Author Topic: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism  (Read 17852 times)

Vajraprotector

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 610
Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« on: July 13, 2012, 12:43:41 PM »
Buddhism is a "wisdom tradition," meaning that it is based on the realisations or insights of the historical Buddha and that it holds that all suffering and even the suffering of death are related to a failure of wisdom. One is freed only by wisdom, by seeing the nature of things.

In Tibetan monastic universities, a sophisticated and very dynamic method of philosophical debate is used by the monks and nuns to penetrate the meaning of Buddhas teachings about the nature of reality.
 
In the past during the time of the great pandits in India, debate was so valued that, if you lost a debate with an opponent, you would have to convert to the view of that opponent. If you cannot defeat a view, then you are compelled to accept it.
 
I know that the usual form is a debate between a Challenger, standing and asking questions, and a Defender, sitting and answering those questions. May be someone can shed a light about the process of debate, or the topic, or the format of the debate in the monastery?

bambi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2012, 02:40:02 PM »
Its really interesting to watch the monks debate as it looks very exciting with the non stop gestures and debating. I had the chance to watch it 'live' when I was in India at the monastery. I heard that they do it everyday to sharpen their knowledge. How nice if we have it all around in the Dharma centres and have lay people like myself and others to try and learn the process.

Debates

      
Debating monks and gesturing.
Debates among monks on the Buddhist doctrines are integral to the learning process in the colleges in the Sera Monastery complex. This facilitates better comprehension of the Buddhist philosophy to attain higher levels of study. This exemplary debating tradition supplemented with gestures is said to be exclusive to this monastery, among the several other monasteries of Lhasa. Visitors also attend to witness these debates that are held as per a set schedule, every day in the 'Debating Courtyard' of the monastery.

Procedures and rules
The debate among monks unfolds in the presence of their teachers, with a very well set rules of procedure for the defender and the questioners. The tradition of such debates is traced to the ancient ‘Hindu Orthodoxy’ in India and this practice permeated into Buddhist orthodoxy in Tibet in the eighth century. Such debates usually take place within the monastery’s precincts. The defender has the onus to prove his point of view on the subject proposed for debate. The debate opens with an invocation to Manjushri recited in a loud and high pitched tone. The roles of the debater and the questioner are well defined; the questioner has to succinctly present his case (all on Buddhism related topics) and the defender has to answer within a fixed time frame. The finality of the debate is with specific answers like: “I accept (do), the reason is not established (ta madrup) or there is no pervasion (Kyappa majung)”. Many a time, the questions mooted are meant to mislead the defender. If the defender does not reply within a time frame, an expression of derision is witnessed. In the Tibetan debating sessions, there is no role for a witness and there is normally no adjudicator. This leads to “conflicting opinions of participants and listeners.” When there is direct contradiction on the defenders part, the outcome is, however, formally decided.

Physical gestures
Debates are punctuated with vigorous gestures which enliven the ambience of the occasion. Each gesture has a meaning. The debater presents his case with subtlety, robed in a formal monk’s attire. Some of the gestures (said to have symbolic value), made during the debates, generally subtle dramatic gestures are: clapping after each question; holding right hand and stretching left hand forward and striking the left palm with the right palm; clapping hands loudly to stress the power and decisiveness of the defender’s arguments denoting his self-assurance; in case of wrong answer presented by the defender, the opponent gestures three circles with his hand around the defenders head followed by loud screaming to unnerve the defender; opponent's mistake is demonstrated by wrapping his upper robe around his waist; loud clapping and intense verbal exchange is common; and the approach is to trap the defender into a wrong line of argument. Each time a new question is asked, the teacher strikes his outstretched left palm with his right palm. When a question is answered correctly, it is acknowledged by the teacher bringing the back of his right hand to his left palm. When the defender wins the debate he makes an allegorical dig at the questioner by questioning his basic wisdom as a Buddhist.

