He is remembered in early Buddhist texts as Milinda, a king who discussed Buddhism with Nagasena, a monk. Probably the most famous part of the discussion is when Menander asks about the concept of *anatta* – the non-existence of the self – and Nagasena replies with a metaphor of a chariot: What is a chariot? If we take a wheel out, is it still a chariot? How about two wheels? The beam? The platform? When exactly, during this deconstruction process, the chariot stops being the chariot and if one can answer this question, can we then look at the last thing that was removed and say, “oh yes, this is the self of a chariot”?
This is not by concidence similar to the “Ship of Theseus” thought experiment, created by Heraclitus and Plato, and recently popularized by “WandaVision” 🙂 The early Buddhist and ancient Greek philosophy were similar in many aspects, up to the point where some argue that the conquest of Alexander the Great and the subsequence creation of Greek kingdoms on the conquered territories eased the exchange of thought. We know about at least one report of a Buddhist monk visiting ancient Athens, but in that story the monk wasn’t received well and, err, self-immolated himself.
To be noted that “the Savior” is rather literal translation of greek “soter”, which was a honorific title for hellenistic kings (and even later Roman officials). So nobody worshipped this king as if he was the Messias (which is also translated as soter).
The basics of Buddhism and Stoicism are very similar so its not surprising a Greek king would promote it.
7 comments
ΒΑΣΕΔ!
This is cool—you should post in r/oldcoins!
The fact that I can read that amazes me. Even though it’s a name
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menander_I
He is remembered in early Buddhist texts as Milinda, a king who discussed Buddhism with Nagasena, a monk. Probably the most famous part of the discussion is when Menander asks about the concept of *anatta* – the non-existence of the self – and Nagasena replies with a metaphor of a chariot: What is a chariot? If we take a wheel out, is it still a chariot? How about two wheels? The beam? The platform? When exactly, during this deconstruction process, the chariot stops being the chariot and if one can answer this question, can we then look at the last thing that was removed and say, “oh yes, this is the self of a chariot”?
This is not by concidence similar to the “Ship of Theseus” thought experiment, created by Heraclitus and Plato, and recently popularized by “WandaVision” 🙂 The early Buddhist and ancient Greek philosophy were similar in many aspects, up to the point where some argue that the conquest of Alexander the Great and the subsequence creation of Greek kingdoms on the conquered territories eased the exchange of thought. We know about at least one report of a Buddhist monk visiting ancient Athens, but in that story the monk wasn’t received well and, err, self-immolated himself.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarmanochegas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarmanochegas)
To be noted that “the Savior” is rather literal translation of greek “soter”, which was a honorific title for hellenistic kings (and even later Roman officials). So nobody worshipped this king as if he was the Messias (which is also translated as soter).
The basics of Buddhism and Stoicism are very similar so its not surprising a Greek king would promote it.