It's not entirely fair to say that Charvaka's atheism had it easier than we do today. Remember, they were questioning the existence of God at a time when science wasn't as advanced as it is now and there wasn't much evidence to challenge the belief in a deity. Even Astravakr had a tough time, earning his father's scorn just for rejecting the Vedas. People who dared to question God back then probably had to overcome bigger hurdles than we do today. Back then, religion was deeply intertwined with every aspect of life, unlike today. To publicly express doubts about God in such an environment would have demanded remarkable intellectual bravery and insight. It's like saying we're smarter than Plato just because we can use a computer - it doesn't quite add up, right?
I think today, it is much easier to explain everything as we are having science, now there is no extreme reaction for rejecting a god, as the atheist community is much larger now. But just imagine, at that time whole world was under influence of religion and it was very difficult to think against stream.
Yeah Even I was thinking same also that society was much more violent as compared to today so the freedom of expression is much more difficult in those times were much harder to show and as far as societies goes even in that era there were kingdomes and the socities whose impact do used to show their effect on us.
Ashtavakra may have rejected vedas or i dont know. But he belived in consciousness and supreme consciousness. He said the same thing which later were said in gita. Edit: read ashtavakra gita, its really good. 300 verses only
When I started becoming an atheist, I felt lost, helpless.. The reason is that all my life I was believing that there a superpower behind me that is protecting me, helping me.. But now it's only me, and that is really heartbreaking for me. Now there is no one to save me, except me. It would take some time for me to process and heal this.
I as a theist can perhaps help you buddy WITHOUT proselytizing . In the mahabharat war krishna the god did not lift any weapons . he only worked as a guide or a strategist in a mortal capacity . pandavas had to fight there brothers, fight those who raised them since childhood (bhishma father to all ,dhrona and kripa there guru ,shalya there uncle etc) yet they overcame it all by themselves without any godly miracles .
I agree with Vimoh also For a Hindu Bhakth kinda odd when He/She Claims and Talks about Charvaka with Literally Nothing but Just a Few Facebook Post and UA-cam videos on UA-cam Channels when they themselves would be Following all the Death Rituals etc 😅. Also Keep in mind Materialist Movements aur Ideas have Arisen Worldwide in Different Ways and Forms so Even more Naive of Bhakts to Think Atheism Started only in India as though. I highly recommend People to Explore Greek writers, Epicurus, Roman Writer Lucretius, Japanese Yamagata Banto etc etc so Will the Bhakts call them Hindus ? Materialist Atheist toh wo bhi the. In Modern Times Read Books by Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking, Richard Dawkins, Charles Darwin, Armin Navabi etc etc that would be the Best in Modern Times. Let Charvaka school be For Academic Research and Exploration.
No one says Indians invented atheism 😂.. we say compared to other nations of Abrahamic and other faiths, Indians considered them as person's with different ideas and we did debates for long ages. But still atheism is a 'belief' both western and Eastern philosophy (only considering the 'burden of proof' is 'more' on assertor than negator).
@@Pantheist2602we were first to thought about it yes india is the land which explored idea of God not existing and materialism way before anyone it is true
Excellent thought. I agree with your perspective. Also, the word Charvaka has been deceptively integrated into Hinduism, and proper atheists are better off without redundant and misrepresented titles.
@@MK-lc7nf Atheist that comes from India is called Indian Atheist, similar to how you would call an atheist from America an American Atheist. It's not a title, it's an adjective. Charvaka philosophy is only known because of the evidences from historical sources that were not themselves Charvakas. We are still not clear on their philosophy and their peculiar vision of the world. So, instead of creating ambiguity, it is sufficient to use a descriptor that aptly tells someone who you are using the modern lingo. If you cannot clearly do that, and still call yourself Charvaka, you are wearing a sheep skin to hide who you are within. Once you get out of the sh*tholery called religion, you tell people you got out of that sh*thole by using words like ex-muslim, ex-christian, ex-hindu, etc. When you do that, you don't need to see if you previously believed in a single god, multiple gods, human-like god, cosmic god, air-particle god, or things like that. You are simply saying you don't subscribe to the line of thought when you say you are ex-hindu and want to stay away from the twisted tentacles of religions saying "we accept atheism, so you are a Hindu atheist".
Clearly n succinctly presented points. In my journey from religious to spiritual and now atheist, i find a last stumbling block - physical pain, suffering. When i experience these in the context of illness, whether mine or loved ones, i fall back upon religion. Pl make a video addressing this, which i think is common to many.
