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

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 53 scholarship and cultured life should be able to exercise a subtle and permanent influence over the young students sitting at his feet for their lessons. High Code of the Teaching Profession : The teach- ing profession had a very high code in ancient India. There was often competition for getting more students ; but if one teacher was found to be less well grounded than his rival in his subject, he was expected to close down his school and become a disciple of his rival in order to get full knowledge.¹ The teacher was to begin the education of the student as soon as he was satisfied that the latter was sincere and possessed the necessary calibre ; he was not to postpone instructions unnecessarily.² 1 G. Br., I. 1. 31 shows how on being defeated in debate with Maudgalya, Maitreya at once closed his school and became the pupil of his vanquisher in order to become better grounded in his subject. The debate between Śaṅkara and Maṇḍana Miśra was also held on the usual condition that the vanquished should become the disciple of the vanquisher. 2 Usually teachers were allowed to watch the conduct and calibre of the new entrants for about six months or a year: but after that period they were bound to start instructions. If they did not do so, they were saddled with all the sins of the students they were keeping in suspense; cf. संवत्सरोषिते शिष्ये गुरुर्ज्ञानमनिर्दिशन्। हरते दुष्कृतं तस्य शिष्यस्य वसतो गुरुः॥ Kūrma P. in VMS., p. 515 Ashṭāṅga-hṛidaya, Sūtrasthāna, chap. 2, allows only a six months' period of waiting for medical students. Longer periods of waiting like 5 or 32 years that we sometimes come across in Tantras (e. g Tantrarāja-tantra, II. 37-8) and Upanishads (e. g. Ch. Up. VIII. 7. 2. 3.) were intended for those who aspired to be initiated in secret and esoteric philosophical doctrines, and not for ordinary students.

54 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. The duty to teach was imperative;¹ all students possessed of the necessary calibre and qualifications were to be taught, irrespective of the consideration as to whether they would be able to pay any honorarium or not. We have seen already that no regular fees were charged by ancient Indian teachers and institutions. The poorest of the poor could demand and get education from the tea- cher by merely agreeing to do household work in the tea- cher’s house. Further, the teacher was required to teach every thing he knew to his disciple; he could withhold nothing under the apprehension that his pupil may one day outshine him in the profession.² How generous and largehearted teachers usually were in this connection can be judged from the conduct and exclamation of Alāra Kalama, when the future Buddha had finished his edu- cation under him :— “Happy friend are we in that we look upon such a venerable one, such a fellow ascetic as you. The doctrine which I know, you too know, and the doctrine which you know, I too know. As I am, so you are, as you are so am I. Pray, sir, let us be joint wardens of this company”.³ 1 The Smritikaustubha narrates how a teacher was condemned to be a mango tree in his next existence for his failure to impart Vedic knowledge; cf. स चूतवृक्षो विप्रोऽभूद्विद्वान्वै वेदपारगः । विद्या न दत्ता विप्रेभ्यस्तेनैव तरुतां गतः । There is an obvious subtle humour in the retribution imposed upon the teacher who would not give what he possessed to others; as a mango tree he would have to give all fruits to others and retain none for himself. 2 Milinda-pañha, I. p. 142 3 Further Dialogues of the Buddha, Ariyapariyesana-sutta, p. 116. Compare also the spirited protest of Bhāradvāja when he apprehended that his royal pupil was suspecting that he was not teaching him all that he knew; P. T. O.

