Line 19: |
Line 19: |
| | | |
| == Founder - Brhaspati == | | == Founder - Brhaspati == |
− | 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, | + | Brihaspati is usually referred to as the founder of Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy, while Ajita Kesakambali is credited as the forerunner of the Charvakas, |
| | | |
− | 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. | + | 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. Most references available in the present day is obtained through cross references scattered in Sanskrit literature. |
| | | |
| 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 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. |
Line 28: |
Line 28: |
| 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. | | 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. |
| | | |
| 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. |
Line 34: |
Line 34: |
| 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 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. |
| | | |
− | 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". |
| | | |
− | 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 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. The name Lokāyata, for example, is found in Chanakya's Arthashastra, which refers to three ānvīkṣikīs (अन्वीक्षिकी, literally, examining by reason, 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, 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." |
| | | |
− | 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". Shantarakshita and Adi Shankara use the word lokayata to mean materialism, with the latter using the term Lokāyata, not Charvaka. The terms Lokayata and Brhaspatya have been used interchangeably for the Charvaka philosophy of materialism. |
| | | |
| == Origin of Lokayata or Charvakas == | | == 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 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. |
| | | |
− | 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] | + | The primary literature of Charvaka, such as the Brhaspati Sutra is missing or lost. 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. These sutras predate 150 BC, because they are mentioned in the Mahābhāṣya (7.3.45). |
| | | |
| 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. | | 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. |
Line 51: |
Line 51: |
| 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 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. |
| | | |
− | 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]<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.[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. |
| | | |
| == Charvaka Siddhantam == | | == Charvaka Siddhantam == |
− | # The Charvaka school considers perception as the only reliable source of knowledge.[9][44]. Sensory experience is the only valid source of knowledge. | + | # The Charvaka school considers perception as the only reliable source of knowledge. Sensory experience is the only valid source of knowledge. |
| # It is declared that motion in matter (i.e. atom) is due to the inherent potentiality of matter itself and thus denied the necessity of accepting any super-natural agency such as God to account for creation. Matter itself is the basis of consciousness. C | | # It is declared that motion in matter (i.e. atom) is due to the inherent potentiality of matter itself and thus denied the necessity of accepting any super-natural agency such as God to account for creation. Matter itself is the basis of consciousness. C |
| # Consciousness is produced by the combination of elements. Mind and body are unified. There is no eternal soul apart from body. Since consciousness is connected only with body, body itself is soul. So long there is body, there is soul; when body is destroyed soul is also destroyed. Consciousness becomes stronger by rich food and exercise. | | # Consciousness is produced by the combination of elements. Mind and body are unified. There is no eternal soul apart from body. Since consciousness is connected only with body, body itself is soul. So long there is body, there is soul; when body is destroyed soul is also destroyed. Consciousness becomes stronger by rich food and exercise. |
Line 68: |
Line 68: |
| # All beings are created by male and female sexes. | | # All beings are created by male and female sexes. |
| # All men are equal. There is no purity or superiority of caste. Social equality is the supreme philosophy. Lokãyata declared that there was no milk in the veins of a Brahmin and blood only in a Südra. Hence all are equal. | | # All men are equal. There is no purity or superiority of caste. Social equality is the supreme philosophy. Lokãyata declared that there was no milk in the veins of a Brahmin and blood only in a Südra. Hence all are equal. |
− | 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. |
| | | |
| == Comparison with other schools of Hinduism == | | == Comparison with other schools of Hinduism == |
| '''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. | | '''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] | + | 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). |
| | | |
− | '''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> | + | '''Metaphysics''' : 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. |
| | | |
− | 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] | + | 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. |
| | | |
− | '''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> | + | '''Supernatural Causes''' : 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. |
| | | |
− | '''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> | + | '''Religion''' : 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. |
| | | |
− | '''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> | + | '''Critics of Vedas''' : 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. |
| | | |
− | '''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> | + | '''Ethics and Morals''' : 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". Vedic tenets lay down dharma as applicable to a different people in different walks of life. |
| | | |
| == Charvaka Literature == | | == Charvaka Literature == |
− | 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] | + | 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. |
| | | |
| 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. | | 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. |
| | | |
− | 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. |
| | | |
− | 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: | + | 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:<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: |
| | | |
| While life is yours, live joyously; | | While life is yours, live joyously; |
Line 100: |
Line 100: |
| When once this frame of ours they burn, | | When once this frame of ours they burn, |
| | | |
− | How shall it e'er again return?[63]''</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.[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. 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. |
| | | |
− | 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. |
| | | |
| == Controversy on reliability of sources == | | == Controversy on reliability of sources == |
− | Bhattacharya[59] states that the claims against Charvaka of hedonism, lack of any morality and ethics and disregard for spirituality is from texts of competing religious philosophies (Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism), Its primary sources, along with commentaries by Charvaka scholars is missing or lost. This reliance on indirect sources raises the question of reliability and whether there was a bias and exaggeration in representing the views of Charvakas. Bhattacharya points out that multiple manuscripts are inconsistent, with key passages alleging hedonism and immorality missing in many manuscripts of the same text.[59] | + | Bhattacharya states that the claims against Charvaka of hedonism, lack of any morality and ethics and disregard for spirituality is from texts of competing religious philosophies (Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism), Its primary sources, along with commentaries by Charvaka scholars is missing or lost. This reliance on indirect sources raises the question of reliability and whether there was a bias and exaggeration in representing the views of Charvakas. Bhattacharya points out that multiple manuscripts are inconsistent, with key passages alleging hedonism and immorality missing in many manuscripts of the same text. |
| | | |
− | Buddhists, Jains, Advaita Vedantins and Nyāya philosophers considered the Charvakas as one of their opponents and tried to refute their views. These refutations are indirect sources of Charvaka philosophy. The arguments and reasoning approach Charvakas deployed were significant that they continued to be referred to, even after all the authentic Charvaka/Lokāyata texts had been lost. However, the representation of the Charvaka thought in these works is not always firmly grounded in first-hand knowledge of Charvaka texts and should be viewed critically.[38] | + | Buddhists, Jains, Advaita Vedantins and Nyāya philosophers considered the Charvakas as one of their opponents and tried to refute their views. These refutations are indirect sources of Charvaka philosophy. The arguments and reasoning approach Charvakas deployed were significant that they continued to be referred to, even after all the authentic Charvaka/Lokāyata texts had been lost. However, the representation of the Charvaka thought in these works is not always firmly grounded in first-hand knowledge of Charvaka texts and should be viewed critically. |
| | | |
| == Notes == | | == Notes == |