A Letter to God · Class 10 English · First Flight: 135 MCQs with answers

Watching the sky towards the north-east

He knows his fields intimately and reads the weather himself, watching the north-east sky all morning before announcing that water is coming.

Because a timely shower on a ripe crop is the money his family will live on

To a farmer with a ripe field, rain at the right moment is the value of the harvest, so he prices the drops: big ones ten-cent pieces, little ones fives.

A strong wind begins to blow and large hailstones fall along with the rain

Everything before that sentence is hope and everything after it is loss; the wind converts a welcome shower into the storm that ruins the year.

For an hour, over the house, garden, hillside, cornfield and the whole valley

The writer gives both the duration and the sweep to show that nothing was spared: one hour cancels a season across the entire valley.

White, as if it had been covered with salt

The salt image does double work: it gives the colour of the hail-covered field and suggests land on which nothing will grow.

Help from God

The story states it plainly: in that solitary house there was one hope, and it was help from God.

A hundred pesos — enough to re-sow the field and feed the family till harvest

The request is exact and practical, with two named purposes — seed for a fresh sowing, and food until that crop is ready.

Seventy pesos

The postmaster could gather only a little more than half the hundred, and Lencho counts seventy pesos in the envelope.

The post office employees, as a group

He never names an individual. In the second letter he calls the post office employees a bunch of crooks and asks that the rest not be sent through the mail.

The contentment of a man who has done a good deed

The story gives him that quiet satisfaction deliberately, so that the second letter, when it arrives, lands on a man who expected nothing but had earned gratitude.

He goes to the window to ask for paper and ink

He writes at once, at the public writing-table, wrinkling his brow with the effort of putting his complaint into words.

Lencho never discovers who sent the money and never doubts that it came from God

The story ends with the postmaster reading the accusation. Lencho's faith is untouched precisely because he never learns what actually happened.

—

—

That he is experienced enough to read the weather himself and plan around it

He knows his fields intimately and forecasts the shower correctly, which establishes competence before the disaster that has nothing to do with his skill.

He breaks out laughing along with the postman

The laughter matters: it makes his change of mind a moment of genuine recognition rather than a habit of piety.

He gave part of his own salary towards the sum

Organising a collection is easy; paying from his own pay is the point at which sympathy becomes sacrifice.

They are the only people in the story who actually gave him anything

The accusation lands exactly on his benefactors, which is what makes the ending ironic rather than simply unpleasant.

1 and 2 only

He pays and he hides. Telling Lencho anything would have undone the purpose of the whole effort.

Frightened and plain-spoken — their work has come to nothing and they expect to go hungry

They say the simple, frightened things people say after a disaster, and the single hope of God's help sits inside that fear rather than replacing it.

—

—

Humans against nature, and humans against each other

The hailstorm supplies the first; Lencho's accusation against the post office staff supplies the second.

An outcome that is the opposite of what is expected or deserved

Its textbook example is this ending: the men who gave their own money are described in writing as thieves.

Two — one asking for money, one accusing the post office

Both of Lencho's letters are addressed to God, and the second is the one that gives the story its ending.

Calm and hopeful, with a family confident of a good harvest

The ripe corn, the promised rain and the shared meal establish security, so that the hour of hail can take it away completely.

—

It shows that the family has no neighbour to turn to, so help must come from outside the valley altogether

The isolation is practical, not decorative. With no neighbours within reach, no ordinary source of help exists, which is why a letter to God seems to Lencho like a reasonable next step.

That the household trusts both Lencho's practical skill and God's will, the two forces the whole story turns on

In one line the story names its two forces: a farmer's skill and a family's faith. Both will be tested by the hail, and the second is what survives.

Because locusts eat what they can but the hail stripped every plant and leaf bare

He reaches for the worst disaster a farmer knows and says this is worse. The comparison measures total loss: no corn, no flowers, not a leaf on the trees.

1 and 2 only

Statements 1 and 2 are both spoken that night. There is no neighbour: theirs is the only house in the valley, which is precisely why help has to come from elsewhere.

