Why I am an Atheist

[mehar singh]

(Bhagat Singh wrote this document in 5-6 Oct. 1930)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A new question has cropped up. Is it due to vanity that I do not believe in the existence of an omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God? I had never imagined that I would ever have to confront such a question. But conversation with some friends has given me, a hint that certain of my friends, if I am not claiming too much in thinking them to be so-are inclined to conclude from the brief contact they have had with me, that it was too much on my part to deny the existence of God and that there was a certain amount of vanity that actuated my disbelief. Well, the problem is a serious one. I do not boast to be quite above these human traits. I am a man and nothing more. None can claim to be more. I also have this weakness in me. Vanity does form a part of my nature. Amongst my comrades I was called an autocrat. Even my friend Mr. B.K. Dutt sometimes called me so. On certain occasions I was decried as a despot. Some friends do complain and very seriously too that I involuntarily thrust my opinions upon others and get my proposals accepted. That this is true up to a certain extent, I do not deny.

This may amount to egotism. There is vanity in me in as much as our cult as opposed to other popular creeds is concerned. But that is not personal. It may be, it is only legitimate pride in our cult and does not amount to vanity. Vanity or to be more precise "Ahankar" is the excess of undue pride in one's self. Whether it is such an undue pride that has led me to atheism or whether it is after very careful study of the subject and af

ter much consideration that I have come to disbelieve in God, is a question that I, intend to discuss here. Let me first make it clear that egotism and vanity are two different things.

In the first place, I have altogether failed to comprehend as to how undue pride or vaingloriousness could ever stand in the way of a man in believing in God. I can refuse to recognize the greatness of a really great man provided I have also achieved a certain amount of popularity without deserving it or without having possessed the qualities really essential or indispensible for the same purpose. That much is conceivable. But in what way can a man believing in God cease believing due to his personal vanity? There are only two Ways. The man should either begin to think himself a rival of God or he may begin to believe himself to be God. In neither case can he become a genuine atheist. In the first case he does not even deny the existence of his rival. In the second case as well he admits the existence of a conscious being behind the screen guiding all the movements of nature. It is of no importance to us whether he thinks himself to be that supreme being or whether he thinks the supreme conscious being to be somebody apart from himself. The fundamental is there. His belief is there. He is by no means an atheist. Well, here I am I neither belong to the first category nor to the second. I deny the very existence of that Almighty Supreme being. Why I deny it shall be dealt with later on. Here I want to clear one thing, that it is not vanity that has actuated me to adopt the doctrines of atheism. I am neither a rival nor an incarnation nor the Supreme Being Himself. One point is decided, that it is not vanity that has led me to this mode of thinking. Let me examine the facts to disprove this allegation. According to these friends of mine I have grown vainglorious perhaps due to the undue popularity gained during the trials-both Delhi Bomb and Lahore conspiracy cases. Well, let us see if their premises are correct. My atheism is

not of so recent origin. I had stopped believing in God when I was an obscure young man, of whose existence my above mentioned friends were not even aware. At least a college student cannot cherish any short of undue pride which may lead him to atheism. Though a favourite with some professors and disliked by certain others, I was never an industrious or a studious boy. I could not get any chance of indulging in such feelings as vanity. I was rather a boy with a very shy nature, who had certain pessimistic dispositions about the future career' And in those days, I was not a perfect atheist. My grand-father under whose influence I was brought up is an orthodox Arya Samajist. An Arya Samajist is anything but an atheist. After finishing my primary education I joined the D.A.V. School of Lahore and stayed in its Boarding House for full one year. There, apart from morning and evening prayers, I used to recite "Gayatri Mantra" for hours and hours. I was a perfect devotee in those days. Later on I began to live with my father. He is a liberal in as much as the orthodoxy of religions is concerned. It was through his teachings that I aspired to devote my life to the cause of freedom. But he is not an atheist. He is a firm believer. He used to encourage me for offering prayers daily. So, this is how I was brought up. In the Non-Co-operation days I joined the National College. it was there that I began to think liberally and discuss and criticise all the religious problems, even about God. But still I was a devout believer. By that time I had begun to preserve the unshorn and unclipped long hair but I could never believe in the mythology and doctrines of Sikhism or, any other religion. But I had a firm faith in God's existence.

Later on I joined the revolutionary party. The first leader with whom I came in contact, though not convinced, could not dare to deny the existence of God. On my persistent inquiries about God, he used to say, "Pray whenever you want to". Now this is atheism less courage required for the

adoption of that creed. The second leader with whom I came in contact was a firm believer. Let me mention his name-respected comrade Sachindra Nath Sanyal, now undergoing life transportation in connexion with the Karachi conspiracy case. From the every first page of his famous and only book, "Bandi Jivan" (or Incarcerated Life), the Glory of God is sung vehemently. In the last page of the second part of that beautiful book his mystic-because of vedantism - praises showered upon God form a very conspicuous part of his thoughts. "The Revolutionary leaflet" distributed- throughout India on January 28th 1925, was according to the prosecution story the result of his intellectual labour, Now, as is inevitable in the secret work the prominent leader expresses his own views-which are very dear to his person and the rest of the workers have to acquiesce in them-in spite of differences, which they might have. In that leaflet one full paragraph was devoted to praise the Almighty and His rejoicings and doing. That is all mysticism. What I wanted to point out was that the idea of disbelief had not even germinated in the revolutionary party. The famous Kakori martyrs-all four of them-passed their last day in prayers. Ram Prasad Bismil was an orthodox Arya Samajist. Despite his wide studies in the field of Socialism and Communism, Rajen Labiri could not suppress his desire, of reciting hymns of the Upanishads and the Gita. I saw only one man amongst them, who never prayed and used to say, "Philosophy is the outcome of human weakness or limitation of knowledge". He is also undergoing a sentence of transportation for life. But he also never dared to deny the existence of God.

