A lot of physical evidence is appearing that supports the notion that he could have been a black African, this is especially evident in scriptures and sculptures of the ancient Buddhist eras. Why is it being covered up by Asians and whites?
This is true friend. The physical evidence is all over the place. Buddha was black just like Jesus was.
WE
WAZ
>>3101947
>>3101955
>>3101960
>>3102063
>Falseflag
>Samefag
>>3102063
KANGZ
>>3101960
Buddha's N'Shiet
>>3102063
SIDDHARTHURS
>>3102446
NSHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEET
>>3101947
I'm like 90% sure that Buddha is described in Buddhist texts as having more Nordic features like blond hair and blue eyes.
>>3102877
>what is symbolism
>>3101947
Siddhartha was a Brahmin. We all know who the proto-Indo-Aryan speaking peoples were.
>>3102909
What is symbolism?
I actually did read a European account of a voyage to Siam in the 17th century (maybe 18th) where the traveller saw statues of the Buddha and said he must have been black because of his hair, and that the local priests must have confused India and Africa. It's retarded but I thought it was funny.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_characteristics_of_the_Buddha
>29. "Eyes deep blue[8]"
The earliest Buddhist art didn't even include anthropomorphic representations of the Buddha. The pieces in OPs pic and the response below it all seem to be later visualisations of the Buddha, when the religion was being somewhat spread outwards and was diminishing in it's areas of origin.
Low quality bait
>>3102958
Black people back then could have blue eyes
>>3102995
Not an argument
Buddha was probably Iranic, Scythian type guy, blue eyes and shiet, imagine a sallow skinned Irishman like Colin Farrell but with Blue eyes there ya go. That's what those iranics look like, the slant eyed Asians came into the region much later.
>>3102936
Buddha's "hair" isn't his hair.
>>3102995
You wish
>>3103598
>implying
slant eyes in nepal are the indigenous people