Hellenistic Buddhism

If Buddhism had spread to the west more than in our time, how do you think it would have adapted to the probable predominant Hellinistic culture of the time? I say Hellenistic as I think the best time for it to spread would be right after Alexander the Great's time.
 
He'd probably be added to the list of gods or heros. Buddah might be said to be the son of Apollo or something. Being as his measage was peace and general compassion he might be linked to Athena. I don't really see him fiting in with other Greek gods though, because of how violent and assholish they tended to be. But then Helenistic culture didn't just have Greek gods, but Egyptian and Persan too. Or he might just be seen as another philosopher like Plato.
 
Last edited:
I give you Greco-Buddhism!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism

I also give you the actual low down on G.B. (Philosophy, How-To-Practice, Rituals, Cosmology, etc) written by a real life practitioner of Greco-Buddhism http://www.neosalexandria.org/greco_buddhism.htm

Actually there are anicent sources that Buddhism did reach places as far as Egypt itself. Surprisingly not all that much different. Hercules and Fortuna are two of the best known Western Gods to become apart of Eastern Buddhism. It would be unsurprising if a few of the Eastern Gods did become popular in the West, but this would more likely be under the time of the Romans are be counted amongst the Oriental religions.

Quite possibly it would have been very popular, depending ont he sect of Buddhism, it would have been popular amongst all the classes most likely flourishing in Grecco-Roman territory. Not sure how they would react to it in the traditionally Gaulish-Celtic territory.
 
He'd probably be added to the list of gods or heros. Buddah might be said to be the son of Apollo or something. Being as his measage was peace and general compassion he might be linked to Athena. I don't really see him fiting in with other Greek gods though, because of how violent and assholish they tended to be. But then Helenistic culture didn't just have Greek gods, but Egyptian and Persan too. Or he might just be seen as another philosopher like Plato.

The religion of the Hellenistic Era was not the religion of Homer. The Gods had taken on a much more sober, moralistic image in the minds of the people by this point. They were still 'assholes' in that they were in control of the world and the world sucked, but no more so than the Christian God that followed them.
 
He'd probably be added to the list of gods or heros. Buddah might be said to be the son of Apollo or something. Being as his measage was peace and general compassion he might be linked to Athena. I don't really see him fiting in with other Greek gods though, because of how violent and assholish they tended to be. But then Helenistic culture didn't just have Greek gods, but Egyptian and Persan too. Or he might just be seen as another philosopher like Plato.

I think its worth mentioning that not all the Greeks saw the Gods in the same way Homer did. A few prominent philosophers were critical of the poems and stories written about them, as they felt that they potrayed the Gods as rather flawed and petty, and therefore considered them blasphemous.
 
It is quite probable that Buddhists reached not just Egypt, but Greece and taught there. There is no way of knowing to what degree mystical philosophies and the doctrine of reincarnation were influenced by them (it has been argued the latter is a shared Indo-European heritage), but there are indications that these gymnosophists 'from india' were taken seriously by earnest thinkers and had a number of followers. One of them publicly burned himself in Athens. Of course, he might have been Jain, Hindu, or anything.

The good thing about Buddhism is that it would noit have been a problem. Even in the most extreme form, it would have been no stranger or more threatening to established order than Pythagoreanism or Mithraism. It should fit in well.
 
Some thoughts: Try finding a book on Greco-Buddhism. You won't. You will find books on Gandharan Buddhism, which is the actual name for a vibrant and dynamic form of Buddhism which led to a lot of what's in Mahayana.

How wikipedia lets that slide, when there's a vigorous debate over waht Louis XVI ate for breakfast before his execution, I dunno.

Anyway, the problem is that your window is prettty narrow; Gandharan Buddhism didn't really flower til the 1st century CE, 2nd century CE. Before that, you get an aniconic religion based on the Buddha's past lives. It's still an option, but, hrmm.
 
Top