Charvaka
Charvaka (IAST: Cārvāka), originally known as
Lokāyata and Bṛhaspatya, is the ancient school of Indian materialism. Charvaka holds direct perception,
empiricism, and conditional inference as proper sources
of knowledge, embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects Vedas, Vedic ritualism, and supernaturalism.[1][2]
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]
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]
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] Much
of the primary literature of Charvaka, the Barhaspatya
sutras (ca. 600 BCE), are missing or lost.[5] 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]
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]
Charvaka is categorized as a heterodox school of Indian The Buddhist Sanskrit work Divyavadana (ca. 200–350
philosophy.[10][11] It is considered an example of atheistic CE) mentions Lokayata, where it is listed among subschools in the Hindu tradition.[12][13][14]
jects 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
1 Etymology and meaning
Lokayata and Brhaspatya have been used interchangeably
for the Charvaka philosophy of materialism.
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 2 Origin
from the root charv meaning to eat possibly alluding to
the philosophy’s hedonistic precepts of “eat, drink, and The tenets of the Charvaka atheistic doctrines can be
be merry”.[15] Yet another theory believes it to be epony- traced to the relatively later composed layers of the
mous in origin, with the founder of the school being Char- Rigveda, while substantial discussions on the Charvaka is
vaka, a disciple of Brihaspati.[16]
found in post-Vedic literature.[5][30][31] The primary litsuch as the Brhaspati Sutra is missBhattacharya notes that the word Charvaka is of irregular erature of Charvaka,
[5][32]
ing
or
lost.
Its
theories
and development has been
construction, as cara as an adjective means “agreeable,
compiled
from
historic
secondary
literature such as those
pleasant”, but as a noun is another name of Brihaspati,
Arthashastra), sutras
found
in
the
shastras
(such
as
the
[17]
and both derivations are plausible.
and the epics (the Mahabharata and Ramayana) of Hinduism as well as from the dialogues of Gautama Buddha
and Jain literature.[5][33]
1.1 As Lokayata
Substantial discussions about the Charvaka doctrines are
According to Chattopadhyaya, the traditional name of only found in texts after 600 BCE.[5][32][34] Bhattacharya
Charvaka is Lokayata. It was called Lokayata because posits that Charvaka may have been one of several athe1
2
3
istic, 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 philosophies such as Ājīvika,
Jainism and Buddhism in the classical period of Indian
philosophy.[37]
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]
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]
A.L. Basham, citing the Buddhist Samaññaphala Sutta,
suggests six schools of heterodox, pre-Buddhist and preJain, 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]
3
Philosophy
PHILOSOPHY
3.1 Epistemology
The Charvaka epistemology holds perception as the primary and proper source of knowledge, while inference is
held as prone to being either right or wrong and therefore conditional or invalid.[9][44] Perceptions are of two
types, for Charvaka, external and internal. External perception is described as that arising from the interaction
of five senses and worldly objects, while internal perception is described by this school as that of inner sense, the
mind.[9] Inference is described as deriving a new conclusion and truth from one or more observations and previous truths. To Charvakas, inference is useful but prone
to error, as inferred truths can never be without doubt.[45]
Inference is good and helpful, it is the validity of inference
that is suspect – sometimes in certain cases and often in
others. To the Charvakas there were no reliable means by
which the efficacy of inference as a means of knowledge
could be established.[7]
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][45]
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.[46] 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][47]
Comparison with other schools of Hinduism
Charvaka epistemology represents minimalist pramāṇas
The Charvaka school of philosophy had a variety of athe- (epistemological methods) in Hindu philosophy. The
istic and materialistic beliefs. They held perception to be other schools of Hinduism developed and accepted multhe valid and reliable source of knowledge.[43]
tiple valid forms of epistemology.[48] To Charvakas,
3.4
Pleasure
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), Anupalabdhi (non-perception, cognitive proof)
and Śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[48][49] While Charvaka school accepted just
one, the valid means of epistemology in other schools of
Hinduism ranged between 2 and 6.[48]
3.2
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.[50]
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.[51]
The fire is hot, the water cold, refreshing
cool the breeze of morn;
By whom came this variety ? from their own
nature was it born.[51]
3.3
Consciousness and afterlife
Charvaka school of Hinduism did not believe in karma,
rebirth or an afterlife. To them, all attributes that represented a person, such as thinness, fatness etc., resided in
the body. The Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha states the Charvaka position as follows,[52]
There is no other world other than this;
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are invented by stupid imposters.
— Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, Verse 8[52]
3
3.4 Pleasure
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,[53]
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.
A fool wears himself out by penances and
fasts. Chastity and other such ordinances are
laid down by clever weaklings.
— Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, Verses
9-12[53]
3.5 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.[54]
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.[54][55]
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.[55]
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”.[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.[57]
Haribhadra notes that Charvakas assert that there is noth-
4
4 WORKS
ing beyond the senses, consciousness is an emergent prop- ter the 12th century. Whatever is written on Charvaka
erty, and that it is foolish to seek what cannot be seen.[57] post this is based on second-hand knowledge, learned
works
The accuracy of these views, attributed to Charvakas, has from preceptors to disciples and no independent
[38]
Chatterjee
and
on
Charvaka
philosophy
can
be
found.
[58][59]
been contested by scholars.
Datta explain that our understanding of Charvaka philosophy is fragmentary, based largely on criticism of its ideas
by other schools, and that it is not a living tradition:
4
Works
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.[60]
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.[61]
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:[62]
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.[63] In the text, the
Mughal historian Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak summarizes
Charvaka philosophy as “unenlightened” and characterizes their works of 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.[64]
“Though materialism in some form or other
has always been present in India, and occasional references are found in the Vedas, the
Buddhistic literature, the Epics, as well as in
the later philosophical works we do not find any
systematic work on materialism, nor any organised school of followers as the other philosophical schools possess. But almost every
work of the other schools states, for refutation,
the materialistic views. Our knowledge of Indian materialism is chiefly based on these.”[65]
4.2 Controversy on reliability of sources
Bhattacharya[58] 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.[58]
The Skhalitapramathana Yuktihetusiddhi by Āryadevapāda, in a manuscript found in Tibet, discusses the Charvaka philosophy, but attributes a theistic claim to Charvakas - that happiness in this life, and the only life, can be
attained by worshiping gods and defeating demons. Toso
posits that as Charvaka philosophy’s views spread and
were widely discussed, non-Charvakas such as Āryadevapāda added certain points of view that may not be of
[66]
Sanskrit poems and plays like the Naiṣadha-carita, the Charvakas’.
Prabodha-candrodaya, Āgama-dambara, Vidvanmoda- Buddhists, Jains, Advaita Vedantins and Nyāya philosotaraṅgiṇī and Kādambarī contain representations of the phers considered the Charvakas as one of their opponents
Charvaka thought. However, the authors of these works and tried to refute their views. These refutations are indiwere thoroughly opposed to materialism and tried to por- rect sources of Charvaka philosophy. The arguments and
tray the Charvaka in unfavourable light. Therefore, their reasoning approach Charvakas deployed were significant
works should only be accepted critically.[38]
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
4.1 Loss of original works
is not always firmly grounded in first-hand knowledge of
Charvaka texts and should be viewed critically.[38]
Main article: Barhaspatya sutras
Likewise, states Bhattacharya, the charge of hedonism
against Charvaka might have been exaggerated.[58] CounThere was no continuity in the Charvaka tradition af- tering the argument that the Charvakas opposed all that
5
was good in the Vedic tradition, Dale Riepe states, “It [12] R Thomas (2014), Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma, and Design. Sociology of Religion, Vol.
may be said from the available material that Cārvākas
75, No. 1, pages 164-165, Quote: “some of the ancient
hold truth, integrity, consistency, and freedom of thought
[67]
Hindu traditions like Charvaka have a rich tradition of main the highest esteem.”
