INDIAN PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION AND PEDAGOGY: AN ESSENTIAL PROPOSITION Prof. N.B. Biswas1 Epistemology and pedagogy both the concepts are philosophical in its origin. The present century demands an integrated teacher who can shape the inner potentiality of a learner through an integrated approach of knowledge of the content area and of the philosophy of teaching. Since, India won Independence; attempt has been made to formulate a national education policy. It has been essential to evolve an Indian philosophy of education in the light of the tradition and culture upheld by Swami Vivekananda, Rabindra Nath Tagore, M. K. Gandhi, Sri Aurobinda and others. Every nation needs an educational philosophy for building up a sound system of education. India has passed through various stages of development during different periods. Since Brahmanistic education it has followed the monastic scholastic, realistic, idealistic and pragmatic trends when values changed and new priorities emerged. India is a land where values have emerged and influenced the cultural life of the land. The cross-cultural studies of modern values show an increasing tendency towards materialistic and self-centered outlook. The world in which we live today is shrinking every day, but every nation is busy in building a wall of prejudice. This is why we need to develop an Indian Philosophy of Education. Since 1944 and uptil now about 150 philosophical studies have been carried out on education, out of which only 10 studies have been specially conducted on Indian philosophy of Education. Remaining studies are conducted either on the life and work of Educational thinkers and philosophers. Hardly any attempt has been made to study the Indian philosophy of education as a whole or of its implication in present situation. It reveals that the educational implications of total thought of the Indian system and the thinkers have not been studied carefully in the context of actual situation in the schools. Doctoral theses have been written about the Educational work related to Indian Philosophy and also of Rabindra Nath Tagore, M.K. Gandhi, Shri Aurobindo and others, but such a theses have usually the rather specific objective of obtaining a degree and it does not , as a rule , become part of the stream of academic thinking or find its way to the teachers. I think, some of the renowned scholars like S.K.Das, R.K.Mukaerjee, S.P Chaube, J. Krishnamurthi, R.S. Pandey, J. Krishanmurthi
1

Dean, A.M. School of Educational Sciences and Director, Centre for Educational Planning and Management, Assam University, Silchar-788011. Assam. India. E-mail:biswasnb1952@gmail.com

1

etc have written some books on Indian Philosophy of Education which are very useful for building up discipline of Indian Philosophy of Education. Thus it is necessary for students of Indian education to ask ourselves why the philosophy or the ideas which these thinkers have advocated so persuasively have failed to evoke sufficient response, why there has been a resistance, or at least indifference, to their acceptance in the day-to-day work of the educational institutions. This gap between theory and practice is alarming. The present research paper entitled ‘Indian philosophy of education and pedagogy: an essential proposition’ is designed with a view to find out the answers of those issues and also to abridge for fulfilling the gap. I In India, from the dawn of history, the quest for spiritual values has been the salient feature of life and thought. The Indian view of life has always laid stress on the divinity of man, unity of existence, .and the harmony of religions and creeds. The sages and seers of India long ago discovered and expounded the two fold path of the Vedic religion, leading man to the attainment of all-round prosperity (abhyudaya) and supreme spiritual well- being (nihsreyasa). To the Indian mind, man is neither a luckless sinner nor a human brute, but a pre-eminently divine being whose welfare consists in ordering life in such a way as to lead to the reawakening of his potential, non-material powers and the integration of his personality. From time immemorial Indian philosophers have sought to proclaim to the entire world the magnificent discoveries they made from time to time in the field of human thought. The Vcdic Rishis of old, as also Krishna, Buddha, Lao-tsze, Socrates, Jesus Christ, and such other world teachers, gave to humanity the results of their researches in what knowledge mankind possesses of philosophy and metaphysics. These results were the outcome of centuries of human efforts and struggle with a view to manifesting the divinity of man. The Indian philosophic thought may be sated in brief as follows: Man IS rooted in the spirit which is omnipotent and omniscient. The soul of man is divine; it is in fact deathless and also birth less. Whereas, the west more or less holds to the pragmatic view of the nature of man, that is to say, it takes as the measure of his value his utility to society. The East, while not ignoring this feels that this is not his sole value or even his chief value, but that his true value lies in the realization of salvation. In Mahayana Buddhism, where salvation was understood in the cosmic sense as meaning the salvation of the entire human race. The idea of cosmic salvation has been made one of the main principles of his philosophy by Sri Aurobindo, who has
2

