Conger, George P._did India Influence Early Greek Philosophies_Philosophy East and West, 2,...

8/9/2019 Conger, George P._did India Influence Early Greek Philosophies_Philosophy East and West, 2, 2_1952_102-128

1/28

Did India Influence Early Greek Philosophies?Author(s): George P. CongerSource: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Jul., 1952), pp. 102-128Published by: University of Hawai'i PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1397302 .

Accessed: 23/02/2015 12:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy

East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:43:34 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1397302?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1397302?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp


2/28

GEORGE

P.

CONGER

Did ndianfluence

Early

reek

hilosophie

In the

belief

hatthis

ntriguing

estof

problems

eeds

o

be

re-examined,

recently

pent

omemonths

n

India,

Greece,

ndthe

Near

East

nd

n

ibraries

n

Europe

nd

America.

n

ade-

quate tudyftheproblemsould equire ears.n this eportofferome

impressions

hich

hesitate

o

call

conclusions,

ut

which

may

erve

t

least

o

state ome

f

the

questions.

o

attempt

s

made

o

enumeratehe

kindly

cholars

ho n all

these

ountries elcomed

e

and

helped

me. I

would

e

glad

o

receive urtherriticisms

nd

uggestions

rom

nyone

ho

is

interested-especially

t

any

oint

where

may

avefollowedhe

wrong

expert.

t

should e

noted

hat

onsideration

s

here

lmost

ntirely

onfined

to

philosophers

rior

o

Socrates;

he

roblems

f

possible

astern

nfluences

on Plato andAristotleretoo involvedorbrief reatment,nd in the

Hellenistic

eriod,

fter

he

blaze

of

Alexander,

onditions

ere

different

from

hose

f

the

arly ays.

I

It

begins

o

appear

hat

he

lder iscussionsf this

uestion

avebeen

either

asty

nd

uperficial,

ased

n

inadequate

nowledge

f

one

or

more

of the

ultures

tudied,

r

havebeen

oo

exclusively

hilological,

ased

oo

narrowlypon

he

vailable

extual

vidence.

ccasionally

writer

xhibits

bothfaults.'As

regards

hilology,

oone candoubt hat thas ts ndis-

1

Brief

mention f

earlier

works

n

the field

sually

ncludes he

very

oose

comparisons

y

Sir William

Jones,

Works

London:

G. G. and

J.

Robinson, 799),

Vol.

I,

pp.

360

ff.,

nd

by

H.

Gladisch,

ie

Religion

und

die

Philosophie

n ihrer

Weltgeschichtlichen

ntwicklung

(Breslau:

F.

Hirt,1852),

and other

works.

More cautious ffirmative

pinions

were

xpressed

by

R.

Garbe,

Philosophy

f

Ancient ndia

(Chicago:

Open

Court,

899),

pp.

32

ff.,

2

ff.

These

were countered

y

the

strongly egative

pinions

f

E.

Zeller,

Die

Philosophie

er

Griechen,

th

ed.

(Leipzig:

Fues,

R.

Riesland, 870),

Vol.

,

pp.

28

ff.

Zeller

has

beenfollowed

by

J.

Burnet,

arly

Greek

hilosophy,

th ed.

(New

York:

The

Macmillan

ompany,

948),

pp.

15

ff.

H.

G. Rawlinson's

ntercourseetween ndia

and

the

Western

World

from

he

Earliest

imes

o

theFall

of

Rome

Cambridge: ambridge

niversity

ress,

916)

is

valuable

for

background,

ut

some statements

bout

Greek

philosophies

n

his

paper

n

the volume

edited yG. T. Garratt,heLegacy f ndia (Oxford:Clarendonress, 937), pp. 4 ff., eed

to

be

scrutinized.or

an

extensive

ibliography,

ee

E.

Zeller,

a

filosofia

ei

Grecn

ranslated

by

R.

Mondolfo

Florence:

a nuova

talia,1932),

Vol.

I,

Parte

1,

pp.

63-99.

102


http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/28


4/28

104

GEORGE

P. CONGER

possible

ommunication.

ne was

by

watervia the

Arabian

Sea,

then

by

the

Persian

Gulfor

theRed

Sea,

and

eventually y

and

to

theMediterranean

or

Aegean.

The other

oute

an

overland,

hrough

he

ranian

plateau

and

the

Mesopotamian

iver

alleys

ndthen

by

various

branchings

o different

sections

f

the Mediterraneanoast.

(Other

possibilities

ia Arabia

on

the

south

nd

the

Oxus Riverand Black Sea

on

the

north re

here

eft

ut

of

account.)

Any

of

the routes

n

ancient imes

equired

long

hard

ourney

in

the

face

of

forbidding

atural onditions.

ach

was

subject

o

occasional

disruptions

y

war

or

piracy,

ut

it

appears

that

generally

he

routes,

t

least

by

one

makeshift

r

another,

ere

open.

By

sea

the ittle

hips

ould

hug

the coast

or,

with

the use

of

homing

birds,

enture

ccasionally

ut

of sight f theshores.ScylaxofCaryandra,t thecommand fDarius I,

about

516

B.C.,

ailed down the Indus

and

around

o

Egypt,

voyage

of

thirty

months.4

y

land

the

caravans

ould

plod along, say

twenty

miles

per day,

from

ne

halting

lace

to another.When

by

any

means

the

coast

of the

Mediterranean

as

reached,

herestwas

relativelyasy.

Greece,

with

its

ndented

oast

ine,

was

naturally

dapted

or

eafaring.

he

many

slands

on three

ides

were ike

stepping

tones

nd

almost

ike

bridges

or

ncient

travelers.

ne does

not

need

to think f

continuous

ourneys y

dventurous

individuals,

overing

housands

f

miles nd sustained

ormonth

fter

month.

Alongeither oute herewere ettlementshere, nder rdinaryonditions,

travelers,

ringing

ith

hem heir

deas,

might

arry

or onsiderablenter-

vals

before

ressing

nward.

With

or without

enefit

f

such

halting

laces,

he

numerous raditions

that ncient

hilosophers

isited

emote

egions

nd

either

ave

or

received

ideas need

to

be scrutinized

ith

considerable

are.

The stories

re

usually

late

and

are

likely

o

reflectendenciesurrent

n

the

days

of

chroniclers

r

interpreters

ho

were

not

very

areful

r

critical.

At

the same

time t must

be

remembered

hat uch

ourneys

ere n

principleossible

nd

that ccounts

of them did

not seem

utterly

bsurd

o

the

original

writers nd readers.

Eventhe

most ncisive riticism

have

een

akes few

f

the tories

eriously.5

The

most

striking

f the

stories s the one which

Eusebius,

uoting

Aristocles,

scribes o Aristoxenus.

he

story

as

it that certain

ndian

at

Athens,

when he asked Socrates

bout

his

philosophy

nd

was

told

that

Socrates

iscussed

uman

ife, nswered,

How is it

possible

obe sure bout

human

affairs

f

one

is

ignorant

f

things

ivine? 6The

story

s

usually

dismissed

s

improbable

nd

apocryphal,

otivated

y

some ate

criticism,

' Herodotus,v. 44.

'T.

Hopfner,

Orient

nd

Griechische

hilosophie,

er Alte

Orient,

eihefte

(1925),

8-27.

6Eusebius, raeparatio

vangelica,

i,

3,

8.

The

story

s

criticized

y

A.

J. Festugiere

n

Revue

e

l'histoire

es

religions,

XXX

(1945),

34

ff.




5/28

DID INDIA

INFLUENCE

EARLY

GREEK

PHILOSOPHIES?

