12 1982 1 ID: 120066
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contribut..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 12 1982 1 \ \ D G D U D Q D R 9 W V \ \ D Q D % K \ D (vol. 3), Paschimbanga Rajya Pustak Parshat, Calcutta (rep.). V ANAMAMALAI , N. 1973 Materialist Thought in Early Tamil Literature , « Social Scientist» , 2, 25 - 41. W HITNEY , W.D. 1890 Translation of the Ka . K D - Upani D G ¨ Transact ions of the American Philological Association» , 21, 88 - 112. Acknowledgements: Amitava Bhattacharyya, T. Seshasayee, Krishna Del Toso. R. Bhattacharya / Development of Materialism in India 11 2010a Commentators on the & U Y N D VÍ W U D : A Critical Survey , « Journal of Indian Philosophy» , 38, 419 - 430. B HATTACHARYA , R. 2010b «L R N \ D W D ' D U D Q D D Q G D & R P S D U D W L Y H 6 W X G \ Z L W K * U H H N P D W H U L D O L V P © L Q 3 * K R V H H G by), Materialism and Immaterialism in India and the West: Varying Vistas , Ce ntre for the Studies on Civilizations, New Delhi, 21 - 34 . B HATTACHARYA , R . 2010c ¨ / R N \ D W D 0 D W H U L D O L V P & O D V V L I L F D W L R Q R I 6 R X U F H 0 D W H U L D O © L Q 6 & K D U D Q * R V Z D P L H G by), / R N \ D W D 3 K L O R V R S K \ $ ) U H V K $ S S U D L V D O , The Asiatic Society, Kolkata, 37 - 42. B HATTACH ARYA , R. 2010d : K D W W K H & U Y N D V 2 U L J L Q D O O \ 0 H D Q W 0 R U H R Q W K H & R P P H Q W D W R U V R I W K H & U Y N D VÍ W U D « Journal of Indian Philosophy », 38, 529 - 542. B HATTACHARYA , R. 2012 6 Y D E K Y D Y G D D Q G W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D $ + L V W R U L F D O 2 Y H U Y L H Z , « Journal of Indian Philos o- phy » , 40, 593 - 614. B RONKHORST , J. 2007 Greater Magadha: Studies in the Culture of Early India , Brill, Leiden. C HATTOPADHYAYA , D. 1989 In Defence of Materialism in Ancient India , Peoples Publishing House, New Delhi. C HATTOPADHYAYA , D. AND G ANGOPADHYAYA M.K. 1 990 C U Y N D / R N \ D W D , Indian Council of Philosophical Research, New Delhi. D ASGUPTA , S. 1975 A History of Indian Philosophy (vol. 2), Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi (rep.). D EL T OSO , K. 2012 « W H E K \ D F D L W D Q \ D ¥ : il sé secondo il Materialismo indiano», in A. Cisla ghi and K. Del Toso (ed. by), Intrecci filosofici. Pensare il Sé a Oriente e a Occidente , Mimesis, Milano - Udine, 135 - 153. E NGELS , F. 1966 Dialectics of Nature , Progress Publishers, Moscow. F RANCO , E. 1997 ' K D U P D N° U W L R Q & R P S D V V L R Q D Q G 5 H E L U W K , Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien, Wien. F RANCO , E AND P REISENDANZ , K. 1998 «Materialism, Indian School of», in E. Craig (ed. by), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (vol. 6), Routledge, London, 179. F RAUWALLNER , E. 1997 History of Indian Philosophy (2 vols.), Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. G ANGOPADHYAYA , M.K. 1984 Indian Logic in Its Sources: The Validity of Inference , Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi. H IRIYANNA , M. 1952 Popular Essays in Indian Philosophy Kavyalaya Publishers, Myso re. M ARX , K. AND E NGELS , F. 1957 On Religion , Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow. M OOKERJEE , S. 1935 The Buddhist Philosophy of Universal Flux , Calcutta University, Calcutta. R ADHAKRISHNAN , S. 1948 Indian Philosophy (vol. 1), George Allen and Unwin , London. S EN , A.K. 2005 The Argumentative Indian , Penguin Books, London. T ARKAVAGISA , Ph. Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 10 Vasudevahi ¥ ° prathama kha § D P , ed. by M. Caturavijaya and M. Punyavijaya, Gujarat Sah i- tya Aka demi, Ga n dhinagar 1989. SDS 6 \ D D - 0 G K D Y D 6 D U Y D G D U D Q D V D Æ J U D K D : Sarva - ' D U D Q D - Sa ¥ J U D K D R I 6 \ D § D - 0 G K D Y D , ed. by. V.S. Abhyankar, Bhandarkar Oriental R e search Insitute, Poona 1978 (rep.). ' 6 D P = Haribhadra, D G D U D Q D V D P X F F D \ D : D G D U D Q D V D P X F F D \ D R I + D U L E K D G U D 6Í U L : L W K W K H & R P P H Q W D U L H V 7 D U N D - rahasya - G° S L N R I Gu § D U D W Q D 6 Í U L D Q G / D J K X Y © W W L R I 6 R P D W L O D N D 6 Í U L D Q G D Q $ Y D FÍ U Q L , ed. by M.K. Jain, Bhar a- tiya Jnanap i tha, Varanasi 1969. ° O I N D , 6Í W U D N © W § J D V Í W U D ° N (see SKS ). 6° W K D O D L 6 W W D Q U Ma § L P N D O D L : Silappattikaram, Manimekalai [by I " DI N Á $ L N D" and 6° W K D O D L 6 W W D Q U @ , Engl. rendering by L. Holmstörm, Orient Longman, Hyderabad 1996. SKS = 6Í W U D N © W Æ J D V Í W U D : F U Æ J D V Í W U D P D Q G 6Í W U D N © W Æ J D V Í W U D P Z L W K 1 L U \ X N W L R I F U \ D % K D G U D E K X 6 Y P° D Q G W K H Commen W D U \ R I ° O Æ N F U \ D H G E \ 6 0 D K U M D U H - H G Z L W K $ S S H Q G L [ E \ 0 - D P EÍ Y L \ D M a- ji), Motilal Bana r sidass, Delhi 1978. 6 X U H Y D U D 0 Q D V R O O V D V D ¥ J U D K D : U° D Æ N D U F U \ D µ V ' D N L§ PÍ U W L 6 W R W U D Z L W K W K H 9 U W W L N D 0 Q D V R O O V D R I 6 X U H Y D U F U \ D , ed. and Engl. tr ans. by S. Harshananda, Ramaskrishna Math, Bangalore 1992. SVM = Malli H D 6 \ G Y G D P D ñjar ° : 6 \ G Y G D P D ñjar ° R I 0 D O O L H§ D Z L W K W K H $ Q \ D \ R J D - Vyavaccheda - ' Y W U L ¥ L N R I Hemacandra, ed. by. A. B. Dhruva, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Inst i tute, Poona 1933. Y Up = Y H W D Y D W D U D Upani D G (see EPU ). TRD = Gu D U D W Q D 7 D U N D U D K D V \ D G° S L N : Sha G D U D Q D - samuchchaya by Haribhadra with Gu § D U D W Q D µ V & R P P H Q W D U \ 7 D U N D U D K a- sya - G° S L N , ed. L. S u ali, The Asiatic Society, Calcutta 1905. TS = Q W D U D N L W D Tattvasa ¥ J U D K D : The Tattv asa ¥ J U D K D R I F U \ D Q W D U D N L W D Z L W K W K H ² 3 D ñjik ³ & R P P H Q W D U \ R I F U \ D . a- P D O D ° O D Y R O V H G E \ ' V W U° Bauddha Bharati, Varanasi 1968. TSP . D P D O D ° O D Tattvasa ¥ J U D K D S D ñjik ( See TS ). 9 F D V S D W L P L U D % K P D W° (see BS ). 9 P D Q D D Q G - D \ G L W \ D . L N : 3 § L Q ° \ D Y \ N D U D § D V Í W U D Y © W W L . L N R I 3 W 9 P D Q D D Q G - D \ G L W \ D Y R O V H G E \ 1 0 L U D Chow k hamba, Varanasi 1996. 9 W V \ \ D Q D 1 \ \ D E K \ D (see NS ). Vyom 9 \ R P L Y F U \ D 9 \ R P D Y D W° : 9 \ R P D Y D W° R I 9 \ R P L Y F U \ D (2 vols.), ed. by G . Shastri, Sampurnana nd Sanskrit V i- shvav i dyalaya, Varanasi 1983 - 1984. P X Q D Siddhitraya : U° E K D J D Y D G P X Q D P X Q L Y L U D F L W D ¥ 6 L G G K L W U D \ D P H G E \ 7 9 L U D U J K D Y F U \ D 7 L U X S D W L U° Y ° 0 X G U D O D \ D 7 L U X S D W L b) Secondary sources B HATTACHARYA , R. 2009a Reasoners and Relig ious Law - makers: An Ancient Indian Case Study , « Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research », 26, 49 - 56. B HATTACHARYA , R. 2009b 6 W X G L H V R Q W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D , Società Editrice Fiorentina, Firenze. B HATTACHARYA , R. R. Bhattacharya / Development of Materialism in India 9 AC = Hemacandra, $ E K L G K Q D F L Q W P D § L : 7 K H $ E K L G K Q D F L Q W P D § L R I + H P D F K D Q G U F K U \ D : L W K + L V 2 Z Q 1 R W H V (2 vols.), ed. by H.T. Se . K D % - ' R ° D Q G 0 0 - D \ D Q W D Y L M D \ D 1 / 9 D N L O % K D Y Q D J D U - 1919. U \ D Í U D - W D N D P O : - W D N D - P O E \ U \ D Í U D , ed. by P.L. Vaidya, The Mithila Institute, Darbhanga 1959. A 3 L Q L A G K \ \° : A G K \ \° R I 3 § L Q L , ed. and Engl. trans. by S.M. Katre, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi 1989. AYVD = Hemacandra, $ Q \ D \ R J D Y \ D Y D F F K H G D G Y W ©¥ L N (see SVM ). B © K D V S D W L V Í W U D : Brihaspati Sutra, Or the Science of Politics A ccording to the School of Brihaspati , ed. by F.W. Thomas, Motilal Banarsidass The Pubjab Sanskrit Book D e pot, Lahore 1971 (rep.). BS = % G D U \ D Q D % U D K P D VÍ W U D : 7 K H % U D K P D VÍ W U D D Æ N D U D % K \ D : L W K W K H & R P P H Q W D U L H V % K P D W° . D O S D W D U X D Q G 3 a- rimala , ed. by $ . V W U° D Q G 9 / 6 K D V W U L 3 D Q V L N D U & K R Z N K D P E D 6 D Q V N U L W 6 H U L H V 2 f- fice, Var a nasi 1982. BSB D I N D U D % K D U P D VÍ W U D E K \ D (see BS ). EPU = Eighteen Principal Upani D G V , ed. by V.P. Limaye and R.D. Vadekar, Vaidika Sa m- sodhana Mandala, Poona 1958. Hari b hadra, 6 D P D U L F F D . D K : 6 D P D U D L F F D . D K $ - D L Q D 3 U D N U W D : R U N , ed. by H. Jacobi, The Asiatic Society, Ca l cutta 1926. Jinendrabuddhi, 9 L O P D O D Y D W° 3 U D P § D V D P X F F D \ D ° N : Jinendrabuddhis 9 L O P D O D Y D W° 3 U D P § D V D P X F F D \ D ° N & K D S W H U (vol. 1), ed. by. E. Steink ellner, H. Krasser and H. Lasic, China Tibetology Publishing House Austrian Academy of Sc i ences Press, Beijing Vienna 2005. KUp = Ka K D 8 S D Q L D G (see EUP ). Manu = Manusm © W L : Manu - Sm © W L : L W K 1 L Q H & R P P H Q W D U L H V E \ 0 H G K W L W K L 6 D U Y D M Q D Q U \ D § D . X O O Í N D 5 J K a- Y Q D Q G D 1 D Q G D Q D 5 P D F D Q G U D 0 D § L U P D * R Y L Q G D U M D D Q G % K U X F L (6 vols.), ed. by. J.H. Dave, Bharatiya Vidya Bh a van, Bombay 1972 - 84. MBh = 0 D K E K U D W D : 7 K H 0 D K E K U D W D (19 vols.), crit. ed. by V.S. Sukthankar et alii , Bhandarkar Oriental Research Ins t i tute, Poona 1933 - 1966. MUp = 0 D L W U° R U 0 D L W U \ D § ° R U 0 D L W U \ D § ° \ D 8 S D Q L D G (see EPU ). NM = Jayantabha .. D 1 \ \ D P D ñjar ° : 1 \ \ D P D ñjar ° of Jayanta Bha D : L W K W K H & R P P H Q W D U \ R I * U D Q W K L E K DÆ J D R I & D N U D d- hara (3 vols.), ed. by. G. Sastri, Sampurnanand Sanskr it Vis h vavidyalaya, Varanasi 1982 - 84. NS = Gautama, 1 \ \ D VÍ W U D : 1 \ \ D ' D U D Q D 9 W V \ \ D Q D % K \ D [in Bengali], ed. by Ph. 7 D U N D Y D J° D : H V W % H Q J D O State Book Board, Calcutta 1989 (rep.). 5 P = 5 P \ D § D : 7 K H 9 O P° N L 5 P \ D § D 7 K H $ \ R G K \ N § D , ed. by P.L. Va idya, Oriental Instit u te, Baroda 1962. 6 D G Q D Q G D . P° U D N D Advaitvabrahmasiddhi : Advaita - Brahma - 6 L G G K L E \ . D P° U D N D U° 6 D G Q D Q G D D W L , ed. by G. Tarka - Darshanatirtha and P. Tarkavagish, University of Calcutta, Calcutta 1932. 6 D G Q D Q G D R J° Q G U D 9 H G Q W D V ra : 9 H G Q W D V U D 2 U 7 K H ( V V H Q F H R I 9 H G Q W D R I 6 D G Q D Q G D R J° Q G U D , Engl. trans. by S. N i- N K L O Q D Q G D $ G Y D L W D $ V h rama, Calcutta 1990. Sa I J K D G saga L Vasudevahi ¥ ° : Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 8 The E KÍ W D Y G L Q in the Tamil epic, however, rejects inference as such, G H F O D U L Q J L W W R E H I D O V H 2 Q W K H R W K H U K D Q G W K H & U Y N D V D V L W K D V E H H Q pointed out time and again, 31 do admit inference in all worldly affairs. 3. The Old and t he New Materialists: Points of Difference , Q Y L H Z R I D O O W K L V W K H Q H Z P D W H U L D O L V W V & U Y N D V P D \ E H G L V W L Q J X L V K H G from the old materialists of all sorts in the following respects: a) Instead of five elements (including N D or vyoma, space) as their pr inciple ( tattva ) W K H & U Y N D V V S R N H R I I R X U H [ F O X G L Q J V S D F H 32 pr e sumably because it was not amenable to sense - perception. b) The E KÍ W D Y G L Q s believed in two kinds of matter: lifeless and living. Life originates from living matter, the body from the life less. The & r Y N D / R N \ D W D V G L G Q R W E H O L H Y H L Q V X F K G X D O L W \ W R W K H P D O O E H L Q J V H Q W L W L H V were made of the same four basic elements. 33 c) There was another domain in which the two differed more radically. Some of the Pre - & U Y N D P D W H U L D O L V W V Z H U H D F F L G H Q W D O ists ( yad © F F K Y G L Q s); they did not believe in causality. On the other hand, the & U Y N D V appear to have endorsed causality; 34 they adopted the doctrine of V Y D E K Y D - as - causality rather than the opposite one, namely, V Y D E K Y D - as - accident. 35 d) T K H & U Y N D V admitted the validity of inference insofar as it was confined to the material and perceptible world (hence verifiable), not e x tended to the invisible and unverifiable areas, such as the imperishable soul, god, omniscient persons (admitted by the Buddhists and the Jains as well), the outcome of performing sacrifices called D SÍ U Y D (as claimed by W K H 0° P 2 V D N D V H W F 36 while some of the old materialists rejected infe r ence as such as an instrument of cognition, and clung to perception alone. Bibliography a) Primay sources and abbreviations 31 Mookerjee (1935: 368 - 369), Dasgupta (1975: 539), Gangopadhyaya (1984: 32, 55 note 1, 56 note 4, 66 note 51), Chattopadhyaya (1989: 52) and Bhattacharya (2010b: 28 - 30). 32 Bhattacharya (2009b: 78, 86; aphorism I.2). 33 Bhattacharya ( I bidem : 78 - 79, 86; aphorisms I.1 - 3). 34 See SDS , pp. 12 - 13. 35 For a study of the doctrine of V Y D E K Y D , see Bhattacharya (2012). 36 For sources see Bhattacharya (2009: 57 - 58) and (2010b: 28 - 30). R. Bhattacharya / Development of Materialism in India 7 Now. Talk of other birth is falsity. 