Аннотация: I wrote for them, but they refused: Science and Philosophy - Shared History, Diverging Paths? (25-26 July , 2025, Leibniz University, Germany)
Abstract
This study investigates the philosophical parallels between the Indian Vedic schools of Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, and Vaiśeṣika and the Hellenistic school of Stoicism, focusing on their shared commitments to logic, ethics, and cosmology. Employing a comparative-historical method, the research analyzes primary texts and secondary sources to uncover similarities in epistemological frameworks, ethical principles, and cosmological theories, contextualizing these within their respective cultural and historical settings. The novelty of this work lies in its systematic comparison of these Indian schools with Stoicism, highlighting convergences in rational inquiry and ethical practice that have been underexplored in cross-cultural philosophy. Practically, the findings contribute to academic discourse by enriching comparative philosophy curricula and fostering interdisciplinary studies in philosophy, history, and cultural studies. In societal contexts, the research promotes intercultural understanding by demonstrating how diverse philosophical traditions address universal human concerns, encouraging dialogue on ethics and rationality in globalized societies. This study is valuable for students, researchers, and educators interested in the intersections of Eastern and Western intellectual traditions.
This study employs a comparative-historical method to explore parallels between Indian philosophical schools (Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, and Vaiśeṣika) and Stoicism, offering novel insights into their shared emphasis on logic, ethics, and rational cosmology, with practical applications for cross-cultural philosophical education.
Keywords: Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, Vaiśeṣika, Stoicism, Indian philosophy, comparative philosophy, rationalism.
Nyāya and Stoic Logic
The Nyāya school, founded by Akṣapāda Gautama around the 6th century BCE, emphasizes logic and epistemology, focusing on pramāṇas (sources of knowledge) and rational argumentation (Shohin 2001: 32). Nyāya"s systematic approach to knowledge, as seen in the Nyāya Sūtras, parallels Stoicism"s emphasis on logical rigor. Stoics, such as Zeno of Citium and Chrysippus, developed a propositional logic system to ensure rational coherence in understanding the cosmos (Long & Sedley 1987: 195). Both Nyāya and Stoicism prioritize reason as a tool for achieving harmony with the natural order, with Nyāya"s pramāṇas resembling Stoic criteria for truth, such as katalepsis (cognitive impression) (Shohin 2001: 35 & Long & Sedley 1987: 250).
Mīmāṃsā and Stoic Ethics
Mīmāṃsā, founded by Jaimini around the 3rd century BCE, focuses on the interpretation of Vedic rituals and the concept of dharma (duty) to maintain cosmic and social order (Flood 1996: 128). This emphasis on duty aligns with Stoic ethics, which stress living in accordance with nature and fulfilling one"s role in the cosmic order (Diogenes Laertius 2005: 195). Mīmāṃsā"s rational analysis of ritualistic action mirrors the Stoic practice of aligning personal actions with universal reason (logos). For instance, Mīmāṃsā thinkers like Kumārila Bhaṭṭa (7th century CE) systematized ethical conduct through Vedic exegesis, much as Stoics like Epictetus emphasized rational self-discipline (Flood 1996: 130 & Epictetus 1998: 11).
Vaiśeṣika and Stoic Cosmology
Vaiśeṣika, founded by Kaṇāda around the 6th century BCE, proposes an atomistic theory of reality, categorizing existence into padārthas (categories) such as substance and quality (Radhakrishnan 1927: 205). This atomistic worldview shares similarities with Stoic cosmology, which views the universe as a material continuum governed by divine reason (Long & Sedley 1987: 274). Vaiśeṣika"s focus on causality and the interaction of atoms parallels the Stoic notion of a deterministic universe guided by fate (Radhakrishnan 1927: 208 & Diogenes Laertius 2005: 241). The eventual synthesis of Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika into a unified system further reflects a holistic approach akin to Stoicism"s integration of logic, ethics, and physics (Shohin 2001: 37).
Historical Context and Cross-Cultural Exchange (Indian Philosophical Influence on Europe)
The conquests of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BCE facilitated a significant cultural and philosophical exchange between India and the Greco-Hellenistic world, extending beyond the encounters with the gymnosophists. The gymnosophists, as described by Greek historians, were Indian ascetics, primarily Jain and Buddhist practitioners, known for their austere lifestyles and philosophical discussions (Radhakrishnan 1923: 252). These figures, often identified with the śramaṇa traditions, included Jain monks practicing ahimsa (non-violence) and Buddhist ascetics advocating detachment and the pursuit of nirvana. Notable among them was Calanus (likely a Jain or Buddhist ascetic), who accompanied Alexander"s entourage and engaged in philosophical dialogues with Greek thinkers (Diogenes Laertius 2005: 237).
However, the transmission of Indian philosophical ideas to Europe was not limited to these gymnosophists. Alexander"s campaigns in northwest India, particularly in regions like Gandhara and Magadha, exposed Greek intellectuals to a broader spectrum of Indian thought, including Vedic schools such as Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, and Vaiśeṣika, as well as non-Vedic traditions like Jainism and Buddhism (McEvilley 2002: 45). For instance, the rationalist methodologies of Nyāya, with its emphasis on logic and pramāṇas (sources of knowledge), resonated with Greek philosophical concerns, potentially influencing figures like Pyrrho of Elis, whose skepticism shares similarities with Buddhist and Jain doctrines of doubt and non-dogmatism (Radhakrishnan 1923: 253). Similarly, Vaiśeṣika"s atomistic cosmology, which categorized reality into padārthas, paralleled Greek atomist ideas, suggesting possible cross-pollination (Radhakrishnan,1927: 208).
