Changes

Charvaka (IAST: Cārvāka), originally known as Lokāyata and Bṛhaspatya, is the ancient school of Indian materialism.  

Charvaka (IAST: Cārvāka), originally known as Lokāyata and Bṛhaspatya, is the ancient school of Indian materialism.  The School of Charvaka (those of sweet-talk)or Lokayata (those of the world) pre-dates the Buddha and Mahavira; and has a

of Indian thought.  

* Charvaka holds direct perception as proper sources of knowledge hence they rule out ‘inference’ and ‘testimony’ as the source and criterion of knowledge.

* Charvaka holds direct perception as proper sources of knowledge hence they rule out ‘inference’ and ‘testimony’ as the source and criterion of knowledge.

* Its philosophy embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects Vedas, Vedic ritualism and supernaturalism.[1][2]

* Its philosophy embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects Vedas, Vedic ritualism and supernaturalism.[1][2]

* Charvakas, believe that truth can be known only through the sense organs.  

* Charvakas, believe that truth can be known only through the sense organs.  

== Founder - Brihaspati or Charvaka (will check) ==

== Founder - Brhaspati ==

Ajita Kesakambali is credited as the forerunner of the Charvakas,[3] while Brihaspati is usually referred to as the founder of Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy.[4]  

Brihaspati is usually referred to as the founder of Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy.[4] while Ajita Kesakambali is credited as the forerunner of the Charvakas,[3]  

 

Unfortunately, the basic sources if this system are not available today, destroyed due to lack of royal patronage and due to influence of other philosophers. Much of the primary literature the Brhaspatya sutras (ca. 600 BCE), are missing or lost.[5]   Most references available in the present day is obtained through cross references scattered in Sanskrit literature. 

== Literature of Charvakas ==

== Literature of Charvakas ==

Much of the primary literature of Charvaka, the Barhaspatya sutras (ca. 600 BCE), are missing or lost.[5]

The teachings of Charvakas have been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras, sutras and the Indian epic poetry as well as in the dialogues of Gautama Buddha and from Jain literature.[5][6]  

 

Its teachings have been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras, sutras and the Indian epic poetry as well as in the dialogues of Gautama Buddha and from Jain literature.[5][6]

One of the widely studied principles of Charvaka philosophy was its rejection of inference as a means to establish valid, universal knowledge, and metaphysical truths.[7][8] In other words, the Charvaka epistemology states that whenever one infers a truth from a set of observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge is conditional.[9]

One of the widely studied principles of Charvaka philosophy was its rejection of inference as a means to establish valid, universal knowledge, and metaphysical truths.[7][8] In other words, the Charvaka epistemology states that whenever one infers a truth from a set of observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge is conditional.[9]

Charvaka is categorized as a heterodox school of Indian philosophy.[10][11] It is considered an example of atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition.[12][13][14]

The Sütra-krtañga is one of the oldest and most important works of the Jain Agama Prakrt literature, Sílãnka, the oldest commentator of the Sutra - krtänga , has used four terms for Cãrvãka, viz. ( 1 ) Bärhaspatya ( 2 ) Lokãyata ( 3 ) Bhütavädin ( 4 ) Vãmamãrgin.

The etymology of Charvaka (Sanskrit: चार्वाक) is uncertain. Some believe it to mean "agreeable speech" or pejoratively, "sweet-tongued" (from Sanskrit's cāru "agreeable" and vāk "speech"). Others contend that it derives from the root charv meaning to eat possibly alluding to the philosophy's hedonistic precepts of "eat, drink, and be merry".[15] Yet another theory believes it to be eponymous in origin, with the founder of the school being Charvaka, a disciple of Brihaspati.[16]

The etymology of Charvaka (Sanskrit: चार्वाक) is uncertain. The term " Lokãyata » is made of two Sanskrit words, viz. loka and äyata i.e. " world view" or " life view " or " view prevalent among people ". Lokãyata was also known as Cãrvãka who was a disciple of Brhaspati.

