Archives

(Continued from March 10)

University of Colombo convocation address 2003 delivered by Professor J. B. Disanayaka

As Prof. Basham notes "Under its aged and saintly abbot Silabhadra, Nalanda did not confine itself to training Buddhist novices, but also taught the Vedas, Hindu philosophy, logic, grammar and medicine. It would seem that the student population was not confined to the Buddhist order, but that candidates of other faiths who succeeded in passing a strict oral examination were admitted" (P. 166).

Sri Lankan Buddhists can also take pride in establishing universities attached to their monasteries. Two of the most famous monastic universities of ancient Sri Lanka were the Maha Vihara and the Abhayagiri. By the fourth century AD these monasteries had earned such a reputation as centres of learning and scholarship that monks from distant China came to Sri Lanka in search of rare Buddhist manuscripts.

One such monk who visited Sri Lanka in the 4th century was Fa Hsien whose 'Record of the Buddhist Countries' refers to these two monasteries as centres of learning. He records that while Abhayagiri had five thousand monks, Maha Vihara had three thousand monks. Fa Hsien spent two years at Abhayagiri studying Buddhist texts.

He was happy that he was able to obtain copies of the Dhirgagama, the Samyuktagama and the Sannipata, manuscripts that were unknown in China. He also found a copy of the Rules of the Mahisasakas. These were Sanskrit texts, a fact that helps us to conclude that Sri Lankan centres of learning were not confined to Theravada studies only but included Mahayana studies as well.

We are thus inheritors of a long tradition of university education. We do not have, however, nomenclature that refers to the different levels of academic status that are found in the Western tradition, such as bachelor, master and doctor. As such we do not have information about the crossings in life that ancient and medieval Sri Lankan scholars had to undergo in their university life.

However, there is something that brings the university traditions of medieval Europe, ancient India and Sri Lanka together. They were all agreed on the primary aim of education: the systematic development and cultivation of the mind and other natural powers. It begins in the nursery, continues through school and also through life, whether we will or not.

The modern Italian word for education - Educazione - sheds much light on this aspect of education. 'Educazione' means 'upbringing', that is 'the development of character by teaching, discipline and other social processes'. The modern Italian phrase 'un uomo senza educazione' means, literally, a man without education but it really means a man without upbringing, that is, without a cultivated mind.

He who has a cultivated mind has also cultivated the art of speech and the art of behaviour. This meaning of 'education' presents a sharp contrast to the normal meaning attached to 'education' today, where it refers to the impartation of knowledge relating to various fields such as economics, geography, mathematics,physics, medicine or law.

I had the very good fortune of spending my fist sabbatical year in Italy, at a university near Rome, -Unveirsita Per Stranieri - studying the Italian langauge and culture, and one of the fist things I had to learn was that in modern Rome, there is no ministry named, in Italian, 'Ministero dell'educazione'! Isn't it surprising to note that Rome, "la citta eterna" ("the eternal city" as the Italians call it,) - the capital of the great Roman Empire that shaped Western civilisation and the capital of the country that produced the oldest university in Europe - has no 'Ministry of Education'?

This means that the Italians, even today, do not associate 'educazione' with what takes place in schools and universities. In their view, what goes on in schools and universities is not 'education' but 'public instruction', as they say in Italian, 'publica istruzione', in various fields of study.

Thus they have named their Ministry that manages schools and universities 'Ministero della Publica Istruzione' and not 'Ministero dell'educazione'.We are told that even in colonial Sri Lanka the Department of Education was named the 'Department of Public Instruction' for the British also too did not want to confuse 'public instruction' in various fields such as medicine, sciences and the arts with 'education'. Public instruction is but a part of education. What is most unfortunate is that we have today equated 'public instruction' with 'education'.

This shift of focus from 'education' to 'instruction' has brought about adverse results. The origins of the crises that society is facing today in almost every field of activity - politics, economics, commerce, and so on - is the inevitable result of placing more emphasis on 'knowledge that is relevant to public instruction' than on 'wisdom that is relevant to education': on 'Vishaya gnana' than on 'pragna'.

Today, in whatever field of study, we are collecting more and more facts and figures, and our corpora of data are thus becoming larger and larger. We are entering into the so-called 'world of information', and 'information technology' brings in vast amounts of knowledge, almost to the extent of an 'information explosion'.

Knowledge and Information we certainly need and this increase is undoubtedly a favourable phenomenon. However when knowledge increases at the expense of wisdom, then, there is something to worry about, because in the final analysis, wisdom cannot be replaced by knowledge. For wisdom lone will guide humnity to use knowledge for the better.

Traditional education, in spite of its many faults, placed more emphasis on wisdom than on knowledge. It was a kind of education where the relation between the teacher and the pupil was one of affectionate respect, almost of reverence. This reverence was called 'Guru bhakti' and that was the basis on which all the other elements of traditional education rested.

I am reminded of what Dr. Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, one of the msot outstanding Sri Lankans of the twentieth century, said in his masterpiece 'Medieval Sinhalese Art' on this aspect of education. Having described the traditional system of education of this country, he compared it with the kind of 'English education' that public schools of the day provided in the following way:

"The old system of education above described could not have been preserved in its entirety; it is in many respects unsuited to modern requirements besides having intrinsic faults; but it is very unfortunate that so many of its real advantages are lacking in the modern system and especially unfortunate that an 'English education'... leaves the 'educated' ignorant of everything that would appear to be of special interest and value to him, and unable to hand on to others even that knowledge which he possesses of the great world beyond, and the lesson he has learnt from a study of the history and manners of other people" (P. 51).

Dr. Coomaraswamy concludes his observation with a special reference to the Sinhalese, particularly because he was writing on medieval Sinhalese art but what he said of the Sinhalese could be equally applicable to the Tamils.

"Most stupid of all is the affectation of despising everything Sinhalese and thoughtlessly admiring everything English; reminding one of the time in England when 'Falsehood in a Ciceronian dialect had no opposers; truth in patois no listeners' (P. 51).

Raindranath Tagore, in his essay on 'My School' in his collection of 'Lectures and Addresses' laments the unholy division of education into distinct segments to suit modern trends:

"The object of education" insists Tagore "is to give man the unity of truth. Formerly, when life was simple, all the different elements of man were in complete harmony. But when there came the separation of the intellect from the spiritual and the physical, the school education put entire emphasis on the intellect and the physical side of man. We devote our sole attention to giving children information, not knowing that by this emphasis we are accentuating a break between the intellectual, physical and the spiritual life" (P. 27).

I can cite some examples from my own field of langauge and grammar to show the truth of what Tagore said: the unholy separation of knowledge from wisdom. The English grammarian who wants to show the difference between the two kinds of sentence - the active and the passive - cites as examples, sentences such as the following:

"The farmer killed the rabbit" is an active sentence.

Its passive sentence is "The rabbit was killed by the farmer".

The student understands the grammar that underlies this pair of sentences but that was all the information that the modern grammarian cared for. The idea of "Killing" did not bother him t all. Now let's turn to the traditional Sinhala grammarian. What did he achieve when he taught another grammatical usage;

'The instrumental case' (Karana vibhakti)?

The Sidath Sangarawa, the traditional grammar of the thirteenth century gives the following sentences to illustrate the instrumental case:

Metnen vera parayanu
(Conquer hatred by loving kindness)
Gunen dana: saganne
(Treat people by virtue)
Sitini ve: dusiri susiri

(By mind is immorality changed into morality)

In the sentences cited above, the Sinhala words metnen gunen, sitini are in the instrumental case denoting the meanings by loving kindness' by virtue' and 'by mind' respectively. Even if the pupils were to forget the grammar of these sentences, they would still retain in their hearts the wisdom that was imparted to them by these sentences.

Do you see a difference between "the farmer killing the rabbit" of the modern grammarian and "conquering hatred by loving kindness" of the traditional grammarian?

Education minus wisdom has also resulted in the increase of violence in modern society and particularly in educational institutions themselves. There are more than a dozen universities in this country today but the inhuman phenomenon called the rag' keeps on spreading like wild fire, making it more and more violent. Of what worth is university eduction if a colleague who enters the groves of Academe is subjected to inhuman torture in the name of a welcome'?

It was only a few months ago that we heard the shocking news that an undergraduate was killed by his own colleagues! Does a university degree of whatever colour, mean anything if differences of opinion are settled on the campus - the highest educational institution of a country - in ways that lack wisdom? It is time we realised that knowledge, however modern or precise, cannot replace wisdom.

Violence is fast spreading into other educational institutions as well. A tuition institute in the suburbs of Colombo, that has earned a name as one of the finest, keeps on churning out thousands and thousands of young men and women, equipped with knowledge but lack wisdom. Had they acquired, at least an iota of wisdom, they would have thought twice before killing one of their fellow pupils for the want of some space on a bench!

Last week the newspapers reported that two school girls and their grandmother were kidnapped and taken to desolate place to be killed. They were somehow saved but it is the cause for the attempted murder that shock every member of civilized society. It was reported that a father who wanted her daughter to become the class captain or the head girl had masterminded this crime to get rid of the other girl who could compete with her daughter for this position. If this father succeeded in killing almost a family to get a petty position in the school for her daughter, what is education in the school worth?

I can go on and on citing examples from our own contemporary society to show that there is something absolutely wrong in the way we think and act. Action follows thinking, and thinking is a matter of the mind . Education, in the final analysis, is the development and cultivation of the mind but who taught us to develop and cultivate our minds?

In my view, it is time for our senior educators and those who today receive diplomas in education to redefine 'education' so that we bring wisdom back into it. Knowledge we need, but we can afford to have less knowledge and more wisdom. Let's go back to educazione' where it meant up bringing' rather than amassing knowledge' in various fields. This implies a change: a change for the better.

In this endeavour, all of us, whether we are bachelors, masters or doctors, whether we are physicians, engineers or educators, have a role to play. What role can I play, I am just another individual' you might say. Well, the society is made of individuals and if each individual makes his or her contribution to change our society for the better by bringing wisdom back, then, it will bring about a new society where we can live without fear.

Let me conclude this option by quoting Tagore whom I greatly admire not only as a poet but as man of wisdom. In his collection of poems, titled 'Stray Birds' he makes the Sun ask question:

"'Who will take up my duties?' asked the setting sun

I shall do what I can, master' said the earthen lamp".

On this memorable day when you are honoured for your achievements in moving up the scale of knowledge, let me congratulate you for the hours you have spent in pursuit of such knowledge. However, that is not the end of the scale. You have now a special role to play as an educated member of our society to bring knowledge into harmony with wisdom. It is then, and only then, that we can mould a society where we can live in peace, harmony and dignity.

May all intellectuals be wise!

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager