A History of Indian Literature v2.c19.s3.t1.163

v2.c19.s3.t1.163

The method of proof in our Suttas cannot possibly be compared with that of Plato. Nor is the number of Suttas which, as dialogues, can bear comparison with the Platonic dialogues, very great. It is true that *Karl Fries*¹ has pointed out a number of remarkable parallels between Indian and Greek dialogues; but the parallels fail in just the most essential points. They are certainly not sufficiently striking to compel us to assume any mutual influence. The majority of the Suttas are indeed not "dialogues" in the real sense of the word, but rather the speeches of one principal speaker, usually Buddha, which are generally interrupted only by yes or no or by expressions of assent or approbation on the part of the other speakers. Even the best real dialogues in the Nikāyas will rarely remind us of the dialogues of Plato, but very often indeed of the dialogues of the Upaniṣads and the Itihāsa dialogues,² with which we became acquainted in the Mahābhārata.