Inclusive Roots: Uncovering Bharat’s Indigenous Educational Legacy

-KG.M.MURUGAN

Indigenous education in Bharat has long been celebrated for its broad accessibility—a fact that stands in stark contrast to claims by some critics who argue that historical systems of learning were marred by caste, creed, and sect discrimination. Drawing on extensive evidence from British archival records and the seminal research presented in Dharampal’s The Beautiful Tree: Indigenous Indian Education in the Eighteenth Century, it becomes clear that traditional educational institutions such as Padashalas,  and Gurukulas were designed and sustained by local communities to serve a wide cross-section of society. At the same time, it is essential to understand that the indigenous educational landscape was structured by the spiritual principles of the Varna system, which demarcated specialized knowledge for different social groups.

Dharampal’s The Beautiful Tree: Uncovering a Flourishing Educational Tradition

Dharampal’s groundbreaking work challenges the notion that education in pre-colonial India was an exclusive preserve of the elite. By meticulously analyzing data from surveys ordered by British administrators in the Madras, Bengal, and Bombay Presidencies, he demonstrated that indigenous schools were widespread and largely community-funded. These institutions not only imparted literacy and numeracy but also taught a sophisticated curriculum that extended to practical subjects such as accounts, astronomy, and medicine. Importantly, the surveys reveal that the student populations were remarkably diverse. In many regions, the majority of students came from workers class called Sudras, while Brahmins and other other social groups constituted only a minority of the learners. This evidence underscores that basic learning was accessible to all sections of society, regardless of social background

The Varna System: A Spiritual Arrangement with Distinct Educational Roles

It is crucial to recognize that the traditional Indian social order—the Varna system—was conceived as a spiritual arrangement rather than a tool for exclusion from all forms of education. In this system, the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas were trained in the sacred texts, including the Vedas, Upanishads, and other philosophical schools of thought. Their education was geared toward acquiring spiritual and intellectual knowledge that was meant to guide ethical and administrative leadership in society.

In contrast, the Sudras, who were primarily peasants, farmers, and laborers responsible for the physical sustenance of the community, were not traditionally expected to study the scriptures. Instead, their education focused on worldly skills—mathematics, astronomy, metallurgy, civil engineering, sculpture, and other practical disciplines—that were essential for the development and maintenance of society. This differentiation ensured that each group received knowledge pertinent to its societal role, forming an integral part of the broader indigenous educational ecosystem.

British Archival Records: Data That Speaks for Itself

British colonial surveys provide independent corroboration of Dharampal’s findings. Reports by officials such as Sir Thomas Munro and William Adam noted that virtually every village in the Madras Presidency possessed a school. In Tamil-speaking regions, the community-wise breakdown indicated that students from worker class known as Sudras—and often even those later classified among the scheduled castes—comprised between 70% to 84% of the total student body. These statistics suggest a community-driven system of education that, for basic learning and practical skills, embraced all social strata. At the same time, specialized scriptural education remained the domain of brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vysyas , a reflection of the original spiritual design of the Varna system.

Dispelling Myths: A System Built on Community, Practicality, and Spiritual Order

Critics—sometimes pejoratively labeled “foreign Dravidian ideologists”—have argued that ancient Indian education was rigged against Sudras- the worker class. However, the evidence tells a more nuanced story. The indigenous system was sustained by local revenue contributions and served the educational needs of the community broadly. While specialized  learning in scriptures and philosophy was indeed reserved for Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas, the vast majority of the educational infrastructure was devoted to imparting worldly knowledge. Sudras, far from being excluded from education altogether, were provided with practical training in disciplines that were vital for society’s economic and technological development.

This arrangement reflects a duality: on one hand, there was an exclusive sphere of spiritual and philosophical learning for the specific three  varnas; on the other, there was an inclusive system of practical education that ensured every member of society—especially those responsible for its material sustenance—received the skills necessary to thrive.

Legacy and Contemporary Implications

Understanding this dual heritage is vital today. Modern debates over educational policy and social equity in India often overlook the complex historical legacy of indigenous education. The evidence from Dharampal’s work and colonial surveys offers a corrective narrative. Instead of being a system of rigid exclusion, indigenous education was characterized by its adaptability and its dual focus—spiritual instruction for those meant to guide society’s ethical and intellectual life, and practical, worldly education for those tasked with its material maintenance.

This nuanced understanding provides modern educators and policymakers with a powerful model. By acknowledging the strengths of a system that balanced spiritual and practical knowledge, contemporary educational reforms can be designed to honor both cultural heritage and the demands of modernity. Such an approach can help create an educational future that is rooted in the country’s historical strengths while upholding the values of diversity, equity, and cultural integrity.

Conclusion

The rich archival evidence presented in The Beautiful Tree and the detailed British administrative records leave little doubt that traditional education in Bharat was both widely accessible and thoughtfully structured. While the higher echelons of education focused on spiritual and philosophical teachings for the guiding ,ruling and commercial varnas, the majority of the educational system provided practical knowledge essential for societal functioning. By dispelling myths of pervasive discrimination in indigenous education, we gain a more nuanced understanding of India’s intellectual and cultural heritage—one that celebrates a legacy of community-based learning interwoven with a spiritual order that acknowledged diverse societal roles.

 Recognizing this dual legacy is not merely an academic exercise; it holds practical implications for modern India’s educational reforms. By drawing on the inclusive, community-driven strengths of its indigenous past and understanding the role of spiritual specialization, Bharat’s historical experience can guide the creation of an educational future that truly upholds diversity, equity, and cultural integrity.

.