N.b. that this is theocrasy
(not a typo!), not an historical statement at all; I will nonetheless address it historically:
Jezus, Moses, Allha, Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu where all students to give uss a head-start and left.
Jesus and Moses are fictional characters. Such can be said because they are alleged to have been historically extant human beings; and the Biblical alleged histories are bunk, just fiction (although they may be in part based very roughly on composites of bits and pieces of historical events).
In particular, I am amazed that anybody after the late 19c./early 20c. treats Jesus as having any more reality than the Wizard of Oz. The Gospels are historically prepostrous. Josephus was a liar generally, as can be readily demonstrated on many points (not only relevant to this issue). Roman historical sources contemporaneous to, or soon after the alleged life of Jesus contain absolutely nothing about corroborates the story; biased “scholars” are left hanging onto some old chestnut about Tacitus and “Chrestus”, a misinterpretation that is completely absurd to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the matter. Etc... Moreover, there is no reliable evidence that
Christians (
i.e. followers of Jesus) existed before the Second Century.
The others whom you listed are wholly mystical beings, not susceptible to scientific examination or other rational scholarship. It is, strictly speaking, not
irrational to believe in the existence of such beings somewhere that mere mortals (and their scientific instruments) cannot see.
The alleged historicity of Jesus was actually what I was thinking of specifically, when I wrote this:
I love history it gets really crazy the more i search.
Most of what you think you know about history is wrong.
That’s not personal. It is just a general observation. Most of what people believe to be “history” is fake news, either twisted or just made up by somebody with an agenda somewhere along the line—the Bible being only the worst and most notorious example. Indeed, if you want a neat demonstration of just how bad the problem is, peruse the idiot-bait on Wikipedia and follow the “verifiable” citations to so-called “scholars” who crank out arrant nonsense “supporting” or “investigating” the historicity of completely fictional stories.
Hinduism (Shiva as supreme being within Shaivism) is the world's oldest religion and Boedha are the most still intact.
Not intact in the least.
Many if not most of the modern sects of the Hindus are almost unrecognizable compared even to the diverse syncretisms of the Hindu Golden Age, let alone the religion of Vedic times.
The oldest religion would probably be something from prehistorical times—therefore perforce unknown. I need not reach the question of which religion has the oldest historically or archaeologically attested tradition.
Gautama expressed an essentially atheistic philosophy, eerily similar to Schopenhauer’s World as Will. His
Nirvana had the same objective as Schopenhauer’s
Renunciation. All of the Buddhist religious mysticism was piled on later, after the historical Gautama. Such a thing could conceivably also happen over the course of future centuries to Schopenhauer and his quasi-mystical palingenesis of the Will, which can only be escaped by renouncing all desires and attaining the state of Nirvana,
i.e. nonexistence.
(Sanskrit nirvāṇa = ‘extinguished’, literally ‘blown out’ in the sense of a candle.)Obligatory at this juncture:(Although bit weak on south Asian/Indian subcontinent history, may be you didn't expressed yourself much and i avoid correcting peeps on interweb)
I’d be pleased for some pointers on the
Lokāyaka. ;-)
(I appreciated that your post, and did not intend to ignore it. If were to I answer the question that you thereby asked, I should do so properly; but I have (as yet?) lacked both the time and the inclination for such a discussion here—sorry. It also invokes the problem that I keep my reading list private; indeed, I use Tor to help assure that
nobody can track what I am reading.)
