Debates in ancient India

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

There was, for a considerable period of time, a very lively and extensively practiced tradition of formal debates in ancient India. These

King Janaka
's court.

Though debate was popular at the time of the

Kathavatthu.[3]

Theory of debate in Charaka Samhitha

The earliest available treatises in Sanskrit in which the principles of debates are systematically explored are, strangely, two texts on Ayurveda, namely Charaka Samhita and Sushruta Samhita.[4][5]

These are the two foundational

anumana (inference), yukti (reasoning). The discussion under the third head is much more elaborate.[4]

The examination of vada-vidhi begins by dividing debates into two classes, namely, anuloma sambhasha (peaceful debate) and vigrihya sambhasha (hostile debate). The respondents are then classified as superior, equal and inferior. Also, the assembly witnessing the debate is classified as learned and ignorant. Each of these is then further classified as friendly, indifferent or hostile. There are suggestions as to how to handle the debate depending on the nature of the respondents and of the assembly. The treatise then goes on to give a list of 44 items a thorough knowledge of which is essential for the successful conduct of a debate.[4]

Theory of debate in Nyayasutras

The

Nyayasutras contain a more systematic and improved version of the theory of debate than the one presented in Charaka Samhitha. The term katha (meaning speech or discourse), is the preferred term to denote philosophical debate in Nyaya literature. The Nyayasutras mention three kinds of debate, namely, vada, jalpa, and vitanda. The first variety is between a proponent and his teacher or somebody with a similar status. The other two are between those who want victory. The goal of the first is establishment of truth or an accepted doctrine, that of the other two is victory. The first corresponds to Caraka's friendly or congenial debate, and the other two to his hostile debate.[6]

Vada, the honest debate

Vada, the good or honest debate, is constituted by the following characteristics:

Jalpa, the bad debate

Jalpa is defined in Nyayasutra as a debate where, among the stated characteristics of the first type of debate, only such characteristics as would seem appropriate would be applicable. In addition, the debater can use, for the establishment of his own position and for the refutation of the opponent's thesis, such means as quibbling, illegitimate rejoinders and any kind of clincher. Three kinds of quibbling are listed, twenty-four kinds of illegitimate rejoinders and twenty-two kinds of clinchers.

Vitanda, the wrangling debate

The third debate mentioned in the

wrangling
. It is defined as a debate where no counter-thesis is established. In other words, the debater here tries to ensure victory simply by refuting the thesis put forward by the other side. It is sometimes claimed to be a type of bad debate, for the only goal is victory, as in the second type, and the use of such trickery as quibbling and illegitimate rejoinder is allowed.

Debate in Tibetan Buddhism

The debate traditions of ancient India are still practiced in modern times by Tibetan Buddhists.[7] Monks debate one another in order to sharpen the mind and defeat misconceptions. They may spend years in university studying debate as part of their education, and learning how to be precise and logical with their arguments.[8]

Debates between monks are energetic and performative, with formalized roles and expressions.[9] The defender sits and offers formulaic responses, while the challenger stands and asks questions, which are punctuated by a clap at the end.[8]

References

  1. . Retrieved 27 November 2016.
  2. .
  3. .
  4. ^ .
  5. ^ Karin Preisendanz (2009). "Logic, Debate, and Epistemology in Ancient Indian Medical Science" (PDF). Indian Journal of History of Science. 44 (2): 261–312. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
  6. .
  7. ^ Perdue, David. "Tibetan Buddhist Debate". Asia Society. Retrieved 2021-02-07. The Tibetan argument forms were brought over with minor adaptations from the Indian logical forms.
  8. ^ a b Perdue, David. "Tibetan Buddhist Debate". Asia Society. Retrieved 2021-02-07.
  9. ^ Wangkhang, Rignam (2019-09-19). "Debating the Buddhist Masters". Tricycle.org. Trycicle. Retrieved 2021-02-07. Arms raised, voices raised, hands clapping, rosaries clasped, crowds watching.