CHAPTER III.

The Doctrines of Anvik3iki.

A COUNCIL OF DEBATE (Pari~ad) 16. (CIRCA 900-500 B.C.).

The theory of reasons (hetu) , which lormed ~ln imf Pleoar;~~.t .

- . 'k- t of debates In counCl s 0 subject of AIlVik~~ Id grew l ou d Brhadaranyaka i upani~ads there men. In the Chan ogya an '. .. f ta hysical sub­are references to councils for the dISCuSsIon 0 me PB" . . The

]·ects e g the nature of the soul and the Supreme ·lel~g. which , .. d 3 t the proceedinO's of a councI, In

Pras~opanil?a r~por s . t . ak~ma, Sauryayal}.i Gargya, Sukesa BharadvaJa, Sa~vya Sa

VY'd bhi and Kabandhi Katya-

I.] As lavana Bhargava al ar Kau~a ya . va 01' 1 d d k him a series of qU~8-vana approach the sage Pippa a a an as d d " "how is it ., . h" how has this world been pro uce , " tionts . SUdC "as

nd "how does the life-breath come into our body

ad·

sus alne a d·t . bha parisad or pars . Such a council was called 8amSa ,.8am~. ~'. sa .' t't t' J of Mailu '

In the SOCI0- religIouS" lnsl u es , A Council of l~arned Parisara,5 Yajfiav~lkya IJ • and others, w~

men. find that the councIl consIsted ~enerally . ~ h re learned In the Ved 10·

four, ten or twenty-one BrahmaQ.~, w 0 ~~ . which and secular literatures and could gIve deClslonR In matters on

Max Miiller's History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, pp. 128~132.

s Pr~nopani~d, Praana 1-6.

~fq~ ~~~ ~.?ft) ~tAUJlI: ,

~1l • .f~1I{: ~ 11'ft:1rl[ .T~lc:ro II (Manu-samhita, 12-110, 111).

TECHNICAL TERMS OF DEBATE. 23 \

people might a.sk their advice. The debates or dialogues, such as those described in the Prasnopani~ad, the Chandogyopani~ad and the BrhadaraQyaka, were in all probability the precursors of the theory of reasons (hetu-vada) treated in the Anvikf?iki. The words, ,vhich had to be used in special senses to carryon debates in the councils) cop.stituted the technical terms of the Anvik~iki.

l7. THE TECHNICAL TERMS USEO IN THE COUNCILS OF

DEBATE

(900-500 B.C.).

Some of the technical terms used in the councils of debate Some of the terms used had grown up along with the Upani~ads.

in the Brihmanas and For instance in the Taittiriya, AraQyaka l Upani!?a.ds.· we meet with four terms, viz. (1) Smrti (scripture), (2) pratyalc~a (perception), (3) aitihya (t.radition), and (4:) anumana (inference). These terms recur in the Ramaya~a z with a little alteration as (1) ait·ihya (tradition) I (2.1 anUlnana tin­ference), and (3) sastra, scripture. Three 6f these terms, are used in the Manu-samhita,3 as (l) pratyak~a , anUlnana and sastra .

Similarly in the Aitareya Bra.hma!)a, Kathopani~ad, etc., there occur such terms as tarlca 40 (reasoning), vada:' (debate), yukti (J

(continuous argument), jalpa 1 (wrangling), vita1JAJa 3 (cavil), chala'li (quibble). nir1).aYr;£ 10 (ascertainment), prayojana H (purpose), prama1J,a n (proof), prameya 13 (the object of knowledge), etc.

