Why earlier? Because Vedānta refutes ignorant views that previously did not work for the researcher, in order to discover his or her true nature: To be complete freedom and peace.

The counter-argument or objection comes from the opposite (pakṣa), ignorant side. The objector may be present in the satsaṅga. But traditionally, an objector (real or imagined) is presented in vedānta texts as the teacher’s means of clarification. Not only to reveal the shortcomings of opposing views, but to provide the reader with greater clarity and precision in understanding the words and vision (dṛṣṭi) of the commentator.

In manana, it is also a way for the self-researcher to sharpen her or his knowledge. Logic falsifies shortcomings or errors, just like in science. The pakṣa, the flawed counter-assertion, is “consciously” evoked in my mind or presented by the teacher and refuted by the logic of vedānta. Then the siddhānta, the correct conclusion, is presented.

Setting aside wrong views is a necessary step in unburdening the mind in preparation for hearing what is right. A suitable teacher appreciates stubborn questioners in the satsaṅga because the doubts and obstacles of ignorance are universal, and thus apply to everyone.

In the history of truth, great sages did not shy away from debates either. In the Bṛhadāraṇyaka upaniṣad, Yājñavalkya debates freely, thus presenting the famous neti neti (ignoring objects by knowing that they are pure, full of consciousness) methodology. Ādi Śaṅkara has traveled all over India, engaging in debates everywhere. In this way he made his way through a jumble of misunderstandings in India around 800 AD.

For the aspirant who is ready, the knowledge presented will result in an aha experience, which is called apūrva, literally: “never seen before”, “unparalleled”, and therefore “to put it mildly” life changing. People who have surrendered to the knowledge tool know what this can be like and how it works.