stressed it more strongly than any other philosopher, either in the East or in the West, but this idea also runs through the teaching of Swami Vivekananda, Rabindra Nath Tagore, and Mahatma Gandhi. Coming now to the problem of education, this problem is an offshoot of the problem of the nature of man we have discussed above. The types of men that the East and the West respectively want to produce must therefore colour their respective philosophies of education. India has always stood for the production of the universal man. Education therefore in India partakes of the nature of yoga: it is education with a view to attainment of Moksha. The West takes a more limited and pragmatic view of the purpose of education. For it the aim of education is to train men so that they may become useful members of society, whether as captains of industry or administrators or scholars or soldiers or in other ways. The educational outlook of the West is distinctly pragmatic. It discovers no higher aims of education than to produce useful citizens. It lacks the spiritual character of the Eastern outlook. It is a truism in philosophy that unless a stand point has a certain spiritual character; it cannot be in the proper sense cosmic, although it may outwardly appear to be so. In such crisis Tagore viewed education as the process for evolving new patterns of life culminating in the realization of universal man. In this world of flux and change there are certain paramount features which hold good for all the time and remain same under all conditions. Similarly the field of education which has been witnessing immense changes with the introduction of ever evolving modern technology has certain aspects and philosophers which remain permanently and universally popular and useful. Since, India won Independence; attempt has been made to formulate a national educational policy. It has been essential to evolve an Indian philosophy of education in the light of the tradition and culture upheld by Swami Vivekananda, Rabindra Nath Tagore, M.K. Gandhi, Sri Aurobindo and others. Every nation needs an educational philosophy for building up a sound system of education. India has passed through various stages of development during different periods. Since Brahmanistic education it has followed the monastic scholastic, realistic, idealistic and pragmatic trends when valus changed and new priorities emerged. India is a land where values have emerged and influenced the cultural life of the land. The cross cultural studies of modern values show an increasing tendency towards materialistic and self-centred outlook. The world in which we live today is shrinking every day, but every nation is busy in building a wall of prejudice. This is why we need to develop an Indian Philosophy of Education.
3

Thus it is necessary for students of Indian education to ask ourselves why the philosophy or the ideas which these thinkers have advocated so persuasively have failed to evoke sufficient response, why there has been a resistance, or at least indifference, to their acceptance in the day-to-day work of the educational institutions. This gap between theory and practice is alarming. The present research paper is designed with a view to find out the answers of those issues and also to make a bridge for fulfilling the gap. Since 1944 and uptil now 225 philosophical studies have been carried out on education out of which only 20 studies have been specially conducted on Indian Philosophy of Education remaining studies are conducted either on the life and work of educational thinkers and philosophers and hardly any attempt has been made to study the Indian philosophy of education as a whole or of its implication in present situation. It reveals that the educational implication of the total thought of the Indian system and of the thinkers have not been studied carefully enough in the context of the actual situation in the schools. Doctoral thesis have been written about the educational work of Rabindra Nath Tagore, M. K. Gandhi, Shri Aurobindo and others, but such thesis has usually the rather specific objective of obtaining a degree and it does not, as a rule, become part of the stream of academic thinking or find its way to the teachers. I think, some of the renowned scholars like S.K. Das, R.K. Mukherjee, S. P. Chaube,1. Krishnamurti, R.S. Pandey, J. Krishnamurti etc. have written some books on Indian Philosophy of Education which are very useful for building up a discipline of Indian Philosophy of Education. Ancient India hardly conducted any experiment with education because education was related with the very stages of life itself and with the very supreme aim of life that was to attain purusartha. It was considered as the ultimate aim of man and of his education. There are certain fundamental values and verities of life which are not of any age or time. They are applicable in all time and for all. India has borne the birth pangs of several vital educational experiences and reflections. We are required to know our roots; we have to be familiar with our Sages and Seers of the hoary past. The Vedic age marks the beginning of the Indian culture, literature and science. The Vedic Aryans had a keen desire to make progress in the realms of knowledge and science. It was well realised that the intellectual equipment and efficiency were the corner stone of the human progress. It laid down that every person should undergo a period of training and discipline called Brahmacharya during the childhood and adolescence, when he or she should be initiated into sacred literature and trained in family profession. The most important creative experiments were made during the
4

Upanishads-stura period. This period is regarded as the most creative epoch of Indian culture, literature, arts and sciences. Metaphysics made remarkable progress as is evidenced by the Upanishadic, Buddha and Jain works. Philosophy and grammar were well developed and literary activity in the legal literature commenced. Speculations in the realm of political thought were fruitful. Astronomy and Mathematics, Medicine and Surgery and Mining and Metallurgy began to be cultivated. The ancient documents revealed that the Sages and Seers had explored the following field of studies - Four Vedas, Six Angas, Dasa Granthas, Fourteen Vidyas, Sixty-four Kalas ans Enghteen Silpas. The eighteen Silpas have great importance to the practical and professional education even today. These are as follows : Vocal Music, Instrumental Music, Dancing, Painting, Mathematics, Accountancy, Engineering, Sculpture, Agriculture, Cattle Breeding, Commerce, Medicines, Law, Administrative Training, Archery Military art, Magic, Snake charming and poison, antidotes, the art of finding hidden treasures. Thus it reveals that the aims of education are related to real life situation. In ancient India, learning was a part of religion. It was sought as the means to the highest end of life i.e., Mukti or emancipation. Education never meant mere book learning. Intellectual attainments were of less consequence than the development of moral feeling and character. All learning in Ancient India was a voluntary partnership in pursuit of truth. It reveals that the Indian Philosophy of Education was nothing special than that of Ancient Indian Philosophy of life. Medieval period starts with the advent of the Muslims in India. It is nonetheless, true that Islamic education, as is evident from the accounts given by Babar and Bernier, could not grow into popularity. That is why the Muslim system of education could not enter into the depths of the life of masses as Ancient Hidnu education had done. The Islamic education, despite State patronage, could not affect Indian soul, whereas ancient education spread throughout the country even without any patronage of whatsoever description. Not only that, the ancient Indian system of education co-existed with Islamic education during medieval age inspite of the absence of state patronage. The Mohammedan institutes could not attain to that universal fame which had been the unique privilege of the Buddhist Universities whose fame did not remain confined only to India but had travelled abroad. The literature reveals that most of the Muslims centers of education enjoyed only local repute. But on the other hand, there were educational centers like Jaunpur, Agra and Delhi which had established some high educational traditions. It is also revealed that the medieval period did not come out with broader philosophical perspectives in education but only to spread the Islamic education. The modem period starts with the Missionaries and of the British with the
5

