The Rules of Debate Begin
The sixth and by far most extensive of the seven kinds of determination through discourse: the actual rules governing formal debate, unfolding into seven parts of its own. This part examines the first two — six distinct kinds of discourse, from ordinary everyday talk to talk aimed at settling and liberating another's mind, and the proper venues in which formal debate should actually be conducted.
1. The Seven Parts of the Rules of Debate
何等論軌決擇？略有七種：一論體、二論處、三論依、四論莊嚴、五論負、六論出離、七論多所作法。
What is determination through the rules of debate? In brief, there are seven parts: the essential nature of debate, the venue of debate, the basis of debate, the adornment of debate, defeat in debate, withdrawal from debate, and what debate most fundamentally requires.
2. The Essential Nature of Debate: Six Kinds
第一論體復有六種：一言論、二尚論、三諍論、四毀論、五順論、六教論。言論者，謂一切世間語言。尚論者，謂諸世間所隨聞論，世智所尚故。諍論者，謂互相違返所立言論。毀論者，謂更相憤怒發麁惡言。順論者，謂隨順清淨智見所有決擇言論。教論者，謂教導有情心未定者令其心定，心已定者令得解脫所有言論。
The first, the essential nature of debate, is, further, of six kinds: ordinary talk, respected discourse, disputation, vilification, accordant discourse, and instructional discourse.
Ordinary talk is simply everyday worldly speech. Respected discourse is discourse widely attended to throughout the world, valued by the wisdom the world itself esteems. Disputation is speech setting forth mutually opposing positions. Vilification is coarse, hostile speech spoken in mutual anger. Accordant discourse is discourse of determination that accords with pure knowledge and vision. And instructional discourse is speech that guides sentient beings — settling the mind of one not yet settled, and bringing to liberation the mind of one already settled.
These six kinds sort discourse by both its content and its purpose, ranging from the entirely mundane to the most soteriologically serious. Ordinary talk and respected discourse are both simply worldly in character, differing only in how broadly they are attended to and esteemed. Disputation and vilification both involve conflict, but disputation remains at the level of opposing positions honestly held, while vilification degenerates into open hostility. Accordant discourse and instructional discourse, by contrast, are both grounded in genuine wisdom — accordant discourse being the kind of careful determination this entire treatise itself exemplifies, and instructional discourse being speech whose entire purpose is to actually settle and liberate the listener's own mind, the highest and most consequential of the six.
3. The Venue of Debate
第二論處，謂或於王家、或於執理家、或對淳質堪為量者、或對善伴、或對善解法義沙門婆羅門等而起論端。
The second, the venue of debate, is this: formal debate should be initiated either in the presence of a ruler, or in the presence of an official charged with settling disputes, or before honest and capable judges, or before a fair-minded companion, or before ascetics and brahmins genuinely skilled in the meaning of the Dharma.
T1606 clarifies each of these five settings: "in the presence of a ruler" means a venue where the ruler is personally present to preside; "in the presence of an official" means wherever royal disputes are actually adjudicated; "honest and capable judges" refers to merchants and others whose fair-mindedness qualifies them to render a genuine verdict; "a fair-minded companion" means one among a group of peers whom neither side in the debate would think to overstep; and ascetics and brahmins "skilled in the meaning of the Dharma" are those who genuinely understand the wording and meaning of whatever teaching is actually under discussion. What unites all five is the presence of a competent, impartial party capable of actually judging the debate's outcome — formal debate conducted without such a venue risks becoming mere dispute for its own sake.
Part 126 Complete
The essential nature of debate and its proper venue are now examined. Part 127 turns to the basis of debate — what is actually to be established, and the eight-part structure of formal proof itself, from stating a thesis through citing valid perception, inference, and scriptural authority — illustrated through a complete worked example proving the absence of a self.
Continue to Part 127 — The Basis of Debate, and Proving the Absence of a Self →