Did the Buddha Exist?

This episode's viewer question is about the historicity of the Buddha. Did Siddhartha Gautama actually exist? Find out what Dr. Miano says about the historical Buddha.
After viewing, come back to the notes here for further information.
►DOWNLOAD Professor Miano's free e-booklet: "Why Ancient History Matters":
mailchi.mp/a402112ea4db/why-a...
►SUBSCRIBE to the World of Antiquity KZbin Channel for great travel videos about ancient ruins and ancient history museums.
► SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL
Supporters get access to behind-the-scenes videos, early-release videos, course discounts and more! / worldofantiquity
FTC Disclaimer Notice: Some of the links here may be affiliate links, meaning that if you click on them and purchase something on another website, I get a small commission. It doesn't cost you any extra, but I thought you should know! It does help support the channel.
► REFERENCES
David Drewes, "The Idea of the Historical Buddha"
www.academia.edu/36121418/The...
Bryan Levman, "The Historical Buddha: Response to Drewes"
thecjbs.org/wp-content/upload...
Alexander Wynne, "Did the Buddha Exist?"
www.academia.edu/39253185/Did...
Professor Miano's handy guide for learning, "How to Know Stuff," is available here:
www.amazon.com/How-Know-Stuff...
Follow Professor Miano on social media:
►FACEBOOK: / drdavidmiano
►TWITTER: / drdavidmiano
►INSTAGRAM: / drmiano

[@yorkshirepudding9860]

Just wanted to add that I appreciate you making the effort with your subtitles. KZbin's auto generated subtitles can be a nightmare when it comes to historical content and all the names it doesn't automatically recognise.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I am happy to hear they have helped. There are still many of my videos I haven't done them for, but I plan to!

[@harishthethird]

I double that!

[@mnomadvfx]

Seconded, I use subtitles to assist as I can't read lips anymore due to poor central vision - so accurate subtitles can be a godsend on the more tricky names/words.

[@bobwilson7684]

@@WorldofAntiquity I wouldnt trust that much these kind of people that can convince thousands to come to the temples with their pockets full of money....the same as with some youtubers...the fake political white correctness of these days is stopping us for having the same public debate as there is with Mohammed and Jesus, Buddha was just another fairy tale, anyone who claim these people existed, will have to confront the divine historic side of it, no matter what...again the problem is history in itself and historians....are we realy supposed to trust you?, hundreds of years ago, those guys writing those sacred books, where taken as much especialists as you today David... ...is such a paradox, hstorias of civiliyation that is not stopping finding entire new civiliyations they never knew existed.... what the fuck do historians know hahahahaha fairytellers

[@davidmurphy563]

6:20 _"I can't tell you for a fact this is so and nor can anyone else at this point"_ In matters of religion and politics, my experience is that there's always someone who will proclaim something with absolute certainty. You know, the sort of person you should be very, very cautious about listening to. Such a great question. I haven't asked one, the others have been just too good and I don't want to bring down the level..

[@tHiNk413]

Absolutely. Dogma is the mindkiller...

[@burritodog3634]

ok david murphy thanks for the feedback

[@wfcoaker1398]

The opposite of faith is certainty.

[@bobwilson7684]

ask David about Kufu and Djoser hahaha

[@wickedsamurai3323]

I love hearing smart people like you explain seemingly simple questions like these and giving them the due diligence and thought to come up with a great answer. The channel toldinstone does a lot of similar stuff with ancient roman history questions

[@MrAchile13]

I would love to see a collaboration between world of antiquity and told in stone

[@jayarava]

The information here is not very reliable and needs to be factchecked.

[@magnushorus5670]

This is the kind of sincere and stringent approach we need .... I remember when I was younger and reading “historical” new age books from Costco of all places and wondering about .... none sense. I wish I never wasted time on any of that. So thank you! This kind of concise analysis based on academic standards could help prevent more people from falling down that lazy magical thinking rabbit hole. Love all the vids btw. Hope your having a lovely good sir

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thanks for watching. I appreciate your kind words!

[@dazuk1969]

That is a great question, and as always David boils it down to point that makes sense...peace to ya.

[@texanfilms]

Love these shorter runtime videos! Great job as always.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Glad you are enjoying them!

[@pepushein1350]

Piyadasi ( Priyadarshi) was Ashoka's official royal titled-name ( regnal name) as his other title 'Devānaṃpiya'.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Yes, I understand that it is commonly assumed that Priyadasi and Ashoka are one and the same. Others believe that Priyadasi preceded Ashoka.

[@pepushein1350]

@@WorldofAntiquity Thank you.

[@JAlanne]

thanks man, this a really nice video!

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Glad you liked it!

[@johnny196775]

You are so perfectly scrupulous in your language that it is a joy to watch your videos.

[@willmosse3684]

Excellent concise summary of the arguments. Are there any writings on the scholarly analysis of the Pali Canon researching which Suttas may be the most historical that you can recommend? I believe Stephen Batchelor has written on this, but as a practitioner of his own interpretation of “Buddhist Atheism”, he may have ulterior motives for selecting the passages he does (though maybe he is more impartial than I worry)?

[@martinvanburen4578]

I think a factor to consider is there is a sincerity for Buddhism and lack of need for fabrication. Which you point at 3:39 and the other matter is the Buddha was not to be worshipped and the Buddha was a man who wanted others to reach enlightenment. In contrast, Christianity has one Christ and no one else can be or become a Christ.

[@Cgl3g3nd]

Great work man keep it up, feel like I’ve seen you some where else, maybe on the SOMA channel

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Never been on SOMA, but thanks!

[@protectork9831]

Congratulations on 100k subscribers

[@henrimourant9855]

Wow I loved this. Thank you! Do you think you could at one point do a video on the historicity of Zoroaster? I have a hard time finding books about that.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Great suggestion! I may do that at some point.

[@PraveenJose18551]

Zoroaster's existence is an amazing question. Zoroastrians say he lived during 500s to 400s BC, but linguists examining the Gathas date to pre-1000s BC and the cultural clues seems like it is hinting at a conflict between very Ancient rig vedic style religion and a proto zoroastrian religion. It's one of the first times I seen a religion claiming their prophet/icon is much younger than historical consensus.

[@willmosse3684]

@@PraveenJose18551 Ha - that is fascinating

[@carymartin1150]

Great video!

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thanks!

[@tracymcgeachie7525]

Enjoyed your video.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thank you!

[@maheshgamage8904]

Good explanation :)

[@ivokolarik8290]

Great video

[@vassily-labroslabrakos2263]

Minor off topic question(maybe an inspiration for a new video (if the topic wasn't already covered): did in your opinion the Thera-Eruption have a part in the bronze age collapse?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Well, it probably had something to do with the Minoan collapse at least, but it keeps getting redated, so it is tough to say.

[@michael4250]

Nice to see common sense articulated so lucidly. Thanks.

[@happierabroad]

There's a famous quote: Even if the Buddha never existed, everything he said is still true. Not the same with the modern fundamentalist Christian religion.

[@jayakrishnan26]

Other religions are much worse than Christianity

[@Dystisis]

Both your views of Buddhism and Christianity seem false. Buddhism has specific religious/ritual teachings, and Christianity has universal moral truths.

[@prathameshawachar1395]

@@Dystisis No that's false.

