On The Connexion Between Indian and Greek Philosophy

Hegeler Institute
ON THE CONNEXION BETWEEN INDIAN AND GREEK PHILOSOPHY

Author(s): Richard Garbe
Source: The Monist, Vol. 4, No. 2 (January, 1894), pp. 176-193
Published by: Hegeler Institute
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27897134
Accessed: 16-06-2015 07:59 UTC
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 support@jstor.org.
Hegeler Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Monist.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 151.100.161.41 on Tue, 16 Jun 2015 07:59:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ONTHE CONNEXION
BETWEENINDIAN
AND
GREEKPHILOSOPHY.*
I enter upon the discussion of the questions forwhich
TJEFORE
U
I have the honor of asking your kind attention, I think it neces
doctrines of Ancient
sary to sketch briefly the two philosophical
India which principally come into consideration formy purpose.
In the earliest philosophical works of India, in the oldest Upani
shads, we meet with an idealistic monism which later acquires the
name of Ved?nta.
It is true, those works abound in reflexions on
ritualistic, and other matters, but all these reflexions
theological,
are utterly eclipsed by the doctrine of th? Eternal-One,
the Atman
or
Brahman.
The
word
Atman
originally
meant
"breathing,"
vital principle,"
"the Self";
but soon itwas used to
one
the
Intransient
is
which
without
any attribute or quality?
signify
the All-Soul, the Soul of theWorld,
the Thing-in-Itself, or whatever
on
to
translate
it.
the other hand, originally " the
like
Brahman
you
a term- for the power which is inherent in every
prayer," became
then "the
prayer and holy action, and at last for the eternal, boundless power
which is the basis of everything existing. Having attained this stage
of development, the word Brahman became completely synonymous
with Atman.
The
and the subjective Atman

objective Brahman
into
the
idea ; and this
one,
amalgamated
highest metaphysical
the
doctrine
the
of
of
the subject and
amalgamation
comprises
unity
In numerous parables the Upanishads
the object.
try to describe
*An
Auxiliary
address
delivered
at Chicago,
before
the Philological
Congress
of
theWorld's
Fair
July 12, 1893.
THE
the nature
INDIAN
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
of Brahman,
but all
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
IJJ
their reflexions culminate
in one
: the inmost Self of the individual being
point
power
pervading
{tat
tvam
art
"thou
asi,
is one with
that all
That").
the contradiction of Kapila,

spiritual monism challenged
the founder of the Sa;;/khya philosophy, who, in a rationalistic way,
saw only the diversity, but not the unity of the universe. The S?/;/
This
en
oldest real system of Indian philosophy?is
khya doctrine?the
Two things are admitted, both eternal and ever
tirely dualistic.
in
innermost character totally different ; namely,
but
their
lasting,
matter and soul, or better a boundless plurality of individual souls.
The existence of the creator and ruler of the universe is denied.
The world develops according to certain laws out of primitive matter,
first produces those subtile substances of which the internal
which
organs of all creatures are formed, and after that brings forth the
At the end of a period of the universe the products
gross matter.
dissolve by r?trogradation into primitive matter ; and this continual
cycle of evolution, existence, and dissolution has neither beginning
nor end. The psychology of this interesting system is of special im
All the functions which ordinarily we denote as psychic,
portance.
sensation, thinking, willing, etc., according to the
doctrine, are merely mechanical
processes of the internal
i. e., perception,
S?wkhya
that is, of matter.
organs,
it were
not
for the
soul
which
These
"
would
illuminates
remain
"
them,
unconscious,
i. e., makes
if
them
other object is accomplished

Soul is per
by soul.
not
the
of
vehicle
moral re
fectly indifferent. and, therefore, also,
This office is assumed by the subtile or internal body,
sponsibility.
which is chiefly formed of the inner organs and the senses, and which
conscious.
No
the soul. This internal body accompanies

soul from one
into another, and is, therefore, the real principle of metem
to teach
It is the object of the S?wkhya philosophy
psychosis.
to
distinction
know the absolute
between soul and matter in
people
surrounds
existence
itsmost subtile modifications, as it appears in the inner organs.

A
man has attained the highest aim of human exertion, if this distinc
tion is perfectly clear to him : discriminative knowledge delivers
soul from the misery of the endless flow of existence
the necessity of being born again.
The
and abolishes
Sa/z/khya philosophy
is al
THE
178
MONIST.
ready saturated with that pessimism which

the outcome of this system.
Buddhism,
has put
its stamp
on
the following reflexions it is necessary to bear inmind that

of the Upanishads
and the S?wkhya philosophy had
both spread through Northern India before the middle of the sixth
For
the Ved?nta
century before Christ.