105

perhaps

ythagorean,

f

the

humanistic

ocrates.

t

raises ome

complicated

questions.

n

theFirst

Alcibiades,

ocrates s made

to

say

thathe who

looks

at the divinepartof thesoul and at things ivinewill be most ikely o

know himself.'

his

passage

has

been

used

to

support

he

argument

hat

the

FirstAlcibiades s not

by

Plato,s

but

is an

attempt y

a

Platonist

o

restate

ome Platonic theses

nd

to

defend ocrates

gainst

the

Indian

criticism

y

makingknowledge

f

the divine

rucial

or he

proper

onduct

of

human affairs. ritics f

the

story

verlook

what

might

have

been

its

provenance;

ristoxenuss

said

to

have been

a friend f

one of

the

youngest

followers

f

Socrates

nd to have

been

either

son or a

contemporary

f

Spintharus,

ho is

also said

to

have

known

ocrates

ersonally.'

As

to

the

authenticityf thestorybout the ndian, nemayperhaps uspend urther

judgment

hile

onsidering

atters iscussed

elow.

It

is

true

that for

a time the Greeks

had

their

uperiority

omplex

s

regards

barbarians,

ut the

prejudice

eems

to have

developed

n

the

classical

eriod,

artly

s a

reaction

o the Persianwars.

In

the

earlier

ays

the

young

nd

tentative ivilization

f

Greece

musthave been

powerfully

impressed

y

the much

older

civilizations

round

t,

by

Egypt

f

not

by

Babylon.

Our traditions

ave

magnified

he

Greeks,

omewhat

s

they

ave

magnified

he

Israelites,

making

hem

ppearculturally

more

ndependentthanwe need o

suppose hey

were rcouldhavebeen.

The

history

f

Asia Minor

hroughout

illenniumss

a

bewildering

ix-

ture

f

migrations,

nvasions,

ars,

estructions,

nd

butcheries.

iewing

t

end-on,

s

we do

from

ur

more or less safe

distance,

ne

wondershow

there

was

anything

eft for

the

archaeologists

r

historians.

estruction,

however,

uries

s well as

burns;

he

rchaeologists

ave been ble

to

recover

far

more

han

might

ave

been

expected,

nd the

end

is

not

yet.

The more

progressive

men

declare

that

archaeology

s in

its

infancy.

Ancient

wars,

violent s theywere,were cultural atalysts;mercenaryroops n one side

and

enslaved

aptives

n

the

other

helped

n

the diffusion

f

ideas.

Out of

the welter

f

war

occasionally

great

mpire

was

formed

nd,

t

least

for

time,

ncouragement

as

given

to

the

arts of

peace.

Babylon

was

by

no

means

the boorishmonster hich

ome of

our

literature

uggests,

nd the

Lydian mpire

rom

he

eighth

o

the

sixth

entury,

s

a

great

ntermediary

between he

Orient nd the

Occident,10

as

apparently

ttractive

o

visitors.

Of

prime

mportance

was

the

Achaemenian

mpire,

beginning

with

7

Alcibiades

133c.

8

J.Bidez, os (Brussels:M.Hayez, 945), pp. 123ff.

'K.

von

Fritz,

Pythagorean

olitics

n

Southern

taly

(New

York:

Columbia

University

ress,

1940),

p.

28.

:0

G.

Radet,

La

Lydie

et le monde

grecque

(Paris:

Thorin

et

fils,

1893),

p.

270;

A.

Rey,

La

science

orientale

vant

es

Grecques

(Paris:

A.

Michel,

1942),

p.

21.




6/28

106

GEORGE

P. CONGER

Cyrus

,

who

captured

ardis

n

546

B.C.

nd

Babylon

n

539,

and

continuing

until

ts overthrow

y

Alexander he

Great

n

333.

In

its

great

days

the

empire f Darius I and Xerxesstretchedrom heIndusto theMediter-

ranean.

n

the

culptures

n the

taircase

t

Persepolis,

howing

he

procession

of

representatives

f

more

han

wenty

ations

ringing

ribute

o

the

Great

King,

some emissaries ear the tunic

f

Ionia,

some ead

the

two-humped

camel

of

Bactria,

nd some

the

humped

ull

of

India.

Except

forMarathon

and

the

later

battles,

he

empire

might

have includedGreece

tself,

s it

included he

Greek

cities

f

Ionia.

Heraclitus ived

n

the

Persian

Empire,

Xenophanes

was

born

here,

nd

there

were

ndians

n the

rmy

f

Xerxes.

The

general

policy

was one of

tolerance

f

local

institutions

nd

beliefs,

as long as therewereno revolts nd tributewas dulypaid. Fromearlier

times

herewas

a

road

of

sorts

rom

ran

to

Sardis;

he

Achaemenian

ings

made

it

the

Royal

Road,

a

great

highway

or

military

nd commercial

purposes

with

he nevitable

y-products

nd overtones

f

culture.

The

study

f commercial

elations,

articularly

s

revealed

y

rchaeology,

offers ome results

ignificant

or our

problem.

There

is now

widespread

agreement

hat rom emote imes

he

ncient ations

raded

with

ne another

much

morethanhas

usually

been

supposed.

We have

rated oo

highly

he

political

nd

linguisticarriers,

hich

fter

ll

were

semi-permeable

em-

branes.

Among

the notable

urprises

f recent

years

have been the ndica-

tions

hatthe

Indus

Valley

civilization

f

about

2500

B.C.

imported

ome

articles

rom

Mesopotamia,

nd vice

versa;

bjects

haracteristic

f

each area

have been

found

n

the

ruins f the

other.

n

the

Aegean

copper ge,

down

to

about 2400

B.C.,

there

was

lively

rade

n

the

Cyclades.'2

Crete

eems

to have been

an

emporium.

n

fact,

o

great ity

ike

Nineveh

or

Babylon

or

Miletus

could

have

grown

up

without ommerce orne

ndirectly

r

directlyy

and and sea.

A few tems fdetail re likestrawshowing ariousways nwhich he

trade

winds

blew.

The Chaldeans

n

the ninth

entury

re

said to

have

had

an

active

rade

with

ndia. 3

n

the

ighth

entury,

reek

ompetition

orced

even

the

roving

hoenicians

rom

he

Mediterranean. 4

ssurbanipal

n

the

seventh

entury

s said

to

have

sent

to

India

for

the

wool-bearing

ree,

which

we

know

as

cotton. l

At about the same time rice was known n

Mesopotamia. 6

n that

ame

century

hrygia

nd

Lydia

had

an

extensive

'

Herodotus,

ii.

65.

2

Encyclopaedia

ritannica,

4th

d.

(1942),

Vol.

X,

p.

754.

13 .Kennedy,Early ommercefBabylonwithndia, JournalftheRoyalAsiatic ociety

of

Great

ritain

nd

reland

1898),

pp.

246

ff.

Encyclopaedia

ritannica,

4th

d.,

Vol.

X,

p.

762.

'

Rawlinson,

ntercourse

etween

ndia nd

the

Western

orld,

p.

2

ff.

R.

C.

Thompson

n

raq,

VI

(1939),

182.




7/28

DID INDIA

INFLUENCE

EARLY GREEK

PHILOSOPHIES?

107

tradewith

he

East.17

n theruins f

Babylon,

ating

rom

he

ixth

entury,

the

excavators ound

eak

wood,

presumably

rom

India. s

An

inscription

of Darius , now n theLouvre, ays hathe brought oodfrom he Hindu

Kush

region

nd

ivory

rom

Abyssinia

nd

India.