The interactions were facilitated by trade routes, diplomatic exchanges, and the presence of Indian scholars in Hellenistic courts, such as those established by Alexander"s successors in the Seleucid Empire (McEvilley 2002: 47). These exchanges introduced concepts like karma, dharma, and cyclical time to Greek thought, which may have influenced Hellenistic philosophies, including Stoicism"s emphasis on cosmic order and ethical duty (Long & Sedley 1987: 274). While gymnosophists like Calanus provided direct personal encounters, the broader dissemination of Indian texts, oral traditions, and cultural practices through merchants, diplomats, and travelers ensured a more extensive influence. This cross-cultural dialogue laid the groundwork for later philosophical syntheses, enriching both Indian and Western intellectual traditions.
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of the Indian philosophical schools of Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, and Vaiśeṣika with Stoicism reveals profound convergences in their approaches to rational inquiry, ethical living, and cosmological understanding, underscoring the potential for Indian and Western philosophies to mutually inform each other. These parallels not only highlight shared intellectual commitments but also offer valuable insights into universal questions about knowledge, duty, and the nature of reality, enriching contemporary philosophical discourse and affirming the enduring relevance of these traditions in a globalized world.
Nyāya"s emphasis on logic and epistemology, as articulated in the Nyāya Sūtras (Shohin 2001: 32), mirrors Stoicism"s rigorous propositional logic, developed by thinkers like Chrysippus (Long & Sedley 1987: 195). Both traditions prioritize reason as a tool for aligning human understanding with the natural order, whether through Nyāya"s pramāṇas (sources of knowledge) or the Stoic concept of katalepsis (cognitive impression). This shared commitment to rational inquiry suggests that, despite their distinct cultural origins, both systems address the universal human need to establish reliable methods for acquiring knowledge. Nyāya"s systematic analysis of perception, inference, and testimony parallels the Stoic insistence on clear and distinct impressions as the basis for truth, demonstrating a cross-cultural convergence in epistemological priorities.
Similarly, Mīmāṃsā"s focus on dharma and Vedic rituals (Flood 1996: 128) resonates with Stoic ethics, which emphasize living in accordance with nature and fulfilling one"s role within the cosmic order (Diogenes Laertius 2005: 195). Mīmāṃsā"s rational exegesis of ritualistic action, as seen in the works of Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, aligns with the Stoic practice of rational self-discipline, as exemplified by Epictetus (Epictetus 1998: 11). Both traditions view ethical conduct as a means to achieve harmony with a larger cosmic framework, whether through adherence to Vedic duties or alignment with the Stoic logos. This parallel underscores a shared ethical aspiration to transcend individual desires and contribute to a greater order, suggesting that ethical questions are not bound by cultural or geographical divides.
Vaiśeṣika"s atomistic cosmology, with its categorization of reality into padārthas (Radhakrishnan 1927: 205), finds a counterpart in Stoicism"s materialist yet divinely ordered universe (Long & Sedley 1987: 274). Both systems grapple with the nature of causality and the structure of reality, with Vaiśeṣika"s atomism and Stoicism"s deterministic cosmology reflecting a common interest in understanding the universe as a coherent, rational system. The eventual synthesis of Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika into a unified philosophical framework further parallels Stoicism"s holistic integration of logic, ethics, and physics, illustrating a shared ambition to create comprehensive systems of thought (Shohin 2001: 37).
While Stoicism developed independently, its rational and ethical frameworks echo the concerns of Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, and Vaiśeṣika, pointing to universal philosophical inquiries that transcend cultural boundaries. This cross-cultural analysis has significant implications for contemporary philosophy. By highlighting these parallels, it challenges the Eurocentric bias often present in philosophical discourse and advocates for a more inclusive approach that recognizes the contributions of non-Western traditions. Practically, this study can inform educational curricula by integrating Indian philosophy into comparative philosophy courses, fostering a deeper understanding of global intellectual heritage. In societal contexts, it promotes intercultural dialogue by demonstrating how diverse traditions address shared human concerns, encouraging mutual respect and collaboration in addressing ethical and epistemological challenges. Ultimately, the enduring relevance of Nyāya, Mīmāṃsā, Vaiśeṣika, and Stoicism lies in their ability to inspire ongoing reflection on the nature of knowledge, duty, and reality in an interconnected world.
References:
Diogenes Laertius. (2005). Lives of eminent philosophers (R. D. Hicks, Trans.). Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1925).
Epictetus. (1998). Discourses and selected writings (R. Dobbin, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1925).
Flood, G. (1996). An introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press.
Long, A. A., & Sedley, D. N. (1987). The Hellenistic philosophers (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
McEvilley, T. (2002). The shape of ancient thought: Comparative studies in Greek and Indian philosophies. Allworth Press.
Radhakrishnan, S. (1923). Indian philosophy (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
Radhakrishnan, S. (1927). Indian philosophy (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press.
Shohin, V. K. (2001). Philosophy of Nyāya: A historical-philosophical study. Eastern Literature.