The coincidences between
dian
systems
became
philosophy are so
immediately after the In
Indian and Greek
that some of them were noticed
numerous
to Europeans.
known
am almost tempted to say

striking resemblance?I
that between the doctrine of the All-One in the Upani
sameness?is
teaches that
the
and
shads
Xenophanes
philosophy of the Eleatics.
The
God
and
most
the Universe
are
one,
eternal,
and
unchangeable
; and
Par
menides holds that reality is due alone to this universal being, neither
created nor to be destroyed, and omnipresent ; further, that every
thing which exists inmultiplicity and is subject to mutability is not
real ; that thinking and being are identical. All these doctrines are
and of the Ve
congruent with the chief contents of the Upanishads
It is true, the ideas about
d?nta system, founded upon the latter.
the illusive character of the empirical world and about the identity
between existence and thought are not yet framed into doctrines in
the older Upanishads
;we only find them inworks which doubtlessly
are later than the time of Xenophanes
and Parmenides.
But ideas
those doctrines must ultimately have developed, are met
in the oldest Upanishads
; for it is there that we find particular
fromwhich
with
the singleness and immutability of Brahman

and
I therefore do
upon the identity of thought {yijn?n?) and Brahman.
an
to
trace
the
anachronism
not consider it
philosophy of the Eleatics
stress
laid upon
to India.
even earlier than this can analogies between theGreek and
of thought be traced. Tha?es, the father of the Gre
Indian Worlds
But
imagines everything to have sprung fromwater.

us of a mythological
reminds
idea which was very
certainly
time ; namely, the idea of the
familiar to the Indians of the Vedic
cian philosophy,
This
Even
in
primeval water out of which the universe was evolved.
the oldest works of theVedic literature there are numerous passages
THE
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
INDIAN
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
179
this primeval water is mentioned, either producing itself

things or being the matter out of which the Creator produces
in which
all
them.
the
among
too, are found
ideas of the S?/wkhya philosophy,
Fundamental
Greek
Anaximander
physiologers.
as
assumes,
the
a primitive matter, eternal, un

(apXH) ?f a^ things,
fromwhich the definite sub
fathomable and indefinite, the axzipov,
stances arise and into which they return again.
If you now advert
foundation
to the Sa/z/khya doctrine,

the primitive
Prak/v'ti,
There
ample.
when
and,
is evident.
into it, the analogy
back
that the material
matter,
the
is Heraclitus,
Let
"dark
world
the
time
is produced
has
us proceed
Ephesian,"
come,
by
sinks
to another ex
whose
doctrine,
it is true, touches Iranian
ideas in itsmain points.

Nevertheless
it
offers several parallels with the views of the S?;//khya philosophy.
is a suitable expression for the in
The n?vrcx pei of Heraclitus
change of the empirical world, set down by the Sa;;/khya,
and his doctrine of the innumerable annihilations and re-formations
cessant
is one of the best known
of the Universe
theories of the Sa;;/khya
system.*
But
let us
with whom
turn to the physiologers of later times. The first

have to deal is Empedocles,
whose
theories of
we
and
metempsychosis
evolution
may
well
be
compared
with
the corre
ideas of the Sawkhya philosophy.

But most striking is
sponding
can
the agreement between the following doctrine of his, "Nothing
not
can
existed before, and nothing existing
arise which has
be an
nihilated,"
about the beginningless

or?as
v?da),
one of the Sa;;/khya system

and endless reality of all products (sat-k?rya
and that most

we
should
characteristic
put
it?about
the
eternity
and
indestructi
bility of matter.
In a similar way, a connexion may be traced between the dual
and that of the Sa;//khya philosophy.
ism of Anaxagoras
And not
withstanding
*
Colebrooke,
other analogies
his atomism, which
is certainly not derived from India, f
Miscellaneous
between
second edition, Vol. I, p. 437, discovers

Essays,
the philosophy
and the Sa///khya doctrine.
of Heraclitus
that the Indian atomistical

systems, Vai?eshika
f For it is beyond doubt
were conceived
a long time after
and Democritus.
Leucippus
and
Ny?ya,
THE
i8o
MONIST.
even Democritus
in the principles of his metaphysics, which prob

in the doctrines of Empedocles,
reminds us of a
Sa;;/khya tenet, which is in almost literal agreement with the fol
can rise from nothing." * The same is true of
lowing : "Nothing
To Democritus
his conception of the gods.
they are not immortal,
ably are rooted
but only happier than men and longer-lived ; and this is in perfect
harmony with the position the gods occupy not only in the S?wkhya
to Indian ideas, the gods are
but in all Indian systems. According
like human beings, and they also must
subject to metempsychosis
is ex
step down, when their store of merit, formerly acquired,
in his commen
the renowned Ved?ntist,
hausted.
Says ?awkara,
i Indra 'mean
on
Brahmas?tra
like
the
"Words
tary
(I. 3. 28):
only
'
'
for instance ;
the holding of a certain office, as the word
general
"
he who at the time occupies this post is called 1Indra.'
The same ideas are met with in Epicurus, whose dependency
upon Democritus must needs have brought about a resemblance. But
has laid down principles
also on matters of other kinds Epicurus
in themselves
which
as well as in their arguments bear a remarkable
to Sa;;/khya doctrines.
in denying that the
Epicurus,
is ruled by God, because this hypothesis would necessitate our
investing the deity with attributes and functions that are incongruous
with the idea of the divine nature, gives voice to a doctrine that is
resemblance
world
repeated by the S?wkhya teachers with unfatiguing impressiveness.

