Indian Education & Philosophical Culture - past, present & future

तत्त्वविद्या (tattvavidyā – study of suchness / philosophy) has always been the foundation on which religion has flourished, particularly in the ancient time-tested civilizations of the Indian subcontinent viz. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism etc., just as pure science is the back bone of applied science (engineering).

The English term ‘philosophy’ is epistemologically derived from the Latin roots ‘philos - love’ & ‘sophia -wisdom”. In words, ‘philosophy’ means “love of wisdom”. Technically speaking, in Hinduism, philosophy, is generally categorized under the ज्ञान मार्ग​ (jñāna mārga – gnostic/wisdom path). The latter, in turn, is one among the चतुर् योग​ मार्ग​ (catur mārga – fourfold communion paths) viz. कर्म​ योग (karma yoga – communion through service), भक्ति योग (bhakti yoga – communion through devotion), ध्यान​ योग (dhyāna yoga – communion through meditation) & ज्ञान योग (jñāna yoga – communion through knowledge / wisdom). These are the four pillars of religion – all equally important and powerful. One is no way inferior to the other and based one’s aptitude and attitude, one can always choose one or more of these paths, in order to effectively accomplish his or her ultimate पुरुषार्थ (puruṣārtha – soul’s goal). In fact, the more the merrier as we would get a more holistic picture of reality. Again, please remember these four channels are not water tight compartments as deep diving in one will eventually lead to the other. Just as among the चतुर् पुरुषार्थ (catur puruṣārtha – fourfold life goals), धर्म​ (dharma – righteousness / law) serves as the foundational governing framework for righteously streamlining/prioritizing the intermediate goals of काम (kāma) & अर्थ​ (artha) towards मोक्ष (mokṣa) - the ultimate soteriological goal, ज्ञान योग (jñāna yoga – communion through knowledge / wisdom) helps effective use of other three मार्ग​ (mārga –paths). Please remember Knowledge is power.

Philosophical knowledge provides a very strong foundational platform for erecting the building blocks of one’s religious (spiritual) conviction. As in any building, the stronger its foundation, the stronger becomes stays the constructed structure. If the foundation is not strong, the building becomes weak and is more vulnerable to structural damage and collapse.  The same analogy applies to religious convictions as well. That is why, highest importance was always given to philosophy in time many tested religions.

Take Hinduism for example, it has got one of the richest corpus of philosophical wealth backing its sacred theological heritage - a very holistic framework spanning both deep as well as a wide spectrum of interdisciplinary domains of wisdom viz. metaphysics, psychology, mysticism, logic, syllogism, ontology, epistemology, cosmology, theology, soteriology, ethics, eschatology, hermeneutics, mathematics, astrology, astronomy, philology, etymology etc.  Again, from a theistic perspective, Indian philosophy seamlessly absorbs (encompasses) some aspects of atheism, agnosticism, monotheism, polytheism, henotheism, pantheism, panentheism etc., into its all-embracing holistic framework.  Besides, unlike many of its occidental counterparts, Indian philosophical tradition aims to provide an optimum golden balance or harmony between all the three dimensions of spiritual wisdom viz. reason, अनुभव​ (anubhava – experience) & श्रद्धा (shraddhā - faith) wherein each of them mutually synergize to complement and supplement holistically.   

Moreover, unlike many other religions, it has always encouraged a healthy synergy of multiple interpretations and ideological schools of philosophies including a very diverse range of orthodox, heterodox and hybrid doctrinal point of views (PoVs) technically called दर्शन (darśana - perspective) including षट वैदीक दर्शन (ṣaṭa vaidīka darśana – six orthodox schools) viz.

·         पूर्व मीमांसा (pūrva mīmaṁsa), 

·         उत्तर मीमांसा (uttara mīmaṁsa), 

·         सांख्य (sāṁkhya), 

·         योग (yoga), 

·         वैषेशिक (vaiṣeśika) & 

·         न्याय (nyāya).

Alternatively, there are सर्व विध अन्त दर्शन (sarvavidha anta darśana – different kinds of final doctrines): वेदान्त (vedānta), सिद्धान्त (siddhānta), नादन्त (nādanta), कलान्त (kalānta), योगान्त (yogānta) & भोगान् (bhogānta) etc. Now, each of these schools in-turn have several sub-schools. For example, उत्तर मीमांसा (uttara mīmaṁsa) is again branching into various दान्त वाद (vedānta vāda) schools like

·         केवलाद्वैत वाद (kevalādvaita vāda – doctrine of absolute nondualism), 

·         विशिष्टाद्वैत वाद (viśiṣṭādvaita vāda – doctrine of qualified non- dualism), 

·         द्वैत वाद (dvaita – doctrine of dualism),

·         स्वभाविक द्वैताद्वैत वाद (svabhāvika dvaitādvaita vāda – doctrine of dual yet nondualism), 

·         औपादिक भेदाभेद वाद (aupādika bhedābheda vāda – doctrine of different yet non-different) etc. 

Similarly, we have various sub-schools within the सिद्धान्त वाद (siddhānta vāda) also, as indicated below:

·         शैव सिद्धान्त (śaiva siddhānta),

·         सिद्ध सिद्धान्त (siddha siddhānta),

·         शुद्ध सिद्धान्त (śuddha siddhānta), 

·         त्रिक सिद्धान्त (trika siddhānta) etc.

Now in some case, these doctrines further branch into sub-branches as well. Like the branching of केवलाद्वैत वाद (kevalādvaita vāda – doctrine of absolute nondualism) itself into विवरण​ (vivaraṅa) & भामति (bhāmati). Of course, even this is only an indicative and not an exhaustive list.

