Theory of Karman in Indian Thought

SR No.: 011109
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Koshelya Walli
Publisher: Bharat Manisha
Publication Year: 1977
Total Pages: 377
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 17 MB

Page 177

CHAPTER V CONCEPT OF KARMAN IN SANKHYA, YOGA VEDANTA AND OTHER SYSTEMS OF
INDIAN PHILOSOPHY
Indian philosophy, so far as Hindu philosophy is concerned, is usually considered to be six in number. Hindu Philosophy from its earliest stages in its faint adurnberations in the Upanis adic and post Upanişadic literature is known to have various lines of approach to the truth. The six-fold arrangement as known at present is comparatively recent, though it is undoubtedly more than a thousand years old. In the earliest age of philosophical speculation, there were various schools of thought, many of which conflicted with one another on different vital points. There is enough evidence in support of the fact that free thinking was widely prevalent in the country. As in Buddhist literature works like the 'Katthāvattu' show different ways of thinking, so in the Upanişadic and post-Upanişadic India, philosophical thought ran in different directions and apparently there was no systematization. We know of several materialistic schools who did not believe in karma or freedom of will or God and immortal self and the post-mortem life corresponding to the activities of the soul in the present existence. We know of the Ājīvakas and others. There was definitely a materialistic line of thinking which gathered strength under the name of Lokāyata and later Indian thought. As embodied in Sanskrit Literature, we know of the materialistic school of Cārvaka. It is believed that in the earlier age Byhaspati was a powerful exponent of the materialistic school and compiled a system of sūtras under his name which in later years came to be known as Bärhaspatya Darśana. This system consisted of several sūtras which have been recovered from diferent Sanskrit works. Looking at these sūtras as a whole we come to the conclusion that the author was a staunch materialist of a representative school following this line of thought. From a cursory survey