philosophy of colonial administration in India. The aim of education in the British Colony was to dehumanise the Indian people. Indian philosophers and educationists continued their effort to conduct experiments with education in India simultaneously. Rabindranath Tagore started his experiments by establishing Shantiniketan. He wrote: "At first the object in view was purely patriotic, but later on it grew more spiritual. Then, in the very midst of all these outer difficulties, i.e., establishing Santiniketan and trails, there came the greatest change of all, the true varsha Sesha (end of the old year), the change in my own inner life." But he gave greater importance to Sriniketan than Santiniketan because it approached closer to his ideals, than his first school. At Santiniketan he had to compromise his ideals, but at Sriniketan he tried to introduce methods which he considered absolutely necessary for good education. Experiments were also conducted by M.K. Gandhi by establishing Ashrams. His educational experiments started in 'Kocharab Ashram'(Ahmedabad) around 1915. It was started with an ideological alternative to the prevailing educational pattern. This experiment was different from the other educational experiments (Arya Samaj or Christian Missionary or Prarthana Samaj) because it had its base among the masses. Gandhian education has been characterized as encompassing the head, the heart and the hands. Man is neither mere intellect, nor the gross animal body, nor the heart or soul alone. A proper and harmonious combination of all the three is required for the making of the whole man and constitutes the true economics of education. M.S. Patel has called Gandhi's educational philosophy naturalistic in setting, idealistic in aims and pragmatic in methods naturalism in education is apparent from Gandhi's tendency toward simplicity in life, in language and literature and in his opposition to pedantry. Sri Aurobindo also had conducted the experiments with education in the International Centre at Pondichary. Aurobindo approached education less from the perspective of existing pedagogy than from the quality of man envisioned in the future. His point of departure was the twenty-first century man. The Mother also had this vision: "We want to show to the world what must be the new man of tomorrow.” Education 'in the evolution of consciousness and in the discovery and development of the psychic being is the prelude to a new man and new age. It is revealed that in their experimentation, Gandhi, Tagore and Sri Aurobindo focused upon the social, the aesthetic and the mental potentialities of their students. Gandhi's experimentation resulted in a service to man; Tagore's experimentation resulted to a unity in humanity and Aurobindo's experimentation effected to develop an integral man. In all cases their spiritual thinking and education were confronted in educational experimentation. But they established continuity with India's past for the extraordinary teacher was the Guru or the
6

Philosopher. In a country like India, which is so deeply weighted with the burden of the past and spurred by the urgencies of the present and the pulls of the future, where there is so much cultural and social diversity, it is obviously of the utmost importance to maintain a proper balance between tradition and experiment, between the national heritage and the human heritage, between the claims of reason and the light of institution, between science and technology and religion and vision, between activity and contemplation, between power and compassion, between the world of matter and the world of spirit. II Education has something to do with knowledge; thus education is going, explicitly or implicitly, to have something to do with a theory of knowledge, with epistemology. The epistemological view highlighted by ancient Greek philosopher, especially, Socrates, Plato and others have exercised a lasting influence. They have cast a long shadow in the field. Indeed, Richard Peters, in his introduction to Paul Hirst's book Knowledge and the Curriculum says that Hirst is the first curriculum theorist since Plato to make any significant contribution to the subject. Plato's educational theory has a number of strengths in particular its anti-empiricism, its stress on understanding and its recognition of the need for students to be actively involved in the learning process. There are some enduring weaknesses in the theory. The stress on insight leads to a closure and absolutism about intellectual endeavour. This is to be avoided in favour of openness and fallibilism. Nowhere does Plato provide criteria for assessing rival claims to insight. Epistemology has to be good, it attended to, it will inevitable be put to use in practical programmes and in the creation of educational theories. Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, John Henry Newman, Alfred North Whitehead are just some of the classical figures for whom this claim is clearly true. In contemporary philosophy of education Paul Hirst at Cambridge, Israel Schemer at Harvard and Paulo Freire, the once exiled Brazilian, all see that epistemology is the way to bring rigour to their theorizing, and relevance to their proposals for the practical conduct of education. Teachers are involved in the process of producing, transmitting and justifying public knowledge. They do this explicitly via the curricula and implicitly via the hidden curricula. Course content, teaching styles, grading procedures, power relations entered into, are all means whereby the school makes its contribution to the consciousness of students and to the store of public knowledge, public values, public culture. School children recite the Lord's Praver; line up at assemblies; salute the flag; attend History and English lessons; put on musicals; go on excursions; join
7

