Types of arguments (Vaada, Jalpa, Vitanda)

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Could someone please shed light into the

differences of the above three modes of

arguing ?

 

adiyein,

Sri Ramanuja Dasan

 

 

 

New DSL Internet Access from SBC &

http://sbc.

[Guest guest]

--- Dodge Ram <ramchellam wrote:

>

>

> Hi All,

> Could someone please shed light into the

> differences of the above three modes of

> arguing ?

>

> adiyein,

> Sri Ramanuja Dasan

>

 

 

There are actually four types of discussions - samvaada, vaada, jalpa

and vitanDa.

samvaada is the discussion between the teacher and the taught as in

shree krishna-arujuna samvaada. The student does not question the

teacher but questions his understanding for clarification. This type

of discussion can occur only when the student surrenders himself

compleately at the feet of the teacher.

 

Vaada - is the discussion between two equals - the purpose is to

settle what is the truth. Both come to the table for discussion with

an open mind and the discussion is based on some accepted pramaaNa -

of the authority - for vedanata the pramaaNa-s are specifically the

prasthaanatraya - the Vedas, Bhagavad Geeta and Brahmasuutra. There

are judges to insure the discussion proceeds along the accepted

pramaaNa-s The discussion proceeds until one accepts the other

arguments. Some time the discussions can take days - as in the

famous discussion between Shankara and Mandana Misra which was

supposed to have lasted for 18 days till Mandana Misra accepted

defeat and became Shankara's disciple. Mandana Misra's wife,

Bharati, who was a scholar by herself was supposed to have served as

a judge for that vaada.

 

 

Jalpa is where each discussors comes to the table with preconceived

notion that he is right and the other fellow is worng. The other

fellow also comes with the same notion. The purpose of the

discussion is only to conver the other fellow to his camp. There is

no knowledge that takes place in these discussions. Even if one is

loosing his arguments, he only goes and comes back with more

ammunition to defend himself. Only lot of noise. But those who are

bystander can learn the defect in each of their orguments and they

can learn out of these discussions if they do not have nay

preconceived notions. Now a days when I hear any discussions among an

adviatins, vishishhTaadvaitins and dvaitins, I find it mostly as

jalpa than vaada.

 

Vitanda - is some what peculier. In these discussions one is ready

to take up the other fellows arguments, which he himself does not

believ in, but orgues against the other fellow just to prove that he

is wrong. This is also accepted arguments and is used very

effectively to prove there is no credibility for the opponent. You

are wrong, not becuase the stament by itself is worng but it is wrong

because you made that statement.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

 

 

=====

What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift

to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.

 

 

 

New DSL Internet Access from SBC &

http://sbc.