Sorry sir, as per my understanding Charvaka have more followers than any other religion. Charvaka was saying there is no God, rebirth, swarga, narak, atman, paramatman only this life is true hence enjoy as much as possible even by taking loan. So everyone following charvaka in life its imaterial in which religion they born or whatever their belief is they are following Charvaka only except few real saints
He has made a view/disclosure about how liberal ancient India used to be . Even a charvaka's views about reality was well respected and not condemned physical by fights but by debates.
Your points cannot be validated since no original writings of Charvaka exists today. All the remarks pertaining to the Charvaka school of thought only survives through the written existing compositions of the opponents. Charvaka could not have stated that the concept of inference does not exist since he debated with people who used inference. Charvaka's simple point was that the only truth, the only final arbiter about the existence of any thing was observation. So, to use your example about science: The transition from hypothesis, to theory, to law can only be made on the basis of repeated observation. When anomalies occur, even laws (Newton's Laws) have to be modified (into General Relativity) to fit the observation. This makes observation the alpha and the omega of the scientific method. India produced Charvaka but Europe grasped the concept of Charvaka and universalized it in the form of the scientific method.
1. u r right on the non-existence of Charvaka material - but question is y did Charvaka system did not survive - they were not persecuted - their philosophy could not find many takers - hence it collapsed. 2. Observation - u r right and wrong : Yes observation is key to scientific advancement but not the sole process. eg Einstein's theory was not based on any observation - he postulated his theory with only pen, paper and his imagination. It was only in 1919 that his theory was validated by observation. How can u invent zero with observation?
You may have forgotten that truth is not subject to public opinion. For thousands of years Homo sapiens thought that the Earth was flat. That is just one of many examples. One more example of popular takers: Christianity is the most popular religion with 2.4 billion Christians on the planet today. Do you believe that a kind natured first century Jew was the son of God and is God himself who was born of a virgin to absolve you of your sin as you are born a sinner because two people ate an apple being persuaded by a snake? You must believe this since this is the most popular religious view. It is true that observation may not be the genesis of a new idea. However, observation is the gold standard that tests the validity of any idea which claims to be true. Without observation, it is only a conjecture. As far as GR goes, the GPS system is very observable and clearly validates the relativistic nature of time. So one must have observational support (observation of popularity does not count towards the validity of a popular conjecture). You cannot use popularity as the golden measure for truth. Every valid claim must be supported by observation. So now you cannot claim truth on the basis of popularity. Please present your view as to where Charvaka may be wrong and what view of the natural world do you have to replace it?
What view did Charvaka have - they were only ranting against believers. Where did i mention that popular view is the correct view? Question is how to infer through observation - here one has to go into the imaginary part of the mind - so when u r activating imaginary part of the mind - how to stop your mind to only infer about scientific truths and not about gods?
I am happy to know that your statement about “no takers” in the Indian Subcontinent is a simple observation of a fact but has absolutely no implication on the validity of the philosophy of Charvaka. The common monkeys in the forest of India are also not among the “takers” of Charvaka philosophy. That too is a simple observation. These observations do not make any judgement about validity of the Charvaka philosophy. However, presently, there is another truth that does support the view of Charvaka: When a scientist follows the scientific method, she beings with observation, formulation of the hypothesis, then sets up the question with a skeptical approach by formulating the “null hypothesis” with statistical parameters. Experiment is conducted, data is collected, and if the hypothesis doesn’t stand the statistical tests of the experimental results (observation), then the null hypothesis is retained. This is the approach taken by modern science which has made tremendous progress. Remember, observation is the gold standard, the alpha and the omega No gods, spirits, of demons are evoked in this process. You are correct to say that the human mind churns up a lot of trashy ideas, many do not stand the test of observation. The idea is not to stop the churning of ideas, but to filter them through the gold standard of reality, evidence, and factual support. The scientific method, using a skeptical approach of the null hypothesis as described above is one such method. It has been a great success over the past 200 years. Charvakas, in their rants against believers, believers who believed in things without evidence, the Charvakas tried to awaken the Indians 3 millennia before the Europeans grasped the Idea. You are correct, alas, there were no takers. They missed the boat 3 millennia ago, but thanks to the internet, the wisdom of Charvaka is once again appearing in the Subcontinent.