5
See also
• Ajñana
• Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya
• Lokayata: A Study in Ancient Indian Materialism
• Positivism
• Śramaṇa
6
Notes
[1] KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought,
Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67;
Roy W Perrett (1984), The problem of induction in Indian
philosophy, Philosophy East and West, 34(2): 161-174;
(Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 21–32);
(Radhakrishnan 1957, pp. 187, 227–234);
Robert Flint, Anti-theistic theories, p. 463, at Google
Books, Appendix Note VII - Hindu Materialism: The
Charvaka System; William Blackwood, London;
[2] V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon - Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3):
549–574, Quote (page 557): “Aside from nontheistic
schools like the Samkhya, there have also been explicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulently anti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Charvaka school.”, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01274.x
[3] Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna (2011). Studies on the Carvaka/Lokayata. Anthem Press. pp. 26–29. ISBN
9780857284334.
terialism, in general, other schools...”
V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon - Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3):
549–574, Quote (page 557): “Aside from nontheistic
schools like the Samkhya, there have also been explicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulently anti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Charvaka school.”
[13] KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought,
Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67;
Quote: “Of the three heterodox systems, the remaining
one, the Cārvāka system, is a Hindu system.";
[14] Bill Cooke (2005), Dictionary of Atheism, Skepticism,
and Humanism, ISBN 978-1591022992, page 84;
For a general discussion of Charvaka and other atheistic traditions within Hindu philosophy, see Jessica Frazier
(2014), Hinduism in The Oxford Handbook of Atheism
(Editors: Stephen Bullivant, Michael Ruse), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199644650, pages 367-378
[15] N. V. Isaeva (1 January 1993). Shankara and Indian Philosophy. SUNY Press. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-7914-1281-7.
Retrieved 31 December 2013.
[16] Sharma, Chandradhar (1987). A critical survey of Indian
philosophy (Reprinted. ed.). Delhi: M. Banarsidass. p.
40. ISBN 9788120803657. Retrieved 7 July 2015.
[17] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 166–167)
[18] Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad (1992). Lokayata: A Study
in Ancient Indian Materialism (7th ed.). New Delhi: People’s Publishing House. p. 1. ISBN 81-7007-006-6.
[19] Monier-Williams’ 'Sanskrit-English Dictionary See loka
and ayata, Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon, Germany;
(लोक, loka which means “worlds, abode, place of truth,
people”, and आयत, āyata means “extended, directed towards, aiming at”)
[20] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 187–192)
[4] Johannes Quack (2014), Disenchanting India: Organized
Rationalism and Criticism of Religion in India, Oxford
University Press, ISBN 978-0199812615, page 50 with
footnote 3
[21] Paul Hacker, Anviksiki, Kleine Schriften / hrsg. von Lambert Schmithausen (1978), OCLC 463106529, page 164,
ISBN 978-3515026925
[5] (Radhakrishnan 1957, pp. 227–249)
[22] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 188–190)
[6] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 21–44, 65–74)
[7] Cowell and Gough, p. 5.
[8] (Bhattacharya 2011, p. 58)
[9] MM Kamal (1998), The Epistemology of the Cārvāka
Philosophy, Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies,
46(2): 13-16
[23] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 27, 189–191)
[24] (Bhattacharya 2011, p. 188)
[25] CK Chapple and J Casey (2003), Reconciling Yogas:
Haribhadra’s Collection of Views on Yoga, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791458990, page 2
[26] Haribhadrasūri (Translator: M Jain, 1989), Saddarsanasamuccaya, Asiatic Society, OCLC 255495691
[10] (Radhakrishnan 1957, pp. 1–3, Contents)
[27] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 193–195)
[11] (Flood 1996, p. 224)
[28] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 196)
6
6 NOTES
[29] Bhattacharya 2002, p. 6.
