kmguru
Staff member
exactly :thumbsup:
Hinduism's stance on Buddhism
- Thread starter greenberg
- Start date
exactly :thumbsup:
ja
what of charvaka, circa 600 bc... a seminal dolt
It is a fact, that at one point in the history of India - the land of the Vedic wisdom - many people were influenced by the philosophy of Charvaka Muni who propagated absolute atheism. He said that conscious life does not exist before inert matter. The self and the consciousness refer only to certain aspects of matter. Or, in other words, by interaction of certain material elements consciousness is created. To illustrate this Charvaka gave the following example. Just as the mixture of rice and molasses produce alcoholic beverage so, the mixture of different elements of earth, water, fire, air and sky produce the conscious living being. Further, in the expressions, "I am fatty", "I am skinny", "I am dark skinned" the word 'I' that refers to nothing else then the temporary, material body and not the soul, since the soul does not exist. Ultimately, when the material elements are decomposed the self and the consciousness are again merged into matter.
Concerning the existence of God, he says that since there is only matter, to propagate or to study the teachings about God is a useless waste of time. If any God exists one should search for a higher God that controls that God. Ultimately, however, God's existence was never proven.
As there is neither God nor the self is spiritual, there is also no rebirth, wanderings of the soul into different life forms. Moreover, attainment of liberation is also imaginary concepts. In this way, because the whole existence is only a variety of aspects of matter, and because one will not get reactions for ones good or bad activities after this life, everybody should take full opportunity of this one life's facilities to enjoy to the max.
Thus, despite the Vedas and similar books all over the world, clearly teach theism, Charvaka argued that in all the countries books that describe God, the spiritual world, the hell, and the existence of the soul are only imaginations of some primitive people or so-called sages. They do not describe anything that truly exists. He didn't accept the Vedas because of seeming contradictions in them and he didn't follow and perform the prescribed rituals either since they do not give immediate, obvious enjoyable results.
what of charvaka, circa 600 bc... a seminal dolt
It is a fact, that at one point in the history of India - the land of the Vedic wisdom - many people were influenced by the philosophy of Charvaka Muni who propagated absolute atheism. He said that conscious life does not exist before inert matter. The self and the consciousness refer only to certain aspects of matter. Or, in other words, by interaction of certain material elements consciousness is created. To illustrate this Charvaka gave the following example. Just as the mixture of rice and molasses produce alcoholic beverage so, the mixture of different elements of earth, water, fire, air and sky produce the conscious living being. Further, in the expressions, "I am fatty", "I am skinny", "I am dark skinned" the word 'I' that refers to nothing else then the temporary, material body and not the soul, since the soul does not exist. Ultimately, when the material elements are decomposed the self and the consciousness are again merged into matter.
Concerning the existence of God, he says that since there is only matter, to propagate or to study the teachings about God is a useless waste of time. If any God exists one should search for a higher God that controls that God. Ultimately, however, God's existence was never proven.
As there is neither God nor the self is spiritual, there is also no rebirth, wanderings of the soul into different life forms. Moreover, attainment of liberation is also imaginary concepts. In this way, because the whole existence is only a variety of aspects of matter, and because one will not get reactions for ones good or bad activities after this life, everybody should take full opportunity of this one life's facilities to enjoy to the max.
Thus, despite the Vedas and similar books all over the world, clearly teach theism, Charvaka argued that in all the countries books that describe God, the spiritual world, the hell, and the existence of the soul are only imaginations of some primitive people or so-called sages. They do not describe anything that truly exists. He didn't accept the Vedas because of seeming contradictions in them and he didn't follow and perform the prescribed rituals either since they do not give immediate, obvious enjoyable results.
"hindu" is a term coined by muslim invaders for those living over the "sindhu" river - sure, collectively there was a lot of disparity in the practices, but they were all based upon the vedic scriptures. The appearance of buddhism entailed a rejection of the vedas as authoritative.
actually the successor of buddhist philosophy was sankharacarya, who basically argued identical principles as buddhism, except on the authority of the vedas .... and sankharacarya's doctrine was challenged by madhvacarya etc etc
charvaka muni was simply am arguing brahmana - the history of india is full of them. Simply because he existed in no way entails that he had a major following
Last edited:
The notion of seeking conflict on the grounds of religious difference was especially played up and introduced (at least to the European world) by Thomas Aquinas. It has become so much an ingrained issue of contemporary society, that the notion of two different religious communities existing side by side without rallying for conscripts seems alien.
Actually, upon further reflection, it appears that the Buddha's objection against creationist theism was specifically against the kind of creationist theism that is without notions of karma (and thus also without notions of dependent co-arising and rebirth).