We also occasionally meet, in the systematic works of the S?wkhya
"
Every
philosophy, a favorite argumentative formula of Epicurus,
thing could rise from everything then."
It is a question requiring the most careful treatment to deter
mine, whether the doctrines of the Greek philosophers, both those
here mentioned and others, were really first derived from the Indian
world of thought, or whether they were constructed
independently
their resemblance being
of each other in both India and Greece,
by the natural sameness of human thought. For my part, I
confess I am inclined towards the first opinion, without intending to
caused
an apodictic
pass
*
Comp.
decision.
S?mkhyasi?tra,
The
book of Ed.
Roth
(" Geschichte
I. 78.
THE
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
INDIAN
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
l8l
unsrer abendl?ndischen
first edition 1846, second edi

Philosophie,"
tion 1862), the numerous works of Aug. Gladisch,
and the tract of
B.
C.
eine Tochter der Sa///khya
Schl?ter (" Aristoteles' Metaphysik
too
Lehre des Kapila,"
far
in
their estimation ofOrien
go
1874)?all
tal influence and
in the presentment of fantastical combinations ;

moreover, they are all founded upon a totally insufficient knowledge
of the Oriental sources.*
I consider them to contain
Nevertheless,
a kernel of truth, although it can hardly be hoped that this kernel
will ever be laid bare with scientific accuracy.
The historical possi
bility of the Grecian world of thought being influenced by India
through themedium of Persia, must unquestionably be granted, and
with it the possibility of the above-mentioned
from India toGreece.
of Asia Minor
and
The
ideas being transferred

connexions between the Ionic inhabitants
those of the countries
to the east of it were
so
and numerous
during the time in question, that abundant

must have offered itself for the exchange of ideas between
the Greeks and the Indians, then living in Persia, f
various
occasion
him, Sir William

: "Of
analogies
the treatise of Baron
v. Eckstein
"
der
Ueber
die Grundlagen
mit den Philosophemen
der west
und deren Zusammenhang
Even earlier than this, such questions
lichen V?lker," Indische Studien, II. 369-388.
a facility of conception
to
were treated with astounding
With
boldness.
peculiar
also
Compare
Indischen Philosophie
the following
Jones (Works, quarto ed., 1799, I. 360, 361) perceived
the philosophical
schools itwill be sufficient, here, to remark that
seems analogous
to the Peripatetic
called
; the second, sometimes
the first Ny?ya

to the Ionic
is often distin
the second
of which
; the two Mimansas,
to the Platonic
to the Italic
; the first Sankhya,
guished by the name of Vedanta,
: so that Gautama
to the Stoic philosophy
and the second or P?tanjala,
corresponds
with Thaies;
with Aristotle;
Kanada,
Vyasa, with Plato;
Jaimini, with Socrates;
with Zeno.
with Pythagoras
But an accurate
; and Patanjali,
comparison
Kapila,
Vai?eshika,
between
the Grecian
and
Indian
schools
would
require
a considerable
volume."
der Philosophie,
Grundriss
revised and edited by
f In Ueberweg's
"
: With much
sixth edition, I. 36, I am happy to find the following passage
Heinze,
Oriental
influence in the form of a
better reason we could suppose a considerable
der Geschichte
with Oriental nations."

But
of the older Grecian
communication
philosophers
I am sorry to say, I cannot concur with the opinion of the author, expressed on the
same page, that a perfect and decisive
solution of this problem might be expected
with the
studies.
For even the closest acquaintance
of Oriental
from the progress
direct
before men
systems and religions cannot do away with the alternative,
tioned on page 180 ; and, with one single exception, which I shall presently consider,
the older Grecian
the means
for fixing the limits of these foreign influences upon
are utterly wanting.
.philosophy
Oriental
THE
l82
to this the Greek
Add
that the greater part of the

with whom we have dealt, Thaies, Empedocles,
Anax
philosophers
and
Democritus,
agoras,
MONIST.
considerable
undertook
others,
intoOriental
duration,
studies, and
philosophical
these Grecian
tradition
countries
the probability
acquired Indian
philosophers
will be increased.
But it cannot be denied
borrow foreign ideas, they well understood
them the stamp of the Grecian
intellect.
of
sometimes
journeys,
for the sake of making

of our supposition that
ideas on Persian ground
that, if they really did
the art of impressing on
I have purposely omitted a name which ismuch more

intimately connected with this question, than the others I have men
tioned. While,
for the derivation of Indian ideas in the case of the
Hitherto,
and Epicurus,
the Eleatics
I could only
physiologers,
a certain probability in favor of my hypothesis, there seems
to be no doubt about the dependence
of Pythagoras
upon Indian
Grecian
assume
philosophy and science ; and all the more so, as the Greeks them
It was Sir William
selves considered his doctrines as foreign.
Jones (Works, 8vo ed., III, 236)* who first pointed out the analo
gies between the Sa;;/khya system and the Pythagorean philosophy,
starting from the name of the Indian system, which is derived from
the word
and
"number,"
samkhy?
from
the
fundamental
importance
to number by Pythagoras.
After Jones, Colebrooke (Misc.
even more emphasis the idea
I.
with
2d
Ess.,
ed.,
436, 437) expressed
that the doctrines of Pythagoras might be rooted in India. He says :
attached
"
. . . .
Adverting
to what
I shall not hesitate

to have
Grecian
brooke
gives
It may
particular,
between
heaven,
and
* See
Colebrooke,
to us of the
history
an inclination
to Indian
indebted
to consider
instructors."
the
Cole
for his opinion (1. c, 441 et seq.) in the

to me to be sufficiently important
by the way,
that
as parts of the world,

they
of Pythagoras,
seems
which
be here remarked
distinguish
earth,
....
the reasons
them, which
come
to acknowledge
been
following passage,
to quote in full :
"
has
term
(transpicuous)
Miscellaneous
lofty and
aerial.
intermediate
Essays,
the Pythagoreans,
the heaven,
and Ocellus
the earth, and
. . .Here
we
have
precisely
region of the Hindus.
second
edition,
in
the interval
I. 241.
the
THE
as
"Pythagoras,
as heaven
demons,
tures, flitting unseen,

