{ "metadata": { "schema": "org.dharma-open-school.open-study-pack.v1", "publisher": "Dharma Open School by Aniruddha Dāsa", "canonicalUrl": "https://dharmaopenschool.com", "contentLastModified": "2026-08-26", "edition": "school research edition", "collection": "Ready-to-teach source classes", "recordCount": 6, "provenance": "SCHOOL_RESEARCH_EDITION", "reuseNotice": "Free to download for personal study and teaching preparation. No separate open licence is asserted for editorial research-edition text; retain provenance and check permissions before redistribution or adaptation." }, "plans": [ { "slug": "identity-and-change-bg-2-13", "title": "Identity and change", "question": "What changes in the verse, and what does the grammar invite us to track?", "reference": "BG 2.13", "audience": "Newcomers", "duration": 60, "summary": "A first source-study class that moves from observable sequence to a carefully bounded explanation, without asking newcomers to accept an unlabelled interpretation.", "objective": "Learners can identify the verse’s sequence of bodily stages, distinguish observation from interpretation, and explain one relationship with a source reference.", "sourceBoundary": "Use the Sanskrit and an identified rendering. Any account of the self, rebirth or liberation must be attributed to its source or named tradition rather than presented as a grammatical fact.", "heroImage": "/images/school-learning-journey-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "Learners moving along a path through encounter, practice and teaching", "materials": [ "Printed BG 2.13 in Devanāgarī and IAST", "One identified translation or learner-created provisional rendering", "Three stage cards: childhood, youth, old age", "Blank observation / inference table" ], "accessOptions": [ "Read the IAST aloud or listen while another learner reads", "Respond by speaking, writing, arranging cards or drawing the sequence", "Preview the key terms dehin and deha without requiring memorisation", "Allow a private exit note instead of public teach-back" ], "workedExample": "Model one bounded statement: “The verse visibly names a sequence of embodied stages.” Then model the boundary: “A larger claim about the enduring self requires translation and interpretation, so I will name the edition or commentary that supports it.”", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 8, "title": "Hear and inspect the source", "teacher": "Read once without explanation, then display the verse and invite only visible observations.", "learners": "Underline repeated structures, sequence words or unfamiliar forms without guessing meanings.", "evidence": "Each learner records two direct observations." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 7, "title": "Rebuild the sequence", "teacher": "Hide the verse and place three blank positions on the board.", "learners": "Arrange or name the bodily stages from memory, then reopen and correct the order.", "evidence": "A corrected sequence remains visible." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 12, "title": "Separate observation from inference", "teacher": "Demonstrate one statement in each column and explain why the labels matter.", "learners": "Sort six prepared statements, then write one new observation and one explicitly labelled inference.", "evidence": "A two-column record shows the distinction." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 12, "title": "Ask what the verse does not settle alone", "teacher": "Give each pair the prompt: “Which larger claim needs another source?”", "learners": "Compare boundaries and identify one question for a translation, commentary or teacher.", "evidence": "Each pair produces one source-seeking question." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 13, "title": "Explain one relationship", "teacher": "Assign a listener to interrupt once with “How do you know?”", "learners": "Give a ninety-second explanation using “the source shows,” “this rendering chooses,” and “I infer.”", "evidence": "The listener marks the evidence link and one repair." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 8, "title": "Correct and schedule a return", "teacher": "Reopen the source and model a precise correction rather than a total rewrite.", "learners": "Revise one sentence and choose a retrieval prompt for three days later.", "evidence": "A dated correction and future prompt close the class." } ], "assessment": [ "The sequence is reconstructed accurately after the source is hidden.", "Observation and interpretation remain visibly separate.", "The teach-back cites the verse and survives one evidence question." ], "teacherBoundary": "Do not use a newcomer’s uncertainty as a public test of faith. Assess the stated learning objective - source reading and evidence labelling - not private conviction.", "extension": "Compare the same verse in two identified translations. Circle one meaningful difference and write the exact Sanskrit term that makes the choice necessary.