Education Portal for Students in India

In The Function of Education Jiddu Krishnamurti argues that the purpose of education is to prepare people for life. That is done by making students feel free, so that they can think freely, and won’t conform to society. Society is corrupt, violent, and oppressive.
View complete answer

Who is the author of education?

Emile, or On Education

Title page of Rousseau’s Emile
Author	Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Language	French
Subject	Pedagogy
Publication date	1762

View complete answer

What is the central theme of the essay the function of education?

It shapes our beliefs and moral values through a systematic formal transmission. Education is said be an integral function of society, as it provides a contributory characteristic which helps to maintain and adapt society and it’s values.
View complete answer

What is function of education by J Krishnamurti?

What Do We Mean by Education? • Krishnamurti Foundation Trust The right kind of education is not concerned with any ideology, however much it may promise a future utopia: it is not based on any system, however carefully thought out, nor is it a means of conditioning the individual in some special manner. Education in the true sense is helping the individual to be mature and free, to flower greatly in love and goodness.

• That is what we should be interested in, and not in shaping the child according to some idealistic pattern.
• The highest function of education is to bring about an integrated individual who is capable of dealing with life as a whole.
• Those who are being educated have rather a difficult time with their parents, their educators and their fellow students: already the tide of struggle, anxiety, fear and competition has swept in.

They have to face a world that is overpopulated, with undernourished people, a world of war, increasing terrorism, inefficient governments, corruption and the threat of poverty. This threat is less evident in affluent and fairly well-organized societies, but it is felt in those parts of the world where there is tremendous poverty, overpopulation and the indifference of inefficient rulers.

This is the world the young people have to face, and naturally they are really frightened. They have an idea that they should be free, independent of routine, should not be dominated by their elders; and they shy away from all authority. Freedom to them means to choose what they want to do; but they are confused, uncertain and want to be shown what they should do.

The student is caught between his own desire for freedom to do what he wants and society’s demands for conformity to its own necessities, that people become engineers, scientists, soldiers, or specialists of some kind. This is the world students have to face and become a part of through their education.

It is a frightening world. We all want security physically as well as emotionally, and having this is becoming more and more difficult and painful. So we of the older generation, if we at all care for our children, must ask what education is. If education, as it is now, is to prepare children to live in perpetual striving, conflict and fear, we must ask what the meaning of it all is.

Is life a movement, a flow of pain and anxiety and the shedding of unshed tears, with occasional flares of joy and happiness? Unfortunately we, the older generation, do not ask these questions, and neither does the educator. So education, as it is now, is a process of facing a dreary, narrow and meaningless existence.

• But we want to give a meaning to life.
• Life appears to have no meaning in itself but we want to give it meaning, so we invent gods, various forms of religion and other entertainments, including nationalism and ways to kill each other, in order to escape from our monotonous life.
• This is the life of the older generation and will be the life of the young.

We the parents and educators have to face this fact and not escape into theories, seeking further forms of education and structures. If our minds are not clear about what we are facing, we shall inevitably, consciously or unconsciously, slip into the inaction of wondering what to do about it.

• There are a thousand people who will tell us what to do: the specialists and the cranks.
• Before we understand the vast complexity of the problem, we want to operate upon it.
• We are more concerned to act than to see the whole issue.
• The real issue is the quality of our mind; not its knowledge but the depth of the mind that meets knowledge.

Mind is infinite, is the nature of the universe, which has its own order, has its own immense energy. It is everlastingly free. The brain, as it is now, is the slave of knowledge and so is limited, finite, fragmentary. When the brain frees itself from its conditioning, the brain is infinite. You come to these schools with your own background, traditional or free, with discipline or without discipline, obeying or reluctant and disobeying, in revolt or conforming. Your parents are either negligent or very diligent about you. Some may feel very responsible, others may not.

• You come with all this trouble, with broken families, uncertain or assertive, wanting your way or shyly acquiescing but inwardly rebelling.
• In these schools you are free, and all the disturbances of your young lives come into play.
• You want your own way and no one in the world can have his or her own way.

You have to understand this very seriously; you cannot have your own way. Either you learn to adjust with understanding, with reason, or you are broken by the new environment you have entered. It is very important to understand this. In these schools the educators explain things carefully and you can discuss with them, have a dialogue and see why certain things have to be done.

When one lives in a small community of teachers and students it is necessary that they have a good relationship with each other that is friendly, affectionate and has a certain quality of attentive comprehension. No one, especially nowadays living in a free society, likes rules, but rules become totally unnecessary when you and the grown-up educator understand, not only verbally and intellectually but with your heart, that certain disciplines are necessary.

The word discipline has been ruined by the authoritarians. Each craft has its own discipline, its own skill. The word discipline comes from the word disciple which means to learn: to learn, not to conform, not to rebel, but to learn about your own reactions and your own background and how those limit you, and to go beyond them.

1. The essence of learning is constant movement without a fixed point.
2. If its point becomes your prejudice, your opinions and conclusions, and you start from this handicap, then you cease to learn.
3. Learning is infinite.
4. The mind that is constantly learning is beyond all knowledge.
5. So you are here to learn as well as to communicate.

Communication is not only the exchange of words, however articulate and clear those words may be; it is much deeper than that. Communication is learning from each other, understanding each other; and this comes to an end when you have taken a definite stand about some trivial or not fully thought-out act.

When one is young, there is an urge to conform, not to feel out of things. To learn the nature and implications of conformity brings its own peculiar discipline. Please always bear in mind when we use that word discipline that both the student and the educator are in a relationship of learning, not assertion and acceptance.

When this is clearly understood, rules become unnecessary. When this is not clear, then rules have to be made. You may revolt against rules, against being told what to do or not to do, but when you quickly understand the nature of learning, rules will disappear altogether.

It is only the obstinate, the self-assertive, who bring about rules – thou shalt and thou shalt not. Learning is not born out of curiosity. You may be curious about sex. That curiosity is based on pleasure, on some kind of excitement, on the attitudes of others. The same applies to drinking, drugs, smoking.

Learning is far deeper and more extensive. You learn about the universe not out of pleasure or curiosity, but out of your relationship to the world. We have divided learning into separate categories depending on the demands of society or your own personal inclination.

1. We are not talking of learning about something, but the quality of the mind that is willing to learn.
2. You can learn how to become a good carpenter or a gardener or an engineer.
3. When you have acquired skill in these, you have narrowed down your mind into a tool that can function perhaps skilfully in a certain pattern.

This is what is called learning. This gives a certain security financially, and perhaps that is all one wants, so we create a society which provides what we have asked of it. But when there is this extra quality of learning that is not about something, then you have a mind and, of course, a heart that are timelessly alive.

• Discipline is not control or subjugation.
• Learning implies attention; that is, to be diligent.
• It is only the negligent mind that is never learning.
• It is forcing itself to accept when it is shallow, careless, indifferent.
• A diligent mind is actively watching, observing, never sinking into second-hand values and beliefs.

