Debates in ancient India
There was, for a considerable period of time, a very lively and extensively practiced tradition of formal debates in ancient India. These
Though debate was popular at the time of the
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
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
Vada, the honest debate
Vada, the good or honest debate, is constituted by the following characteristics:
- Establishment (of the thesis) and refutation(of the counter-thesis) should be based upon adequate evidence or means for knowledge (pramana) as well as upon (proper) hypothetical or indirect reasoning (tarka).
- The conclusion should not entail contradiction with any tenet or accepted doctrine (siddhanta).
- Each side should use the well-known five steps of the demonstration of an argument explicitly.
- They should clearly recognize a thesis to be defended and a counter thesis to be refuted.
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
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
- ISBN 9780791437407. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
- ISBN 9780791437407.
- ISBN 9780791437407.
- ^ ISBN 9788120805651.
- ^ 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.
- ISBN 9780791437407.
- ^ 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.
- ^ a b Perdue, David. "Tibetan Buddhist Debate". Asia Society. Retrieved 2021-02-07.
- ^ 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.