MOTHER THERESA

Mother Teresa was born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in Skopje, Macedonia, on August 26, 1910. Her family was of Albanian descent. At the age of twelve, she felt strongly the call of God. She knew she had to be a missionary to spread the love of Christ. At the age of eighteen she left her parental home in Skopje and joined the Sisters of Loreto, an Irish community of nuns with missions in India.

Mother Teresa's date of birth is disputed: "So unconcerned was she about accuracy in relation to the chronicling of her own life, and so disinclined actually to read anything written about her, that for many years and in a succession of books her birthdate was erroneously recorded as 27 August 1910.

It even appeared in the Indian Loreto Entrance Book as her date of birth. In fact, as she confided to her friend, co-worker and American author, Eileen Egan, that was the date on which she was christened Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu. The date which marked the beginning of her Christian life was undoubtedly the more important to Mother Teresa, but she was none the less actually born in Skopje, Serbia, on the previous day."

Moter Teresa said: “By blood, I am Albanian. By citizenship, an Indian. By faith, I am a Catholic nun. As to my calling, I belong to the world. As to my heart, I belong entirely to the Heart of Jesus.
”Small of stature, rocklike in faith, Mother Teresa of Calcutta was entrusted with the mission of proclaiming God’s thirsting love for humanity, especially for the poorest of the poor.
“God still loves the world and He sends you and me to be His love and His compassion to the poor.” She was a soul filled with the light of Christ, on fire with love for Him and burning with one desire: “to quench His thirst for love and for souls.”

After a few months' training in Dublin she was sent to India, where on May 24, 1931, she took her initial vows as a nun. From 1931 to 1948 Mother Teresa taught at St. Mary's High School in Calcutta, but the suffering and poverty she glimpsed outside the convent walls made such a deep impression on her that in 1948 she received permission from her superiors to leave the convent school and devote herself to working among the poorest of the poor in the slums of Calcutta.

On 10 September 1946 during the train ride from Calcutta to Darjeeling for her annual retreat, Mother Teresa received her “inspiration,” her “call within a call.”
On that day, in a way she would never explain, Jesus’ thirst for love and for souls took hold of her heart and the desire to satiate His thirst became the driving force of her life. Over the course of the next weeks and months, by means of interior locutions and visions, Jesus revealed to her the desire of His heart for “victims of love” who would “radiate His love on souls.”

“Come be My light,” He begged her. “I cannot go alone.” He revealed His pain at the neglect of the poor, His sorrow at their ignorance of Him and His longing for their love. He asked Mother Teresa to establish a religious community, Missionaries of Charity, dedicated to the service of the poorest of the poor.
Nearly two years of testing and discernment passed before Mother Teresa received permission to begin. On August 17, 1948, she dressed for the first time in a white, blue-bordered sari and passed through the gates of her beloved Loreto convent to enter the world of the poor.

After a short course with the Medical Mission Sisters in Patna, Mother Teresa returned to Calcutta and found temporary lodging with the Little Sisters of the Poor. On 21 December she went for the first time to the slums. She visited families, washed the sores of some children, cared for an old man lying sick on the road and nursed a woman dying of hunger and TB.
She started each day in communion with Jesus in the Eucharist and then went out, rosary in her hand, to find and serve Him in “the unwanted, the unloved, the uncared for.” After some months, she was joined, one by one, by her former students.

Although she had no funds, she depended on Divine Providence, and started an open-air school for slum children. Soon she was joined by voluntary helpers, and financial support was also forthcoming. This made it possible for her to extend the scope of her work.

On October 7, 1950, Mother Teresa received permission from the Holy See to start her own order, "The Missionaries of Charity", whose primary task was to love and care for those persons nobody was prepared to look after. In 1965 the Society became an International Religious Family by a decree of Pope Paul VI.

The new congregation of the Missionaries of Charity was officially established in the Archdiocese of Calcutta. By the early 1960s, Mother Teresa began to send her Sisters to other parts of India. The Decree of Praise granted to the Congregation by Pope Paul VI in February 1965 encouraged her to open a house in Venezuela. It was soon followed by foundations in Rome and Tanzania and, eventually, on every continent. Starting in 1980 and continuing through the 1990s, Mother Teresa opened houses in almost all of the communist countries, including the former Soviet Union, Albania and Cuba.

n order to respond better to both the physical and spiritual needs of the poor, Mother Teresa founded the Missionaries of Charity Brothers in 1963, in 1976 the contemplative branch of the Sisters, in 1979 the Contemplative Brothers, and in 1984 the Missionaries of Charity Fathers.
Yet her inspiration was not limited to those with religious vocations. She formed the Co-Workers of Mother Teresa and the Sick and Suffering Co-Workers, people of many faiths and nationalities with whom she shared her spirit of prayer, simplicity, sacrifice and her apostolate of humble works of love.
This spirit later inspired the Lay Missionaries of Charity. In answer to the requests of many priests, in 1981 Mother Teresa also began the Corpus Christi Movement for Priests as a “little way of holiness” for those who desire to share in her charism and spirit.

During the years of rapid growth the world began to turn its eyes towards Mother Teresa and the work she had started. Numerous awards, beginning with the Indian Padmashri Award in 1962 and notably the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979, honoured her work, while an increasingly interested media began to follow her activities. She received both prizes and attention “for the glory of God and in the name of the poor.”

The whole of Mother Teresa’s life and labour bore witness to the joy of loving, the greatness and dignity of every human person, the value of little things done faithfully and with love, and the surpassing worth of friendship with God.
But there was another heroic side of this great woman that was revealed only after her death. Hidden from all eyes, hidden even from those closest to her, was her interior life marked by an experience of a deep, painful and abiding feeling of being separated from God, even rejected by Him, along with an ever-increasing longing for His love. She called her inner experience, “the darkness.”

The “painful night” of her soul, which began around the time she started her work for the poor and continued to the end of her life, led Mother Teresa to an ever more profound union with God. Through the darkness she mystically participated in the thirst of Jesus, in His painful and burning longing for love, and she shared in the interior desolation of the poor.

During the last years of her life, despite increasingly severe health problems, Mother Teresa continued to govern her Society and respond to the needs of the poor and the Church. By 1997, Mother Teresa’s Sisters numbered nearly 4,000 members and were established in 610 foundations in 123 countries of the world.

