Abstract
The Chāndogya Upaniṣad provides an abundant amount of rich and comprehensive narrations between a teacher (Guru) and a disciple (Śiṣya). Based on the content analysis of a select twelve conversations in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, a few ideas are derived on teaching and learning method by referring to the foundational concepts in modern pedagogy, andragogy, and the virtue epistemology branch of Western philosophy.
The results are important for (1) carrying out holistic development of students for creating both an ‘intellectual’ and a ‘wise, humble person’, (2) imparting in them a critical thinking disposition, and (3) providing them with human values and ethics anchored by ancient Indian ethos.
“Before God trusts you with success, you have to prove yourself humble enough to handle the big prize.”
APJ Abdul Kalam, Wings of Fire
A. Introduction
The Chāndogya Upaniṣad
The Chāndogya Upaniṣad, one of the earliest Upaniṣads, is ascribed to the Sāma-Veda (the Taṇḍya school). Consisting of a total of eight chapters, it deals with the melodious songs (Sāman) in praise of Gods. It directly deals with topics such as the true nature of Brahman, the Supreme Self and its identity with the individual Self and so on. It also gives the details on the knowledge of life and its origin, types of Upāsanā, different types of Vidyās (the Agni-vidyā, the Prāṇa-vidyā, Kośa-vijñāna, and the Bhūma-vidyā), the destiny of the Soul after Death, and so forth. Thus, it enjoys high importance in the Upaniṣadic tradition.
The Guru-Śiṣya Paraṁparā in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad
The basis of the Indian theory of Knowledge is self-realization. It does not happen without the proper guidance, monitoring and instruction of a Guru. Thus, there is a dire need for a Guru in a disciple’s journey towards self-realization.
As the pupil himself seeks an authoritative Guru who can banish his doubts, there is no prescribed syllabus. The course material is decided based on the pupil’s interest and curiosity. The method of preparing the student to have Brahma-vidyā is decided based on his expertise and attitude. This way of pedagogy, as many modern scholars have mentioned, takes the student from existential beliefs to integrity, integrity to action, and action to inner peace. It is argued that the central feature of this system of pedagogy is its focus on the nature of the self.[1] The consequence of the learning was the quality of humility in the student who then becomes a teacher himself. His personality was then characterized by traits such as accepting one’s intellectual limitations, independence of intellect and ego, openness to learn and experience, and respectfulness towards others’ opinions.
Another observation in the Upaniṣadic narratives we come across is that knowledge comes from anywhere, from the most unexpected and unlikely places. The teachers can be non-human beings such as Agni (fire), animals and birds, and so on. Most of the time, the knowledge is imparted by the Kṣatriyas and other jatis such as in the stories of Pravāhana (the king of Jaivali), and Raikwa (the cart-puller). The seeker of the knowledge can also be a non-Brahmin such as Janaśruti (a king), Satyakāma (the one who does not know his gotra) and so on.[2]
B. The Upaniṣadic Way of Pedagogy
There is a direct mention of the necessity of the trait of humility in teaching methodology in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. At the outset, commentator Ādi Śaṅkarācārya (Chapter IV.1-2), states that this story gives insights on how to teach and learn, with faith, giving food, and humility. It reads:
“The story has been introduced, for the purpose of making the teaching easily intelligible, and also for the purpose of laying down the procedure by which the Teaching is to be imparted and received; and the story also shows how the attainment of the knowledge of the Teaching is to be brought about by such means as faith, giving of food, absence of haughtiness (humility) and so forth.”
Along with a few occasional explicit showcases of pedagogy, one can observe the following inherent methods[3] of teaching in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad:
1. The Analogical Method
In this method, a preceptor explains a conceptual relationship between two ideas or things by drawing a comparison between them, going from a more general to more specific, to generate novel information about one or both of them. The comparison usually focuses on the similarities, dissimilarities, and peculiarities of the two ideas. The analogic method has been used extensively in all schools of thought in the Indian knowledge system. In modern pedagogical terms, it is known as the ‘Guided Example-based Learning’.
