Sycamore
Banned
First, some background information: the Brhaspati Sutra (ca. 600BC) which was the primary text of the Cārvāka school of heterodox Hinduism- now lost, but recompiled to an extent from secondary sources. This school of thought was originally known as Lokāyata, and there's been considerable speculation as to whether the Ancient Greek philosophy of Logos was inspired by this school of Hinduism (which would make this school of thought the original source of the word 'logic') or whether it coincidentally emerged independently roughly 100 years later. The Sarvasiddhanta Samgraha, the most complete surviving text, states the Cārvāka position as follows;
To Cārvākas, the step which the mind takes from the knowledge of something to infer the knowledge of something else could be accounted for by it being based on a former perception, or by it being in error. Cases where inference was justified by the result were seen only to be mere coincidences. Therefore, Cārvākas denied all metaphysical concepts, including deities, reincarnation, the extracorporeal 'soul', the efficacy of religious rites, the existence of other worlds (heaven and hell), fate, the accumulation of merit or demerit through the performance of certain actions, and the notion of 'sin'.
Cārvākas also rejected the use of supernatural causes to describe natural phenomena. To them, all natural phenomena was produced spontaneously from the inherent nature of things (properties, laws and forces). They were arguably the first organised atheists; their movement was arguably even more aggressively atheistic and anti-religious than even present-day Western Atheism. And yet, Cārvāka is still counted as merely a school of the Hindu religion today; in spite of the fact that it utterly disavowed the Vedas, decrying them as works written by profiteering priests who simply used religion as a tool to control and manipulate people so that they could fleece money from them, its texts have still ended up going down in history as Vedic texts.
Cārvāka was a living philosophy up to the 12th century in India's historical timeline, after which this system seems to have disappeared (having been driven to extinction) without any continuity in the Cārvāka tradition; beyond this point, whatever sources we have on Cārvāka are based on second-hand knowledge. At a symposium of philosophers of all faiths, held in 1578 at Akbar's insistence, the Mughal historian Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak summarized Cārvāka philosophy as "unenlightened" and that their literature served as "lasting memorials to their ignorance". He noted that Cārvākas considered paradise as "the state in which man lives as he chooses, without control of another", and considered hell as "the state in which he lives subject to another's rule". On state craft, Mubarak stated that Cārvākas believed that it was best when "knowledge of just administration and benevolent government" is practiced.
So, here's an interesting scenario- WI the Cārvāka school of Hinduism had managed to eventually out-compete all of its rivals to become the dominant form of Hinduism (with 'Hinduism' ITTL becoming an inherently materialist atheist philosophy, rather than an actual religion)? What would need to change to bring about this outcome? And how profound an impact would it have had on the religious, social and political history of India, of Asia and of the World in general?
There is no heaven, no final liberation, nor any soul in any other world; nor do the actions of the four castes and order produce any real effect. The Aguihotra, the three Vedas, the ascetic's three staves, and smearing one's self with ashes, were made by Nature as the livelihood of those destitute in knowledge and manliness.
If a beast slain in the proper ritual will go to heaven, why then does not the sacrificer forthwith offer his own father? If paying homage produces gratification for beings who are dead, then here, too, in the case of travellers when they start, it is needless to give provisions for the journey. If the beings in heaven are gratified by our providing them with offerings here, then why not give the food down below to those who are standing on the rooftop?
While life remains, let a man live happy, let him feast on butter even though he runs into debt; Once the body becomes ashes, how can it ever return again? If he who departs from his body goes to another world, how is it that he comes not back again, restless for love of his kindred? The enjoyment of heaven lies in eating delicious food, keeping company of young women, using fine clothes, perfumes, garlands, sandal paste; while moksha (reincarnation) is death, which is the cessation of life-breath.
The wise therefore ought not to take pains on account of moksha. A fool wears himself out by penances and fasts. Chastity and other such ordinances are laid down by clever weaklings. Hence it is only as a means of livelihood that the priests have established here all these ceremonies for the dead- there is no other fruit anywhere.
The three authors of the Vedas were buffoons, knaves and fiends. All the well-known formulae of these priests, spiritualists and holy men, and all of the obscene religious rites for the queen, these were invented by buffoons, and so too all the various things handled by the priests; while the eating of flesh was similarly commanded by night-prowling knaves.
To Cārvākas, the step which the mind takes from the knowledge of something to infer the knowledge of something else could be accounted for by it being based on a former perception, or by it being in error. Cases where inference was justified by the result were seen only to be mere coincidences. Therefore, Cārvākas denied all metaphysical concepts, including deities, reincarnation, the extracorporeal 'soul', the efficacy of religious rites, the existence of other worlds (heaven and hell), fate, the accumulation of merit or demerit through the performance of certain actions, and the notion of 'sin'.
Cārvākas also rejected the use of supernatural causes to describe natural phenomena. To them, all natural phenomena was produced spontaneously from the inherent nature of things (properties, laws and forces). They were arguably the first organised atheists; their movement was arguably even more aggressively atheistic and anti-religious than even present-day Western Atheism. And yet, Cārvāka is still counted as merely a school of the Hindu religion today; in spite of the fact that it utterly disavowed the Vedas, decrying them as works written by profiteering priests who simply used religion as a tool to control and manipulate people so that they could fleece money from them, its texts have still ended up going down in history as Vedic texts.
Cārvāka was a living philosophy up to the 12th century in India's historical timeline, after which this system seems to have disappeared (having been driven to extinction) without any continuity in the Cārvāka tradition; beyond this point, whatever sources we have on Cārvāka are based on second-hand knowledge. At a symposium of philosophers of all faiths, held in 1578 at Akbar's insistence, the Mughal historian Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak summarized Cārvāka philosophy as "unenlightened" and that their literature served as "lasting memorials to their ignorance". He noted that Cārvākas considered paradise as "the state in which man lives as he chooses, without control of another", and considered hell as "the state in which he lives subject to another's rule". On state craft, Mubarak stated that Cārvākas believed that it was best when "knowledge of just administration and benevolent government" is practiced.
So, here's an interesting scenario- WI the Cārvāka school of Hinduism had managed to eventually out-compete all of its rivals to become the dominant form of Hinduism (with 'Hinduism' ITTL becoming an inherently materialist atheist philosophy, rather than an actual religion)? What would need to change to bring about this outcome? And how profound an impact would it have had on the religious, social and political history of India, of Asia and of the World in general?