoms, or Mohammed brand canned ham. And that is completely cool too, right?
Speaking of Romans (Ramans), Rahman, one of the 99 official names of Allah is clearly an Arabic version of Raman. Hence proved.
So, since I was taking a brief break…
zee (who has gone mysteriously silent ever since the links were posted, I sincerely hope he/she’s not trapped under something heavy!) said Tolle plagiarized the Gita, and then attributed stuff to Buddhism. I found this hilarious since the “plagiarism” (or as I’ve said before, use your favorite phrase) was in the opposite direction at least between the latter two, and did not say anything about Tolle specifically since I hadn’t read the book. Thankfully, my realization of Scientology as the ultimate truth eliminates the need to resort to the kind of mumbo jumbo like Tolle, Chopra, and Amritanandamayi.
And about folks who had a lot of hands in their time…
You should write an offended letter to the Zedster, patron saint of Hindu American offence.
Rajan Zed pointed out that Hinduism promoted strict vegetarianism insisting on ahimsa (not harming living creatures) and non-killing, and renouncing animal slaughter and meat eating. It suggested taking of sattvik (vegetables, fruits, etc.) and avoiding rajasik (eggs, etc.) and tamasik (meat, intoxicants, etc.) foods.
I wonder if the ~60+% of Hindus who eat meat should now protest at being marginalized by the HAF.
Not to mention that their habit of sitting on bison skin is clearly a ripoff from Shiva and his steed.
That is actually the “yogic diet” as propounded by Krishna in the Gita (a yogic treatise). Many Buddhists also follow that diet, avoiding onions and garlic as well (as do yogis and Jains).
There are several people in India who follow a yogic/sattvic diet their entire life, and many who follow the diet periodically (certain days of the week or month, or for a specific time period in their life). It depends on one’s sub-cultural/religious mileiu or on one’s personal choice as well in some cases.
“I found this hilarious since the “plagiarism” (or as I’ve said before, use your favorite phrase) was in the opposite direction at least between the latter two”
So which uniquely Buddhist concepts were plagiarized? You’d have to prove that the Gita authors weren’t lifting it from earlier Upanishadic or even other sramanic traditions-which your sources (or source, rather) don’t actually do.
“and did not say anything about Tolle”
So then why get your panties in a bunch over zee’s comments since you have no idea which concepts in Tolle’s book he/she was referring to?
“Thankfully, my realization of Scientology as the ultimate truth eliminates the need to resort to the kind of mumbo jumbo like Tolle, Chopra, and Amritanandamayi.”
Hmm? I made it clear that I found zee’s outrage hilarious given the direction of “plagiarism” of several Gita concepts from Buddhism. Your “passionate” defence and intuiting of zee’s unspoken ideas make me more comfortable about zee not being trapped under something heavy.
Good point, Rahul–one reason Hindutva has heretofore failed to break the stranglehold of “The Family” is its sometimes lapsing (whether careless or intentional could, I suppose, be debated) into a somewhat exclusivist conception of Hinduism. We’re working on emphasizing inclusiveness and diversity, though, for version 2.0. 😉
With my knowledge of both marketing and Hindu religion, I should really write the definitive comment on this subject. But it’s late and I’m taking the ABD to this Harry Potter shindig tonight that goes on all night like religious movies on Shivaratri nights back when I was growing up. Maybe tomorrow, if I am not too busy.
What are you trying to do, Rahul? Set a record for how many comments you can make on one thread? Not that they aren’t good.
Rahul: Thanks for keeping my name alive in the thread in a series of irrelevant comments even when I was busy in my real life. About you references: what is hilarious is that you reference the same wiki page I referenced before you (although I took care to mention the referenced within). The references in wiki contradicts your claim. You second reference is an essay that gives a range (500-200 BC), which says nothing at all.
Thanks to esdawet and others for clearing some things for Rahul. But I refuse to argue with Rahul on this topic anymore as it is hardly related to the thread Ennis provided (and also because I have a world outside the internet). Rahul: I have heard you enough and seen your references, now please leave it to me to draw my conclusion, instead of fox-news like force feeding your opinion to me.
Now onto something related for others: Is there any scripture in Hinduism, where beef eating is written to be forbidden ? I have never heard/seen any, so I’m curious.
Thankfully Rajan Zed doesn’t get to issue fatwas. Anyway, I have washed my sins in the Ganges (another cool feature of Hinduism)last week, and can satiate my tamasik wanderlust free of guilt for at leat another year.
Buddhism is nothing more than yoga theory stripped down to its essence (the four noble truths).