''
needs
Nobody
in the intermediate
to be reminded,
agree
"They
likewise
or a?rial
Here
man
region with
they agree
again
beneath,
183
and
pre
crea
spiritual
region.
and
that Pythagoras
the Hindus
his
successors
the same
do
universally
the Hindus,
"Like
etherial
held
the
tenet of trans
the body,
Pythagoras,
the sensitive,
(jiv?tman)
the other
with
apart
organ
?pr/v of
immortal.
other Greek
from
material
: tiv/xog and
philosophers,
the corporeal
assigned
part, and a grosser
(or lingo) ?avira and sth?la

body ; the s?kshma
I should be disposed
to conclude
that the
the rest. ...
united with
of the S?nkhyas
were
with
to the soul
clothing
to it when
clothing
living soul
and conscious
; one perishing
Pythagoras
in distinguishing
generally
from the rational
{nuuias),
Indians
PHILOSOPHY.
of souls.
migration
subtle
GREEK
the middle
peoples
the gods above,
place
as
AND
the earth with men.
and
gods,
who
of metempsychosis,
doctrine
?arira
after him Ocellus,
with
the Hindus,
cisely-with
INDIAN
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
and
in this instance
teachers
rather
than learners."
12, and S?nkhya

IV, n,
{Quarterly Oriental Magazine,
on
the
touches
K?rik?,
p. XI) only incidentally
analogies pointed
out by Jones and Colebrooke.
goes a little more into detail regard
Barth?l?my Saint-Hilaire
"
" Premier M?moire sur le
ing one point. He treats, in his
S?nkhya
Wilson
1852, pp.
(Paris,
512, 513, 521, 522), of Pythagoras's

theory of
and he is right in observing that the greater prob
metempsychosis,
ability is on the side of its Indian
one.
Further,
Barth?l?my
"Phaedrus,"
"Phaedon,"
"
sont assez
Les
analogies
origin, and not on its Egyptian

finds S?wkhya
ideas in Plato, in the
"Timaeus,"
and
nombreuses
et assez
in
the
"Republic":
profondes
pour
qu'il
soit impossible de les regarder comme accidentelles"

(p. 514). He
points out that the ideas of redemption and bondage are doctrines
and of the Sa;//khya philosophy, inasmuch as they
the liberation of soul from matter and the confinement of
both of Plato
denote
is common to
; and that the idea of metempsychosis
both, together with that of the beginningless and endless existence
of the soul. On p. 521 Barth?l?my then says that Plato, the great
soul by matter
admirer of the Pythagorean school, took these doctrines from Pytha

goras ; but ifwe ask where Pythagoras obtained them, all the ap
pearances are, in his opinion, in favor of India.
The
supposition
that Pythagoras
derived his theory of transmi
THE
MONIST.
several
times
184
from
gration
was
India,
in older
broached
be
works
sides.
In
a much
more
and
exhaustive
but
manner,
comprehensive
evidently without knowledge of his predecessors, Leopold von Schroe

der has also treated this subject in an essay "Pythagoras
und die
Inder"
(Leipsic,
1884), which, notwithstanding the contrary opinion
seems to me to be perfectly correct in its
of Professor Weber,f
From Schroeder's
main points.
theories it follows, that almost all
the doctrines
ascribed
were
mathematical,
to Pythagoras,
current
in
before Christ, and even previously.

doctrines
appear
both religio-philosophical
as
India
in Pythagoras
early
as
As themost
without
connexion
sixth
the
and
century
important of these
or
explanatory
background, whilst in India they are rendered comprehensible by the

In
intellectual life of the times, Schroeder conclusively pronounces
ideas.
Of course, no
dia to be the birthplace of the Pythagorean
power of conviction would rest in single traits of agreement ;?and
for that reason I did not venture to give any definite opinion with
regard to the dependence of the other philosophers mentioned on In
dia ;?but
enforces
with Pythagoras,
conviction
; and
it is the quantity of coincidences
the more
so,
as
the
concordance
that
is also
to
be noticed in insignificant and arbitrary matters which cannot well

be expected to appear independently in two different places.
Here
can
I must refer to Schroeder's
detailed
argumentation and
only
and the ancient In
Pythagoras
:
dians have
the theory of the transmigration of souls,
inwhich there is harmony here and there even in noticeable details,
indicate
the chief features which

in common
and which Pythagoras cannot have taken fromEgypt for the simple
reason that modern Egyptology
teaches us, that?in
spite of the
ancient Egyptians were not
inHerodotus?the
well-known passage
familiar with the doctrine of metempsychosis
; further, the curious
/a?)ojuix^v;
prohibition of eating beans, the 7rpos ?j\wr rerpau^?vor
* See Lucian
tur, p. 26, note
Scherman,
Materialien
zur Geschichte
der Indischen
Visionslitera
1.
"
also
Die Griechen
Centraiblatt,
1884, p. 1563-1565.
\ Literarisches
Compare
zu
Akademie
der Wissenschaften
der A'gl. Preussischen
in Indien," Sitzungsberichte
XXXVII,
Berlin,
pp. 923-926.
THE
CONNEXION
BETWEEN
INDIAN
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
185
the doctrine of thefive elements, i. e. the assumption of ether as the

