Charvaka PhilosophyThe Charvaka Philosophy believes that only those things that can be perceived is the ultimate reality. Charvaka Philosophy is a fanatical effort made to rid the age of the weight of the past that was oppressing it. It is a system of Indian philosophy that adopted numerous forms of philosophical agnosticism and religious impassivity. The branch is also known as Lokayata philosophy, as is stated in the Rig Veda. Named after its founder, Carvaka, (also known as Charu or Brhaspati) author of the Barhaspatya-sutras, the Charvaka Philosophy is an atheistic, acquisitive and wild thought. It is also known as `Lokayata` because it admits the existence of this world (loka) alone. Materialist philosophers who are referred to as Charvakas are also known as Lokayatas or Laukayatikas, because they act like ordinary people. The name `Lokayata` can be found in Kautilya`s Arthasastra that refers to the three `anviksikis` or logical philosophies Yoga, Samkhya, and Lokayata. This very term was restricted to the school of the `Lokyatikas`. In 7th century, the philosopher Purandara had used the term `Charvaka` for the first time. The 8th century philosophers Kamalasila and Haribhadra had also used the same term. 2.15). 3. While this branch of Indian philosophy is not considered to be part of the six orthodox schools of Hinduism. it meant `scepticism`. 3. Udayana`s Nyayakusumanjali (1. Sridhara`s Nyayakandali.3. Shankara`s Sharirakabhasya (1.3.53).1.35). Jayanta`s Nyayamanjari. Apart from the account of Charvaka philosophy found in the Rig Veda. certain amount of material is also contained in the Chhandogya Upanishad. 2.C. Further research has proved that during the Mauryan period the Charvaka philosophy had grown out of generic skepticism but at the same time the exact date of Charvaka philosophy cannot be ascertained before the 6th century. It has also been found that the Brhaspatya Sutras were written during the reign of the Mauryas. Charvaka is classified as a "heterodox" (nastika) system.In the outlines of Indian philosophy.1.1. 53-54) and Vachaspati`s Bhamati (3. the Mahabharata. Prabhachandra`s Nyayakumudachandra. the same classification as is given to Buddhism and Jainism. According to research by eminent scholars it has been found that Charvaka philosophy is co-eval with Buddhism and in 500 B. Vatsyayana`s Nyayabhasya (2. it is a remarkable testimony of the materialistic movement within Hinduism.37.2. The Charvaka Philosophy is called the Lokayata because the philosophy believes that only this world or the `lok` is the .2. Even consciousness says the Charvaka philosophy is produced after combining the four elements.truth. In fact they said that intelligence is also the modification of the four elements and intelligence is perished when the element from which it rises gets dissolved. They believe that there is no world other than this. For them religion is a foolish aberration and God is not necessary to account for the world. air and fire. weakness and cowardice. Whatever is not perceivable is non-existent because of the simple reason that it cannot be perceived. Thus with an audacious dogmatism the Charvaka philosophy has swept the world clean of all its values and has put down belief in the Almighty as a symbol of mendaciousness. They believe that whatever is arrived by the means of direct perception is the ultimate truth. These elements according to them are eternal and can explain the development from a protozoan to a philosopher. It is only matter that is cognizable with the help of senses. The proponents of this school of thought believed that since sense perception is the only form of knowledge therefore in that case matter becomes the only reality. water. There exists neither hell nor heaven. The Charvakas have emphasised that pleasure and pain are the . According to the philosophy the ultimate principles are the four elements. Thought is also the function of matter. The four elements are earth. everything is pivoted according to this principle. The prime importance is laid on the likes and dislikes of humans. Unlike the Upanishads the Charvaka or the materialist philosophy asserts the doctrines of uncontrolled-energy. They have also claimed that virtue is nothing more than a delusion and enjoyment is the only reality. they refute most of the already-established rules in the context of Indian philosophy. Charvaka philosophy strictly believes in perception as the one source of valid knowledge. Charvakas believe not in the notion of stringent philosophy. As a result. It is consciousness that makes one grasps the reality of everything worldly. atman is not a separate entity. self-assertion and reckless disregard for authority. Charvakas believe in the perceived knowledge of the present life. and not in rebirth and past . Hence. According to Charvakas. the physical body. but in liberal beliefs. as one can never `see` atman.everything depends on perception and the realisation by the consciousness. or the world one dwells in . Hence. Metaphysics or the knowledge of being and knowing is also rigidly adhered with perception as the source of knowledge.central themes of life and it is not possible to separate life from all these. the mind. Hence. The Charvaka School of Thought believed that life is the end of life. The Charvakas denied the validity of dhartna (self-dharma. Hence. righteous duty) in any form. It is foolish to think that past actions become a kind of unseen force (adrsta) and determines one`s future births. The Charvaka Philosophy is in fact a man`s return to his own spirit and rejection of all those which are external and foreign. Apurva or the latent potential form which action takes. The Charvaka way of life Charvakas lead a life on his/her own will. or merit and demerit cannot be perceived by anyone at all. In fact. as is instructed by the crafty priests. It also says that nothing needs to be accepted by an individual which do not find its place in the way of reason.life. They are therefore not real. the Charvakas would say. Action when completed. there is no rebirth. . it can be concluded saying that the materialist philosophy had a lot to do with regard to the repudiation of old system of religion and custom of magic. ends there. as there is no hell where one can be hurled. according to the Charvaka way of life. According to them good deed is not much necessary to perform in one`s lifetime. never worrying