VOCATIONALIZATION OF SANSKRIT EDUCATION

VOCATIONALIZATION OF SANSKRIT EDUCATION - +xÉÖ¤ÉxvÉ& SÉiÉÖ¹]õªÉ¨ÉÂ.

´ªÉÉQÉ& ºÉä´ÉÊiÉ EòÉxÉxÉÆ ºÉÖMɽþxÉÆ ËºÉ½þÉä MÉÖ½þÉÆ ºÉä´ÉiÉä* ½ÆþºÉ ºÉä´ÉÊiÉ {ÉÎnÂù¨ÉxÉÓ EÖòºÉÖʨÉiÉÉÆ MÉÞwÉ& ¶¨É¶ÉÉxɺlɱÉÒ*

ºÉÉvÉÖ ºÉä´ÉÊiÉ ºÉÉvÉÖ¨Éä´É ºÉiÉiÉÆ xÉÒSÉÉä%Ê{É xÉÒSÉVÉxÉÆ* ªÉÉ ªÉºªÉ |ÉEÞòÊiÉ& º´É¦ÉÉ´ÉVÉÊxÉiÉÉ EäòxÉÉÊ{É xÉ iªÉVªÉiÉä*

Everyone is a creature of his/her habits, which reflect their cognitive abilities that are both inherited and culturally acquired. According to Ayurveda, the embryo inherits different, but fixed characteristics (crystallized intelligence) from both parents, which, in turn are derived from their respective parents. This way, there is a continuous chain of mutation between the genes passed on to the off-springs. The Gotra system prevalent in our country ensures greater degree of genetic mutation making our country a veritable storehouse of rich genetic strands. The bringing up of a child in different cultural environments modifies the effect of these genetic traits (fluid intelligence). This net modified effect is called “º´É¦ÉÉ´É” – talent or heritability coefficient. One can excel only if his profession fully harmonizes with his talent - “º´É¦ÉÉ´É”. Hence it is called “º´ÉvɨÉÇ” –cognitive ability. If one is engaged in a profession where his heritability coefficients are not harmonized with his activities, it becomes ineffective or generates contradictory thoughts and performance, which may create serious problems. Hence Gita (18/47) says: ¸ÉäªÉÉxº´Évɨ¨ÉÉæ Ê´ÉMÉÖhÉ& {É®úvɨ¨ÉÉÇiº´ÉxÉÖι`öiÉÉiÉÂ* º´É¦ÉÉ´ÉÊxɪÉiÉÆ Eò¨¨ÉÇ EÖò´ÉÇzÉÉ{xÉÉäÊiÉ ÊEòα¤É¹É¨ÉÂ* Even though not performed in the best possible manner, action according to one’s cognitive abilities is better than doing something contrary to it in the best possible manner. Following one’s talent or cognitive abilities is not sinful or wrong.

DEFINING EXCELLENCE: YÉÉxÉÉªÉ EÞòiªÉÆ {É®ú¨ÉÆ ÊGòªÉɦªÉ&*

All descriptions of reality are based on existence (+κiÉi´É) that can be cognized (+ʦÉvÉäªÉi´É) and expressed in a language (´ÉÉSªÉi´É). Objects (ʴɹɪÉ) are special combinations of materials (pù´ªÉ) joined by energy that display different degrees of excellence (MÉÖhÉ) through interactions (Eò¨¨ÉÇ) with other bodies based on density gradient (Ê´É ¶É´nùÉä ʽþ ʴɶÉä¹ÉÉlÉÇ& ʺÉxÉÉäiÉä¤ÉÇxvÉ =SªÉiÉä* ʴɶÉä¹ÉähÉ ÊºÉxÉÉäiÉÒÊiÉ Ê´É¹ÉªÉÉä%iÉÉä ÊxɪÉɨÉEò&). These are described based on commonality (ºÉÉvɨ¨ªÉÇ) and differentiation (´Éèvɨ¨ªÉÇ) of objects with each other. Knowledge (YÉÉxɨÉÂ) is the commonality (ºÉɨÉÉxªÉ) evident in everything. Science (Ê´ÉYÉÉxɨÉÂ) is the special (ʴɶÉä¹É) knowledge about the identifying characteristics of any group or each member of a group. Thus, science is a derivative of knowledge. Vedas contain knowledge. Hence science can be derived from the Vedas. Since knowledge is revealed as science, it is called Ê´ÉtÉ. Without action (Eò¨¨ÉÇ – also technology), knowledge is practically useless. However, knowledge cannot induce action directly. Only science (and technology dependent on it), induces action through freewill. Hence action (Eò¨¨ÉÇ) is called +Ê´ÉtÉ. Ishopanishad uses these two words in this sense (+Ê´ÉtɪÉÉÆ ¨ÉÞiªÉÖÆ iÉÒi´ÉÉÇ Ê´ÉtªÉɨÉÞiɨɶxÉÖiÉä). Knowledge and science are interdependent. Without proper knowledge and science, technology can not only be misleading but also be dangerous.