That although he labours like an animal in the fields, he knows how to write

Literacy is the hinge. A man who could not write would have prayed and the story would end; because Lencho can write, his faith becomes a posted letter that other people must answer.

A is true, but R is false

No letter had ever gone to that address before; that is exactly why he laughed. The assertion holds, the reason does not.

He recognises the faith behind the letter and wishes he shared it

Almost immediately he turns serious, taps the letter on his desk and says he wishes he had the faith of a man who would start a correspondence with God.

The post office employees, the postmaster's own salary, and several of his friends

He asks the employees, gives part of his own salary and obliges several friends to give something for an act of charity — and the three together still fall short.

So that Lencho will believe his prayer was answered and his faith will stay whole

The point of the whole effort was that the writer's faith should not be shaken. A signature in the postmaster's own name would have destroyed exactly what he set out to protect.

Because his confidence that God would send it was complete

The story says his confidence was such that he showed not the slightest surprise. To him the arrival of the money is normal; only the amount is wrong.

That it should not be sent through the mail

Having decided the employees are thieves, he asks for a different route — which is the last thing the men who paid for the money out of their own pockets deserve.

Poor but hopeful, with a ripe crop about to reward a year's work

They work the field themselves and their year depends on it, yet at the start the corn is ripe and the flowers promise a good harvest — which is what makes the loss complete.

He wrinkles his brow with the effort of expressing his ideas, and fixes the stamp with a blow of his fist

Both details belong to a man whose body is trained for field work, not for pens — and both keep him convincing as a labouring farmer who happens to be literate.

1 and 2 only

He addresses, stamps and posts the letter himself. He never speaks to the postmaster at all, which is why he never learns who answered him.

That he is heavily built and works with the strength and patience of a labouring animal

The comparison is about build and toil, and it sits deliberately beside the fact that this same man can write — the contrast the writer wants us to notice.

—

—

—

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — the setting: the lone house, the ripe corn, the promise of a good harvest. 1 mark — Lencho predicts the rain and welcomes the drops as coins. 1 mark — the wind rises and hail falls for an hour; the field is left white as salt and the corn destroyed. 1 mark — the family's single hop…

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — Lencho addresses, stamps and posts the letter himself. 1 mark — the postman finds the address unknown in his career and takes it to his boss laughing. 1 mark — the postmaster laughs, then turns serious and admires the writer's faith. 1 mark — he decides to answer so that the faith…

That he labours like an animal in the fields and that he knows how to write

The story sets the ox-like labourer beside the literate man deliberately. Everything that follows depends on a field worker who can put a request on paper.

He is practical and has calculated what survival will actually cost

Seed for a fresh sowing plus food until harvest is a budget, not a wish. The precision is the mark of a working farmer, and it also creates the shortfall later.

It is unquestioning — he never asks how a letter could reach God or who might have answered it

At no point does he examine the mechanism of his own belief, and that absence of doubt is the quality the postmaster admires and envies.

1 and 2 only

The first two are established facts of his character. There is no neighbour to ask: his is the only house in the valley, which is why the letter is his first and only resort.

He assumes dishonesty in them as readily as he assumes perfection in God

The two judgements are made in the same breath — a faultless sender and thieving handlers — and together they form the contradiction at the centre of his character.

He realises that the writer genuinely believes, and admits he wishes he had such faith

He taps the letter on his desk and speaks of wishing for the same faith. Respect, not pity, is what starts the collection.

That the writer's faith should not be shaken

The story gives the motive precisely, and it is about belief rather than relief — which is why the reply had to appear to come from God.

Because a human sender would destroy the faith he was trying to protect

The one-word signature is chosen for its effect on Lencho's belief, and it is exactly why Lencho can receive the money and still accuse the office.

A good-natured official who acts on an impulse of respect and pays for it himself without asking for credit

Respect, cost and anonymity are his three defining features, and a sketch that names all three cannot go wrong.

Her reply, 'God willing', introduces the idea of faith before the storm makes it necessary

A few words plant the theme early, so that when the family falls back on God after the storm, the idea has already been established in the household.

That the whole household's living depends on the one field

Everyone's day is organised around the crop, which is why its destruction is a family catastrophe rather than a business loss.

He takes the strange letter to the postmaster, and he later hands the reply to Lencho

Had he thrown the letter away, nothing follows. He is present at both ends of the kindness, and he is also among the men Lencho later calls crooks.

He has no faith in the post office as an institution and wants the money routed around it

He does not seek justice or an inquiry; he simply writes the institution off, which is the harshest verdict a man can pass without raising his voice.

Lencho is a hardworking farmer whose faith in God is as complete as his distrust of people

A sketch opens with a claim the rest of the answer can prove. The other options give plot, setting or bibliography rather than character.

Believing and practical — one trusts God to act, the other acts himself

Both are honest and both can write. The real difference is where each locates the power to change a situation.

That everyday people are quietly capable of generosity towards a stranger they will never meet

Not one of them knows Lencho, and all of them give. The story's quiet argument about human goodness is built entirely out of these minor figures.

—

—

—

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — a poor but capable farmer; the ox comparison and his own labour. 1 mark — he reads the sky and predicts the rain correctly. 1 mark — he can write, which turns faith into a posted letter. 1 mark — his faith is absolute: God sees even the conscience; he asks for a precise sum. 1 mark…

A man's unshaken faith is answered by the quiet generosity of people he never suspects

The theme has to hold both halves: a belief that never wavers, and a rescue performed by human beings whose part in it is never known.

Because the money is collected by the postmaster, his employees and his friends

Every peso is traceable to a human pocket. The story allows a believing reading but never supplies divine intervention as a fact.

Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

This is dramatic irony working exactly as intended: our extra knowledge, not the characters' emotion, supplies the ending's weight.

1 and 2 only

There is no confrontation and no discovery. The story closes on a private reading, which is what keeps the irony intact.

That ordinary people can be quietly generous to strangers and usually receive nothing for it

None of the givers knows Lencho, none is named, and the only response any of them gets is an accusation — yet the giving still happens.

Because the purpose was to protect a belief, which a named human sender would have destroyed

Anonymity here is functional, not modest. The signature God is the only one that leaves Lencho's faith standing.

To the discovery of the letter — the strange address and the laughing postman

The comedy is early and brief. Treating the ending as funny misreads a scene in which a generous man is called a thief.

A is false, but R is true

He never learns it, so the assertion is false. The reason correctly states that nobody tells him.

1 and 2 only

The narration is third person, standing outside all the characters. The hour-against-weeks proportion and the Sunday rhythm are both accurate.

Strangers fund a patient's treatment online and the family thanks God for the rescue

Both statements are true at once — the help is divine in the receiver's account and entirely human in fact — which is the situation the story dramatises.

That giving is purest when it cannot be traced back to the giver

He gives up the credit deliberately. The deception exists only to keep the gift invisible, which is the opposite of charity done for display.

That it often fails to reach the people who actually deserve it

Lencho is genuinely grateful — to God. The story's quiet point is that his thanks go past the men who earned them without touching them.

It is plain and unhurried, and it states the cruellest facts without comment

The refusal to editorialise is the story's method. The ending is simply reported, and the reader supplies the judgement.

That it was collected openly as a good deed, from people who had no obligation to Lencho

The friends gave because the postmaster asked it of them as charity, which makes the ending's word 'crooks' fall on entirely voluntary givers.

That kindness and injustice can come from the same set of circumstances, and often do

The same post office produces the collection and the accusation, and the story asks the reader to hold both without simplifying either.

Because the letter, not the storm, is what sets the story's real events in motion

The storm is the occasion; the letter is the cause of everything that follows, from the postmaster's decision to the final insult.

—

—

—

They gather like treasure the very thing that is destroying their family's year

The hail looks like silver coins and is called frozen pearls, so the children treat ruin as riches — an image that quietly prepares the story's larger irony.

A posted letter enters a system of other people, who then have to decide what to do about his faith

The moment the letter enters the mailbox it becomes somebody's work. That is what turns a private faith into a public event and brings the postmaster into the story.

Kind feelings alone cannot help; the reply has to contain real money that someone must pay

The phrase separates sympathy from cost. To answer honestly he must produce a hundred pesos, which is why he turns to his employees, his friends and his own salary.

Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

His anger follows directly from his certainty. If God is incapable of error or refusal, then a shortfall of thirty pesos can only be somebody's theft.

The week between each step gives the postmaster time to collect the money and Lencho time to be sure of an answer

The gaps are structural. Nothing in this story happens fast except the hour of hail; the weekly rhythm is what makes the collection and the reply possible.

It shows that his kindness costs him something, rather than being an easy gesture with other people's money

Anyone can pass a collection box around. Paying out of his own pocket makes the postmaster's decision a sacrifice, which is what the final insult is measured against.

The irony stays complete: the men who helped him are the men he calls thieves

If Lencho learned the truth the story would become a tale of gratitude. Because he does not, the reader is left holding the whole irony alone.

Falling rain — new coins; hailstones — frozen pearls; the ruined field — covered with salt

One material — money, then ice, then salt — carries the whole arc from hope to ruin, and extract questions often ask you to trace it.

The exact sum forces the postmaster to produce real money and creates the shortfall that ends the story

A vague plea could have been answered with sympathy. A precise figure can be measured against what arrives, and the thirty-peso gap is exactly what produces the second letter.

—

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — raindrops are called new coins: big drops ten-cent pieces, little ones fives. 1 mark — for a farmer a timely shower is literally the value of the harvest. 1 mark — the hailstones also look like new silver coins. 1 mark — the boys gather them as frozen pearls, treating ruin as riche…

He treats God as someone who already knows his situation and can be written to directly with a request

Because he believes he is already fully known, the letter needs no explanation of his worth — only the facts, the figure and the purpose.

He runs his farm capably, forecasts weather correctly and asks only for what he needs; his limitation is that he never doubts

Stupidity would mean incapacity, and the text shows the opposite. The precise word for his weakness is unquestioning, which is why the story can admire and criticise him at once.

Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A

Both are true. How long he had farmed there does not explain why he never suspected a human sender.

He works out that since God cannot err, the missing money must have been taken in transit

He does none of the loud things. He reasons from a fixed premise to a conclusion, which is what makes his injustice believable rather than cartoonish.

He used every claim he had on other people to raise the money

Obliging friends to give is a social cost, spent quietly. It measures how seriously he took a decision he could easily have abandoned.

A is true, but R is false

His satisfaction is real, but it comes from the deed itself. Lencho never thanks him and never learns his part — indeed the only message he sends the office is an accusation.

He cannot be grateful to people whose help he does not know about, and his certainty rules out a human sender

His fault is a closed mind rather than a hard heart, and separating the two is what turns a plot summary into a character answer.

It shows the limits of his effort — three sources of money and still only a little more than half

He is a decent man of ordinary means, not a miracle worker. The shortfall keeps him human and, incidentally, supplies the story's ending.

Both act firmly on a belief, one in God and the other in the value of that faith

The farmer's resolution and the official's resolution mirror each other, which is why the pair works as a study in contrast rather than a simple good-and-foolish opposition.

It keeps attention on what the office and its people do rather than on one individual

Namelessness generalises him. Any decent official in that chair might have done the same, which makes the story's kindness institutional as well as personal.

He shows no surprise at all when money actually arrives

Anyone can post a letter; only someone who truly expected an answer feels no surprise when it comes. The absence of astonishment is the proof.

The one person who knows the truth is also the one who receives the insult

Placing the accusation in the benefactor's hands is what closes the circle: the reader sees both the kindness and the verdict on it at the same instant.

He commits himself to producing money he cannot be sure of raising, and indeed falls short

He resolves first and finds the money afterwards. The shortfall he ends up with is the direct result of promising more than his circumstances could deliver.

He thanks no one because he believes no one is involved — his mistake is in his understanding, not in his heart

This distinguishes a failure of knowledge from a failure of character, which is exactly the distinction an examiner rewards in a 6-mark answer.