about the past or fearing godly penalisation. The basic thought of the Charvakas is to obtain worldly pleasure by making merry. If there is rebirth. no hell. and there are no objective ethical laws. there is an end to life at death and all will be quietened then. one ought to remember it. in the Charvaka way of life. And the science (shastra) of the laws of state is the only science worth studying. who invented them to make a living out of them by refereeing at sacrifices. no one remembers his/her previous births. Accepting only perception as the valid source of knowledge. What is meant by heaven is the pleasure one has in eating. And hell is the pain one experiences in this world itself. The only laws binding men are the laws of the state. No one has ever seen God and no one can see him in future. no God. In fact. There is no point in trying to obtain salvation and a life of eternal quietude. making merry and singing. drinking. They and the Vedas belong to the imagination of guileful priests. and to awe people into submission by saying that God would punish them if they did not abide by the Vedas. the Charvakas disapproved the reality of God. obedience to which brings rewards and disobedience of which fetches punishment. There is no heaven. The Charvaka way of life speaks that the differences between castes and their distinctive duties are laid down misleadingly . even the minor gods also do not exist.Humans have only one birth and that is the present one. without believing in all that the Brahmanic religion preaches. thus. or else. It is useless to make food offerings to people already beyond the realms of this world. because of its attachment to its family and friends. If so. The teachings of the Vedas. do not believe in what they preach. are those appropriate for fools. The life of the monk belongs only to impotent persons. it is bound to come back to this very body. rogues. if the animal offered in sacrifice goes to heaven. Man should hence try to make the best of this life. Charvakas go on to state that. Life belongs only to this world and ends in this world.by interested people. or demons. Charvaka way of life sates that there is no soul that leaves the body after death and goes to the other world. an extinguished flame in one lamp should burn. The priests should . provided he is careful that his actions do not bring pain as an outcome. They instruct that the offerings made in this world on death anniversaries of ancestors satisfy their hunger and thirst in the other world. so one can do what one wishes to. when oil is poured in another. There is no other world. viewed by Charvakas. There are no objective ethical laws. Charvaka way of life are of the faith that the religion of sacrifices is false and is circularised only by priests concerned in sacrificial offerings. why should not man offer his parents in sacrifice instead and send them to heaven? The priests. And any action done for the sake of pleasure is justified. borrow. which this philosophy seems to have made to the philosophy of life. some of the Charvakas are also believed to be vegetarians.thus never be trusted and man should do whatever possible to enhance his pleasure and avoid pain. The Charvakas do not seem to have advocated pleasures of the moment. because pleasure is associated with fine arts like music.beg. The value of dhartna (duty) and the value of salvation (moksha) were firmly rejected by the Charvaka School. Of course. It is also said that. A man can do anything .in order to accumulate more wealth and more pleasure. And because they were unwilling to kill animals. By spending money one can obtain pleasure (kama). Nothing is recognised by this school as a duty. pleasure is not possible in the absence of wealth (artha). But the state laws prevent a man from doing whatever he desires and punishes him . was the philosophical justification it tried to furnish to any kind of action for the sake of pleasure. But the peculiar contribution. because pleasures of the moment and over-indulgence may result in pain and pain has to be avoided. they encouraged them and contributed much for their development. steal or murder . One does not and cannot perceive the atman. pleasure and dominion. When a man dies. who have the power over the state`s laws. themselves can do whatever they like and do anything for increasing their wealth. According to the Charvakas. The Charvakas state that consciousness is not due to the atman. It can keep back the consciousness so long as the physical parts are healthy and stay together in a certain form. Being conscious is a peculiar quality of the living human body. he should follow them to avert the pain of punishment. his/her consciousness goes away and one cannot prove that it vanishes and exists somewhere else. there is no such thing as the atman. and one cannot establish its existence with the help of inference. Kings. power. then his action is justified. because inference is not a valid source of knowledge. If he is clever enough to outsmart them. Metaphysics in Charvaka philosophy Charvaka metaphysics states that nothing that is not perceived with the senses or consciousness is real and existing.when he disobeys them. Thus Charvaka philosophy was later made to support what in Europe was called `Machiavellian policies of princes`. Otherwise. Consciousness thus is an emergent quality of the physical parts coming . `I have a handsome body. According to the . But one always says that. If the `I` is not different from the body. when yeast is blended with certain juices. according to Charvaka metaphysics. which of course is not separate from the body. life also is only a new configuration of matter. For example. Therefore the atman or self-awareness is only the physical body with a new emerging quality.together in specific proportions. created by the false impression that the `I` is different from the body. But the Charvakas appear to think of mind as the consciousness in its knowing function. how can it say: `I have such and such a body`? To this the Charvakas answer by saying that the use of `have` in these expressions is only conventional. The property of being wine is a new quality which yeast and juices obtain when blended. The world is the material world only. which is different from the atman. Mind knows the external world through the senses. they turn into wine. Nothing but matter is real. Therefore. The Charvaka metaphysics speak