In Search of The Integral Learning Paradigm
Invitation to the discussion and participation in the research project:
“On self-learning center”
Preliminary remarks:
There is a growing interest in the modern world in a new possibility of human consciousness to be integrated around a higher center of consciousness, and in the field of the Humanities for all branches of knowledge to be integrated around One Knowledge. There is a need in a new educational environment, where all major faculties of human consciousness could be studied and exercised in the most comprehensive and intelligible way. What we are looking for is new ways of learning which may result in a concrete change of consciousness.
The technological progress is a priority today in every field of human endeavor including education. It is, no doubt, very important for the growth of human welfare in general. But the fast technological progress which is not backed up or not balanced with the growth of human consciousness in its psychological, philosophical, linguistic, social and artistic development may cause a fundamental disbalance, leading to a destruction of all that the technological progress was meant to stand for in the first place. So there must be also a ‘high-tech’ development in the field of the Humanities, as it were, if we are to sustain a harmonious growth on earth.
With the successful and rapid growth of technological progress unfortunately other approaches, which are different from scientific, have been looked at as ‘a taboo’ and got banished from the curricula of many hard-core ‘scientific’ institutions, which still persist in the one-sided technological development, ignoring and sometimes even belittling the psychological and spiritual needs in the development of human beings, treating them as purely biological phenomena. There are quite a few reasons for such a treatment, which can be found in the past history of the fight with the religious dogma, and also within the resent economic trends based on the industrial mind-set, building up the so called market-oriented society rather than the human-oriented one. Religions on the other hand, and especially Abrahamic, offer nothing much in terms of the technological progress or its material manifestation. They deal with the issues related only to the afterlife existence, ‘blackmailing’ human beings with their dogmas, offering them the everlasting existence beyond this world, and in many cases making good money already in this world by selling tickets for the life after death. None of these two approaches can truly solve the paradox of human existence. We need a new paradigm of Integral Knowledge which is neither purely religious nor exceptionally materialistic.
In our research we must overview many ancient and modern systems of knowledge in different traditions in the West and in the East. But at the end we shall focus mainly on the Vedic and Vedantic paradigms of learning trying to understand in depth their epistemological background and see how far they can help us in deconstructing the knowledge we have already acquired in the fields of the Humanities in order to approach it in a more integral way. The systems of knowledge that developed in the pre-rational structures are of utmost importance for our research, for they (1) shed some light on the beginnings of the rational structure, (2) build up a historical depth of our consciousness, and (3) introduce the solutions which lie beyond the methods of rational structure; for it is a synthesis or ‘diaphaneity’, in Gebserean terms, of all of them that may give us a glimpse of an emerging Integral structure.
Vedic tradition designed many different epistemological frameworks, viewing reality from many different perspectives and in many ways. But three of them are fundamental: adhibhūta, adhidaiva and adhyātma. Adhibhūta deals with our material existence as such, adhidaiva with non-material workings in us of our faculties of consciousness (seeing, hearing, etc.) and adhyātma views all from the highest point of view of Consciousness (the all-pervading presence of the Self).
To comprehend the relations between these epistemological frameworks we must look deeper into their origins and the fundamentals of Vedantic Philosophy and Psychology.
Some important points of our research:
1) The studies of the faculties of human consciousness.
At first we shall define the essential cognitive faculties of consciousness as they are seen in the ancient Vedanta. Seeing, thinking, hearing, speaking, feeling and touch were considered to be the main functions of consciousness. These are the definitions of the pre-rational structure (before 800 BC), which makes it very valuable for our research, for they differ from the definition of senses in the mental structure of consciousness in Sankhya and Yoga (200 BC). To understand the shift of epistemological paradigm in terms of the faculties of consciousness is crucial for our research, for it will help us to widen and deepen our perspectives and will allow us to stay rational in our methodology. So we shall be able to use the perspectives of the pre-rational: magic and mythical structures, being rational in our research.
2) The studies of the Humanities.