Schedule at Sera Monastery
The tradition of conducting debates in the Gelukpa tradition was set in many monasteries of the Gelukpa sect, namely the Ganden Monastery, the Sera Monastery, the Drepung Monastery and the JIC, not only in pre-modern Tibet but also in other similar monasteries established in exile, such as in Sera, India. At each location in Tibet, the debates are held under eight debating schedules in a year, depending on the rituals and festivals observed during the whole year. Each daily session is held between eight breaks when students debate on issues of Buddhist scriptures and related subjects. In the Sera monastery, the debate alternated by rituals has a daily schedule (with alterations to suit the climatic season) of the Morning debate (7 AM to 10 AM), Noon debate (11 AM to 1 PM), Afternoon debate (2 PM to 4 PM) and Night debate (8.30 PM to 9.30 PM).

bambi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2012, 02:43:49 PM »
Dear vajra protector,

There is another site that has a lengthier explanation from Drepung Monastery which I believe will be too long to post here so please go read here

http://www.thlib.org/places/monasteries/drepung/essays/#!essay=/dreyfus/drepung/monasticed/s/b41

if you want more explanation.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2012, 02:47:42 PM by tsangpakarpo »

Positive Change

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2012, 04:34:04 PM »
Below is an extract from an interesting paper written on precisely this topic. It is very concise and descriptive which I thought would be nice to share here. Though a little lengthy, it is amazingly clear how he explains in depth the topic at hand. Daniel Perdue is also the author of best selling book "Debate in Tibetan Buddhism" which is a clear and thorough exposition of the practice and theory of Buddhist logic and epistemology. I have highlighted certain pertinent aspects that I find most interesting:

A paper by Daniel Perdue
Virginia Commonwealth University

The Tibetans were converted to Buddhism beginning in about the seventh century of the Common Era. After their conversion to Buddhism, the kings sent young trainees to Buddhist India to learn Sanskrit, develop a written language for Tibetan, and translate the Buddhist literature of India into Tibetan. One of the approaches the Tibetans adopted from the Indian Buddhists is a tradition called “the path of reasoning” which employs philosophical debate. In India, the importance of debate was highly valued. Among Tibetan Buddhists, debate has the reputation of being the most effective way of learning the Buddhist doctrine, preparing one to understand clearly the assertions and be able to apply them in meditation to achieve the liberating wisdom.

For more than a millennium, the Tibetans preserved and practiced the Indian style of philosophical debate. The Tibetan argument forms were brought over with minor adaptations from the Indian logical forms. In this system of reasoning syllogisms, consisting of a thesis and a reason stated together in a single sentence, and consequences, an argument structurally similar to a syllogism but is merely a logical outflow of an opponent’s own assertions. This paper describes the structure of the Tibetan Buddhist syllogistic form and suggests that, from the point of view of Buddhist religious practice, the central point of Buddhist reasoning and debate is to guide the student to become capable of understanding the profound view leading to liberation.

The paper in full: http://www.chibs.edu.tw/ch_html/chbj/21/010_perdue_CHBJ_21.pdf
 
Here is a video clip of the going ons at a typical courtyard debate of a monastery:

Small | Large



This Asia Society video below (1 hr, 42 mins) begins with an introduction by Daniel Perdue, showcases four debating Tibetan monks, includes an excellent lecture by Geshe Thupten Jinpa (the star attraction), presents a sample debate between Perdue and Jinpa in English, and ends with an engaging Q&A. Here is Perdue's intro to the tradition:

Introduction

Since the time of the early Buddhist kings, Tibet has enjoyed a rich history of philosophical enquiry and carries this heritage forth today. Buddhism is a "wisdom tradition," meaning that it is based on the realizations or insights of the historical Buddha and that it holds that all suffering and even the suffering of death are related to a failure of wisdom. They hold that one is freed by wisdom, by seeing the nature of things. Philosophical debate is part of this effort. In India, debate was so valued that, if you lost a debate with an opponent, you would have to convert to the view of that opponent. If you cannot defeat a view, then you are compelled to accept it.

