PDA

View Full Version : Greek and Eastern Philosophy



SanHeChuan
03-06-2009, 02:53 PM
We know that the ancient world was not as isolated as it would be easier to believe. Trade crossed the globe even during the bronze age. The global connection was greater than most are willing to admit. The Mystery of the Cocaine Mummies being a prime example. (Enter Uki) :p

It is well documented that Rome and China traded from the 1st century BCE.


The Seres (Chinese), are famous for the woolen substance obtained from their forests; after a soaking in water they comb off the white down of the leaves… So manifold is the labour employed, and so distant is the region of the globe drawn upon, to enable the Roman maiden to flaunt transparent clothing in public.

—Pliny the Elder, The Natural History VI, 54

Alexander the Great 356 BC–323 BC reached as far as India in his conquest of the world.

Would the leap be so great to think that they east and west had contact even earlier.

Comparative Philosophy would suggest great minds think alike, but What if the two cultures actually trade ideas?


Reincarnation

Gautama Buddha 563 BCE to 483 BCE

Pythagoras of Samos 580 to 490 BC
Pythagoras was a believer of metempsychosis. He believed in transmigration, or the reincarnation of the soul again and again into the bodies of humans, animals, or vegetables until it became moral.


Chi - breath

Anaximenes 585 BC–c. 525 BC
"As our souls, being air, hold us together, so breath and air embrace the entire universe."

Dong Zhongshu 179–104 BC

Not only human beings and animals were believed to have "qi". Zhuang Zhou (also known as Zhuang Zi or Master Zhuang) indicated that wind is the "qi" of the earth. Moreover, cosmic Yin and Yang "are the greatest of 'qi'." He describes qi as "issuing forth" and creating profound effects.


Tao

Neoplatonism 3rd century AD
The One
The primeval Source of Being is the One and the Infinite, as opposed to the many and the finite. It is the source of all life, and therefore absolute causality and the only real existence. However, the important feature of it is that it is beyond all Being, although the source of it. Therefore, it cannot be known through reasoning or understanding, since only what is part of Being can be thus known according to Plato. Being beyond existence, it is the most real reality, source of less real things. It is, moreover, the Good, insofar as all finite things have their purpose in it, and ought to flow back to it. But one cannot attach moral attributes to the original Source of Being itself, because these would imply limitation. It has no attributes of any kind; it is being without magnitude, without life, without thought; in strict propriety, indeed, we ought not to speak of it as existing; it is "above existence," "above goodness." It is also active force without a substratum; as active force the primeval Source of Being is perpetually producing something else, without alteration, or motion, or diminution of itself.

Tao both precedes and encompasses the universe. As with other nondualistic philosophies, all the observable objects in the world - referred to in the Tao Te Ching as 'the named' or 'the ten thousand things' - are considered to be manifestations of Tao, and can only operate within the boundaries of Tao. Tao is, by contrast, often referred to as 'the nameless', because neither it nor its principles can ever be adequately expressed in words. It is conceived, for example, with neither shape nor form, as simultaneously perfectly still and constantly moving, as both larger than the largest thing and smaller than the smallest, because the words that describe shape, movement, size, or other qualities always create dichotomies, and Tao is always a unity.

SimonM
03-06-2009, 03:11 PM
Let me preface my statements by saying that I am a proponent of the position that there was cultural exchange and communication during the classical period in history. There are marked simmilarities in philosophy, technology and thought between the nations of Asia and those of Europe between 500 BCE and 500 CE. Some of these are almost certainly as a result of cultural diffusion and cultural exchange.

With that in mind...


It is well documented that Rome and China traded from the 1st century BCE.


It is believed that the statements of Pilny the Elder with regards to the Seres refer to the Chinese. It is believed by others he was referencing a mediterranean island culture. We aren't sure. The balance of probability, at this time, favours the Chinese. But let's not put the cart before the horse, a single cryptic reference is not "well documented".



Alexander the Great 356 BC–323 BC reached as far as India in his conquest of the world.


True. And although his empire collapsed it left a network of roads, cosmopolitan cities and cultural enclaves that persisted long after it perished.



Comparative Philosophy would suggest great minds think alike, but What if the two cultures actually trade ideas?

Well... buddhist thought on post-death consciousness aside (a subject that Gautama Siddhartha didn't actually talk too much on, part of the reason you see such a variance between various branches of buddhists) I think it's unlikely that Gautama Siddhartha and Pythagoras were sending each other letters in the post. They lived at nearly precisely the same time and were separated by the mass of land called Asia Minor. That's not a small schlep.

Issues relating 'life energy' to breath may be as a result of cultural diffusion but there is no evidence of it. An equally likely hypothesis would be that the likeness of ideas was a cultural confluence.