The sixth chapter on ‘Philosophy of Being’ starts with the story of Śvetaketu and Uddālaka. Uddālaka’s exposition on the subtle knowledge of the Ātman given to his son by a number of simple, daily-life illustrations is quite refreshing. The phrase ‘Tat tvam asi, Śvetaketo!’ (“That thou art, O Shvetaketu!”) is the emphasis of his talk which is later known as Mahā-vākya. Examples given by Uddālaka are as follows: By knowing one lump of clay, one can know about everything that is made of clay, the only difference between all those objects is the name and that is the result of speech. In a honey hive, it is indistinguishable from which flower the honey came from. Similarly, a river is indistinguishable when it merges into the ocean losing its individuality. A tree stands tall even after cutting one of its branches. It explains the nature of Brahman which is all-pervading and indistinguishable from the objects in which it is manifested.
In another story, King Aśvapati explains the knowledge of Vaiśvānara Ātman to the great five Rishis or Sages by using the analogy of a hungry girl who goes to her mother (to satiate her hunger). Similarly, all the five elements approach the Agnihorta.[4]
2. The Synthetic Method:
The method of philosophical teaching where the different elements of an idea or a thing are mentally combined to form a whole, integrated understanding of a concept is known as Synthetic method teaching. It is also known as a progressive method that stands in contrast with the analytic method which divides a concept into different parts in order to understand it.
In Chapter V.11, King Aśvapati effected the synthesis of thought out of the doctrines of the six cosmological philosophers. He explains the Self to the six disciples, based on their objects of meditation that are the parts of the Vaiśvānara Self.
(1) Divam (heaven) as the Head,
(2) Āditya as the eye,
(3) Vāyu (air) as the Prāṇa,
(4) Ākāśa (space) as the trunk,
(5) Apaḥ (water) as the bladder, and
(6) Pṛthvi (earth) as the feet.
Finally, pointing to the limitations of the knowledge of these Ṛṣis, he said to them that it is not by meditating on parts that one can know the all.[5] Therefore, realizing the whole consists of all parts, one has the experience of Vaiśvānara Ātman. This method of philosophical teaching is known as the Synthetic method of philosophy where Aśvapati effected the synthesis of thought out of the doctrines of the six cosmological philosophers.
In another story of Upakosala, the synthetic method was used to explain the nature of Brahman by three fires.
- The Gārhapatya (the householder’s fire) instructed him that ‘Earth, fire, food and sun are my four bodies. Of these, the person that is seen in the Sun, that is indeed I am, i.e., the Gārhapatya fire. The one who meditates on it, destroys all sins. He remains a full life-span of a hundred years gloriously. We protect him in this world and the other world.’
- Then the Anvāhāryapacana (the Dakṣiṇāgni fire or the southern sacrificial fire) instructed him, ‘the waters, quarters, stars and moon are my four bodies. Of these, the person that is seen in the Moon- that I am, i.e., the Dakṣiṇāgni fire…’
- Now the Āhavanīya (the eastern or the offertorial fire) instructed him, ‘Breath, Ākāśa, Heaven and Lightning- these are my four bodies. Of these, the person that is seen in the lightning, that I am…’ etc.
By instructing him about their bodies, their parts, and how the one who truly meditates on it destroys all his sins, the three fires have used the synthetic method of teaching.
3. The Monologic Method
The Monologic method of teaching is predominantly based on instruction practices where there is not much scope for a conversation between a preceptor and a disciple. A disciple mainly performs the role of a listener.[6] The monologic style of teaching and the dialogical style of teaching are considered as two extremes of a continuum, where a dialogical method includes a text-centered interaction between a teacher and a student. Useful at the beginning stage where a student is unaware of the content of the topic and cannot have his own interpretation yet, the monologic method proves useful in some scenarios.
