Introduction

Human life has three strata or spheres: physical, psychic and spiritual (the thirst for infinite). In the physical sphere, five basic things are necessary for all human beings: food, clothing, shelter, education and medical treatment. There exists wide disparity towards availability of these five fundamental necessities of life. In order to remove people’s sufferings in the physical sphere, common sense dictates that the wealth of the entire universe should be considered as common patrimony.

The wealth is meant for all, so that all can live collectively. It is not proper that one person will snatch away the morsels of food from the mouths of others due to his/her superior intellectual or physical power. All narrow sentiments like geo-sentiment, socio-sentiment, provincialism, nationalism, internationalism encourage exploitation in diverse spheres of life.

Neohumanist approach is needed to broaden the horizons of human thought. Neohumanism was propounded by the great Indian philosopher Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (1921-1990). As a key approach to internationalisation, Sarkar emphasised manifestation of human qualities that lie in the subtle layers of mind. Sarkar advocated transcending nationalism and building a larger indivisible human society. In doing so, he specifically mentions three new directions - spiritual philosophy, Neohumanism and socio- economic philosophy PROUT (Progressive Utilization Theory). In this text, the author seeks to introduce internationalisation and interculturality from Neohumanist perspective.

Law of Social Cycle, Sentiments and Exploitation

According to seer India Philosopher Shrii Prabaht Ranjan Sarkar (P.R. Sarkar), there are four classes in a society viz. shudra, the toiling class; ksatriya, the warrior class; vipra, the intellectual class; and vaeshya, the capitalist class (Sarkar,2018). According to him, after the shudra age (the age of manual workers) comes the age of warriors (ksatriya age), next comes the vipra age (the age of intellectuals); then the vaeshya age (the age of capitalists). However, in each age a particular social class emerges both as ruler and as exploiter. The moment one class becomes exploiters, the life of the majority becomes miserable, a few enjoy at the expense of many. Hence, it is essential that no social class should be given any scope to exploit the rest of the society.

Often people are guided by narrow sentiments. When one’s sentiment flows towards a particular territory, it is called geo-sentiment. People do all sorts of illogical activities devoid of logic and superstition is substituted for logic. All religious, economic, political or social theories based on geo-sentiments yield to superstition from their very inception. When people move along the path of a particular geo-sentiment in the social sphere, they do not think of others. They thrive on the lifeblood of others, thinking this to be natural. Fascism is born from such a mentality and also imperialism, capitalism and oligarchy. Geo-sentiment may also be in economic life e.g., although there is no iron ore or cheap electricity, we must have a steel plant in our area. This is nothing but an expression of geo-economic sentiment (^{Sarkar, 1982}). Under such circumstances, the industrially developed countries, to ensure a permanent supply of raw materials and the continuing availability of markets for their products, resort to imperialism, economic and political fascism and so on. They try to create an arena of satellite markets to ensure supply of raw materials and markets for their finished goods. When the developing, or underdeveloped countries detect the intentions of the developed countries, conflict arises between the developed and undeveloped countries and this poses a great threat to world peace. There may be geo-religious sentiment like giving holy tag to a particular area.

When sentiment expands beyond the limit of an individual to embrace others also, it is called ‘socio-sentiment’. Family sentiment, caste sentiment, community sentiment, national sentiment, international sentiment and so on are all examples of socio-sentiment only difference is in their increasing radius.

Economic exploitation is perpetrated in two ways: psycho-economic exploitation and politico-economic exploitation. Motivated by socio-sentiment, one social group tries to forcibly dominate another group. The dominant group uses the land of exploited group as source of raw materials and also as a market of their finished product produced from the raw materials diverted from the exploited land. They are forced to enslave themselves to the powerful countries or groups due to their fear complex born of their impotence or poverty. As a result, exploited land / country are economically ruined. Such things happen as a result of psycho-economic exploitation and politico-economic exploitation. When this exploitation is perpetrated by the application of brute force, it is politico-economic exploitation; but when it is done not through brute force but through the application of cunning intellectual strategy, it is primarily psycho-economic exploitation (^{Sarkar, 1982}). Poverty, oppression, conflicts and other social ailments continue to undermine social progress. Tyranny of weak by strong, domination and oppression present serious obstacle to human flourishing (^{Lovett, 2009}). Attempts to subjugate humanity continue and human rights are violated.

