A Debate Among Christians, Buddhists, and Muslims at the Mongol Court 'n May 1254, Möngke sent word to William that, before departing, the Christians, Muslims, and Buddhists should meetand debate religious teach- ings, since Möngke hoped to "learn the truth." William agreed to participate, and he and the Eastern Christians, whom William called Nestorians, had a practice session in which he even took the part of an imaginary Buddhist opponent. On the appointed day, Möngke sent three of his secretaries-a Christian, a Muslim, and a Buddhist-to be the judges. Since William's report is the only record that survives, historians cannot compare it with other descriptions of what happened. It is possible, for example, that he exaggerated his own role in the debate or misunderstood the arguments of his opponents. The debate began with William arguing points with a Chinese Buddhist, whom William identifies by the Mongolian word tuin (TWUN). Like the Crusaders, William refers to the Muslims as Saracens and reports that they said little. Source: From Peter Jackson, The Mission of Friar Waliam Rubruck, The Hakluyt Society, 1990, pp. 231-235. Reprinted with pemission. The Hakluyt Society was established in 1846 for the purpose of printing rare or unpublished Voyages and Travels. For further information please see their website at: www.hakluyt.com. of things is evil and the other half good, or at least that there are two principles; and as regards souls, they all believe that they pass from one body to another. The Christlans then placed me in the middle and told the tvins to address me; and the lat- ter, who were there in considerable numbers, began to murmur against Möngke Khan, since no Khan had ever attempted to probe their secrets. They confronted me with some- one who had oome from Cataia [China]: he had his own interpreter, while I had Master William's son. Even one of the wiser of the Nestorian He began by saying to me, "Friend, if you are brought to a halt, you may look for a wiser man than yourself." I did not reply. Nexthe enquired what I wanted to debate first: either how the world had been made, or priests asked me whether it was possíble for the souls of animals to escape after death to any place where they would not be com- pelled to suffer. In support of this fallacy, moreover, so Master William told me, a boy was brought from Catala [China], who to judge by his physical size was not three years old, yet was fully capable of rational thought: he said of himself that he was in his third incarnation, and he knew how to read what becomes of souls after death. and write. "Friend," I answered, "that ought not to be the starting-polnt of our discussion. All things are from God, and He is the fountain- head of all. Therefore we should begin by speaking about God, for you hold a different view of Him from us and Möngke wishes to learn whose belief is superior." The umpires ruled that this was fair. I sald, then, to the tuin: "We firmly belleve in our hearts and acknowledge with our lips that God exists, that there is only one God, and that He is one in perfect unity. What do you believe?" "It is fools," he said, "who claim there is only one God. Wise men say that there are several. Are there not great rulers in your country, and is not Möngke Khan the chief lord here? It is the same with gods, inas- much as there are different gods in different regions." They wanted to begin with the issues I have mentioned because they regard them as more important. All of them belong to the Manichaean heresy, to the effect that one half "You choose a bad example," I told him, "in drawing a parallel between men and God: that way any powerful figure could be called a god in his own dominions." But as I was seeking to demolish the anal- ogy, he distracted me by asking, "What is your God like, of Whom you claim that there is no other?" "Our God," I replied, "beside Whom there is no other, is all-powerful and there- fore needs assistance from no one; in fact we all stand in need of His. With men it is not so: no man is capable of all things, and for this reason there have to be a num- ber of rulers on earth, since no one has the power to undertake the whole. Again, He is all-knowing and therefore needs no one as statement and recorded it In writing as some- thing erroneous and impossible.... He sat for a long while reluctant to an- swer, with the result that the secretaries who were listening on the Khan's behalf had to order him to reply. Finally he gave the an- swer that no god was all-powerful, at which all the Saracens burst into loud laughter. When silence was restored I sald: "So, then, not one of your gods is capable of rescuing you in every danger, inasmuch as a predica- ment may be met with where he does not have the power. Further, 'no man can serve two masters': so how is it that you can serve so many gods in Heaven and on earth?" The audience told him to reply; yet he re- mained speechless. But when I was seeking to put forward arguments for the unity of the Divine essence and for the Trinity while everyone was listening, the local Nestorians told me it was enough, as they wanted to speak themselves. At this polnt I made way for them [the Eastern Christians). But when they sought to argue with the Saracens, the latter replied: "We concede that your religion is true and that everything in the Gospel is true; and therefore we have no wish to debate any is- sue with you." And they admitted that in all their prayers they beg God that they may die a Christian death.... Everybody listened without challenging a single word. But for all that no one said, "I believe, and wish to become a Christlan." When it was all over, the Nestorians and Saracens alike sang in loud volces, while the tuins remained silent; and after that everyone drank heavily. counsellor: in fact all wisdom is from Him. And again He is the supreme Good and has no need of our goods: rather, 'in Him we live and move and are.' This is the nature of our God, and it is unnecessary, therefore, to pos- tulate any other." "That is not so," he declared. "On the contrary, there is one supreme god in Heaven, of whose origin we are still ignorant, with ten others under him and one of the lowest rank beneath them; while on earth they are with- out number." As he was about to spin yet more yarns, I asked about this supreme god: did he believe he was all-powerful, or was some other god? He was afrald to answer, and asked: "If your God is as you say, why has He made half of things evil?" "That is an error," I sald. "It is not God who created evil. Everything that exists is good." All the tuins were amazed at this