In a short story of the teacher Satyakāma and a disciple Gośruti in Chapter V.2 of ‘Prāṇa-vidyā’ or ‘Brahma-vidyā’, we find a monologic teaching method used by Satyakāma where he narrated the story/ a conversation between a Breath and Speech and others, leaving very less scope for Gośruti to interact. Breath asks a question to all: what are its food and clothes? The Speech and the rest answer that whatever in this world is known as food will be its food. It will all be eaten by Breath alone. The clothing of breath is water. The sipping of water before and after eating food is known to be for the purpose of purification.
In another story of Śaunaka and a Brahmacārin, we come across a monologic method used by Śaunaka who answers to the claim put forth by the Brahmacārin that by refusing him food, Śaunaka has, in a way, refused food to God. In a very long monologue, Śaunka convinces him that God consumes food through his being and not through any external instrument.
4. The Personalized and Experiential Method
The emphasis of the Indian philosophical teachings is on the Self-actualization or Realization of the Ultimate Truth. The main theme of the Upaniṣadic teachings is the relation or non-duality of the Ātman (the Self, the individual Soul) with that of the Brahman (the Supreme Soul). Thus, the method of teaching and learning includes several narratives and interesting stories peeking through the conversations between a teacher and a disciple. The teaching was to allow the student to have experiential knowledge of the same. Consequently, the learning is self-paced and thus, the teaching is personalized.
In modern pedagogical terms, it is known as the ‘Guided Self-Learning’ method. It aims to customize the learning method based on each student’s strengths, weaknesses, needs, skills and interests. We find one story where Satyakāma does not allow Upakosala to leave for his home even after he finishes his study at the Gurukula, unlike he does for his other students. Once Upakosala attains the knowledge of Agni-vidyā, he is allowed to complete his stay at the Guru’s place.
Personalized teaching can be of a short-term period (like that of Upakosala) or a long-term period (like that of Indra following Brahmacarya/ studentship for around 102 years). During the entire journey, there is close monitoring by the teacher along with extra support and extreme patience. Due to the lack of any competitiveness in this method, a disciple focuses more on his progressive development than a weak demonstration of it.
In Chapters I.10-11, we come across a sacrificial priest named Uśasti of Kurudeśa who uses a personalized method to teach the three other priests the knowledge of the deities of their hymns. Uśasti taught that the deity linked to the prastāva (the Introductory praise) is prāṇa (Breath), the deity linked to udgītha (the High chant) is Āditya (the sun), and the deity linked to the pratihāra (the Response) is Anna (food). Only personalized teaching takes one to the level where one is well-equipped to have experiential knowledge.
The story of Indra Prajapati is an epitome of personalized teaching where Indra stays with his father Prajāpati to gain knowledge for thirty-two years, more than three times, until he has experiential knowledge of the nature of the Brhaman in the states of wakefulness, dream and deep sleep. It is stated by Olivelle (1998, p. 66) that it is visible in the story of Indra and Prajapati that the teacher is brusque and reluctant to reveal what he knows; most often he will give only half-answers containing half-truths. This allows the student to overcome these obstacles, be persistent and most importantly, it teaches them to ask the right questions. He goes on saying that, “A student needs humility, persistence, and basic intelligence to detect a half-truth and press the teacher to reveal the truth more fully.”
The two stories already mentioned above, that of Aśvapati and six Rishis, and that of Upakosala and three fires also give us the hint of the personalized method of teaching.
5. The Aphoristic Method
A compact and epigrammatic style of teaching is known as Aphoristic style. An aphorism is a short sentence expressing truth in the fewest possible words. It is observed that once a pupil has reached the level of attainment of the knowledge of the Brahman, the teachers in the Upaniṣads have used the aphoristic style of teaching. In the story of Śvetaketu and Uddālaka, the phrase ‘Tat tvam asi, Śvetaketo!’ (“That thou art, O Shvetaketu!”) is the emphasis of this story which is later known as Mahā-vākya. This method works well for the advanced-level students when no more explanations or examples are needed. It is used in combination with other methods such as analogic and synthetic, which is known as the Blended Learning method. Even though modern pedagogy is mute about this method, there has been some discussion on the aphoristic method of writing in the literature domain.
