You aare either lying or revealing how you do not bother to read what I write.Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:43 pmYou did not cite anything. Just gave a link. Not how it's done around here.I was kind enough to cite sources supporting my claims about Buddhism in response to your request.
Herre was my series of citations
And here are all of the links in that set of citations.ABuddhist wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 4:32 amWell, the Lotus Sutra, a lengthy prose-and-verse narrative claiming to be truth which is regarded by nonMahayana Buddhists and nonBuddhists as having arisen between 50 CE and 150 CE (Kajiyama, Yuichi (2000), "The Saddharmapundarika and Sunyata Thought", Journal of Oriental Studies, 10: 72–96) is over 300 pages in English translation: https://www.amazon.com/Lotus-Sutra-Revi ... 886439397/
The Buddhāvataṃsaka Sūtra, which I have been referring to as the Flower Garland Sutra, is a lengthy prose narrative claiming to be truth which is regarded by nonMahayana Buddhists and nonBuddhists as having arisen during the 2nd century CE at the earliest (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddh%C4% ... ra#History). It is so long that the modern translation into English is in 3 parts, the 1st of which ( https://www.amazon.com/Flower-Adornment ... 93541335X/ ) is 884 pages long.
The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (commonly called in English the Perfection of Wisdom in 25,000 lines) in its English translation is over 600 pages long ( https://www.amazon.com/Large-Sutra-Perf ... 390064112/ ) and is surviving, in addition to in Sanskrit, in in four Chinese translations by four different translators: Moksala (c. 291 CE), Dharmaraksha (c. 286 CE), Kumārajīva (C. 403 CE), and Xuánzăng (c. 660 - 663 CE): Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō (大 正 新 修 大 大), volume 8, text no. 221 Zhōnghuá dàzángjīng (大 日本 續 藏經), volume 7, text no. 2,Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō (大 正 新 修 大 大 藏經), volume 8, text no. 222 Zhōnghuá dàzángjīng (大 日本 續 藏經), volume 7, text no. 4, Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō (大 正 新 修 大 大 藏經), volume 8, text no. 223 Zhōnghuá dàzángjīng (大 日本 續 藏經), volume 7, text no. 3, Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō (大 正 新 修 修 大 藏經), volume 7, text no. 220 [2], scrolls 401-478 Zhōnghuá dàzángjīng (大 日本 續 藏經), volume 1-6, text no. 1 [2]. See also here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Pra ... S%C5%ABtra . The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra received the Dà zhìdù lùn (大智度論, *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, T no. 1509), which is a large and encyclopedic commentary to the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā translated into Chinese by Kumārajīva (344–413 CE).
Is this sufficient evidence?
Furthermore, because you regard only links to websites as valid citations (WHY!?), here is an additional link about the Lotus Sutra: www.iop.or.jp/Documents/0010/kajiyama.pdfABuddhist wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 4:32 am https://www.amazon.com/Lotus-Sutra-Revi ... 886439397/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddh%C4% ... ra#History
https://www.amazon.com/Flower-Adornment ... 93541335X/
https://www.amazon.com/Large-Sutra-Perf ... 390064112/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Pra ... S%C5%ABtra
And from this,
I provided the following link:ABuddhist wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 4:45 amBudd Buddhism is not based to such a strong degree upon chronology or upon the arrival of an anticipated saviour, excepting cults around Metteya/Meitreya Buddha.Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 4:11 am Show Buddhist "gospels" developed from an obsession with messianic chronology i.e. that after a certain number of years the messiah or Buddha would come and that the fulfillment of these calculations was/were entirely fictitious i.e. a hoax and that this sham became the centerpiece to an acceptance of a historical savior where believers gathered in centers of worship ritually confessing AT EVERY GATHERING from at least 150 years from the event stretching into modern times that this savior came under a temporal ruler who was known to have governed at a specific time and place. Good luck.
The notable exception is the Kalacakra Tantra from Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism, but that arose in response to Islamic depredations and influences.
Furthermore, I agree with you that Jesus was a historical figure. I am just questioning how reliable the gospels are as accounts.
But Mahayana Buddhist sutras, which like the gospels in certain models, are later prose (or prose-and-verse) fictions (some of which are very long) about a real person (Shakyamuni Buddha), which have become the bases for rites of various sorts. For an obvious example, the Bhaiṣajya-guru-vaiḍūrya-prabhā-rāja Sūtra (readable here: https://chungtai.org.au/wp-content/uplo ... hagata.pdf), commonly called the Medicine Buddha Sutra, which has been found in manuscripts dated to before the 7th century CE (Bakshi, S.R. Kashmir: History and People. 1998. p. 194), is a fictitious prose narrative about Shakyamuni Buddha preaching about a being, the Bhaiṣajya-guru-vaiḍūrya-prabhā-rāja, and prescribing a ritual, which some Mahayana Buddhists still perform.
Which I supplement with another link because you are refusing to trust other ways of citing things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhaisajyaguru#Origin