Changes

Types of Discourse (Samskrit: सम्भाषाप्रकाराः) refers to the different styles of discussion and debate. Sambhasha (participating in debates) is considered one of the three methods to obtain knowledge; the other two being, adhyayana (study) and adhyapana (teaching), says the [[Charaka Samhita (चरक संहिता)|Charaka Samhita]].<ref name=":9">Rajpreet Singh, Veenu Malhotra, Rimpaljeet Kaur and Shashikant Bharadwaj (2016) , [http://www.ijrap.net/admin/php/uploads/1534_pdf.pdf Comparative study of Sambhasha in Charaka Samhita with Sympoisums held in Modern Era], International Journal of Research in Ayurveda and Pharmacy. </ref><blockquote>अध्ययनमध्यापनं तद्विद्यसम्भाषा चेत्युपायाः ॥४॥<ref name=":14">Edited by Debendra Nath Sen and Upendra Nath Sen, Charaka Samhita, Vimana Sthana, Chapter 8, [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.322332/page/n399 Pg.no.326]</ref> ''adhyayanamadhyāpanaṁ tadvidyasambhāṣetyupāyāḥ ॥4॥''</blockquote>Meaning: To this end, we shall indicate the means viz. study, teaching and discussion with those versed in the same subject.<ref>Edited and Published by Ayurvedic Society (Jamnagar, 1949), Charaka Samhita (Volume 5), [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.326551/page/n375 Pg.no.324]</ref>

Types of Discourse (Samskrit: सम्भाषाप्रकाराः) refers to the different styles of discussion and debate. This article discusses these types of discourses in detail.

 

This article discusses the science of 'Tadvidya Sambhasha' (debate between experts of same field).

 

== परिचयः ॥ Introduction ==

== परिचयः ॥ Introduction ==

There was a long and a time-honored tradition in ancient India where philosophers and thinkers met to discuss metaphysical issues over which there were multiple views. There are detailed narrations of such discussions, debates and dialogues recorded in [[Chandogya Upanishad (छान्दोग्योपनिषतद्)|Chandogya Upanishad]], [[Brhadaranyaka Upanishad (बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद्)|Brhadaranyaka Upanishad]] and Prashna Upanishad. The other early texts such as Aitareya Brahmana, Kathopanishad and others use terms like : tarka (reasoning), Vada (debate), Yukti (sustained arguments), Prameya (object of knowledge), [[Pramana (प्रमाणम्)|Pramana]] (proof), Nirnaya (ascertainment) etc. which later became the principal terminologies of the Nyaya School. It is also said that the idioms of inquiry (Anveshiki) dealing with the theory of reasons (Hetu vidya or Hetu shastra) were mentioned in Manu samhita and Panini’s Ashtadhyayi.<ref name=":3" />

Shri. Bimal Krishna Matilal ji observes in his work 'The Character of Logic in India' that,<blockquote>''.. The intellectual climate in India was bristling with questions such as: “Is there an [[Atman (आत्मन्)|atma]] different from sharira ?”; “Is the world (loka) eternal?”; ”What is the meaning, goal, or purpose of life?”; and, “Is renunciation preferable to enjoyment?” etc. which were of major concern.'' </blockquote>As teachers and thinkers argued about such matters, there arose a gradual awareness of the characteristics or patterns of correct, acceptable and sound reasoning. There were also concerns to evolve the norms to distinguish sound reasoning from pseudo-reasoning ([[Hetvabhasa (हेत्वाभासः)|hetvabhasa]]) which is unacceptable.<ref name=":0">Bimal Krishna Matilal, Jonardon Ganeri & Heeraman Tiwari (1998), The Character of Logic in India, SUNY Press, p. 31. </ref>  

 

As Bimal Krishna Matilal observes in his work 'The Character of Logic in India':<blockquote>''.. The intellectual climate in India was bristling with questions such as: “Is there an [[Atman (आत्मन्)|atma]] different from sharira ?”; “Is the world (loka) eternal?”; ”What is the meaning, goal, or purpose of life?”; and, “Is renunciation preferable to enjoyment?” etc. which were of major concern.'' </blockquote>As teachers and thinkers argued about such matters, there arose a gradual awareness of the characteristics or patterns of correct, acceptable and sound reasoning. There were also concerns to evolve the norms to distinguish sound reasoning from pseudo-reasoning ([[Hetvabhasa (हेत्वाभासः)|hetvabhasa]]) which is unacceptable.<ref name=":0">Bimal Krishna Matilal, Jonardon Ganeri & Heeraman Tiwari (1998), The Character of Logic in India, SUNY Press, p. 31. </ref>  