These fundamental faculties of consciousness in their essential function seem to have a correspondence with the main subjects of the Humanities, for the latter have developed as a result of their application. So in the context of the Vedantic paradigm the basic subjects of the Humanities can be briefly defined in this way:
Psychology deals with our subjective processes of thinking and self-evaluation;
Philosophy deals with our mental ability to overview and to conceptualize;
Linguistics deals with our faculty of Speech, as an ability to communicate and express ourselves;
Sociology and History deal with relationship as such: how the individual and collective relate to one another, on the scale of space (Sociology, Ethnography etc.) or time (History);
Art deals with the refinement of our feelings and emotions.
Science of Nature deals with Matter as such, our physical existence in the objective way.
Such an approach to learning, where all major cognitive faculties of consciousness are integrated into one movement of individualised consciousness is a desideratum for modern education. Having identified the nature of different approaches with their cognitive faculties of consciousness, the scholars themselves may become a field of research, as it were; and the division on the subjective and objective approaches to knowledge would seize to exist and have only a classifying value, where the subjects of the Humanities would simply become a means for self-education, necessary to develop Philosophical, Psychological, Social (Historical), Artistic, Linguistic and Scientific approaches to reality, tuning to One Consciousness beyond them. Such an approach may prepare a wider ground for a truer perception of our life, and lead us eventually to an integral perception of our faculties, opening them up to their higher capacities. So, the aim of this research is the discovery of the Integral Paradigm of Knowledge, and all possible ‘technological’ solutions for its achievement.
As a result of this research we intend to create a program for self-education, which can be used also online, where students will be able to find all the means and methodologies necessary to educate themselves. The program shall be built in such a way that it will help them to find all the essential elements for self-education. Moreover it should be organized into a structure which would reflect the hierarchical and developmental relations between the disciplines and different topics, helping students to understand the complexity of integral education. Thus through the structure itself students should be able to find the elements they need for their integral education and concentrate on filling in lacunas. Such a research cannot be completed by one person and requires a group of dedicated scholars who will be willing to deconstruct and to bring out the essential elements of their subjects in a new light of the Integral Paradigm of Knowledge. It is a tremendous and noble work of which this research can be a humble beginning.
commented by KRISHNA G MISRA on Jan 13, 2012
Therefore, first principle of education is, that children should be protected from 'subjects' or 'vishay'. We should not give them our knowledge that they do not need or have a distaste of learning it by force. Environment is their only teacher and in creation of that inspiring environment is our only responsibility. Purity and innocence of a child by default comes from non-differentiation or truth, and they are not as much hard wired mind as ours.
Second principle is, to have four basic understanding of चार पुरुषार्थ जैसे काम (जीवन के आवश्यकताओं की पूर्ति) अर्थ (व्यक्तिगत रुचियों और स्व-भाव के ज्ञान से सांसरिक स्थिरता की प्राप्ति ) धर्म (प्रकृतिक सिद्धांतों के ज्ञान की पूर्णता, विवेकशील आचरण) मोक्ष (आत्मा का सत्य, अपेक्षाओं, संकल्पों और मोह का पूर्ण क्षय)।
Shiksha .... 'technique' with aim to be able to relate to real world by sensory and intellectual ability
Gyan ......independent realization by histroically known natural sciences, and how do these work in the real world
Vidya ...wisdom or decision making without bias or control interest
Satya ....truth of self
Unfortunately, none of the above are included in our processes of 'education'. Historically, education is a legal process of making or manufacturing publicly recognized individual. You all may be knowing that 'father in law' is a manufactured father after a process of marriage of son/daughter. Similarly, degree of bachelor of medicines is about making a'physician in law' which is not a natural physician but manufactured by education as process. The degree or measurements in education are really very tough (rather cruel) and any examination is no less than testing a machine in a workshop.
For those who have studied Plato and his work 'republic' would know that education is very important military tool (with rigid strategy and structure) and by that it crafted finest warriors and as did Dronacharya in Mahabharata or Chanakya to Mourya.
