Watch Henry Ford #1 on Nebula RIGHT NOW: nebula.tv/videos/extrahistory-henry-ford-the-boy-who-hated-horses OR Check out Real Life Lore's Modern Conflicts episode "The fall of Isis" here: nebula.tv/videos/reallifelore-modern-conflicts-the-fall-of-isis?ref=extrahistory
except he came back after 4 years(he told his wife he was leaving). He left to learn about the world at 29 and came back to teach his family and the common folk at 33. He lived with died by his family btw. Love how you make it seem like he never came back lol
When i was like 12, my mom was working in the theater/art department of this small local university. One of the plays they were putting on that year was "Siddhartha" and my mom signed me up to play Siddhartha's son. I know it was just a small production in some small college, but as a kid in small town America that had only really been exposed to Christian ideals, being in this play really gave me a new perspective on the world. It's been 20 years since that but it definitely impacted me in ways i didn't appreciate at the time. I guess this is just a shout-out to the Arts, especially the small ones.
I liked how you showed the role of women in Buddhism changing depending on who was doing the wrting/interpretation of the texts. Sort of like modern politics.
Growing up as a Buddhist the way I was always told this story as a culmination of karmic lifetimes and in reference to how one leaves the material world behind. Buddha didn't just pick up and leave, it was lifetimes of building enough karma to make this happen. At the end Buddha's family didn't face financial hardship when Buddha left and that softened the blow for him. He was a prince in this lifetime and he knew that whatever happened to him, his family would be taken care of. Of course there was emotional hardship, and suffering is a part of that path and every decision the man made had consequences. Usually Buddhist look at the end and say his wife and child gained enlightenment and thus Buddha acted correctly if you look at the big picture, but I'm not sure if I agree with that. I think Buddha like any man could make the wrong decisions. The difference being he is able to recognize that he made the wrong decision and come back into his wife and son's life to help them gain enlightenment.
My problem with this line of thinking is it is by itself, incredibly selfish. If Yasodhara died in childbirth and Gautama was left to raise his son by himself, would he have made these same decisions? Probably, but he would have remarried bore another child and then left creating a lot of drama in the kingdom. It takes a lot of privilege to be able to do what Gautama did and it only reinforces the caste system as kings ascend to Brahmin and Brahmin can do whatever they please. Only someone who has everything can give it up but a person abandoning the bonds they would create with their children is something not even the gods do for us. If I were in Gautama’s position, I would have included my wife and son in my search for enlightenment and maintained a boddhisattva position until my obligations to those who have stayed by my side are fulfilled. If yasodhara was to leave Gautama with their child to become and sage. She would be seen as cruel and selfish. So why does her husband get a pass?
@@L3onking I mean you can certainly look at his decision and say it was selfish and cruel, but then again you have to look at the bigger picture and weigh the obligation to family and his ultimate destiny of becoming the Buddha. The line between selfless and selfishness doesn't end with his singular decision to leave his family. When he does become enlightened, he doesn't just seek his own salvation, he decides to become a teacher. You can make the assumption that it is possible to keep his family and seek enlightenment, but you make that assumption without actually being in the position of the Buddha and the norms for that time. Buddha lived in a time where there was an established tradition of becoming an ascetic to find enlightenment so he did the things other learned men did at his time. In fact Buddha failed to gain enlightenment even after abandoning his family and becoming an ascetic. Only through learning from his mistakes did he find a middle path and a message that resonated with people. Buddha doesn't get a pass, in fact he suffers and at the end pays for his transgressions. In the story we have him redeeming himself with his wife and child by teaching them afterwards, but that doesn't erase anything he did before. But the truth of these stories is up in the air and we don't even know if him, his wife or his son existed in the form that we read. The only thing I know is that the stories don't shy away from his perceived failures. They point them out if anything. Also I agree that according to the stories Buddha was in a Privileged position, but that doesn't make his message of compassion, introspection and moderation less true in any way.
@@winzyl9546 I mean I think Buddha would agree that he was naive. The man wasn't above criticism and he was willing to learn. If you could point out the error in his way of thought, his wrong actions and the bad consequences he caused, he would hear you out and think about a better way. I mean I think that's the whole point of Buddhism.
There is a story where the Buddha sits with his wife and as she cries, asking why he left her and their son, the Buddha says he left because he wanted to find the cure for suffering so they wouldn't have to suffer ever again. This contextualizes the Buddha's story in the Medicine journey archetypes, where someone goes off to find a cure for some disease. The Buddha found a cure, the Dharma, and brings it back home to his family. As far as whether women can attain enlightenment, in Mahayana teachings we point to a dragon princess who, after hearing the Lotus Sutra, immediately attains Buddhahood. She is the first person to attain Buddhahood after the actual Buddha, and is used as an example of how the Lotus Sutra opens the way to enlightenment for all living beings, while many pre-Lotus Sutra teachings say either only men can attain enlightenment, or that one has to be reborn as a human to attain enlightenment (as supposed to being able to attain enlightenment as an animals, or in heaven or hell rebirths).
I think that context is so key and it's kind of odd it's missing from this video given the different interpretations they mention. While his attachment to his wife and son were a kind of hinderance in the material sense, they fueled his motivation in a spiritual sense.
The pali canon believes women can attain enlightenment. There is even a collection called the verses of senior nuns that describes many as well as many instances of the Buddha saying that women can. The only thing it mentions is that a woman cannot become a sammasambuddha which is specifically a Buddha that teaches people like Gotama. However there is plenty of arguments showing that even that may be an interpolation.
Because of that interpolation the lotus sutra says that the dragon princess turned into a male when she became a Buddha which is very strange. According to the lotus sutra though all three: arhats, patyekabuddha (lone buddha) and boddhisattvas are all but one vehicle leading to being a sammasambuddha and seeing as the original pali canon does not say a patyekabuddha cannot be a woman or even that plenty of arhats are women then a sammasambuddha doesn’t have to be male??? It’s super confusing.
One of his reasons for leaving (according to texts) was that by finding the path to enlightenment he could help them and assure their happiness moreso than if he didn't.
I mean isn't Buddha more relatable because he is flawed and makes mistakes. Also this is just a story and we have no idea if any of this actually happened historically. It's just a story to teach monks and lay people the sacrifices they might choose to be a part of the monkhood.
I truly wish that this was a story that was told more often, because it reminds us that to achieve something great you don't just abandon needless decadence but sometimes you also sacrifice the things that bring you happiness. I also just like the more sorrowful perspective on the origins of the buddha
Nice series, although I wished you guys covered why Buddhism declined in India and Afghanistan and it's survival in East & Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka.