[III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 55 Duties of the Teacher: The relationship between the teacher and the pupil¹ was regarded as filial in character both by Hindu and Buddhist thinkers; the teacher therefore had to discharge several duties in addition to imparting intellectual education and helping spiritual progress. He was the spiritual father of the pupil and was held as morally responsible for the drawbacks of his pupils.² His extra-academic duties were varied and numerous. He was always to keep a guard over the conduct of his pupil. He must let him know what to cultivate and what to avoid; about what he should be earnest and what he may neglect. He must instruct him as to sleep and as to keeping himself in health, and as to what food he may take and what he may reject. He should advise him as to the people whose company he should keep and as to the villages (and localities) he may frequent.³ If he was poor, he was to help him in getting some financial help from people of influence and substance in the locality. He was to arrange for his food and clothing: the teachers of Sanskrit Pāṭhaśālās in eastern India used to do this till quite recently. If the student was ill, the teacher was to nurse and serve him as a father would do his son.⁴ (Continued from the last page) नाहमिदं वेद। यद्यवेदिषं कथं ते नावक्ष्यमिति। समूलो वैष परिशुष्यति योऽनृतमभिवदति ॥ Pr. Up., VI. 1 1 Cf. पुत्रमिवैनमभिकांक्षन् Ap. Dh., S., 1. 2. 8. M. V. 1. 32 2 अतीत्य बंधूनवलंघ्य शिष्यानाचार्यमागच्छति शिष्यदोषः ॥ Pañcharatra 1. 21 3 Milinda-pañha, Vol. I, p. 142 4 The testimony of I-tsing shows that this was also done in Buddhist monasteries; p. 120. The Buddha has left express injunctions on the point; Mahāvagga, I. 26. 1-6

56 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. Income of the Teacher; Early Period: We have no data to enable us to get a precise idea of the normal income of the teacher in the early period. In ancient days in India as in the West, there was no Education Department prescribing a scale of salaries, which was more or less followed in private institutions also. Educational institutions them- selves came into existence only at about the 5th century A. D. We have already seen how the educational theory and practice prohibited the teacher from charging any fixed scale of fees from his students. The teacher in ancient India therefore had, as a general rule, no fixed income. We have seen already that usually he was also a priest. His income therefore consisted partly of offerings obtained by him on the occasions of rituals and sacrifices and partly of voluntary gifts given by his stu- dents either during or after their course. There was to be no stipulation for these presents; so they varied with the financial capacity of the guardians. At Taxila we learn that the 'world-renowned' teachers used to have 500 students reading under them, and that the rich ones among the latter used to offer a fee of a thousand coins.¹ This however does not enable us to get any accurate idea of the teacher's income. The number of students, 500, is conventional² and not real and we do not know whether the fee of 1000 coins offered was for one year or for the whole course, and whether it included the expenses of boarding and lodging also, which were normally offered by the Taxila teacher. We therefore can form no definite idea of the income of the teacher during the early period. 1 The coins were probably silver Kārshāpaṇas, each weighing about one third of the modern rupee. 2 Usually each teacher had only about 15 to 20 students read- ing under him; see Chp. VI.

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 57 Income of the Teacher in Later Period: We how- ever get more definite data about the teacher's income from the time educational institutions were evolved. Teachers at Buddhist Universities of Nălandā and Vikramaśīlā were monks and so required no salaries; the administra- tion had to spend for each monk-teacher just the amount necessary for the maintenance of only four students.¹ In south Indian colleges the annual salary of teachers varied according to their qualifications and subjects from 160 to 200 maunds of rice.² This income was about two and half times the income of the village accountant or the carpenter, and was equal to about four times the amount necessary for meeting the normal food expenses of a family of five persons. We would not be wrong in supposing that as a general rule in ancient India the Sanskrit teacher imparting higher education received a similar income. He was thus neither suffering from abject poverty nor rolling in superfluous wealth. Society enabled him to lead a life of moderate comforts accord- ing to the ideal of plain living and high thinking. We can now understand why learned teachers were exempted from taxation. The income of the primary teacher was naturally less than that of the Sanskrit teacher. In Bengal at the advent of the British rule, the income of the primary teacher was just equal to that of the 1 Bose, Indian Teachers of Buddhist Universities, p. 35. 2 S. I. E. R., 1917, No. 333. The total cost of one good meal for one year was about 8 maunds of rice. The salaries above men- tioned were given in the college at Ennayiram; in other insti- tutions they were sometimes different. Sometimes inscriptions disclose that the Veda teachers used to get only 30 maunds of rice per annum; in such cases they were probably part-time teachers and were expected to supplement their income from the proceeds of the priestly profession.