[@Emotion-3642]

@@Dystisis Moral of what desperately trying to convert people and marketing religion like a salesperson.

[@stephentoons]

is it nescessary when raising someone up that some else is knocked down?

[@Chris.Davies]

Thank you!

[@swagatochatterjee7104]

Is there any evidence that the Sarnath sermon happened? Because that is first sermon recorded, and is still a major archeological site.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

There is no corroborating evidence.

[@BazNard]

Every video is perfect

[@raydavison4288]

You had me convinced of the Buddha's existence by 4:28. 😉

[@sylvias.7048]

A very reasonable conclusion to an ineffable but important question. Deep bows of thankfulness.

[@ervishal21]

Plz make video on pali vs sanskrit....which came first?

[@mandy28887]

Magadha Piyadasi in Pali or Priyadarshi in Sanskrit was actually Ashoka. It was his official title.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

It's an interpretation, but it is not known for certain.

[@straightfrom]

My day is better with education like this.

[@RLekhy]

I am busy in other things but your videos are compelling me to watch. Just now I've watched 'Did the Buddha exist?', you are reflecting my stake. Even King Menander once suspected if Buddha was historical but any how he was convinced and became the patron of Buddhism. Indo-Greek Buddhists dated the age of Buddha same to the age of Heracles. In many iconographic artifacts, Heracles is shown personal guard of the Buddha. At least, he might have existed before Cyrus II's occupation of Gandhara/Taxila because in the Buddha time Gandhara was a part of greater India (Jambuswip), and Buddhism says about the ancient Ionians, Babylon but not about Achaemenid empire. I would like to support Prof Robin Coningham than Prof. Gombrich

[@adisura9904]

Iv heard that one of the last meals buddha had was a pork based dish. Also could make a brief video on Mahajanapadas? Iv heard some people say it may have funtioned as a republic. Would like you to enlighten me if you could!

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I will keep that in mind!

[@adisura9904]

@@WorldofAntiquity i know I'm being greedy but thank you so much!

[@patrickohooliganpl]

Pork with mushrooms. Yummy! Probably this time pork was rotten (and full of botox) or mushrooms were poisonous. Sakyamuni is told to die then from severe indigestion and diarrhea in fair age of 80. So we know that the Buddha ate, (pardon my Anglo-Saxon) shat, and died - thus he was rather a real person than a mythical figure. Especially the part that he used to go to the john. Mythological entities are not supposed to go to the john.

[@parveenchahal1]

Buddha never eat non vegetarian food nor he ever preached about eating non vegetarian food . He was strictly against the killing of any sentiment beings. Buddha eating pork is even against his own philosophy of non-violence. Some colonial historians tried to deliberately portrayed Buddha in a diminished light. They did the wrong translation of the text and manipulated The facts related to Buddha, which were challenged by producing the right translations and facts. So it was not pork but a forest vegitable which usually pigs loves to eat. So don't go with the colonial distorted history which they r still preaching in the public domains.

[@PraveenJose18551]

Hello Professor Miano What do you think about the controversy between the major vs minor edicts/rocks of Ashoka? Major edicts seem to reference a more general dharmic religion and never talks about the Buddha explicitly. Also Ashoka never calls himself Ashoka in major edicts/rocks. While minor edicts has Ashoka referencing himself as "Ashoka" and the Buddha. This has lead some historians to conclude these are two different figures and Mauyran historiography is very flawed, what your personal thoughts?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

It may be that Ashoka is not the author both, but from what I understand, the edicts are still from the Mauryan period.

[@MrShankaPerera]

Nice video 👍🙂

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thanks 😀

[@welcometonebalia]

Thanks. I especially appreciate this point, although it does not in itself is a proof of the historicity of the Buddha: there must have been someone after all who initiated the movement. It may have been someone quite different than the mythical figure depicted in later texts, it may have been actually several people, it may have taken some time, and we always need to establish, as much as we can, what is historical and what is mythical in the mostly secondary sources telling the story of such people, but the historicity, at least in some aspects, of the supposed founder seems a far more reasonable assumption than the complete forgery of a mythical founder... by people who in this case would actually be such founder(s). It's only removing a step (or adding one, I don't know actually). I must say I have had some discussions of the sort with friends arguing for the non-existence of the historical Jesus. I fear it's bending towards conspiracy stuff. I'm not less an atheist as they are, but you don't have to assume the non-existence of the historical Jesus to justify not believing in christianism. Actually, I tend to think that giving such importance to this argument... makes all the following discourse more... shaky? Of course, the gospels should not be taken as historical accounts. Same for those texts you mention regarding the Buddha. But some parts of it, and at least the idea of someone initiating some movement, and in part ressembling the (first) canonical accounts of the life and deeds of such a person, seems a reasonable assumption. And I don't think we could go further than that while not having a time machine, absolutely. When facts cannot be established with certainty (so, most of the time?), probability and plausibility are the only tools we can use in such matters. And we can hope to know more as science progresses.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I haven't heard about any ex-Buddhists trying to prove the Buddha didn't exist, but there may be. It is interesting, though, that quite a number of ex-Christians feel such a strong urge to disprove the historicity of Jesus.

[@welcometonebalia]

@@WorldofAntiquity It is indeed.

[@willmosse3684]

@@WorldofAntiquity I think when it comes to Jesus, because people have been raised to believe that the Bible is ultimate truth, and then they come to realise that it is full of invented nonsense, there is then a tendency to think that every single thing in the Bible is nonsense. Which can quite obviously stretch to the very existence of Jesus. I was actually raised as an atheist by my parents, and was certainly very open to this idea. Two or three years ago I stumbled across the Mythicist writings and lectures of Dr Richard Carrier, and his arguments to this effect seemed very well made. However, looking into it further, I was convinced that by others - notably the writings of Professor Bart Ehrman - that Carrier’s arguments do not hold water, and that there is strong evidence for the historicity of Jesus, even if the stories told of him in the gospels evolved and added mythical elements over time.

[@zoomedout]

There is an increasing hypothesis by Harvey Kraft and others that Buddha was the same person as Smerdis Gaumata Bardiya the son of Cyrus the great of Persia who later travelled to the Indian subcontinent. A video exploring this topic would be quite fascinating

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Interesting. That's the first I've heard of that!

[@kishankumargupta7125]

@@WorldofAntiquity buddha was the king of kapilavastu.