cadet corps; segregate according to sex to use toilets, participate in sport, and attend certain lessons; hand work to teachers; sit exams and gain certificates. No important epistemology has ever been proposed which ignores scientific practice and the process of theory appraisal in science. Aristotle, Francis Bacon, David Hume, lmmanuel Kant all based their epistemology upon an understanding of science. Although difficult, and prone to error, this procedure is a wise one. Much contemporary Anglo-Saxon epistemology is simply aberrant in this respect. It is a departure from the great tradition. It is of particular note that Paul Hirst's "Forms of Knowledge" theory, so influential in British philosophy of education, is altogether bereft of considerations of the history and philosophy of science. Before we get into the pedagogical implication we are to clarify the operational definition of the concept pedagogy. The term pedagogy is used in the sense of the "science of teaching" (OED). Although, pedagogy is considered a science or an art is still under debate. Thus, in the present study, pedagogy will refer strategy of teaching or art of teaching also. It will be used in a very wider perspective and in a very comprehensive way, because education as a science was first used by Alexander Bain in 1879 since then less and less has been heard of this claim (Sirnon, 1999). The pedagogy followed by Socrates was question answer. Aristotle adopted inductive and deductive procedure, while Hegel used the logical measuring procedure. Descartes used to simple to complex method. Pragmatic Philosophers used to use the process of continuity by adopting experimental procedure. The content of knowledge is no doubt past but its reference is always future. The knowledge of an engineer is what he has studied about the experiences of others but he uses this knowledge in planning the construction of the roads, bridges, buildings, etc., and in executing his plans. Knowledge which is not used is not knowledge at all. The pragmatist assumes the continuity of past and future. He holds that knowledge of the past is desirable so far as it is helpful in forecasting the future. Continuity means there is no fundamental difference between the knower and the thing known. Knowing is the process by which one experience gives meaning to another experience. One experience leads to another experience which in its own turn will lead to some other experience. The process goes on continuously. The Indian epistemology has also its pedagogical implication. The Jainism recognizes the importance of learning and training. There are five means of knowledge - Mati, Sruta, Awadhi, Manahaparyaya and Kevla. The last three belong to Tapasvina. Mati and Sruta indicate sense - contact, lecturing, dialogue, discussion, seminar, visits and tours as techniques of teaching which may be adopted by a teacher. Jainism would include ethics, religion and philosophy in the curriculum but will not oppose science. The study of space and five elements are emphasized in Jainism. The
8

Buddhism has also practiced its epistemology in the form of oral teaching, preaching, repetition, exposition, discussion and debates were all used. The Buddistic council organized seminars' to scholars to discuss the major issues at length. The Shankhya Philosophy recognized a system of teaching for achieving the self conscious principle. This can be achieved by virtue and wisdom, by dispassion and clarity of consciousness. For, "passionate attachment leads to transmigration. Sankhya also recognizes that error has to be removed before supreme wisdom or Mukti can be attained. Error (Viparaya), is of five forms, i.e., Ignorance, Egotism, Passion, Hatred and Attachment, to the body as also to the objects of sense". In Nyaya, all learning was based upon the discussion method. Even the four sources of knowledge, i.e., Perception, Inference, Comparison and Trustworthy Testimony were put to the test of objective standards in the shape of discussion of various forms such as Vada Argumentation, consisting of objections and answers, both disputants, however carrying only for truth. The Upanishadic system of teaching was done at that time at all the three levels viz., memory, understanding and reflective. The emphasis was laid on discussions, questioning, induction and deduction. Commentaries, illustrations, descriptions, narrations and practical demonstrations may be easily inferred from the text of Upanishads. Prof. R.D. Ranade has analysed the method of Upanishadic as follows: (1) Engimatic method, (2) Aphorisitc method, (3) Etymological method, (4) Mythical method, (5) Analogical method, (6) Dialectic method, (7) Synthetic method, (8) Monologic method, (9) Adhoc or Temporizing method and (to) Regressive method (Pandey R.S., 1997). The Upanishadas fall often into the form of a dialogue, which shows that the method of teaching was catechetical, the method of explaining a subject by an intelligent and graduated series of questions and answers, anticipating the method of the great Greek teachers, Socrates. The pupils asked questions (there was no lack of boldness in some of them, e.g., Prasana 3b) and the teacher discoursed at length on the topic referred to him (e.g. Kenopanishad, Katha). In these discourses teachers utilized all the familiar devices of oral teaching such as apt illustrations (Prasana, 2) stories (Katha), and parables (Kena, 3) the Taittirya Brahmana uses the technical terms Parsanin (questionnaire) and Prasana-Vivaka (answer), while the Atharveda knows of Pracachika or expounder (where Nirvachara and Nirukta). The use of discussion as a method of study led to the development of the science of Logic called Vakovakyarn, by which Sankara understands Tarka-sastra, the science of disputation. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishada clearly states that education in the highest knowledge depends upon the three process following one another, viz., (1) Sravana (2) Manana, and Nidhidhvasana. Sravana is listening to what is taught by the teacher. Manana, is defined as
9

constant contemplation of the one Reality in accordance with the ways of reasoning aiding in its apprehension. Nididhyasana is concentrated contemplation of the truth so as to realize it. (Bourai, H.H.A., 1993). From the above brief reference of the implication of epistemology in pedagogy reveals that hermeneutics has occupied an important place in the pedagogical sciences in the west and the east. Hermeneutics refers a theory, a philosophy, a methodology, a view of reality and approach, a hope, a promise, an ideology or a slogan, a batterley ... filed of study, a discipline (Galtagher, 1992). Although, there is still no uniformly accepted definition of Hermeneutics, however, we refer hermeneutics as understanding or interpretation, especially as related to language and text, as the subject matter of hermeneutics. If we characterize hermeneutics as a study or a theory of interpretation, we should also note that the paradigm or textual interpretation dominates hermeneutical studies. Thus, we should consider the hermeneutical approach to educational experiences. This Hermeneutics may be of conservative, moderate, radical and critical. Hermeneutics is employed as a means of penetrating false consciousness, discovering the ideological nature of our belief systems, promoting distortion free communication and thereby accomplishing a liberating consensus. On the other hand, critical hermeneutics is conservative to the extent that it promises to destroy false consciousness rather than to live within it, as radical hermeneutics contends we must. It is conservative to the extent that it expects actually to accomplish an ideology-free situation of consensus. If we wanted to transmit knowledge and help to imbibe the development of mental faculties of the learners, integration of knowledge and pedagogy is essential. A teacher must have knowledge base of the discipline or the content and also must have the knowledge of the pedagogical sciences, such as, which subject and which learning experiences is to be imparted through which pedagogy or through which approach. There is no unified universal pedagogy for all the knowledge base areas. Every branch of knowledge demands different types of strategies and approaches for teaching and for learning. Kathy Cater made an exhaustive study "teachers knowledge and learning to teach" where she has examined the knowledge to teach question, research on teachers' knowledge, such as, information processing, practical knowledge i.e., personal practical knowledge, class room knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge. There she has reported that the final approach to studying teacher knowledge represents an attempt to determine what teachers know about their classroom curricular events. There has been recent concern that, the discipline knowledge that many beginning and experienced teachers possess poorly, equips them for
10

this transformation process (see for example, Anderson 1989; Ball, 1988; Buchmann, 1984; Gomez, 1988). The process, to be sure, is multifaceted and complex. L. Shulman and Sykes (1986) suggested that pedagogical content knowledge includes: understanding the central topics in each subject matter as it is generally taught to children of a particular grade level and being able to ask the following kinds of questions about each topic: what are core concepts, skills and attitudes which this topic has the potential of conveying to students? ... What are the aspects of this topic that are most difficult to understand for students? What is the greatest intrinsic interest? What analogies, metaphors, examples, similes, demonstrations, simulations, manipulations, or the like, are most effective in communicating the appropriate understandings and prerequisites? What students' preconceptions are likely to get in the way of learning? Tamir (1988) suggests that additional aspects of what he terms "subject matter specific" pedagogical knowledge include a teacher's knowledge of students' interest and motivation to learn particular topic within a discipline, a teacher's understanding of how to make outsideschool settings (e.g., museums and laboratories) quality learning environments for special content areas, and a teacher's discipline based knowledge of special needs for testing and evaluating students' work (e.g., practical laboratory tests in science). Inquiry into teachers pedagogical content knowledge has been particularly active since about 1985, and yet it is important to preface a review of representative studies by saying that the work is still in its early stages. Further, Shulman, L. S. (1999) has made a remarkable contribution in his article "Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform" where the author has explain the knowledge base of teaching and its pedagogical skills. There the author made the following categories of knowledge base:   Content knowledge; General pedagogical knowledge, with special reference to those broad principles and strategies or classroom management and organization that appears to transcend subject matter;   Curriculum knowledge, with particular grasp of the materials and programs that serve as 'tools of the trade' for teachers; Pedagogical content knowledge, that special amalgam of content and pedagogy that is uniquely that province of teachers, their own special form of professional understanding;
11

 

Knowledge of learners and their characteristics; Knowledge of educational contexts, ranging from the workings of the group or classroom, the governance and financing of school districts, to the character of communities and cultures;



Knowledge of educational ends, purposes, and values, and their philosophical and historical grounds. Among those categories, pedagogical content knowledge is of special interest because it identifies the distinctive bodies of knowledge for teaching. It represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction. Pedagogical content knowledge is the category most likely to distinguish the understanding of the content specialist from that of the pedagogue (Leach and Moon, 1999). The author has presented a model of pedagogical reasoning and action which includes the components like, comprehension, transformation, instruction, evaluation, reflection and new comprehension.

The word 'teaching' signifies a broader connotation. It is a very dynamic, complex and comprehensive concept. It is a term, which does not have sharply defined limits. The concept of teaching, however, is by no means an easy one to handle. The meaning of teaching varies from period to period, from country to country, from stage to stage, from discipline to discipline. The whole theory of teaching depends up on philosophy of teaching and of the philosophy of education of a country. Further, the philosophy of teaching is determined by the society where teaching-learning process takes place. It is often difficult to draw the line which separates teaching from other activities which may resemble it. For example - in ancient Indian society teaching meant what the teacher told. Even in the beginning of the modern education in India "teacher was the center" that meant teacher centered education. Society is dynamic and changeable so is teaching. It shifted from teacher- centered education to subject centered education. With the advancement of knowledge, science and technology education is designed need based. So, we are thinking of giving more importance to the learner in teaching than that of the content or of even information. Teaching is to help the students to enable to lead a whole life and this includes a continuing life of some significance. Hence, preparation for modem life in a democratic, culturally plural society requires developing the capacity for intelligent, freedom of choice rather than simply acquiring the patterns of thought, feeling and action possessed by the elders. Teaching is an art. It is a spontaneous
12

flow of teacher's mind. It is an art because it involves human beings, their emotions and their values. Of course, the artistic activities have inherent order and lawfulness that make them quite suitable for scientific analysis. Teaching is a progressive revelation of hidden faculties; these faculties are powerful enough to give concrete shape to a new experience. Nothing can be taught, unless receiver is ready to receive. Thus, teaching means to help the students to learn by imparting knowledge to them and by setting up a situation in which students can and will learn effectively. Individual creativity is important to both learning and teaching. Teaching is a process of contribution to the growth of knowledge, skill, literature or art, etc. It is an activity to train up the students for creative thinking to face the challenge in their future life. We have look into the concept in different perspectives, but hardly have taken into consideration the philosophical views of teaching. Philosophical views refers how do we look into teaching. How people reflects teaching. When we look into teaching creates penetration or reflection in the minds of the teacher for creating some new knowledge in the field of knowledge. When teaching is seen in a reflective, comprehensive and integrated ways then teaching develop its own philosophy. I think prior to the embarkation of the western thought and action, especially European and American ideas or Philosophy of Teaching in Indian Subcontinent, the people of India had looked into teaching as a noble social service. It was considered as a service to mankind. But due to the westernization of Indian education the teaching has been turn into a vocation or a profession. As a result teaching has turn into a profession of imparting skill and training not to develop human hood. Thus, teaching has lost its credentialties. Lot of studies have been carried out in the field of education and teaching. It is suppose that every after 36 hours even so less of it one research study is coming out. But it is a matter of regret that hardly any study has been taken up to look into the questions of the sorry affairs of teaching. Why teaching has lost its credentials? Why teachers are not in a position to deliver the goods? Why teachers failed to help to develop a complete and perfect man like that of Swami Vivekananda, Swami Dayananda, Sri Arobindo, Mahatma Gandhi and so on. Philosophy of Teaching in India is quite different from the philosophy of teaching in the Western countries of the world. Teaching is a sacred duty. It was considered a social obligation. It was a mission for paying back to the society. The welfare of society depends up on the proper discharge of one's duties by him. Teaching is an obligation on Indian context. It is an ethical action. It is the philosophy of teacher that he has to lead the student from the darkness of ignorance to the light of knowledge. The lamp of learning is concealed under a cover; the teacher removes it and lets out the light. Andhakaranirodhata gurur ityabhidhiyate. Andhakara is not merely intellectual ignorance but spiritual blindness. A teacher should be able to remove that kind of
13

spiritual blindness. Philosophy of education in ancient time considered knowledge as the third eye of man, which gives him insight in to all affairs and teacheshim how to act. Ina jnanam tritiyam manujasya netram samasta tattvartha vilokadaksam (subhasita ratna sandoha, p. 194) Nothing gives us such an unfailing insight as vidya; in the spiritual sphere, it leads us to our salvation, in the mundane sphere it leads us to all around progress and prosperity. Nasti vidya samam caksuh, Nasti satyam samam tapah (Mahabharat, XlI: 339.6) It was the philosophy of a teacher as well as teaching to create a third eye in the man. It was holy duty. If something goes wrong in the eye of a man, a doctor can treat but if there is no eye what the doctor will do. Thus, the social, ethical and moral responsibility of a teacher is to create a third eye. It is a gift to the man by a teacher. Society realized that Vidyadana or the gift in the cause of education was to be the best of gifts, possessing a higher religious efficiency than even the gift of land. The interesting theory of three debts, which have been propounded since the Vedic age. The theory maintains that the moment an individual is born in this world, he incurs three debts, which he cab discharge only by performing certain duties. Jayamano vai brahmanastribhir rnairna vinjayate Yanjna devebhyo brahmacaryena rsibhyah prajaya pitribhyah The above sukta of the Taittiriya Samhita is the evidence of such theory which has great bearing to the philosophy of teaching. Man owes a debt to gods, and he can liquidate it only by learning how to perform proper sacrifices and regularly offering them. He owes a debt to rishis or seers and can discharge it only by studying their works and continuing their literary and professional traditions (Altekar, 1995). The rising generation was thus enabled to master and maintain the best literary and professional traditions. The debt to ancestor was the third debt, which can be repaid only by rising progeny and by imparting proper education to it. It is seen that the indebtness to a rishi or a seer or a teacher can only be liquidated by performing teaching or carrying out literary activities by way of culminating the process to the next generation (Das 1931). The convocation address as found in the Taittriya Upanishad mentioned the same. Sradhyayapravacanabhyam na pramaditavyam Esa adesah (Guru Dutta, 1888 Esa Upadesha) "Do not neglect the daily duties of 'learning and teaching. This is the rule. This is the teaching." Teaching was a process of repaying or retuming back to the society. It was a benevolent practice. Of course, it was the rule or the conunand from the institution where the individual was charged with the spirit of Vidya or education.
14

