Early one morning my parents were preparing to go somewhere. I was just 12 years old at the time and was wondering where we were going. Later I could make out that we were certainly going to visit a monastery as they were carrying kabne (a long white shawl for men), rachu (a colourful short scarf for women), incense sticks, butter, etc. Usually Bhutanese people carry these things when they visit a monastery.
After travelling for a few hours, we reached Tango Monastery—one of the oldest and the most important Buddhist universities in Bhutan. Once we were in the monastery, my parents and I prostrated inside the shrine after which the monks advised us to sit down. There were quite a number of visitors. It was the last day of yarney (summer retreat) during which the monks perform debates, called tsodpa in Tibetan. I saw that the monks were being seated in rows. I was curiously watching and thinking, “What are they going to do?” After some time, two groups of monks came up. The first group took their seats facing the second group who were standing and clapping their hands, and saying something in Tibetan. From the beginning to the end I did not understand anything but I enjoyed the drama of their laughter and when they sometimes showed their angry faces. I even thought that the monks were impatiently fighting. Seeing this gave me the wrong impression about monks being impatient, egoistic, etc. From that night onward I was obsessed with this. But, fortunately, later I met one khenpo and came to know about Tibetan monastic debate. It was not at all as I thought it to be.
Tibetan monastic debate is said to have been started at the end of the eighth century by the great Indian Buddhist master Kamalashila. He was invited to Tibet by the Dharma king Thrisong Deutsen and defeated the Chinese monk Hashang in debate. Slowly this practice of debate pervaded all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism. It is said to be one of the best ways to learn Buddhist philosophy.
Generally the debate starts with an invocation of Manjushri, the Buddha of wisdom, in which one says ‘Dhi jitar chejal’, along with one clap of the hands. Debate engages two groups, defenders (damchawa) and challengers or questioners (tagsalwa). When the questioner first claps, he should have the true motivation to liberate sentient beings from samsara through the path of Enlightenment. After the invocation, the debate starts with the questioner proposing the topic of the debate in the form of a query. The questioner raises doubts and questions the defender’s assertions. A perfect question should be well-expressed, rational and applicable to the refutation of the defender’s thesis. Since the challenger’s task is not to establish the thesis, he approaches from several angles to contradict the statements that the defender makes. On the other hand, the defender asserts a thesis which he is responsible to defend as a true thesis. The defender answers in such a way that it will defend his thesis and refute the challenger’s questions.
The defender should be prompt to answer the questions. If not, the questioner will insist, punctuated by hand claps, that the defender respond, repeating the prompt ‘ochir’. There are four permissible answers that the defender must respond with:
- I accept (dod)
- The reason is not valid (tag madrub)
- Why (chichir)
- That is not generally applicable (makhyab)
They must only use these four permissible answers so the questioner will systematically understand. A very interesting and surprising fact about such debate is that any kind of question is answerable with one of these four responses. Not all debates end in a defeat of the defender but sometimes the questioner fails to contradict the defender and the questioner is defeated.
The main purpose of Tibetan monastic debate is to refute philosophical misconceptions, to establish the correct position and to respond to the criticism of a correct and true thesis. Systematic debate in the study of Buddhist logic should fulfil these essential factors. H.H. the Dalai Lama also said that debate should not only take place in the monasteries but it should also be used in our regular schools for study. At last, I came to know that Tibetan monastic debate is not a furious, ordinary argument with criticism, hatred and malice towards each other — that is what is not Tibetan debate. Rather, debating is the best method to learn, refute misunderstanding and establish the truth with compassion.
By Pema Wangda
Final Year NNI
