Category: Discourse

– मुकुन्दप्रसाद उपाध्याय

मदिरापान एक्काइसौँ शताब्दीमा हरेक सम्भ्रान्त परिवारको संस्कृति बनिसकेको छ। मदिरापान गर्ने वर्गहरू आफूलाई सभ्य र सुसंस्कृत बताउँछन्। तर मदिरापान कुलीन वर्गको मात्र वर्गीय पहिचान होइन। सर्वहारादेखि सर्वमारासम्मको हरेक वर्गमा यो व्याप्त छ। वास्तवमा यो नसा हो, व्यसन हो। निम्नवर्गले निम्नकोटिको मदिरा सेवन गर्छन् त कुलीन या उच्चवर्गले उच्चकोटिको। फरक त्यत्ति हो। मेडिकल साइन्सले मदिरापान स्वास्थ्यका लागि हानिकारक प्रमाणित गरिसकेको छ।

हाम्रो समाजमा ब्राह्मणजाति बुज्रुक, अग्रज अनि चतुर र छट्टु जाति मानिन्छ। मदिरापानको कुलतमा फसेका यस जातिका विद्वान्हरू आफ्नो ज्ञान र विद्वत्ताको दुरुपयोग गर्दै ‘मदिरापान हाम्रो वैदिक संस्कृति हो, स्वर्गका देवताहरू पनि सोमरस पान गर्ने गर्थे’ भन्दै आफ्नो लतलाई उच्चता प्रदान गर्न उद्यत देखिन्छन्। के देवताहरूको प्रिय वस्तु, देवताहरूले पान गर्ने, वैदिक यज्ञमा चढाइने सोमरस पनि साँच्चिकै नसालु पेयपदार्थ नै थियो त ? यस लेखमा यसैको परिचर्चा गर्न खोजिएको छ।

हिन्दूधर्मलाई सनातनधर्म भनिन्छ। किनकि यो वेदविहित धर्म हो, अनि वेद अनादि, सनातन र अपौरुषेय हो। त्यसैले अचेल हाम्रो हिन्दूधर्मलाई सनातन वैदिक धर्म भनेर परिभाषित गर्ने गरिन्छ। वेद अनादि र अपौरुषेय भनेर जान्दाजान्दै पनि हाम्रा केही आध्यात्मिक चिन्तक, इतिहासकार र संस्कृतिविद्हरू वेदरचनाको कालखण्ड पहिल्याउनमा तल्लीन छन्। तिनको बुद्धिविलासका अनुसार तिनीहरूले ‘ऋग्वेद’ को रचनाकाल आजभन्दा ५ हजार वर्षदेखि ६ हजार वर्षका बीचमा रहेको अनुमान लगाएका छन्। ‘ऋग्वेद’ मा प्रमुख देवताका रूपमा इन्द्रको उपासना र स्तुति गरिएको छ। इन्द्रपछिका अन्य प्रमुख देवताहरूमा सूर्य, अग्नि, वरुण, वायु, मरुत्, अश्विनिकुमार, सोम, मित्र, विश्वदेव, ऋभु, वृहस्पति आदि छन्। यी सबै देवताहरूले सोमरस पान गर्ने गरेको कुरा ‘ऋग्वेद’ मा सयौँपटक आउँछ। ‘ऋग्वेद’ मा इन्द्रलाई सोमपान गर्नेहरूमध्ये धेरै सोमपान गर्ने देवताका रूपमा वर्णन गरिएको पाइन्छ। इन्द्रलाई देवताहरूका राजा, भोगविलासमा रमण गर्ने, सुरासुन्दरीप्रति आसक्त, इन्द्रियासक्त विषयी देवताका रूपमा पुराणहरूले समेत स्वीकारेका हुँदा ‘ऋग्वेद’ मा वर्णित इन्द्रले पान गर्ने, इन्द्रलाई मन पर्ने पेयपदार्थ सोमरसलाई मदिरा बताउनेहरूको तर्कलाई पनि ठाडै नकार्न सक्ने ठाउँ छैन।