I don't think you should worry about falling back to religion from usual atheist self when faced with suffering. It is natural, just shows you are human after all. Whenever faced with extreme difficulties our mind tries to grasp whatever little straw of help possible to cope with that situation. That help can either be tangible like money or emotional like hope which leads to your mind praying to whichever gods you grew up knowing. So that's nothing to think much about. Just let your emotions flow a little in such situations. Also we should not be so rigid in our beliefs that we become slave to them whether being religious or athiest.
@Kalyani Mookherji "Clearly n succinctly presented points. In my journey from religious [...] make a video addressing this, which i think is common to many." ======================================== I am a former practising Hindu; about 10 years ago I opened my eyes and smelled the coffee, and it led me to stop believing in unsubstantiated claims. I have been an atheist since that time. May I ask *_WHICH_* religion or 'belief-system' or 'god' you find yourself falling back on ?
"Time is more accurate connector than space is ever going to be" 7:30 - A bit reductive as it seems to indicate that time and space are the only competing variables here. People, culture, age and even profession are important variables. Time has played an important role only in the last 2 decades. For my father & mother, space (and therefore the people around them, their language, culture and belief) were a much stronger influencer than time. And their influence on my life is the most significant component, unless I make a conscious attempt to break away. Unless you are an extreme rationalist who can never switch off your rational mind (even when enjoying music that stimulates emotions, however irrational), I think space still plays a big role. Emotionally, a charvaka from past might find more in common with a Hindu born in today's rural India, who is trying to breaking free from the superstitions/customs imposed on him/her by the immediate community. I believe, the logical foundations for both modern and ancient atheists are same. Only the amount of empirical evidence has increased substantially over centuries. My guess is that, if a charvaka from 600BC was brought to our times, his thrill would be comparable to the thrill a theoretical physicist would have when the predictions based on his theory are proven true by an experimental physicist. My guess is that there is something else deeper in you that makes you shun the charvaka identity.
I think until sometime in 20th century, location was more impactful in one's thoughts than their time of living. But as communication became better and globalisation happened, time suddenly became more important. In the future, time will remain more important than location I think
It sounds very similar to Ancient Greek materialistic philosophy started by Democritus. That was 300 years after Charvaka. I wish Alexander the Great could have merged the schools.
Sir, Can you kindly share the link of the video where you have share why and how you became religious to spritiual to Atheist. I will be very thankfull to you.
But then by your logic even today’s religions are different than the original. Cuz the surrounding conditions of society have changed drastically. Changes happening in the arena of science and technology will not affect basic tenets of carvaka. The point of difference maybe that he didn’t even believe in inference as a source of knowledge but science does. On the basis of these epistemological differences you can claim the divergence but not solely on scientific advancement.
@@VINAYVIVEK-u5sNo babes, For him to be a theist it's required to believe in the God. A confused theist would be one who believes in God but isn't quite sure which god he believes in. In fact all the theists are confused atheists because they don't really know about the God and their beliefs keep changing over time, for example muslims don't believe God created the earth flat anymore. Christians don't believe God created the world in six days anymore.Hindus don't believe earth rests on snakehead or elephants. So basically all the religious theists are confused people who actually are atheists. LoL.
Rational being accepts whats is evident. I would call athiest blind for not taking a theory. Atleast agnost have no belief. But athiest have, that there is no god. @@VINAYVIVEK-u5s
It is gibberish explanation. Basically, it is the scientific understanding as well as the unscientific approach of the religious that leads to what we loosely call atheism.
You say you cant remove atheism from contemporary politics. But then say that secularism is the idea of removing religion or religiois ideology from politics. Can you explain these two?
@FinestBat "The quality of your videos and your subscriber count dont match up. I'm really shocked by how low it is." ================================================= UNFORTUNATELY, the overwhelming majority of Indians are very religious... even though many will call themselves 'dharmists', which is a conveniently fuzzy terrm.
Do we need to make things complicated.. Atheist means not a theist. End of story. If you do not have a theistic imagination to satisfy then you are an atheist. Funny enough every theist is an atheist towards other imaginations. Maybe charvaka represented not a theist philosophy sometime back, today they got a new name and tomorrow the name would be different. The properties and shades of theism also have changed with time. Same thoughts could be applicable there as well.
Hinduism is unique in nature. It try to absorb new ideas that are poping up in the society, whether it is local god (Gagganath), bhudha( at least it tried) and now atheism
I don't have the same milieu (different place but same time) and it's interesting. As far as i understand (that's the first video from you i watch), I totally agree about your vision about atheism and why it's politic. Here in France, i don't "identify" as an atheist just because in my (nearest) milieu religion is not a subject. So there's just no need for that. I understand that fact is a new thing, and isn't view in the same manner in my own town, now, by some neighbors. "Our milieu" is a concept that can have several scales, all as true as others. Thank you for yout video ☺
Simply disbelief in god is not modern Atheism. Mimansa, samkhya and naya used to agree with the idea of aatman I don't think any of the Atheist would agree with this idea. God can have several definations and somehow the idea of aatman makes another description of god. Simply rejecting an omnipotent and omniscient god is not atheism at all. Even Charvaks would not be called as modern Atheism because they are more about materialism.