Bhattacharya notes that the word Charvaka is of irregular construction, as cara as an adjective means "agreeable, pleasant", but as a noun is another name of Brihaspati, and both derivations are plausible.[17]

Bhattacharya notes that the word Charvaka is of irregular construction, as cara as an adjective means "agreeable, pleasant", but as a noun is another name of Brihaspati, and both derivations are plausible.[17]

The most prominent member of this school during the time of the Buddha was a man named Ajita Kesakambali (Ajita of the Hair Blanket), whose ideas are summarized in a Buddhist Pali text known as Samannaphala Sutta, where he denies the doctrine of transmigration of the soul.

The most prominent member of this school during the time of the Buddha was a man named Ajita Kesakambali (Ajita of the Hair Blanket), whose ideas are summarized in a Buddhist Pali text known as Samannaphala Sutta, where he denies the doctrine of transmigration of the soul.

According to D. Chattopadhyaya, from about 10th century B. C. to the beginning of Christian era, when slave system was developing, Indian materialistic philosophy including Lokãyata very much developed as a popular system of philosophy and did exert great iufluence among the traders, craftsmen and other lower castes of the then Indian society.

According to Chattopadhyaya, the traditional name of Charvaka is Lokayata. It was called Lokayata because it was prevalent (ayatah) among the people (lokesu), and meant the world-outlook of the people.[18] The dictionary meaning of Lokāyata (लोकायत) signifies "directed towards, aiming at the world, worldly".[15][19]

 

The dictionary meaning of Lokāyata (लोकायत) signifies "directed towards, aiming at the world, worldly".[15][19]

In early to mid 20th century literature, the etymology of Lokayata has been given different interpretations, in part because the primary sources are unavailable, and the meaning has been deduced from divergent secondary literature.[20] The name Lokāyata, for example, is found in Chanakya's Arthashastra, which refers to three ānvīkṣikīs (अन्वीक्षिकी, literally, examining by reason,[21] logical philosophies) – Yoga, Samkhya and Lokāyata. However, Lokāyata in the Arthashastra is not anti-Vedic, but implies Lokāyata to be a part of Vedic lore.[22] Lokāyata here refers to logic or science of debate (disputatio, "criticism").[23] Rudolf Franke translated Lokayata in German as "logisch beweisende Naturerklärung", that is "logically proving explanation of nature".[24]

In early to mid 20th century literature, the etymology of Lokayata has been given different interpretations, in part because the primary sources are unavailable, and the meaning has been deduced from divergent secondary literature.[20] The name Lokāyata, for example, is found in Chanakya's Arthashastra, which refers to three ānvīkṣikīs (अन्वीक्षिकी, literally, examining by reason,[21] logical philosophies) – Yoga, Samkhya and Lokāyata.  

In 8th century CE Jaina literature, Saddarsanasamuccaya by Haribhadra,[25] Lokayata is stated to be the Hindu school where there is "no God, no samsara (rebirth), no karma, no duty, no fruits of merit, no sin."[26]

In 8th century CE Jaina literature, Saddarsanasamuccaya by Haribhadra,[25] Lokayata is stated to be the Hindu school where there is "no God, no samsara (rebirth), no karma, no duty, no fruits of merit, no sin."[26]

The Buddhist Sanskrit work Divyavadana (ca. 200–350 CE) mentions Lokayata, where it is listed among subjects of study, and with the sense of "technical logical science".[27] Shantarakshita and Adi Shankara use the word lokayata to mean materialism,[5][28] with the latter using the term Lokāyata, not Charvaka.[29] The terms Lokayata and Brhaspatya have been used interchangeably for the Charvaka philosophy of materialism.

The Buddhist Sanskrit work Divyavadana (ca. 200–350 CE) mentions Lokayata, where it is listed among subjects of study, and with the sense of "technical logical science".[27] Shantarakshita and Adi Shankara use the word lokayata to mean materialism,[5][28] with the latter using the term Lokāyata, not Charvaka.[29] The terms Lokayata and Brhaspatya have been used interchangeably for the Charvaka philosophy of materialism.

