The Indian Knowledge System (IKS) constitutes a vast and intricate tapestry of intellectual, scientific, and

cultural traditions that have evolved over millennia on the Indian subcontinent. Concurrently, the structure of

Indian higher education has been significantly reshaped by the widespread adoption of the Choice-Based

Discipline-Specific Electives, and Ability Enhancement Courses, to propose a structured model for embedding

IKS content across diverse academic programs. The paper also addresses significant implementation

challenges, including faculty readiness, pedagogical resources, and institutional scepticism, while outlining

strategic recommendations such as specialised teacher training and the creation of digital repositories. The

study concludes that a deliberate integration of IKS through the CBCS is essential for moving beyond symbolic

inclusion toward a meaningful, decolonised, and holistic educational paradigm that equips graduates with a

rooted yet global perspective.

Curriculum Design, Decolonisation, Interdisciplinary Learning, Generic Electives.

for millennia (Balagangadhara, 1994; Dhar, 2018). This disconnection did not merely represent a knowledge

gap; it represented a rupture in the continuity of intellectual identity. However, two concurrent developments in

the contemporary era have created a unique historical moment to address this schism: the national mandate of

the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which explicitly champions the integration of the Indian

Knowledge System (IKS) into all levels of education, and the structural overhaul provided by the widespread

adoption of the Choice Based Credit System (CBCS). This review paper, therefore, seeks to explore the critical

intersection of these two powerful streams, arguing that the CBCS provides the most pragmatic and effective

pedagogical and administrative framework for the meaningful integration of IKS into the mainstream of Indian

paradigm of knowledge that challenges this hegemony. For instance, Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī (c. 4th century BCE),

a formal grammar for Sanskrit, is recognised for its logical rigour and has been influential in modern

computational linguistics (Briggs, 1985; Scharfe, 1977). Similarly, the philosophical debates within

the Pramāṇa Śāstra (the science of epistemology) on the nature of valid knowledge (pramā) provide a robust

framework for critical thinking that is often absent from contemporary education focused solely on Western

logic (Matilal, 1986; Dasti & Phillips, 2017). Ignoring these systems is not merely an academic loss; it

constitutes a fundamental failure to provide students with a complete and pluralistic understanding of the

history of human thought.

Furthermore, the need extends to fostering cultural identity and holistic development. The NEP 2020 explicitly

states that education must develop "not only cognitive skills - both ‘foundational skills’ of literacy and

helping to create not just skilled professionals, but grounded, conscious, and ethically responsible individuals.

The importance of this paper lies in its timely and practical approach to bridging the gap between policy and

implementation. While the NEP 2020 provides a powerful vision for IKS, the question of "how" to integrate it

into a complex, established university system remains a significant challenge (Jain & Jaidka, 2021). This is

where the CBCS becomes critically important. The CBCS, by its very design, offers a flexible, student-centric,

and interdisciplinary structure that is uniquely suited for this task (University Grants Commission [UGC],

2018). Its components, Core Courses, Discipline-Specific Electives (DSE), Generic Electives (GE), and Ability

Enhancement Courses (AEC/SEC), provide multiple, non-disruptive entry points for IKS content. For example,

a student of Computer Science could take a GE on the "History of Indian Mathematics," while a Management

student could opt for a DSE on "Indian Ethos in Leadership." This paper argues that the CBCS framework is

researchers across disciplines, demonstrating how IKS can enrich their own teaching and research, fostering

interdisciplinary dialogues that can lead to innovative solutions to contemporary problems. For instance, the

holistic principles of Āyurveda can inform modern public health strategies, and traditional water management

knowledge can contribute to solving current ecological crises (Valiathan, 2009; Agarwal & Narain, 1997).

In conclusion, the integration of IKS through CBCS is not an exercise in cultural revivalism or a rejection of

global knowledge. Rather, it is an essential step toward creating a truly holistic, pluralistic, and rooted

educational system. It is about providing Indian students with the intellectual tools from both their own

heritage and the global canon, enabling them to become confident, critical, and innovative contributors to the

world. This review paper will synthesise existing literature on IKS, analyse the architecture of CBCS, and

propose a concrete framework for their synergistic integration, thereby contributing to one of the most vital

academic and national projects of our time.

This review paper aims to synthesise scholarly work on IKS and critically analyse its potential integration

1. To review the foundational pillars and key domains of the Indian Knowledge System.

2. To analyse the core components of the CBCS model (Core, Elective, and Ability Enhancement

Courses).

epistemology, a field systematically developed within the Pramāṇa-Śāstra (the science of valid knowledge).

Unlike traditions that may take the nature of knowledge for granted, the foundational schools of Indian

and validity of human understanding (Matilal, 1986). This sophisticated framework is not merely of historical

interest; it provides a timeless methodology for critical thinking and rational inquiry, establishing a crucial

foundation for any modern educational endeavour seeking to develop discerning intellects.

At the core of this epistemological structure lies the theory of Pramāṇas, the valid means of knowledge.

Different philosophical schools debated the number and primacy of these pramāṇas, but a consensus formed

around several primary sources. Pratyakṣa (perception) is universally acknowledged as the foundational source

of knowledge, providing direct, sensory data about the world. However, Indian thinkers quickly recognised the

Beyond perception and inference, other pramāṇas reveal the nuanced understanding of knowledge acquisition

in IKS. Upamāna (comparison or analogy) is recognised as a distinct source of knowledge, validated through

the process of learning by similarity, for instance, identifying a new animal by comparing it to a known one.

This acknowledges the cognitive role of relational thinking. Perhaps the most significant and widely

discussed pramāṇa is Śabda (verbal testimony or reliable word). In a pedagogical culture that prized oral

transmission, the nature of valid testimony was paramount. Śabda goes beyond mere hearsay; it is defined as

the assertion of a reliable person (āpta), one who possesses direct knowledge and is truthful (Matilal, 1986).

This concept underpins the entire tradition of learning from a guru or an authoritative text, but it is not a call

for blind faith (Gupta, S., & Singh, V., 2024). The reliability of the source is itself subject to scrutiny based on

other pramāṇas, creating a self-correcting system where authority is earned through demonstrable competence

critically analyse and deconstruct information. It trains them to ask essential questions: Is this claim based on

direct evidence (Pratyakṣa)? Is the logical inference (Anumāna) sound? Is this analogy (Upamāna)

appropriate? Is the source of this information (Śabda) credible and authoritative? In an era of information

overload and digital misinformation, these are not abstract philosophical questions but essential graduate

attributes. The IKS epistemological tradition, therefore, does not offer a dogmatic set of answers. Still, rather a

Accurate planetary models and computational methods.

Table 2: Framework for Integrating IKS within the CBCS Structure

rote memorisation of Sanskrit verses and develop teaching methodologies that foster a critical, conceptual, and

in faculty capacity, as there are very few academics trained in both the intricacies of traditional IKS and the

teaching (Gupta, S., 2023). Furthermore, the initiative often encounters scepticism and tokenism, where IKS is