Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Did a man named Siddartha Gautama ever truly exist, or was he too a myth, that his followers created to accompany what is actually their teachings? Your thoughts?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Since this comes up often about Jesus- Did Lord Buddha exist?
- Thread starter Rainbow Mage
- Start date
I think he probably existed.
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
Buddha being an honorific that can be applied to others besides Siddhartha Gautama, she's right.
Some of my teachers have mentioned that scholars traveling with Alexander's armies wrote of people they met claiming to have seen the Buddha when they were children some 60 years previously.
Without a time machine, I'm not sure how one can conclusively prove anything that happened in human history millennia ago, even with artifacts and written records.
Some of my teachers have mentioned that scholars traveling with Alexander's armies wrote of people they met claiming to have seen the Buddha when they were children some 60 years previously.
Without a time machine, I'm not sure how one can conclusively prove anything that happened in human history millennia ago, even with artifacts and written records.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Buddha had to exist but forget the religion, and the myths surrounding Buddha. I would say he had to exist because the original Pali Literature is scientific in thought, too many centuries ahead of its time. The west didn't produce such thinkers until the likes of David Humes, John Locke, or Rene DeCartes put thoughts to paper. It was a departure from Buddhist thought that became popular in eastern Asia as the Buddhist philosophy was adopted by its cultures, and changed radically from its original course.
Last edited:
If he did exist? I really don't know. I don't think it really matters either.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
I think it significant in that Buddha may be the first known materialist.
In which sense was he a materialist? And how can we know if he was a literal character as opposed to a fictional or alegoric one?
Runlikethewind
Monk in Training
I voted yes and I think I agree with Smoke's assessment of the situation.
Although we would likely disagree on the details of what is mythological...
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Gotama's concept of Abidhamma appears as a supremely naturalistic and psychological one. It refers to the representation within the human mind of the external order of things and events. It is the logical system for organizing and interpreting experience that is constructed by human mental capacities during the process of experiencing external phenomena: the instrument that regulates the mind. Some twenty-three centuries were to pass before the idea was taken up and further developed by David Hume, Herbert Spencer, Bertrand Russell and Jean Piaget -- among others. For the early Buddhists, the concepts of Dhamma and Abidhamma provided a conceptual structure of such power that an entire systematization of logic and a subsequent unification of Indian learning was subsequently made possible by means of them. Only Western cultural chauvinism has prevented us from recognizing it as an accomplishment at least equal to that of Aristotle, which occurred considerably later.
Was the Buddha the First Humanist[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
[/FONT]You can't fake this.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
.
[/FONT]
Smoke
Done here.
Hmmm.... Myth isn't necessarily false. I suspect we'd disagree on what's factual.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Are there any history scholars that doubt Siddhartha Gautama actually existed?
Thesavorofpan
Is not going to save you.
I remember being taught in school that he was some prince, who saw a homeless man on the street and decided to be on equal terms with the poor man and started to starve himself. Then while he was starving he had a vision. Though I totally could be wrong and I'm sorry if that sound insensitive it is the only way I can put it in my own words.
Agreed! Jesus and Buddha are both said to have been born of a pure virgin, honoured by heavenly beings at their birth, prayed to by Kings, and loaded with presents, happy is the whole world sing the gods, under the form of young Brahmins at the birth of the child Buddha. And it is said over and over again in the Chinese books that Buddha was incarnate of the Holy Spirit, and born of a pure virgin. It is written also in the Lalita Vistara, the legendary biography of Buddha, dating from before the time of Christ, For he is indeed born who brings salvation, and will establish the world in blessedness. He is born who will darken sun and moon by the splendor of his merits and will put all darkness to flight. The blind see, the deaf hear, the demented are restored to reason. A. Drews, The Christ Myth, P. 104.
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Senedjem,
The question should be:
Did *Gautama* exists?
Buddha is not a person but a state which was, is and will be from eternity to eternity.
Yes, Gautama did exists and and personally find no difference even if he did not as his he himself had said: *All attachments should be killed if they came in the WAY*
Love & rgds
The question should be:
Did *Gautama* exists?
Buddha is not a person but a state which was, is and will be from eternity to eternity.
Yes, Gautama did exists and and personally find no difference even if he did not as his he himself had said: *All attachments should be killed if they came in the WAY*
Love & rgds
Oh, ok. Although I'm not certain that rules out his being a literary device, but that is of little importance.
But you can fake that humanism is materlialism.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
How so?But you can fake that humanism is materlialism.