LOKĀYATA in ANCIENT INDIA and CHINA Author(S): Rasik Vihari Joshi Source: Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

LOKĀYATA IN ANCIENT INDIA AND CHINA Author(s): Rasik Vihari Joshi Source: Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 68, No. 1/4, RAMAKRISHNA GOPAL BHANDARKAR 150TH BIRTH-ANNIVERSARY VOLUME (1987), pp. 393- 405 Published by: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41693336 . Accessed: 03/02/2014 19:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LOKÃYATA IN ANCIENT INDIA AND CHINA

Rasik Vihari Joshi

I proposeto discuss in this paper the materialisticphilosophy of India knownas Lokãyata or Cãrvãka. Unfortunately,the basic sources of this systemare notavailable today. Probably,the sources have beendestroyed due to lack of royal patronizerand also due to Brahmanic,Buddhist and Jain philo- sophers. To understandthe doctrines of thissystem, we have to remainsatisfied withwritings of the opponentsof Lokãyata. The Brhaspati-sütra, supposed to have beenwritten by Brhaspati,the founderof this system,is lost. I have madean attemptin this paper to reconstructthe Brhaspati-sütrathrough cross referencesscattered in Sanskritliterature. The presentpaper is dividedinto two sections: Section I deals wite Lokãyata in ancientIndia and Section II with ancientChina. I The term " Lokãyata» is made of two Sanskritwords, viz. loka and äyata i.e. " worldview •' or " lifeview " or ,cview prevalentamong people". Lokãyatawas also knownas Cãrvãka whowas a discipleof Brhaspati.This was a kindof primitivepre-materialism in ancient Indian clan society. In all proba- bility,it was linkedwith Tantrismwhen Aryans came to India. Lokãyata declaredthe identityof body and soul and that all beingswere resultsof the combinationof twosexes. Accordingto D. Chattopadhyaya,from about 10th centuryB. C. to thebeginning of Christianera, when slave systemwas developing, Indian materialisticphilosophy including Lokãyata very much developedas a popularsystem of philosophyand did exertgreat iufluenceamong the traders, craftsmenand otherlower castes of the then Indian society.Lokãyata was the oldest heterodoxsystem in India and certainlypre-Jain and pre-Buddhistic. Several referencesto Lokãyata are available in the oldesttexts of Jain and Buddhistliterature. The Sütra-krtangaand theBhagavati Sütra ( V Section) of Jainliterature, and the Samanna-phala-sutra, the Mahãvibhãsã-éãstra, the Mahâyâna-nirvâria-sïitraand the Lankävatära-sütra of Buddhist literature containvaluable information regarding Lokãyata. The Sütra-krtañgais one of theoldest and most importantworks of the JainAgama Prakrtliterature, áílãnka, the oldestcommentator of the Sutra- krtänga, has used fourterms for Cãrvãka, viz. ( 1 ) Bärhaspatya( 2 ) Lokãyata SGB...50

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 394 AB OBI : B. G. Bhandarkar 150thBirth- Anniversary Volume

( 3 ) Bhütavädin( 4 ) Vãmamãrgin. Sllãnka clearlymentions that the Cärvakas secretlyindulged in improperconduct. He discussesin detailas a primafacie view thefundamentals of Cãrvãka philosophy,stating that theywere tajjivavãdin or tacchariravãdin, i. e. theybelieved in theidentity of body and soul. They did notaccept existence of an internalindependent Ätman apart frombody, existence ofnext world, rebirth, and completelydiscarded the theory of action.1

The Upãóga literatureis equallyimportant in Jainism. In the Räyapa - 8enaiya-8ütra>Mahãvlra narrates a storyof an ancientking Paesi ( Pradesï) of Kekaya Pradesa.