Even more interestingly, some of the schools are atheistic, and some are theistic, while some are even agnostic.  While these are mainstream philosophical schools, there are philosophical doctrines encapsulated within other scriptural texts including वैयाकरण (vyākaraṇa -grammar), आगम (āgama), पुराण /इतिहास (purāṇa / itihāsa – mythology / history), तन्त्र (tantra). Thus, you find that there is a very rich philosophical tradition serving as the foundational building blocks on which the religious frameworks have evolved. 

Take वेदान्त दर्शन (vedānta darśana) alone for example, it literally means “philosophy of final wisdom”. Yes, the philosophical doctrines in the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three) viz. उपनिषद् (upaniṣad), श्रीमद् भगवत् गीता (śrīmad bhagavat gītā) & ब्रह्म सूत्र (brahma sūtra) forms the crux or grand finale - वेदान्त (vedānta - ultimate / final wisdom) revealed in the sacred वेद श्रुति (veda śruti). Actually, वेदान्त शास्त्र (vedānta śāstra – vedantic scriptures) form the backbone for all the sub schools of उत्तर मीमांसा (uttara mīmāṁsā) including अद्वैत (advaita - non- dualism), द्वैत (dvaita - dualism), विशिष्टाद्वैत (viśiṣṭādvaita - qualified non-dualism) etc. which in turn are the basis for the main theological schools of Hinduism viz. स्मार्त (smārta), ब्रह्म (brahma), श्री वैष्णव (śrī vaiṣṇava) respectively.

Again, शैव सिद्धान्त (śaiva siddhānta), शिवाद्वैत (śivādvaita), त्रिक (trika), etc. forms the basis for various forms of शैव संप्रदाय (śaiva saṁpradāya), while तन्त्र (tantra) forms the basis for शाक्त संप्रदाय (śākta saṁpradāya) schools of theology.

In fact, just as from a theological perspective Hinduism’s erstwhile सनातन धर्म (sanātana dharma – eternal righteousness) which encompasses multiple varieties of deities viz. वेद देवत (veda devata – Vedic deities), पुराण देवत (purāṇa devata – mythological deities), ग्राम देवत (grāma devata – village deities) etc. integrally consolidated broadly under षण्मत संप्रदाय (ṣaṇmata saṁpradāya – six fold theological traditions), all the varieties of philosophical traditions can broadly be grouped under the above mentioned schools. Again, all these seemingly different deities are always considered as सविकल्प उपकाश सगुण ब्रह्मन् (savikalpa upakāśa saguṇa brahman – differentiated aspect of qualified divinity), each manifesting relatively specific कल्याण गुण (kalyāṇa guṇa – auspicious characteristics) of the underlying absolute singularity - कैवल्य परब्रह्म (kaivalya parabrahma – absolute transcendent divinity).   Similarly, all the seemingly contradictory philosophies are different perspectives of the infinitely multidimensional singularity. Hinduism very clearly recognizes that branches could always be many, yet holistically the tree is one. Different philosophies are different branches of the same tree. Similarly, in Buddhism also there are various branches viz.थेरवाद (theravāda), मध्यमक (madhyamaka), योगचार (yogacāra) and various sub branches.

Many eminent saint & scholars like व्यास महऋषि (vyāsa mahaṛṣi), श्री आदि शङ्करभगवत्पाद (śrī ādi śaṅkarabhagavatpāda).  திருமூலர் (thirumUlar), வள்ளலார் (vaLLalaar), Theosophical society etc. at different periods in Indian history have made unparalleled contributions in re-establishing the cross-philosophical synthesis.

Relatively recently, திரு அருட்பிரகாச இராமலிங்க வள்ளலலார் (thiru arutpirakaasa iraamalinga vaLLalaar), who lived in the last century, originally established the சுத்த சன்மார்க சங் கங்கள் (suththa sanmaarga sangangaL – suddha sanmarga groups) to stay united, by setting aside all their ego clashes. The synthetic vision behind this establishment is very categorically stated by the saint himself as follows:

“எல்லா சமயங்களுக்கும் பொதுவாகிய அறிவு நூல் முடிப்பான நாங்காவது மார்கத்தை அனுஷ்டிக்கின்ற கூட்டம் என்று கொள்க”.

Here, the term அறிவுனூல் முடிப்பு (aRivunUl mudippu) corresponds to the state of ultimate (final) gnosis/wisdom obtained by synthesizing the षठान्त समरस / ஷடாந்த சமரசம் (ṣaṭhānta samarasa/ shataantha samarasam – six edged harmony) i.e., a healthy harmony between six different philosophical schools viz. वेदान्त (vedānta), सिद्धान्त (siddhānta), भोगान्त (bhogānta), नादान्त (nādānta), योगान्त (yogānta) & कलान्त (kalānta).

In his prose section the saint explains thus: “ஷடாந்த சமரச சுத்த சிவ சன்மார்க்கம் என்பதில் ஷடாந்தம் என்பது யாது? வேதாந்தம், சித்தாந்தம்,போதாந்தம், நாதாந்தம், யோகாந்தம், கலாந்தம் ஆக ஆறு”. Again, in his magnum opus திருவருட்பா (thiruvarutpaa) the saint sings thus,

நாதாந்த போதாந்த யோகாந்த வேதாந்த
நண்ணுறு கலாந்த முடனே
நவில்கின்ற சித்தாந்தமென்னுமா றந்தத்தின்

Moreover, almost every परमाचार्य (paramācārya – chief preceptor) including the likes of the noble श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrī madvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) would not have indulged in detailed philosophical articulations and debating. They would not have spent their valuable time and energy in writing massive भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentaries) on the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three). In fact, following them, there are huge corpus of commentaries, commentary on commentaries etc. for each of these schools written by their next level revered disciples and subject matter experts. 