fifth element, which obtains in the Pythagorean
school as well as
in India ; above all the so-called Pythagorean
theorem,
the
in
the
irrational
number
/2
l
; then the
*;
developed
?ulvas?tras
whole character of the religio-philosophical
fraternity, founded by
to
the
is
Indian
orders of the time ;
which
analogous
Pythagoras,
everywhere
to the Pythagorean
arid at last the mystical speculation, peculiar
a
to
which
bears
resemblance
the
fantastical notions
school,
striking
in favor
greatly
with
the
so-called
Brahma;/a
literature.
with a few more
Schroeder
analogies of lesser value

proceeds
and of doubtful nature, and finally he is certainly mistaken in the
two following points.
Namely, he holds that Pythagoras
acquired
his knowledge in India itself,?an
idea excluded at once by reference
to the history of ancient
traffic.")"The only country inwhich Pytha

to
have met his Indian teachers, is Persia,
could
goras
possibly
which place I above found myself obliged to ascribe the eventual
between Indian ideas and the Greek physiologers
mediation
and
Eleatics.
agorean
The other point is that of the connexion between the Pyth

doctrine and the Sa;;/khya philosophy, supposed by Schroe
der.
It may be that Pythagoras acquired his knowledge of the the

ories of metempsychosis
and of the five elements from adherents of
the S?wkhya system ; but further relations are not to be discov
ered. SchroederJ tries, on pp. 72-76, to bring the fundamental idea

of the Pythagorean
philosophy, that number is the essence of all
things, into connexion with a fictitious, older form of the S?wkhya
He says p. 74 : "To me it appears to be evident from

philosophy.
the name Sa/z/khya, that number (samkhyti) originally had a deciding,*
*Weber's
treatise is chiefly based on the fact that

against Schroeder's
polemic
the age of the ?ulvas?tras
the mensurations
he underestimates
which describe
of
the sacrificial
that led to the discovery of the renowned
tenet.
The
compound
are not appendages
?ulvas?tras
ritual complexes,
each of which
offered
diums
to us
in the ?ulvas?tras,
to the ?rautas?tras,
but integrant parts of the great
has been composed
The material,
by one author.
is of course
still much older than these compen
themselves.
fThe
Grecian
the Alexandrine
\ As before
tradition of Pythagoras
having
visited
India
did not arise before
time.
him Sir William
Jones
; comp.
p.
182 above.
i86
THE
MONIST.
fundamental importance in this system, although the later system,

the books of which appeared more than a thousand years after the
pre-Buddhistic S?wkhya doctrine of Kapila, has effaced this charac
In stating this, Schroeder has
trait and entirely lost it."
overlooked the fact that those Upanishads
which are full of Sa;;/khya
teristic
and which must be dated only a few hundred years later

than Buddha,
in question, also wanting in what
are, in the passages
doctrines
the "original"
characteristic
trait, and that they are in
one."
He
harmony with that system which he calls the "later
himself declares this theory to be a very bold one, but in reality it
is perfectly baseless.
There is not the smallest particle of evidence
he calls
for the hypothesis

that there ever existed a S?;;/khya system dif
ferent from that of our sources, which acquired its name from the
to it. On the contrary, weighty
peculiar
reasons speak against the supposition that our system has undergone
If ever we should try to
noticeable
changes in the course of time.
mania
for enumeration
fabricate some historical

Pythagorean
occur to us.
of
things,
ments
the
the S?wkhya
system and the
the
idea
following
philosophy,
only could
: Number is the essence
doctrines of Pythagoras
The
elements
of everything
number?these
link between
numeral
of numbers
existing,
doctrines
are
are
the whole
unique
to be
considered
universe
in the history
as
the
is harmony
of human
ele
and
thought,
and, if theirmeaning should be something else than "everything ex

law," theymight be regarded as
isting is ruled by themathematical
It therefore does not appear to me as a thing
unphilosophical.
utterly beyond possibility, that those ideas took root in a misunder
It is possible
that he misinterpreted
the
standing of Pythagoras.
words of his Indian teacher : "The S?wkhya philosophy
is named
"
after the enumeration of the material principles
into : " Number is
considered the essence of thematerial principles in the S?wkhya sys
this surely is nothing but a supposition.
who in his " Indische Alterthumskunde
It is Lassen
tem."
But
"
denies
every Indian
influence upon Grecian philosophy in ante-Christian

times, but adopts it (III. p. 379 et seq.) for the Christian Gnosti
cism
and Neo-Platonism.
As
lively relations between Alexandria

and India are sufficiently attested for this time, it is indeed impos
THE
sible to doubt Indian

and
INDIAN
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
influence upon
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
the doctrines
187
of the Gnostics
Neo-Platonists.
us first dwell
Let
Lassen
holds that the
upon Gnosticism.
in theGnostic systems were derived fromBuddhism
which (in the secondary, modified form it had assumed at that time)
influence upon the intellec
undoubtedly exercised a considerable
Indian elements
tual
life of Alexandria.
influence ismost clearly perceptible

