Changes

== Controversy on reliability of sources ==

== Controversy on reliability of sources ==

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. '''<u>Bhattacharya points out that multiple manuscripts are inconsistent, with key passages alleging hedonism and immorality missing in many manuscripts of the same text.</u>'''

Bhattacharya states that the claims against Charvaka of hedonism, lack of any morality and ethics and disregard for adhyatmikity '''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. '''<u>Bhattacharya points out that multiple manuscripts are inconsistent, with key passages alleging hedonism and immorality missing in many manuscripts of the same text.</u>'''

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.

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.