Buddhism was definetly modeled after earlier forms of Indic philosophical thought. It was not created in a vacuum.
That being said, why argue which came first – the chicken or the egg? They are both the same, in this case.
The chicken IS the egg.
“Now onto something related for others: Is there any scripture in Hinduism, where beef eating is written to be forbidden ? I have never heard/seen any, so I’m curious.”
Seeing as how this thread has derailed anyways….the answer is yes, but depends on how its interpreted-there are references within the Rig Veda, though there are verses that go against it, some dharmashastras seem to advocate abstaining from beef. The Mahabharata and various Puranas do have references in reverence of the cow and their protection. I’ve also read that whatever prohibitions or sentiments that existed were meant for milk cows and were not applicable to bulls and oxen.
A lot of it is also based on how certain things are translated, and of course what the motivations of the scholar might be (both traditional and non-traditional).
Of course. I’d never get in the way of your having an opinion about chronology
in contradictionindependent of the facts.
Like what? That the Gita came post Buddhism, unlike claims made by a certain someone about new/old testament and quran/bible? I realize that revisionists see this as a grave threat to their entire being, and that GGM uncles have boldly come forth to posit that Karma/Jnana Yoga traditions existed in shamanic traditions, but these claims mostly seems to be in the realm of “Mina Losa, gujarati washerwoman from bhavnagar”. I a
This is what new agey stuff does, I tell ya. Try the only true belief system there is!
That would certainly be a welcome change. The history of conservative movements, especially those organized around culture, gives one pause, though.
You know things are bad when Floridian feels the need to step in 🙂 I’ll rate limit now. Enjoy Hari Puttar.
114 LS there are prohibitions against intoxication in Hinduism.
Regardless of that, since you quote puranic references of people in intoxicated states. Are you therefore implying that a picture of Shiva on alcohol bottles would not have led to “outrage” by the same set of people who are so now?
I seriously doubt that.
FWIW there are branches of Hinduism that do not accord authenticity to Puranic text but that’s irrelevant to the point I made in #113.
“Perhaps the Gita was itself the original and Buddha was the plagiarist.”
Lots of what passes off as Hinduism today has been influenced by Buddhism. For example the principle of non-violence – original Hinduism glorified it; the gods are perenially at war and many are depicted carrying weapons. Respect for non-human life forms – original Hinduism sanctioned the sacrifice of animals (eg Ashwamedha), infact this still happens in many parts of India where goats and chickens are sacrificed within temple compounds..and the Hindu gods frequently go on hunting expeditions. Vegetarianism, this is where Jainism had a huge influence. It was ‘Hinduism’ that started co-opting Buddhist and Jain teachings.
Without a doubt, the folks we refer to as “Hindus” today did NOT realize that they were practictioners of the same religion until the 1850s when the British formalized the name of the polytheistic religionS (plural form of “religion”) of South Asia.
The “Hindu” religion of South India prior to the 1850s is so vastly different from the “Hindu” practiced in North India prior to 1850s. Most North Indians don’t even know many South Indian gods/goddesses, or even by able to pronounce their names. The myths surrounding the South and North Indian gods are different.
South Indians worship Murugan, which has been made into an avatar of one of the Hindu trinity, but this is a much later development. This same revisionist pattern of “avatarizing” South Indian gods has been repeated over and over again. Even Jesus Christ has been made an avatar of Raama/Krishna by latter-day Hindus!
In South India, they worship: Kartikaya, Murugan, Venkatasha(sp?), Senthil, etc. Moreover, the North Indians, in order to distinguish themselves from the South Indians, tend to be Vaishnavites, and some are even insistent that this is NOT Hinduism. For example, the ISKCON here in Boston, the desi priest there made it clear that “We are not Hindus. We are Monotheists”. Same way, South Indians typically worship a Shiva, or an indigenous Dravidian god that has been made into an avatar of Shiva.
The idols from South India and North India are quite different as well as is the architecture. But just because the art is different, this doesn’t have to mean that the two religions are different. After all, Anatolian churches look very differently than St. Paul’s Cathedral.
Finally, in Boston, I noticed that the Hindu temple here is primarily ‘marketed’ towards the South Indians – mostly new computer professionals. The North Indians go to a different place of worship or they go to gurudwaras, even if they are not Sikh.
All four Vaishnava (Vishnu) sampradayas originated in SOUTH India and their strongholds are there.
Umm…ISCKON started in Bengal I think. The Vaishnava Sampradaya of Bengal is also very strong with the likes of Chaitanya and others.
Whether ISKCON is an authentic branch of any of the four major Vaishnava sampradayas is a constroversial point that has been contested for decades.
