VĀDA IN THEORY AND PRACTICE: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses. Radhavallabh Tripathi. D.K. Printworld. Kindle Edition. February 2021 .
‘…we need a sort of continuous dialogue between persons who do not treat knowledge as power, who want to use knowledge as process of understanding, a process of becoming, that can bring together all living beings. It is a process of love and a process of discovering what has been universal across cultures.’
Rafael Argullol in From the Ganges to the Mediterranean.
The Prologue
This monograph is mainly the result of studies conducted by me as a Fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla; during the year 2014-15. My area of study has been Sāhityaśāstra (Literary Theory) and Nāṭyaśāstra (Theory of Drama and Theatre). But as a teacher and researcher, I have always remained conscious of the vitality of Vāda – which is roughly translated for the purpose of this work as a category involving theory and practice of intellectual debates, dialogues and discussions. Traditional knowledge systems in India thrived because of Vāda. These traditional systems have been subjected to a general negligence during recent two centuries or have been largely misrepresented.
There has been an over-emphasis on spirituality and religion in the recent studies on the ancient Indian knowledge systems, and the disciplines having a focus with logic and arguments remained side-tracked.
Ānvīkṣikī (logic and investigation) was a major discipline which was highly valued in BC era. K. Sachchidanand Murty rightly points out that ‘the study of classical philosophy in India has been dominated by darśana-concept, ignoring the Ānvīkṣikī-concept of philosophy.’1 A revisit to the theories and practices of Vāda will hopefully lead to viewing these knowledge systems in their right perspective.
Vāda subsists on Diversity. No vāda is possible if there is only one point of view. Also, Vāda does not happen in singularity, it always pre-requisits the other- and mostly promotes the presence of many others. India’s History of Ideas and debates presents a multi-linear view. The tradition of Vāda envisages pluralism. The learned editors of Isibhāsiyāin, a neglected work, but immensely valuable for understanding the Indian Vāda, tell us that during the days of Mahāvīra there were as many as 363 theories discussed under four well-known sects. Vāda vitalized intellectual life and the seers, monks and intellectuals residing in the āśramas, vihāras and saṅghas cultivated Vāda.
I have used the Sanskrit term vāda in a broad sense here and have given its nearest approximation –‘debate’ in bracket where vāda is used to denote a restricted sense. The seven chapters of this book deal with various aspects of the theory and practice of vāda. Since no comprehensive study in this field has so far been made, (the works by Amartya Sen and A. Raghuramaraju merely touch its fringes, and the work by Esher Solomon mosly takes up the dialectic divergences), and the present study is intended to be a ground work only, it was not possible for me to go deep into so many versatile aspects which the vast area of study on vāda unfolds. The use of the word ‘Indian’ in the subtitle may be termed as misnomer. Owing to my limitations, I have mostly used Sanskrit sources for the treatment of vāda in theory and practice. But the intention was not to keep this work confined only to Sanskrit-traditions of vāda; I have tried to include alternate or parallel traditions. Reference to Naryosang, Albiruni, Darashikoh or the works like Dabistān-e-mazahib, how so ever insufficient and scanty they may be, do indicate a broad frame work for a study like this.
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 for our socio-political fabrics as well. 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. Saṃvāda (correspondence) and vivāda (difference) are two faces of Vāda. Texts like Isibhāsiyāin and Śāstravārtāsamuccaya of Harbhadrasūrin 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 Ṥaṅkarācārya himself. He vehemently criticized Buddhist philosophies, but beneath a very intense tussle and difference of outlook, there is an inherent acceptance of theVijñānavādin for which he is also labeled as a Buddhist in disguise (pracchannabaudha), not only by Buddhist philosophers2 or modern scholars alone, but by some of the adherents of classical non-dualist philosophies like Vedāntadeśika, a extra-ordinary philosopher-poet of 13th century AD and a nephew of Rāmānuja. 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, well-known Buddhist logician; and hence he was decried as ‘a friend of the Buddhists’ (bauddhabandhuḥ).
It is true that we find a lot of maneuvering in the vādas. But this has contributed to maturing a particular system of ideas. The search for truth led the seeker to traverse on diverse paths.
