The school of Materialism in India is ancient and likely arose as a protest against the excessive asceticism of Brahmana priests. Although it favoured enjoying the pleasures of life, Charvaka’s metaphysics never found approval in the Indian context.
There are a few views suggesting how this school got its name. According to one view, Charvaka was the name of the sage who advanced materialism. Another view states that Charvaka signifies the people who believe in the philosophy of ‘eat, drink and be merry’ (the root ‘charv’ means eat). Yet another view states that Charvaka is someone whose philosophy is flattering. Further, Brihaspati was the founder of Charvaka school.
The very philosophy of the Charvaka depends on their epistemology. Their epistemological theory reveals that perception or pratyaksha is the only means of valid knowledge. Perception is the act of perceiving an object through senses, i.e., sense-object contact. The school of Charvaka rejects inference or anumana by stating that there cannot be an invariable relationship of concomitance or vyapti. It also rejects verbal testimony or sabda as a means of valid knowledge.
Charvaka’s metaphysics is the outcome of its epistemology. Since perception is the only reliable source of knowledge, Charvaka School only accepts those realities that can be perceived. Accordingly, it admits only four elements- earth, water, air and fire. It rejects the fifth element, ether, since it cannot be perceived.
Likewise, it refutes the existence of the eternal soul. Charvaka emphasizes that the soul is the quality of the body (Dehatmavada). As long as the body is alive, the soul is present in it.
Using similar logic, Charvaka also denies the existence of God, heaven, life before or after, and the law of karma. Material objects are the only objects whose existence can be perceived. Hence, according to Charvaka, the material world is the only reality.
Ethically, Charvaka regards sensual pleasure as the summum bonum that a man can achieve. It is a crude individual hedonistic form of ethics, where only Artha and Kama are accepted, ignoring the two other Purushartha.
In conclusion, at one point in time, Indian Materialism was encouraged to fight against the monk-dom of Brahmana priests. Yet due to a few limitations in its metaphysics, it soon died in serious thought.
Sources
An Introduction to Indian Philosophy by Satishchandra Chatterjee and Dheerendramohan Datta
A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy by C.D. Sharma
Leave a Reply