I ~fl: 1;JiU"Cf ;fil~ I ~'1iTiI.rJl1J~ I ~~~rf(i1l".~ I ~~(\l1f finlNlt II - (Taittiriya aral'.lyaka, 1-2).

~~~f1riRI ~.1ifq ~T11iT. ,

'" f~ ~~~ '1'~~ai; ~~T~!~lfT II (Ramayal,la, 5-87-23).

Sfcqi5_I~1I~ 1IT"" fqf~~fi1{ I

",?j 'If4"~" 1ITvl-' lf1llUf,,, .. '-.wr n (Manu-samhits, 12-105).

, Tarlca occur3 in Ka~hopani~ad, 2-9; lVIanusaluhitii, 12-106; Mahfibh&rata, 2-453; and Bhagavata puriil)a, 8-21-2.

6 Vada occur~ in Manu-samhita, 6-50; RamiyaQa, 1-13-23 and 7-53-15; :lnd Yfijtiavalkya-samhita, 3-292.

8 Yukti occur3 in Aitarays. Brahmat:la, 6-23; Ramsyal}a, 2-1-13; Bhigavata pura~a, 3-31-15; and Klimandakiya-nitisiira, 1-49.

7 Jalpa occurs in Mahiibhiirata, 13-4322. 8 Vita\~4a occur3 in Mahabhars.ta. 2-1310 and 7-3022; and Piil)ini, 4-4-10?

. w Oh'ala occurs in Manu.sarilhita.. 8-49; and RamiiyaI}.a, 4-57-10. 10 NiNJ.aya occurs in Mahiibharata, 13-7533, 7535. .

.11.PrayojanainManu-sarilhita, 7-100; Mahiibharata, 1-5805; and YiiJiiavalkya­sa.mhlta, 3-133.

12 Pramana occurs in Manu-samhitii, 2-13: Riimiiyal}a, 2-37-21 ; and Mahii­bharata,13-5572' Kautilva 3-1.

13 Prameya oc~ur8 in RiimAyal).a, 1-52-13; Mahabharata, 1-157 and 8-1449.

24 I~DIAN LOGIC, ANCIENT SCHOOL, ANVIKf?IKl, OHAP. III.

18. Tantra-yukti-THE TERMS OF SCIENTIFIO CARGUMENT

(QUOTED BY KAU1'ILYA ABOUT 327 B .. ).

In the last chapter of the Artha-sastra (a work on polity), Kautilya gives a list of thirty-two technical t~~ms ~all.e.d, T~n~r~­yukti or "' the forms of scientific argu~ent (~vatT1/msadr:k~r~~ ,l1tantrayuktayah). This list appears also 1n the Caraka-sam~l.ta and the SusTuta-samhita ,9. two authoritative works on medIcIne. It was evidently prepared neither by E.autilya nor by the authors ~f the two sarilhitas, but by a person ur persons who wanted to . i establish debates on a scientific basis. . '

The to:rms included in the list are found to ha ve been er,nployed more widely in works on NyaYa: ~hllosophy

Tant.ra-yukt.i for the P l ' t M d ne Defi than in those on 0 I Y or e leI .-systematization of de- b bates. nitions of some of those terms have ee~ , actually quoted by Vat.syayana 3 and ot~er comn:en.t'ltor~ o~ th~ :'. Nyaya-sutra. The Tantra-yukti w~ich ~Iterally sIgnIfies sClentl fic argument" was compiled posslbly In the 6th. century B.C. to systematize debates in Pari~ads or learned councIls. In the Sus:. ruta-sarhhita 4 it is distinctly stated th:tt by means of Tantra-yukb

1 Vide Caraka saluhita, Siddlllsthlina, cha.p~er: ~Il. The Ta~~raJu~~b:l~~' .' " with other matters was a.dded to tIln Caraka-samhlta. bS the reda~t' fl_. ts of :w : Pancanada (the Punjah). In !,he Ca~aka-s?,mhitR th~ Tantra-yu 1 conSlS technical terms as enumerated In the tollowmg verses.-

~f!iilt'i fqf~lflf~~f~w ff~~f"~: • W~Tf1l,"1ri '-l!~ ~iJTSiJ: q~~ .. I ~1fr~1{fir~1{ ql~: 1j(~l~il1( 1

'S'1I~1{T~m-.T~~f'flf_~r: " ~~T-.1Wftlifil~: ~Tqqm firq~'q: I

l.~fq~Ti(~1iil~ltillTi(~~: .1

~'1;nilTf~tltilfr ~tiWT ~~1J~~T: , fir~wii filcf:qif 13fllll)~) fcrCfilNill[ "

~~.T~~~rtn~: ~,"~'iJ;:r.r~~: I

1I~ ~l~~in~T~t ltq;ftpnfil ~tt.1{: "

1 Vide Susruta-sa.rhhita, Uttaratantra.' ~~~pt~r L~~·reI~~~o~t~~~-;~:~:. is ,

to have be~n addebdd~od t.he t~u~r.u::~~:~~a~~ita Yconsists of 32 technical terms :-- ' Tantra-yu.kh as em 0 Ie In e_ Io.:.}..... '

~Tf-.f1{C( ~~,. ~l{T.o;r.rijt~~~~1U" , '

if~T '3~~fqfi(f~"T: 1{~~ 111T~~~in: "

q~"ii~~fttfqi1~il"fflfif N ff.~f1l: _ _ - (Nyaya-bha:}ya of Vatsyayana, 1-1-4).

~~~TfC{~liilli(t ifT.TifT ~rn~~il1{ I

~1fT" f~f~~fq :q f;fi~a "~~f1fiff~ l\ ~ T

(Susruta-sarbhitii, Vttaratantra. chapter LX\' ).

MEDHATITHI GAUTAMA'S DOCTRIN.ES. 25

a debater can establish hiR own POitlts and set 3iside those of his opponents who indulge in unfairness. In 'the department of Hetu­sastra (Logic) there is indeed no work older than the Tantra-yukti which is a little manual on the systematization of arguments. or debates.

The technieal terms constituting the. Tantra-yukti are the following :-

(1) Adhikara1J.a (a subject), (2) vidhana (arrangement), (3) yoga (union of words), (4) padartha (category), (5) hetvartha (implication), (6) udde.ia (enunciation), (7) nirde~a (declarat.ion), (8) upadesa (in-. struction), (9) apade.~a (specification). (10) at'ide~a (extended appli­cation), (ll) prade.~a (determination from a statement to be made). (l:2) upa'mana (analogy), (13) nrthapatti (presumption), (14) sam-

.iaya (doubt), (15) prasaiu]a (a connected argument), (16) viparyaya (reversion), (17) vakya-.';e~a (context), (18) anurnata (assent), (19)

vyakhyana (description), (20) nirvctcana The thirty-two terms (etymological explanation), (:21) nidar.fana

of Tantra· yukti. -(example), (22) apavarga (exception), (~3)

sva-samfiia (a special term), (24) pftrva-pak~a (question), 25) 'utt.~­ra-pak~a (reply), (26) ekunta (certa n), (27) anagatiivek~alJa (antici­pation), (28) atikf(-'ntiivek~a~~a (retrospection), (29) niyoga (in­junction), (30) vikalpa (alternative), (a L) samuccaya (aggregation), and (32) flhya (ellipsis).

