[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Science, technology and education](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science) › [Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021) › c2.4 # Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c2.4 Vāda in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c2.4 - **Language:** English ### [c2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2.4) I hope that this book will prove how vital and important \*vāda\* — comprising theories and practices of debate, dialogue and discussion — has been, not only for the growth of our knowledge systems and ideologies, but also for our socio-political fabrics. \*Vāda\* was cultivated in India’s intellectual discourses to project the distinct nature and uniqueness of each concept. This was possible through the frank admittance of both the agreements and the disagreements. \*Saṁvāda\* (correspondence) and \*vivāda\* (difference) are two faces of \*vāda\*. Texts like \*Isibhāsiyāin\* and \*Śāstravārtāsamuccaya\* of Haribhadra Sūri could be composed because of the first, whereas the second inspired a vast mass of philosophical literature. But then, there are inherent correspondences in the differences and the differences loom large when correspondences are being sought out. Gauḍapāda categorically said in \*Māṇḍūkyakārikā\* IV.99 that he has not borrowed from Buddha, but his concept of \*vijñāna\* or consciousness as the Ultimate Reality and the world appearing due to the diverse nature of \*vijñāna\* together with the examples he has given to illustrate his thesis are derived from Buddhism. A little intriguing example of such correspondence is Śaṅkarācārya himself. He vehemently criticized Buddhist philosophies, but beneath a very intense tussle and difference of outlook, there is an inherent acceptance of the Vijñānavādin for which he is also labelled as a Buddhist in disguise (\*pracchannabaudha\*), not by a section of modern scholars alone, but by some of the adherents of classical non-dualist philosophers like Vedāntadeśika, an extraordinary philosopher-poet of thirteenth century CE and a nephew of Rāmānuja. F. Stcherbatsky and Dhirendra Sharma have shown that by begging to differ with his \*guru\* Kumārila on the nature of \*abhāva\* (non-existence), Prabhākara denied the status of a \*pramāṇa\* to \*abhāva\* and thus followed the path of Dharmakīrti, a well-known Buddhist logician; and hence he was decried as “a friend of the Buddhists” (\*bauddhabandhuḥ\*). - [Previous: c2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2.3) - [Next: c2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2.5) - [Up: c2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2) ## Linked texts (2) - [Śāstravārtāsamuccaya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.post.sastravartasamuccaya) — Haribhadra Sūri, Sanskrit - [Āgamaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.advaita.sastra.agamasastra) — Gauḍapāda, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c2.4) · Pramāṇa