“During the days of the Pallava Renaissance, there was a close interconnection between the learned Brāhmaṇas of Kerala and the Pallava court at Kanchi. It is worth noting that Cheraman Perumal who could have been a contemporary of Śaṅkara or of his disciples, is said to have taken an interest in diverse religious faiths including Christianity and Islam. A story even relates to his conversion to Islam and pilgrimage to Mecca, He is also said to have partitioned Kerala in deference to Ṥaṅkara’s prescriptions.”3
Intellectual discourses in India have remained so much argumentative that most of the works written in Sanskrit under diverse knowledge systems are structured in the techniques of debate.
This applies not only to philosophical writings but to works belonging to medical sciences (Āyurveda), or works related to Management of life and society like Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya or Kāmasūtra of Vātsyāyana. There are texts that have been thoroughly structured through vāda.
Some of the issues that have repeatedly surfaced in the vādas are concerned with the conflict between karma (action) and Jñāna (knowledge), choice between violence and non-violence, the clash between two ideologies – pravṛtti (empiricism) and nivṛtti (renunciation) and they still persist in modern India in some form or the other. The doctrine of cumulative pursuit of karma and jñāna continued till Śaṅkara vehemently discarded it.
Even though marginalized to a large extent in the textual tradition of philosophical literature, and surviving in thin numbers, the lokāyatas – materialists – have always remained assertive. Due to their skills in vāda, they actually commanded respect and were given prominence in socio-political life. There are epigraphic records to prove that they flourished in Karnatak and continued to practically debate with vedāntins and other philosophers till 14th-15th centuries.”4 The Cārvāka Philosophy has remained a contentious issue with almost all the philosophical schools for more than two millennia. The modern scholars have vehemently debated on various perspectives of the Cārvāka5. The present work re-positions Cārvākas and their postulations in the light of the vādas and vāda-texts.
That Vāda could transform society, could bring changes in the life-styles; and quite often could also result in conversions of faith or religion is evidenced through numerous examples in this work. The concepts and categories related to the vāda not only shaped the course of discussions in the areas of philosophy or religion, they cast everlasting impact on the milieu and the traditions of arts and aesthetics also. In the VI chapter, I have discussed some well-known masterpieces from Sanskrit literature in which Vāda forms the structural or narrative designs.
There are literary pieces in which the debate becomes a major theme, whereas in others, debates are employed as a device to enrich the narrative. Āgamadambaraprahasana, Dhuttakkhāṇa (Dhūrtākhyāna), Mudritakumudacandra etc. are works by philosophers composed with the intention of projecting the Vāda. Mahiṣaśatakaṃ by Vāñchānātha is a poem penned with fervor and intensity by a pundit-kavi, scholar poet. It is a poetic statement in protest in which the author enters into vāda with social institutions and oppressive systems.
At surface level, the culture of vāda involves verbal duals, attacks and even violence of speech – the debates on the propriety of such ramifications of vāda have been noticed in this monograph. But at the deeper levels, the vāda-culture imbibes values and harmony. Alberuni whom I have viewed as a source of inspiration for this work, had closely watched the people of our country and our habits of debate one thousand years ago. His remarks on the Hindus are noteworthy:
– ‘…at the utmost they fight with words, but they will never stake their soul, or body or their property on religious controversy.”6
The vāda traditions have not simply subsisted on refutation. They evolved methods for critiques of reasoning. Each system established its uniqueness through vāda. Prashant Dave rightly pointed out during the discussions with the present author that Vāda led to revitalizing each theory, and each system developed by undergoing through the series of vāda with other systems. In fact, history of Indian philosophy should be re-written from the point of view of vāda which led to the culling out the essentialities of a system and assumption of its precise nature.
Vādas were taken up to re-invigorate a thought system, and also to sharpen one’s own intellect. Mahimabhaṭṭa, a logician, wanted to prove the applicability of anumiti in the field of belless lettress, and for this he composed an extensive text – Vyaktiviveka with a twofold purpose, i.e., to establish the theory of poetic inference (Kāvyānumiti) and also to earn instant recognition by the way of posing a potent challenge to as great a stalwart as Ānandavardhana.7 Texts such as the Vyaktiviveka are created in deep structures of agreement with surface structures in sharp diagreemeents.
