CHARAKA PHILOSOPHY OF NASTIKA ATHEISM & asthika theism
In the theory on the source of knowledge, perception occupies the
undisputed place because it is immediate cognition. Moreover, it is the
foundation on which all other *pramāṇas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/pramana#ayurveda>* operate. So,
perception is discussed first in all most all philosophical systems. Quite
contrary to that, Caraka
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/caraka#ayurveda> places primacy on
verbal testimony (*śabda
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/shabda#hinduism>*) because in Āyurveda
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/ayurveda#ayurveda> scriptural
knowledge is an essential prerequisite for a physician. It is only after
attaining competency in scriptural testimony that a physician becomes
proficient in making use of the other sources of knowledge for diagnosis.
In Indian tradition, it is a conventional belief that truth reveals itself
to a man with pure heart and chaste mind when he engages in sincere and
deep meditation, with a view to providing social welfare and without the
slightest trace of selfish interest. Such is the belief in the ultimate
revelatory nature of knowledge.
2 Caraka defines verbal testimony as the authoritative instructions of
reliable persons (*āpta
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/apta#hinduism>*).( *tatrāptopadeśo
nāmāptavacanaṃ,* CS, Vimāna - sthāna, IV. 4.) Trustworthy persons (*āptas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/apta#hinduism>*) are authoritative
and enlightened persons who are freed from *rajas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/rajas#hinduism>* and *tamas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/tamas#hinduism>* by spiritual
endeavour and knowledge. Such persons have a clear and untainted vision of
things belonging to the present, the past, and the future. (*rajastamobhyāṃ
nirmuktastapojñānabalena ye yeṣāṃ trikālamamalaṃ jñānamavyāhataṃ sadā
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/shada#hinduism>. āptāḥ śiṣṭā
vibuddhāste teṣāṃ vākyamasaṃ-śāyaṃ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/saya#hinduism> satyaṃ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/satya#hinduism>, vakṣyati te
kasmādasatyaṃ nīrajastamāḥ.,* CS, Su, XI. 18-19.) The teachings of such
trustworthy persons are regarded as authentic. Their words are regarded as
authentic because they have an unimpaired memory and complete knowledge
free from doubts, attachment, and affliction.( *aptā
hyavitarkasmṛtivibhāgāvido niṣprītyupatāpadarśinaśca*.
*teṣāmevaṃguṇayogādyadvacanaṃ tat pramāṇaṃ*, CS, Vimāna-sthāna, IV. 4.)
Further *śabda* is seen to be included in the table of logical terms.
There it is said that a word (*śabda) is* a collection of letters and that
it is of four kinds, namely perceived purport (*drṣṭārtha),* unperceived
purport (*adrṣṭārtha),* truth (*satya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/satya#hinduism>*) and untruth (*anṛta
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/anrita#hinduism>*) According to this
definition and division, *śabda* refers to articulations of all types
without considering whether they are authoritative or not. It brings about
some ambiguity due to the inclusion of untruth as one of its divisions. It
may mislead to the conclusion that statements of any person can be treated
as a source of valid cognition. But according to the Carakasaṃhitā
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/caraka-samhita#hinduism> itself, all
sentences, particularly of untruth, in no way, can be treated as the source
of valid cognition. Caraka has not only explained in clear terms the
specific qualities essential for a man to be recognized as a trustworthy
person, but he has also cautioned that the intoxicated, mad, the illiterate
persons and persons having attachment should not be treated as
bonafide.( *apramāṇaṃ
punarmatton mattāmurkha raktaduṣ ṭādus ṭavacanamiti*, Ibid., IV. 4.)
3 Caraka primarily accepts Vedas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/vedas#hinduism> as authoritative
scriptures (*āptāgama*). He includes the knowledge of moral rule, spiritual
goals, and practices derived *from* the Vedic scriptures in verbal
testimony. At the same time, the duly verified and established doctrines by
critical thinkers in other secular disciplines which do not contradict the
objects of Veda <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/veda#hinduism> and
are aimed at the well-being of the universe were also treated with greater
importance. ( *tatrāptāgamastāvadvedaḥ, yaścānyo*'*pi
kaścidvedārthādaviparītaḥ parīkṣakaiḥ praṇītaḥ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/pranita#hinduism> śiṣṭānumato
lokānugrahapravṛttaḥ śāstravādaḥ, sa cāptāgamaḥ;* CS, Su, XI. 27.) This
shows his unbiased synthesizing attitude. Referring to this, P.V. Sarma
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sharma#hinduism> points out that
Caraka was a *daiṣṭika
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/daishtika#hinduism>* who accepted
both *āstika <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/astika#hinduism>*
and *nāstika
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nastika#hinduism>* views as logic
permitted. He says that *diṣta* is a term which Pāṇini
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/panini#hinduism> puts in between *asti
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/asti#hinduism>* and *nāsti
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nasti#history>*. The last two are at
opposite poles while the first one (*diṣṭa
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/dishta#hinduism>*) balances the two.