The central purposes of Tibetan monastic debate are to defeat misconceptions, to establish a defensible view, and to clear away objections to that view. Debate for the monks of Tibet is not mere academics, but a way of using direct implications from the obvious in order to generate an inference of the non-obvious state of phenomena. The debaters are seeking to understand the nature of reality through careful analysis of the state of existence of ordinary phenomena, the basis of reality. This is the essential purpose for religious debate.

In practice, the usual form is a debate between a Challenger, standing and asking questions, and a Defender, sitting and answering those questions. The attitude is as if the Challenger is respectfully approaching the Defender with a quandary. The dramatic clapping is done by the standing Challenger only, and is used to punctuate the end of the "question," which is an argument in response to the Defender's answer.

In their understanding of the gesture, the right hand represents method, meaning especially the practice of compassion, and the left hand represents wisdom. Bringing the two hands together represents the joining of wisdom and method. At the moment of the clap, you hear the left foot stomp down and that represents slamming shut the door to rebirth in the lower levels. After the simultaneous clap and stomp, the Challenger holds out the left arm of wisdom to keep shut the door to all rebirth. Also, in that gesture, the Challenger uses his right hand to raise up his prayer beads around his left arm. This represents the fulfilment of the efforts of compassion, in lifting up all suffering beings out of the round of rebirth.

The Argument Forms

The Tibetan argument forms were brought over with minor adaptations from the Indian logical forms. In this system of reasoning, two forms of argument are used to defeat wrong conceptions and to support a clear understanding. These are syllogisms, consisting of a thesis and a reason stated together in a single sentence, and consequences, an argument structurally similar to a syllogism but merely a logical outflow of an opponent's assertions. A valid argument may take theform of either a syllogism or a consequence. The form of a syllogism generally used in the Tibetan philosophical literature and in debate consists of a thesis and a reason, both what is to be proven and the proof, in one sentence:

The subject, sound, is an impermanent phenomenon because of being a product.

The minor premise is that sound is a product. The major premise, which is "suppressed," is that all products are impermanent phenomena. And, the thesis/conclusion is that sound is animpermanent phenomenon. When one states a syllogism, it is like a "promise," the person's best effort to speak a true argument.

However, what you generally hear in philosophical debate are consequences, which are not "promises" but are logical implications drawn from the Defender's statements. The Defender is limited to several answers to the Challenger's arguments. These answers include:

(1)"The reason is not established," which is the way of denying the minor premise;
(2) "There is no pervasion," which is the way of denying the major premise; and
(3) "I accept it," meaning that the Defender accepts the argument and the conclusion.

The goal for the Defender is to give a consistent set of responses to the Challenger's arguments without contradicting what he said earlier. When the Defender contradicts earlier claims, the Challenger will shout, "Tsa!" meaning "Finished!" Your earlier claim is finished! If the Defender contradicts the fundamental thesis put forth at the first, the Challenger shouts "Tsa!" three times.

The practice of reasoning and debate is a broad avenue for many. Whether or not the student is bright and rational, the study of reasoning and debate will help. In fact, whether or not one is even a Buddhist, the study of reasoning and debate will help. All of us want to be able to understand better, to assess better the words of others, and to express ourselves more clearly. These skills develop with the practice of debate. From its origins in India, Buddhism has had anappreciation for reasoning and debate skills. The profound purpose of Buddhist debate and reasoning is to clear away a wrong conception of our own natures and thereby to become free of suffering and even death. However, the vast majority of us cannot go directly to the point. So in the effort to get there, the Buddhists have tried to build up reliable tools and procedures.
Reliable tools and procedures are called "reliable" because they help us to understandwhat is factual and accurate, what is real and what is unreal. Thus, the tools used in Buddhist reasoning should apply not only to topics of Buddhist philosophy but also to anything we wish to look into. The actual tools and procedures are simple and elegant, so they are useful to many. The style of Buddhist reasoning and debate provides a useful way of organizing your own thought and words and for assessing the flood of information that is coming our way.


