On FPTAS and many one parsimonious reductions We have two $NP$ complete problems $\Pi_1$ and $\Pi_2$. Suppose  $\Pi_1\rightarrow\Pi_2$ be a many one parsimonious reduction.


If $\Pi_1$ has an FPTAS then does $\Pi_2$ also have?
If $\Pi_2$ has an FPTAS then does $\Pi_1$ also have?
Regarding number 1: The reduction to 3-SAT in the Cook-Levin theorem is many-one and parsimonious. There's no FPTAS for 3-SAT unless $\mathcal{P=NP}$, yet any problem in $\mathcal{NP}$, including those with a FPTAS, reduce to it in the fashion you describe.
With respect to number 2: I don't know many problems with FPTAS's but I strongly suspect that, if you look through a few and the reductions that prove them to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete, you'll quickly find a counterexample. That's because I don't see any connection between being able to count solutions and being able to approximate them.