On the idea of intercultural idea of Eastern influences, E. F. Beall has a page
on Aristotle interpretation of Milesian school (Thales, Anaximander, and
Anaximenes) as possible historical precursors from the Orient. (01)
http://philosophy.efbeall.net/philosophyindex.htm (02)
As he says, mid-20th scholars began to notice that ancient texts from places
like India contained statements, somewhat philosophical in nature that
resembled those of early Greek thought (insofar as it is attested by Aristotle,
who is the only source for some this attesting). (03)
Martin West took this approach in a 1971 book. (04)
Beall has an article on Charles Kahn's 1979 book The Art and thought of
Heraclitus, discussing the idea that Heraclitus used syntactical ambiguity as a
means to enhance the import of his sayings. His paper argues that there is a
comparable example in an ancient Sanskrit text that was composed in the general
era of the early Presocratics. (05)
The following is a snipptet from (06)
The Mediterranean and Asia: A History of their Intercultural Encounters and (07)
Related Issues in Comparative Philosophy, by Lenart Skof (08)
...it gives some of the flavor of the Indian writings (09)
....Some comparisons between Ancient Indian and Greek philosophies: Rigveda and
Hesiod (010)
The 129th hymn of the 10th book of the Rigveda (Riksamhita), which can be dated
to the Middle Vedic period (1200-850 BC, the period followed by the first
Upanishads), provides probably the first philosophical evidence for the general
question of the origin of the existent. It also provides evidence for the
question of the First and concomitantly, in the flow of the existent and
non-existent, the continually preserving principle of all the living and
non-living world. Together with other 'philosophical' Rigvedic hymns (10,
81-82; 10, 121, etc.), the hymn is an expression of the wish of ancient Vedic
Indians to approach that which stands at the beginning of the world, enabling
gods and people to come into being in this world and the world to preserve
itself from day to day. Analogous to the development of Greek philosophy
(Parmenides, Plato, Aristotle), within the framework of Indian philosophy, the
'first' philosophers can be recognised in the most important Upanishadic (and
generally the first philosophical) thinkers: Raikva, Shandilya, Uddalaka Aruni,
Yajñavalkya and others (Uddalaka Aruni and Yajñavalkya, the central thinkers of
the Upanishads, probably lived in the 8th /7th century. Ruben10 categorises
them as the third generation of Upanishadic philosophers who lived in late 7th
century, at least a century before Thales). Nevertheless, the pre-Upanishadic
period with its Rigvedic hymns bears crucial importance in relation to the
question about and the definition of the beginnings of philosophical
questioning. (011)
Apart from Rigvedic hymn 10, 121, one that describes the birth of the world
from a golden embryo/egg (hiranyagarbha) and cosmic waters, the Rigvedic (RV)
hymn 'Nasadasiya' (RV 10, 129) is the most important and most frequently
translated hymn of the Riksamhita. The hymn can be divided into two parts: the
first talks about the beginning of the world (10, 129, 1-4ab), while the second
(4cd-7) describes the created world, a world populated by gods and poets who
explain the new reality. The key stanzas remain the first and second, in which
a Vedic poet wonders about what was there before the 'beginning' of this world.
It questioned: what/how was it then when nothing yet existed? (v.1a: "Then was
not non-existent nor existent"11 ). "No sign was there, the day's and night's
divider" (v. 2b) - in manifold ways the answer is hidden in the mysterious
language used, which nevertheless anticipates the philosophical nature of the
question about the beginning. In the introductory lines, the poet removes
himself from the mythological content, as gods came into being only later: "The
Gods are later than this world's production" (v. 6c). Hence, the beginning is
described as a state in which only the indivisible One is present ('tad ekam';
cf. Gr. 'to hén'). In the absence of any sign of life (there is no death, no
human element, no immortality, no divine), the One breathes by itself: "That
One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature" (v. 2c). The One is neither
existent nor non-existent. If the non-existent had existed at the beginning, it
would have already predetermined the existent, the time and space. The only
thing that 'is', can, beyond this dichotomy, be understood as the enigmatic and
mysterious primal void, embracing all possibilities before the creation of the
world: "All that existed then was void and formless" (v. 3c). In light of the
third and fourth stanzas, the first two describe the creation process of the
world and life: what is necessary is desire (kama), the ground principle of the
creation of the world in this cosmogony: "Thereafter rose Desire in the
beginning, Desire, the primal seed and germ of Spirit" (4ab). Before desire,
there is the spirit. Thus, the 'spiritual' - according to the majority of
interpreters (including the most important Indian commentator, Sayana) -
