subjects such as preparing of soil, the tending of bullocks, the implements of husbandry etc.”40 He asked the colonial government to limit English education to affluent Brahmins and set up separate schools to meet the educational requirements of “variously civilized communities.”41 Against this background, it is hardly surprising that he openly opposed the admission of boys from untouchable castes into schools.42
What is interesting in these early discussions is that, Tilak although he called himself a nationalist, yet warned the colonial government “that the interests of the society and the government are similar […] by placing the latest results arrived at by moral and political science in a young graduate’s hand the government is encouraging the reformers to ask for extreme reforms in the society which would lead to reformers demanding similar extreme reform in the governance.”43
By 1891, Tilak changed his stand. The British and Indian reformers were successful in getting the Age of Consent Bill passed. This Bill was introduced in the Imperial Legislature by Andrew Scoble and Dayaram Gidumal and was a limited measure, aiming at the abolishment of child marriage and meant to raise the marriageable age of girls to 12. During the debate, the reformers argued that the additional years secured in a girls’ life could be used to educate them. Tilak vehemently opposed it by arguing that if girls were educated “India would lose its nationality its individuality as a separate nation”.44 By quoting the British newspapers, he argued that “the brain of a woman on an average weighed less by five ounces than that of a man.”45 He even stated that women reformers like Rakmabais, Pandita Ramabai “should be punished for the same reason as there ←53 | 54→is punishment for thieves, adulterers and murderers.”46 After the passing of the Age of Consent Act, Tilak became a vocal advocate of anti-colonial nationalism and national education. He placed the traditional caste hierarchy - varnashrama dharma at the heart of the Indian nationhood and argued that “had it not been for the influence of caste, the Hindu nation would have long ceased to exist.” He asserted that activities of the reformers “would kill the caste and with it kill the vitality of the nation.”47 Since modern education undermined “respect for old institutions and beliefs” and led to “religious nihilism,” it was a great impediment to Indian nationalism.48 Tilak argued that religious and vocational education alone should form the basis of the curriculum to restore respect for “old institutions, old values and old idol”. Tilak explained that with “old institution” he was referring to the caste stratification and by “old values” he hinted to the honour and respect paid by the lower castes to the “old idol”, the Brahmins.49 Since modern education had upturned all three, national education was vital to re-construct a strong Indian nation.50 Tilak opposed the teaching of Sanskrit poetry or even Hindu philosophy. He explained that “much of the religious instruction should consist of dogma pure and simple. The schoolboys will have to be told dogmatically that there is God […] of course; the schoolboy who wants an ocular proof of the existence of God will have to be caned into silence.”51
Tilak and his supporters established national schools during the first phase of anti-colonial struggle (called the Swadeshi movement, 1905–1912). These schools were not popular with the people and soon disappeared. The quality of literacy that was advocated in the schools was very low. They opposed the efforts of Gopal Krishna Gokhale’s Compulsory Education Bill 1912 and the efforts of the Maharaja of Baroda to implement compulsory education in his province.52 During the public debates surrounding the passing of the Compulsory Education Bill, they argued that “the soul of education is really information; hence, it is sufficient to give information to boys.” Since everybody loves to write his name, ←54 | 55→he should be taught to do so. They also suggested “the appointment of a music master to play music in public and arrange slide shows of Hindu religious places to attract people.”53 Beyond this, the masses did not require education.
Tilak started the Indian Home Rule League, modelled after the Irish Home Rule League in 1916 to intensify his agitation against colonial rule. Home Rule aimed at the transfer of India’s internal administration into Indian hands while India continued to be part of the British Empire. The justification he gave for Home Rule was that chaturvarna had declined under the influence of modern education and India needed Home Rule to protect varnashrama dharma – the caste system.54 Tilak argued that “the colonial education discouraged students from learning anything from their elders about the actual surroundings […] only in the national schools independent of government control, adequate education in making good citizen can be given.”55 In these schools the children should be taught “the theory of karma and the existence of god,” and the pedagogy “is found in our Puranas” (Hindu Mythological stories).56 The theory of karma in the Hindu religion provides justification for a person’s low or high birth, and the Puranas upheld these justifications linking it up with the will of god. The instruction given to boys was mostly oral.57 So, the aim of national education was to make children accept their caste and economic status in the society and not question them.
Two important issues can be deducted from these developments. Firstly, Tilak did not advocate the abolition of modern schools, colleges and universities. Secondly, the national education advocated by Tilak and comprised of religious and vocational education was essentially for the lower caste and lower class Indians. This meant that the affluent upper-caste Brahmins would have access to modern education and thereby control important positions of power, while the poor from the upper caste and the lower castes would be taught to accept the social and economic hierarchy. This was not based on the pre-colonial Indian education system but certainly derived from the class-based education system of the imperial rulers.
Tilak’s national education could not be dismissed off as rhetoric produced during the time of anti-colonial struggle to cater to popular demand or to seek ←55 | 56→the support of the more conservative sections of the society. His supporters controlled ten out of eleven municipalities in the Marathi speaking areas of the Bombay Presidency where they refused to expand educational infrastructure or support the admission of lower caste boys, let alone the education of girls.58 They also refused to implement compulsory education even after the provincial Bill was passed in 1918.59 Tilak, however, died on 1 August 1920, and the leadership passed on into the hands of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
Spiritualising an imperial idea
If Tilak successfully nationalised the imperial idea of keeping the poor, girls and the lower castes from getting any meaningful education and emphasise religious instruction as real national education, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi went a step ahead and spiritualised it. Gandhi was born into privilege; his father was a prime minister of the princely states of Porbandar and Rajkot. By his own admission, Gandhi was an average student and barely managed to pass the examinations,60 yet he was sent to England for higher education. Later he went to South Africa in 1893 to represent a legal case of an Indian trader and spent the next 14 years there experimenting