Origin[edit]

== Origin of Lokayata or Charvakas ==

The tenets of the Charvaka atheistic doctrines can be traced to the relatively later composed layers of the Rigveda, while substantial discussions on the Charvaka is found in post-Vedic literature.[5][30][31] The primary literature of Charvaka, such as the Brhaspati Sutra is missing or lost.[5][32] Its theories and development has been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras (such as the Arthashastra), sutras and the epics (the Mahabharata and Ramayana) of Hinduism as well as from the dialogues of Gautama Buddha and Jain literature.[5][33]

The tenets of the Charvaka atheistic doctrines can be traced to the relatively later composed layers of the Rigveda, while substantial discussions on the Charvaka is found in post-Vedic literature.[5][30][31]  

 

The primary literature of Charvaka, such as the Brhaspati Sutra is missing or lost.[5][32] Its theories and development has been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras (such as the Arthashastra), sutras and the epics (the Mahabharata and Ramayana) of Hinduism as well as from the dialogues of Gautama Buddha and Jain literature.[5][33]. These sutras predate 150 BC, because they are mentioned in the Mahābhāṣya (7.3.45).[39]

Substantial discussions about the Charvaka doctrines are only found in texts after 600 BCE.[5][32][34] Bhattacharya posits that Charvaka may have been one of several atheistic, materialist schools that existed in ancient India.[35] Though there is evidence of its development in Vedic era,[36] Charvaka emerged as an alternative to the Āstika schools as well as a philosophical predecessor to subsequent or contemporaneous nāstika philosophies such as Ājīvika, Jainism and Buddhism in the classical period of Indian philosophy.[37]

Lokãyata was the oldest heterodox system in India and certainly pre-Jain and pre-Buddhistic. Several references to Lokãyata are available in the oldest texts of Jain and Buddhist literature. The Sütra-krtanga and the Bhagavati Sütra ( V Section ) of Jain literature, and the Samanna-phala-sutra , the Mahãvibhãsã-sãstra , the Mahâyâna-nirvâna sutra and the Lankävatära-sütra of Buddhist literature contain valuable information regarding Lokãyata.  

 

The Upãnga literature is equally important in Jainism. In the Räyapasenaiya-sütra, Mahãvlra narrates a story of an ancient king Paesi ( Pradesï ) of Kekaya Pradesa who was unrighteousness personified. The discussion between Paesi and Kesisramana, a follower of Parsvanatha, testifies that even before Mahavira, during the period of Parsvanatha, the materialistic philosophy of Lokayata (Nastika vada) was popular in ancient India.  Lokayata in Ancient India and China a paper by Rasik Vihari Joshi outlines the three other references to prove that Buddhist literature was also fully familar with Lokäyata.

The earliest documented Charvaka scholar in India is Ajita Kesakambali. Although materialist schools existed before Charvaka, it was the only school which systematised materialist philosophy by setting them down in the form of aphorisms in the 6th century BC. There was a base text, a collection sūtras or aphorisms and several commentaries were written to explicate the aphorisms.[38]

The earliest documented Charvaka scholar in India is Ajita Kesakambali. Although materialist schools existed before Charvaka, it was the only school which systematised materialist philosophy by setting them down in the form of aphorisms in the 6th century BC. There was a base text, a collection sūtras or aphorisms and several commentaries were written to explicate the aphorisms.[38]

E. W. Hopkins, in his The Ethics of India (1924) claims that Charvaka philosophy was contemporaneous to Jainism and Buddhism, mentioning "the old Cārvāka or materialist of the 6th century BC". Rhys Davids assumes that lokāyata in ca. 500 BC came to mean "skepticism" in general without yet being organised as a philosophical school. Its methodology of skepticism is included in the Ramayana, Ayodhya kanda, chapter 108, where Jabāli tries to persuade Rāma to accept the kingdom by using nāstika arguments (Rāma refutes him in chapter 109):[39]

