Ⅰ Prologue

During times of great change, people seek a kind of new structure. Something remarkable is underway. It is characterized by fluid organizations reluctant to create hierarchical structure, averse to dogma. It operates on the principle that change can only be facilitated, not decreed. It seems to be something very old. We are in the midst of a turning point. It is a new mind set-the ascendance of a startling world view that gathers into its framework break through science and insights from earliest recorded thought. New perspectives give birth to new historic ages. Each of discoveries is properly described as a paradigm shift. A paradigm shift is a framework of thought, a scheme for understanding and explaining certain aspects of reality. People speak of educational paradigm change. But they have not fully recognized this process of leaping ahead, however, in part because textbooks tend to tame them. A paradigm shift is a distinctly new way of thinking about old problems. A new paradıgm involves a principle that was present all along unknown us. It does more than the old. That 1s not more knowledge, but a new knowing pattern.

II. Introduction
We take the view that education is itself going through profound change in terms of purpose, content and methods. These change are part of a process that, generally, questions the role of education as the only child of the enlightenment. Consequently, education is currently the site of conflict and part of the stakes in that conflict. Its effort toward that solution looms to start of the personal and structural level. This activity can help us to better understand conflict and to examine the extent to which it is both a dıstorted symptom of and a condition of modernity. In a sense, it is a confrontation with epistemology and deeply embedded notions of foundations, disciplines and scientificity. In the same way it means that we attempt to deconstruct the text of modern education. Education is, we would always argue, particularly resistant to the postmodern message.

Educational theory and practice is founded on the discourse of modernity and its self-understanding have been forged by that discourse's basic and implicit assumptions. Historically, education can be seen as the vehicle by which modernity's grand narratives, the enlightenment ideals of critical reason, individual freedom by way of logos, are substantiated and realized The very rationale of the educational process and the role of the educator is founded on modernity' s self-motivated, self-dırected, rational subject, capable of exercising individual agency. Education is perhaps the most important way we relate to the world, to the way we experience, understand and attempt to change the world and the ways in which we understand ourselves and our relations with others Certainly, as author interested in postmodern mind, fascinated by postmodernity, I have been recognized own location in much a matter of something new. And yet, another totalizing and oppressive discourse, give us a fresh and radical way of confronting modern educational questions.

III. The text of modern education
Curriculum and instruction in education are the very heart and soul of schooling. They are more central to the experience that students have in schools than the content of the curriculum and the ways in which it is mediated. In the modern education, the education profession has borrowed much terminology from the medical and factorial model. We test and diagnose students in order to apply appropriate treatment. Students who are deficient are sent to a lab for prescriptive remediation. Technical details in the production of this came from the Tylerian rationale focused on objective and scientific evaluation process in theory into practice. In this context, classroom activities foster a sense of technical knowing, mechanical teaching-learning commitment. We distinguish between two kinds of knowing: technical knowing and ontological knowing. Technical knowing refers to adaptive, publicly transferable information and skills: ontological knowing refers to a more diffuse apprehension of reality. Ontological knowing requires metaphors of organic life and transcendent dance so that we can come to know with our holıstic bodies as we move from ımagınation and intention to crıtical self-definition, and finally to perishing ego and awakening new being. In this sense, future curriculum development begins with the deconstruction of grand narratives that impose knowledge through unequal power relations where students must be subordinate and submissive teachers, and then moves to the emancipation of both teachers and students who have been disempowered by this structure.

Likewise, the modern technological approach to currıculum and instruction will continue to avoid the question's pitfall of behaviorısm and behavioral objectives as essential elements of present schooling because these issues are consıdered the modern scientific parameters of the schools. Thus, revisionary postmodern scholars propose a model of curriculum and instruction as metaphorical text where the educational enterprise will include the metaphysical dialogue. In this proposal, self-reflection, intuition, nonrational discourse, nonlınear teaching methodologies, meditation, and wisdom are all encouraged and nurtured in the postmodern era education.

IV. The text of Son dialogue
In the modern paradigm, the scientism of psychology is motivated by a mode that the world cannot be mastered without scientific method. At the root of the modern scientific attitude is a dream of presence, desiıre to know the world through a language which represents the world transparently. Presence means perfect representation, where language is simply a transparent representational medium for describing the nature of the world, making it present, without interposing itself between the observing subject and the world Presence is where the subject sees clearly and systematically and where speech is merely the means of accurately communicating thoughts from one rational subject to another But this assumption has the misunderstanding of subject. For example, understanding Being of subject in this way, Descartes found the subjectivity of the subject in the ego cogito of mortal man It conversely missed the possibility of inner form originated from the up-change of subject and the re-scendence of being within the world. It is that transcendence is firstly the relationship between being and Being starting from the former and going towards the latter. Transcendence is, however, at the same time the relationship leading from the changeable being to a being in repose.