The king Paesi was personifiedunrighteousness. There was no place for religionand moral conductin his life. Once Kesiiramana,a followerof Pãrávanãtha,went to Paesi in his city Seyambiyä( ávetãmbl) and had a long discussionwith Paesi on the identityor non-identityof body and soul. The kingargued that his grandfatherloved him very much, he led a lifeof a sinnerand unrighteousnessand thereforeaccording to theoryof action he shouldhave been doomedto hell. He shouldreturn from hell to warn his dear grandsonagainst indulgingin sinfulacts but he neverreturned. Therefore,there is no next world and no existenceof soul afterdeath. On thisKesisramana replied that people in hell are not freeto returnand hencehis grandfathercould not come to warn him. Paesi furtherargued that his grandmotherwas a verypious and god-fearing lady,she also lovedhim very much. She shouldhave gone to heaven according to the theoryof action. She was certainlyfree to come fromheaven but she also nevercame to warnhim. Thereforethere was no next worldand the soul did notexist after death. The discussiontestifies that even beforeMahãvlra, duringthe periodof Pãrsvanãtha,the materialistic philosophy of Lokäyata (i. e. Nãstikavãda) was popularin ancientIndia. JainBhadra-Ganï, the author of VeéesãvaèyakaMahãbhãçya* occupies a significantplace in KsamãsramaJain literature. The Ganadhara-vãdais a partof thisMahãbhãsya, wherein Mahãvlra had a long discussionwith eleven Brahmin savants. In this context,the pointsof view of Indrabhütiand Väyubhütiare noteworthy. Indrabhütivehemently denounces the existence of an externalÃtman apart frombody and accepts«perception1 alone as theonly means of valid knowledge. Väyubhütipropounds that consciousness is producedby the combinationof the

1. (a) Siitra-krtãúga: 1.1. 1. 11-12. (b) ŠUcíňka-TiM: I. I. 1.7-8.

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JosHi : Lokäyata in ancient India and China 395 firstfour basic elements. He gives an analogyto supporthis stand-pointof certain flowers,molace and waterwhcih, put together,produce liquor.2 Thè doctrinesof Indrabhutiand Väyubhütidefinitely belonged to Lokäyatatradition. Several otherJain writers such as Hemacandra,the great dialectician* and Malli Sen Süri, the philosopher,have severelycriticised the Cärväka epistemo- logyin the Anya-yoga-vyavachedadvätrifisikäand the validityof perceptionas theonly proof of knowledgein the Syãd-vãda-Manjari respectively.3Besides, boththese Jain critics refute the Lokäyata view of theproduction of consciousness by thecombination of thefirst four basic elements. Hemacandraalso gives a long account in his Tri-^stilaksana-ialäka-purusa-caritaMahãkãvya, of the previouslife of l^sabhadevaas the king Mahãbala who was very lustfuland fallenperson. Sambhinna-mati,one of his ministers,supported the King's way of life,advocating that there was no soul and rebirth. It is useless to performany religiousritual or to follow rules of moral conduct. Here, we findseventeen argumentswhich give a clear pictureof Lokäyata philosophyin ancientIndia.4 In theBuddhist literature the Lokäyata is also frequentlyreferred to as Nästika i. e. Natthika Dariana. I give below threereferences to provethat Buddhistliterature was also fullyfamilar with Lokäyata : (1) Pürana-Kassapa, in the Dighanikãya (2. 16-17) advocatesLokä* yata doctrine. The text states : c once the king Ajãtasatruappro- ached Pürana-Kassapa and enquiredabout, the visible reward of enteringinto the orderof Samnyäsa. Pürana-kassapareplied : " Your Majesty, there is no result by performingthe socalled good action, by killingor torturingothers, or by stealing,or by sexual relationswith other women". He, thus, clearly denounces the theoryof action.5 The Anguttara-Nikãyarefers to two Brahmin disciplesof Pürana-Kassapawho wereLokãyatas.6 ( 2 ) In the Tripitakaliterature, we findtwo personages Ajitakesakambalï and Payâsï whowere contemporaries of Buddha. Accordingto them all vedic ritualswere worthless;there was no resultof good and bad actions; nobodycould tell us the personalexperience regarding thenext world. All bodiesare made of thefour elements and dissolve intothem after death; hence any ritualfor ancestors is meaningless.7

