Fwd: Vedantic Discussions in Advaitin List - Vadas

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " advaitins " <advaitins> wrote:

Namaste:

 

Historically it was a common practice for Vedic scholars (including

Shankara) to participate in philosophical debates in the public.

The

scholars engaged in meaningful discussions and debates have

undergone

formal training in `tarka sastra'(expression of viewpoints with

logical coherence and consistency). In all public debates, rights

and

wrongs are openly exchanged and expressed. The point-counter points

and the extent of tarka sastra that went in the analysis have been

well documented in the Vedantic literature. There is nothing

unusual

in pointing out someone is wrong using logical means where

appropriate. The scholars were fully aware that logic alone can

never resolve all the outstanding philosophical issues.

 

All discussants in forums like the advaitin list should also become

familiar with two key terms – kutarka and vitanda. Here is my

understanding of these terms: Kutarka is the technique generally

applied by ego centered scholars to use their knowledge and skills

of

communication to discredit the viewpoints expressed by others.

Mostly

the kutarkis (those who apply the kutarka) will not hesitate to

change their logic quite often because their only goal is to

discredit others. From the Vedic time peirod, discussions are

classified by Samvada, Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda.

 

Samvada is the discussion between the teacher and the taught. All

our scriptures are written in the form of samvada. Before the

teaching starts, the teacher and the taught invoke the grace of the

Lord, to make sure there is no hatred between the two so that

teaching can takes place. The student is allowed to question, and

the questioning is not intended to test the teacher but to clarify

student's understanding (or misunderstanding).

 

Jalpa is the discussion between the two who are also convinced that

each one is right and the opponent is wrong. Unlike in vada, the

purpose is not to discover or establish the truth, but only to

convert the other guy. The outcome of this whole jalpa is lot of

noise. Even if it appears that one has lost an argument, he will

not

accept it, instead he goes back to get some more materials or

concocts some other arguments only to establish he is right and

other

is wrong.

 

Vitanda is the least preferred and recognized among the above four

employed with the sole purpose to defeat the opponent. Those who

employ Vitanda do not have any conviction and only purpose of

vitanda

is to invalidate any established position. It is important for all

of

us to know the pitfalls of kutarka and vitanda so that we avoid

employing those ill-suited techniques for discussions focusing on

`Seeking the Truth.'

 

This article is reposted at this time to help members to understand

why they should avoid using Kutarka and Vitanda Vada during

discussions. We all should also remind ourselves that posting is a

privilege and is not a right. When a member engages in `Kutarka'

or `Vitanda' the most `effective reply' for such posts is `no

reply!'