One quality that devotees have to develop nowadays in order to be able to peacefully live inside our spiritual society is the capacity to hear different opinions without becoming disturbed or bewildered. Looks straightforward, but it’s actually much harder than it seems.
Nowadays, in general society, we can see that many are capable of something like that. They talk with everyone, hear everything, and don’t become disturbed by different opinions. However, this usually doesn’t come from being genuinely tolerant, but just from believing that everyone can have his own truth. This is a form of impersonalism, which comes from the idea that truth is relative, and thus there is ultimately no truth. People can just live the way they want and do whatever makes them happy.
This doesn’t work for devotees, since we understand that the world doesn’t work like that. There is right and wrong, there is higher and lower. We are supposed to do certain things and avoid certain things. It’s not just a matter of each one having his or her own truth. Certain things, like animal killing and promiscuous sex, are intrinsically wrong and should be avoided by all sane people.
Once we start accepting that it is indeed right and wrong and it’s not just a matter of doing whatever feels good, we automatically start having some trouble dealing with opposite opinions, which can create intolerance, fanaticism, and other problems. How to reconcile both things?
The point is that there are points that are more important than others, and there are also different levels of relationships. When we focus on details, it becomes very easy to disagree with other people, since even inside the most close-knit groups, we will never find people who think exactly the same. If however, we focus on the most important principles and become tolerant about details, it becomes much easier to find like-minded people and cooperate with them. Another point is that it may not be possible to keep a very close relationship with someone who thinks radically differently from us, but it may be possible to maintain a cordial relationship if we keep a healthy distance. When we learn the art of correctly ascertaining what kind of relationship we can have with different people according to the level of affinity we have with them, our lives become much easier.
Another point that can influence our capacity to deal with different opinions is our level of knowledge. When we have just a poor fund of knowledge, our view will tend to be black and white. This is right, that is wrong and there is nothing in between. However, as our knowledge grows, our view becomes more nuanced, and we can see that there are different angles of view and different degrees of truth. We can thus better understand and categorize with we hear from other people, understanding that often they are just describing concepts and ideas that are close to what we also believe.
Ego is also a very important factor. Srila Jiva Goswami explains that there are three types of discussion: vada, jalpa, and vitanda.
The lowest type is vitanda, where one just wants to convince others about his or her opinion. In this type of discussion, there is little interest in finding the real truth and one may use all kinds of dishonest tricks just to win the discussion. Vitanda is thus mainly a dispute of egos. One just wants his opinion to prevail. This type of discussion is in the mode of ignorance since the participants are attached to their own limited truth and have little interest or capacity to understand what is real or not. Emotional debates centered around conspiracy theories are a good example of this type of discussion.
The second type is jalpa, which is in the mode of passion. In this type of discussion, one comes to the argument already convinced that he is right and the other is wrong, and thus just focuses on proving that his point of view is correct. Different from the emotional vitanda discussions, jalpa is usually centered around more solid arguments, but the essence is still the same: there is little interest in finding the truth, one just wants to prove his point. A good example of jalpa is the unlimited battles of quotes we often see.
Vada on the other hand is based on the mode of goodness. In this type of discussion, the goal is to find the truth. It doesn’t matter who is right or wrong. If my opponent is right, I will be happy to learn from him. We can see many examples of this type of discussion in the Caitanya Caritamrta, where opponents of Lord Caitanya would be happy to become His followers once defeated by Him. These were people who were looking for the truth and would be glad to admit defeat when confronted with an opponent with a higher level of realization. The difficulty of course is that this type of debate can be conducted only between people in the mode of goodness, something that is in short supply nowadays.
In the Bhagavad-Gita, Krsna says that “among logicians I am the conclusive truth.” The word used in this verse is “vadah”, which shows how this type of enlightened, fruitful argument is a manifestation of Krsna.
Apart from being able to respect and tolerate other opinions, there is another side to it, that is to have conviction on what we are doing and not becoming bewildered by other opinions. This can also be a challenge because it demands deep philosophical understanding and deep commitment to the path we are following.
In his writings, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura emphasizes the path of Sambandha (philosophical understanding), Abhidheya (practice), and Prayojana (the ultimate goal). The normal progression is that one would first inquire about spiritual knowledge from some enlightened soul, ask questions, and present arguments, and when firmly convinced one would adopt the process and continue practicing until achieving the ultimate goal. The problem is that nowadays we frequently adopt the process on a sentimental basis, just because someone told us so, and thus we are often internally very insecure about what we are doing. We thus try to protect ourselves by being fanatical and closing ourselves to external opinions, or we become bewildered when we hear people advocating other points of view, thinking that we may not be on the best path.
We can see that leaders and spiritual teachers often try to restrict devotees to this level, by training them to just shut up and follow what they say instead of training them to understand and counteract different ideas and philosophies that are not entirely correct. We can see that Srila Prabhupada gives a very good foundation in his books, teaching us about many different ideas and philosophies and gradually training us to differentiate with is right from what is wrong. Taking time to deeply study his books and getting connected with spiritual teachers who can help us to deepen our understanding of his teachings can give us very solid foundations (Sambandha) in our spiritual life, which can in turn allow us to deal with maturity with different opinions, respecting different points of view, but at the same time not falling to point out misconceptions and not becoming bewildered when faced with opposite ideas.
In an environment of abundance of information and facility of communication, as we have nowadays, I believe this is the only viable way to be able to navigate the onslaught of misconceptions and conspiracy theories and be able to find our way back to Krsna. Without solid philosophical understanding, it’s very difficult to be stable in our spiritual practice, and without this stability, it’s very improbable we will be able to reach the ultimate goal by the end of this life.