Knowledge is not data, but the ‘awareness’ of exposure/result of measurement associated with any object, energy or interaction stored in memory as an invariant concept that can be retrieved (º¨ÉÞÊiÉ{ÉÚ´ÉÉÇxÉÖ¦ÉÚiÉÉJªÉ ʴɹɪÉÆ YÉÉxɨÉÖSªÉiÉä). It describes through a language (xÉɨÉ) the defining characteristics of some previously known thing – physical properties (°ü{É) and chemical interactions (Eò¨¨ÉÇ) - by giving it a name that remain the same as a concept at all times – thus immune to spatiotemporal variations - till it is modified by fresh inputs. The variations of the object, energy or interaction under different specific circumstances and the predetermined result thereof form part of knowledge. In a mathematical format (ºÉÉRÂóEäòÊiÉEò), it depicts the right hand side of each equation or inequality representing determinism (EòÉ®úhÉMÉÖhÉ{ÉÚÌ´ÉEòÉ). Once the parameters represented by the left hand side are chosen and the special conditions represented by the equality sign are met, the right hand side becomes deterministic and starts a new chain (|ÉÉ®ú¤vÉ). In ancient times, this knowledge was technically called +ÉÎx´ÉÊIÉEòÒ, which literally means describable facts about the invariant nature of everything. Vedic research methodology is also called +ÉÎx´ÉÊIÉEòÒ.

Engineering and Management which deal with the efficient use of objects or persons respectively; are related to left hand side of an equation – free-will (ÊGòªÉ¨ÉÉhÉ Eò¨¨ÉÇ); which presupposes knowledge of the deterministic behavior of objects or humans that can be chosen or effectively directed to create something or function in a desired manner in a maximally economic and regenerative way. This was called jɪÉÒ – literally the three phases of mass (three states of solid, fluid and plasma - wÉÖ´É, vÉjÉÇ, vɯûhÉ), energy and radiation in all combinations – physical and chemical properties (protestation, loyalty and expectation in the case of humans). Since the three Vedas contain knowledge about these three aspects (@ñSÉɨÉÚÌkÉ& ªÉÉVÉÖË¹É MÉÊiÉ ºÉÉ¨É¨ÉªÉ iÉäVÉ&), they are also called jɪÉÒ. The responsive mechanism was called nùhb÷xÉÒÊiÉ – principles of inducement through reward and punishment (essentially material addition or reduction both for men in management and materials in Engineering). The regenerative mechanism was called ´ÉÉkÉÉÇ – problem solving. It solved the problems of deficiency through regenerative agriculture, diary farming, marketing, etc, and kept machines production-ready through maintenance. These four basic tenets, equally valid for both technology and management, are also immutable - invariant in time, space and culture leading to deterministic results. Hence from Manu to Brihaspati (in his ¤ÉɽÇþ{ÉiªÉ +lÉǶÉɺjɨÉÂ, which was followed by Kautilya in his +lÉǶÉɺjɨÉÂ) to later day authors like Kamandaki, everyone has described +ÉÎx´ÉÊIÉEòÒ jɪÉÒ ´ÉÉkÉÉÇ nùhb÷xÉÒËiÉ SÉ ¶ÉÉ·ÉiÉÒ. Lack of knowledge of the deterministic behavior to guide choice of the freewill components has led engineering and management astray. The fast changing technology and management principles point to their inherent deficiencies that need immediate rectification. But first, what causes such distortion?

According to the Vedic tradition, excellence in action is Dharma and non-excellence is Adharma (EÖò¶É±ÉÉEÖò¶É±ÉÉèEò¨ÉÉê vɨÉÉÇvɨÉÉê). Excellence ({É®ú¨ÉÉä ʽþ ¨ÉxjÉ&) is the harmonization of one’s talents with thought and action (¨ÉxɺªÉäEäò ´ÉSɺªÉäEäò Eò¨¨ÉÇhªÉäEäò ¨É½þÉi¨ÉxÉɨÉÂ). Its opposite is called ÊVÉÀ - ¨ÉxɺªÉäxªÉiÉ ´ÉSɺªÉäxªÉiÉ Eò¨¨ÉÇhªÉäxªÉiÉ nÖù®úÉi¨ÉxÉɨÉÂ. Excellence has two components: 1) acquisition of the presently unavailable - orientation towards growth (ªÉÉäMÉ-¦ÉʴɹªÉ±ÉɦɺªÉ ºÉRÂóMɨÉÉlÉǨÉÂ) and 2) maintenance of the available assets (IÉä¨É- +iÉÒiÉ ±ÉɦɺªÉ ºÉÖ®úIÉhÉÉlÉǨÉÂ), which includes provisions for disaster management (+É{Éi|É{ÉzɺªÉ SÉ ¨ÉÉäIÉhÉÉlÉǨÉÂ). When such principles of ªÉÉäMÉ-IÉä¨É are applied for the body, it is called nourishment ({ÉÖι]õ), for sense organs, it is happiness (ºÉÖJÉ), for mind, it is contentment (iÉÖι]õ) and for the self or consciousness, it is peace (¶ÉÉÎxiÉ). Increasing prosperity of the body and sense organs are called development orientation (+¦ªÉÖnùªÉ) and that for mind and soul are called the ultimate goal (ÊxÉ&¸ÉäªÉºÉ).

THE MATERIALISTIC WORLD - ºÉ´ÉäÇ MÉÖhÉÉ& EòÉ\SÉxɨÉɸɪÉxiÉä*

Everyone wants to be happy. Happiness (ºÉÖJÉ) in the world depends on six factors. These are:

1.      Regular source of income to meet one’s requirements (+lÉÉÇMɨÉÊxÉiªÉ¨ÉÂ).

2.      Freedom from any disease (+®úÉäÊMÉiÉÉ).

3.      A loving spouse (Ê|ɪÉÉ ¦ÉɪÉÉÇ)

4.      A soft spoken and well behaved spouse (Ê|ɪɴÉÉÊnùxÉÒ ¦ÉɪÉÉÇ).

5.      Obedient children (´É¶ªÉ& {ÉÖjÉ&).

6.      Productive vocational education (+lÉÇEò®úÒ Ê´ÉtÉ).

Of these, the last is most important, because, happiness is defined as that, which fulfills the following three conditions:

·        That which is not curtailed by sorrow (ªÉzÉnÖù&JÉä¹ÉÖºÉÆʦÉzÉ),

·        Which does not get exhausted (xÉ SÉ OɺiɨÉxÉxiÉ®ú¨ÉÂ) and

·        That which is in conformity with one’s desires (+ʦɱÉʹÉiɨÉÉ{xÉÉäÊiÉ).