Most fascinating video:

http://asiasociety.org/video/countries/great-debates-tibetan-debate-complete

Poonlarp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
    • Email
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2012, 06:31:46 PM »
Debate is a very unique tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, Mahayana and Hinayana do not use this way in the  learning part. Tibetan Buddhism is more into study and application of wisdom.

I was so lucky to witness a debate "live" in a monastery, at first I was a little surprise why they are so rude and speak so loud. After the explanation by the local monks, this is the way of debate and they don't feel offended. Indeed, they learned faster as they need to think and answer back.That was a new year celebration, and they were having the debate outdoor. I was also surprise that the villagers gather together and watch the debate, they even laugh at the defender when he didn't know how to answer.

Debate makes me think of HH Trijang Rinpoche, a great master who start debating since his young age. He was a learned scholar and master debator. In 1919, when he was only 18, he debated before the Geshes of the three major Gelugpa monasteries for his final examination. The 13th Dalai Lama awarded him third place, and he received the highest Geshe degree, the Lharampa; in the age of 18, wow!

pgdharma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2012, 02:39:19 AM »
Debating formed a huge part of the curriculum in most Tibetan monasteries. This was how the monks sharpened their critical skills and tested their ability to explain and debate various teachings.

I have witnessed “live” debates and I think it’s interesting.   The monks were not allowed to have sutras handy so they had to memorized the entire texts and then remember the precise location of passages and examples they wished to use.  It is through this critical and logical skills and the excellent memorization ability that debates are useful for someone who is trying to become more aware of their thoughts and more in control of their actions. Thus before starting the debates, they will invoke the blessings of Manjushri.

Tibetan Debate

The distinctive form of Tibetan debate (rtsod pa) plays an important part of philosophical investigations in Tibetan intellectual communities.  It is central in the Gelug sect, in particular those earning their kenpo (mkhan po) degrees, though it is also practiced in other sects to varying degrees.  The practice involves a seated defender (dam bca’ ba) and a standing challenger (rigs lam pa).  The roles are quite different; the defender must assert a thesis and attempts to defend its truth.  The challenger, however, asks questions in an attempt to get the defender to accept statements that are contradictory (for example, both “all colors are white” and “there is a color that is red”) or absurd (for example, “the color of a white religious conch shell is red”).  The challenger is not held responsible for the truth content of the questions; like someone raising an objection at a lecture, the challenger does not have to assert any thesis, but only aims to show that the defender is mistaken.

The debate begins with the challenger invoking Mañju?r?, the bodhisattva of wisdom.  This invocation is variously interpreted, but can be seen most generally as a reminder to the debaters that they are aiming at wisdom, at finding out the truth about the subject.  The challenger then sets the topic of debate by asking a question to which the defender replies and reveals his thesis. The challenger may ask questions to clarify the defender’s thesis or establish common assumptions or simply begin the debate.  During the debate, the challenger raises questions of a particular form; a complete question is one that contains a subject, predicate, and a reason.  For example, the question “(Do you agree that) the subject, Socrates, is mortal because of being a man (?)” ascribes a predicate (being mortal) to the subject (Socrates) in virtue of a reason (being a man).  When an element is omitted or ambiguous, the defender is allowed to clarify, but upon receiving a complete question, the defender has three possible replies:

1.   “I accept” (’dod)
2.   “The reason is not established” (rtags ma grub)
3.   “It does not pervade” (ma khyab)