A mind that is learning is a free mind, and freedom demands the responsibility of learning. The mind that is caught in its own opinions, that is entrenched in some knowledge, may demand freedom, but what it means by freedom is the expression of its own personal attitudes and conclusions – and when this is thwarted it cries for self-fulfilment.

Freedom has no sense of fulfilment. It is free. So when you come to these schools, or to any school in fact, there must be this gentle quality of learning, and with it goes a great sense of affection. When you are really, deeply affectionate you are learning. The professor said he had been teaching for many years, ever since he graduated from college, and had a large number of boys under him in one of the governmental institutions.

He turned out students who could pass examinations, which was what the government and parents wanted. Of course, there were exceptional boys who were given special opportunities, granted scholarships and so on, but the vast majority were indifferent, dull, lazy, and somewhat mischievous.

There were those who made something of themselves in whatever field they entered, but only very few had the creative flame. During all the years he had taught, the exceptional boys had been very rare; now and then there would be one who perhaps had the quality of genius, but it generally happened that he too was soon smothered by his environment.

As a teacher he had visited many parts of the world to study this question of the exceptional boy, and everywhere it was the same. He was now withdrawing from the teaching profession, for after all these years he was rather saddened by the whole thing.

However well boys were educated, on the whole they turned out to be a stupid lot. Some were clever or assertive and attained high positions, but behind the screen of their prestige and domination they were as petty and anxiety-ridden as the rest. ‘The modern educational system is a failure, as it has produced two devastating wars and appalling misery.

Learning to read and write and acquiring various techniques, which is the cultivation of memory, is obviously not enough, for it has produced unspeakable sorrow. What do you consider to be the end purpose of education?’ Is it not to bring about an integrated individual? If that is the purpose of education then we must be clear as to whether the individual exists for society or whether society exists for the individual.

If society needs and uses the individual for its own purposes, then it is not concerned with the cultivation of an integrated human being; what it wants is an efficient machine, a conforming and respectable citizen, and this requires only a very superficial integration. As long as the individual obeys and is willing to be thoroughly conditioned, society will find him useful and will spend time and money on him.

But if society exists for the individual then it must help in freeing him from its own conditioning influence. It must educate him to be an integrated human being. ‘What do you mean by an integrated human being?’ To answer that question one must approach it negatively, obliquely; one cannot consider its positive aspect.

Positively to state what an integrated human being is only creates a pattern, a mould, an example which we try to imitate; and is not the imitation of a pattern an indication of disintegration? When we try to copy an example, can there be integration? Imitation is a process of disintegration; and is this not what is happening in the world? We are all becoming very good gramophone records: we repeat what so-called religions have taught us or what the latest political, economic or religious leader has said.

We adhere to ideologies and attend political mass-meetings; there is mass-enjoyment of sport, mass-worship, mass-hypnosis. Is this a sign of integration? Conformity is not integration, is it? ‘This leads to the very fundamental question of discipline.

1. Are you opposed to discipline?’ What do you mean by discipline? ‘There are many forms of discipline: the discipline in a school, the discipline of citizenship, the party discipline, the social and religious disciplines, and self-imposed discipline.
2. Discipline may be according to an inner or an outer authority.’ Fundamentally, discipline implies some kind of conformity.

It is conformity to an ideal, to an authority; it is the cultivation of resistance, which of necessity breeds opposition. Resistance is opposition. Discipline is a process of isolation, whether it is isolation with a particular group or the isolation of individual resistance.

1. Imitation is a form of resistance.
2. Do you mean that discipline destroys integration? What would happen if you had no discipline in a school?’ Is it not important to understand the essential significance of discipline, and not jump to conclusions or take examples? We are trying to see what are the factors of disintegration, or what hinders integration.

Is not discipline in the sense of conformity, resistance, opposition, conflict, one of the factors of disintegration? Why do we conform? Not only for physical security, but also for psychological comfort, safety. Consciously or unconsciously, the fear of being insecure makes for conformity both outwardly and inwardly.

We must all have some kind of physical security, but it is the fear of being psychologically insecure that makes physical security impossible except for the few. Fear is the basis of all discipline: the fear of not being successful, of being punished, of not gaining, and so on. Discipline is imitation, suppression, resistance, and whether it is conscious or unconscious, it is the result of fear.

Is not fear one of the factors of disintegration? ‘With what would you replace discipline? Without discipline there would be even greater chaos than now. Is not some form of discipline necessary for action?’ Understanding the false as the false, seeing the true in the false, and seeing the true as the true, is the beginning of intelligence.

• It is not a question of replacement.
• You cannot replace fear with something else; if you do, fear is still there.
• You may successfully cover it up or run away from it, but fear remains.
• It is the elimination of fear, and not the finding of a substitute for it, that is important.
• Discipline in any form whatsoever can never bring freedom from fear.

Fear has to be observed, studied, understood. Fear is not an abstraction; it comes into being only in relation to something, and it is this relationship that has to be understood. To understand is not to resist or oppose. Is not discipline then, in its wider and deeper sense, a factor of disintegration? Is not fear, with its consequent imitation and suppression, a disintegrating force? ‘But how is one to be free from fear? In a class of many students, unless there is some kind of discipline – or if you prefer, fear – how can there be order?’ By having very few students and the right kind of education.

• This of course is not possible as long as the state is interested in mass-produced citizens.
• The state prefers mass-education; the rulers do not want the encouragement of discontent, for their position would soon be untenable.
• The state controls education, it steps in and conditions the human entity for its own purposes; and the easiest way to do this is through fear, through discipline, through punishment and reward.

Freedom from fear is another matter; fear has to be understood and not resisted, suppressed, or sublimated. The problem of disintegration is quite complex, like every other human problem. Is not conflict another factor of disintegration? ‘But conflict is essential, otherwise we would stagnate.

Without striving there would be no progress no advancement, no culture. Without effort, conflict, we would still be savages.’ Perhaps we still are. Why do we always jump to conclusions or oppose when something new is suggested? We are obviously savages when we kill thousands for some cause or other, for our country; killing another human being is the height of savagery.

But let us get on with what we were talking about. Is not conflict a sign of disintegration? ‘What do you mean by conflict?’ Conflict in every form: between husband and wife, between two groups of people with conflicting ideas, between what is and tradition, between what is and the ideal, the should be, the future.

Conflict is inner and outer strife. At present there is conflict at all the various levels of our existence, the conscious as well as the unconscious. Our life is a series of conflicts, a battleground – and for what? Do we understand through strife? Can I understand you if I am in conflict with you? To understand there must be a certain amount of peace.

Creation can take place only in peace, in happiness, not when there is conflict and strife. Our constant struggle is between what is and what should be, between thesis and antithesis. We have accepted this conflict as inevitable, and the inevitable has become the norm, the true – though it may be false.