Bawa Chitu < Giordano Bruno was persecuted and executed by the Church for rejecting Catholic doctrines. The church prevailed. And, now he's called the Martyr of Science. And we can fairly assume what happened to the Charvaka texts that didnt survive. Vedic system is the Catholic church of India. It'll fall one day, and you will know - y?
Manohar Varma - you assume a lot. You r equating Abrahmic cults with Hindusim . No scientists was ever persecuted in Hindusim. If you want to read about differences between the two - read here : ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2016/02/abrahamism-andhinduism-can-they-adapt.html and if you want to know who Hindus were in 1000 AD then read here : ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2015/11/al-berunis-india.html
Bawa Chitu - You bluff a lot. And I am equating Abrahamic faith with Brahmanism. I dont see any difference. Both are bullying cults calling themselves superior and noble, all in the name of God. In Abrahamic faith they speak about slaves, in Hinduism (Brahmanism) its about Shudras. Buddha rejected the Vedas, but they wrote Puranas claiming Buddha as Vishnu avatar who came to mislead people who reject Vedas. Hinduism is more like a capitalist ideology that bullies and hijacks its competitors. The link you posted itself talks about how Brahmans are superior to others. You probably need such propaganda articles to maintain your superiority. When Islamic ideology is criticized they say Islamophobia. And you say defaming Vedic philosophy. These holier-than-thou ideologies may prevail now, but will one day die out. And you woundnt be around to witness it.
Manohar Varma - This is your opinion and you r free to have one. I have given the link presenting the proof and you need to refute. Caste System : read the following ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2014/07/caste-system-caste-system-is-themost.html Buddha issue : read it here : ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2018/ Now dont come with your opinions - they dont have any value beyond yourself. Come with refutation. I have had debate with a Buddhist - there r references - to cross check - similarly there r references on caste system and also on the previous links. U need to find mistakes in them and refute the narrative. I hope you will come with strong arguments.
The books are there. The need is to decode the sutras. His thoughts on administration was adopted by chanakya. Abulfazi and somadeva has given enough support on this side. Chanakya adopted his views. First read those books which have decoded his sutras. The only school who talked about democracy, health and humanism. akshaygroundreality.blogspot.in akshayaharshudou.blogspot.in
Manusmriti is not used in Indian Legal System. It is internally inconsistent. Here is one example of the internal inconsistancy: Manusmriti offers conflicting perspective on women's rights. The text declares that a marriage cannot be dissolved by a woman or a man, in verse 8.101-8.102. Yet this is contradicted in verses 9.72-9.81 which gives a way out. I have no problem with being granted a way out. I do have problem with the inconsistency. Skepticism, on the other hand, still lives through the process of the "scientific method". "Sirji" please do your studies with comprehension.
Lol charvaka was destroyed by buddism ..charavaka was more arguing with buddism then vedic ..at the time of chravaka there buddism infunce in india..so u can get record of charvaka in buddist text
Sorry sir, as per my understanding Charvaka have more followers than any other religion. Charvaka was saying there is no God, rebirth, swarga, narak, atman, paramatman only this life is true hence enjoy as much as possible even by taking loan. So everyone following charvaka in life its imaterial in which religion they born or whatever their belief is they are following Charvaka only except few real saints
He has made a view/disclosure about how liberal ancient India used to be . Even a charvaka's views about reality was well respected and not condemned physical by fights but by debates.