But, I feel that Plato and Dronacharya has had a loss. Arjun was found saying in middle of war, that he cannot use weapon whatever was taught by Drona, and has had no initial interest in war. Instead, Krishna and Buddha were altogether another type of Guru who only taught love and liberty and also an enthusiasm of war, and 'dharma'
natural laws. Alexander who came from Plato-kul, (socratese- plato-artotle- alexander) and Ashoka from Buddha-kul differ. And so is difference in DronACharya and Krishna.
commented by Vladimir on Aug 25, 2011
The real difficulty in the subjective studies of the faculties lies in the fact that consciousness is acting through all the faculties simultaneously; the faculties cannot be easily distinguished when applied to the fields of studies. They are inseparably mixed in their flow making researcher unconscious of their particularities. The researcher moves from one object to another trying to make sense of a coherent presentation of things to his own mind, being unconscious or half-conscious of what is really going on within his faculties. He is not in control of them but is controlled by them, for he is not aware of the fundamental relation of his subjective faculties with the essential approaches in the subjects and therefore is easily driven astray, mixing up levels and approaches, seemingly discovering new vistas, endlessly arguing and doubting all. To make an order within the endless branches of the Humanities we must introduce criteria of subjective perception. All the knowledge thus must have its meaningful correspondence with a true subjectivity in the individual consciousness. It is because we were not fully conscious of it, using it in a mixed fashion, that we created this endless jungle of subjects and approaches. To clean up this mess we need a steady knowledge of our subjectivity and a true understanding of our faculties of consciousness. On this ground we shall be able to deconstruct the subjects of the Humanities bringing them into a new light of Integral knowledge.
It is in this view that we shall seek our help from the ancient systems of Knowledge. In the ancient Vedanta we shall find a clear definition of consciousness it terms of its faculties: hearing, seeing, speaking, thinking, feeling and being in the body (touch). These faculties represent consciousness in manifestation. Being different in their approaches to learning they produce their own domains of knowledge.
Thinking – Psychology
What we call ‘Thinking’ in our system is actually a capacity of the mental Self to hold the image of things in order to enter with it into comprehensive or apprehensive, synthetic or analytic relations; when this faculty is predominantly exercised it produces what we may call Psychological sciences in the fields of application, including Yoga, Meditation techniques, Religious and Spiritual practices from different Religions, Mystical and Philosophical Traditions. In one word we may call it ‘Psychology’ or the Study of the subjective actions of the Self, implying the capacity to concentrate and identify with the image of things. It is the central power of the knowledge by identity.
Seeing - Philosophy
What we call ‘Seeing’ is a capacity of Consciousness to view and overview the image of things in its relation with other images, as it were, to see all the bits and pieces of mosaic of the Self or selves in one meaningful picture. We often use the word ‘vision’ as ‘understanding’ of a bigger picture; or in the same way we use the word ‘philosophy’. Seeing can be exercised on all the levels: mental, vital and physical. When it is done on the mental level it produces Philosophy.
So, if ‘Thinking’ can be defined as concentrating or holding the Self upon the image of things to be able to identify with it, then ‘Seeing’ can be defined as viewing it as such, as if objectively; it is the essential characteristic of consciousness to reflect the image of things in one’s own mirror, as it were, where it can be seen and understood as such, while being held by our ‘Thinking’ capacity of the Self. Seeing implies light in both directions of illumining the image of things and reflecting it in the mirror of our own consciousness, knowing it. It is through this process of illumination and reflection that the whole process of cognition is taking place.
Speaking – Philology
What we call ‘Speaking’ is a capacity of the Self to express oneself and to communicate it with others. We shall call it also ‘the Word’. This capacity differs fundamentally from the previous two, where holding and perceiving the image of things is the essential capacity of the Self and it’s Consciousness. ‘Speaking’ is expressing the Self from the point of view of ‘Thinking’, but from the point of view of ‘Seeing’ it relates or communicates it to the wider environment. In this context it is noteworthy to mention the distinction between speech and language.
So we may say that essentially the Word relates the Self to other selves in a particular way of self-expression through communication.
Hearing – History/Sociology
What we call ‘Hearing’ is a fundamental faculty of Consciousness to relate the self-expression of the Self, the Word, to all other expressions made by the Self or selves, to create a coherent meaningful environment, as it were. It is no more in the direct order as it is done by the direct seeing of Consciousness, but in the indirect relation to its meaning or rather of its meaning to other meaningful relations. It is a capacity to deal with relations as such, as if objectively, creative of space (sociological approach) and time (historical approach).