Take बाद्रायण ब्रह्म सूत्र​ (bādrayāṅa brahma sutra), alone for examples has detailed commentaries by almost all the leading वेदान्त परमाचार्य​ (vedānta paramācārya – chief preceptor)’s including श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrī madvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya). Each of their commentaries were further commented by their disciples which in turn were commented by the next level disciples and so on.

Again,take श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya) major commentary called शरीरक भाषय (śarīraka bhāṣya) was further expanded by श्री वाचस्पति मिश्र​ (śri vācaspati miśra) & श्री ​ पद्मपाद​ (śri padmapāda) independently wrote separate commentaries on the same titled भामति (bhāmati) & पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) respectively. श्री अमलानन्द (śri amalānanda) in turn wrote independent commentaries called वेदान्त कल्पतरु (vedānta kalpataru) & पच्ञपादिक दर्पण​ (pañcapādika darpaṇa) on भामति (bhāmati) & पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) respectively. The former was further commented by श्री अप्पय दीक्षित​ (śri appaya dIkṣita) in his परिमल​ (parimala) while the श्री प्रकाशात्मन् (śrī prakāśātman) wrote a विवरण(vivaraṇa-gloss) on पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) and so on goes the rich tradition of philosophical commentaries….

The interesting aspect to note is that in these commentaries there is a highly professional standard विचार युक्ति​ (vicāra yukti – modes of deliberation) governed by the best practices laid down by the highly evolved principles in the तर्क शास्त्र (tarka śāstra – dialectic science) employing different ज्ञानवाद प्रमाण​ (jñānavāda pramāṇa - epistemological channels) of knowledge acquisitions viz. प्रत्यक्ष (pratyakṣa - perception), अनुमान​ (anumāna – inference), शब्द​ (śabda – authority / testimony)  etc. and generously supported by various explanation techniques viz. उपमा & व्यतिरेक​ (upamā & vyatireka – comparison & contrast),  उदाहरण / उपमान​ (udāharaṇa / upamāna – example / analogy) etc.  The even more beautiful point is that the debate is well articulated by documenting very detailed विवेचन​ परीक्षा (vivecana parīkṣā – critical examination) of his पक्ष (pakṣa – proposition) in terms of the पूर्व​ पक्ष (pūrva pakṣa – prior proposition) of the of वादिन् (vādin – accuser) with a logical खण्डन​ (khaṇḍana – refutation) of प्रतिवादिन् (prativādin – respondent) articulated in the form of a उत्तर​ पक्ष (uttara pakṣa – posterior proposition) and the final स्थापन​ (sthāpana – proof / establishment) of his सिद्धान्त​ (siddhānta - philosophy). Here the modus operandi of proving the point of view would typically involve a fair share of different युक्ति (yukti -techniques) of logical reasoning, based on the specific needs of the context in the grand narrative. These युक्ति (yukti -techniques) including prudent choices of one or more of  

·         विभ​ङ (vibhaṅga - analysis) of the parts by segregating the whole (OR) 

·         संयोग​ (saṁyoga - synthesis) of the whole by aggregating the parts, on the one hand 

(AND)

·         अपवहन (apavahana – deduction) of the specific conclusion from general premises or 

·         उन्नयन​ (unnayana - induction) of generalized conclusions based on specific premises

 Moreover, philosophy was the back bone of not only religious and theological domains but was also the mother of scientific quest. In fact, historically speaking, philosophical quest has always been the common link between religion and science. Again, take Hinduism for example, science and spirituality were always (even now) two sides of the same coin – mathematics including geometry, cosmology, logic & syllogism, ontology, epistemology, biology, physiology, psychology, medicine, alchemy etc., were always an integral part of Hindu religious philosophy. न्याय दर्शन (nyāya darśana) for example deals at length with logic & syllogism, वैषेशिक (vaiṣeśika) with atomic physics, सांख्य (sāṁkhya) with ontology. Besides अद्वैत (advaita - non- dualism), for example, deals at concepts of relativistic physics – holographic black hole singularity etc. त्रिक (trika) with quantum loop gravity, super strings etc.; योग (yoga) with psychology, neuroscience etc., consciousness, physiology etc., so on goes the huge list of overlapping. In fact, these are only random example including but not limited to the following 

• Earth sciences: geology, soil mechanics
• Atomic Physics: अनु (anu - atam) and परमानु (paramanu - microparticle), molecular & nuclear physics, string /quantum loop  
• Chemistry: chemical compounds, alchemistry, biochemistry, metallurgy
• Physiology: Neuroscience, heredity/genetics, sympathetic spinal system, respiratory system, reproductive system, excretory system, vascular system  
• Engineering & technology: Kinetics / Mechanics, acoustics, architecture & building technology, Iron and steel, ship building, agriculture, transport, mining, irrigation  
• Acoustics: pitch, musicology, 
• Mathematics: Decimal number system, Boolean logic, Fibonacci, ruler measurements, geometry, algebra, arithmetic, infinity, zero, calculus, coordinate geometry, Vedic mathematics, trigonometry
• Astronomy: cosmology, Planetary systems, solar science, atmosphere, aeronautics, weather forecasts etc.
• Zoology: taxonomy of species, medicine, animal husbandry, dairy farming
• Botany: Plant taxonomy, herbal sciences, cryptogamy
• Medicine: Ayur Veda & Siddha Vaidya - Naturopathy, Surgery, general medicine, dentistry, pediatrics, psychiatry, rejenuvative medicine 
• Psychology: Yoga,   
• Occult / Esoteric sciences: Kundalini, Extra Sensory Perceptions, astrology  

Just as ancient Greek philosophical tradition of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Euclid etc. formed the basis for today’s western modern science and mathematics, Indian philosophical tradition was the mother of many sciences. In fact, metaphysics was the mother of physics, astrology was the mother of astronomy. Again, in the recent decades, thanks to phenomenal advancements in relativistic and quantum physics, lots synergies between physics and philosophy is beginning to get recognized. Originally, in ancient religions tradition particularly in the Indian tradition including Hinduism, Jainism & Buddhism, for example, the disparity never existed in principle.