Can what is be transformed by the conflict with its opposite? I am this, and by struggling to be that, which is the opposite, have I changed this? Is not the opposite, the antithesis, a modified projection of what is ? Has not the opposite always the elements of its own opposite?Through comparison is there understanding of what is ? Is not any conclusion about what is a hindrance to the understanding of what is ? If you would understand something, must you not observe it, study it? Can you study it freely if you are prejudiced in favour of or against it? If you would understand your son must you not study him, neither identifying yourself with nor condemning him? If you are in conflict with your son, there is no understanding of him.

So, is conflict essential to understanding? Is conflict in any field productive of understanding? Is there not a continuous chain of conflict in the effort, the will to be, to become, whether positive or negative? Does not the cause of conflict become the effect, which in its turn becomes the cause? There is no release from conflict until there is an understanding of what is,

The what is can never be understood through the screen of idea; it must be approached afresh. As the what is is never static, the mind must not be bound to knowledge, to an ideology, to a belief, to a conclusion. In its very nature conflict is separative, as all opposition is; and is not exclusion, separation, a factor of disintegration? Any form of power, whether individual or of the state, any effort to become more or to become less, is a process of disintegration.

All ideas, beliefs, systems of thought, are separative, exclusive. Effort, conflict, cannot under any circumstances bring understanding, and so it is a degenerating factor in the individual as well as in society. ‘What then is integration? I more or less understand what are the factors of disintegration, but that is only a negation.

• Through negation one cannot come to integration.
• I may know what is wrong, which does not mean that I know what is right.’ When the false is seen as the false, the true is.
• When one is aware of the factors of degeneration, not merely verbally but deeply, then is there not integration? Is integration static, something to be gained and finished with? Integration cannot be arrived at; arrival is death.

It is not a goal, an end, but a state of being; it is a living thing and how can a living thing be a goal, a purpose? The desire to be integrated is not different from another desire, and all desire is a cause of conflict. When there is no conflict there is integration.

1. Integration is a state of complete attention.
2. There cannot be complete attention if there is effort, conflict, resistance or concentration.
3. Concentration is a fixation; concentration is a process of separation, exclusion, and complete attention is not possible when there is exclusion.
4. To exclude is to narrow down, and the narrow can never be aware of the complete.

Complete, full attention is not possible when there is condemnation, justification or identification, or when the mind is clouded by conclusions, speculations or theories. When we understand the hindrances, then only is there freedom. Freedom is an abstraction to the man in prison; but passive watchfulness uncovers the hindrances, and with freedom from these, integration comes into being.

• Education has no meaning unless it helps you to understand the vast expanse of life with all its subtleties, with its extraordinary beauty, its sorrows and joys.
• You may earn degrees, you may have a series of letters after your name and land a very good job, but then what? What is the point of it all if in the process your mind becomes dull, weary, stupid? So while you are young must you not seek to find out what life is all about? And is it not the true function of education to cultivate in you the intelligence which will try to find the answer to all these problems? Do you know what intelligence is? It is the capacity to think freely without fear, without a formula, so that you begin to discover for yourself what is real, what is true.

But if you are frightened you will never be intelligent. Any form of ambition, spiritual or mundane, breeds anxiety and fear, therefore ambition does not help to bring about a mind that is clear, simple, direct, and hence intelligent. You know, it is very important while you are young to live in an environment in which there is no fear.

Most of us, as we grow older, become frightened; we are afraid of living, afraid of losing a job, afraid of tradition, afraid of what the neighbours or what the wife or husband would say, afraid of death. Most of us have fear in one form or another, and where there is fear there is no intelligence. And is it not possible for all of us, while we are young, to be in an environment where there is no fear but rather an atmosphere of freedom; freedom not just to do what we like but to understand the whole process of living? Life is really very beautiful, it is not this ugly thing that we have made of it, and you can appreciate its richness, its depth, its extraordinary loveliness only when you revolt against everything – against organized religion, against tradition, against the present rotten society – so that you as a human being find out for yourself what is true.

Not to imitate but to discover. That is education. It is very easy to conform to what your society or your parents and teachers tell you. That is a safe and easy way of existing, but that is not living because in it there is fear, decay, death. To live is to find out for yourself what is true, and you can do this only when there is freedom, when there is continuous revolution inwardly, within yourself.

• But you are not encouraged to do this; no one tells you to question, to find out for yourself what God is, because if you were to rebel you would become a danger to all that is false.
• Your parents and society want you to live safely, and you also want to live safely.
• Living safely generally means living in imitation and therefore in fear.

The function of education is to help each one of us to live freely and without fear. And to create an atmosphere in which there is no fear requires a great deal of thinking on your part as well as on the part of the teacher, the educator. Discipline is not control or subjugation.

Learning implies attention; that is, to be diligent. It is only the negligent mind that is never learning. It is forcing itself to accept when it is shallow, careless, indifferent. A diligent mind is actively watching, observing, never sinking into second-hand values and beliefs. A mind that is learning is a free mind, and freedom demands the responsibility of learning.

The mind that is caught in its own opinions, that is entrenched in some knowledge, may demand freedom, but what it means by freedom is the expression of its own personal attitudes and conclusions – and when this is thwarted it cries for self-fulfilment.
View complete answer

What is the function of education?

Learning Objectives –

1. List the major functions of education.
2. Explain the problems that conflict theory sees in education.
3. Describe how symbolic interactionism understands education.

The major sociological perspectives on education fall nicely into the functional, conflict, and symbolic interactionist approaches (Ballantine & Hammack, 2009). Table 16.1 “Theory Snapshot” summarizes what these approaches say. Table 16.1 Theory Snapshot

Theoretical perspective	Major assumptions
Functionalism	Education serves several functions for society. These include (a) socialization, (b) social integration, (c) social placement, and (d) social and cultural innovation. Latent functions include child care, the establishment of peer relationships, and lowering unemployment by keeping high school students out of the full-time labor force.
Conflict theory	Education promotes social inequality through the use of tracking and standardized testing and the impact of its “hidden curriculum.” Schools differ widely in their funding and learning conditions, and this type of inequality leads to learning disparities that reinforce social inequality.
Symbolic interactionism	This perspective focuses on social interaction in the classroom, on the playground, and in other school venues. Specific research finds that social interaction in schools affects the development of gender roles and that teachers’ expectations of pupils’ intellectual abilities affect how much pupils learn.

View complete answer

What is education essay?

Education is what differentiates us from other living beings on earth. It makes man the smartest creature on earth. It empowers humans and gets them ready to face challenges of life efficiently. With that being said, education still remains a luxury and not a necessity in our country.
View complete answer

What is the introduction of essay on education?

Introduction – Education is a significant tool that provides knowledge, skill, technique, information and enables people to know their rights and duties towards their family, society and the nation. You can expand your vision and outlook to see the world around us.
View complete answer

What is the theme or main idea of the essay?