Gradually, the notions of ‘good’ and acceptable debate took shape as distinct from wrong and ugly arguments. That gave rise to the development of a branch of study dealing with theories of reasoning and logic (Hetu vidya or Hetu shastra). Subsequently, manuals came to be written for conduct of proper and successful debates (Tarka vidya or Vada vidya). These manuals included instructions and learning methods for the guidance of aspiring debaters. The earliest known text of that genre was [[Tantrayukti (तन्त्रयुक्तिः)|Tantrayukti]] (structured argument) compiled to systemize debates conducted in learned councils (Parishads).

Gradually, the notions of ‘good’ and acceptable debate took shape as distinct from wrong and ugly arguments. That gave rise to the development of a branch of study dealing with theories of reasoning and logic (Hetu vidya or Hetu shastra). Subsequently, manuals came to be written for conduct of proper and successful debates (Tarka vidya or Vada vidya). These manuals included instructions and learning methods for the guidance of aspiring debaters. The earliest known text of that genre was [[Tantrayukti (तन्त्रयुक्तिः)|Tantrayukti]] (structured argument) compiled to systemize debates conducted in learned councils (Parishads).

# How to handle an aggressive and troublesome opponent

# How to handle an aggressive and troublesome opponent

# How to conduct oneself in prestigious Parishads, to influence the flow of debate and to impress the judges and the onlookers etc.<ref name=":3">Sreenivasa Rao, [https://swaminathanv208.blogspot.com/2016/05/discussions-debates-and-arguments.html Discussions, Debates and Arguments: Ancient India.]</ref>

# How to conduct oneself in prestigious Parishads, to influence the flow of debate and to impress the judges and the onlookers etc.<ref name=":3">Sreenivasa Rao, [https://swaminathanv208.blogspot.com/2016/05/discussions-debates-and-arguments.html Discussions, Debates and Arguments: Ancient India.]</ref>

== सम्भाषायाः इतिहासः ॥ History of Sambhasha ==

== सम्भाषायाः इतिहासः ॥ History of Sambhasha ==

The science of inquiry, Atmavidya, was at a later stage called Anvikshiki. However, while comprising the entire function of Atmavidya, Anvikshiki, was in fact different from it. Kautilya recognized Anvikshiki as a distinct branch of study over and above the three, viz, Trayi (the Vedas), Vartta (Commerce) and Dandaniti (Polity).<ref name=":13">Satis Chandra Vidyabhusana (1921), [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.489008/page/n1 A History of Indian Logic], Calcutta University.</ref><blockquote>आन्वीक्षिकी त्रयी वार्त्ता दण्ड-नीतिश्चैति विद्याः ।। ०१.२.०१ ।।<ref>Kautilya, Arthashastra, Adhikarana 1, [https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A5%E0%A4%B6%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D_%E0%A5%A7/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%83_%E0%A5%A8 Adhyaya 2].</ref> ''ānvīkṣikī trayī vārttā daṇḍa-nītiścaiti vidyāḥ ।। 01.2.01 ।।''</blockquote>The distinction between Atmavidya and Anvikshiki lay in this, that while the former embodied assertions about the nature of atman, the latter contained reasons supporting those assertions. Therefore, Anvikshiki dealt in fact with two subjects, viz. atman and hetu (theory of reasons). Later on, Anvikshiki was recognized as a distinct branch of learning that bifurcated into two branches - philosophy and logic.<ref name=":13" /> And this logic, developed in ancient India through the tradition of Vada Vidya, a discipline dealing with the categories of debate over various religious, philosophical, moral and doctrinal issues.<ref name=":0" /> Hence, Sambhasha is also called as Vada (discussion) in many texts.  

The science of inquiry, Atmavidya, was at a later stage called Anvikshiki. However, while comprising the entire function of Atmavidya, Anvikshiki, was in fact different from it. Kautilya recognized Anvikshiki as a distinct branch of study over and above the three, viz, Trayi (the Vedas), Vartta (Commerce) and Dandaniti (Polity).<ref name=":13">Satis Chandra Vidyabhusana (1921), [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.489008/page/n1 A History of Indian Logic], Calcutta University.</ref><blockquote>आन्वीक्षिकी त्रयी वार्त्ता दण्ड-नीतिश्चैति विद्याः ।। ०१.२.०१ ।।<ref>Kautilya, Arthashastra, Adhikarana 1, [https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A5%E0%A4%B6%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D_%E0%A5%A7/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%83_%E0%A5%A8 Adhyaya 2].</ref> ''ānvīkṣikī trayī vārttā daṇḍa-nītiścaiti vidyāḥ ।। 01.2.01 ।।''</blockquote>The distinction between Atmavidya and Anvikshiki lay in this, that while the former embodied assertions about the nature of atman, the latter contained reasons supporting those assertions. Therefore, Anvikshiki dealt in fact with two subjects, viz. atman and hetu (theory of reasons). Later on, Anvikshiki was recognized as a distinct branch of learning that bifurcated into two branches - philosophy and logic.<ref name=":13" /> And this logic, developed in ancient India through the tradition of Vada Vidya, a discipline dealing with the categories of debate over various religious, philosophical, moral and doctrinal issues.<ref name=":0" /> Hence, Sambhasha is also called as Vada (discussion) in many texts.  

This concept of Vada is derived from the [[Nyaya Darshana (न्यायदर्शनम्)|Nyaya darshana]]. It is said that,<blockquote>प्रमाणतर्कसाधनोपालम्भः सिद्धान्ताविरुद्धः पञ्चावयवोपपन्नः पक्षप्रतिपक्षपरिग्रहः वादः ।।१।।<ref>Nyaya Sutras, Adhyaya 1, [https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%82%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BF/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%83_%E0%A5%A7/%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%AD%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%83 Part 2].</ref></blockquote><blockquote>''pramāṇatarkasādhanōpālambhaḥ siddhāntāviruddhaḥ pañcāvayavōpapannaḥ pakṣapratipakṣaparigrahaḥ vādaḥ ।।1।।''</blockquote>Amongst the 44 Vada marga padas (logical terms used in debate), the first one is Vada. It refers to a debate following the laws of shastra (text) ie. it should have 5 avayavas, paksha (in favour) and Pratipaksha (in opposing side) both laid down on the basis of Pramana (parametres of evidence) and tarka (logical reasoning).<ref name=":9" />

This concept of Vada is derived from the [[Nyaya Darshana (न्यायदर्शनम्)|Nyaya darshana]]. It is said that,<blockquote>प्रमाणतर्कसाधनोपालम्भः सिद्धान्ताविरुद्धः पञ्चावयवोपपन्नः पक्षप्रतिपक्षपरिग्रहः वादः ।।१।।<ref>Nyaya Sutras, Adhyaya 1, [https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%82%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BF/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%83_%E0%A5%A7/%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%AD%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%83 Part 2].</ref></blockquote><blockquote>''pramāṇatarkasādhanōpālambhaḥ siddhāntāviruddhaḥ pañcāvayavōpapannaḥ pakṣapratipakṣaparigrahaḥ vādaḥ ।।1।।''</blockquote>Amongst the 44 Vada marga padas (logical terms used in debate), the first one is Vada. It refers to a debate following the laws of shastra (text) ie. it should have 5 avayavas, paksha (in favour) and Pratipaksha (in opposing side) both laid down on the basis of Pramana (parametres of evidence) and tarka (logical reasoning).<ref name=":9">Rajpreet Singh, Veenu Malhotra, Rimpaljeet Kaur and Shashikant Bharadwaj (2016) , [http://www.ijrap.net/admin/php/uploads/1534_pdf.pdf Comparative study of Sambhasha in Charaka Samhita with Sympoisums held in Modern Era], International Journal of Research in Ayurveda and Pharmacy. </ref>

== सम्भाषाप्रकाराः ॥ Types of Sambhasha ==

== सम्भाषाप्रकाराः ॥ Types of Sambhasha ==