The Smile of the Buddha
1. What does this final chapter accomplish? How does it take aspects of the text and develop them further?
OR
2. Do you think it is possible to love the world (as Siddhartha says he does on p. 125 and 128) and yet not be attached to it?
OR
3. Siddhartha says he values things more than he does thoughts or words. What is ther eto value about things (from Siddhartha's perspective)? He soesn't exactly say; just do your best.
4. Assume for a moment that when Govinda kisses Siddhartha on the forehead and "sees" what om means we are at the climax of the book. Can you say why the climax of the book might involve this particular act--a kiss on the forehead?
21 comments:
I think this final chapter nicely concludes the journey of Siddhartha. There is a certain parallelism used; meeting up with Govinda once again, now having achieved his ultimate goal. The dialogue between Govinda and Siddhartha serves as a kind of summary of Siddhartha's past beliefs and his new ones, and this in combination with the parallelism wraps up the book and the ideas in an interesting way. But, there is a bittersweet tone in the beginning; Govinda has not found this enlightenment in his life yet, is still "seeking." This is resolved somewhat when Govinda kisses Siddhartha's head, and sees "the face of a fish, a carp ,with a mouth open in infinite pain. . . the face of a newborn baby. . . the face of a murderer," all creating the "om." This leaves the reader with an assumption that Govinda may be close to enlightenment as well.
Checking in. . .
Siddartha values thingds more than he does words. Wha I think he means by that is that things are real they have color, texture, edgse, etc. and these are all things tha can be admired or loved. What he means by not loving words are that they are not always real, meaning they don't necesarily excist and therefore he can not love them. Also he does not like words because he says they create and illusion of contradiction, or an argument, but that really all things are one. This is really hard for me to undersrand but basically it seems that things that one can feel and touch and see can be loved but words are not always real and threfore can not be lved or admired.
2. I most definitely think that it is possible to love the world and not be attached to it. The reason I think this is because on page 128 it says, "...to be able to view it [the world] and myself and all beings with love and admiration and awe." He's not attached to it, he's just viewing it and amazed at what he sees. I believe many of us, including myself, are amazed at things we see in the world, even everyday things...yet we are not attached to the world. We don't love it so much that if something changes, we flip out...well, depending on what it is at least. Siddhartha is amazed at changes and learning and just taking the world for what it is, not looking past it. I feel like he was a bit attached to it when he was looking past it in the very beginning, trying to find "the truth." But, since he's discovered wisdom for himself, he has become less attached because he is thankful for how the earth is as it is. I think the world would be better off if we were all just thankful for what we see right in front of us, and what we're given.
promt # 2
what he is saying is very interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"all sin contains grace, all youngsters already contain oldsters, all babies contain death".....etc....
this is true. I think in genral what he is saying the life is planned, in a way, by an unkown force (maybe God, or someting else....) Everything has a set begining and end......
Are we SUPPOSED to find a way out of this life where we KNOW we are going to die and that horrible tragic things are going to happen to us and amazingly awesome good things are going to happen to usin our life...how can we live like that?????????? How are we supposed to live like this???? Are we supposed to or not??????? WHy dont we just wait around till someone like Siddhartha comes along and finds "the meaning of life?????
How can we LOVE this world???? WE love it SSSSSSSSOOOOOO much w=yet we DESPIZE it so much!!!!!!!!!!!!
Every huan being on this earth has a love-hate relationship with their life and the earth.......WHY???????????!!!!!!!!!!????????? their are lots of reasons why we shold hate or lives and the earth AND love it.do we choose or decide....or choose both love and hate????????
We need BOTH love and hate in our lives...to....well....LIVE a life with emotions, to be human.................or.......not???????!!!!!!
After all this handling an dthinking and going on this spiritual journey in this book i feel i have gotten NOWHERE fast!!!!!!!!!!! it just makes we question more about different ideas and philosophies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree withnjake the fact that its a very well written ending, The kiss on the forhead was a nice touch and added dramticism to it. I thought it was funny how Govinda doesnt know who siddhartha is when he does kiss him on the forehead. My favorite thing about it is the fact that they both achevive enlightment at the end and it kind of wraps up all that he went through to acheive in a simple but cool . And the fact that he and Govinda at the begging of the novel were seeking and they both live their own lives and have their own paths , but they still acheive enlightenment together.
checking in
I think it is very possible to love the world, not hate it, and love yourself as Siddhartha said on page 128, while not getting attached to it. I think it is possible like as Hunter said and page 128, you can love and admire the world, and still not be attached to it. He is talking about a point between two opposites. I think he is talking about how he can veiw the world and love it but it is easy to say bye if he needs to.