Cherished happiness fulfills all three conditions (ºÉ& ºÉÖJÉ& ºÉ¨{Énùɺ{Énù¨ÉÂ). While we cannot do much about the first two, the third can be achieved in most cases with money. With the right vocational education, we could get a job to earn good money. With money, we could treat the diseases, get a good wife (with luck favoring), and bring up our children properly. In today’s world, money is the most cherished object (vÉxÉÉÊxÉ ¶±ÉÉPÉxÉÒªÉÉÊxÉ). Thus, choosing the right branch of education has become most important. The issue will be clear if we examine the decline in popularity of vernacular languages like Odia and increasing popularity of English in general and obscure languages like Pali in Civil Service Examinations in particular.

In the earlier times, our daily routine was regulated by the seasons. Sporadic hard work in some seasons was followed by long periods of leisure and enjoyment in other seasons. People enjoyed cultural activities including music, drama, etc. As music climaxed, dopamine flooded the right caudate nucleus, correlating with the listener’s experience of anticipation rushing out from the synapses of neurons in the right nucleus accumbens (NAc) increasing heart rate and sweating, rapid breathing and a drop in skin temperature indicating emotional arousal. The music generated interest in vernacular language. But modern day life is stereotyped without variation. Electronic media has demolished cultural barriers. The “variety” in culture is a mix with emphasis on “change”, which is contrary to happiness. Our body’s internal clock is set for two 12-hour periods of light and darkness. Shift duty is affecting the immune system (NFIL3 genes keep the production of T_H17 cells synchronized with periods of light and darkness). With this job-shift, searching, calibrated, indifferent, reactant and apathetic boredom increases. Thus interest in literature - which was the main source of entertainment - has declined. Increased competition has forced the students to search for avenues that give maximum return with minimum effort. Thus, English and other foreign languages that facilitate getting jobs are preferred over vernacular languages like Odia or Bengali. Languages like Pali or subjects like geography, are preferred not for interest in them, but for getting more marks by studying comparatively less. In IT and other international business sectors, learning a foreign language is considered an added asset.

In this scenario, what is the future of Sanskrit language or for that matter, the Sanskrit Universities? The job prospects of Sanskrit scholars are very limited. It will be increasingly acute in times to come – particularly when the quality of teachers are declining rapidly. Without jobs, interest in Sanskrit Degrees will decline. Can Sanskrit Universities, where compartmentalization due to reductionism is distorting textual meaning (as the Vedas can be interpreted correctly only after reading all the Vedangas), survive only with Government grant? With increasing emphasis on the weeding out of subsidies to reduce current account deficit, they may not survive long. Their survival depends on their vocationalization. Even top institutions like IIM Calcutta are changing to tech-enabled education and restructuring the curriculum to stay afloat. Why not they.

This is the age of science. But currently physics is at cross-roads. There are a large number of different approaches to the foundations of Quantum Mechanics (QM). Each approach is a modification of the theory that introduces some new aspect with new equations which need to be interpreted. Thus there are many interpretations of QM. Every theory has its own model of reality. There is no unanimity regarding what constitutes reality. Quantum Mechanics is not compatible with Einstein’s Relativity. General Relativity does not work beyond solar system. Most of the ‘established theories’ have been questioned as the latest observations find mind boggling anomalies in theoretical prediction and actual measurement. In hierarchy problem of dark energy, the theory and observation differ by a mind boggling factors ranging from 10⁵⁷ to 10¹²⁰. Similarly fantasies like extra-dimensions have not been proved even after more than a century. In short, there is a severe crisis in physics, though no one is publicly admitting it, as they fear that international funding will dry up. The Sanskrit Universities should use this opportunity to fill the void by scientifically interpreting the Vedas and presenting the science inherent in it.

Vedas contain knowledge from which science can be derived. In various international fora, we have challenged most of the leading scientific theories by pointing out their deficiencies and pointing out alternative theories derived from the Vedas. These are in the public fora including in our blog: basudeba.blogspot.com. We are getting many queries indicating interest in Vedic science. There is ample scope for research in Vedic science. But scientists do not understand Vedas and Vedic scholars do not know science.

Knowledge cannot be imparted – it has to be acquired (xÉɪɨÉÉi¨ÉÉ |É´ÉSÉxÉäxÉ ±É¦ªÉÉä xÉ ¨ÉävɪÉÉ xÉ ´É½ÖþvÉÉ ¸ÉÖiÉäxÉ* ªÉ¨Éä´Éè¹É ¤ÉÞhÉÖiÉä iÉäxÉ ±É¦ªÉÉä iɺªÉä¹É +Éi¨ÉÉ Ê´É¤ÉÞhÉÖiÉä iÉxÉÖÆ º´ÉɨÉÂ). Hence the schools are called Ê´ÉtÉ±ÉªÉ and not YÉÉxÉɱɪÉ. If the student contemplates on any question with an open mind (Ê´ÉÊSÉxiɪÉäÊzÉiªÉ¨ÉÖnùÉ®únù¶ÉÇxɨÉÂ), the answer is revealed to him in a flash. But when that flash will appear depends on many factors. We are not discussing these here. Memorization and reproduction of certain facts is not education. The teacher only teaches – tries to make the student enabled – regarding how to solve some problems by himself. The student solves the problems using his talent - heritability coefficients, which is inborn. Education and practice only enhances skill - cognitive abilities. Since talent is inborn, the same education will not develop the same cognitive abilities in all students.

THE PUZZLE: BEòÉänù®ú ºÉ¨ÉÖnÂù¦ÉÚiÉÉ BEòxÉIÉjÉVÉÉiÉEòÉ&* xÉ ¦É´ÉÎxiÉ ºÉ¨ÉÉ& ¶ÉÒ±ÉèªÉÇlÉÉ ´Énù®úÒEòh]õEòÉ&*

Whether and how heritability coefficients vary across specific cognitive abilities has been debated for ages. In the West, the traditional “investment” theory of cognitive abilities classifies intelligence into two main categories: fluid and crystallized (different in detail from our view). Differences in fluid intelligence are thought to reflect novel, on-the-spot reasoning, whereas differences in crystallized intelligence are thought to reflect previously acquired knowledge and skills. Crystallized intelligence develops through the investment of fluid intelligence in a particular body of knowledge. Genetically, this theory predicts that in the general population; in which people differ in their educational experiences, the heritability of crystallized intelligence is expected to be lower than the heritability of fluid intelligence. This theory assumes that fluid intelligence is heavily influenced by genes and relatively fixed, whereas crystallized intelligence is more heavily dependent on acquired skills and learning opportunities.

In a recent study: “On the Nature and Nurture of Intelligence and Specific Cognitive Abilities: The More Heritable, the More Culture Dependent” published in Psychological Science, (DOI: 10.1177/0956797613493292), researchers investigated how heritability coefficients vary across specific cognitive abilities both theoretically and empirically. They assessed the “Cultural load” of various cognitive abilities by taking the average percentage of test items that were adjusted when the test was adapted for use in 13 different countries. The finding suggests that:

1.In adult samples, culture-loaded subtests tend to demonstrate greater heritability coefficients than do culture-reduced subtests; and

2.In samples of both adults and children, a subtest’s proportion of variance shared with general intelligence is a function of its cultural load.

The above finding implies that, the extent to which a test of cognitive ability correlates with Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is the extent to which it reflects societal demands and not cognitive demands. “IQ” here refers to the general intelligence factor: technically defined as the first factor derived from a factor analysis of a diverse battery of cognitive tests, representing a diverse sample of the general population, explaining the largest source of variance in the dataset. Further, in adults, higher heritability of the cognitive test reflects more test-dependence on culture. The effects were medium-to-large and statistically significant. Highly culturally loaded tests such as Vocabulary, Spelling, and Information had relatively high heritability coefficients and were also highly related to IQ. This counterintuitive finding is inconsistent with the traditional investment theory and aggravated the nature-nurture debate of intelligence.

The question: “why did the most culturally-loaded tests have the highest heritability coefficients” – returns many puzzles. The society is a homogenous learning environment – school systems are all the same; everyone in a class has the same educational experiences; yet the cognitive ability varies. If the traditional investment theory is correct and crystallized intelligence (such as vocabulary, general knowledge) is more cognitively demanding than solving the most complex abstract reasoning tests, then tests such as vocabulary would have to depend more on IQ than fluid intelligence. But why tests such as vocabulary would have a higher cognitive demand than tests that are less culturally-loaded but more cognitively complex (such as tests of abstract reasoning)? Also, this theory doesn’t provide an explanation for why the heritability of IQ increases linearly from childhood to young adulthood. One way out is to abandon some long held assumptions in the West. These findings are best understood in terms of genotype-environment covariance, in which cognitive abilities and knowledge dynamically feed off each other. Those with a proclivity to engage in cognitive complexity will tend to seek out intellectually demanding environments. As they develop higher levels of cognitive ability, they will also tend to achieve relatively higher levels of knowledge. More knowledge will make it more likely that they will eventually end up in more cognitively demanding environments, which will facilitate the development of an even wider range of knowledge and skills.

Societal demands influence the development and interaction of multiple cognitive abilities and knowledge, thus causing positive correlations among each other, and giving rise to the general intelligence factor. These findings do not mean that differences in intelligence are entirely determined by culture. The structure of cognitive abilities is strongly influenced by genes also. What these findings do suggest is that there is a much greater role of culture, education, and experience in the development of intelligence than mainstream Western theories of intelligence have assumed. Behavioral genetics researchers - who parse out genetic and environmental sources of variation – have often operated on the assumption that genotype and environment are independent and do not co-vary. These findings suggest they very much do co-vary.

Attempts were made to link perception and intelligence - for instance, do intelligent people see more detail in a scene? Now scientists at the University of Rochester and at Vanderbilt University have demonstrated that high IQ may be best predicted by combining what we perceive and what we cannot. In two studies in the journal Current Biology, researchers discovered that performance on this test was more correlated with IQ than any other sensory-intelligence link ever explored - but the high-IQ participants were not simply scoring better overall. Individuals with high IQ indeed detected movement accurately within the smallest frame - a finding that suggests that the ability to rapidly process information contributes to intelligence. More intriguing was the fact that subjects who had higher IQ, struggled more than other subjects to detect motion in the largest frame. The authors suggest that the findings underscore how intelligence requires that we think fast but focus selectively, ignoring distractions. Earlier, analysts of the US Army data claiming black-white difference invented a “Spearman’s hypothesis” to show that “the magnitude of the black-white differences on tests of cognitive ability are directly proportional to the test’s correlation with IQ”. In “Psychology, Public Policy, and Law” 2005, Vol. 11, DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235, the authors made the case that this proves that black-white differences must be genetic in origin. But the recent findings discussed above suggest just the opposite: The bigger the difference in cognitive ability between blacks and whites, the more the difference is determined by cultural influences. More study on the role of genotype-environment covariance in the development of cognitive ability needs to be done.

This conclusion is the same as that we discussed in the beginning. The Vedic principles are re-establishing itself. According to Samudra, the inventor of Samudrika, the heritability coefficients can be judged from human body by analyzing a conglomeration of eight characteristics: “ºÉƽþÊiɺÉÉ®úÉxÉÖEòºxÉä½þÉäx¨ÉÉxÉ|ɨÉÉhɨÉÉxÉÉÊxÉ* IÉäjÉÉÊhÉ |ÉEÞòÊiɺlÉÉä ʨɸɨÉäiÉnùÊ{É ¶ÉÉ®úÒ®ú¨ÉÂ*”. He has given detailed descriptions. Similarly, according to Manu, analysis of a conglomeration of seven external signs indicates the cognitive abilities: “+ÉEòÉ®èúÊ®úÎRÂóMÉiÉèMÉÇiªÉÉ SÉä¹]õªÉÉ ¦ÉÉʹÉiÉäxÉ SÉ* xÉäjÉ´ÉCjÉÊ´ÉEòÉ®èú¶SÉ MÉÞÁiÉäxiÉMÉÇiÉÆ ¨ÉxÉ&*”. The mechanism of perceptive or cognitive ability has been elaborately discussed by Gautama (|É´ÉkÉÇxÉɱÉIÉhÉÉ nùÉä¹ÉÉ&) and in its commentary by Vatsayana (Eò¨¨ÉDZÉIÉhÉÉ& JɱÉÖ ®úHòÊuù¹]õ¨ÉÚføÉ&, ®úHòÉä ʽþ iÉiÉ Eò¨¨ÉÇ EÖò¯ûiÉä ªÉäxÉ Eò¨¨ÉÇhÉÉ ºÉÖJÉÆ nÖù&JÉÆ ´ÉÉ ±É¦ÉiÉä, iÉlÉÉ Êuù¹]õºiÉlÉÉ ¨ÉÚfø <ÊiÉ). Unfortunately, people have forgotten how to interpret the Vedas and allied texts, as the meanings of most of the technical terms used in the Vedas and other related literatures have been forgotten. We are not discussing these in detail here.

The Vedic Vak is not limited to speech. It includes all perceptions as they are expressed only through speech form. We cannot even think without speech form. Hence Patanjali in his Mahabhashya says: ´ªÉÉEò®úhÉÉä{ɨÉÉxÉEòÉä¶ÉÉ{iÉ´ÉÉCªÉÉnÂù ´ªÉ´É½þÉ®úiɶSÉ iÉjÉ ¶ÉÊHòOÉɽþEòʶɮúÉä¨ÉhÉä´ÉÞÇrù´ªÉ´É½þÉ®úºªÉ <ÊiÉ |ÉɽÖþÌ´ÉrÆùɺÉ&*. In the mechanism of perception, each sense organ moves outward ({É®úÉÎ\SÉJÉÉÊxÉ) to perceive different kind of impulses related to the fundamental forces of Nature. Eyes see by comparing the electromagnetic field (={ɪÉɨÉ) set up by the object with that of the electrons in our cornea, which is the unit. We cannot see in total darkness because there is nothing comparable to this unit. Tongue perceives when the object dissolves in the mouth, which is macro equivalent of the weak nuclear interaction (´ÉʽþªÉÉǨÉ). Nose perceives when the finer parts of an object are brought in close contact with the smell buds, which is macro equivalent of the strong nuclear interaction (+xiɪÉÉǨÉ). Skin perceives when some external object reaches/moves out of it that is macro equivalent of radioactive disintegration (beta decay - ªÉÉiɪÉɨÉ). Ear perceives when the impulse reaches it by traveling through space that is macro equivalent of the gravitational interaction (=tɨÉ). Individually these perceptions have no meaning. They become information and acquire meaning only when they are turned inwards to be pooled in memory (|ÉYÉÉxɨÉxÉ) and interpreted by intelligence (Ê´ÉYÉÉxÉ or ¤ÉÖÊrù).

At any moment, our sense organs are bombarded by a multitude of stimuli. But only one of them is given a clear channel at any instant to go up to the thalamus and then to the cerebral cortex, so that like photographic frames, we perceive one discrete frame at every instant, but due to the high speed of their reception, mix it up so that it appears as continuous. This happens due to an active transport system against concentration gradient with input of energy like the sodium-potassium pump in our body, which moves the two ions in opposite directions across the plasma membrane through break down of Adenosine triphosphate (ATP). The concentrations of the two ions on both sides of the cell membrane are interdependent, suggesting that the same carrier transports both ions. Similarly, the same carrier transports the external stimuli through the sense organs in the opposite direction to the cerebral cortex. This carrier is the mind (|ÉYÉÉxɨÉxÉ).

The first experience of decoding of the signals is the sensory impression that is uni-modal and without any symbolism (ÊxÉÌ´ÉEò±{ÉEò), because it is an impression in isolation. This is the simplest of the transactions that occur between our sensory modes and the observable. A sensation is a combination of sensory impressions and is multi-modal with alternate symbolism (ºÉÊ´ÉEò±{ÉEò). Since measurement is a process of comparison between similars, perception occurs when sensation is accompanied by an interpretation with reference to what is already experienced and stored in memory. Measurement is done at a time t, when the result is frozen for use at other times t’, t’’, etc, even though the observed evolves in time. As experience becomes less immediate and more remote, and as the processes of inference increase, cognition enters the picture. Then thinking and knowing become predominately operative (Ê´ÉYÉÉxÉ or ¤ÉÖÊrù).

In the perception “this (object) is like that (the concept)”, one can describe “that” only if one has perceived it earlier. Then only we give the concept a name (following the principle described by Patanjali) and use it. Perception requires prior measurement of multiple aspects or fields and storing the result of measurement in a centralized system (memory) to be retrieved when needed. To understand a certain aspect, we refer to the data bank and see whether it (+ʦÉYÉÉxÉ – specific defining characteristic) matches with any of the previous readings or not. The answer is either yes or no. This is why the binary number system is used in computers. Commentator Vatsayan calls this naming process of two types (whole by part or one by other) of perceptions (´ªÉ{Énäù¶É& - ÊGòªÉÉEò®úhɪÉÉä& EòkÉÉÇ ºÉ¨´ÉxvɺªÉÉʦÉvÉÉxɨÉÂ) as general definition (ºÉ{ÉÊ®ú¹EòÉ®úÉ ºÉÆYÉÉ). He divides this into two categories: causative definition (ÊxÉʨÉkɺÉÆYÉÉ) and descriptive definition (+ʦɴªÉ\VÉEòºÉÆYÉÉ). Causative definition is the general description that arises out of perception (ºÉɨÉÉxªÉYÉÉxÉ) of a concept following rules of cognitive assimilation (¶ÉÊHòOɽþ). Descriptive definition is the imposition of other characteristics due to similarity (+xªÉäxÉÉxªÉºªÉ ´ªÉ{Énäù¶É&). This imposition differs in the case of each individual based on both heritability coefficient (natural attraction or repulsion) and past experience (description), which is regulated by the cultural environment (naming). This is what the Western researchers found out. It is not Nature versus nurture; it is Nature-cum-nurture.

PREVAILING SYSTEM: ÊxÉ´ÉænùÉnùÉi¨ÉºÉ¨¤ÉÉävÉ&* ´ÉÉSÉɱÉi´É\SÉ {ÉÉÎhb÷i´Éä* {ÉÖVªÉÉ ´ÉÉMnÖùʹÉEòÉ ÊuùVÉÉ&*

In the present day context of industrialization and economic redistribution, diversified vocational courses have been considered as the panacea for all evils. Unfortunately, it has turned into a dumping ground for children, without properly judging their proclivity for learning the subject. During 1936, Gandhiji started “Nai Talim” Sangh, which imparted training to students for identified occupation. Kulandaiswamy described vocational education as something designed to prepare skilled personnel at lower levels of qualification for one or more jobs, (which) must include general education, practical training, and related theory. This is the right approach, but it need not be aimed at skills at lower levels only – it can go for excellence.

The Radhakrishnan Commission (1948), which had eminent academic leaders from universities in the UK and the US among its members, deemed vocationalization not as a break-away from higher education and recommended it in Intermediate Courses. The Mudaliar Commission (1952) advocated it in the post-secondary stage as a terminal which automatically sieved the audience for higher education, as a result of which multipurpose schools were set up. The Education Commission (1964-66) recommended introduction of Work Experience to combine education with work in schools. It recommended the split between the two streams: academic and vocational. Strengthening of research in the university system was also recommended. The National Policy on Education (1986) was brought into force in 1991 and gave shape to the Action Plan of 1992 for the NPE. It recommended that the schools and community should be brought closer through suitable programs of mutual service and support. It led to encouragement of emerging sectors like Information Technology, which witnessed an upsurge following the opening up of the technical education sector, particularly in capacity expansion in the private sector. Although the 1986 policy spoke against commercialization of education, the rapid expansion of private institutions has resulted in deterioration in quality. In some sectors, corruption, ego clash between administrating/regulating agencies (e.g. Medical education) and concerns over quality is alarming necessitating review all deemed universities by the Centre.

In his Independence Day speech of 2011, the Prime Minister has announced setting-up of a commission “to make suggestions for improvements at all levels of education”. The proposed commission should recommend as to what could be a new National Policy on Education. The commission is expected to be headed by an eminent educationist, assisted by experts from the fields of higher, technical, medical, secondary, elementary, vocational and other sectors of education. It will also have inputs from the reports of the National Knowledge Commission, the Yashpal Committee and the Valinathan Committee. The proposed commission would address all sectors of education irrespective of the domain interests of Ministries. Thus, here is an opportunity for Sanskrit Universities to present their case for vocationalization. As can be seen, all the above Committees, which consisted of Western experts or people with Western education, considered the issue from the Western perspective of guided education, which spreads superstition with its “memorize and reproduce” system instead of the desired self-development.

Education sector reviews or analysis consist of conducting a critical analysis of both internal and external aspects of an education system. Education institutions review the internal dynamics of the education system from various angles, as well as the external conditions affecting educational provision such as macro-economic and socio-demographic contexts. Education sector analysis include: (i) Macro-economic and socio-demographic frameworks; (ii) Access and equity issues in education; (iii) Quality of education; (iv) External efficiency; (v) Costs and financing of education; and (vi) Managerial and institutional aspects. In all these high sounding but open-ended goals, real education that should be aimed at enabling the student to solve the problems faced by him in life all by himself, is overtaken by guided education with maximum emphasis on economic and material considerations. Whatever be a country’s level of development, there is a demand for education reform in order to be able to face political, social and cultural changes, scientific and technological transformations, and the need for reconstruction in the wake of armed conflicts and social unrest. Yet, 90% of the text book materials are not required or ineffective to serve the purpose. Value education is more economic than moral. Modern economic theories are more redistributive (exploitative) than regenerative.