I am Buddhist. This act of Buddha is always debatable. One the only hand leaving possession and family is the greatest of becoming enlightened. Because being emotional in both happiness and sadness is suffering. Being attached to your possessions including family which you live most is suffering. Caring for them and wishing them well are suffering. On the other hand, not caring for them or how they feel at all is selfish. But without being selfish you cannot just leave everything behind and dedicate yourself to your training.
It’s always fully appreciated how high quality, passionate and well researched your videos are! Your content is always an instant watch! Thanks guys! I deeply enjoyed it and will be first here on youtube to see ford!
@extrahistory Hi there, I always loved your videos since the beginning. And can I ask for you guys to do a topic on The Philippine Revolution especially figures such as Aguinaldo, Rizal, and Bonifacio.
I wonder how the "leaving family behind" aspect was seen at first, and if something like that was changed 8n different cultures. At least when it comes to normal people.
Child rearing wealthy women like the princess did not sleep in same chambers as husband's. Babies wake every 2 hours. And when Buddha returned to home, she would not leave her women's wing of the palace, Buddha had to break protocol, come over in person to see her again and deliver his enlightenment he gained from their separation. The princess cried in private upon meeting for first time in 7 years. Buddha had come over to repay what he owed his wife, for all her support and loyalty.
@@Urlocallordandsavior learn a bit about eastern cultures. It is widespread for women to sleep separate from husband for birth and child rearing. Poor people need not apply though, they have one room for entire family.
Every good thing has a sad side, it's because we humans difrentiate things/ events using moral values and categorize into good/evil. Another example is Leika the space dog. Her story was tragic, but her voyage taught new lessons to space scientists and other researchers.
The story of Buddha looking back at his wife and kids, and left... .... is actually the life story of previous Buddha, Vipassi. The current Buddha Gotama, mentioned that he cut his hair in front of his crying parents, and left. Source: The Life of the Buddha, According to the Pali Canon.
True, those are all Mahayana stuff. Buddha was never big on previous or next Buddha's. He was always about the now and here time people have to reach enlightenment. The time between each Buddha is so vast, it is notionally counted by tens of thousands of earths, i.e. lives of entire planets.
@@caliburn1123no… the story is quite literally related from another buddha, the pali canon only the bodhisattva being disillusioned with the householder life and the terrifying prospect of death, illness, and suffering, and then leaving to be homeless; nothing less nothing more
Yosodhara, her story one of the complexities of Buddhism's past and present growing pains in its relationship and outlook towards women and the issues of whether the idea of family lies *in the way* of the path towards enlightenment, lies *on the way* to the path of enlightenment, or if it even factors into the gaining of enlightenment at all. A story that is difficult to draw absolute answers from and where those practicing may interpret it in any which way they may to fit narratives that iare very much wrapped up in the ever-evolving outlooks of the cultures where Buddhism permeates, and still very incomplete... It may never even be completed, really. *Westerners:* _Nothing but memes, oversimplifications, and contrarianism to make themselves sound smarter and/or morally superior to man who has been dead for over a millenium_
I have mixed feelings on this series as a Buddhist. I'm sure y'all had someone read it for sensitivity and accuracy so I'm not sure why it's not landing for me. I think, similar to the series on Christian schisms, there really needed to be a more thorough grounding in the theological aspects of Buddhism in order to understand the historical events that were examined here. Because the Buddha leaving his wife is taught with a very different context in the tradition I'm in and ones I've visited. He understood that his leaving would be quite painful for his family, but he wanted to release them from suffering completely in the long run and the only way to do that was to find a way out of samsara. He weighed the costs and benefits - specifically to them because he was a profoundly compassionate being. Their material needs were met given their wealth and he knew that but he wanted to truly liberate them. What is that but love? And the discussion of his wife and kids as an obstacle is just...it was not well handled in my opinion. When grounded in the theology, it doesn't seem nearly as cruel as it was here. The way I was taught, Rahula got his name because in part because he loved his son so much he almost didn't leave. It's used to illustrate how your attachment to someone can bar you from genuine compassion. Also there's some cultural stuff that would have been nice to see here. Many cultures take refusing spiritual requests to be a key part of the process of ordination. By refusing them several times, he was demonstrating to any that came afterwards that this was the genuine desire of the women and this was not a commitment they entered into lightly. The story is one, not of the Buddha being biased, but of him protecting the reputation of the orders in the present and well into the future. Maybe adding this stuff in would have ballooned the time too much. It makes me wish then that the series had tried to cover less ground so there was space to include a better understanding. I do worry that this series may have created more misconceptions than it dispelled. That being said, I still very much appreciate the effort that went into making this. The art especially was gorgeous and wonderfully rendered.
The timing of this video is freaky. I just started a class about Buddhism and I have constantly been wondering about his wife and child that he left behind.
she attained a version of enlightenment in her lifetime partially because of his teachings. While that doesn't make up for what he did, it is still a wonderful gift from him.
Shes a princess and a part of the royal family and lived in luxury. She wasnt really suffering at all. Considering most male princes at that time didnt even see their wives and were off to battle and war most of the time. So Buddha being gone for self enlightenment isnt so much different then if he stayed a prince and was off doing princely things like smashing other virgins or war...
@@nowhereman6019and yet all of those billions gave up many more loved ones and put them in suffering too. It really shows that Buddhism is only nirvana dukha on the personal scale.
@@teovu5557so she wasn’t suffering because it was a common thing? Also how would we know Siddhartha would’ve gone about his life like any other prince, you really can’t tell the other ways he could’ve tried to cease suffering.
Prince siddhartha was fed up of life and eternal suffering so he sought of enlightenment or a path to end suffering. He left his wife and children and all his possessions and after attaining enlightenment he visited kapilawasthu pura, his kingdom and when he visited, queen yashodara explained to his son that the Buddha was his father and why he left, and she told him to go and meet him. Buddha took the child and made him an arahat and later yashodara also became an arahat. So after all they all ended their suffering of the physical and spiritual worlds.
In kalama sutra, lord Buddha said not believe anything just because it is written on a book, or ur teacher taught you that, or just because u heard it etc, only u should believe something after investigating it thoroughly and if it something good u should practice it.
I'm not sure how I feel about this being the last episode of this series. On one hand, it makes a certain amount of sense to end by returning to how the series started, focusing on a single person. And, if you're going to do that, choosing the person that was arguably the most affected by Siddhartha's life does seem like a good choice. On the other hand, the series wrapped up the last episode so well that I didn't realize y'all were going to mention Yaśodharā at all - which makes the primary woman in this series kind of an optional bonus episode that's easy to miss. And that feels deeply uncomfortable, not the least because of how closely that attitude seems to align with her life as y'all chose to present it.
