Comparing Early Greek and Buddhist Thought
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 มี.ค. 2017
- How is early Buddhist thought like that we find in classical Greece? I'll give a short intro to that fascinating question, pointing out some key differences.
This is my second TH-cam video, so it's a bit rough. Apologies in advance! Check out some of my later videos for more smoothness.
For a good intro to classical Greek philosophy see:
www.iep.utm.edu/greekphi/
-------------------------
Please visit the Secular Buddhist Association!
secularbuddhism.org
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | ครอบครัวสะท้านทุ่ง "นางบี & อ้ายสติ๊ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A1rhYcxxNtA/mqdefault.jpg)
Only a (possibly) unrelated comment about early Greek and Buddhist overlaps. I live in Athens and I was surprised to find here a school of Early Greek and Chinese Medicine. It all seems very much like Aruvedic medicine to me and I like the speculation about early Greeks and early Chinese meeting up in India and then returning to their respective homelands with medical/scientific ideas as well as, in the case of China, philosophical ideas from the other cultures.
Thanks a lot for this marvelous explanation. Evangelina Cortes.
You’re very welcome Evangelina.
Would be interesting to hear your opinions on pyrrhonism, a fantastic book by Adrian Kuminzki called the ancient greeks reinvented buddhism is highly recommended. Thanks for the video doug, keep up the good work.
Good work .thanks to you 👍
My pleasure! 🙏
Hi Doug! I've managed to find my way back to this early video of yours. I am currently reading 'What the Buddha Thought' in which Gombrich mentions Heraclitus. I'm surprised, though you may mention him in a later video, that you haven't brought him up here. I feel the similarities of thought around 'fire' are quite striking. I find it inconceivable that there was no exchange of ideas between Greek and Indian philosophies. I think it entirely possible that The Buddha and Heraclitus were contemporaries to a degree albeit in greatly different locations. Heraclitus' notion of 'never touching the same water in the one river' is rather indicative of 'Impermanence' I would say.
Hi Patrick and thanks for your comment. When I was at university in philosophy class I was interested in Heraclitus, but really so little is known about him and his thinking. We don't really have a worked-out idea of what he taught, so it's hard to focus too much on him. The notion of the flowing stream shows consonance with Buddhism, but there is no good evidence that these very distant philosophers would have known anything about one another. (FWIW Heraclitus probably lived around a century before the Buddha, though he seems to have been considered odd and obscure by his Greek compatriots).
Doug's Secular Dharma I think more research needs to be done on the exchanges between East and West in those times. I find some of the similarities too coincidental. Saying that I do not know enough by any stretch of the imagination. Interesting though.
Yes indeed. I think the similarities are because wise people coincide in their views, but who knows? 😄
Hey Doug, I was wondering if you could make a video comparing Stoic and Buddhist thought. There seems to be many parallels between them.
Yes Felipe I already have a few videos on the topic. For starters see: th-cam.com/video/wJ0iQiNf6ZE/w-d-xo.html
@@DougsDharma Thanks Doug!
There's a lot of commonality between buddha and diogenes (or cynicism and buddhism), in that a central tenet for both paradigms is about the idea that desiring less or non at all is better and makes you more content than wanting more, but ones solution is making one cynical, whereas the other's solution is being detached/indifferent.
Did you make any episode on Greco-Buddhism or Halenestic influence over Buddhist rituals (first statue of Buddha)?
I did a video awhile back on Buddhist art where I discussed some of that, I may make another video on it eventually: th-cam.com/video/ydYLXYvz6oA/w-d-xo.html
Doug, why add weight to the idea of reincarnation? I thought proponents of Secular Buddhism took a more realistic view. Anyway, I think if you look at Stoicism you'll see more similarity with Buddhist thought. Perhaps that's something you could explore in a future video?
Thanks for the comment Patrick. Yes indeed, secular Buddhists in general take a this-life view of Buddhist teaching. In discussing reincarnation/rebirth in a Greek context I didn't mean to suggest that that lent weight to it as an idea, but simply to say that it was more of a shared view than some may realize. I find this of historical interest, even if it need not inform present belief or practice.
As for Stoicism, I absolutely agree. That's a great suggestion, I would like to discuss a comparison between Stoicism and Buddhism in a future video.
Thanks Doug for your response. I now see and appreciate more where you're coming from. I look forward to your video on the Buddhism/Stoicism comparison; having studied both philosophies for some time I do feel they're closely matched and in many respects complement each other. Again thanks.
Hello Doug ! 6 days back, I wrote a comment here (now non existent, coz I deleted it). I just wanna add something important (at least according to me) :
If I am not mistaken, the Indian Equivalent of 'Reason' is BUDDHI. I don't know if Indians have ever considered Buddhi to be the Rational part of the Mind alone, but it certainly has been associated with Cognition. For eg, in Samkhya, Buddhi is considered to be Discriminatory in Nature and it helps establish the Difference between Truth and Falsity, as far as I know.
Also, Samkhya existed during Buddha's own lifetime and I have heard that he knew about it. So, he must have known what Buddhi is all about. That's probably why he was such a Good Debater. Moreover, if Indians didn't really know anything about Buddhi, how did Panini end up with the Greatest Grammatical Text, the Ashtādhyayi, in Human History ? I think someone needs to go through the Ancient Indian Texts to find out how Reason oriented Buddhi is ...
Anyway, Thanks a LOT for the video ! It's Awesome, as Usual !!! 😄
Thanks Dipayan. I'm not sure to what extent Saṃkhya existed in the Buddha's day, though I think proto-Saṃkhya may have in the Upaniṣads and elsewhere. In any event I wouldn't want to say that Indian philosophy lacked the concept of "reason" or the "rational mind"; and certainly buddhi is one word associated with discriminative wisdom and intelligence. It's simply that it didn't hold the centrality that it did in Greece, at least in the map of the mind we find in Buddhism.
@@DougsDharma
Yes. I agree that Reason was not given as much importance in India as it was in Greece. However, Indians did care about being Rational/Reasonable. Buddha, in particular, was Amazing. We Indians often call a Reasonable human being like Buddha 'BUDDHIMAAN'. In Hindi, Buddhimaan means Intelligent Person, coz the term is associated with Intelligence or Cleverness ...
Anyway, yesterday, I was reading Majjhima Nikaya 56 (Upāli Sutta). In it, Buddha says, to Upāli, multiple times, the following :
'Think about it, householder! You should think before answering. What you said before and what you said after don’t match up.'
This is clearly an Application of BUDDHI to distinguish between Right and Wrong, and, Buddha seems to be endorsing it. It's kind of like Plato's 'THINK MORE'.
Sometimes I think about Actual Conversations between Buddha in his Prime and Plato in his Prime. I think that Plato would Appreciate Buddha for his Reasonableness but Advise him to care more about Reason, particularly Pure Reason. Having learnt about Pure Reason from Plato, Buddha would probably be very impressed by him and his Advice. In return, he would probably tell Plato that Reason just doesn't help humans get rid of Dukkha. To get rid of Dukkha, people need Buddha's Dhamma. Having learnt Dhamma from Buddha, Plato would probably be Amazed. The Exchange of Info would probably be a very Fruitful one.
Anyway, I strongly believe that MOST of the Problems on this Planet can be Eliminated by covering the Teachings of Plato, Aristotle and Buddha in Schools/Colleges/Universities. These 3 People were Superhumans ! 😂
(EDIT : More than 1 year after this comment of mine, I am convinced that I was WRONG about the importance of Buddha. I now realise that he was NOWHERE as Brilliant as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Reason is Supreme. It's sad that Buddha never realised this. The Scientific and Mathematical Revolutions took place in Ancient Greece alone, not India or China or Egypt or Mesopotamia. This realisation is one of the most profound realisations of my life. I wish I had known about this earlier ...)
@@DipayanPyne94 Yes, though I would include Socrates as Plato's teacher and "guru".
@@DougsDharma Oh of course Doug, of course ! I was only talking about an Imaginary conversation between 2 people from different cultures/civilizations. Plato was very much like Socrates. That wasn't my point. I was simply talking about how Plato and Buddha would Think of each other. It's the kind of stuff that I like to think about. Lol 😂
Difference between Zen Buddhism and secular Buddhism?
That’s a hard one Alan. For some people Zen Buddhism can be secular. On the other hand as an established form of religion it has many religious components such as a lineage, a hierarchy, forms of behavior and worship, a liturgy, established forms of dress, so on and so forth. So, depends upon your viewpoint.
@@DougsDharma Well, thanks Doug for answering a sort of goofy question. That was a great answer. Thank you.
Jews and Mahayana Buddhism similarity please explain
How do you mean?
No, Love/Eros is superior to reason sometimes according to Plato.
Thanks Kj Mj. Can you give a citation? I would imagine in that case Plato would be referring to the love of knowledge or wisdom.
@@DougsDharma 4 years later, in Phaedrus, Socrates discuss the power of divine love that goes beyond imaginative logics and dialectics possible, in the term of 'Theia Mania'
You can't do justice in 10 minutes to such a vast subject. I would like to remind you that the central concept related to the mind in Greek philosophy is that of Nous, the faculty of the human mind necessary to understand what is true or real. It might be translated by intuitive understanding, roughly equivalent to the third mode of knowledge of Spinoza. I struggle to understand the Buddhist theory of mind. They use concepts differently from us. The books I've read are heavy in Pali or Tibetan terminology and mingled with religious ideas. Do you know a book or course that gives the essence of the Buddhist theory of mind?
I think to really understand it one needs to learn it in detail, which means spending time with the philosophy and immersing oneself in it. I'd suggest focusing on one school of Buddhism since there have been different interpretations of the various components of mind (and of mind itself) over the millennia of Buddhist development. I focus on early Buddhism. I don't know of any one book that would provide the essence of an early Buddhist theory of mind, but I'm sure there are some out there that try to. Most likely they would be based on the Abhidhamma, which itself is a later development.
@@DougsDharma , One of the books I've tried is "The Manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation. Though this is the best translation I've seen, it is brimming with Pali terminology.
If we need to understand the philosophy we might have to study most of the preachings of Buddha which were preached on specific incident or person.
In therawadha Buddhism most belive that only the Sutta and Vinaya scriptures are the words of Buddha and all the other scriptures or books were not. And those were written later to explain the words of Buddha or to enhance Buddha's teaching as a religion. Because by the time after the Buddha, the other religions in India tried to suppress the rise of Buddhism there by improving their ideologies or preaching.
As I see, Buddha didn't aim to establish a religion or a philosophy but to help people to end the "suffering". That's why some parts which are not relevant have been lightly explained or not at all.
They was both born around the same time..... Coincidence??
I think so, yes.
Be reasonable is the ancient science.