I am speaking of the four Vaishnava sampradayas – Sri, Rudra, Kumar and Brahma Sampradayas, represented by their acharyas – Ramanuja, Vishnu Swami, Nimbarka and Madhva, respectively.
Look at me everyone! I’m boston_mahesh, a dark skinned tamil who routinely gets fair skinned babes. I’m so fucking high class.
I think you meant don’t fuck with Viswanathan Ranjana Gopala Ramu Deva. We all know that’s your real name you little tamil tiger, so put down the comic books “mahesh” and embrace your heritage. Don’t get so caught up in the grandeur of class systems, chatting up someone with lighter skin than you isn’t what everyone would call being productive.
Play time has just begun for Kashy.
It’s the actual mode of thinking for people from certain parts of South Asia. The skin color spectrum and class system is why Desi’s are historically so insecure in the first place
Mahesh, one of the nice things about polytheism is that the God(s) you worship aren’t necessarily indicative of the theological beliefs you hold. The thing with Hinduism in general is that your God(s) are personal to your family/clan/caste/village rather than universal. They are, in fact, all simply representations of a broader ultimate reality anyway. Whichever representation has resonance with you is your business.
Where it gets its unity as a religion is in the broader cultural understanding of Brahman and Dharma and has very little to do with whichever forms of divinity you are accustomed to revering.
144 Â· Yoga Fire on July 15, 2009 04:36 PM Mahesh, one of the nice things about polytheism is that the God(s) you worship aren’t necessarily indicative of the theological beliefs you hold. The thing with Hinduism in general is that your God(s) are personal to your family/clan/caste/village rather than universal. They are, in fact, all simply representations of a broader ultimate reality anyway. Whichever representation has resonance with you is your business.
Where it gets its unity as a religion is in the broader cultural understanding of Brahman and Dharma and has very little to do with whichever forms of divinity you are accustomed to revering.
I realize that polytheism is nice. That’s not what my post was about. My post was about how there was not one unified/coherent religion as practiced in South Asia, but instead, there were at least 2 very different belief systems and practices.
? I’m a gay Indian American Hindu whose father died when he was 21. You think I haven’t had any ‘setbacks of the sort that strip [me] of self-confidence” despite whatever other advantages I might have? That’s awfully presumptuous.
In any case, one might consider that it is precisely because of those setbacks that I can value the role that religion can play people’s lives and at the same time am entitled to my own opinions about whether i prefer more abstract and philosophical versions of faith rather than those which invoke the power of a supreme deity to convince people to follow. Or are atheists/agnostics/nonbelievers/complicated thinkers not entitled to their own ideas? Is Abdolkarim Soroush not Muslim just because he’s a philosopher? Is Buddhism completely outside of South Asian religious traditions just because it’s identified as a separate faith and has only recently found a following again in South Asia?
I apologise that I chose my words in a way that offended you. Sincerely. However, what i was trying to say – that I prefer the more abstraction-based ideas in some of the Upsanishads that I’ve read excerpts of in English than the Gita’s reliance on an the overwhelming power of God, given that they have similar ideas.
Um, no. It’s because I’ve actually read the book as well as other books and have opinions about the Gita. It’s just something that sort of happens if you take it seriously at some point.
Well, one, I wasn’t disrespectful to krishna – I was sarcastic about the gita. But why do I prefer Buddha – because he was moved by poverty. And I believe he existed.
To quote Stephen Colbert to Bill O’Reilly, “Yes, that must be it.”
well i’ve never heard of these things, but that’s fine with me. I like some ideas of Karl Marx too but that does’t make me a Stalinist.
what do you think?
Dr. A, I am sorry that your father is no more.
So totally offensive – using Lakshmi to advertise beef?! Ridiculous.
— “The snack is sacred but the idiocy divine” Love the tagline Ennis.
“I realize that revisionists see this as a grave threat to their entire being, and that GGM uncles have boldly come forth to posit that Karma/Jnana Yoga traditions existed in shamanic traditions, but these claims mostly seems to be in the realm of “Mina Losa, gujarati washerwoman from bhavnagar”. “
Right…cause there is just no indication of Jnana Yoga in the earlier Upanishads…who’s the revisionist?
“that the Gita came post Buddhism, unlike claims made by a certain someone about new/old testament and quran/bible?”
Actually, the issue was your claim that it directly plagiarized from Buddhist teachings, and the that concepts were uniquely Buddhist. (and to which you’re still unable to provide any evidence). I get that this is the YSS line that people have to be hold but come on!