In a modern university, it is quite common for an undergraduate to conceive of general education as the rest part of curricula opposed to what is offered by his/her department whose business lies in specialised education. This paper is aimed to make the case that it is this misleading division of labour and dichotomy of general education and specialised education that results in the frustration of the idea(l) of liberal education in modern universities. In Michael Oakeshott's view, liberal education is the idea(l) of a university, and liberal learning and liberal education need to be undertaken by all scholars, teachers, and undergraduates in a university. The tradition of (liberal) learning is passed on to the new generation by each scholar who engages him/herself in the pursuit of learning and initiating the newcomers, i.e. undergraduates into a specific voice of human self-understanding and conversation among the specialisms. It is imperative for a university to cautiously detach its world of liberal learning from the world of power and utility, and carefully maintain its defining feature of 'interval' in which each undergraduate is invited to freely seek his/her intellectual fortune without hurry among the limited variety of specialisms selected and offered by a university and henceforth acquires a distinct voice and participates in the conversation. Liberal education is aimed to liberate learners from the limitations of instrumental learning and enable them to enact and disclose themselves by exploring the various voices of human self-understandings. Liberal education as the idea(l) of university education is an embodied practice of 'free' human beings who become themselves by learning. Finally, three severe challenges confronting liberal education in a modern university are the self-betrayal of university, the fragmentation of specialisms, and problematic general education.