तर यो शास्त्रको सतही बुझाइ र आफ्नो रुचिअनुसारको विश्लेषण हो जस्तो लाग्छ। मदिरालाई चलनचल्तीको भाषामा रक्सी भनिन्छ, शास्त्रमा सुरा पनि भनिन्छ, रसायनशास्त्रको भाषामा अल्कोहल भनिन्छ अनि अल्कोहलको मात्रामा र स्वादमा विविधताका दृष्टिले मदिराभित्र ह्विस्की, ब्रान्डी, रम, बियर, वाइन, जाँड, तोङ्वा अनि रूखबाट सोझै निकालिने खजुर र ताडी आदि सबै पर्दछन्। यी सबै मादक पेयहरू मूलभूत रूपमा तीन किसिमले बन्दछन् — (१) अन्नबाट बनाइन्छ, २. फलहरू र फूलहरू (महुवा आदि) बाट बनाइन्छ, अनि (३) विशेष प्रजातिको वृक्षलाई ताछेर त्यसको रस वा चोपबाट बनाइन्छ। यसरी बनाइने मदिराहरूमध्ये कुनचाहिँ मदिरा देवताहरूले पान गर्ने सोमरससँग मिल्दोजुल्दो छ त ? यो पनि चर्चाको विषय हुन सक्छ।

एकथरी सन्त–महात्माहरूले गरेको अभिभाषण वा प्रवचनमा ‘वेदवर्णित देवताहरूले पान गर्ने भनेको सोमरस मदिरा किमार्थ होइन, किनभने सोम भनेको चन्द्रमा हो र चन्द्रमाको शीतलतालाई पान गर्ने कामलाई नै सोमरसपान भनिएको हो’ भनेर अथ्र्याएको मैले सुनेको छु। नेपाल राजकीय प्रज्ञाप्रतिष्ठान

(हालको नेपाल प्रज्ञाप्रतिष्ठान) द्वारा प्रकाशित ‘नेपाली वृहत् शब्दकोश’ मा ‘सोमरस’ लाई ‘सोमलता नामको लहराबाट निकालिने देवताहरूले पान गर्ने रस एवं सोमरसले झैँ मत्याउने पेयपदार्थ’ भनेर अर्थ लगाइएको छ। सोही शब्दकोशमा ‘सोमलता’ लाई चाहिँ ‘शुक्लपक्षमा दिनहुँ पातहरू पलाउने र कृष्णपक्षमा क्रमशः झर्दै गएर औँसीको दिनमा डाँठ मात्र बाँकी रहने हिमालयतिर पाइने एक लहरो’ भनिएको छ। शब्दकोशले उक्त लहरोको बोटानिकल नाम भने दिन सकेको छैन। यसरी शब्दकोशले परोक्ष रूपले सोमरसलाई मत्याउने पदार्थका रूपमा स्वीकारेको देखिन्छ। साथै उक्त शब्दकोशमा नै ‘सुरा’ शब्दको अर्थ दिने क्रममा ‘(१) रक्सी, मदिरा, मद्य, (२) सोमरस, (३) जल, पानी’ भनेर थप भ्रम सिर्जना गरिदिएको देखिन्छ।

यी प्रश्नहरू वा शङ्काहरूको निवारण गर्न फेरि वेदतिर नै जाऊँ। हिन्दूहरूको मात्र होइन, मानवजातिकै प्राचीनतम ग्रन्थका रूपमा ‘ऋग्वेद’ लाई मानिएको छ। यस कुरामा पाश्चात्य विद्वान्हरूको पनि विमति छैन। वेद विभिन्न समयमा विभिन्न ऋषिहरूले साक्षात्कार गरेका मन्त्रहरूको सङ्ग्रह हो। मन्त्रसङ्ख्याको दृष्टिले १०५५२ मन्त्रहरू भएको ‘ऋग्वेद’ लाई वेदहरूमध्येको जेठो र गहन मानिएको छ। वेदलाई संहिता, ब्राह्मण, आरण्यक र उपनिषद् गरी चार भागमा विभाजन गरिएअनुसार ‘ऋग्वेद’ का पनि चार भाग छन्। ऐतरेय र कौषीतकी यी दुई ‘ऋग्वेद’ का ब्राह्मण हुन्। आरण्यकहरूमा ऐतरेयारण्यक, साङ्ख्याउन र कौषीतकी गरी तीन आरण्यकहरू प्रसिद्ध छन्।

