Traditional Philosophy of India and China

The Tradition of Philosophy in Ancient India

Ethical Teachings of Indian Thinkers

The ultimate goal of all Indian thinkers was to justify a particular way of life that would lead individuals to a state perceived as the pinnacle of aspiration, something of unequivocal value. However, this state was often defined through the negation of all the negative conditions that afflict humanity and from which one seeks to escape. Thus, the aim of Indian philosophy can largely be interpreted as salvation, liberation from suffering, and a departure from a painful reality into another realm where all anguish ceases.

In a positive light, this state was described as a transcendent and unblemished bliss. Buddhists referred to it as nirvana, signifying the extinguishing of desires and aspirations that generate suffering, while adherents of orthodox schools termed it moksha, or liberation from the dependencies that cause pain.

Yet, it is only within one philosophical school—Lokāyata—that this positive state is interpreted as a directly accessible sensory experience of pleasure (kama), felt through the body. Pleasure arises from the interaction of bodies, an inherent possibility within the fabric of existence. Some interactions yield suffering, while others produce pleasant sensations. Therefore, by living wisely—studying the outcomes of various interactions, remembering them, and examining one’s own body, especially its reactions—one can maximize pleasure while minimizing suffering. Concerns about the demise of the body should not trouble an individual, for with the body’s dissolution, sensitivity fades, memory is erased, and thus death marks the limit of existence. Death frees one from all suffering, yet it also eliminates the opportunity for enjoyment. Consequently, Lokāyatans argue that fears regarding one’s own death are futile, merely overshadowing life. All that is good for a person exists only in this earthly life, and it is senseless to avoid pleasurable moments for the sake of an unproven otherworldly bliss. Wisdom, they contend, consists in the ability to extract the utmost enjoyment from life.

Representatives of other strands of Indian ethical thought ridiculed the Charvakas, deeming such teachings an example of baseness and gross error. Each of these schools proposed its own model of exemplary living, but all shared common features, save for minor distinctions. Let us outline these foundational principles of Indian ethical teachings.

First and foremost, Indians viewed passionate desires aimed at achieving material wealth and social status as the source of suffering and dependence. Every suffering entails dissatisfaction with something unattainable; desires tether individuals to external, uncontrollable objects. The world does not conform to human will; mere desire is insufficient for realization. Buddhists taught that any desire ultimately leads to suffering since all potential achievements are fleeting and perishable. Everything dear to the heart is subject to destruction, and grief over loss follows any acquisition. Life, by its very nature, is suffering. Other thinkers perceived the body as a kind of shackle binding the soul, a terrible burden that afflicts individuals, forcing them to suffer due to their bodily needs. Liberation from this dependence was envisioned as awakening from a nightmarish dream, wherein one sighs in relief upon realizing it has ended. The means to this liberation is found in the cultivation of restrained desires and asceticism.

Jains believed that the perfect individual could subdue the body by refraining from yielding to its needs, thus liberating the soul. However, suicide was not deemed a suitable option, as it does not exemplify the triumph of will over desires, but rather represents a cowardly attempt to swiftly end suffering. Such suffering would resurface, for the soul would cling to a new body. The doctrine of reincarnation became a hallmark of Indian philosophy, governed by the law of karma, understood as the principle of reciprocal action: all that is inflicted upon another will return in kind to the inflictor. However, such retribution does not necessarily manifest in the current life for this body but is cumulatively realized through rebirth into a body predetermined by one’s past existence. The concept of karma emerged as an attempt to explain why two very similar individuals, under the same circumstances, experience such different life paths. One may enjoy fortune while misfortunes plague the other. Indians refused to view this as mere coincidence; lacking sufficient reasons, they interpreted it as consequences of actions from a prior life.

From this perspective arose a distinctive logic: the avoidance of causing suffering to any living being (ahimsa) and the strict adherence to moral commandments, which pertain not only to external conduct but also to thoughts and even spontaneous desires. Thus, total control over one’s passions, actions, and intentions is deemed essential for a righteous way of life. Progress along the path to perfection entails acquiring ever-deeper skills of self-discipline.

In some instances, this aspiration to avoid harming living beings took on grotesque forms. For example, Jains not only abstained from animal products (as this entails killing or forcibly depriving something, such as in the case of milk or eggs) but also walked with great caution to avoid inadvertently stepping on unnoticed creatures, using bells and soft brushes to announce their presence and clear their path of any potential victims.