365bet娱乐

In general outlook, materialism represents the tendency that seeks to reduce the higher to the lower or explain the 160 higher phenomena in the light of the lower ones. The Carvaka of Indian Materialism seems to be an old system and is known as the atheistic or Materialistic School The reference about this system, are of Indian Philosophy.

ge 42 found even in the Pre-Buddhistic and the Buddhistic literature. 160 A The founder of this system is known as Brhaspati. The references to this system, are also seen in the Upanisadic literature. The main tenets of this system are described thus: 1. Earth, water, fire and air are the four elements. i 2. Bodies, senses, and objects are the results of the different combinations of the elements. 3. Consciousness 'arises from matter like the intoxicating quality of wine arising from fermented yeast. 4. Soul is nothing but conscious body. 5. Enjoyment is the only end of human life. 6. Death itself is the liberation. 161 Vadiraja refutes the views of the Carvaka system logically. The epistemology of the Carvaka system is that the perception alone is the valid means (Pramana) of knowledge. But this belief is not sound. Because, if perception alone is admitted as the Pramana, then this statement itself becomes invalid. The perception is the contact between the sense-organs and their objects. Everywhere and at all times this type of contact is impossible. In that case one has to advocate some reliable statements causing the same

43 sense. If one does not make any statements, then one cannot 162 make others know the things or gain the knowledge. Because, the very statement is verbal testimony which is not accepted as a valid means of knowledge by the Charvaka. Thus, he cannot open his mouth to convince others or to teach others. When a statement is made as "Perception alone is Pramana" and if this statement is accepted as valid, then the very statement becomes invalid. If it is not considered as valid, then also it is useless. Thus, by both, there is futility in advocating and accepting perception as the only means of valid knowledge. The invalidity accrues with the means when they fail to convey the sense and do not denote the objects to be denoted. So the theory of Pramana, advanced by the Carvakas is not acceptable since it does not fulfil the required conditions. Thus, the verbal testimony becomes valid as it has not faced adversity in any way. 'The single Pramana i.e., perception cannot protect the Charvakas, as it causes injury to themselves. 163 F 164 As Anumana (inference) is not considered as a valid means, the Carvaka has to shut his mouth in scholarly debates. Because, there he cannot participate since he cannot advance any arguments. Advancing arguments is the core of inference. When the inference is not accepted, there is no scope for arguments. The knowledge of perceptive observance cannot

44 clear the doubts of opponents and satisfy them. Thus, he becomes ineligible and incompetent to participate in the debates. 165 If something is said about the thing perceived, it does not convey any sense, since that expression itself is invalid. If he argues for validity to that, then it is but inevitable that he has to accept both Anumana and Sabda as valid. Then only he can advance arguments, Even when he does not argue, his silence cannot disregard and debar the possibility of the validity of inference. 166 The rejection of inference and verbal testimony narrows down the scope to express our thoughts and ideas which cannot 167 be perceived. So, those who incline to think and to discuss, should necessarily and involuntarily or voluntarily resort to the inference and verbal testimony. Accepting perception as the only valid means of knowledge and at the same time rejecting the validity to inference and testimony is not helpful to gain knowledge. Therefore, one has to accept the validity of all the three means of 168 knowledge, namely perception, inference and testimony. C.D.Sharma has rightly observed- "The Carvaka view that perception is valid and inference is invalid is itself a result of inference... Thoughts and ideas, not being material objects, cannot be perceived, they can only be inferred...

45 Pure perception, in the sense of mere sensation, cannot be regarded as a means of knowledge unless conception of thought has arranged into order and has given meaning and signifi- ,,,169 cance to the loose threads of sense-date. Vadiraja discusses the invisible destiny before coming to the description of the Jiva or embodied soul connected with this. It is said that Carvakas have not accepted the theological truths such as Adrsta, 170 Karma and the like. We cannot deny the possibility of invisible destiny for it is this that has caused difference among the individual souls. The perceptible body, organs etc., cannot be held as the cause of this difference. Because, both the poor and rich may have similarity in their physic and desire. But even then such a notable difference is seen in the society. Thus, when the effect is clearly seen there must be a cause. cause. When the cause is not seen, it cannot be said that effect resulted without the cause. The cause and the effect relation is a universal principle and it cannot be disregarded by any one. So, here an invisible cause Adrsta 171 is to be accepted inevitably. And this Adrsta differs from person to person and is also under the control of the 172 Lord. The view of the Carvakas that there is no Jiva as such,

