Unfolding STEAM Perspectives from a Veda/Vedanga's Worldview: A Collaborative Self-sanskara Inquiry

Abstract

The Vedangas are Vyasti,1 or interconnected approach, and the Vedas are Samasti,2 or holonic approach (Gallifa, 2018) of ancient education. STEAM education, on the other hand, is a contemporary integrated education. They seem to operate well together for a symbiosis of Eastern and Western Wisdom Traditions, unfolding, understanding, and appreciating one another. However, in modern Nepali society, it looks like a division between Eastern and Western ideologies, like controlled as West and oppressed as East. Thus, the dialogical and dialectical healing between them was often overlooked. It has not moved the transmission and creation of intergenerational knowledge like walking and erasing their steps3 . The Western-induced ideologies are based on individualism4 , rationalism5 , and human rights centered on ideas. So, it talks about democracy, freedom, and scientific exploration. Meanwhile, Eastern ideologies prioritize collectivism, companionability,and spirituality6 . It often highlights the importance of balance, community, and the interconnectedness of existence. Thus, there is a dialogical and dialectical practice related to individualism and collectivism, rationalism and companionability, human rights, and spirituality. These dialogues seemed relevant for knowledge generation. Thus, the inquiry focused on the unfolding process of interpreting STEAM education and Veda/Vedangas education through their educational practices and values as my leading Prashna7 . Unfolding a one-way strategy with expert-driven learning, it explored a two-way approach: Guru-Shishya8 (mutuality of teacher and student-centric methods) and an Sobjective9 approach (MacLeod, 2015) to implement 21st -century skills in the education system. The inquiry explored a collaborative self-sanskara inquiry focusing on Svarupasatshyakar10 or Shravanachatushtaya11 ’s theory. This is an integrative approach to education, dialogical or dialectical knowledge, and eventually like NetiNeti12 . This approach helped informants go beyond subjectivity and objectivity through the healing approach of the Vedas. It seemed initially useful for re-engineering the pedagogical approach of Sanskrit education but not for disciplinary contents and structure. The inquiry unfolded the interconnectedness of Svakarma13 (self-action) and Svadharma14 (self-characteristic) as outer myself within inner-self for self-regulation.From an interconnectivity perspective, it revealed that Dharma15 was pointless without Karma16 , and Karma was meaningless without Dharma (Bhangaokar & Kapadia, 2009), which addressed self-other conceptualizations and the landscape of relational ethics. It highlighted those self-actions that involved the processes of thought, mindfulness, movement, continuity, growth, energy, emotion, and knowledge, which were linked with individualism. Similarly, it stressed self-characteristics that pointed to righteousness, truth, wisdom, compassion, peace, and forgiveness as collectivism. The present inquiry encouraged policymakers to interplay for co-dependent ideas and out-of-box thinking. Once they did so, they felt the co-dependence among Vedica17 as the recitational praxis of Vedas and Shastrika18 as the scholastic praxis of Vedangas, Upanishads, and other ancient scriptures (Larios, 2017) for learning of Vedas; subjective and objective approaches for Sobjectivism (Pouliot, 2007); Nitya19 and Anitya20 existence for Nityanitya21 ; Sajatiya,22 and Vijatiya23 for Svagata24(Chandrashekara, 2023); and Para25 and Apara26 for Parapara27 (Timilsina, 2023). This inquiry also helped them to unfold multi-layer and multi-realities of transformative thinking and action. The inquiry unfolded the Guru-Shishya approach for curriculum developers and textbook writers as a two-way or spiral relationship for teaching and learning. In the context of teaching and learning, it suggested some approaches to teachers and students. They were like the inspirational approach (four-folding schooling, sound schooling, scholastic schooling, and Vedic schooling), grammatical and lexical approach (Vedanga schooling, hermeneutic schooling, and Anuvad28 schooling); Upanishadic approach (enigmatic29 , aphoristic30 , etymological31 , dialogical/dialectical32 , mythical33 , analogical34 , synthetic35 , monologic36 , regressive37 , and ad hoc38 methods); and cross-cultural approach (middle way of thinking, transformative thinking, ethical thinking, and four alternatives as NetiNeti). Therefore, this inquiry contributed to re-engineering ways of representing pedagogical approaches to school-level Sanskrit education in Nepal and has implications for modern education policy.