@@ajaydalaya2195 by debates? Bro they destroyed their entire body of work
Your points cannot be validated since no original writings of Charvaka exists today. All the remarks pertaining to the Charvaka school of thought only survives through the written existing compositions of the opponents. Charvaka could not have stated that the concept of inference does not exist since he debated with people who used inference. Charvaka's simple point was that the only truth, the only final arbiter about the existence of any thing was observation. So, to use your example about science: The transition from hypothesis, to theory, to law can only be made on the basis of repeated observation. When anomalies occur, even laws (Newton's Laws) have to be modified (into General Relativity) to fit the observation. This makes observation the alpha and the omega of the scientific method. India produced Charvaka but Europe grasped the concept of Charvaka and universalized it in the form of the scientific method.
1. u r right on the non-existence of Charvaka material - but question is y did Charvaka system did not survive - they were not persecuted - their philosophy could not find many takers - hence it collapsed.
2. Observation - u r right and wrong : Yes observation is key to scientific advancement but not the sole process. eg Einstein's theory was not based on any observation - he postulated his theory with only pen, paper and his imagination. It was only in 1919 that his theory was validated by observation. How can u invent zero with observation?
You may have forgotten that truth is not subject to public opinion. For thousands of years Homo sapiens thought that the Earth was flat. That is
just one of many examples. One more example of popular takers: Christianity is the most popular religion with 2.4 billion Christians on the planet today. Do you believe that a kind natured first century Jew was the son of God and is God himself who was born of a virgin to absolve you of your sin as you are born a sinner because two people ate an apple being persuaded by a snake? You must believe this since this is the most popular religious view.
It is true that observation may not be the genesis of a new idea. However, observation is the gold standard that tests the validity of any idea which claims to be true. Without observation, it is only a conjecture. As far as GR goes, the GPS system is very observable and clearly validates the relativistic nature of time.
So one must have observational support (observation of popularity does not count towards the validity of a popular conjecture). You cannot use popularity as the golden measure for truth. Every valid claim must be supported by observation. So now you cannot claim truth on the basis of popularity. Please present your view as to where Charvaka may be wrong and what view of the natural world do you have to replace it?
What view did Charvaka have - they were only ranting against believers. Where did i mention that popular view is the correct view?
Question is how to infer through observation - here one has to go into the imaginary part of the mind - so when u r activating imaginary part of the mind - how to stop your mind to only infer about scientific truths and not about gods?
I am happy to know that your statement about “no takers” in the Indian Subcontinent is a simple observation of a fact but has absolutely no implication on the validity of the philosophy of Charvaka. The common monkeys in the forest of India are also not among the “takers” of Charvaka philosophy. That too is a simple observation. These observations do not make any judgement about validity of the Charvaka philosophy.
However, presently, there is another truth that does support the view of Charvaka: When a scientist follows the scientific method, she beings with observation, formulation of the hypothesis, then sets up the question with a skeptical approach by formulating the “null hypothesis” with statistical parameters. Experiment is conducted, data is collected, and if the hypothesis doesn’t stand the statistical tests of the experimental results (observation), then the null hypothesis is retained. This is the approach taken by modern science which has made tremendous progress. Remember, observation is the gold standard, the alpha and the omega No gods, spirits, of demons are evoked in this process.
You are correct to say that the human mind churns up a lot of trashy ideas, many do not stand the test of observation. The idea is not to stop the churning of ideas, but to filter them through the gold standard of reality, evidence, and factual support. The scientific method, using a skeptical approach of the null hypothesis as described above is one such method. It has been a great success over the past 200 years.
Charvakas, in their rants against believers, believers who believed in things without evidence, the Charvakas tried to awaken the Indians 3 millennia before the Europeans grasped the Idea. You are correct, alas, there were no takers. They missed the boat 3 millennia ago, but thanks to the internet, the wisdom of Charvaka is once again appearing in the Subcontinent.
Ajita Kesakambali সহমত
Vedic priests destroyed charvaka texts thats it
Charvaka's philosophy was defamed by opponent philosophers, mostly Vaidik priests.
