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.
Gautama Buddha: deadbeat dad?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Now, if there are no children or the children are well grown and established in their own minds, then a person is basically free to do what they want, but I hope they would consider the needs of their spouse/partner and so on, first. After all if you do all the work to raise your children, missing out on your grandchildren and the unique opportunity to be a mentor to them, and to your children as they raise their own would be unfortunate.
That's what I mean by parenting is a lifetime job. it isn't always, but it *should* be. I am 37, and my parents are 61 and 58, and they are just as involved in my kid's lives as they were in mine. Even my grandma. It is invaluable to them to have their values reinforced and to have that kind of extended family to turn to. When you decide to have kids, you have to think that far in advance, because it's not limited to raising them and booting them out at 18, or 22 or whatever.
To:
"Family has rooms and rooms full of gold, as much food as they can eat for the next 50 years. The most opulent Royal palace to stay in, with 20 servants each, attending to their every need. The best doctors money can buy. Personal protection of the King's army, the rulers of the land. "
Or something like that. Then I think it might be an accurate comparison.
But perhaps others who do have kids don't really feel like having a choice because the calling is too strong.. I don't know, but I can very well imagine. I just try to be open minded and nonjudgmental about it, especially because they already have enough hurt because of it, probably.
@seeker242 I was referring to your 2 comments about why it's ok for someone to leave their family to come to another country to send money back home but not ok for them to leave for spiritual reasons. I don't see how you can compare the 2 at all. You asked earlier why it's ok for someone to move to a foreign country to send money home. You tell me how you'd like to compare the 2 then? lol I guess I misunderstood what you were asking then, because someone who already has a palace and money and servants then would not leave their home to go to another country to make money to send home...
In Korea, my local friends kept asking me why everyone kept getting divorced in the US. Those same people wouldn't question a man leaving home to join a monastery. Different cultures, different expectations.
My point was that it's considered ok for a Mexican husband to leave home to go get money, but not ok for Prince Siddhartha to leave home to go get enlightenment, even though he is leaving them in the lap of luxury. I don't understand how the first can be ok, but not the 2nd.
This also makes me wonder how many other people tried to do this before Prince Siddhartha? He couldn't have been the first to want to try to do this. Only difference is, is that he succeeded.
When the man leaves his country to work, he in theory is not only sending money to support his family, but is still talking to them, writing, calling, maybe even visiting. Not just gone. While living in a palace certainly eases some of the problem of a parent leaving the home, it does not ease them all. I know rich kids who grew up without a parent (and in one case, both parents, she had to emancipate herself when she was 16 from her grandparents) and the psychological and emotional problems associated with that were not much different.
in buddhist countries, if you leave to become a monk.
it is considered a good thing.
in the west, it is frowned upon if you have young children.
but if it is due to your career or 'passion', then it is ok.
eg. if i leave my young children n become a soldier, i will
spend a few years away from my children and possibly
die in the war. i am a hero.
I think it's a mistake to assume that people climbing across the border fences have a guaranteed job with a guaranteed pay. They could easily be sent to jail just for trying to cross the border to begin with. Many of them are. I also think it's a mistake to assume that a person who lives in a royal palace would be struggling. They have everything handed to them on a silver platter, literally. They live in the lap of luxury! They are royalty, not some poor Mexican farmers wife. I also think it is a mistake to assume that he was pursuing his own desires. He set out for the benefit of all beings, not just himself. Even if he only made it 1/2 way to enlightenment, the benefit would still be 500,000 timer greater than any amount of money. Even if he only made it 0.01% of the way to enlightenment, that benefit would still be 100 times greater than any amount of money. The chances of making it 0.01% of the way, I think are pretty good.
Reminds me of something my zen teacher once said. He said "Even one minute of seeing into your true nature is worth more than all the money you will ever make in your entire life". It seems that people who actually believe that, tend not to think that the Buddha was being selfish when he left. That's probably why you don't ever hear of teachers talking about the Buddha being selfish, because they actually believe that.
Just my 2 cents
you are not supposed to just abandon your family
and responsibility.
you are required to make sure that they are well cared for.
and that is exactly what buddha did.
that is what most people who become monks still do today.
if you just abandon your family, leaving them destitute,
do you think you can have the peace of mind to be a monk/nun.
