This analysis reveals how Jain scholar Hemacandra and commentator Malliṣeṇa misrepresented Cārvāka epistemology by ignoring commentarial literature. Contrary to their claim that Cārvākas rejected all inference, commentators like Purandara, Aviddhakarṇa, and Udbhaṭa affirmed empirical inference for daily life while rejecting its use for unobservable, supernatural entities like heaven or karma.