[@danielhopkins296]

Gaumata , or Komedes, lit " bull-sacrifice", is a personal name and tribal name of the Kambojas whose name is littered throughout Cyrus' family ( Cambyses / Kambojas). The Buddha's first two merchant missionaries were said to have converted the Kambojas during the reign of Cambyses. The archeologist Flinders Petrie unearthed an Indian Buddha at the Memphis Ptah temple where Cambyses was dated to the time of Cambyses. Interestingly, the name Cambodia is said to have been a rendering of Kambojas. The name Gaumata, or Cow-Sacrifice is interesting because it shows the Vedic Indians before the horse sacrifice replaced the cow or bull. This supports that Herodotus was wrong about why Cambyses killed the Apis bull who, like the Vedic bull sacrifice, was resurrected after his death

[@danielhopkins296]

Gaumata , or Komedes, lit " bull-sacrifice", is a personal name and tribal name of the Kambojas whose name is littered throughout Cyrus' family ( Cambyses / Kambojas). The Buddha's first two merchant missionaries were said to have converted the Kambojas during the reign of Cambyses. The archeologist Flinders Petrie unearthed an Indian Buddha at the Memphis Ptah temple where Cambyses was dated to the time of Cambyses. Interestingly, the name Cambodia is said to have been a rendering of Kambojas. The name Gaumata, or Cow-Sacrifice is interesting because it shows the Vedic Indians before the horse sacrifice replaced the cow or bull. This supports that Herodotus was wrong about why Cambyses killed the Apis bull who, like the Vedic bull sacrifice, was resurrected after his death

[@CChissel]

I’ve read that he was born in 526 BC? Or sometime in the 6th century BC. Not saying that’s true, but it is interesting that such a specific date was given and I remember vaguely that it stated something else about the date, that it was either well known and most recorded or accurate date in religious history. I can’t be sure if it was one of those things or none of them, but I read it in an interesting book called Living Religions of the World by Frederick Spiegelberg, which I really enjoyed and I’ll need to read it again obviously as I’m having trouble recalling it. I’m not very religious, if at all, but I find the stories and history fascinating, but I do not hold faith in their verity. I’d be interested to hear an experts take on that supposed date of Siddhartha Gautama’s date of birth.

[@borgholable]

you need to make a series on these topics , did 'historic figure' exist , i know other channels have already made this kind of series but it would be interesting to hear it from an actual archeologist point of view

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Or, in my case, historian's point of view. 🙂

[@samiamtheman7379]

Metatron has pretty good videos on historical Jesus. I highly recommend giving them a watch.

[@bouseuxlatache4140]

Hi Doctor, can we apply a triangulation technique to test whether the Bouddha really existed? There are a lot of different sources from different author and background who wrote about Julius Cesar, Alexander the Great and other. But for the Buddha not much. Thank you

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Triangulation technique?

[@bouseuxlatache4140]

@@WorldofAntiquity i believe i am not using the right concept. What i meant is since there are not many texts at the time of the Buddha, would it be possible to use sources from other cultures/languages during the same time to see if the Buddha was defined with different words and concepts?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@bouseuxlatache4140 Oh, I see. Well, this all has to be done according to the historical method (primary sources vs. secondary sources, etc.) But I am not aware of any foreign sources about the Buddha from near his time.

[@danielpaulson8838]

I have interpretive work up which may point to another theory. The Buddha, Lao Tzu and Jesus are all figures from history that have based their local teachings on a template called the monomyth. There is something more going on behind the scenes. They play out in the human psyche and are simply different analogous terms to carry the same metaphors. (Karma, The measure you mete... - Seek emptiness, Be poor in spirit, etc) Interpreted as literal they fit in the greater population and compete with other religions in the same manner that the masses of people do. They conflict like people do. Inwardly they are all the same, for the wise to self heal. The teachings are the boxes for the masses. The Ark. The lessons are nested in a technique. It isn't history though. It is from a inward turning, spiritual understanding. In the end I see this, it doesn't matter if any of them truly existed, this body of work is identical and that template is what we're actually looking for. I invite people to look. It is rare to find people who can see it.

[@danielpaulson8838]

The Buddha, Lao Tzu, Jesus! Same, same. They even teach the same things as each other once one figures out how to read them properly. Someone is behind the curtain feeding these to humanity.

[@lesscott4301]

I would disagree that the Buddha's teaching are the same as Jesus. There are fundamental differences. Jesus" teaching is all about him, whereas Buddha's teaching is all about the parh. Jesus encourages his followers to hate their families. Buddha does expect his monastic followers to leave their families but not in a hateful way.

[@danielpaulson8838]

@@lesscott4301 Remember this part of my comment. "once one figures out how to read them properly" There are not multiple realities. Just multiple ways of spreading it around.

[@yellenaresh5542]

Other than budhist scriptures and Ashoka books, were there any other nations parallel historians that mentioned Budha.

[@Alkis05]

3:00 Saying that the fact that the texts seem to have a place and time some what consistent with that region of india makes the historicity of buddha the most parsimonious explanation for its historicity is like saying that The fact that stories about Jason and Hercules makes their historicity the most parsimonious explanation for the fact that they have a place and time consistent with Greece. No, you don't need for people fabricate stories to fool and defraud people. That is not how myths or stories work. That is like saying that Rowlling was trying to deliberately trying to defraude people when she told stories about Dumbledore. Or that Dan Brown was trying to defraud people when he said Jesus married Mary Magdalene and left a linage that survived to modern days.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Jason and Hercules don’t fit the historical context.

[@bobwilson7684]

I like the beginning of your video, so you can never be truly certain...except when it comes about pyramids and egypt, then you know it aaaaaalllllll

[@samisiddiqi5411]

Yes. I knew him in my past life.

[@themaskedman5954]

🙄

[@andreaarchaeology]

🤣

[@themaskedman5954]

Buddha was infact a real historical personality This video is good you nicely addressed this question

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thank you, but of course, you cannot say it is a fact. You can say only that it is probably true.

[@luizr.5599]

We can only know he probably existed, had a surname Gotama and was some kind of ascetic teacher. All else is legend and conjecture.

[@jayarava]

Piyadasi *was* Asoka. Same person, not "an earlier king". Also note, not Priya but Piya (Prakrit not Sanskrit), and on the same theme Aśoka is Sanskrit, a language the Emperor did not use, and Asoka is Prakrit, a language he did use. Scriptures are religious texts. They are not reliable guides to history. For example, none of the people in the Buddhist stories have ever been linked to historical events or facts. Yes, the cities are/were real cities, and some of the other details like fauna and flora are accurate, but the people are not. The people are invented characters, who often have supernatural powers. Moreover, as Greg Schopen has demonstrated, where we do have archaeological evidence, it almost always contradicts the texts rather than supporting them. That the Buddha existed is not parsimonious at all. It only seems that way because of bias. The most parsimonious explanation is that we *don't know*. Historians are divided between secularists who don't believe we know (or can know at this remove), and religieux for whom belief in the Buddha is not really optional. I gave up at this point. There is a too much misinformation here, too much that is only dealt with in the most superficial manner, for this video to be considered a useful contribution. Only the most naive students of Indian history will find this presentation interesting. I only hope that lazy misinformation by a non-specialist does not swamp the ongoing work some of us are doing on the history of early Buddhism.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

*Piyadasi was Asoka. Same person, not "an earlier king".* Maybe. Maybe not. There is more than one interpretation. *I only hope that lazy misinformation by a non-specialist does not swamp the ongoing work some of us are doing on the history of early Buddhism.* I know you are an independent researcher, who is producing a revisionist history of Buddhism. Of course you are going to say that.

[@kaushalendramanav9209]

Please provide a video about armies of ancient indian empire

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Which empire?

[@kaushalendramanav9209]

@@WorldofAntiquity Gupta and Gujjar pratyahara or you can give me direction towards the source

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@kaushalendramanav9209 I'm not sure what you want to know about the armies.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

You can leave me a question at speakpipe.com/DavidMiano

[@themaskedman5954]

@@WorldofAntiquity yeah that will be interesting to see

[@Critical_Capybara]

What do you think about Barlaam and Josaphat? Did they exist? 🤔

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I never heard of Barlaam. And do you mean Jehoshaphat?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Ah, I just looked it up, and you seem to be referring to the Tale of Barlaam and Josaphat. I hadn't heard of it. It definitely looks like a fictional tale.