I actually have an acquaintance who for a long time worked for a successful business. He made really good money but between his commute and his job, he worked 12 hours a day and often on weekends and even holidays. His kids had a great nanny, a great school, lots of presents, a big house and so on. Except the kids routinely told him as they grew up that they would rather see him more, yet he justified his career/job (which he took on after the kids were born) by saying it was important for him to enjoy his job. What about what was important to the kids? In the end his wife left him for another man, and left the kids too while she pursued her PhD. So for many years, the kids were not only abandoned by their mom, but lived with a dad who abandoned them most of the time for his own career happiness. Both of them managed to justify their actions and even said it was for the best for the kids, while the kids were home trying to get their parents to listen to what they actually wanted and needed.
And no, I don't think that most people who would ordain would be able to abandon their family in such a way. I think I said that earlier in the discussion. But in the case of the person the OP talked to, clearly that is how they think. They would encourage someone to do so because that's what Buddha did.
I understand what you're saying though, and it is indeed suspicious for a father/mother who has kids and a job to suddenly feel "called" to a life without all these pressures and deman- err- responsibilities.
And like @vinlyn said, how can the laypeople rely on someone who gave up their own family?
However, I don't think it's up to others to say what is or isn't a "true calling." It sounds pretty out there and theistic, I know, but that's not what I mean. We are not in the renunciate's head, we are not the arbiters of the laws of the universe (although I'm sure some of us would like to think so... and in some ways we are... but that's a totally different topic), so how can we say that their "calling" is merely escaping from responsibility? That being said, renouncing comes with responsibility - leaving a family with little warning or preparations is irresponsible. If a father or mother wants to ordain, they should make proper preparations for their family - monetarily and emotionally.
For example I know several people who feel called to various, but after a few months, it's no longer a calling, it was a passing fancy. My mom has sworn up and down for the past 15 years that her calling was to be a life coach. She still says this. yet she has taken exactly zero steps to make this happen, even though she is perfectly capable of doing so. This is about her 4th true calling in the past 25 years. Not a one of them has turned out to be a true calling. On the other side of the coin, I know 2 brothers who claimed from very early ages (pre teens) that they wanted to be priests. And they are, both of them. They eat, live and breathe their calling, from the time they realized it was present. I think the term "true calling" is thrown around a bit too much. True I do not know what is truly in their head, nor do I claim to.
The funny thing is, I've never really had myself what I consider a calling. Though i remember clearly what I wanted my life to be when I was 8, 9, 10 years old. Then real life took hold and I needed to be more realistic, and I went through several phases of what I thought I'd do with my life. From teacher to criminal profiler. Turns out, 30 years later, I'm going back to what I wanted as a child.
So then he has a son. His son has material things. I can't say it is good to leave your son. And maybe he kept contact with the son somehow. If he is separated from the wife then there is limited time with the son in any case.
I see no responsibility to stay connected to an adult woman, but I am vexed trying to think how he could leave behind the fruit of his loins. My father certainly didn't do that with me.
is a fool. For even your body do not belong to you.
~Buddha.
even my so called thoughts and emotions have been 'stolen' from samsara
. . . not even an 'I' to call my own . . .
Buddha help us . . .
the rest is up to you...
btw, can a lobster walk straight or does it walk sideways
like a crab.
if so, it will be difficult for you to follow the middle path. lol.
People don't realize that the Buddha left so that he could help his family. People think that he did that "for himself", but you never hear teachers or wise men talking like that.:)
It's not so much I'm asking if what the Buddha did was or was not helpful to the world. I think this truth is obvious to non-teachers and non-wise men alike.
However, what I am asking here is, should regular ol' people like myself who are already in relationships (and those who may have children and the sort, or important jobs where people rely heavily upon them, or pets to care for, or other responsibilities/promises they've made to others) leave them in order to peruse their own desire to become an ordained monk or nun?
Could I change the world and become enlightened? Sure, why not! There is always that possibility that if someone renounced their lay life to lead a monastic one, they could end up helping the world out on a greater scale.
I simply wanted to open this thread to ask people if they think it is irresponsible and selfish to leave when you have other obligations and relationships going on, or not. Some believe it's okay, since we all die and our relationships become severed anyway, while others believe that it may not be the right lifetime to do such a thing, because you already took "vows," so to speak, with the people already in your life.
So with your argument, perhaps you would say that, yes, leaving my family would benefit them because I would be on the path to enlightenment and while doing that, it indirectly helps them out, too, since that is everybody's ultimate goal. Even if I don't reach enlightenment and end up teaching dharma to the world, I still have taken the steps towards something greater than myself and my idea of a family.