[30] Hymn 10.129; John M. Koller (1977), Skepticism in Early
Indian Thought, Philosophy East and West, 27(2): 155164
[31] CV Vaidya (2001). Epic India, Or, India as Described in
the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Asian Educational
Services. p. 503. ISBN 978-81-206-1564-9. Quote:
These atheistical doctrines existed from the earliest times
as their traces are visible even in the Rigveda in some
hymns of which Prof Max Muller pointed out the curious traces of an incipient scepticism. (...) Two things
are therefore clear that the Brihaspatya tenets also called
Charvaka tenets are of a very old standing...”
[32] John M. Koller (1977), Skepticism in Early Indian
Thought, Philosophy East and West, 27(2): 155-164
[33] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 21–44, 65–74)
[34] Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian
Thought, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812932,
pages 53-58
[35] Ramkrishna Bhattacharya (2013), The base text and its
commentaries: Problem of representing and understanding the Charvaka / Lokayata, Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal, Issue 1, Volume 3, pages 133-150
[36] A. K. Sinha (1994), Traces of Materialism in Early Vedic
Thought: A Study, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 75, No. 1/4, pages 235-241
[37] (Bhattacharya 2011, p. 9)
[38] Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna. Materialism in India: A Synoptic View. Retrieved 27 July 2012.
[39] see Schermerhorn (1930).
[40] Ray Billington (1997), Understanding Eastern Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415129640, page 43
[41] Arthur Basham (2009), History and Doctrines of the
Ajivikas: a Vanished Indian Religion, ISBN 9788120812048, pages 11-17
• John A. Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian
Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English,
State University of New York Press, ISBN 9780791430675, page 238
[49] Gavin Flood, An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge
University Press, ISBN 978-0521438780, page 225
[50] Cowell and Gough, p. 9.
[51] Cowell and Gough. p. 10
[52] Ray Billington (1997), Understanding Eastern Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415129640, page 44
[53] Ray Billington (1997), Understanding Eastern Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415129640, page 44-45
[54] Richard Hayes (2000), The Question of Doctrinalism in
the Buddhist Epistemologists, in Philosophy of Religion:
Indian Philosophy (Editor:Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN
978-0815336112, pages 187-212
[55] Original Sanskrit version:Sarva-darsana-sangraha, pages
3-7; English version: The Charvaka System with commentary by Madhava Acharya, Translators: Cowell and
Gough (1882), pages 5-9
[56] The Charvaka System with commentary by Madhava
Acharya, Translators: Cowell and Gough (1882), page 10
[57] See verses 78-end (ET99-end) in Potter, Karl H. (2007).
The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies: Buddhist philosophy from 350 to 600 A.D. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Publications. pp. 435–436. ISBN 978-81-208-1968-9.
[58] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 10, 29–32)
[59] Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian
Thought, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812932
[60] Joshi, Dinkar. Glimpses of Indian Culture. Star Publications (P) Ltd, Delhi. P. 37. ISBN 81-7650-190-5.
[61] Shanti Parva, Chapter XXXIX The Mahabharata, KM
Ganguli (Translator), pages 121-122
[42] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 65–74)
[43] Cowell and Gough. p. 3
[44] Ramkrishna Bhattacharya (2010), What the Cārvākas
Originally Meant?, Journal of Indian Philosophy, 38(6):
529-542
[45] (Bhattacharya 2011, pp. 55–67)
[46] Ramkrishna Bhattacharya (2013), The Base Text and Its
Commentaries: Problems of Representing and Understanding the Cārvāka/Lokāyata, Argument, 3 (1):133-149
[47] D Chatterjee (1977), Skepticism and Indian philosophy,
Philosophy East and West, 27(2): 195-209
[48]
• Eliott Deutsche (2000), in Philosophy of Religion
: Indian Philosophy Vol 4 (Editor: Roy Perrett),
Routledge, ISBN 978-0815336112, pages 245248;
[62] Cowell and Gough, p. 2.
[63] Ain-i-Akbari, Vol. III, translated by H. S. Barrett, pp 217–
218 (also see Amartya Sen [2005], pp 288–289)
[64] Henry Sullivan Jarrett (Translator), The Ain-i-Akbari,
Volume 3, p. 217, at Google Books, Abu'l-Fazl ibn
Mubarak, 16th century, pages 217-218
[65] Satischandra Chatterjee and Dhirendramohan Datta. An
Introduction to Indian Philosophy. Eighth Reprint Edition.
(University of Calcutta: 1984). p. 55.
[66] KD Toso (2010), The Stanzas on the Cārvāka/Lokāyata
in the Skhalita pramathana yuktihetusiddhi, Journal of Indian Philosophy, 38(6): 543-552
[67] Riepe, Dale. The Naturalistic Tradition of Indian Thought
(Motilal Banarasidas, Varanasi) p.75
7
7
Bibliography
• Bhatta, Jayarashi. Tattvopaplavasimha (Status as a
Carvaka text disputed)
• Bhattacharya, Ramakrishna (2011). Studies on the
Carvaka/Lokayata (Cultural, Historical and Textual
Studies of Religions. Anthem. ISBN 0857284339.
• Bhattacharya, Ramakrishna (2002). “Cārvāka Fragments: A New Collection”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 30 (6): 597–640.
• Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad (1959) Lokayata: A
Study in Ancient Indian Materialism. New Delhi:
People’s Publishing House.
• Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad (1964) Indian Philosophy: A Popular Introduction. New Delhi: People’s
Pub. House.
• Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad (1994).
Carvaka/Lokayata: An Anthology of Source Materials
and Some Recent Studies. New Delhi: People’s
Publishing House.
• Cowell, E. B.; Gough, A. E. (2001). The SarvaDarsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy: Trubner’s Oriental Series
(Partial Translation). Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780-415-24517-3.
• Flood, Gavin (1996). An Introduction to Hinduism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gokhale, Pradeep P. The Cārvāka Theory of
Pramāṇas: A Restatement, Philosophy East and
West (1993).
• Koller, John M. Skepticism in Early Indian Thought,
Philosophy East and West (1977).
• Nambiar, Sita Krishna (1971). Prabodhacandrodaya of Krsna Misra. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.
• Phillott, D. C. (ed.) (1989) [1927]. The Aini Akbari. by Abu l-Fazl Allami, trans. Heinrich
Blochmann (3 vols. ed.). Delhi: Low Price Publications. ISBN 81-85395-19-5.
• Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli and Moore, Charles
(1957). A Source Book in Indian Philosophy.
Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.
• Riepe, Dale (1964). The Naturalistic Tradition of
Indian Thought (2nd ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
• Salunkhe, A. H. Aastikashiromani Chaarvaaka (in
Marathi).
• Schermerhorn, R. A. When Did Indian Materialism
Get Its Distinctive Titles?, Journal of the American
Oriental Society (1930).
• Sen, Amartya (2005). The Argumentative Indian:
Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity.
London: Allen Lane. ISBN 0-7139-9687-0.
