Chapter 22: Of the Priests
I used to go for a morning walk, and he was the only one whom I used to meet on my morning walks. By and by we became very friendly and very close. One day I was talking about sophistry, and he remembered one of his cases that he had fought in the Privy Council, in London. The case was between the Maharaja of Jaipur and the Maharaja of Udaipur. It was a big case but the night before he drank too much, and in the morning there was still the hang-over.
He went to the court. In his drunkenness he forgot completely that he was fighting for the Maharaja of Jaipur. Everybody was astonished because e started criticizing the Maharaja of Jaipur. He gave great arguments, brought all the precedents, all the legal support. Even the judges were looking at each other: What had happened to this man? - he was supposed to fight for the Maharaja of Jaipur. The man who was going to fight for the Maharaja of Udaipur could not believe what is happening: Now what is he going to do?
He was so convincing, that at lunch-time, when the court dissolved, his secretary said, “What are you doing? Are you fighting for the Maharaja of Jaipur or for the Maharaja of Udaipur?”
He said, “I drank too much last night. I do not know for whom I am fighting, for what I am fighting, but I had to say something. Do you think I was on the wrong side?”
The secretary said, “Absolutely wrong - and you have convinced the judges. Even the advocate who is going to argue against you, feels completely lost, because you have done his job already.”
He said, “Do not be worried. So I am for the Maharaja of Jaipur. Just you remain standing by my side and go on pulling my coat, so I don’t forget again. I am still not absolutely out of the influence of the alcohol: I look at the judge and I see two judges and I know - that is my criterion.”
In the second half, after lunch, he said to the judge, “Before lunch I spoke in favor of the Maharaja of Udaipur and against the Maharaja of Jaipur. That was only half my argument. I was preparing the ground. These are the arguments that can be given by the opposing advocate. Now I will begin to destroy all those arguments, because I am here to protect the Maharaja of Jaipur and his interests.”
This was a new revelation to everybody and even the judge could not believe that he would be able to contradict what he had established so clearly. But he contradicted it. Now he argued against himself and he won the case.
So he was telling me that sophistry is a prostitute. Arguments don’t prove anything: A little better argumentation and they can be demolished. If you don’t have the experience, it is dangerous to get into a quarrel, into argumentation, into sophistry, because your mind, having no experience, can be convinced by arguments for something which is not true.
The advice of Zarathustra is: first have the experience - then there is no need to be afraid of any argument, because no argument can destroy your experience. Your experience has a quality of being self evident.
They are bad enemies: nothing is more revengeful than their humility.