The contrasts between Charvakas and pseudo-intellectuals.
Sarva-Darshana-Sangraha’ an authoritative work attributed to Maadhavaacharya of 14th century A.D., is an orderly collection of sixteen different schools of thoughts of India. Even today, 700 years after the compilation, this book is leading the real seekers of knowledge to the right direction. It is a unique work of its kind, which impartially keeps the account of all the Darshanas of India, irrespective of one’s proof system (Pramana) and the one’s way of approaching the philosophical height.
Herein, the first Darshana ever put forth is ‘Charvaka Darshana’ according to which the human life is an accidental opportunity that has happened, and enjoyment of life is the only goal. These Charvakas are known as Lokayatas and they are well-known in the world of atheistic school, as well as among common public. Their arguments and expositions are not easily condemnable or hard to be eradicated, since this Darshan is aiming only on the worldly life.
Well, the word Charvaaka is fabricated out of two Sanskrit words- ‘chaaru’ which means ‘beautiful’ and ‘vaak’ which means ‘speech’. The outcome of combination of these two words is so clear; ‘He who speaks attractively, and beautifully, is Charvaka’. Perhaps the assertions of Charvakas are felt powerful and unfaultable because of the way they narrate and convince. People listened to them, since their perspective was worldlier and broadly experienced in daily life of common man. The society, especially the Indian society always been almost orthodox, and it was a hard challenge to drag them towards unorthodox Charvakism or materialism as such. However, only because of sweet and tactful logics, they could achieve some success.
Later came the Buddhism, which also is an unorthodox Darshana, and Buddhists opened a new channel in a broad manner, which really led to some phenomenal changes in both society and spiritual life of India. Buddhist arguments and well built logics were so capable of questioning the society of their time, and of shaking pre-established faith system.
While Buddhism was almost all pervasive, the reformers (not the founders) of Astika Darshanas emerged and reestablished or propagated their system. In Sarva Darshaan Sangraha, finally comes the Adwaitha philosophy of Shankara, which is non-duality or singularity.
Here in the order also Maadhavaachaarya reveals the systematic evolution of individual’s ability to discuss, argue and to have a perfect perception of truth. Darshana- the Sanskrit word itself stands for the ‘vision’ and certainly it differs from person to person. No Darshana is shunned in Indian system, in contrast the unorthodox philosophy is also considered to be the Darshana- vision.
Let us have a look at present scenario of Karnataka, where people like Bhagavan- the self proclaimed descendants of Charvaka, Buddha, and such unorthodox scholars- are making social noise and provoking people to get agitated by their bigmouth and agnostic statements in the public. Though they quote Buddha as well as Charvaka, yet they are noisy and create filth unlike the scholars or Darshanikas whom they quote. Buddha was of a pleasant smile and peace, not of venomous words against particular community. Charvaka had a great kind of eloquence with sweet words, unlike Bhagavan- who is bigmouthed. Then, what actually these ‘pseudo intellectuals’ stand for?
While a society is so open in terms of constitution and in terms of religion, why should one make issues out of Darsahna which he/she believes in?
If one has to change a philosophy and understanding of a society, then the path should be peaceful, academic, and purely logical. Here with Bhagavan what we find is lack of complete awareness of the topic which he condemns, and the lack of adherence to the thing what he asserts. In the whole philosophical system of India, debate was the means of posing questions and answering. Acharya Shankara is a best example here, who won over Buddhists, Karmathas and such others, by debating.
Instead of intellectual debate or churning, it seems Bhagavan is more interested in vomiting venom on Hindu community. Today the traditional intellectuals of Hindu society are very much ready for debate, but pseudo intellectuals like Bhagavan are quitting and refusing to participate. It shows the intellectual impotence of pseudo intellectuals.
The pathetic condition of Karnataka is- the very person is being awarded by Sahithya Academy, in spite of having negative opinion of majority public. This is indeed the most embarrassing moment for the literary world of Karnataka, and even for democracy.
Will the award after this much of chaos be blissful to Bhagavan?
