object:2.11 - On Education
book class:Evening Talks With Sri Aurobindo
author class:A B Purani
subject class:Integral Yoga
class:chapter
ON EDUCATION
ON EDUCATION
MAY 1923
Sri Aurobindo: Does anyone know anything about the Montessori method of child-education?
Disciple: The principle is to base education round the spontaneous activities of the child, i.e., primarily, round its sense-activities which have to be intelligently guided by the teacher. In fact, the child learns, the teacher does not teach in the old sense. Group-life furnishes occasions to inculcate social virtues in the child's mind. Freedom of the child is the cornerstone of her system. The training centres round child-life by guided activities of the senses, i.e., the nervous system.
Sri Aurobindo: The principle is all right. There are, I believe, three things: To bring out the real man is the first business of education. In the present system it is sorely neglected. It can be done by promoting powers of observation, memory, reasoning, etc. Through these the man within must be touched and brought out.
The second thing that acts is the personality of the teacher. Whatever Montessori may say, the teacher is there and his influence is there and it does, and must act. The teacher may not directly guide or instruct but the influence keeps the children engaged. Children are quite open to such an influence.
The third thing is to place a man in the right place in the world.
Disciple: She has also provided for silence in her teaching. There is no religious teaching. There are people who object to this method saying that the child must be brought in contact with the past.
Sri Aurobindo: When the real man — the true individual — is brought out, then you can place him in contact with the past. At present information is forced into the child's brain. The child can very well gather it by himself if his mind is trained. Perfect liberty would be desirable for the child. I would not like any hard things to be brought into the child's experience. In Japan, it seems, the child is free when it is young and, as it grows and reaches the college, discipline tightens.
Disciple: But the sum total is the same whatever the method.
Sri Aurobindo: No. The Japanese are more naturally disciplined. I mean they take to discipline very easily.
26 AUGUST 1926
The question at the evening talk arose out of the convocation address delivered by Brajendra Nath Seal.
Sri Aurobindo: All the ideas are too academic.
Disciple: Frankly Icould not go through the address because of its heaviness and also too much 'internationalism'.
Disciple: But I liked it, it is readable.
Sri Aurobindo: Readable to a professor like you but not to X.
Disciple: Y read a long sentence to me out of the address and then stopped halfway for breath!
Sri Aurobindo: That way, somebody can even say the same thing with regard to the Arya, because there are long sentences there also.
Disciple: Someone told me that there was a striking resemblance between your style and that of Brajendra Nath Seal.
Disciple: When I read the first article of the Arya I could not understand anything, so I gave it up.
Sri Aurobindo: Many people cannot understand it. The Arya requires two things. First of all, a thorough knowledge of the English language which many Indians have not got. And secondly, it requires a mind that is subtle and comprehensive. I wrote the Arya, really speaking, for myself. I wanted to throw out certain things that were moving in my mind. I did not write it for others and so I did not care to write with that purpose.
Disciple: Even P. Chaudhury says that he does not understand anything of the Arya except The Future Poetry.
Sri Aurobindo: That is not because of the style but because he takes interest in literature and knows something about it. It is his subject.
Disciple: But how is it that he does not understand anything else?
Sri Aurobindo: Because other things don't interest him. Do you think he made a serious effort to read it through and failed?
Disciple: I got the Arya in my college and I could never understand anything of it in the daytime. I used to begin at 11 o'clock at night and go up to 12 or 1 o'clock. Then I could understand something of it. It took me a few months to get into the style.
Sri Aurobindo: The difficulty is not merely language and style but thought also. The Arya makes a demand on the mind for acute and original thinking. You can't expect all men to meet that demand.
Disciple: I hear that Hiren Dutt and Dr. Bhagwandas also do not understand it.
Sri Aurobindo: But some Englishmen do understand the Arya. The Americans too are reading it easily because they understand the language — of course, provided they take interest in the subject.
Disciple: My friend Swami Adwaitananda understands it all right but when I met professors of philosophy at Baroda and Lahore I found them complaining about their inability to understand it. Perhaps, people connected with Pondicherry can follow the writing easily.
Sri Aurobindo: Not always. But even The Life Divine is not so difficult; only, there are some chapters which anybody would find difficult.
Disciple: In his address Dr. Brajendra Nath Seal speaks of the ancient ideal of education.
Sri Aurobindo: What was that ideal?
Disciple: There was guru grha vāsa — living with the Guru — and corporate life.
Sri Aurobindo: Where is the guru-grha now?
Disciple: Seal says that in ancient times students used to do manual work for the Guru, and they were also living a corporate life, i.e., the student community working together for common ends.
Disciple: He wants modern education to be national, international, socialistic, etc. I am afraid he tries to read some modern thoughts into the ancient system.
Sri Aurobindo: That is what people usually do.
Disciple: What was the ancient system of education in India?
Sri Aurobindo: In very ancient times it was the building up of spiritual character which was the aim of education. The Guru was generally a yogi who put his influence for the growth of the student. Spiritual life was the aim, and its centre was the Veda. Of course, there was also cultural training, but it was not the main thing. For instance, take the case of Satyakama. The method of teaching was to send him out driving the cows. How does Seal reconcile that with any modern method?
The main basis in India was spiritual in contrast to the Greek ideal of education. In Greece it was intellectual and aesthetic. The Greeks tried to give intellectual training but not through giving information and teaching different subjects. They rather allowed the intellect to grow freely and there was an atmosphere in which these capacities and activities could grow.
In India also, the classical period was much different from the ancient one in its educational system. There is no reason to suppose that the method in India did not change. During this period many subjects were taught and the system was much more elaborate.
Disciple: What is the classical time you refer to?
Sri Aurobindo: The time of Kalidasa, for instance. You see the subjects women had to study in those days. You will see there were so many arts and accomplishments they had to learn. Then there was a time when Buddhist Universities like Nalanda, Takshashila were in vogue. They were like the Schools in mediaeval Europe.
Disciple: What was the system of education in Europe at that time?
Sri Aurobindo: It consisted of discussions and general knowledge but the whole system mainly centred round philosophy.
Disciple: Can one completely get over his physical personality by the Yoga?
Sri Aurobindo: What do you mean by physical personality? There is the external personality of man which is predominantly physical but there are also the vital and mental parts. The external part of man is that which comes out but there is much more behind. Some part is very near the surface ready for expression, but some parts are so hidden that they may not come out in this life. It is the object of Yoga to harmonise the different parts in the mental being, in the vital being and the physical being. Then the whole is to be given a harmonious expression; and for that the external personality has to be got over and changed. Some of the elements may remain but they must be transformed.
Disciple: Which are the elements that may remain?
Sri Aurobindo: That depends on the individual case. There is no general rule. In Yoga the external personality is so much changed as to appear quite a different being. Thus when you are transformed by Yoga, those who have not seen you for ten years would find it difficult to recognise you.
Disciple: In the external personality there may be a combination of different personalities.
Sri Aurobindo: In the personality of man there may be mental, vital and physical elements. Man's personality is mainly physical — the mental and vital are there but generally involved in the physical.
Disciple: Are the different personalities the result of ones past life?
Sri Aurobindo: There are other elements also; the personalities of past lives may be continued with what the man creates in the present life. But it is difficult to distinguish and separate the personalities in men who are not well developed. In such cases all the elements are lumped together, and we say that the person has no individuality. I call these cases 'single-personality'. But in developed men the personalities can be easily distinguished.
Disciple: Are the contradictions in the character of a man accounted for by the difference in his personalities?
Sri Aurobindo: Yes.
Disciple: For example, Robespierre at one time could not pass the sentence of death on a criminal.
Sri Aurobindo: That was in his young age and he got over that.
Disciple: In C.R. Das there were many personalities: the lawyer, the poet, the politician, etc.
Sri Aurobindo: In your article you have said that Das's speeches were not logical. But in earlier days all his speeches were logical like those of a lawyer. When he entered politics he gave up that habit and that was why he succeeded!
Disciple: There have been persons whose private lives are very loose but in political life they are successful.
Sri Aurobindo: What connection is there between morality and greatness? Most great men were immoral. Looseness in private morality arises from a strong vital being, and that strong vital being leads to success in great works. Immorality consists in allowing the vital impulses to go out unchecked. They may arise from strength or from weakness. In case of strength the vital impulses go out by the strength, in case of weakness they go out because they cannot be checked. Self-control, saṁyama, does not necessarily require one to be a yogi or a divine man. Asuras exercise control over their vital impulses to conserve energy for great enjoyment. Those who do not give indulgence to their impulses through weakness or fear of society may be respectable, but I cannot call them pure.
The ordinary idea of morality is the observance of social law. When Gandhi indulged with his pregnant wife there was nothing immoral in it according to ordinary ideas, but he regards that as immoral!
Most saints have been sinners in the earlier period of their lives — like Bilwamangal.
Disciple: There are exceptions.
Sri Aurobindo: No, the fact is that they do not confess their sins. Das was not exactly moral, but he became great.
Disciple: In his later life he controlled himself.
Sri Aurobindo: Yes. He was always a very strong man.
***
ON VEDIC INTERPRETATION ON MIRACLES
Use ctrl + Y to copy selected text in markdown format.
objecat:
questions, comments, suggestions/feedback, take-down requests, contribute, etc
contact me @ integralyogin@gmail.com or via the comments below
or join the integral discord server (chatrooms)
if the page you visited was empty, it may be noted and I will try to fill it out. cheers