Changes

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.

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.

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):<blockquote>''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)''</blockquote>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.

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):<blockquote>''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)''"</blockquote>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.

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.

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.

When once this frame of ours they burn,

When once this frame of ours they burn,

How shall it e'er again return?''</blockquote>

How shall it e'er again return?''"</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. 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.

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. 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.