Nyāya Sūtras 44

Disputation is that which is endowed with the aforementioned [characteristics] and in which proof and refutation are carried out by means of quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat.

'Endowed with the aforementioned [characteristics]' means: having proof and refutation by means of valid cognition and hypothetical reasoning, not contrary to established tenets, endowed with the five components of an inference, and maintaining a thesis and a counter-thesis. 'In which proof and refutation are carried out by means of quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat' means: disputation is qualified in this manner, that proof and refutation in it are carried out by quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat.

Indeed, proof of any object by means of quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat is not possible; for their purpose is only refutation, as heard in their general and specific definitions: 'Quibble is the obstruction of a statement by inventing an alternative meaning,' 'Futile rejoinder is an objection based on similarity and dissimilarity,' and 'Point of defeat is misunderstanding and non-understanding.'

[This is seen] also in the specific definitions respectively. Nor should one understand that they establish an object precisely through their purpose being refutation, for this would be understood even if it were merely said that disputation is refutation by means of quibble, futile rejoinder, and point of defeat. Quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat are auxiliary factors to proof and refutation by means of valid cognition, because their purpose is the protection of one's own thesis; they do not function as independent means of proof. In that proof of an object which is effected by means of valid cognition, quibbles, futile rejoinders, and points of defeat are auxiliary factors because their purpose is protection; for when employed, they protect one's own thesis by demolishing the opponent's thesis.

And so it has been said: 'Disputation and cavil are for the purpose of preserving the determination of reality, like a fence of thorny branches for the purpose of preserving the sprout of a seed.' And as for that refutation of the counter-thesis by means of valid cognition, these [quibbles, etc.], when employed, become cooperative factors because they demolish the [opponent's] refutation. Thus, the inclusion of quibble and the rest in disputation is as auxiliary factors, not as independent means of proof. In refutation, however, there is even independence. || 2