If UGC gives only the broadest of guidelines and leaves it to the Universities to decide the content, it would lead to a lot of incoherence between them. The right approach would look at how the curriculum can be slimmed down from an “over-prescriptive” approach that contained too much that is not essential. It would emphasize a core of vital knowledge while leaving teachers free to decide how this should be conveyed. Only competent (in quality - not position) teachers should be allowed to decide the specifics of what is taught within a broad and balanced centrally agreed framework. But in all these, the real goal of education must be preserved.

We have already shown that the West is rediscovering the Vedic values even in the field of educational system including cognitive abilities. Excellence could be achieved only if one has the propensity (|É´ÉÞÊkÉ) for the subject of knowledge. The propensity is generated only when the knowledge is eminently meaningful (+lÉÇEò®úÒ Ê´ÉtÉ) to the person concerned, as all knowledge is not equally meaningful to all persons. “º´É¦ÉÉ´É” is a special attribute (ʴɶÉä¹É) of every individual. Hence it has to be tested differently from the general attributes (ºÉɨÉÉxªÉ). Proficiency in general education cannot determine the inherent “º´É¦ÉÉ´É” – talent or instinct - that determines the cognitive response of someone. Hence for vocational/higher education, dependence on marks obtained in general education or a common entrance test can not only be ineffective, but also counter-productive.

EXCELLENCE IN VOCATIONALIZATION: EòkÉÉÇ®ú& ºÉֱɦÉÉ ±ÉÉäEäò Ê´ÉYÉÉiÉÉ®úºiÉÖ nÖù±ÉǦÉÉ&*

Vocationalization is deemed to be predominantly practical oriented, with theory playing an insignificant role (the difference between a mechanic and an Engineer). Theory without technology is lame, but technology without theory is blind. They require each other. However, the person must “know” what he/she is doing is right. Otherwise it will lead to unintended consequences.  Thus, Vedic method advocates theory before technology. For all these reasons, all ancient texts prescribed four preliminary expositions - +xÉÖ¤ÉxvÉ& SÉiÉÖ¹]õªÉ¨É - that must be fulfilled before any subject is taught. These are:

ʴɹɪÉ& Eò& ¡ò±ÉÆ ËEò Eò& ºÉ¨¤ÉxvÉ& EòÉä%ÊvÉEòÉ®ú´ÉÉxÉ * *

According to the traditional method, any discourse, all books start with four initial or introductory stipulations (+xÉÖ´ÉxPÉ), which define the subject (ʴɹɪÉ&), the necessity of the subject to fulfill any particular need (|ɪÉÉäVÉxÉ), relationship of the knowledge to the object sought to be achieved (ºÉ¨¤ÉxvÉ&), and the category of persons that would benefit best from such knowledge (+ÊvÉEòÉ®úÒ). Let us consider one example: The ´Éè¶ÉäʹÉEò ºÉÚjɨÉ begin with “+lÉÉiÉÉä vɨ¨ÉÈ ´ªÉÉJªÉɺÉɨÉ&”. Literally it means, now begins the exposition about Dharma. ºÉÚjɨÉ literally means a thread, which is used to join objects in a proper sequence like a necklace. Thus, it cannot be seen in isolation. vɨ¨ÉÈ here indicates the subject of the text (ʴɹɪÉ&).

Dharma is different from religion, which is a way of life. The word dharma literally means that which upholds. To understand Dharma, let us take the example of a boat moving in a river. It is held partially by water and partially by air. Both water and air have their distinctive dynamics independent of the boat. If the boat harmonizes its motion with those which hold it – water and air – it will reach its destination safely. Otherwise it will land in problem. This is the concept of upholding vɨ¨ÉÈ - harmonization with one’s environment. But unless we know about the nature or dynamics of our environment, we cannot harmonize our actions with it. Hence there is a necessity of knowing about everything in our environment. The word +iÉÉä literally means by this teaching. Here the word +iÉÉä conveys the necessity of the knowledge of the special nature of the objects in the Universe – hence ´Éè¶ÉäʹÉE. - to fulfill any desired need (|ɪÉÉäVÉxÉ).

The word +lÉ literally means here-after, which indicates that something has been done before this. Traditionally, ‚ is used before reciting the Vedas. +lÉ is used before reading everything else. Here the word +lÉ indicates that the ´Éè¶ÉäʹÉEò ºÉÚjɨÉ should be read only after reading the Vedas, which discusses only the theory (YÉÉxɨÉÂ) from which science (Ê´ÉYÉÉxɨÉÂ) has to be derived. This can be done only with separate teaching. Hence the word +lÉ indicates the category of persons that would benefit best from such knowledge (+ÊvÉEòÉ®úÒ). This also is the view of Gautama Buddha in ´ÉÉäÊvÉÊSÉkÉ Ê´É´É®úhÉ (näù¶ÉxÉÉ ±ÉÉäEòxÉÉlÉÉxÉÉÆ ºÉk´ÉɶɪɴɶÉÉxÉÖMÉÉ&). This also indicates that theory should precede trial and error based technology to prevent unintended consequences. Everyone does not possess the same talent. Hence it is necessary to identify the talent needed for learning the technology. Thereafter, the students should be tested to see if they possess that talent or not. Only the deserving candidates with the appropriate talent should be trained in the relevant technology. The less talented should be trained properly to develop them to come up in life in the fields in which they can excel. But selection should be according to talent and not arbitrarily imposed on them.