In March 1997 she blessed her newly-elected successor as Superior General of the Missionaries of Charity and then made one more trip abroad. After meeting Pope John Paul II for the last time, she returned to Calcutta and spent her final weeks receiving visitors and instructing her Sisters. On 5 September Mother Teresa’s earthly life came to an end.
She was given the honour of a state funeral by the Government of India and her body was buried in the Mother House of the Missionaries of Charity. Her tomb quickly became a place of pilgrimage and prayer for people of all faiths, rich and poor alike. Mother Teresa left a testament of unshakable faith, invincible hope and extraordinary charity.
Her response to Jesus’ plea, “Come be My light,” made her a Missionary of Charity, a “mother to the poor,” a symbol of compassion to the world, and a living witness to the thirsting love of God.

The Society of Missionaries has spread all over the world, including the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries. They provide effective help to the poorest of the poor in a number of countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and they undertake relief work in the wake of natural catastrophes such as floods, epidemics, and famine, and for refugees. The order also has houses in North America, Europe and Australia, where they take care of the shut-ins, alcoholics, homeless, and AIDS sufferers.

The Missionaries of Charity throughout the world are aided and assisted by Co-Workers who became an official International Association on March 29, 1969. By the 1990s there were over one million Co-Workers in more than 40 countries. Along with the Co-Workers, the lay Missionaries of Charity try to follow Mother Teresa's spirit and charism in their families.

Mother Teresa's work has been recognised and acclaimed throughout the world and she has received a number of awards and distinctions, including the Pope John XXIII Peace Prize (1971) and the Nehru Prize for her promotion of international peace and understanding (1972). She also received the Balzan Prize (1979) and the Templeton and Magsaysay awards.

Less than two years after her death, in view of Mother Teresa’s widespread reputation of holiness and the favours being reported, Pope John Paul II permitted the opening of her Cause of Canonization. On 20 December 2002 he approved the decrees of her heroic virtues and miracles.

BEATIFICATION OF MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA. HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS JOHN PAUL II
World Mission Sunday
Sunday, 19 October 2003

1.- "Whoever would be first among you must be slave of all" (Mk10: 44). Jesus' words to his disciples that have just rung out in this Square show us the way to evangelical "greatness". It is the way walked by Christ himself that took him to the Cross:  a journey of love and service that overturns all human logic. To be the servant of all!

Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Foundress of the Missionaries of Charity whom today I have the joy of adding to the Roll of the Blesseds, allowed this logic to guide her. I am personally grateful to this courageous woman whom I have always felt beside me. Mother Teresa, an icon of the Good Samaritan, went everywhere to serve Christ in the poorest of the poor. Not even conflict and war could stand in her way.

Every now and then she would come and tell me about her experiences in her service to the Gospel values. I remember, for example, her pro-life and anti-abortion interventions, even when she was awarded the Nobel Prize for peace (Oslo, 10 December 1979). She often used to say:  "If you hear of some woman who does not want to keep her child and wants to have an abortion, try to persuade her to bring him to me. I will love that child, seeing in him the sign of God's love".

2.- Is it not significant that her beatification is taking place on the very day on which the Church celebrates World Mission Sunday? With the witness of her life, Mother Teresa reminds everyone that the evangelizing mission of the Church passes through charity, nourished by prayer and listening to God's word. Emblematic of this missionary style is the image that shows the new Blessed clasping a child's hand in one hand while moving her Rosary beads with the other.

Contemplation and action, evangelization and human promotion: Mother Teresa proclaimed the Gospel living her life as a total gift to the poor but, at the same time, steeped in prayer.

3.- Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant" (Mk 10: 43). With particular emotion we remember today Mother Teresa, a great servant of the poor, of the Church and of the whole world. Her life is a testimony to the dignity and the privilege of humble service. She had chosen to be not just the least but to be the servant of the least. As a real mother to the poor, she bent down to those suffering various forms of poverty. Her greatness lies in her ability to give without counting the cost, to give "until it hurts". Her life was a radical living and a bold proclamation of the Gospel.

The cry of Jesus on the Cross, "I thirst" (Jn 19: 28), expressing the depth of God's longing for man, penetrated Mother Teresa's soul and found fertile soil in her heart. Satiating Jesus' thirst for love and for souls in union with Mary, the Mother of Jesus, had become the sole aim of Mother Teresa's existence and the inner force that drew her out of herself and made her "run in haste" across the globe to labour for the salvation and the sanctification of the poorest of the poor.

4.- "As you did to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me" (Mt 25: 40). This Gospel passage, so crucial in understanding Mother Teresa's service to the poor, was the basis of her faith-filled conviction that in touching the broken bodies of the poor she was touching the body of Christ. It was to Jesus himself, hidden under the distressing disguise of the poorest of the poor, that her service was directed. Mother Teresa highlights the deepest meaning of service - an act of love done to the hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, prisoners (cf. Mt 25: 34-36) is done to Jesus himself.

Recognizing him, she ministered to him with wholehearted devotion, expressing the delicacy of her spousal love. Thus, in total gift of herself to God and neighbour, Mother Teresa found her greatest fulfilment and lived the noblest qualities of her femininity. She wanted to be a sign of "God's love, God's presence and God's compassion", and so remind all of the value and dignity of each of God's children, "created to love and be loved". Thus was Mother Teresa "bringing souls to God and God to souls" and satiating Christ's thirst, especially for those most in need, those whose vision of God had been dimmed by suffering and pain.

5.- "The Son of man also came... to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mk 10: 45). Mother Teresa shared in the Passion of the crucified Christ in a special way during long years of "inner darkness". For her that was a test, at times an agonizing one, which she accepted as a rare "gift and privilege".

In the darkest hours she clung even more tenaciously to prayer before the Blessed Sacrament. This harsh spiritual trial led her to identify herself more and more closely with those whom she served each day, feeling their pain and, at times, even their rejection. She was fond of repeating that the greatest poverty is to be unwanted, to have no one to take care of you.

6. "Lord, let your mercy be on us, as we place our trust in you". How often, like the Psalmist, did Mother Teresa call on her Lord in times of inner desolation:  "In you, in you I hope, my God!".

Let us praise the Lord for this diminutive woman in love with God, a humble Gospel messenger and a tireless benefactor of humanity. In her we honour one of the most important figures of our time. Let us welcome her message and follow her example.