[@Critical_Capybara]

@@WorldofAntiquity, there are people today who think those two saints were real people. There are feast days for them too

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@Critical_Capybara Ah, interesting!

[@chrism4008]

That was a good ass video, fascinating!!

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Thank you!

[@INSEARCHOFPURPOSE23]

We (Archeological surveys of India) have ashes of Buddha from Piparhwa site. There is detailed records and documentaries on that. One such documentary is "The Bones of the buddha".

[@WorldofAntiquity]

There is dispute about the date of the inscription. It seems to come from after the time of the Buddha. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piprahwa But thanks for bringing this up. I should have included a discussion of this in my video.

[@INSEARCHOFPURPOSE23]

@@WorldofAntiquity Sir, Thank you for the reply. The link you provided is from Wikipedia and it is not a reliable source of information for history and archeology as anyone can change contents on it (Just as they did in adani saga in india). From my research based on official documents of ASI, the language (Sanskrit in bramhi script) on the earn is from period of Asoka. And there is no denying in that, also the two burial sites were found, First one By W.C. Pepe in 1898 and the second one beneath the first one in 1970s by ASI. Later one is the original burial site from the period of buddha. I hope that you will take deeper look at that. There are official excavation documents on ASI website (my comment is getting deleted after i put link).

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@INSEARCHOFPURPOSE23 Wikipedia is not a source of information. It PROVIDES sources of information. Those little numbers you see are citations, and they refer to the scholarly literature.

[@INSEARCHOFPURPOSE23]

@@WorldofAntiquity Yes i am aware that wikipedia provides sources of information. But sometimes they provide wrong info in their main article about the topic. So, that main article is not reliable. That is why i prefer official sources. And it takes time to go through them which is worth it if one wants detailed and valid info. I hope you go through those official sources and update your video or make another one on the topic, it is a humble request.

[@cristiano2741]

Those bones of budha are not his bone 😂those were bones of some animal ....... Jhant bhar baat na kar bhimvadi

[@swagatochatterjee7104]

Wasn't Priyadassi Ashoka himself? Because he would call himself to be "Devanampriya" at some of the edicts, most of the edicts would talk of one "Devanampriya Priyadarshi" and Dipavamsa mentioned Priyadassi to be the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

There is a difference of opinion about that. Some say Priyadasi is Ashoka. Others think he was another person.

[@swagatochatterjee7104]

@@WorldofAntiquity I'm curious was he a later Mauryan ruler, or some pre Nanda ruler?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@swagatochatterjee7104 The theory is that he is a Mauryan ruler before Ashoka.

[@nachiketakumar9645]

Sir I have a question "Why Magesthenes never wrote about Gautum Buddha?"

[@yours_ash]

Because buddha wasn't very popular at his time, his dhammachakra only gained speed after ashoka's conversion

[@mandy28887]

It is estimated by some Indian analysts like Nilesh Oak and Raj Vedam that the Buddha or Siddharth Gautam existed about 1800 BC or 3800 years ago.

[@celsus7979]

They have corrupt motives to push the date of indian civilization back to the poiknt that it is the first civilization on earth

[@mandy28887]

@@celsus7979 I think recent archaeological evidence at Gobekli Tepe and other places has ruined the current historical model. The Church of Progress has made wrong assumptions of how history has existed

[@cookiecruncher3260]

A very rational and thoughtful presentation. Could you please make a video like this on Krishna?

[@SuperRobinjames]

Interesting, thanks. How about doing the same with Jesus? I would like to hear your opinion of the 'Flavian hypothesis', could any of it hold water?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I have had numerous similar requests. I will add it to my list of possible subjects.

[@unicyclist97]

If you're going to address the historicity of Jesus, it's probably necessary to address Atwill's version because of its popularity, but I think it would be more important to address the academic literature on this question (i.e. Raphael Lataster, Richard Carrier, Shirley Jackson Case).

[@henrimourant9855]

@@WorldofAntiquity If you are doing research on this topic I recommend checking out New Testament scholar and historian of early Christianity Bart Ehrman's book on this topic, if you haven't already. It's called "Did Jesus Exist?". From what I understand his book is basically in line with the scholarly consensus.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@henrimourant9855 I've heard him speak about it, but I haven't read the book. Yes, his view is in line with the consensus.

[@henrimourant9855]

@@WorldofAntiquity It might also be worth reading Tim O'Neill's ongoing series on Mythicism. It tries to deal with all the Mythicist arguments and defends the scholarly consensus. Although to be clear Tim O'Neill is not a scholar himself but he is very well read on the topic (and history in general). Also he is not a Christian so he can't really be accused of bias in that regard: historyforatheists.com/jesus-mythicism/

[@rubin6202]

Was buddha an indo-aryan or east-asian looking guys, i have watched many tv shows and he is depicted differently in Different shows? What do you think, i would love to hear your thoughts.

[@truthseekerhuman]

There are archeological evidences like their bones which recently Narendra Modi gave to Mongolia as a gift that proves buddha existed.

[@KaiserOfAryas]

Can you make a similar video on historical existence of Krsna (Avtaar of Vishnu)?

[@Doctor_Fate5]

Buddha probably existed but krishna no there is no non-hindu sources

[@p..1695]

@@Doctor_Fate5Krishna really existed,Krishna's city of Dwaraka submerged in the sea was discovered by SR Rao. Heliodurus pillar 113BCE mention name of krishna and balrama Agathocles of Bactria coins image of krishna and balram 180BC Karoshti inscription 100BC Hathibada goshundi inscription most scholars accept His historicity. Guy L. Beck says: Most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna - that he was a real male person, whether human or divine, who lived on Indian soil by at least 1000 BCE and interacted with many other historical persons within the cycles of the epic and puranic histories. - (Alternative Krishna, Suny press, pg 4-5) Horace H. Wilson said: Rama and Krishna, who appear to have been originally real and historical characters… - (The Visnu Purana. Nag Publishers. 1989, pg. ii) Dr. Thomas J. Hopkins, 1978: From a strictly scholarly, historical standpoint, the Krishna who appears in the Bhagavad-Gita is the princely Krishna of the Mahabharata... Krishna, the historical prince and charioteer of Arjuna. - (Five Distinguished Scholars on the Krishna movement in the West. Groves Press, N.Y. l983, pg. 144.) Rudolf Otto opined: That Krishna himself was a historical figure is indeed quite indubitable. - (The Original Gita, cit. for Majumdar Bimanbihari, ot. cit. pg. 5) The New British Encyclopaedia: Vasudeva-Krisna, a historical Vrisni prince who was presumably also a religious leader levitated to the Godhead by the 5th century BC. - (The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1984, vol. 7 Micropedia, pg.7) Dr. R. C. Majumdar: There is now a general consensus of opinion in favour of the historicity of Krishna. Many also hold the view that Vâsudeva the Yadava hero, the cowherd boy Krishna in Gokula… were one and the same person. - (The History and Culture of the Indian people, vol. I, pg. 303) Dr. Bimanbihari Majumdar, 1968: The western scholars at first treated Krishna as a myth... But many of the Orientalists in the present century have arrived at the conclusion that Krishna was a historical ksatriya warrior who fought at Kuruksetra,... . - (Krishna in the History and Legend. University of Calcutta. 1969, pg. 5)

[@Doctor_Fate5]

@@p..1695 bruh that city does not prove the existence of Krishna i mean do you have any carbon dated prove of Krishna existence or any non vedic sources etc and there are multiple cities around that abandoned or are submerged in water etc

[@Doctor_Fate5]

@@p..1695 and right now historians from around the world only accept that Buddha‚Jesus Christ and Muhammad as historically real like they actually existed and that they preached

[@p..1695]

@@Doctor_Fate5 A statement of the Mahabharata and Harivamsa is the seal bearing the motif of a 3-headed animal representing the bull, unicorn and goat. The HarivamSa says that every citizen of Dwaraka had to carry a mudra as a mark of identifications The seal (mudra) found in the excavation belong to 2000BC. Dwarkadisha Temple of Krishna is 2500 years old.