2. VefesãvafyaJca-Mahãbhã sya(Ganadhara vãda) Gãthã. 1549-1553 ; 1650-1651. " 3. Pratyaksamevaikam pramãnam itimanyante Cärväkäfr Syád-váda-mañjari, 4. Trisasti laissa na - íalãhã-puru sa-Cari ta1 1.1. 329-345. 5. S. N. Dasgupta,History of Indian Philosophy (III) p. 52U-21. 6. B. M. Baruaj Historyof Pre-Buddhistic Indian Philosophy , p.278. 7. Digha-Nikãy%

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 596 AB ORI : iř. G. Bhandarkar150th Ěirťh-annivérsáry Volume

( 3 ) In Pali literature,too, we findthe doctrine of Sañjaya Velaththi-Putra who was totally indifferentto this question of the originof the universe, cycles of births and rebirthsand the theoryof action. He was rathera sceptic ( saméayavãdin) and agnostic ( afiiãna- vãdin). Obviously,he was influencedby Lokãyata.

In Chineseclassical Buddhistliterature, Lokãyata has beentranscribed as " Lu-kã-yã-tuo", " Lu-ge-ye-duoM, and " Lu-kã-yi-duo it was translated as 11Zhuo-bo-ka " whichwas none else but Sanskrit"Cãrvãka". We also " " find some other terms such as Wu-hou-shi-lun (doctrineof denyinglife " " " M afterdeath), Shi-Lun (doctrineof this world); Shi-Jian-Xing(popular " doctrineof thisworld ) and " Shun-shi-Wai-Dao ( populardoctrine prevalent in thisworld ).

Profusereferences are preservedin the Chinese versionsof Buddhist writings. The ChineseBuddhist Dictionary entitled Yi-Qie-Jin-Yin-yi by Hui " Lin translatesM Lu-kã-ye-ti-kã i.e. Lokäyatika as wickeddoctrine. It is interestingto notethat Daêa-bhumi-vibhãsã-sãstra translated into Chinese in the latterhalf of ChinDynasty during 384-417 A. D. refersto Lokäyatikaas Lu-ka- " ye-jin i. e. Lokãyata Sütra. This seemsto be noneelse but Brhaspati Sütra. I may mentionthat the Chinesetranslation of theŠardůla-Karna- Sütra (She- Tou-Jain-Tai-Zi-Jin) during western Chin Dynastyalso refersto " Shi-li-Jin" i. e. thedoctrine of thisworld.

Referencesto Lokãyata have been preservedin several Chinesewritings. Rightfrom the period of threekingdoms ( 265-280 A. D.) to theperiod of Ming Dynasty ( 1368-1644 A.D.) morethan fiftyreferences are scatteredin the Chineseversions of Buddhistcommentaries and works. I shouldlike to drawthe attentionof scholarsto threeof thesereferences :

( a ) The Brahma-jala-sïLtra. It systematicallyexpounds the Lokãyata doctrineand was translatedinto Chinese as early as the third centuryA. D. by Chin Chien in the kingdomof Wu ( 225-253 A.D.).

(b) The Šramana-phala-sutratranslated into Chineseduring the East ChinDynasty.

( c ) The editionof the Brahma'J ala-Sütra withChinese translation and notesby Chi-Kuangduring the period of Ming Dynasty,

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JosHl : Lokãyata in ancient India and China 397

An outlineof Lokãyata on thebasis of theserecords is givenbelow :

( 1 ) The Brahma-Jäla-Sütra and theMätangi-Sütra give ample evidence that the followersof Lokãyata contributeda lot to thedevelopment of secular sciencessuch as medicine,astronomy and agronomy.

2) The Chinesereferences provide material to understandLokãyata viewson epistemologyand social norms.

3) The Müla-Sarvästi-Väda Nikäya-Vinaya(Vol.35) mentionsthat frequentdebates took place between Lokãyata and Buddhist. Lokãyatas wereoften rough in theirlanguage and behaviourand the debateswere converted into fights with heated words, abuses, blows, kicksand sticks.