Virgin Mary, Queen of all the Saints, help us to be gentle and humble of heart like this fearless messenger of Love. Help us to serve every person we meet with joy and a smile. Help us to be missionaries of Christ, our peace and our hope. Amen!

LAST INTERVIEW WITH MOTHER TERESA.

The magazine gave the Brazilian Missionary Borders Sem. Here are some passages which conveyed the agency Zenit:

HOW MANY ARE THE MISSIONARIES OF CHARITY?

Teresa of Calcutta: 3604 We have sisters who have pronounced their religious vows, 411 novices, 260 aspirants to religious. We are scattered in 119 countries. Today we have 560 booths or houses.

WHY CALL THEM "TABERNACLES"?

Teresa of Calcutta: Because Jesus is present in these homes. These houses of Jesus. Our congregation wants to help people to satisfy their thirst for Jesus. This rescue and try to sanctify the poorest of the poor. Utter the vows of chastity, poverty and obedience. But we have also received special permission to make a fourth vow: ourselves at the service of the poorest of the poor.

YOU OFTEN SAID THAT THERE IS NO LOVE WITHOUT SUFFERING.

Mother Teresa: Yes, true love hurts. Every life and every family relationship must be lived honestly. This presupposes a lot of sacrifices and love. But at the same time, these sufferings are always accompanied by a great sense of peace. When a house is peaceful, there are also the joy, unity and love.

HIS CONGREGATION HAS OPENED HOMES FOR "AIDS" PATIENTS IN DIFFERENTS PARTS OF THE WORLD...

Teresa of Calcutta: A few years ago, some people went further to commit suicide when they received the news that they were suffering from AIDS. Today not one person dies in despair and anguish in our homes. Everyone, including non-Catholics, die in the Lord's peace. Do not you think this is wonderful? The rules of the congregation indicated that work for the poor must either be" in the spiritual realm as in the material.
"WHAT IS MEANT BY SPIRITUAL POVERTY"?

Teresa of Calcutta: The spiritually poor are those who have not discovered Jesus or those who have been separated from Him because of sin. Those living on the street are also in need of help in this regard. On the other hand, I'm perfectly happy to see that, in our world, we also have the help of well established, to whom we offer the opportunity to do good work for God.

DO YOU RECEIVE HELP ALSO PEOPLE OF OTHER RELIGIONS?

Mother Teresa: Yes, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and many others. A few months ago, a Japanese Buddhist group came to talk to me about spirituality. I told them that we fast every first Friday of the month and the money we saved was used for the poor. When returned home, they asked the Buddhist families and communities to do the same. The money collected has enabled us to build the first floor of our downtown "Shanti Dan" ( "Gift of Peace") for girls who are in jail. Over a hundred girls have already left prison.

THOSE WHO CRITICIZE ENSURE THAT YOUR SOLE PURPOSE IS TO CONVERT NON-CHRISTIANS...
Teresa of Calcutta: No one can force or require the conversion, takes place only by the grace of God. The best conversion is to help people to love each other. We who are sinners, we were created to become children of God and we must help each other to be as close to Him We are all called to love.

YOU SAY THAT YOUR SISTERS ARE NOT SOCIAL WORKERS.

Teresa of Calcutta: We are contemplative, for "pray" our work. We play a social work, but we women consecrated to God in the world today. We have entrusted our lives to Jesus and Jesus gave his life in the Eucharist. The work we do is important, but what matters is not the person doing that job.
We do this through Jesus Christ, because we love it. We are not able to do everything. Anyway, I always pray for all who care about the needs and miseries of the people. Many wealthy people have joined our action. Personally we have nothing. We live off the charity and the charity.

-AND OF PROVIDENCE...

Teresa of Calcutta: We always face unforeseen needs. God is infinitely good. Always concerned about us.

WHY DO SO MANY YOUNG PEOPLE ENTER IN YOUR CONGREGATION hy do so many young people enter in your congregation?

Mother Teresa: I think they appreciate our prayer life. We pray four hours a day. Furthermore, they see what we do for the poor. Not that they are important and impressive work. What we do is very discreet, but we do it for the little ones.

YOUR ARE A WELL-KNOWN. DO NOT YOU EVER GET TIRED OF SEEING SO MANY PEOPLE, PHOTOGRAPHS...?

Teresa of Calcutta: I consider it a sacrifice, but also a blessing for society. God and I have made a pact: I said "for every photo you make me, You take to release a soul from purgatory .... "Between smiles, he adds. I think that at this rate, soon will be empty purgatory.

WHAT MESSAGE WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAVE US?

Teresa of Calcutta: Love one another as Jesus loves you. I have nothing to add to the message that Jesus left us. To love one must have a pure heart and pray. The fruit of prayer is the deepening of faith. The fruit of faith is love. And the fruit of love is service to others. This brings us peace.<meta name="google-site-verification" content="TuEPuj6RDYKorFMsNmh50Ik8jsSn-6nEHln8v8l8CEk" />

SREE ADI SANKARACHARYA

SREE Adi Shankaracharya

It is said that when chaos and confusion reign supreme, the Divine manifests itself in the world to reestablish righteousness or Dharma. Adi Sankara was born at a time when India was under the sway of superstition and religious fights.

Sankara was born in a poor Malayali Brahmin family in 788 AD, in a village named Kaladi in the present Ernakulam District of Kerala. His father was Sivaguru who was proficient in the Shastras and his mother was Aryamba. They had no children for a long time after their marriage. Sivaguru and Aryamba prayed to Lord Siva to bless them with a son and their prayers were answered by the birth of a boy at the time of Vasantha Ritu (spring season) in the auspicious Abhijit Muhurta.

Sankara’s father passed away when he was barely seven years old. His mother took care to educate him in the proper way that was expected of a young Brahmin. Sankara, who possessed extraordinary intelligence, was determined to be a Sanyasi at a very young age. This grieved his mother but events accelerated his decision.

One day, Sankara and his mother went to bathe in the river. While Sankara was bathing, a crocodile caught hold of his foot and started dragging him down into the water. He then called out aloud to his mother and asked for her consent to become a Sanyasi. She immediately agreed and the crocodile let go of his foot. Sankara was then just eight years old.

Sankara was now ready to undertake his life’s mission. His left his mother under the care of his relatives promising her that he would look after her at her deathbed and perform her death rites. He now embarked on his search for a Guru.

In a hermitage, near Badrinath in the Himalayas, Sankara met Govindapada Acharya, his future Guru. When Govinda asked him who he was, Sankara answered that he was neither fire nor air, nor earth, nor water, but the Immortal Atma behind all names and forms. Later, he narrated his whereabouts.

Swami Govindapada, pleased with the young aspirant, initiated him and made him a Sanyasi. Sankara learned the philosophy of Advaita, which he later propagated. He then went to Kashi (Varanasi) where he wrote the commentaries on Bhagavad Gita, Brahma Sutras and the Upanishads.

During his stay in Kashi, Sankara is said to have encountered a chandala (outcast). While he was walking with his disciples through a narrow alley, he unexpectedly stood face to face with the chandala. During those days a chandala had to move aside and give way to a Brahmin, lest the latter be polluted by his proximity.

Sankara asked the chandala to move aside. To his surprise, the outcast rebuked him and asked him, “Oh, great Brahmin, who are you asking to move ? This body, like yours, built up of food, cannot move by itself. And if you are asking the pure, infinite consciousness, which I am made up of, that too cannot move aside. Now, who are you asking to clear the way and for whom? “ At once, Sankara realized his mistake and prostrated before the chandala who is said to have been Lord Siva in disguise.

Sankara, after his triumphant tour of India, finally was led to the Seat of Omniscience (Sarvajna Peetha). He put forth his arguments to authorities of knowledge and through his discussions and refutations easily defeated them.

In the course of his tour, Sankara went to Mahishmati, where he had to encounter Mandana Mishra, the chief Pundit of the court of Mahishmati. He was a person who intensely hated Sanyasis. Sankara challenged Mandana to an argument in which Bharathi, Mandana’s scholarly wife was the umpire. It was agreed beforehand that Sankara, if defeated would become as l householder and marry, and if Mandana was defeated, he would become a Sanyasi. The controversy continued for days and finally Sankara emerged victorious. Bharati, Mandana’s wife, is said to have been the incarnation of Goddess Saraswathi, the Goddess of knowledge. Mandana Mishra, as agreed, was initiated by Sankara into Sanyasa and he was named Sureswara Acharya. Sankara won over all the various sects and firmly established his Advaita philosophy.

When Sankara received news that his mother was ailing, he immediately set out to visit her at Kaladi, as promised. He comforted her and assured her that she would be liberated. It is said that Sankara tried to teach her Advaita, but was not successful. So, he stated chanting hymns of Siva and Vishnu, thereby helping his mother to face death without fear. All the Brahmins revolted against Sankara when he wanted to perform the obsequies for his mother, since it was not the order of sanyasis to have family ties. Undaunted, he decided to perform the death rites on his own. He cut the body into pieces and carried it himself to the backyard of his house. The Brahmins refused to give him fire to light the funeral pyre, but he made a fire out of his yogic powers and cremated his mother.

Sankara established four Mutts in the four corners of India, Joshi Mutt in the north, Puri in the east, Dwaraka in the west and Sringeri in the south, and placed his four disciples, Totakacharya, Padmapada, Hastamalaka and Sureshvaracharya respectively, in charge of the four Mutts.

After building the Joshimutt and the Badrinath temple in the Himalayas, Sankara proceeded towards the heights of the great mountain and left his body, in his 32nd year.

His writings propound the basic tenets of Sanatana Dharma. Some of his main works include Viveka Chudamani, Atma Bodha, Aparokshanubhuti, Ananda Lahari and Upadesa Sahasri. In addition, he wrote a number of hymns, full of deep meaning.

Sankara’s teachings can be summarized in the following words:
“Brahma satyam, jagan mithya, Jeevo Brahmaiva na apara”
Brahma alone is real, this world is unreal.
The Jiva is not different from Brahman.

SRI NARAYANA GURU

Sri Narayana Guru was a prophet, sage and Hindu saint and also a social reformer of India. He was born in the family of Ezhavas, in a period when people from backward communities, like, the Ezhavas faced much social injustices in the caste-ridden Kerala society. Gurudevan, as he was fondly known to his followers, revolted against casteism and worked on propagating new values of freedom in spirituality and of social equality, thereby transforming the Kerala society and as such he is adored as a prophet. India as a whole may have produced its Gandhi, but Keralites are inclined to take more pride in their own great spiritual and social leader, the contemporary of Gandhi, the low-caste sage Sri Narayana Guru, with his tireless preaching of the doctrine of `One Caste, One Religion, One God.` He preached for moral and religious universalism.

• Life of Sri Narayana Guru

Narayana Guru was born in the 20th of August, 1856, in a village called Chempazhanthi which is situated close to Thiruvananthapuram. He was the son of a farmer called, Madan Asan and mother Kutti Amma. The boy was called Nanu. His father was also a teacher, educated in Sanskrit and well-versed in Ayurveda and astrology. Nanu had three sisters. He used to listen to his father with much interest while he narrates the tales from the Mahabharata and the Ramayana to the common village folks. Nanu was introduced into traditional education pattern Ezhuthinirithal, by a local school master and also a village officer called Chempazhanthi Pillai. He carried on his studies at home under the guidance of his uncle Krishnan Vaidyan, a famous Ayurvedic physician and a scholar of Sanskrit and his father, where he was trained with the basics of the Sanskrit and Tamil languages and traditional subjects like Balaprobhodhanam, Siddharupam and Amarakosam.

At a young age, Nanu possessed a sharp mind and admitted in the reputed school, Kummampilli Raman Pillai Asan at a village called Karunagapalli, which was fifty miles from his home, when he was only twenty one years old. He stayed as a guest in the family home Varanapally close to Kayamkulam. Nanu, with other students, was given teachings on Sanskrit language and drama, poetry and literary criticism, along with logical rhetoric. He learned the Upanishad and the Vedas. He started teaching in a nearby school and his knowledge earned him the name `Nanu Asan`.

Due to pressure from his family, Nanu got married to a traditional village doctor`s daughter called Kaliamma. His marriage was very simple with the sisters of the groom investing the bride along with the `Thaali` (wedding knot) on his behalf. The bride stayed with her parents because Nanu Asan soon after became a wanderer. After the death of his wife and father, Nanu Asan carried on his life as a wandering Sanyasi and became a `Parivrajaka` (who wanders one place to another in the pursuit of Truth). During those days Nanu came across Kunjan Pillai, who was later called Chattampi Swamikal. Kunjan Pillai, who discovered and apprized the philosophy of Nanu Asan and his passion towards Yoga, acquainted him to a Hatha yogi, Thycaud Ayyavu. Under the guidance of the Yogi, Nanu learned several Yogic practices like Hatha Yoga and this experience had a deep impact in the later parts of the life of Narayana Guru.

