Ancient Indian Education: An Inquiry into its Origin, Development, and Ideals c8.67

c8.67

It does not then seem possible to speak of these indigenous primary schools, taken as a whole, as being the relic of an ancient village system. If they had been so we should expect to find that the teacher was in the same position as others in the village, like the carpenter, blacksmith, barber, village priest, and others, who receive fixed customary grants from the agricultural community of the village in return for the performances of their services, and pass on their rights from father to son. Not only did the manner of paying the teacher differ, generally at least, from the way that men of other professions and trades in the village received their remuneration, but the teachers were not confined to one caste, and there is little trace of their office being hereditary. In the case of a Brāhman teacher his position in the village community was no doubt due to his priestly office, and the ancient method of rewarding his services was continued even when he undertook vernacular teaching. But in the case of teachers of other castes, if in some cases they have established a similar position in a village community, it is hardly sufficient evidence in itself of the antiquity of the system. Apart from the Brāhmans there has never been a caste of teachers in India, and the teaching work of the Brāhmans was originally in connection with the Vedas and the higher Sanskrit learning given only to the three ‘twice-born’ castes rather than the imparting of primary education to all comers. It seems likely that the village primary school was an institution of much later growth than other parts of the Indian village system.¹