4 ) The Lokãyata doctrineswere mostly distorted and misinterpretedby Chinese Buddhistmonks in such a way that they suited to their ideology. Let us rememberthat Lokãyata and Buddhistarrived in China almost at the same timefrom India. The Annals of Tang Dynastryin India refersto a Lokãyata ( Lu-kã-yi-tuo) who went to China fromIndia at theinstance of EmperorKao Tsung ( 650-680 A. D. ) of Tang Dynasty.

5 ) Profusereferences to Lokãyata and its doctrineare preservedin The Establishmentof the Theories of Buddhist and otherReligions Sects writtenby theChinese-Tibetan Buddhist savant Hijamdbyan- sbshed-phirorje.

6) In theMemories of the Emenents-HinenChao , Yi-tsingrefers to a discussionbetween Hiuen-tsang and a Lokãyata Mahãyãna-Devana at Nalanda ( India), where-inthe Lokãyata adhered to the originof all beingsand all substancesfrom the first four basic elementswhile Hiuen-tsangsupported the Mahãyãnapoint of view. The reference testifiesthat Lokãyata still exertedits influencein India in the7th centuryA. D.

7 ) The ChineseBuddhists were scared of Lokãyata and consideredthem as theirdead enemy. They prohibitedtheir followers to studyLok- ãyata and translatedlokãyata by "evil doctrine". Chi-tsang (550-625 A. D. ) bracketedLokãyata, Confuciansand Taoists " togetherin his 11San-Lun (Three Scriptures) and pronounced Lokãyata as " wickedinterpretations ". The Buddhistsconsidered Lokãyata as bad as Confuciansand Taoists duringNorthern and

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 398 ABORT : i?. G. Bhandarkar lõOth Birth-Anniversary Volumé

SouthernDynasties and Sui-Tang Dynasty. And they always criticisedthese three.

8 ) The Buddhistmonks mis-interpreted the Lokãyata doctrineof atom ( arm) statingthat there was consciousnesspresiding over the atoms of fourelemen:s. Chih-chouof Tang Dynastysaid thatthe atom of Lokãyata has emptynesswhich results in mind; that atom has puritywhich results in senses, and atom has non-impuritywhich resultin formand sound.8 This was explainedby Ting Pin of Tang Dynastyin his criticalnotes on theDharma- gupta-vinaya-vãrtika ( Vol. 10 ) thatLokãyata accepted only ( anu ) as thecause of entire universeand thefour elements as thecause of all forms,sense organs and intellect. He, however,refuted Lokãyata doctrine,arguing that therewas always a purespirit behind the elements and thisspirit was mind. Truly,all formsarise from elements but only lightillumines and othersdo not. Similarly,it's onlymind which perceives.

9 ) Indianleftist Tantrism and ChineseTaoism were related to Lokãyata. Tantrismrecognised creation by the combinationof two sexes, and Taosim advocatedthat universewas a resultof twoprinciples viz. Ying and Yang. Both systemsaccepted practices for longivityand vitality. Bothrecognised mysticism, but also played an important rolein thedevelopment of sciencessuch as medicineand chemistryin ancientIndia and China. Thereis no doubtthat Taoism arrivedin India in 7th centuryA. D.. The Annals of Tang Dynastystate that Wang Hsuen-tse,a Chinese author,had requested to the Emperor to send him a statue of Lao-tse also a bookof Lao-tse entitledTao To Chang to India. I was told by my friendand colleagueProf. P. V. Bapat several years ago that this book was translatedinto Sanskritby Hiuen-tsang. I have not so far been able to catchhold of thisSanskrit translation.

