Discuss how Aurangzeb's letter to his teacher is a
criticism of the education system and student-teacher
relationship
10
Answers
Answer:
In the Aurangzeb's letter to his teacher it is way too critical in his way of teaching, the subjects that he taught, and the desire for the money. he is so angry with him but requests him politely to go back to the village where he came from and live unknown.
Explanation:
Aurangzeb would have given his tutor the highest position in his kingdom if he had been properly directed. He asks simple and embarrassing questions. He wants to know from his teacher what reward he wants from the emperor. He reveals that if he had taught him well as a kid, he could have easily appointed his courier or higher post. A father who teaches properly is better than his father. This feeling from Aurangzeb should be accepted as truth. It shows that he respects a good teacher. This teacher gave him false information about the various kings of the world. He was taught that the kings of European countries, the Netherlands, England and Spain were very small and weak. He was taught that even the kings of China, Burma and Russia are petite. This false information (false fact) was given to him to make him feel that the King of India was the most powerful in the world. In this way, the teacher gave the young prince the wrong information (tell the wrong facts). What was the purpose of this education-is this wrong way of teaching? It just wasted the prince in his position. The teacher filled him with false vanity and pride. The teacher brutally failed to motivate the prince to read various stories objectively (without prejudice) in order to measure his strength. He first understands different states and then teaches Aurangzeb along with its strengths, war strategies (combat methods), customs, religions, political and administrative structures, public welfare programs, and progress in various areas. Was the duty of the teacher. Fields, their cases, and the reasons for such cases. The teacher who teaches the prince must teach him to avoid the mistakes of other kings in order to rule smoothly.
A good teacher teaching a prince needs to prepare him to successfully fulfill his duty as a king in later years. This is only possible if he gives him a comparative analysis of the king and his administration. Forgetting the history of others, the teacher did not bother to teach him the history of his own ancestor, the founder of the Mughal Empire in India. The teacher didn't mind teaching his ancestors how and how to build a strong empire in India. Therefore, the teacher failed in front of the house (also the history of his own family. If such a prince rules according to such teachings, the kingdom will collapse. Aurangzeb is for his teachers to teach. I blame you for setting the wrong priority (subject). The teacher planned to make Aurangzeb a great scholar of Arabic and Arabic literature. The teacher conveniently forgot that after the death of his father, the prince would not be an Arabic grammarian or poet, but a king. It's a complete waste of time as they have nothing to do with his work. The king needs to deal with a very serious and serious problem, which requires a lot of common sense.
#SPJ3
Answer:
One of the primary grievances of Aurangzeb against his schoolteacher was that he failed in duly educating him about the rest of the world, especially the European nations, their strengths and sins and how they objectively compared with India in terms of their warfare capacity and ways.
It's intriguing to note that during Aurangzeb’s time, several European trading companies, each a monopoly possessed by a European State, were laboriously involved in trading in India, had established small agreements in India and were also beginning to get involved in Indian politics. It seems that Aurangzeb may have been intrigued by them and his lack of mindfulness about these nations disturbed him. maybe, he wasn't sure how important to trust them, and whether they could be a trouble to his Conglomerate one day. May be, a more well educated Emperor would have been suitable to prevision the troubles posed by them, and could have enabled applicable safeguards like confining their capability to import and accumulate fortified men and material on Indian home. Had it happed, the fortune of South Asia may have been veritably different moment.
Explanation:
#SPJ3