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.
The Buddha - a PBS Special
I did a search on PBS and did not get anything so I wanted to make sure that you are aware of a great show that I'm very much looking forward to.
The Buddha - a Film by David Grubin
Premiering April 7, 2010 at 8 p.m. (check local listings)
A Film by David Grubin
http://www.pbs.org/thebuddha/education-pilgrimage/
The Buddha - a Film by David Grubin
Premiering April 7, 2010 at 8 p.m. (check local listings)
A Film by David Grubin
http://www.pbs.org/thebuddha/education-pilgrimage/
0
Comments
Since I don't have a TV, has anyone heard inklings if PBS might be steaming it online or iTunes or amazon Unbox might have it available for renting?
Well they will have the dvd for sale so I'm sure it will become available for rental somewhere soon...
Mod.note:
Done!!
I've just watched a few other videos on the site and I'm really looking forward to this. Hopefully everyone who wants to has the opportunity to see it on air or DVD.
http://video.pbs.org/video/1418075805/
Just a friendly reminder to all, try not to miss it. It premieres tonight but as you know PBS repeats shows like this a few times. I'm excited about it and hope to have my wife and two teenage sons (16 & 18) watch it with me.
I don't speak much about Buddhism with them but I figure if we share the time as a family PBS will do all the talking for me.
Hope you enjoy it.
Ivan
I got to see about the first hour and then had to go pick up my brother from the train station, but what I saw of it was very good. I enjoyed how they used the story of Siddhartha to illustrate how the Buddha's message is applicable to the everyday act of living. I also liked the fact that they didn't shy away from the mythology because it is some really beautiful stuff. You don't need to believe it to benefit from the power of the story and the poetic nature of the cosmology.
Luckily, my PBS station is re-airing it tomorrow afternoon so I'll have a chance to see the whole thing.
It was beautiful. Sadly I had great plans to watch it with my wife and kids but it all fell apart, usual yelling attitudes etc... is sure is an example of being attached to anything even emotions and then being dissapointed.
Still, I skirted the "tension" in the house, even paused the show (since I had taped it) went with my wife to get gas so she could vent about or teenagers, then came back and went into our spare room to watch it by myself.
I don't want to preach, so I don't want to push them into watching. but I for one enjoyed it a lot.
It was very informative and simply beautiful. As it is, I stopped by a used bookstore and picked up a few excellent books on Buddhism earlier today with some fabulous artwork.
I like your point about mysticism etc... like the show says nobody really knows how much is true\accurate about the life of Buddha, but does it really matter? I for one have been moved about everything I have read so far, and true or not, It has changed my life.
Unlike Christianity (not to knock it but...) which mandates that you believe or else etc...
Anyway, I loved the show and recomend it to anyone who is interested or simply curious about Buddha
http://genkaku-again.blogspot.com/2010/04/buddha.html
http://genkaku-again.blogspot.com/2010/04/buddhism-who-cares.html
If you miss taping it I'm sure it will be available for rental, as its being sold over the usual channels.
Have a wonderful day!
ivan
The second hour focused more on the Buddha's teachings. I liked this section best. Overall, a great introduction to the Buddha and Buddhism. Didn't focus on any particular tradition or teaching to any depth. I had not slept much the night before, so was fighting sleep, and the desire to nod off. I will definitely watch this again. I understand that a DVD is available from PBS.org, so may even purchase that.
The program left me feeling like he abandoned his wife and child for no good reason. And did he really atone? I don't think you should ever turn your back on your wife and child that want/need you there, but those are just my personal views.
True, they also made no mention that his wife and son became students (as the story goes).
After all Buddha did the hard work for us, it's up to us know to follow our own path based on his findings. No need for us to abandon family or try asceticism
I just watched the whole thing. The Dalai Lama's contributions I felt didn't add very much. I think there were some other possible less-well-known interviewees that could have been more insightful: Jack Kornfield, Gil Fronsdal, Thich Nhat Hanh, Jon Kabat-Zinn, etc. I did appreciate the viewpoints of the two poets in particular, W.S. Merwin and Jane Hirshfield, especially Hirshfield. She managed to articulate the teaching and the story of the Buddha's life in a wonderful way that was neither overly pedantic or overly simplistic. Her contributions were probably my favorite throughout the program. I also liked the young monk Metteyya Sakyaputta and the Columbia professor Max Moerman.
