We Hindus have so many schools of
thought and in a sense we are so fortunate that time and again we have a new
thought which makes our effort to comprehend the Truth much more easier. We have had the
great philosophers like Sri Sri Shankara, Srimad Ramanuja and Sriman Madhva to
decode the Vedas for us with a new dimension.
We only know that these three
Acharyas gave contrary views about the Truth, but we do not understand that it
was completely under the guidelines of Khandana (Refutation) followed by
Mandana (Embellishment). It is very easy to disagree but it is difficult to
give an alternative. In the social media we find many discussions and arguments
which sometimes get diverted from the topic due to lack of material to
embellish that which was refuted.
The truth about a subject will get the clarity through debate, this is called Carcha. There are 4 types of debate.
The first and foremost is the one
between a learned and a learner, here the learned one is doing the talking the other is
listening most of the time, but when he has any doubt he will pose a question.
The best example is that of Sri Krishna and Arjuna just before the start of
Kurukshetra war. This is called Samvaada (Interaction). The Upanishads are
filled with such Samvaada where the Shishya clarifies his doubt by approaching
his Guru and requesting him for clarification.
Next is the debate between two who have the same wavelength of understanding. This kind of debate is to resolve the confusion and arrive at the truth. This is called Vaada (Discussion); here both the individuals have an open-mind. Though at first they are convinced that what they think is right, they will be ready to listen and accept the version of the other. At the end of the discussion understanding unfurls and there is a flow of knowledge from one individual to the other. There is a sense of satisfaction in both, as the Truth is established.
While Samvaada and Vaada help in establishing the truth there are yet two more types of debate which fall back in establishing the truth. The first among them is Jalpa (Argument) which is just to prove either of the debater is correct. Unlike in Vaada, the purpose is not to establish the Truth, but only to establish the supremacy. This kind of debate create lots of noise and there is no end for it. With the keen interest of gaining supremacy both do not value the debate but will continue to overpower the other with the sword of words.
Next type of debate is much funnier. This is called Vitanda (Nitpicking). Here the topic of debate is diverted by targeting the other by taking the statement made out of context or using Anukula Shastra (Theory of Convenience). The sole purpose of the debate will be to humiliate the other. Basic exercise in this kind of debate is to refute whatever the other says without providing an alternative. Sometimes a topic is so selected that it is only to argue, even though either of them have no faith in the truth of the subject.
Jalpa and Vitanda are nothing but display of mental strength and desperation to win instead of knowing the truth. But the result of Samvaada and Vaada is to ascertain truth and an unbiased non-partisan agreement of truth. We have heard of the debates and discussions held at the court of King Janaka. The King was one of the great patrons of learning metaphysics. He had an impressive court and would invite all for debate and discussions.
No comments:
Post a Comment