If the defender thinks that the proposed relationship between the subject, predicate, and reason holds, then she responds with “I accept.”  When the subject does not correspond to the reason, the defender asserts that the reason is not established. For example, “Socrates is mortal because of being an elephant” would warrant this reply because the reason, being an elephant, does not apply to the subject, Socrates.  The denial of pervasion, a Tibetan innovation that is not found in earlier Indian Buddhist debate system of Dharmak?rti, claims that the reason does not entail the predicate.  There are two kinds of failures of pervasion — one of uncertainty (ma nges pa) and one of contradiction or exclusion (’gal pa).  “Socrates is a philosopher because of being a man” is uncertain because some but not all men are philosophers; the reason, being a man, does not entail the predicate, being a philosopher. “Socrates is a reptile because of being a man” is contradictory because the terms “men” and “reptile” are exclusive; there are no men that are reptiles.


Source: http://www.iep.utm.edu/tibetan/

Jessie Fong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2012, 08:49:02 AM »




I have experienced the live debates among the monks in the monasteries.  It was lively and full of participation.  But I did not understand a word of what went on.  Those that I witnessed were rather "formal" i.e. they were about teachings.

I came across this and was wondering if such topics were also part of the debates that I came across:


One of the funny examples of such a debate is:
Does a farmer have a tail?
No, of course not
Does a farmer have a cow, a horse or a dog?
Yes.
Then a farmer has a tail!
Source(s):
http://viewonbuddhism.org



ratanasutra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2012, 05:08:21 PM »
I'm fortunate to see the monks debate in traditional way in the monastery twice, even though i did not understand what they were debate about? but from the expression of the two sides of the monk really shown that they have to concentrate and think how to answer another in order to win the debate session. And i also witnessed the Debate of my teacher with Dharma brother, the sound of clapping hand really made me excited and think of how to answer the questions even though i not in the debate.

Below here is how the debate and what is the meaning of debate actions for most of us who did not have a chance to debate before so that we will be able to understand it in future when we come across the debate. 


The Debate

Debate is an integral part of a Tibetan monk’s training, and is an effective means of expanding the mind, increasing mental sharpness, developing analytical capacity, and gaining internal clarity.

There are two parties to the debate: a defender and a questioner, each with clear roles and strict rules of behavior which assure an orderly exchange of questions and answers. The defender is usually a novice, while the questioner is a more experienced debater.


Debate Style

The style of the debate follows a precisely choreographed routine beginning with a ritual invocation of Manjushri, the boddhisattva of wisdom, in a loud high pitched tone.

Then the questioner, who is standing, begins the questioning in a very low and barely audible voice. He bends gently forward toward the defender, who is sitting, as a sign of humility and respect. At this point, the questioner is wearing his robe in the customary style, with the left shoulder covered, and the right shoulder bare. These initial gestures and soft speech are part of a skillful strategy designed to bring about a false sense of security in his opponent.

The defender presents his thesis. The questioner raises doubts. As the back and forth exchange of questions and answers progresses, the debate grows increasingly animated, impassioned, and physically intense, with plenty of forceful clapping and spirited verbal exchanges.

If the questioner has been able to draw the defender into making errors and contradicting himself, the questioner wraps his upper robe around his waist, as a sign of his understanding and control. No longer bending forward, he stands tall and makes forceful sweeping gestures, clapping his hands loudly to stress the power and decisiveness of his arguments.

Finally, after 2.5 hours, it all comes peacefully to an end.


Meaning of the Physical Gestures

* Putting the left hand forward symbolizes closing the doors to the lower states of rebirth.

* Clapping 2 hands together represents the union of the two aspects of the path: wisdom and method (i.e., compassionate actions).

* Drawing back the right hand signifies a wish to liberate all sentient beings.

* Circling the opponent’s head three times with the right hand, while speaking in an decisive and forceful voice., “These are the three circles.” (‘di ‘khor gsum) indicates the the defender has made a mistake or a false argument.

* Wrapping the upper robe around the waist is a sign of understanding and control

* Standing tall, making forceful sweeping gestures, and clapping hands loudly signifies the power and decisiveness of the questioner's arguments.