Its methodology of skepticism is included in the Ramayana, Ayodhya kanda, chapter 108, where Jabāli tries to persuade Rāma to accept the kingdom by using nāstika arguments (Rāma refutes him in chapter 109):[39]

O, the highly wise! Arrive at a conclusion, therefore, that there is nothing beyond this Universe. Give precedence to that which meets the eye and turn your back on what is beyond our knowledge. (2.108.17)

O, the highly wise! Arrive at a conclusion, therefore, that there is nothing beyond this Universe. Give precedence to that which meets the eye and turn your back on what is beyond our knowledge. (2.108.17)

There are alternate theories behind the origins of Charvaka. Bṛhaspati is sometimes referred to as the founder of Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy. Billington states that a philosopher named Charvaka lived in or about the 6th century BC, who developed the premises of this Indian philosophy in the form of Brhaspati Sutra.[40] These sutras predate 150 BC, because they are mentioned in the Mahābhāṣya (7.3.45).[39]

Profuse references are preserved in the Chinese versions of Buddhist writings. The Chinese Buddhist Dictionary entitled Yi-Qie-Jin-Yin-yi by Hui Lin translates M Lu-kã-ye-ti-kã " i.e. Lokäyatika as wicked doctrine. It is interesting to note that Dasa-bhumi-vibhãsã-sãstra translated into Chinese in the latter half of Chin Dynasty during 384-417 A. D. refers to Lokäyatika as Lu-ka- ye-jin " i. e. Lokãyata Sütra. This seems to be none else but Brhaspati Sütra. References to Lokãyata have been preserved in several Chinese writings also.

A.L. Basham, citing the Buddhist Samaññaphala Sutta, suggests six schools of heterodox, pre-Buddhist and pre-Jain, atheistic Indian traditions in 6th century BCE, that included Charvakas and Ajivikas.[41] Charvaka was a living philosophy up to the 12th century in India's historical timeline, after which this system seems to have disappeared without leaving any trace.[42]

Charvaka was a living philosophy up to the 12th century in India's historical timeline, after which this system seems to have disappeared without leaving any trace.[42]

 

 

 

 

Charvaka's epistemological argument can be explained with the example of fire and smoke. Kamal states, that when there is smoke (middle term), one's tendency may be to leap to the conclusion that it must be caused by fire (major term in logic).[9] While this is often true, it need not be universally true, everywhere or all the times, stated the Charvaka scholars. Smoke can have other causes. In Charvaka epistemology, as long as the relation between two phenomena, or observation and truth, has not been proven as unconditional, it is an uncertain truth. Such methods of reasoning, that is jumping to conclusions or inference, is prone to flaw in this Indian philosophy.[9][46] Charvakas further state that full knowledge is reached when we know all observations, all premises and all conditions. But the absence of conditions, state Charvakas, can not be established beyond doubt by perception, as some conditions may be hidden or escape our ability to observe.[9] They acknowledge that every person relies on inference in daily life, but to them if we act uncritically, we err. While our inference sometimes are true and lead to successful action, it is also a fact that sometimes inference is wrong and leads to error.[47] Truth then, state Charvaka, is not an unfailing character of inference, truth is merely an accident of inference, and one that is separable. We must be skeptics, question what we know by inference, question our epistemology.[9][32]

This epistemological proposition of Charvakas was influential among various schools of in Indian philosophies, by demonstrating a new way of thinking and re-evaluation of past doctrines. Hindu, Buddhist and Jain scholars extensively deployed Charvaka insights on inference in rational re-examination of their own theories.[9][48]

This epistemological proposition of Charvakas was influential among various schools of in Indian philosophies, by demonstrating a new way of thinking and re-evaluation of past doctrines. Hindu, Buddhist and Jain scholars extensively deployed Charvaka insights on inference in rational re-examination of their own theories.[9][48]

