this is taken from a small booklet authored by sardar bhagat singh. it was originally written in gurumukhi and later translated in english. if someone has any objection about copyrights of the same, please note that my objective is only to spread the word..nothing more!
continue from part two
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 consideration 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, the 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 criticize 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 criticize 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 almighty 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 cowed 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 endeavor, 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.
to be continued…
comments