The topic is the general subject of a paragraph or essay. Topics are simple and are described with just a word or a phrase. The main idea is a complete sentence; it includes the topic and what the author wants to say about it.
View complete answer

What is the central message of the essay?

The main idea of the essay is stated in a single sentence called the thesis statement. You must limit your entire essay to the topic you have introduced in your thesis statement.
View complete answer

What is according to J Krishnamurti?

Mind and Consciousness as per J. Krishnamurti Consultant Psychiatrist – Private Practice; Founder Trustee – Desousa Foundation, Mumbai, India Find articles by Received 2011 Aug 5; Revised 2011 Sep 29; Accepted 2011 Sep 30. : © Mens Sana Monographs This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. The present article looks at mind and consciousness from the perspective of the eminent Indian philosopher, Jiddu Krishnamurti.
2. He believed in total awareness as being essential for a free mind.
3. Human beings always learned from their past, and it was important that they looked inwards and freed themselves from self-perpetuated torment.

It was also necessary that they avoided repression. The society in which we live should be organic, where, although individuals had no choice but to dwell in that society, it was one where the interests of the individual and society were the same. He also maintained that religion was always the result of past conditioning.

1. A mind should be investigative and scientific.
2. One could not get pleasure without difficulty, for which living in totality, not in segments, was a must.
3. We often dwell on one part of the consciousness and miss its holistic aspect.
4. One must uncover the mind layer by layer to achieve complete growth.
5. Deeper delving into it and a study of J.

Krishnamurti’s philosophy is a must for the understanding of human consciousness, in a manner that is simple, yet abstract and deep, Keywords: Awareness, Consciousness, Free mind, Krishnamurti, Mind, Organic society, Religious mind, Society Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895 – 1986) was an eminent writer and speaker on philosophical and spiritual issues, including psychological revolution, the nature of the human mind, consciousness and evolution, meditation, human relationships, and bringing about positive social change.

• Maintaining that society was ultimately the product of the interactions of individuals, he held that fundamental change in society could emerge only through freely undertaken radical change in the individual (Krishnamurti, 2008),
• He stressed the need for a revolution in the psyche of every human being and posited that such a revolution could not be brought about by any external entity, be it religious, political, or social.

It had to be brought about by a holistic transformation from within, and an insight into the various layers of one’s consciousness (Krishnamurti, 1987). Born into a Telugu family, in what was then colonial India, he lived, in his early adolescence, next to the Theosophical Society headquarters at Adyar, in Chennai (earlier, Madras).

• He then came in contact with influential theosophists, Annie Besant and C.W.
• Leadbeater, who educated him, believing him to be a future spiritual leader.
• However, Krishnamurti later broke away from the Theosophical Society and traveled internationally as an independent speaker and writer on fundamental human issues.

He held many dialogs with eminent physicist David Bohm, and several Buddhist scholars and Jesuits. Whether discussing politics with Indira Gandhi, debating philosophy with Rupert Shedlrake and Iris Murdoch, or challenging the audience to test the truth of his words, Krishnamurti engaged fully with every aspect of the human condition (Fouere, 1969).

He also addressed the United Nations on the subject of peace and awareness and was awarded the UN Peace Medal in 1984. Neither Krishnamurti’s style of writing, nor his language, nor ideas, can be discounted. They are the major factors that made so many people follow him. He disregarded the stature of being a holy man, sadhu, saviour, and messiah.

His simplicity of ideas flowed even through his language. Nothing was too complicated. His English was wonderfully elegant, British bred after all (Fouere, 1969), Rene Fouere calls his style simple, adapted to psychological investigation, and free of all mythical or religious reference (Ibid).

He used terms and examples that were not subject to any pre-conceived ideas and prejudices, those that were not standard and boringly repeated in the past. His language was not meant to be convincing on first reading (Fouere, 1969). It only gave a viewpoint so simple that you would not be persuaded into believing it.

Belief just happened. He questioned the most obvious, and prodded into the dodgy subjects of life and the truth. The method of using many contradictions by itself served his purpose of proving that he was a mere mortal; and it was we, humans, who needed to think and question life from within; and look for answers, not elsewhere, but within ourselves.

• As humans, we were always told what to do and what not to do; he believed we need not be instructed with steps of life, but merely awakened.
• Sometimes outright hurtful or targeting words used by him were only meant to awaken those who had become dormant (Fouere, 1969).
• The essence of his writings / teachings was not a learning system that had many steps.

The idea was to start anywhere and eventually reach the same place (within you, through life). He did not offer a school or cult of any sort. Claude Bragdon wrote that Krishnamurti did not offer something more to life; instead, he was a subtractor of everything that stood between him and his maker, which was life itself (Bragdon, 2006).

1. Rishnamurti believed life itself was God, and every action manifested itself with God.
2. The description and writing of his subject may seem so simple that you may go over it again and again and still be left lost (Ibid).
3. His teachings leave many people with unanswered questions, but like he said, truth was a pathless land (Ibid).

Claude Bragdon summarized his teaching well in two words — trust life (Ibid). Most of our troubles came from our fear of life, religion itself being a refuge from that fear (Krishnamurti, 2000), If we trusted life instead of fearing it, it would never betray us — only by ourselves could we be betrayed (Krishnamurti, 2000).

Those who look to Krishnamurti for a new religion or a new philosophy would be disappointed. He does not offer something more, but always something less. The very simplicity of Krishnamurti’s teaching confuses our sophisticated minds. His teaching shall seem anarchic and destructive only till the perception dawns that his blows are aimed at our fetters.

It is then that we realise that life, unconditioned by personal fears, ambitions, and desires, is not a void but a plenum (Krishnamurti, 1987). The teachings of Krishnamurti do not have a school or organization, but, as humans with tendencies to categorize and organize, I am drawn to comparing him with Jean Paul Sartre, the father of modern existentialism.

• Rishnamurti’s works also include the space of a human in the social and political scenario.
• Rishnamurti states so very well that one cannot know of something unless the other is also present.
• He gives the example of non-violence: one cannot know of non-violence unless you know what violence is.
• Life itself is a movement of relationships, and we try to manipulate and control it even in the most common events of life.

For example, when someone praises us, we grow in pride, when someone insults us we have rage filled in us; and what we do is behave in ways that increase positive reactions and decrease negative comments; the point being that we are only living a half automated life, and doing something habitually.

He emphasises that total awareness, and continuous awareness, will lead to living a non-habitual life, and no amount of discipline will do it – and once again, discipline is not freedom from the known (Krishnamurti, 1975). Krishnamurti does not trust ideals. He states that an ideal is what is not. A human cannot understand an ideal without knowing what the other part of it is.

I cannot know what truth is without knowing what is false, and what non-violence is without knowing what is violence. Truth cannot be seen as an object of desirability or attained because of its vastness and context. It cannot be reduced to an intellectual formula for our brains, or eternity, and reduced to a mere objective perspective,

One cannot ‘Know’ of something in the present. Even ‘I’ cannot know of its moment during self-enquiry other than the past, as the present shall not be understandable unless it passes into the past. Humans can only learn from their past and not from their present, as the present is this very moment. All introspection is a form of retrospection (Krishnamurti, 1986).

Problems that affect our behaviour cannot be resolved without awakening the creative intelligence or the intuition within us. That will, in turn, fully grasp the circumstance and liberate us from our miseries. It is a fact that all self-consciousness is painful and is absent in the states of ecstasy and fullness.

1. Rishnamurti states that when you are really happy and deeply in love, the ‘I’ is not.
2. Liberation is a state in which all ‘I’ consciousness has ceased, because the duality indispensable to self-consciousness is no more.
3. All our urges for personal aggrandizement, which have cost the world so much blood and tears, are merely a futile evasion of a fact, an endless search for the non-existing security, an absurd refusal to meet face to face, with one’s own true condition.

It is only in the full awareness of oneself that we can put an end to our self-perpetuated torment (Krishnamurti, 1996). It is well known that the power to think is what makes us different from other living beings, but this unfortunately is also the reason why we may consider ourselves higher in the order of nature.

This very essential power is mostly used and abused over time. Our mind is misinterpreted, according to Krishnamurti, and we must start using it differently than it is used, and not as an object for self-protection and self-expansion. We are no more primitive humans, and survival instincts have to be abandoned so as to achieve higher awareness.

He talks of how, if society has to remain truly human, it must be in a state of constant revolution and re-evaluation. The mind is being used more for ego-centred acquisitiveness and for personal growth and power, in turn lessening others opportunities.

1. We must try and belong to an organic society and not an organised one; because an organised society will always follow a hierarchy; and the standards of morality may exist, but not necessarily in the nobler sense like that of an organic society,
2. An organic society means that its members have no choice but to belong to it.

However, it goes even further. It implies that they have no desire but to belong to it, for their interests and those of the society are the same; they identify themselves with the society. Unity here is not a principle proclaimed by the authorities, but a fact accepted by all the participants.

• No great sacrifice is involved.
• One’s place in society may be onerous or undignified, but it is the only one available; without it, one has no place in the world.
• The opposite of this perspective, with rights and liberties granted to an individual, is what forms an organised society (Krishnamurti, 1986).

This world is full of chaos and it is the human being who must understand that he is part of that chaos — the cause and the effect. Krishnamurti states that bringing of the unconscious to the conscious is the first fruit of intelligence. It marks the reaching of the human level and there should be no conflict.

1. This integration of the entire mechanism of consciousness will open to awareness, vistas of perception and experience of affection and action beyond our boldest dreams (Krishnamurti, 2010).
2. Rishnamurti statesthat every experience in our life is imprinted deeply in our mind whose strength will vary in pleasure and pain and will crystallise in our life later on.

This sounds as familiar as Freud, who said childhood experiences form the base of our adulthood and our adjustment to life; but it is more than this. Krishnamurti goes on to say further, that every action we try to connect positively or negatively to, comes back to form a habit, and does not allow a free mind to grow.

1. Sometimes, even suffering is based on our habits and when we try to overcome one habit, we form another; and eventually, as humans, we form the habit of repression.
2. We must understand that there is no stopping of habits, but rather only a cessation.
3. We have to understand it and overcome it, which is acquired through great alertness and patience.

The idea of a free mind is to look inward with this patience and alertness. On doing so, we free ourselves of the thinker who cages us. Once we destroy this cage of controlled thoughts, man finds a new freedom, which is not a freedom from painful experiences, but a release from the scar these experiences used to leave on the mind (Krishnamurti, 2000).

1. According to Krishnamurti, we all follow a religion blindly, out of past conditioning or fear.
2. We do not question or enquire what we may believe or not believe out of fear.
3. And who is to be responsible for this – our elders who condition us to believe without questioning.
4. What we are doing out of fear, or so-called belief, must be questioned.

He states that a true religious mind is free of fear, blind faith, and contradiction. All religion is followed by tradition, whether it is religion that is 2000 years old, or 200. The list of must do’s in any religion should be questioned by itself. A mind should be investigative and scientific in its approach, and not bound by something, or compelled.

• Religious matters make humans irrational, insane; and all these build the walls of our conditioning.
• The beginning of self-knowledge is the beginning of the religious mind and not the knowledge of the supreme self; because that will again be belief in authority; and authority makes us imitate, and dictates; and we have to learn to free ourselves from this.

A religious mind does not separate the inner world and the outer. It is the unitary movement of the tide that goes out and comes in; and only that mind, which is free and enquiring, can perceive that which is immeasurable (Krishnamurti, 2008). Feeling is a part of the mind, as per Krishnamurti.

The mind includes desires, love, jealousy, emotions, everything. It includes contrary beliefs, double minds, and all that we understand and feel. What is different is its manifestation and its intensity. The problem is not about feeling right or wrong, because humans will feel. What needs to be changed is the greed to have many things: people want the good things of life and yet want to feel contented and peaceful.

The former brings about the need to acquire things, have power / prestige, and be ambitious. To have both is not possible: a real mind has no place for ambition and acquisitions. Pleasure is not difficult, but with it come difficulties; but we want pleasure without difficulties.

• It is only when the mind is capable of living in totality that remorse, difficulty, and pain will have no meaning and feeling to it (Krishnamurti, 1976).
• According to Krishnamurti, living in totality involves not looking at life in the form of segments or as an idea, but rather as a series of ideas and segments; and experience various facets of life at the same time, along with all the joys and sorrows in each facet.

The less divisive we are within ourselves, the more we shall be able to experience the totality of life (Krishnamurti, 2001). According to Krishnamurti, when one becomes aware of one’s conditioning, one understands the entire consciousness. Consciousness is the total field in which thoughts, functions, and relationships exist.

All motives, emotions, desires, pleasures, fears, aspirations, longings, hopes, sorrows, joys, and inspirations are in that field. Consciousness can be divided into the active and the dormant, the upper and lower levels. All daily thoughts, feelings, and activities are on the surface, and below them is the subconscious, the aspects with which we are not familiar, which express themselves occasionally through certain imitations, intuitions, and dreams.

We are occupied with one little corner of consciousness, which is most of our life; the rest, that we call the subconscious, we do not even know how to get into. The subconscious does exist and it is as trivial and stupid as the conscious mind; as narrow, as bigoted, anxious, conditioned, and tawdry.

1. When one is aware of the totality of consciousness then one is functioning in full attention, not partial attention.
2. In such a state there is usually no friction.
3. Friction in life arises when one tries to divide one’s consciousness (Krishnamurti, 1983).
4. We live our life in fragments.
5. We are one person at work, another with friends, and another at home.