I also loved seeing echoes of the Buddha's world today in the footage of modern-day ascetics, Vedic priests and of Lumbini, Deer Park and Bodh Gaya. The animation work was incredibly beautiful. I loved the impressionistic aspect of them; the echoes of ancient Indian art as well as the symbolic representations of the Buddha's words themselves. I liked the depiction of the night of the Buddha's enlightenment with the arrival of the armies of Mara, the illustration of the sitar analogy and the fire sermon. The music was also interesting. Not quite Indian, not quite Western. It gave the whole documentary a meditative quality.
Jane Hirshfield was simply beautiful with her sincerity and understanding.
I had to watch it in pieces and just finished the last part, which brought tears to my eyes.
I'm very new to Buddhism, yet It feels like home and like I've been thinking, questioning and walking in my path my whole life.
It touched me when they talked about Buddha's suffering loosing his mother as a baby etc... for you see, I lost my mother to a stroke followed by years where she did not recognize anyone until she died. This happened to me at the age of 9 just as I had emigrated to the US.
There are many more events in my life that taught me to keep a lit flame within me lit and protected from the suffering that I felt.
Sadly I, my sister (4 years older than me) suffered to the point that she took her own life back in 2007. I was very angry with her for bailing out, until recently.
Recently, I realized that I no longer needed to keep the little boy protected inside anymore, and let him now, I felt liberated and started following my spiritual path with focus and motivation and this has led me to Buddhism.
By now I have lost both of my parents, my sister, and recently my dear mother in law who was a mother to me for the last 21 years!
I now understand my sister's suffering and no longer feel any resentment only sorrow.
And with Buddha's teachings I now see that I'm not alone that we all suffer in life.
I now feel sorrow instead of anger for my sons when they do some of the things they do, or for the people I meet who are angry, and confused like I was for so long.
Anyway, This documentary was wonderful and it touched me deeply!
ivan
I did like the program overall. I just think too many people have misconceptions about what Buddhism is and parts of this program did not help.
Thanks, Floating Abu for the link. Very Interesting.
I must say, Serenity and Olarte, that I simply cannot see the ethical problems you seem to be raising about the Buddha abandoning his wife and small child. They were left well provided for. If anything, the point of the legend (and it IS legend) is that the Lord Buddha renounced the pleasures of this world for the sake of spiritual pilgrimmage. I think the point of this aspect of the legend was that he gave up one of the chief joys in life in leaving his beautiful princess and the baby prince behind. (What a noble sacrifice!) He did not leave them destitute.
Again, you must be using the values of your own culture to judge someone from a very different culture remote in time, distance, and conceptual-linguistic bearing. Doing so can never render fair appraisal. It's a lot less appropriate than trying to account for the size of helium balloons by measuring their weight. Sorry, wrong form of measurement; best pull out a tape-measure instead.
They did show the piece in Charlotte, afterall! (Billy Graham country) Nice for those not knowing anything about Buddha or Buddha Dharma!
Funny, was just thinking about you and Kris, and srivajaya (sic) last night. Sad that those two folk are no longer here, such a nice bunch of people, reasoned, reasonable, mature and wise.
Namaste.
Actually, W.S. Merwin (one of the interviewees) made the point you are making: in Buddhism, it doesn't matter if you believe these stories literally or metaphorically. Some people need to believe in literal demons and devas and others need to see them as metaphors. So long as you can use them to inform you on your path, it doesn't matter.
I did not say it was unethical, or that I did not understand it, In fact having been married for 20 years (happily for most I must add), I can see and understand as you said leaving "one of the chief joys in life in leaving his beautiful princess and the baby prince behind. "(What a noble sacrifice!) He did not leave them destitute" was a sacrifice etc... that it was a sacrifice etc, I felt sad because I cannot imagine doing such a thing to my wife. Also because she is so supportive of my journey, I'm just glad she did not see this part, (because she IS so understanding and suppportive) as I would not want her to worry even for a Milsecond of such a thing.
It was sad yet I can see that he had to do what he had to do. We all have our journeys, and paths to follow whether we know it or not, whether we ar Buddhists or not. I have followed my own way for as long as I can remember and I'm just glad that my particular journey does not include such a though as leaving the mother of my children, my soulmate, and my best friend for the least 21 years!
all I meant is that i was a very sad moment for me to think of such a thing, being so happily married and all. talk about sacrifice! :eek:
the dvd and blu-ray will be released on April 27th and the lowest I've seen it is for 17 and 20 at deepdiscountdvd I will definitely be picking up a copy.
Here is the description of the DVD\Blu-ray. I don't think there is any extra on the Blu-ray except for higher resolution which in this case is well worth it due to the beautiful art work and photography of the film.
"The United States, primarily a Judeo-Christian nation until recently, now encompasses theological groups relatively unknown in the early days of the republic. Buddhism -- the world's fourth largest religion after Christianity, Islam and Hinduism -- has been steadily gaining adherents in America.
THE BUDDHA, a two-hour documentary from Emmy Award winner David Grubin, relates the life of the Indian sage who famously gained enlightenment as he sat beneath a fig tree two-and-a-half millennia ago. This film tells the Buddha's story through painting and sculptures by some of the world's greatest artists and tracks his biography across the sweeping landscapes of northern India.
The testimony of contemporary Buddhists, from Pulitzer Prize-winning poet W.S. Merwin to the Dalai Lama, provide insight into the ancient narrative of the man who never claimed to be God or God's emissary, but merely a human being who, in a world of unavoidable pain and suffering, had achieved a serenity that others, too, could find.
This documentary tells the story of his life, a journey especially relevant in our own times.
Richard Gere narrates this two-hour documentary.
Directed and produced by multiple Emmy Award-winning producer David Grubin (The Jewish Americans, American Experience's: RFK, and LBJ, and Abraham and Mary Lincoln: A House Divided.
Extras include:
Interview with David Grubin;
Interview with His Holiness the Dalai Lama;
Making Animation for The Buddha; and
Buddhist Pilgrimage Sites. "
It's true that in some cases, Mara is portrayed as an actual being who apparently considers himself the head of the kamavacara world. Nevertheless, looking at the texts more critically, it's evident that in most contexts Mara is used in reference to death or to the mental defilements of greed, hatred and delusion.
In regard to the story of the Buddha being assailed by the hosts of Mara under the Bodhi tree, for example, G. P. Malalasekera's entry in the Dictionary of Pali Names states:
There is no need to ask, as does Thomas, with apparently great suspicion (Thomas, op. cit., 230), whether we can assume that the elaborators of the Mara story were recording "a subjective experience under the form of an objective reality," and did they know or think that this was the real psychological experience which the Buddha went through? The living traditions of the Buddhist countries supply the adequate answer, without the aid of the rationalists. The epic nature of the subject gave ample scope for the elaboration so dear to the hearts of the Pali rhapsodists.
As for the earthquake after Mara's defeat, to me this represents the the fact that Buddha's enlightenment was a stupendous, earth shaking event, not that the earth actually moved. A lot of people tend to take these poetic allegories literally, but I'm not one of them. This is partially due to the nature of ancient Indian literature itself, which was full of allegory and symbolism.
I'll admit that when I first began studying the Suttas, I tended to take everything literally; but now, I've learned how to "read between the lines" as they say.
You make a good point there, Nirvy, but I still say that leaving your family in the middle of the night seems like kind of a dickish thing to do.
Having a family is a responsibility, and just because someone else is there to support your wife and child doesn't mean that it's OK to just up and leave them. Sure, his intentions were noble, and I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision for him to make, but I can understand if other people have trouble seeing this as a noble act.
Honestly, I thought it was a bit cheesy and watered down, but I still enjoyed it for the most part.
Now, we're not sure that's exactly what happened... for all you know there were days or weeks of discussion (unreported) that took place before he eventually decided one night to leave. That was 2500 years ago... my God, his teachings, much less his life story, weren't even written down till 500 years after his death, so how can we "judge" whether his actions were "dickish". Get a grip my man!
Esteemed Olarte, I am glad you are not troubled by Buddha's leaving his family. In a different thread some months ago this subject was also broached. Anybody remember where? Anyhow, it amazes me how people keep alluding to this matter. In India there is a long tradition of men going to live in the forest after they have discharged all the duties towards their families. This is an exalted thing to do even in today's culture among people of traditional values. Now Buddha simply had the resources in place to leave his family behind while still young, healthy, and strong enough to undergo all that he had to undergo. That is simply how the whole thing was made possible. The Legend Requireth Things to Be in Place.
If one were to contrast Buddha with Karl Marx (two men who arguably were interested in "saving the world") one would find Buddha's behavior responsible and Marx's totally irresponsible. The Marx family would have starved left to the actions of Marx alone. It's a good things friends intervened with their help.
Perhaps the jury hasn't had quite enough time to come in with a verdict on how much good Marx brought into the world, but as of now it seems like his writings have brought more harm. Another Londoner of his time, Charles Dickens, through his stories did much more to better the lot of the poor around the world. Dickens humanized us where Marx deified the works of our hands, as it were.
We are simply in no position to judge the decisions of Gautama Buddha —a man so far removed in time and "shape" (culture and language) from ours— because he chose to put the dictates of his conscience above emotional and sentimental values. However, I'm not so sure that Marx and Dickens lived so long ago or were immersed in cultures so unlike ours that we should feel so incompetent to pass judgment there.
Again, I repeat, this IS a Legend. It is by no means the basis for taking a snapshot.
As Legend, the story is crafted in such a way as to make the protagonist look very heroic and noble. It may not have happened that way at all, but the shapers of the Legend crafted a story glorifying aspects that they considered positively commendable or even superhuman. They would not have included elements in the narrative if they thought those elements would create stumbling blocks.
Metta
You're right, Les, sorry for having an opinion. I don't know what came over me. :rolleyes: But in my defense, at least notice that I said "seems like kind of a dickish thing to do," not that it necessarily was.
For good or ill, I think that's true with most religious literature. My approach to ancient literature has recently been to try and put things into context, understand the symbolism, etc. Even so, I'm not saying people in ancient Indian didn't believe in "supernatural" concepts, or that I don't for that matter, but I do think that not everything is meant to be taken literally.
In The Celestial Key to the Vedas, for example, B. G. Sidharth notes that the Mahabharata "refers to an old lady who spins a fabric with 360 black threads and 360 white threads while a white horse stands by. The old lady is of course time. The black and white threads are night and day, and the white horse is the Sun. Incidentally, the origin of this symbolism is in the Vedic hymns of the Rig Veda. (1.64)" (53).
Of course there are myths and superstitions involved in allegories such as this, but I imagine that this would make complete sense to an ancient Indian, whereas we might not make the connections right away. The point I was trying to make is that one can't simply assume every word is meant to be taken literally in Indian literature, or any other for that matter, which so heavily utilizes allegory and symbolism. It's easy to judge ancient cultures by our modern scientific standards, but I think that this is a mistake if and when we don't understand the subtleties of a particular culture because a lot can get lost in translation.
In the end, I think that there are many places in the Pali Canon where we can adopt a metaphorical interpretation of things that seem superstitious in nature. One can certainly have the view that ancient beliefs and myths are nothing but superstition, but it's just as probable that people simply didn't know how to express certain ideas or experiences in any other way. Who knows. I'm just offering one possible explanation.
I disagree. For one thing, the idea of putting conscience above "emotional and sentimental values" is something that we can still relate to today, so it's not like this is some sort of foreign concept lost to antiquity. Furthermore, we all have the ability to study ancient Indian culture, history and literature — just as we do the culture, history and literature of 19th century Eurpoe — so I fail to see this as some sort of impenetrable barrier to making value judgments. I think it's more a question of perspective than ability.