Feeling – Art
There are two more fundamental faculties of consciousness: ‘Feeling’ and ‘Touch’, which are closer to our physical reality and require different treatment altogether, more familiar to our scientific approaches. Feelings and emotions empower our self-expression with the dynamism of the vital force which makes it possible to be manifested on the physical plane. This empowerment by the vital emotion of the mental will of the Self links it to the physical reality. The refinement of this vital power by the growth of consciousness through the mental will of the self-expressing Word is one way of looking at Art and Culture in general. It is a realm of subjective manifestation of the Self, whereas the objective manifestation of it is the next faculty of Touch or awareness of the body.
Touch – Science of Nature
This is the last essential faculty of Consciousness, presenting the Self to the objective perception of other selves, knowing itself objectively and by instruments detecting objectively its data, in other words, knowing ‘objective’ by ‘objective means’ – a purely scientific approach.
Education, the meaning of
- Obviously, our mission is Education.
1.1 Education as State SubjectBut what does the word education mean? It differs from one person to another. In the Greek, idea of republic was a concept of Plato. In those days, education was a process, of making citizens out of a laymen by indoctrination into a procedures /laws of the state. University system to this day is filled with terms like a 'degree' (legal sanction), 'senate' (a group of law makers) and ‘ordinances’ (communication of laws), and so on. These terms are from the family of legal terminology. Do we really mean the same meaning of education what it was in 700 BC? In those days, degree or legal status gave an individual an authority to get employment in work of the state, and in course of implementing different laws. To under go a procedure of education and those who qualify it were awarded a degree by the senate or court of the town. The one, getting a degree is essentially a product of a procedure or law. He/she is not a man or women in flesh and blood but in essence, becomes an instrument of law or procedure (also called legal machinery).
1.2. Laws and actors of the Laws
'Father in law' is a very common example. The term 'in law' is denoting a shadow (or acting in the role) of father with respect to a certain references in the law, or an artificially defined father. This position of 'father in law' is a result of a procedure or application of public laws of marriage of his son or daughter. By this procedure ‘marriage’, a couple can legitimately live together in a society and their children become legal heir. Procedure is a formal and public act such as rituals involving several witnesses, and thus, is recognized by the state. Although he is not a ‘natural father’ but is ‘a father in law’ produced and defined artificially (man made) by methods, formal and legal procedure of ‘marriage’. ‘Father in law’ is neither a birthright nor a family tradition.In a similar way, education makes ‘citizen in law’ or 'engineer in law' artificially by award of a degree. An engineer in law is a practicing laws of engineering. Similar is a 'doctor in law' holding a degree in medicines and is allowed to practice laws of medicine, and 'architect in law' by a formal training in the procedure of architecture. All 'in laws' are like actors in a cinema, where script of logic, emotion and action is practiced in real life. A magistrate or police or judge or convict or lawyers are a sort of artifacts of legal (defined 'in law') conduct; and for this reason, have to conform to a strict dress code while acting (authorized or assigned roles) in the public domain.
Education is a formal and state processes of regulation of public conduct which apply to every specialist activity in public domain. Any other way of doing even better than the prescribed by the laws is illegal and punishable. Interestingly, all scientific research is illegal and prohibited to practice in public domain unless that becomes a law. Word of 'allopath' (branch of scientific study of medicine) meant 'alternative medicine' because it was not a legal practice but an alternative treatment. This dramatic construction of state or any man-made organization is an attempt of defining various conducts and by it, introducing some kind of art and discipline.
1.3. Disease of Specialization
For the Greek, a character of human was never easy to understand, and it remained inconclusive and unknown. On the other hand, conduct was relatively easier to define ('in laws') by observation and evidences, and can be treated as a prescription of the state and statesmen for peace and prosperity. In this way, precision of sword gets converted into the precision of making of the laws, and in establishing a framework of education for people in practicing those procedures and laws. Results are initially very good. In Greek, every house was constructed as per provisions of laws or codified procedures. The way of taking food or etiquette and rituals of ceremony, were all regulated by some or the other laws. Western nations have practiced diligently the idea of the Greek education and that made them good citizens.