10) The Lankãvatãra Sütra refersto the doctrineof Lokãyata as Šarira-buddhi-visayopalabdhi-matram, i. e. connectedonly with body,intellect and object.9 This valuablework was translatedinto Chineseby Bodhiruciduring Wei Dynastyand throwsmuch light on the doctrineof Lokãyata. One full section is devoted to Lokãyata entitledas ««Lu-chia-yeh-to M. I quote below a legend fromthe Lankãvatãra Sütra regardingthe origin of Lokãyata:

8« Chich-chou,Revelation of Vidyã-niãtra siddha -f äst ra , Vol.I. 9. TheLaúhãvatãra Sütra ( ed.) BunyuNanjio, Kyoto, 1923, p. 174.

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JosHi î Lokãyata in ancient India and China 399 " Also Indra,learned by thestudy of severalsastras and authorof his own ( Sanskrit) grammar,through the discipleof Lokãyata dressed as a Nãga, declaringin thecourt of Indrain heaven,4 O Indra! either yourchariot of thousandspokes will be destroyedor all myhoods one by one thus, havingconquered Indra of Gods throughthe disciple of Lokãyata dressedas a Nãga and havingdestroyed the thousand- spokedchariot of Indra,again returnedto thisworld M.10

Whileinterpreting this reference, Prof. GiuseppeTucci has translatedthe phrasesva-sabdasãstra-prarietã as - authorof his own sãstra i. e. Lokãyata. Obviously,Prof. Tucci has missedthe point, and so have theChinese translation by áiksãnanda, Gunabhadraand Bodhirucias well as Tibetan translations. None of themhave takeninto accountthe word " áabda n. The word éabda- sästra undoubtedlystands for grammar. We know that Aindra Vyakaraqa was writtenby Indra. That is exactly what is meantby the phrase sva- èábdasãstra-pra^etãi. e. authorof his own Sanskritgrammar. We also come across two sütras relatingto the doctrineof Lokãyata writtenby Purandara,a followerof Brhaspati. The firstsu tra is quotedby Abhayadevain the Sanmati Prakarana Tikä as etac ca Purandara-matam (this is the doctrineof Purandara) ; secondby Kamalaslla as Purandaras tv äha ( thusspeaks Puran- dara). Let us rememberthat Indra is a synonymof Purandara. Both belong to Lokãyatatradition. In all probabilitythis is thesame Indrawho wrote Aindra Sanskritgrammar. I have notyet been able to investigateAindra Vyakaraya. An enquiryinto that Vyäkarana will probablyprove my contention.

I givebelow the resumé of thedoctrines of Lokãyata:

(1) It is declaredthat motion in matter (i.e. atom) is due to the inherentpotentiality of matteritself and thus deniedthe necessityof acceptingany super-naturalagency such as God to accountfor creation. Matteritself is thebasis of consciousness.

( 2 ) Consciousnessis producedby thecombination of elements.Mind and body are unified. There is no eternalsoul apartfrom body. Since consciousnessis connectedonly withbody, body itselfis soul. So long thereis body,there is soul; whenbody is destroyedsoul is also destroyed.Consciousness becomes stronger by richfood and exercise.

10. Indro'pi Mabãmafce! aneka-áãstra-vidagdha-buddhiti sva-áabda-áãstra-pranetã, fcacchisyecanäga-rüpa-vesa-dhärinä svargeIndra-sabhãyãm. pratijnãm krbvã, fcava vã sahasrãro rathobhajyatãm, mama vã ekaika-nãga-bhãvasyaphaçacchedo bhavatu, iti sabadbarmesa oãga-vesa-dhãriuãLokayatika-sisyena devãnãm Indram vijitya, sabasrãra-ratbam bhaiitvã^ punarapi imamlokaiñ ágata fr.

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 400. ABORI ' R . G. Bhandarkar 150thBirth-Anniversary Volume

( 3 ) Since memory,feelings, senses and life exist onlyin body,and not outsidethe body, they are simplyattributes of body.