about the many spiritual worlds
This
in the ideas formed by theGnostics

These
and the numerous heavens.
ideas are certainly derived from

of later Buddhism.
But I do not admit the
the fantastical cosmogony

great importance which Lassen
attributes toBuddhism
in the forma
tion of the Gnostic
expo
systems. It ismy opinion that, inLassen's
sitions the Sa/z/khya philosophy does not get all that is due to it. If
we keep it inmind that the centuries inwhich Gnosticism was devel
coinci
oped? that is, the second and third century after Christ?are
dent with the period during which the Sa;//khya philosophy flourished
in India, many things will appear in a different light to us, than was
the case with Lassen. * On p. 385 he establishes a connexion between
the doctrines of Buddhism and the Gnostic contrast of soul and mat
ter.
is it not more natural
But
form the foundation

with which we have
met
with
among
to remember here the ideas which
of the Sa///khya philosophy ? Another point

is the identification of soul and light,
to deal
almost
all Gnostics.
Lassen
some remote and singular speculations

to make
tive realm of later Buddhism,
has
brought
forward
from the misty and imagina

in
plausible the Buddhistic
I cannot say that this endeavor

fluence upon this Gnostic doctrine.
has been a successful one. How very simple and natural the idea
appears with which a mere glance at the S?wkhya philosophy fur
nishes us ! For
not known
there we are taught something which was evidently

viz., that the soul is light (prak??a),^ which
to Lassen,
* On
to trace that resemblance

the other hand, I must confess that I am unable
on the origin
and the doctrine of the Valentinians
the S?wkhya
philosophy
on pp. 400, 401.
of matter, which is stated by Lassen
The agreements
of the S?w
that of the Ophites,
collected by Lassen
in the following pages,
khya system with
between
likewise
and
appear
to me
open
to doubt.
I* 145: "[Soul
f Comp. S?mkhyas?tra,
light do not belong
together," and VI,
tjie non-intellectual
is] light, because
"
50 : Being distinct from the non-intel
i88
THE
that
means,
the
mechanical
or made
MONIST.
of
processes
the
internal
are
organs
il
by the soul. This idea of the S?;;/

are
the same, or?to put it otherwise?
light
khyas,
that the soul consists of light, we undoubtedly have to regard as
luminated
conscious
that soul and
the source of the similar idea of the Gnostics.

In regard to another point, Lassen
(on pp. 384, 398 et seq.)
has rightly acknowledged
the influence of the Sa;;/khya philosophy
It was Ferd. Chr. Baur who even before him
upon Gnosticism.
christliche Gnosis," pp. 54, 158 et seq.) had
(in his work, "Die
noticed the remarkable agreement of the classification of men into
the three classes
several Gnostics,
to
of nvavpiaTiuoi,
tyvxiKoi and vXinoi, peculiar
with the Sa;;/khya doctrine of the three Gu^as.
I have entered in detail upon this theory in my forthcoming

I only wish to state here that in
book on the Sa;;/khya philosophy,
to the
this system every individual is considered as appertaining
As
sphere of one of the three powers, according as the luminous, se

rene, and joyful, or the passionate, fickle, and painful, or again the
There is also
and dull character predominates.
dark, motionless,
to be found.*
It is that between the
interesting parallel
to
the
doctrine
which
Buddhi, Ahawk?ra, and
according
S?wkhya
another
i. e.,
Manas,
the
substrata
existence
pendent
universe,
intellect,
and
will,
during
the Gnostic
and
so
on.
of
the
have
processes,
psychic
an
inde
the first stages of the evolution of the

tenet which allots personal existence to
I
am
sure
that
those
who
are
ac
better
quainted with theGnostic systems than I am, would be successful in

finding some more points of contact, upon studying the doctrines of
the S?wkhya philosophy in detail.
we find that here also Lassen
In passing toNeo-Platonism,
valued
the influence of the Sa;;/khya

(204-269 A. D.),
The views of Plotinus
doctrines
has
to its full extent.
the chief of the Neo-Platon
the non-intellectual."
has the nature of thought illuminates
lectual,
[soul] which
makes
the following remark on the first passage
The commentator Vijn?nabhikshu
"
The soul is in its essence
light like the sun," etc.
* Mentioned
in his translation of Nehemiah
Ni'lakantha
Hall
by Fitz-Edward
S'astri Gore's A Rational
Philosophical
Systems, Calcutta,
Refutation
of theHindu
1862, p. 84.
THE
CONNEXION
BETWEEN
INDIAN
AND
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
189
ists, are in part in perfect agreement with those of the S?wkhya sys
tem. The following sentences must be placed here : the soul is
free from sorrows and passions, untouched by all affections ; for the
sufferings of the world belong tomatter. By his philosophy Plotinus
same pur
promises to deliver the world frommisery, and this is the
pose as that of the Sa//zkhya system which strives to lead men to dis
it to redemption, that is to say, to

all Brahman systems have made it
and with
criminative knowledge
absolute painlessness.
Though
their task to liberate mankind
from the miseries
of mundane
exis
tence by means of some special knowledge, yet none of them have

so much emphasised
the principle of this life being a life full of
misery, as the S?wkhya system ; none of them have defined the word
with
"redemption"
the same precision
as "the
absolute
cessation
of pain."
On page 428 Lassen establishes a connexion between a Ved?ntic

notion and the sentence of Plotinus, that one may also be happy
when sleeping, because the soul does not sleep. But there is no ne
*
cessity for it. The same doctrine appertains to the Sa;;/khya system.
Deep dreamless sleep is there, too, stated to be homogeneous with
redemption, insomuch as in these two states the affections and func
tions of the inner organs have stopped, and pain with them. Consid
ering the many cases in which the dependence of Plotinus upon the
system is established,
S?wkhya
the S?wkhya
from
idea
must,
however,
make
system
us
doubly
we need
as well.
careful
not hesitate
numerous
These
to expand
not
to derive
this
agreements
too much
the
limits of this dependence