Comparison with other schools of Hinduism

== Comparison with other schools of Hinduism ==

Charvaka epistemology represents minimalist pramāṇas (epistemological methods) in Hindu philosophy. The other schools of Hinduism developed and accepted multiple valid forms of epistemology.[49] To Charvakas, Pratyakṣa (perception) was the one valid way to knowledge and other means of knowledge were either always conditional or invalid. Advaita Vedanta scholars considered six means of valid knowledge and to truths: Pratyakṣa (perception), Anumāṇa (inference), Upamāṇa (comparison and analogy), Arthāpatti (postulation), Anupalabdi (non-perception, cognitive proof) and Śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[49][50] While Charvaka school accepted just one, the valid means of epistemology in other schools of Hinduism ranged between 2 and 6.[49]

'''Pramanas''' : Charvaka epistemology represents minimalist pramāṇas in Hindu philosophy. The other schools of Hinduism developed and accepted multiple valid forms of pramāṇas. To Charvakas, Pratyakṣa (perception) was the one valid way to knowledge and other means of knowledge were either always conditional or invalid.  

Advaita Vedanta scholars considered six means of valid knowledge and to truths: Pratyakṣa (perception), Anumāṇa (inference), Upamāṇa (comparison and analogy), Arthāpatti (postulation), Anupalabdi (non-perception, cognitive proof) and Śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[49][50]  

Since none of the means of knowing were found to be worthy to establish the invariable connection between middle term and predicate, Charvakas concluded that the inference could not be used to ascertain metaphysical truths. Thus, to Charvakas, the step which the mind takes from the knowledge of something to infer the knowledge of something else could be accounted for by its being based on a former perception or by its being in error. Cases where inference was justified by the result were seen only to be mere coincidences.[51]

Therefore, Charvakas denied metaphysical concepts like reincarnation, an extracorporeal soul, the efficacy of religious rites, other worlds (heaven and hell), fate and accumulation of merit or demerit through the performance of certain actions.[38] Charvakas also rejected the use of supernatural causes to describe natural phenomena. To them all natural phenomena was produced spontaneously from the inherent nature of things.[52]

'''Metaphysics'''<nowiki> : Since none of the means of knowing were found to be worthy to establish the invariable connection between middle term and predicate, Charvakas concluded that the inference could not be used to ascertain metaphysical truths. Thus, to Charvakas, the step which the mind takes from the knowledge of something to infer the knowledge of something else could be accounted for by its being based on a former perception or by its being in error. Cases where inference was justified by the result were seen only to be mere coincidences.[51]</nowiki>

The fire is hot, the water cold, refreshing cool the breeze of morn;

Therefore, Charvakas denied metaphysical concepts like reincarnation, an extracorporeal soul, the efficacy of religious rites, other worlds (heaven and hell), fate and accumulation of merit or demerit through the performance of certain actions.[38]  

By whom came this variety ? from their own nature was it born.[52]

'''Supernatural Causes'''<nowiki> : Charvakas also rejected the use of supernatural causes to describe natural phenomena. To them all natural phenomena was produced spontaneously from the inherent nature of things.[52]</nowiki>

Charvaka school of Hinduism did not believe in karma, rebirth or an afterlife. To them, all attributes that represented a person, such a thinness, fatness etc., resided in the body. The Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha states the Charvaka position as follows,[53]

'''Religion'''<nowiki> : Charvakas rejected many of the standard religious conceptions of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains, such as afterlife, reincarnation, samsara, karma and religious rites. They were critical of the Vedas, as well as Buddhist scriptures.[55]</nowiki>

There is no heaven and no hell;

The realm of Shiva and like regions,

are invented by stupid imposters.

'''Critics of Vedas'''<nowiki> : The Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha with commentaries by Madhavacharya describes the Charvakas as critical of Vedas, materialists without morals and ethics. To Charvakas, the text states, the Vedas suffered from several faults – errors in transmission across generations, untruth, self-contradiction and tautology. The Charvakas pointed out the disagreements, debates and mutual rejection by karmakanda Vedic priests and jñānakanda Vedic priests, as proof that either one of them is wrong or both are wrong, as both cannot be right.[55][56]</nowiki>

Part of a series on

Schools of hedonism[show]

