Acharya Prashant addresses the question of whether the ancient tradition of 'Shastrarth' (scriptural debate) is still useful today for defeating false gurus, as was done by figures like Adi Shankaracharya. He explains that in those times, such debates were effective because the participants who lost were honest enough to accept their defeat. For instance, Mandana Mishra, after being defeated by Shankaracharya, accepted him as his guru. Today, however, the situation is different. The dishonest individuals spreading falsehoods would not even agree to a face-to-face debate. Even if they did, it would resemble a modern television debate where both parties shout simultaneously, and victory is determined by who gets more airtime, not by the merit of their arguments. Acharya Prashant laments the loss of honesty and integrity. He recounts the story of the debate between Shankaracharya, a proponent of Advaita (non-dualism), and Mandana Mishra, a staunch dualist. When Mandana Mishra was on the verge of defeat, his wife, Bharati, who was equally learned, intervened. This story, he notes, contradicts the modern, distorted narrative that ancient India was a place of constant oppression of women. This false narrative, he argues, is deliberately spread to make people feel ashamed of their roots and lose faith in their own identity. He points out that the entire 4000-year history of India is often wrongly reduced to practices like Sati, while stories of learned women like Bharati are ignored because they don't fit the agenda of portraying a history of exploitation. Continuing the story, Bharati posed questions to Shankaracharya about carnal desire and sexual intercourse, subjects the renunciate was unfamiliar with. Displaying his integrity, Shankaracharya asked for time to learn about these worldly matters. The legend says he used his yogic powers to enter a king's body to gain this experience, after which he returned and answered Bharati's questions, leading to Mandana Mishra's acceptance of discipleship. Acharya Prashant highlights the honesty of Mandana Mishra, the practical wisdom of Bharati, and the integrity of Shankaracharya as qualities that made such profound exchanges possible. He asserts that while base instincts like lust and greed are timeless, the heights of consciousness are also timelessly possible but require dedicated effort. The current challenge is that the minds of people are being corrupted, making it difficult to spread the truth. He concludes that the only way forward is to continue the work of spreading truth, even if it means adapting the presentation to be more engaging for a modern audience that is often drawn to sensationalism over substance.