In the Caraka-t'alnhita t.he Tantra-yukti, which consists of thirty-four tern1s~ includes the following :--

(1) Prayoiana (purpose), (2) nhofJaya (ascertainment) I (3) ane­The list of Kautilya kanta (uncertain), (4) pratyuccii,ra (repeti­

differs from that of the tion), (5) uddhara (citation), and (6) sa·m-Caraka-saluhitii. bhava (probability).

19. ~VIEDHATITHI GAUTA:\l~\ 'S DocrRINES AS REPRODUCED IN

THE CARAKA-SA~IHITA ,ABOUT 78 .A. D.).

The Caraka-salllhita 1 gives a sumnlary of the principal doc- _ \Vho was Caraka ? trinr:s of Anvlkf?iki possibly as propounded

by ~ledha,tithi Gautama. Caraka i~ a general name for the ancient .sakhas (branches) of the Yajul veda as well as for the teacher of those sakhas. The word "Carakah " Signifies, according to Pil1).ini,2 the persons who study the Veda. d.e.

c ~ 1 As Atreya communicated his Ayurveda-samhita at first to Agnivt.sa the . __ ~r~k~-sarhhita is also called the AgBive~a-tantra. Agnivesa is called in Tib~tan

l:l~~ ~~"l l\:1:e-LJshin-ujug (vide Mahfivyutpatti, part I, p. 23, Bibliotheca Indica aeries).

2 .iJ~~ctiT~Cfi~ (Piil)ini's _l~~adhyayi, 4-3-1(7).

350 ~6a4x Muller's History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, 2nd edition, pp. 225, , ,369.

26 INDIA.N LOGIC, ANCIENT SCHOOL, ANVrK~lKI CHAP. III.

the sakhas of the Yajurveda) enounce.d by the teacher Caraka. Some say that the exact meaning of "Cara~a,':, as applied, to. ~h~ Caraka-samhita, is unknown. The expresslon Caraka-samhlta may, according to them, l!.lean . the A:yu:v_eda-sarhhita of the school of Carakal:t or the Ayurveda-samhlta as redacted by a member of the Caraka 1 sect or by a physician '·named Caraka. According to the Nyayama~jari:2 .Caraka was. a. physician, and the Chinese Tripitaka 8 descnbes hIm as a physIcIan at the_ court of Kaniska the Kusana king of Gandhara. Punarvasu A treya. (about 5;)0' B .C.) was the original author of the Caraka-salhhita called Avurveda-samhita, and the physician Caraka was perhaps the reda~tor of the Sarhhita at the beginning of the Christian era.'

The doctrines of Anviksiki did not evidently constitute a part _. . , of the original Ayurveda of Punarvasu

MedhAtIthl Gantama s - . . 1 b '. doctrinesrefiected through A treya. The::;e doctrInes seem t? l.a~e een the Caraka-samhita. incorporated into the Caraka-salnhlta by.the redactor Caraka in whose time they were widely known and stud.le?_ The doctrines 'w'ith the exception of those relating to Karyabh~n~r­vrtti ) seem to \ have been the productions Df Med~tit.hi Gautam,a who flourished in the 6th cent,ury B.C. lVledhatlthl Gautama 8

doctrines ,vere embodied in the Caraka-sa!nhita [, of Caraka as well as in the Nyaya-sutra of Ak~apada. But while Caraka accepted t.hem in their crude forms, Ak~apada pruned them thoroughly be-fore they were assimilated in the Nyaya-sutra. . ._

Th~ doctrines as we find them in the Caraka-sa~hlta are treated under three heads, viz. :- .

(1) Karyabhinirvrtti; the aggregate of resources for the accomplish­ment of an action.

(2) Pariksa the standard of examination, and (3) 8ambha~a-vidhi, or vada-1)idh'l~, the method of debate.

1 For an account of the wandering sect n~med C.~~aka see the Anguttara nikiya, part iii, p. 276; RatnolkA dharaI}.i; Mahllvast.u m. 4~2, 7-10, etc. d~~ . by Prof. Rhys Davids in his "Indian sects or schoo!s 10 the t.~e o~ the B; R :''s iIi the J.R.A.S. for 1898. See also Prof. C. Bendall s observatIOns 10 the . . .•