58 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. patwari, who collected the village revenue or the amin, who settled village disputes on behalf of Zemindar.¹ Probably the same was the case during the ancient Indian period. This income however was not in the form of a fixed salary, but had to be collected in the form of voluntary and irregular subscriptions from the villagers and guardians. Duties of Students : Let us now survey the duties of students towards their teachers. The student was to hold his teacher in deep reverence and honour him like the king, parents and god.² His outward behavi- our must be in conformity with the rules of decorum and good manners, he ought to get up and salute his tea- cher in the proper way, he ought not to occupy a higher seat or wear a gaudier dress. Reviling and backbiting are severely condemned. It however did not follow that the student was to connive blindly at his teacher's mis- conduct. Both the Buddha³ and Āpastamba,⁴ who enjoin high reverence for the teacher, lay down that the student should draw his teacher's attention in private to his failings, and dissuade him from wrong views if he happened to be inclined towards them; the duty of obedi- ence comes to an end if the teacher transgresses the limits of Dharma.⁵ His commands were to be regarded as

1 Stark, Vernacular Education in Bengal, pp. 28—48. 2 I Manu, II, 200 ff. Cf. also Charaka Saṁhitā, Vimāna-sthāna, VIII, 4, :- तमग्निवच्च देववच्च राजवच्च पितृवच्च भर्तृवच्चाप्रमत्तः परिचरेत् । 3 MV., 1. 25. 10. 20. 4 प्रमादानाचार्यस्य बुद्धिपूर्वकं वानियमातिक्रमं रहसि बोधयेत् । 1. 2. 6, 13 5 आचार्याधीनो भवति अन्यत्राधर्माचरणात् । G. D. S. III, 1.15 गुरोरप्यवलिप्तस्य कार्याकार्यमजानतः । उत्पथप्रतिपन्नस्य न्याय्यं भवति शासनम् ॥ Mbh., I. 140. 54

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 59 ultra vires, if they were likely to jeopordise the student's life or were against the law of the land. Duty .of Personal Service : Both in Buddhist monasteries and Hindu Gurukulas, the student was expected to do personal service to the teacher 'like a son, suppliant or slave.¹ He was to give him water and tooth stick, carry his seat and supply him bath water (M. V.. I. 25, 11-12). If necessary, he was to cleanse his utensils and wash his clothes.² He was fur- ther to do all sundry work in his monastery or his tea- cher's house, like cleansing the rooms etc., bringing fuel or guarding cattle. This custom existed in the Vedic age³ and was widely prevalent in later times also. Tradition asserts that even great personages like Śrī-Kṛishṇa had deemed it an honour to do all kind of menial work in their preceptor's house during their student days. It was held that no progress in knowledge was possible without service in the teacher's house.⁴ Limitation on this Duty : There were, however, limitations to this duty to work. The teacher was prohi- bited from assigning any work that was likely to inter- fere with the studies of the student. The duty was further more nominal than real in the case of paying scholars. We have seen already that the duty to teach was imperative and a teacher could not refuse a student merely because he was poor. Poor students were admit- ted if they were willing to help the teacher in his house- hold or farm work; this duty to work was effectively operative only in their cases. At Taxila the students ¹ पुत्रवद्दासषदर्थिवच्चानुचरता त्वया....। ² Mahāvagga, 1. 25-2 ³ G. Br., I, 2, 1-8. ⁴ गुरुशुश्रूषया ज्ञानं शान्ति योगेन विन्दति । Mbh,, V. 36. 52

60 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. who used to pay their teachers honorarium in advance used to stay in their houses like eldest sons, doing no household work and spending all their time in study. Free students,—dhammāntevāsikas,—on the other hand used to do all kind of manual work for their teachers. They used to work by day, when paying scholars were receiving their lessons ; teachers used to hold special classes for them at night with a view to see that their education did not suffer on account of their day’s work on the farm or in the household.¹ At Nālandā also secular students who sought free boarding, lodging and education had to do some manual work for the monasteries.² · Mutual reltaions between Teachers and Students : Public educational institutions, where tea- chers used to teach students admitted by the managing body, were not many in ancient India. The relations between the teacher and the student were therefore direct and not through any institution. The student usually went to such a teacher as attracted his atten- tion by his reputation for character and scholarship ; the teacher selected such students as appeared to him sincere, zealous and well-behaved. The student usually lived either under the roof of the teacher or under his direct supervision. The teacher not only did not demand any fee but also helped the poor students in getting food or clothing. He nursed him if he was ill. The student naturally lived as a member of the household of the tea- cher and helped him in doing the household work if necessary. The teacher on the other hand would not

1. Cf. धंमंतेवासिका आचरियस्स कम्मं कत्वा रत्तिं सिप्पमुग्गण्हन्ति आचरियभाग- दायका गेहे जेट्ठपुत्ता विय हुत्वा सिप्पमेव उग्गण्हन्ति । Tilamuṭṭhijātaka, No. 252
2. Takakusu, I-tsing, P. 106.