Sri Narayana Guru went to his hermitage in the hilly forest regions of Maruthwamala, where he practiced an austere life by undertaking yoga and meditative thought and followed severe sustenance rituals. This period lasted for eight years. After completing a modest life of more than 30 years thriving in knowledge and rough experiences, this epoch is regarded as the completion of the meditative recluse; the period at which Sri Narayana Guru is believed to have got Enlightenment.

• Reform Work of Sri Narayana Guru

Subdued for centuries by the Brahmin and the Nayar castes, regarded as outside the fourfold structure of the caste system, the Ezhavas, nevertheless, retained a pride even in their position as the leading caste of the outcastes, and during the nineteenth century developed a great will to rise above the limitations which society had laid upon them, a will personified most dynamically in the teachings of Sri Narayana Guru, who was himself an Ezhava. Revolution was motivated and catalyzed by a most unbelievable revolutionary, a conventional Shaivite vedantin, an ascetic and monk who wrote a number of devotional songs in Tamil, Sanskrit and Malayalam and he was Sri Narayana Guru.

When one discusses about Sri Narayana Guru, one uses superlatives in order to compare the great saint with a list of notables. Guru was the famous reformer in Hinduism to come out to the southern parts of India since the incomparable Adi Sankara. Narayana Guru was the champion of the rights of lower caste oppressed Hindus in the twentieth century, and was more flourishing than the better known Dr. Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi. He overturned the social system of entire Kerala, while following simple means unlike the works of EV Ramaswamy Naicker in the state of Tamil Nadu. The revolutionary reformer, whose call for self improvement and self reliance touched delicately the heart of the oppressed class all over the world.

Similarities are there with regard to the blacks struggling in the United States, led by Dr. Martin Luther King to that of Sri Narayana Guru of India. Narayana Guru brought to the underprivileged Kerala class the realization that they are also human beings and are also subject to get respect. The reason today that in the state of Kerala, there prevail a self-asserting egalitarianism is mainly due to the intellectual and spiritual revival brought by Sri Narayana Guru. The fact that Sri Guru did this wholly in the fabric of Hinduism is noteworthy.

One of the major strengths of Hinduism is its capacity for renaissance, renewal and reform and in this case, the authority of personality of a great saint was sufficient to cleanse the Hinduism of Kerala of the amassed dross of about a millennium. Guru gave much importance to the requirement for the social and spiritual upliftment of the unfortunate with the help of their own efforts by the institution of educational institutions and temples.

• Advaita Ashram at Aluva

• Sri Narayana Guru founded an Ashram at Aluva in the year 1913, which was called the Advaita Ashram. This event was vital in the life of Sri Guru. The concerned Ashram was devoted to the great principle - `Om Sahodaryam Sarvatra` (it means, each and very unman being is equal in the eyes of God). In the year 1921, a Conference of Universal Brotherhood organised at Alwaye and in the year 1924, an all religion conference was organized there. The Guru gave importance to the requirement for a Brahma Vidyalayam for comparative study of several religious faiths. Narayana Gurukulam is the name of an institution which was founded in the Nilgiri Hills of Tamil Nadu by Bodhananda Swamikal and afterwards given over to Nataraja Guru.

• Books by Sri Narayana Guru

Some of the works of Sri Narayana Guru in Sanskrit are Darsana Mala, Brahmavidya Panchakam, Slokathrayi, Nirvruthi Panchakam, Vedantha Suthram, Municharya Panchakam, Homa Manthram, Asramam, Charama Slokangal, Dharmam, Chidambarashtakam, Bhadrakaliashtakam,Sree Vasudeva Ashtakam, Guhashtakam, Vinayaka Ashtakam and Genani Navamanjari. His works in Malayalam include Swanubavageethi, Advaitha Deepika, Atmopadesa Satakam, Arivu, Jeevakarunya Panchakam, Daiva Dasakam, Anukamba Dasakam, Daiva Chintanam - 1 & 2, Jathi Lakshanam, Chijanda Chinthakam, Jathi Nirnayam, Athma Vilasam and Shiva Satakam Thevarappathinkanga is one of his works in Tamil language.

Sri Narayana Guru became severely ill in the month of September, 1928 and stayed bedridden for a certain period. His devotees flocked in huge numbers to have a look of their Gurudevan. The same year, the birthday of Gurudevan was observed in several places, mainly in Mangalore, Kerala, Chennai, Sri Lanka and Europe. On the 20th of September, 1928 Sri Narayana Guru died.

Narayana Guru is idolized for his knowledge of the Vedas, openness to other`s views, poetic proficiency, non-violent philosophy and his persistent resolve to correct the social wrongs. Narayana Guru was involved in fixing the spiritual bases for social reform in the state of Kerala and was also among the most-renowned social reformers who dealt with the caste system in India. He established a path leading to social emancipation while not fuelling the dualism of the oppressor and the oppressed.

MAHATMA GANDHIJI.

