I am not Buddhist.
Was Buddha a royal?
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
That's why I noticed that you have already finished with it.thepea wrote: I’m impartial as it’s wrapped up in belief rather than wisdom.
On the other hand not every belief is non-wisdom. It is not a valid argument.
Strange!thepea wrote: who discovered these truths first is not a concern of mine.
What is the first refuge out of 3 refuges?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Greetings,
Metta,
Paul.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Belief is faith, the only importance of faith is it develops to wisdom.Eko Care wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 12:30 amThat's why I noticed that you have already finished with it.thepea wrote: I’m impartial as it’s wrapped up in belief rather than wisdom.
On the other hand not every belief is non-wisdom. It is not a valid argument.
Strange!thepea wrote: who discovered these truths first is not a concern of mine.
What is the first refuge out of 3 refuges?
These refuges are within the framework of ones body.
It matters not who discovered this first.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Last edited by cappuccino on Sun Apr 24, 2022 12:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
I would not say anything against, as you have already said that,thepea wrote: It matters not who discovered this first.
thepea wrote: I am not Buddhist.
-
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2022 4:44 am
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
His caste was ksatriya. They're not warriors they didn't fight in the front line. You recruit Sudras to do that. Ksatriyas were aristocrats. Blue bloods. Powerful families. This was 500 BC folks. It was iron age not bronze age. It might be a small kingdom but it was still a real kingdom. Well at least that is according to my opinion. Rome transitioned from kingdom into republic around this time too.
money is worthless toilet paper • the tongue has no bone (a person might say one thing but it cannot be further from the truth) • you cannot teach a goat math as in you cannot teach the dhamma to a dumb person
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
The Buddha was part of the warrior caste aka the ruling class of ancient India. What's interesting is that even though the Sakyan republic was a vassal of Kosala, the Sakyans saw themselves as "superior" to Kosala...can you imagine being the ruler of a powerful kingdom and treated as "inferior" by your subjects...that was the case with King Pasenadi(Pali)...
"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------
"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "
--------------------------------------------
"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Isn't there only 4 castes? He is not a Brahmin?Kusala wrote: ↑Mon Jun 06, 2022 8:03 amThe Buddha was part of the warrior caste aka the ruling class of ancient India. What's interesting is that even though the Sakyan republic was a vassal of Kosala, the Sakyans saw themselves as "superior" to Kosala...can you imagine being the ruler of a powerful kingdom and treated as "inferior" by your subjects...that was the case with King Pasenadi(Pali)...
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
even warren buffet will water his garden as time pass/relaxation or personal interest but doesn't mean he is poorBKh wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 10:24 amThat's an erroneous conclusion to draw. To come to that, you have to argue that the mention of him working in a field is true (and then insist it means he was just a farmer/manual laborer) and that all other places where the suttas mention the Buddha raised in wealth are wrong. This is not a good way of reading the texts. It's very easy to understand how both pieces of information are true.He likely didn't have 3 or 4 palaces either, since he talks bout his father working the field.
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
-
- Posts: 1098
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Didn't we have an endless debate about this already?
Apparently he was the Aryan Superman, preacher of the Aryan Eight-fold path and culmination and fulfilment of the Indo-European tradition (Eastern branch).
Or something like that
Apparently he was the Aryan Superman, preacher of the Aryan Eight-fold path and culmination and fulfilment of the Indo-European tradition (Eastern branch).
Or something like that
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
-
- Posts: 1098
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
He was surely Royal. Even according to the Mahavamsa he was from Sri Lanka so confirmed royal.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
-
- Posts: 2607
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
What ever alex or westerners write about lord budda being siddartha was destined to be borne with the criteria as dipaya deshaya kalaya kula mawa meaning continent , country , time , clan and mother so that he will achieve his target of buddahood without obstacles . Clan meaning ksatriya or warrior clan was meant to be socially highest. Mother happened to be maha maya being the wife of king Suddodana who happened to be reigning India or Jambudvipa. Hence from buddhist literatureSam Vara wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 12:32 pmThanks Alex - that's an interesting little essay from Wynne which I hadn't seen before. It contains a more plausible account of the Buddha's social position than the Suttas and later mythology, but overall I thought it made too much of the Buddha's "separation from worldly values". In particular, there was little on the ethics and the way in which sīla has played such a huge part in lay life.AlexBrains92 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 8:08 am 'Who was the Buddha?' by Alexander Wynne:
https://aeon.co/essays/was-the-buddha-a ... -itinerant
Gautama budda was from a Royal clan.
Re: Was Buddha a royal?
Lord Buddha was from Khattiya (aristocrat, ruler, or warrior) clan. And Lord Buddha said Khattiya clan is superior in a way.
Before Buddhahood, prince Siddhattha was a full trained warrior.
Even in Suttanta, Buddha praised Khattiya clan.
Before Buddhahood, prince Siddhattha was a full trained warrior.
Even in Suttanta, Buddha praised Khattiya clan.
Ambaṭṭhasutta"At this point, Ambaṭṭha, that aristocrat has reached rock bottom, with head shaven, inflicted with a sack of ashes, and banished from city or nation. Yet still the aristocrats are superior and the brahmins inferior. Brahmā Sanaṅkumāra also spoke this verse:
‘The aristocrat is first among people
who take clan as the standard.
But one accomplished in knowledge and conduct
is first among gods and humans.’
That verse was well sung by Brahmā Sanaṅkumāra, not poorly sung; well spoken, not poorly spoken, beneficial, not harmful, and it was approved by me. For I also say this:
The aristocrat is first among people
who take clan as the standard.
But one accomplished in knowledge and conduct
is first among gods and humans.”
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false