Our educational system has not yet really prepared us for such a task. It may seem small comfort to hear Son Buddhism [禪佛教] of Eastern tradition. Sõn gives us a new point of view on the things, a new way of appreciating the truth and beauty of life and the world, by discovering a new source of energy in the inmost recesses of consciousness. Sõn emphasizes the training of attention and pure awareness, and it encourages its students to practice infusing them into everyday life. Certaın types of Sõn medıtation encourage an 'emptying of the mund, ' and 'no-mund [無心] approach.' Simultaneously, Son masters aimed to bring their students so intimately in touch with the 'Being of Life which animates all things' that they felt its own awareness vibrate within themselves.

Communication is very important in Son practice. That is the Son question and answer method. It is a dialogue taking place between a master and his student. But this dialogue differs from the communication of teacher and students in modern classroom. Son is the dialogue between Being and being, between groundless ground and man. Therefore, teaching and learning of Son come out of the self, it return to the self. Sõn dialogue is designed to be become enlightened ourselves. We are attracted to analytical knowledge or discriminative understanding, and we divide reality into several pieces. Analyzing the reality of the world, you will have missed the point entirely At that time, our time of being fade away beyond our life Son is a way of life, a state of being, that is not possible to embrace in any concept whatsoever, so that any concepts, any ideas, any words that I shall put across to you will have as their object, showing you the limitations of words and of thinking. In such instances, Son master and student interact in mutuality and co-responding not separated the field of living. of They conspired teaching and learning through Sõn training composed meditation, dialogue, and hua-dou [話頭] study. Students who truly concentrated their hua-dou can shut off the flow of other distracting ideas and channel themselves toward one central focus of inquiry. Here hua-dou in itself has no literal meaning. It is an artificial concentration device, a metaphor which stands for the great unanswered questions With the hua-dous Sön masters give their students, most problems cannot be solved at the level at which they are asked. They must be reframed, put into a large context of the world.

V. Yin-Yang spectrum of learning
Modern education is a paradigm of modernity. This is therefore mistaken in drawing this line between knowledge and wisdom, rather then being counterposed are inseparable, immanent in one another, each a condition for the possibility of the other. Knowledge refers to Yang[, +] domain of learning Li Learning [理學]. Wisdom refers to Yin [陰,一] domain of learning Sim Learning [心學]. They are correlative [對待], but modernity's discourse is thus brought into question by the notion of knowledge-wisdom. Modernist in education lies in discourse overlook of a condition for the fallacy possibility for that learning dimension. They have assumed a significant position associated with them by same dımensional learning pattern. This is not simply due to some what lucid rejection of categorızation of modernist's work. Rather, it is complex multiform and resists reductive and simplistic explanation and explication. Perhaps it is best understood as a state of mind, a critical, self-referential posture and style, a different way of seeing and working, rather then a fixed body of educational ideas. In modern paradigm, it is to assume that knowledge can be learned unequivocally, that a single, definitive meaning can be extracted from it and that the meaning so extracted is always one that can be 'applied' to wisdom learning. As educators this seems particularly had to cope with the delicate difference of them. At the same time, however, Eastern tradition would deny that knowledge and wisdom appeared by only a tendency to think of this in terms of one dimension learnıng. East traditional philosophy of learning of knowledge and wisdom is different at the premuse of metaphysical and epistemological questions The mplications of this discourse for educational theory and practice are not under unclear, but are lıkely to make what is learned, where and how, ever more contestable and debatable

VI. Epilogue
The great error of modern paradigm is the oversimplification about the being questions of man. That is on the subject-object division pervadıng partıcularly modern Western thought. While modern science seeks to uncover the object and invariant laws of nature, the self of subject breaks through the field of consciousness, the field of beings. Modern educators have been trusted modern paradigm. In this context, they have been mistaken the practice of teaching and learning. Strictly speaking, they rejected the inquiry of Being and becoming.

It makes manifest that in any way of comforting oneself entities as entities there lies a prori an enigma. 'Being' cannot indeed be conceived as an entity. 'Being' cannot be derived from higher concepts by definition, nor can it be presented through lower ones. At this point, miısfortune of modern education begins to start. This point is crevice of modern and postmodern in the education world. In sum, Being is life, life is will to transcend: will to transcend is Chaos