Society, Progressive Socialism and Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT)

No one is totally independent. Everyone makes up their deficiencies by taking help form others. Whenever a large group of people strive to make up for their differences on mutual understanding, we call it a society. The significance of founding a true society lies in solving all problems in a collective way.

The inner spirit of the word samaja (society) is to move together. The vitality of society depends on two factors: its existence which is a collective creation and its inherent dynamism (moralism).

When the nature of movement of individual life does not hinder the rhythm of collective movement of society, there remains the possibility of forming a society from the collective movement of numerous individuals (^Sarkar,2018).

Human society is one and indivisible. There is no fundamental difference between one human being and another. All derive the vital juice and the life force from one and the same source. Those who support casteism, racialism, provincialism, parochialism, nationalism, even internationalism, are enemies of the big human society. Human society is, rather should be, based on one ism and that is universalism.

Like light, air and water, all mundane resources of the universe are the common property of everyone, and no property is the personal property of any individual. All natural resources are meant to be used for collective welfare, No one should have monopoly over these resources.Basic amenities of life like food, clothing, shelter, education and medical treatment must be provided to all and there should be rational distribution of resources. Every member of the society should utilize all the mundane and supra-mundane wealth accepting the principal of cosmic inheritance. This is progressive socialism. The society needs a stir for life, vigour and progress and for this the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT) was propounded by Shrii Prabaht Ranjan ^{Sarkar in the year 1959}.

The principles of PROUT depend upon the following five fundamental factors:

The main features of PROUT are:

Adoption and implementation of principles of PROUT will establish a true human society free from all sorts of exploitation. According to PROUT society should be led by Sadvipras who are physically fit, mentally strong and spiritually elevated and who possess all the qualities of all classes (shudra, the toiling class; ksatriya, the warrior class; vipra, the intellectual class; and vaeshya, the capitalist class).

Internationalization, Humanism, Neohumanism and Universalism

Internationalisation is a very comprehensive term and there is no single agreed definition of internationalisation. It refers to the engagement of multi -national, multi lingual and multi -cultural approach to achieve an integrated human society. However, when one talks about ‘internationalisation’, one is actually accepting existence of different nations and hence conflict among nations cannot be ruled out which we see in the present day world. Internationalisation or in other word ‘globalization’ is a top-to-down socio-economic model and cannot solve problems confronting humanity.

If we enlarge the circumference beyond the scope of nationalism of internationalism and embrace all people within one-fold, this is called ‘humanism’ or ordinary or general humanism. Humanism cannot solve problems of human beings for two reasons. The first is that even within humanism there is still intra-humanistic clash and secondly, in the living world, humans are not the only livings beings - there are many other creatures as well. If we completely ignore or destroy them, there will be imbalance among the plant, animal and human worlds and will result in catastrophic ruin of human life as well. For sustainable development, human being must take care of all other animate and inanimate resources of the world. For the sake of our existence, we should not pollute our resources like air, water, soil etc. Providing food to the starved is no doubt a humanitarian work. But if one exploits that starved population in lieu of food or other facilities, this sort of exploitation will one day destroy peace in society. This is ‘intra-humanistic clash’. Hence, the humanistic approach is not perfect - it is adulterated. In the name of ‘literacy drive’, if one injects ideas in the minds of educationally backward class which paralyse them mentally and then one governs these mentally-paralysed people as colonized people, the peace of the world will be compromised. This is ‘intra-human conflict’. The intention is to develop them socially in the way we like and thus destroy their originality. This mentality is at work. The reason for this mentality is ‘I pity them’ - this vanity or this superiority complex will eventually create satellite social groups. This adulterated humanism is not genuine humanism nor is its true humanistic spirit, it is ordinary human sentiment or what P. R. ^{Sarkar calls ‘pseudo-humanistic strategy’ in another form (Sarkar, 1982}). Intra-humanistic clash is a continuing phenomenon and as a result there are constant conflicts between individual and individual, between group and group. The basic reason is that this so-called ordinary humanism or general humanism is nothing more than an enlarged form of nationalism; only its radius is large. This is the only difference. As long as there are bondages of nationhood, the tendency to exploit individuals or group will continue to exist. There may be degeneration in various spheres of life like political, religious or cultural life. When one’s cultural life is controlled, one becomes a slave. The rules and exploiters who are motivated by general humanism, want to exploit people in all spheres of life - social, economic, political, cultural and religious. Hence, humanism cannot be considered the panacea, it is not a perfect remedy. Often certain social groups - be they international group or the largest social group seek to preserve their existence by destroying non-human creatures - animals and plants. This results in human-animal conflicts and other natural calamities like drought, global warming and so on. Every creature has two types of values - utility value and existential value. Human beings usually preserve those creatures which have an immediate utility value for them e.g., cow. Human beings protect them for their own benefit, because cows have some utility. If in future people are able to prepare synthetic milk by chemical process, they will stop breeding cattle and will not take care of cows. But still every creature has existential value and has a right to live. Most creatures have existential value, although they may not be valuable to human beings, or we may not be aware that their existence has some significance due to lack of scientific knowledge. A thing by its very existence in the cosmos contributes to the cosmic harmony (^{Mohanty, 1995}). From the microscopic organisms to humans, everyone has contributed to this cosmological balance. Just as humans have a birthright to live on this earth, the plant and animal worldhave a birth right to remain on this earth. This concern leads to a greater sensitivity for the entire ecosystem and acknowledges the legal responsibilities to maintain it. Its urge is felt from within rather than from imposition of constitutional protection from outside (^Runde,1999).