; and for that reason I am bound to say
that the parallels which Lassen has drawn (p. 418 et seq.) between
the theory of emanation, set up by Plotinus, and the doctrine of de
velopment
series
in the Sa/;/khya system appear
of coincidences
here
to me out of place
in the
treated.
there is a good evidence of harmony between the pure

Though
of Plotinus, there exists
Sa;;/khya doctrine and the Neo-Platonism
even a closer connexion between the latter one and that branch of
the Sa;;/khya philosophy which has assumed
* See
S?mkhyas?tra,
V,
a theistical and asceti
116.
THE
MONIST.
cal character, and has, under the name of the Yoga philosophy, ac
The
quired an independent place among the Brahman
systems.
an
nature.
of
is
Plotinus
of
ascetic
feature
This
altogether
morality
might be explained, it is true, by an inclination towards Stoicism ;
but on account of its agreement with the Yoga system in the fol
lowing points, this ascetic coloring has, most probably, its founda
tion in the influence of this system. Plotinus pronounces all worldly
things to be vain and void of value, and he therefore calls upon us
to throw off the influence of the phenomenal world.
If we keep off
all external impressions and by way of concentration of thinking
overcome the multiplicity of ideas, resulting from these impressions,
the highest knowledge will fill our mind, in the form of a sudden
ecstatic perception of God.
There
is not the slightest difference
between this theory and the doctrines of theYoga philosophy.
The
auGraGiS
or the anXaoai?
of Plotinus
("the union with the deity")

is the pratibh? or the prdtibham jndnam of the Yoga system ("the
immediate, universal knowledge of truth, which, after methodically
the
exercising
Besides
ascetic
Yoga-praxis,
Plotinus,
comes
we principally
upon
have
us
unexpectedly
M).*
to consider his most dis
who, even more than

tinguished disciple Porphyry (from 232-304)^
his master, has followed the Sa;;/khya philosophy.
With him the
influence can be proved directly ; for he has made use of the
from which he copied an important passage
Indian
treatise of Bardesanes,
the Brahmans.
about
mation
about
And
India
Bardesanes
had
acquired
from the Indian ambassadors
authentic
who were
infor
sent to
In all principal points, Porphyry

the Emperor Antoninus Pius.
to give up
as, for instance, in his demand
agrees with Plotinus,
the external world and to seek truth by contemplation
; but Por
phyry records in a purer way than his master the S?wkhya doctrine
of the contrast between the spiritual and the material world.
His
is also to be noticed in
dependency upon the Sa;;/khya philosophy
of the reign of the spiritual over the material, of the
of the soul when liberated frommatter, and of the
omnipresence
his doctrines
* See
Yogasfitra,
f Comp.
Lassen,
III,
33.
p. 430 et seq.
THE
BETWEEN
CONNEXION
of
beginninglessness
To
be
sure,
AND
Here
we
the world.*
diction to kill animals, made

fices.
INDIAN
Lassen
GREEK
must
PHILOSOPHY.
note
also
the
191
inter
by Porphyry, and his rejection of sacri

says,
on
page
432,
that
Porphyry
here
but as we
are dealing with things

which Buddha adopted from the Sa;//khya system,f there is no rea
son why we should not derive them from the primary, instead of the
followed
the Buddhistic
law;
source.
secondary,
I thinkwe need not enter upon the resemblances which Lassen

discovers (p. 434 et seq.) between Indian ideas and the later Neo
Platonist Abammon
(about 300); for this fantastical and superstitious

teacher, and the ideas peculiar to him, do not offer any but doubtful
points of contact with Indian models. Only one opinion of Abammon
and that even was already suggested by his
It
is
the
idea, that people who are filled with a holy
predecessors.
enthusiasm attain miraculous
powers. J Here we clearly perceive
comes into consideration,
the coincidence with the conviction, universal in India, thatmiracu

lous powers are to be acquired by the methodical
exercise of the
The Yoga philosophy promises, as the fruit of such
Yoga-praxis.
exercise, the acquisition of the faculty of making one's self invisible,
infinitely large, or infinitely light, of assuming other bodies, of chang
ing the course of nature, and the attainment of other supernatural
powers.
I cannot
take leave of Neo-Platonism
without mentioning a
of
with
the
Indian
world of thought,
agreement
highly important point
which, it is true, neither concerns the S?;;/khya philosophy nor Bud
dhism, but which nevertheless impressively supports our arguments,
as
it is a most
significant link in the series of Grecian loans from

