प्राचीन भारत में शिक्षा (डॉ. ए.एस. अल्तेकर - गुरुकुल एवं बौद्ध विहार शिक्षण इतिहास)

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 65 was threatened with serious spiritual sanctions.¹ In medieval universities of Europe, a very large number of students used to maintain themselves by begging out of sheer necessity; in ancient India begging was elevated into a duty of the student life. It may however be point- ed out that our educationalists have pointed out that a student can beg food just sufficient for his needs; if he collected more, he would be guilty of theft.² Similarly he could not have recourse to begging when his education was over.³ Society was morally bound to support every poor student who was honestly struggling to educate himself; when however he was educated, he was expected to stand on his own legs. How far was the Rule to Beg Followed: There is clear evidence to show that Smṛitis themselves did not expect the rule of begging to be literally followed by all students, both rich and poor. They have laid down a penance, only if the student did not beg at least once in the week.⁴ This shows that the rule of begging was a mere formality in the case of rich students and a reality only in the case of the poor ones.⁵ When circumstances 1 Cf. स्त्रीणां प्रत्याचक्षाणां समाहितो ब्रह्मचारी इष्टं दत्तं हुतं प्रजां पशूं ब्रह्मवर्चसमन्नाद्यं वृङ्क्ते । Ap. Dh. S. 1, 3, 24-25, 2 आहारादधिकं वर्णी न क्वचिद्भैक्षमाचरेत् । युज्यते स्तेयदोषेण कामतोऽधिकमाहरन् ॥ Manu in VMS. p. 486. 3 समावृत्तस्य भिक्षाऽशुचिकरा । B. D. S., II. 1. 53; see also S. Br., XI. 3. 3. 7. 4 न चैनं सप्तम्यभिक्षित् यायात् । B. D. S., I. 2. 52. 5 There are also other indications in Smritis to show that begging was not a reality in the case of all. It has been laid down by Sumantu (quoted in VMS. p. 486) that students under 12 should take their food early in the morning; begging should be resorted only after 12. अश्नीयादष्टवर्षस्तु ब्रह्मचारी प्रगे सदा । तदूर्ध्वमाद्वादशाब्दादश्नीयात्सङ्गवे सदा ॥ तदूर्ध्वं गृहिष्वद्भिक्षां भोजनं च समाचरेत् । The view of Krishṇājini is also the same, Ibid. 5