The Incredible Find that may reset the Buddha's birth date.

[Mycroft]

A dig at the suspected birthplace of the Buddha has led to the discovery of an unknown timber structure beneath a series of brick temples. Remarkably, it's the first known archaeological evidence linking the life of the Buddha to a specific century.


Incredible Archaeological Discovery May Reset the Buddha's Birth Date

A pretty interesting find, regardless of what you may believe!

 

[Ablaze]

Fascinating. Thanks for sharing!

 

[Mycroft]

It's interesting that he was born in the 6th Century. I wonder how this effects Buddhism in general and associated history?

 

[psychoslice]

It doesn't make any difference to me personally, I wouldn't even care if he never existed, its not the man Guttuma, but what was within the man, the Buddha that I'm more concerned with.

 

[steeltoes]

Sixth century origins is nothing new: Was the Buddha the First Humanist

 

[LooseEnd]

It's interesting that he was born in the 6th Century. I wonder how this effects Buddhism in general and associated history?

It doesn't affect Buddhism at all.

Also this finding doesn't really give conclusive evidence to say Buddha was born in 6th century, or am I missing something here? This looks like a shrine which could be the birth place of Buddha. How are they connecting it to the birth date of Buddha??

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't particularly care whether Gautama even existed. It matters little ultimately.

 

[BruceDLimber]

May I presume all these references to "the Sixth Century" in fact refer to the Sixth Century BCE?!

This was never made clear so far as I've seen.


Peace,

Bruce

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

It's interesting. The site shows that the Buddha could have lived a full century before even the normally earliest dates given for his life. However, as the Buddhists here and others will tell you, not only does this not affect Buddhism, even if the Buddha never existed, it would have little effect on Buddhism as a whole.

 

[Jainarayan]

I don't particularly care whether Gautama even existed. It matters little ultimately.

However, as the Buddhists here and others will tell you, not only does this not affect Buddhism, even if the Buddha never existed, it would have little effect on Buddhism as a whole.

For sure... the same goes for Jesus, Lao Tzu, Homer, Krishna, et.al. People fret over whether they existed as individual historical persons, but what matters is what they had to say, even if "they" were several persons who wrote under their names.

 

[Ablaze]

It's interesting that he was born in the 6th Century. I wonder how this effects Buddhism in general and associated history?

It changes nothing other than proposing an earlier date for the birth of the Buddha, bearing no tangible influence of the teachings of Buddhism themselves.

However, it does slightly change the context for the Buddha's teachings. India in the 6th century BCE was characterized by economic and religious unrest, largely surrounding the role of caste (varna) in society. The prevailing social structure divided people into four varnas, corresponding roughly to socio-economic classes with pre-defined functions (no chance for upward mobility - each person was bound to their tier on the social hierarchy indefinitely) yet with strong religious ties. For instance, only the highest varna, the Brahmanas, were able to serve in any spiritual capacity, being "born from the mouth of Brahma [God] himself." Understandbly, this stratification of society was met with some resistance. In particular, the Kshatriyas or warrior caste rose to prominence in the 6th century BCE, disputing the authority of the Brahamanas. The Buddha himself was a Kshatriya and is largely credited for abolishing the caste system within the Sangha, the Buddhist community. To place the Buddha's birth in the midst of the 6th century BCE, as opposed to a century afterwards, provides additional context for the Buddha's "revolutionary" breaking of the status quo.

 

[oldbadger]

A dig at the suspected birthplace of the Buddha has led to the discovery of an unknown timber structure beneath a series of brick temples. Remarkably, it's the first known archaeological evidence linking the life of the Buddha to a specific century.


Incredible Archaeological Discovery May Reset the Buddha's Birth Date

A pretty interesting find, regardless of what you may believe!

Very interesting! Thankyou for the news.
I look forward to reading about any more such finds and discoveries...

 

[Poeticus]

India in the 6th century BCE was characterized by economic and religious unrest,

India suffered economic and religious unrest since much earlier. In fact, it's more plausible to state that around 300-100BCE was when it was at its worst. Which would be much later.

largely surrounding the role of caste (varna) in society. The prevailing social structure divided people into four varnas, corresponding roughly to socio-economic classes with pre-defined functions (no chance for upward mobility - each person was bound to their tier on the social hierarchy indefinitely) yet with strong religious ties. For instance, only the highest varna, the Brahmanas, were able to serve in any spiritual capacity, being "born from the mouth of Brahma [God] himself."