I loved your take on time. It is amazing that a foreigner living at the same time as me would have more common things than my ancestor a thousand years ago. I always felt I did not belong in a specific ideology - like Charvaka, Theism, or Atheism. Now, when I look at these origins of ideologies from the lens of time, I see why. Ideas evolve. PS - This video seriously lacks a thing - Hans Zimmer's Inception/Interstellar soundtrack. Add that, and you have a masterpiece. (Personal opinion).
@@NTIS-DHARMIK I do not question that they existed. I question as to what they really believed. The only thing we know of their beliefs is what the others have said as criticism.
You can reject any title they put on you but know this even hindus didnt call themselves hindus before the invasion. The point is, labelling is what others do to others.
I disagree on commonality of people of india and americans...yes we do follow more western things like gregorian calendar, english language, suit and tie etc. These are forced through western dominance and colonisation. But manh of the americans are very relegious and not how its shown in hollywood. They embrace their culture, food, ideologies, family structure etc. And they are very differeent from 21st century folks from asian or african countries.
@@Rolando_Cuevaaccepted how? As if it was debated and rebuild from scratch. Our constitution is more of cut copy paste rather than build from scratch.
I don't think that it was easier for them as they lived in a society/era which was much more violent as well a feudal/agricultural society, also the religion played a huge role in day to day life and to reject the concept of god at that era will be much more difficult as law wnd order won't be as fair as it is today though even today it sucks but still it is better than the times of Charvaka.
Bro Why India is not developed like china although we are democracy and china is dictatorship. Do you think India is next China? Will india grow rapidly in next 10 to 20 years. When will India's GDP per capita Rise? I want to see India as a developed country before I die, I am 17 year old am lucky I hope I will live till 22nd century and live as a citizen of modern developed India
For that We as an Indians has to do a lot of hardwork instead of getting pleasures from the stats these foreign power shows... This century will be of Indians blah blah... Yes We will be Second in GDP but with the people living a miserable life? Think about it... What Foreigners talk about is Growth... We need a development... Yes Those who want to follow religion, let them do... There may be criticizers but I just wanna say that Let Religious people believe in their philosophy and a different from those, Atheists should be respected! We are one nation... Atheism looks good...
Funny you call yourself an 'Indian' and say it's inappropriate to call you carvaka. The lack of commonality in lifestyle doesn't affect a person much on a cultural/philosophical basis. Just say you're a postmodernist who feels everything is great only in West.
@@vimoh .. you're saying about two distinct usages in my comment. But postmodernist and western are literally different and I do know it. But taking in Indian perspective why considering ancient Indian developments as unimportant, when it really shows we had a diplomatic way of considering things. Western developments will always be western, no matter if it's Christian or atheistic. You do speak of taking atheism as a political drive, so why not respect the fact that Indians had a history of pragmatism and rationality?
You can't read anything BY the Charvakas. All you get about them is some rivals finding holes in their philosophy and a high degree of misrepresentation may be there.
@@RR_theproahole because, all the works by Charvaks have been Destroyed by the Ancestors of Bhagwa Goon. What's left, is just Puranic Propaganda against them .
After watching this i believe im more Charvaka than ever before as i believe indian philosophies r malleable & mutable. And i definitely dont wanna relate myself with new age militant atheist (which i used to be part of before)
I think this militant atheism is similar to all Abrahamic religions. Charvaka philosophy sounds more attractive to me because it doesn’t try to propagate and assert its thoughts on others. Similar to western religions the western atheism also does prosthlytisation.
@@studywithme-dh8iu what is the correlation here? And why does it even matter. This statement doesn’t add anything to the conversation. Are you that guy who wants to make everything political?
@@mihirpingle5067 I have a question: don’t you think that having a particular stance is a form of assertion, even if it’s not militant? Not all Western atheists are militant, just as not all who identify as Charvaka are pacifists. Believing or stating that one’s philosophy is superior is also a kind of assertion. While it might be vocal now, it could potentially lead to physical conflict.