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 61 expect this work if the student was a paying boarder and would limit it to the minimum in the case of poor students.¹ Under such circumstances the relations bet- ween the teacher and the student were naturally very cordial and intimate; they were united, to quote the words of the Buddha, 'by mutual reverence, confidence and communion of life'.² Students usually did not desert one teacher for another merely out of freakishness.³ Teachers would often entertain genuine affection for their students and would sometimes select some of them as their sons-in-law. Later authorities have laid it down that a student cannot marry his teacher's daughter, because she stood in the relation of a sister to him ; Kacha refused to marry Devayānī on that account. This rule seems to have been framed to prevent complications likely to arise in practice when young students used to live and board with their teachers. But earlier practice seems to have been different. In Jātakas we come across sev- eral cases of teachers marrying their daughters to their 1 Cf. न चैनमध्ययनविघ्नेन आत्मार्थेषूपरुन्ध्यादनापत्सु । Ap Dh S., I 2. 8 The teacher was also responsible for the safety of students when he sent them out for his own work; if any mishap overtook them he was held guilty. Cf. गुरुप्रयुक्तश्चेन्म्रियेत (शिष्यः) त्रीन्कृच्छ्रांश्चरेत् । Bau. Dh. S., II. 1. 27 2 M. V.. I. 32. 1 3 Students deserting their teachers without any reason are ridiculed as crows by Patañjali, cf. यो गुरुकुलं गत्वा न चिरन्तिष्ठति स उच्यते तीर्थकाक इति । Vol. I. P. 391 In Uttararamacharit, II, we no doubt find Ātreyī leaving Vālmīki, and going to Agastya But the reason was that she was too dull to read along with Kuśa and Lava. Of course if a student wanted to learn a different branch of learning, he would leave his old teacher and go to the expert in the particular branch.

62 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. most promising students; the custom was so deep rooted in certain teachers' families that students had often no option in the matter, even if they were not in favour of the match.¹ Mutual Relations in After-life: The cordial rela- tions that existed between the teacher and the student continued also in their after-life. Even when the student had returned home after his education, he was to call on his teacher frequently, bringing him some present, it may be even a tooth-stick.² Teachers also used to return these visits.³ The teacher's visit was not without its benefit to the student ; he used to utilise the occasion to ascertain how far the ex-student was keeping up his reading and studies. In the Anabhirati Jātaka⁴ the ex-student informs his teacher that he was quite up-to-date in his studies for some time after he had left his school, but admits that he had forgotten some of his Vedic Mantras since the time he was married; he however promises to mend the matters without delay. The mutual contact between the teacher and the student thus continued in the after- life and was not without mutual benefit The Daily Life of the Student:—Let us now see what was the daily life of the student. Naturally it differed in different courses and we have detailed informa- tion only about the religious and literary education. The students taking these courses used to get up early in the morning before birds had begun to stir,⁵ i. e. at 1 See Silavimansa Jātaka, No 305. In Mahāmagga Jātaka, we find the student marrying his teacher's daughter because there was no option for him in the matter. He was against the match. 2 Ap. Dh. S., 1, 2, 8,22. 3 Jātaka No. 130. 4 No. 185. 5 T. S., VI. 4. 3. A. Br. II. 15