Neo-Platonism has it's root in old-fashioned classical platonism - the metaphysical arrow points firmly back to Plato. Again we may be seeing cultural confluence rather than cultural diffusion at play here.

I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying you have to consider the possibility that thinkers in the same time, in simmilar conditions, had simmilar thoughts independent of each other.

Still, with all the talk of CMA being imported from Greece it's nice to see somebody turn the equation on it's head.

And there is compelling evidence for Buddhism being a major factor in the creation of Christianity... along with Hebrew religion and Zoroastrianism.

SanHeChuan
03-06-2009, 03:45 PM
But let's not put the cart before the horse, a single cryptic reference is not "well documented".

I was just giving the earlest documented example from the west, there are others.


The Son of Heaven on hearing all this reasoned thus: Ferghana (Dayuan) and the possessions of Bactria (Daxia) and Parthia (Anxi) are large countries, full of rare things, with a population living in fixed homes and given to occupations somewhat identical with those of the Chinese people, but with weak armies, and placing great value on the rich produce of China.

—Fan Ye, Hou Hanshu or Book of the Later Han

and more.


I think it's unlikely that Gautama Siddhartha and Pythagoras were sending each other letters in the post.

No but both greece and china had contact to India, and possible through India.
Greece probably got their reincarnation views from Brahmanism, while the Chinese got theirs from Buddhism.


And there is compelling evidence for Buddhism being a major factor in the creation of Christianity... along with Hebrew religion and Zoroastrianism.

Links...?

Shaolin Wookie
03-06-2009, 08:48 PM
We know that the ancient world was not as isolated as it would be easier to believe. Trade crossed the globe even during the bronze age. The global connection was greater than most are willing to admit. The Mystery of the Cocaine Mummies being a prime example. (Enter Uki) :p

It is well documented that Rome and China traded from the 1st century BCE.



Alexander the Great 356 BC–323 BC reached as far as India in his conquest of the world.

Would the leap be so great to think that they east and west had contact even earlier.

Comparative Philosophy would suggest great minds think alike, but What if the two cultures actually trade ideas?


Dude. You guys are like 2-3 centuries late on this one. Look up Sir William "Oriental" Jones, Sir Isaac Newton, and guys like William Temple. They were talking about this issue in the late 17th Century and early 18th in the Royal Society and the Asiatick Society (Yes, "Asiatick" had a "k" on it back then, sometimes w/o the "c"). Caused a huge ****fit between the Ancients and Moderns (read Swift, Pope, etc.). Temple assumed the entirety of Greek culture was dependent upon Eastern philosophies---take Pythagoras with his "cult" that was entirely vegetarian, humanistic, and, well, I hate to say animistic, but it was in a couple of ways. Although we treat Pythagoras as a Western "mystic", he was probably patterning a way of life learned from the orient. None of this was "new". It was a inter-cultural exchange that led to a Greek "fad". Oriental Jones took it ****her--he assumed the West had hijacked the gods of India and China and patterned them thus.

It has been taken as granted that the West has its roots in India and China for quite some time now, due to the "antickness" of the Eastern historical records (and our knowledge of this was entirely due to the Jesuit presence in China).

Besides: Greece, Italy, the barbarian tribes--they were all involved in skirmishes with the far East. Hell, we've had a very old presence in the Middle East, and that was always a prime mixing bowl rife with cultural exchanges.

Ethnography exchanges died off in Victorian times, but these arguments are as old as..........yo mammas.:)


If anyone's interested in this, I could email you a couple of articles or genuine documents (PDF files of facsimiles of the original 17th Century publications) that I get free from university databases if I bother to visit this forum again. They're incredibly interesting.

For your reading:

Sir William Jones "The Gods of Greece, Italy, and India"

Sir Isaac Newton "On the Chronology of Ancient Kings"

Sir William Temple "On Ancient and Modern Learning"

mantis108
03-06-2009, 10:35 PM
Well...

There are definitely some "foreign Gods" in the Chinese pantheon.

While Vajrapani, or Jinnalou in Mandarin, could have been modeled after Hercules but his status is not as important and influential to the Chinese as Nalakuvara (Na Jia - 哪吒) who is non other than Alexander the Great. In Hindu mythology, he is revered as Skanda, the second son of Shiva. Skanda in Chinese Buddhist community is known as Wei Tuo (韋陀). He is often depicted as the guardian warrior or personal guard of Avalokistesvara Bodhisattva or Guan Yin Pu Sa. Wei Tuo is also a martial arts division of Shaolin which is called Wei Tuo Liu He (Liu He for short) that is famous for its spear and staff. So in Chinese Na Jia is the Daoist (Thunder Sect) version of Alexander the Great; while, Wei Tuo is the Buddhist version.

Mantis108

SimonM
03-07-2009, 12:23 AM
Links...?

Books. Give me some time to rummage and I'll try to come up with a name or two for you. It's been a while.