Maybe it's just my perspective, but I never consider a series to be wrapped up until the "Lies" episode drops. I get the concern that this episode might not get the viewership of the others because it's not directly designated as the 6th episode, and how it echo's Yaśodharā's treatment in some Buddhist stories, but it will be recommended by the algorithm alongside the others (I always see the Sanitation episode get recommended whenever I rewatch the John Snow vs cholera episodes), and it will be in the Buddhism playlist alongside them. I think there will be more chances to be discovered than we might realize at first.
@TheSmileMile While I hope you're right and it'll get the views, it really feels less like part of the series and more like the bonus episodes that come out between the end of a series and Lies, which is disappointing.
I would love to see how that would play out in front of a judge: "You see, your honor, I cant pay pension to my child because I have given up all wordly things. Thus I am not a father anymore, neither do I have posessions because I am an ascetic". 🤣😂
That joke would be funny except Buddha was a prince of a kingdom and left his wife a whole palace,riches and gold,servants and lived as high members of the royal family. THEY HAD EVERYTHING. And suffering wasnt one of them lol Buddha was the only one who gave up his titles and riches. Also he left for lietarally 4 years from 29 to 33 and returned home to teach his family before teaching the masses shortly after
Interesting how Siddhartha had to relearn enlightenment when his last life reincarnated into himself. Avatar: the Last Airbender must have borrowed this, seeing as each avatar must relearn their skills every time they reincarnate.
To those who said the Buddha left his wife. He didn't leave his wife in hardship. Both their lives are in wealthiest family, living in 3 castles. One for the summer, one for the winter, one of the rainy season. It's not like his entire family is a farmer, and he can't stand his hard life and leave his wife to bear it alone. If knowing that his wife is well taken care off, yet he cannot cut off his familiar ties and leave, what enlightenment can he seek? Besides, don't forget if he didn't left, his life is extremely luxurious and comfortable. If the Buddha is selfish, he wouldn've stayed and enjoy life. Not left and live in the forest.
Yeah, people forget his gave up a while kingdom and titles of nobility to be with the common folk and to experience the hardships of the regular working class. And he left his family for ONLY 4 years and returned to teach them and lived with and taught his family til his death living simple lives.
Of what value are worldly comforts and wealth compared to the love of a father? Poverty is nothing compared to abandonment. He left his child to grow without a father to pursue his own desires. That is selfish. He left his wife at her most emotionally vulnerable. That wounds the heart deeper than a knife.
@@Liethen Indian culture even now considers cutting family ties a hallmark of renunciation. If you have read Buddha's story properly, you would know that his love for whole humanity and empathy for their suffering forced him to seek a solution by renouncing his family life. people used to die in drones in petty wars but no one says that they abandoned their families for glory.
@@Liethen do not deny that. but such is the way. such is samsara. whatever you do. there is a price to pay. if he stays.... many millions would've have to paid the price of not knowing the way out. it's like eating meat or vegetarian? eating meat means some animal must die. vegetarian? the worms will die. moving left or right, up or down, even standing still, someone will get hurt. such is samsara.
@@Liethen that's why intention (karma) matters. Why did he do that? The Buddha left his family in search of noble truth. Thus all actions coming out of this pure intention is pure - faultless. Not to be blamed. Compare this to one who speaks words like layered honey, yet his intention is evil to drive you away from the truth. Regardless of his words or tonality, or pleasantness of his speech, his actions are bad. Because it comes from a bad source.
Please do the Greek war of independence of 1821 against the ottoman empire next I've been asking for this since the first episodes of the sengoku Jidai
I think the creators of Avatar The Last Airbender also drew inspiration from this part of the Buddha's story, when Guru Pathik advised Aang to let go of his attachments to Katara.
From a modern, Western perspective, the Buddha’s behaviour is pretty awful. Which makes it very useful as a tool to explain to others that not all cultures share remotely the same norms!
If anything, this ought to increase one's respect for the sakyan sage, to give up one's former life, and loved ones and sacrifice these relationships to dedicate one's life to saving thousands from Dukkha and guiding them to the path to liberation from samsara is an honourable act.
If abandoning your Wife and Infant child is considered a norm in other cultures, than I don't respect that culture. Regardless if you live in a Western culture or not, you should at least share some value in human decency and compassion for others.
He didnt abandon them, he left for 4 years to learn about the world and returned at 33 to teach them. He literally lived and died with his family after enlightenment. And you think him leaving them in the care of the royal palace with riches beyond imagination as members of the royal family of a kingdom is horrible? lmao Dude literally came back after 4 years to be with and teach his former wife and child in Buddhism. Ya'll act like he just left and never returned. @@47d75
Not true. Emotional hardship? Yes. But not physical. These are top 0.5% we are talking about in terms of wealth. They don't need to work to live. Siddharta would've stayed if he is selfish and wants a comfortable life. Leaving all these and goes into the forest is his ultimate sacrifice. Don't compare our peasant lives and responsibility with him. His position is like Elon Musk left his wife and kids to go into the forest - and his wife and kids are also billionaires by extension, well taken care off.
Lord Siddharth Gautam aka Buddha is also considered a reincarnation/Avatar of Lord Vishnu to reform Hinduism of the social ills and guide people towards enlightenment. That he certainly did.
If anything, this ought to increase one's respect for the sakyan sage, to give up one's former life, and loved ones and sacrifice these relationships to dedicate one's life to saving thousands from Dukkha and guiding them to the path to liberation from samsara is an honourable act.
How noble of the Buddha to decide for his wife and child that they didn't need him in their lives. No, being willing to abandon familial responsibility is not more respectable. In comparison, Jesus took no wife and had no children to abandon through his sacrifice and even in the midst of his painful death by Crucifixion managed to provide for his widowed mother by having his disciple John care for her.
Jesus was a poor sheep herder. Did he get arranged marriage at 14-16 for a crown prince duty to sire next generation? Oh, yes. You didn't understand anything beyond your narrow perspective, did you?
@@Soraviawas Gautama executed for his beliefs? No he had PRIVILEGE. You Aren’t practicing his doctrine by defending his behaviours, he never asked for this. Find peace in your heart and let others say what they wish, it will not detract from the principals of Buddhism. You are only creating your own troubles 🙏🏾
@@Ia32627 The abandonment of familial responsibility vas a necessary sin, for he vould not have learned of the Middle Path if not for his departure from his princely life, and his Enlightenment and the subsequent establishment of the sangha saved far more people than he could have as a prince. Think about it like this, if a man vas asked to choose betveen abandoning family to save humankind/his nation and saving his family to abandon humankind/nation, its obvious that the greater deed vould be to sacrifice family for humankind or his nation.