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 63 about 4-30 A. M. Then they used to attend to morning functions, take their bath and offer their prayers. Vedic students used to spend a good deal of the morning time in performing various morning rituals connected with fire sacrifices; this afforded them practical training in the rituals they were expected to perform in their after-life. Other students contented themselves with their prayers (sandhyā) and spent the rest of the morning either in learning new lessons or in revising old ones. At about 11. A. M. this work would come to an end and students used to break off for their meals. Those staying with their teachers or in boarding houses used to get ready meals served out for them; those who were poor used to go out to collect cooked food for their meals. After the noon meal there followed a period of rest of about an hour or so; and teaching started at about 2 P. M. and went on till the evening. We sometimes get refer- ences to students spending their evening in collecting sacred fuel for sacrifices (Jātaka No. 150); but this must have been true of Vedic students of the early period only. Evening was probably spent in physical exercises. At sunset they offered usual prayers, attended to fire sacrifices, and then took their supper. Poor students, who had to work by day in the teacher's house or else- where, used to spend a considerable part of the night in studies. We should not forget that paper and printing were unknown and books were rare and costly; so there was little of homework possible, except the revision and reca- pitulation of the lessons learnt in the teacher's presence. Students of sculpture, architecture, painting, smithy and carpentry etc. spent most of the day in the teacher's workshop, learning the details and the technique of the art and trade, and often accompanying and helping the teacher as apprentices in the professional work that he

64 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. may have undertaken in the town or city. It will be thus seen that the educational system tried to reproduce in the student life the atmosphere and the conditions exist- ing outside in actual life both in the case of religious and industrial students.) The Student Life and the Duty to beg : The begging of the daily food has been enjoined on the stu- dent as a religious duty. This injunction occurs in sacred texts from the Vedic age downwards;¹ nay, some texts lay it down that the student must beg his food both morning and evening.² It has been declared that no food is so holy for the student as the food he obtains by begging at midday.³ Why begging food was prescribed : The rule of begging was laid down for the student in order to teach him humility and make him realise that it was due to the sympathy and help of society that he was learning the heritage of the race, and being enabled to follow a profession that would secure him a living. This rule further removed the distinction between the rich and the poor and brought education within the reach of the poorest. It was also useful in reminding society of its duty and responsibility about the education of the rising generation. Civilisation will not progress if each gene- ration does not take proper steps to transmit its heritage to the next. Hindu thinkers therefore made it an incum- bent duty for all householders to offer cooked food to the begging student; a householder refusing his request 1 A. V., XI. 5. 9.; Go. Gr. S., II; 10; Dr. Gr. S. II. 5. 16 Manu II. 65 2 Jai. Gr. S., I. 18; Ap. Dh. S. I. 1. 3. 24-5 3 शाकभक्षाः पयोभक्षा ये चान्ये यावशाकिनः। सर्वे ते भैक्षभैक्ष्यस्य कलां नार्हन्ति षोडशीम् ॥ Atri in SCS P. 111.

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

66 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. permitted, Smṛitis have allowed students to take their food in the house of their preceptors.¹ Well-to-do students at Taxila were generally living and boarding at their teachers' houses. In richly endowed colleges like those at Nālandā, Salotgi and Ennāyiram, arrangements were made by the college administration for the free boarding of students from generous endowments received for the purpose; begging food was not necessary at these places. Sometimes, as at Benares for instance, such arrangements were independently made by rich citizens of the locality.² Begging food was not necessary at such places. The Chinese pilgrim Yuan Chwang attributes the fame of Indian scholars for deep scholarship to the circumstance that students in India have not to worry about their food, clothing and medicines.³ It will be thus seen that begging was elevated into a duty for the student, primarily for the purpose of bringing education within the reach of the poorest, and secondarily for removing the superiority complex from the mind of rich students; he was the ideal student who lived by begging and not he who lived on his family's support. The rule was not intended to be literally followed by all students every day. Rules of Discipline: Let us now survey and com- ment upon the rules of discipline prescribed for students.⁴ It was felt that student's life should be characterised by dignity, decorum and self-discipline and should be devoted to acquire a grounding not only in learning but also in the 1 भैक्षाचार्यवृत्तिः स्यात् । M. Gr. S., 1 1. 3; see also Manu, II. 142. 2 Losaka Jātaka, No. 41 (C. 500 B. C.) and Bernier p. 335, (17th century A. D.) both refer to the arrangements made by the rich citizens of Benares for distributing khichdī to poor students. 3 Beal, Life of Yuan Chwang, p. 113. 4 For the rules of the student life, see Manu, II, 175ff. ; Yāj. I. 28 ff.; Gau. Dh. S. I. 2; As. Gr. S. I. 22; Dr. Gr. S. II. 5 etc.

