On the first question, the simple answer is no, this is not true! This is wishful thinking on the part of Hindus who are trying to prove, without evidence, that Hinduism affected Judaism. The problem with this is that there simply is NO EVIDENCE to support this claim. None. It is true that the Phoenicians were great sailors who sailed great distances. The sailed throughout the Mediterranean, even entering into the Atlantic, certainly to Spain and even to the British Isles. Their peak of power and influence was from about 1000 t0 400 BC–long after the Jewish religion was created. What there is not any evidence for is that they sailed in the Indian Ocean. I have seen no evidence for this and, unless someone can present actual evidence for this claim, you should simply dismiss it as wishful thinking.
On the second question, let me say that you are not asking an expert on linguistics. However, if I understand correctly from my limited study, Sanskrit is a language which finds its roots in Central Asia. It is part of the Indo-Aryan language group. In other words, it is related to Farsi (Persia, Afghanistan today), but it is not a Semitic language. The evidence is that the migration was from Western Asia into India, not from India toward Western Asia. The source of Sanskrit is north and west of India, and the source of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek is certainly NOT the Indian subcontinent. There is probably a common source for the Greek language and Sanskrit, but there is no evidence that Sanskrit influenced any of these languages. The idea is not supported by evidence and is further evidence of wishful thinking on the part of Hindus who understand that Christianity is a highly respected religion and want some sort of “credit” as a source of Judaism and Christianity. The big problem for this theory is that there is no evidence supporting it, which ought to be the death knell for any theory.