27 The words of the E KÍ W D Y G L Q have been paraphrased by a late medieval commentator in the following way: When certain flowers and jaggery are boiled together, liquor is born which produced intoxication. Just as when elements combine, consciousness arises. Consciousness dissolves with the dissolutions of the elements composing them like the disintegration of sound. Elements combine to produce living bh Í W D s and from them other living E KÍ W D s will be born. Life and consciousness are synon y mous. From non - living E KÍ W D s consisting of two or more elements rise non - living E KÍ W D V R I W K H V D P H W \ S H / R N \ D W D L V D Y D U L D Q W R I W K L V V \ V W H P W K D W agrees in fundamental w ith this system. Observation is the method by knowledge is o b tained. Inferential thinking is illusion. This worldly life is real. Its effect is e x perienced in this life only. The theory that we enjoy the fruits of our action in our next birth or in another world is false. 28 So far as the Ma § L P N D O D L is concerned, the number of elements admi t- ted by the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s is not specified; hence there is no way of ascertai n- ing whether the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s spoke of five or four elements. The first statement regarding the rise of consciousness is very muc h similar to the & U Y N D D S K R U L V P ¨ $ V W K H S R Z H U R I L Q W R [ L F D W L R Q D U L V H V R U L V P D Q L I H V W H G from the constituent parts of the wine (such as flour, water and mola s- ses)». 29 The rejection of rebirth is a basic materialist position which can be traced back to mu ch earlier sources. 30 27 In another translation (or rather a prose adaptat ion), the distinction between the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s and the O D X N \ D W L N D s is somewhat differently explained: «The % KÍ W D - Y G° V hold that the world is I R U P H G R X W R I W K H I L Y H H O H P H Q W V D O R Q H Z L W K R X W D Q \ G L Y L Q H L Q W H U Y H Q W L R Q : H D J U H H Z L W K W K H / R N \ D W D the sage said, and believe that when the elements combined together, a material and a spirit come into existence. That is all. We believe that perception alone is our means of knowledge and nothing else. We recognise only one birth and we know that our joys and pains en d on earth with this one life» ( Holmstörm, 1996: 170). 28 This paraphrase has been translated into English by N. Vanamamalai (1973: 36). The co m- mentator further says ( Ibidem ) that there were three such schools: % KÍ W D Y G D / R N \ D W D D Q G 6 D U Y D N D P H D Q L Q J & U Y N D " , I V R W K H F R P P H Q W D W R U P X V W K D Y H I O R X U L V K H G D I W H U W K H H L J K W K F H Q W X U \ I R U W K H Q D P H & U Y N D D V K D V E H H Q V D L G E H I R U H G R H V Q R W R F F X U L Q W K H F R Q W H [ W R I S K L O R V R S K \ E H I R U H W K H Q 29 See Bhattacharya (2009b: 7 9, 87; fragment I.5). 30 The KUp , as said before, is perhaps the first attempt to refute the h e retical idea, namely, d e- nial of the after - world. There is, however, no reference to hell in the KUp (as Whitney, 1890: 92) so perceptively noted); the deniers of the after - world are forced to repeated redeath and subsequent rebirth on earth. It is in Mbh 12.146.18 that we read of the abode of Yama ( y amak D \ D ) where the messengers of Yama ( \ D P D GÍ W D s) bring back the deniers of the other - world; such sinners have to stay there for a while before they are sent back to earth. The elaborate picture of hell with its eighty four pits ( ku § D s) developed later, P D L Q O \ L Q W K H 3 X U D V Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 6 S U R S R V H V W Z R D O W H U Q D W L Y H V H L W K H U W K H / D X N \ L W D N D V R U W K H 6 2 N K \ D V + H uses all the names of materialists current in his time & U Y N D Q V W L N D , % U K D V S D W \ D E KÍ W D Y G L Q (also pañcabh Í W D Y G \ G \ and more elaborately as pañcabh Í W V W L W Y G L Y G L Q D (on SKS 1 .1.20 - S D Q G / D X N \ D W L N D V (besides W D M M° Y D W D F F K D U° U D Y G L Q s) interchangeably, as many others such D V . D P D O D ° O D D Q G - D \ D Q W D E K D .. D G R V H H D E R Y H We do not know whether materialism appeared in south India (as r e- corded in Ma § L P N D O D L , composed be tween the third and the seventh century CE ) quite independent of the developments in the north. Whatever the case may be, there can be little doubt that materialism in course of time gained adherents even in faraway Kashmir. 