Finally, it is intended to search the resonances and percolations of the vāda traditions in modern times, to investigate how this tradition still continues to enrich our intellectual life and contribute to create better stands and harmony in our society. Some of the spiritual or religious gurus like Raman Maharshi, J. Krishnamurti and Vinoba Bhave have served as men of dialogues. Of these, Vinoba, remains most misunderstood, yet most versatile and learned bhāṣyakāra of ancient wisdom. His Āśrama at Pavanar functioned as a vibrant place for discussions on social, moral and religious issues, and continued to be frequently visited by persons from diverse walks of life. Vinoba strived to create conciliations in a society torn with strife. Texts like Samaṇasutta, Svarājyaśāstra, commentaries on Gītā and Japuji, as well as the institutions like Acharyakula and Sarvasevasangha were created through his efforts. The idea of giving up the fight (raṇachoḍanīti), Sakalāyatanapaddhati and silence mooted by him are fresh manifestations of the potential nature of vāda.
Vāda has manifested in our responses to the opinions on Indian traditions of intellectual discourse by western philosophers. S. Radhakrishnan gave a critique of Albert Schweitzer’s view which he had expressed in Indian Thought and its Development in 1939. Schweitzer had opined that Indian philosophy has been escapist. S. Radhakrishnan challenged his views in his Eastern Religion and Western Thought in the year 1939 itself. In another work he also presented a critique of Bergson.
Also see: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIxVtb8ZiBGZxiSBbk_TCZA
In the last chapter, I have tried to present the manifestations of vāda on a vast canvass during the nineteenth and twentieth century. India has been facing the onslaught of modernity and social reforms as well as the ethics evolved through contact with Christianity during these two centuries, drawing sharp reactions from fundamentalists or puritans. “Modern Indian thought finds itself in a historical context created by Europe, and it has difficulties speaking for itself. Even in its self-representation and self-assertion, it speaks to a large extant in a European idiom. This does not however mean that the dialogue between India and Europe has been decided in favor of Europe, or that India has been superseded by Europe. The power of the Indian tradition has not exhausted itself in the self-representation and self-interpretation of modern India. The dialogic situation is still open”8 – at the backdrop of these remarks by Wilhelm Halbfass, this chapter raises several questions, i.e., whether with the anthropocentric self-confidence of the west remains an overpowering force; whether the relationship between orient and occident is a relationship of subordination of India and subjugation by the west; or there are possibilities in the pundit’s tradition for rejuvenating itself. Anand Coomarswamy says that India’s would come out unscathed from the colonial onslaught though its body was badly damaged.9 An Aurobindo would view the present scenario a mere surface deterioration.
One of the issues that consistently came up in all the knowledge texts is related to freedom. The concept of salvation in Darśanas seeks individual liberation linked to social aspirations. The last criterion of dharma defined by Manu is svasya ca priyam ātmanaḥ– that which pleases the self. There is a continuity of search for the liberation in smṛti texts, philosophical discourses, texts on aesthetics and literary theory through logics and reasoning and this has continued to the twentieth century.
Due to the nature of this work and my own limitations, I have profusely used original terms from Sanskrit sources. I have also tried to limit myself to the original sources following the model set by Mallinātha, the great commentator of Sanskrit classics. In the preface to his commentary on Kirātārjunīyam, an epic by the poet Bhāravi he said –
इहान्वयमुखेनैव सर्वं व्याख्यायते मया।
नामूलं लिख्यते किञ्चिन्नानपेक्षितमुच्यते।।
(Here I have explained everything just by paraphrasing, have not written anything without the base of the original and have not said anything unwanted.)
[1] Philosophy in India, p. 194 [3] Ibid, p. 77 [4] Ibid, p. 17 [5] Sadashiv Athawale, Cārvāka – Itihāsa āṇi Tattavajñāna (3rd edition,1997). [6] Albiruni’s India, p. 19 [7]In his prefatory remarks says I am appropriately making an effort for those who are like me, everything is not agreeable in this world. When the lamp of the world – the Sun - rises in the horizon, some start burning, some are blooming, while others wither out. The propositions of the author of dhvani-theory by agreements or disagreement are being taken up here for fame, because acquaintance with great leads to glory.) [8] See, preface to the German edition of India and Europe, by Wilhelm Hulbfass, p. xiii [9] Debates in Indian Philosophy: Classical Colonial and Contemporary, p. 6
******
Radhavallabh Tripathi former Vice Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi is known for his original contributions to literature as well as for his studies on Nāṭyaśāstra and Sāhityaśāstra. He has published 162 books, 227 research papers and critical essays and is the recipeint of 35 national and international awards for his literary work.
Leave a Reply