Siddhartha - Why the name?

[one_raven]

As many of you likely know, the name of the Buddha was Siddhartha Gautama (last name varies from place to place).
He was the son of King Suddhodana and Queen Mayadevi of the Sakya tribe in India.

What I am curious about is why Hesse chose Gotama as the name of the Buddha and Siddhartha as the name of the main character in the book.

He seems to have broken the Buddha into two different characters.
Siddhartha's life in the book, by no coincidence, I'm sure, closely mirrors the Buddha's own life.
Buddha was born into a rich, Brahaman family.
He was seen as a holy person from a very young age.
He rejected the life of ease and comfort in his father's garden to pursue the life of an ascetic.
Upon living as an ascetic came, on his own, to his "Middle Path".

The best I can come up with is the seemingly (in my mind anyway) central theme of the story, in that you can not teach or learn wisdom, you must find it on your own, by way of your own path.

Buddha taught "kill your parents, kill your god, kill your teacher".
He always came back to the notion that you should not believe what anyone teaches you unless you have experienced it on your own and it makes reasonable sense to you.
However, there is an inherent contradiction (as I pointed out in another thread) in teaching people to reject the notion of being taught.

It seems to me that Hesse split the Buddha into two characters in order to most clearly demonstrate that Buddha's Dhamma can't be taught to people.
Gotama is Buddha, so is Siddhartha.
This is why in Chapter 3 Siddhartha walked away from the Buddha.

"I wish that you, oh exalted one, would not be angry with me," said the young man. "I have not spoken to you like this to argue with you, to argue about words. You are truly right, there is little to opinions. But let me say this one more thing: I have not doubted in you for a single moment. I have not doubted for a single moment that you are Buddha, that you have reached the goal, the highest goal towards which so many thousands of Brahmans and sons of Brahmans are on their way. You have found salvation from death. It has come to you in the course of your own search, on your own path, through thoughts, through meditation, through realizations, through enlightenment. It has not come to you by means of teachings! And--thus is my thought, oh exalted one,--nobody will obtain salvation by means of teachings! You will not be able to convey and say to anybody, oh venerable one, in words and through teachings what has happened to you in the hour of enlightenment! The teachings of the enlightened Buddha contain much, it teaches many to live righteously, to avoid evil. But there is one thing which these so clear, these so venerable teachings do not contain: they do not contain the mystery of what the exalted one has experienced for himself, he alone among hundreds of thousands. This is what I have thought and realized, when I have heard the teachings. This is why I am continuing my travels--not to seek other, better teachings, for I know there are none, but to depart from all teachings and all teachers and to reach my goal by myself or to die. But often, I'll think of this day, oh exalted one, and of this hour, when my eyes beheld a holy man."

Hesse made Siddhartha walk away from the Buddha, not to point out a flaw in his teachings, but to clearly exemplify the flawlessness of the Dhamma, while drawing attention to the necessary self-contradictory nature of attempting to teach the Dhamma.
The Dhamma is perfect knowledge, which can lead to perfect wisdom, but not through the teachings of anyone else, including the Buddha.

What do you think?

[Cesare More]

Short and simple answer one raven:
If you have read most of Hesse's work, you would notice that all of it is autobiographical. And the knowledge he got through his real life like the teachings of Buddha he used it in his writings, specifically in Demian , Steppenwolf , Siddhartha, Narcissus and Goldmund)
Regarding your curiosity about the split character,Buddha is his father or creator; then Buddha teaches his son to kill whatever he is attached to (son leaves childhood , finds adulthood ) So here Siddhartha is destructor or breaks the eggshell and grows up ( a mirror image on the story of Abraxas in Demian)
Then, how could it be a contradiction if he learned everything from Buddha?
In other words, his stories are not about the Philosophy of Buddhism, but about the pain and mystery of growing up .Only that he does it beautifully and in a touching way hence the influences he had in most of the post-war generation; that means younger people of that time (painful because they had to be reborn from the trauma of war and mysterious because it all starts again and being young, life ahead seems unraveled and unknown)
The common end is when one walks away from childhood painful adolescence and comes into adulthood and realization of own self.

[Kentop]

A common theme in all of Hesse's books is the dual nature of human existence. In Steppenwolf, the protaganist has both internal and external conflicts between wanting to be the social man and simultaneously be the lone wolf. That theme resonates in Siddartha, too. Hesse even laboriously points out that there is a budda inside every thief and a thief inside every budda. His choice of names merely reflects that idea. Siddartha is the anti-budda, yet he achieves sartori anyway.

[Turk]

Simple; because Siddhartha was one of names of Buddha. And Siddhartha is a book which is almost a biography of Buddha.

[lenoka]

When i've read "Siddhartha" the same question with you, one_raven, has appeared in my mind "why Siddhartha and Gotama Buddha are different persons?" though we all know that it's just name's variations of one person Buddha. I can't agree that the life of Siddhartha is a mirror of the Buddha's life, even though it seems so.... There is a great difference between them - Siddhartha is rejecting teaching...Govinda has joined the teachings of Gotama...
What i think is that Hesse has devided one person in two to show the choice that can be made by everyone (Siddhartha was doing choices all his life and living different lifes)...
we know that a hermit predicted to Buddha: "if he remains in the palace after his youth, will become a great king to rule the Four Seas, but if he forsakes the household life to embrace religious life, he will become a Buddha and the world's Savior". But the author didn't make Siddhartha a great king that rules the Four Seas....

the question is still living in my mind "how to perceive two different characters and the name that is combining them...."

that is what i think....
quit hard to make things right in this question....the more i'm thinking about it the more i'm becoming puzzled...

[KidTruth]

A lot of people read this book as though it is meant to be a historical account of Buddhist philosophy - it is not. Hesse had no interest in that, as a very astute poster above me pointed out. He is twisting the vague concepts he understood about Buddhist philosophy into a coming of age story. Hesse is very much an existential author, and a very good one at that.

[one_raven]

Originally Posted by Turk

Simple; because Siddhartha was one of names of Buddha. And Siddhartha is a book which is almost a biography of Buddha.

You really think it's that simple, do you?