Many books on Buddhism repeat common misconceptions about the Buddha. This happens because many of these books are just referencing older writings instead of presenting new research or insights. I’d like to clear up a few myths that even some knowledgeable Buddhists believe. Here we go:
Firstly, the country of India didn’t exist at the time of the Buddha. When people refer to the Buddha being Indian, they mean he was born in what is now India. However, tradition states he was born in Lumbini in the Sakyan country, part of present-day Nepal, not India. While the Buddha spent much of his life in what is now India, he was actually born in what is today’s Nepal.
In the scriptures, the Buddha is only referred to as “Gotama.” It’s unclear if this was his family name or his personal name. We know the personal names of his family members, and it would be strange if we didn’t know the Buddha’s personal name. The Pali scriptures mention the name Siddhattha in some very late texts, indicating this name was assigned long after the Buddha’s death.
The Buddha’s family name was likely Ādicca, meaning “sun,” and he was part of the Sakyan people. Gotama was a brahmin family name, and it’s improbable for the Buddha to have a brahmin family name, as early scriptures refer to his family members by their personal names. Thus, Gotama was probably his personal name, making him “Gotama Ādicca,” not “Siddhattha Gotama.”
There was no religion called Hinduism during the Buddha’s time. Instead, there was Brahminism, based on the Vedas, which evolved into contemporary Hinduism. There’s no evidence the Buddha followed this tradition; in fact, his people, the Sakyans, claimed superiority over the Brahmins. The Buddha likely left home to seek spiritual enlightenment outside the Vedic traditions, following teachers like Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta who focused on truth-seeking through meditation, not Vedic rituals.
The Sakyans, the Buddha’s people, lived in a republic without kings, governed by a council of family heads. The Buddha’s father was more like a senator than a king. Over time, as republics were overtaken by kingdoms, people might have assumed the Buddha was a prince due to the grander, more relatable narrative. Religious traditions often portray their founders with grandeur to attract patronage and respect, but historically, the Buddha was not a prince.
The story of the Four Sights (seeing an old person, a sick person, a dead person, and a wandering ascetic) prompting the Buddha to leave home is a myth. This story is about a legendary former Buddha named Vipassi, not Gotama. The Buddha’s actual motivation, as described in scriptures, was seeing the conflict and suffering in the world, which led to his spiritual quest.
The Buddha’s dwelling places were not grand palaces but likely modest stilt longhouses, fitting archaeological evidence. Stories of his luxurious early life and dramatic midnight departure are also myths. Scriptures mention he said farewell to his parents before leaving, making his departure more human and believable.
In some communities, especially among Hindus and Buddhists, these corrections can be controversial because they challenge long-held beliefs. The Buddha emphasized the importance of not clinging to views. Embracing new historical evidence and letting go of outdated beliefs can reduce suffering and lead to greater happiness.
Overall, understanding the historical Buddha helps connect more deeply with his teachings, emphasizing human practicality over mythological grandeur. Continuously re-examining and updating our understanding based on new evidence is crucial in appreciating the Buddha’s true message.