The Vadavidhi
By Giuseppe Tucci
Summary
The Vadavidhi's authorship remains debated, with Vidyabhiṣaṇa attributing it to Dharmakirti's *Vadanyāya* (later identified as *Codananyāya* in Tibetan translations), while critics like R. Tyengar and later Prof. Keith question this link. Uddyotakara's references to the *Vadavidhi* and *Vadavidhinī* (possibly the same work) lack explicit authorship details in Sanskrit sources. Vidyabhiṣaṇa's theory hinges on the *pratijñā* definition (*sadhyabhidhanam pratijñā*), which differs slightly from Dharmakirti's *Codananyāya* (defining *pratijñā* as *bhāṣṭrūp*). The *Vadavidhi* aligns more closely with Buddhist logical frameworks, emphasizing *pakṣa* theory over the Nyāya-sūtra's syllogistic structure. Despite textual similarities, the *Vadavidhi*'s definition of *pratijñā* as inherently tied to *pakṣa* (unlike Dharmakirti's incidental mention) suggests distinct doctrinal positions. Prof. Keith dismisses Tyengar's arguments as unconvincing, noting no definitive evidence to overturn Vidyabhiṣaṇa's attribution. However, the absence of explicit authorship in primary sources and discrepancies in definitions leave the debate unresolved, underscoring the need for further evidence.
Conclusion
The debate over the authorship of the *Vadavidhi* remains pivotal for understanding the evolution of Buddhist logic, particularly its divergence from Nyāya frameworks. This analysis underscores the inconsistencies in attributing the text to Dharmakirti, primarily due to the absence of the *Vadavidhi* title in Tibetan translations of his works and the semantic discrepancies in the definition of *pratijñā*. The *Vadavidhi*'s unique emphasis on the *pakṣa* doctrine, distinct from both Nyāya and Dharmakirti’s approaches, further complicates its attribution. While Vidyābhisaṇa’s identification with the *Vadanyāya* is challenged by textual and terminological mismatches, the lack of definitive evidence leaves the authorship unresolved. This ambiguity not only highlights the complexity of tracing Buddhist logical treatises but also underscores the need for further scholarly inquiry to clarify the historical lineage of these texts. The *Vadavidhi*’s significance as a critical link in the development of Buddhist logic