Teaching was considered as one of the yajna in the Manusamhita. The great sages devised the five great sacrifices for the house holders to do every day to redeem him from all of five slaughter houses successively. The study of the Veda is the sacrifice to the ultimate reality. Adhyapanam Brahmayajna. The above analysis reveals that the philosophy of teaching as mentioned in the literature was very much related with the very concept of Vidya. It was not with the concept of education. Vidya is of two types the supreme or highest knowledge technically called paravidya and it is synonyms with atma-vidya, knowledge of soul or of spiritual truth; and it is distinguished from other knowledge termed apara- vidya, knowledge of material world or knowledge of the lower level. Paravidya is a subject of spontaneous and imbibed realisation for which a teacher can penetrate the conscience of the student and for creating penetration teacher himself has to reach up to that level with reflection. It demands practice, dedication, devotion and sacrifice to acquire such qualities. Vidya thus promotes our material as well as spiritual welfare, both in this as well as in the after-life. vidya tu vaidushyamupajaiyantee jagarti lokadauyasadhanaya. The illumination, insight and guidance provided to us by Vidya effects a complete transformation. Teaching was moral duty, a pious obligation or dharma in ancient India. Teacher was the only source of knowledge. Thus, it was historical duty to transmit to his students whatever knowledge he has. To control it from the deserving one and to impart the same to the unworthy were thought to be seenful acts. Para-vidya cannot be induced or infused by all teachers and every teacher does not have same philosophy also. The philosophy of teaching depends upon the philosophy of a country, philosophy of the teacher himself or herself, philosophy of a particular stage of education, philosophy of a subject or discipline or area of study and also the reflective capacity of the teacher. In ancient India there was no such organised system of education because of the fact that the modem concept of state or of the European concept of state was not there. In spite of that there was cultural heritage in India so far life and education of the people of the country, Indian heritage reveals that the philosophy of education was ideal in character and spiritual in spirit and the same wave had even continued till the embarkation of the European specially the British in India. The philosophy of teaching was in tune with the attainment of reality or of Purusartha, or Nirvana or Moksha, etc. which has a bearing with paravidya' and the practicing of'aparavidya' helps to attain paravidya. In British - India, the aim and philosophy of education was changed, and it was adopted with 'Education', which is considered as the substitute of' siksha' or aparavidya. The concept of paravidya was dropped out. Hence, education was considered as medium of earning livelihood for which certain training and skills are to be developed The question of reflection which is related with some fundamental issues of life like origin of life, it existence, universe and reality of life, etc. were undermined. The result of which is the crisis of values in education. Even after achieving the independence the philosophy of education
15

in India was not change. The basic philosophy of education is to achieve the material development of the country not the development of positive values. The philosophy of teaching is also emerged for achieving such values as are decided in the aims of education by the national education commission or by the NE Policy. One more important aspect of philosophy of teaching is to be noticed that' the teaching' has converted into a profession and it should be guided by professiotJ.al ethics which is yet to be developed in India. It has already been mentioned that the philosophy of teaching depends upon the teacher and the level in which he or she teaches. In ancient India there were three kinds of teacher in ancient India, i.e., Guru or Acharya and Upadhyaya. The teacher was generally called "Guru", which means 'heavy' or 'great' and he was to be really great in learning and moral conduct. The term' guru' also connotes a spiritual preceptor who is leaned and dwells entirely in Brahaman. It was the philosophy of the guru to lead the student from the darkness of ignorance to the light of knowledge. The lamp of learning is concealed under a cover, says the educationists, the guru removes it and lets out the light. In this connection S. Radhakrishanan opined, "I hope that ideal of a true teacher will be remembered by us. Andhakaranirodhata gurur ityabhidhiyate. Andhakar is not merely intellectual ignorance but spiritual blindness. He who is able to remove that kind of spiritual blindness is called a guru. Are we deserving of that novel appellationofaguru". (S. Radhakrishnan, 1961,1:166) Alpam v.a bahu va yasya srutasyopakaroti yah Tamapi tha gurum vidyat srutopakriyaya taya (Manu 2/149) Guru was also called 'acharya' (J4.c,harayastu Vedaparagah, Manu, 2.148) which comes from the word "car" to behave and means onewho trains up others in good behaviour (acharam grahayati itiacharyah). Acharya is one whose achar or conduct is exemplary, is good. It is also taken by some to mean the source of all religion. Yasmat dharmanacinoti sa acaryah (Apa. Dha.ASKA.Suta 1.1.1.14; yaska) In either sense the teacher was expeced to train up the pupils in good behaviour, the essence of religion, and naturally to possess those qualities himself. "This truth is not grasped when taught by an inferior man"-- says the Kathopanisad. The Acraya is defined by Manu to be one who initiates a pupil and teaches him the Veda together with the kalpa and the Rahasyas. An "Upandhyaya" is he, who teaches only a portion of the Vedas. "Ekadesamupadhyayah" (Yajna, 1/135). One who teaches the Angas of the Vedas is also an upadhyaya. Thus it appears that a guru is the highest level of teacher who concerned with highest knowledge or supreme knowledge and who must have a philosophy of removing all sorts of ignorance. The philosophy of teaching was very much related with Vidya - Para Vidya and Apara Vidya or subsidiary knowledge. Apara Vidya or subsidiary knowledge is divided into a number of disciplines but naturally the classifications vary with different schools. Some have regarded even
16

knowledge of the Vedas and the Vedangas as Apara Vidya. It is also interesting to note that the term Veda is extended to science which have nothing to do with religion (Humayun Kabir, 1961, 176). The main philosophy of teacher was to help the students to attain freedom from ignorance and hence from limitations and also to help to attainment of knowledge, thus, released one from bondage of want and fear. The seers of ancient India were not afraid of living dangerously in thought and action. Their example, even more that their precept, inspired their pupils, and again and again we come across cases where the students asks the most searching and devastating questions from their teachers. The teacher were having disinterested action (mishkarna karma). In modem times with advent of cultural imperialism along with westernization the values in teaching and philosophy of teaching both have lost its ground. The very important dimension of teaching is the reflective analysis and sensitization of the learner inner abilities and ideas. In teaching today, the reflective ability of a teacher has been subordinated to machine and mechanism which can help to develop skill but not the penetration. Teaching is an integrated activities has been reduced into disposition of inform action. It is considered only in the light of production. Teaching is a part of input and output process of education. A synoptic examination is required to see the present status of teaching in our country. Country has lost its heritage and philosophy of teaching. Although movement has been started for academic audit in line with the western accreditation which may produce some numerical change and result but hardly has it had any scope to examine the philosophy of teaching in India today. Thus it appears that Indian philosophy has its historical and traditional foundation with regard to its philosophy of life and it is entertained with Aparavidya and Paravidya i.e. immediate aim of life which is related to professional or vocational aim of education and its lead to Paravidya which is related to the ultimate goal of Indian life. To achieve these no school of epistemological theory is sufficient or complete or perfect so far knowledge formation is concerned. Therefore an integrated approach is essential. Further, the knowledge is to be integrated along with the pedagogical sciences. Therefore, the present study proposes a cooperative effort for developing an integrated policy of Indian philosophy of education in tune with the national policy of education combining the aim of education, Indian aim of education, Indian epistemology and Indian philosophy of teaching along with the philosophy of the contemporary world so that India can maintain its own culture and tradition inspite of maintaining of globalization of education.

17

References   Altekar, A.S. (1995), Education in Ancient India, 5th Edn, Nand Kishore and Bros, Banaras. Bourai, H.H.A. (1993), Indian Theory of Education, Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation.  Brubachcr, John S, Modern Philosophies of Education, Tata Megraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd. New Delhi, 1983.           Buch, M.B. Survey of Educational Research, NCERT, New Delhi, 1988. Cenkner WiIliam, The Hindu Personality in Education, Monohar Book Service, New Delhi, 1976. Das, Santosh Kumar (1931), The Educational System of the Ancient Hindus, Mitra Press, Calcutta. Datta, Guru. (1888), Ishnopanishad (with Sanskrit text and English translation), Virajanand Press, Labor. Gallagher, S. (1992), Hermeneutics and Education, New York: State University of New York Press. Kabir Humayan (1961), Indian Philosophy of Education, Asia Publishing, Bombay. Kabir, Humayun, Indian Philosophy of Education, Asia Publishing House, Bombay, 1961. Mukherji, Radha Kumud (1951), Ancient Indian Education, London. Pandey, R.S. Preface to Indian Philosophy of Education, S.K. Publishers & Distributors, Aligarh. Prasad, Durga (1893), The Mundakopanishat (with English translation) Virajanand, Press, Lahor.    Radhakrishanan, S & Raju, PT. (Ed), The Concept of Man, George Alien & Unwin Ltd., Musuem Street, London. Raja, C.K. (1950), Some Aspects of Education in Ancient India, Adyar. Rusk, Robcrt, The Doctrines of Gret Educators, Mac Millan & Co. Ltd., New York, 1957.  Saiyidain, K.G. The Humanist Tradition in Indian Educational Thought, Asia
18

Publishing House, London, 1966.    Sandranan Acharya (1876), Taittariya Upanis had, (with Bengali translation and notes) Sandrananda Press, Calcutta. The Maitri Upahishat, (1926), Panini Office, Allahabad. Zaidi, Sabira, K. Education and Humanism, Institute of Advanced Study, Simla, 1971.

19