26 In or around the eighth ce n- tur y one suc K V F K R R O F D P H W R E H N Q R Z Q D V W K H & U Y N D 3 D U W L D O D F F H S W D Q F H of the validity of inference was their hallmark. They distinguished the m- selves from the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s and other earlier materialists by declaring their view regarding inference in no uncertain term s. Yet a host of their opponents, whether they were Brahminical, Buddhist or Jain, continued to criticize them for not admitting inference at all as an instrument of cogn i- tion. Who are the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s? In the list of rival claimants for the first cause ( ja J D W N U D § D ) given in the Y 8 S 1.2, E KÍ W Q L (the elements), along with time, V Y D E K Y D (own nature), niyati (destiny) and others are mentioned. There is no way to prove that E KÍ W D Y G D was a direct descendent of the doctrine of E KÍ W Q L . We first read of the bh Í W D Y G L Q s in the Ma § L P N D O D L who in many respects r e semble the O R N \ D W L N D s. The E KÍ W D Y G L Q however , says that on doctrinal points they have some differences with the / R N \ D W D V . This Tamil epic does Q R W P H Q W L R Q W K H & U Y N D V E X W G R H V U H I H U W R W K H / R N \ D W D V . A E KÍ W D Y G L Q is made to declare the basic doctrine of the system he adheres to in the fo l lowing terms (27.265 - 76; p. 154): When aathi (?) flowers, sugar and the rest Are mixed, wine is made. Life too appears By the mixing of elements, vanishes When they separate as sounds from a drum. Conscious elements produce life within And unconscious one produces the body Each appearing through their elements. This is the truth. Words different from this $ Q G R W K H U I D F W V D U H I U R P 0 D W H U L D O L V W V � / R N \ D W D V @ Sense perce ption is valid. Inference Is false. This birth and its effect conclude 26 Udbha . D Z K R F R P S R V H G D U D W K H U X Q X V X D O F R P P H Q W D U \ R Q W K H & U Y N D VÍ W U D (now lost), was a Kashmirian as was his arch opponent, Jayanta, author of the NM . R. Bhattacharya / Development of Materialism in India 5 M D K L ¥ G D G K D§ X M D K L F F K ë da ¥ V D§ ° \ D ¥ X S S D M M D W L S X§ R Y L jahic F K ë pavi § D V V D s H Y D¥ Q D N R ï H W W K D V U D E KÍ | D W W K L [ \r na koï \r ] M R V D U° U D S D E K H ë ï parabhavasa ¥ N P° (Emphasis added). «As the rainbow is seen accidentally and disappears accidentally again, so is there no essence, [nothing] that goes through another birth to another body». E. Frauwallner (1997, vol 2: 222) interprets a C U Y N D VÍ W U D I.9, jalabudbud a- Y D M M° Y , « Souls are like water bubbles» (see Bhattacharya 2009: 79, 87) as a denial of the rigorous law of retribution following from the power of good and bad actions. This would make the & U Y N D / R N \ D W D V D S S H D U D V D F F L G H Q W D O L V W V ( yad © F F K Y G L Q s). But E. Francos (1997: 99) way of viewing the simile as an expression of epiphenomenalism, in my opinion, is more appropriate. The ana l- ogy has nothing to do with nec essity and accident. 24 2. % KÍ W D Y G D The presence of several groups of pre - & U Y N D P D W H U L D O L V W V L V W H V W L I L H G E \ D Q R O G Jain canonical work, the SKS (1.1.1 - 20, 2.1.15 - ° O I N D (ninth century) in his commentary on the SKS employs the word E KÍ W D Y G L Q alo ng with % U K D V S D W \ D & U Y N D D Q G / R N \ D W L N D R Q SKS 1.1. 6 - 8, pp.10 - 11). He identifies H J H V (in Sanskrit eke P with the E KÍ W D Y G L Q s and calls them «followers of the doctrine of B K D V S D W L © R Q SKS 1.1.7 - 8). He uses another synonym, W D M M° Y D W D F F K D U° U D Y G L Q (on SKS 1.1.11 - 14; pp. 13 - 14), «one who holds that the spirit and the body are identical» as well as Q V W L N D (on SKS 1.1.14; p.15). The SKS also refers to several other presumably materialist schools that mostly spoke of five elements (1.1.7 - 8, 15, 20 - 25) instead of four Z K L F K W K H & U Y N D V G L G ° O I N D D S S D U H Q W O \ G L G Q R W D W W D F K D Q \ L m- portance to E KÍ W D F D W X D \ D Y G D (four - H O H P H Q W V G R F W U L Q H R I W K H & U Y N D V and identified even the E KÍ W D S D ñcakav G L Q s (mentioned in SKS 1.1.7) 25 at I L U V W Z L W K W K H & U Y N D V D Q G W hen as E KÍ W D Y G L Q V D Q G % U K D V S D W \ D V ° O I N D µ V L G H Q W L I L F D W L R Q R I P D Q \ R I W K H R S S R Q H Q W V R I W K H - D L Q F U H H G K R w- ever, is not always convincing. In his comments on the same text (on SKS 2.1.20) he himself is uncertain about the identity of «the second man» and 24 It may be noted in this connection that the same simile was used in the SKS to uphold the id e- alist view (1.2.1.26): «As for instance, a water - bubble is produced in water, grows in water, is not separate from water, but is b ound up in water: so all beings have the Self for their cause and their object, they are produced by the Self, they are intimately connected with the Self, they are bound up in the Self». 