I 46 apart from the body, is critically examined at length and refuted by Vadiraja. Just being dependent or being controlled by this Adreta, the Jiva performs the activities causing different results. If Caitanya or consciousness is accepted as the very body then what is the difference between a living body and a dead body? asks Vadiraja. If the existence of the Jiva is not accepted on account of the presence of the sense-organs, one cannot differentiate a living body from a dead one. It cannot also be said that the breathing is the standard since we cannot perceive the breathing in the case of minute bodies like insects etc. So one has to accept the existence of soul in the body. The Carvaka's contention of this kind is the result of their epistemological point of view. As perception cannot behold the Jiva and prove its existence they took it for granted that there is no Jiva besides the body. 173 i The Charvaka says that the consciousness in the body. originates by the proportionate combination of the material elements earth, water, wind, and fire' like the red colour 174 that originates by the combination of pan-leaf, arecanut and lime. If it is accepted, then, why should the consciousness not be present in a dead-body wherein there are all the four elements. According to the Carvaka, consciousness should 175 also exist in a dead body.

47 But this view is not correct. Because, the reddish colour that results from the combination of leaf, arecanut and lime, is also material unlike non-material consciousness. So whatever is not there in any constituents of a cause, cannot get resulted in the product. Consciousness is not an attribute of any of these constituents. So their combination cannot produce consciousness. On account of the proximity of red flower, marble appears red and that redness cannot be brought in formless air by any means. In the same way, if there would have been consciousness in any one of the constituents of the cause then the theory of Carvakas would have been correct. But consciousness, an attribute of non-matter Jiva cannot be 176 considered as a product of material elements. The gathering of hundred blind persons cannot give rise to visual power, but only with the help of a visioned person there can be visual power. In the same way, a body also can live only when it is associated with Jiva an embodiment of consciousness. And moreover, with artificial means, a body cannot be made active or to live. Because, a well-painted eye in a picture can behold nothing. So one has to accept the existence of the Jiva voluntarily which is entirely distinct from the material body. Thus, one is called Dehl. term Dehi can thus be explained as one having a material body. Thus the derivative explanation also proves the existence of Jiva who is entirely different from the material body. 177 The 178

1 The Jiva as different from the material body, can be established with reasoning. The just born infant voluntarily inclines towards breast-feeding. That infant is in no way taught regarding breast-feeding by anybody. It is the impact of past life (experience) that it inherits the experience and feels happy in breast-feeding. Here, there is not the same body to retain the experience. And it is seen clearly that the consciousness of an experience is not an attribute of the body. So, on this ground, one can infer the presence of Jiva apart from the body. It is something other than the body that constitutes the attributes such as consciousness, 179 knowledge and the like and that is the Jiva. Thus, the body may change whereas Jiva is the same since he is carrying the experience of past-lives, like food may change but experience of food-taken can be retained. In the same way, the body is different and the Jiva is different. If this is not accepted then breaking, splitting, cutting etc., would have to be attributed to the consciousness element which is not 180 desirable. Hence the Jiva is different and eternal. When the existence of the Jiva is accepted, it cannot be said that he is formless. The nature (form) of the Jiva is of Jnana and Ananda. The nature of Jnana and Ananda is 181 to be accepted since it is asserted in the Vedas (sruti) that the Jiva is the Pratibimba of Isvara and it is described 48

49 in the srutis that the liberated souls experience all sorts of blissful enjoyments. + As God is an embodiment of (nature of) unlimited and eternal Jnana, Ananda and other auspicious qualities, the Jivas being Pratimba of God, are also embodiments of eternal Jnana, Ananda and the like, but a limited scope. The reason also does not come in the way of proving the nature of Jnana and Ananda to Jiva. As atomic form and nature is recognised and accepted in the case of atoms, likewise nature of Jnana and Ananda can be accepted in the Jivas. 182 As the minute atomic form and nature is invisible, in the same way the nature of Jhana and Ananda of Jivas is also invisible to our material eyes. As the atomic form (Parimandalya etc.) can be recognised with the help of the advanced and scientific instruments; in the same way, the nature and form of the Jiva can also be recognised and 1 realised by the divine power of sight. Thus, as atoms have the eternal atomic nature in the same way the Jivas also have the nature of Jnana and Ananda. They are lusture-natured 183 or formed. It may also be sometimes questioned "why not the Jivas be formless like ether?" But Vadiraja says that even the ether has its own form and nature. The natural form, giving scope to space for all, is the form of the ether. And moreover, it looks blue from a distance. In the same way

