It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Fallen Prince! A Machiavellian insight into Gautama Buddahs Descent into Peasantry!

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 06:51 AM
link   


Siddharta Gautama was the son of Śuddhodana, "an elected chief of the Shakya clan",[5] whose capital was Kapilavastu, and who were later annexed by the growing Kingdom of Kosala during the Buddha's lifetime. Gautama was the family name. His mother, Queen Maha Maya (Māyādevī) and Suddhodana's wife, was a Koliyan princess. Legend has it that, on the night Siddhartha was conceived, Queen Maya dreamt that a white elephant with six white tusks entered her right side,[web 5] and ten months later Siddhartha was born. As was the Shakya tradition, when his mother Queen Maya became pregnant, she left Kapilvastu for her father's kingdom to give birth. However, her son is said to have been born on the way, at Lumbini, in a garden beneath a sal tree.


Gautama Buddha

I try to be Fair ...
So if i am The Prince
like Gautama Buddha!
I don't go down to the Peasantry
and Perfect being a Peasant!
I bring them all Up to me
and make them All Princes!

Unless I am sent as a false prophet to misguide millions into living with less ... when really we all can have it all!


Did The Buddha think to narrowly and mistrust us all and hence sell out for a greater spiritual lesser physical reality or was he a false prophet sent by his father to misguide everybody?

edit on 19-11-2013 by TripleLindy because: Edited to fix spelling.




posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Buddha chose to live in the woods and left his palace life. I'm not really sure what Machiavelli has to do with this since it was about a millienium before Machiavelli.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 


No, Buddha seems to have known instinctively the data that Jesus spoke about when talking about rich men and heaven. To get into a place of consciousness about "what everything is" a person has to realize that things are created as images in the mind, and the enjoyment and attachment to and of riches pushes that knowledge aside.

Buddha griped a lot about non-attachment, and suffering tied to attachment, so probably he saw lots of psychological upsets in his own family centered on things, money, and power, and somehow came to the conclusion that all those things were illusion and distractions.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


I made a simple connection between Machiavelli's book called The Prince which is basically a discourse in bastardry and ruthlessness, which are inherent properties assumed of ANY of TPTB and their kin ... AND Gautama Buddha being born into a ROYAL bloodline as A PRINCE!

The insight is my own and because it looks conspiratorial and evil minded to me and hence I applied the Machiavellian spin since it is appropriate.

I hope this dispels the confusion for you.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 


Buddha realized that spiritual growth needs separation from the physical, from the earthly possessions, needs and desires.

Nothing Machiavellian here...

Do you feel that all of the humanities problems would be gone if we were all rich ??? I hope you're not that naive.


edit: typo
edit on 19-11-2013 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


So you are stating basically that The Buddha DID think to narrowly and mistrust us all and hence sell out for a greater spiritual lesser physical reality.

Because we can know both and use both ... it is not an either or situation ... it is an AND situation!

Otherwise there would be no polarity at all.

I believe he set the bar far too low for physical reality to be enjoyed because simply reflecting ALL THE TIME gets pretty boring! And life has to be more than about being forced to have bodily functions taken care of OR it is worthless ... because we return to god in the long run anyway and so being that here when we came here to be not that is pretty poor wisdom in my books.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
 


I agree that everything has its proper place and time ..and that is exactly what I am arguing for here ... more room for the physical to be truly enjoyed for the physical whilst not disregarding the spiritual side of things!

There is no point being a peasant god when WE can ALL be princes!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 


You haven't read The Prince, have you?



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 


With knowledge even a peasant can live like a king.


Today in materialistic terms being a worker in some countries is in a way more comfortable than some kings had it when they lived thousands of years ago.

And a blessed ones like Jesus, Buddha, Nanek and Rumi always go back to basics and see thru much that is ego based illusion and indoctrination from humankind. They cannot stop it since they are what they are. Too far evolved to stay corrupted and dreaming the human dream. Blessed by the spiritual light that is ever present to them outside Platos cave. Feeling the bliss that come from the symbiosis in the body and the internal heat from the root flame.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 





There is no point being a peasant god when WE can ALL be princes!


You can not be a prince if we are all princes. A prince has to have subjugates to prince over...if there aren't any..than you're not.

In instance when you seek princehood...you in fact seek inequality. The very thing the Buddha knew was a deception.

What does "a Prince" term mean to you? Wealth ? Power ? A kingdom ?


edit on 19-11-2013 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 


While it is valiant to want to bring others up to "your level" you must remember that focusing on that too much will take you off your OWN path. What will happen will happen naturally, you will radiate as you would and affect others as you would. Your sole focus should stay on being true.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


I certainly have and so I know its all about exploiting all you assets!

Kings don't have friends!

The Buddha makes it easy for TPTB to exploit the sheeple and shear them!

Do you disagree! Or do you agree with me that he was a false prophet?



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 


They do indeed shine the light that leads the way back home!

BUT WE CAME HERE TO HOLIDAY OK!

We can all be Princes and still share fairly like brothers and sisters do ... just like in the palace!

Technology allows it!

As above so below!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
 


I am subjugate unto myself and that is all the subjects I need or want as any more would be greedy.

The term Prince to me means to BE principled. That means to seek the highest ... not the lowest slumming way back to god because one can't handle how hot it is this kitchen.

We are Gods children ... he has an infinite credit card we can use ok!

Don't make me quote Jesus at you please!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by chadderson
 


Starred!


I concur ... this thread comes from within my being and IS an expression of my true nature!

Hence this IS my current path ... I shall not be swayed!

We can be God at any moment ... it takes but a single instant of realization ... and then u die and go back there.

Here is LIMITED just enough to make its special ... rare ... extremely valuable!

TPTB know that value but discount entirely the greater good spirituality side of things.

The Buddhists have it in reverse.

Where is the balance ... to raise us all to princes I say!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   

TripleLindy
reply to post by filosophia
 


I made a simple connection between Machiavelli's book called The Prince which is basically a discourse in bastardry and ruthlessness, which are inherent properties assumed of ANY of TPTB and their kin ... AND Gautama Buddha being born into a ROYAL bloodline as A PRINCE!

The insight is my own and because it looks conspiratorial and evil minded to me and hence I applied the Machiavellian spin since it is appropriate.

I hope this dispels the confusion for you.


But Buddha left his princely life, so if you're saying all princes are part of tptb then he left it and disrupted the plan, since his prophecy was to be a world monarch or universal teacher, he chose the latter.



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TripleLindy
 




Do you disagree! Or do you agree with me that he was a false prophet?

I know you didn't ask me, but I disagree with you.

False prophet? How? By speaking in plain terms a truth?

He never called himself a prophet anyway. In answer to similar questions, his reply was "I'm awake".




Are you pushing the "false prophet" idea more for your religious/spiritual views rather than pseudo-intellectual reasons?

He wanted to live an authentic life, not play the power and deception games of the Prince (which as said was written looooong after anyway.)



The term Prince to me means to BE principled.


I know you said you did, but did you really read The Prince?
edit on 11/19/2013 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


When everyone IS TPTB ... then no one is TPTB!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Chamberf=6
 


I agree that he speaks the truth ... just a very poor one!

I prefer a truth that is a bit more RICH for all of us!

One that includes both worlds and neither at the expense of the other!



posted on Nov, 19 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Chamberf=6
 


They were asking MY PERSONAL TAKE on what being A Prince was.

Not what my take on The Prince was!

Don't get confused now please.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join