25 sa Æ W L S D¥ F D P D K D E E K Í \ L K D P H J H V L P K L \ | S X G K D Y° X W H X Y Y X J V D S D ¥ F D P || («Some profess [the exclusive belief in] the five gross elements: earth, water, fire, air and space»). Mbh 12.267.4 also mentions «five great elements» ( P D K E KÍ W Q L S D ñceti ) in relation to a similar, if not the same, doctrine. Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 4 denigrator of the Veda , 19 the theist and the atheist (current in modern I n- dian languages such as Bangla, Hindi, Marathi, etc. even today), etc. came later. The Jains explain the word somewhat differently: a Q V W L N D is one who thinks that there is no virtue and vice, Q V W L S X § \ D ¥ S S D P L W L P D W L U D V \ D Q V W L N D 20 To this Malli H D D G G V W K H G H Q L D O R I W K H D I W H U - world 21 and Gu D U D W Q D W K H G H Q L D O R I W K H V H O I te ( scil . Q V W L N ) ca M° Y D S X § \ D S S G L N D ¥ Q D P D Q \ D Q W H . 22 The opposition is on ethical grounds rather than ontological. 0 H G K W L W K L in his commentary on the Manu , explains the word Q V W L N D in two senses: a denier of the after - world ( S D U D O R N S D Y G L Q ; on Manu 8.22) and as one who hold the view that the Vedic doctrines are false ( Y H G D S U D P § N Q P D U W K Q ¥ P L W K \ W Y G K \ D Y D V D \ D ; on Manu 4.163). It may be pointed out that the first signification is directly connected with ontology (the view rejecting the existence of the extra - corporal and impe r- ishable self distinguishes the materialists from the idealists) while the se c- ond is more relevan t to the domain of epistemology (whether D E G D ve r- bal testimony, is to be admitted as a valid instrument of cognition, and if so, if the Veda is to be admitted as the highest of such testimony). The m a terialists are to be called Q V W L N D in the first sense only . In fact Buddhist and Jain savants join their voice in condemning the materialists as Q V W i- ka s whereas in the second sense the Buddhists and the Jains too are branded so. In both senses, however, the approbatory nature of the word is obvious. Like another such word, S D§ L Q , it is loaded w ith an attitude of censure and disapproval. 1 V W L N D is the commonest word to suggest irreligious attitude. Whether in the Mbh R U 9 W V \ \ D Q D µ V F R P P H Q W D U \ R Q NS 1.1.2, Q V W L N \ D is used in this sense. 23 % X W 9 W V \ \ D Q D D O V R H P S O R \ V W K H Z R U G W R P H D Q m at e rialism (on NS 3.2.61). Similarly the § K L \ D Y G° Q D W W K L \ D Y° in the Sa I J K D G V D J D L µ V Vasudevahi ¥ ° (pp. 169, 275) and the Q K L \ D Y G° in Haribhadras 6 D P D U L F F D . D K S L V D P D W H U L D O L V W U \ D Í U D µ V - W a N D P O 23.57 employs the work Q V W L N D to su g ge st a materialist or a non - believer . A passage from the Vasudevahi ¥ ° (p. 275), a Prakrit work written in the third century, makes the position of some earlier natthiyav L s ( Q V W i N D Y G L Q s) clear: 19 A Q V W L N D is the defiler of the Veda: Q V W L N R Y H G D Q L Q G D N D ( Manu 2.11). 20 AC auto - commentary, p. 334. 21 SVM , p. 130. 22 TRD , p. 300. 23 See Bhattacharya (2009b: 227 - 231). R. Bhattacharya / Development of Materialism in India 3 rec ords all the four words as synonymous in his lexicon. Names like G H K W P D Y G D , L Q G U L \ W P D Y G D , mana - W P D Y G D , S U § W P D Y G D , 15 etc. a p- parently refer to some pre - & U Y N D V \ V W H P V R I S K L O R V R S K \ I R U W K H V H Y L H Z V D U H G L V F X V V H G V H S D U D W H O \ X Q F R Q Q H F W H G Z L W K W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D 16 6 \ D D - 0 G K D Y D S H U K D S V I R O O R Z L Q J D I N D U D P H Q W L R Q V G H K W P D Y G D in SDS F K D S W H U S W R P H D Q W K H & U Y N D V It needs to be emphasized that materialism in India, however, did not E H J L Q Z L W K W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D 2 Q W K H R W K H U K D Q G L W F D P e as the cu l- mination of a long history of heterodoxy and the attempt to see nature «just as it is, without alien addition». 17 There are several words in Sa n- skrit, Pali and Prakrit that bear evidence to the existence of materialist ou t- looks, if not of system V E H I R U H W K H & U Y N D V : H V K D O O W D N H X S W Z R V X F K words first. 1. 