Charvaka, also known as Lokayata, approaches the religious landscape with radical skepticism and a thoroughgoing materialism. All claims that depend on unseen realms, divine beings, or transcendent purposes are treated as fabrications, rooted in fear and ignorance rather than in reliable knowledge. Religious diversity is not interpreted as many paths to a single truth, but as a variety of errors arising from the same basic superstition about the supernatural. From this standpoint, any doctrine that invokes gods, spirits, or divine judgment is regarded as a projection of human imagination rather than a description of reality.

Central to this outlook is a rejection of religious authority in all its forms. Scriptures such as the Vedas and similar texts are regarded as human compositions, not as revelations from a higher source. Religious literature is seen as crafted and propagated by priests and religious teachers who seek social control, economic benefit, and status. The priestly and hierarchical structures that grow around these texts are viewed as instruments for exploiting popular credulity, maintaining inequality, and securing a livelihood through ritual and dogma.

Charvaka thought also subjects specific religious practices to sharp criticism. Sacrifices, rituals for ancestors, ceremonies promising merit or salvation, and other observances such as pilgrimages, fasting, and ascetic disciplines are dismissed as wasteful, deceptive, or self-defeating. Animal sacrifice in particular is condemned as cruel and irrational, serving primarily the interests of those who receive offerings rather than any genuine spiritual good. Such practices are seen as diverting people from practical living and from attention to the tangible conditions of this life.

Underlying this critique is a distinctive epistemological stance. Only direct perception is accepted as a trustworthy means of knowledge, and testimony or inference is rejected whenever it is used to support claims about invisible worlds, karma, rebirth, or liberation. Concepts such as soul, heaven, hell, and afterlife are treated as fictitious constructs, lacking any empirical grounding. On this basis, moral codes tied to divine command, sin, or karmic retribution are interpreted as social conventions rather than reflections of a cosmic order. What remains as meaningful is the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain within the bounds of ordinary life, without recourse to otherworldly hopes or fears.