are the re any similarities between Greek philosophy and Indian philosophy?

Answer 1

While the Western races crave for freedom even at the price of conflict, the Eastern stoop to peace even at price of subjection. That is the difference between the two cultures where as, so far as the philosophy is concerned; the Greek learnt a lot from India right from the presocratic days.

The Socratic dictum 'Knowledge is power' is derived from the Vedic dictum or Mahavakya 'Pragnyanam Brahmam'. The Platonic concept of Justice in his Republic as 'to do ones duty in his appointed station without meddling with others' is translation of the famous hymn in the Srimad Bhagvad Geeta, 'Swadharme Nidhanam Shreyah, Parodharmo Bhayavah'. The metaphor used in 'The Republic' is borrowed from the Kathopanishad. Pythagoras was believing in rebirth and transendence of human soul. He became a vegetarian and pleaded in its favour while in Italy and Greece. Monism is a Upanishadic Truth that was planted in the Western thought from India during the days of Buddha. Buddhism is post-Upanishadic in terms of time.

Greek art and culture, Roman law and organisation, Christian religion and ethics, and scientific enlightenment are said to be the moulding forces of modern civilisation. But it has evolved to this present form through a long period of superstition that happened when the West was severed from India. In the 13th century Emperor Frederick II had declared that "the world had been decieved by three impostors, Moses,Jesus and Mohammad". Machiavelli in his 'Prince' revived the old conception that religion is an instrument for keeping the people in subjection. Karl Marx put religion as opium for the people. The West has reflected these in its history of last 3200 years.

It all became different to-day, because the Truth as was understood from Indian classics lost continuity in the West. In India it is a continuous flow that is reflected in its faith, culture as well as history.

Answer 2

There are lots of similarities between ancient Greek Thought and the Indian philosophy. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, the famous Indian philosopher and professor in the Oxford University has written a separate chapter in his famous book 'Eastern Religions and the Western Thought' on the subject entitled "Greece, India and Palestine". He is of the view that the Greeks were very much influenced by the ancient wisdom of India, but later on with the growth of the Roman Empire the Greeks lost continuity with India and the stream of thought lost its course.

Answer 3

u r talking about 2 great cultures!But do u refere on greek-indian philosophy of today or of the past?Well in the past the Greeks and the Indians had no connection.However both philosophies were mystic.greek philosophy was more realistic and logical.the indian philosophy was more spiritual and had an element of sensuality!nowadays because of the globalisation many cultural elements have been transferred between the 2 cultures.now in greece we are doing yoga which is the practic part of the indian philosophy!of course as a greek i must admit that our philosophy is the best in the world(i m bit sovinist huh?!!!)

Answer 4

I'll assume so, even if vague, but I hope not,,,very specifically.

The question relates to different cultures, evolution, and dillution, or exploration over time.

Don't all cultures share SOME similar beliefs, attitudes, choices?

Also you don't state whether or not you want a comparison of ancient, or modern? Or compare one as modern to one as ancient?

The Greeks of antiquity had little knowledge of East Indians, if any, and the reverse is also true. It's a synergy that develops philosophies, as much as it is a very specific, defined, narrow, thought process.

Steven Wolf

Answer 5

don't know too much about the comparisons between Greek and Indian philosophy but there was a direct connection between Greek civilisation and India. after the death of Alexander the great, the Persian empire, which included Afghanistan and parts of northern India, fragmented into a number of fragmented kingdoms. one of these was the Hellenic Greek bactrian kingdom which included Afghanistan and northern India. the name of the city in Afghanistan, Kandahar, is a corruption of Alexandria. see this site. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactrian_Greeks

Answer 6

many times, the blend-up is between spirituality and faith! Even the category on YA mentions those jointly! Spirituality is experiential, the position as philosophy is conceptual. Spirituality relates to the 'being' (except body or concepts), philosophy is conceptual, and at concepts element, and is in holding with journey of self or others major distinction is about idea, spirituality is previous nature (no longer averting nature), philosophy .relates to perceptions at sensory element. Spirituality evolves with thoughts (many times, though it ought to ensue evidently also), practices, and so on, the position as philosophy does no longer want any technique. Spirituality humbles someone, the position as philosophy ought to develop the ego of someone, if no longer dealt with properly. Spirituality can't be communicated , philosophy should be communicated through discourses, lectures, media and so on. Spirituality can't be surpassed over to someone, no longer even the subsequent era as an journey, each has to conform into it through oneself, each of ways. Philosophy should be documented and preserved for posterity. Spirituality isn't depending on any faith. Religions if right preached, can initiate someone into religious direction also. it really is meant to guide in direction of spirituality. Philosophy should be non secular too, advocating the recommendations of a particular faith, its sub divisions and so on (operating example, the dwaita, adwaita, vishista adwaita are different philosophies inspired through historic non secular leaders/saints in Hinduism.) and so on...

Answer 7

Several of the pre-socratic Greek philosophers were in essential agreement with the core philosophical beliefs of the Advaita Vedanta school of Indian philosophy, which is generally regarded as one of the strongest of the Indian philosophical systems of thought.

In particular, the Vedantins hold that there is but One Reality, and that everything else that appears to exist seperately from that Reality is an illusion. That Reality is called Brahman in Vedanta. Ramana Maharshi put it this way:

The world is illusory.
Brahman alone is real.
Brahman is the world.

(That is quoted from memory, the words might be slightly off, but it is essentially what he said.)

What this means is that the world, all that appears, really is the One Reality, or Brahman, and that insofar as the world appears to exist as a collection of independently existing things, that is all an illusion. Shankara also argued that there is nothing within us, so to speak, that is other than Brahman. The soul is really Brahman, just as everything else is.

Several of the pre-socratic Greeks held this exact same view. Beginning with Parmenides who founded the Eleatic School, and followed by thinkers such as Zeno (Zeno's paradoxes), and Melissus. Their view was essentially that Existence alone is real, and that everything that appears to have a kind of independent existence from Existence itself is an illusion. Everything ultimately is One, and multiplicity and change are illusory. Zeno's paradoxes were an excellent attempt to demonstrate that even though change apparently exists, it cannot truly exist if one assumes things have independent real existence from Existence itself.

In many regards, Zeno's paradoxes are stunningly similar to the works of the great early Indian Buddhist philosophy, Nagarjuna, who argued something very similar, only with more sophistication (perhaps because we have much more of his works than we do of Zeno's). Nagarjuna argues that one cannot find any trace of independent, or inherent, existence in anything whatsoever. His works dealing with the illusory nature of motion are very similar, in many regards, with what Zeno was saying. The implication being, the world of multiplicity and change are illusory.

Furthermore, the pre-socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus argued that the nature of everything is change. This is very similar to Buddhist ideas concerning the nature of Emptiness, though perhaps more in line with non-Indian forms of Buddhism, such as Zen.

The neoplatonists, particular Plotinus, also held amazingly similar ideas to Hindu and Buddhist philosophies, perhaps more so than the pre-socratics. Plotinus, like the schools before him, held that Reality is One, and went into this subject in great detail. He went further than he predecessors in suggesting that nothing can truly ever be said of the One, because it transcends all dualistic conceptions, which is a view held by the Advaitins directly, and indirectly by the Buddhists. His theories concerning a "great chain of being" were also held in great similarity by many Indian schools of thought -- one such philosopher that comes to mind would be Aurobindo.

I'm sure there is much more, but I'll stop there, hope this helped!

Answer 8

both talk nonsense. just follow wht ur heart says