[@aakashkumarsaha6859]

2:06...want to correct.. Priyadaasi is not another person or historical figure... ASHOKA was also known as Priyadaasi.... Its a honorific epithet of Ashoka in ' brahmi script' in barabar caves... Also in lumbini minor pillar edict... Information available in Wikipedia also BTW your explanation is amazing

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Some scholars think Priyadasi preceded him.

[@aakashkumarsaha6859]

@@WorldofAntiquity I mean I will not say you are wrong but Bhabru inscription, Rajasthan, India where Ashoka was referring himself to be ' Priyadaasi'... There are several other inscription.. And rarely any solid proof that ' Priyadaasi' was to be another king or historical figure before Ashoka who have ruled such a vast empire.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@aakashkumarsaha6859 I tend to agree with you.

[@saddha1]

And yet only Buddha and his disciples have relics! No other religious figure in history has this tradition.

[@MarkVrem]

Ghenghis Khan is also a god, on par with Hercules I believe. He existed. So it happens sometimes. Probably Buddha as well, altho Budda is regarded way above Hercules level.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Genghis Khan's existence is generally accepted.

[@alcosmic]

In the stories, his mother WAS named Maya...

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Did she change her name?

[@alcosmic]

@@WorldofAntiquity I think she dies a little while after giving birth to him. What I mean is that in Sanskrit 'Maya' roughly means 'illusion,' or 'the transitory world of appearances'. It might be a wink from the story teller to the audience that this might not all be totally true or as part of an allegory.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@alcosmic Ah, I see. Yes, I don't recall her name being in the earliest accounts.

[@Infiniteemptiness]

@@alcosmic Maya is very common name in India for women even today

[@developeronthego]

It is very simple. The only and earliest person to claim that Buddha existed is Emperor Ashoka. The problem is that he was a great promoter of this religion. So it's not very reliable. There is nothing about Buddhism between Buddha's death and him. Genuinely nothing. However, there was a similar religion at that time, which is historically confirmed, called Jainism. And you won't guess. There is strong connection between Ashoka family and Jainism religion..

[@Alkis05]

If you would ask Christian church fathers who lived 150 years after the gospels were written, they would also have no doubt saying that the gospels were written by Mark, Luke, John and Matthew. So Ashoka's certainty that those Buddha teachings were written by Siddhartha doesn't add to much.

[@joydeeproy1580]

priyadarshini was Ashok himself

[@TheLastOutlaw289]

It’s very likely he existed 👍🏿

[@Alkis05]

We have example of people putting their teachings on the lips of more authoritary figure, like the epistoles that claim to be written by Paul. That was a common practice in antiquity. It is not far fetched to imagine that siddartha buddha started as a story of a enlightened dude that a teacher invented to pass on his teachings. Probably what happened to Moses. Probably all of the Moses story is not historical, very unlikely, but nobody says the authors were trying to defraud people. That isn't how this work.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Nobody is doubting that writings put words into the mouth of the Buddha, just as with Paul. But Paul was a real person.

[@Alkis05]

@@WorldofAntiquity Yes, Paul is a real person. The point is, one person had a teaching and she didn't write them as if it was the person saying, but put in the mouth of another character (historical or otherwise). Namely, someone who would be seen as more authoritative. Another point is that they didn't see it as fraud or trying to mislead people (like you claimed in the video). On the contrary, they believed the message and believed to be preaching something that Paul himself would have preached (which is not necessarily the case). Or believe he did preach it, but the letters were lost. For these people, that the message is good and that it be accepted is more important than claims of historicity to be accurate.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@Alkis05 Yes, this happened all the time. But don't try to convince a historian that historical accuracy does not matter. 🙂

[@keithkarnage]

What about JC? Was JC real? I like to tell people he'd be rolling in his grave if he knew what the church was doing with his name. Nobody ever gets it. That's just a joke though. I've seen no convincing evidence he was real.

[@andreaarchaeology]

🌿👀🌿 same

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Julius Caesar probably existed.

[@andybeans5790]

Yeah there's nothing I'm convinced by either and lots of other messianic figures around at the time. I used to watch a lot of mythicism content but it always tends to go full conspiracy mode, however Dr Bob Price is always entertaining to listen to.

[@MarkVrem]

@@WorldofAntiquity You know what would be interesting.. This might not be your field specialty at all, but I'll throw it ou there anyways. Examples in recent times --- last 1,000 years I guess. Of where we know for a FACT - That a person did NOT exist, that was somehow utilized for propaganda or religious purposes. Basically looking at the usual question in reverse sorta LOL. Sort of to show that people have a habit of making people up. I suppose l. I guess the actual question would be. Do people actually do that?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@MarkVrem Yes, people have done that on occasion (see my Hermes Trismegistus video, for example).

[@iammrbeat]

You broke it down very well. Now you might as well do Jesus. 🙂

[@abid5087]

If you’re interested in that question, I recommend this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d2WUhaBre6l-pNU. It takes a secular, scholarly approach to the question and thoroughly examines historical evidence

[@usergiodmsilva1983PT]

You think? Wink wink, nudge, nudge.

[@ianhawkes2901]

you ask the question and my answer is yea man buddha existed. every man knows buddha was a huge stoner, sat in bliss under a tree. back then, in times of less congestion, men were lauded for smoking top shelf resin and how it made them feel. back then, man starts hallucinations in the desert starts a conversation with a dry bush that he's just set on fire and he gets put in the bible...try that on these days mate and one's looking at 5 hard years prescription medication was i there, yes and no, in spirit i was (kinda there right now). did buddha exist yes. had buddha walked through the hindu kush with his collecting bucket 100%

[@numberninja6335]

Conclulsion : i don't think he existed but MABYEE MAYBEEe

[@ritesharora6032]

why cannot be same logic be applied to Mahabharat ? Therea are inscriptions dating back to 2000 years which says Mahabharat war happened around 3000 BC

[@WorldofAntiquity]

That’s 3000 years later.

[@ritesharora6032]

@@WorldofAntiquity what about geneologies in Puranas. they do push back vedic period

[@WorldofAntiquity]

The genealogies of the Puranas don't match up with each other. Plus the Puranas were written a long time later too.