Rejection of the colonial education system, which the British administration had established in the early nineteenth century in India, was an important feature of the intellectual ferment generated by the struggle for freedom. Many eminent Indians, political leaders, social reformers and writers voiced this rejection. But no one rejected colonial education as sharply and as completely as Gandhi did, nor did anyone else put forward an alternative as radical asthe one he proposed. Gandhi's critique of colonial education was part of his overall critique of Western civilization. Colonization, including its educational agenda, was to Gandhi a negation of truth and non-violence, the two values he held uppermost. The fact that Westerners had spent ‘all their energy, industry, and enterprise in plundering and destroying other races' was evidence enough for Gandhi that Western civilization was in a ‘sorry mess'.¹ Therefore, hethought, it could not possibly be a symbol of ‘progress', or something worth imitating or transplanting in India.
It would be wrong to interpret Gandhi's response to colonial education as some kind of xenophobia. It would be equally wrong to see it as a symptom of a subtle revivalist dogma. If it were possible to read Gandhi's ‘basic education' plan as an anonymous text in the history of world education, it would be conveniently classified in the tradition of Western radical humanists like Pestalozzi, Owen, Tolstoy and Dewey. It does not lend itself to be read in the context of the East-West dichotomy that Gandhi did deal with in some of his other writings. Yet the fact remains that Gandhi wanted education-reconstructed along the lines he thought correct-to help India move away from the Western concept of progress, towards a different form of development more suited to its needs and more viable, for the world as a whole, thanthe Western model of development.
Man versus machine
Gandhi was able to initiate an educational discourse outside the familiar East-West dichotomy yet forming part of the critique of the West by locating the problem of education in a different dialectic, that of man versus machine. In this dialectic, man represented the whole of mankind, not just India, and the machine represented the industrialized West. Throughout his life Gandhi had perceived his personal life and the causes he fought for in a global context. This perception was no less operative in the final decade of his life, at the beginning of which hepresented his ‘basic education' proposal.²
The core of Gandhi's proposal was the introduction of productive handicrafts in the school curriculum. The idea was not simply to introduce handicrafts as a compulsory school subject, but to make the learning of a craft the axis of the entire teaching programme. It implied a radical restructuring of the sociology of school knowledge in India, where productive handicrafts had been associated with the lowest groups in the hierarchy of castes. Knowledge of the production processes involved in crafts, such as spinning, weaving, leatherwork, pottery, metal-work, basket-making and book-binding, had been the monopoly ofspecific caste groups in the lowest stratum of the traditional social hierarchy. Many of them belonged to the category of ‘untouchables'. India's indigenous tradition of education as wellas the colonial education system had emphasized the skills (such as literacy) and knowledge of which the upper castes had a monopoly. In terms of its epistemology, Gandhi's proposalintended to stand the education system on its head. The social philosophy and the curriculumof ‘basic education' thus favoured the child belonging to the lowest stratum of society. This ishow it implied a programme of social transformation. It sought to alter the symbolic meaning of ‘education' and thereby to change the established structure of opportunities for education.
The rationale Gandhi proposed for the introduction of production processes in the school was not as startling as this interpretation. The rationale he proposed was that schoolsmust be self-supporting, as far as possible, for two reasons. One was purely financial: namely,that a poor society could not provide education to all its children unless schools couldgenerate the physical and financial resources to run them. The other was political: thatfinancial self-sufficiency alone could protect schools from dependence on the State and frominterference by it. As values, both self-sufficiency and autonomy were close to Gandhi's heart. They belonged to his vision of a society based on truth and non-violence. Financial self sufficiencywas linked to truth, and autonomy to non-violence. An individual or an institution that did not participate directly in the process of production for survival could afford to adhereto ‘truth' for long. Such an individual or institution would have to depend on the State to anextent that would make violence, in one form or another, inevitable. A State system of education was a contradiction of Gandhi's view of education. The possibility of the school developing the resources for its own maintenance showed a way out of this contradiction.
The idea of productive schools clearly came from the two communities Gandhi had established in South Africa. Phoenix Farm, started in 1904, and Tolstoy Farm, which was established in 1910, provided him with a lasting interest and faith in the potential of life in arural commune. The first of these experiments was apparently inspired by John Ruskin's Untothis last. Gandhi drew three lessons from this book, or rather, as Louis Fischer has explained,Gandhi read three messages into the book.³ The first message was that the benefit of all iswhat a good economy is all about; the second was that earnings from manual work (such asthat of a barber) have the same value as mental work (such as that of a lawyer); and the thirdone was that a life worth living was that of a labourer or craftsman. Gandhi recalls in hisautobiography that he decided to put these messages into practice as soon as he had finishedreading Ruskin's book on a train journey.
The kind of life that Gandhi's ‘basic education' proposal projected as the ‘good' life was first practised by him at Phoenix Farm and, somewhat more rigorously and ambitiously, at Tolstoy Farm a little later. As the name indicates, by the time of this latter experiment, Gandhi had read the works of, and had established contact with, the Russian writer and thinker Leo Tolstoy. The inspiration Gandhi received from Tolstoy spanned a wide range of interests and concerns. Prominent among them was to fight the sources of violence in human society. Tolstoy's celebration of the individual's right to live in peace and freedom, and his negation of all forms of oppression, brought him close to Gandhi. Even though Gandhi did not read Tolstoy's articles on education in the journal Yasnaya polyana, Tolstoy's view that ‘educationas a premeditate formation of men according to certain patterns is sterile, unlawful, and impossible'⁴ could well have been expressed by Gandhi.
The right to autonomy that Gandhi's educational plan assigns to the teacher in the context of the school's daily curriculum is consistent with the libertarian principles he shared with Tolstoy. Gandhi wanted to free the Indian teacher from the slavery of the bureaucracy.The school teacher's job had come to be defined under colonial rule as one transmitting and elucidating the forms and content of knowledge selected by bureaucratic authorities forinclusion in the prescribed textbook. Exposing the link between the mandatory use of text books and the feeble position of the teacher, Gandhi wrote: ‘If text books are treated as avehicle for education, the living word of the teacher has very little value. A teacher whoteaches from textbooks does not impart originality to his pupils.'⁵ Gandhi's basic education plan implied the end of the teacher's subservience to the prescribed textbook and the curriculum. For one thing, it presented a concept of learning that could not be fully implemented with the help of textbooks. More important, however, was the freedom and authority that the basic education plan gave to the teacher in matters concerning the curriculum. It was a libertarian plan in as much as it denied the State the power to decide precisely what the teacher must do in the classroom. In accordance with his wider philosophy of social life and politics, this aspect of Gandhi's educational plan implied a dramatic reduction of the State's sphere of authority.
Self sufficiency