@@Ia32627 And its not like it ended bad, they reunited after some ears, left their royal lives for monkhood and lived together as a family until they each died.
You're not supposed to pronounce the character "a" that's at the last of a word.. For eg Rahula is correctly pronounced as Rahul, Siddhartha is correctly pronounced as Siddharth
This is starting to make more sense. So, the Buddha is clearly from Shelbyville, given him getting married to his most attractive cousin. And, he abandons family. Is the Buddha also the father of Nelson Muntz?
Now I'm in a momastery (Hare Krsna) and is true about to the dificult to talk whit your family, is hard some times whit all the stuff that you have to do
Ive enjoyed this whole series, but this video definitely made me think of the commonalities with Christianity. Jesus is a single man, but not all of the disciowho follow him ate, and the Bible mentions some of them leaving their families (although some people talk about how there may have been a lot more people who actually traveled with Jesus during his ministry who simply aren't mentioned in the Gospels). Christianity (or at least Catholicism) also has followers who consecrate themselyto religious life, and I think families often have mixed feelings about that. Early formation periods can include pretty strict isolation from the outside world (which can open up more over time) that includes really limited contact with family and friends as the postulant figures out if this is truly the life for them. There are plenty of stories of saintowho left behind their families for strict lives of poverty and prayer. Although, again, at least in Catholicism, someone wouldn't leave a marriage in order to join religious life because marriage is until death (although you certainly can enter religious life as a widow or widower).
This is just my own stance here, and no insult is intended towards any actual Buddhists. But frankly, no matter how impressive or important enlightenment is, I'd never be willing to walk out on my own family to obtain it 😟
@@emilybarclay8831 No it isn't. Selfishness is defined by what an individual stands to gain at the cost of another. What Siddhartha stood to "gain" at the time of his renounciation was starvation and homelessness.
@@princepscivitatis4083 he ‘gained’ enlightenment. He did it to break the cycle of reincarnation. He abandoned his child and his responsibilities for his own spiritual gain.
@@emilybarclay8831 At the time of his renounciation he didn't even know where his next meal was going to come from let alone how to break the cycle of reincarnation. His goal was to seek the truth about suffering so he could liberate mankind but it wasn't a given. What was given was starvation, homelessness and probable death.
Thing is Siddhartha and Buddha is different. Man who left his family is Siddhartha. One who attained enlightenment is Buddha. Siddhartha is flawed human. Nobody needs to worship him only Dharma attained by Buddha worthy of worship.
Can I just say that naming your first child "fetter" is a dick move? I mean, what were other people supposed to make of Prince "Fetter" if he decided to not go on the path of enlightenment and continued his training as a future royal ruler? First impressions are EXTREMELY important and Buddha gave his son a bigtime handicap!
He didn't name the son. His facial expression when hearing news of the birth got the name to the boy. His wife probably gave the name. The shadowing the room was the prince sneaking a look at his son from the doorway without entering the maternity room.
Watch Henry Ford #1 on Nebula RIGHT NOW: nebula.tv/videos/extrahistory-henry-ford-the-boy-who-hated-horses OR Check out Real Life Lore's Modern Conflicts episode "The fall of Isis" here: nebula.tv/videos/reallifelore-modern-conflicts-the-fall-of-isis?ref=extrahistory
Thanks For all your hardwork guys! It's always deeply appreciated! Huge fan of yours😊😊😊😊🙏🙏🔥🔥🔥🔥
Wasn't Buddha a prince in Nepal?? Its still in Nepal now Lumbini.. Search it up and it even says birth place of buddha.
Buddha was born in NEPAL
Budhha is from Nepal so stop saying India
Siddhartha's story must be one of the earliest written record of a father going out to buy milk.
Going out to buy milk and then coming home owning the world's entirety of Milk.
except he came back after 4 years(he told his wife he was leaving). He left to learn about the world at 29 and came back to teach his family and the common folk at 33. He lived with died by his family btw.
Love how you make it seem like he never came back lol
@@teovu5557 Prbly to be funny.
I hate milk
He left home to renounce milk.
When i was like 12, my mom was working in the theater/art department of this small local university. One of the plays they were putting on that year was "Siddhartha" and my mom signed me up to play Siddhartha's son. I know it was just a small production in some small college, but as a kid in small town America that had only really been exposed to Christian ideals, being in this play really gave me a new perspective on the world. It's been 20 years since that but it definitely impacted me in ways i didn't appreciate at the time. I guess this is just a shout-out to the Arts, especially the small ones.
It’s amazing how ancient stories can give us so much information through how they were interpreted
I liked how you showed the role of women in Buddhism changing depending on who was doing the wrting/interpretation of the texts. Sort of like modern politics.
Growing up as a Buddhist the way I was always told this story as a culmination of karmic lifetimes and in reference to how one leaves the material world behind. Buddha didn't just pick up and leave, it was lifetimes of building enough karma to make this happen. At the end Buddha's family didn't face financial hardship when Buddha left and that softened the blow for him. He was a prince in this lifetime and he knew that whatever happened to him, his family would be taken care of. Of course there was emotional hardship, and suffering is a part of that path and every decision the man made had consequences. Usually Buddhist look at the end and say his wife and child gained enlightenment and thus Buddha acted correctly if you look at the big picture, but I'm not sure if I agree with that. I think Buddha like any man could make the wrong decisions. The difference being he is able to recognize that he made the wrong decision and come back into his wife and son's life to help them gain enlightenment.
My problem with this line of thinking is it is by itself, incredibly selfish. If Yasodhara died in childbirth and Gautama was left to raise his son by himself, would he have made these same decisions? Probably, but he would have remarried bore another child and then left creating a lot of drama in the kingdom.
It takes a lot of privilege to be able to do what Gautama did and it only reinforces the caste system as kings ascend to Brahmin and Brahmin can do whatever they please.
Only someone who has everything can give it up but a person abandoning the bonds they would create with their children is something not even the gods do for us.
If I were in Gautama’s position, I would have included my wife and son in my search for enlightenment and maintained a boddhisattva position until my obligations to those who have stayed by my side are fulfilled.
If yasodhara was to leave Gautama with their child to become and sage. She would be seen as cruel and selfish. So why does her husband get a pass?
Did he come back to them in the end?
@@L3onking I mean you can certainly look at his decision and say it was selfish and cruel, but then again you have to look at the bigger picture and weigh the obligation to family and his ultimate destiny of becoming the Buddha. The line between selfless and selfishness doesn't end with his singular decision to leave his family. When he does become enlightened, he doesn't just seek his own salvation, he decides to become a teacher. You can make the assumption that it is possible to keep his family and seek enlightenment, but you make that assumption without actually being in the position of the Buddha and the norms for that time. Buddha lived in a time where there was an established tradition of becoming an ascetic to find enlightenment so he did the things other learned men did at his time. In fact Buddha failed to gain enlightenment even after abandoning his family and becoming an ascetic. Only through learning from his mistakes did he find a middle path and a message that resonated with people. Buddha doesn't get a pass, in fact he suffers and at the end pays for his transgressions. In the story we have him redeeming himself with his wife and child by teaching them afterwards, but that doesn't erase anything he did before.