of the mind (manas). The body together with its consciousness is the atman and consciousness in its experiencing function is the mind. a tall body` and so on. Every event is a probability. Charvaka metaphysics are of the faith that there is no external cause for the four elements coming together and obtaining the qualities of life and consciousness. and ether are the usual five elements corresponding to the qualities smell.Charvaka metaphysics. and if it develops into something. However one cannot generalise on this process and establish a law that. taste. It is their inherent quality to come together and to have those qualities. The elements may alter their nature any time. therefore say that Nature comprises some eternal laws. touch. whenever these four elements come together in certain ratio. The particles accepted by the Charvakas are visible particles. Sound occurs due to the movement of air. life and consciousness will emerge. But the Charvakas say that sound is caused by air touching the ear. nose. The other four elements make up the world. eye. and also corresponding to the five sense organs. and ear. One cannot. air. not of ether. and sound. touch. colour. Excepting ether. Hence the Charvakas deny the reality of ether. fire. it does not consist of five elements. the first four elements are perceivable. It was believed that the cause of sound in the ear was the all-pervading ether. They consist of tiny particles. Earth. water. tongue. they could not accept the reality of anything that could not be comprehended with the senses. . Of the three crucial sources of knowledge accepted in common by all the orthodox schools (perception. They are of faith that. but they did not discuss the significances of this question and maintained a realistic position. but every object possesses its own nature. according to the Charvaka metaphysics.then it develops according to its own peculiar nature. . One may conclude that. the Charvakas accepted only perception as the valid source of knowledge and disapproves both inference and verbal testimony. Theory of Knowledge in Charvaka philosophy Charvaka theory of knowledge states only the validity of perception as a vaild source of knowledge. inference. which were pointed out later by the Buddhist and Vedanta logicians. The Charvakas at first seem not to have been mindful of the difficulties in accepting perception as a valid source of knowledge. and that there are no laws of nature. and verbal testimony). the existence of everything is a chance. The later Charvakas expressed that they were aware of the difficulties. whatever one experiences through perception is rightful and existent. the mountain also. (2) Then what is the use of making an inference when we have already perceived that there is fire in the mountains?` Hence the Charvakas say that inference is either impossible or unnecessary. However.It is interesting to notice here that. Inference cannot generate truth. we must have seen the present case. how can we logically be justified in using the word `wherever`? If we have seen all the instances. in their examination of inference. There is fire in the mountain (Conclusion). This mountain has smoke (Minor premise). The Charvakas state that . And they are universal propositions like the major premise. For instance: Wherever there is smoke. there is fire (Major premise). causal statements like `Fire causes the bodies to expand` are also regarded as truth. They said that inference was not a valid source of knowledge. because the major premise of an inference cannot be proved. This is the classical example of inference in Indian epistemology.(i) `How can we formulate the major premise unless we have seen all the instances of smoke? If we have not seen all the instances. the Charvakas foresaw the European sceptics. viz. The Charvakas ask . but at another place they ask us to sacrifice animals to gods. Now. everything comes into existence and passes out of it according to its own nature. For either reason. Verbal knowledge is only knowledge of words and their meanings are based upon inference. One can never be sure of the reliability of the observer of orange. How can one believe that the killing of animals in sacrifices brings one merit?` .these causal laws also are bound to be false. verbal testimony is not a reliable source of knowledge. it is only just a chance event. The Charvakas make a strong attack on verbal testimony. If one is able to apply causal laws and find them to be true. `At one place they enjoin on us not to commit any injury. through the established meanings of the four words. it too is subject to change. They propound thus in their theory. the Charvaka theory of knowledge speak that there is no existence of causal laws. In fact. because they are self-contradictory. The Charvakas perhaps make their strongest attack on the authenticity of the Vedas. But it has already been pointed out that inference is a dicey source of knowledge. Even this nature is not a universal law. one infers that the object before the mind of the observer is an orange and that it is red. Every event is a chance. The Vedas are not reliable at all. One can say that: `The orange is red`. In fact. The Charvaka theory of knowledge is not exactly scepticism or agnosticism. And perception does not show that the word-sound can be eternal. They did not criticise the structure of the syllogism. However. But they never stated that. They questioned only on the premises regarding how one can obtain the major premise. inference was wrong. And it stays only when produced by the vocal organs. . it should also be noted that they did not deny the formal validity of inference. If it is said that its timelessness can be proved by inference. it has already been established that inference is not reliable. even if one had the major premise.Charvaka theory of knowledge also does not believe that the word-sounds are eternal. when no one utters it. they used the law of contradiction in disproving the doctrines of their rivals. There is no sound. but a fairly thoroughgoing positivism. They accept the reality of whatever one can perceive with one`s senses and refute the reality of whatever one cannot perceive. because they used the very laws of inference to show that one cannot obtain material truths about the world through inference. but only wanted to prove that it was absolutely useless for obtaining any new truth about the world.