And on the other side of the coin, there will be those who will contend that, no, leaving my family would not benefit them, because it may hurt them emotionally, financially (if they, in fact, depend on me for money-- but in my case, they don't), psychologically, and so forth. To truly care for them would be to see your time through to the end with them. There are plenty of lifetimes ahead of us to devote ourselves to the monastic life, so perhaps it's more compassionate to wait.
It basically comes down to this: are your "vows" to your family as important as taking a monastic vow?
I do like the suggestion someone made here about becoming a nun every couple of months during the year. That is an interesting alternative and a good middle-way approach.
But what about, strictly speaking, emotional/psychological issues? Let's not focus on the financial part. Let's say your family are millionaires (mine are not by any means, but they can definitely take care of themselves financially speaking without me present) and they have everything they will ever need or want. However, the one thing they won't have is the company and love, care, and commitment that you have made to them to stay until the very "end". So is that just giving into attachments by staying? Is it prolonging the inevitable by staying and not leaving (because one day we will all have to say goodbye to one another eventually)?
I'm not posting this reply because I'm still looking for input. I think everyone here has already shared enough great insights which has helped me to formulate my own opinion on the matter. I just wanted to clarify what my main aim was in this thread, that's all. Everyone was basically answering the general question, but I was just looking for something a little more specific, that's all. What I have come to realize is that, yes, the "vows" you make on an emotional level to the ones you love should not be broken. It is just not the right time to get up and go. There will be other lifetimes to explore that.
When Gautama left the palace in the middle of the night, he was essentially deceiving his spouse and family -- and thus his actions would have been in violation of the ethical guidelines he taught later. But as others have pointed out, Gautama the troubled young man was not Gautama the enlightened Buddha. In my view, it's better to go by the teachings he left us then by trying to read too much into his life history.
(First off, I hate when I read something in a book and don't mark it so it becomes nearly impossible to find again...)
Anyways... Brad Warner says that the culture of Siddhartha's time is much different than ours and this was a generally accepted thing (to leave the family life and pursue that of a holy man). So, to put his actions into our modern day culture with its own new rules of what is generally accepted would be wrong. Also noted is that Siddhartha was a prince who had more than enough wealth so that his family would never want for anything. He hardly left them destitute.
It is probably also worth noting that he did this before he was enlightened and this was the very start of his journey. To wonder if you should follow suit is similar to wondering if you should follow suit in starving yourself, a path which he later determined was not the way to enlightenment.
Most people dont think this world is a place of suffering.
sure, they experience suffering from time to time.
but for the most part, they still want to enjoy life,
to fulfill their potential, whatever that means.
until, you can see things from buddha's perspective,
running away to the cave or forest is very irresponsible.
to emphasize my point, buddha call our body a bag of
skin n bones, containing urine, phlegm and excrement.
pretty harsh.
buddha doesnt mince his words, does he?
What are you prepared to do?
Personally I am well on the way to Buddhahood. In fact part of me is already there. Yippee. Did not have to travel far, did not have to leave anything. No time like the present. I may say something really cosmic soon . . . may just have a cup of tea . . . with my inner 'Dharma Dad' aka 'ShakeYaMoney Buddha' :thumbsup:
I think the problem is we always "assume" a) causality and b) That a person is either all awesome or all useless/dead beat. Can't he be both?
Why can't a possible theory be that maybe he really did not know what the future held for him. Maybe he was just depressed. Maybe he as a dead beat dad and husband at THAT moment.
And then he continued creating his story....
Maybe the story could be a common: Depressed guy --> leaves family --> fools himself into thinking he is pursuing spirituality --> gets into drugs --> Dies a lone death.
Happens all the time. We would never had a Buddha or the opportunity to discuss on this thread.
But the story in this case was different.
Depressed guy --> leaves family --> really serious about overcoming suffering --> works hard --> ended up unlocking some secrets that are universally useful.
Maybe his curiosity was more than his irresponsibility, and his hard work was enough for his curiosity. But at hindsight, if we start getting jittery about "But if he as good, how could he have done that bad thing????" or "If he did a bad thing, how can we call him good?" then the confusion is inside us. In our need to generalize and see everything in black and white.
What counts is the message, not the messenger.
Why don't you just learn vipassana and practice it in early morning ! There are 10 days sessions of vippasana which you can attend per year. In these 10 days you can live like monk or nun and just meditate most of the hours.
There are 45 days sessions too. In these session you need to live away from home and need to keep silence to practice meditation.
old thread. And we all know what happens to 'old threads', right?