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 67 culture and religion of the race. In order to infuse piety, it was therefore laid down that they should regu- larly offer the prescribed prayers and sacrifices both morning and evening. In order to inculcate good etiquette and manners, it was insisted that they should show proper courtesy and respect to their elders and teachers. The duties towards the latter have been described already. In order to develop character, em- phasis was given on moral earnestness; lying, slandering and backbiting were never to be indulged in. They were to observe strict celibacy even in thought and speech. Strength of mind and character is developed if we learn to deny to ourselves our natural desires and incli- nations¹; rules of discipline therefore laid down that articles like meat, sweetmeats, spices, ornaments and garlands, which have a natural attraction for the youth and tend to accentuate the sex impulse, should be tabooed to students. Even royal students, staying in a Gurukula were not allowed to have any private purse, lest they should secretly purchase prohibited articles.² Plain living and high thinking was to be the student's ideal: they were to shave their heads clean or keep matted hair: no time was to be wasted in oiling, combing and dressing the hair. Students must take the bath once in the day, but pleasure baths were forbidden. Shoes, umbrellas and cots were not to be used as a general rule. Food and dress were to be simple but sufficient. The aim in prescribing these rules was to enable students to form a number of useful habits during the formative period of

1 This was the view of Locke also; Graves, Great Educationalists, p. 61. 2 The prince in Junha Jātaka could only promise that he could compensate the poor Brahmana for the breakage of this bowl only when he later returned to Benares and became a king. Obviously he had no privy purse (V. p. 456).

68 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. childhood and adolescence, which were expected to be of good use to them throughout their life. And finally students were to attend their classes regularly, listen to lectures attentively and master and digest carefully all that was taught before the school met the next day. How far Relaxation was Permitted: Of the above rules, those relating to religious duties and moral behaviour, were particularly emphasised and strictly enforced; modifications however were permitted in the case of the rest, if demanded by special circumstances. Thus the prohibition against the use of shoes and um- brellas was not rigorously enforced in ancient India as in ancient Sparta; the idea was that students should not be so soft as to require these articles when moving about on good roads in villages and towns¹ under normal circum- stances. Students going to thorny forests in search of the sacred fuel (samidhs) or undertaking a long journey to distant places like Taxila over the burning plains of northern India², were permitted the use of both the shoes and umbrellas. Similarly occasional exceptions were permitted in the case of the use of sweetmeats, when students were invited to some religious function or feast like a Śrāddha. The use of oils was permitted in some localities once a week probably after the shave³. Cots also were probably permitted in swampy or snake-infested areas. Were Rules of Discipline unreasonable? : The rules of discipline were on the whole reasonable for the age. They were intended to infuse piety, teach manners, 1 Cf. न ग्रामोपानहौ। Dr. G. S. II. 5. 2 See Tilamutthi Jātaka, No. 252, where students coming to Taxila from Benares are seen to be equipped with shoes and umbrellas. 3 Such was the case in the college at Tirumukhudal in the 11th century A. D.; see E. I, XXI. p. 223.

III] THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT 69 promote self-control, discipline the will and facilitate the formation of good habits. The complaint that they were too ascetic is not true; students were required only to control their passions and desires and not to kill them, as was recommended in the case of ascetics. Strict celibacy was insisted upon, but that was for the purpose of promoting concentration in studies and the development of the body. At the end of the course, students were enjoined to marry. At Sparta students' food was both plain and scanty. In India it was only plain; the educa- tionalists had realised that the body is developed and built up during the childhood and adolescence and have therefore permitted students to take as much food as was demanded by the needs of their developing constitution. In the light of these facts the observation of a recent writer that the student life in ancient India was very severe because it required a stay at a stranger's place, demanded a beggar's or a menial's life and denied all pleasures of life¹ will appear to be considerably wide of the mark. Society did not regard the student life as a proper period for enjoying the pleasures of life. Its standards of plain living also were naturally much different from those of the modern age, dominated by the novel, the drama and the cinema. Stay at a stranger's place was nothing else than the stay at a boarding house. The beggar's life was the mere ideal, recommended with a view to bring educa- tion within the reach of all; it was a reality only in the case of the poor and a mere formality in the case of the rest. Menial duties like personal service at the teacher's household were expected to be performed only by the poor students, who were given free tuition by the teacher; they were a mere formality in the case of the rest. 1 Bokil: The History of Education in India, Part I p. 151.

