Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Refutation of Charvaka

  1. #1
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    38
    Posts
    740
    Rep Power
    342

    Refutation of Charvaka

    Charvaka is the ancient atheist "religion" of India.

    Charvakas beleived only in pratyaxa pramANa, or direct perception. ---(1)
    Charvakas did not accept inference as an evidence.---(2)

    The first question raised against this system is:

    Is there any pratyaxa pramANA for axiom 1?
    No, there is none, and axiom 1 is an inference, leading to an apa siddhAnta or an internally inconsistant system.

    Modern day atheists accept inference and many other sources of knowledge, so this logic no longer holds water against atheism.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,685
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Sudarshan
    Charvaka is the ancient atheist "religion" of India.

    Charvakas beleived only in pratyaxa pramANa, or direct perception. ---(1)
    Charvakas did not accept inference as an evidence.---(2)

    The first question raised against this system is:

    Is there any pratyaxa pramANA for axiom 1?
    No, there is none, and axiom 1 is an inference, leading to an apa siddhAnta or an internally inconsistant system.

    Modern day atheists accept inference and many other sources of knowledge, so this logic no longer holds water against atheism.

    I suppose one could argue until the cows come home about what pratyaxa pramANa is.

    We know that our senses don't give the whole picture of anything. Many animals have better senses in certain aspects so how can we see this pratyaza pramANa?

    So unless the divine showed up here in jeans and T-shirt and told them "I am that" they will not acknowledge his existence? What a pity!

    satay

  3. #3
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    38
    Posts
    740
    Rep Power
    342
    Atheism is not as bad as it is projected to be.

    It is a kind of intellectual honesty and normal human nature of being rational. At the same time, denying God without proof is a sign of irrationality. A true rational person is an agnostic, willing to accept the divine if sufficient general evdience or personal evidence is available.

    If you have a close source giving testimony to the divine, it is a valid evidence for you, though not for others. We beleive in God because rishis and yogis have testified it. Why would you beleive in this testimony? That is the difference between theists and atheists.

    God cannot be proved in anyway, and has to known from the scripture alone. God has nothing to loose if you choose to deny- you are the looser!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,685
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Sudarshan
    Atheism is not as bad as it is projected to be.

    It is a kind of intellectual honesty and normal human nature of being rational. At the same time, denying God without proof is a sign of irrationality. A true rational person is an agnostic, willing to accept the divine if sufficient general evdience or personal evidence is available.
    I agree with this. I am rather comfortable in the agnostic position if there was no personal experience.

    If you have a close source giving testimony to the divine, it is a valid evidence for you, though not for others. We beleive in God because rishis and yogis have testified it. Why would you beleive in this testimony? That is the difference between theists and atheists.
    I agree.

    God cannot be proved in anyway, and has to known from the scripture alone. God has nothing to loose if you choose to deny- you are the looser!
    This is where we disagree. My position is that scripture only takes you to a certain point. It gives you 'knowledge' theoritical knowledge but there is still one more rung of the ladder after scripture.

    In my opinion that is the "experience" one has to experience in his being that no scripture will ever be able to provide because of its obvious limitations.

    don't you think?
    satay

  5. #5
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    38
    Posts
    740
    Rep Power
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    This is where we disagree. My position is that scripture only takes you to a certain point. It gives you 'knowledge' theoritical knowledge but there is still one more rung of the ladder after scripture.

    In my opinion that is the "experience" one has to experience in his being that no scripture will ever be able to provide because of its obvious limitations.

    don't you think?
    satay
    What do you disagree with? I said that the only proof of God is the scripture. Scripture itself says that - shAstra yOnitvAt.h.

    Unless you are willing to accept the knowledge of God obtained from the scripture, you cannot perform any sAdana that can lead to the aparoxa jnana or realization of God.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    177

    Post

    CARVAKA

    The following passage from the “Dighanikaya” exemplifies the neglected thought of the entirely materialist Carvaka Philosophy:

    “Man is formed of the four elements.