But the truth of these stories is up in the air and we don't even know if him, his wife or his son existed in the form that we read. The only thing I know is that the stories don't shy away from his perceived failures. They point them out if anything.
Also I agree that according to the stories Buddha was in a Privileged position, but that doesn't make his message of compassion, introspection and moderation less true in any way.
Buddha was a naive princeling
@@winzyl9546 I mean I think Buddha would agree that he was naive. The man wasn't above criticism and he was willing to learn. If you could point out the error in his way of thought, his wrong actions and the bad consequences he caused, he would hear you out and think about a better way. I mean I think that's the whole point of Buddhism.
There is a story where the Buddha sits with his wife and as she cries, asking why he left her and their son, the Buddha says he left because he wanted to find the cure for suffering so they wouldn't have to suffer ever again. This contextualizes the Buddha's story in the Medicine journey archetypes, where someone goes off to find a cure for some disease. The Buddha found a cure, the Dharma, and brings it back home to his family.
As far as whether women can attain enlightenment, in Mahayana teachings we point to a dragon princess who, after hearing the Lotus Sutra, immediately attains Buddhahood. She is the first person to attain Buddhahood after the actual Buddha, and is used as an example of how the Lotus Sutra opens the way to enlightenment for all living beings, while many pre-Lotus Sutra teachings say either only men can attain enlightenment, or that one has to be reborn as a human to attain enlightenment (as supposed to being able to attain enlightenment as an animals, or in heaven or hell rebirths).
I think that context is so key and it's kind of odd it's missing from this video given the different interpretations they mention. While his attachment to his wife and son were a kind of hinderance in the material sense, they fueled his motivation in a spiritual sense.
The pali canon believes women can attain enlightenment. There is even a collection called the verses of senior nuns that describes many as well as many instances of the Buddha saying that women can. The only thing it mentions is that a woman cannot become a sammasambuddha which is specifically a Buddha that teaches people like Gotama. However there is plenty of arguments showing that even that may be an interpolation.
Because of that interpolation the lotus sutra says that the dragon princess turned into a male when she became a Buddha which is very strange. According to the lotus sutra though all three: arhats, patyekabuddha (lone buddha) and boddhisattvas are all but one vehicle leading to being a sammasambuddha and seeing as the original pali canon does not say a patyekabuddha cannot be a woman or even that plenty of arhats are women then a sammasambuddha doesn’t have to be male??? It’s super confusing.
@@sonpa7436 no
@@sonpa7436 the buddha takes birth as a male in a higher caste to take their bodhi
One of the biggest obstacles to me finding buddha relatable on a moral and motivational level, historically speaking
You must be reading the wrong Buddha😅.
@@Lockflydo you realize how f'd up that last sentence is every one needs a dad or father figure in their lives man
@@Lockfly you are aware of the phrase "money can't buy happiness"? right?
One of his reasons for leaving (according to texts) was that by finding the path to enlightenment he could help them and assure their happiness moreso than if he didn't.
I mean isn't Buddha more relatable because he is flawed and makes mistakes. Also this is just a story and we have no idea if any of this actually happened historically. It's just a story to teach monks and lay people the sacrifices they might choose to be a part of the monkhood.
I truly wish that this was a story that was told more often, because it reminds us that to achieve something great you don't just abandon needless decadence but sometimes you also sacrifice the things that bring you happiness. I also just like the more sorrowful perspective on the origins of the buddha
Buddha: “I’m not paying child support.” *Ascends to enlightenment*
LOL
HE HA!
If you ain’t Buddha, that check better be in the mail. -every baby momma everywhere
"sorry judge, i cant pay child support for religious reasons"
"No bitches, No problems" = Nirvana
I love how you mentioned Wu Zetian, she is a special figure in history!
We can't wait for our upcoming series on her to launch! Stay tuned!
A pretty evil one if I can recall
Nice series, although I wished you guys covered why Buddhism declined in India and Afghanistan and it's survival in East & Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka.
ISLAM
@@JoeRogansForeheadand Hinduism and probably Christianity
@@AStoryteller-for-funHindus ddn't convert people
I am Buddhist. This act of Buddha is always debatable.
One the only hand leaving possession and family is the greatest of becoming enlightened. Because being emotional in both happiness and sadness is suffering. Being attached to your possessions including family which you live most is suffering. Caring for them and wishing them well are suffering.
On the other hand, not caring for them or how they feel at all is selfish.
But without being selfish you cannot just leave everything behind and dedicate yourself to your training.
It’s always fully appreciated how high quality, passionate and well researched your videos are!
Your content is always an instant watch! Thanks guys! I deeply enjoyed it and will be first here on youtube to see ford!
Thank you! We can't wait to relese our Ford video either! We're so excited to delve into this one.
@@extrahistory Always! You guys are the Best!
@extrahistory Hi there, I always loved your videos since the beginning. And can I ask for you guys to do a topic on The Philippine Revolution especially figures such as Aguinaldo, Rizal, and Bonifacio.
well I'm definetly looking forward to any future series you make on religions if you choose to do so
I wonder how the "leaving family behind" aspect was seen at first, and if something like that was changed 8n different cultures. At least when it comes to normal people.
His wife was a princess his son was son of crown prince. They didn't starve.
@@Soraviaso?
@@Soravia No, I meant how they saw it mentally.
not uncommon, aseticism as a tradition in the Indian subcontinent had been present for sometime by the time siddartha vas born.
"I'm going to leave my family in the middle of the night on the day my child is born."
-an enlightened man
Kind of based. For if he was lustful, he would never be able to leave desire for a woman
Not quite, at that point he wasn't enlightened.
@@johnlove2954 no, he had no care for his own family
Child rearing wealthy women like the princess did not sleep in same chambers as husband's. Babies wake every 2 hours.
And when Buddha returned to home, she would not leave her women's wing of the palace, Buddha had to break protocol, come over in person to see her again and deliver his enlightenment he gained from their separation.
The princess cried in private upon meeting for first time in 7 years. Buddha had come over to repay what he owed his wife, for all her support and loyalty.
I wonder when did that custom begin.
@@Urlocallordandsavior learn a bit about eastern cultures. It is widespread for women to sleep separate from husband for birth and child rearing.
Poor people need not apply though, they have one room for entire family.