for 190 1. -..c::: --t:l ~r~ ~ifT~"" ~filt(fi1.~ftr: CflT.'-',",~~-a,~ I

~~~~q ~~t~~: .",T~: if U it ~fii(: a (Nyiya.maiijari, chapter IV, p. 249, edited by Gangadhar aastri, Vizianagram .

Sanskrit series). , .. .. S Jolly Medicin (Buhler s Grundrlss, lll, 10). p. 11. . L' . In the 'Journal Asiatique (1896). T. VIII, pp. 447-451, Mr. S:lva,~ hev~lDa~,:_

tains on the authority of Chinese books that Caraka the. aut or 0 t e ar:een samhiti lived in the court of Kanh:~k~. The date of KB:nl~ka h~ ;.ot yetof the' . finally fixed, but I provisionally take It to be 78 A.~. ,V~de .my Ist~ry ura ' Medieval School of Indian Logic," pp. 62-6~. Kam~ka 8 c~p.tal W~8 at u~pap (Peshwar) in Gandhara, but he held his Buddhi~t convocatIOn at. Jf\lan~ha(;.~\ ofia

~ Professor L. Suali fixes the date of Caraka at about 100 A.. 108

Indiana, p. 28). __ & Caraka-samhitl, Vimana-sthana, adhyaya 8.

MEDHATITHI GAUTAMA'S DOCTRINES. 27

As regards Karyabhinirvrtti, it does not appear to have been a part of the Anvjk~iki of Medhatithi Gautama. Perhaps it was a part of the Vaise~ika philosophy in an early stage. Parik~a is re­dundant as the four terms coming under this head, viz.: aptopade;a,

Which of the doctrines pratyak~at .anuptana and yukt£ reappear with of the Caraka-samhita a little modification in the names of .~abda, emanated from Meuha- pratyak~{l, anum.ana and aupftmya under the tithi Gautarna? sub-:Q.ead vadamarga of sambha~a-vidhi. It is uncertain as to whet:b.er the first four or the last four were in­cluded in the Anviksiki of Medhittithi Gautama. Sambhasa-vidhi" or Vada-1)idhi was u~doubtedly the principal topic of An~ik~iki­vidya. Some of the t~rms coming undpr the sllb-head vida-marga did not however form a part of the original sambh(j~a vl:dhi. For instance the terms dravya, gurpa. karma, samanya, vii~a and sama­vaya were borrowed from the Vaise~ika philosophy in its first stage and incorporated into the v1da-marga by Caraka himself. There are other terms such as pratijJii, sthlipan-a, prati~th.ipana. hetu, upanaya, nigamana, uttr"JJra, dr~(ijnta and sz:ddha'1,ta which in their technical senses were perhaps unknown to ~Iedhatithi Gautama and were introduced into the v:tda ·mirga by Caraka while he com­piled and redacted the Ayurveda·sarhhita in the first century A.D.

The terms corning under the three heads are explained in the Caraka-sarilhita as follows :-

I. Karyabhinirvrtti-the a.ggregate of resourc~s for the accom­plishment of an act.ion.

A person who is determined to accomplish an action success­fully should examiQ.e the following resources :-

(1) Kara,!a or hetu-the actor or agent who accolnplishes an action. (2) Karfl,'!a-the instrument which co-operate~ with the actor to

accomplish the action. (3) Karya-yoni-the material cause which while undergoing modi­

fication is developed into the action. (4) Kiirya-the action for the accomplishment of which the actor

moves . . (5) Kiirya-phala-the effect for the attainment of which the action

is undertaken. (6) Anuba.ndha-the adjunct, that is, that pleasurable or painful

condition which resulting from the action a,ttaches unavoid­abl v to the actor

(7) De8a.~the place of t'hc action. (8) Kala-the time of the action. (9) Pra·vrU£-the activity or exertion put forth for achieving the

action. (10) Upaya-a favourable circumstance or that condition of the

actor; instrument and the material cause in \vhich they can well render facilities and aid~ to the action being accom­plished.

28 INDIAN LOGIC, ANCIENT SCHOOL, ANVIK~IKI, CHAP III.

II. Parik~a-THE STANDARD OF EXAMINATION.

Things, existent or non-existent, are tested by four stit~d,ard8, viz. (1) aptopadesa, reliable ~ssertion (2) pratyak~a, pe~ceptlon, (3) anumana inference, and (4) yukti, contjnuous reasonIng. The~e are colle~tively called pari k~a I (exainination), hetu'J. (reason), or prama/~ia 8 (means of valid knowledge).

Reliable assertion is the assertion of a person who is trustworthy, noble, w-ise and freed from ev~il ~~ropensities: \vhose .percep .. tion runs unimpeded~ and the trut.h of whose words IS never " called in question. .

Perception is the knowledge which is produce? th~ough a unlOn of the soul with the mind, senses and theIr obJects . .

Inference is preceded by perception and refers to three tInleS, e.g. a fire is inferred from smoke, fruits are inferred from a s~ed,

Gontin:~~~~ rea80ning refers to the knowledge which beholds con- " ditions resulting from the c?-operation ~f n:an~ cau~;e~ and , ' abiding in three tilnes. For Instancc, Qne s bIrth In the w?mb is clue to a. combination of the ~oul and the five prImal essences of earth, water. fire, air aIfd space; the s?ul alone is reJated to the I'lext life; acts l'eslllt fron1 the unlO,n of .:n aaent and certain means; act,s that are done beal {rubs, a~ts not done bear no fruits: there can be no sprout whel'e there is no seed; good or bad fruit.s correspond to the good or bad acts that produce ,them ; and one kllld of 8~ed cannot prodllee another kind of fruit.