The *daiṣṭikas <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/daishtika#hinduism>,*
choose
one of the two after critically examining the facts and circumstances.( PVS,
.164; *asti <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/asti#hinduism> nasti
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nasti#history> distaṃ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/dishta#hinduism> matiḥ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/mati#hinduism>,* Aṣṭādhyāyī
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/ashtadhyayi#hinduism>-sūtrapāṭha
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sutrapatha#hinduism> of Pāṇini
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/panini#hinduism>., IV. iv. 60;
*pramāṇanupatinī
yasya matiḥ sa daiṣṭikaḥ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/daishtika#hinduism>,* KV, Part—I, p.
399. Vaiśeṣikadarśana.. Agarwala says that *daiṣṭika
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/daishtika#hinduism>* mentioned by
Pāṇini refers to the followers of the determinist philosophy preached by
Makkali Gośāla <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/goshala#hinduism> who
repudiated the efficacy of *karma
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/karma#ayurveda>* as means for the lot
of human beings. Vaiśeṣikadarśana.. Agarwala, *India
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/india#hinduism> as Known to Pāṇini*,
Varanasi, 1963, pp. 384-85.) However we cannot deny the fact that Caraka
was an *āstika* even though he adopted a neutral approach.
4 Akṣapāda <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/akshapada#hinduism>
describes
verbal testimony as the assertion of a worthy person (*āpta*) which is
further followed by the later thinkers. With regard to the question as to
who an *āpta* is, Vātsyāyana
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/vatsyayana#hinduism> says that he is
one who operates through the direct and intuitive knowledge of things.
Quite different from the Mīmāṃsakas, the Naiyāyikas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/naiyayika#hinduism> consider that the
knowledge derived from the Vedas is valid, since they are the
utterances of *īśvara
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/ishvara#hinduism>*. He adds that
*āptas* need not be sages. Even foreigners (*mlecchas
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/mleccha#hinduism>*) can be *āptas*. It
is relevant to note that the Nyāya-sūtra
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nyayasutra#hinduism> refers to two
divisions of verbal testimony, namely *dṛṣṭārtha* and *adṛṣṭārtha*.
5 The Bhāṭṭa <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/bhatta#hinduism>
Mīmāṃsakas
describe verbal testimony in the following way: When the words of a
sentence are heard there arises the recollection of the meaning of the
words. The recollection gives rise to sense of the sentence, which is not
in contact. They give a different division of verbal testimony namely human
(*pauruṣeya <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/paurusheya#hinduism>*)
and superhuman (*apauruṣeya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/apaurusheya#hinduism>*). The first is
the words of reliable persons and the second is the Vedic scriptures. The
Prābhākara <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/prabhakara#hinduism>
Mīmāṃsakas,
at the same time, recognize only the Vedic scriptures as verbal
cognition. The reason is that though the words of a man lead to the
inference of the intention of the speaker they do not convey themselves the
meaning of the sentence because their capacity is made blunt by doubt Kaṇāda
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/kanada#hinduism> asserts that the
cognition derived from verbal testimony is a variety of inference and it is
attested by his followers. In classical Sāṃkhya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/samkhya#ayurveda>, reliable authority
(*āptāgama) is* verbal testimony (*śabda*). The Vedāntins, similar to that
of the Prābhākara Mīmāṃsakas, consider only the Vedic scriptures as
authority. At the same time, Caraka, in coherence with the Sāṃkhya, Nyāya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nyaya#hinduism>, and some other
systems, consider the articulations of trustworthy persons as authority.
6 On the contrary what atheist CHARWAKA THINKS AS HIS PHILOSOPHY?.
Cārvāka <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/carvaka#hinduism> *darśana
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/darshana#hinduism>* is one of the
heterodox (*nāstika <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nastika#hinduism>*)
and materialistic school of thought. It has different views about *mokṣa
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/moksha#hindu-philosophy>* than
others. Every school of philosophy states relation of soul
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/soul#hindu-philosophy> with *mokṣa*.
In Cārvāka *darśana*, the soul (*ātmā
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/atma#hindu-philosophy>*) is nothing
but the physical body, so the death of body is itself *mokṣa* and no *mokṣa* is
resulted from the right knowledge—
*dehasya nāśo muktistu najñānānmuktiricyate* |
When Cārvākas <https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/carvaka#hinduism> are
queried how can they say that the soul is not different from body, they
answer-It is in practice as we all say, ‘I am fat, I am thin’ etc. Always
we refer ‘I’ with our body. So the soul is nothing but only physical body.
