Is there any? Here is what I know: Now the "early" Buddhist texts were written down in 1 B.C. [Pali Canon] and later http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agamas No one knows what he really looked like: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/dharmadata/fdd35.htm So what evidence is there for Buddha? Did he exist or was he made up by people? How do we know his "history"?
Oh don't you want to know if he was a real person and whether he did say such and such or merely plagiarised what other people said? Won't it make a MASSIVE difference to your view of Buddhism? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oh come on, surely if you found out that Buddha was actually some Tamilian guy playing a cosmic joke, you'd give up everything you knew about Buddhism?
Not at all. My appreciation of it is based on it's own qualities. Of course, Buddhism IS a cosmic joke. You find that out when enlightenment happens. It's not a cult of personality, it's not based on any miracles.
What enlightenment is that? Duh, what do you think?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm not really sure. Every time I try to describe it, the words seem inadequate. I can only say that it isn't a matter of thought or intellect, otherwise it could be written down and transmitted in that way. I think it can only be experienced.
Hmm, I've read Buddha's doctrine and it seems highly idealistic to me. I don't know anyone who does not cling to some form of "attachment" and I can't imagine why anyone would want to reach a state free of dukha. Its like having CIPA.
It does describe an ideal of initial conditions that would assist the realization of this state. Most people don't have the will power to fufill all of his recommendations, but that isn't necessary. Every bit helps.
Since I do not see the point of a desire free life, I'm not interested in what assists the realisation of such a state.
That's fine, there is no perogative in Buddhism to convince others. If you aren't sick, you don't need medicine.
The philosophy of Buddhism is cohesive whether the actual person of Buddha existed or not. Islam, and its primary branches, on the other hand depends entirely on the ideas of Mohammed and his offspring. Discredit Mohammed and his sons and much of Islam will collapse. Christianity is even worse: If Jesus never existed then the entire notion of a savior for the human race is total nonsence. It is essential for Christianity that Jesus actually existed. We have yet to see any eveidence that that is true yet.
On a related subject, the founder of Taoism, Lao Tzu, quite possibly never existed. Some people say he might have been a composite of several people.
Not at all. For one thing he had no sons, just one daughter. Secondly, Mohammed-ur-rasoolullah, he is only a messenger. Its not his message. He is not a guide or a warner.
Do you mean was Siddhārtha Gautama a real person? Its entirely possible since there is nothing in particular that would make him having been real problematic. Its more likely that he is a composite of local hero myths and early leaders. Certainly a lot of Buddhist texts were written by others and attributed to him. Does it matter? Not at all. Any one who takes Buddhism based on what they think old Gautama said in some sutta doesn't understand Buddhism. Its not about him. Its not about this or that sutta. Its about taking the techniques and learning, testing it against your life and becoming a Buddha yourself. Ultimately the goal of Buddhism is for it to become superfluous so that you discard it and are able to stand on your own. A light unto yourself.