Ships

of Darius

are

said

to have sailed

from

he

Nile

through

heRed

Sea to

Iran.'

A

marble

orso,

unmistakably

reek,

was

found t

Persepolis

nd is now

in

the Teheran

Museum.

By

this

time

Egypt,

which

for

centuries ad

been

closed

to

foreigners,

had

so farmodified

ts

policy

s to

invite

he

Greeks

o

make

a

settlement

in

the

Nile

Delta. The

important

rading

enter

Naucratis,

ignificantly

enough,

was a

colony

fMiletus.

t

continued

o

flourishntil bout

520

B.C.,

with emples o theGreekgodsshowing hat ifetherewas notwithoutts

intangibles.20

erodotus

ays

hat rom

Naucratis

he

Greeks

were

ransferred

to

Memphis.21

From

the fourth

entury

here

was a

temple

f

Isis

in

the

Peiraeus.22

aure

says

thatfrom 20

to

525

the

Greeks ould

go

to

India

freely.23

An

indication

f

widespread

Greek

commerce

ppears

n

the work of

Sir

Leonard

Wooley

at Al

Mina

in

northern

yria.

Here

was a commercial

port

withthe remains

f

buildings

o

stocked

with

Greek

pottery

hat

the

inference

s

that

they

were warehouses.

The dates

assigned

o

the

pottery

indicate,

oo,

that the

trade

between

Greece

and the

East

continued

ight

through

he

period

f

the

Persian

wars.24

Rice

was

known n

Greece

n the

time

f

Sophocles;25erhaps

epper

nd

mustard,oo,

were

on

Greek ables

in

thefifth

entury.26

Except

for

pottery

nd

its

fragments,

he

physical

emains f such com-

merce

re

scanty.

oubtless

much,

nd

perhaps

most,

raffic as

n

perishable

goods

such

as food

products,

ines,

ndtextiles.

n

one notable

espect

he

potsherds

hemselves

ive

indications

f

cultural

nfluences

rom

he

East;

this, bout700

B.c.,

is theshiftn Greecefrom heearlygeometricalype

of

decoration

o themore

mobile orientalized

esigns,

ith

reer

elineation

1

M.

Rostovtzef,

istory

f

the

Ancient

World

Oxford:

Clarendon

ress,

926),

Vol.

I,

p.

193.

De

Lacy

O'Leary,

ow

Greek

cience

assed o the

Arabs

London:

Routledge

nd

Kegan

Paul, 1948),

p.

97.

Cf.

J.

Horrell,

Sea Trade

n

Early

imes,

Antiquity,

V

(1941),

248.

1

W. W.

Hyde,

Ancient

reekMariners

New

York:

Oxford

niversity

ress,

947),

p.

176.

0

H. G.

Rawlinson,

istory

f

Ancient

gypt

Boston:

Cassino,

stes nd

Lauriat, 882),

Vol.

II,

pp.

480

ff.

'

Herodotus,

i.

154;

but

cf.

D.

H.

Gordon,

The Buddhist

rigins

f

the Sumerian'

eads

from

Memphis,

raq,

VI

(1939),

37.

'

P.

Foucart,

es

mystdres

'Eleusis

Paris:

A.

Picard, 914), p.

17.

' J.A. Faure, 'Agyptet espresocratiquesParis:Stock, 923), p. 21.

SC.

L.

Wooley,

Excavationst

Al

Mina,

Journal

f

Hellenic

tudies,

VIII

(1938), 13,

22.

'

Kennedy,

p.

cit.,

p.

268.

W. W.

Tarn,

The Greeks

n

Bactria

nd India

(Cambridge:

ambridge

niversity

ress,

1938),

pp.

365,

370.




8/28

108

GEORGE

P.

CONGER

of

animal

and

human

igures.27

t

has

been

suggested

hat

he new

designs

were

adapted

from

mported

extileswhich

re

now lost.

To

trace commerce etween

ncientnations

one need

not

depend

al-

together

n

material

ulture

aid bare

n

archaeology;

henumerous

nstances

known

n

comparative

hilology

n

which

oreign

ords

orvarious rticles

crop

out

in

language

after

anguage

ndicate hatthe articles

hus named

came

with he

words.

No

attempt

an

be made

hereto

go

into

the details

and the

controversies,

ut sometime ome

superphilologist

hould

bring

together

nto

one

picture

he words

which

n

one or

another

f

the various

languages

tand,

for

example,

for

almonds, loes,

apes, beryll,

amphor,

carpets,

assia,

chicory,

inger,

vory,myrrh, epper,

rice, tin,

and other

things.A specialcase appears n the word for kind ofwoolen

mantle.28

Beyond

he data

of

archaeology

nd

philology

like,

ne

must

dmit hat

various rticles

f

merchandise,

ith or without

ocuments,

re oftennot

lacking

n

suggestion

nd

may

well

come

trailing

deas

with

hem.

We

may

always

doubt

f

highly

developed

heories

bout

the

world

are

accurately

transmitted

y

untrained

men

along

the

trade

routes,

ut

stories,

egends,

and

myths

ass

current

verywhere;cythian

omads,

Phoenician

ailors

(from

he nationwhich

nvented

he

alphabet),

camel

drivers,

nd

peasants

of

all

lands

nd times ave

had

a kind f

gift

f

tongues.

Garbled

deasand

rudimentary

uggestions

asily

lipthrougho findodgmentnminds

apable

of

developing

hem.

III

It is

understood

hat

ndia,

ran,

nd

Greece

had a

common

eritage

rom

Aryan

days,

lthough

ust

whatthe

heritage

was

and

how

it

came to

them

are difficult

uestions.

At all events

we

may

nfer hat

omewhere

ack

n

human

prehistory

here

was

a

primeval

tage

in which

the cosmos was

regardeds vaguely live and as moreor lesssimilar oman'sbody, rcon-

sciousness,

r

mind,

r

thought,

r

word,

r

right

ction.

Instead f

mere

projections,

he

gods

of

polytheism

ay

have

been

so

many

rystallizations,

alternately

ormed

nd dissolved

ithin

uch matrix.

he

gods

re

regarded

as

being,

r

being

ike,

natural

bjects

nd

processes,

nd

sooner

r

later

s

being,

r

being

ike,

animals,

ertility

igures,

oodsubstances r

symbols,

ancestors,

nd heroes. Sometimes

hey mbody

r reflectthical

deals or

what

aterbecome

ogical principles.

When the curtain

egins

o

rise for

us,

the

Aryan

raditionseem

to

exhibit

ome of these

characteristics.he

J.

D.

Beazley

nd

D.

S.

Robertson

n

Cambridge

ncient

istory

New

York:

The Mac-

millan

ompany,

926),

Vol.

V,

pp.

582

ff.

'

J.

Przyluski,

L'Influence

'Iran

en

Grece

et dans

l'Inde,

Revue

de

l'Universite e

Bruxelles,

XXVII

(1932),

284.




9/28

DID

INDIA INFLUENCE EARLY

GREEK

PHILOSOPHIES?

109

heritage

n East and West

is

plainest

n the name

of the

sky god

Dyaus

Pitar

Zeus

Pater

Jupiter;

here

re

a fewother ndications

f

common

ancestral ulture nd institutions. or ourproblems hesedatamaywork

either

way--on

theone

hand,

making

atercultural ransmissions

asier,

and,

on

the other

hand,

making

hem

unnecessary.

t is easier

to

discern

common lements

or he

ndo-Iranian

roup

hanfor he

ess

closely

elated

Indo-European

amily

s a whole.

It

begins

o be clearthat he

ndians nd

Iranians

had

in

common,

or

example,

he

gods

Mitra

and

Yama,

the

use

of

the sacred

plant

haoma,

or

soma,

and some

duality

etween

ight rta,

arta)

and

wrong

drubh,

ruj).29

Dumezil's

detection f a

common

ocietal

structureeflected

n

various

mythologies

pplies

o

India

and

ran,

lthough

it is more vident n Romethan nGreecebefore hetimeofPlato. 3

IV

In

such a

quest

as

this,

ne

mustfollow

various

rails,

ot all

of

which

yield

appreciable

eturn.For

instance,

he law

codes

of

ancient

peoples

exhibit

ountless

imilarities,

ut it

is a

question

whether

much s

to

be

gained

here

by

comparisons.

n

any

early ociety

here re

only

about so

many

ules

o

observe

nd

only

bout o

many

rimeswhichmark

nfractions

oftherules. t isnot trangefmany rall primitiveeoples rrive tpretty

much he

same

standards.

nly

an

occasional

eculiarity

eed

be

noticed--

for a

well-known

xample,

he

fact hat

the

Buddhists,

ythagoreans,

nd

Empedocles 1

ll

forbade he

ating

f

beans.

Efforts

o

show

that

he

styles

f

early

rchitecture

nd

sculpture

f

ndia,

Iran,

Assyria,

gypt,

nd

Greece

are

variously

ntertwined

ay

offer

ome

suggestions

or

ur

study,

ut

now

seemto

yield

ittle ndication f

possible

communication.

omebody

had to

learn

to

substitutetone

columns

for

tree

runks

n

support

f

a

roof,

nd

perhaps omeGreekfirstawthedevicein

Egypt

r

elsewhere.

Egypt's

echniques

f

stonework

may

have

helped

the

Greeks,32

nd

elements f

ornamentation

ay

well

have

been

adopted

from

ther

ultures.

ut

the

flutings

f

a

column

r

thevolutes

f a

capital,

even

if

they

could

speak

with

onic

clarity,

might

not

convey

ny

great

ideas.

The famous

Gandhdra

culptures,

ith

their

Greek or

Roman in-

fluence,

re

by

everal

enturies

oo

recent or

ur

tudy.

It

is

plausible

o

suppose

hatthe

traditions

f

ancient

ndian

medicine,

J.Duchesne-Guillemin,

oroastre

Paris:

Maisonneuvet

Cie,

1948),

pp.

62

ff.

SeeG. Dumezil, 'hUritagendo-europen

a

ome Paris:Gallimard,949).

81H.

Diels,

ed. W.

Kranz,

Die

Fragmente

er

Vorsokratiker,

th

ed.

(Berlin:

Wiedmannsche

Verlagsbuchhandlung,951), Vol.

I,

p.

368,

Empedocles

141.

Diels's

fragments

re

hereafter

cited

y

uthors'

ames,

ith

etters

nd

numbers.

a

See

H.

Frankfort,

ylinder

eals

(London:

The

Macmillan

ompany,

939),

p.

308.




10/28

110 GEORGE

P.

CONGER

older

han

he

extant

exts,

ere

f

some nfluence

n

Greekmedicine.33

As

to

other

ranches

f

cience,

t

appears

hat

n ancient

ndia,

much

more

thannGreece,osmologyas an accessoryfreligiousituals.We shall

see

that

few

deas,

ike

hose

f

he

lementsnd

he

microcosm,

ay

ave

been

etached

nd

exported,

ut he ines

re

now

itherost

r

crossed

nd

cannot e

clearly

raced.

Whatever

ay

havebeen

hecase as

regards

reek

hilosophies,

here

is

no

doubt

f

foreign

nfluences

n

theGreek

eligion

r

religions.

t is

an

old

tradition

hat he

names or

the

Greek

gods

came

from

oreign

sources,34

nd

the

mysteries

f

Eleusis

ppear

t

this

istance

o havebeen

an

amalgam

fold cults

rom

he

north,ast,

nd

south. 3

he

Aristotelian

interpretationf thepre-Socraticsid not do justice o their eligious

interests.3

n all these ountries

he

religions

re

so

closely

elated

o the

philosophies

hat

we

eave

hem or onsideration

elow.

Also

closely

elated

o

the

philosophies

re

theworks

f the

poets.

No

Indian

r

ranian

ecular

oet

s

early

nough

r well

enough

nown o

be

of

help

o

us,

nd

most

f

he

arly oets

f

onia

nd

he

Cyclades,

lthough

they

may

well have

raveled

s

they

ang,

dd ittle

r

nothing

nusual

o

our

deas.

Above

ll

Greek

oets,

owever,

nd

whether

r not

he

was

synthetic,towershe

igure

eknow sHomer. ome fhim,t east,ppearso have

come

ither

rom

myrna

rfrom

hios,

n

or

just

off he

onian

oast.

He seems

o

have

known

ittle

f

any

egion

utside

onia,

buthe knew

in

and

other

merchandise

y

Sanskrit

ames.37

is Eastern

thiopians ay

have

been

ndians.3

n

his

poems

here

re trandslder

han

he

brilliant

Olympians;

ome

f

them eem o reach

ack

o

Indo-European

ays.

His

IOvbo-tg,

ccording

o

Cornford,

s a material

ontinuum,

live

and

divine,

identical

ith

he

primitive

ubstance

utof which

he

divinities

f

Greek

religionook hape.3 ackfindshat heHomeric ivine owersrenot

necessarilynthropomorphic

r

personal.

ear,

error, ar, trife,

rayer,

the

Graces,

umor,

nd

justice ppear

s

divinities.

he name

Zeus s

used

n several

enses,

ith

ifferent

egrees

nd

shades

f

meaning.

he

I

J.

Filliozat,

Le sommeil

t

les reves

elon

es medecinsndiens t les

physiologues

recs,

Journal

e

psychologie,

L

(1947),

338,

346.

Cf.

E.

Benveniste,'La

doctrine

m'dicale

des

indoeurop6ens,

evue

de

l'histoire

es

religions,

XXX

(1945),

5

If.

8

Herodotus,

i.

43, 49, 50;

Foucart,

p.

cit.,

.

18.

35Cf.

bid.,

Chap.

X.

8

H.

Cherniss,

Aristotle's

riticism

f

the

Pre-Socratic

hilosophy

Baltimore: Johns

Hopkins

Press,

1935),

p.

374;

W.

Jaeger,

The

Theology

of

the

Early

Greek

Philosophers

(Oxford:

Clarendonress, 947). The atter orks hereafterited sTheology.

7

Encyclopaedia

ritannica,

4th

d.,

Vol.

XII,

p.

185.

See

R. M.

Cook,

Ionia

and

Greece

in

the

Eighth

and Seventh Centuries

B.C.,

Journal

of

Hellenic

Studies,

LXVI

(1946),

86.

8

Odyssey

.

23

ff.;

Rawlinson,

ntercourse

etween

ndia

and

the

Western

World,

pp.

18

ff.

9

F. M.

Cornford,

rom

Religion

o

Philosophy

London:

E.

Arnold,

912),

pp.

x,

134.




11/28

DID

INDIA INFLUENCE EARLY

GREEK PHILOSOPHIES?

111

reservoir

f

divine

power

may

manifesttself

s

impersonal

Moira

or

as

personal

deities.40All this

serves

o recall the

incomplete ersonifications

of theRg Veda; there lso, nthedawnthegodsareforming.n Hinduism

to this

day

the

various

deities re

manifestations

f

the

one

Brahman,

nd

theword

Brahman,

ike

the

Greek

word

h50o-tg,

tems

rom

root

meaning

to

grow. 41

Jaeger

ays

that

n

Homer

there s

a

deep

sense of

harmony

between

man

and

nature;

ne

great

hythm

enetrates

he

moving

whole.42

Hesiod's

father as from

yme

n

Asia

Minor;

he

himselfived

n

Boeotia,

never far

from

he

sea which

framed

he

islands

and on its other side

washed the

Asian coast. His

fragments

ention he

Nile, Nineveh,

he

Scythians,

nd the

Ethiopians.43

o

one

supposes

hatHesiod's

gloomy

ut-

look reflectsnything riental;oppression nd poverty, articularlyor

peasants,

re

everywhere,

nd

may

even

suggest

ontrasts

etween

on-

temporary

nd

past

history.

numerationsnd

gradations

f

ages

of

history,

however,

re

more

significant;

esiod

has

five,

while

ndia and Iran

stop

with

our.44

As

in the

Rg

Veda

and

the

Homeric

oems,

Hesiod's

theogony

s

peopled

in

part

with

shadowy

bstractions,

any

of

them

certainly

re-Hellenic.45

His

gods

arose from he

elements 4;

e

could

see

divine

personalities

n

physical orces.47

rom

the

confused

medley

f

myth

e

broughtogetherinto

something

ike a

system

heold stories f

gods

and

goddesses,

with

theirnumerous

ffspring

nd

battles. t

is

not clear

that his

Cronus,

he

son who

rebelled

gainst

eus,

was

Chronos,

ime48;

t

is

somewhatmore

likely

hat Chronos s

Time

appears

n

the

Greek world n

the workof

Pherecydes.

ornford

etects

n

Hesiod the

conviction f a

magical

sym-

pathy

between

man and

nature49-something

hich t

about this

ime

was

being

ritualized

nd

exaggerated

n

the

Hindu

Brdhmanas,

ut no

one

supposes

hat

here

was

any

onnection.

Alongwiththepoets, omeof the tsevenages should be examined.

When

we

stop

to look at

it,

Solon's Know

thyself

tandsout

rather

strangely

gainst

he older

Greek nterestn

myths,

n

the

one

hand,

and

'

R. K.

Hack,

God in

Greek

hilosophy

o

theTime

of

Socrates

Princeton:

rinceton

ni-

versity

ress,

931),

pp.

6, 8, 10, 13,

35.

See S.

Radhakrishnan,

ndian

Philosophy,

ol.

I

(New

York:

The

Macmillan

ompany,

1922),

p.

163,

n.

1.

SW.

Jaeger,

aideia

New

York:

Oxford

niversity

ress,

945),

Vol.

,

p.

50.

*

Cook,

loc.

cit.

R.

Reitzensteinnd

H.

Schaeder,

tudien um

antiken

ynkretismus

us

Iran

und

Griechen-

land,

Studien er

Bibliothek

Warburg,

ol.

VII

(Leipzig

nd

Berlin:

Teubner,

926),

p.

65.

*

Oxford

lassical

ictionaryOxford:

Oxford

niversityress, 949), p. 670.Cornford,p. cit., . 39.

'

Jaeger,

heology,

.

12.

8

Encyclopaediaritannica,

1th

d.

(1910),

Vol.

XXIV,

p.

231;

Jaeger,

heology,

p.

68,

220,

n.

62.

'

Cornford,

p.

cit.,

.

170.




12/28

112

GEORGE

P.

CONGER

the

newer nterest

n

nature,

n

the other.

s the

great

maxim o

be

under-

stood

n

the

ight

of

the

age-long

ndian

emphasis

n

the nner ife? Did

Solon,

even

f

he did

not

see

Croesus

t

Sardis,

make

contact

here

r

else-

wherewith ome

vagrant

raditionromndia?

Pherecydes,

rom

he sland

of

Syros,

was a

contemporary

f Thales and

lived

at

Athens. Like

Thales,

he is

credited

with

the view that

the

first

principle

f

everything

s

water,50

ut

to a

greater

egree

han Thales

he

is still

within

he

ge

of

myth.

n his

theogony,

ime

(Chronos),

long

with

Zas

(Zeus)

and

Chthonie

GE, Earth),

existed

lways.5

amascius

n

the

sixth

century

.D.

reports

hat

Pherecydes

made

Time

the

parent

of

fire,

earth,

nd

water;

from

uch

elements arious

gods originated

nd

were

distributedna five-chambered

orld.52

These

and other

assages

may

point

n

various

irections.

gypt,

t

least

at

a

later

date,

correlated he elements nd

the

gods. 3

The

Chsandogya

Upanisad

has a

detailed

description

f

a

five-fold

orld.54

n

Iran,

five

elementswere

thought

f as

united

n

Zarvan,

or

Time,55

lthough,

gain,

the

ranian

doctrine

may

be later.

n

Pherecydes,

oo,

the notions f

Time

are

not

consistent;

fragment

hich omesfrom

Celsus via

Origen

makes

Chronos he

eader

f

an

army

n

an

old

war

between

ods

or

titans.

At

his

wedding

with

Chthonie,

ays

Pherecydes,

eus

presents

er

with

a robewhichhe has woven. The robe s

presumably

he

phenomenal

p-

pearance

f

things.

n

the

same

fragment

here

s also

an

obscure

eference

to an

allegory

f a

winged

ak

on

which

he

embroideredobewas

hung.57

Freeman

hinks hat

Pherecydes'

ention f titans

nd the

robe shows

he

influence

f

Orphism,58

which s

traditionally

ore

or

less

associated

with

his

career.

Diels's

third

ragment

omes

from

roclus,

erhaps

thousand

ears

fter

Pherecydes;

f

t

s authentic

t

contains he

germs

f

several

octrines

hich

made laterphilosophersamous. t saysthatZeus,whenaboutto create,

changed

nto

Eros,

because

by combining

he cosmosout

of

opposites

e

brought

t nto

harmony

nd

ove,

nd

sowed

ikeness

n

all

and

unity

xtend-

ing

through

ll

things.

This

is

hardly

n

Iranian

dualism,

lthough

t

is

an

instance

f

the

widespread

octrines

oncerning

pposites

which

ppear

n

the Greek

world,

erhaps

bout

the

time

f

Zoroaster.On

the

other

hand,

'

Diels,

Pherecydes

la.

*

Ibid.,

B

1.

5

Ibid.,

A

8.

Reitzenstein

nd

Schaeder,

p.

cit.,

.

75.

Chindogya panisad

I.

2-7.

1Wilhelm

Nestle,

Griechische

Weltanschauung

n

ihrer

Bedeutung

fir

die

Gegenwart

(Stuttgart:einrich . C. Hannsmann,946), p. 81.

Diels,

B

4.

MIbid.,

B 2.

K.

Freeman,

he

Pre-Socratic

hilosophers

Cambridge:

Harvard

University

ress, 946),

pp.

39 ff.




13/28

DID

INDIA INFLUENCE

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHIES?

113

if

t

s

authentic,

t

shows hat ater

re-Socratics

id

notneedto look

outside

the

Greek

heritage

or

uggestions

f some of their ardinal

eachings.

Hesiod and Pherecydesre on the threshold etweenmythologynd

philosophy.

hadowy

igures

loat n their

world,

worldwhich

s as

yet

hardly nalyzed

ut

s

beginning

o

be anatomized.

