________________
[ 166 1
of these sutras we learn that in this view there is no room for a conscious soul distinct from the body. This school believed in only a single Pramāņa or line of evidence namely perception. It has no faith in inference or even in verbal knowledge as being free from error. According to this view, there is no room for adṛṣṭa or karma which corresponds to popular fortune or vice. There is no rebirth, no transmigration, no heaven and hell and no birth. Self-enjoyment is the only enjoyment worth striving for i. e, Puruṣārtha (q). The so called sacred scriptures are all fictitious representing the invention of crafty people, Death represents emancipation (Mokṣa ). There were parallel schools of thought but they are not in the good places of the great religious thinkers of the age. The Hindu Literature criticizes these schools. So do the Buddhists and the Jaina.
What has been said above, it seems to be clear that the materiali ts under different names had no faith in karma but other ways of systematic thinking though holding different views on different topics agreed in believing the concept of karma and a post-mortem life in different forms or in different planes of existence to enjoy or suffer the consequences of the action of the present life. In the present survey, we propose to deal with some of these systematic thinkers.
NYĀYA-VAIŠEṢIKA VIEW ON KARMÁ
Of the so called six Hindu systems of thought, the Nyaya and Vaiseṣika schools represent strong realistic trends. The Nyaya system was founded by the Rși Gautama and the Vaiśeşika system by the Rṣi Kanāda. Both the systems were realistic and had much in common. They had a strong faith in the doctrine of karma. According to Gautama,1 Karma is the cause not only of the origin of the body, but also of the conjunction with a soul. According to him2 separation between body and soul is due to the exhaustion of karma (kaunakṣaya). Gautama seems to distinguish
1. Gautama III. 2.70
2. Gautama III. 2.72