Were Charvaka not defaming Vedic philosophy - but vedic survived - u need to ask yourself - y?
Bawa Chitu < Giordano Bruno was persecuted and executed by the Church for rejecting Catholic doctrines. The church prevailed. And, now he's called the Martyr of Science.
And we can fairly assume what happened to the Charvaka texts that didnt survive. Vedic system is the Catholic church of India. It'll fall one day, and you will know - y?
Manohar Varma - you assume a lot. You r equating Abrahmic cults with Hindusim .
No scientists was ever persecuted in Hindusim.
If you want to read about differences between the two - read here :
ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2016/02/abrahamism-andhinduism-can-they-adapt.html
and if you want to know who Hindus were in 1000 AD then read here :
ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2015/11/al-berunis-india.html
Bawa Chitu - You bluff a lot. And I am equating Abrahamic faith with Brahmanism. I dont see any difference. Both are bullying cults calling themselves superior and noble, all in the name of God. In Abrahamic faith they speak about slaves, in Hinduism (Brahmanism) its about Shudras.
Buddha rejected the Vedas, but they wrote Puranas claiming Buddha as Vishnu avatar who came to mislead people who reject Vedas. Hinduism is more like a capitalist ideology that bullies and hijacks its competitors.
The link you posted itself talks about how Brahmans are superior to others. You probably need such propaganda articles to maintain your superiority. When Islamic ideology is criticized they say Islamophobia. And you say defaming Vedic philosophy.
These holier-than-thou ideologies may prevail now, but will one day die out. And you woundnt be around to witness it.
Manohar Varma -
This is your opinion and you r free to have one.
I have given the link presenting the proof and you need to refute.
Caste System : read the following ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2014/07/caste-system-caste-system-is-themost.html
Buddha issue : read it here :
ramansaigal.blogspot.in/2018/
Now dont come with your opinions - they dont have any value beyond yourself. Come with refutation. I have had debate with a Buddhist - there r references - to cross check - similarly there r references on caste system and also on the previous links.
U need to find mistakes in them and refute the narrative. I hope you will come with strong arguments.
Can u upload rest part of this lecture please
What was the philosophy of charvaka
khao pio jio
Most practical and logical philosophy....rationalism, liberalism and atheism philosophy
@@akscs373 non sense
The books are there. The need is to decode the sutras. His thoughts on administration was adopted by chanakya. Abulfazi and somadeva has given enough support on this side. Chanakya adopted his views. First read those books which have decoded his sutras. The only school who talked about democracy, health and humanism.
akshaygroundreality.blogspot.in
akshayaharshudou.blogspot.in
What is his name?
That is Roddam Narasimha. legendary fluid dynamicist. We recently lost him to covid.
I follow charvac.
How to get his philosophy
Internet is very limited for his philosophy
Follow it but don't cry when you lose everything.
@@akashrima7917 what to loose???
Water bottle ad
I follow charvac
Guru-Word authenticity..?
Followers of manusmriti destroyed charvaka the way buddhism is thrown away from India. Sirji you are taking rubbish.
How?
ChittaRanjan Mahato I m sure u r using jio☺
Manusmriti is not used in Indian Legal System. It is internally inconsistent. Here is one example of the internal inconsistancy: Manusmriti offers conflicting perspective on women's rights. The text declares that a marriage cannot be dissolved by a woman or a man, in verse 8.101-8.102. Yet this is contradicted in verses 9.72-9.81 which gives a way out. I have no problem with being granted a way out. I do have problem with the inconsistency.
Skepticism, on the other hand, still lives through the process of the "scientific method". "Sirji" please do your studies with comprehension.
@@ajitakesakambali2388 Are you a member of Nirmukta?
Lol charvaka was destroyed by buddism ..charavaka was more arguing with buddism then vedic ..at the time of chravaka there buddism infunce in india..so u can get record of charvaka in buddist text
Bad