-Jl1. Sambhasa OR vada-vidhi "-THE METHOD OF . DEBATE.

lJtility 0/ Debate (satnbhii.~a-pra .~a'1h8ii).

If a person carries on debate with a~other person both bein.g versed in the same science, it increases theIr knowledge and h~PPI­ness. Besides, it produces dexterity, bestows eloq~enc~ and bfl~ht­ens reputation. If thero was any misapprehensIon In a subject

1 Caraka·saffihitii, SGtra-sthana, lithadhyaya :-

f~f~ifq ._ ~~. ~~~~ I "~~QfcOrr q~~T I .a)l;r~: ~ll~fiJlt " ~fw~ftr I

.t '2 Caraka-sarnhita, Vimana'sthiina, · adhyaya 8 :_

"aiftfi)q~filf.T{lIi «n! ~~~f1~i1Ti1fiftr;nitl~~ I "af~~~q~it Wf! if~ I

,) Caraka sarnhibi, Slit..a-:;thana, lith adhyaya:-

l!ii ~ill~: .Gf.i.qf~~: SiJ~ ~ ~~T{1ifq..(TlIi ~ CarS).ka-~alnhita, VirnAna-3thana, adhyiiya S.

SAMBHASA-VIDIIf-THE METHOD OF DEBATE. 29

already studied it remove~ that mis&,pprehension, and if there was no mi~arprehension in the subject it produces zeal for its further study. It also makes debaters familiar with certain matters which were" unknown to them. Moreover some precious mystic doctrines, which a preceptor imparted to his favourite pupil, come out in essence frOIll the pupil who, owing to a tern porary excitement and arnbition for victory, is impelled to expound them in the course of the debate. lIenee wise m~n applaud debate with fellow scholars

Twokinds ot Debate (dviv1~dha 8ambha~ii).

A debate with a fel1ow-scho1ar may be carried on either ( l) peacefuJly (8andhaya) or (2) in a spirit of opposition (viYrhya). The first is called

A congenial debate.

a congenial debato (anuloma sambhall~a), and the second a hostile debate (vigrhya sambha~ii). Th(~ congenial debate takes place when t.he respondent (or opponent) is possessed of erudition, wisdom, eloquence and readiness of reply, is not wrathful or malicious, is well versed in the art of persuasion, and is pati('ntand sweet­speeched. In debating with such a person one should speak con­fidently, interrogate confidently and give answer in confidence. One should not be alarmed at suffering defeat from him nor should one rejoice in inflicting defeat on hi m It is improper to show obstinacy towards him, or to introduce before him matters which are irrelevant. While using persuasion with gentleness, one should keep in view the subject of debate. This kind of debate IS called a peaceful or congenial debate.

Before ent.ering upon a hostile debate with a person one should A hostile debate. examine one's strength through a casual

conversation with him and observation in any other way of his merits. Such an examination should settle the opportuneness or otherwise of entering upon the debate. The merits considered as good are erudition, wisdom, memory, ingen­uity and eloquence. The demerits considered as bad are irrita­bility, shallowness, shyness and inattentiveness.

Three classe8 01 respo ,ldents (trividha~~ para~) _

In consideration of the merits and demerits m0ntioned above - ~he 1\3Spondent (or opponent) ~nay be of three kinds, viz. superior,

Inferior, and equal

A Council 01 Debate (pari~ad).

The assembly (par£~ad) in which a debate is to take place :rnay be of two kinds, viz. (1) learned, i.e. an assemblvofwisemen, and (~) .ignorant, i.e. an assenibly of fools. Each of ~these may be sub­dIVIded as (a) friendly, (b) indifferBnt or impartial, and (c) hostile Or committed to one side.

30 INDIAN LOGIC, ANCIENT SOHOOL, XNVIK~IKI, OHAP~ IIl.

The Expedients 01 De1Jat~ (vadopaya).

It is not advisable to enter upon debate in a hostile assemhly, no matter whether the assembly is learned

How to vanquish a per- or ignorant. In an ignorant as'3emblv , son of b lazing fame. oJ..

friendly or indifferent, one may enter upon debate with a· person who is of blazing fame, but who neither pos ... sesses erudition, wisdom and eloquence, nor is held in esteem by respectabl~ people. In debating with such an opponent one may employ crooked and long-strung word-bolts, Now assuming a delightful countenance and now indulging in ridicule one should engage the assembly in such a way that the opponent does not find an opportunity of speaking~ If the opponent utters an unusual word he should be immediatelv told that such a word is never used or that his original proposition has fallen to the ground. In the case of his attempting to offer challenge he should be stopped. with the observation: "Go and study for a full year, sitting at the feet of your preceptor: this much that you have done to-day is enough." If in the meantime the shout of "vanquished, va.n quished" has even once been uttered, no further debate need be held with the opponent.

Some say that this procedure may be adopted in debate even with a superior opponent, but ~xpert8 do Respect for a.n old man. not approve of its adoption \vhen the

opponent happen8 to be an old man. In a friendly assembly one may enter upon debate with an

opponent who is inferior or equal. In a.n How to argue with an indifferent (or impartial) assembly consist-

