Exigency Of Educating The Masses: The Inspirational Ideology Of Jotiba Phle

Understanding the Exigency of Educating the Masses:The Inspirational Ideology of Jotiba Phule Poonam Singh, Assitant Professor, Satywati College (M), University of Delhi.
Abstract
The traditional Indian system gave monopoly of educational resources to Brahmins. Anyone who tried to break the hegemonic encroachments of educational resourceswas severely punished by the Laws of Manu or by the preaching of Vedic scriptures such as Rig-Veda. For a very long-time Indians born in disparate Varnas could not even think of transgressing the caste lines or stepping into the zones that were not made or meant for them, especially those who were born in lower segments of Varnas. Although a mild system of punishment is also listed in Manusmiriti for a transgressive
The British wanted to educate the upper class which by default meant upper castes and expected them to spread education amongst the masses. Jotiba Phule objected to it, as he understood that upper class or caste people could not empathize with the untouchables and the masses at large. Phule did not spare anyone for exploiting the masses or the lower caste/class people. Although, he has beencharged of being sympathetic towards the Christian religion, perhaps for his defense of Pandita Ramabai’s proselytization, this could be a propaganda to portray him as anti-Hindu. He did not remain lackadaisical to the inimical policies of the British authority on education and vehemently pointed out their privation of Indian masses. In his Memorial Addressed to the Education Commision, Jotiba Phule
He was a man of extraordinary courage and beliefs. His theory was that the Indian lower castes were the natives of India who were subjugated by the Aryans. In Greek tradition of dialogue, he indulged in dialogic form to deconstruct the mythological stories of the Hindu religious order. To provide education to those who had been denied it for centuries, he urged the British authorities to re-formulate their guidelines and focus on primary education than on the higher education.
Phule’s criticism was not limited to Brahminism and their machinations to keep lower caste subjugated. He also disapprovedof British who did not throw away Brahminic prominence in Indian social system. Omvedt says
[i]n fact, one of his major criticisms of the British was that in leading their pleasure-seeking life they acquiesced in Brahman dominance of the masses. In every department, education, irrigation, the judiciary, etc, the Brahmans were seen as monopolizing the benefits of rule(Omvedt,