6. The Question-Answer Method
The Guru and the Śiṣya depict a very personal and intimate relationship between them. It is stated that their relationship is stronger even than the relationship between a disciple and his father.[7] This relationship is anchored by many traits on the part of both the teacher and the disciple. For example, a disciple has extreme faith in Guru, unquestionable trust in his methods, readiness to follow austerity, penance and celibacy, and imbibing qualities of persistence, tenacity, humility, honesty and truthfulness throughout the procedure. A teacher is equally patient and immensely benevolent in the journey of curiosity of his disciple, and having faith in his abilities and in his progressive development. This relationship is far beyond personal and faithful. It also allows a disciple to find comfort in asking questions to the Guru if he is not satisfied with his earlier answers. It places more importance on the epistemic advancement of the disciple.
In Chapter VI.1, when Śvetaketu was not satisfied with the knowledge given by his father Uddālaka puts forth many questions to know more about the all-pervading power. He says, “This is something very baffling, father! But, how on earth can I realize it, even if I merely know it?” Uddālaka and Śvetaketu’s conversation is marked by inquisitiveness and curiosity. In Chapter VII.1-26, Nārada showcases his Intellectual Tenacity to have a complete Cognitive Closure by raising questions time and again such as, ‘On what does the Infinite depend, O venerable one?’ In Chapter VIII.7-12, a dialogue between Prajāpati, Indra and Virocana, Indra follows Prajāpati’s instructions and replies, “Revered Sir, we saw ourselves well dressed, well groomed, and well adorned.” And keeps on asking questions until he is satisfied with Prajāpati’s teachings that matched his personal experience.
Similarly, the Guru, from time to time, asks the pupils questions to assess their progress and for other reasons. Uddālaka puts forth two questions in front of Śvetaketu to break his ego, Śaunaka does the same for the brahmacārin, and Uśasti to the sacrificial priests.
It is maintained by Richard Paul (1990) that a person with intellectual humility has the ability to question one’s own framework of thought and an ability to reason dialectically to determine when one’s own point of view is weakest. In modern pedagogical terms, the Q&A method of teaching is applied to form the questions that check comprehension, application and memory. This type of Engaged Learning method is designed to challenge and encourage students to learn the focal point of the concepts. It channelizes their preparations for a certain topic offering them an idea about the core concepts along with flexibility in learning. It also helps the instructor to change his way of teaching for a better understanding of the students.
7. The Collaborative and Cooperative Method:
It involves a situation where all the pupils work together on an activity or a task in order to learn better and have hands-on training. They may work on a single problem as a shared task or on a separate one contributing to a common overall outcome. This is also known by the terms Peer Learning or Peer Tutoring. The task is designed carefully so that all participants contribute equally.
We find a story of the six sense organs (Chapter V.1.6-15) learning by themselves to find out who among them is the greatest of all, by leaving the body one by one. By this method of collaborative and cooperative learning, they found out that the Prāṇa (Breath) is the greatest among all of them. Similarly, in the sixth chapter, Uddālaka decides to put Śvetaketu to the test and asks him to perform some experiments so that he can experience the Truth through the collaborative learning method. Uddālaka teaches him with an example of a seed of a Banyan tree that the nature of Ātman is evident as it reflects the invisibility of the aṇu (subtle) Ātman. By the illustration of salt and water, he teaches the nature of all-pervading Ātman. Thus, Uddālaka gives Svetaketu a very comprehensive idea in a simplistic manner about the Brahman and how to realize That.[8]
The research in modern pedagogy indicates that groups of 3-5 are the most effective collaborative learning approach. Additionally, it is found that if pupils are given the responsibility of a joint outcome (as mentioned in the story of the six senses), they perform more efficiently. The intervention of the teacher in-between the learning process of the pupils (as mentioned in the story of Śvetaketu) makes it even more efficient by providing them with the performance report. It is known as one of the High-inference Teacher Behaviors in pedagogy.