And

there

s

a trace f

empirical

aution-if,

as

Diogenes

tells

us,

Pherecydes

n his

Letter

o

Thales

really

wrote hathe did not

claim

to

have arrived

t

the

truth.

It

is often

held

thatOriental

nfluences

n

Greece

re to be

seen

n

the

doctrines

nd

practices

f the

Orphics;

he usual

argument

s that

Orphism

is

so

non-Greek

hat

t

musthave come from

utside,

nd

that t

has

so

many

features

n

commonwith

Oriental

aiths

nd

cults

that

t

musthave

comefrom hatdirection.59robablytcamewell before hesixth entury

B.c.,

bringing

ts

theogonic

myths

nd

mystery

ult

nto

Greece nd

blending

with

myths

nd

mysteries

lready

here.

t

can

be

traced

back

with some

confidenceo the

forests

f

Thrace

and

from

here,

llowing

for

modifica-

tions,

astward s far s

Phrygia.

n

both

places

t was

coarse

nd

orgiastic.

The

Greeks

pparently

efined

t,

abandoning

ts

more

gruesome

eatures,

for time

retaining

ts

primitiveheogonies,

nd

always

keeping omething

of its

enthusiasms

or

unionwith

he

deity

nd

hope

of

life

after

eath.

It

appears

o

have

been

developed

y

Onomacritus

t Athens

round he

year500 andinthebroaderGreekworld ohave nfluenced

ythagoras

nSouth

Italy.

Orphism

nd

Pythagoreanism

hade into

each

other;

some

of the

refinement

fthe

former

s what

we

know

s

the

atter.

A

majorquestion nvolving

ll

these

ultures

nd

a

number f

ndividual

philosophers

oncerns

he

origin

f

the beliefs

n

reincarnation

r

metem-

psychosis.

here are

traditions,

rguments,

nd

often

dherents

or

lmost

any

theory0--so

many

that

there

s

not

as

much

support

s

one

might

expect

or he

view

that

ndia

nfluenced

reece.

Knowledge f ndia ntheGreekworld ftheperiod ppears ohavebeen

scanty

nd

faulty.

Hecateusof

Miletus

mentioned he

ndus,

he

ndi,

and

the

Gandarii.6 Herodotus

was

more

concerned

ith

he

Egyptians

nd the

Persians,

whom he

had

visited,

han with

the

Indians,

whom

he

regarded

as

living

way

to

the East

at

the

extreme

ounds

f

human

habitation,

ext

to

the

great

desert.

For

some

of his

information

bout

them

he

depended

on

what

the

Persians

aid;

he

may

also

have

used the

work

of

Scylax.

He

called ndia

the

most

populous

atrapy

f

the

Persian

mpire.

He

reported

9

On

the

resemblances,

ee S.

Radhakrishnan,

astern

eligions

nd

Western

hought Ox-

ford:Clarendonress, 939), pp. 135ff.

'For

various

pinions,

ee, e.g.,

F.

Cumont,

ux

perpetua

Paris:

P.

Geuthner,

949),

pp.

408

ff.;

.

Rohde,

Psyche

London:

Kegan

Paul,

1925),

p.

346;

Jaeger,

heology, .

84;

Cornford

n

Cambridge

ncient

istory,

ol.

V,

p.

535.

'

Rawlinson,

ntercourseetween

ndia

nd

the Western

orld,

.

19.




14/28

114

GEORGE

P.

CONGER

that

omeof

the

ndians

werenomads nd

somewere

vegetarians,

hat

hey

had

a

hot

climate

nd

worecotton

arments.

ut he also

toldthe ale

about

ant-goldnd madethe famousmistakefcallingMitra goddess.62 tesias,

the

physician

o Artaxerxes

emnon,

ccompanied

im

on his

expedition

against

yrus

he

Younger

n

401.

In

his

Persica

e

presented

ome

fantastic

stories

bout

ndia,

vidently

ased

n

what hePersians old

him.

Xenophon

noted

hat

Cyrus

uled ver

ndia,

whose

king

was

verywealthy;

he

Persians

once

sentfor

he

king

o

arbitrate

dispute.

Xenophon's

mostnotable tate-

ment s that

he

Chaldean

mercenaries

ere

frequently

mployed y

ndia,63

buthiswork

s

notrenowned

or

ccuracy.

V

In

the

histories,

f not

the

history,

f

Western

philosophy

he three

Milesians ead

off.

They

come too

early

for

the

Achaemenian

mpire,

ut

belong

n

the

great ays

f

Miletus,

fter

he

Egyptian

haraoh

had allowed

the

city

to

found

Naucratis

n

the delta

as

a

commercial enter

for

the

Greeks.

t is

thus

asy

to credit he

traditionhat

Thales learned

geometry

from he

Egyptians,

ho

had

developed

heir and

measurements

s a

result

of

experiences

iththe

errant

Nile,64

lthough

hales,

as a

Greek,

would

naturally o on to moretheoretical eneralizations.

f

he predictedhe

eclipse

of

585,65

he

almost

certainly

ad

access

to

records

f

Babylonian

observations;

s a

Greek, oo,

he

wouldbe

likely

o

generalize

he

Babylonian

ideas

about numbers.

The

traditional

nterpretation

f his

teaching

bout

water calls

it

a

principle, orgetting

hat Thales is

hardly

ut of

the

age

of

myth.

n

Egypt

he

god

Rd

comes

from

Noun,66

he

primordial

abyss,

nd

the

symbol

or his

s

accompanied

y

the broken

r

wavy

ines

indicating

ater.67

n

Mesopotamia

water

s

regarded

s

primordial

nd the

gods

are descended

rom

t.68

ither

r

both

of

these

myths

ould

have

been

familiaro Thales,and served etter han thelodestoneo account orhis

dictum

hat ll

things

re

full of

gods.

Such

myths,

owever,

re

not

con-

fined

o these

neighbors

f

Miletus.

The

awe-fillingymnRg

Veda

X.

129

asks whether

t

the

beginning

f

things,

when

the

gods

did

not

yet

xist,

all

was

deep

unfathomable ater.

Several

passages

n

the

Upanisads

on-

tinue he

tradition.69

he Iliad and

the Book of

Genesis

arry

races

f

the

2

Herodotus,

.

131;

iii.

94-106.

'

Xenophon,

Cyropaedia

.

1.

4;

ii.

4.

8;

iii. 2.

25-27;

viii.

6.

21.

8

Herodotus,

i.

109.

SIbid.,

i.

74.

Faure, op. cit.,pp. 62, 146.

a

E.

Amblineau,

La

cosmogonie

de

Thales

et

les doctrines

e

'1gypte,

Revue

de

l'histoire

des

religions,

XII

(1910)

:

18,

23.

'

See

Encyclopaedia

ritannica,

4th

ed.,

Vol.

II,

pp.

860

ff.

Brhad4ranyakapanisad

. v.

1;

Chdndogya panisad

II.

x.

1; Aitareya panisad

.

i.

3;




15/28

DID

INDIA

INFLUENCE

EARLY

GREEK PHILOSOPHIES?

115

view,70 nd,

as we

said,

t is ascribed

o Thales'

contemporaryherecydes.

All

this

makes

any theory

f

specific

erivation

rbitrary;

hales'

theory

aboutprimordial ater ouldhavecome,notmerely romheMeander, ut

from

he

Nile,

the

Euphrates,

r even he ndus.