In a little essay by Professor Weber,
Vach und \6yos, In
dische Studien," Vol. IX, the author, with great caution?"without
intending in the least to settle this question "?has put forward the
India.
that the Indian conception of the v?ch (a feminine noun,

meaning voice, speech, word) may have had some influence upon the
supposition
* This
last point
f Compare
S?wkhyas?tras,
X See Lassen,
is not mentioned
by Lassen.
to my translation
the preface
etc., Calcutta,
1892.
of Aniruddha's
Commentary
on
p. 438.
the
the.
ig2
monist.
and passed from

idea of the \oyos which appears in Neo-Platonism
starts from the hymn Rig
there into the Gospel of St. John. Weber
veda
X,
the Vach
in which
125,
already
appears
as
an
'divine Vach
and he refers to the personification of the

as the vehicle of priestly eloquence and wisdom.
He
active
power,
"
or language,
then traces the
literature, where the

development of this idea through the Br?hma^a
more
more
to
the
similar
and
Vach becomes
Xoyos in the beginning
In the numerous passages quoted by
of St John.
of the Gospel
as
the creator,
the consort of Praj?pati,
the Vach appears
Weber,
"in union with whom and by whom he accomplishes his creation ;
yea, theVach is even ultimately themost spiritual begetter, and now
and then she is placed absolutely at the beginning of all things, even
concludes this
above the personal bearer of her own self." Weber
are certainly no
"There
pithy article with the following words:
the cosmogonical
difficulties in understanding
position of the Vach
as the culmination of glorifying
which is simply to be conceived
and knowledge, while the same position of the
priestly meditation
on the other hand, appears without any suggestion as to its
I hold to be an ex
This
idea ofWeber's
origin or development.''
ceedingly happy one, and, in my opinion, it deserves another name
\6yoZ,
than that of a mere
supposition.
to set one point aright.

the idea of the \oyos first appears,
connexion,
doctrines
of Philo,
which
to a great
Only I may be allowed, in this

inwhich
It is not Neo-Platonism
but
extent
it is derived
are
there from the
the basis
of Neo-Pla
tonism. Philo again adopted the XoyOS"doctrine from the Stoics, and
towhom the Xoy OS already was the eter
they took it fromHeraclitus,
nal law of the course of theworld.*
My opinion, mentioned above, of

Indian
influenced
being
thought, meets, accordingly,
by
I
If the whole theory is right?and
with a welcome confirmation.
think it is?the derivation of the \oyos theory from India must be
Heraclitus
put more
than five hundred
years
earlier
than would
appear
from
statement.
Weber's
Among
Compare
Oldenburg,
the Indian doctrines which we believed we could
Max
Heinze,
Die
Lehre
vom Logos
in der griechischen
trace in
Philosophie,
1872.
the
between
connexion
indian
and
greek
philosophy.
193
Greek philosophy, those of the S?wkhya system occupy the firstplace;

agreeably to their character, they presented the smallest difficulties,
when transplanted to a foreign ground and embodied into a new
world of thought. This influence of the S?wkhya and Indian phi
philosophy does not extend
losophy in general upon Occidental
the Buddhistic
Neo-Platonism.
coloring of
And?except
beyond
and
Schopenhauer's
Hartmann's
in
philosophy?even
our
modern
time we cannot notice any real influence exercised by Indian ideas.

in the compendiums
Even
of the general history of philosophy
It now need not
the Indian systems are usually entirely omitted.
be proved, that this is a mistake. An explanation of this indifference
may be found in the fact that the Indian systems became known
in Europe
only in their roughest outlines in this cen

excellent description
the exception ofDeussen's
philosophy (Leipsic, 1883)?they have not been laid
and America
tury, and that?with

of the Ved?nta
open to study by detailed works. I hope to contribute a little to fill

up this gap in our knowledge of Indian philosophy, by my exposi
tion of the S?wkhya system which will appear in a fewmonths.
I have confined myself here to seeking out, and so far as pos
sible, to proving the historical connexion between Indian and Greek
But to follow up the internal relations of the Indian
philosophy.
doctrines
sional
to the whole Occidental
agreements
formance of which
philosophy
have
and to trace the occa

been
in detail,
that would
surpasses
the limits of this paper.

Richard
K?nigsberg,
task,
the per
Garbe
Prussia.

On The Connexion Between Indian and Greek Philosophy - Garbe, R PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

On The Connexion Between Indian and Greek Philosophy - Garbe, R PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Hegeler Institute

and the subjective Atman

July 12, 1893.

their reflexions culminate

: the inmost Self of the individual being

the contradiction of Kapila,

that is, of matter.

other object is accomplished

the soul. This internal body accompanies

itsmost subtile modifications, as it appears in the inner organs.

ready saturated with that pessimism which

the following reflexions it is necessary to bear inmind that

century before Christ.

Indian and Greek

that some of them were noticed

am almost tempted to say

the singleness and immutability of Brahman

imagines everything to have sprung fromwater.

this primeval water is mentioned, either producing itself

too, are found

ideas of the S?/wkhya philosophy,

a primitive matter, eternal, un

to the Sa/z/khya doctrine,

into it, the analogy

that the material

it is true, touches Iranian

ideas in itsmain points.

is one of the best known

theories of the Sa;;/khya

turn to the physiologers of later times. The first

ideas of the Sawkhya philosophy.

about the beginningless

one of the Sa;;/khya system

and that most

his atomism, which

is certainly not derived from India, f

second edition, Vol. I, p. 437, discovers

that the Indian atomistical

in the principles of his metaphysics, which prob

as well as in their arguments bear a remarkable

repeated by the S?wkhya teachers with unfatiguing impressiveness.

first edition 1846, second edi

in the presentment of fantastical combinations ;

ideas being transferred

those of the countries

to the east of it were

during the time in question, that abundant

him, Sir William

the treatise of Baron

the first Ny?ya

with Oriental nations."

to this the Greek

that the greater part of the

for the sake of making

I have purposely omitted a name which ismuch more

I shall not hesitate

for his opinion (1. c, 441 et seq.) in the

as parts of the world,

the earth, and

region of the Hindus.

tures, flitting unseen,

part, and a grosser