CHAPTER 5. AT THE HIGH SCHOOL | An Autobiography or My Experiments with Truth by Mahatma Gandhi

5. AT THE HIGH SCHOOL

I have already said that I was learning at the high school when I was married. We three brothers were learning at the same school. The eldest brother was ina much higher class, and the brother who was married at the same time as I was, only one class ahead of me. Marriage resulted in both of us wasting a year. Indeed the result was even worse for my brother, for he gave up studies altogether. 

Heaven knows how many youths are in the same plight as he. Only in our present Hindu society do studies and marriage go thus hand in hand. My studies were continued. 

I was not regarded as a dunce at the high school. 

I always enjoyed the affection of my teachers. Certificates of progress and character 

used to be sent to the parents every year. I never had a bad certificate. 

In fact I even won prizes after I passed out of the second standard. 

In the fifth and sixth I obtained scholarships of rupees four and ten respectively, an achievement for which I have to thank good luck more than my

merit. For the scholarships were not open to all, but reserved for 

the best boys amongst those coming from the Sorath Division of Kathiawad. And in those days there could not have been many boys from Sorath in a class of forty to fifty.

My own recollection is that I had not any high regard for my ability. 

I used to be astonished whenever I won prizes and scholarships. But I very jealously guarded my character. The least little blemish drew tears from my eyes. 

When I merited, or seemed to the teacher to merit, a rebuke, it was unbearable for me. I remember having once received corporal punishment. I did not so much mind the punishment, as the fact that it was considered my desert. I wept

piteously. That was when I was in the first or second standard. 

There was another such incident during the time when I was in 

the seventh standard Dorabji Edulji Gimi was the headmaster then. 

He was popular among boys, as

he was a disciplinarian, a man of method and a good teacher. He had made gymnastics and cricket compulsory for boys of the upper standards. I disliked both. I never took 

part in any exercise, cricket or football, before they were

made compulsory. My shyness was one of the reasons for this aloofness, 

which I now see was wrong. I then had the false notion that gymnastics had nothing to do with education. Today I know that physical training should have as much

place in the curriculum as mental training. I may mention, however, that 

I was none the worse for abstaining from

exercise. That was because I had read in books about the benefits of long 

walks in the open air and, having liked the advice, I had formed a habit of taking walks, which has still remained with me. These walks gave me a fairly hardy

constitution. The reason for my dislike for gymnastics was my 

keen desire to serve as nurse

to my father. As soon as the school closed, I would hurry home 

and begin serving him. Compulsory exercise came directly in the way of this service. I requested Mr. Gimi to exempt me from gymnastics so that I might be free to

serve my father. But he would not listen to me. Now it so happened that one Saturday, when we had school in the morning, I had to go from home to the school for gymnastics at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. I had no watch, and the

clouds deceived me. Before I reached the school the boys had all left. The next day Mr. Gimi, examining the roll, found me marked absent. Being asked the reason for absence, I told him what had happened. He refused to believe me

and ordered me to pay a fine of one or two annas (I cannot now recall how much). 

I was convicted of lying! That deeply pained me. How was I to prove my innocence? 

There was no way. I cried in deep anguish. I saw that a man of truth must 

also be a man of care. This was the first and last instance of my carelessness 

in school. I have a faint recollection that I finally succeeded in

getting the fine remitted. The exemption from exercise was of course

obtained, as my father wrote himself to the headmaster saying that he wanted

me at home after school.

But though I was none the worse for having neglected exercise, I am still paying

the penalty of another neglect. I do not know whence I got the notion that

good handwriting was not a necessary part of education, but I retained it until I

went to England. When later, especially in South Africa, I saw the beautiful 

handwriting of lawyers and young men born and educated in South Africa, I was

ashamed of myself and repented of my neglect. I saw that bad handwriting

should be regarded as a sign of an imperfect education. I tried later to improve

mine, but it was too late. I could never repair the neglect of my youth. Let

every young man and woman be warned by my example, and understand that

good handwriting is a necessary part of education. I am now of opinion that

children should first be taught the art of drawing before learning how to write.

Let the child learn his letters by observation as he does different objects, such

as flowers, birds, etc., and let him learn handwriting only after he has learnt to

draw objects. He will then write a beautifully formed hand.

Two more reminiscences of my school days are worth recording. I had lost one

year because of my marriage, and the teacher wanted me to make good the

loss by skipping a class – a privilege usually allowed to industrious boys. I

therefore had only six months in the third standard and was prompted to the

fourth after the examinations which are followed by the summer vacation.

English became the medium of instruction in most subjects from the fourth

standard. I found myself completely at sea. Geometry was a new subject in

which I was not particularly strong, and the English medium made it still more

difficult for me. The teacher taught the subject very well, but I could not

follow him. Often I would lose heart and think of going back to the third

standard, feeling that the packing of two years' studies into a single year was

too ambitious. But this would discredit not only me, but also the teacher;

because, counting on my industry, he had recommended my promotion. So the

fear of the double discredit kept me at my post. When, however, with much

effort I reached the thirteenth proposition of Euclid, the utter simplicity of the

subject was suddenly revealed to me. A subject which only required a pure and

simple use of one's reasoning powers could not be difficult. Ever since that

time geometry has been both easy and interesting for me.

Samskrit, however, proved a harder task. In geometry there was nothing to

memorize, whereas in Samskrit, I thought, everything had to be learnt by

heart. This subject also was commenced from the fourth standard. As soon as I entered the sixth I became disheartened. The teacher was a hard task master,

anxious, as I thought, to force the boys. There was a sort of rivalry going on

between the Samskrit and the Persian teachers. The Persian teacher was

lenient. The boys used to talk among themselves that Persian was very easy

and the Persian teacher very good and considerate to the students. The

'easiness' tempted me and one day I sat in the Persian class. The Samskrit

teacher was grieved. He called me to his side and said: 'How can you forget

that you are the son of a Vaishnava father? Won't you learn the language of

your own religion? If you have any difficulty, why not come to me? I want to

teach you students Samskrit to the best of my ability. As you proceed further,

you will find in it things of absorbing interest. You should not lose heart. Come

and sit again in the Samskrit class.'

This kindness put me to shame. I could not disregard my teacher's affection. 

Today I cannot but think with gratitude of Krishnashankar Pandya. For if I had

not acquired the little Samskrit that I learnt then, I should have found it

difficult to take any interest in our sacred books. In fact I deeply regret that I

was not able to acquire a more thorough knowledge of the language, because I

have since realized that every Hindu boy and girl should possess sound Samskrit

learning.

It is now my opinion that in all Indian curricula of higher education there

should be a place for Hindi, Samskrit, Persian, Arabic and English, besides of

course the vernacular. This big list need not frighten anyone. If our education

were more systematic, and the boys free from the burden of having to learn

their subjects through a foreign medium, I am sure, learning all these

languages would not be an irksome task, but a perfect pleasure. A scientific

knowledge of one language makes a knowledge of other languages

comparatively easy.

In reality, Hindi, Gujarati and Samskrit may be regarded as one language, and

Persian and Arabic also as one. Though Persian belongs to the Aryan, and

Arabic to the Semitic family of languages, there is a close relationship between

Persian and Arabic, because both claim their full growth through the rise of Islam. Urdu I have not regarded as a distinct language, because it has adopted

the Hindi grammar and its vocabulary is mainly Persian and Arabic, and he who

would learn good Urdu must learn Persian and Arabic, as one who would learn

good Gujarati, Hindi, Bengali or Marathi must learn Samskrit.

Read All