Phoenixstar

I wasn't saying that I believed he was a man of African origin. I had just never heard that before in my life and was wondering what those that practice Buddhism thought. I was wondering if this was one persons skewed view of things or whether it had merit.

Yeah I like him too but the accent just did not fit.

Seraphim

by Phoenixstar

I wasn't saying that I believed he was a man of African origin. I had just never heard that before in my life and was wondering what those that practice Buddhism thought. I was wondering if this was one persons skewed view of things or whether it had merit.

Well ... I have yet to come across any philosopy or religion from Africa which shares any similarities with Buddhism, so I doubt Buddha came from Africa.

Also, the teachings and philosophy behind Bhavagad Gita is some what more similar (about 50%) to Buddhism so I always thought that Gautama maybe a Hindu when he was alive.

Yeah I like him too but the accent just did not fit.

Oh well ... at least he portray it nicely ... Surfer accent or not.

bagong

It seems their entire argument is based on the "nappy" hair of Buddha statues. But as andy_d has already said, the first Buddha statues were produced in the early 1st century CE in Gandhara (modern day Pakistan and Afghanistan), roughly 500 years after the Buddha's death. Representations of Jesus occur much quicker after Jesus's death, yet I'm sure Afrocentric scholars would (rightly) discount these as merely reflecting a European conception of Jesus, not his actual appearance. So why do they unquestioningly assume that Buddha representations are perfectly accurate depictions of the historical Buddha?

Furthermore, the iconographical details conform to the so-called "32 Major Marks of a Great Man", a frankly bizarre list of physical features unique to a Buddha or a World Conqueror, quite distinct from some racial type. 2 of the marks are: every hair comes out of a seperate pore, and all the Buddha's hair is blue and curls clockwise. Different artists chose to represent this in different ways - the earliest Gandharan and Mathuran statues show either wavy or straight hair. The famous "bubbles" are a Gupta-period innovation that only became standard throughout the Buddhist world roughly 1000 years after the Buddha's death.

So if the Buddha's nappy hair is all they have to go on, their argument is very weak.

hinduwoman

Buddha being of Nubian descent has never been heard of before.
All traditions speak of him as belonging to India.

Any ruling clan ruling over a state, which is different from a tribe, automatically was deemed kshatriya.
Adivasis have their own gods, they do not believe in rebirth or karma. Buddha's teaching were definitely Hindu teachings. In fact, he even lays down the rules for who a true Brahmin is, which actually corresponds with Upanishadic definitions.

Waning Moon Conrad

Find some different sources.
Who cares what colour his skin was anyway? It's what he taught that matters, not the colour of his skin.

Phoenixstar

I was not trying to make this into a race thing. I was just wondering about what was being said. Don't misconstrue what I was asking please. I had a question that I wanted more information about is all. Skin color does not matter to me, as I said before. I had never heard this about Buddha and was wondering what others thought.

Waning Moon Conrad

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across that way.

I didn't assume that you were making a race issue of it but quite honestly I think the information you mention is a crock.

He may have been a darkish Indian, or a lighter Indian, he may have been a goldenish brownish sort of Nepalese looking bloke.

He wasn't African though.

Apparently there is a school of thought among some African Americans which alleges that the Egyptians were black, the Greeks were black, Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Moses were black, anybody who helped lay the foundations of civilization and culture - was black. Maybe one of these people thinks to appropriate Buddhism.

Opera Nut

I saw Little BUddha when it came out some years ago, and I thought it was a very good very basic intro to Buddhism and how they pick the next Dalai Lama. Notwithstanding Keanu.

And there were some laughs when they were running around Seattle to find Bridget Fonda's kid, the next Dalai Lama.
As I said, very very basic, but good for those with no exposure to Eastern religion at all, unlike the educated and curious bunch that hangs out here.