A mind that is fragmented shall never be aware of full consciousness. One must uncover one’s mind, layer by layer, in order to understand the fragments one by one. This is a process that may take weeks, months or even years (Krishnamurti, 1983). Attention is not the same thing as concentration.

1. Concentration involves exclusion, while attention excludes nothing.
2. It is often that we concentrate on our own problems, our own ideas, and our own world, such that we are not objectively aware.
3. Verbally we can only be superficial.
4. What lies beyond cannot be put into words.
5. One needs to be aware.
6. Awareness about how we walk, how we speak, how we talk, and how we think, is necessary.

It is with a choiceless awareness that doors shall open and one would know a consciousness in which there is no conflict and no time (Krishnamurti, 1983). Once we change ourselves, we can change society and the world in which we find ourselves. Understanding ourselves marks the beginning of wisdom (Krishnamurti, 2001).

Freedom is found in the choiceless awareness of our daily existence and activity. For Krishnamurti, every human with a mind to think will have an interpretation of the same. To be aware might not necessarily mean to give up on life and look for the internal truth, but to be able to live peacefully with an understanding of the life one leads, the relations one shares with one’s environment, and one’s family and friends (Krishnamurti, 2008).

A concept very similar to that of dharma, which I cannot help but compare it with — put simply as — Live your life the right way; do what you have to and be a good human being; and maybe that will lead to the final freedom, Although understudied, Indian philosophers like Krishnamurti have a lot to add to the general philosophy of consciousness and mind.

Simplicity and elegance mark Krishnamurti’s work and writings, but one needs to put in deep thought to understand his concepts. It is essential that readers and researchers in the philosophy of mind and consciousness study Krishnamurti, to gain further insights into our mind, into consciousness as a concept, and human evolution, learning and growth in general.

Flow Chart of the Article

• Contemporary thought may have a lot to learn by a scientific study of mind and consciousness from the perspective of the eminent Indian philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti.
• Awareness of the self is an essentiality for a free mind. We have always looked at our past and troubled ourselves, but it is important that we dwell inwards and free ourselves from our own ridicule and guilt. We must do this to avoid repression and self-blame.
• Society can be organised or organic. An organic society is preferred as per Krishnamurti, where individuals have no choice but to dwell in that society, but one where the interests of the individual and of society are the same.
• Religiosity and orthodox thought is often the result of conditioning from an early age.
• One must cultivate an investigative and scientific mind.
• There is no pleasure without difficulty; and living in totality, not in segments, is a must.
• We often just dwell on one part of consciousness and miss its holistic nature.
• One must uncover the mind, layer by layer, to achieve complete growth.

1. It is very important that we promote self-awareness and develop an insight into the various layers of the self for a complete understanding of the mind and consciousness.
2. We have to free ourselves from past conditionings and uncover our self, layer by layer, for a holistic understanding of consciousness, and for personal growth.

1. Do the teachings of Krishnamurti hold relevance in the modern understanding of mind and consciousness?
2. Does the philosophy of Krishnamurti give us new insights into the human mind, and does it provide further impetus for studies in human consciousness?
3. Do Indian philosophical concepts of mind and consciousness need to be understood in, and compared with, Western concepts, and the Western context, to understand them better?

Avinash De Sousa is a consultant psychiatrist and psychotherapist with a private practice in Mumbai. He is an avid reader and has over 95 publications in national and international journals. His main areas of interest are alcohol dependence, child and adolescent psychiatry, mental retardation, autism, developmental disabilities, neurobiology and interdisciplinary consciousness studies.

• Conflict of interest: None declared
• Declaration
• This is my original, unpublished work, not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

CITATION: De Sousa A. Mind and Consciousness as per J. Krishnamurti. Mens Sana Monogr 2012; 10: 198-207.1. Bragdon C. More Lives Than One. New York: Cosimo Books Inc; 2006.2. Fouere R. Krishnamurti: The Man and His Teaching. Mumbai: Chetana Publishers; 1969.3.

1. Rishnamurti J.
2. The First and Last Freedom.
3. New York: Harper One Publishers; 1975.4.
4. Rishnamurti J.
5. Beginnings of Learning.
6. London: Gollancz Publishers; 1976.5.
7. Rishnamurti J.
8. The Flame of Attention.
9. New York: Harper Row Publishers; 1983.6.
10. Rishnamurti J.
11. The Future of Humanity.
12. New York: Harper Row Publishers; 1986.7.

Krishnamurti J. The Awakening of Intelligence. New York: Harper One Publishers; 1987.8. Krishnamurti J. Total Freedom: The Essential Krishnamurti. New York: Harper One Publishers; 1996.9. Krishnamurti J. Truth and Actuality. Chennai: Krishnamurti Foundation; 2000.10.

1. Rishnamurti J.
2. You are the World.
3. Chennai: Krishnamurti Foundation; 1996.11.
4. Rishnamurti J.
5. In the Problem is the Solution: Question and Answer Meetings in India.
6. Chennai: Krishnamurti Foundation; 2008.12.
7. Rishnamurti J.
8. Freedom from the Known.
9. London: Rider Books, UK; 2010.
10. Mind and Consciousness as per J.

Krishnamurti
View complete answer

How does Allama Iqbal define education?

Educational Aims – Education aims are primarily a phase of values. They are conscious or unconscious value judgments. These judgments involve thinking in metaphysics and epistemology, Educational aims take their root from philosophy, Iqbal’s philosophy is the philosophy of the self.

He prizes and stresses self or individuality. Hence in Iqbal’s view the highest or ultimate aim of all educational effort as well as other social efforts is to develop strengthen the individuality of all persons. In other words, the ultimate aim of the man is his life as well as in education is the actualization and realization of the open, infinite possibilities within, without and before him.

The highest ideal is a continued life with the highest quality of knowledge, power, perfection, goodness, vision and creativity. But the ideal at this level is not a fixed one. As one acquires more of the qualities of the ideal, it shifts its place to a still higher level.

1. It does not mean only the development of the inherent possibilities of man, but in a great measure the individual’s power to absorb into himself, for the reconstruction of his experience, power, personality, and the enrichment of his life, the influence of the universe external to him.
2. Sense, reason, intellect, and intelligence are the evolved instruments for this purpose.

Hence according to Iqbal, the cultivation of any of the faculties like reason, intellect, and intelligence is not the aim of education; rather they are the means of the ideal of continuation and enrichment of life. According to Iqbal, the statement the ultimate aim and the description of its various aspects into objectives education as continuous life of good health, perfection, power, knowledge, goodness, vision, creative and original activity, and other values of his philosophical system for the development of individuality would not be enough.

He recognizes the need for more proximate, immediate and specific objectives which when realized become resource to achieve the ultimate aim with more vigor and enthusiasm. He encourages freedom of thought and originality for the achievement of something unique. The actualization of specific objectives becomes a means and refers to immediate while the ultimate aim.

The value of ultimate aim as the development of individuality is supreme because, through suggestion and direction, it controls the selection of more proximate aims, and their execution. The development of individuality can be accelerated by the formulation of new creative purposes and objectives which always determine the direction of man’s activity and evolution.

• Hence by means of motive force of unceasing and creative desires and ideals the individual builds his selfhood, culture, and institutions.
• Education would defeat its purpose of the development of free, creative and unique personalities if the educational system discourages the formation of new ideals and objectives.

These objectives according to Iqbal, grow out of dynamic, forward – moving activity of the individual in relation to his environment, culture heritage, ongoing experience and projected ideals. The objectives depend also upon the nature of the pupil, social institutions, contemporary life with due regard to the activities of children and adults for the development of their personalities and character and preparation for vocation.

1. They emerge from the present experience and man’s problems of meeting the constant need of dynamic environment; his desire to achieve ideals by changing the environment to his needs with the help and direction of his will, intelligence, and valuable surviving traditions and principles of the past.
2. Our duty is carefully to watch the progress of human thought, and maintain an independent critical attitude towards it”.

Growth and development of individuality in active and purposeful participation in life, through the agency of education, requires a material and cultural environment. There is need of intense and manifold activity on the part of growing individual which must be carried out in vital contact with the whole of his material and cultural environment.

1. The social setting provides the individual with such a whole some environment.
2. Man doesn’t live to himself alone.
3. On the contrary basis, he lives among his fellows in a social structure.
4. He realizes his ideals in participation in not simply as it is, but also as it is becoming and ought to be.
5. Iqbal’s concept of an ideal society is a democracy of more or less unique individuals towards which they all should move progressively for their mutual rejuvenation.

Such a social organized environment, to Iqbal’s mind, is not the end but the means to each individual’s effort to realize his idea of his unique personality. Of course, society does not exist for individual’s selfishness but for mutual help through cooperative effort of all its members.

Education develops individuality by bringing about a dynamic and progressive interaction between the individual and the society with the object of adjusting them to each other. Mohammad Iqbal, in spite of his learning and wide reading, is no mere echo of other men’s ideas, but is distinctly an original thinker.

To realize the broad educational aims and values as framed by Iqbal, the teacher will have to plan specific objectives for classroom activities. Of course, when these aims and values are expanded to this length a detailed, the merge with the curriculum its self.

According to Iqbal, then, the specific objectives will not be one or many in a specific number but a multitude as framed by teachers and pupils. Iqbal would like these aims to be based on democratic principles. they should not be enforced from outside. The pupil and teacher should be free to make, choose and accept them.

In other words, they should be meaningful to those who use them. Iqbal would disapprove of the determination of aims of one individual or group by another individual or group, because he has great regard of the individuality of each person and even urges him to make his purposes and ideals himself.

Further, aims arise out of the actual and concrete situations and are selected by the teacher and the pupil from among the various alternatives. The end of these intelligently projected ideals gives an insight or vision and becomes an instrument in guiding both pupil and teacher in reaching that end by helping them consider and adjust the means, and by suggesting the order a procedure to be followed in using the means.

Since aims are values, they provide motivating forces to achieve the ideal put forth, and also the basis for the evaluation of the ideal when it is achieved. Further according to Iqbal, his aims and values are a set of principles, and are useful to the educator as well as the educated, not as aims, but as suggestions for their guidance in keeping an overall balance of all the values that may be involved.

Iqbal’s philosophy subscribes to that kind of proximate educational aims which are not fixed, static, and immutable, but which should be flexible and subject to the continual reconstruction. In universe of change and evolution the educational aims should be tentative and must shift with rest of the scenery of changing individuals and their environments.

They should be constantly made and remade be an outgrowth of practical changing situations. Hence Iqbal’s educational aims do not consist in maintaining a status quo because he preaches a life of ideals and purposes, and ceaseless effort to realize them.

The desires, objectives, purposes and ideals are not mere impulses, because one’s acting on impulse does not become an activity with a purpose until one tries to see the means at one’s command, the reasonableness of the objective, and probable outcome of the activity. One may note that educational aims and their outcomes are not the same or identical in their meaning.

The former are what one tries to do and the latter are what one actually succeeds in performing. Here one perceives how aims change in the process of actualization, and the scope of uncertainty of result they are expected to bring. It also points towards the importance of careful formulation and use of aims to manage the educative process with intelligence and vision which Iqbal emphasizes.
View complete answer

What are the functions of education in society essay?

Education certainly determines the quality of an individual’s life. Education improves one’s knowledge, skills and develops the personality and attitude. Most noteworthy, Education affects the chances of employment for people. A highly educated individual is probably very likely to get a good job.
View complete answer

What is the most function of education?

Socialization and development of communication skills – One of the main purposes of education is socialization and the development of social skills. It is a process where children learn to communicate with others, and understand the needs of others. Children develop these skills from an early age, and additional training in school allows them to perfect the skills such as negotiation and collaborative problem solving, as well as to spend time with peers, learning to express their attitudes while showing respect for the opinion of others.

1. As the school context commonly implies large groups of students, schools have a great responsibility to be mediators of sorts, defining the rules and presenting ways of communicating so as to guide children toward examples of positive behavior.
2. This way, children gain the confidence to become part of their community and acquire valuable skills that will prove extremely useful later in life.

If a good foundation is laid, children will be able to overcome all challenges, which will be reflected in their success in school, as well as defining life goals.
View complete answer

What is the first function of education?

The primary function of education is the transferring or transmission of knowledge and reconstruction of the social heritage.
View complete answer

How do you write an educational essay?

Possible steps (In no strict order) –

Analyse the question and define key terms

Establish a possible thesis/point of view

Research the topic. Use books, journals and other credible academic sources for support and evidence.

Take notes from your readings.

Write an essay plan and organise your ideas.

Write a first draft to include your introduction, body and conclusion.

Set the draft aside for a day or two, then re-read and make changes,

Get some feedback – ask a friend/parent/colleague to read it.

Edit and redraft your essay.

Complete or finalise your references and citations

Complete your final draft and hand it in

View complete answer

Who is mother of education?

TBI Heroes: Savitribai, The Mother Of Modern Girls’ Education In India Savitribai Phule may not be as famous as Mahatma Gandhi or Swami Vivekananda. But her impact on the liberation of the Indian woman has been no less spectacular or significant. One of the earliest crusaders of education for girls, and dignity for the most vulnerable sections of society – dalits, women and widows, Savitribai broke all the traditional shackles of 19th century India to herald a new age of thinking.

1. She can be legitimately hailed as the mother of Indian Feminism.
2. Read about her remarkable life of courage and initiative.
3. Y ou owe her.
4. But do you know her? Savitribai Phule, the Mother of modern education.
5. If you are an Indian woman who reads, you owe her.
6. If you are an educated Indian woman, you owe her.

If you are an Indian schoolgirl reading this chapter in English, you owe her. If you are an educated international desi woman, you owe her.” – Excerpted from ‘Savitribai and India’s Conversation on Education’ by Thom Wolf and Suzana Andrade, published in ‘Oikos Worldviews Journal’ (2008).

1. As a new bride at the age of nine, when Savitribai moved to her marital home in Pune in 1840, her most prized possession was a book that had been given to her by some Christian missionary.
2. Impressed by her thirst for learning, Jotirao Phule, her husband, then all of 13, taught her to read and write, little knowing that this would lay the foundation for a whole new chapter in Indian history.

In times when women were treated no better than the cattle at home, Savitribai Phule earned the distinction of being the first Indian woman to become a teacher. For this she undertook training at Ms. Farar’s Institution at Ahmednagar and in Ms. Mitchell’s school in Pune.

“The first Indian to place universal, child sensitive, intellectually critical, and socially reforming education at the very core of the agenda for all children in India”, is how Wolf and Andrade describe her in their paper. Savitribai Phule placed “universal, child sensitive,intellectually critical, and socially reforming education at the verycore of the agenda for all children in India” by setting up the first school for girls in 1848 with eight students.

Long believed to be the preserve of the Brahmins, children from other castes and communities were denied the right to an education. Savitribai and her husband broke the rules and established the first school for girls in 1848 in Bhide Wada, Narayan Peth, Pune.

Eight girls, belonging to different castes, enrolled as students on the first day. When she started her unique school, Savitribai also overcame another hurdle – of women not being allowed to step outside the home to work. Of course, the young woman had to contend with a lot of opposition. She carried a change of sari with her every day as men pelted her with stones, mud and even dung as she made her way to the school.

But undeterred by all the opposition, Savitribai opened another school for adults the same year. By 1851, she was running three schools with around 150 girl students. “Women who cite harassment as a reason to quit what they want to do can learn a lot from Savitribai,” feels Sushama Deshpande, actor, writer and director of Marathi theatre.

• A journalist by training, she has written and directed the play, ‘Vhay, Mee Savitri Bai’ (‘Yes I am Savitri Bai’), based on the life and works of the educationist.
• Today, 24 years later, too, the play inspires and enthralls audiences across the world.
• Theatre journalism, as I call it, is my way of reaching out to women from all walks of life and telling them how strong they are through stories like that of Savitribai’s,” she says.

Today, government programmes like the ‘Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’, the Right to Education Act and the midday meal scheme that incentivize education, may seem like modern concepts, but even 150 years back Savitribai had set a precedent – she gave stipends to prevent children from dropping out of school.

• She was the teacher who inspired a young student to ask for a library for the school at an award ceremony instead of gifts for herself.
• A poet and writer, Savitribai had motivated another young girl, Mukta, to write an essay that became the cornerstone of ‘Dalit literature’.
• She even conducted the equivalent of a parent-teacher meeting to involve the parents so they would understand the importance of education and support their children.

Her schools imparted vocational training as well. Along with educating women, Savitribai also took on the responsibility for the health and well-being of young widows, another exploited group. A poster from 1863 reads something like this: “Women who conceive out of wedlock should go to the home of Jotirao Govindrao Phule for their confinement.

Their names will be kept confidential”. Pained by the plight of young Kashibai, a widow sentenced to ‘Kalapani’ rigorous imprisonment in the Andamans for killing her newborn, the Phules opened up their home as a shelter for young widows. Raped by family members and then disowned when pregnant, these women often resorted to suicide or killed their babies.

The couple even adopted one child as their own. Today, every educated Indian woman owes a debt of gratitudeto Savitribai Phule, often referred to as the mother of modern girls’ education. Yeshwant, their adopted son, trained as a doctor and eventually joined his mother in all the good work she did.

• Setting an example for others, she conducted his wedding under the ‘Satya shodhak samaj’, or the truth-seekers society, with no priests, no dowry and at very little expense.
• She even brought her son’s fiancée for a home stay before the wedding, so she could get familiar with her soon-to-be home and family.

Moreover, she took on the household chores so the young woman had time to study. Maybe if soaps today had mothers-in-law like her instead of the scheming kitchen politics they show on TV, we may have reduced dowry deaths and other social problems. laments Mridu Verma a journalist-turned-entrepreneur.

• Savitribai is an Indian icon who realised the true meaning of women’s liberation long before it became fashionable,” she adds.
• Savitribai and Jotirao were always there for the community.
• In 1877, their region was hit by a severe drought.
• The couple launched the ‘Victoria Balashram’ and aided by friends and funds collected by going from village to village, they fed over a thousand people every day.

Earlier in 1868, during a very dry spell, they had opened up their wells to the Dalits, who were forbidden to draw water from other wells. Stories of her personal generosity are legend. No one visiting the Phule home would go empty handed. At the very least they would be assured of a meal.

She would give away her saris too, if she saw anyone in torn saris. Extremely hands on, she looked after all the young widows who came to their house to have their babies. She also personally nursed husband Jotirao to health when a stroke paralysed him. says Harish Sadani of Men Against Violence and Abuse (MAVA), an all-men organisation directly intervening in gender-based violence against women.

Sadani admits that he is influenced by her more than by any western thinker. Savitribai broke yet another taboo when she led the funeral procession of her husband. Even today, the Hindu last rites are considered to be the sacred privilege of men alone.

When Jotiba passed away in 1890, warring relatives tried to wrest the rights of performing the last rites away from Yeshwant, faulting his parentage. Savitribai took the ‘titve’, or the funeral mud-pot, herself and led the procession. Even the fear of death did not deter this brave woman from doing what she felt was right.

In 1897, when the plague hit Pune, she was at the forefront. She even carried young Pandurang Babaji Gaikwad, a 10-year-old boy, from Mundhwa to the clinic strapped to her back. Ironically, he beat the infection but Savitribai caught it and in March 1897, she breathed her last.

“Every Indian woman who is educated today owes Savitribai a debt of gratitude,” sums up Sushama Deshpande, whose play has now been adapted by many and is preformed extensively to packed houses, adding, Not a single performance goes by without a few women coming backstage to tell me how watching the play has helped them find solutions to their personal problems.

She epitomises the aspirations of women even 150 years after she burst on the scene. Today, the school Savitribai had set up is part of Pune’s ‘heritage’ walk, a reminder that her legacy needs to be carried forward for the generations that follow. : TBI Heroes: Savitribai, The Mother Of Modern Girls’ Education In India
View complete answer

Who is the author of education and society?

Education and Society by Thurston Domina, Benjamin G. Gibbs, Lisa Nunn, Andrew Penner – Paperback – University of California Press.
View complete answer

Who is the first philosopher of education?

Plato. Plato (427–347 BCE), influenced by the Sophists as well as by the speculative scientists and metaphysicians and inspired by the instruction of Socrates, gave us the first fully developed philosophy of education—that is, the first explicit, philosophical justification of a theory of education.
View complete answer