Rajiv Shukla

I am well aware of the amount of scorn this post would draw from the people who think that knowledge, education, wisdom and experience ought to be shared equally with others, irrespective of their class, caste, creed or religion. This is all the more necessary in a country like India where the government is laying an increasing amount of stress on higher education, frantically trying to boost its Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER).

However my argument in this write-up is that some piece of knowledge, some quantum of wisdom is essentially elitist, inherently esoteric and needs to be bestowed only upon the deserving ones — on a class of students who really deserve it and are able to appreciate it. As against this there are people who think that education or knowledge cannot be the sole monopoly of a select few.

The argument in favour of universal education stems from the concept of the Welfare State that seeks to ensure maximum welfare of maximum people. The line of thinking of this essentially Western concept is that by educating its maximum number of people and boosting country’s Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in Education, a country can ensure maximum welfare of maximum people.

Education, they believe, would make students educationally competent;
competence, they think, would ensure eligibility/employability;
eligibility/employability would ensure them jobs;
jobs would ensure them salary;
salary/ money would ultimately ensure their welfare,
provided there are sufficient jobs!

Now the only step that is needed to ensure the welfare of the largest number is to create more jobs in the country.

The argument is so simple!, isn’t it?

Well, my answer is a big NO. That’s because there is a major flaw in this line of argument: it equates welfare with happiness, or to say it in Hindi, “kalyan” is equated with “anand” or “sukh”.

Now let’s have a look at the word “esoteric”. Oxford Dictionary defines “esoteric” as something “Intended for, or likely to be understood by, only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.”

The Cambridge Dictionary defines the word as “very unusual and understood or liked by only a small number of people, especially those with special knowledge.”

The common denominator in both the definitions above is the phrase “a small number of people“ having specialised knowledge or interest. Indeed that’s what I am driving at ! My point in this article is that indeed there is a body of knowledge, wisdom, gyan or vigyan that is meant to be taught exclusively to, or reserved for, a class of persons who really merit it.

Esotericism

Esotericism has been in practice in one form or the other in all eminent civilisations since times immemorial: as occult in the West, Shu shu in China, and Tantra in India.

In Chinese culture Esotericism had had an established convention that culminated in esoteric Budhism, passed on from master to pupil for generations.

In India esotericism is, so to say, the very substratum of Indian philosophy — the very foundation on which the complex edifice of Indian thought is established. I will come to that later. First I have to argue about the justiciability of the very concept of esotericism in today’s world when monopolisation of wisdom or knowledge is considered an indefensible sin against society and ‘education for all’ is the catchword — the summum bonum — of the society.

Let us take up the legal aspect first.

More>>

(more…)