1 V W L N D The oldest word implying dissidence from the orthodox Brahminical view of the world is of course Q V W L N D , the Neinsager (to use a convenient word once employed by Bertolt Brecht in his play Der Jasager und der Nei n- sager ). The KUp (sometime after the fifth century BCE) is perhaps the first attempt to refute the heretical idea, namely, denial of the after - world, which characterized the idealists and the materialists in India. The w ord Q V W L N \ D , like another such word avaidika , however occurs only once in the whole Upani D G L F O L W H U D W X U H D Q G W K D W W R R L Q D O D W H U W H [ W MUp D Q G U H V S H F W L Y H O \ : H O H D U Q I U R P 9 P D Q D D Q G - D \ G L W \ D F R P P H Q W D W R U V R I 3 L Q L µ V A G K \ \° , that it is the exi stence of the after - world that is affirmed and denied by two sets of people; those who affirm are known as V W L N D V ; those who deny, Q V W L N D V . 18 This was the original meaning of these terms. Other meanings, such as the upholder and the 15 In D I N D U D µ V BSB on BS 1.1.1, we find the following expressions: D U° U D P H Y W P H W L Y L S a ryayo O R N \ D W i N Q P ; L Q G U L \ § \ H Y W P H W° Q G U L \ D F D L W D Q \ D Y G° Q P ; P D Q D F D L W D Q \ D Y G L Q P D Q D H Y H W L 9 \ R P (vol. 2, p. 126), E KÍ W D F D L W D Q \ D Y G D S D N D . NM (vol. 2, p. 218), also indriyacaitanyapak D ( Ibidem , p. 219), yet another view which G. Sastri has called P D Q D F H W H Q D W Y D Y G D ( Ibidem 6 X U H Y D U D µ V 0 Q D V R O O V D V D ¥ J U D K D 5.14 - P X Q D µ V Siddhitraya , pp. 19 - 6 D G Q D Q G D R J° Q G U D µ V V e- G Q W D V U D , pp. 70 - 6 D G Q D Q G D . P° U D N D µ V Advaitvabrahmasiddhi , chapter 2 (each chapter is called mudg a U D S U D K U D ), pp. 101 - 102. 16 S. Radhakrishnan (1948 : 280) is of the opinion that what is common to all these views is that «the soul is only a natural phenomenon». Hiriyanna (1952: 26) thought that such views were var i- D Q W V R I W K H & U Y N D V 17 Engels (1966: 198). 18 . L N on A 4.4.60 (p . 396). Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013 / Contributi 2 To most of the people materialism (some prefer to call it naturalism or S K \ V L F D O L V P L Q , Q G L D P H D Q V W K H & U Y N D R U Z K D W F D P H W R E H N Q R Z Q D V L W V Q D P H V D N H / R N \ D W D % R W K W K e words are often used figuratively for mat e- rialism in general without, however, any ulterior motive, but as a matter of habit. 5 7 K H R U L J L Q R I W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D P D W H U L D O L V W V \ V W H P L V W K X V traced back to hoary antiquity, 6 at the least to the first mille nnium BCE. 7 7 K H U H L V H Q R X J K H Y L G H Q F H W R S U R Y H W K D W W K H & U Y N D / R N \ D W D Z D V Q R W the only system of materialism in India. Even if we exclude the early in k- lings of materialist thought lurking in the ¨ L J Y H G D 8 and some of the Upani D G V D Q G L Q W K H W H D F K L Q J V R f Ajita Kesakambala as found in the ' L J K D Q L N \ D , there are several indications of the existence of several pre - & U Y N D S K L O R V R S K L F D O V F K R R O V W K D W Z H U H I R U D O O L Q W H Q W V D Q G S X U S R V H V I X n- damentally materialistic, although there were some differences of opinion among them (stated in clear terms in the Tamil epic Ma § L P N D O D L 27.272 - 273, to which I shall soon revert) as there were different interpretations of certain VÍ W U D V D P R Q J W K H & U Y N D V W K H P V H O Y H V 9 W W K H I D F W L V W K D W Z H G R Q R W F R P H D F U R V V W K H Q D P H R I & U Y N D L Q W K H field of philosophy before the eighth century. 10 Three other words, Q s- W L N D O R N \ D W D and E U K D V S D W \ D were already current to designate mater i- alism although the same words, particularly Q V W L N D and O R N \ D W D , were also used in other senses too. 11 By the eighth century, however, all these words have become interchangeable in signification and so used in the works of several Buddhist, Jain and Brahminical authors such as Kama l- D ° O D 12 ° O I N D 13 Jayantabha .. D 14 and others. Hemacandra ( AC 3.526 - 527) 5 Speaking of the adherents of a different school of materialists, Gu D U D W Q D TRD , p. 300) called them F U Y N D L N D G H ° \ V R P H V H F W L R Q V R I W K H & U Y N D V 6 D G Q D Q G D R J° Q G U D µ V 9 H G Q W D V U D (124 - 127; pp. 70 - V S H D N V R I V H Y H U D O & U Y N D V S U R I H V V L Q J V W KÍ O D D U° U W P D Y G D , L Q G U° \ W P D Y G D , S U § W P D Y G D and W P D Y G D , sections. Phanibhushana Tarkavagisa (1982: 69) endorses this view. More recently Johannes Br R Q N K R U V W V S H D N V R I D P D W H U L D O L V W & U Y N D Q R W W K H G H P R Q L Q the Mbh . 