Downfall during Dark Ages

While this has always been true for several centuries, yet in the recent decades, there has been gross neglect of studying and contemplating the philosophical wisdom underlying religious customs and traditions. In fact, I strongly feel that post-industrial revolution, there has been a gradual neglect researching on pure sciences like physics, chemistry etc., in general and almost a complete neglect of philosophical studies across the globe. 

 Particularly, if one goes through the history of modern science, it would clear that in last 500+ years, there has been an artificial dichotomy rather trichotomy created between religion, philosophy and science. In western medieval world, certain religious fundamentalists out of vested interest dogmatically created the first dichotomy between theology, science and philosophy…. They even went to extent of persecuting scientists and philosophers in the name of such religious fanaticism; while this was from the religious side, science also very soon started boycotting philosophy and religions as mere dogma. Thus, on the whole, it was a double edged self- damage… which continued for almost 300 years now…

Of course, any open minded historical analysis will testify that originally value-based spiritual education was an integral practice, as part of the time-tested वर्णाश्रम धर्म (varṇāśrama dharma) model of गुरुकुल (gurukula) learning. While the चतुर् पुरुषार्थ (catur puruṣārtha – fourfold soul’s goal) doctrine serves as the backbone of the Hindu religious principles, categorizing the four-fold objectives in life, the वर्णाश्रम (varṇāśrama – class-phase) doctrine, serves as its logical corollary. This doctrine basically contains two parts each containing fourfold classifications, viz

• चतुर् वर्ण (catur varṇa – fourfold classes) viz.: The classification of the विज्ञान साधक (vijñāna sādhaka – wisdom seeker) purely based on his spiritual quotient in terms of his spiritual aptitude and attitude towards prioritizing the स्वधर्म (svadharma – self duties) with respect to his or her चतुर् पुरुषार्थ (catur puruṣārtha – fourfold soul’s goal) viz.  ब्राह्मन (brāhmana), क्षात्रिय (kṣātriya), वैश्य (vaiśya) & शूद्र (śūdra) focusing on मोक्ष (mokṣa), धर्म​ (dharma – righteousness / law), अर्थ​ (artha - pursuit) & काम (kāma - desire) respectively.     
• चतुर् आश्रम (catur āśrama – fourfold phases): Next, how the achievement of these स्वधर्म (svadharma – self duties) are effectively managed (planned, organized and implemented) through the different phases (life’s mile-stones) of temporal existence viz. ब्रह्मचर्य आश्रम (brahmacarya āśrama –  student phase), गृहस्थ आश्रम (gṛhastha āśrama – householder phase), वनप्रस्थ आश्रम  (vanaprastha āśrama – retirement phase) & सन्न्यासम (sannyāsam āśrama – renunciation phase) .

Thus, one does not become a ब्राह्मन (brāhmana), क्षात्रिय (kṣātriya) etc., just by his or her जनन (janana- birth), nor does one become a ब्राह्मन (brāhmana) just by blindly performing rituals nor by superficial knowledge or blind intellectual scholarship. Moreover, the चतुर् वर्ण (catur varṇa – fourfold classes) was based on the temperamental potential viz. the Spiritual Quotient (SQ) of the individual soul rather than on hereditary basis as misunderstood by many these days. In other words, individual souls where associated with specific groups based on their qualifications i.e. कर्म (karma - aptitude) & गुण (guṇa – attitude). This fact is very categorically and unambiguously testified in many sacred scriptures.  For example, none less than भगवान् श्री कृष्ण परमात्म (bhagavān śrī kṛṣṇa paramātma) who is the महा विभव अवतार (mahā vibhava avatāra – supreme glorious incarnation) in His श्रीमद् भगवद् गीता (śrīmad bhagavad gītā) declares thus:

चातुर्वर्ण्यां मया स्रिष्टं गुणकर्म विभागशः।

तस्य कर्तारम् अपि मां विद्ध्य् अक्कर्तारम् अव्ययम्॥

- श्रीमद् भगवद् गीता (4:13)

ब्राह्मन क्षात्रिय विशां शूद्राणं च परन्तप।

कर्माणि  प्रविभक्तानि स्वभाव प्रभैर् गुणैः॥

- श्रीमद् भगवद् गीता (18:41)

(

cāturvarṇyāṁ mayā sriṣṭaṁ guṇakarma vibhāgaśaḥ|

tasya kartāram api māṁ viddhy akkartāram avyayam||

brāhmana kṣātriya viśāṁ śūdrāṇaṁ ca parantapa |

karmāṇi  pravibhaktāni svabhāva prabhair guṇaiḥ||

The four divisions of human order were created by me according to differences in quality, activities and aptitude; although the creator of this, know me as the non-doer being immutable.

O Arjuna, the activities of the Brāhmana, kṣātriya, vaiṣyas and the śūdras are clearly divided according to the qualities born of their own nature.

