MY OBJECT IN WRITING (MY) AUTOBIOGRAPHY
My countrymen, for a long time I have been actuated by a desire to commit to writing, in the form of a treatise, my experiences, good and bad, of life, from the time of my birth. But whenever that thought occurred to me, it was accompanied by a consciousness that any incidents, to be embodied in a treatise, must be of a singularly marvellous or unprecedented character. In the absence of these characteristics, the treatise will be of no interest. For, a consideration of the matter makes it obvious that every being that is born must pass through some good or bad experiences before it ceases to exist. If the story of one’s life does not contain anything that is not to be found in the lives of the generality of men, if the perusal of one’s good or bad career does not arouse in the minds of the people any feeling of pleasure or pain, or, if one’s righteous conduct is barren in its effect in inculcating a wholesome moral or in gratifying the public taste, then of what avail is such a treatise ? What is the use of a needless waste of time (in writing it) ?
The aim of a man’s life should be the accomplishment of such righteous deeds as would engage the pens of several authors in describing them. Blessed is that righteous man to versify whose career in befitting metre several eminent poets, with their pen poised upon their ears, will, while seated in solitude, be gazing heaven-ward, as if to invoke the goddess of learning !+++(5)+++ His blessedness is indeed beyond description. The biographies of such personages tend to save, while those of others to destroy, mankind. In short, in such cases (alone) is the object of one’s existence attained. Otherwise, is not the writing of an autobiography like making a display of one’s own wisdom or waving a lighted lamp around one’s own head ? On the other hand, if there be any fascinating episodes in a man’s life unknown and likely to remain unknown to the public, these also may be (embodied in an autobiography). But as neither of these two tests is applicable to me I have not been able till now to fulfil my desire to write an autobiography. From these cogitations the wise would be able to gather, without being told so explicitly, that the desirability of writing the story of my life did not commend itself to me.
WHAT THE LEARNED SAY ?
Now let us consider the opinions of the ancients as well as of the moderns in regards to this matter, and then we might follow the adage " Hear all (but) act according to (your) own inclination." First of all let us consult the learned men of the present day who have received an English education. By consulting them I do not mean that we are to go to their houses or to invite them to ours and then to ask that body of learned men their opinion in regard to this commonplace matter. The wise would readily understand that what I mean is only to ascertain from the conduct, the writings or the speeches of those universally respected men whether my undertaking has their approval. Some days back I was at Meru Jalgaon, a village in Khandesh. While there, in the usual course of my reading various ancient and modern books at the (local) library, I came across a modern work entitled " Sansaramargopadeshika,"+++(5)+++ wherein good advice is given as to how householders should conduct themselves. The whole of this advice is not the author’s own, but in several places (quotations from the work of) great men are given in support of the writer’s opinions, And, therefore, those maxims, are, I think, worthy of acceptance. While reading that book from beginning to end, I came across the author’s own views regarding the present subject in one place. He says that a man should, during his leisure hours, write the story of his life, whether it be good or bad and should invest it with interest by describing various places, times and habitations.+++(5)+++ Particular care should be taken to avoid the use of vulgarisms, and the harmonious arrangement of the subject dealt with, should not be disregarded. This kind of writing becomes the means of endowing the writer with literary skill, intellectual capacity and elegance of speech. It also becomes the means of acquainting future generations with our careers, and of enabling them to form a correct estimate of our character, the rectitude or otherwise of our conduct, and the truth or falsity of the accusations against us.
Let this, however, pass. From what the author of the aforesaid book says it may be inferred that men of the present time approve of this course. There are many other instances of similar approval, but I lay them aside as they would cover considerable space, and as there exists a great difference between my views and the opinions of these self-styled learned men. But of what worth am I ? I am only an insignificant individual among those ignorant men who are to be found in this vast world. There is however, a heaven-wide difference between the views of our modern scholars and those of Vyas, Valmiki, Parashara, Manu and other great Rishis and founders of religion, who are counted amongst men of transcendent intellect, whose works, such as the Shrutis and the Smrities, have gained the acceptance of the people continually for several ages and who are looked upon as incarnations of the Deity. That is to say, they are sceptical as to (the soundness of the dicta of) these great men. These blockheads, who call themselves learned, seem to entertain doubts as to the existence of that Supreme Being who has created the universe, by whose power it is regulated, whose grace brings happiness and whose displeasure misery to mankind, and who is called the Adi Narayan in our religious books. What more need be said and what more is required ? Why should we then accept even this view which has emanated from the detestable minds of such vile atheists ? As I have a great faith in the ancients, I shall first ascertain their views and then determine whether I am fitted to write my autobiography.
But wait. My readers might here raise a question as to why I had taken even one instance from the learned men of the present day, if these were not acceptable to me. Old opinions only ought to have been followed. Yes, readers, what you say is true. But it is a principle of ethics that if any question is to be considered, all, whether ignorant or wise, young or old, poor or rich, should join in discussing it. As there is no saying in what way God may inspire any one, a wise man, without considering (any distinctions) of wealth, knowledge or age, should, after hearing the opinions of all, do only what is right. In view of this rule of conduct, I have drawn these distinguished scholars on my side.
WHAT THE REVERED ANCESTORS SAY?