UP to that period I was only a romantic idealist revolutionary. Uptil then we were to follow. Now came the time to shoulder the whole responsibility. Due to the inevitable reaction for some time the very existence of the Party seemed impossible. Enthusiastic comrades-nay leaders-began to jeer at us. For some time I was afraid that some day I also

might not be convinced of the futility of our own programme. That was a turning point in my revolutionary career. "Study" was the cry that reverberated in the corridors of my mind. Study to enable yourself to face the arguments advanced by opposition. Study to arm yourself with arguments in favour of your cult. I began to study. My previous faith and convictions underwent a remarkable modification. The Romance of the violent methods alone which was so prominent amongst our predecessors, was replaced by serious ideas. No more mysticism, no more blind faith. Realism became our cult. Use of force justifiable when resorted to as a matter of terrible necessity: non-violence as policy indispensable for all mass movements. So much about methods. The most important thing was the clear conception of the ideal for which we were to fight, As there were no important activities in the field of action I got ample opportunity to study various ideals of the world revolution. I studied Bakunin, the Anarchist leader, something of Marx the father of Communism and much of Lenin, Trotsky and others the men who had successfully carried out a revolution in their country. They were all atheists. Bakunin's "God and State", though only fragmentary, is an interesting study of the subject. Later still I came across a book entitled 'Common Sense' by Nirlamba Swami. It was only a sort of mystic atheism. This subject became of utmost interest to me. By the end of 1926 I had been convinced as to the baselessness of the theory of existence of an almighty supreme being who created, guided and controled the universe. I had given out this disbelief of mine. I began discussion on the subjects with my friends. I had become a pronounced atheist. But, what it meant will presently be discussed.

In May 1927 I was arrested at Lahore. The arrest was a surprise. I was quite unaware of (he fact that the police wanted me. All of a sudden while passing through a garden I found myself surrounded by police. To my own surprise, I was very

calm at that time. I did not feel any sensation, neither did I experience any excitement. I was taken into police custody. Next day I was taken to the Railway Police lock-up where I was to pass full one month. After many day's conversation with the Police officials I guessed that they had some information regarding my connexion with the Kakori Party and my other activities in connexion with the revolutionary movement. They told me that I had been to Lucknow while the trial was going on there, that I had negotiated a certain scheme about their rescue, that after obtaining their approval, we had procured some bombs, that by way of test one of the bombs was thrown in the crowd on the occasion of Dussehra 1926. They further informed me, in my interest, that if I could give any statement throwing some light on the activities of the revolutionary party, I was not to be imprisoned but on the contrary set free and rewarded even without being produced as an approver in the Court. I laughed at the proposal. It was all humbug. People holding ideas like ours do not throw bombs on their own innocent people. One fine morning Mr. New man, the then Senior Superintendent of C.I.D., came to me. And after much sympathetic talk with me imparted-to him-the extremely sad news that if I did not give any statement as demanded by them, they would be forced to send me up for trial for conspiracy to wage war in connexion with Kakori Case and for brutal murders in connexion with Dussehra Bomb outrage. And he further informed me that they had evidence enough to get me convicted and hanged. In those days I believed-though I was quite innocent-the police could do it if they desired. That very day certain police officials began to persuade me to offer my prayers to God regularly both the times. Now I-was an atheist. I wanted to settle for myself whether it was in the days of peace and enjoyment alone that I could boast of being an atheist or whether during such hard times as well I could stick to those principles of mine. After great consi

deration I decided that I could not lead myself to believe in and pray to God. No, I never did. That was the real test and I came, out successful. Never for a moment did I desire to save my neck at the cost of certain other things. So I was a staunch disbeliever : and have ever since been. It was not an easy job to stand that test. 'Belief' softens the hardships, even can make them pleasant. In God man can find very strong consolation and support. Without Him, I man has to depend upon himself. To stand upon one's own legs amid storms and hurricanes is not a child's play. At such testing moments, vanity-if any-evaporates, and man cannot dare to defy the general beliefs, if he does, then we must conclude that he has got certain other strength than mere vanity. This is exactly the situation now. Judgment is already too well known. Within a week it is to be pronounced. What is the consolation with the exception of the idea that I am going to sacrifice my life for a cause ? A God-believing Hindu might be expecting to be reborn as a king, a Muslim or a Christian might dream of the luxuries to be- enjoyed in paradise and the reward he is to get for his sufferings and sacrifices. But what am I to expect? I know the moment the rope is fitted round my neck and rafters removed, from under my feet. that will be the final moment-that will be the last moment. I, or to be more precise, my soul, as interpreted in the metaphysical terminology, shall all be finished there. Nothing further. A short life of struggle with no such magnificent end, shall in itself be the reward if I have the courage to take it in that light. That is all. With no selfish motive, or desire to be awarded here or hereafter, quite disinterestedly have I devoted my life to the cause of independence, because I could not do otherwise. The day we find a great number of men and women with this psychology who cannot devote themselves to anything else than the service of mankind and emancipation of the suffering humanity; that day shall inaugurate

the era of liberty. Not to become a king, nor to gain any other rewards here, or in the next birth or after death in paradise, shall they be inspired to challenge the oppressors, exploiters, and tyrants, but to cast off the yoke of serfdom from the neck of humanity and to establish liberty and peace shall they tread this-to their individual selves perilous and to their noble selves the only glorious imaginable-path. Is the pride in their noble cause to be - misinterpreted as vanity? Who dares to utter such an abominable epithet? To him, I say either he is a fool or a knave. Let us forgive him for he can not realize the depth, the emotion, the sentiment and the noble feelings that surge in that heart. His heart is dead as a mere lump of flesh, his eyes are-weak, the evils of other interests having been cast over them. Self-reliance is always liable to be interpreted as vanity. It is sad and miserable but there is no help.

You go and oppose the prevailing faith, you go and criticise a hero, a great man, who is generally believed to be above criticism because he is thought to be infallible, the strength of your argument shall force the multitude to decry you as vainglorious. This is due to the mental stagnation, Criticism and independent thinking are the two indispensable qualities of a revolutionary. Because Mahatamaji is great, therefore none should criticise him. Because he has risen above, therefore everything he says-may be in the field of Politics or Religion, Economics or Ethics-is right. Whether you are convinced or not you must say, "Yes, that's true". This mentality does not lead towards progress. It is rather too obviously, reactionary.

Because our forefathers had set up a faith in some supreme, being-the Al mighty God- therefore any man who dares to challenge the validity of that faith, or the very existence of that supreme being, he shall have to be called an apostate, a renegade. If his arguments are too sound to be refuted by counter-arguments and spirit too strong to be co

wed down by the threat of misfortunes that may befall him by the wrath of the Almighty-he shall be decried as vainglorious, his spirit to be denominated as vanity. Then why to waste time in this vain discussion? Why try to argue out the whole thing? This question is coming before the public for the first time, and is being handled in this matter of fact way for the first time, hence this lengthy discussion.

As for the first question, I think I have cleared that it is not vanity that has led me to atheism. My way of argument has proved to be convincing or not, that is to be judged by my readers, not me. I know in the present, circumstances my faith in God would have made my life easier, my burden lighter and my disbelief in Him has turned all the circumstances too dry and the situation may assume too harsh a shape. A little bit of mysticism can make it poetical. But I, do not want the help of any intoxication to meet my fate. I am a realist. I have been trying to overpower the instinct in me by the help of reason. I have not always been successful in achieving this end. But man's duty is to try and endeavour, success depends upon chance and environments.

As for the second question that if it was not vanity, then there ought to be some reason to disbelieve the old and still prevailing faith of the existence of God. Yes; I come to that now Reason there is. According to. me, any man who has got some reasoning power at his command always tries to reason out his environments. Where direct proofs are lacking philosophy occupies the important place. As I have already stated, a certain revolutionary friend used to say that Philosophy is the outcome of human weakness. When our ancestors had leisure enough to try to solve out the mystery of this world, its past, present and the future, its whys and wherefores, they having been terribly short of direct proofs, everybody tried to solve the problem in his own way. Hence we find the wide dufferences in the fundamentals of various religious creeds, wh

ich some times assume very antagonistic and conflicting shapes. Not only the Oriental and Occidental philosophies differ, there are differences even amongst various schools of thoughts in each hemisphere. Amongst Oriental religions, the Moslem faith is not at all compatible with Hindu faith. In India alone Buddhism and Jainism are sometimes quite separate from Brahmanism, in which there are again conflicting faiths as Arya Samaj and Sanatan Dharma. Charwak is still another independent thinker of the past ages. He challenged the authority of God in the old times. All these creeds differ from each other on the fundamental question., and everybody considers himself to be on the right. There lies the misfortune. Instead of using the experiments and expressions of the ancient Savants and thinkers as a basis for our future struggle against ignorance and to try to find out a solution to this mysterious problem, we lethargical as we have proved to be raise the hue and cry of faith, unflinching and unwavering faith to their versions and thus are guilty of stagnation in human progress.

Any man who stands for progress has to criticise, disbelieve and challenge every item of the old faith. Item by item he has to reason out every nook and corner of the prevailing faith. If after considerable reasoning one is led to believe in any theory or philosphy, his faith is welcomed. His reasoning can be mistaken, wrong, misled and sometimes fallacious. But he is liable to correction because reason is the guiding star of his life. But mere faith and blind faith is dangerous: it dulls the brain, and makes a man reactionary. A man who claims to be a realist has to challenge the whole of the ancient faith. If it does not stand the onslaught of reason it crumbles down. Then the first thing for him is to shatter the whole down and clear a space for the erection of a new philosophy. This is the negative side. After it begins the positive work in which sometimes some material of the old faith may be used for the purpose of reconstr

uction. As far as I am concerned, let me admit at the very outset that I have not been able to study much on this point. I had a great desire to study the Oriental Philosophy but I could not get any chance or opportunity to do the same. But so far as the negative study is under discussion, I think I am convinced to the extent of questioning the soundness of the old faith. I have been convinced as to non-existence of a conscious supreme being who is guiding and directing the movements of nature. We believe in nature and the whole progressive movement aims at the domination of man over nature for his service. There is no conscious power behind it to direct. This is what our philosophy is.

As for the negative side. we ask a few questions from the 'believers'.

(1) If, as you believe, there is an almighty, omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent God-who created the earth or world, please let me know why did he creat it ? This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal combination of number less tragedies: Not a single soul being perfectly satisfied.

Pray, don't say that it is His Law: If he is bound by any law, he is not omnipotent. He is another slave like ourselves. Please don't say that it is his enjoyment. Nero burnt one Rome. He killed a very limited number of people. He created very few tragedies, all to his perfect enjoyment. And what is his place in History ? By what names do the historians mention him? All the venomous epithets are showered upon him. Pages are blackened with invective diatribes condemning Nero, the tyrant, the heartless, the wicked. One Changezkhan sacrificed a few thousand lives to seek pleasure in it and we hate the very name. Then how are you going to justify your almighty, eternal Nero, who has been, and is still causing numberless tragedies every day, every hour and every minute ? How do you think to support his misdoings which surpass those of Changez every single moment? I say why did he create this world-a veritable hell, a place of constant an

d bitter unrest ? Why did the Almighty create man when he had the power not to do it ? What is the justification for all this ? Do you say to award the innocent sufferers hereafter and to punish the wrong-doers as well? Well, well: How far shall you justify a man who may dare to inflict wounds upon your body to apply a very soft and soothing liniment upon it afterwards? How far the supporters and organisers of the Gladiator Institution were justified in throwing men before the half starved furious lions to be cared for and well looked after if they could survive and could manage to escape death by the wild beasts? That is why I ask, 'Why did the conscious supreme being created this world and man in it? To seek pleasure? Where then is the difference between him and Nero'?

You Mohammadens and Christians : Hindu Philosophy shall still linger on to offer another argument. I ask you what is your answer to the above-mentioned question ? You don't believe in previous birth. Like Hindus you cannot advance the argument of previous misdoings of the apparently quite innocent sufrerers? I ask you why did the omnipotent labour for six days to create the world through word and each day to say that all was well. Call him today. Show him the past history. Make him study the present situation. Let us see if he dares to say, "All is well",

From the dungeons of prisons, from the stores of starvation consuming millions upon millions of human beings in slums and huts, from the exploited labourers, patiently or say apathetically watching the procedure of their blood being sucked by the Capitalist vampires, and the wastage of human energy that will make a man with the least common sense shiver with horror, and from the preference of throwing the surplus of production in oceans rather than to distribute amongst the needy producers-to the palaces of kings built upon the foundation laid with human bones.... let him see all this and let him say "All is well". Why and wherefore ? That is my question. You are sile

nt. All right then, I proceed. Well, you Hindus, you say all the present sufferers belong to the class of sinners of the previous births. Good. You say the present oppressors were saintly people in their previous births, hence they enjoy power. Let me admit that your ancestors were very shrewed people, they tried to find out theories strong enough to hammer down all the efforts of reason and disbelief. But let us analyse how far this argument can really stand.

From the point of view of the most famous jurists punishment can be justified only from three or four ends to meet which it is inflicted upon the wrongdoer. They are retributive, reformative and deterrent. The retributive theory is now being condemned by all the advanced thinkers. Deterrent theory is also following the same fate. Reformative theory is the only one which is essential, and indispensable for human progress. It aims at returning the offender as a most competent and a peace-loving citizen to the society. But what is the nature of punishment inflicted by God upon men even if we suppose them to be offenders. You say he sends them to be born as a cow, a cat, a tree, a herb or a best. You enumerate these punishments to be 84 lakhs. I ask you what is its reformative effect upon man ? How many men have met you who say that they were born as a donkey in previous birth for having committed any sin ? None. Don't quote your Puranas. I have no scope to touch your mythologies. Moreover do you know that the greatest sin in this world is to be poor. Poverty is a sin, it is a punishment. I ask you how far would you appreciate a criminologist, a jurist or a legislator who proposes such measures of punishment which shall inevitably force man to commit more offences ? Had not your God thought of this or he also had to learn these things by experience, but at the cost of untold sufferings to be borne by. humanity ? What do you think shall be the fate of a man who has been born in a poor and illiterate family of say a chamar or a sweeper. He is poor

, hence he cannot study. He is hated and shunned by his fellow human beings who think themselves to be his superiors having been born in say a higher caste. His ignorance, his poverty and the treatment meted out to him shall harden his heart towards society. Suppose he commits a sin, who shall bear the consequences? God, he or the learned ones of, the society ? What about the punishment of those people who were deliberately kept ignorant by the haughty and egotist Brahmans and who had to pay the penalty by bearing the stream of being led (not lead) in their ears for having heard a few sentences of your Sacred Books of learning-the Vedas ? If they committed any offence-who was to be responsible for them and who was to bear the brunt? My dear friends: These theories are the inventions of the privileged ones: They justify their usurped power, riches and superiority by the help of these theories. Yes: It was perhaps Upton Sinclair, that wrote at some place, that just make a man a believer in immortality and then rob him of all his riches, and possessions. He shall help you even in that ungrudgingly. The coalition amongst the religious preachers and possessors of power brought forth jails, gallows, knouts and these theories.

I ask why your omnipotent God, does not stop every man when he is committing any sin or offence ? He can do it quite easily. Why did he not kill war lords or kill the fury of war in them and thus avoid the catastrophe hurled down on the head of humanity by the Great War? Why does he not just produce a certain sentiment in the mind of the British people to liberate India? Why does he not infuse the althuistic enthusiasm in the hearts of all capitalists to forgo their rights of personal possessions of means of production and thus redeem the whole labouring community-nay the whole human society from the bondage of Capitalism. You want to reason out the practicability of socialist theory, I leave it for your almighty to enforce it. People recognize the merits of socialism in as much as the

general welfare is concerned. They oppose it under the pretext of its being impracticable. Let the Almighty step in and arrange everything in an orderly fashion. Now don't try to advance round about arguments, they are out of order. Let me tell you, British rule is here not because God wills it but because they possess power and we do not dare to oppose them. Not that it is with the help of God that they are keeping us under their subjection but it is with the help of guns and rifles, bomb and bullets, police and millitia and our apathy that they are successfully committing the most deplorable sin against society- the outrageous exploitation of one nation by another. Where is God ? What is he doing ? Is he enjoying all I these woes of human race ? A Nero; A change (changez): Down with him :

Do you ask me how I explain the origin of this world and origion of man ? Alright I tell you. Charles Darwin has tried to throw some light on the subject. Study him. Read Soham Swam's "Commonsense". It shall answer your question to some extent. This is a phenomenon of nature. The accidental mixture of different substances in the shape of nebulace produced this earth. When ? Consult history. The same process produced animals and in the long run man. Read Darwin's 'Origin of Species'. And all the later progress is due to man's constant conflict with nature and his efforts to override it. This is the briefest possible explanation of this phenomenon.

Your other argument may be just to ask why a child is born blind or lame if not due to his deeds committed in the previous birth ? This problem has been explained away by biologists as a more biological phenomenon. According to them the whole burden rests upon the shoulders of the parents who may be conscious or ignorant of their own deeds led to mutilation of the child previous to its birth.

Naturally you may ask another question-though it is quite childish in essence. If no God existed, how did the people come to believe in him? M

y answer is clear and brief. As they came to believe in ghosts, and evil spirits; the only difference is that belief in God is almost universal and the philosophy well developed. Unlike certain of the radicals I would not attribute its origin to the ingenuity of the exploiters who wanted to keep the people under their subjection by preaching the existence of a supreme being and then claiming an authority and sanction from him for their privileged positions. Though I do not differ with them on the essential point that all faiths, religions, creeds and such other institutions became in turn the mere supporters of the tyrannical and exploiting institutions, men and classes. Rebellion against king is always a sin according to every religion.

As regards the origin of God my own idea is that having realized the limitations of man, his weaknesses and shortcoming having been taken into consideration, God was brought into imaginary existence to encourage man to face boldly all the trying circumstances, to meet all dangers manfully and to check and restrain his outbursts in prosperity and affluence. God both with his private laws and parental generosity was imagined and painted in greater details. He was to serve as a deterrent factor when his fury and private laws were discussed so that man may not become a danger to society. He was to serve as a father, mother, sister and brother, friend and helpers when his parental qualifications were to be explained. So that when man be in great distress having been betrayed and deserted by all friends he may find consolation in the idea that an ever true friend was still there to help him, to support him and that He was almighty and could do anything. Really that was useful to the society in the primitive age. The idea of God is helpful to man in distress.

Society has to fight out this belief as well as was fought the idol worship and the narrow conception of religon. Similarly, when man tries to stand on his own legs, and become a realist he shall have to thr

ow the faith aside, and to face manfully all the distress, trouble, in which the circumstances may throw him. That is exactly my state of affairs. It is not my vanity, my friends. It is my mode of thinking that has made me an atheist. I don't know whether in my case belief in God and offering of daily prayers which I consider to be most selfish and degraded act on the part of man, whether these prayers can prove to be helpful or they shall make my case worse still. I have read of atheists facing all troubles quite boldly, so am I trying to stand like a man with an erect head to the last; even on the gallows.

Let us see how I carry on : one friend asked me to pray. When informed of my atheism, he said, "During your last days you will begin to believe". I said, No, dear Sir, it shall not be. I will think that to be an act of degradation and demoralization on my part. For selfish motives I am not going to pray. Readers and friends, "Is this vanity"? If it is, I stand for it.

[simmal tree]

one visit from bhai sahib bhai randhir singh ji changed all of these views for bhagat singh

[mehar singh]

Can you post anwsers of Bhai Randhir Singh's to Bhagat Singh?

If you do not have anwsers then try to anwser Bhagat Singh's questions.

Take care

[S1ngh]

Can you post anwsers of Bhai Randhir Singh's to Bhagat Singh?

If you do not have anwsers then try to anwser Bhagat Singh's questions.

Take care

Read the chapter of the meeting of bhagat singh and bhai randhir singh from the autobiography of Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh.. you will get all answers.. You might find the chapter online from other websites.. maybe try tapoban.org..

[JSingh]

You can read the autobiography of Bhai Randhir Singh at the link below but i'm not sure if it has the chapter where he wrote about his and Bhagat Singh's meeting. I had a pdf file of this chapter but i misplaced it somewhere. if i find it, i'll post it.

http://www.tapoban.org/JAIL_CHHITHIAN.pdf

[JSingh]

I searched this pdf file, and it does not have anything about Bhagat Singh.

[S1ngh]

I have the english version and it has about 3 or 4 pages in details of meeting between bhagat singh and bhai sahib.. I don't have the book at this very moment otherwise i would have typed it..

[JSingh]

Found it (in english):

http://www.sikhcybermuseum.org/People/BhagatSingh.htm

MEETING WITH BHAGAT SINGH, THE GREAT PATRIOT

From Autobiography of Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh

At last the day came. It was 6 p.m. on 4th October, 1 930 The news of my release was announced and everyone was very happy about it. I was sitting in a blissful solitude within my cell. All the patriots rushed towards my cell to break the news to me and congratulate me. The first to come and congratulate me was Bhai Gajjan Singh (Teacher). In a matter of minutes other patriots gathered around me and read joyfully the orders

of release. I was overwhelmed not so much by the joy of release as by the separation I would have to bear from devoted friends like Bhai Kartar Singh (of Canada). I was overwhelmed by these dual emotions of joy and sorrow when friends came to bid good-bye with loving embraces: The prison officials stood there ready to carry out the order of my release but my feet were reluctant to move away from such dear companions. I embraced everyone of them and after a few affectionate words with each one of them I left them all with tears in their eyes. The stream separated from the river at last.

When I went out of these prison-wards I met Mohammed Akbar near the central dome. He was smiling and coming towards me. On seeing me he congratulated me for my release. Inattentive to his felicitations I told him hat it was time that he should fulfill his promise. He should not miss the chance. He smiled and said that he had already m

ade arrangement for the meeting with Bhagat Singh. I could now meet him for full two hours. I asked him if he had taken permission from the Superintendent.

Daroga: Before I found it necessary to ask him, the Superintendent was already worried and puzzled and was seeking a way out of a difficult situation. His worry is that you should be quietly released without giving any chance to outsiders to make much noise about it.

He asked me to find a way out of this difficulty. He said, there are regular pickets of people outside, who are waiting for the news of the release of political prisoners. As soon as a political prisoner is released the news spreads like fire and there is a great noise and hubub of long processions, which are very disturbing to the Government. The Government has issued strict instructions, that the release should be secret and quiet. You see people sitting near the prison gates in regular pickets till sunset, so you must make some arrangement to send Randhir Singh out secretly and quietly so that we may not be blamed for anything later on. At that very, moment I asked the Superintendent not to worry, and suggested to him the plan, saying, "You remember sir, the day Randhir Singh came to this prison, Bhagat Singh who has been sentenced to death submitted an, application for permission to meet him, but you rejected it. I believe that if we now allow him to meet Randhir Singh, the meeting may take about two hours. It will be quite dark by then and by 8 P.M. we will send Randhir Singh out and strict secrecy about the releasewill be maintained." The Superintendent was impressed by this suggestion and gladly issued orders to allow this meeting and you can talk freely as long as you like. I will now give you a warder, who will guide you to Bhagat Singh.

So saying, he sent a prisoner warder with me and ordered him to permit us to have an unrestricted meeting. Bhagat Singh was taking his daily stroll in the prison compound. He had been told about the permission granted for this meetin

g. On seeing me he came running towards me. I was standing outside the fence of the courtyard. He crossed the fence and greeted me with great love and affection, bowing low out of reverence. I also folded my hands and greeted him warmly. The warder moved away when we were together. Even the policemen on duty in the compound kept away from us. We were all alone facing each other.

Bhagat Singh was so overwhelmed by the, joy of meeting after months of anxious moments, that tears rolled down his eyes. I had hardly met anyone in life who had developed so deep affection and love even before coming into contact with me. It appeared we had known each other for long time. In a rapturous tone he said, "O I can hardly say how

happy I am today on having met you at last. Day and night I was restlessly longing for just a short meeting with you. At last the blessed moment has come and my wishes have been fulfilled. After knowing all your great sacrifices and suffering in prison, I had become a keen admirer and passionate devotee. It was the heroism of the great freedom fighters of 1914-15 like you, which inspired insignificant

patriot like me. All our revolutionary exploits are nothing compared to the astounding heroic deeds performed by you and your companions. Your own life and struggle for freedom and rights especially impressed me. Munshi Manna Singh has perhaps told you with what passionate longing I was thirsting to meet you and talk to you. I should say that my inner attachment and admiration for you brought you back to Lahore prison after sixteen years. When I first sent a message to you within this prison, that I was anxious to meet you, I received your divine command to keep the sikh symbols (beard and hair.) I am prepared to abide by your wishes. I am really shamed and am prepared to tell you frankly that I removed my hair and beard under pressing circumstances. It was for the service of the country that my companions compelled me to give up the Sikh appearance and disguise myself as a sannyasin. So it i

s in association with the irreligious people that I was compelled to show disrespect certainly my religious symbols, but now I will certainly do whatever you wish me to do:

I was glad to see Bhagat Singh repentant and humble in his present attitude towards religious symbols. I was deeply impressed by his frank statement of facts, but I could not hesitate in expressing my inner feelings and I said

"Brother Bhagat Singh ji, I am deeply touched by your love for me. I am also impressed by your spirit of service and partriotic zeal, but I must tell you dear brother, that your companions did not give you good advice. You seem to be seeking something very petty and you became a prey to the evil and mischievous suggestions of your companions. Compared to our times the period in which you started the freedom struggle is a period of, great awakening. You could fearlessly take part in the freedom struggle and serve your country and humanity as you wished. But you must be knowing that, in our times (1914-15) few and rare souls felt inspired to dedicate their lives to this cause. In the Punjab only a few Sikhs who could be counted on finger-tips were politically awake felt the patriotic fervour to fight for freedom. There was a great feeling and political opposition to the heroic partriots who had come from Canada and America,, Every child in the Punjab was opposed to them. I will give you only one example of the moral courage of our patriot brothers of those days.