opponent of superior. in- h ferior or equal merits. ing of members that are endued wit at-

tentiveness, erudition, wisdom, memory and eloquence, one sho~lld speak with great care marking the merits and demerits of one's opponent. If the oppo~ent appears to be superior.,. one should, without expressing one's inferiority, never engage in debate with him. If on the other hand the opponent happens . to be inferior, one should at once defeat him . An opponent, who is weak in the scriptures, should be defeated tht'ough citations of long passages from them. An opponent devoid of erudition should be' defeated . through the employment of unusual words and phrases.' An opponent whose memory is not sharp should be defeated with crooked and long-strung word -bolts. An opponent devoid of in­genuity . should be defeated through the use of same words bearing . different meanings and different words bearing the same meaning. An opponent. ,vho is devoid of eloquence, should be defeated through the jeering imitations of his half-uttered speeches: An opponent whose knowledge is shallow should be defeated by being put to shame on that account. An opponent. of irritable temper

SAMBHASA-VIDHI-THE METHOD OF DEBATE. 31

should be defeated by being- thrown into a state of nervous exhaus­tio~. An oppo~ent who is timid should be defeated through the eXCItement of hIS ~ear. An opponent who is inattentive should be def~ated by .belng put under the restraint of a certain rule. Even · In a ho~tde debate one should speak with propriety, an ab~ence of whIch may provoke t.he opponent to say or do an thIng. Y

Influencing the assemblj one should cause it to name that as

H t . fI the subject of debate with which one is per-ow 0 In uence a f If" . .

Council, ect Y amllIar .and which presents an in-surmountable difficulty to one's opponent.

When ~he assembly ~~et~. one should observe silence after saying to one s opJ?onent: It. IS not now permissible for us to make any ~ug.gestlons. Here IS t.he assembly which will fix the subject an? lImIts of debate agreeably to its wishes and sense of _ prIety." 1 pro

- The Limits 0/ Debate (vada-maryada).

. : The limits of debate consist of such directions as' "This / should be said, this should not be said, if this oc~urs' defeat follows, etc." t

The Oour8e 01 Debate (vada-marga).

The following are the categories 8 which should 'be studied for a thorougb knowledge of th~ course of debate:-

(1) Debate (~da)-a disc?ursebetween two parties agreeably to the"scrlptures and 1!l a spirit of opposition on a subject such as whet?er th~re IS rebirth, or there is no rebirth." It is .of two kInds, VIZ. (1) wrangling (jalpa) .which is a. debate for. the 'purpose of defence or attack, -and (2) cavil (vitanda) whIch IS a perverse debate for the purpose of a m~re attack.

(2) Substance (~ravya.)-that in which actions and qualities inhere ' and whICh can constitute a material cause, e.g. ether, air, fi~e, water, earth, sou1, mind, and space.

(3) Quald!! (gu1.la)-that which inheres in a substance and is in­actIve, e.g. colour, taste, odour, touch, sound, heavy and

I This trick the k led f h' h . . cunning debatf>.r' h Idnow gbe

0 W lC • IS use~ul 1Q guarding oneself against a 2 Uda a _ .: s ou never e adopted ln a fair debate.-S. C. Vidyabhusana.. .

thU't an 06- n;carya (10th century A.D_) following the old laws of debate obset,.es beyond th~~~~tn mf ay be. rem I 0bved b.y debate, but on no account should it proceed

o prachca a surdlty.

3 iIl11mITlff?RTI{WT "ci:1{WTfil~:fr.: II (KusumiinjaJi,3-7). . The explanation f b t Z' • '!,herence is giveu· in th 3 8~ 8 a,!,ce: gua _,ty. achon, generality, particularity and tlon of the remainin e ara .a· samhlt,:" Sutra-sthana. adhyiiya I; and the explana­"'ere evidentl g terms In the .Vu~Ana-sth&na. adhyiiya 8, The terms (2-7) Medhatithi o! tat ken from the Val~e!illka philosophy and not from Anviksiki of u ama. .

INDIAN LOGIC, ANCIENT SCHOOL, ANVIK~IKJ, CHAP. III .

. ht cold and hot, intelligence, ple.asure a~d p~in, de~ire ~~d ~version, dissimilarity, contrarIety, unIon, separatlOn,

umber measure . etc. . d ~ , a)-that which is the causcofboth unIon ansepa.-

(4) Actwn. (ka.r~ich inheres in a substance and representR the func-~~:~o~~h7ch is to be performed, and which -is not dependent on any other acton. .

- Z. · (- anya)-that which produces unIty. (5) Gene~a tty .. ,'jam. -that whicn produces diversity. (6) ParhcuZanty (v'ts~a) rmanent relation between a sub-(7) Inherence (8adm~tvaYq~~ali~ie;e or actions in virtu~ of which they

stance an 1 S' -' not exist separately. . b t b

can. . .. .'. --)-th'e statement of what Is to e e8 a -(8) Propos'lthon (1Jralnna . , l~ h d g thA soul IS eternal. 't' IS e e:. ~, _ -)-the establishment of a pro~oSI Ion (9) Demonst1'at1,on (sth'1.p:tnfJ, f reason example, applicatlon and

through the process 0 a , conclnsion, e.g.

(i) The soul is eternal (a proposition). .. it is a non-product (reason).