वेदका मन्त्रहरूलाई ऋचा भनिन्छ। ‘ऋग्वेद’ को पहिलो मण्डलको सूक्त २३ को २३० औँ ऋचामा ‘हे वायुदेव ! आऊ र यी दूध मिसाइएका कडा सोमरसहरू पान गर’ भनेर भनिएको प्रसङ्ग र सोही मण्डलको सूक्त ५ को ४५ औँ ऋचामा सोमरसलाई दहीमिश्रित पवित्र पदार्थका रूपमा उद्धृत गरिएबाट केही धार्मिक विद्वान्हरूले ‘ऋग्वेद’ मा वर्णित सोमरस पञ्चामृत हुन सक्ने तर्क अघि सारेका छन्। वैदिक कर्मकाण्डका यज्ञ, पूजा आदिमा सबै देवीदेवताहरूलाई पञ्चामृत अर्पण गरिन्छ, जुन पाँच पदार्थको मिश्रित झोल हो। ती पाँच पदार्थहरूमा गाईको दूध, गाईको दही, गाईको घिउ, सखर (वा चिनी) र मह पर्दछन्। ‘ऋग्वेद’ को बाँकी प्रसङ्गलाई बेवास्ता गरेर ती दुई ऋचाहरूलाई मात्र लिँदा सोमरसलाई हालको पञ्चामृतजस्तो रस भनेर भन्न सकिन्छ। तर अन्य प्रसङ्गहरूमा चाहिँ वनस्पति वा लतातिर बढी सङ्केत गरिएको छ।

‘ऋग्वेद’ कै प्रथम मण्डलको सूक्त ५ को ३७ औँ मन्त्रमा सोमरसलाई यज्ञको सम्पत्ति, नेताहरूलाई उत्साहित गर्ने, वहनशील, साथीहरूलाई आनन्द दिने, शीघ्र प्रभाव पार्ने भनेर वर्णन गरिएको छ। वेदको यो वर्णनमा रहेको ‘नेतृत्ववर्गलाई उत्साहित गर्ने, आनन्द दिने र शीघ्र प्रभाव पार्ने’ यी तीन गुण मदिराको गुणसँग मिल्ने भएकाले केही पण्डितहरूले मदिराको नाता सोमरससँग जोड्न खोजेको देखिन्छ।

‘ऋग्वेद’ को सूक्त २८ को ३१३ औँ मन्त्रमा ‘पिँध मोटो भएको ढुङ्गालाई माथि राखेर त्यहाँ ओखलमा पिसिएको सोमरस बारम्बार खाऊ’ भनेर इन्द्रको स्तुति गरिएकाले सोमरस ओखलमा पिसेर निकालिने रस रहेछ भन्ने बुझिन्छ। सोही सूक्तको ३१४ देखि ३२१ सम्मका ८ वटा मन्त्रहरूमा मुस्ली र ओखलबाट सोमरस उत्पादन हुने कुराको उल्लेख छ, अनि वृक्ष–वनस्पतिहरूको पनि उल्लेख भएको हुँदा कुनै वनस्पतिविशेषलाई ओखलमा पिसेर विशिष्ट प्रकारको मीठो रस निकालिने कुरो बुझिन्छ। चास्नीमा छानेर सोमरस निकाल्ने प्रविधिको समेत उल्लेख गरिएको छ। सूक्त ३० मा पुनः दूध मिसाइएको सोमरसको वर्णन छ। हाल चलनचल्तीमा खाइने रक्सी, बियर आदि विश्वमा कहीँ कतै पनि दूधसँग मिसाएर अथवा दहीसँग मिसाएर खाइने चलन छैन। त्यसैले मदिरासँग सोमरसको एकता स्थापित गर्न सकिँदैन। वेदवर्णित सोमरस उत्पादन गर्ने विधि र मदिरा उत्पादन गर्ने विधिमा पनि फरक छ। सोमरस निकाल्न ओखल, मुस्ली आदि प्रविधि पाइएकाले यो प्रविधि वनौषधि निकाल्ने आयुर्वेदिक प्रविधि रहेको प्रतीत हुन्छ।