@@goofychameleon So according to me there are two aspects of any faith or ideology. One is limited to what we think about something that is personal faith and second is what we think that other should think, that is assertion of faith. This second part is what I am not really fond of in western atheism. It stems from the fact that it stemmed from Abrahamic society where dichotomy is a common way of thinking (good and evil). Indian philosophies are not usually dichotomies and allow more space to agree to disagree. Although there can be exceptions but exceptions are not norms. Personal opinions dont have to be assertions and a healthy discussion doesn’t lead to physical confrontation. On the other hand there is a need to talk it out in a healthy way without straight away disregarding what the next person is saying. Which according to me and it comes from reading chritopher hitchens and richard dawkins is a very common aspect of western atheism.
@@mihirpingle5067 I thought you were referring to Hitchens and Dawkins when discussing militant atheism, as they are among the most vocal critics of religion and theism. You're accusing Western atheism of being influenced by Judeo-Abrahamic faiths and highlighting a dichotomy in Western thought, but aren't you also subscribing to Advaita philosophy, which is inherently religious? Ultimately, no one can affect another's personal faith; conflicts arise when beliefs are made public.
Charvaka has no surviving sutras or sastras, no guru-sisya parampara, nothing. It is a dead school and whatever it had died long ago. People identifying with it to cling to some identity they don’t want to lose are fooling themselves.
@@vimoh here is an issue with your argument. I am literally a proud atheist. However, discounting Charvak is like discounting Ram Mohan Roy. Sure the sociopolitical conditions were not the same, but it is the tradition of thought that binds us. We couldn't build communities and follow these traditions without interruptions because we were persecuted. So why not accept that we are continuing the tradition? You couldn't refer to any example in this video where you could point to instances of Charvak tradition that we Indian Atheists have a problem with. Rather I can literally see similarities, where the pressure of persecution is still upon us, be it from a monarch or from the masses of a democratic republic. Hence, when some NRI Uncle tries to force us to say we are Charvak and we are religious, we should be open to point out to the fact that Vendanta tradition hated the Charvaks and hence they were prosecuted for their infidelity over giving up on the identity. Your argument kind of sounded like "I'm not a feminist, but I support equality amongst genders".
It's not entirely fair to say that Charvaka's atheism had it easier than we do today. Remember, they were questioning the existence of God at a time when science wasn't as advanced as it is now and there wasn't much evidence to challenge the belief in a deity. Even Astravakr had a tough time, earning his father's scorn just for rejecting the Vedas. People who dared to question God back then probably had to overcome bigger hurdles than we do today.
Back then, religion was deeply intertwined with every aspect of life, unlike today. To publicly express doubts about God in such an environment would have demanded remarkable intellectual bravery and insight. It's like saying we're smarter than Plato just because we can use a computer - it doesn't quite add up, right?
I totally agree with you.
I think today, it is much easier to explain everything as we are having science, now there is no extreme reaction for rejecting a god, as the atheist community is much larger now.
But just imagine, at that time whole world was under influence of religion and it was very difficult to think against stream.
Yeah Even I was thinking same also that society was much more violent as compared to today so the freedom of expression is much more difficult in those times were much harder to show and as far as societies goes even in that era there were kingdomes and the socities whose impact do used to show their effect on us.
@@atuldoiphode7237 I don't think extreme reaction from the general public was a thing back then either.
Ashtavakra may have rejected vedas or i dont know.
But he belived in consciousness and supreme consciousness.
He said the same thing which later were said in gita.
Edit: read ashtavakra gita, its really good. 300 verses only
When I started becoming an atheist, I felt lost, helpless.. The reason is that all my life I was believing that there a superpower behind me that is protecting me, helping me.. But now it's only me, and that is really heartbreaking for me. Now there is no one to save me, except me. It would take some time for me to process and heal this.
Friend, why do you think there's no God? I can stake my life on the claim that Jesus is alive and risen, and that He is the God of all mankind.
@@GodJesusChristlovesyou_knows_u😂we don't even care abt him who is he? Jesus?
@@Gaurav_Bharali brother try reading why I am an atheist by Bhagat Singh it will answers your many questions.
@@GodJesusChristlovesyou_knows_u☠️ you wanna get destroyed ?
I as a theist can perhaps help you buddy WITHOUT proselytizing . In the mahabharat war krishna the god did not lift any weapons . he only worked as a guide or a strategist in a mortal capacity . pandavas had to fight there brothers, fight those who raised them since childhood (bhishma father to all ,dhrona and kripa there guru ,shalya there uncle etc) yet they overcame it all by themselves without any godly miracles .
I agree with Vimoh also For a Hindu Bhakth kinda odd when He/She Claims and Talks about Charvaka with Literally Nothing but Just a Few Facebook Post and UA-cam videos on UA-cam Channels when they themselves would be Following all the Death Rituals etc 😅.
Also Keep in mind Materialist Movements aur Ideas have Arisen Worldwide in Different Ways and Forms so Even more Naive of Bhakts to Think Atheism Started only in India as though.