~~~) EJectause ether which being a n\:>n-product is eternal (ex- , (In) us as

ample\ . 'lar to ether is a non-produc~ (appZ(cation). (iv) TThho sOfu reS1~~ ~oul is eternal (conclusion). (v) ~re 0 ~ l' h t of Counter-demonstration: . (prati~!hapana) -the estab IS men

(10) the counter-prOposItIOn, e,g. ,. ,

(.) The soul is non-eternal (a propostt~on). co )

1 .• .. e:l by the senses (rz'-l'jon (it) Bec'lu~e It IS cognhI~ h b" (f ~ognize:l bv' the senses i~ non-(ii.i) Just as a pot w 1C e1no ~ .

eternal (exa-mple) . t . (fnize:i by the senses (appltca-(iv) The soul similar to a po , 1S coo J ~ •

(v) Tt~~;ltore tl~e ~onl is non-eternal (conclusion). . . I rce of knowleJge such as perceptIon ,

(11) Rea,8on, (het'u; -:-t£he ~ou ( ulnana) scripture (aitihya) , and (pratyak~a), In erence an , comparison (aupamya).

(12) A-pplication (up'1naya)-as ~hhown aabb~::' . (. amana)-as sown· t' (13) Concluswn nl.g - ~'t' in a connter·demoDstra 1011.

(14) Rejoinder (utta.:a)-th~pr~h~~~ I~~out which an ordinary man ~ (15) Example (dr~~anta)-tt tC

. ' thOe same opinion, and which des-d expert en er aln " th " e40:-. an an . " fi "stable as ear } ~ ,

cribes the subj~ct , e',9' .hot a'~lum~~~tor lSO is the text of the : or just as the sun IS an 1

Samkhya.

. . n the old BrAhmanic and J aina works si~ni-I The, word reason lhetu), whIch 1 tl " d ntI'cnl with the reason (hetu) whIch

1 d 's not exac vIe.. . I that fled a source of knowe ge, lber of a svllogism or demonstratIC?n. t .seems 0 io constitutes the second .mem , emonst;'ation wa.3 introduced mto ~md,?- L g is the doc, trine of syllogtsm. or d d tho n'ord hetu. used. jn connectIon With tb

. \ late tune an.. • . ' . at a compa.ratlv~ y t,' to retain its old sigmficatlOn. . doctrine was altowC(l for some Ime

SAMBHA~A-VIDHI-THE METHOD OF DEBA1'E. 33

(16) Tenet or conclusion {siddhanta)-a truth which is established on examination by experts and on proof by reasons. It is of four kinds: viz. a truth accepted by all the schools, that accepted by a particular school, tha.t accepted hypotheti­calJy, and that accepted by implication.

( 17) Word (8abda)--a combination of letters. It is of four kinds, viz. that which refers to a matt~r which is seen, that which refers to a matter which is not seen, that which corresponds to what is real, and that which does not correspond to what is_real.

(18) Perception{pratya~a)-that knowledge which a person acquires by himself through his mind conjoined with the five senses. Pleasure, pain, dAsire, aversion, and the like are objects of the mind . while sound, etc., are objects of the five senses.

(19) Inference (anumana)-a reasoning based on the Knowledge~- of connected facts, e.g. fire is inferred from the power of diges­tion.

(20) Oomparison {aupamya)-the knowledge of a thing acquired through its Rimilarit.-y to another ~hing .

(21) Tradition (aitihya)-consisting.of reliable assertions, e.g. the Veda , etc.

(22) Doubt (sam8aya)-ullcertainty, e.g. is there, or is there not, un­timel v death 1

(23) Purpose (prayojana)-that for the accompHshment of which actions are undertaken, e.g. I shall live carefully" to avoid untimelv death."

(24) Uncertain~(savyabhicara)-going astray, e.g. this medicine may be or may not be suited to this disease.

- (-25) Inquiry (jijnasa)-examination. (26) Ascertainment (vyavasaya)-determination, e.g. that disease is

due to the disturbance of wjnd in the stomach. and this is its medicine. ' -

(27) Pre8umption (artha-priipti)-the knowledge of a , thing implied by the decla.ration of- another thing, e.g. when it is said that a person should not eat during -the day, it is implied that he' should eat during ~he night .

(28) 'The originating cause {sambhava)-that from which something springs out, e.g. the six ingredients (dhiitus), constitllte the originating cause of the foetus in the womb.

(29) Censurable (anuyojya)-a speech which is fraught with fa.ult, e·R· a person makes a general statement while a particular one is required: instead of saying 'this disease is curable by medicine,' one should. say' this disease is curable by an emetic medicine or a purgative medicine.'

(30) N on~censurable (ananuyojya)-the reverse of the censurable. (31) Interrogation (anuyoga)-an inquiry about a subject made by

a person who studies it, ego when a person asserts that the soul is eternal, his fellow.,.scholar inquires "what is the re~son 1" This inquiry is an interrogation.