8 External links
• The Lokāyata, Nāstika and Cārvāka, Surendranath
Dasgupta, 1940
• Jayarāśi, a 9th-century Indian philosopher associated with Cārvāka / Lokāyata school, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2011)
• Lokāyata/Cārvāka – Indian Materialism (Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
• Materialism in India: A Synoptic View Ramkrishna
Bhattacharya
• Bibliography: Carvaka/Lokayata secondary literature, Karl Potter, University of Washington
8
9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES
9
Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses
9.1
Text
• Charvaka Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charvaka?oldid=784398901 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, Hephaestos, Edward, Michael
Hardy, AlexR, EdH, Charles Matthews, Timwi, Nataraja~enwiki, Jeffq, Naddy, Shoesfullofdust, Everyking, Utcursch, LordSimonofShropshire, Pgan002, Anirvan, Rgrg, Rosarino, Freakofnurture, DanielCristofani, Rich Farmbrough, Dbachmann, Ashwatham, Bender235,
LordGulliverofGalben, Summer Song, Art LaPella, MANOJTV, Nk, Pearle, Ogress, Sextus~enwiki, Wiki-uk, Monado, Indianskeptic,
Skollur, Ilse@, Cheyinka, Philthecow, Mel Etitis, Woohookitty, Shreevatsa, Dangerous-Boy, Bluemoose, BD2412, Grammarbot, Makiaea~enwiki, Josh Parris, Koavf, George Burgess, Tpkunesh, FlaBot, Bgwhite, Deeptrivia, Gaius Cornelius, Cunado19, Vastu, Tachs,
Tomisti, PotatoSamurai, SmackBot, Kilo-Lima, Arny, Srkris, Mhss, Radagast83, Metamagician3000, Ohconfucius, Serein (renamed because of SUL), Zahid Abdassabur, Rigadoun, Sunil vasisht, Paulatz, Shivashree, Dl2000, Iridescent, Ewulp, Maleabroad, Dixitpd, VedicFollower, Editorius, Gregbard, Cydebot, Viscious81, Vkvora2001, Thijs!bot, Coelacan, Ramendra Nath, Joy1963, Nick Number, JAnDbot,
KConWiki, Tuncrypt, Kkrystian, Gwern, Kumarilabhatta, J.delanoy, Abecedare, Ian.thomson, Anant k, Krishnachandranvn, Zerokitsune,
Jorfer, Guru-45, DH85868993, Redtigerxyz, Buddhipriya, Roland zh, SieBot, Le Pied-bot~enwiki, Peaceoutside, Cmcelwain, EoGuy, Vanisheduser12345, Editor2020, Rossen4, Cxz111, LatitudeBot, MrOllie, Redheylin, VASANTH S.N., Lightbot, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot,
Cuziyam, KamikazeBot, Eduen, AnomieBOT, Emperornutz, Dhidalgo, Citation bot, Homobot, Xqbot, Erud, TechBot, Pi3.14159265359,
Verbum Veritas, Stiepan Pietrov, FrescoBot, Kenfyre, Bhagat.bb, Boleyn3, DrilBot, EmausBot, Dcirovic, The Blade of the Northern
Lights, Janus549, Naviguessor, Wikignome0530, Zuggernaut, Rafiq Mohammad, Polisher of Cobwebs, Mcc1789, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Siddhant2010, Xoloitzcuintle, BG19bot, Geoffrey Riggs, Mark Arsten, FolkTraditionalist, Andamannicobar, Manoguru,
SKEPTICINDIA1, Shsomash, BattyBot, Amitrochates, SAMKHYAIST, Cpt.a.haddock, Vanished user sdij4rtltkjasdk3, Sagar R Salvi,
Charan Gill, Blacknight87, Soham321, Flobbadob, The Rahul Jain, Smscities, Bladesmulti, Schmake, Audijit, Ms Sarah Welch, Monkbot,
Mohanbhan, Ashishjain190, Kautilya3, Terabar, Human3015, Randhwasingh, Conradjagan, Rleakey, Nøkkenbuer, KasparBot, Capankajsmilyo, Pranavesh, Manishkrisna108, Harifan, Aṭlas, Magic links bot and Anonymous: 118
9.2
Images
• File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-bysa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
• File:Om_symbol.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Om_symbol.svg License: Public domain Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author
provided. Rugby471 assumed (based on copyright claims).
• File:P_religion_world.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/P_religion_world.svg License: CC-BY-SA3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
• File:People_icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/People_icon.svg License: CC0 Contributors: OpenClipart Original artist: OpenClipart
• File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
• File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg License:
CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: This file was derived from Wiki letter w.svg: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Wiki_letter_w.svg' class='image'><img alt='Wiki letter w.svg' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Wiki_
letter_w.svg/50px-Wiki_letter_w.svg.png' width='50' height='50' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/
Wiki_letter_w.svg/75px-Wiki_letter_w.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Wiki_letter_w.svg/
100px-Wiki_letter_w.svg.png 2x' data-file-width='44' data-file-height='44' /></a>
Original artist: Derivative work by Thumperward
9.3
Content license
• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0