From: ravichaudhary2000
Message: 16369
Date: 2002-10-17
--- In cybalist@..., jpisc98357@... wrote:
In a message dated 10/17/02 12:18:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
richard.wordingham@... writes:
Dear Richard Wordingham,
When I received the email from Indian Civilization I thought it
interesting enough concerning the
history of Europe that it would not hurt to pass it along to my
friends who might find it interesting.
There may indeed be errors in the chronology or the facts presented,
I have not read nor tried to
document independently the original work.
Language must always be studied in historical context. This is
the first work that I have seen on the
subject of the Christianization of Europe. I suspect that there were
some effects on the language
because of this historical process.
. John Piscopo
My first reaction too was that this was off topic, but I can see
where John is coming
from.( I have no comment on the accuracy or relevance of the post
itself).
I had posted an excerpt from two books two very well known
historians, R C Majumdar,
and H C Raychaudhari on the Indian Civilization List, and reproduce
it here.( both of
which I would recommend highly as being of excellent scholarship and
invaluable to
someone seeking a knowledge of the history of the subcontinent)
They draw attention to the Interaction of the Indians and the
Greeks form the time of
Pythagoras( 6th century BC),
This is also the generally accepted time of the Grammarian Panini,
who contributions to
the science of language and grammar need no explanation..
I too had thought the evolution and spread of languages cannot be
done without a
historical context, however as this is a technical language list, I
hesitated, wondering if
this is off topic.
On refection, I think List members may find it interesting.
One question I would like to see answered is how the Greek, Latin and
their structure
evolved, and what part the interaction with the Indic Grammarians
contributed?
Ravi
This is a longish post, but may be of interest in some current
threads. I have extracted some paragraphs from two historians on the
interaction of the religious and philosophical ideas between India
and West Asia, including the Greeks.
Ravi
In History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. II - The Age of
Imperial unity, PP 683.R.C Majumdar, writes
" The influence of Indian religion in the Western Countries cannot
be
doubted.
It has been claimed that Indian Philosophy exercised a certain
influence upon Greek Philosophy (Cambridge Ancient History, XH,
112).
Clement of Alexandria even went so far as to say that the
Greeks 'stole their philosophy from the barbarians'. Sir William
Jones was the first to point out that the analogies between the
Sankya system and the Phythagorean philosophy. Phythagoras lived in
the latter half of the sixth century BC.
Rawlinson has drawn our attention to a statement of Eusebius, which
runs as follows: Aristoxenus, the musician, tells the following
story. One of the men met Socrates at Athens and asked him what was
the scope of his philosophy.' An enquiry into human phenomena'
relied
Socrates. At this the Indian bursts out laughing. ' How can a man
enquire into human phenomena' he exclaimed, ' when he ignorant of
divine ones'? Aristoxenus was a pupil of Aristotle and lived in 330
BC
. Phythagoras -. Schroeder (Phythagoras und die Inder (Leipzig 1884)
has pointed out, not one or two chance ideas, but almost all of the
doctrines ascribed to Phythagoras, both religio - philosophical and
mathematical were current in India. As the most important of them
appear in Phythagoras without connection or explanatory background,
whilst in India they are rendered comprehensible by the intellectual
life of the times, Schroeder definitely pronounces India to be the
birthplace of the ideas. The same view was emphatically asserted by
Colebrooke (Miscellaneous Essays2nd EdI, 436-37) and is shared by
Garbe (Richard Garbe: Philosophy of Ancient India (Chicago 1897)).
The last named scholar has further pointed out the numerous
coincidences between Indian and Greek philosophy. He has referred to
the most striking resemblance between the doctrine of the One in the
Upanishads and the philosophy of the Eleatics, and between the
theory
of Thales, the father of Greek philosophy, that everything spring
from water, and the Vedic idea of the primeval water out of which
the
Universe evolved. He also traced the fundamental ideas of the Sankya
philosophy among the Greek Philosophers such as Anaximander,
Heracltius, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Democritus and Epicurus.
It has been argued that these resemblances do not necessarily
indicate Indian influences, for it is possible for that the Greeks
and Indians reached similar conclusions independently of each other.
But the same argument cannot be urged in the cases of similar
resemblances in some mystery cults and teaching of Phythagoras and
Plato. Foe these show a great departure from the Greek tradition of
rationalism and humanism. In mystery cult associated with Orpheus,
faith in the immortality of the souls is a cardinal feature, and the
idea of transmigration is fully worked out, the wheel of birth going
on until the Soul escapes from it by attaining release." Orphic
religion is different from the anthropomorphic worship of the
Greeks,
and Orphic cosmogony and eschatology are foreign to the Greek." But
Professor Burnett has shown that it has some striking resemblances
to
the beliefs prevailing in India about the same time such as rebirth,
the immortality and godlike character of the soul, the bondage of
the
soul in the body and the possibility of release by purification. If
we add to them metaphors like the wheel of birth and the world egg,
the Indian influence seems to be the only reasonable explanation.