‘ऋग्वेद’ को पहिलो मण्डलको ८९७ औँ ऋचामा सोमरसलाई शीतलता प्रदान गर्ने, आनन्द दिने र बल दिने भनिएको छ भने ९०४ औँ ऋचामा ‘ऋत्विक्हरूले इन्द्रको प्रसादका रूपमा सोमरस खाँदा साँच्चै नै तृप्त भएर आ–आफ्नो शरीर हल्लाए’ भनिएको छ। यहाँ ‘खाएर शरीर हल्लाए’ भनिएबाट सोमरस मादक पदार्थ हुन सक्ने अनुमान गरिएको हुन सक्छ। त्यस्तै त्यही मण्डलको ९०७ र ९०८ औँ ऋचामा इन्द्रलाई सोमरसले मनग्गे खुसी पारेको हुँदा ‘गएर आफ्नी पत्नीसँग पारिवारिक सुख प्राप्त गर’ भनिएबाट सोमरस पुष्टिवद्र्धक अति पौष्टिक पेय हो भन्ने अर्थबोध हुन्छ। यसै गरी अन्य ऋचाहरूमा पनि सोमरसलाई बल दिने, मीठो, स्वादिलो आदि विशेषण दिइएको छ।

यसरी शास्त्रहरूमा वर्णित सोमरसपान र सुरापान बिलकुलै फरक कुरा हुन् भनेर बुझ्नुुपर्ने हुन्छ। वेदमा उल्लिखित अश्वबलि र पशुबलिको साङ्केतिक अर्थ नबुझेर वर्तमान हिंसाप्रधान बलि र केही आदिवासी समाजमा प्रचलित नरबलिलाई वेदसँग जोड्ने धृष्टता गरिएजस्तै अचेलको मदिरालाई वैदिक सोमरससँग जोड्नु पनि धृष्टता नै हो। वेदमा धेरै ठाउँमा यज्ञलाई अहिंसामय यज्ञ भनेर बताइएबाट पनि पशुबलि वैदिक यज्ञको विरासत होइन भनेर बुझ्नुपर्ने थियो।

‘ऋग्वेद’ को प्रसङ्गबाट कतिसम्मचाहिँ प्रस्ट हुन्छ भने सोमरस सात्विक पेयपदार्थ हो जो देवताहरूले पान गर्दथे, यो यज्ञको एक अङ्ग पनि हो, कुनै खास वनस्पति वा लतालाई कुटेर त्यसको रस छानेर सोमरस बनाइन्थ्यो, जुन रस दही र दूधसँग मिसाएर सेवन गर्दा अझ बढी लाभदायक हुन्थ्यो। यज्ञमा सोमरस पान गर्न सबै वैदिक देवताहरू आउन आतुर हुने स्थितिलाई बुझ्दा केचाहिँ अर्थ लगाउन सकिन्छ भने सोमरस देवताहरू आफैँले उत्पादन गर्न नसक्ने तर मनुष्यहरूले उत्पादन गरेर देवतालाई अर्पण गर्न सक्ने झोल पदार्थ रहेछ।

‘महाभारत’ को उद्योगपर्वमा महात्मा विदुर र राजा धृतराष्ट्रबीचको संवाद छ जसलाई विदुरनीति पनि भनिन्छ। त्यसमा विदुरले एउटा राजाले सातवटा दुर्गुणबाट टाढै रहनु भनेर मद्यपानलाई पनि एउटा दुर्गुण बताएका छन्। भद्रपुरुषले मद्यपान गर्न हुँदैन भन्ने विदुरको ठहर छ। ऋग्वेदकालीन इन्द्र देवताका राजा, भगवान् विष्णुका अंशपुरुष भएका कारणले इन्द्रले पान गर्ने सोमरस मद्यपान हुने सम्भावना देखिँदैन।

