The tradition of Vāda — discussion, and the stubborn rejection of truth.

There’s a strange bliss in the ignorance of those who argue without logic, facts, or even basic introspection. A divine pastime, perhaps—for those too intoxicated by their own voices to notice the silence of reason. The Gita (2.11) addressed them ages ago:

𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘧.” In simple terms—talking smart doesn’t make you smart. It’s stupid.

The Nyāya Sūtras—our ancient guide to logical reasoning—begin with a premise even the most heated Twitter debater should tattoo on their forehead:

‘Pramāṇa-jñānānām anārambhāt apavādaḥ’ —
𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘦.

Noisy, emotional rants may win applause from the unthinking crowd, but they’ll never win you the truth.

So, if you’re about to unleash another opinion disguised as wisdom — 𝘗𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦. Ask yourself:
Is it grounded in pramāṇa (valid means of knowledge)? Is it smṛti (remembered truth), or is it just your ego dressed up in some complex language and empty soundbites?

Because, Krishna never said but surely meant: “𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘶𝘥 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘭𝘶𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘴. 𝘛𝘳𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦.”

To the earnest seeker of clarity — and the occasional overconfident keyboard warrior posing as a philosopher — let’s keep it simple: “Debate” — like dharma, has its kinds. Not all are noble. Not all deserve applause.

𝗧𝘆𝗽𝗲 𝟭: Vāda – The Grown-up Table:

This is real debate—where both sides commit to something rare and powerful: the truth. Here, thinkers lean on pramāṇa (valid knowledge) and tarka (rigorous reasoning)—not vibes, not volume.

As Nyāya Sūtra 1.2.1 states,
“pramāṇa-tarka-siddhāntānumānopapattiḥ vādaḥ”

𝘋𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘶𝘪𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘳𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴.

The moment truth is uncovered? The debate ends. No drama. No curtain call. Just pure clarity. Rare, elegant, and far too mature for Twitter.
𝗧𝘆𝗽𝗲 𝟮: Jalpa – The Intellectual Wrestling:

This is where the show truly begins. Jalpa isn’t about truth—it’s about victory, ego, and crushing your opponent.
Debate as spectacle. Valid logic? Optional. Trickery, verbal gymnastics, twisted analogies? Absolutely welcome.
Here, it’s not the stronger argument that wins—it’s the loudest, slickest, and most cunning.
Philosophical fancy dress, nothing more.

𝗧𝘆𝗽𝗲 𝟯: Vitandā – Denial Without a Stand

Finally, we reach vitandā—the “debate” where one doesn’t even bother presenting a position.
Oh no. Here, the sole goal is to poke holes, throw shade, and smirk from the sidelines.
The Nyāya Sūtra (1.2.44) leaves no doubt: this is simply “refutation without proposition.”
Even Vātsyāyana, a master of argument, labeled it “useless wrangling” and a disgrace to the discipline.
Why? Because it’s not a debate. It’s heckling dressed up in Sanskrit.
A cheap victory, loaded with jalpa’s ego but none of its effort.
Like winning chess by flipping the board and shouting, “Checkmate!”

𝘚𝘰, 𝘋𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘚𝘦𝘦𝘬𝘦𝘳—𝘈𝘴𝘬 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 :

– Are you stepping into vāda, seeking truth?
– Or just flirting with jalpa, chasing applause and hollow trophies?
– Worse—have you fallen into vitandā, all critique, no contribution?

𝘈𝘴 𝘒𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘯𝘢 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘪𝘵𝘢 ( 4.40 ):

“The ignorant, the faithless, and the doubting self perish.”
Or in less divine terms: If you debate like a clown, don’t expect a philosopher’s respect.

𝘑𝘰𝘪𝘯 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘴𝘺𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺, 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦— Vāda, Jalpa and many more.

DATES OF THIS ONLINE COURSE WILL BE ANNOUNCED VERY SOON

(𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘳𝘢𝘸𝘯 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴)

– Govinda Das (ISKCON Member)