@@Urlocallordandsaviorthis is true. What he's saying. Ancient empires in South Asia were like that
I like that various versions of the stories are acknowledged- that these traditions vary in beliefs among many people.
Every good thing has a sad side, it's because we humans difrentiate things/ events using moral values and categorize into good/evil. Another example is Leika the space dog. Her story was tragic, but her voyage taught new lessons to space scientists and other researchers.
The story of Buddha looking back at his wife and kids, and left...
.... is actually the life story of previous Buddha, Vipassi.
The current Buddha Gotama, mentioned that he cut his hair in front of his crying parents, and left.
Source: The Life of the Buddha, According to the Pali Canon.
Nope, the myths around the Bodhisattvas and previous budhhas are later myths. The story said here is the canon.
There was only one Siddhartha Gautama.
True, those are all Mahayana stuff. Buddha was never big on previous or next Buddha's. He was always about the now and here time people have to reach enlightenment. The time between each Buddha is so vast, it is notionally counted by tens of thousands of earths, i.e. lives of entire planets.
Who will appeal to you then ?Jesus ?Muhammad?Tate?
@@SaiKiran-fd3gq if you are asking me. it is the buddha. i have full confidence in buddhism.
@@caliburn1123no… the story is quite literally related from another buddha, the pali canon only the bodhisattva being disillusioned with the householder life and the terrifying prospect of death, illness, and suffering, and then leaving to be homeless; nothing less nothing more
I grew up as a buddhist and taught about this story. I never really thought about this story from this point of view.
Y’all should do series on Islam and Christianity. I would love to see that.!
Yosodhara, her story one of the complexities of Buddhism's past and present growing pains in its relationship and outlook towards women and the issues of whether the idea of family lies *in the way* of the path towards enlightenment, lies *on the way* to the path of enlightenment, or if it even factors into the gaining of enlightenment at all. A story that is difficult to draw absolute answers from and where those practicing may interpret it in any which way they may to fit narratives that iare very much wrapped up in the ever-evolving outlooks of the cultures where Buddhism permeates, and still very incomplete... It may never even be completed, really.
*Westerners:* _Nothing but memes, oversimplifications, and contrarianism to make themselves sound smarter and/or morally superior to man who has been dead for over a millenium_
I have mixed feelings on this series as a Buddhist. I'm sure y'all had someone read it for sensitivity and accuracy so I'm not sure why it's not landing for me. I think, similar to the series on Christian schisms, there really needed to be a more thorough grounding in the theological aspects of Buddhism in order to understand the historical events that were examined here.
Because the Buddha leaving his wife is taught with a very different context in the tradition I'm in and ones I've visited. He understood that his leaving would be quite painful for his family, but he wanted to release them from suffering completely in the long run and the only way to do that was to find a way out of samsara. He weighed the costs and benefits - specifically to them because he was a profoundly compassionate being. Their material needs were met given their wealth and he knew that but he wanted to truly liberate them. What is that but love?
And the discussion of his wife and kids as an obstacle is just...it was not well handled in my opinion. When grounded in the theology, it doesn't seem nearly as cruel as it was here. The way I was taught, Rahula got his name because in part because he loved his son so much he almost didn't leave. It's used to illustrate how your attachment to someone can bar you from genuine compassion.
Also there's some cultural stuff that would have been nice to see here. Many cultures take refusing spiritual requests to be a key part of the process of ordination. By refusing them several times, he was demonstrating to any that came afterwards that this was the genuine desire of the women and this was not a commitment they entered into lightly. The story is one, not of the Buddha being biased, but of him protecting the reputation of the orders in the present and well into the future.
Maybe adding this stuff in would have ballooned the time too much. It makes me wish then that the series had tried to cover less ground so there was space to include a better understanding. I do worry that this series may have created more misconceptions than it dispelled.
That being said, I still very much appreciate the effort that went into making this. The art especially was gorgeous and wonderfully rendered.
The timing of this video is freaky. I just started a class about Buddhism and I have constantly been wondering about his wife and child that he left behind.
Did he even cease suffering, if he caused so much suffering to his wife?
she attained a version of enlightenment in her lifetime partially because of his teachings.
While that doesn't make up for what he did, it is still a wonderful gift from him.
He literally created a tradition to liberate billions of people from suffering. Yes, it was worth it.
Shes a princess and a part of the royal family and lived in luxury. She wasnt really suffering at all. Considering most male princes at that time didnt even see their wives and were off to battle and war most of the time. So Buddha being gone for self enlightenment isnt so much different then if he stayed a prince and was off doing princely things like smashing other virgins or war...
@@nowhereman6019and yet all of those billions gave up many more loved ones and put them in suffering too. It really shows that Buddhism is only nirvana dukha on the personal scale.
@@teovu5557so she wasn’t suffering because it was a common thing? Also how would we know Siddhartha would’ve gone about his life like any other prince, you really can’t tell the other ways he could’ve tried to cease suffering.
I think my dad went out and reached Nirvana too
Love your videis guys! They always make my day 🎉🎉🎉🎉❤❤❤❤
Buddha dictated that monks owe half of their alms to wives they left behind
6th century BC: I'm off to attain enlightenment
2023: I'm out to get milk
I'm out to fight 7 foot Mexican Gods of Fitness, - zeppeli
Milk=enlightenment.😇
He came back with enlightenment, did the others come back with milk?
@@Soravia nope the others gained real enlightenment, which told them not to go back. The milk was just a red herring.🤣
@@Soravia coming back with cigarettes is one form of enlightenment 😂
Prince siddhartha was fed up of life and eternal suffering so he sought of enlightenment or a path to end suffering. He left his wife and children and all his possessions and after attaining enlightenment he visited kapilawasthu pura, his kingdom and when he visited, queen yashodara explained to his son that the Buddha was his father and why he left, and she told him to go and meet him. Buddha took the child and made him an arahat and later yashodara also became an arahat. So after all they all ended their suffering of the physical and spiritual worlds.
I loved the series! I learnt a lot about the universe of the story we all know
In kalama sutra, lord Buddha said not believe anything just because it is written on a book, or ur teacher taught you that, or just because u heard it etc, only u should believe something after investigating it thoroughly and if it something good u should practice it.
2:48 "Only going forward 'cause we can't find reverse"
Sorry to say ,yashoda was residing in Lumbini during her pregnancy which is situated in Nepal
I'm not sure how I feel about this being the last episode of this series.
On one hand, it makes a certain amount of sense to end by returning to how the series started, focusing on a single person. And, if you're going to do that, choosing the person that was arguably the most affected by Siddhartha's life does seem like a good choice.