Charvaka believed that there was nothing wrong with sensual pleasure. Since it is impossible to have pleasure without pain, Charvaka thought that wisdom lay in enjoying pleasure and avoiding pain as far as possible. Unlike many of the Indian philosophies of the time, Charvaka did not believe in austerities or rejecting pleasure out of fear of pain and held such reasoning to be foolish.[43]

The Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha states the Charvaka position on pleasure and hedonism as follows,[54]

'''Ethics and Morals'''<nowiki> : Charvakas rejected the need for ethics or morals, and suggested that "while life remains, let a man live happily, let him feed on ghee even though he runs in debt".[57] Vedic tenets lay down dharma as applicable to a different people in different walks of life. </nowiki>

The enjoyment of heaven lies in eating delicious food, keeping company of young women, using fine clothes, perfumes, garlands, sandal paste... while moksha is death which is cessation of life-breath... the wise therefore ought not to take pains on account of moksha.

No independent works on Charvaka philosophy can be found except for a few sūtras composed by Brihaspati. The 8th century Tattvopaplavasimha of Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa with Madhyamaka influence is a significant source of Charvaka philosophy. Shatdarshan Samuchay and Sarvadarśanasaṅ̇graha of Vidyaranya are a few other works which elucidate Charvaka thought.[61]

The Brahma- Jäla-Sütra and the Mätangi-Sütra give ample evidence that the followers of Lokãyata contributed a lot to the development of secular sciences such as medicine, astronomy and agronomy.

 

— Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, Verses 9-12[54]

Charvakas rejected many of the standard religious conceptions of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains, such as afterlife, reincarnation, samsara, karma and religious rites. They were critical of the Vedas, as well as Buddhist scriptures.[55]

 

The Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha with commentaries by Madhavacharya describes the Charvakas as critical of Vedas, materialists without morals and ethics. To Charvakas, the text states, the Vedas suffered from several faults – errors in transmission across generations, untruth, self-contradiction and tautology. The Charvakas pointed out the disagreements, debates and mutual rejection by karmakanda Vedic priests and jñānakanda Vedic priests, as proof that either one of them is wrong or both are wrong, as both cannot be right.[55][56]

 

Charvakas, according to Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha verses 10 and 11, declared the Vedas to be incoherent rhapsodies whose only usefulness was to provide livelihood to priests. They also held the belief that Vedas were invented by man, and had no divine authority.[56]

 

 

The Jain scholar Haribhadra, in the last section of his text Saddarsanasamuccaya, includes Charvaka in six darśanas of Indian traditions, along with Buddhism, Nyaya-Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Jainism and Jaiminiya.[58] Haribhadra notes that Charvakas assert that there is nothing beyond the senses, consciousness is an emergent property, and that it is foolish to seek what cannot be seen.[58]

 

 

No independent works on Charvaka philosophy can be found except for a few sūtras composed by Brihaspati. The 8th century Tattvopaplavasimha of Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa with Madhyamaka influence is a significant source of Charvaka philosophy. Shatdarshan Samuchay and Sarvadarśanasaṅ̇graha of Vidyaranya are a few other works which elucidate Charvaka thought.[61]

In the epic Mahabharata, Book 12 Chapter 39, a villain who dresses up like a scholar, self appoints himself as spokesperson for all scholars, and who then advises Yudhishthira to act unethically, is named Charvaka.[62]

In the epic Mahabharata, Book 12 Chapter 39, a villain who dresses up like a scholar, self appoints himself as spokesperson for all scholars, and who then advises Yudhishthira to act unethically, is named Charvaka.[62]

One of the widely studied references to the Charvaka philosophy is the Sarva-darśana-saṅgraha (etymologically all-philosophy-collection), a famous work of 14th century Advaita Vedanta philosopher Mādhava Vidyāraṇya from South India, which starts with a chapter on the Charvaka system. After invoking, in the Prologue of the book, the Hindu gods Shiva and Vishnu ("by whom the earth and rest were produced"), Vidyāraṇya asks, in the first chapter:[63]