‘श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता’ को सत्रौँ अध्यायमा श्रीकृष्णले अर्जुनलाई बताएको सात्विक, राजसी र तामसी खाद्यवस्तुको व्याख्याअनुसार मदिरा दुर्गन्धित, बासी, उच्छिष्ट मादक द्रव्य भएकाले त्यो तामसी भोजन हो। तामसी वस्तु वैदिक यज्ञमा चढ्ने या चढाइने कुरै भएन। परम्परागत रूपमा रक्सी सेवन गर्ने विश्वका केही आदिवासी जनजातिहरूले भौगोलिक विशिष्टताका कारण जाडोबाट बच्न रक्सी सेवन गर्ने गरेका र आफूले सेवन गरेको वस्तु आफ्ना इष्टदेवतालाई समेत अर्पण गर्ने गरेका कारण त्यो नै परम्परा बन्न गएको र देवतालाई पनि रक्सी चढाउन थालिएको कुरा बुझ्न सकिन्छ। तान्त्रिक पद्धतिमा पनि देवतालाई मदिरा चढाइन्छ, तर वैदिक पद्धतिमा मदिरा वर्जित छ र ब्राह्मण–क्षत्री मात्र चतुर र छट्टु जाति भएकाले तिनीहरूले आफूले सेवन गर्ने सबै वस्तु भगवान्लाई चढाउँदैनन् वा भनौँ देवताहरूलाई नचढ्ने अभक्ष वस्तुसमेत भक्षण गर्ने गरेका छन्।

वेदमा सोमयाग, राजसूययज्ञ, अश्वमेधयज्ञ आदि ठूला–ठूला यज्ञहरूमा सोमलतालाई पिसेर मन्त्रोच्चारणसहित सोमरस निकाली देवतालाई चढाउने प्रसङ्ग आउँछ। यो रस पुष्टिवद्र्धक, वीर्यवद्र्धक र पवित्र रस भएकाले देवताहरूलाई अर्पण गरिएको हुँदा ऋचाहरूको प्रसङ्ग, सन्दर्भ र सङ्केतलाई नबुझेर वा बढी बुझेर त्यो रसलाई सुरा वा मदिरा थियो भन्नु भनेको वेदका त्यस्तै मन्त्रहरू नबुझेर वा बढी बुझेर अश्वबलि र पशुबलिबाट बलिप्रथा र नरबलिप्रथा जस्ता गलत प्रथाहरूलाई परम्परा र धर्मको जलप लगाइदिएजस्तै हो भन्न सकिन्छ। प्रकृति वा ईश्वरका स्थलचर, जलचर र नभचर जीवहरूमध्ये अनि ब्रह्माजीका दस प्रकारका सृष्टिहरूमध्ये मानवजातिलाई उत्कृष्ट मानिएको छ। अन्य चराचुरुङ्गी र जीवजन्तुहरूभन्दा मानवलाई उत्कृष्ट बनाउने तàवका रूपमा मानवजातिलाई बुद्धि र विवेक दिइएको छ। त्यसैका कारण मानवजाति सिर्जनशील, कलाकार, चिन्तक, लेखक, अन्वेषक, वैज्ञानिक, दार्शनिक आदि बन्न सक्छन्, अन्य जीवहरू सक्तैनन्। यसरी प्रकृतिप्रदत्त बुद्धि र विवेकलाई केही क्षणका लागि विस्मृत गराई हामीलाई बुङ्गुर–सुँगुरजस्तो पशुतुल्य बनाउने मदिरा कसरी सोमरस हुन्छ होला त ? मानवभन्दा श्रेष्ठ सृष्टि रहेका देवताहरूले यज्ञमा कसरी मद्यपान गर्छन् होला त?

खाद्यप्रविधिसम्बन्धी विशेषज्ञहरू ह्विस्की, रम र ब्रान्डीबाहेक वाइनहरूमा १० देखि १३ प्रतिशतसम्म अल्कोहल हुने, बियरहरूमा ५ देखि ७ प्रतिशतसम्म (प्रिमियम बियरमा चाहिँ बढी) अल्कोहल हुने र टनिकहरूमा ५ प्रतिशतभन्दा कम अल्कोहल हुने कुरा बताउँछन्। सोमरस बन्ने सोमलता पनि एक प्रकारको लता भएकाले लतामा सुगर हुन्छ। त्यस्तो सुगर ग्लुकोजबाट नसालु पेय बनाइँदा पनि ५ प्रतिशतभन्दा बढी अल्कोहल हुने सम्भावना देखिँदैन।