Having assembled a conceptual outline of Gandhi's plan, we can now return to its coreconcern and probe it more deeply. Basic education was an embodiment of Gandhi's perceptionof an ideal society as one consisting of small, self-reliant communities. To him, Indian villageswere capable of becoming such communities; indeed, he believed that Indian villages werehistorically self-reliant, and the great task now was to restore their autonomy and to create theconditions necessary for economic self-sufficiency and political dignity in villages. Colonial rule, he thought, had damaged the village economy, subjecting it to exploitation by citydwellers. Freedom from colonial rule would mean empowerment of the village and itsdevelopment as a viable community. The basic education plan was meant to develop thevillage along these lines, by training children for productive work and by imparting to the mattitudes and values conducive to living in a co-operative community.
This programme of development was rooted in Gandhi's view of industrialization as at hreat to human sanity. Much debate has taken place about Gandhi's ‘real' view of technology. It is not clear whether he was against the spirit of modern science and technology,or whether his opposition to Western-type modernity was confined to the manner in which science and technology had been used to exploit non-European societies. In the vast body ofresponses contained in his collected works, one finds ample evidence on both sides. Perhaps itis wrong to look for an either/or kind of position in Gandhi on this matter (and several others) ,for he was not so much a theorist of action as a person always ready to react and engage in action. Preparing for action by developing a symbolic model first was not his style. In thecontext of science and industrialization, he appears to have worked towards slowing down the march of capitalism and industrial development in India. He wanted India to develop socially and politically first, so as to be in a position of power to exercise options in the face of technological and market pressures coming from the industrialized West and from thecapitalist lobby within Indian society.
His programme can be understood as a chronological ordering of priorities in which the consolidation of a viable political system would come first, and the development of productive processes through the use of machines would come second. According to Gandhi, a viable political system for India had to be centred on village republics, organized like‘oceanic circles'. The metaphor was meant to convey the principle of local power in combination with commitment to the larger society. He wanted such a political system to develop before the modernization of the means of production so that the masses, who lived invillages, would not lack the power to protect their interests under the imperatives ofmodernization.⁶ His educational plan fits nicely in this ordering of priorities. If the march of industrialization could be slowed down and shaped in accordance with a plan for social and political progress, basic education could serve a definite purpose in such progress. More specifically, if purposeful industrialization meant protecting the right of villages to producewhat they could without competition with large-scale mechanized establishments, basic education could enhance the productive capacities of village children under such a plan.
The ideal citizen in Gandhi's Utopia was an industrious, self-respecting and generous individual living in a small community. This is the image underlying his educational plan. This image of man and the production system sustaining it brings to mind the American philosopher John Dewey (1859-1952), and it is useful to probe the similarities between the educational visions of these two contemporaries. Dewey grew up in a country whose frontiers were stilldeveloping. The small community of skilled, hard-working men and women, whose individual personalities mattered to the community, seemed the ideal democratic unit in Dewey's youth.
The growing capitalist economy had not yet revealed the nature of politics and culture that it would demand. In his famous book, Democracy and education, published in 1916, Dewey had rooted his work-based model of teaching in the idealized small community of responsible individuals. Linking productive work with education was at the heart of Gandhi's model too, and it was rooted in the idealized village republic of his Utopia not much different fromDewey's. But whereas Dewey sketched his democratic community rather late in terms of hiscountry's development along the path of capitalism, Gandhi sketched his ideal villagecommunity at a point when he thought there was still time to make choices. Furthermore,Dewey's plans were not as dependent on traditional craft-based production processes as Gandhi's were. Both, however, were products of the ethos of early capitalist development. Inretrospect, Dewey's educational proposal reads like a plea for protecting a special space forchildren in the midst of rampant, dehumanizing, capitalist advancement. Gandhi' proposal, onthe other hand, reads like a plea for delaying the growth of capitalism, for buying time to strengthen the capacities of men and women to live with machines.
If we take this comparison between Gandhi and Dewey a step further, we shall discover another similarity between the two educators: both propagated a purely secularpedagogy. This is indeed somewhat startling in the case of Gandhi because, in every sphere ofaction except education, Gandhi acted as a man with deep religious feelings. In the context ofeducation too he seemed reluctant to commit himself to a purely secular position, but the fact remains that his basic education plan provides no room for religious teaching. In June 1938 hehad to explain the matter in some detail because a delegation of educators demanded to know precisely what his view was on this matter. His answer was:
We have left out the teaching of religion from the Wardha scheme of education because we are afraid that religions as they are taught and practised today lead to conflict rather than unity. But on the other hand, I hold that the truths that are common to all religions can and should be taught to all children. These truths cannot be taught through words or through books-the children can learn these truths only through the daily life of the teacher. If the teacher himself lives up to the tenets of truth and justice, then alone can the children learn thatTruth and Justice are the basis of all religions.⁷
Apparently, Gandhi resolved the conflict in his mind between the religious role of education in which he believed and the secular programme of basic education by upholding the moral imageof the teacher. By arguing that the teacher can convey the basic truths of all religions-whichare similar, he says-by practising them, Gandhi was surely making an extraordinary demand.
Whether the practical impossibility of the demand bothered him or not is a secondary matter. Most probably it did not, for he was used to overlooking the limitations-physical, intellectual or moral -within which ordinary people worked. And it is true that as a great educator active in politics he made many ordinary people do extraordinary things. The important thing for us to note is that by demanding the daily example of moral correctness in the teacher's conductGandhi was opting for a religious, as opposed to a purely professional, role for the teacher. Also, he was using a familiar Indian motif, that of guru living in his ashram in the company of his disciples. In the ideal ashram community, the teacher was expected to set an example of the life worth living, and from this high pedestal of daily existence he was permitted to demandany conceivable form of sacrifice from the students. This quasi-mythologized image seems tohave served an important rhetorical function in Gandhi's plea for reform in education along thelines of his basic education proposal. It promised to place what was a modern concept of education and pedagogy within the halo of Indian tradition.
Opposition
This modest strategy, however, could not protect basic education from the attacks, indifference and undermining to which it was subjected from the beginning. The hostility that Gandhi's proposal faced cannot be separated from the political battles of the final decade ofIndia's struggle for independence. Basic education was described as a ‘Hindu ploy' by theleaders of the Muslim League in northern India. These critics chose to miss the secularcharacter of Gandhi's plan. On the other hand, they paid exaggerated attention to a schemethat happened to synchronize with Gandhi's proposal and had some features similar to it. This other scheme was initiated by Ravi Shankar Shukla in the Central Provinces under the name of Vidya mandir, which literally meant ‘temple of knowledge'. The rural schools Shukla wantedto start under this scheme and, more than that, the known absence of liberal, secular elements in his personality, made them vulnerable to attack. It was purely by metonymic logic that theat tack covered Gandhi's original proposal. The attack found an audience wide enough to include members of the committee appointed by the Central Advisory Board of Education to discuss basic education in the perspective of State policy.
