Pracheen Jainagamon mein Charvakadarshan ka Prastutikaran evam Samiksha
By Sagarmal Jain
Summary
The article undertakes a critical examination of the representation of Cārvāka (Lokāyata) philosophy within ancient Jain Āgamas and commentaries. Cārvāka, also known as Lokāyata, is an Indian materialist school that denies the authority of the Vedas, rejects the existence of an afterlife and holds that direct perception is the only valid source of knowledge. Jain texts, while opposed to this worldview, provide some of the earliest descriptions of its doctrines. The author begins by outlining key tenets of Cārvāka: its emphasis on the material world as the only reality, scepticism toward inference and testimony, and a hedonistic ethic that advocates enjoyment in the present life. She then surveys references to Cārvāka in Jain canonical works such as the Sūtrakṛtāṅga, Uttarādhyayanasūtra and commentaries like Haribhadra’s Ṣaḍdarśanasamuccaya. These texts often present the Lokāyata as a rival school that denies moral causality and karma, making it an important foil in Jain philosophical debates. The article analyses passages where Jaina authors summarise Cārvāka arguments only to refute them, particularly focusing on arguments about the non‑existence of soul, heaven and hell. The author notes that while Jain texts sometimes caricature Cārvāka positions, they also preserve fragments of its arguments that would otherwise be lost, making them valuable sources for reconstructing materialist thought. The essay further examines the rhetorical strategies used in these critiques: the use of analogies from everyday life to demonstrate the invisibility of karma does not imply its non‑existence; appeals to practical ethics; and assertions that denial of karmic retribution leads to moral chaos. The author contextualises these polemics within the broader pluralistic intellectual milieu of ancient India, where Jain, Buddhist, Brahmanical and materialist traditions engaged each other. By comparing Jain representations with the fragments found in Brahmanical texts and later Buddhist works, the study assesses the accuracy of Jain portrayals. It concludes that despite polemical intent, Jain authors provide a relatively systematic account of Cārvāka epistemology and ethics. The paper thus contributes to our understanding of how heterodox philosophies were debated and preserved in religious literature.
Conclusion
The article concludes that Jain Āgamas, while critical of Cārvāka, serve as important sources for reconstructing India’s materialist tradition. Their refutations reveal the core doctrines of Lokāyata—sense perception as the only valid knowledge, denial of soul and karma, and affirmation of worldly enjoyment—and highlight the logical and ethical counter‑arguments posed by Jain philosophers. The study shows that inter‑school debates were central to the development of Indian thought, fostering intellectual diversity. By analysing these dialogues, modern scholars can appreciate the richness of ancient philosophical discourse and the ways in which dissenting views were acknowledged and preserved even by opponents.