Bhai Nidhan Singh of Chugga village was a great patriot and fighter for freedom, who inspired hundreds of Indians living in foreign countries to come to India and dedicate their lives to freedom struggle. He spent thousands of rupees from his own pocket for freedom fight. And yet he did not disguise himself. He came openly by sea but the Government atonce made elaborate arrangements to arrest him. He reached India along with his companions without being detected. He could not be arrested. He came to the Punjab and threw himself heart and soul i

n the freedom struggle. His heroic deeds for the cause of freedom must be known to you. Warrants for his arrest had been issued, his photograph was widely publicised and a price was set on his head. There was an all out attempt to arrest him.

He moved swiftly from one place to another organizing the 'freedom struggle. There was no sympathy and support for these freedom fighters in the public. The patriots depended mostly on Bhai Nidhan Singh

for organisation and inspiration. Of course in fearlessness there was none so daring as Kartar Singh Sarabha. One day Kartar Singh feared that Bhai Nidhan Singh may be arrested. He was the key figure among the freedom fighters and it was necessary that he should not be arrested soon. Keeping only the political interest in view he suggested to Bhai Nidhan Singh that he should dye, his beard and thus change his publicised appearance to some extent. Bhai Nidhan Singh boldly answered that he would never do such a thing and tarnish and disgrace his heroism in the freedom fight. You can use me as best as you like with this appearance only and do not make any suggestions which would

make me a coward" he said. His companions wanted him to fall a prey to their evil suggestions but his determination remained unshaken. For organising the freedom struggle he travelled twenty to thirty miles a day and sometimes fearlessly passed close by police posts. He performed such heroic deeds compared to which your plans were insignificant. He did not even agree to change the colour of his beard, while you went to the extent of removing your hair and beard.*

*Note: Bhai Nidhan Singh of village Chugga, Ferozepur district was sentenced to death in the First Conspiracy case on 13th Dec, 1915, but the death sentence was changed to life imprisonment. He was released and died on 6th December 1936 at Mop.

Bhagat Singh: Actually I did not murder Saunders. I was of course accused of having murdered him. I considered it, a great heroic deed and so took the credit for it. I con

fessed that I killed Saunders. Whether there was any benefit in it or not, I nevertheless got the credit for the whole deed. Even otherwise there was no escape for me.

I: The ideal of a true patriot is never to seek such petty joys of empty credits. For the joy of getting worldly praise you did not hesitate to fall from a higher spiritual ideal, nor did you ever repent over this fall from a much higher ideal. All that you have achieved by this wrong step is some trumpeting of your name and heroism by some papers. You gave up the Guru's personality for false glory and empty ambition. If you felt that you made a mistake you should have, repented and come back to the ideal by maintaing a Sikh-like appearance again. Why did you not do it?

Bhagat Singh: I might have kept the Sikh like appearance again, but then I would have lost the friendship and sympathy of my comrade B.K. Dutt. Secondly, I would not have got so much publicity as I am getting now. It is true that my sacrifices are insignificant compared to the sacrifices of the freedom fighters of 1914-15. But after such astounding sacrifices they did not get any publicity or praise in the papers. The Sikh papers had very limited circulation. Even they did not reveal all facts of the heroic deeds of patriots like you, because their timid policy prevented them from writing anything frankly. It is the non-Sikh papers which publicised my name widely and it is through them I have acquired all the glory associated with my name. It is a fact that if I had maintained the Sikh appearance and if I had professed myself to be a Sikh and kept hair and beard the non-Sikh papers would not have written a word about me, just as they did not write a word about

you and your companions. Even out of Sikh papers "The Khalsa Akhbar", Lahore, an urdu paper, dared to write something about you. I know it for certain that Hindu papers are always reluctant- to write even a word in praise of Sikh patriots and freedom fighters. They do not like Sikhs being praised for

anything. If I had kept hair and beard again and become a Sikh, they would have started belittling me instead of praising me. So I hesitated to keep hair and beard again.

I: On judging what you have said, my dear Bhagat Singh, your ideal of patriotism is very. low and frippery. To make such a show of patriotism and service to the country for personal glory is cheap chauvinism and vain jingoism. The patriots of 194-15 movement suffered and saved the country keeping only the selflless service. of the motherland in view. They did not have the slightest thought of such cheap publicity and never even in a dream had any ambition of personal glory. It is only in the company of petty minded and evil-motived people that your mind was misled into such vain, thoughts of personal glory. The seeking of eminence through newspapers, and honour and glory through propaganda are all superficial things about which it is rightly said in the Guru-Granth.

Mad are those who trumpet a man's glory,

Shameless is he who accepts such fame,

He is like a rat who has tied a winnowing basket to his waist,

He now finds it impossible even to get into his hole

On hearing this Bhagat Singh was deeply moved and said "The ideal of Sikhism is no doubt very high. The world in general hankers after empty glory only. I also drifted in the same passion for personal glory. But today I have realised that all these things are idle exhibition of vanity; conceit and self-glorification. I would have been fortunate if I had got the opportunity of living in close association with you for at least three or four months. If I had got this opportunity to live in your company for three or four months, I would have gained much and all my shortcomings would have disapeared. Now I will do whatever you ask me to do You now want me to become a kesha-dhari Sikh. I now admit that I made a great mistake. Even contrary to this healthy family tradition, I went against the Guru's instructions and showed irreverence to the Sikh symbols.

>

But there is one more fact, and I would be committing a sin if I conceal

it from you. I kept hair and beard merely because there was a long standing tradition in our family to do so. I am very proud to be called a Sikh, But the hard fact is that I am not a Sikh at heart. You will excuse me if I tell you in quite plain terms that at heart I am an atheist. I do not believe in God All my companions know it. With all that I am willing to do anything you ask me to do. If you command me, I will keep hair and beard. Alas! if only I had got the opportunity to stay near you a little longer, you could have changed my atheistic views.