) श्रीमद् भगवद् गीता (śrīmad bhagavad gītā) (4.13, 18.41)

श्री मद्वाचार्य  (śrī madvācārya) in his famous भाष्य  (bhāṣya – commentary)  on the above verses of the गीता  (gītā), further explains the concept thus, “Lord Krishna is the origin of the four classifications in Vedic culture as spoken here. Those of sattva guṇa or the mode of goodness are designated as Brahmins or priestly class. Those of mixed sattva guṇa and rajas guṇa or the mode of passion are known as ksatriyas or warrior class. Those mixed with rajas guṇa and tama guṇa or the mode of ignorance are the vaisyas or mercantile class and those in tama guṇa are the sudras or servant class.” Thus, the personal character and capabilities of every individual, to a great extent is determined by his सञ्चित कर्म (sañcita karma) accumulated as कर्म वासना (karmic vāsanās - inherent tendencies).

Originally according to the orthodox वैदिक संप्रदाय​ (vaidika saṁpradāya – vedic tradition), the वर्णाश्रम धर्म (varṇāśrama dharma) was specifically used for classification of the souls purely on spiritual maturity basis. Gradually, for operational reasons, the model was extended to defining the occupational hierarchy in the society in terms priestly visionaries/consultants, political / administrative governance, economic (and other resource) mobilization and executive teams.  The intent was to leverage optimum mix of knowledge and skill sets based on the individual abilities to effectively harness the collective consciousness of the society as a whole, towards the वश्वानर पुरुषार्थ​ (vaiśvānara puruṣārtha – universal soul’s goal).   Thus, वर्णाश्रम धर्म (varṇāśrama dharma) which was originally driven by spiritual intentions was extended to vocational or politico-economic fabric - जाति (jāti – caste /genus) viz. क्षेत्रिन् (kṣetrin - farmer), तन्त्वाय​ (tantvāya – weaver), अर्चक​ (arcaka - priest), ज्योतिष (jyotiṣa - astrologer), वैद्य​ (vaidya -  physician), कुलाल​ (kulāla - potter) etc., each specializing on and mutually contributing to specific socio-economic goals of the society. In due course, the subject matter expertise of each of these functionalities was preserved and retained within the families. The knowledge was transferred from father to son through generations and gradually such occupations became कुटुंब क्रिया (kula kriya – family occupation) and such families with common specializations then grouped to form कुल (kula - lineage) etc. And thus, subsequently social hierarchies of जाति (jāti – caste /genus) evolved. Nothing wrong about it as this a natural evolution and was very effective for several centuries. Of course, even today, in postmodern societies such professional or managerial hierarchies are inevitable in both corporate as well as government sectors.  Initially there was no major discriminations in terms of dignity of labor and each depended on the other one way or the other. There was hence a health synergy. So far so good.

However, somewhere down the line, during the dark middle ages of our society, the concept of वर्णाश्रम धर्म (varṇāśrama dharma) got वक्र​ (vakra – crooked / corrupted) from वर्गनुवंश​ (vargaanuvaṁśa – class hierarchy) based on spiritual index to जाति वंस​ (jāti vaṁsa – caste hierarchy). Synergies broke and not all occupations were treated with same respect. Certain occupations or functionality were considered more important than other.  And soon the social evils of nepotism, racial discrimination and untouchability etc., began to spread like cancer across the length and breadth of the country. Worse still, degrees of purity (sanctity) as tagged to each of the professions. Some were considered sacred and pure while others were belittled as impure. And at the peak of such discriminative politics resulted in to the social evil called untouchability, wherein even the sight or touch of a person involved in menial/ impure job was considered a sin.   

The important point to understand was that this was purely a social structure and had nothing to do with Hindu spirituality as such.  The concept of जाति (jāti - caste) based hierarchy was never emphasized in the original sacred Vedic scriptures but somehow got introduced in the social lifestyle. जाति (jāti - caste) replaced वर्णा (varṇā) and people got confused between the two concepts. For example, technically speaking, ब्राह्मन (brāhmana) is a वर्णा (varṇā - class) and not a जाति (jāti - caste), unlike ஐய்யர் (aiyyar), ஐயங்கார் (aiyangaar) etc. which are social castes. But unfortunately, somewhere down the lane. वर्णा (varṇā - class) got mixed up with जाति (jāti - caste) tagged ‘Brahmin’. So is the case with முதலியார் (mudhaliyaar), செட்டியார்(chettiyaar) etc. Eventually, जाति (jāti - caste) was indirectly mapped with वर्णा (varṇā) and then tagged as “forward” and “backward” gradings purely for materialistic reasons. 

To the best of my knowledge such जाति (jāti - caste) based model was a new intrusion as one cannot find it in any of the ancient scriptures whether it is the वेद (veda), आगम (āgama) or even the original धर्म सूत्र​ (dharma sūtra) versions as well as मनु स्मृति (manu smṛti) or for that matter any other धर्म शास्त्र​ (dharma shastra). For example, none of the above-mentioned castes are rereferred in any of these scriptures. The scriptures only refer to वर्णा (varṇā - class) and not about जाति (jāti - caste),  

Gradually the walls become thicker and the discrimination more brutal. Some (so-called) forward castes in the name of untouchability, were responsible for the social discrimination. Lower castes were exploited and denied equal justice and ill-treated. They were not allowed to enter the residential areas or places of worship of the forward castes. In extreme cases, women folk belonging to lower castes were not even allowed to cover their top. Spiritual education became the exclusive rights of the forward castes as they denied the right of studying Vedas and other Sanskrit scriptures for other communities. Sanskrit learning was exclusive privilege of selected few so called upper castes...And as these forward castes were a minority, Vedic and Sanskrit scholarship began to reduce.