This prescription of republic in India is unusual. Laws in India were of colonial interpretation, and ideas of laws and education were alien. In India, laws were taken more seriously and sacrosanct. Laws become a tool of control rather than a tool of equality. In any republic, ordinary people take roles in it by practicing different laws and procedures, but not becoming the one. When actors of laws get mad, he/she begins to change the principles so that the role played becomes his/her monopoly. In India, people when claiming pension from state, need a certificate of a physician to prove to the bank that they are alive. Similarly, many people are walking but are dead in record of the state and have no right on their property. Government and physicians take money for this. Physicians and government in such example taken the advantage of and misuse the law for controls. Of course, the Greek civilization reminds us how it collapsed with best of the judges, architects and every artifacts of the republic. Laws or procedures if not constantly renewed and not open to criticism, it gives rise to a ‘disease of specialization’ and laws take shape of the sword in a reverse integration and are misused. Civilizing in that case, becomes an incurable disease by the reluctance to change.
1.4 Separation of Character and Conduct
Greek education builds conduct; because only conduct is public, whereas character is private. If conduct gets somehow controlled by the state, character gets controlled as a result. Codification of conduct became important because the concept of gentleman or those who fit as judges with an unquestionable integrity were impossible to find. Judges were corrupt and they compromised on integrity or gentleman status. Gentleman agreement is a sort of agreement where what another party says is unquestioned. Greek philosophers then zeroed on a principle of “judge, not a man but a procedure”. As a machinery of state, the education de-humanized the public conduct by adopting codified laws of the state that made anyone and every men as judges of their own and others action.
Judges were then law bound and not by a character of integrity, or any birthrights. Graduating in law (of public conduct) from university and practicing judges, for example, wore black attire in workplaces that make them faceless and free from any bias of personal character. Even a convict can practice laws and become a judge, and simultaneously can endure the punishment. Also, a man who is sick can become a doctor and can, without a problem, practice laws of medicine. In India, the offenders of laws or erstwhile criminals constitute a sizable proportion of lawmakers. In this way, character and conduct got separated, and state action based on conduct was called secular (means, without bias of character of individuals).
1.5 Abolition of birthright and nepotism for making a place of the framework of laws
This Greek education leading to a degree was strictly 'legal' activity, and not flexible. By Greek tradition, state has a role to make artificial (man-made) citizens by awareness of the laws (acceptable public conduct in every field) by a formal process of education. Only a degree holder could be employed for a position of authority such as in act of judges or magistrates. Skill, knowledge and authority flowing from birthright or family tradition or without formal state regulated procedure, were unlawful and were in those days, known as nepotism.
1.6 Market and invention of Lawless States
State action of education also came into crisis because it is generally felt even now that those having degrees and authority associated with it cannot succeed outside the state protection. And it is often found that education for degree did not made good human being even though they were indeed practitioners of the great laws as engineer, or doctor or architect. Things changed. In a market economy, education is defined not in strict legal sense and degree is no longer a prestige of state authority; but the acquisition of knowledge that encourages liberty and experimentation, and doing and becoming what one wants to be. This is a sort of lawlessness as far as the state control was concerned, and market is an alternative state or a lawless state with people having right of choices.
1.7. Indian dilemma with defining education
In India, education is not a state or citizen/public legalization subject. Greek idea of education in making of a citizen of laws is not valid. Even lawmakers in India need have no formal education, or any sense of formalized ‘acceptable public conduct’. Citizenship of state here is not artificial (legal, man made) but a birthright. Education, indifferent of a state, is nothing to do with ensuring laws and conduct of citizens in a town or a country, but in serving market of occupation and skills, and assumed a very different dimension of intellectual development. In the present context, purpose of education has grown much bigger and not remained in hand of the state and in serving its limited purpose.
It is also interesting for India to know how do the government defines it? Of course, it is yet to define the word of education and what properties should be inside ‘educated’ human. Same is the problem with word ‘development’. If a person asks what should I do to be called ‘developed’ and what all can make our country ‘developed’, it has no correct or even incorrect but ONE answer. For example, if we call a man ‘white’, it is easy to recognize it by color. But without a definition, how can it be known and what tests apply who is educated and who is not, in an impartial manner. In pondering at finding any meaning of education, there are interesting points of views even in judgments of supreme courts, especially in its judgment of abandoning Chhatisgarh based Universities, and one certainly can read them.
2.1 New Definition of Education
If we have to define education for our country we should be certain what educating means to us, and its traits.
Becoming Human is all about Education.