यसरी हेर्दा सोमरस पुष्टिवद्र्धक, बलवद्र्धक र गुलियो, मीठो हुने हुँदा भिटामिन टनिकजस्तो पेय पदार्थ हुन सक्छ भन्न सकिन्छ, जसमा ४–५ प्रतिशत अल्कोहलको मात्रा रहनु अस्वाभाविक देखिँदैन। वनस्पति कुटेर सोमरस बनाइने हुँदा यो पेय पनि तराईतिरका वनस्पति खजुर र ताडीको रस, नरिवलको पानी जस्तो शीतलता दिने, मीठो, बल दिने र स्वादिलो पेय रहेछ भनेर बुझ्नुपर्ने हुन्छ, जसमा केही प्रतिशत अल्कोहलको मात्रा पनि हुन सक्छ भन्ने तर्कमा भने केही तुक भेटिन्छ।

 

– Khagendra Acharya

In this article I discuss some of the aspects that pertain to Open and Distance Learning (ODL) in Nepali context. More specifically, drawing from the articles which explicate the prevalence of ODL in developing countries, I delineate on the prospects and challenges of ODL in Nepalese context. As such, the article aims to explore fundamental aspects of popularly designated alternative paths to the traditional mode of learning.

Background

Broadly, the beginning of ODL dates back to 18^th Century due to the phenomenal advancement and innovation in transportation and communication heralded by industrial revolution. In Desmond Keegan’s account, ODL as alternative model of education started when technology made it feasible to separate teacher and learner from a fixed place, at a fixed time, to meet a fixed person, in order to be trained. An alternative account at micro level, i.e., at the level of individual, invokes the name of Isaac Pitrnan (in 1840 Britain) as the precursor of this mode with his initiation of modern correspondence education.

Started with correspondence mode, ODL is now agreed to have undergone notably four other stages namely multimedia model, tele-learning model, flexible learning model and interactive flexible learning model (Taylor). The proliferation suffices to prove why ODL has been so widely accepted in the western hemisphere and why European countries have established and recognized this method through European Distance Education Network (EDEN).

Compared to the genesis of ODL in the west, its official and documented history in South Asian Countries (SAC), however, carries shorter history. The table below shows the history of open and distance learning in the SAC (I have included only the State Universities which offer courses in ODL mode):

Table 1: History of Open University in SAC[1]

Though offered very lately, ODL in SAC has been gaining an increased attention and thereby a phenomenal growth in recent years. The change can best be described as the move of ODL from marginal to integral part of overall educational provision.

Introduction

In Nepalese context, ODL offered by the state’s own establishment carries no history in the sense that the government’s plan to establish Open University Nepal (OUN) has yet not been materialized. Hence, ODL in relation to OUN can be discussed only at the level of efforts made[2]. The government’s initial endeavour can be located in the very year when Nepali Government became a signatory of SAARC Consortium to Open and Distance Learning (SACODiL) in 1999. Wagle recall of the government’s effort for Open University also establishes 1990 as a starting point:

The MoE (Ministry of Education) itself constituted an Open Learning and Distance Education (OLDE) Committee in 1999 under the chairmanship of then Secretary of Education to suggest the government with modalities of OLDE in Nepal. The Committee comprising OLDE experts suggested the government with alternatives of programs and resources. (The Himalayan Times)

Nonetheless, the report, Wagle writes very sarcastically, must be gathering dust in some cabinet of the MoE even today. Since 1999 the agenda does not seem to have occupied any importance for around a decade. Exactly after eleven years, i.e., in October 2010, another notable [might be more optimistic effort from the government due to collaborative nature of the venture: MoE and Non-Resident Nepali Association (NRNA) have signed in the agreement to start Open University Nepal (OUN)] move appears visible. The proposed OUN has included the following major objectives:

• Close the gap in higher education demand, currently unmet by the combined capacity of all the institutions, through open and distance mechanisms.
• Take tertiary education to the rural, remote, and marginalized people of Nepal, especially women and Dalits, who are practically confined to the villages due to family obligations, social challenges, and financial constraints.
• Provide opportunities for teachers and government employees who are unable to advance their education, skills and careers while living in rural and remote places, or to those who are unemployed.
• Provide a mechanism to continue education for the youth who take temporary or permanent employment in foreign countries.
• Advance a computer-based education to rural Nepal that relates to health, social-systems, productivity, economic improvement, and sustainability disciplines.

