Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

So I'm confused..

Seeker567Seeker567 Explorer
edited March 2011 in Buddhism Basics
After becoming an aesthetic, he vowed to follow the middle way. I get this. but then, he sits under a tree in meditation for 46 days...how in anyway is that the middle way? that seems pretty harsh to me

Comments

  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited March 2011
    He gave up asceticism when he understood the nature of reality and became unfettered (enlightened), seeing that neither asceticism or indulgence would lead to liberation. He didn't teach the Middle Way until after this; he was no longer an ascetic.

    If he chose to sit in meditation for 46 days, why not? Did he have something better to do? ;) I'm sure he wasn't starving himself, he was just meditating. It wouldn't have been "harsh" to him at that point, he would have been perfectly at ease and content.
  • ZaylZayl Veteran
    Yes, I do not think he sat there constantly meditating without eating/drinking/relieving himself. I imagine he did what he needed to do then went back to meditating. I do not care if he is the Buddha, the human body would not survive otherwise, no matter how devoted you were to the ascetic path.
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    It's just allegorical. Allegories are like that sometimes. Don't let it keep you awake at night. Does it make a real difference to the teachings? Does knowing this liberate you from suffering?
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    I thought it was only ten days?
Sign In or Register to comment.