Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Siddhartha Leaves Wife and Newborn Son.
JosephW
Veteran
Yes, news right?
What do you guys think about about Siddhartha leaving his wife and newborn son to go on his journey?
What do you guys think about about Siddhartha leaving his wife and newborn son to go on his journey?
0
Comments
That said, my father's motives probably weren't as noble as the Buddha's, who's said to have set out with compassion in his heart for all affected by ageing, illness, and death, and who eventually returned to share what he'd discovered with his family and anyone else who'd listen, his son eventually ordaining himself (and his wife, too, if you believe the later literature). In addition, they weren't left helpless, but under the care and protection of his wealthy father (and it should also be noted that the story of him 'sneaking off' in the middle of the night while his wife and child slept isn't mentioned anywhere in the Pali Canon itself, but comes from later, post-canonical sources).
So while I'm somewhat critical of the act in and of itself, and can understand why others find it rather unbecoming of someone supposedly so worthy of respect, I think the Buddha deserves some slack given his noble motives and the fact that we don't have any idea how it actually went down.
There are those who think it was a wise thing to do, and those who think it was selfish.
As someone mentioned, it was wise in hindsight.
But I guess I would ask, how would we judge his action if it had totally failed? The reason I ask that is that I think we should consider that looking at it in hindsight sort of leads us to imply that the ends justified the means.
This being said though, you never know the position that he was in or what he was going through, exactly...
But it is precisely the otherworldliness of Buddha's undertaking that is artfully underlined in the story. It may not even have been true; perhaps it was added to the Gospel stories to glorify what Siddhartha had done. That is to say, what prince could be so detached from creature comforts of a warm home with soft furnishings and servants —and even to give up the tender embraces of wife and child?
Note also that in the Christian wisdom tradition, Jesus admonishes his disciples to leave family, kith, and kin behind —and go and follow him.
We simply cannot judge people of other societies from bygone ages by our own standards and yet at the same time be fair to them. But, beyond that, the stories may very well have been embellished to highlight things that their first hearers heard in a very different way than we either can or will hear.
But if you're going to take that stance as a principle, then we can't judge Siddhartha/Buddha on anything he did at that time...most of which was very good...or, oops, I guess I can't make that judgement. Hmm.
So taking that into account, and imaging him eventually coming into contact with the samana tradition of wandering ascetics and finding himself deeply called to follow that way of life, I have some sympathy for him and his predicament. That doesn't mean I necessary praise his decision to leave his wife and son to become a wandering ascetic; but for all I know, he discussed it with his wife and she supported his decision. (In my own case, my longtime girlfriend of nine years has said that she'd support my decision to ordain if I ever chose to follow that path). Just one perspective to consider.
The birth narratives ARE part of the story, too. Essential to the story, also, is his royal, untainted upbringing. In the end his wife became an ardent follower, too. The story is a gospel and not one containing any stumbling blocks at all, so far as I'm concerned.
I maintain that Buddha DID NO HARM. Rather than causing pain, he brought joy into the lives of others.
And besides he was the best father and husband because he found the ancient forgotten path and taught it to his family who became enlightened... What better thing can a guy do?
Best concentrate on the core teachings and sit loose to the biographical stuff..imo.
However; back then , i think it was the norm!!!!! Every one did it!
A person in the midst of raising his family must work with his situation.
Later there will be time for individual pursuits.
Everything gained in those family years will compound in later life dedicated to practice or other personal endeavours.
Everybody went out and sought enlightenment back then?
Is anyone really thinking about what they're writing here?
Many historians date it to the Middle Ages. Check it out.
However in our times it is almost heretical to say so.
We have a whole culture built around a mental mechanism which is largely a social construct, but which we are taught is central to existence.
Early Buddhists distinguished between metta , which I hope needs no explanation and " kama" ( note; not kaRma )..sensual attachment, the latter is most like our notion of romantic love.
Metta is seen as condusive to spritual growth.
Kama is seen by both Buddhism and Hinduism as a major obstacle to Enlightenment.
