"Only good is good, it is easy to be a Buddha when you are a prince. Don't follow me, if you find Buddha, kill Buddha, by which I mean, kill the Buddha in you which you falsely worship. Göbekli Tepe is a university to transmit building traditions. The purpose is to build and learn through building. It is not a temple, otherwise, why would its builders continue to build after the first large circular structure supported by megaliths (immense columns of carved stone, often richly adorned with depictions of humans, animals and adornments?"
–– Mehmet Ali Munir.
The site of Göbekli Tepe, situated in modern-day Turkey, offers an intriguing case study in this context. Göbekli Tepe is considered one of the oldest known archaeological sites dating back to approximately 9600 to 8200 BC. This site, replete with grandiose stone structures and intricate carvings, has sparked intense debate among archaeologists and historians regarding its purpose and the civilization that built it. Conventional wisdom dictates that such structures served primarily religious or ritualistic purposes. However, the author challenges this assumption, positing Göbekli Tepe as a "university to transmit building traditions."
Here, a parallel is drawn between the processes of building physical structures and those of building knowledge structures. This comparison invites us to re-evaluate the rigid dichotomy often posited between 'sacred' and 'secular' spaces. If Göbekli Tepe was indeed a center of learning rather than a temple, it challenges our understanding of how knowledge was created, preserved, and transmitted in prehistoric societies. It also illuminates the intricate relationship between the practical (construction skills) and the conceptual (architectural designs, astronomical knowledge) in these early societies.
However, the assertion that if Göbekli Tepe were a temple, its builders wouldn't have continued to build after the completion of the first large circular structure, needs further analysis. This conclusion could be overly simplistic as it assumes a uniform purpose for all religious structures and ignores the possibility of evolving needs and beliefs within a society. Temples, like other social institutions, could serve multiple functions including spiritual, educational, and social. Furthermore, continuous construction could be interpreted as a form of devotion or an expression of changing theological ideas or societal needs.
What the Göbekli Tepe example brilliantly underscores is the multi-dimensionality of knowledge and belief. It highlights the possibility that our ancestors pursued knowledge in a holistic manner, integrating the practical and the conceptual, the sacred and the secular. Furthermore, it raises questions about our modern categorizations and assumptions, nudging us towards a more nuanced and open-minded approach to knowledge acquisition and dissemination.
This discussion intertwines the abstract contemplations on good, belief, and self-skepticism with the tangible realities of Göbekli Tepe. By linking philosophical speculation with archaeological interpretation, the discourse underscores the richness and complexity of human knowledge and belief systems. It challenges us to revisit and reassess our assumptions and encourages us to adopt a more critical and reflexive approach towards our understanding of the past, present, and future. Ultimately, it reaffirms that knowledge is an ever-evolving edifice, one that we build and rebuild as we navigate our way through the world, guided by the light of self-directed inquiry and skepticism.
