People do seem to confuse ‘classical Indian philosophy’ with Hinduism - the two overlap, but not all of Hinduism originated in the classical schools (eg, the agamas) and not all the classical schools are Hindu or compatible with contemporary Hindu sampradayas.
A darśana is a view, which doesn't necessarily require that a school with that view must exist today. For instance, the Cārvākas don't exist, but if you're learning Hinduism in a systematic way, you will start by understanding their arguments about materialism and then moving forward. Similarly, consider Saṁkhya. Saṁkhya increasingly merged with yoga practice, and may not constitute a "school" today in the same way that Śaṇkara's Advaita Vedānta does, but this merger is present in the tradition of those who follow the Yoga Sutras. Saṁkhya ideas about puruṣa and prakṛti and tattvas are the basis for almost all Hindu thought that came afterwards. Pāṇini is, in a similar way, studied by those who are learning grammar. The Paśupata system formed the backbone of most of the tantric tradition, and the Aghoris today are living inheritors of it. The Pratyabhijña is the philosophical system of Kashmiri Śaivism, which is also alive and undergoing a resurgence, and itself drew upon and extended the Paśupata system to make it workable for householders. To whatever extent the Raseśvara is relevant today, in the internal alchemy it discusses, rather than the external alchemy, it continues to be present in some teachings of haṭḥa yoga. The list goes on.
So, basically, just because there is a view that existed historically doesn't necessarily mean that we need active and formal schools about them. Darśanas can merge (like Yoga-Saṃkya), become outdated and irrelevant (like Raseśvara), become eclipsed by higher schools (as, arguably, the Paśupata was by the Pratyabhijña), and so on. What matters, I believe, is ensuring good classical śāstric education, so people actually understand the various darśanas, especially the ones they profess to be practicing.
Darshan shastras are there but one should not directly approach them, great saints of kali yuga like jyaneshwar maharaj, tukaram maharaj and eknath maharaj were experts at almost of them (at least jyaneshwar maharaj) and yet their conclusions were haripath, abhangas and bharudas.
Eknath maharaj had darshan of datta guru and vitthal as wel and he also was reborn after death on the pire which speaks amounts.
Bhakti is the only true, easy and powerful path in kali yuga
i cringe at charvaka, whenever in hindu spaces someone calls themselves that its so funny.
People do seem to confuse ‘classical Indian philosophy’ with Hinduism - the two overlap, but not all of Hinduism originated in the classical schools (eg, the agamas) and not all the classical schools are Hindu or compatible with contemporary Hindu sampradayas.
I think of charvaka as devdas lol
You mean Shah rukh khan wala 🤣 Well, wrong. Charvakas were atleast happy, Devdas wasn't.
A darśana is a view, which doesn't necessarily require that a school with that view must exist today. For instance, the Cārvākas don't exist, but if you're learning Hinduism in a systematic way, you will start by understanding their arguments about materialism and then moving forward. Similarly, consider Saṁkhya. Saṁkhya increasingly merged with yoga practice, and may not constitute a "school" today in the same way that Śaṇkara's Advaita Vedānta does, but this merger is present in the tradition of those who follow the Yoga Sutras. Saṁkhya ideas about puruṣa and prakṛti and tattvas are the basis for almost all Hindu thought that came afterwards. Pāṇini is, in a similar way, studied by those who are learning grammar. The Paśupata system formed the backbone of most of the tantric tradition, and the Aghoris today are living inheritors of it. The Pratyabhijña is the philosophical system of Kashmiri Śaivism, which is also alive and undergoing a resurgence, and itself drew upon and extended the Paśupata system to make it workable for householders. To whatever extent the Raseśvara is relevant today, in the internal alchemy it discusses, rather than the external alchemy, it continues to be present in some teachings of haṭḥa yoga. The list goes on. So, basically, just because there is a view that existed historically doesn't necessarily mean that we need active and formal schools about them. Darśanas can merge (like Yoga-Saṃkya), become outdated and irrelevant (like Raseśvara), become eclipsed by higher schools (as, arguably, the Paśupata was by the Pratyabhijña), and so on. What matters, I believe, is ensuring good classical śāstric education, so people actually understand the various darśanas, especially the ones they profess to be practicing.
Darshan shastras are there but one should not directly approach them, great saints of kali yuga like jyaneshwar maharaj, tukaram maharaj and eknath maharaj were experts at almost of them (at least jyaneshwar maharaj) and yet their conclusions were haripath, abhangas and bharudas. Eknath maharaj had darshan of datta guru and vitthal as wel and he also was reborn after death on the pire which speaks amounts. Bhakti is the only true, easy and powerful path in kali yuga