Subsequently, this pathetically corrupted socio-political situation was cunningly capitalized by various foreign invaders. Yes, they tried to fish in already troubled waters by fueling the fire in the feudalized society. I honestly feel, that such diminishing importance to spiritual pursuits was neither due natural evolution of social needs nor a fatal accident. It was the master plan of vested interests of colonial capitalism. India again is a perfect case-study here, to prove my point.  One of the first and I would call the worst calamities of 500+ years of Mughal dynasties followed by British 200+ years of imperial colonialism was to break our time-tested spiritual value based native education system cutting across our native religious traditions viz. वैदीक (vaidīka - Vedic), आगम (āgama - Agamic), बौद्ध​ (bauddha - Buddhist) & जैन (jaina – Janise) etc. First there was a cunningly plotted multi-pronged strategy to destroy the rich intellectual; heritage that India possessed by

·         Plagiarizing intellectual properties by taking unfair control, Looting and plundering its rich corpus of advanced scientific and philosophical manuscripts containing

·         Destroying by burning, damaging etc., several thousands of the native religious scriptural manuscripts that were originally being preserved as palm-leaves, epigraphs etc.,

·         Destroying many of our ancient indigenous research universities and study centers including leading विश्वविद्यालय​ (viśvavidyālaya – university) like the ones at नालन्दा (nālandā), तक्षशीला (takṣaśīlā), काच्ञी (kāñci) etc. 

·         Demolish the native learning curriculum which was essentially focusing on spiritual education by replacing it with the commercial/materialistic focused educational system.

·         Discourage Sanskrit, Prakrit, Pali, Tamil, Grantha, Manipravalam etc., and all other native languages which boast to have unparallelly rich heritage of scriptural language. Most of Indian scriptures were historically recorded in these languages.

·         Discourage local religious belief systems (devotion, rituals, philosophy etc.) by brainwashing in the pretext of rationalistic or atheistic ideologies

The last 2 items listed above had perhaps the worst debacle which completely created a paradigm shift in mindset from “education for wisdom sake” to “education for career or economics sake”. Originally, for almost thousands of years, Indian education was a spiritual-man making pursuit - to borrow Swami Vivekananda’s golden words – education was “the manifestation of the divinity already in man”.  But, thanks to the selfish vested colonial interests, the education-DNA was permanently mutated (corrupted). Cunningly the Lord Macaulay and his British team adopted a carrot & stick approach to brainwash Indian intellectual class into ditching their native sciences and start learning the newly introduced English medium Anglo-vernacular curricula through their chain of education factories to mass produce ready to deploy robotized cheap but efficient labor force catering to their ever expanding manufacturing and clerical job requirements.

This gradually demotivated Indians from learning other traditional sciences, philosophies, literature and above all spiritual sciences as it was no longer economically or socially lucrative. Instead only materialistic sciences, economics, English etc. gained popularity. Sanskrit and Vedic learning was no longer the priority of the माणवक (māṇavaka –seeker /learner) etc. The relevance of Sanskrit as an academic language was declining… soon Sanskrit was a dead language in India.  Gradually, post English introduction in education these forward casts also lost motivation to learn Sanskrit as they started applying for Government jobs by passing English exams. Industrial revolution and factory model of English education reduced the need for studying Sanskrit, Vedas or scriptures... Sanskrit which was predominantly a language of spiritual learning than for social communication lost importance gradually among forward casts as well.

 The western imperialists applied cheap 'carrot and stick" tactics of tying education to employment (and thereby economics). They brainwashed the people to move away from the traditional learning to adopt the newly designed education system which was tailor made to cater to providing cheap labor supply for their greedy needs of industrial revolution and imperialism. Indians were encouraged to learn English and apply for Civil services and other Government jobs.

In the process the Britishers destabilized and almost completely destroyed the traditional गुरुकुलं (gurukulaṁ) styled learning viz. वेद पाठशाल​ (veda pāṭaśāla – vedic school), आगम​ पाठशाल​ (āgama pāṭaśāla – agamic school) etc. This was one of the worst causalities of British imperialism. Yes, it’s an obvious fact that the British regime economically plundered our richness by looting gold, diamonds and other precious assets. Of course, India was economically one of the richest nations in the world with its which was continuously looted by one invader or the other. But more chronic than the economic damage is the colossal damage done to its rich educational fabric. But of course, this does not mean, it does not mean that the British education system did not help India in anyway. After all, while calling a spade a ‘spade’, we also have to give even a devil, its rightful due. It is obviously true that British indirectly helped us in establishing basic infrastructure services including railways, roadways, drainage systems etc. across the length and breadth of India. Similarly, in the domain of education also they democratized education breaking the caste barriers already discussed. Anybody who was willing to and capable of learning what the British wanted them to study and then to loyally serve the British colonial interests, were provided opportunities to learn. And this process Indians were exposed to the modern western scientific discoveries, economics etc. Of course, these benefits would be like mere peanuts, when compared to the overall intensity of damages the British has done to India.   

 And ironically the same Westerners, who by their educational policies, demotivated Sanskrit learning among Indians.  themselves pumped lots of money to learn and master Sanskrit. Yes, Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Italy, Denmark, Spain etc... set up their Indological research centers and spent lots of time learning Indian history, science, philosophy, anthropology, theology, languages, scriptures, philology, culture, sociology, ethnic divisions etc. Indology soon became a royal western hobby (pursuit).
Wellesley and Warren Hastings, Friedrich Max Muller, J Gonda, Sir William Jones, Charles Wikins, Elbridge Salisbury, Edward Washburn Hopkins, Stcherbatsky, Frits Staal etc., are some classic examples of eminent Western Indologists from across the globe.  In a nutshell, Indians stopped learning their own native sciences while Europeans began learning. These Indologists in the pretext of studying our scriptures, started taking possession of huge corpus of original manuscripts and looted it to their countries. They actually employed a two-pronged approach viz. destroyed all original scriptures that they considered a threat to their imperialistic / evangelistic vested interests, while at the same time grabbed those scriptures which they felt would aid them for their scientific and other needs. To this end, they translated these texts English, German, French etc.  Of course, the indirect benefit was the message of these scriptures became more reachable and accessible to a wider userbase. Thanks to these effects. The benefits of the Hindu scriptures got globalized. The whole world began to recognize the richness of these texts.  But on the flip side, firstly India lost control of its precious assets. Secondly the colonialists conveniently, mischievously misinterpreted the essence of many scriptures to suit their political needs. Their grand narrative was many a times inimical to Hindu and Indian interests. This was a very cunning strategy of promoting their colonial greed.