Tenzin K

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2012, 03:05:05 PM »
The religious practitioner is compared to a patient and Buddha to a doctor.  Our kind teacher, the Buddha,
administers the medicine of doctrine to sentient beings who suffer the illness of ignorance.  The purpose for
debate and all Buddhist practice is to abandon the first two truths—suffering and origin—and to attain the
latter two—cessation and path.

1. Purpose for Debate

A Tibetan monastery is the center for the teaching of the Buddha’s doctrine and a gathering place for those seeking inward peace and spiritual growth. The central purposes of Tibetan monastic debate are to defeat misconceptions, to establish the correct view, and to clear away objections to that view.  To these ends, with great effort the monks of the Gelugpa Sect engage in debate diligently, seeking to learn well the words and to understand fully the meaning of the Buddhist doctrine (dharma). Debate for the monks of Tibet is not mere academics, but a way of using direct implications from the obvious in order to generate an inference of the non-obvious state of phenomena.  The diligent debaters are seeking to understand the nature of reality through careful analysis of the state of existence of ordinary phenomena, the bases of reality.

Although reasoning has an essential and irreplaceable place on the path to liberation, even so, the Gelugpas place a tremendous emphasis on devotion.  When one visits a monastery, one sees that the main activity there is prayer, not study and debate.  Indeed, the monks identify the limits of reasoning, for even this essential component is to be transcended by the development of direct perception.  Reasoning itself and the inference it produces are not the actual antidotes to cyclic existence.  Only direct realization of selflessness—the wisdom realizing emptiness (sunyata)-- is able to eradicate the foe of ignorance.   

2. Practice of Debate

A monk hears teachings on topics of debate; then he reads the texts, memorizes the definitions and divisions; and then on his own, thinks about the meaning of what he is studying and meditates (analytical meditation) on its implications.  After this preparation, he is able to debate the topic with others.  He puts forth his own view or understanding of a point of doctrine, and others raise objections to that view.   Similarly, one raises objections to others’ interpretations or understandings.   Although the monk may become very excited and object vigorously and vehemently to the views of his opponent in a debate, the purpose for his debate is not to defeat and embarrass an opponent, thereby gaining some victory for himself; rather, the purpose is to help the opponent overcome his wrong view.

3. Course of Study

The monks practicing debate study within a well-developed system beginning with basic logic and working up to the great texts of India, both the sutras and commentaries.  Monks studying in the colleges of the Gelugpa Sect work toward the Geshe degree.  In order to attain this, a monk must pass through a rigorous program of studies consisting of fifteen or possibly sixteen classes, some lasting for two years each.

a.  Collected Topics of Valid Cognition (three classes)—the Introductory, Middling, and  Greater Paths of Reasoning. (Parana)
b. Perfection of Wisdom (five classes).  (Prajnaparamita)
c. Middle Way (two classes).  (Madhyamaka)
d. Discipline (two classes).  (Vinaya)
e. Treasury of Knowledge (two classes).  (Abhidharmakosha)

Beyond these classes devoted to particular topics, there are two retainer classes, Kar-um and Hla-ram, in which the monks engage in lengthy review prior to their examinations for the degree of Geshe.  All told, a monk typically studies from twenty-two to twenty-six years to achieve this degree.

4. Actual Debate Session

An actual session of debate involves two people, a Defender who sits and gives answers to the Challenger who stands and asks questions.  The Defender puts forth assertions for which he is held accountable.  The Challenger raises qualms to the Defender’s assertions and is not subject to reprisal for the questions he raises.  The debates usually take place outside in winter as well as in summer.  The daily schedule of the monasteries re-established in India include two hours of debate in the morning and two hours in the evening after dinner, although advanced classes may extend these sessions.  The disputants come to the debating courtyard with no aid but their own understanding.  One does not peruse books at the time of debating and books may not be brought to the debating courtyard.  There is a joke among debaters that if one has studied a topic and knows where to find the information in a text or in one’s notes but is not able to explain then such a person “has his learning in a box.”  Rather, the debaters must depend on their memorization of the points of doctrine—definitions, illustrations, and even whole texts—together with their own measure of understanding gained from instruction and study.

