Ted Hoffman

Thanks. I had no idea. Thought Kung-fu only referred to a tradition/way of life/fighting style - like Shaolin.

Now I know better.

Answerer

Seriously, I don't feel that the existence of Buddha will affect His teachings in anyway. Nevertheless I will still like to point out that even though the story of the Buddha is mythical or symbolic, it does not apply his non-existence.



Actually, I, myself, saw the relics of Buddha before(his giant tooth) which was confirmed by the historcial and archeologists, themselves. Below are some other evidences:


http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/whatbudbeliev/17.htm

http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/bud...mananda/17.htm

So, if you still don't think that the above information is enough, maybe, you can look into the Chinese or Japanese buddhist archive. You are not the first one to question Buddha's existence, many before you had already done the job of research into Buddha's past.




Thats your choice, there is no point for me to force the existence of Buddha down in your mind. As for Kong Lao Fu Zi, his existence is already proved by the existence of 72(out of 300+) famous disciples(who had played some important roles during the Spring and Autumn period ). And since Confucius had some discussions with Lao zi before, his existence was proved as well. There was not much evidences to say that they are both purely mythical figures.

So, my point is mythical stories do not apply mythical individuals.