One of the widely studied references to the Charvaka philosophy is the Sarva-darśana-saṅgraha (etymologically all-philosophy-collection), a famous work of 14th century Advaita Vedanta philosopher Mādhava Vidyāraṇya from South India, which starts with a chapter on the Charvaka system. After invoking, in the Prologue of the book, the Hindu gods Shiva and Vishnu ("by whom the earth and rest were produced"), Vidyāraṇya asks, in the first chapter:[63]<blockquote>''"but how can we attribute to the Divine Being the giving of supreme felicity, when such a notion has been utterly abolished by Charvaka, the crest-gem of the atheistic school, the follower of the doctrine of Brihaspati? The efforts of Charvaka are indeed hard to be eradicated, for the majority of living beings hold by the current refrain:

 

“ ...but how can we attribute to the Divine Being the giving of supreme felicity, when such a notion has been utterly abolished by Charvaka, the crest-gem of the atheistic school, the follower of the doctrine of Brihaspati? The efforts of Charvaka are indeed hard to be eradicated, for the majority of living beings hold by the current refrain:

While life is yours, live joyously;

While life is yours, live joyously;

None can escape Death's searching eye:

None can escape Death's searching eye:

When once this frame of ours they burn,

When once this frame of ours they burn,

How shall it e'er again return?[63]

How shall it e'er again return?[63]''</blockquote>"Ain-i-Akbari, a record of the Mughal Emperor Akbar's court, mentions a symposium of philosophers of all faiths held in 1578 at Akbar's insistence.[64] In the text, the Mughal historian Abu'l-Fazl Mubarak summarizes Charvaka philosophy as "unenlightened" and that their literature as "lasting memorials to their ignorance". He notes that Charvakas considered paradise as "the state in which man lives as he chooses, without control of another", while hell as "the state in which he lives subject to another's rule". On state craft, Charvakas believe, states Mubarak, that it is best when "knowledge of just administration and benevolent government" is practiced.[65]

Ain-i-Akbari, a record of the Mughal Emperor Akbar's court, mentions a symposium of philosophers of all faiths held in 1578 at Akbar's insistence.[64] In the text, the Mughal historian Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak summarizes Charvaka philosophy as "unenlightened" and that their literature as "lasting memorials to their ignorance". He notes that Charvakas considered paradise as "the state in which man lives as he chooses, without control of another", while hell as "the state in which he lives subject to another's rule". On state craft, Charvakas believe, states Mubarak, that it is best when "knowledge of just administration and benevolent government" is practiced.[65]

Sanskrit poems and plays like the Naiṣadha-carita, Prabodha-candrodaya, Āgama-dambara, Vidvanmoda-taraṅgiṇī and Kādambarī contain representations of the Charvaka thought. However, the authors of these works were thoroughly opposed to materialism and tried to portray the Charvaka in unfavourable light. Therefore, their works should only be accepted critically.[38]

Sanskrit poems and plays like the Naiṣadha-carita, Prabodha-candrodaya, Āgama-dambara, Vidvanmoda-taraṅgiṇī and Kādambarī contain representations of the Charvaka thought. However, the authors of these works were thoroughly opposed to materialism and tried to portray the Charvaka in unfavourable light. Therefore, their works should only be accepted critically.[38]

Controversy on reliability of sources[edit]

Controversy on reliability of sources[edit]

Jump up ^ D Chatterjee (1977), Skepticism and Indian philosophy, Philosophy East and West, 27(2): 195-209

Jump up ^ D Chatterjee (1977), Skepticism and Indian philosophy, Philosophy East and West, 27(2): 195-209

^ Jump up to: a b c

^ Jump up to: a b c

Eliott Deutsche (2000), in Philosophy of Religion : Indian Philosophy Vol 4 (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN 978-0815336112, pages 245-248;

Eliott Deutsche (2000), in Philosophy of Religion : Indian Philosophy Vol 4 (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN 978-0815336112, pages 245-248;

John A. Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791430675, page 238

John A. Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791430675, page 238

Jump up ^ Gavin Flood, An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521438780, page 225

Jump up ^ Gavin Flood, An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521438780, page 225