Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin 1

Author(s): Nathmal Tatia
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur

Page 264

MATERIALISM VERSUS SPIRITUALISM
NATHMAL TATIA, The two dogmas of materialism are—(1) the sole reality of matter and (2) the reign of law. In the field of ethics, pleasure and the fulfilment of desires is the only end Of course, sometimes intellectual pleasures are considered higher than the sensuous. It is further recognized that one cannot be happy unless one is just, wise and noble, as also that only a cheerful person can be just, noble and wise. The materialist morality is---enjoy your life and help others to enjoy it, without harming any one. This is what can be considered as materialism in its most commendable perspective of modern times.
In ancient Indian thought, materialism is associated with: Bșhaspati, the preceptor of gods, and Carvāka, both of whom are perhaps mythical figures. They are not mentioned either in the Jaina Āgamas or the Buddhist pițakas. The Mahābhārata, however, mentions Carvāka Raksasa by name, and in the Rāmāyaṇa we find reference to Jābāli who propounds hedonism. The Jaina Āgamas refer to a doctrine which rejected the existence of soul and explained conscious. ness as a temporary effect of the mixture of material elements. This doctrine and others which accepted God and soul but did not agree to the Jaina doctrine are denounced as heresies in the second Agama of the Jainas. In the Pali Samaññaphalasutta, we find mention of Ajitakeśakambali as a protogonist of nihilism (ucchedovada). He did not believe in good and bad deeds and their results. Nor did he accept the authority of any person who has experienced the life hereafter. The human personality according to him is a combination of four material elements and nothing remains of it after death. Charity and benevolence are futile actions. But in spite of all these doctrines assigned to him, the fact remains that Ajitakeśakambali was a recluse and had a moral code of his own. He was, therefore, a materialist in the modern acceptation of the term defined above, allowance being made to the modes of life and thinking of those times. It appears that anyone not believing in the established moral code was called a heretic, irrespective of his ontological convictions. The school of thought which believed in determinisn (niyativada) or naturalism (svabhavavada) was also looked at with contempt. The Buddha denounced determinism as the worst type of heresy which deserved unqualified condemnation. The opposition, therefore, was not between materialism and spiritua
..
. Read at the Seminars of Scholars on April 14, 1965.