23rd March, 1931

[Nama Singh]

Vaheguroooooo

today, 23rd March 2004 marks the rememberance of the day Shaheed Bhagat Singh, and his comrades, were hanged.

Sardar Bhagat Singh (1907 - 1931)

Family of Patriots

Bhagat Singh was born in a Sikh family of farmers in the village of Banga of Layalpur district of Punjab (now in Pakistan) on September 27th of 1907. His family stood for patriotism, reform, and freedom of the country. His grandfather Arjun Singh was drawn to Arya Samaj, a reformist movement of Hinduism, and took keen interest in proceedings of the Indian National Congress. Bhagat Singh's father Kishen Singh and uncle Ajit Singh were members of Ghadr Party founded in the U.S. in early years of this century to route British rule in India. Both were jailed for alleged anti-British activities. Ajit Singh had 22 cases against him and was forced to flee to Iran. Thereafter he went to Turkey, Austria, Germany and finally to Brazil to escape Black Water (Kalapani) punishment for his revolutionary activities in India.

The Jalianwala Bagh Massacre

Young Bhagat Singh was brought up in a politically charged state of Punjab which was left with a seething memory of the Jalianwala massacre of more than 400 innocent lives and thousands injured (1919). As a lad of fourteen he went to this spot to collect soil from the park of Jalianwala (bagh) in his lunch box, sanctified by the blood of the innocent and kept it as a memento for life.

Bhagat Singh was studying at the National College founded by Lala Lajpatrai, a great revolutionary leader and reformist. To a

void early marriage, he ran away from home and, became a member of the youth organization Noujawan Bharat Sabha which had memberships of all sects and religions. He met Chandra Shekhar Sharma (Azad), B.K. Dutt and other revolutionaries. They used to print handouts and newspapers in secret and spread political awareness in India through Urdu, Punjabi and English. These were all banned activities in India at the time, punishable with imprisonment.

The Simon Commission, Murder of Lala Lajpatrai and the Revenge

Anti-British feelings were spreading; Indians wanted some proper representation in running the administration of their country to which British reciprocated only on paper. Noticing restlessness was spreading, the British Government appointed a commission under the leadership of Sir John Simon in 1928, to report on political happenings. There was no single Indian member in this commission, and all the political parties decided to boycott the commission when it planned to visit major cities of India.

In Lahore, Lala Lajpatrai (picture) and Pandit Madan Mohan Malavia decided to protest to the commission in open about their displeasure. It was a silent protest march, yet the police chief Scott had banned meetings or processions. Thousands joined, without giving room for any untoward incident. Even then, Scott beat Lala Lajpatrai severely with a lathi (bamboo stick) on the head several times. Finally the leader succumbed to the injuries.

Bhagat Singh who was an eye witness to the morbid scene vowed to take revenge and with the help of Azad, Rajguru and Sukhadev plotted to kill Scott. Unfortunately he killed Mr. Sanders, a junior officer, in a case of mistaken identity. He had to flee from Lahore to escape death punishment.

Bomb in the Assembly

Instead of finding the root cause for discontent of Indians, the British government took to more repressive measures. Under the Defense of India Act, it gave more power to the police to arrest persons to stop processions with suspici

ous movements and actions. The act brought in the council was defeated by one vote. Even then it was to be passed in the form of an ordinance in the "interest of the public." No doubt the British were keen to arrest all leaders who opposed its arbitrary actions, and Bhagat Singh who was in hiding all this while, volunteered to throw a bomb in the central assembly where the meeting to pass the ordinance was being held. It was a carefully laid out plot, not to cause death or injury but to draw the attention of the government, that the modes of its suppression could no more be tolerated. It was agreed that Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt would court arrest after throwing the bomb.

It was a forgone conclusion in 1929 April 8th at Delhi Central Assembly. Singh and Dutt threw handouts, and bombed in the corridor not to cause injury and courted arrest after shouting slogans Inquilab Zindabad (Long Live, Revolution!)

Meanwhile the killers of Sanders were identified by the treachery of Bhagat Singh's friends who became "Approvers." Bhagat Singh thought the court would be a proper venue to get publicity for the cause of freedom, and did not want to disown the crime. But he gave a fiery statement giving reasons for killing which was symbolic of freedom struggle. He wanted to be shot like a soldier, and not die at the gallows. But, his plea was rejected, and he was hanged on the 23rd of March 1931. He was 24.

Bhagat Singh became a legendary hero for the masses. Innumerable songs were composed about him, and the youth throughout the country made him their ideal. He became a symbol of bravery and a goal to free India.