( 4 ) The theoryof action cannotbe proved. Thereis no resultof good or bad actions. Who knowsfor certainthat next birthand next worldexist ? Who knowsthat good and bad actionsresult in happi- ness and unhappiness? We daily experiencethat sinful persons prosperand enjoyin thisworld. ( 5 ) All divineliterature and all religiouspractices are madeby priests fortheir own benefits. Religionis for foolishpeople. There is no God. Only weak people believein God. Nature alone is respon- siblefor all happeningswithout any God. Worldis self-existent. (6) Only this perceptibleworld is real, rest is unreal. Body is life. Thereis no otherlife after the death of body. ( 7 ) Sensoryexperience is theonly valid sourceof knowledge. ( 8 ) All beingsare createdby male and femalesexes. (9) All men are equal. There is no purityor superiorityof caste. Social equalityis the supremephilosophy. Lokãyata declaredthat therewas no milk in the veinsof a Brahminand blood only in a Südra. Hence all are equal.

I have no hesitationto acceptthat my study of ChineseBuddhist literature is not very profoundbut I believe that a deeperresearch in thesesources will bringout morefacts about this materialistic system of Indianphilosophy which is in no way less important.

Reconstructionof the Bihaspati-sütra

1. athätas tattvamvyãkhyãsyãmah / ( Now onwardswe shallexplain the elements. )

2. prthivyaptejovãyurititattvani / ( Earth,water, fire and air elements.)

3. tatsamudayeéarirendriya visaya-samjnã / ( The namesbody, senses and objectsare in theiraggregate. )

4. tebhyaécaitanyam ' (Fromthem consciousness [ appears ]. }

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JosHl : Lokayata in ancient India and China 401

5. kirivädibhyoìwda-èaktitvat / ( As intoxicatingpower from kinva ( seed) etc. ingredients.) 6. kãma evaikah purusarthah/ ( Sex is thesole objectof humanlife. ) 7. anumãnam apramanamj ( Inferenceis not valid.) 8. caitanya-viéistahkãyah purusah/ ( Body endowedwith consciousness is man.)

9. maranam evapavargah/ ( Death itselfis liberation.)

10. na dharmami caret/ ( one shouldnot follow religious duties. )

11 . esyat-phalatvãt/ ( Since theresult is in future.)

12. sãméayikatvãcca I ( And doubtful.) 13. ko hy abãliéo hastagatamparagatam knryãt/ ( Who but a sillywill handover ( his) possessionto other? ) 14. varam adya kapotahsvomayurãt / ( Bettera pegeonof todaythan a peacockof tomorrow.) 15. varamsãméayikãn niskãd asamšayikahkãrsãpartah / ( Bettera definiteordinary coin thana doubtfulgolden coin. )

16. šarirendriyasamghãta èva cetanahksetrajñah / ( The conscioussoul is onlythe aggregate of bodyand senses.) 17. kãma èva prãninãmkärariam / ( Onlysex is thecause of beings.) ' 18. para-lokino bhãvãtparalokõbhãvah / ( Since nonehas seennext world, it does notexist. )

19. ihaloka-paraloka-èarïrayorbhinnatvãt tadgatayor api cittayor naikah santãnah/ RGB...51

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 402 ABORl î R. G. Bhandarkar 150thBirth- Anniversary Velum*

( Since bodies of this worldand next worldare different,the minds are also different,hence no continuity.) 20. etãvãn eva puruso yãvãn indriyagocarah/ ( That muchis man whichis seenby senses.) 21. pratyaksamemikam pramãnam/ ( Perceptionis theonly valid proof.) 22 käyad èva tatojnãnam prãnãpãnãdyadhisthitãdyuktam jãyate / ( Thereforeknowledge arises only from body possessed of prãm and apana etc., thevital breaths. ) 23. sarvatraparyanuyoga-parãny èva sütrani Brhaspateh/ ( The sütrasof Brhaspatiare alwaysintent on refuting.) 24. lokãyatamèva êãstram/ ( OnlyLokãyata is a scripture.) 25. pratyaksameva pramartam/ ( Perceptionin theonly valid proof.) 26. prthivyaptejovãyavastattvãni / ( Earth,water, fire and air are elements.) 27. artha-kämaupurusãrthau / ( The purposeof lifeis wealthand sex. ) 28. bhütänyeva cetayanti/ ( The elementsalone produceconsciousness. ) 29. nästi paralokah/ ( Thereis no nextworld. ) 30. mrtyurevãpavargah / ( Death itselfis liberation.) 31. dan$a-nitireva vidyã/ ( The onlylore is scienceof politics.) 32. atraiva vartantarbhavati/ ( Hereinis includedagriculture. ) 33. dhürta-pralapastrayi / ( The threevedas are nonsensicalprattling of a swindler.)

