What is the oldest religion?

[outhouse]

Not necessarily. While the amount of food wouldn't have been enough to feed large populations, it would have been more than enough to keep nomadic tribes well-fed and fat with muscles. Mammoths would have had a LOT of meat on them.

I just did a bit of digging on the matter, and an article from a Greek peer-reviewed journal had this to say on the matter:

And the Venus statue being referenced:

Spoiler: Medium-Large Picture

Source article: Hormones.gr

Should be noted that the article is about 10 years old, so new findings might have outdated it.



Food would have likely been the main measure of "wealth" for these people.

Thanks that was a great read :bow: [high protein diets]


I linked this to my earlier guessing.

alaeolithic population density was small, there was enough food for everybody, and there is no evidence of major endemic disease. Adult longevity, at 35 years for males and 30 years for females, implies fair to good general health during the Upper Palaeolithic. Females always died earlier because of the extra stress of pregnancy and dangers of childbirth, combined with shifting camp, carrying burdens, and presumably doing much of the food collecting and cooking5.

 

[roger1440]

Here is an interesting docu-drama about Neanderthal man and humans. It does feature Venus figurines in at least two places. The movie is done very well. The movie also has a hot black chic, which makes the movie all that more entertaining.




BBC Planet of the Apemen Battle for Earth 2 Neanderthal


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klkqPiY1WC0

 

[roger1440]

Considering the small size of the Venus figurines my guess is that the statues accompanied the men while they went out hunting. The statues were probably thought of having some sort of power like luck, protection or good will. I don’t think the statues were meant to stay on the home front with the women, children and elderly, otherwise the statues would be much larger. A larger statue would have brought more luck, protection or whatever. Since these statues are found threw out Europe, they might have been traded with other tribes. Either that or while these tribes migrated and came into contact with others, other tribes copied the customs and beliefs of those they came into contact with.

 

[outhouse]

I don’t think the statues were meant to stay on the home front with the women
.

They were nomadic, they had no home or home front.

They all traveled and had seasonal camps at best.

 

[religion99]

The youngest possible age for the Vedas is about 3500 years, and it's highly likely that the oldest passages date to about 4-5000 years ago, if memory serves me correctly. (Many Hindus will claim they're 20,000 - 100,000 years old, or even eternal.) The Vedas, historically speaking, record a religion already well in practice, indicating that the religion goes back much further.

As for oldest surviving religion, what about the Bear Cults that are still practiced by certain people like the Ainu or Sami?

And latest version of Vedas has edited out all references of Jainism from it. If you read the versions which are 100 years old , you will find references to Jainism in it.

 

[Riverwolf]

And latest version of Vedas has edited out all references of Jainism from it. If you read the versions which are 100 years old , you will find references to Jainism in it.

Doubt I'd be able to. All I've got are translations (that are ~100 years old). I don't know Sanskrit.

 

[religion99]

Doubt I'd be able to. All I've got are translations (that are ~100 years old). I don't know Sanskrit.

in Rigaveda it is mentioned thus:-
"Om traelokay prtishthan chaturvishti teerthkran
rishbhadyan vrthmaanantan sithan, shranram
prpdyai .
Om pvitr ngnmupvisprisamhai asham nagnam
yaisham jatan yaisham veeram
suveeram……..itiyadi."

Here it is stated that I (the aspirant of liberation) take
the refuge of 24 Jain Gods from Rishabha etc. to
Vardhmana -all liberated souls who are worshipped
by whole of the universe,... etc.

And in Yajurveda it
is written so
"Om namo Arhato rishbhaye"

Here Rishabh is Jain God.

in the same Veda it is further stated so:
Om rishmpvitran puruhootmdhvangyam ygyaishu
nagnam
Parman mahsanstutam varan shatrun jyantam
pashuyidrmahtiritisvaha. Om tratarmindram
rishbhan vdanti amritarmindram havai sumtam
supashvrmindram
Havai Shakrmrjitam tdvarthmanpuruhootmindram
mahriti
Svaha. Om nagnam sudheeram digvasasam
brahmgbarbh snatnam upaemi veeram
purshmrhatmaditye vranr tmsa
Prstat svaha. Om svasti nah indro vrithshrava svasti
nah poosha vishvvaida svastinstashryo arishtnaimi
svastino vrihaspatirdadhatu. Deerghayustvayurva
shubhajatayu. Om raksh raksh Asishtnaimi svaha.
Vamdaiv shantyarth manuvidheeyatai so smakam
arishtnomi svaha.
_____ (Yajurvaid a. 25, m. 16, ashth 91, a 6,
varg 1)

Here , Rishabh and Arishtnaimi are Jain Gods.

