Chapter 111 of Gandhi’s My
Experiments With Truth
TRAINING OF THE SPIRIT
The
spiritual training of the boys was a much more difficult matter than their
physical and mental training. I relied little on religious books for the
training of the spirit. Of course, I believed that every student should be
acquainted with the elements of his own religion and have a general knowledge
of his own scriptures, and therefore I provided for such knowledge as best I
could. But that, to my mind, was part of the intellectual training. Long before
I undertook the education of the youngsters of the Tolstoy Farm I had realized
that the training of the spirit was a thing by itself. To develop the spirit is
to build character and to enable one to work towards a knowledge of God and
self-realization. And I held that this was an essential part of the training of
the young, and that all training without culture of the spirit was of no use,
and might be even harmful.
I
am familiar with the superstition that self-realization is possible only in the
fourth stage of life, i.e., sannyasa (renunciation). But it is a matter of
common knowledge that those who defer preparation for this invaluable
experience until the last stage of life attain not self-realization but old age
amounting to a second and pitiable childhood, living as a burden on this earth.
I have a full recollection that I held these views even whilst I was teaching
i. e., in 1911-12, though I might not then have expressed them in identical
language.
How
then was this spiritual training to be given? I made the children memorize and
recite hymns, and read to them from books on moral training. But that was far
from satisfying me. As I came into closer contact with them I saw that it was
not through books that one could impart training of the spirit. Just as
physical training was to be imparted through physical exercise even so the
training of the spirit was possible only through the exercise of the spirit.
And the exercise of the spirit entirely depended on the life and character of
the teacher. The teacher had always to be mindful of his p's and q's, whether
he was in the midst of his boys or not.
It
is possible for a teacher situated miles away to affect the spirit of the
pupils by his way of living. It would be idle for me, if I were a liar, to
teach boys to tell the truth. A cowardly teacher would never succeed in making
his boys valiant, and a stranger to self- restraint could never teach his
pupils the value of self-restraint. I saw therefore that I must be an eternal
object-lesson to the boys and girls living with me. They thus became my
teachers, and I learnt I must be good and live straight, if only for their
sakes. I may say that the increasing discipline and restraint I imposed on
myself at Tolstoy Farm was mostly due to those wards of mine.
One
of them was wild, unruly, given to lying, and quarrelsome. On one occasion he
broke out most violently. I was exasperated. I never punished my boys, but this
time I was very angry. I tried to reason with him. But he was adamant and even
tried to overreach me. At last I picked up a ruler lying at hand and delivered
a blow on his arm. I trembled as I struck him. I dare say he noticed it. This
was an entirely novel experience for them all. The boy cried out and begged to
be forgiven. He cried not because the beating was painful to him; he could, if
he had been so minded, have paid me back in the same coin, being a stoutly
built youth of seventeen; but he realized my pain in being driven to this
violent resource. Never again after this incident did he disobey me. But I
still repent that violence. I am afraid I exhibited before him that day not the
spirit, but the brute, in me.
I
have always been opposed to corporal punishment. I remember only one occasion
on which I physically punished one of my sons. I have therefore never until
this day been able to decide whether I was right or wrong in using the ruler.
Probably it was improper, for it was prompted by anger and a desire to punish.
Had it been an expression only of my distress, I should have considered it
justified. But the motive in this case was mixed.
This
incident set me thinking and taught me a better method of correcting students.
I do not know whether that method would have availed on the occasion in
question. The youngster soon forgot the incident, and I do not think he ever
showed great improvement. But the incident made me understand better the duty
of a teacher towards his pupils.
Cases
of misconduct on the part of the boys often occurred after this, but I never
resorted to corporal punishment. Thus in my endeavour to impart spiritual
training to the boys and girls under me, I came to understand better and better
the power of the spirit.
1. How did Gandhi
initially seek to train his pupils spiritually, and why did he find this
approach unsatisfactory?
2. What did he decide
was the best way to offer spiritual training to his pupils? Why?
3. Why does Gandhi
think waiting until you are old and through with the householder’s life to develop
yourself spiritually is not a good way to live? What ought we to be doing all
the time?
4. What does Gandhi
say is of paramount concern for a teacher to teach his or her students properly
and well?
5. Assess Gandhi’s
claim that “It is possible for a teacher situated miles away to affect the
spirit of the pupils by his way of living.” Explain your assessment.
6. How did Gandhi
deal with the “unruly” and “quarrelsome” student in his classroom? What
happened as a result, and what did Gandhi learn from this?
7. In a paragraph, explain in your own words what makes a teacher “good,” and how a good teacher would deal with the “wild” student that Gandhi describes.