Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c7.s2.6

c7.s2.6

Debates between the practitioners of Āyurveda were assiduously cultivated and were regarded as essential for a healthy growth of the discipline itself. Caraka regards the employment of debating techniques to defeat the designs of the pseudo-*vaidyas*. He equates such *vaidyas* to wolves terrorizing poor folks who are like weak animals. The knowledgeable *vaidya* should assert himself as an *āpta* (authority on the subject) so that he appears as a wolf for dispelling the appearances of the ignorant one. A *vaidya* knowing nothing but boasting of his expertise should be confronted with eight questions pertaining to the fundamentals of the discipline. In the course of the debate his adversary who is feigning to be a great *vaidya* then is exposed like a *babhru* or *nakula* (mongoose) covered by his woollen hair. The knowledgeable *vaidya* should carry on a hostile debate to such a fake practitioner. A *vaidya* should face the challenge in the debate and should not tolerate pedantry and misconstrued notions. A debate is necessary for revelation of true knowledge in the field of Āyurveda. A true *vaidya* would carry *sadvāda* (fair debate) and would put an end to *Asadvāda* (unfair debate). Through the real debate, the *āpta* (authentic expert) is recognized. *Ānāptas* (non-authorities) start boasting of their knowledge and become rude out of hypocrisy. They are actually *dūṣakas* (revilers) of the *śāstra*. One should avoid them and approach the real *vaidyas* to arrive at true knowledge of the *śāstra*.⁴⁰