Let us now see what our revered ancestors have to say. With the object of learning the views of the ancients I have read a large number of ancient works.+++(4)+++ I nowhere came across any clear statement in those works to the effect that every man should write his autobiography with his own hand. As, however, those great men spent their precious time and took great pains in writing a detailed account of themselves, whether good or bad, there is no objection in presuming that this course commended itself to them. Here my readers might perhaps say : " As they were great, it became, them. Their achievements were also great and their’ talents deserved to be memorised. If they themselves had not written their own histories, many would have assiduously laboured to write them. Because those warriors and statesmen wrote, should even an imbecile, who has not wit enough to manage his domestic affairs, write a story of his feeble life ?" My friends, I hold the same opinion as you do, viz., that only great men should write their autobiographies,
INSTANCES FROM HISTORY
But the autobiography written by the accomplished statesman Nana Phadanvis and the accounts of themselves chronicled by such great personages as Ahalyabai and Alexander (the Great), clearly indicate their inward conduct and inward disposition as well as the tendency of their minds. Alexander had specially engaged a chronicler to write his history, and during his leisure hours he used to make him read it out in his own presence.+++(5)+++ Those passages, however, in which the impartial chronicler had found fault with Alexander would move him to great wrath, while those in which he was eulogized would please him. So also Ahalyabai used to make a scribe write an account of herself and read it out to her. She, however, would get angry with the clerk on hearing those passages in which she was praised by the writer.+++(5)+++ The difference between the woman (Ahalyabai) and the man (Alexander) would be quite apparent to any sensible man from the above facts. Nana Phadanvis also has written a faithful and detailed account of himself from his childhood to old age, wherein he notes even his loathsome acts. A perusal of these might stem to render his outward conduct reprehensible. But I feel sure that sensible people, instead of attaching any blame to him, would only extol him for his candour. On considering all these facts it would appear that great men have followed the practice of writing the stories of their own lives.
WHAT ABOUT COMMON PEOPLE ?
Now it is undeniable that common people should not waste their precious time in writing autobiographies. And even if they write any, these autobiographies being devoid of any extraordinary incidents, would fail to commend themselves to popular appreciation. Like thousands of other creatures, they came into existence and passed away. What was unusual in this ? In short, if an autobiography is not read, the labour expended in writing it would be fruitless. A man would do well to consider this fact before undertaking any such task.
TWO WAYS OF ACQUIRING FAME
There are two ways in which a man can acquire fame namely, by committing a reprehensible deed or by performing a very laudable act. Ravana, Duryodhana and other very wicked persons acquired splendid notoriety only by seizing the wealth (or) wives of others. So, Ramaraj and Dharmaraj, by following a career of rectitude as laid down in our sacred books, have achieved ever- lasting glory.
These examples, however, are of very remote antiquity. But in quite recent times both bad and good men have acquired fame in history. To the former category belong Muhammad Taghlak and other Muhammadan kings, who amused themselves by frying human beings in pans, and Malharao and Bajirao II who brought about their own downfall by ravishing the wives of others +++(4)+++. To the latter category belong Akbar, Shivaji Maharaj, Bajirao I and others. Men like Valya Koli were saved though they committed great sins. From this it appears that to acquire fame, one must execute one’s undertaking, be it good or bad. (One should do) either an extremely good or an extremely bad act.
MY ASPIRATION
Now, in concluding this lengthy discussion, I disclose my views. Friends, all things considered, it is the dictate of my conscience that I should write an autobiography. Here it is necessary for me to. tell my friends whether I am justified in doing so. But having regard to the present time (I think) it would be inadvisable to refer to the matter in explicit terms. I, therefore, content myself by saying that I, your friend, intend to put my hand to great deed after some days, and I am sure that before and after I have put my hand to it I shall have to forego all happiness and to undergo diverse sufferings. For, can it ever be said that if one placed his foot upon fire it will not be scorched ? No. It is probable, therefore, that like the victim of sacrificial rites, I shall be consumed in the furnace of fire into which I am going to plunge. Perhaps God in His mercy may extricate me from all difficulties and vouchsafe fame to me, as that Supreme Soul rescued Pralhad from burning fire by cooling its flames and made him renowned.
WHY I UNDERTAKE A TERRIBLE DEED
Now, the question arises, why should such a murderous and terrible deed be undertaken ? Yes, brethren, here also I shall compare myself to Prahlad. Just as Prahlad worshipped the Almighty with boundless devotion, so my love for my country is unwavering, in other words, it is undying. This obviously means that I am a thorough patriot. I shall relinquish all happiness and sacrifice my life for my country. The wise may draw their own inferences from this. I do not say anything further anent this matter. He who undertakes a task of such magnitude must be involved in various difficulties, from which he can only be extricated by the grace of God. Hence a life so full of joy and sorrow as mine will probably be interesting to the public mind in some measure at least. Besides, there is another reason why I desire to write (an autobiography).
LESSON OF MY LIFE.
When the public will read, in a detailed story of my life, how I commenced my undertaking, what was its middle state, how it terminated or what (other) fate overtook it in the end and similar other matters, I hope that those patriotic friends who will come after me will take care to avoid the mistakes I may have committed and achieve their aims. Readers, I leave it to you to judge, from the above discussion of the reasons for and against my undertaking the task and from my firm resolve (to sacrifice myself) for the good of my country, whether the course which I have adopted of writing (an autobiography) is right or wrong. Now I follow this course because I consider it good and proper. But before doing so I, your most humble friend, very respectfully request you that if, perchance, this undertaking of mine be against your views, that is to say, if you disapprove it, you will, bearing in mind the maxim " There are as many characters as there are forms," consider it natural that all men should differ in their opinions, and pardon me. With these remarks only I take my leave of you.
I am, yours,
Well-wisher of the country,
DAMODAR HARI CHAPEKAR ,
Patriot.