becomes the first recognisable sign of the life of the One. V. 4b contains a
genitive structure that allows the possibility of the opposite interpretation -
that the thought was born from love or desire. 'Kama' (desire or love) can be
compared to Hesiod's 'éros' and is the principle that provides the origin from
which life is born. Deussen contrasted 'kama' (and the later desire to exist -
'trishna') with the Greek expressions 'éros' and 'epithymía' (cf. Aristotle,
Met. 984b23).12 An even more significant comparison is offered by Hesiod (lines
116-125) in the Theogony: his Chaos can be juxtaposed with the Vedic conception
of the beginning, devoid of the existent and the non-existent. Already West
points out a selection of Rigveda hymns (in particular 10, 72. 90. 129. 190)
that can be - together with the other theogonic literature of the ancient world
- compared to Hesiod's Theogony.13 In a comparative sense and within the
framework of the philosophy of the beginning, Hesiod has, to a significant
extent, shifted from ancient mythology to an entirely new question of the
cosmological or cosmogonical 'void' and pre-creation state. He is, more than
the Indian poet, formally and comparatively compelled to expressive forms of
the mythological language. Nevertheless, his Chaos can be understood as a
singular philosophical epoché, a shift to the state before the creation of the
celestial and terrestrial worlds: "Verily first of all did Chaos come into
being, and then broad-bosomed Gaia [earth], a firm seat of all things for ever
(...) and Eros, who is fairest among immortal gods."14 Chaos belongs neither to
the order of being nor to the order of non-being. It is a "qualitative void"15
of the philosophy of the beginning. As such, it is comparable to the
fundamental question of the Vedic thinker. The Vedic hymn also describes the
initial 'qualitative void', that is neither existence nor non-existence. Just
like the Vedic poet, Hesiod does not answer the question of whether something
had been there before Chaos: Chaos is simply referred to as 'came to be'
(génet'). (012)
Gary Berg-Cross
Potomac, MD (013)
________________________________ (014)
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of John F. Sowa
Sent: Fri 6/22/2007 11:50 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Cause and chemical reactions (015)
Paola, (016)
There is something to that, because the silk route from China
to Europe carried sages and soldiers as well as merchants: (017)
> Aristotle's intuition and knowledge are indeed based on older stuff,
> possibly knowledge coming from the ancient vedic civilizations. (018)
Both Plato and Aristotle discuss Heraclitus, who was almost two
centuries older and who lived in the Greek colonies in Anatolia,
on the trading routes from the east (and on the routes over which
the Persians and Greeks marched their soldiers). (019)
It's interesting that Heraclitus was a near contemporary with
Gautama Buddha in India and Lao Tzu (the founder of Taoism)
in China. Various commentators have observed some remarkable
similarities in their writings. It's not clear who influenced
whom or what the older sources might have been. (020)
Pythagoras was slightly older than Heraclitus, and he was another
strong influence on both Plato and Aristotle. In his youth, he
went to Egypt, where he was trained and inducted into the Egyptian
priesthood. Pythagoras is also said to have visited Babylon to
learn their mathematics before going to the Greek colony of Croton
(on the Mediterranean, as opposed to my home in Croton on Hudson). (021)
So there was definitely a flow of ideas from older civilizations
to the Greeks. (022)
> Indeed Greek language has roots in Sanskrit... (023)
More precisely, Greek and Sanskrit both evolved from the older
Proto-IndoEuropean. And actually, Sanskrit is slightly closer
to the Balto-Slavic languages than it is to Greek. (024)
> the word aitia comes from adya, Sanskrit for primordial,
> original, beginning (025)
I just checked the Liddell and Scott Greek dictionary, and the
adjective form, aitios -on, -a, meant 'culpable' or 'responsible'. (026)
The noun 'ho aitios' meant 'the accused' or 'the culprit'. (027)
The noun 'to aition', plural 'aitia', acquired the meaning 'cause'. (028)
By the way, the adoption of legal terms in Greek philosophy was
common. The word 'kategoria' originally meant an accusation in
a court of law. Aristotle adopted it in the more general sense
of what is said or predicated of anything. (029)
The major reason why Greek legal terms moved into philosophy is
that the ancient Greeks has as many law suits as modern Americans.
But unlike Americans, the Greeks required the plaintiff and the
accused to plead their own case in court. So the sophists earned
their money by training people how to plead their case. (030)
That's why Plato condemned the sophists for "making the weaker
case seem to be the stronger". But that's exactly what lawyers
try to do today. (031)
John (032)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (033)
<<winmail.dat>>
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01)
|