Property of human is very hard to define, only this is the reason why it is much easier becoming doctor or engineer or lawyer and not human. From this point of view, becoming human is key to education, and these get reflected in the three forms:Relative ‘success’ i.e., strength, livelihood and dignity
Strength is merit or ability of being useful and not armtwisting or seeking control. This means, the individual is concerned with pains and pleasure of others, and finds skill and knowledge in being a solution. Strength is fearless and sensitive aptitute with a purpose. All of these are called relative Success because individuals own none of these by birth, and this is a decision of challenging evil. This means, an individual is 'unsuccessful' if he/she cannot such an strength, is unable to find decent livelihood or in fulfilling worldly responsibility for self and family and those dependent on, and is without dignity. Being 'unsuccessful' is ‘not education’.
Self "life' i.e., liberty, happiness and self realization
Life as we all know is not produced by specification and comes naturally. In Sanskrit, "ya vidya sa vimuktye" i.e., education is known by its property of liberation. A child for example, has liberty, and happiness naturally, which are not ‘relative Success’ but very much of his/her own. To loose liberty and happiness to relative success is not a bargain that educated persons can choose. Education is provisioning of environment in which an individual can express himself/herself, and remains not influenced in any undesirable way. This evolution of self is called 'self realization'.
Co-existence i.e., peace, co-operation and being unharmful
This is non-interfering way of living, and helping and receiving help from one another without asserting control or fear. Sense of authority is deterioration of our co-existence. And every effort of control manifested in technology, market and governance becomes a liability to manage. And has detrimental effect on nature, society and family. Every next day, the cost of management rises, consumption of natural resources rises, and effluents and pollution rise. And these cause conflict.
The potential of harm increases with skills and techniques. These substitute self-awareness. For example, a man/women with gun in hand does not become developed. More care is needed with high technology to give it in right hands. Earth is sitting at brink of collapse only because of high technology in hand of idiots.
Purpose of education is far greater than acquiring skill, and technology. This aspect of education is for guiding human spirit in regard to serving nature and togetherness for mutual gain, and not being harmful. Sri Krishna in Bhagwat Gita says, ‘yasmaannodvijateloko’, he who is not a source of annoyance to his fellow creatures, and who in his turn does not feel vexed with his fellow creatures and who is free from delight and envy, perturbation.
2.2 Choices of Work as Worship or War
Education in a lower realm of mind, from time immemorial is associated with physical or intellectual precision and strength like in swordsmanship, power of law and authority in kings, and administration (measurement and control) in public/citizen. All are acts of warriors. Schools in China, India and Japan taught art of war and treated every work as wars. Dronacharya, Chanakya were chancellors of major thoughts in those times, and run their schools. Educational tradition started from kings and warriors had its origin in military schools. Even now, most of our business and technology schools is a sort of civil military schools. Europe and America build character of warriors even now and war is used as the only arbiter of peace.
In an alternative way, in Rishi tradition in contrast of King or state), there existed Gurukul in India for higher education that considered work as worship instead of the war. The climate of worshipping is very different than those who considered work as wars. Highest ideal of knowledge is therefore peace, derived from strength as first step, to liberation in second step, and finally the peace.
Surprisingly, India has just opposite ideas of education than the Greek. In India, character was more important and character was codified instead of the conduct. Here, no faceless instruments of laws but names that identify character. For example, very famous scripture in India reads as Ram Charit Maanas i.e. Reflections in mind about the character of Sri Ram.
In India, character was codified in color (varna) or personality traits such as Shudra (owner, warrior, egoist, attached to things or with a responsibility, uncompromising character) – Vaishya (compromising character, give-take, experimentation ‘not loyal' prostitute, businessmen, professionals) – Chhatria (neither compromising nor uncompromising, creative character in self indulgence, research minded, contemplative/struggling mind for liberation) – Brahman (truth, liberation).
Brahman is Akshar which is never deteriorated ; and from it, comes Shabd, Arth, Zyan and Satya
Shabd - Words or identification label, proper noun, object, physical recognition or name plate information
Arth - Meaning of the word, subject or storyline of character or common noun or defined knowledge
Zyan - Knowledge, symbolic truth that can be applied universally like theorem of science that take differet names and measurement
Satya - Truth
Education in India was aimed at integrating the purpose of life with the work, and these were based on character recognition.
