New Discovery may push back Buddha's Birthdate

[cooran]

Oldest Buddist Shrine in Nepal uncovered - may push back Buddha's Birthdate:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... n-history/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With metta,
Chris

[daverupa]

"Archaeologists love claiming that they have found the earliest or the oldest of something," says archaeologist Ruth Young of the United Kingdom's University of Leicester in an email message.

Julia Shaw, a lecturer in South Asian archaeology at University College London, called the claims for a wooden railing surrounding a possible tree shrine convincing but speculative.

"The worship of trees, often at simple altars, was a ubiquitous feature of ancient Indian religions, and given the degree of overlap between Buddhist ritual and pre-existing traditions, it is also possible that what is being described represents an older tree shrine quite disconnected from the worship of the historical Buddha," Shaw says.


"Still, it does indeed present some new insights into the archaeology of Indian ritual in general," she adds.

I can definitely see bodhigara tied to early Wanderer traditions as early as this; if the Buddhist angle pans out, though, that'd be something extraordinary.

[SarathW]

Thanks Chris.
I did not know that there is a big debate about Buddha's birthdate!
For many of us it is not relevant.
Only big debate what I see here is about his teachings. (Kamma, re-birth, Anatta etc.)
Archaeologists cant help us to solve those problems unfortunately.

[Aloka]

.

That isn't a recent article, I remember seeing it a couple of years ago - and it says:

"By Dan Vergano, National Geographic
PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 26, 2013"

[daverupa]

The Buddhist angle has yet to pan out, it seems...

[peterve]

Oldest Buddist Shrine in Nepal uncovered - may push back Buddha's Birthdate:

Hmm quite interesting. This may bring revelation to all the people out in the world.

With metta,
Chris

[Kim OHara]

.

That isn't a recent article, I remember seeing it a couple of years ago - and it says:

"By Dan Vergano, National Geographic
PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 26, 2013"

We talked about it at the time, too:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=19229
and
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=20106


Kim