Alexander the Can I Have That One Back?

Well, there are the Gospels. It's worth noting that aside from the Tripitaka and the Jain holy texts there's no more direct evidence of Buddha or Mahavira, nor is there any greater historical evidence for Kung Fu Zi, but everyone accepts their existence on the same basis. However the historical Jesus was probably more of a Shabbatai Zevi figure than anything like the figure of Christianity.

Hehe, there would certainly be no references to Master Kong in either the Buddhist or Jain canons. However, there are enough references to him in books of the Confucian canon (e.g., the Lunyu, the Zuo Zhuan, the Mengzi, etc), the Mohist canon (the Mozi is probably the only one left), the Daoist canon (the Dao De Jing may have predated Kongzi, but he's mentioned in the Zhuangzi), and the Legalist texts (Kongzi is mentioned in the Hanfeizi). Technically, you could argue that none of these were written by contemporaries who saw and met him, but these are generally considered reliable sources. The Lunyu, I'm pretty sure, was written by people who met and knew Kongzi (similar with some of the Gospels and Jesus, but that's a separate debate). However, you cannot argue that the Master is found only in the works of Confucianism.

I'm pretty sure the Buddha also features in Hinduism, so he's not just in the Buddhist canon. I don't know anything more about this, so I'm not sure whether this point adds anything to the argument. While I personally think the Buddha (and Kongzi) were real people, I say Buddha would be the one whose documentation is weaker, and that Kongzi is more likely to be real. At least with the latter, we can assert that his rough contemporaries wrote things down, though their writings probably changed up to the point when the Lunyu was finalized in the Han Dynasty. With the former, the teachings of Buddhism were passed through oral tradition for centuries before they were written down.

EDIT: Actually, a bit more research says that two parts of the Tripitaka (the oldest parts) are traditionally said to have been recited just after the Buddha died. However, they were not actually written down. Still, I spoke too strongly, in the sense that they were composed, if not written, by the Buddha's disciples after the Buddha's death.
 
Last edited:
Top