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JosHi : Lokãyata in ancient India and China 403

34. svargotpãdakatvenaviéesãbhãvãt / ( They don'thave any excellenceas theysimply produce heaven.)

35. loka-prasiddhamanumanain cãrvãkair apl&ijataeva, yat tu kaiécü laukikam mãrgam atikramyãnumãnamucyate , tan nisidhyate/ (The world-knowninference is equally desiredby Cãrvaka, only inferencebeyond this world, accepted by others,is denied.)

36. paéyãmi smomityãdi-pratityãmar ana-par y anta in yãvantindriyãni tisthantitãny evãtmã / (Due to apprehensions,"I see "I listen all senses which remaintill death are soul.)

37. itar endriyãdyabhãvesattvãt mana evãtmã/ ( Since it exists in the absence of othersenses etc., mindissoul )t

38. prãm evãtmãj ( Vital breathis soul. )

39. loukikomãrgo 'nusartavyah/ ( The worldview should be followed.) 40. loka-vyavahãrafnprati sadršau bãla-panditau/ ( Equal are a childand scholartowards worldly behavior. )

These fortyBrhaspati sütras are scatteredin Sanskritliterature. Sutras nos. one to threeare quotedby JayarãsiSimha in the Tattvopaplava-simha. Ho mentions11 Thus spokeSûtrakâra M. Nos. two to fiveare quoted by Bhaskaťa in Brahma-sútra-bhãsya. Bhäskara clearly mentionsthat the sütras are writtenby Brhaspati( tathã ca Bãrhaspatyasutrãni) . These sütras have been frequentlyquoted by severalauthors, such as by Kamalaslla in the Tattvasam- graha-pañjika and by Gunaratnain thecommentary Tarka-rahasya-dipika on the Sad'daréana-samuccaya. Kamalaslla designatesthem as " theirsütras " (tathã ca tesãmsüträni) and Gunaratnaclearly refers as Lokäyata-sütram.Nos. twoto fourand eightare quotedand discussedby Sañkara in his Brahmaputra bhãsya' nos. six, eightand nineby Sadãnanda in the Vedãntasãra; six is quoted by NUakanthain his comm.on theBhagavadgitã. He refersto it as Brhaspati- sütra( tathã ca BãrhaspatyamSütram). Abhayadevaquotes no. seven in his Tattva-bodha-vidhäyini)stating : tathã ca Brhaspati-sütram. Väcaspati Migra also quotes no. eightin his commentaryon the Bhagavadgitã, stating: " and " thusis Brhaspati-Sütra ( tathã ca Bãrhaspatyamsütram ). Vãtsyãyanaquotes