50 everything has its own nature and form. At this juncture, Vadiraja ridicules the Nirakaravada of the Advaitins. - 184 He states that everything is (including the Lord) having the 185 form of Jnana and Ananda. The acceptable view is that the Jiva is lustrous and all his minute parts such as face, hands, feet etc. are also lustrous. Moreover, it is but practical experience to everyone that material should be different from non-material. 186 In this body made of material elements, fire has its own form; in the same way, let there be form to that also (Jiva) made of pure lusture, We do find the references regarding the lustrous and other formed Jivas in 187 their respective worlds. So all the Jivas are of the nature of bliss and knowledge and possess the limbs of Jnanananda which are eternally real. Otherwise, they cannot be 189 treated as Pratibimbas of the Lord. The Pratibimba, although being entirely different, carries the same nature and form of Bimba as seen everywhere. Bimba Lord is of the nature of Jnana and Ananda, so Pratibimbajivas are also of the nature of Jnana and Ananda. The Sruti also supports this view. Hence, the form with hands, feet etc., is natural to the Jivas, as being closely attached to this; the Linga-deha has also the form (of the same kind). And these Linga-dehas are made of Prakrti contents. These contents of Prakrti have atomic form. So, they themselves cannot take the form of hands, feet etc. So, it is by the close association with the

Svarupa-body of Jiva (having the form of hands, feet etc.) Linga-dehas have the form of feet, hand, etc. Linga-dehas I are the garments, made of Prakrti. of Svarupa body of Jiva. The Linga-deha gets the form of Svarupa body of Jiva. 190 So the form of hands, feet etc., is there in the Jivas naturally and eternally and Linga-Sarira (form) is like the garment of that. Otherwise let all the material products i 191 (forms) have the hands, feet etc., of their own like human beings, which is impossible and impracticable. Therefore, a natural and of its own kind form must be accepted in the case of the Jiva. 192 He Vadiraja then attacks the ethics of the Carvakas. says that the Carvakas' ethics is not at all the ethics on account of the absence of any morals in the system. The doctrines of any philosophical system should have the base of morals or ethics. The system becomes sound and firm if it is supported by ethics. 51 The ethics of Carvakas is a path unrestricted and unrestrained. Every one is given freedom of all kinds and of all sorts. It preaches the enjoyment of worldly pleasures. When the core of life is spoiled, when the society is polluted; the Carvakas cannot control or overcome the misfortunes since there is no steps in his system to control all that. 193.

52 I The freedom sanctioned by Carvaka system may lead to excess indulgence of worldly enjoyments, and that in course, indeed, causes bad results. Excess eating leads to indigestion and the like. So taking into consideration all these, one has to conclude that, everything has got its own limitations. Identifying and realising the limitations, one should try his best 194 to gain the pleasure not mixed with mispleasure. f The scholars do not like the path of Charvakas as it leads to troubles and then displeasure. And the illiterate do not require the help of Carvaka system. Thus neither the wise nor the layman prefer this system. So, on account of its uselessness the Carvaka system has become non-effective 195 There is no like the impotent weapons having no power. topic (good) to be studied and there is no proper relation among these as there is no utility. So the whole Carvaka system lacks in having essential qualifications of a system (Visaya,Adhikari, Pravojana and Sambandha). K. T. Pandurangi has rightly observed the defective ethics of the Carvakas: # This will certainly make his life and the life of his fellow-beings miserable because of excessive indulgence. civics or ethics is possible for a selfless society. #196 C.D. Sharma remarks, "The ethics of the Charvaka is a crude No individual hedonism; pleasure of the senses in this life and that too of the individual is the soul end. ,,197 ,