Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c25.24

c25.24

Buddhist literature throws considerable light on the rules for the conduct of such discussions and proceedings of the *Saṁgha*. The earliest work describing the methods of disputation is the *Kathāvatthu* [i, 1–69] of Asoka's time. The *Chullavagga* gives an elaborate account of the working of *Saṁghas* as democratic parliamentary assemblies [ib., pp. 209–216]. We may only refer here to a special treatise on the subject of debate, *Sapta-daśa-bhūmi-śāstra-yogāchārya* of Maitreya of about A.D. 400, which was translated into Chinese in A.D. 646 and was known to the great Asaṅga at Ayodhyā [Watters' *Yuan Chwang*, I, 355–6]. The fifteenth volume of this important work is a treatise or the art of debate in seven chapters. The first chapter defines the *subject* of debate which must be a useful one. It rules out useless subjects. The second chapter defines the *place* of debate which should be an assembly of scholars, the palace of a King, or the office of a Minister, or the Parishad. The third chapter points out the *means* of Debate. The Thesis to be proved (*sādhya*) depends on eight kinds of proof, viz. (1) *Siddhānta*, conclusion, (2) *Hetu*, reason; (3) *Udāharaṇa*, example; (4) *Sādharmya*, affirmative example; (5) *Vaidharmya*, negative example; (6) *Pratyaksha*, perception; (7) *Anumāna* inference; and (8) *Āgama*, scripture. The fourth chapter lays down the qualification of the debaters. They must be acquainted with each other's scriptures; should be able to speak continuously without a break and intelligibly; and should speak in harmony, sometimes soft, and sometimes loud, to please their audience. The fifth chapter mentions the points of defeat (*nigrahasthāna*), viz. (1) opposing a proposition and then speaking in agreement with it; (2) leaving the subject started and introducing another; (3) talking irrelevantly (*atīta-vākya*). The next chapter discusses the fitness of the debate by its subject, place, or audience. The seventh chapter recommends self-confidence in the debater.