Question:  It could be argued that Sidhartha was in the position similar to Oedipus, and Sidhartha’s father, the King, was in a position similar to King Laius — but after that, both Sidhartha and his father responded to their situations very differently – it could be said ‘oppositely’ to what Oedipus and Laius did. 

Indeed, one scholar observed, “I could respect the thinking of Sidhartha’s father, except for the fact that his son was Sidhartha, who was destined to grow up to be the Buddha. So, in that case, of course it was necessary for Sidhartha to disobey his father, for the good of the whole world.”

Could you explain what this scholar is talking about, and do you agree with this scholar’s view?