Opponents of the Cārvāka-s were never wanting. Idealist and fideist philosophers and custodians of different religious groups rallied to refute the Cārvāka doctrine, not only on philosophical grounds with arguments but also by spreading false charges and calumnies in order to make the doctrine appear morally reprehensible.

Two such oft-quoted charges will now be examined on the basis of original sources.

The Cārvāka system of philosophy is generally known as one of hedonism. The following verse is supposed to epitomize its basic position:

It has been shown that the earlier sources of this verse read the second hemistich differently: nāsti mrtyor agocaraḥ (no one is beyond death) in place of rṇaṃ krtvā ghrtaṃ pibet. Apparently this slight but skilful alteration was made by S-M in order to make the doctrine appear in an unfavourable light.

However, the fact remains that the verse does urge people to ‘live happily’, sukhaṃ jīvet. What could the Cārvāka-s mean by it? Did they not advocate enjoyment of sensual pleasure as the summum bonum of life?

I shall attempt to answer this question. Needless to say, where the Cārvāka-s are concerned, there are very little positive evidence to go by, for everything is culled from the polemical writings of their opponents.