Another perspective from which Gandhi's plan received suspicion and criticism was that of planning for industrial development in India. The basic education proposal coincided with the setting up of the National Planning Committee (NPC) by the Congress Party. The specific aim of the NPC was to formulate a plan for India's industrialization with the aim of‘economic regeneration' after independence. Its chairman, Jawaharlal Nehru, had believed fora long time that large-scale industrialization alone could solve India's problems of poverty and unemployment. But apart from Nehru's own beliefs, the NPC's reports on different spheres of development reflected the vision of a powerful and growing class of industrialists, their supporters in politics and intellectuals with high qualifications in different areas, includingscience and technology.The projection of a centrally controlled economy and rapid expansion of large-scaleindustries in the NPC's reports could hardly have pleased Gandhi. He had been unhappy with the news of the NPC's meetings and work, and had said so. The conflict between Gandhi'sview and the NPC's was not confined to the role and proportion of large-scale industries inthe national economy; it extended to the rationale underlying industrial development. Apartfrom the material prosperity of India, the NPC's reports used India's security as a majorrationale for the growth of heavy industries. Militarization and development were to go hand in hand, as in the West. This association was not something we might regard as cheerful rhetoric to please Gandhi.
The NPC's sub-committee on general and technical education did not acknowledge this conflict, perhaps because it was not necessary to talk about larger conceptual issues in the context of education. But the sub-committee's report showed great reluctance in recommending a shift from the existing system to the one suggested by Gandhi. It argued thatthere had been a sudden increase since 1938 in the efficiency of primary schools under theCongress ministries (the data provided to support this claim were confined to Bombay). ‘It would, therefore, be wrong', the report said, ‘to displace the movement by one in favour of basic education. The introduction of basic education should be a process of grafting it on tothe elementary education possible.'⁹ Obviously, the sub-committee saw serious problems inthe Wardha scheme of basic education. The major problem had to do with the importancegiven to the teaching of productive skills. The sub-committee's argument against this was that‘too much stress on vocation at such [an] age is spiritually harmful and teaching of general subjects through such [a] single narrow-down medium makes the knowledge of subject superficial and defective'.¹⁰
The other major objection was related to this first one. The idea that the output of children's work at school should financially sustain the school was unacceptable to the sub-committee. ‘To a certain extent such a system will mean [the] existence of child labour in schools', the report said.¹¹
These were familiar arguments, and they were consistent with the general approach perspective adopted by the NPC. A broad, liberal curriculum for elementary education, and expansion of facilities for technical education, were the major thrusts of the recommended plan. Financial responsibility for compulsory primary education was assigned to be that of the State. This was indeed the staple of modernist thought, compared to which Gandhian ideas looked obsolete and conservative. In contrast to Gandhi's Utopia of village republics enjoying considerable autonomy but offering a modest standard of life dependent on rudimentary production processes, the modernist Utopia featured a strong centralized State responsible for building an industrial infrastructure in order to ensure a high standard of living for all. A liberal curriculum under State-supported arrangements for elementary schooling was part of the modernist vision. The pedagogical strengths of such a system were indicated by Nehru in one of his few reflections on education which figured at the end of a sub-chapter entitled ‘The Congress and Industry', in The Discovery of India:
It is well recognized now that a child's education should be intimately associated with some craft or manual activity. The mind is stimulated thereby and there is a co-ordination between the activities of the mind and the hands. So also the mind of a growing boy or girl is stimulated by the machine. It grows under the machine'simpact (under proper conditions, of course, and not as an exploited and unhappy worker in a factory) andopens out new horizons. Simple scientific experiments, peeps into the microscope and an explanation of the ordinary phenomenon of nature bring excitement in their train, an understanding of some of life's processes,and a desire to experiment and find out instead of relying on set phrases and old formulae. Self-confidence andthe co-operative spirit grow, and frustration, arising out of the miasma of the past, lessens. A civilization basedon ever-changing and advancing mechanical techniques leads to this. Such a civilization is a marked change, a jump almost from the older type, and is intimately connected with modern industrialization.¹²
There can be little doubt that, while writing these words, Nehru was engaging in a dialogue with Gandhi's basic education plan. He starts by agreeing with the main pedagogical assumption underlying basic education, namely that a craft or manual activity stimulates the child's mind. Then, by the force of analogy between craft and machine, he goes off along another argument that challenges the main economic assumption underlying basic education, without identifying it. The starting point of a dialogue with Gandhi's proposal turns, after two sentences, into a statement regarding the pedagogical value of scientific experiments and the relation such experiments have with an industrial civilization. Nehru was, of course, correct in pointing out this relationship, and also in stressing the enormous role that an experiment-based pedagogy of science could play in revitalizing education in India. He shared the hope of such revitalization with many Indian intellectuals who were committed to rapid modernization and who found Gandhi's educational plan unacceptable. One of them was the well-known novelist Mulk Raj Anand, who wrote in his book On education published at the time of independence: The dream of perfecting good little minds on the basis of Khadi and non-violence, so that these moronsvegetate within the limits of their self-sufficient communities, is not only impossible in an India where everyvillage is already inundated with cheap machine-made goods produced by foreign and indigenous capitalists,but is likely to bring about the very opposite of all those qualities which the Mahatma seeks to create in theaverage Indian.¹³
Clearly, from the modernists' point of view, Gandhi's plan was an invitation to take India backward. Furthermore, they believed that modernization of children's education (to the extent of providing microscopes in elementary schools) could be accomplished within theforeseeable future with the help of available resources.
Implementation

Not all responses to Gandhi's scheme of education were hostile. Many eminent educators welcomed basic education, and they prepared extensive plans to implement it. As might beexpected, the ways in which Gandhi's idea was interpreted differed widely. At one extreme were educators and leaders who understood the scheme in the context of progressive educational thought associated with thinkers like Pestalozzi and Dewey. At the other extremewere those who lived by the letter of Gandhi's thoughts and who saw basic education as afixed charter, a matter of orthodoxy. The fact remains that despite this range in the interpretations that Gandhi's proposal received, and despite imaginable administrative and financial problems, the scheme of basic schools was implemented on a considerable scale inseveral parts of India after independence. It is customary to look back at this implementationas a big failure, a conclusion that may not appear to be particularly sound if examined in the light of historical circumstances. But that is another story. The only fact that ought to be recorded here is that the implementation of Gandhi's plan could not survive the ‘development decade' of the 1960s when the Indian economy and its politics entered into a new phase featuring the penetration of Indian agriculture by the advanced economies of the West and the centralization of power.

SWAMI VIVEKANANDA

SWAMI   VIVEKANANDA.                                                                                                                          A VIDEO OF HIS LAWS.