6 P.L. Vaidya (1962: 703), in his edition of the 5 P ., even goes to the extent of saying that «the W H Q H W V R I / R N \ D W D V F K R R O D U H D V R O G D V K X P D Q L W \ L W V H O I © 7 Sen (2005: 23). 8 See Del Toso (2012: 138 - 141). 9 See Bhattacharya (2010a), (2010d) and (2010c). 10 Jinendrabuddhis 9 L O P D O D Y D W° 3 U D P § D V D P X F F D \ D ° N , p. 24: D W K D Y F U Y N D ¥ S U a- tyetaducyate . For other references see note 11 below. 11 Bhattacharya (2009a: 187 - 92), (2009 b). 12 See Haribhadra, ' 6 D P , chapter 6 7 K H F K D S W H U L V G H Y R W H G W R W K H H [ S R V L W L R Q R I / R N \ D W D l o- N \ D W Y D G D Q W \ H Y D P , etc.; 80a), but in 85d we read: F U Y N pratipedire 6 H H D O V R . D P D O D ° O D Z K R in his commentary TSP on TS , chapter 22 , entitled / R N \ D W D S D U° N X V H V W K H Q D P H V & U Y N D D Q G / R N \ D W D L Q W H U F K D Q J H D E O \ 6 H H TSP , vol. 2, pp. 639, 649, 657, 663, 665, also 520 ( E U K D V S D W \ G D \ D ), 939 ( O R N \ D W D ) and 945 ( O R N \ D W D P ). 13 On SKS 1.1.1.6 - 8 (pp.10 - 11) and on 1.1.1.14 (p.15). 14 NM , vol 1, pp. 9, 43, 154, 2 75, 387 - 388, etc. Esercizi Filosofici, 8, 2013, pp. 1 - 12. ISSN 1970 - 0164 D EVELOPMENT OF M ATERIALISM IN I NDIA : T HE P RE - C 5 9 . $ 6 $ 1 ' 7 + ( C 5 9 . $ 6 Ramkrishna Bhattacharya 7 K H H [ L V W H Q F H R I P R U H W K D Q R Q H P D W H U L D O L V W V F K R R O E H I R U H W K H & U Y N D (eighth century) has been admitted by modern scholars. 1 They have used different nomen clatures to denote the pre - & U Y N D D Q G & U Y N D P D W H U L D O L V W systems. I prefer to use simpler names, «old materialism» and «new mat e- rialism». 2 Unlike them, however, I do not propose to confine the Pre - & U Y N D P D W H U L D O L V W V W R W K H S H U L R G E H I R U H W K H & R P P R Q ( U D My contention is that such schools appeared even in the Common Era and they existed side by side for a long time. 7 K H U D G L F D O G H S D U W X U H P D G H E \ W K H Q H Z P D W H U L D O L V W V W K H & U Y N D V Z D V most apparent in the field of epistemology: even though the ontology of the old and the new materialists was similar, the partial acceptance of i n- ference as a valid means of knowledge marked off the new materialists from the old ones. The VÍ W U D work most probably redacted by Purandara seems to have retained the old form of th e aphorism: Q Q X P Q D ¥ S U D P § D P , inference is not an instrument of valid cognition. Purandara and following him Aviddhakar D D Q G 8 G E K D. D E K D.. D W R R N S D L Q V W R D V V H U W that inference based on perception is perfectly admissible but an inference on the basis of v erbal testimony or authority was not. 3 If we do not want to appear uncharitable to Hemacandra and others who continued to ridicule W K H & U Y N D V I R U Q R W D G P L W W L Q J L Q I H U H Q F H D V V X F K 4 we must say that their understanding of «new materialism» was faulty; they failed or more probably refused to distinguish between the old and new approaches. 1 Frauwallner (1997, vol. 2: 219) speaks of the oldest Materialistic doctrines of Pura D . \ D S D $ M L W D . H D N D P E D O L Q D Q G . D N X G D . W \ \ D Q D D Q G Ibidem W K H / R N \ D W D V \ V W H P Z K L F K ) U D u- wallner believes «arose in pre - & K U L V W L D Q S H U L R G © D Q G R Q H & U Y N D Z D V L W V I R X Q G H U ) U D Q F R D Q G Preisendanz (1998: 179) call them «Early Materialists» and «the Classical Materialistic Philos ophy» (sixth century). 2 In his tenth thesis on Feurbach, Marx distinguishes between «old materialism» and «new m a- terialism». See Marx and Engels (1957: 72). Similarly, Engels (1966: 255) in his study of Ludwig Feurbach branded the whole of pre - Marxian mat erialism as «old materialism». 3 For details see R. Bhattacharya (2010a), (2010d) and (2010c). 4 Cf. AYVD , v. 20; SVM S 9 F D V S D W L P L U D % K P D W° on BS 3.3.53 (tranlsated in Cha t- topadhyaya and Gangopadhyaya 1990: 242 - 243). Development of Materialism in India: the pre - & U Y N D V D Q G W K H & U Y N D V Ramkrishna Bhattacharya Esercizi Filosofici 8, 2013, pp. 1 - 12. ISSN 1970 - 0164 Link: http://www2.units.it/eserfilo/art813/bhattacharya813.pdf