*ahaṃ sthūlo kṛśo'smīti sāmānādhikaraṇyataḥ* |
*dehaḥ sthaulyādiyogācca sa evātmā nāparaḥ* ||
The question then arises, that we sometimes use the term ‘my body’ here we
differentiate ‘I’ from ‘body’ But according to Cārvākas, such phrases are
significant only metaphorically .
*mama deho'yamityuktiḥ sambhavedaupacārikī* |
If Cārvākas are asked, the physical body is sensation less, when the spirit
enters into it, it becomes live, so we have to accept the soul different
from body, they say that the spirit is not any other thing than the body.
To prove that they give the example of beetle leaf. The beetle leaf, lime,
catechu etc. don’t have red colour in themselves, but when you mix and eat
them, the red color is automatically created. Similar to that, the spirit
is created in the body itself which is the mixture of four elements, viz,
earth, water, fire and air.
The typical materialistic view of Cārvākas is summed up in the following
verse:—
*yāvajjīvetsukhaṃ jīvedṛṇaṃ kṛtvā ghṛtaṃ pibet* |
*bhasmībhūtasya dehasya punarāgamanaṃ kutaḥ
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/kuta#hinduism>* ? ||
7 *Orthodox (āstika):*The *āstika* system consists of six *darśanas* and
they are:*nyāya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/nyaya#hindu-philosophy>*, *vaiśeṣika
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/vaisheshika#hindu-philosophy>*, *sāṅkhya
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/samkhya#hindu-philosophy>*, *yoga
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/yoga#yoga>*, *mīmāṃsā
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/mimamsa#hindu-philosophy>* and *vedānta
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/vedanta#hinduism>*.
*Heterodox (nāstika):*The *nāstika* system consists of: Cārvaka, Bauddha
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/bauddha#hinduism> and Jaina. KR
IRS 101022
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 09:07, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --
> *Mar*The Ravage of Disbelief
>
>
>
> Atheism champions the Cartesian logic, the logic of the machine. It
> propels the introduction of Technology into every field. It cultivates the
> deliberate ignorance of the basic fact, that breathing, smelling, sensing,
> and perceiving leads to symbiotic understanding among all life forms,
> creating the ready availability of nature in solving one’s problems. Nature
> as a whole is one organism, with the air as its hormonal system and the
> rhythm between the lithosphere, hydrosphere, troposphere and the Biosphere,
> as its nervous system. The hormonal system and the nervous system of each
> organism are completely connected as the extension of the macro systems of
> nature. Every organism is part of the planet earth, the living organism.
> Nature has its own correctional systems to keep it healthy and nature
> simply cannot allow sickness in any organism, which is a functioning part
> and component of nature.
>
> Today, from the life of symbiotic rapture, we have changed or Darwined
> into the problem plagued lives as humans, while every other organism is
> waiting in the extermination camp, the planet earth changed into the death
> factory of life forms. We are now taught that routinized killing of any and
> every life form for economic utility is economic and scientific
> advancement. Without feeling any sense of shame we chant that ‘Manava seva
> is Madhava Seva,(Service to Humans is service to God),converting God into a
> partner in the routinized crime against nature.(We thus uphold the dictum
> of Rene Descartes who said that God resides only in pineal gland of the
> humans, while every other life form is a feelings-less and emotions-less
> machine without any life at all.) God is made into an economist who
> champions mechanical engineering or the logic of the machine in the place
> of the symbiotic emotional feeling generated by breathing.
>
> We lost the ultimate and most effective Doctor for our diseases-nature,
> and we have adopted the molecular medicine which follows the Cartesian
> logic. Imagine the situation in which as a life form in thick, free and
> lush nature where you just live by continuously inhaling the smell lessons
> and messages from nature and exhale your responses and smell contributions
> to the other organisms continuously, where every ailment or disease gets
> corrected by the emotional symbiosis of nature, to the present situation
> where every life form of the Biosphere dreads and hates you. Nature no
> longer loves you. You inhale continuously the hate filled smells of every
> other organism. You breathe negativity and your hormones are polluted.
>
> Today, we find many Doctors whose only aim is to extort money from the
> patients caught into their spider web. Many doctors have their own medical
> shops; labs and membership in the racket, the syndicate of consultants. We
> have been making nature sick, while the doctors loot us after we get snared
> into their web.
>
> There are also many dedicated Doctors, but they are fighting against the
> continuous poisoning of nature and have to help the patients without the
> basic help from nature, which once was available. And these Doctors too are
> smeared because the money making racketeers have become the conspicuously
> visible spectacles. And they are just webs that snare you.
>
> If you want help, then help nature.
>
> YM
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZor_XAHMdB0WJVQxYNmh63wmFwrTuP5OBfnxThhKvM2jKQ%40mail.gmail.com.