—

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — he is a minor figure whose choices control the second half of the story. 1 mark — first reaction is laughter, shared with the postman. 1 mark — he turns serious and admires, even envies, the writer's faith. 1 mark — decision one: answer the letter so the faith is not shaken. 1 mark…

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — Lencho's faith is in God: he states a sum and expects an answer. 1 mark — the proof is his lack of surprise when money arrives. 1 mark — the postmaster's faith is in people: he makes the answer happen. 1 mark — he uses employees, friends and his own salary. 1 mark — the two men nev…

The storm could not have been prevented by anyone, while the injustice needed only a moment's doubt to avoid

Nature is indifferent and unanswerable; the human harm is entirely avoidable, which is why the story spends its second half on it.

Lencho posts the accusation, so the postmaster must open and read it himself

Delivery is the cruelty. The story arranges for the benefactor to be alone with the insult, which is why the last paragraph lands so hard.

It is literal and also names the story's question — whether such a letter can be answered, and by whom

A good title answer covers both the plain fact and the question the phrase raises; here the letter is real, posted, and answered by people.

It lets the reader feel the change from hope to ruin before anything is explained

One material — money, ice, salt — carries the whole arc, so the loss registers as an image rather than as a statement.

It matches the whiteness of the hail and also suggests land on which nothing will grow

The colour is the surface meaning; barrenness is the one that matters, and it arrives without the writer having to say the word.

A neat ending would release the reader from the discomfort the irony creates

The refusal to resolve is a deliberate technique: the reader is left holding both the kindness and the insult, with no comfortable conclusion.

The reader judges his conclusions instead of sharing them

We are given his actions and his letters, not his reasoning as felt from inside — which keeps a critical distance the last paragraph depends on.

A faith that is never confronted with the facts can survive intact, and the story leaves us to judge that

The shortfall never shakes Lencho because he reassigns the blame. His belief endures, and the writer offers no verdict on whether it should.

That the writer is interested less in the disaster than in what people do about it

Structure is a statement of interest. One hour of weather sets up three weeks of human decisions, which is where the story's attention lies.

Thus the story teaches us that we should always have faith in God

The first is a slogan that ignores the postmaster, the collection and the ending. The other three each carry the story's complication.

Sympathetic but clear-eyed — he neither mocks the faith nor hides its consequences

The narration allows Lencho his dignity and his skill while showing exactly what his certainty costs other people.

It leaves the question open and never states an answer

Everything visible is human, and the silence about anything beyond that is what allows believing and sceptical readers to finish the story satisfied.

The postmaster signing his collection with the single word God

In one gesture human generosity disguises itself as divine answer, which is precisely where the story's two subjects meet.

Lencho's faith would have been shaken, and the irony of the ending would disappear

The signature holds the whole design together: it preserves the belief and it makes the final accusation possible.

It completes the irony by turning a gift into a theft in the receiver's mind

Everything the story has built — the faith, the collection, the anonymity — is brought to its point by that one accusation.

It reverses the story: the people are trustworthy and generous, and it is Lencho's distrust of them that is shown to be unjust

Every human being in this story behaves well. The only failure of judgement belongs to the man who assumes the opposite.

—

—

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — Lencho's faith: God sees the conscience; the letter names a sum and a purpose. 1 mark — his confidence is complete; he expects an answer. 1 mark — the postman carries the letter on; the postmaster decides to answer. 1 mark — the goodness is collective: employees, obliged friends, t…

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — situational irony defined: the outcome is the opposite of what is deserved. 1 mark — the givers are the ones accused of theft. 1 mark — the accusation is posted, so the benefactor reads it alone. 1 mark — dramatic irony defined: the reader knows what the character does not. 1 mark…

—

Any six points, 1 mark each. 1 mark — rain as new coins: the value of the harvest. 1 mark — hail as silver coins and frozen pearls: wealth turned to ice. 1 mark — the field white as salt: whiteness plus barrenness. 1 mark — pacing: one hour of storm against three weeks of human action. 1 mark — third-person narration o…