(32) R~-'tnt~rrogat1:on (pratyanuyoga )-an inquiry about another mquIry, e.g. when one says that the soul is eternal because

3

34 INDIAN LOGIC, ANCIENT SCHOOL, ANVIK~IKI, OHAP. III.

it is non-produced, the re-interrogation will be ":why it is non-produced 1"

(33) Defect of apeech (~kya-~a)-consisting of inadequacy, re­dundancy, meanInglessness, incoherence, co:r;ttradiction, etc.

(a) "Inadequacy" or saying too little which occurs when there is an omission of the reason, exa.mple~ applica­tion or conclusion.

(b) "Redundancy" or saying too much which consists of (i) "irrelevancy," e.g. a person talks of the polity of Vrhaspati or Bukra whil~ the subject of discourse is medicine, or (ti) "repetition," e.g. when a person re­peats a word or its meaning several times, as bha~aiya, aadhaM, a~adha, etc., all of which signify medicine.

(c) "Meaninglessness" -consisting of a mere grouping of letters without any sense, e.g. k, kh, g, gh, il, etc.

Cd) "Incoherence "-a combination of words which do not con­vey a connected ' meaning, e.g. whey, wheel, race, thunder, morning" etc.

(e) "Contradiction" -cons~sting of opposition to the example, ' tenet or occasion, e.g. on the occasion of sacrifices, animals should be offered up. Any thing uttered inconsistently with the occasion is contradiction.

(34) Excelle~ce 01 apeech (valcya-praAam8a)-when a speech is freed from inadequacy, etc., is fraught with well-expre'ssive words and is otherwise uncensurable, it is applauded as excellent, perfect or meritorious. ,

(36) Quibble (chala)-a speech consisting of mere words fraught with cunning, plausibiJity and diversion of sense. It is of two kinds, viz. (1) 'quibb1e in respect of a word,' e.g. a person uses the word' navatantra' to signify a man who has studied nine scriptures, though he really intends to signify a man who has studied his scripture recently, 01' (2) 'quibble in , respect of a generality,' e.g. the . medicine which cures phthisis should also cure bronchitis, EtS' both come under the , genus 'disease.'

(36) Non-rea80n or fallacy (aketu)-which is of three kind~, viz. : (a) U Begging the question" (H prakara~a,:-sama") occurring

when that which is to be pro\""ed is taken as the : reason. e.g. the soul is eternal because it is distinot,~ from the body: the body is non-eternal, and the soul being heterogeneous from the body must be eternal. '

(b) "Assumption based ' on doubt" (" sarilllaya-sama ") occur­ring when that \\'hich is a ca.use of doubt is regarded ,:' as dispelling the doubt, e.g. it is doubtful whether a.,' person who has studied a portion of the science' of' medioine is a physician; this person has studied a portion of the science of medicine'. hence he is a, physi­cia.n. This is another form of "begging the question." ',

(c) "Balancing the subject" (" varnva-sama") occurring where the example is not different from ,the subJeot

SAMBHA~A-VIDHI-THE METHOD OF DEBATE. 35

~n respect of their questionable h luteI1ect is hon-eternal b' c. a~acter, e.g. the sound. Here the ete~ 1?:use It IS ll;ttangible, as a questionable as that of th

a 1 y °df the Intellect is as

( 37 U • . e soun .

) 1u'tst'tmed (atita-kala) a fall . should be stated first is st:~}~ w~ch arises when that which

(38) Attribution oj censure (u ala e a e~wards .. the reason adduced P mbha)-lmputatlon of defect to

(39) Avoidance 0/ defect (~arihii) h' h is corrected or amended ra w IC occurs when the defect body, the signs of life a'r:'~~;r!~~]t~e ;oul resides in the leaves the body those si e, ut when the soul the soul is disti~ct from li~:-b arde no longer noticed: hence

(40) Abando t / 0 y. nmen 0 a lJroposition ( t" . ..,- - . . when a disputant, bein att kPra ~Jna-Jujn~)-whlch occurs first advanced bv him g ac ed, abandons the proposition

\ d . , e.g. .: tPherson a. vances first a proposition viz

e soul IS eternaJ . .' . and being att{tcked bv an 0 " . the soul is not eternil. pponent. he abandons It saying,

(41) A~mi88ion (abhyanujiiQ,)-th IS attributed to him bv h ~ e acceptance by a person of what d~sagreeable, e.g. ,,1S opponent, whether agreeable or

A .dlsputant says: "you are a th' f " HJS oppon t I· , Ie . TI en rep Ies: " you too are a thief "

le reply of the op t . . (42) Sh :/t ' h ' ponen IS an admission.

1 'tng t e reason (hetvantara) h' h stead of advancin~ the p -w IC occurs when 011e in­ane. 0 roper reason adduces a different

(43) Shifting the topic (arthiintara), e. A . (44) toms of gonorrhoea while he . g. perso.DCltes the symp· , A point of defeat or an occas;as to have Clte~ those of fever.

which Occurs when a disp t 0: T~ rebuke (n'tqrahasthana)_ his opponent. It consists ~na~ s~. erst defeat. at the hands of or being unable to a h e lSpU .ant mIsapprehending. an assembly the me!t~~s :~, sOf~thlng repeated thrice m: may also occur when one cen ereo - ave apprehended it. It abJe or abstains from censur~ugr~~ thtath~hhiC:h is not censur-

a w lC IS censurable.