During the past million years of human history, proper justice has not been done to human beings. A particular class, a particular section has always been given greater importance than others and in this process the other sections have been neglected. When some people started advancing, they thought more about themselves and less about others and they did not think about the animals and plants. By neglecting other creatures, development cannot be sustainable.

In the words of P.R. Sarkar:

Neohumanism is humanism of the past, humanism of the present and humanism - newly explained - of the future. Explaining humanity and humanism in a new light will widen the path of human progress, will make it easier to tread. Neohumansim will give new inspiration and provide a new interpretation for the very concept of human existence. It will help people understand that human beings, as the most thoughtful and intelligent beings in this created universe, will have to accept the great responsibility of taking care of the entire universe - will have to accept that the responsibility for the entire universe rests on them. Humanism newly explained and newly-sermonized is Neohumansim - the philosophy which will make people understand that they are not merely ordinary creatures. This philosophy will liberate them from all inferiority feelings and defects and make them aware of their own importance’ it will inspire them to build a new world. (^{Sarkar, 1982}, p. 95)

The first step towards the establishment of Neohumanism is study; the second step is rationalistic mentality. When one hears something, then one should analyse its positive side and its negative sides through rational analysis. One should weigh the pros and cons of everything. If the positive side is predominant, one should give verdict in its favour and when the negative aspect is predominant, one should conclude in the negative. This is called ‘logical decision’ which is not just ‘decision’. This logical decision in favour of the positive or negative is not final either. One should still has to proceed ahead. If that logical decision (positive or negative) is conducive to human welfare, for the benefit and happiness of all beings, then only one should support and propagate that idea and devote oneself wholeheartedly to its implementation. Otherwise, one may say; this decision is good, no doubt, but it has no value in practical world. When one completes this whole process of logical reasoning, the outcome is one’s ‘awakened conscience’. This state of awakened conscience is what is called ‘rationalistic mentality’.

P.R. Sarkar sates that:

Keep your conscience ever-vigilant. Develop a firm rationalistic mentality, and no one will be able to deceive you by false geo-sentiment. This rationalistic mentality will provide you with sufficient inspiration and strength to fight against socio-sentiment, ordinary humanistic sentiment, and pseudo-humanistic strategy. You will not only gain vocal strength, but become strong in all respects. (^{Sarkar, 1982}, p. 79):

To establish in Neohumanism, one should train one’s mind and to train the mind there must be a proper base. The base is ‘sama-samajatattva’ (the principle of social equality): “whatever others might say, I sincerely believe that all humans have the right to food, clothing, accommodation, education and medical treatment. It is not enough for me to accept their rights in principle; as an honest person I should make the utmost effort to see that they have attained their rights”. This is the spirit of ‘sama-samajatattva’ (the principle of social equality) (^{Sarkar, 1982}).

The concept of universalism is prominent in the definition of education in Neohumanism: ‘education is that which liberates’(^Sarkar,1998). We divide humanity on the basis of race, caste, clan, language, religion and country. In his Neohumanism discourse, Sarkar has shown how people use these divisible factors as the weapon to create wrong sentiments and foolish ideas. According to him, if exploitation is removed from the society neither the exploiter nor the exploited will exist. He, therefore, laid more emphasis on identifying the root cause of exploitation and for him, this lies in human mind.