[@ritesharora6032]

@@WorldofAntiquity Why cannot IVC be type of Vedic period ? afterall there is evidence of Yoga, Shiva etc in there. hOw will the Jains, Buddhists list of kings, Tirthankaras fit in such short period from 1500 BC -

[@helenamcginty4920]

There are also those who wonder if Jesus, as an individual, actually existed.

[@Sohamk881]

Buddha existed ,ashes found in India

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Please provide the archaeological report that is the source of your information.

[@sukritdubey2630]

​@@WorldofAntiquityjournals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/download/8511/2418 I think this can be a start. The site Piprahwa is where William Peppe found human remains inside inscripted containers. There's considerable agreement that these were probably Buddha's corporeal remains.

[@harishthethird]

Beard >>> no beard XD

[@tHiNk413]

I had some decent history and latin teachers, but I'd have listened the holy crap out of your stuff and probably would've made a much better examen Latinum... ;-)

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Aw, thanks!

[@jimmer1047]

My wife is happy you got me to stop signaling the night sky with a powerful flashlight in an effort to make contact with the aliens Bright Insight had me convinced built the pyramids. 😂😂😂😂 LOL

[@CChissel]

Man, that guy really frustrates me. It’s easy for him to get people to believe the stuff he says, he’s very charismatic and a good speaker, it’s easy to see why people would believe him.

[@parveenchahal1]

I think here you made a mistake by not including the "bone relics of the Buddha" discovered from many archaeological sites. we founds the bone relics with many other proofs like inscriptions attached with it, it becomes clear that the existence of the Buddha is very evident , only the time period of the Buddha is debatable i think , when he existed is still not very convincing. Anyway , did you forget to include the Buddha's relics in the proofs or you deliberately missed it bcs it is not worthy as an evidence?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

It's a bit like relics of Christian saints. They don't start appearing until long after the death of these individuals. I don't know of any bones of the Buddha that can be established to be from his time.

[@liltick102]

I feel like no matter what - after how long it’s been, in the same manner I guess to the original purpose of the Colosseum being forgotten in Rome for a while- and imo especially within a faith / belief system, the facts, even if guarded- and say, as for Buddhism, closely studied (hypothetically speaking, ceaselessly).. The facts will be misconstrued, especially from any person, especially one highly idealistic in a position of influence - new countries, new interpretation’s put on a society, or individual biased, self-deifying, delusional, idealistic etc To suit their law’s, to settle religion based social disruption, which I can imagine was madly common - facts had to have been veered I mean even to someone back then not afforded, or permitted education who was introduced to buddhism - if their live’s were miserable, as it is with Christianity to “slayeth this, and slayeth that”, or the kind of shit you read in Leviticus- how likely is it, that just like a scientology theetan test, that person might for example find an enemy through it. And if they’re an influential, and idealistic narcissist - what was either originally something not written in the text that inspired them changed- suited to culture, interpreted through a person’s existing core beliefs, good, or bad, a chance to rise within it’s widespread ill actions of misconducted ‘upholding god’s will’ aside, we cycle lesson’s generation, to generation that have been wholly understood, written.. I would say even most buddhist’s in simple, unhindered, menial family life, through hundreds year’s in societal flux drew the universal S through small, seemingly mundane interventions- another hypothetical, an angry father, far removed at home from any metropolis/pivotal hearsay farmer- uses the same “or you will be punished by-“ to his son. Just as people are basically accustomed to now in religion- from scripture that is both to be interpreted for use beneath their own inherent character - traits that reflect their experience, scripture to confirm their prejudice maybe.. and no doubt a system with which they frequently contradict, down to those the closest to the ‘facts’.. Now imagine the kids father dies, leaves him with resentment (or in religious value’s, an opinion in effigy of it’s teacher) - and although he didn’t like his father- that subconscious corner will likely always have a significant voice back seating their conscience - if they themselves become a figure of relevance~~~ - a misunderstood mentally unstable person in decades of non-stop meditation taken by their quotes particularly in a timeline when cows were hung for sorcery in one of the largest cities on Earth, their word taken even if it’s so absurd as “a figure appeared to me” type shit - They too will stir in a new frame to interpret And so on, and so on Not to say ‘I am right, and religious history couldn’t possibly be very well near to it’s basis upon inception’ - but is it massively likely that those truth’s (especially my guess) had changes- whether down to the drastic individual, from irrelevantly minimal to ‘catchy’, unto truth even, necessary politically, mandated to whatever uniform, or misconstrued culturally by nature - permanent, or impermanent, lost, found, reevaluated - You get me, I feel it’s utterly impossible for us to draw a separation anyhow after over a thousand years, and then some.. no matter what beneath all human factors - I might parrot back the information from this video to one person and say it all wrong, or say it right, and make that person become a devout buddhist, or even kill me - the more hands to touch the window, the more obscure the outside become’s, especially one stained to begin with - hence half the war in the world This probably sounds overall negative - and I’m sure there were innumerable chroniclers fixed to each written actual ‘fact’ of buddhism (if any to be truthful), and some educated by them, who were nearest historically in their understanding of it as the buddha himself, had the same ripple effect - but cycle that down a thousand years and change.. immense differences in humanity, the pivotal point between morality, and religiosity, population growth even Idk, no matter the evidence, I feel that misrepresentation of any belief systems basis being lost, culturally redressed, or misunderstood is an inevitable consequence to humanities development, and infinite factors over time down to the individual

[@jamisojo]

That is a lot to write, to not have it easy to read. That is, it felt like you were rambling. Understanding it is difficult.

[@liltick102]

@@jamisojo Appreciate the criticism g. Yeah, I do tend to go up in the air a lot - I’d gotten that criticism a lot in school. I’ve been working on that. Not that this was anything worth taking seriously being an opinion on yt. Being up 4 / 5 days on opiates & coke when I wrote this comment though.. I know that for sure. It looks like a lot of unfinished points.. I don’t feel like reading it all. I feel like I soort of said what I was trying to say, maybe.. besides that I’m wired out of my mind in what we have here lmfao idk.

[@zam6877]

As a Buddhist, I really enjoyed this😁 What if there was shadowy group that developed this kind of practice? The dang works, making me less miserable and a meanie! Thanks shadowy group! 😘

[@rstevewarmorycom]

Doesn't MATTER! Only what he said is at all important.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

If you're not interested in history, this channel is not for you.

[@rstevewarmorycom]

@@WorldofAntiquity I am, just not YOUR kind of "history".

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@rstevewarmorycom What kind of history are you interested in?

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

Nonsense

[@rstevewarmorycom]

@@TheGuiltsOfUs Mu

[@Commonsense1020]

Jesus existed, mohammad existed, krishna existed, taalmat existed, everything thats related to faith existed, but archeological proofs of a buddha are there but he wasn't existed. I love this logic, even buddha is laughing in corner

[@sukritdubey2630]

Where does he claim Buddha didn't exist?

[@srijanbhattacharya8858]

There is no archaeology evidence contemporary to buddha so he is right he doesn't existed and Lord krishna existed because there is dwarka which is contemporary to him

[@floptaxie68]

Dont be like that, Christians say similar things.