At the opening of a session of debate, the standing Challenger claps his hands together and recites the seed syllable of Manjushri, “Dhih”.  Manjushri is the manifestation of the wisdom of all the Buddhas and, as such, is the special deity of debate.  In debate, one must have a good motivation, the best of which is to establish all beings in liberation.

Upon first seeing a debate, the most striking characteristic is the hand gestures.  When the Challenger first puts his question to the sitting Defender, his right hand is held above the shoulder at the level of his head and the left hand is stretched forward with the palm turned upward.  At the end of his statement, the Challenger punctuates by loudly clapping together his hands and simultaneously stomping his left foot.  Then he immediately draws back his right hand with the palm held upward and at the same time, holds forth his left hand with the palm turned downward.  This motion of drawing back and clapping is done with the flow of a dancer’s movements.

Holding forth the left hand after clapping symbolizes closing the door to rebirth in the helpless state of cyclic existence.  The drawing back and upraising of the right hand symbolizes one’s will to raise all sentient beings up out of cyclic existence and to establish them in the omniscience of Buddhahood.  The left hand represents wisdom—the actual antidote to cyclic existence.  The right hand represents method—the altruistic intention to become enlightened, motivated by great love and compassion for all sentient beings.  The clap represents a union of method and wisdom.  In dependence on the union of method and wisdom, one is able to attain Buddhahood.

Positive Change

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2012, 09:52:17 AM »
The Tibetan style of debate is not what you might expect. It's physically intense and mentally demanding, characterized by emphatic movements, such as foot stomping, loud clapping and hand gestures. There's also a "defender" and a "challenger." So how does an aggressive exercise fine-tune your mental skills?

I liken it to physical exercise e.g. going to the gym to tone up and get fit. Similarly, this age old method of training one's mind to 'think on the go', to be quick in responses, to be train the mind to have logical understanding from either side to have a better understanding of an issue. One must always view a topic from both sides in order to make any conclusions and the Tibetan style of debate does exactly that in a very swift and demanding aspect!

Check out the video below on the 'intensity' of such debates. It really is very interesting to watch. I am mesmerized everytime... even though I do not understand one word!!! ;)

                                     

Small | Large


buddhalovely

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
    • Email
Re: Debate in Tibetan Buddhism
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2012, 10:37:07 AM »
The purpose for debate

A Tibetan monastery is the center for the teaching of the Buddha’s doctrine and a gathering place for those
seeking inward peace and spiritual growth. The central purposes of Tibetan monastic debate are to defeat
misconceptions, to establish the correct view, and to clear away objections to that view.  To these ends, with
great effort the monks of the Gelugpa Sect engage in debate diligently, seeking to learn well the words and
to understand fully the meaning of the Buddhist doctrine (dharma). Debate for the monks of Tibet is not
mere academics, but a way of using direct implications from the obvious in order to generate an inference of
the non-obvious state of phenomena.  The diligent debaters are seeking to understand the nature of reality
through careful analysis of the state of existence of ordinary phenomena, the bases of reality.
Although reasoning has an essential and irreplaceable place on the path to liberation, even so, the Gelugpas
place a tremendous emphasis on devotion.  When one visits a monastery, one sees that the main activity
there is prayer, not study and debate.  Indeed, the monks identify the limits of reasoning, for even this
essential component is to be transcended by the development of direct perception.  Reasoning itself and the
inference it produces are not the actual antidotes to cyclic existence.  Only direct realization of
selflessness—the wisdom realizing emptiness (sunyata)-- is able to eradicate the foe of ignorance.