Anaximander

ived

in

the sixth

century,

he

century

n

which

some

authorities ate Zoroaster.

n

the

fragments

cosmic

duality

f

opposites

becomesmore

pronounced

han n

Pherecydes,

ut t is

hardly

oroastrian;

according

o

Anaximander,

oth

members

re

punished

nd

give

atisfaction,

and

the

characteristics

ndicated

hot

and

cold,

moist

nd

dry)

are not the

Zoroastrian

ight

and

darkness.The

punishment

nd

satisfaction

roceed

according

o

the

decree

of

Time,

but

we

cannotbe sure

that

the

Iranian

doctrinefZarvangoesback o thedays fZoroaster.t would eem, owever,

that

a

suggestion

f

duality

oming

from omewhere

as

beginning

o

be

developed

with

Greek

variations

n

the theme. Influence oes

not

mean

mere

mitation. he

Greeks,

o

be

Greeks,

must

have

shown

originality,

but

no

one but

n

extremisteeds

o

suppose

hat

n

their

world,

articularly

at

Miletus,

hey

were

ntirelyriginal.

Curiously

enough,

in

Anaximander's

ragments

here seems to

be

closer

resemblance

o

Indian than to

Iranian

thought.

The

unlimited -

which

is

not

to be thought f as an undifferentiatedass,or as mere

emptiness,

ut

as

a matrix f

everything

is

eternal

nd

ageless

and

encompasses

rTEPLE'XEi,

A

11)

all

the

worlds.

n

the

Rg

Veda,

among

many

other

views,

we

findthat

Aditi,

the

unbounded,

nlimited,

s

the

matrixfrom

which

all

the

gods

and all

the

world

originate.

In

the

Chandogya

Upanisad,

Jana regards

tman s

akafa,

he

boundless

ky,

ut

there re several

lternative

iews,

ncluding

hose

hat

Atman

s

water,

ind,

andearth.7

f,

s

Jaeger

maintains,

naximander

poke

f

his

first

rinciple

as

divine, 73

he

resemblanceo Indian

thought

s

still

closer.

In other ragmentsheres theunmistakablereek haracteristic,lmost

or

actually

he

beginning

f

that

pen-eyed

bservation

f

nature

which

ave

theMilesians

he

name

of

naturalists.

In

the

case

of

Anaximenes,

ragment

2

calls

for

special

attention-

Just

s

our soul

which

s air

holdsus

together

crvyKparTEE),

o

breath

nd

air

encompass

he whole

world.

Breath

nd

wind

(Vdyu),

if

not

air,

have

Katha

Upanisad

IV.

6. R.

E.

Hume,

The

Thirteen

Principal

Upanishads (Oxford:

Oxford

University

ress,

1921),

pp.

151, 256, 294,

354.

The

Upanisads

from

his

volume

are

hereafter

cited

by

names

and textual

references.

70o

liad

XIV.

201,

246;

Genesis

1:

2.

71Rg

Veda

I.

89. 10.

Radhakrishnan,

ndian

Philosophy,

Vol.

I,

p.

82,

says

thatAditi

corre-

sponds

to

Anaximander's

nfinite.

72

Chandogya

V. xiv.

1;

xvi.

1;

xvii.

1.

3

Jaeger,

heology,

p.

71.

A

close

reading

of

Aristotle,

hysica,

203b

13

ff.,

may

not

support

this

nterpretation.




16/28

116

GEORGE P.

CONGER

been

associated n Indian

thought

ver

since

the

Purusa

Sikta.74

The

Chandogya

panisad

has,

among

ts other

hypotheses,

he

view that

Atman

is

wind;

another

f

its

passages compares

he

macrocosmic

ind

to

the

microcosmic

reath.75

n the

Kausitaki

Upanisad

the cosmic

powers

are

declared

o

be

revertible

nto

wind,

and

an

individual's

owers

revertible

into

breath. 76

naximenes

may

also

be

set

in

striking

arallel

with the

Brhadaranyaka panisad- As

all

the

spokes

re

held

together

n

the hub

and

felly

f

a

wheel,

o in this

oul

all

things

..

all

breathing

hings

re

held

together.

f

the Greek

rvyKparEZ

s

translated

constrains,

nother

parallel

appears:

n

the

Upanisad

he

thread

y

which

ll

things,

ncluding

the

limbs

of

a

body,

re tied

together

s

said

to

be

wind,

which

n

Hindu

fashionsidentifiedith he InnerController. 77ubendeclareshat efore

the time

of

Anaximenes evenmen

in India

had

expressed

n

idea similar

to

that

f

the

fragment.7

We

must not

expect

too

much

clarity

r

consistency

rom

hese

stray

fragments;

oo

many

pieces

of

the

picture

uzzle

are

lost.

On

the other

hand,

we

mustnot

make

of Miletus ither cultural sland

or

a

miracle.

Some

of the

pieces

begin

o

ndicate

roader

orizons.

It

is

customary

o

consider

ythagoras

fter he

Milesians

and before

Heraclitus,

lthough

ncertaintiesbout

the

sources, ates,

nd content

f

the Pythagoreaneachings-reminiscentf some of the uncertaintiesn

Indian

philosophy--make

ny placement pen

to some

question.

t is

best

not to

attempt

o

distinguish

he so-called

eachings

f

Pythagoras

rom

those

of

the

Pythagoreans.

We assume

hat

here

was a

long

development

from

early

stages

n

South

Italy

under

Orphic

nfluence,

hrough

more

rational nd

theoretical

nterests,

specially

ith

Philolaus

nd other

ythag-

oreans f

Plato's

ime,

o

Plato and ater

writers.

Pythagoras

f

Samos

apparently

went

to

Crotona

and,

influenced

y

Orphism here, ounded communityhich, s mighthavebeenexpected

of

Greeks,

ecamemore nterested

han were the

myth-lovingrphics

n

problems

f

government,

athematics,

nd

philosophy.

The

community

influenced

mpedocles

f

Agrigentum

nd

perhaps

Parmenides

f Elea.

After

he

colony

was driven

rom

Crotona

because

of too much nterestn

government,

he uccessors

n

Greece

eveloped

ther

nterests,

oncentrating

on

theoretical

roblems,

eveloping

heir

amous

heories

f

numbers,

nd

on

the

religious

ide more

or less

amalgamating

ith the

local

mysteries.

Towardthe end

of

the

fifth

entury

heir

eachings

ttracted

hilolaus nd

Plato.

1Rg

Veda

X.

90.

13.

'

Chbidogya

V. iii.

1-3.

6

Kasqitaki

I.

12-13.

77

Brhaddranyaka

I.

v.

15;

III.

vii.

1-3.

8s

W.

Ruben,

ie

Philosophie

er

Upanishaden

Bern:

A

Francke,

947),

p.

168.




17/28

DID

INDIA INFLUENCE


117

Orphism

nd

Pythagoreanism

re

intertwined;

y

and

large,

however,

Orphism

s a

myth-loving

eligion,

while

Pythagoreanism

s a

religious

metaphysics.here s good room forthe thesis hatwhatever rientalism

is

found

mong

the

Pythagoreans

s second-hand

nd has come from he

Orphic

ide.

This

may

account orthe doctrine f

metempsychosis,

aid

to

have

been

taught

y

Pythagoras,

ithout

making

him

ourney

o India

to

get

it.

The

theory

f the five

lements,

ttributed

o

Philolaus,

ould

have

been

an

adaptation

rom

herecydes.