CHAPTER IV. EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION & FINANCE. Private teacher the pivot of the system-How organised in- stitutions arose-Organisation of Buddhist universities and Hindu temple- colleges-School and college buildings-Boardings for students-Payment of fees how far obligatory-Admission procedure-The size of classes- School hours-Duration of the college session-Holidays-Organisation and duration of courses-Longer courses for experts-Lifelong students Educational finance-The quota of ordinary men-Of rich men-The example of the Punjab--Government contribution in direct and indirect forms-Government help without Government control-State help in other countries in contemporary time. Introduction: The history of ancient Indian edu- cation extends over several centuries, and so we naturally come across different types of educational organisations in different ages. In the pre-historic period down to about 1000 B. C. the family was the only educational agency both for the literary and professional education: we have already shown in Chap. II how it used to dis- charge this function. As education began to become more and more complex and exacting, the specialist came into the field in the form of the private teacher. He continued to be in its sole and undisputed possession till about the early centuries of the Christian era, when organised educational institutions came into existence in connection with the Buddhist monasteries. In a few centuries, Hinduism copied the Buddhist example and organised its own temple colleges. Monastic universities and temple colleges were however confined to some famous centres of learning; private teachers still conti- nued to be the main stay of the educational system through- out the moffusil. In medieval times the Maṭhas of the various religious pontiffs (Āchāryas) used to organise

IV] EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION AND FINANCE 71 small centres for higher education, which co-operated with the private teacher in rendering the valuable service of keeping the lamp of learning burning in a dark age, when society was often over-whelmed by anarchy, inter- necine war and foreign rule. Private teachers: Private teachers have all along been the sheet anchor of the educational system. In the prehistoric period, the followers of different Vedas had no doubt formed their own literary organisations like the Parishads, the Śākhās, and the Charaṇas, but curiously enough these do not seem to have ever made any concerted effort to form educational institutions, which would hand down to the next generation the literature of which they were the custodians. This need not cause any surprise. The sacred texts required each Brahmana to devote himself to the cause of teaching in his individual capacity, and the injunction was very largely followed. Each learned Brahmana was thus an educational institution by himself. The Parishads or councils of famous scholars of the different centres or tribes therefore did not feel it necessary to organise public educational institutions of the modern type, worked with the co-operation and assistance of a number of teachers. Famous capitals and holy places like Taxila and Benares were centres of a number of famous scholars, but they also imparted education in their individual capacity, and did not as a rule combine to form any colleges. If the number of pupils under any teacher happened to be large, he would either engage an assistant teacher, or assign part of the work to brilliant advanced students.¹ Neither step however would change the individual character of the See Anabhirati Jātaka (II p. 185) and Mahadhammapala Jātaka (IV. p. 447) for the appointments of pittiachārayas and Jethantenva- sikas respectively.

72 EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA [Ch. school. How private teachers organised and imparted education and how they were supported has already been described in Chap. III. It may be observed in passing that in ancient Athens also education was for a long time imparted by private teachers and not in public institutions. The first real founder of public schools in Europe is believed to be Charlmaigne the Great (800 A. D.); his death however completely frustrated his schemes.¹ Rise of Organised Institutions : Corporate edu- cational institutions were first evolved in ancient India in connection with Buddhist monasteries. The Buddha had emphasised the vital importance of imparting systematic instructions to novices, who were required to be educated for ten years, not only in spiritual practices, but also in the study of the sacred literature, which required a good grounding in Pali and Sanskrit, logic and metaphysics. When Buddhist monasteries developed into big establish- ments from the time of Aśoka onwards, they naturally developed into centres of education. They were the counter parts of Hindu Gurukulas, where the Guru was the head, not of a family but of a monastery. At first they were intended for monks and nuns only, but later on for the lay population as well; for it was soon discovered that the best way of getting a good supply of novices of the right type and of propagating the religion among the masses was to mould the pliant minds of the young generation by taking up its education. Hindu educational institutions, so far known, are all later than the time of the Nālandā University (c. 400 A.D.). It is probable that the starting of organised public institutions for education may have been suggested to Hindus by the

¹ Staunton: The Great Schools of England, p. xv.