|
Post by Ekantin on Sept 25, 2009 17:51:59 GMT -6
I'm currently flicking through Mel Thompson's Religion and Science, and I spotted this interesting extract where he describes Platonic thought in relation to religion:
"Plato argues that the things we see and experience around us are only copies of unseen eternal realities. Thus the tree that I see in front of me is a particular example of an ideal, perfect tree. I know it to be a tree because I have an intuition of that ideal tree - indeed, it is the eternal and ideal tree that leads us to the notion 'tree' in the first place. Therefore, in order to understand the world, a person has to look beyond the particular and examine the most general and universal. In his famous analogy of the cave, most people do not see things as they really are, but merely as a set of fleeting images, shadows cast on a wall as objects are passed in front of a fire. The philosopher sees beyond the fire, through the mouth of the cave, to the light of the sun. Reality is only understood by turning away from the wall and its shadows (the phenomena we experience) and making a difficult journey out of the cave and into the world of eternal and unchanging Forms.
"The key feature here is that there are two very different worlds, the world of the Forms, ideal and perfect, and the imperfect, transient world of our everyday experience. The religious person, like the philosopher, is encouraged to turn away from the latter in order to appreciate the former. Notice what far reaching implications this has for religion and science. For Plato, the concept or idea is more real than the particular thing experienced. When Christianity was influenced by Platonic thought, it therefore claimed that its doctrines represented a reality, compared with which knowledge of the world is a shadow. This is the very opposite of the scientific approach, which is empirical - i.e. it is based on experience."
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Sept 25, 2009 18:04:29 GMT -6
For obvious reasons I found the above fascinating to read. It is more or less a description of the spiritual path that we find in all the books (scriptures) that we are familiar with; understanding the difference between the material and the spiritual, having the inclination to turn away from ephemeral things and turn to a more 'real' way of life and living.
But I was fascinated with the use of the tree as a description. Does this not remind us of the banyan tree described in BG 15.1-4? That is used in the text (and also in interpretation) as alike to Plato's symbolism of reality, with the upside-down reflection of that tree in the material world representing the ephemeral nature of material activities. asaGga-zastreNa dRDhena chittvA tataH padaM tat parimArgitavyaM says Krishna in the text, with detachment one has to find a way out of the tangled roots and branches of materialism.
It is widely known that Greek philosophy was the foundation of civilisation, philosophy, etc., but to what extent have Greek (Platonic) ideas influenced Indian religious philosophy? This is a question that fascinated me today after reading the above extract. I suppose the next step would be to try and track down where in Plato's writings these descriptions can be found, so I can check how close the parallels are. Unless someone else has already done it and would like to share their knowledge here.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Sept 26, 2009 15:55:45 GMT -6
BG 15.4 also speaks of the need to attain to the 'eternal abode'; one should find a way out of the tree's tangled roots and branches because tam eva cAdyaM puruSaM prapadye, to Him, the first Lord, one should surrender. It seems to be a progression from Plato's idea of simply accepting a higher reality, that one should not only accept it but also actively pursue it as a worthy goal.
According to scholars, the Bhagavad-gita was probably not written by Vyasa 5000 years ago but sometime between the 5th and 2nd Centuries BC. Nitai thinks it was around the 3rd Century BC. Either way, we know that Alexander the Great first conquered some parts of India in 326 BC, and the total duration of the Indo-Greek Kingdom proper was from the early 2nd Century BC till about 10 AD. Is it possible to suggest that this was how Greek thought infiltrated India and influenced it's philosophical thought?
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Oct 6, 2009 11:00:56 GMT -6
In Bhagavad-gita 18.61, Krishna is believed to have said:
IzvaraH sarva-bhUtAnAM hRd-deze 'rjuna tiSThati
"The Lord is situated in the heart of all beings, O Arjuna."
It puts me in mind of what the Upanishads state about the jIva and the Lord being as two birds seated on a twig (Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.3 for example). There are similar verses to MU 3.1.1 but this one just says that they "sit on the same tree". It doesn't say that they reside in the heart, but I will have to look at my Upanishads and see.
Whatever it may be, where did this idea come from, that they reside in the heart? What are the textual origins of that idea? How far back can it be traced?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 6, 2009 13:26:22 GMT -6
In Bhagavad-gita 18.61, Krishna is believed to have said: IzvaraH sarva-bhUtAnAM hRd-deze 'rjuna tiSThati "The Lord is situated in the heart of all beings, O Arjuna." It puts me in mind of what the Upanishads state about the jIva and the Lord being as two birds seated on a twig (Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.3 for example). There are similar verses to MU 3.1.3 but this one just says that they "sit on the same tree". It doesn't say that they reside in the heart, but I will have to look at my Upanishads and see. Whatever it may be, where did this idea come from, that they reside in the heart? What are the textual origins of that idea? How far back can it be traced? It is hard to speak with anything like certainty here, but as far as I know the heart does not become important until post-Vedic times. I don't recall any instances in actual Vedic texts, nor in the Upanisads, at least not in Upanisads that are early. That means that such ideas develop after say the 5th century BCE and probably hand-in-hand with the rise of yoga. The heart is enormously important in Saivite tantrik texts, but those too only develop beginning in the second or third century BCE and reach their height in the middle of the first millennium of the common era.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 6, 2009 13:35:18 GMT -6
There are many interesting parallels between ancient Greek thought and ancient Indian thought. I think those parallels arise from a common shared ancestry of languages and culture going back to Indo-European roots. I rather object to the idea though that the Greeks were the inventors of civilization. (Most science writers seem to always begin there) Long before them were the Mesopotamians and at roughly the same time the mysterious Mohenjodaro civilization. What to speak of the ancient Chinese and more recent but still fascinating the Olmecs of Central America. There is an interesting book-length essay on the early interactions between the Mediterranean civilizations and India. It is called India and Europe by Wilhelm Halbfass. Are you familiar with that book? It is an interesting read. I highly recommend it. It has a sequel also which I have not read. Can't thing of the title at present.
