Questions on Education with Mahatma Gandhi-II

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Questions on Education with Mahatma Gandhi-II

 

Q. 4. Nowadays the teacher’s task has in fact been reduced to that of a postman or a foreman. It consists only of placing books written by educationists in the hands of pupils and of supervising whether they make use of these or not. In addition to this, what other skill do you expect the teachers to possess? The science of education has been developed to the extent where the term ‘teacher’ may be defined as one who can clarify the meaning of difficult passages and prepare abstracts of long chapters. Why should we not now accept this ideal?

A. I keep on feeling that teachers in the true sense of the word are essential, no matter how good the text-books are. A good teacher would never content himself with summarizing or explaining the meaning of difficult passages. Time and again, he would go beyond the text- books and present his subject to the pupil in a vivid manner in the same way as an artist does. The best text-book may be compared to the best photograph. However, just as a painting by an artist although second rate is invariably superior to a photograph, similar is the case with a real teacher. A true teacher introduces the pupil to his subject, creates in him interest for the subject and enables him to understand it independently. In my opinion, one who explains difficult passages and prepares abstracts can never be regarded a good teacher. Our endeavours should be to turn out true teachers who could be infused with a spirit of service. It is not that stray instances of such teachers are not being found even today.

Q. 5. At the time of the educational conference at Broach you said although primary education might be free, it should not be compulsory and that even a good thing should not be compulsorily enforced on a nation which was not independent. If today the educational structure were to come within your control, would you or would you not see that your educational system in which khadi and other national crafts have a place of primary importance was made compulsory?

A. I don’t think I have as yet the courage to make compulsory the educational system that I have conceived. I think our country has no need of it for many years to come, because although primary education ought to be made compulsory, many conditions that go before it remain to be fulfilled. I feel that if we put before the people the type of education that will further their growth and also meet with their approval, they will readily welcome it without any effort on our part.

Q. 6. Do you believe that teachers have a right to give any kind of religious instruction which is in accordance with their viewpoint?

A. Teachers who teach under a common administrative system have no right to impart religious instruction according to their own viewpoint. As in the case of other subjects, religious instruction too must be given in accordance with the scheme provided by the administrative authorities. Every teacher will have his own method of teaching within that framework; however, such instruction may be imparted only in accordance with the ideals that have been laid down by the authorities with regard to religion. It is true that instruction in other subjects can be impacted by one who has read certain books on these subjects. That is not the case of religious instruction. It is never given through books. The method of imparting this instruction is quite different from that followed in the case of other subject. Whereas the latter is communicated through the intellect, the former can proceed from one’s heart alone. Hence so long as the teacher is not steeped in religion, he should not impart religious instruction. Although in this manner the means of imparting religious instruction are different, nevertheless it is necessary to have a certain amount of understanding about the way in which it is to be done. In other words, one cannot impart education which would encourage violence where non-violence has been accepted as the supreme dharma. Or, instruction antagonistic to other religions cannot be imparted where the ideal of love, tolerance and compassion towards all religions has been accepted as the ideal. In short, there can be no place for a state of anarchy with regard to religious instruction where its necessity has already been accepted.

Reference:

Navajivan, 10-6-1928