Value judgments, by their very nature, are fairly subjective and influenced by personal biases, which is why two people can find the same act to be noble and dickish. So you're right to point out that this particular story is "crafted in such a way as to make the protagonist look very heroic and noble," which most likely reflects the values of the story's author(s), who were probably renunciates themselves.
This also explains why the act seems kind of dickish to me, because my own father left my mother and I just before I was born, but that in and of itself doesn't invalidate my opinion, it simply clarifies where I'm coming from. Sure, my father's reasons probably weren't as noble as the Buddha's, but even if they were, I doubt that the unhappiness of not having a father would have been any less, which is why I said I can understand if other people have trouble seeing this as a noble act.
Leaving a child behind in a palace to be raised is not such a bad thing to do to a child. Better than staying behind as a boorish or unfriendly parent, I tend to think.
You speak of your Father leaving. Sometimes that's all a man can do, when chips are down (when that's the case). He simply cannot bear the humiliation. The woman will do anything for her children, but men can be very weak indeed. I, of course, know nothing of your Father's situation, but am a firm believer in the dictums:
To know all is to forgive all. (?)
Nothing human is foreign to me. (Terence)
It's a far worse thing, in my opinion, to stay around and be emotionally abusive. I'm one of nine born in twelve years and my experience speaks loudly on this matter. Sometimes a higher love just says good-bye and doth not cling.
Interesting discussion.
Are you implying that Buddha would have been a "boorish" or "unfriendly" parent?
Hm, this seems like a rather poor justification for men to abandon their children to me, especially since I know at least two people who are in the opposite situation, i.e., the mother leaving the father with the burden of raising their children.
Which, I think, just goes to prove my point. You know nothing of my father and yet you still feel competent enough to make a type of value judgment (that sometimes it's better for a father to leave), just as I never knew the Buddha yet still feel competent enough to express how I can understand if other people have trouble seeing his leaving as a noble act.
The way we see things is often influenced by our personal biases and experiences as much as knowledge of the subject itself, and when it comes to value judgments, who's to say that one person's opinion is more valid than another's?
Nobody. But it would not necessarily follow from that premiss, I think, that there's no reason to put more light on the subject so at least the context is better understood. Opinions are like earlobes in that everyone has one, but reality is quite another thing. The fact that people make choices in life is not to be lamented but embraced.
I just cannot conceive of Buddha as anything other than pure Being spreading kind and nourishing thoughts to all other beings, including his own dear wife and child. I am unable to see anything but genuine holiness (beauty) and pure intention there.
Well, I am.
I understand, and I never said that we should rely heavily on our judgments, only that we have them and that they are influenced by our personal biases and experiences as much as knowledge of the subject itself, which makes it hard to say that one person's opinion is more valid than another's.
Of course, and for my part I feel that I have a reasonable amount of knowledge concerning the Buddha's life — as well as ancient Indian culture — to form an opinion on the matter, one that more or less agrees with yours. Where we disagree is that I also think that leaving your family in the middle of the night seems like kind of a dickish thing to do, which is a value judgment on my part. Sure, the Buddha might have had pure and noble intentions, but I don't think that makes the act itself particularly pure or noble. It was just something he felt he had to do.
I can't conceive of the Buddha as anything other than a great debater, philosopher, teacher and all around human being, but that doesn't mean I think he was perfect either.
I always remember what Lama Norbu said to Jesse's father in Little Buddha when they were talking about the book he had given to Jesse about the life of the Buddha. He said, "It's one way of telling the truth." I think it should be taken just like that. Whether it's "true" or not is ultimately irrelevant, for what is true anyway? Samsara is all a dream. How can it be "true" or "not true"?
Palzang
When Prince Siddhartha left the castle, he was not yet a Fully Awakened Buddha, the Cometh One of this age.
Even then, regardless -- it is hard to judge or understand another without being them - without really being them, living their lives, their experiences, their thoughts, emotions, troubles and concerns.
Who knows what runneth through his mind, what the real circumstances of his life and environment were. It can be fine that we choose to speculate, and even choose to judge, but I think it may be too much to not recognise that we are just passing our own judgement of what could be a situation and circumstance we do not truly understand - unless we too were Prince Siddartha at that time.
_/\_
Palzang