The

Pythagoreans

ad

a list

of

ten

pairs

of

cosmological

pposites,

ut

light

and

darkness,

which

might uggest

oroastrian

nfluence,

s

only

one of the

ten

pairs,

he

eighth

n

the

ist. 7

This is a marked eduction

n

rank, utwe mustnotoverlookhefact hathere, lso,opposition assome-

how become

mportant.

he

Pythagoreans

mphasized

pposites

n

their

an-

tastic

speculations

bout

odd and even

numbers,

he limited

nd the

unlimited,

nd

the

indeterminate

yad. 80

Plato's

doctrine f

deas,

lab-

orated

under

Pythagorean

nfluence,

howsthat n his

timethe

process

f

abstraction

as used

without

eing

understood.

pparently

t was not

under-

stood

by

the

Pythagoreans

ither,

nd

they

were tillmore t sea in

dealing

with

numbers

which,

s classes

of

classes,

nvolve

bstractions

f a

second

or

higher

rder.

Attempts

o

connect

he

Pythagorean

heories

bout

num-

berswith he

Sdrihkhya

numerationf theconstituentsfthe worldreflect

a

confusion,

ne

might

ay,

between ardinal

nd

ordinal

numbers. uch

attempts

re

farfetched--or,ather,

heir ata

could

hardly

ave

beenfetched

so far.

FromHeraclitus

many

raditions

ave been

recovered

nd

judgedworthy

to

be

called

fragments.

is

dates

re

roughly

rom

40

to

475;

he lived at

Ephesus,

n thePersian

mpire,

nd ived

hrough

he

onian

revolt,

n

which

neighboring

iletus

was

ruthlesslyestroyed.

t has

sometimes

een

held

thathisdescriptionf theprimaryealitys fire ndhisemphasisnopposi-

tion

may

have been due

to

Persian

nfluences,

ut

the

differences

re

so

great

hat

ny

transmission

ould

hardly

ave

been more han

suggestion.

His oft-noted

bscurity

eminds

ne

of the

ztras

f

the

ix

Hindu

systems;

one

could wish for

Heraclitus similar

ullness

nd

continuity

mong

the

commentators.eminiscentf

ndia,

oo,

s his

method;

e

sought

n

himself

and

found he oul

very

eep. 8

ike

a

Greek,

owever,

e

honors

most

hose

things

whichhe can learn

by

sight

nd

hearing,

lthough

he

is

cautiously

critical

f

both.82

7

See

Freeman,

p.

cit.,

p.

248.

s

Ibid.,

pp.

222,

230; Plato,

hilebus

5d,26d;

Aristotle,

etaphysica

081a

15,

1085b7.

'

Diels,

Heraclitus

45,

101.

82

Ibid.,

B

46,

55, 101a,

107.




18/28

118

GEORGE P.

CONGER

We

can

make

the

fragments

onsistent

nlyby

assuming

hat he

magery

shifts,

s

it

oftendoes

in

Indian

texts.

First,

here

s the fact

of

change,universal

lux;

Heraclituswas a

younger

ontemporary

f

Buddha,

who

taught

hat ll

the

constituents

f

being

re

transitory.83

nto

the amerivers

we

step

and do

not

step;

n

this

respect,

nd

in

a

way,

then,

we

are,

and

are

not.84

o,

any

one

tendency

r

property

ntails

ts

opposite.Opposition

is

characteristic

nd essential.

But for ll the

opposition

here s a

reciprocal

change, harmony,

n

encompassing nity;

he universe

lways

was,

and

is,

and

ever

hall

be,

an

ever-living

ire,

n which

here re fixedmeasures

kindling

nd

dying

ut.85

The chief xpressionf thisencompassingnitys thelogos. It is not

the

only

xpression,

owever,

nd the

word

s

used

n

different

enses.

Some-

times

t s the

general

haracteristic

r

property

f

things,ccording

o

which

everythingappens-in

the

non-psychological

ense,

he reason

hings

re

as

they

re-although

it

is

not

recognized

y

men.86

Again,

t is the

sense

or

reasonableness

ommon o

all

men,

by

which ll

ought

o

live.87

Once

it

seems

o be a

superficial

eature

r

effect

f currentvents- a

foolish

man

is

wont

o

be

in a flutter

t

every

ogos. 88

And

once

t

marks

he

character

of the

developing

r

growing

oul.8

here

s no

suggestion,

s

in

Babylonian

and

Egyptian

raditions,hatthe word s the

expression

r command f

a

divinity,

nd

no

echo

of the Vedic

voice

(vac). o

Any

connection

f

the

ogos

of

B

72

with

human

peech

f

B

73

is

hardly

ignificant.

In several

fragments

he

generalregulation

f the world

s indicated

y

words other

than

X6yo

-we

find

v/ol

,

,r

pa,

yvc/t4Pv,

and the

still

more

puzzling

-roov

or

a-

o-o6v.91

In B 41

the

latter

xpression

s often ranslateds

wisdom

nd inter-

preted

s

implying

uman

understanding,

ut

n B 112 thewordfor

human

wisdoms o-orl', andB 32 indicateshat

-o o-o0o'v

s more hanhuman,

cosmic

rinciple

willing

nd

unwilling

o

be

called

Zeus -i.e.,

sometimes

interpretable

n

personal

nd

again

in

impersonal

erms.

108 indicates

that

lthough

men

do

not understand

-ro46v

t is

a

thing

part.

B

78

de-

clares

that

the

human ethos

does

not

have

yva4at

but

that

the divine

does.

Can

T'

croo'dv

n

B

41,

then,

efer

ot

to human

wisdom,

ut to a

'

See

H.

C.

Warren,

uddhism

n

Translations

Cambridge:

Harvard

University,

896),

p.

109.

8

B

49a.

85

B

8, 30, 76,

111,

126.

S

B

1,

72.

wB

2. B 87. B 115.'

Cf.

W. F.

Albright,

rom

heStone

Age

to

Christianity

Baltimore:

ohns opkins

ress,

1940),

pp.

145

ff.;

J.

H.

Breasted,

he

Dawn

of

Conscience

New

York: Charles

cribner's

Sons,

933),

p.

37;

R.g

Veda

X.

125.

*

B

30, 41, 108,

114.




19/28

DID

INDIA

INFLUENCE


119

cosmic

rinciple

which

s

one?

The moreusual

nterpretation

ould

accom-

modate he

nfinitive,

to

know,

but,

f

there

s

no other

xplanation, er-

hapsthequotation,uite ikelymisunderstood,as garbledbyDiogenes.92

At all

events,

he

One Wise

cosmic

principle

ould

hardly

have

been

an

unfamiliar

oncept

n

the

empire

whichvenerated

hura

Mazda,

the

Wise

Lord,

nd

7-ob

o-o4v,

egarded

s

cosmic

nd

transcendent,

ow

personal

and now

impersonal,

s

surprisingly

imilar

o the

Hindu

Brahman,

with

its

quasi-personal

ttributes.

The

word

lwv in B

52

is sometimes

eld

to

reflectn

Orphic

nfluence,

but t

can be

translated

erely

s

an

age

and set

n

a

Heraclitean

ontrast

with

child--as

f

he had

said

that

thousand

ears

re a

day.

Xenophanes f Colophon,nearEphesusand Miletus, ivedat the time

of

the Persian

mpire,

ut

s

said to

have

eft

Asia

because

f

hostility

o

it.

His

denial of

anthropomorphic

olytheism

eads him

not

so

much to a

monotheism

s

to

a monism.

here s

one

God,

but the

one

God

is

not

ike

mortals

n

form

8it~/a)

or

thought.

od sees as a

whole,

hinks

Date post:	01-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	the-gathering
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

Conger, George P._did India Influence Early Greek Philosophies_Philosophy East and West, 2,...

Documents