You are confusing Jāti with varNa.

Understandbly, this stratification of society was met with some resistance. In particular, the Kshatriyas or warrior caste rose to prominence in the 6th century BCE, disputing the authority of the Brahamanas.

Rose to prominence? The rājanya was always prominent since time immemorial in the region.

The Buddha himself was a Kshatriya and is largely credited for abolishing the caste system within the Sangha, the Buddhist community.

You forgot to mention that the Buddha used the term Brahmin interchangeably with learned persons.

To place the Buddha's birth in the midst of the 6th century BCE, as opposed to a century afterwards, provides additional context for the Buddha's "revolutionary" breaking of the status quo.

The Jains already revolutionized it all much earlier. Wasn't Buddha influenced by Jainic personas of note?

 

[Ablaze]

India suffered economic and religious unrest since much earlier. In fact, it's more plausible to state that around 300-100BCE was when it was at its worst. Which would be much later.

No one is denying that. We're discussing the 6th Century in particular. To say "the 6th century BCE was characterized by economic and religious unrest" does not mean other periods were not.

You are confusing Jāti with varNa.

There is considerable overlap between jati and varna despite their differences. No confusion. Just a difference in word choice.

Rose to prominence? The rājanya was always prominent since time immemorial in the region.

Again, no one said they never rose to prominence earlier. The 6th Century BCE is the focus of discussion here.

You forgot to mention that the Buddha used the term Brahmin interchangeably with learned persons.

Irrelevant to the discussion, but if you're really intent on it, the Buddha redefined the term Brahmin to mean other than a specific caste.

The Jains already revolutionized it all much earlier. Wasn't Buddha influenced by Jainic personas of note?

Sure. Would you like to expand on that idea to add something substantial to the conversation rather than simply nit-pick others' posts? Thanks.

 

[Poeticus]

No one is denying that. We're discussing the 6th Century in particular. To say "the 6th century BCE was characterized by economic and religious unrest" does not mean other periods were not.

You made it sound otherwise.

 

[Ablaze]

"The 6th century BCE was characterized by economic and religious unrest."

"Rivers are characterized by water."

To add on top of this that nothing else is characterized by water goes beyond what was stated. Oceans, lakes, streams, etc. are not excluded simply by not being mentioned. I hope that's clear.

Ultimately, I find an earlier date for the Buddha's birth to make more sense, contextually. Highly recommended reading for the contextual atmosphere of the Buddha's teachings, contrasting his approach with that of the Vedas and particularly the Upanishads, is Ethics in Early Buddhism by Kalupahana. The historical, societal, and linguistic contexts parallel 6th Century BCE India, lending credence to this emerging theory of an earlier period of Buddhist teaching.

 

[Poeticus]

I hope that's clear.

It's very clear.

Ultimately, I find an earlier date for the Buddha's birth to make more sense, contextually. Highly recommended reading for the contextual atmosphere of the Buddha's teachings, contrasting his approach with that of the Vedas and particularly the Upanishads, is Ethics in Early Buddhism by Kalupahana. The historical, societal, and linguistic contexts parallel 6th Century BCE India, lending credence to this emerging theory of an earlier period of Buddhist teaching.

A 6th century date might better explain the quick spread of Buddhism.

 

[Ablaze]

A 6th century date might better explain the quick spread of Buddhism.

Good point! I hadn't thought of that.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's interesting that he was born in the 6th Century. I wonder how this effects Buddhism in general and associated history?

Outside of traditional positions I don't see any impact on Buddhism as it is in light of it being a viable practice.

Still difficult to prove conclusively in light of early practices of monastic who were around well prior to the sixth century.

It's just a piece of wood. ;0)

 

[Mycroft]

Outside of traditional positions I don't see any impact on Buddhism as it is in light of it being a viable practice.

Still difficult to prove conclusively in light of early practices of monastic who were around well prior to the sixth century.

It's just a piece of wood. ;0)

Believe it or not as an atheist and scientist I don't find all of Buddhist teachings to be entirely incompatible. I part ways with it when it starts talking about the 'spirit' and suchlike, but many of the practical applications aren't bad.


I find it to be true in that when they say 'if you love yourself, through what you do in that expression, people will love you'. Meaning that if you love yourself, and you try to be the best human being you can, people will start to love you as a result. And what follows from that will be appropriate.