Unfortunately, the above discussed British colonial legacy continues today also even after 70+ years of post-independent native democratic government formed of the people of India, by Indians, for Indians. This is the unfortunate irony.  We are still predominantly following British designed curriculum not only in school education but also higher education. IAS etc. Tweaked anti Hindu versions of history is taught even today. Complete neglect of moral science, humanities and religious studies in school syllabus. We Indians, both individually as well as collectively have a constructive role in safeguarding and enriching Hindu spirituality by proactive social role participation in whatever capacity possible. It can be even better stated that while Hindu organizations failed to perform their roles missionaries capitalized the same and began spreading their tentacles.

Our ancient Hindu, Buddhist and Jain Astronomy, astrology, sociology, economics metaphysics, ontology, mathematics etc., are so advanced many leading western universities across globe are researching for decades. But in Indian curriculum completely neglected. All we teach our kids is how to make money, manage money, multiply money etc. The main message we pass on to the next generation is: “educate yourself only for remunerative jobs”.

So, who is the real black sheep here? We are following many religious festivals and customs but we hardly try to explain its spiritual and scientific basis and reasons to the younger generation. Because of the failure in knowledge transition...the younger generation lose hold of its foundational wisdom and soon become viable for easy brainwashing...In the name of rationalism (பகுத்தறிவு). We have failed to inculcate பகத்து அறியும் spirituality. Earlier गुरुकुलं (gurukulaṁ) style of education focused precisely on such foundational spiritual education...We no longer are ready to invest time, money or energy in giving it to our kids.

Today, unfortunately almost all of us, irrespective of our caste or class is only trying to excel in क्षात्रिय (kṣātriya - politics), वैश्य (vaiśya – business / profession) and not ब्राह्मन वर्ण (brahmana varṇa  – spiritual class). Ask any student (school, grad, post grad) his main purpose of education is to seek a good job etc

Take Sanskrit for example, which although rightfully being the pride of India, yet is the most neglected subject, by almost all stakeholders in India – students, teachers/professors, schools and universities, parents, scholars, government etc.  Sanskrit has always been the pre-requisite for formal Vedic learning in the गुरुकुलं (gurukulaṁ) and every ब्राह्मन (brāhmana) as well as those belonging to other वर्ण (varṇa – class) also was supposed to be proficient in it and was integral to his learning. But how many of us, Indian’s are proficient in Sanskrit. Indians over the years have been so calculative that we would invest time in learning only those subjects which help us in building a remunerative career. We are not prepared to learn for knowledge sake. Even in the case of western sciences, there is a rat race only for MBBS, BE and CA courses and not for pure science – Physics, Chemistry etc.  However, In Europe, the demand for learning Sanskrit is growing year on year. Major universities across the globe are investing huge funds for learning Sanskrit as a language leverage the same in unraveling the sciences in our scriptures – in the domains of physics, mathematics, medicine, defense engineering etc.    

Again, in India, many of us, even those who claim to be very religious and pious, do not care to learn the fundamental philosophical postulates underlying their belief systems. How many of us even make an attempt to learn the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī) - उपनिषद् (upaniṣad), भगवत् गीता (bhagavat gītā) & ब्रह्म सूत्र (brahma sūtra). Many of us proudly claim to belong to a specific मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya) viz. स्मार्त (smārta), ब्रह्म (brahma), श्री वैष्णव (śrī vaiṣṇava) or शैव संप्रदाय (śaiva saṁpradāya) but how many of us even make a sincere attempt to understand the underlying philosophy of अद्वैत (advaita - non dualism), द्वैत (dvaita - dualism), विशिष्टाद्वैत (viśiṣṭādvaita - qualified non dualism) or शैव सिद्धान्त (śaiva siddhānta).

Worse still, some of us even consider it as a waste of time or even foolish to spend energies in trying to understand or comprehend the philosophies; they feel just follow the rituals, or performing meditation is always better than these intellectual gymnastics. The situation is very pathetic because, one group does not respect other group’s interpretations or view-points. Each group considers it has solely patented the copy rights of its philosophy. That is very unfortunate.

Unfortunately, many of us are so ignorant that we do not even know the underlying तत्त्वविद्या (tattvavidyā – philosophy) associated to the our chosen मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya – theological tradition). While many of us take pride in मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya – theological tradition), we do not bother to understand its core philosophical postulate, The compassionate परमाचार्य​ (paramācārya – chief preceptors) of almost all मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya – theological traditions) have taken so much pains in elaborately explaining and documenting the salient philosophical tenets of the respective मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya – theological tradition). Let’s be honest and ask ourselves. But how many of us bother to learn it.  How many of us who claim to be द्वैतिन् (dvaitin – dualist), विशिष्ठाद्वैतिन् (viśiṣṭādvaitin – qualified non dualist), अद्वैतिन् (advaitin – non dualist), शैव सिद्धान्तिन् (śaiva siddhāntin) etc., what exactly is meant by these philosophies. Some of us are so ignorant when it comes to identifying which of these दर्शन (darśana - philosophy) belongs to their respective faith. For example, get confused whether श्री वैष्णव संप्रदाय​ (śri vaiṣṇava saṁpradāya) preaches द्वैत​ (dvaita – dualism) or विशिष्ठाद्वैत (viśiṣṭādvaita – qualified nondualism) etc. ​

Even worse, many times, without even knowing our own philosophical doctrines we blindly ridicule or look down other schools. In fact, this ignorance is the principle root cause of religious intolerance at all levels. Even without understanding what अद्वैत (advaita - non dualism) preaches we blindly feel it is superior to say द्वैत (dvaita - dualism) or विशिष्टाद्वैत (viśiṣṭādvaita - qualified non dualism) and vice versa.  