    When he dies, earth returns to the aggregate of earth, water to water, fire to fire, and air to air, while his senses vanish into space.

    Four men with the bier take up the corpse: they gossip as far as the burning-ground, where his bones turn the color of a dove’s wing and his sacrifices end in ashes.

    They are fools who preach alms-giving, and those who maintain the existence of immaterial categories speak vain and lying nonsense.

    When the body dies, both fool and wise alike are cut off and perish.

    They do not survive after death.”



    Carvaka is certainly an Indian (and thus Hindu) philosophy, but it CANNOT be considered as one of the paths of Sanatana Dharma!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Age
    43
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    105
    Atheism is one phase of spiritual development. Provided you a true atheist, it teaches you not to bow down to superstitions and dogmas and not to take the words of others without proper evidence. At some point, an atheist has to realize that he cannot expect a definite proof for everything, that is all. Certain things in life have to be beleived on faith alone.

    Atheism is possibly a test, in my opinion. A lot of us are truthful and kind to others due to religion and what it teaches. If you dont beleive in God, how good can you be? God can make somebody born as an atheist to test his intrinsic worth in relation to the sattva guna. An atheist who still retains these divine qualities is indeed a great soul, not any different from a bhakta.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,685
    Rep Power
    213
    Atheists are a funny bunch. They keep on missing the "evidence" when the evidence sits right under their noses.
    What other prove is needed when 'existence' sits right here in front of our eyes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ram
    Certain things in life have to be beleived on faith alone.
    Faith alone is not enough for some...for those Bhagwan 'wakes' them up by giving them some sort of 'experience'.

    Atheism is possibly a test, in my opinion. A lot of us are truthful and kind to others due to religion and what it teaches. If you dont beleive in God, how good can you be? God can make somebody born as an atheist to test his intrinsic worth in relation to the sattva guna. An atheist who still retains these divine qualities is indeed a great soul, not any different from a bhakta.
    Being "good" does not require you to believe in an entity called God.

    satay

  9. #9
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Age
    43
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    Atheists are a funny bunch. They keep on missing the "evidence" when the evidence sits right under their noses.
    What other prove is needed when 'existence' sits right here in front of our eyes.


    Faith alone is not enough for some...for those Bhagwan 'wakes' them up by giving them some sort of 'experience'.
    The atheist could turn the plate as well. Theists are also a funny bunch for beleiving in what could be a mere speculation. Beleiving in something without conclusive proof is called faith.


    Quote Originally Posted by satay
    Being "good" does not require you to believe in an entity called God.
    But the goodness itself comes from God, and such an atheist believes in God without his knowledge. Just like plants grow towards the light on their own even when planted in darkness, so does the soul knows how to seek the light even in darkness.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    45
    Posts
    3,685
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram
    The atheist could turn the plate as well. Theists are also a funny bunch for beleiving in what could be a mere speculation. Beleiving in something without conclusive proof is called faith.
    Oh yes, but it is much harder to 'deny' the existence of god I think. Even science is saying that there seems to be an 'intelligent' design at place here. Everything is working so nicely with crazy perfection to be a random thing; this universe.

    But the goodness itself comes from God, and such an atheist believes in God without his knowledge. Just like plants grow towards the light on their own even when planted in darkness, so does the soul knows how to seek the light even in darkness.
    This sounds like some christian talk. goodness, darkness, god.

    karma my brother, karma is at play here. But you are right, 'evil' seems to be rooted in my being somehow and the goodness is there too. But Bhagwan is the source of both. Isn't it?

    satay

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Shaivite refutation Of Advaita
    By Omkara in forum Shaiva
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 04 January 2013, 02:59 AM
  2. Samkhya Karika on Charvaka
    By wundermonk in forum Carvaka
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04 June 2012, 12:15 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 23 September 2011, 01:58 PM
  4. Vadiraja's refutation of non-dualism
    By rkannan1 in forum Dvaita
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12 July 2010, 06:21 PM
  5. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 19 June 2010, 08:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •