Summary:
Gandhi begins by discussing his entry into the legal profession, noting that although he had the legal training of a barrister, he was initially hesitant and nervous about practicing law. He describes himself as lacking the typical aggressive qualities that lawyers often display in court. Instead of taking on many cases or manipulating facts for success, Gandhi believed in speaking the truth and never arguing for cases he knew to be unjust.
Throughout the essay, Gandhi shares a few key cases that shaped his professional life. In one instance, he recalls how he refused to take on a case where the client was dishonest. He was convinced that no success should be achieved through falsehood. In another case, Gandhi managed to settle a dispute out of court, which he considered a better outcome than winning through legal proceedings, as it resolved the conflict amicably.
Gandhi's approach to law was guided by a deep sense of morality, and he preferred seeking justice through peaceful resolution rather than legal confrontation. He found more satisfaction in settling cases by bringing people together than by winning courtroom battles. This was consistent with his broader philosophy of truth and nonviolence (Satya and Ahimsa), which would later become central to his political and social activism.
In conclusion, Gandhi reflects that his time as a lawyer was not marked by any spectacular success in the traditional sense, but rather by his commitment to truth, justice, and ethical practice. He believed that lawyers should be more focused on serving justice and solving disputes than merely winning cases for personal gain or prestige.
This essay offers insight into how Gandhi's early career shaped his later efforts in social and political movements, reinforcing his lifelong dedication to truth, peace, and nonviolence.
No comments:
Post a Comment