C. Conclusion
The Upaniṣads is a storehouse of philosophical teachings in ancient India. Apart from these five methods of teaching, the teachers of the Upaniṣads have used methods such as Enigmatic, Etymological, Ad hoc, Mythical, Dialectic, and so forth. This paper is an attempt to derive the teaching and learning methods in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad especially based on the Guru-Śiṣya Paraṁparā and its underpinnings. It is found that the teachers in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad have used the following methods of teaching: (1) Analogic, (2) Synthetic, (3) Monologic, (4) Personalized and Experiential, (5) Aphoristic, (6) Question-Answer based, and (7) Collaborative and Cooperative Method. In all methods, the emphasis is on the realization of the ultimate true nature of the Brahman and its non-duality with that of Ātman.
Bibliography
Aberdein, A. (2020). Intellectual humility and argumentation. In The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Humility (pp. 325-334). Routledge.
Bodewitz, H. (2001). Uddālaka’s Teaching in Chāndogya Upaniṣad. Indo-Iranian Journal, 44(4), 289-298.
Cartolari, M., Carlino, P., & Colombo, L. (2013). Reading and Note Taking in Monological and Dialogical Classes in the Social Sciences. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(6), 159-183.
Jha, G. (1942). The Chandogya Upanishad: A Treatise on Vedanta Philosophy Translated into English with The Commentary of Sankara . Poona: Oriental Book Agency.
Johnston, C. (1910). The Dramatic Element in the Upanishads. The Monist, 20(2), 185-216.
Narasimhan, N., Bhaskar, K., & Prakhya, S. (2010). Existential Beliefs and Values. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(3), 369-382. doi:10.1007/sl0551-010-0472-7
Olivelle, P. (1998). The Early Upaniṣads. New York: Oxford University Press.
Olivelle, P. (1999). Young Śvetaketu: A Literary Study of an Upaniṣadic Story. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 119(1), 46-70.
Paul, R. (1990). Critical and reflective thinking: A philosophical perspective. Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, 445-494.
Ranade, R. D. (1926). A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy. Poona: Oriental Book Agency.
Vaidyanathan, T. (1989). Authority and Identity in India. Daedalus (Another India), 118(4), 147-169.
References
[1] (Narasimhan, Bhaskar, & Prakhya, 2010, pp. 377-378)
[2] The principle of Guru-Śiṣya relationship goes beyond caste and creed and is certainly not confined to Hindus (Vaidyanathan, 1989, p. 148).
[3] In A Consrtuctive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy, the author Ranade (1926, pp. 34-40) mentions of several other methods found in the Upaniśadic pedagogy. They are: enigmatic, etymological, mythical, dialectic, ad hoc, and regressive and so on.
[4] “yatheha kśudhitā bālā mātaraṁ paryupāsate | evaṁ sarvāṇi bhūtāni agnihotramupāsate ||” (Ch.Up.5.14.5)
[5] “The truth is known when all is seen.”
[6] (Cartolari, Carlino, & Colombo, 2013, p. 162)
[7] (Vaidyanathan, 1989, p. 160)
[8] The teaching of Uddālaka to Śvetaketu also appears in the Taittirīya Upaniṣad where it is known as Bhārgavī Vāruṇī Vidyā or Bṛgu-Vāruṇi Vidyā.
Feature Image Credit: wikipedia.org
Conference on Pedagogy And Educational Heritage
Watch video presentation of the above paper here:
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article belong to the author. Indic Today is neither responsible nor liable for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in the article.