(Source: Rasali, Adhikari and Dhakal)

The outcome of the effort, however, has been only a ray of hope for the advocates of ODL. In a context when the plan is in incubation period, writing on the prospect of ODL might sound highly phantasmagoric. Here, I caution my readers not to harness total skepticism mainly for two reasons: first, the government of Nepal along with a promising partner has declared an Open University as a viable and appropriate means to provide mass access to tertiary education; second, ODL has already been in operation since the turn of century in Nepal through accredited universities such as Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU).

Prospects

ODL by its nature carries promising features such as egalitarianism, equality of educational opportunities, flexible curricula (Peters). Consequently, the mode bears significant potential to widen access to higher education which in Nepalese context has appeared very tough due to various constrains. The following elements appear to create noteworthy scope for ODL.

Availability of Learners

The inability of Nepali government to tackle the consequences of diversity, whether prevalent in the form of extreme economic disparity or geographical inaccessibility or socio-political hierarchies, had stood as a major barrier for a large population in appropriate access to education. Education opportunities were inappropriately decentralized, if not totally centralized, and thus any individual other than well-to-do economic status could not get enrolled for higher qualification. I vividly remember my father narrating his odyssey to Dharan from Khotang to study intermediate level. Many people who could not afford to make such bold decision (I am sure this number is large) could hardly own even fundamental qualifications required to take hold of opportunities which were available. And, the situation is true even now: they cannot claim for any of the provisions made by the governments firstly (though scantily) after the restoration of Democracy in 1991 and secondly after the end of Maoist Armed Conflict in 2005.

A very paradoxical situation ensnares these people now: they have opportunities but not the required qualifications. The situation thereby produces foundational reason to demand for educational qualification which does not look viable through traditional mode of education. The availability of learners due to this necessity has further increased at the acceleration of peace process. We have a large number of cadres who had joined Maoist revolution after 1996 leaving their studies are now in need of education as they have been placed back to society. The two-fold availability, along with other elements such as outbound mobility of students for foreign universities, would be productive factors in pulling learners to ODL mechanism.

Ample Libraries

Libraries in Nepal have grown phenomenally especially after the restoration of Democracy in 1991. Now, we live the condition neither of a group of young students in 1930 who were charged of sedition as they applied for permission to start a public library (the Sarawasti Public Library) nor of students who suffered in 1960 when the king dismissed Nepal’s first elected government and closed public libraries established in the fifties. As the study of Koirala and Bird has outlined, post 1991 has provided appropriate environment for, “re-opening of a number of rural community libraries which were closed during monarchy”. Similarly, a large number of INGOs such as Room to Read, and Read Nepal have been asking for government’s permission to “support for community libraries”. Consequently, the number of libraries in Nepal has increased from about 400 in 1990 to about 800 in 2003 (Shrestha qtd in Koirala and Bird 120). The quality and quantity of library has further been enhanced both by INGOs like Rural Development and Education (READ) and Room to Read, and by foreign mission libraries such as the American Library, British Council Learning Centre, Bharat Sanskritic Kendra.

Though all the libraries, especially the ones located in rural areas, might not have ample and appropriate books, their infrastructure can be used for ODL.

Contribution from Diaspora

One of the most optimistic aspects in ODL comes from the promise of contribution from Nepali diaspora. The diaspora, like the population of this type elsewhere, undergo ambivalent position: on the one hand, they meagerly wish to return their home country but on the other, they wish to see the country prospered and plan to contribute without returning. Rasali, Adhikari and Dhakal have fairly outlined the nature of potential input from the Diaspora due to their empathy for people at home:

There are a sizable number of highly qualified academics and professionals among Nepalese Diaspora, who are eager to help their motherland. Having benefited originally from the Nepal’s investment in public education and having had a first-hand experience of her needs, many of them are also eager to give back to the native land. Several members of this Diaspora group have themselves experienced the hopelessness caused by poverty, have walked barefoot to attend schools in the mountains and plains, and have faced acute shortage of books and other educational facilities when they pursued their education in Nepal.  As many of them have succeeded in obtaining world class education in spite of these insurmountable barriers, they understand the pain and frustrations of the rural poor and marginalized groups and their struggle for education, and know that success is still possible. Because of these reasons, they are well suited to help education in Nepal through open and distance learning and support the neediest groups.

The agreement made in October 2010 (it has already been mentioned) stands as a remarkable gesture of the potential.

