About Buddha's way of life

The Buddha probably thought that he would not be able to make his family happy if he had his own worries and questions. When you are saved, you are saving people.
When the Buddha attained enlightenment, he probably realized that he didn't even need to abandon his wife and children from the beginning.

Since there is no self or otherness, you can treat people and families with compassion not only thinking that you are alone, but also for your family without hesitation. Since they didn't even create a family relationship there, many people were probably shown the path of salvation.

Good evening. My name is Kameyama Junshi.

This is my personal opinion, but I will respond. (Well, the answers to hasunoha are always personal, and not limited to this one...)

The Buddha was able to come to his senses after becoming a monk. Without becoming a monk, the Buddha would not have been able to show us the truth of this world. The truth was not shown to Buddha from the beginning. In other words, the truth was shown prior to the Buddha's priesthood, and the Buddha did not try to push towards it. I think this is something we too will experience. For example, it's an experience where you don't understand your parents' dislikes until you leave home because you want to live away from your parents. I know my parents' dislikes from the beginning, and I don't leave home to live in order to realize them. Or, for example, when a person who was a drug addict complains about the horror of drugs and is giving lectures, etc. If what you say is different from what you are doing, you end up saying why did they take drugs even though they are complaining about the horror of drugs.

These are my answers. I hope you find it helpful.

I read it.
I see, I understand what you're saying very well. That's right. That's because abandoning one's family and doing what one wants is, at first glance, a human being. it's a selfish act of selfishness, isn't it? There are also your comments where I feel the same.

Nonetheless, if the Buddha gave up everything other than his mind and body, abandoned the kingdom and society and sought the path and truth, wasn't it possible for the Buddha to reach a state of enlightenment?
If I hadn't abandoned my current stable lifestyle, environment, and conditions, I might not have been able to see anything really important.

I'm not a Buddha or Buddha, so I can only say it by imagination, but I don't think it's easy to look directly and genuinely at things when various elements and unnecessary things are attached to them.

If people have the financial power or power they have been given, they will get caught up in that, and they won't be able to look at it correctly, right?
Or maybe you may lose sight of yourself by getting caught up in it, right?
As the Buddha said, everything in this world is just a temporary form, and all things are constantly changing.

In such cases, I also think that throwing away everything is the right path in order to see, listen, and accept things as they are without getting caught up in things.

That's why there is a way of life called a monk, or a recluse.

Thinking about that makes me think about the way we monks, that is, monks, and the way we live now.

When it comes to whether I'm really a monk, that is, a recluse, I often think that's not the case.

After all, I would like to go back to the beginning and aspire to live a way of life as a monk seeking the Buddha's advice.

Thank you very much for your questions. Thank you very much.

I sincerely pray to the Buddha that you will be blessed with a relationship with the Buddha, that the right teachings will be brought to you, and that you will live a rich life with your heart.
We wholeheartedly agree

It would be impossible to simply compare Indian values back then with modern Japanese values.
Maybe at that time, it was normal to become a monk or practice ascetic practices in old age.
The Buddha “grew old” a little early (early retirement).
The Buddha may have gone on to become a monk because he fulfilled the minimum responsibility of giving birth to heirs of the royal family.
Well, as a result, that son also became a monk.
As a result theory, Buddha has made peace with his family, so it's a happy ending.
Also, even if it is said that the Buddha became a monk, it does not mean that his whereabouts are unknown because the five fellow monks dispatched by his father were together.
The family (people in the castle) probably knew where the Buddha was practicing his ascetic practices.
Also, since it is a royal family, there was no hindrance to the lives of the wife and child even if the Buddha became a monk.

Buddha has experienced all aspects of secular life (entertainment, marriage, children).
Maybe that's why the Buddha's teachings are so persuasive.

You're right. First of all, the Buddha legend is wrong.
For example, my son Rahul. It is said that Buddha added it to mean “an obstacle to becoming a monk.” However, depending on the sutras, it is named after “Ryujin (Naga), the guardian deity of the Buddha tribe,” and it seems that Buddha's father was delighted to hear that name

Personally, I think it's a “name named after farming.” The father's name is Shuddodana and “King Johan.” Buddha's common name is Gautama Siddhartha, “the best cow.” Both names are related to farming.
If you read Rahla according to that flow, the dragon god symbolizes a river. In other words, it is a name related to irrigation, and it can also be read as derived from agriculture. The status from time immemorial is strongly related to agriculture, so it's persuasive, isn't it?

I think this alone makes it clear that the Buddha legend is ridiculous. Well, it's a story that there are a lot of stories, and that doesn't mean it's a lie.

In the legend of Buddha, which is often mentioned, only the fact that he abandoned his family is close-up, but after realizing it, he went back to his family and became a disciple of the clan almost completely. Of course, my wife, children, and foster mother are apprentices.
Actually, not only in primitive Buddhism, but also in today's southern Theravada Buddhism, even if you become a monk, “you can't break ties with your family.”

Rather, it is common in the south for a wife, mother, and daughter to become the treasurer and support the monks. I don't have any skinship, but I can talk. After the ascetic practice has progressed to a certain extent, it is even the greatest honor to speak the puja to the family. At that time, it's OK to be invited to your home to have a meal memorial service.

Nevertheless, Japanese people assume that “monasticism = breaking ties with family.” The idea is simply “family discrimination.” It's clumsy not to be close only to your family while saying “I will save all sentient beings.” It probably comes from reading too many comics.
If you go back even further, Japanese Buddhism is not about understanding Buddhism accurately, and “Japan also has a religion similar to Christianity! It's a civilized country!” It is important to note that it was created to appeal. Bushido is the same as chivalry. That's why they were shaped by asceticism like Christian monasteries and knights. Actually, even though the Buddha had children, he said, “If a monk isn't a virgin or virgin, it's ridiculous!” There is a reasonable percentage of Japanese people who think that.

I can't write it due to the character limit, but I was a monk with no institutional issues during the “Four Sumi Period,” and I think it actually felt like I was assigned alone.