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on Oct 6, 2009 17:04:21 GMT -6
No I haven't heard of that book before. Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out when I get a chance.
The reason I wondered about the significance of God or soul (depending how people translate Atman in context) in the heart is an idea I'm just playing with at the moment and seeing where it leads. I could be totally wrong of course but I'm just playing with the idea and throwing it out there: Aristotle was an influential figure in suggesting that the heart was the seat of consciousness. He differed from his predecessor Plato, who (correctly, it turns out) thought that the seat (of knowledge) was in the brain, although I'm sure Aristotle had his reasons. A friend tells me he inferred this from numerous dissections and autopsies on human and animal corpses. An excellent book by Theodore Millon (Masters of the Mind) traces the course of psychological illness and treatment throughout history.
I'm thus wondering if the "God/soul in the heart" idea in scriptures was borrowed from Greek sources? It is an interesting exploration anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 7, 2009 16:08:42 GMT -6
No I haven't heard of that book before. Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out when I get a chance. The reason I wondered about the significance of God or soul (depending how people translate Atman in context) in the heart is an idea I'm just playing with at the moment and seeing where it leads. I could be totally wrong of course but I'm just playing with the idea and throwing it out there: Aristotle was an influential figure in suggesting that the heart was the seat of consciousness. He differed from his predecessor Plato, who (correctly, it turns out) thought that the seat (of knowledge) was in the brain, although I'm sure Aristotle had his reasons. A friend tells me he inferred this from numerous dissections and autopsies on human and animal corpses. An excellent book by Theodore Millon ( Masters of the Mind) traces the course of psychological illness and treatment throughout history. I'm thus wondering if the "God/soul in the heart" idea in scriptures was borrowed from Greek sources? It is an interesting exploration anyway. Come to think of it, it is only the first chapter or two of that book which treats of the ancient period. The rest deals with more recent exchanges of ideas and ways in which the West regarded India (Hegel, for instance). Still the first chapter is an interesting read. The second book that continues the project is called Tradition and Reflection. I have not read that one, but I notice there seem to be lots of copies around London here in used book shops. Halbfass' work is generally quite good. On the question of whether the idea of atman residing in the heart was borrowed from the Greeks, I must say that it is an interesting possibility. Certainly, Alexander came right up to the Indus before he turned back and he left many Greeks behind to rule in various quarters of the Punjab after he left. There was a Greek presence and influence in what is now Pakistan for many centuries. they appear in the texts of that period and thereafter as Yavanas (Ionians). I am always struck by how Greek those early images of the Buddha look with their wavy hair, straight noses, and flowing robes. The early Pali Buddhist classic Questions of King Milinda is supposed to be based on an interaction between a Greek King called Menander and a Buddhist monk. So certainly it is possible. There seems to be a common Indo-European root (kerd) for the word hRd or hRdaya (Herz in German, heart in English, cardio in Greek, and cor in Latin). I notice the Sanskrit dictionary also connects hRd with the word zrad which is the root for zraddhA. Anyway, hRdaya is mentioned in the Vedas, but whether it is connected with the presence of any devatA is the question. I think if there is any typical location given to the divine in the earlier Vedic texts in would be the womb, garbha. But that is just an impression, not backed up with hard data.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Oct 7, 2009 16:44:32 GMT -6
I remembered something at posting my last rejoinder to the question, a reference to heart in a rather important hymn of the Rg Veda. In the fourth or fifth verse of the famous Nasadiya Sukta (Rg Veda 10.129) one finds the following line:
sato bandhum asati niravindan hRdi pratISyA kavayo manISA
This means:
the wise kavis searching in their hearts found a connection of the real with the unreal.
Here heart plays a major role in the discovery of truth and this hymn is well before (10th cent. BCE) the presence of the Greeks.
This hymn and the Purusa Sukta have been enormously influential in the development of later Hinduism.
|
|
|
Post by cuckoo4cocopuffs on Jan 15, 2012 18:29:00 GMT -6
The Mahabharata is known to be rife with interpolations. It would be interesting to investigate how recent the most recent ones actually are.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 16, 2012 13:02:39 GMT -6
The Mahabharata is known to be rife with interpolations. It would be interesting to investigate how recent the most recent ones actually are. Indeed it is. I am getting ready to put in a few myself.
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jan 16, 2012 14:47:51 GMT -6
Do the Indic philosophers actually know of the heart or brain like modern science does? Perhaps not, right?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 16, 2012 22:36:42 GMT -6
Do the Indic philosophers actually know of the heart or brain like modern science does? Perhaps not, right? Indic philosophers were about as much in the dark about the brain and the heart as the Greek philosophers. I don't know the state of knowledge of the medical texts, however. It would be interesting to see what they say about the heart and the brain. Aristotle thought the brain was a big radiator useful for cooling down the body.
|
|