I: I am very happy that you have revealed the truth of your inner state of mind and have not concealed what is really in your heart: It is absolutely useless to keep religious symbols like hair and beard while you are an atheist at heart, nor would I be proud of making you do such a thing. I am no more anxious about your coming back to Sikh forms, nor am I sorry that you do not have hair and beard. My only anxiety and wish now is that you should die with faith in God. You will definitely die on the scaffold. It would have been better if your atheism had disappeared before you faced death sentence. Even though you are an atheist remember one thing that you will not die, keep it engraved

in your heart that you will not die. You will be born again. Your soul is immortal and ageless.

It will never be destroyed. It will be born again and again: Know this for dead certain that you will not die. You will take human birth again. Look within and see what you are? Are you a soul, a spirit (Atman) or first a lump of flesh and blood. Do you think that this self within you which speaks, understands, thinks, reflects on serving humanity and expires after doing great deeds, is nothing beyond bones, blood and flesh and do you think it will end with the end of the body ? No, never your real self will not be destroyed and you will never die".

On hearing these words which were

uttered in an inspired mood (by the Grace of God), Bhagat Singh stood there mute and inwardly moved. For a moment he lost his physical consciousness and his mind soared high. Speechless, he bowed low, as if some unknown power had taken possession of him. For quite sometime he remained absorbed in deep silence. I shook him with my hands and helped him to stand. On his face there was a strange glow. He came nearer me and stretching his hands

through the fence he tried to touch my feet. I held his hands in mine and said that only the Guru's feet are worth worship and not human feet. I helped him to stand up and when he had regained control over himself he said "Your words have pierced my heart like an arrow, my unbelief and faithlessness have been terribly shaken, a magnetic influence has changed my inner being. Deep down in my heart now I believe that I will not die and this belief will remain unshaken in my mind, speech and actions. I am that spirit that death will not destroy. I will not die. After I give up my body I will come again. Until my new birth my Atman

will remain in everlasting glory. When I die on the scaffold I will die with a great spiritual joy. I was brave through sheer will power and asserted that I did not care for death. Within my heart was the deep hidden sorrow of complete extinction after death. Whenever this thought came to mind there was darkness before my mind. The thought of being reduced to nothingness after death created a painful void within my heart. Your words have brought a, miraculous change in me. I can now see my future clearly in the light of new consciousness you have given me. The void, created by the thoughts of extinction have disappeared. All doubts and delusions have been dispelled.

I have gained much more strength. I will now die with great moral and spiritual courage. Your exalted life has imparted to me the elixir of spirituality and I feel its ennobling influence. I knew one thing about your life that you always say what you have experienced and your

words and actions are always in unison. Not only am I convinced that I will not die, and that I am immortal Atman but I am convinced that there is God and you have had a glimpse of Him. So now you will be extremely pleased to learn that your beloved Bhagat Singh is a believer in God and he will die with complete spiritual faith in Sikhism, and according to the Sikh terminology, I will face not death but ascension. The word ascension is a beautiful word and reveals that the soul will rise above the body and go beyond death. After leaving my body my spirit will ascend heavenwards and will never die. It will be born again and will work for the ideal service of the Motherland and the nation. How fruitful has been this meeting with you. *

After this significant end of our meeting we greeted each other and parted in blissful silence. It was quite dark now. I was taken to the office from where l was given unconditional release and sent

out of the prison under cover of darkness. I boarded the train from Lahore railway station and came to Amritsar. From Amritsar railway station I walked to the Golden Temple. A Government servant had been given to me to help me in my journey. He carried my bag and bedding and attended to all my needs. Near the clock tower the servant waited with my luggage while I went inside and had a dip in the holy tank. It was 1am. There I sat in peaceful solitude meditating on His Name. I enjoyed this solitude very much. After meditation, I had a mind to meet some friends. But on second thought I wanted to keep this pilgrimage to the Golden Temple a secret. I knew that if I met some friends there will be unnecessary noise of jubilation about the release and a good deal of trumpeting through processions. I was tempted many times to go and meet Gyani Nahar Singh and Gyani Harbhajan Singh in the Malwai Bunga, but I overcame the temptation. Until day break I enjoyed the divine Kirtan of the Golden Temple. Then quietly I slipped out of Amritsar and resumed my journey to Ludhiana.

Vah Guru

ji ka Khalsa Vah Guru ji ki Fateh.

Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh

*Note: At Bhagat Singh's death Sikh rites were performed by a sikh patriot. He had kept the promise of keeping hair and beard. Blitz, Bombay published a photograph on 26th March, 2949 which was taken a few hours before his death.

[natsilahk]

Before you start pondering this...

Bhagat Singh was also a communist.

And we all know how great communism is...

Bhagat Singh was an excellent freedom fighter...but to take him as an extraordinary philosopher?...I dont know about that.

Bhagat Singh may have been an atheist?...who cares?...who do have faith in regarding philosophical issues...Guru Gobind or Bhagat Singh?

People call me an atheist, but I dont proclaim it.

If I was in his position....where I saw *my people* being slaughtered by the British....most people do 1 of 2 things.

1) Give up belief in GOD, and go try to reactify the problem

2) Pick up belief in GOD, and use that help to reactify the problem.

He supposedly changed back neway...who knows...

[GABROO KHALISTAN DAH]

how is communisim bad?

its a form of government....

ntn actually bad in it