The Jainist And Carvaka Approach Ethics Are They Compatible - Essay Example

This essay analyzes the views of two philosophical standings of the ancient India held by Jainism and Carvaka to identify the similarities and differences between the two in regards to ethics. In addition, compatibility of the two viewpoints will be assessed to identify if the philosophical standings can be viewed using similar lenses or if there exist significant deviations. Jainism, just like the Buddhist and Hinduism theories was developed by ancient Indian philosophers and is based on a rational philosophical system. The Jaina concept of philosophy is based upon the ontological doctrine that regards the various philosophical views on reality and correlative understanding of reality. Jainism developed and advanced the concept of reality as animate and inanimate entities such as matter, energy, and sound. According to this theory, there is a mutual interaction between the living and the non-living for the cohesive existence of nature. Thus, liberation arises when a worldly soul attempts to liberate itself from the common bondage that is characterized with the love for material wealth. Liberated souls, according to the jainist concept, do not interact with any other entity present within the universe including other liberated souls or worldly inanimate objects (Kalghatgi 234). In the Jaina code of ethics, the natural results of the rational approach guide the principles of behavior and personality. This is not guided in any way by a principle of laws or commandments made for the people by the higher authority. Individuals who subscribe to the ideals of Jainism are expected to comprehensively study the scripture and understand the basic concepts of rational thinking and acting. This will assist them to develop coherent knowledge and understanding and enable them to integrate rational behavior in their livelihoods. A jainist should, thus, consider his/her experiences and life occurrences to enable them understand that the presence or absence of pain, sickness, health, union, and separation are a part of the existence of the world. The acceptance of these worldly realities enables an individual to develop a mild personality, which puts into the consideration the realities around them to guide their actions and reactions. An individual who consistently becomes upset, discontent with the world, egotistic, and selfish towards the people around them grows into an individual with no peace of mind and the desire to accept the worldly situations as they are. The Jainist approach to ethics loathes fear of the legal system or individuals of the higher authority as this demonstrates the karmic bondage of such a person according to the karma philosophy. Jainists discourage actions that are associated with hypocritical practices aimed at enhancing exploitation of the weak and the vulnerable for material gains only (Kalghatgi 236). All individuals in the Jainist approach should aim at the achievement of happiness and peace of mind due to the fact such individuals possess the power to understand that commitment and equanimity begets happiness and personal satisfaction. The desire to revenge due to anger and resentment fuels violence and provides no room for peaceful solutions to available crises. For example, issuing threatening remarks towards a terrorist as a way of controlling their actions has no impact at all, as it increases the resolve of the terrorist to continue with their activities. When the United States of America decided to enter the Gulf region to retaliate the attacks by terrorists, the solution to terrorism was sent to a mirage position as the criminals’ resolve was doubled (Koller 157). The Carvaka philosophy also traces its roots to the Indian philosophical development, and it assumes forms that go to materialism, philosophical skepticism, and indifference to religion. The development of the Carvaka philosophy arose from the orthodox Hindu and the Nastika philosophical developments in the early 17th century in India. The development of Indian philosophical work has been characterized by a widespread acceptance of skepticism as the different literature available on Indian philosophical works indicates. The Carvakans developed from a basis of rejecting the doctrine of another world or the ability to survive the strength of death. Therefore, this leaves the Carvakans with Artha and Kama as the accepted doctrines in their skeptic analysis against the ideals presented on the possibility of surviving death and having another form of life. The Carvakans argued that any form of perception has not revealed the presence of a world where an individual can be reborn or occupy a different form of a human life in a way that shows escapes or survival of death (Koller 158). Based on this superficial analysis, the Carvakans skeptical analysis strengthens the resolve that there is no hell that possesses an excessive pain as that experienced by the current form of life in the world. It, however, agrees on the presence of a supreme who is the monarch of the earthly materials and whose actions and influence are both visible and can be felt in different ways. In their preposition, it is evident that the Carvakans committed a fallacy when they insisted that the fact that an event or object which is not known to exist cannot exist in any form. This undermined the position of the entire philosophy, which is based on the power of perception as a means of generating knowledge on a particular object. The Carvakans hypothesis must, therefore, admit the use of inference as a point of gaining epistemological ideas or fail to acknowledge the power of perception in acknowledging the presence or absence of an event or an object (Kalghatgi 234). The ideals of Carvakans philosophies differ significantly with the Jainist perspective of ethics making the two philosophies openly incompatible. The Carvakans philosophy does not encourage the over indulgence in earthly pleasures for it views sensual pleasure as a part of life. Jainist, however, views those individuals who are preoccupied with material and bodily happiness as those whose souls are lost. It believes in the presence of a soul that does not interact with other existing souls or objects within the world. Carvakans alludes that the presence of wisdom is accompanied by the presence of pleasure and the desires of an individual to avoid pain (Koller 157). The religious conceptions as explained in Jainist are rejected by the Carvakans philosophies. The Pianist advances the belief in the presence of animate and inanimate entities whose souls do not interact at any level. It, thus, believes in the presence of another form of life, a sort of reincarnation after the physical death on earth. This is against the ideals of Carvakans, which rejects the ability of an individual to escape the power of death and emerge in another form. This position placed the Carvakans philosopher at a collision course with the Veda proponents who also subscribed to a theoretical reference to reincarnation (Koller 159). To the Carvakans, any individual attributes that were used to represent an individual resided solely in the body and could not be replicated in another form after death in a process similar to reincarnation. This makes the two ethical perspectives incompatible, which advanced different and opposing viewpoints. Works Cited Kalghatgi, Gautam. “The Doctrine of Karma in Jaina Philosophy.” Journal of Philosophy East and West 15.4 (1965): 229-242. Koller, John. “Skepticism in Early Indian Thought.” Journal of Philosophy East and West 27.2 (1977): 155-164. Read More