2.3 Shiksha
Shiksha -> 'Shiksha' is a means of 'sakchatkar' or realization. A teacher or 'shikshak' is like a tourist guide that introduces a new visitor to the reality of contemporary (time-space bound, transitional) world. This process brings realization for things that were unknown, brought into experiences by our senses and intellect. Otherwise we are blind in an unknown world even though with the eyes and all the faculties of senses. How do we find out those harmful bacteria in contaminated water cause diseases? How did we know of electricity, New York City, or planetary system?
A human born in the world, like a tree from a seed, is complete already. In an analogy with manufactured product, products when get out of factory, is complete, and date of manufacture and expiry printed. No one can improve a human in its basic design after it has come out of the womb of mother. Education or any external protection is only to delay the process of deterioration. Humans like a freshly harvested fruit are complete in design and life faculty already, but a fruit can deteriorate if it is not processed correctly, and this is what is the objective of education. Seed has to get environment and its relation to its design and faculty of awareness and for its lifelong action.
Shiskha is a process of realizing ('sakchatkar') formless or invisible ('nirakar') knowledge (i.e., in thoughts/theory), into the reality ('sakar'). Anxiety in absence of the realization causes all the work. Search for Truth is the origin of all work. In Bhagwat Gita, Arjuna could not believe in the theory until Sri Krishna shown him His true form. After realization, one becomes aware and achieves an enlightenment (perfect thinking) that dissolves difference between a theory ('nirakar') and its applications of reality ('sakar'). Shiksha gives an ability to have understanding of the nature and tools of exploration of reality.
Endless opportunities of human ingenuity exist by a combination of science (laws and property of nature), communication (language and memory) and art (forms and expression). Shiksha is an access the reservoir of various theory and its practices. Sciences, economics, politics and religion and so on … are products of 'shiksha'. All of these influence our lives and belief at different co-ordinates on time - space canvas of the universe and allows choosing a path for oneself. 'Shiksha' or education thus, offers endless possibilities i.e., we can fly like birds (airplane), listen and see from distance (telephone/TV/Internet), and explore new realities in science, economics, management, politics and society and so on. Without 'shiksha' or education, life cannot work; and our senses and intellect are at risk of getting drowned into severe ignorance causing corruption, disease, crime, poverty and social evils.
2.4 Anusandhan
Anu-Sandhan -> Shiksha is awareness (realization) of the world outside while Anu-Sandhan is awareness of the self. 'Anu' means SELF, 'sandhan' means FOCUS. Self-realization or 'anu-sandhan' is an experience of regaining consciousness after a long sleep of sensual recreation.
No journey of life is complete without knowing oneself. Purpose of Anu Sandhan is individual's ability to put his/her life on right track and to live in the world with own consciousness. Anu-sandhan is an act of solitude, to work for independent self-exploration. Intuition, self-inquiry and conviction of pure reason make an individual free from all biases, erroneous beliefs and possessiveness. People realizing their self, can thus become independent, without limitations and can chart their own course of action. Those people live in a state of truth, self-control and nurture universal values irrespective of the limitation of time and space.
It is act of 'becoming' by self-realization
1. RE SEARCH – new ways of looking
2. DETERMINATION - commitment
3. IMPROVEMENT - causing change for better
4. TRANSFORMATION – relaxation in realization of state of self
Anu-sandhan transforms itself instead of the world outside. Persons like Albert Einstein, Gandhi, Buddha got transformed themselves by 'self research' or 'anusandhan'.
"Self realization does not come from what one knows but what he/she becomes as a result of that knowledge".
– Bhagwat Gita
------------------------------
Date of writing 1.11.2008
commented by Otto Ulrich on Jul 9, 2011
Experiences in designing such a integral knowledge based game - see: www.cooling.down.com - shows, that the designer/creator - the permanently through trial und error self-learning scholar(!) - has permanently to deconstruct rational knowledge at the one hand, he has on the other hand to integrate and to evaluate the gameability of knowledge in the light of his imaginations of the step by step emerging new didactical tool, the seroius learning game.
Everyone should design a game, afterwards he looks quite differently into the world; may be a result of his own intergral learning process!