I highly recommend People to Explore Greek writers, Epicurus, Roman Writer Lucretius, Japanese Yamagata Banto etc etc so Will the Bhakts call them Hindus ? Materialist Atheist toh wo bhi the.
In Modern Times Read Books by Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking, Richard Dawkins, Charles Darwin, Armin Navabi etc etc that would be the Best in Modern Times. Let Charvaka school be For Academic Research and Exploration.
No one says Indians invented atheism 😂.. we say compared to other nations of Abrahamic and other faiths, Indians considered them as person's with different ideas and we did debates for long ages. But still atheism is a 'belief' both western and Eastern philosophy (only considering the 'burden of proof' is 'more' on assertor than negator).
@@Pantheist2602we were first to thought about it yes india is the land which explored idea of God not existing and materialism way before anyone it is true
@@Pantheist2602indians had materialism much before they developed spirituality.
Dude. Charvaka as specifically charvaka by brihaspati is hindu athiest.
I dont fukin care about other
Excellent thought. I agree with your perspective. Also, the word Charvaka has been deceptively integrated into Hinduism, and proper atheists are better off without redundant and misrepresented titles.
Not true though
@@MK-lc7nf Atheist that comes from India is called Indian Atheist, similar to how you would call an atheist from America an American Atheist. It's not a title, it's an adjective.
Charvaka philosophy is only known because of the evidences from historical sources that were not themselves Charvakas. We are still not clear on their philosophy and their peculiar vision of the world. So, instead of creating ambiguity, it is sufficient to use a descriptor that aptly tells someone who you are using the modern lingo. If you cannot clearly do that, and still call yourself Charvaka, you are wearing a sheep skin to hide who you are within.
Once you get out of the sh*tholery called religion, you tell people you got out of that sh*thole by using words like ex-muslim, ex-christian, ex-hindu, etc. When you do that, you don't need to see if you previously believed in a single god, multiple gods, human-like god, cosmic god, air-particle god, or things like that. You are simply saying you don't subscribe to the line of thought when you say you are ex-hindu and want to stay away from the twisted tentacles of religions saying "we accept atheism, so you are a Hindu atheist".
L
@@Epicurousdemosso, communists who are atheist also hindoo? 😂
Every label has gone throught suff like that.
Clearly n succinctly presented points. In my journey from religious to spiritual and now atheist, i find a last stumbling block - physical pain, suffering. When i experience these in the context of illness, whether mine or loved ones, i fall back upon religion. Pl make a video addressing this, which i think is common to many.
I don't think you should worry about falling back to religion from usual atheist self when faced with suffering. It is natural, just shows you are human after all. Whenever faced with extreme difficulties our mind tries to grasp whatever little straw of help possible to cope with that situation. That help can either be tangible like money or emotional like hope which leads to your mind praying to whichever gods you grew up knowing.
So that's nothing to think much about. Just let your emotions flow a little in such situations. Also we should not be so rigid in our beliefs that we become slave to them whether being religious or athiest.
@Kalyani Mookherji
"Clearly n succinctly presented points. In my journey from religious [...] make a video addressing this, which i think is common to many."
========================================
I am a former practising Hindu; about 10 years ago I opened my eyes and smelled the coffee, and it led me to stop believing in unsubstantiated claims. I have been an atheist since that time.
May I ask *_WHICH_* religion or 'belief-system' or 'god' you find yourself falling back on ?
I think you can go on spiritual path without believing in God or a religion. Read 'Waking up' by Sam Harris
I share the same predicament.
❤❤❤
You are doing a great job vimoh.
He thinks out of box that's why I like his videos
Few has guts to spit truth.👏
aap hindi me bhi videos banao. Apke points next level hote hai. Happy to see the growth of this channel recently.
"Time is more accurate connector than space is ever going to be" 7:30 - A bit reductive as it seems to indicate that time and space are the only competing variables here. People, culture, age and even profession are important variables. Time has played an important role only in the last 2 decades. For my father & mother, space (and therefore the people around them, their language, culture and belief) were a much stronger influencer than time. And their influence on my life is the most significant component, unless I make a conscious attempt to break away. Unless you are an extreme rationalist who can never switch off your rational mind (even when enjoying music that stimulates emotions, however irrational), I think space still plays a big role. Emotionally, a charvaka from past might find more in common with a Hindu born in today's rural India, who is trying to breaking free from the superstitions/customs imposed on him/her by the immediate community.
I believe, the logical foundations for both modern and ancient atheists are same. Only the amount of empirical evidence has increased substantially over centuries. My guess is that, if a charvaka from 600BC was brought to our times, his thrill would be comparable to the thrill a theoretical physicist would have when the predictions based on his theory are proven true by an experimental physicist.
My guess is that there is something else deeper in you that makes you shun the charvaka identity.
Very well explained 👍🏼👌🏼👏🏼❤️😊
Vimoh please make a video on Dhruv rathee new video on abhramic religion... he seems to promote the idea of god through it.
I see what you doing there. 😂.
But Charvaka was the pioneer of Atheism in not only India but may be for whole world.
This claim has no evidence to back up with
@@TingTong2568 maybe this is possible because india was the centre of world back then
@@backbenchervlogs5040 correction: it's a self centered syndrome to be more precise
@@backbenchervlogs5040 no. The world had FOUR major centres back then. India, Greece, China, and Iran.
I think until sometime in 20th century, location was more impactful in one's thoughts than their time of living. But as communication became better and globalisation happened, time suddenly became more important. In the future, time will remain more important than location I think
Awesome Explanation 🤓👍
It sounds very similar to Ancient Greek materialistic philosophy started by Democritus. That was 300 years after Charvaka. I wish Alexander the Great could have merged the schools.
Sir, Can you kindly share the link of the video where you have share why and how you became religious to spritiual to Atheist. I will be very thankfull to you.
See the live tab on thos channel
@@vimoh Thanks
But then by your logic even today’s religions are different than the original. Cuz the surrounding conditions of society have changed drastically. Changes happening in the arena of science and technology will not affect basic tenets of carvaka. The point of difference maybe that he didn’t even believe in inference as a source of knowledge but science does. On the basis of these epistemological differences you can claim the divergence but not solely on scientific advancement.
I m an agnostic. 🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰
Basically u r confused theist😅😂
@@VINAYVIVEK-u5sNo babes,
For him to be a theist it's required to believe in the God.
A confused theist would be one who believes in God but isn't quite sure which god he believes in.
In fact all the theists are confused atheists because they don't really know about the God and their beliefs keep changing over time, for example muslims don't believe God created the earth flat anymore. Christians don't believe God created the world in six days anymore.Hindus don't believe earth rests on snakehead or elephants.
So basically all the religious theists are confused people who actually are atheists.
LoL.
Agnostics just sound dumb i am sorry
Rational being accepts whats is evident. I would call athiest blind for not taking a theory.
Atleast agnost have no belief. But athiest have, that there is no god. @@VINAYVIVEK-u5s
It is gibberish explanation. Basically, it is the scientific understanding as well as the unscientific approach of the religious that leads to what we loosely call atheism.
You say you cant remove atheism from contemporary politics. But then say that secularism is the idea of removing religion or religiois ideology from politics.
Can you explain these two?
The quality of your videos and your subscriber count dont match up. I'm really shocked by how low it is.
@FinestBat
"The quality of your videos and your subscriber count dont match up. I'm really shocked by how low it is."
=================================================
UNFORTUNATELY, the overwhelming majority of Indians are very religious... even though many will call themselves 'dharmists', which is a conveniently fuzzy terrm.
Nothing much .... he doesn't talk anything many people could philosophically agree with.
it will grow slowly but he will cross 100k subs soon
Beautiful thoughts
Do we need to make things complicated.. Atheist means not a theist. End of story. If you do not have a theistic imagination to satisfy then you are an atheist. Funny enough every theist is an atheist towards other imaginations. Maybe charvaka represented not a theist philosophy sometime back, today they got a new name and tomorrow the name would be different. The properties and shades of theism also have changed with time. Same thoughts could be applicable there as well.
You imagine things shouldn't get complicated.. but always it does.
Hinduism is unique in nature. It try to absorb new ideas that are poping up in the society, whether it is local god (Gagganath), bhudha( at least it tried) and now atheism
I feel if someone wants to self identify in a certain way, they should be free to do so.
I don't have the same milieu (different place but same time) and it's interesting.
As far as i understand (that's the first video from you i watch), I totally agree about your vision about atheism and why it's politic.
Here in France, i don't "identify" as an atheist just because in my (nearest) milieu religion is not a subject. So there's just no need for that.
I understand that fact is a new thing, and isn't view in the same manner in my own town, now, by some neighbors.
"Our milieu" is a concept that can have several scales, all as true as others.
Thank you for yout video ☺
Not only Charvaak but Samkhya Mimanasa and Naya (not NAV NAYA) darasan they too are atheist darsana
Simply disbelief in god is not modern Atheism. Mimansa, samkhya and naya used to agree with the idea of aatman I don't think any of the Atheist would agree with this idea. God can have several definations and somehow the idea of aatman makes another description of god. Simply rejecting an omnipotent and omniscient god is not atheism at all. Even Charvaks would not be called as modern Atheism because they are more about materialism.