 

[Riverwolf]

And latest version of Vedas has edited out all references of Jainism from it. If you read the versions which are 100 years old , you will find references to Jainism in it.

in Rigaveda it is mentioned thus:-
"Om traelokay prtishthan chaturvishti teerthkran
rishbhadyan vrthmaanantan sithan, shranram
prpdyai .
Om pvitr ngnmupvisprisamhai asham nagnam
yaisham jatan yaisham veeram
suveeram……..itiyadi."

Here it is stated that I (the aspirant of liberation) take
the refuge of 24 Jain Gods from Rishabha etc. to
Vardhmana -all liberated souls who are worshipped
by whole of the universe,... etc.

And in Yajurveda it
is written so
"Om namo Arhato rishbhaye"

Here Rishabh is Jain God.

in the same Veda it is further stated so:
Om rishmpvitran puruhootmdhvangyam ygyaishu
nagnam
Parman mahsanstutam varan shatrun jyantam
pashuyidrmahtiritisvaha. Om tratarmindram
rishbhan vdanti amritarmindram havai sumtam
supashvrmindram
Havai Shakrmrjitam tdvarthmanpuruhootmindram
mahriti
Svaha. Om nagnam sudheeram digvasasam
brahmgbarbh snatnam upaemi veeram
purshmrhatmaditye vranr tmsa
Prstat svaha. Om svasti nah indro vrithshrava svasti
nah poosha vishvvaida svastinstashryo arishtnaimi
svastino vrihaspatirdadhatu. Deerghayustvayurva
shubhajatayu. Om raksh raksh Asishtnaimi svaha.
Vamdaiv shantyarth manuvidheeyatai so smakam
arishtnomi svaha.
_____ (Yajurvaid a. 25, m. 16, ashth 91, a 6,
varg 1)

Here , Rishabh and Arishtnaimi are Jain Gods.

And now, I'd like to see independent scholarly sources confirm this to be true.

 

[Glaurung]

I actually do not know and was asked this the other day. Is there any definite answer? And when I say religion I don't mean as in one guy thinking ''Yeah there's a man in the sky that controls everything" etc. I mean a religion, that may or may not now be dead, that a moderately large group took part and believed in. My history is terrible so I reaaly have no clue :^)

This question is pretty misguided. 'Religious' beliefs are as old as humanity, but codified religion with orthodoxy is relatively new in the grand scheme of the history of human spiritual and religious thought.

 

[gnostic]

Fertility was more than just about getting pregnant. I actually know of at least one still-existent jungle Tribe in New Guinea(one of the last ones that had no contact whatsoever with the modern world until recently) that believed sex had nothing to do with pregnancy, but that there was something else going on.

From what I've seen, Fertility Gods are more about agriculture than successful pregnancy. Granted, those Gods are much, much later than the groups that produced the Venus figurines, but I'd wager the Tribes were still observant enough to recognize the association with rain and green hills.

Please note my highlight, in bold and red.

I would agree with you about the fertility deity or deities would mean fertility in agriculture, BUT at the time of making these Venuses, they were made centuries before AGRICULTURE started during the Neolithic period.

At the stage of (Upper) Palaeolithic, humans were still hunters-and-gatherers, not farmers.

If these Venus figurines were "goddesses" (but I am not saying they were images of goddesses), I don't think they would be agricultural goddesses, given that agriculture didn't exist at these time.

So, no, I don't think fertility had to do with agriculture at these points in time.

 

[Sunstone]

The oldest religion are sermons. Or, at least, they seem the oldest when you're sitting through one.

 

[Riverwolf]

Please note my highlight, in bold and red.

I would agree with you about the fertility deity or deities would mean fertility in agriculture, BUT at the time of making these Venuses, they were made centuries before AGRICULTURE started during the Neolithic period.

At the stage of (Upper) Palaeolithic, humans were still hunters-and-gatherers, not farmers.

If these Venus figurines were "goddesses" (but I am not saying they were images of goddesses), I don't think they would be agricultural goddesses, given that agriculture didn't exist at these time.

So, no, I don't think fertility had to do with agriculture at these points in time.

And if you'll notice the part I highlight in red:

From what I've seen, Fertility Gods are more about agriculture than successful pregnancy. Granted, those Gods are much, much later than the groups that produced the Venus figurines, but I'd wager the Tribes were still observant enough to recognize the association with rain and green hills.

I didn't mean to imply that the Venus figurines had anything to do with agriculture, specifically, but that if fertility was part of it, then the rain = green hills might have been a representation in nature.

Besides, I also pointed out that it's pretty much up for grabs what they may have meant, with the only prerequisites being a basic grasp of cultural anthropology and how to do effective research.

 

[gnostic]

I didn't mean to imply that the Venus figurines had anything to do with agriculture, specifically, but that if fertility was part of it, then the rain = green hills might have been a representation in nature.

Besides, I also pointed out that it's pretty much up for grabs what they may have meant, with the only prerequisites being a basic grasp of cultural anthropology and how to do effective research.

I think if there is any fertility implication or symbolic meaning in the figurines, then either it would be the fertility of women or fertility of animals, not that of agriculture.

Some of the Upper Palaeolithic cave paintings are as old as these figurines, and they mostly depict images of animals, not plant life. It is very highly speculative to think the fertility had to do with plants during these time.

 

[Riverwolf]

I think if there is any fertility implication or symbolic meaning in the figurines, then either it would be the fertility of women or fertility of animals, not that of agriculture.

Some of the Upper Palaeolithic cave paintings are as old as these figurines, and they mostly depict images of animals, not plant life. It is very highly speculative to think the fertility had to do with plants during these time.

Fair point. I understand that the Agricultural Revolution hit Europe kinda late, which might also indicate a fair disinterest in plants from that perspective. Living in a region of relative plenty would do that.

It is also worth noting, in support of the speculation that if fertility were involved it would be that of women, that large hips (as I understand) are generally better for childbirth in terms of safety, both for the mother and child. A larger build would also indicate better health, good for both as well.

I definitely think some kind of ideal for women is at least partially what's being represented, here.

 

[gnostic]

It is also worth noting, in support of the speculation that if fertility were involved it would be that of women, that large hips (as I understand) are generally better for childbirth in terms of safety, both for the mother and child. A larger build would also indicate better health, good for both as well.

I definitely think some kind of ideal for women is at least partially what's being represented, here.

I wonder when the transition occurred from favoring wide hips to narrow hips?

 

[Riverwolf]

I wonder when the transition occurred from favoring wide hips to narrow hips?

Probably a relatively recent development.

 

[religion99]

Of those still alive as opposed to explicitly reconstituted, a major candidate is Zoroastrism. Perhaps Hinduism as well.

Muslims will tell you that Islam goes back to Adam. Myself, I suspect there is no clear point at which early animism and paganism became a definite religion.

So no, I guess there is no definite answer, unless perhaps you rebuild the question to make it a bit more specific.

There is definitely a "definite answer" , only problem is we don't know that answer with certainty.

 

[s2a]

If we are talking about organized religions that exist to this day and have continuity throughout history, it could be any of the following:
-Judaism
-Zoroastrianism
-Santana Dharma
-Jain Dharma

We likely are not.

The OP inconveniently inquires as to what might be the FIRST religion...

...so, try again.

 

[LuisDantas]

There is definitely a "definite answer" , only problem is we don't know that answer definitely.

How do you know that there is such a thing?

It is not even clear what a religion is exactly. For all anyone knows it may have developed independently in several dozen places at once.

 

[Riverwolf]

How do you know that there is such a thing?

It is not even clear what a religion is exactly. For all anyone knows it may have developed independently in several dozen places at once.

Good point.

Is the presence of religious behavior an indication of something we'd recognize as a religion? I'd say no, because religious behavior often manifests nowadays in entirely secular contexts, such as birthday parties or graduation.