Just think what that did to Siddhartha, being raised so his every desire was immediately satisfied and everyone was under orders to smile and act happy and pretend the whole world existed for his benefit. He never learned how to share or care about how other people felt. For all intents and purposes, he would have been trained to be a sociopath. And that entitled, selfish attitude would have been expected of high-born, spoiled nobility then and now.
Then he took the famous ride and one loose-mouthed servant explained the reality of life. It doesn't say, but I'd suspect the furious King had that servant was killed for doing this. Siddhartha underwent a crisis. When he left his mansion and father and wife and child behind, he wasn't thinking of them and he wasn't trying to change the world. His entire life up till then had been a lie and he was obsessed with finding out the true nature of the world and his own happiness.
So no, he wasn't a good husband and father. He was never taught how to be a husband and father. This seriously messed-up young man left on a journey of discovery that eventually brought us the Buddha.
And if your telling me that most men 'didnt' go and seek enlightenment then this siddhartha geezer has just lost ALOT of my respect!
What he did in my opinion was very selfish!
I thought it was the 'norm' back then but if not then WOW - what a horrible, unthoughtful person!
How cud anyone 'leave' their new born just to attain some "enlightenment"
I had a friend from college uni, who had to go back to his country for an arranged marriage! Long story - but does happen im afraid!
Of course they dont.
Buddhists are trying to follow an ancient traditional path that was set in a time when perhaps the buddhist teachings 'were' needed!
Buddha said this
Buddha said that....
Buddha said we need to do this....
That was '2500' years ago!
If we cannot cannot compre culture then i believe we cannot compare our life to theirs 2500 years ago therefore practice surely cannot and 'should not' be the same !
But romantic love was also acknowledged even in those cultures and the truth is that two good people in an arranged marriage usually come to love each other. This "there is only one love for me and I'll be the one to choose" attitude has its critics.
The Taj Mahal is a Perisan monument to a heartbroken Emperor when his third wife died giving birth to his 14th child. Certainly an arranged marriage between royal families. Their love and his grief became legendary. So we certainly can understand how people behaved in other cultures and times. They behaved like people everywhere in every time. The Dharma is universal.
But the cultures in which the three signs arise are very different That includes the social mores of family dynamics.
Ive read that he 'did' meet a girl and fall in love and wanted to marry , but he just wasnt 'conent' with 'something', so decided to go on a journey to seek inner peace!
But like i said no one knows.
He who tries to tell you that 'their way' is correct - RUN a mile!
They might not be 'online' yet!
I see it all the time on here!
Everyone is supposed to be studying buddhism yet all got their own opinion on what buddhism actually is!
Ive noticed some people on here get aggresive quite quick aswell.. Its either 'their' way OR the 'high' way!
Whether it's the dawn of Thai civilization, or colonial New England, or Virginia of the Civil War era, it's every difficult for us to have any clear understanding of how cultures felt about emotions and even norms of behavior. We can go to Sukhothai in Thailand and see many ruins of a culture that began to thrive in the 1200s, and we can walk around and see the stone buildings and not even be aware that the people lived in and did most of their business in wooden structures...not one of which survived. We don't know how they really thought or reacted to events...we hardly even know anything about the events of the era, other than wars and such. And yet you think we can get into the minds of how people thought 1800 years earlier. I don't think so.
Now, how fair it is to judge someone from another era based on our norms...well, that is the question. But we're just chatting here. We're not exactly historians whose words are going to be documented as study tools for future generations.
So it could be that the Buddha-to be felt a range of emotions similar to the ones that we would feel if we were leaving husband/wife and child.
But it is equally possible that in assuming that we are projecting backwards a range of emotions that may or may not have been there.
What we know is that dukkha anicca and anatta characterised their existence then as it does ours.
on the periphery of an ancient empire, speaking a language that we are not sure of ( It was certainly not Pali or Sanskrit ) We can only speculate about the subtleties that motivated him.
But what he discovered or rediscovered about the nature of reality has universal application for all time.