On the other hand, the series wrapped up the last episode so well that I didn't realize y'all were going to mention Yaśodharā at all - which makes the primary woman in this series kind of an optional bonus episode that's easy to miss.
And that feels deeply uncomfortable, not the least because of how closely that attitude seems to align with her life as y'all chose to present it.
Maybe it's just my perspective, but I never consider a series to be wrapped up until the "Lies" episode drops.
I get the concern that this episode might not get the viewership of the others because it's not directly designated as the 6th episode, and how it echo's Yaśodharā's treatment in some Buddhist stories, but it will be recommended by the algorithm alongside the others (I always see the Sanitation episode get recommended whenever I rewatch the John Snow vs cholera episodes), and it will be in the Buddhism playlist alongside them. I think there will be more chances to be discovered than we might realize at first.
@TheSmileMile While I hope you're right and it'll get the views, it really feels less like part of the series and more like the bonus episodes that come out between the end of a series and Lies, which is disappointing.
I would love to see how that would play out in front of a judge: "You see, your honor, I cant pay pension to my child because I have given up all wordly things. Thus I am not a father anymore, neither do I have posessions because I am an ascetic". 🤣😂
Depend on the country and time, unfortunately.
That joke would be funny except Buddha was a prince of a kingdom and left his wife a whole palace,riches and gold,servants and lived as high members of the royal family. THEY HAD EVERYTHING. And suffering wasnt one of them lol
Buddha was the only one who gave up his titles and riches.
Also he left for lietarally 4 years from 29 to 33 and returned home to teach his family before teaching the masses shortly after
@@teovu5557I mean, I was thinking not the Buddah, but as a tactic you know? on my next pension hearing.
@@teovu5557yeah cause throwing money fixes every problem. He still a dead beat
@@kateajurors8640so what if he is a deadbeat?
This is so cool!
Hope he at least got the holy milk down at the store
w8, he did, the spiritual kind
I loved it keep it coming
Enlightenment can wait. I will never abandon my family 🙏
Loved the video
Interesting how Siddhartha had to relearn enlightenment when his last life reincarnated into himself.
Avatar: the Last Airbender must have borrowed this, seeing as each avatar must relearn their skills every time they reincarnate.
Every soldiers they may die on battlefield, they go to battlefield not only to protect family but also person how unknown to them
What an inspiration to all deadbeat dads out there.
To those who said the Buddha left his wife. He didn't leave his wife in hardship. Both their lives are in wealthiest family, living in 3 castles. One for the summer, one for the winter, one of the rainy season. It's not like his entire family is a farmer, and he can't stand his hard life and leave his wife to bear it alone. If knowing that his wife is well taken care off, yet he cannot cut off his familiar ties and leave, what enlightenment can he seek? Besides, don't forget if he didn't left, his life is extremely luxurious and comfortable. If the Buddha is selfish, he wouldn've stayed and enjoy life. Not left and live in the forest.
Yeah, people forget his gave up a while kingdom and titles of nobility to be with the common folk and to experience the hardships of the regular working class. And he left his family for ONLY 4 years and returned to teach them and lived with and taught his family til his death living simple lives.
Of what value are worldly comforts and wealth compared to the love of a father? Poverty is nothing compared to abandonment. He left his child to grow without a father to pursue his own desires. That is selfish. He left his wife at her most emotionally vulnerable. That wounds the heart deeper than a knife.
@@Liethen Indian culture even now considers cutting family ties a hallmark of renunciation. If you have read Buddha's story properly, you would know that his love for whole humanity and empathy for their suffering forced him to seek a solution by renouncing his family life. people used to die in drones in petty wars but no one says that they abandoned their families for glory.
@@Liethen do not deny that. but such is the way. such is samsara. whatever you do. there is a price to pay. if he stays.... many millions would've have to paid the price of not knowing the way out. it's like eating meat or vegetarian? eating meat means some animal must die. vegetarian? the worms will die. moving left or right, up or down, even standing still, someone will get hurt. such is samsara.
@@Liethen that's why intention (karma) matters. Why did he do that? The Buddha left his family in search of noble truth. Thus all actions coming out of this pure intention is pure - faultless. Not to be blamed. Compare this to one who speaks words like layered honey, yet his intention is evil to drive you away from the truth. Regardless of his words or tonality, or pleasantness of his speech, his actions are bad. Because it comes from a bad source.
Please do the Greek war of independence of 1821 against the ottoman empire next
I've been asking for this since the first episodes of the sengoku Jidai
2:27 this holy man was actuary a previous buddha
i always wondered about them, and while we're at it, that deadbeat, st. augustine's family. at least we know what happened to bilah and ismael (kinda)
The Sidharta dilema relates to Jesus in the book The Last Temptation of Christ, by Nikos Kazantzakis.
I think the creators of Avatar The Last Airbender also drew inspiration from this part of the Buddha's story, when Guru Pathik advised Aang to let go of his attachments to Katara.
Yes
"Sorry babe, gotta save the world from Dukkha."
PANR has tuned in.
From a modern, Western perspective, the Buddha’s behaviour is pretty awful.
Which makes it very useful as a tool to explain to others that not all cultures share remotely the same norms!
If anything, this ought to increase one's respect for the sakyan sage, to give up one's former life, and loved ones and sacrifice these relationships to dedicate one's life to saving thousands from Dukkha and guiding them to the path to liberation from samsara is an honourable act.
I think the palace people and his family thought it pretty awful as well. lol.
I'm pretty sure his wife, parents and son all thought that was absolutely awful.
If abandoning your Wife and Infant child is considered a norm in other cultures, than I don't respect that culture. Regardless if you live in a Western culture or not, you should at least share some value in human decency and compassion for others.
He didnt abandon them, he left for 4 years to learn about the world and returned at 33 to teach them. He literally lived and died with his family after enlightenment.
And you think him leaving them in the care of the royal palace with riches beyond imagination as members of the royal family of a kingdom is horrible? lmao
Dude literally came back after 4 years to be with and teach his former wife and child in Buddhism.
Ya'll act like he just left and never returned.
@@47d75
You pronounce Yashodhara perfectly.
You guys should do a series on the Mexican Revolution
I just want to point out. Buddha was born in Lumbini. And it is a part of Nepal.
The "dh" in Yashodhara is one syllable. It's pronounced similar to "th" in "the".
great to learn about this lady
Awesome channel
Buddha, pride of Nepal ❤️
Nepal, Bhutan, India
Entire World
kinda ironic to say that in this particular video
Damn, that's as bad as stepping out for cigarettes and never coming back
Not true. Emotional hardship? Yes. But not physical. These are top 0.5% we are talking about in terms of wealth. They don't need to work to live. Siddharta would've stayed if he is selfish and wants a comfortable life. Leaving all these and goes into the forest is his ultimate sacrifice. Don't compare our peasant lives and responsibility with him. His position is like Elon Musk left his wife and kids to go into the forest - and his wife and kids are also billionaires by extension, well taken care off.