Sarkar advocated universal humanism to build one and indivisible human society. According to Sarkar, true unity lies in the realm of human mind. Every entity in this universe is interconnected. The Cosmological balance is maintained due to this force of attraction. The term universalism has a connotation of expansion, whereas, in the term internationalisation there exists the scope of both cooperation and competition (^{Lub, Wende & Huisman, 2005}, Van der Wende, 2001, ^Zgaga,2011). Internationalisation has been interpreted in various ways. But no matter how it is interpreted, if at its core is the idea of peaceful coexistence of various nations, then there is no other way but to inculcate the spirit of humanity and that will be universal humanity.

There are many kinds of sentiments which exist in human minds like geo-sentiment, socio- sentiment, pseudo-humanistic sentiment and religious sentiment. People can get out of all these narrow sentiments by intellectual analysis i.e., through study and rational thinking. Only universalism is free from allthese narrow sentiments. Therefore, the establishment of indivisible human society is possible only through universalism. Caste, colour, religion, language should be thought of as variations rather than differences. Instead of exaggerating the points of difference one should highlight the points of affinity, what ^{Tagore explained as ‘networks of unity’ (Tagore, 2022}). One should look for the universally acceptable common link. According to Sarkar, “Aspects of unity should be encouraged and aspects of disunity should be discouraged “(Sarkar,1959).

Humanising the Pedagogy

The words ‘prana dharma’ mean the cardinal characteristic of a person which differentiates one person from another. Just as each human being has his or her own traits, similarly an entire race living within a particular geographical, historical and cultural environment will also inherit some traits which distinguish that particular race from other. These traits or specialities are inseparably embedded in the internal behaviour of the entire population, and they help to form a particular bent of mind, expression of external behaviour, attitudes towards life and society and on the whole a different outlook. When the vital expression of a race takes a particular ourse of manifestation, that course of manifestation is known as ‘prana dharma’ (^Sarkar,1998) e.g., people of India are religious minded since ancient time. Capitalism has sucked the vital energy of people by rendering them poverty stricken and is against ‘prana dharma’ of common mass. Educational pedagogy based on ‘prana dharma’ will reinforce and strengthen humanity’s march along the path of progress.

Neohumanism follows relational approach-how all living beings are connected to each other.It is an attempt to reframing humanism tobring all beings - animate or inanimate within the scope of human mind(^{Bhowmik, 2018}). Human possesses two tendencies; one is self-centric and the other is expansive. Expansive tendency refers to the inculcation of subtle human values like empathetic outlook, respect, compassion and magnanimous mind. Neohumanist education refers to practical ways of humanizingthe pedagogy. Humanity is the basis for building relationships with people. When people deviate from this fundamental truth, the disaster is inevitable. Expansion of heart is absolutely necessary to uproot the seeds of violence and exploitation from the human mind. Sarkar in Neohumanism, wanted to redefine human relationship. Humanizing the pedagogy means strengthening the flow of emotions amongst people irrespective of their race, language, religion and nationality. Selfless service is the main tool to expand the mind. Instead of materialist or instrumental human relations, he focused on the subtle human qualities and considered them to be foundation of human relation.

System of education should be based on ‘prana dharma’(cardinal characteristic) of a particular country or race and its underlying philosophy should be Neohumanism. PROUT - the new socio-economic paradigm propounded by Sarkar will equip human beings with their own ‘prana dharma’ and will accelerate human progress in all spheres of life be it economical, cultural etc.

Interculturality and Neohumanism

Culture is sum total of different human expressions of human life. The culture of one community influences the culture of another community. The culture with the greatest vitality has the strongest influence. Sometimes the weaker culture is even absorbed by the more powerful one. When different cultural groups live side-by-side, there is a lot of mutual exchange.

According to P. R. Sarkar, real development is possible not through analysis but through synthesis. He believed that the path of analysis divides society and synthesis, on the other hand, recognises the inter-connectedness (^{Fitzgerald,1999}). The more people of different languages and cultures mix, the more developed a nation will be. The greater the emotional flow between people, the stronger will be the harmony. It has been observed that emotions can bind people of different cultures when it revolves around a common interest or goal. Indivisible human society can be built on neohumanistic lines and as the foundation, one should possess real love and affection for humanity.

Interculturality is a pedagogical approach through which harmonious coexistence is achieved between different cultures. As people from different parts of the world come closer to each other, there will be more chance of exchange of culture and ideas between them. In Neohumanism, this is called the path of synthesis (^Sarkar,1959). This synthesis requires not only the intellect but also heart, affecting both the cognitive and the affective domain.When dialogue between different cultural groups needs to be fostered , understanding and not mere agreement is required(UNESCO Guidelines, 2006).

Sarkar has taken a liberal attitude towards achieving equality among different cultures of the world. Interculturality includes the values of understanding, respectand acceptance. The word tolerance implies a forced acceptance of something in it. The spirit of living together will come from within. People will feel the urge of blending various cultures from the heart. Interculturalism in its broad sense refers to social cohesion. In that case the psychology of social cohesion must be understood well.

Neohumanist Education

Internationalisation or globalization has impacted higher education in two ways: expansion of education through cooperation and collaboration and global-local competition. It has created open knowledge system through intensive networking that allows sharing of knowledge and data resources, multiple online courses offered by the global higher education network and free movement of students for higher education (^{Van der Wende,2007}). Firstly, it resulted in quantitative expansion in higher education and secondly, it created ‘hyper competitiveness’ in workplace. Internationalisation of higher education, enhances the corporate competencies and prepares students with global-career readiness competencies (^{Yeravdekar & Tiwari, 2014}). The impact of internationalisation on higher education has made it a centre of increasing economic profit (^{Kreber, 2009}). Curriculum has been changed to increase the employability in global workplace. It is further noticed that internationalisation has influenced the education system in two ways, firstly, it has made higher education more competitive and secondly, educational institutions have been forced to devise their policies at organisational level (^{Middlehurst & Woodfield, 2007}). More emphasis is placed on external factors. Little effort has been given on how to inculcate the spirit of internationalisation through education. Neohumanist education, therefore, suggests moral education to be made compulsory at all levels of education. Neohumanism in practice has, therefore, advocates incorporation of Yoga (ancient Indian Meditation process) into the curriculum (^{Bhowmik, 2018}). To universalise education, another strategy of Neohumanist education is incorporation of English as a global language (lingua franca) from the primary level (Bhowmik & Bhowmik,2021). Recently, Brazilian universities have developed the internationalisation plans and offered English as the Medium of Instruction (^{Guimaraes, et al, 2020}). In order to internalise the values of Neohumanism, Neohumanist education emphasises concrete engagement and personal experiences. Practice of ten universal moral principles (Yama and Niyama), spiritual practice (meditation) and selfless service towards humanity (including plant and animal kingdoms) are the main transformational tools in Neohumanist education (Bhowmik,2022). Morality is an effort to lead a well-knit life. It is a dynamic force rather than a static one, because balance in the extroversial spheres of life is maintained by wagging a ceaseless war against all opposite ideas (ShriiShrii ^{Anandamurti,1969}). Yoga is an ancient Indian meditation process to unite unit mind with the cosmic consciousness and its foundation is Yama and Niyama. Yama i.e., ‘do unto others’ has five parts: ahimsa (not harming anyone), satya (telling the truth), asteya (non-stealing), brahmacharya (moving and drifting in bliss) and aparigraha (reducing possessions). Niyama i.e., ‘how to treat the self’ has also five aspects: shaoca (cleanliness both physical and mental), santosh (contentment), tapah (sincere endeavour to achieve goal), swadhyay (study) and ishwarpranidhan (meditation).

Neohumanist education focuses on instilling universal moral values among the students. Any decision is said to be perfect if it is rational and also for the collective welfare of the society. Power of Reasoning is a valuable gift for human beings but how and for what purpose this power is to be used primarily depend on sa’dhana (Bhat, 2019). This argument strengthens the link between cognition and spirituality (the practice of meditation).

Conclusion

The philosophy of Neohumanism propounded by seer Indian philosopher Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (P.R. Sarkar) encompasses all beings - animate and inanimate and talks about all round sustainable development of the world to foster universalism. In order to eradicate poverty and to create a just world devoid of all sorts of exploitation, Sarkar advocates implementation of his new socio-economic paradigm PROUT- Progressive Utilization Theory. Sarkar vehemently opposed casteism, racialism, provincialism, parochialism, nationalism, even internationalism and gave a synthetic approach based on universalism to build one indivisible human society. Neohumanist education can be a tool to build a new human society wherein every human being is compatriot and not competitor. Neohumanism and sustainable development go hand in hand.In order to internalise the values of Neohumanism, Neohumanist education emphasises concrete engagement and personal experiences. Neohumanist education focuses on instilling universal moral values among the students.