-Rocco
i kind of agree with rocco and hunter
maybe its about BALANCE....balancing your love, hate and attachment to the world out so it works out okay....right now in this world, it definetly isn't "BALANCED!!!!"
checking in.
checking in
i do not think that you can love something but not be attached to it. because i dont understand this, a lot of things about buddhism confuse me. how can you even do any of the things on the eight fold path if your not attached to improving yourself? i am sure i am being stupid, but i dont really understand it.
I would like to talk about prompt 3.
I think what he means is that he needs to be able to see the item or else he can't love it or value it. This is not specifically said in the book but I thought of this because he gives a list of "... no hardness, no softness, no colors, no edges, no smell, no taste, they have nothing but words. " I think that this means all the "things" that he sees has to be in shape. I know that words can be in shape by text but you are definitely not able to smell it or touch it. Other items that he is talking about has to be touchable because he includes in his list that it has to have edges.
I'd like to answer prompt 3:
The significance of THINGS here is the key, the central piece in Siddartha's differing from Buddhism. This is the aspect that separates Siddartha's world views from Gautama's. Here, it is Siddarha's view that all things "are to be loved". He wishes to be able to love all things. He in fact must as he is part of them and they him. We are all part of each other in space and time. By this I mean that the substance of our bodies, the stuff of our being continues to cycle and become something anew, while at the same time existing free of time: all things containing in them the extent of time and the ephemeralness of time at once. We see this portrayed at the climatic point of Govinda's view into Siddarha's saintly face, all sorts of things existing, ending and returning. So, in order to accept all this, it is Siddartha's goal to love all things, all existence, all being. Words ahve nothing that is part of his own being, and thus he cannot be attached to them. This is so opposite from the Buddha's teachings, Govinda finds Siddartha's words foolish. That is, until he kisses Siddartha's brow...
2. I agree with what everyone has been saying about balance. But, we must keep in mind that if one is living a perfectly balanced lifestyle they can still have feelings of attachment. I think that the balance that must be achieved for someone to be able to love the world and yet not be attached to it is an EMOTIONAL endeavor. The material items, and activities that one pursues in this case do not matter as much as long as someone is THINKING in the right way.
Example:
(Siddhartha speaking)"A ferryman, yes. Some people, Govinda, must change greatly, must wear all kinds of clothes; and I am one of those people, dear friend."
Siddhartha's acknowledgement and acceptance of change in his life shows his balance of emotions.
*Oh I also wanted to mention that this passage reminded me of the way that Mr. Gregg likes us to approach figures:
"When someone seeks...than it easily happens that his eyes see only the thing that he seeks, and he is able to find nothing, to take in nothing because he always thinks only about the thing he is seeking because he has one goal, because he is obsessed with his goal."
just putting that out there. :P
checking in..
checking in...sorry can't wait 30 minutes I must get some sleep tonight. <3
Valuing things seems to have a deeper meaning to Siddhartha, rather than thoughts, because things are what teac Siddhartha and his predecessor the ways in whihc things work. Siddhartha leanrs from things, not from thoughts, and those things that he learns are all relevant to his pursuit of Nirvana and enlightenment. What Govinda fails to realize (up until he kisses Siddhartha on the forehead) is that understanding things is not as important as accepting them for what they are. "Things" are what they are, like Siddhartha said, "this stone is a stone" and from that he can love it. In a way, Siddhartha almost seems to make out thoughts as something that are not only unreal, but twisted and convluted.
Besides that, it seems that love is what comes from things, not words.
This is Sofia...
I thought that the final chapter of Siddhartha was fantastic. As Jake said, it's a very nice conclusion of Siddhartha's journey. I thought Siddhartha's idea of nothing or nobody being just one thing. For example, a person isn't just saintly, or just sinful. People are made up of parts that add up to a whole. The parts that would be considered "bad" such as sinfulness actually aren't. The things that seem like opposites actually go together to create perfection, or "om". This actually reminded me of the previous chapter, when Siddhartha listened hard to the river and heard all sorts of different things: laughter, weeping, moaning, etc., and all of these things put together created "om". Siddhartha even said that the stage in life when he experienced much greed and lust was actually good for him because it was a valuable learning experience. "'...I needed the most shameful despair to learn how to give up resistance..."
I hope it's okay if I don't check in tonight. I had a late night due to the chamber concert and I'm exhausted.
Checking in...
checking in
Post a Comment