For
it is difficult to explain all these resemblances in doctrines novel
in the Greek world as due to mere coincidence."
Here was a close analogy between these mystic cults and the
doctrines
of Phythagoras, who lived in the second half of the sixth century
BC.
He enjoined asceticism and abstention form meat, believed in re-
births and is said to have remembered his previous births.
The mystic tradition finds its full expression in Plato (427- 3547
BC). Attention may be drawn to a few characteristics of his
doctrines:
1. Truth cannot be proved. It appeals to whole nature of man and not
simply to the intellect.
2. The Soul is unperceived, simple, indissoluble, immortal, and has
been many times reborn. It is purified by these rebirths and
ultimately escapes when completely purified.
3. Body is a fetter to which we are chained and we must look forward
to a future world in which we will be freed from the body.
All these and many things more are fundamentally opposed to the
Greek
sprit, which was more, concerned with all that pleased the senses
and
satisfied the emotions.
Lassen denies Indian influence upon Greek philosophy in the pre
Christian period. He however adopts it for Christian Gnosticism and
Neo-Platonism (Indische Alterthumskunde III 379). Barthelemy Saint
Hallaire (Premier Memoire sur le Sankya (Paris 1852) PP 512 -22),
has
traced the ideas of Sankya philosophy in Plato (427 BC), and
believes
that the analogies are too numerous to be explained away as mere
coincidences. Professor Weber has traced the influence of the Indian
conception of 'vach' upon the idea of the Logos which appears in Neo-
Platonism and passed from there into the Gospel of St John (Indische
Studien IX). Garbe has pointed out that the conception of Logos did
not first appear in Neo-Platonism, but may be traced through Philo
and the Stoics ultimately to Heracltius. This corroborates the view,
noted above, of Heraclitus's indebtedness to Indian Philosophical
views.
We have also very interesting evidence that the brahminical religion
prevailed in western Asia. According to the Syrian writer Zenob
there
was an Indian Colony in the canton of Taron on the Upper Euphrates,
to the West of Lake Van, as early as the second century BC (ref -
JRAS 1904,P 309). The Indians built there two temples containing
images of Gods about 18 and 22 ft high. When, about 304 St Gregory
came to destroy those temples; he was strongly opposed by the
Indians. But he defeated them and smashed the images, thus
anticipating the iconastic zeal of Mahmud of Ghazni.
The facts stated above leave no doubt that when Christianity arose,
Indian culture and religion were already an important factor in the
region of its early activity. Thus resemblances between the internal
arrangements of the Christian Church and a Buddhist Chaitya hall,
the
rigorous asceticism pursued by some early Christian sects such as
Thebald monasticism, metempsychosis, relic worship and the use of
the
rosary might all have been borrowed by Christianity from Indian
religious ideas. There is hardly any doubt that the Gnostics were
profoundly influenced by Indian Ideas. It is also a well-known fact
that several religious leaders in the West took the name of Buddha
(ref Priaux, p 174. According to Archelaos (AD 278) Terebinthus
declared himself to be a new Buddha (Mccrindle Anc. Ind. 185), and
that Gautham Buddha under the Title of St. Josephat, is still
recognized as a Christian Saint.
We may conclude India did, as many believe, lead an isolated life,
but maintained a close and intimate contact with the great
civilizations of the West through trade and commerce. This led to
cultural, and occasionally even political relations, which began in
hoary antiquity and continued right upto the middle of the first
millennium of the Christian era and perhaps even later still."
In " Political History of India" 7th edition with commentary, OUP,
New Delhi, PP 542 HC Raychaudhari, writes:
There are unmistakable traces of Buddhist influence on the Manichean
religion.
Mani, the founder of the religion, who was born in AD 215 -16, at
Ctesiphon in Babylonia and began to preach his Gospel In AD 242
shows
unmistakable traces of Buddhist influence. In his book Shaburquan
(Shapurakhan) he speaks of the Buddha as a messenger of God. Legge
and Elliot refer to a Manichean treatise that the form of a Buddhist
Sutra. It speaks of Mani as the Tathagata and mentions Buddha and
Bodhisattava.
Sir Charles Elliot (Hinduism and Buddhism III, 3) points out the
close resemblance between certain Manichean works and the Buddhist
Suttas and the Patimokka, and says according to Cyril of Jerusalem,
the Manichean scriptures were written by one Scytianus and revised
by
his disciple Terebinthus who changed his name to Budas".
"Terebinthus proclaimed himself learned in all the wisdom of the
Egyptians and gave out that his name was no linger Terebinthus but
that he was a Buddha (Budas) and he was born of a virgin.
Terebinthus
was the disciple of Scythanius, who was a Saracen born in Palestine
and who traded with India." Mccrindle, Ancient India as described in
Classical Literature.
He concludes "
Whatever the case may be in the present day, in times gone by,
Western Asia, was clearly not altogether outside the sphere of the
intellectual and spiritual conquests of Buddhism