I like what I understand to be the princples of Buddhism.
Nonetheless, a sceptic would query how it is known the bone fragment is that of Lord Buddha.
During a trip to Nepal last month, we visited Lumbini, the birth place of Lord Buddha and visited ruins that include his purported birth stone (what ever that is) and the small pond/lake his mother apparently bathed in before she gave birth. How are these things "known" 2500 years after the event?
At Lumbini they rely on an inscribed column dated back to something like 300 years after the birth/life of Lord Buddha. To me it is at least plausible that oral history of the region at that time was documented in the enscriptions. As for the "birth stone and lake" it does seem a little tenuous and convenient imo.
Buddhism is interesting in that Lord Buddha was apparently a real person as distinct from being a deity or spirit typical of many religions. For 7 years after his protected life as a prince to the age of 29 he sought "enlightenment" during which time he defined it and then taught and practised it for the rest of his life.
I like the story because it is clear goodness is within humanity.