It would be so great if someday EH could make a series about the birth of Islam and it's spread.
Great series
Lord Siddharth Gautam aka Buddha is also considered a reincarnation/Avatar of Lord Vishnu to reform Hinduism of the social ills and guide people towards enlightenment. That he certainly did.
This is a Hindu revision created long after Buddha died. It seems an unusual addition to the dashavatara in my opinion
This was very interesting.
Does anyone else think this was very selfish and inconsiderate of Buddha to just ghost his family without even taking to his wife first? Just saying 🤔
Man, this is probably why Jesus never married.
Some people think he did, that he had a wife and children at Capernaum which is why he visited periodically.
If anything, this ought to increase one's respect for the sakyan sage, to give up one's former life, and loved ones and sacrifice these relationships to dedicate one's life to saving thousands from Dukkha and guiding them to the path to liberation from samsara is an honourable act.
How noble of the Buddha to decide for his wife and child that they didn't need him in their lives. No, being willing to abandon familial responsibility is not more respectable.
In comparison, Jesus took no wife and had no children to abandon through his sacrifice and even in the midst of his painful death by Crucifixion managed to provide for his widowed mother by having his disciple John care for her.
Jesus was a poor sheep herder. Did he get arranged marriage at 14-16 for a crown prince duty to sire next generation?
Oh, yes. You didn't understand anything beyond your narrow perspective, did you?
@@Soraviawas Gautama executed for his beliefs? No he had PRIVILEGE. You Aren’t practicing his doctrine by defending his behaviours, he never asked for this. Find peace in your heart and let others say what they wish, it will not detract from the principals of Buddhism. You are only creating your own troubles 🙏🏾
@@Ia32627 The abandonment of familial responsibility vas a necessary sin, for he vould not have learned of the Middle Path if not for his departure from his princely life, and his Enlightenment and the subsequent establishment of the sangha saved far more people than he could have as a prince.
Think about it like this, if a man vas asked to choose betveen abandoning family to save humankind/his nation and saving his family to abandon humankind/nation, its obvious that the greater deed vould be to sacrifice family for humankind or his nation.
@@Ia32627 And its not like it ended bad, they reunited after some ears, left their royal lives for monkhood and lived together as a family until they each died.
You're not supposed to pronounce the character "a" that's at the last of a word.. For eg Rahula is correctly pronounced as Rahul, Siddhartha is correctly pronounced as Siddharth
Indeed
8:33 ..did you just slip a loss reference in?
I can't believe I took refuge and practiced for 5 years and never knew any of this. Women are constantly left out of important stories.
This is starting to make more sense. So, the Buddha is clearly from Shelbyville, given him getting married to his most attractive cousin. And, he abandons family. Is the Buddha also the father of Nelson Muntz?
how are u a history channel and mess up the first line of the video. he is from Nepal, Lumbini not India.
So that explains the sequel “Rude Buddha” story 😢.
Those green mugs made me lose The Game at 11:20
Awesome
8:32 loss
Now I'm in a momastery (Hare Krsna) and is true about to the dificult to talk whit your family, is hard some times whit all the stuff that you have to do
Ive enjoyed this whole series, but this video definitely made me think of the commonalities with Christianity. Jesus is a single man, but not all of the disciowho follow him ate, and the Bible mentions some of them leaving their families (although some people talk about how there may have been a lot more people who actually traveled with Jesus during his ministry who simply aren't mentioned in the Gospels). Christianity (or at least Catholicism) also has followers who consecrate themselyto religious life, and I think families often have mixed feelings about that. Early formation periods can include pretty strict isolation from the outside world (which can open up more over time) that includes really limited contact with family and friends as the postulant figures out if this is truly the life for them. There are plenty of stories of saintowho left behind their families for strict lives of poverty and prayer. Although, again, at least in Catholicism, someone wouldn't leave a marriage in order to join religious life because marriage is until death (although you certainly can enter religious life as a widow or widower).
This is just my own stance here, and no insult is intended towards any actual Buddhists. But frankly, no matter how impressive or important enlightenment is, I'd never be willing to walk out on my own family to obtain it 😟
Neither would most. That's why he's the Buddha and we're not.
@@princepscivitatis4083walking out on your own newborn child is a fundamentally selfish act
@@emilybarclay8831 No it isn't. Selfishness is defined by what an individual stands to gain at the cost of another.
What Siddhartha stood to "gain" at the time of his renounciation was starvation and homelessness.
@@princepscivitatis4083 he ‘gained’ enlightenment. He did it to break the cycle of reincarnation. He abandoned his child and his responsibilities for his own spiritual gain.
@@emilybarclay8831
At the time of his renounciation he didn't even know where his next meal was going to come from let alone how to break the cycle of reincarnation.
His goal was to seek the truth about suffering so he could liberate mankind but it wasn't a given. What was given was starvation, homelessness and probable death.
Ur like the only American dude who is pronouncing Yaśōdhara right lmao
Thing is Siddhartha and Buddha is different. Man who left his family is Siddhartha. One who attained enlightenment is Buddha. Siddhartha is flawed human. Nobody needs to worship him only Dharma attained by Buddha worthy of worship.
It's Nepal not india
What kind and where did you learn history
Yes finally🎉
Now we need a video about vidhudhaba, who wiped buddhas clan because buddha's clan was hypocrites.
Well, now that this is over, how about a video about the 6 day war
So a family is broken up by a father who shirks responsibility…and that’s considered a good thing?
Nepal not India
Kid arguing nEpAl nOt InDiA🤡
@sahilsingh6048 well you aren't much different either
This is great and all. But when is the part where Buddha fights for mankind against the Gods?
3:58 Huh who knew Budda and my father had a lot more in common 😂 😭
Does the great ExtraHistory respond? 👀
My family named me after him, Siddharth. I guess I should name my son Rahul. 😅
He went to the cosmic milk store and reached nirvana
2:03 Neighboring republic?
Can I just say that naming your first child "fetter" is a dick move? I mean, what were other people supposed to make of Prince "Fetter" if he decided to not go on the path of enlightenment and continued his training as a future royal ruler? First impressions are EXTREMELY important and Buddha gave his son a bigtime handicap!
He didn't name the son. His facial expression when hearing news of the birth got the name to the boy. His wife probably gave the name.
The shadowing the room was the prince sneaking a look at his son from the doorway without entering the maternity room.
Thank you! I didn’t know this.👍🏽🇦🇺
Marry, or not to marry that is the question..