Our Path to Freedom: (1) Our Positive Heritage

1.  Our Positive Heritage

           The following is a part of the essay ‘Indian Renaissance’ from the collection ‘Humanism, Revivalism and The Indian Heritage’ by the renowned philosopher- revolutionary M N Roy published by Renaissance Publishers Private Limited, Bankim Chatterjee Street, Calcutta. As serious thinkers in India know, Roy tirelessly spoke, wrote and worked for a New Humanist Renaissance. After his demise, the most notable activist intellectuals who worked on the basis of his Radical Humanist Philosophy were VM Tarkunde and Sib Narayan Ray. A staunch Atheist, Roy is one of the founders of International Humanist and Ethical Union ( www.iheu.org ) . I hope this will find favor with the intelligent readers as also activists desirous of heralding a sane society.

      

               “ The students of ancient history and thought, Indian as well as European, know that, barring the period of ancient Greek learning, India developed a greater volume of materialist, rationalist, scientific thought than was done by the pioneers of European civilization. When we come out of the Vedic era and read the Upanishads, which contain the foundation of Indian philosophy, we find not only rationalism, naturalism and agnosticism, but also out and out atheism and materialism. One of the eighteen main Upanishads is entirely devoted to a very brilliant exposition of rationalist and naturalist thinking and most outspoken heretical views. It denies the existence of God and soul; it holds that nothing but matter exists, and that there is no other world beyond this world. Its theses can be summarised as follows:

            There is no reincarnation, no God, no Heaven, no hell; all traditional religious literature is the work of conceited fools; nature, the Originator, and time, the Destroyer are the rulers of things, and take no account of virtue or vice, in awarding happiness or misery to men; people deluded by flowery speeches, cling to God’s temples and priests when in reality, there is no difference between Vishnu and a dog.

 
       ( Swasanvedyopanishad, Eliot II, p. 322.)

          In the same Upanishad, one reads the story of Virochana, who for years studied at the feet of Prajapati himself, and learned Brahmavidya. Thereafter, on returning to earth, he preached:

                   One`s self is to be made happy here on earth. One`s self is to be waited upon. He who makes himself happy here on earth, obtains both worlds, this and the next.

          In Chhandogya Upanishad, orthodox Brahmans are compared with “a procession of dogs, each holding the tail of his predecessor and chanting piously ‘ Om, let us eat; Om let us drink.’ ” ( I, p. 12 )

          The origin of the naturalist and sceptic thought developed in some of the major Upanishads, indeed can be traced even in the Rig veda, for instance, in the Creation Hymn which concludes the dialogue between the parents of mankind- the twin brother and sister, Yama and yami.

          The Ramayana records the story of Jabali- the sceptic and sophist who questioned faith and scriptural laws. The Mahabharata also denounces “doubters and atheists who deny the reality of souls.” They” wander over the whole earth”; they were “rationalists, critics of the Vedas, revilers of Brahmans.” The Gita also refers to heretics “who deny the existence of God.”

          Finally, of the six systems of Indian philosophy, at least three are out and out rationalist, and those three have the greater significance. While the Sankhyas expounded atheistic naturalism, the Vaisheshik and Nyaya system tended clearly towards materialism. That very significant evolution of thought, out of the background of the Vedic religion and Upanishadic metaphysical speculation, in the fullness of time, ushered in the Golden Age of India, if there ever was one, that is the Buddhist period. The later Upanishads and earlier Buddhist literature are full of references to “heretics, atheists and materialists.”

          It is recorded that, when Buddha was a young man, the great halls and vast forests of Northern India were echoing the powerful voice denying the divine origin of the Vedas and the authority of the Brahmans, and preaching agnosticism, atheism and materialism. And it was during the several centuries of the Buddhist era that India really attained a very high level of material and moral culture.

          But the long process of the development of naturalist, rationalist, sceptic, agnostic and materialist thought in ancient India found culmination in the Charvaka system of philosophy, which can be compared with Greek Epicureanism, and as such, is to be appreciated as the positive outcome of the intellectual culture of ancient India. That precious heritage, unfortunately, has come down to us only in small fragments, which, pieced together painstakingly, give a general idea of the system. But there is a hope of rescuing the whole of it thanks to the recorded vehemence and thoroughness of its orthodox opponents who almost succeeded in destroying all traces of it. On the basis of logical inferences from the arguments, used to combat the Charvakas, the entire system can be reconstructed. That is perhaps the basic task of Indian Renaissance.

          The greatness of the “Paribrajakas” mentioned in the earliest Buddhist literature, those Sophists and Stoics of ancient India, was one Brihaspathi. He was the founder of Indian Epicureanism- The Charvaka System. The Brihaspathi Sutras are referred to frequently in contemporary Buddhist and Brahmanical texts. But only some remnants of the Sutras themselves survived the downfall of Buddhism. From them we learn that Brihaspathi condemned Brahmans as “men devoid of intellect and manliness, who uphold the authority of the Vedas because they yield them the means of a comfortable livelihood.”

          The Charvakas laughed at the notion that the Vedas were divinely revealed truth; they held that truth can never be known except through the senses. Therefore, the idea of soul is a delusion. The Charvakas thus anticipated the modern philosophical thought of ultra-empiricism. They held that even reason was not to be trusted, because every inference depended for its validity not only upon accurate observation and correct reasoning, but also upon the assumption that the future would behave like the past, and of this there was no certainty.

          That was anticipating modern agnosticism more than two thousand years before Hume. But the Charvakas were not mere nihilists, agnostics and sceptics. They developed an elaborate system of positive philosophical thought:

                   All phenomena are natural. Neither in experience nor in history do we find any interposition of supernatural forces. Matter is the only reality; the mind is matter thinking. The hypothesis of a Creator is useless for explaining or understanding the world. Men think religion necessary only because, being accustomed to it, they feel a sense of loss and an uncomfortable void when the growth of knowledge destroys faith. Morality is natural; it is a social convention and convenience, not a divine command. There is no need to control instincts and emotions; they are commands of nature. The purpose of life is to live; and the only wisdom is happiness.

                                 (Humanism, Revivalism and The Indian Heritage, Pp.15 to 18, Published: 1999)