Our understanding of universe is still like a drop of water compare to full knowledge of universe
I loved your take on time. It is amazing that a foreigner living at the same time as me would have more common things than my ancestor a thousand years ago. I always felt I did not belong in a specific ideology - like Charvaka, Theism, or Atheism. Now, when I look at these origins of ideologies from the lens of time, I see why. Ideas evolve.
PS - This video seriously lacks a thing - Hans Zimmer's Inception/Interstellar soundtrack. Add that, and you have a masterpiece. (Personal opinion).
We know almost nothing about the Carvakas. One cannot even know whether they were truly atheist.
They were materialists and nastiks
This we know
You should read them
@@Epicurousdemos where do we have texts written by the Caravakas?
@@sourabhmookherjee4218 jain text, hindu text brihaspti somethin
@@NTIS-DHARMIK I do not question that they existed. I question as to what they really believed. The only thing we know of their beliefs is what the others have said as criticism.
I prefer the term materialist/materialism ..
I've the same Agatha Christie 50 book 😅
From your bookshelf
How about modern charvak!! 😂 Jokes aside I liked your explanation on the perspectives and space and time in which given event happens
You can reject any title they put on you but know this even hindus didnt call themselves hindus before the invasion. The point is, labelling is what others do to others.
A perfect ambedkarite description
Nah, go read his works.
Buddha's path is the only path
@@suraj8092 N[ot the buddha appropiated by ambedkar
Do you term Hardcore Atheist?
👍👍👍
I disagree on commonality of people of india and americans...yes we do follow more western things like gregorian calendar, english language, suit and tie etc. These are forced through western dominance and colonisation. But manh of the americans are very relegious and not how its shown in hollywood. They embrace their culture, food, ideologies, family structure etc. And they are very differeent from 21st century folks from asian or african countries.
Non religiosity is rising in the USA, you can see trends.
@@RR_theproahole agree , covid exacerbated it. But it's still like 30% who dont go to church ...And about 10% who believe in atheism.
It's not forced anymore, y'all have accepted it. Even after independence. Why would you do this?
@@Rolando_Cuevaaccepted how? As if it was debated and rebuild from scratch. Our constitution is more of cut copy paste rather than build from scratch.
The question was about commonality, you're just beating around the bush
👌👌👌👌👌👌👍👍👍👍👍👍👍🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
I don't think that it was easier for them as they lived in a society/era which was much more violent as well a feudal/agricultural society, also the religion played a huge role in day to day life and to reject the concept of god at that era will be much more difficult as law wnd order won't be as fair as it is today though even today it sucks but still it is better than the times of Charvaka.
Do you sleep on that bed?
Good
So you are Updated Charvaka😂
Bro Why India is not developed like china although we are democracy and china is dictatorship. Do you think India is next China? Will india grow rapidly in next 10 to 20 years.
When will India's GDP per capita Rise? I want to see India as a developed country before I die, I am 17 year old am lucky
I hope I will live till 22nd century and live as a citizen of modern developed India
My definition of a developed country is one where everyone has free healthcare and education. It's got nothing to do with GDP.
For that We as an Indians has to do a lot of hardwork instead of getting pleasures from the stats these foreign power shows... This century will be of Indians blah blah... Yes We will be Second in GDP but with the people living a miserable life? Think about it... What Foreigners talk about is Growth... We need a development... Yes Those who want to follow religion, let them do... There may be criticizers but I just wanna say that Let Religious people believe in their philosophy and a different from those, Atheists should be respected!
We are one nation... Atheism looks good...
@@vimohthen no country is developed in this world. Vimoh and his definitions Smh
@@South_Asian.Fascist-98atheism only 'looks good'..
@@Pantheist2602Sri Lanka rejected my PR and quoted India's HDI per capita metrics as the reason. 😢
Funny you call yourself an 'Indian' and say it's inappropriate to call you carvaka. The lack of commonality in lifestyle doesn't affect a person much on a cultural/philosophical basis. Just say you're a postmodernist who feels everything is great only in West.
You don't knowwhat postmodernism means.
@@vimoh .. you're saying about two distinct usages in my comment. But postmodernist and western are literally different and I do know it. But taking in Indian perspective why considering ancient Indian developments as unimportant, when it really shows we had a diplomatic way of considering things. Western developments will always be western, no matter if it's Christian or atheistic. You do speak of taking atheism as a political drive, so why not respect the fact that Indians had a history of pragmatism and rationality?
Exactly 😂
Bhai aap kaam kya karte ho?
Comments ka jawab deta hoon.