[@alucardhellsing7435]

​@@srijanbhattacharya8858poor Pajeeet. No one cares about his religion

[@miguelatkinson]

​@@srijanbhattacharya8858no the buddha most likely existed

[@Socialrebel2023]

There is no historical or excavational evidences for Jesus Christ's existence .Only the book called Bible believe to be holy book written by recipes as he said.no tangible proofs.Thats true for Alla ,sriRama and krishna of Bagavathi geetha too. The preachings too by human being only not god in person .its a belief up to the believers.

[@sav7568]

Word has it that he wasn't really the son of god, he was just a very naughty boy.

[@Doctor_Fate5]

@@sav7568existence kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYPJd3-gjLGsmKM

[@bruhaspati560]

Is shroud of Turin not enough?

[@TheMoneypresident]

Did the buddha inspire the Jabba? Big bald guy lounging. Eh? You decide 🤔

[@vassily-labroslabrakos2263]

More likely by Leto II.

[@user-yo2ki7vu7d]

Buddha comes from budha the Hindu mercury god. They made a figure out of budha and Tara was there too. Look upon budha. This is why no historical buddha ever existed.

[@user-nn9wf8fn2f]

Do look into the resources from Sri Lanka and other neighboring countries from the same era :) You'll be able to find corroborative evidence

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I have searched thoroughly and not found anything from the time of the Buddha.

[@saptarsanandan8864]

Did the Jesus exist?

[@Doctor_Fate5]

Did Jesus Christ kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYPJd3-gjLGsmKM

[@leopadh]

Whether he existed or not he was simply a human being. And we do not worship a human being but the God the only our creator himself

[@gregoryporter6434]

Although I'm a DAOIST not "A BUDDHIST" we learn from Buddhist and Buddhist learn from us. So I can assure you that you have insulted my religion

[@leopadh]

@@gregoryporter6434 well, then you need to learn more. Buddhism is not a religion but a philosophy

[@miguelatkinson]

@@leopadh please stop spouting that nonesense

[@leopadh]

@@miguelatkinson let’s hear what you have to share other then “nonsense”

[@bitofwizdomb7266]

Who cares if he existed . It’s what he supposedly said

[@user-dd8qj7zc7r]

Budah was real he was Ethiopian all Indian God were black they changed all the pictures

[@floptaxie68]

Delulu

[@Emotion-3642]

Pls do look at your baby's photo and can you tell with absolute certainty that the baby in the photo is you. Do you have the consciousness and full awareness to believe that the baby in the photo is you or is it just because your parents said it is so and you believe their words as the ultimate truth? Words are not scientific proof. And let's say along the way someone else comes up with another different looking baby photo and says that's the real baby photo of you. And who are you going to believe? Do have any concrete historical evidence or any intelligence to determine which one of the baby photos is you? So my question to you is this do you really believe your parent's words as historical scientific evidence or maybe is it through your consciousness you believe your parents as scientific truth. So do you know the baby in the photo is you and do have the DNA of that baby to prove it now that is you? I know 2 or 3 generations of family lineage through my parent's words and the photos they have shown me and to find my great-great ancestors' origin seeding with evidence is totally out of the question and to say I didn't reap from that sowing is a bit difficult to comprehend but to find the historical person of my ancestors 2600 years ago is absurd and doesn't mean I didn't have one even without scientific evidence. Today if I choose not to me any child to keep my lineage 2600years later it is ridiculous for people to ask me whether I existed genuinely as you will not get anything out of it.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

OVER TWO MILLENNIA OF ENLIGHTENED MASTERS PROVE BUDDHA TO BE TRUE

[@jamisojo]

Typing in all caps encourages people to believe you are not an informed person.

[@almitrahopkins1873]

You had to wear a yellow shirt for this one, eh?

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Ha why not? 🙂

[@prashantjadhav71]

please see national geographic you will get your answer. you believe in abraham religion??☺️ So many archeological evidence are related to Buddha exist.. Jesus exist???

[@bhuvaneshs.k638]

Buddhism as a philosophy did exist even before Sidhartha Gautama. He's actually 25th Buddha. So 24 Buddhas existed before him Many Western scholars misinterpret dharmic philosophies as some Abhramic religion. Along with Vedic , Jain, Yoga, Samkhya, Nyaya, Charvaka, Vaishyashek... Buddhism was part of 8 major Dharmic philosophical schools of thoughts

[@WorldofAntiquity]

What is the evidence for this?

[@bhuvaneshs.k638]

@@WorldofAntiquity I'm sorry , there are 29 Buddhas and 28th one is Siddhartha Gautama. It's all recorded in book of BUDDHAVAṂSA (meaning lineage of Buddha) and also there are many other records Tṛṣṇaṃkara is the first Buddha and Maitreya is considered to be the last Buddha aka 29th Buddha en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_named_Buddhas

[@bhuvaneshs.k638]

@@WorldofAntiquity it's somewhat similar to the status of "Dalai Lama". It's more of a state of person. Not an individual

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@bhuvaneshs.k638 How did the writer of the Buddhavamsa know that these earlier Buddhas existed?

[@bhuvaneshs.k638]

@@WorldofAntiquity well Cuz usually they maintain history of lineages recorded in Pali canon which are bunch of older scriptures. But many of these historical records were burnt during the multiple Turkic invasion of India etc. BUDDHAVAṂSA is written around 2nd century BC and considered as late addition to Pali canon

[@unicyclist97]

"It must have had a founder" as an argument is pretty weak. It's like saying that the angel Moroni must have existed because Mormonism must have had a founder, completely ignoring Joseph Smith.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

Mormonism did have a founder, and Joseph Smith was a real person.

[@unicyclist97]

@@WorldofAntiquity yes, but according to Mormon theology, the actual teachings came from Moroni, which makes him the founder.

[@unicyclist97]

All religions have real founders, but many of the teachings themselves are attributed to mythical founders who are often some sort of magical being communicating with the actual historical founder.

[@henrimourant9855]

@@unicyclist97 Ok but I thought it was pretty clear when he said "It must have had a founder." he meant a real historical human founder.

[@unicyclist97]

@@henrimourant9855 yes, but as an argument over historicity of a person it's a non-sequitur. A founder exists in either case, the question is who the founder actually was.

[@muneishadya6302]

Devils advocate

[@dwightfry99]

You based your entire argument on Buddha being intentionally created. In my mind, such characters aren't 'created' rather a collection of ideas over time. Whether it's Buddha, or Jesus, or other figures. Nobody needs to exist to have deep rooted histories developed. It's a combination of ideas, historical situations, and simple name. The name itself is the the foundation, and all of the traits behind it are applied (fabricated). I'll make up a name, Sen. Sen is in opposition to war. US citizens hear of Sen who is opposed to war and believe he must be opposed to US imperialism. This means Sen must have opposed Bush Jr. (Why Bush Jr? Because I am opposed to Bush Jr's role in US wars). After that I just need to call upon other historical figures before and after that period of time to build the mythological figure known as Sen. So.... your perception of how to detect real people is flawed. All I needed was a name and an idea and I could construct a figure with all the hallmarks of real figure by your own standards. No one person would be responsible for building that history, but rather people talking about that person would create the history of an entirely mythological being. EDIT: I do not understand how you could even argue that one person creates a mythological figure. Even if they try to, other people will put their own spin on them and the result won't represent the creator's vision. You only need to look at story telling through comics to understand how ideas aren't isolated to one person who creates them. Once an idea is out there, whether it was a real figure or not, their histories will evolve. It makes ZERO sense to speak about a creator of a myth. Whether Buddha was real or not, whether there was a creator of the myth or not, it doesn't matter. The stories and history are created organically through word of mouth and basic story telling. EDIT2: For the record... Sen was called to war and instead lived his life in an abandoned barn. He would not adhere to the demands of warmongers and instead sacrificed all forms of privileged living in opposition to the perpetuation of war. It's through the people who met him that his message was spread throughout the land.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

I think it would incorrect to state that I based my "entire argument" on the Buddha being intentionally created, unless you only caught one part of my video. I never argued that one person created the Buddha myth. I argued that one person could have started Buddhism. If you don't believe that one person could create a philosophy, then you don't believe in Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Zeno, Pyrrho, Epicurus, etc. Moreover, I stated very clearly that many people added to the Buddha tale over the centuries, just as you are saying.