Challenges

Challenges in ODL are inherent to the characteristics of this mode. Since it espouses values of flexibility and accessibility, it assumes learners to have sense of both autonomy and responsibility for learning. Before I discuss on the problems that start due to the collusion of two elements, I find it worthy to quote Rennie and Mason’s conclusion on the impediments in distance and distributed learning in Nepal and Bhutan:

Firstly, Internet access is improving rapidly, but is still generally too weak and inconsistent to allow any reliance on net-based learning solutions. Secondly, the academic culture is resistant to the recognition of the value of open-learning degrees, with subsequent difficulties in re-designing course materials for a more educationally flexible, student-centred learning environment.

Certainly, the ambivalent position of scholars[3] on the degree from ODL and the problems of internet access for learners account as major impediments. Leaving aside the skepticism of these scholars, I concentrate on other more important factors which make ODL more challenging. One of them, as already mentioned props up from the dialectics of autonomy and responsibility. In Nepalese context, learners’ autonomy which should be curbed by the sense of responsibility exists in very peculiar situation. Learner’s sense of autonomy often overrides their sense of responsibility. Simply stated, many learners tend to carry no responsibility in pedagogic assumptions in ODL. In turn, the tendency might culminate in using ODL as mere formality for awarding and getting certificate.

Unconducive Political Environment

Political environment in Nepal especially after the restoration of Democracy in 1991 has been constantly unstable. The phenomena such as frequent change of governments and thereby blockage of policies formulated by former government has been hindrance for any initiative. Institutions which are already in operation do not generally suffer; but the institutions like OUN which are in the making face major hindrance due to political instability. Wagle’s account succinctly presents this problem:

The education minister makes the commitment, but how long will he stay in the MoE? By the time the university bill is passed by the parliament, he may already have been out of the government because of the fluid politics of Nepal. That means another minister would have to understand the whole process again.

Lack of Electrification

ODL relies heavily on advancement and proliferated use of media and communication. More specifically, educationists need to rely on novel methods of imparting knowledge such as the internet and e-mail, telephone, CD-Roms, print materials, video cassettes and video-conferencing. All these devices need uninterrupted supply of electricity, which in Nepalese context sounds highly unlikely. Power cut has been so severe that electricity avails to us in many months only for around 6-8 hours.

Conclusion

The proliferation and thereby acknowledgement of ODL both in developing and developed countries imply the mode’s significant potential. However, this does not mean that ODL will replace the traditional mode as euphorically supposed by scholars such as Ramanujam, “the present dominance of  campus based higher education may become a thing of the past perhaps by the middle of the next century, if not earlier than that” (126). In the developing countries like Nepal, ODL has apparent scope due to the availability of learners, accessibility to libraries and promise from prospective collaborators. But, we have challenges such as unconducive political environment, lack of electrification, skepticism from some scholars regarding the strength of degree making the task of tackling almost herculean.

Works Referred

• Chimpololo, Andrew. “The Prospects and Challenges of Open Learning and Distance Education in Malawi.” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. V. 66, 2010.
• Keegan, D. Distance education technology for the new millennium: compressed video teaching.  ZIFF Papiere. Germany: Institute for Research into Distance Education, 1995.
• Koirala, Naresh and Paul Bird. Library Development in Nepal: Problems and Prospects. Retrived on 20 February 2011 from http://www.nepallibrary.org/sites/default/files/Library%20Development%20in%20Nepal%20-%20Problems%20and%20Prospects.pdf
• Ramanajum, P. R. Distance Education in Developing Countries: Prospects and Challenges.
• Rasali D, Adhikari A. and Dhakal P. “A Proposal for Open University for Rural and Marginalized People.” nepalnews.com. http://www.nepalnews.com/home/index.php/guest-column/7001-a-proposal-for-open-university-for-rural-and-marginalized-people.html
• Rennie, Frank and Robin Mason. “The Development of Distributed Learning Techniques in Bhutan and Nepal.” The International review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Accessed on 17 February 2012 from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/339/765
• Taylor, James. New Millennium Distance Education. Retrieved on 18 February 2012 from http://www.amigostercermundo.org/docs/FTW%20WORD%20(7).pdf
• Wagle, Mana P. “Will it Open in Nepal?” The Himalayan Times. http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=Open+University+&NewsID=283434