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 2.13", "role": "Primary source and the only required scriptural passage." }, { "reference": "BG 2.12", "role": "Optional preceding context for the speaker’s line of response." } ] }, { "slug": "action-and-attachment-bg-2-47", "title": "Action, result and attachment", "question": "Which relationships does BG 2.47 state, and where do popular slogans go beyond it?", "reference": "BG 2.47", "audience": "Mixed adults", "duration": 60, "summary": "A claim-mapping class that uses the source to distinguish action, result, motive and inaction before learners apply the relationships to a realistic decision.", "objective": "Learners can map four clauses in BG 2.47, test a common paraphrase against them, and apply the distinctions without pretending that outcomes are irrelevant.", "sourceBoundary": "The lesson maps clauses and translation choices. It does not reduce karma-yoga to a slogan or claim that responsibility for consequences disappears.", "heroImage": "/images/school-language-tools-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "Folios and tangible tools prepared for close source analysis", "materials": [ "BG 2.47 source sheet with clause spacing", "Four relationship cards: action, result, motive, inaction", "One realistic service or workplace scenario", "Coloured pens or movable tokens" ], "accessOptions": [ "Offer printed clause cards for learners who prefer arranging to writing", "Read all scenario text aloud and keep it projected", "Invite examples from home, work, service or study without requiring personal disclosure", "Permit a diagram, spoken response or short paragraph for the final explanation" ], "workedExample": "Take the slogan “Results do not matter.” Place it beside the four clauses. Model how to ask which clause supports it, which clause complicates it, and how a more cautious statement could preserve responsible action.", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 8, "title": "Mark the four clauses", "teacher": "Read the verse and reveal one clause at a time without supplying a summary.", "learners": "Mark verbal forms, negatives and repeated relationship words.", "evidence": "The source sheet shows four learner-marked units." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 7, "title": "Reconstruct the relationship map", "teacher": "Hide the source and display only action, result, motive and inaction.", "learners": "Connect the four cards from memory, then reopen the verse and repair the map.", "evidence": "A corrected relationship map is photographed or copied." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 12, "title": "Test a familiar slogan", "teacher": "Model a claim-evidence check with one deliberately over-broad paraphrase.", "learners": "Underline what the slogan preserves, crosses out what it loses and writes a bounded replacement.", "evidence": "The replacement points to at least two clauses." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 12, "title": "Work a consequential decision", "teacher": "Present a scenario with effort, uncertainty and people affected by the outcome.", "learners": "Distinguish controllable action, desired result, attachment and responsible follow-through.", "evidence": "Each group submits a four-part decision map." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 13, "title": "Defend the boundary", "teacher": "Ask listeners to challenge either fatalism or outcome obsession.", "learners": "Explain how the verse constrains both extremes while keeping interpretation attributed.", "evidence": "The explanation answers one counterexample." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 8, "title": "Write a future check", "teacher": "Return to the objective and ask what evidence actually met it.", "learners": "Complete: “Before my next action, I will check…” and schedule a one-week return.", "evidence": "A concrete future cue is recorded." } ], "assessment": [ "All four clauses are represented in the learner’s map.", "The revised slogan is narrower than the original and source-linked.", "The scenario response preserves both disciplined action and attention to consequences." ], "teacherBoundary": "Do not use the verse to excuse negligence, coercion or avoidable harm. If a scenario carries pastoral, legal or safeguarding risk, leave the classroom exercise and use the appropriate qualified support.", "extension": "Read BG 3.19 as a second source. Record whether it repeats, narrows or develops the relationship mapped from BG 2.47.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 2.47", "role": "Primary source for the four-clause relationship map." }, { "reference": "BG 3.19", "role": "Optional comparison for action without attachment." } ] }, { "slug": "practice-and-restlessness-bg-6-35", "title": "Practice, restlessness and return", "question": "How can a learner describe disciplined return without turning difficulty into failure?", "reference": "BG 6.35", "audience": "Youth", "duration": 45, "summary": "A psychologically gentle class about practice and detachment that produces one realistic return cue rather than a heroic promise.", "objective": "Learners can identify the response structure in BG 6.35, distinguish a lapse from abandonment, and design one small return practice.", "sourceBoundary": "The class is educational, not mental-health treatment. It does not diagnose attention, anxiety or motivation and does not frame difficulty as spiritual deficiency.", "heroImage": "/images/school-learning-journey-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "A learning path with pauses, turns and places to return", "materials": [ "BG 6.34–35 source sheets", "Small habit-loop cards", "Private reflection paper", "Timer visible to the group" ], "accessOptions": [ "Keep personal examples optional and allow fictional scenarios", "Offer standing, seated, spoken and written participation", "Use short timed turns with a visible sequence", "Let learners keep the return cue private" ], "workedExample": "Model a return cue with modest scope: “After I notice I have stopped, I reopen one verse and read it once.” Contrast this with an unmeasurable promise such as “I will never become distracted again.”", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 6, "title": "Hear the difficulty and response", "teacher": "Read BG 6.34 and 6.35 as a question-response pair.", "learners": "Mark one word or phrase associated with difficulty and one associated with response.", "evidence": "The pair is preserved, not reduced to the answer alone." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 5, "title": "Name the two-part response", "teacher": "Hide the answer verse and ask for structure rather than exact wording.", "learners": "Retrieve the two response terms, then correct from the source.", "evidence": "A corrected two-part model remains visible." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 9, "title": "Design a small return cue", "teacher": "Model a cue that is specific, compassionate and observable.", "learners": "Create one cue for a fictional learner or for private personal use.", "evidence": "The cue names trigger, action and scale." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 9, "title": "Compare help and pressure", "teacher": "Offer two teacher responses to the same lapse.", "learners": "Identify which response supports return and which converts difficulty into shame.", "evidence": "Pairs rewrite the pressure statement." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 10, "title": "Explain disciplined return", "teacher": "Invite a twenty-second source reference before the example.", "learners": "Explain how practice and detachment can guide return without promising instant control.", "evidence": "The listener can repeat the two-part structure." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 6, "title": "Choose a check-in", "teacher": "Offer private calendar, paper or partner options.", "learners": "Set one return date and name what will be retrieved.", "evidence": "A voluntary future check closes the loop." } ], "assessment": [ "The question-response structure remains intact.", "The return cue is specific and realistically small.", "The teach-back avoids both condemnation and effortless optimism." ], "teacherBoundary": "If a learner discloses distress or risk, stop treating it as a class example. Follow the institution’s safeguarding procedure and involve a qualified adult or professional.", "extension": "Compare the learner’s return cue with the site’s daily-practice design. Identify one similarity and one difference in scope.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 6.34", "role": "The stated difficulty that makes the response intelligible." }, { "reference": "BG 6.35", "role": "Primary response passage for the lesson." } ] }, { "slug": "qualities-and-observation-bg-14-5", "title": "Qualities, patterns and observation", "question": "How can a class investigate the three guṇas without turning them into labels for people?", "reference": "BG 14.5", "audience": "Experienced students", "duration": 75, "summary": "A case-comparison seminar that studies a conceptual model, tests it against situations and resists using the guṇas as fixed identities or social rankings.", "objective": "Learners can describe the three-term model, apply it provisionally to a changing situation, and state why a person should not be reduced to one label.", "sourceBoundary": "The class uses BG 14.5 as an entry point and requires identified commentary for developed definitions. It does not turn a conceptual model into clinical diagnosis, caste claim or permanent identity.", "heroImage": "/images/school-learning-circle-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "A seminar circle comparing several interpretations and cases", "materials": [ "BG 14.5 and selected identified commentary excerpts", "Three fictional case sequences", "Pattern / person distinction cards", "Large comparison grid" ], "accessOptions": [ "Distribute cases in advance for slower reading", "Use fictional cases only; do not classify classmates", "Allow groups to annotate, diagram or orally report", "Define Sanskrit terms before inviting comparison" ], "workedExample": "Model a changing case rather than a person label: one learner studies clearly in the morning, becomes agitated under deadline pressure and later avoids the task. Ask what the model may illuminate and what it cannot establish.", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 10, "title": "Build the source shelf", "teacher": "Read BG 14.5 and identify where later definitions would need additional passages or commentary.", "learners": "Mark direct terms, relationships and unanswered definition questions.", "evidence": "A source-needed list prevents invented definitions." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 8, "title": "Reconstruct the three-term model", "teacher": "Close all sources and request a relationship sketch.", "learners": "Draw three terms around prakṛti and mark confidence, then reopen and correct.", "evidence": "Corrections are dated rather than erased." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 15, "title": "Analyse a changing case", "teacher": "Demonstrate provisional language: “this pattern resembles,” not “this person is.”", "learners": "Map one fictional case across time and attach evidence to every proposal.", "evidence": "The case map includes at least one change over time." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 15, "title": "Challenge the model’s misuse", "teacher": "Assign groups one misuse: fixed identity, moral superiority or diagnosis.", "learners": "Explain why the misuse exceeds the evidence and rewrite the claim.", "evidence": "Each group produces a boundary statement." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 17, "title": "Teach the pattern-person distinction", "teacher": "Ask listeners to offer a counterexample that changes across context.", "learners": "Give a two-minute explanation, respond to the counterexample and cite the source boundary.", "evidence": "Peer notes identify one strong link and one overreach." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 10, "title": "Revisit with another passage", "teacher": "Assign one relevant later passage according to the teacher’s chosen edition.", "learners": "Predict what the new source may clarify, then schedule the comparison.", "evidence": "The return task names a precise definition question." } ], "assessment": [ "The three terms are related to the source rather than free association.", "Case claims remain provisional and evidence-linked.", "The learner can explain why pattern language must not become a permanent label." ], "teacherBoundary": "Never invite learners to classify one another. Interrupt caste, race, disability, gender or mental-health stereotyping immediately and return to the source and the fictional case.", "extension": "Trace one term through a later chapter passage using the concordance. Record continuity, development and translation differences without assuming identical usage.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 14.5", "role": "Entry point for the three-term relationship." }, { "reference": "BG 14.6", "role": "Optional next passage for a more specific, source-linked comparison." } ] }, { "slug": "humility-and-knowledge-bg-13-8", "title": "Humility and the conditions of knowing", "question": "What happens when a virtue list is studied as a practice of inquiry rather than a scorecard?", "reference": "BG 13.8", "audience": "Mixed adults", "duration": 60, "summary": "A reflective inquiry class that examines one quality in a larger list, uses cases rather than self-ranking and produces a question a learner can genuinely test.", "objective": "Learners can locate humility within the passage’s list, distinguish description from self-advertisement, and formulate one observable inquiry practice.", "sourceBoundary": "The lesson does not diagnose spiritual attainment. Definitions and theological claims beyond the visible list require an identified translation or commentary.", "heroImage": "/images/school-learning-circle-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "Adults listening and questioning in a learning circle", "materials": [ "BG 13.8–12 source range", "Two fictional dialogue cases", "Claim / evidence / revision cards", "Private inquiry sheet" ], "accessOptions": [ "Do not require learners to disclose personal failures", "Offer silent annotation before discussion", "Use paired rehearsal before whole-group speaking", "Accept an inquiry question in writing, audio or diagram form" ], "workedExample": "Model intellectual humility as a visible research move: “I can support this clause; I cannot yet establish the larger claim; here is the source I would check.” Keep that move separate from declaring oneself humble.", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 8, "title": "Read the quality in its list", "teacher": "Display the wider source range so one term does not become an isolated slogan.", "learners": "Mark list structure, repeated forms and translation decisions.", "evidence": "The quality remains connected to its passage context." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 7, "title": "Rebuild the neighbourhood", "teacher": "Hide the list and ask for neighbouring qualities, allowing uncertainty.", "learners": "Retrieve what is remembered, then use a different colour for correction.", "evidence": "The record distinguishes memory from reopened evidence." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 12, "title": "Analyse two dialogue cases", "teacher": "Model the difference between modest tone and revisable reasoning.", "learners": "Compare a polite but uncorrectable claim with a direct but evidence-responsive claim.", "evidence": "Pairs name the observable evidence for revision." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 12, "title": "Ask whether virtue can be scored", "teacher": "Keep discussion on assessment design, not classmates’ character.", "learners": "List what a teacher may observe and what remains inward or uncertain.", "evidence": "The class creates a no-score boundary." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 13, "title": "Explain a practice of inquiry", "teacher": "Require one example and one explicit limitation.", "learners": "Teach a partner how intellectual humility changes source study.", "evidence": "The partner identifies the limitation and evidence." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 8, "title": "Choose one revisable question", "teacher": "Offer prompts about translation, context or application.", "learners": "Write a question that can be revisited with a named source next week.", "evidence": "A testable inquiry replaces a self-rating." } ], "assessment": [ "The term is studied inside its wider list.", "The learner distinguishes observable revision from a claim about inner virtue.", "The final inquiry names evidence that could change the answer." ], "teacherBoundary": "Do not grade inward devotion, humility or character. Assess the stated task: source use, reasoning, revision and respectful participation.", "extension": "Compare how two identified editions render amānitvam. Record the lexical decision and the practical consequence of each wording without declaring one self-evident.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 13.8", "role": "Entry verse for the list and focal term." }, { "reference": "BG 13.12", "role": "Optional endpoint for reading the list as a connected passage." } ] }, { "slug": "offering-and-intention-bg-9-26", "title": "Offering, intention and visible care", "question": "How can a familiar verse become a source-reading and design task rather than a sentimental slogan?", "reference": "BG 9.26", "audience": "Newcomers", "duration": 45, "summary": "A concrete-to-abstract class that begins with the verse’s named offerings, maps relationships and asks learners to design a respectful explanation for a newcomer.", "objective": "Learners can identify the verse’s concrete elements, map giver–offering–recipient relationships and explain why intention does not remove practical care.", "sourceBoundary": "Ritual procedures, eligibility and tradition-specific theology require qualified instruction. The class does not improvise worship practice from a single verse.", "heroImage": "/images/school-cow-calf-landscape-v2.webp", "heroAlt": "A holy cow and calf beneath a flowering tree in the site’s unified art system", "materials": [ "BG 9.26 source sheet", "Four object cards named in an identified translation", "Giver / offering / recipient relationship mat", "Accessibility and practical-care checklist" ], "accessOptions": [ "Use cards, objects, speech or drawing for the relationship map", "Describe all visual objects aloud", "Avoid food handling when allergies, fasting rules or access needs are unknown", "Let learners discuss a fictional offering rather than personal practice" ], "workedExample": "Model a bounded explanation: the verse names simple concrete offerings and includes the manner of offering. Then add the limit: practical cleanliness, consent, access and tradition-specific procedure are not erased by an appeal to intention.", "stages": [ { "id": "encounter", "phase": "Encounter", "minutes": 6, "title": "Notice the concrete list", "teacher": "Read the verse and display the relationship mat without interpretation.", "learners": "Place named items and mark repeated structures or conditions.", "evidence": "A source-linked concrete map opens the class." }, { "id": "recall", "phase": "Recall", "minutes": 5, "title": "Rebuild what is named", "teacher": "Remove the object cards and keep only the mat.", "learners": "Retrieve the concrete elements and reopen the source to correct omissions.", "evidence": "The corrected map distinguishes memory from evidence." }, { "id": "apply", "phase": "Apply", "minutes": 9, "title": "Connect concrete and abstract", "teacher": "Model how intention and visible care can be related without becoming interchangeable.", "learners": "Add two care conditions to a fictional offering scenario.", "evidence": "The design includes both intention and practical responsibility." }, { "id": "discuss", "phase": "Discuss", "minutes": 9, "title": "Test an over-simple claim", "teacher": "Offer the statement: “Only intention matters.”", "learners": "Find what the statement preserves, what it erases and a more bounded replacement.", "evidence": "The replacement points back to the relationship map." }, { "id": "teach", "phase": "Teach", "minutes": 10, "title": "Explain for a newcomer", "teacher": "Assign the listener to ask one practical or source question.", "learners": "Give a one-minute explanation using the concrete list, relationship and boundary.", "evidence": "The listener can reconstruct the three-part map." }, { "id": "return", "phase": "Return", "minutes": 6, "title": "Prepare the next source question", "teacher": "Do not extend into ritual instruction without an identified source or teacher.", "learners": "Write what another passage or qualified teacher would need to clarify.", "evidence": "A source-seeking question closes the lesson." } ], "assessment": [ "The concrete elements are recovered from the source.", "The relationship map includes giver, offering and recipient.", "The explanation preserves intention and practical care without inventing procedure." ], "teacherBoundary": "Do not conduct or prescribe ritual as an improvised classroom exercise. For actual practice, use the community’s authorised guidance, accessibility needs and food-safety requirements.", "extension": "Compare BG 9.27 and ask whether it broadens, explains or changes the relationship map. Keep the passages separate before proposing a synthesis.", "sources": [ { "reference": "BG 9.26", "role": "Primary source for the concrete relationship map." }, { "reference": "BG 9.27", "role": "Optional comparison for a broader action context." } ] } ] }