Unfortunately, they fail to realize that all these philosophies are relativistic interpretation of the same scriptural texts viz. प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī) from different frames of references. Well, the sacred ऋग् वेद मन्त्र (ṛg veda mantra) very categorically declares that 

एकम् सत् विप्र बहुत वदन्ति

(ekam sat vipra bahuta vadanti –

truth is one; sages call it variously).

In modern computer programmer’s jargon, it is referred as multiple dimensions (views) of the same fact table (document/model) -  technically called as document-view/model view architectural paradigm. The Indian philosophically tradition as dealt in depth on this subject. For example, in Jain philosophy, it is called as अनेक अन्त वाद (aneka anta vāda – doctrine of multiple endpoints). twin doctrines of अनेक अन्त वाद (aneka anta vāda – doctrine of multiple endpoints) & स्याद् वाद (syād vāda – doctrine of relative postulates) to mankind. Etymologically, the term अनेक (aneka) means ‘multiple’,अन्त (anta) means ‘final’ or ‘conclusion’ and वाद (vāda) denotes ‘interpretation’ or ‘doctrine’.

Thus, the doctrine reiterates that varieties of spiritual conclusions are equally probably, true and valid. In fact, according to this school, from an epistemological perspective, each of these दरशन (darśana -philosophy) is a kind of स्याद (syād –predication or probability event) that one may or may not experience as part of their spiritual journey. The term स्याद् (syād) literally means “may be” or “perhaps”. Moreover, every such experience is only a नय (naya – relative aspect) of truth.or a specific viewpoint of reality which can be interpreted under the following scenarios as postulated by the revered Jain monk आचार्य बद्रबहुर (ācārya badrabahur), in his conceptual framework called सप्तभन्गिनय (saptabhanginaya – seven dimensional aspects)

·         स्याद् अस्ति (syād asti – May be it is)

·         स्याद् नास्ति (syād nāsti – May be it is not)

·          स्याद् अस्ति नास्ति (syād asti nāsti – May be it is and it is not)

·          स्याद् अस्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād asti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is but not determinable)

·          स्याद् अवक्तव्यः (syād avaktavyaḥ - May be it is not determinable)

·          स्याद् नास्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād nāsti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is not and not determinable)

·          स्याद् अस्ति नास्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād asti nāsti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is, it is not, and is indeterminate)

I would like to refer here the following verses of the आचार्य कुन्दकुन्द (ācārya kundakunda) concisely explaining the whole concept of अनेकान्त वाद (anekāntavāda) in a nutshell.

द्रव्यार्थिकेन सर्वम् ध्रव्यम् तत् पर्व्यायातिह्केन पुनः।
भवति चान्यद् अन्यत् तत्काले तन् मयात्वत्॥
स्याद् अस्ति नास्ति उभयम् अव्यक्तव्यम् पुनश् च तत् त्रितयम्।
द्रव्यम् खलु सप्त बन्घम् आधेशवाशेन सम्भवति॥
(dravyārthikena sarvam dhravyam tat parvyāyātihkena punaḥ|
bhavati cānyad anyat tatkāle tan mayātvat||
syād asti nāsti ubhayam avyaktavyam punaś ca tat tritayam|
dravyam khalu sapta bangham ādheśavāśena sambhavati||)
(All objects are fundamentally the same in the absolute but are different from the relative viewpoints influenced by the individual observer’s mindset. Each of these relative interpretations can be classified under the following seven probability events – may be it is, may be not, may be both (is and is not), may be indefinable (as is or is not) , may be it is but yet indefinable, may be indefinable because it is not, may be both and yet indefinable.)
- प्रवचन सार (pravacana sāra)

  

Past is past. At least going farther, let us not neglect philosophy and give it its due respects and as expressed in the following post, facilitate our kids and the future generations to come, to revive the lost glory of philosophy as a domain of knowledge. 

 Only if we understand the differentiating features of our respective school of philosophy, we can truly appreciate with conviction our मत संप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya). This is step one. Only after understanding the differentiators correctly we can deep dive further and understand the underlying synergies with parallel schools. After all, these schools have same scriptural roots and they try to describe the same Divinity which is but One – Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Omniscient Divinity. Before concluding I would like to reflect the following words of the eminent mathematician, philosopher and thinker Bertrand Russell, “Philosophy and history all make us aware of the great collective achievements of mankind. It would be well if every civilized human being had a sense of these achievements and a realization of the possibility of greater things to come, with the indifference which must result as regards the petty squabbles upon which the passions of individuals and nations are wastefully squandered. Philosophy should make us know the ends of life, and the elements in life that have value on their own account. However, our freedom may be limited in the causal sphere, we need admit no limitations to our freedom in the sphere of values: what we judge good on its own account we may continue to judge good, without regard to anything but our own feeling. Philosophy cannot itself determine the ends of life, but it can free us from the tyranny of prejudice and from distortions due to a narrow view. Love, beauty, knowledge, and joy of life: these things retain their luster however wide our purview. And if philosophy can help us to feel the value of these things, it will have played its part in man’s collective work of bringing light into a world of darkness”