You make a 2 second google search, saw it on fake buddha quotes, didn't even read the page, and called it lies. — Wosret

I have read the page, and it wasn't just that. I've studied Buddhism before, never heard of such a thing.

Despite that the page said that it was in the darmapada, then just insinuated that it was fake because it didn;t sound right to them because Buddha was poisoned, which itself may not even be true. — Wosret

The page did not say that it was in the Dhammapada. You are a very very big liar and you should be ashamed of yourself. You should read that page:

The locus classicus for this particular version would seem to be Eknath Easwaran’s introduction to his translation of the Dhammapada

Does it say it's from the Dhammapada?!! (N) No of course it doesn't, cause I read the damn Dhammapada and it's not there.

first published in 1985

Don't call me dishonest. We both know how frequently you lie. You think I don't know? Don't address me. — Wosret

You probably cannot cite a single instance of me lying, and yet you call me a liar. You should look in the mirror.

Buddhism and Buddha probably initially held the vantage point that there is no immobility called truth (the concept of impermanence which also exists in Daoism at about the same time) — Rich

That's not true. Buddhism states that the five Skandhas (meaning this world) is anicca. Buddhism does not state that Nirvana is impermanent, or the Dharma is impermanent, or Buddha-nature is impermanent. These things, on the contrary, are absolutely permanent and unchanging.

Interesting article on the topic.

I think you will find that Nirvana and such are all subject to interpretation and its evolution is similar to that of Heaven, i.e. a marketing tool. Impermanence just isn't a very good marketing tool for most philosophies turned religion.

I read the article. This is a more neutral, non-religious point of view. Probably closer to the original ideas that have not been influenced by economic distortions.

I liked the article for the more neutral approach. Part of us is eternally five years old, asking "why? why? why?" That is ok. Just take it one breath at a time.