Hindu nationalist advised to me read charvaka....they thinks this is some sort of Hindu atheist thing 😅
Did you ask them (and I hope you got a good answer) on where to read about Charvakas?
Ignorance and Arrogance are the ornaments of Hindu Nationalists
You can't read anything BY the Charvakas. All you get about them is some rivals finding holes in their philosophy and a high degree of misrepresentation may be there.
@@RR_theproahole because, all the works by Charvaks have been Destroyed by the Ancestors of Bhagwa Goon.
What's left, is just Puranic Propaganda against them .
@@sushantshekhar001u can check kushal mehra Charvaka podcast
He has done whole documentation indepth on various topics related to this
After watching this i believe im more Charvaka than ever before as i believe indian philosophies r malleable & mutable. And i definitely dont wanna relate myself with new age militant atheist (which i used to be part of before)
I think this militant atheism is similar to all Abrahamic religions. Charvaka philosophy sounds more attractive to me because it doesn’t try to propagate and assert its thoughts on others. Similar to western religions the western atheism also does prosthlytisation.
Ok I understand you are a rightist person
@@studywithme-dh8iu what is the correlation here? And why does it even matter. This statement doesn’t add anything to the conversation. Are you that guy who wants to make everything political?
@@mihirpingle5067 I have a question: don’t you think that having a particular stance is a form of assertion, even if it’s not militant? Not all Western atheists are militant, just as not all who identify as Charvaka are pacifists. Believing or stating that one’s philosophy is superior is also a kind of assertion. While it might be vocal now, it could potentially lead to physical conflict.
@@goofychameleon So according to me there are two aspects of any faith or ideology. One is limited to what we think about something that is personal faith and second is what we think that other should think, that is assertion of faith. This second part is what I am not really fond of in western atheism. It stems from the fact that it stemmed from Abrahamic society where dichotomy is a common way of thinking (good and evil). Indian philosophies are not usually dichotomies and allow more space to agree to disagree. Although there can be exceptions but exceptions are not norms. Personal opinions dont have to be assertions and a healthy discussion doesn’t lead to physical confrontation. On the other hand there is a need to talk it out in a healthy way without straight away disregarding what the next person is saying. Which according to me and it comes from reading chritopher hitchens and richard dawkins is a very common aspect of western atheism.
@@mihirpingle5067 I thought you were referring to Hitchens and Dawkins when discussing militant atheism, as they are among the most vocal critics of religion and theism. You're accusing Western atheism of being influenced by Judeo-Abrahamic faiths and highlighting a dichotomy in Western thought, but aren't you also subscribing to Advaita philosophy, which is inherently religious? Ultimately, no one can affect another's personal faith; conflicts arise when beliefs are made public.
Man that's too much....just justification....
हिंदी मध्ये पण बोला आम्हालाही समजून घ्यायचे आहे .
I prefer to call myself लोकायत... Instead of चार्वाक
Charvaka has no surviving sutras or sastras, no guru-sisya parampara, nothing. It is a dead school and whatever it had died long ago. People identifying with it to cling to some identity they don’t want to lose are fooling themselves.
Why an 'Indian Athiest' and not a '21st century Athiest' then?
India does that. It is a 21st century phenomenon. It encapsulates the conditions I am working under.
@@vimoh here is an issue with your argument. I am literally a proud atheist. However, discounting Charvak is like discounting Ram Mohan Roy. Sure the sociopolitical conditions were not the same, but it is the tradition of thought that binds us. We couldn't build communities and follow these traditions without interruptions because we were persecuted. So why not accept that we are continuing the tradition? You couldn't refer to any example in this video where you could point to instances of Charvak tradition that we Indian Atheists have a problem with. Rather I can literally see similarities, where the pressure of persecution is still upon us, be it from a monarch or from the masses of a democratic republic. Hence, when some NRI Uncle tries to force us to say we are Charvak and we are religious, we should be open to point out to the fact that Vendanta tradition hated the Charvaks and hence they were prosecuted for their infidelity over giving up on the identity. Your argument kind of sounded like "I'm not a feminist, but I support equality amongst genders".
If charvaks didn't exist, atheists could still exist. That's all.
So Charvaka 2.0
Lol you saying we're much advanced than carvakas were yet you guys use the same old philosophical arguments against the existence of God 😂
Feel free to come on my live stream and discuss or debate this.
Ur life tells me not be one.
Would it be fair to call you a Neo-Charvaka?
who care , jokes on you buddy , i am not atheist , i am unemployed , hooooooooooohooooooooooooo
Hindi me bat karo sir
😂 low budget sam harris
Vimoh, your voice and accent both Hindi and English. 👌🏼👍🏼🫶❤️😊.