[Guest mehtab]

:wub: :wub:

[S1ngh]

Only one camera photograph of Bhagat Singh is available. It was taken in Lahore jail. Other pictures are all imaginary. The above is a painting based on the real camera photograph. (A Jail Meeting With Bhagat Singh, Bhai Randhir Singh, The Spokesman Weekly (Chandigarh), October 2000)

[DhadiMania]

a sad day in indian history. especially if his shahedi neva got wot the singhs wanted. khalistan

[Guest mehtab]

Sikh martyrs fought for a united bharat and not what we have today i.e hindustan. the muslims got their pakistan out of what was and supposed to bharat. Sikhs were fighting for the rights of everyone and every community. please correct me if i m wrong.

[Jaspaul Singh]

Waheguru jio!

I knew someone would put this up or someone who remembers what today marked ... and rochak u are right... thanks AMAN for putting this post up ...

bhul chuk maph!

[Guest mehtab]

i wrote an article on Bhagat Singh in 2002...wanna share it today

LONG LIVE REVOLUTION!!!

That is right ladies and gentlemen. Long Live Revolution!!! But hold on.

Before you mistake this slogan as a promoter of violence, bloodshed and

carnage, please allow me to take you a little more deep into the true

definition of the term "revolution".

The dictionary defines revolution as "a sudden or momentous change in a

situation". It is also defined as a struggle to achieve an aim for the

welfare of an entire society or a nation as a whole. Such revolutions

come under various banners - be they social, political, economical,

educational, religious or even related to sports. Revolution, in the

context of the above mentioned scenarios is always an attempt to bring

about a new and improved change which is different and better than the

pre-existing system.

There have been many such individuals who have left their mark on

society, their impression on the world and their name in history for

aeons to come. Undoubtedly, these personalities will prove to be a great

source of inspiration for the reformers, leaders and "revolutionaries"

of tomorrow. Such people are more than just a name. They are immortal

legends who become the very symbol, and defition of their ideals and

convictions. I am going to discuss about such an individual, who saw

only twenty-three years of his life. And yet, left a message that has

been and will be followed till the end of time. We know this great

personality as none other than Shaheed-e-Azam

Sardar Bhagat Singh.

Born in Punjab in a revolutionary family, Bhagat Singh grew up with a

burning desire to free his motherland from colonial subjugation. He

didnt marry as he didnt want to bring his forthcoming generation as

another oppressed lot under the imperialist British empire. Rather, he

preferred to dedicate his entire life to his country. Bhagat Singh

decided not to leave any stone unturned in his pursuits of ousting the

British from India.

India in the 20s was mostly in support of leaders who were more of

preachers. They encouraged the country to be tolerant towards every act

of aggression committed on them. Not only this, the people were made to

believe that the acceptance of suffering would spark off within the

aggressor a feeling of repentance followed by compassion. Unfortunately,

this hardly ever occurred. It was the call of time for the rise of a

hand that would give a befitting reply to the aggressor, not as violence

but rather in the form of self-defense. It was about time for

retaliation rather than allowing the continuation of barbarity.

Many people are probably unaware of the fact that Bhagat Singh was an

atheist. He had read a lot about Bakunin, Lenin, Trotsky and other

social revolutionaries of that era who were from other parts of the

world and who were also atheists. He believed that it was better to give

up ones life for ones country without any selfish desire, rather than

expecting reincarnation as a king in the next life in case one believed

in rebirth, or looking forward to enjoying se*ual maidens in paradise

for those who disregarded the rebirth theory and looked upon life as a

one-time offer. He thus called his sacrifice as totally selfless without

even the least bit of desire for personal pleasure, even if it was

meant to be procured after death. I have myself had a chance to read his

article entitled Why I am atheist. Although Bhagat Singh makes a

brilliant

attempt in clarifying why he was an atheist, I have a feeling

that his atheism was more circumstancial than a strongly held notion.

The reason I call it circumstancial is because from this article of his,

he seems to have been frustrated at the way the British were treating

Indians in their own country. He questioned the existence of God by

demanding the Almightys intervention in giving the British a sense to

leave India. That never happened on its own, resulting in his becoming a

disbeliever. Now since I call it circumstancial, I beg to be apologized

for putting but one question here : What if India wasnt under British

rule? Even if it was, what if independence was achieved before Bhagat

Singh lost his faith? Would he still go on to become an atheist? The

answer most probably would not be yes, even though I dont rule out its

possibility. But hey, this is just a personal opinion. Even though I am

not an atheist, I can still be wrong and dont hesitate to stand

corrected. Please note : i did not know about Bhagat Singh

meeting Bhaisahib Bhai Randhir Singh Jee when i wrote this article.

Plus, i have tried to prove his thoery of atheism as incorrect. Dunno

how good of a job i have done though .

Coming back to revolution! Bhagat Singhs name today has become a synonym

of revolution. He is known to have stood for a type of Government which

would be more in favor of the exploited labor class rather than the

rich and manipulative owners who wouldnt think twice when it came to

fulfilling their own selfish interests. Mere freedom without equality

was not his ultimate goal. Empty priviledges minus rights to labor meant

nothing to him. His revolution also included an "anti-nonviolence"

component. I shall refrain to call it violenc

e, for the term has more of

a negative essence attached to it, and falls short of describing self-defense

which is what I am trying to point out. The gory massacre that took

place in Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar on April 13th, 1919 on the day of

Baisakhi will remain a block blot in the history of British rule in

India. The person who committed this heinous crime was General Michael O'Dwyer,

who was later on given the title of Sir. He however had to pay for his

misdeed to the bullet of another revolutionary called Udham Singh twenty

one years later in London.

Probably many of my friends will find it funny reading my article on

Bhagat Singh, thinking that I have become an ardent admirer of this

great martyr after watching all the three recently released movies

dedicated to his life. But friends, I have always been an admirer all my

life and have great respect for what he did for India. A mere watching

of a bunch of movies is no reason to idolize someone or look upto them

as a role model. I sincerely believe that the youth of today need to pay

heed to his message of bringing about a revolution in all those aspects

of life where ones country is lacking.

We should definitely be proud of the fact that ours was predominantly a

nonviolent struggle for independence. Nonetheless, it was but ironic

that this humane philosophy failed miserably during the bloodbath of

partition. Certain authors have gone to the extent of calling it "the

devils dance" in which more than a million people are believed to have

been killed. One is compelled to ponder over the fact, that if

nonviolence was all that perfect, we probably dont need any police force,

army, airforce, navy, border security, personal bodyguards etc. But the

truth is that certain circumstances do put us in unpleasant situations

where the use of force becomes the last and mandatory resort for

survival.

All the people about whom we have read and studied

in our high school

history text books do deserve countless salutations for making today

possible for us. They all did what their perception, conscience and

beliefs held as the right thing to do. Whether it was fasting and the

use of words by the followers of nonviolence or the use of the gun by

those who were later on martyred, all soldiers of freedom deserve more

than just mere words of appreciation. I would like to conclude my

article as a kudos to all those who laid down their lives for the

independence of my India, and paved the way for a better tomorrow, yet

left behind an expectation from each one of us to revolutionize the

development and success of this great motherland of ours! (GULP)

Inquilab Zindabad!!! (long live revolution)

(edited)

Rochak (last name)

[Simran9]

Thanks to Gurujee that our people have not forgotten the sacrifice of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev

[Guest mehtab]

Now thats the man !!!

(he is 17 in the picture so i guess thats why little daari n muchh)

[Khalistani Singh]

Ah I just wrote a whole bunch, but hmm somehow I pressed a wrong button on this laptop and ahh everything got erased. Yeah by the way I hate laptops.

Anyways, to make a long story short...

Most punjabis love to claim that we were such great freedom fighters etc.

I did too, especially after I saw Shaheed Udham Singh. Then watching Shaheed Bhagat Singh. I perferred Shaheed Udham Singh because it was more punjabi desi ya know lol..anyways its funn how we claim Bhagat Singh be "Sikh."

Udham Singh, yeah he practiced Sikhi and did paht even though he became sehajdhari since he had to do undercover things and so on. But I really don't get that whole sort, cause he was operating in India, and you can definitely tell whose WHITE and whose INDIAN. And same thing in England, there were Singhs there at that time, and I'm sure that the British guy portrayed in the movie knew he was hiring a Sikh, let alone an Indian. So hmm yeah, anyways yeah Udham Singh was still practicing Sikhi though, so hes off the hook.

Shaheed Bhagat Singh's mother was half hindu marathi. It is written that she was and I know this cause all the marathis I know always knew Bhagat Singh cause of this. Still not a good arguement correct? In his writings later on, Bhagat Singh claimed he was an athiest, and since when is a Sikh defined an athiest? (Even though, I sorta believe I'm an athiest Sikh since at times I do not believe in a God that controls us and etc, but I do live on the teachings of the Gurus, and in the SGGS it states the lord is within ourselves, so hence therefore I cannot be defined as an athiest...lol) However, Shaheed Bhagat Singh strictly stated that he was

an athiest and didn't acknowledge the love for Sikhi.

These men fought for the independence of India, not for the empowerment of Sikhi. Back then we all use to be united, muslims, sikhs, hindus fighting for the same goals. If we want to praise Udham Singh, just cause he's Singh, praise all the others that died for India. There are so many hindus that carry the last name Singh as well. But this isnt like a "Sikh" related celebration. It's a celebration for India, aka HINDIA, aka HINDUSTAN.

Note, I'm not hating on these men, I'm just showing how I use to think, like most of you. Till a fellow friend showed me the story of Bhagat Singh.

Anyways, whether we want to celebrate the Independence of India or not is our personal choice. I sure as hell know I would not, especially what occured after 1984.

Bhul Chuk Maaf Karni,

Gurjote Singh