[@dwightfry99]

@@WorldofAntiquity You state the Edict of Ashoka is the earliest record of the Buddha's existence. Your response to the edict, despite being 150+ years later, implies that it makes it more credible. The Historia Brittonum was written about as long after the supposed existence of King Arthur. And we still don't if he was real. Referencing historic figures and local ecology doesn't mean anything either, You considered the narrator/s as 'skilled fabricators' when there is nothing about those details that imply any skill. All that needs to be done is to hear about character and an idea. Like a game of telephone, details will be added and embellished. The character is most likely NOT built from whole cloth as you put it. There is no deliberate fraud necessary when the idea of a character is meaningful. You also argued it's either a committee or a insightful philosopher that would have started such a movement. Neither of those need to be true. No one person, for example, is responsible for anti-war movements. I could be completely isolated from all politics and still experience war and come to the same conclusion and find others like myself. Nobody needs to start a movement by convincing others. Movements can begin by finding groups of people that already came to the same basic ideas on their own. Even if the character was made up, you would still expect the text to be a more human character and aggrandized over time. It still doesn't provide evidence that a mythological character is real. But lastly, and this is my own philosophy, let's pretend someone like Buddha was based on a real person. When those stories become aggrandized then you are simply not talking about the historical figure any more. Even if there is was a Buddha or a Jesus or a King Arthur, we are still not referencing them when we ask if they were real. If I robbed a bank and got caught, but through word of mouth I was the most prolific bank robber in the united states, then they aren't talking about me. The stories are not about me. That person does not exist any way you look at it.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

*Your response to the edict, despite being 150+ years later, implies that it makes it more credible. The Historia Brittonum was written about as long after the supposed existence of King Arthur. And we still don't if he was real.* Very true. And I say in the video that we don't know if the Buddha was real. *Referencing historic figures and local ecology doesn't mean anything either, You considered the narrator/s as 'skilled fabricators' when there is nothing about those details that imply any skill. All that needs to be done is to hear about character and an idea.* Studying history requires no skill? I'm offended! 😉Studying geography takes no skill? Well, that's an interesting point of view that I have to disagree with. *Like a game of telephone, details will be added and embellished.* That's basically what I said in the video. *The character is most likely NOT built from whole cloth as you put it. There is no deliberate fraud necessary when the idea of a character is meaningful.* I agree. *You also argued it's either a committee or a insightful philosopher that would have started such a movement.* I didn't say it was either-or. I gave two possible scenarios. *Neither of those need to be true. No one person, for example, is responsible for anti-war movements. I could be completely isolated from all politics and still experience war and come to the same conclusion and find others like myself. Nobody needs to start a movement by convincing others. Movements can begin by finding groups of people that already came to the same basic ideas on their own.* Are you suggesting that Buddhism happened to be invented independently by several people at approximately the same time in history? *Even if the character was made up, you would still expect the text to be a more human character and aggrandized over time. It still doesn't provide evidence that a mythological character is real.* I would not expect an idealized character to start out as non-ideal. *But lastly, and this is my own philosophy, let's pretend someone like Buddha was based on a real person. When those stories become aggrandized then you are simply not talking about the historical figure any more.* I completely agree. *That person does not exist any way you look at it.* ANY way you look at it? I disagree. My question, "Did the Buddha exist?, is another way of asking, "Is the Buddha based on a real person?"

[@dwightfry99]

@@WorldofAntiquity " I say in the video that we don't know if the Buddha was real. " You said that, but you believe him to be real and gave your reasoning as to why. ____________________________ "Studying history requires no skill? I'm offended! 😉Studying geography takes no skill? Well, that's an interesting point of view that I have to disagree with" That was not what I was saying. The study of those things absolutely take skill. It's the inclusion of those details in the history of potentially mythological characters that takes no skill. I used the example of a fabricated anti-war character. It takes no skill for me to associate that character with real world political figures, real world ecologies, and basic physical traits. It's important to note that nobody needs to be trying to lie help build the mythology behind the character. It can happen naturally. I don't know how we can sort out what are natural embellishments and what would be factual descriptions. _________________________________ "Are you suggesting that Buddhism happened to be invented independently by several people at approximately the same time in history? " I am suggesting that we didn't need a Buddha character to develop philosophies that aligned with Buddha. Buddha, and such characters help spread ideas, but they don't need to exist for the ideas to be formed. There's no doubt people thought that way before him. And there's no doubt that people would have thought that way if he never existed. 'The same time in history' is a nonsequitur. The ideas became popular at one moment it time. The ideas themselves aren't limited to one moment in time. ________________________________________ "I would not expect an idealized character to start out as non-ideal. " Why? What does that even mean? I don't understand. The ideal, in this situation, is just a rumor of someone who acted on a shared philosophy. EG, I heard that somebody left society because they didn't agree with wars of their nation. I would expect stories of this character to be embellished and become more idealized. I can't even begin trying to give examples because it's literally infinite. Every detail I would imagine about this person to idealize them is based on my own bias. There are other people who would also be attracted to the idea of this character and have there own completely different ideas of who they are. The only thing future historians will know is the stories that became most popular. __________________________ " I disagree. My question, "Did the Buddha exist?, is another way of asking, "Is the Buddha based on a real person?"" I'm okay with that. I don't know how we can really form an educated answer to that question though. I don't know how your answer actually provides any evidence of such. All that takes is a rumor to kick off an entire history. It's a fabricated history, but not a history created by one person. It's just story telling.

[@WorldofAntiquity]

@@dwightfry99 *It's the inclusion of those details in the history of potentially mythological characters that takes no skill. I used the example of a fabricated anti-war character. It takes no skill for me to associate that character with real world political figures, real world ecologies, and basic physical traits.* You cannot do it without knowledge of history. Therefore it takes skill. I stand by my statement. *It's important to note that nobody needs to be trying to lie help build the mythology behind the character. It can happen naturally.* If a person does not know what really happened, and then they tell people what happened, then the person is making things up. Making things up is lying. *I am suggesting that we didn't need a Buddha character to develop philosophies that aligned with Buddha.* This sentence doesn't make sense. How can you align something with Buddha, if there was no Buddha? Your scenario, that many people independently could have come up with the same groundbreaking ideas is far-fetched.

[@pheonix3849]

What jisus is exist? 👽😂😂

[@maliquesmith2311]

Are you straight?

[@usergiodmsilva1983PT]

We all know where this is going... It's Tacitly implied. XD