The text is being discussed after the student has learnt the Vedas – has a theoretical knowledge about the nature of the Universe. But without the requisite technology, we cannot use the theoretical knowledge to fulfill our needs. Hence the text proposes to teach the technology by the word “´ªÉÉJªÉɺÉɨÉ&”. This word indicates that by knowing the technology described there-in, the objective can be achieved (ºÉ¨¤ÉxvÉ&). It may be mentioned that we have references about commentaries on the ´Éè¶ÉäʹÉEò ºÉÚjɨÉ by Atri and Bharadwaja, though these are not available now. Similarly, Ravan had written a commentary named Eò]õxnùÒ on this text. Those were scientific treatises. The book “{ÉnùÉlÉÇvɨÉǺÉÆOɽþ” written by +ÉSÉɪÉÇ |ɶɺiÉ{ÉÉnù does not describe its scientific aspects fully. For example, EòhÉÉnù in ºÉÚjÉ 1-1-6 lists 17 MÉÖhÉÉ& and ends the list with SÉ. |ɶɺiÉ{ÉÉnù interprets the SÉ by adding 7 other MÉÖhÉÉ&, by deriving those from the same text. What distinguishes these 7 from the other 17? The answer is that while the 17 MÉÖhÉÉ& are natural appearances that exhibit the excellence of those aspects based on the net energy content of the objects, the 7 other MÉÖhÉÉ&, are induced (|ÉäÊ®úiÉMÉÖhÉÉ&) by the seven types of gravitational interactions (+ɴɽþÉÊnù ºÉ{iÉ´ÉɪɴÉ&) in Vedic theory (Rk 1-164-15). Similarly, the other ºÉÚjÉÉ& have scientific meanings.

The ¨ÉÒ¨ÉÉƺÉÉ also begins with “+lÉÉiÉä vɨ¨ÉÇ ÊVÉYÉɺÉÉ”. Here, the word ¨ÉÒ¨ÉÉƺÉÉ stands for resolution. This text resolves the doubts or apparent contradictions in the various ¥ÉÉÀhÉ texts, which deal with the operational aspects of the Vedic theories. The ¥ÉÀºÉÚjÉ begins with “+lÉÉiÉä ¥ÉÀ ÊVÉYÉɺÉÉ”, because it resolves the doubts or apparent contradictions in the various ={ÉÊxɹÉnù, which deal with consciousness. The Nyaya school is Vedic research methodology, which has universal application. The Samkhya school deals with the first phase of creation before structure formation. The Yoga school deals with the application part of consciousness.

Sanskrit teachers should understand these properly and teach the Vedas and allied texts scientifically. We have challenged many modern theories by pointing out their deficiencies and explaining them by Vedic principles. It has appeared in many international forums. Till date no scientist in the world had found fault with our analysis. The unfortunate part is that the scientists are taught to follow the beaten path and believe only in the so-called “established theories” and discard everything else. They discard Vedic concepts as metaphysics or philosophy. The Sanskrit teachers are ignorant about the scientific interpretation of the Vedas. They have no idea about modern science, so that they cannot link Vedas to science. They fail to interpret the Vedas correctly starting from +ÎMxɨÉÒ¡âô (not +ÎMxɨÉÒbä÷). Hence we should start with training Sanskrit teachers in both Vedic methods of interpretation and science. While presenting the Vedic theories, we should follow the traditional method of the process (|ÉÊGòªÉÉ), concomitant or connected issues (+xÉÖ¹ÉRÂóMÉ), example, counter arguments, illustrations, analysis, etc., to test the validity of the theories (={ÉÉänÂùPÉÉiÉ) and final conclusion (={ɺÉƽþÉ®ú) scientifically. Then only we can proudly say:

ªÉäxÉ i´ÉªÉÉ ¦ÉÉ®úiÉiÉè±É{ÉÚhÉÇ& |ÉV´ÉÉäʱÉiÉÉä YÉÉxɨɪÉ& |ÉnùÒ{É&*

‚

xɨɺiÉÖRÂóMÉʶɮú¶SÉÖΨ¤É SÉxpùSÉɨɮúSÉÉ®ú´Éä *

jÉè±ÉÉäCªÉ xÉMÉ®úÉ®ú¨¦É ¨Éڱɺiɨ¦ÉÉªÉ ¶É¨¦É´Éä *

 MÉÞhÉÒiÉä iÉk´É¨ÉÉi¨ÉҪɨÉÉi¨ÉÒEÞòiÉVÉMÉiÉ jɪɨÉÂ* ={ÉɪÉÉä{ÉäªÉ°ü{ÉÉªÉ Ê¶É´ÉÉªÉ MÉÖ®ú¤Éä xɨÉ&*

+ÊEòÎ\SÉÎSSÉxiÉEòºªÉè´É MÉÖ¯ûhÉÉ |ÉÊiɤÉÉävÉiÉ&* VÉɪÉiÉä ªÉ& ºÉ¨ÉÉ´Éä¶É& ¶Éɨ¦É´ÉÉäºÉÉ´ÉÖnùɾþiÉ&*

ºÉ´ÉÇYÉÉä ʽþ ʶɴÉÉä ´ÉäÊkÉ ºÉnùºÉSSÉäι]õiÉÆ xÉÞhÉɨÉÂ* iÉäxÉɺÉÉè xÉÉxÉÖMÉÞ¼hÉÉÊiÉ ÊEòÎ\SÉiYɺªÉ MÉÖ®úÉäÌMÉ®úÉ*

+ÊvÉEòÉ®úÒ Ê´É¦ÉÉMÉäxÉ ¶ÉɺjÉÉhªÉÖHòÉxªÉ¶Éä¹ÉiÉ& * ºÉ´ÉÈ xªÉɪªÉÈ ªÉÖÊHò¨ÉiÉÉÆ Ê´ÉnÖù¹ÉÉÆÊEò¨É¶ÉÉä¦ÉxÉ *