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 404 ABOÈI' Ě. tí. Bhandarkar 160thBirth- Anniversary Volunté M Nos. nine to fifteenin the Käma-sütra stating " Thus the Laukãyatikas {iti laukâyatikãh). Numberseventeen is quotedby áaňkara in his Gltã-bhâsya and numbereighteen by Kamalasíla in the Tattvasamgraha-panjikã. Saňkara clearly says " This is the view pointof the Laukãyatikas ( iti Laukãyatika- drstiriyam ). Kamalasíla states: tathã hi tasyaetat sütram. From the context, it is clear that the wordtasya stands forLokâyata. Numbereighteen is also quoted verbatumin the commentaryof the Sammati-tarka-pralcarana.Nos. nineteenand twenty-oneare quotedby Kamalasíla as Lokãyata-Sutra. Number twenty-oneis quotedby Abhayadevaas Cãrvãka Sütra in the Tarka-prakarava- tikã. Twenty-twois quoted in the Tattva-samgrahaas ( tathã ca sütram/ kâyãd eveti,Kambalãévataroditam iti). Let us rememberthat Kambaläsvatara was anotherwriter of Lokâyata philosophylike Purandarain the materialistic philosophyof Brhaspati. Numbertwenty-three is available in the Sammati- tarka-prakarallatas spokenby Cãrvãkas ( iti cãrvãkair abhihitam). Eleven sütras,nos. twenty -four to thirty-four,are quotedby Krsnamisrain thePrabodha- Candrodaya. The textruns as follows: iti eta dasmãlcamabhiprãyãnuvartinã Vãcaspatinã pranïya cãrvãkãya samarpitam , tena ca sisyopasisyadvãrena asmin loke bahulikrtamtattvam . Numberthirty-five is quoted by áãntaraksita in the Tattva-safagraha. áãntaraksitastates : purandaras tvãha ( Purandara spoke) and laukikam lingam iti cet (in case of worldview). Nos. thirty-six to thirty-eightare quotedby Sadänanda in the Vedãntasara. Sadãnanda refutes themas "others' opinions" ( iti kecit, ity anye). The last two sütras are quotedby Jayarãsi-Simhain the Tattvopaplavasimha.

In 1824, Prof.F. W. Thomas edited a manuscriptof the Brhaspati- Sütra but it was proved to be a fabricatedone. There is no doubt the Brhaspati-sütradid existin ancientIndia and probablyit consistedof the sütras and also the slokas. This mixedstyle was not uncommonas we have thesame stylein theKäma-sütra of Vãtsyãyanaand theArtha-šastra of Kautilya. We also findseveral slokas in Sanskritliterature written by Brhaspatiand exposing thephilosophy of Lokâyata. I believethat these slokas were also a part of the Brhaspati-Sütra. I am also inclinedto believe that at least one Sanskrit commentary,if not two,was writtenon theBrhaspati-sütra in thethird century B. C. . The Divyãvadãna refersto a bhãsyaof Lokâyata ( Lokãyatambhãçya* pravacanam) î which was this bhäsya? Obviously lost. Patañjali in the Vyãkarat^a-mahãbhãsyain thesecond century B. C. refersto a text Lokâyata 11 " on whichwas writtena bhãsyaor varnikäentitled Bhãguri ( varyikäbhäguri " Lokãyatasy, vartikã bhãguri Lokãyatsya - Vyãkarana-Mahãbhãsya 7. 3. 45 ). This testifiesthat there existed a workentitled Lokâyata and at least one Sanskritcommentary was well knownin thesecond century B. C.; but it has also beenlost. It has beenbrought to mynotice by some of my friendsthat a

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions josHi i Lokãyata in ancient ìndia and China 405 workon Lokãyata entitledGuang-zhu-Jin does exist in Chineseversion. I have notso farbeen able to procurethis. I believethat when the entiretext of the Brhaspati-sütrai. e. thesütras and the slokas will be reconstructedwith the above mentionedChinese text, it will throwample light on this importantsystem of Indianphilosophy.

Bibliography

1. DakshinaRanjana Shastri,Cãrvãka-sasti , Calcutta,1924. 2. DakshinaRanjana Shastri,Cärvaka-darsana , Calcutta,1959. 3, DeviprasadChattopadhyaya, Lakãyata*Darèanat Calcutta, 1956. 4. Deviprasad Chattopadhyaya,Lokayata - A Study of Ancient Indian Materialism, New Delhi, 1959. 5. Guiseppe Tucci, Linee di una storia del Materialismo Indiano, Roma, 1923. 6. Huang Hsin-chuan,Lokayata and its Influencein Chinât Peking, 1978.

7. Mãdhavãcãrya,Sarva-darsana-saňgraha , Uma Shanker Shastri, Varanasi,1964. EnglishTr. : E. B. Cowell& A. E. Gough,Varanasi, 1961.

This content downloaded from 130.65.109.155 on Mon, 3 Feb 2014 19:50:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions