What do you think?
Rate this book
Why I am an Atheist and Other Works
Bhagat Singh is a name that became synonymous with revolution in India's struggle for Independence. This young boy brought about a change in the way people thought about freedom. He was well read and fought extensively for rights - his own, his comrades' and his countrymen's. A discussion with a friend soon turned into a matter of self-assessment for Bhagat Singh, leading to a discourse on why he chose to be an atheist. Even in the face of death at a very young age, his uncanny observation leads to his putting forth some pertinent questions. On another occasion, he was disappointed with his father's plea in court for his innocence and chose to write a letter to him. This book is a collection of eighteen of his valued writings from within the walls of prison and outside it, which show us the resolve in his words, and the bravery in his acts subsequently.
136 pages, Paperback
First published November 11, 2019
285 people are currently reading
1780 people want to read
About the author
Bhagat Singh
83 books349 followersBhagat Singh was an Indian socialist considered to be one of the most influential revolutionaries of the Indian independence movement. He is often referred to as "Shaheed Bhagat Singh", the word "Shaheed" meaning "martyr" in a number of South Asian and Middle Eastern languages. Born into a Sikh family which had earlier been involved in revolutionary activities against the British Raj, as a teenager Singh studied European revolutionary movements and was attracted to anarchist and Marxist ideologies. He became involved in numerous revolutionary organisations, and quickly rose through the ranks of the Hindustan Republican Association (HRA) to become one of its main leaders, eventually changing its name to the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association (HSRA) in 1928.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 231 reviews
December 19, 2024
Revolutionary Socialism’s Morality and Spirituality?…
Preamble:
--This review follows up on my review of the biography Without Fear: The Life & Trial of Bhagat Singh, which provides broader context of the Indian revolutionary executed at age 23.
--Singh’s brief essays collected here seem to be only a sliver of what he produced even given his short life in the middle of the storm, as the biography mentions he wrote 4 books in prison where the manuscripts were lost.
…For such a short work, it opens up plenty of dormant thoughts…
1) Personal Religion?:
--As Singh starts with a personal account of his upraising with religion, I will provide some personal context as well:
…I was born in Beijing, China, and do not remember learning about a conception of “God”/“religion” until I immigrated to the West to start primary school. Then again, I don’t remember much of anything early on as my memories are a blur from too much moving. Perhaps I was vaguely aware of spirituality (maybe in the context of respecting ancestors?); more prominent would be the teaching of public service/revolutionary spirit (a tangible example being the schoolbooks I kept).
…I remember learning about “God”/“religion” when starting primary school in the West, being impressed that day with the logic (“well, who created everything? There must be a creator to start everything”) and telling my dad. His unimpressed expression is more memorable than his actual reply (probably something like: “you should think about this some more”). I guess this was the extent of institutional religion for me, in contrast to Singh’s context:
2) Personal Politics?:
--My dad’s unimpressed expression and reply would return over a decade later, when I told him about the first “economics” book I was reading for personal interest (by free market fundamentalist Mises), listing the author’s claims of why free market capitalism is ideal. By abstracting away deeper structures and critical history (which Western primary education was already sparse on), Mises would target existing biases in Western state capitalist/imperialist world views.
...I remember reciting to my dad how free market capitalism hinders wars because both countries are freely trading with each other (i.e. the civilized ones), thus mutually dependent; imagine telling this to someone brought up in the context of China and its “Century of Humiliation” from Western/Japanese imperialism cloaked under free trade/civilizing mission (Opium Wars/Unequal Treaties/colonization/invasions):
-Ghosh’s trilogy of novels features vivid passages: Sea of Poppies, River of Smoke, and Flood of Fire
-Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World
--This vulgar “economics” was paired with my initial explorations of “politics” which led me to the “New Atheists”; yet another teenage boy hypnotized by edgy takes, reveling in a plethora of Hitchslaps, picking the lowest hanging fruit of “debunking” mass religion. This eventually eroded thanks to the clash between:
(i) New Atheist Sam Harris’s devotion to deciphering ancient texts in order to translate into US's “War on Terror” foreign policy, vs.
(ii) Critical history of imperialism I was learning (starting with Chomsky's Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance).
...I never properly closed this chapter as I wasn’t writing reviews back then (Hedges’ I Don't Believe in Atheists was the last book in this debate that I bothered with).
--It’s crucial to note I was privileged to come from an immigrant context, which is a fascinating contradiction between:
i) Individualist escapism (in my case, with higher education and not refugees), acceptance of Western assimilation, while
ii) Still recognizing the reach of Western imperialism back “home”.
…While September 11 (2001 in the US… not 1973 in Chile, backed by the US) burst my Western bubble, I was equally as shocked by the reaction from the immigrant context, i.e. wait until you hear the violence Western imperialism imposes daily.
…For intros on US imperialism:
-Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations
-The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World
-American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People's History of Fake News―From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror
3) Socialism and Institutional Religion?:
--Since escaping the reactionary red-pilling of ignorant default-liberals, I’ve been focusing on deciphering the underlying structures of real-world capitalism/imperialism and finding structural alternatives to fulfil social needs (“socialism”).
--I’ve kept some distance debating “religion” in the abstract. Maybe due to my upraising as an atheist/agnostic, I do not see much distinction in substance between religion and philosophy, esp. on the personal level, although I would use “spirituality” to describe the personal experience, whereas religion and philosophy are systematized institutions with societal consequences.
--Given how contradictory the real-world is:
i) I’m not particularly bothered by scientists who are (personally) religious (ex. Stephen Jay Gould, a natural scientist who does not bypass critical social sciences: The Mismeasure of Man) [Correction: Gould is not personally religious, but proposed “science” and “religion” can co-exist because they occupy different domains, i.e. “Non-overlapping magisteria”]
ii) I can support religious struggles for social needs (ex. Liberation Theology, the heretic movements described in Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation, etc.)
--However, there are some strong critiques of institutional religion to synthesize:
i) Contrasting the animism (spiritual relationship with the natural world) of many pre-capitalist societies (from pagans to Native Americans) vs. capitalism (Enclosures, colonialism) weaponizing institutional religion to enforce dualism/dominion (objectifying the material world, so land/labour can be commodified and exploited; thus, land/labour markets are unique capitalist markets featuring “fictitious commodities”, i.e. nature/humans are not actually produced in factories for buying/selling in markets).
…This is introduced in Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World, which references Caliban and the Witch. Naturally, I find attempts to synthesize animist spirituality with the scientific method compelling:
-The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness, and Healing in a Toxic Culture
-Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants
ii) Institutional religion’s role manufacturing social consent for the status quo:
--Marx’s famous passage [bold emphases added]:
…See comments below for the rest of this review…
Preamble:
--This review follows up on my review of the biography Without Fear: The Life & Trial of Bhagat Singh, which provides broader context of the Indian revolutionary executed at age 23.
--Singh’s brief essays collected here seem to be only a sliver of what he produced even given his short life in the middle of the storm, as the biography mentions he wrote 4 books in prison where the manuscripts were lost.
…For such a short work, it opens up plenty of dormant thoughts…
1) Personal Religion?:
--As Singh starts with a personal account of his upraising with religion, I will provide some personal context as well:
…I was born in Beijing, China, and do not remember learning about a conception of “God”/“religion” until I immigrated to the West to start primary school. Then again, I don’t remember much of anything early on as my memories are a blur from too much moving. Perhaps I was vaguely aware of spirituality (maybe in the context of respecting ancestors?); more prominent would be the teaching of public service/revolutionary spirit (a tangible example being the schoolbooks I kept).
…I remember learning about “God”/“religion” when starting primary school in the West, being impressed that day with the logic (“well, who created everything? There must be a creator to start everything”) and telling my dad. His unimpressed expression is more memorable than his actual reply (probably something like: “you should think about this some more”). I guess this was the extent of institutional religion for me, in contrast to Singh’s context:
What I wanted to point out was that the idea of disbelief had not even germinated in the revolutionary party. […] 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.
2) Personal Politics?:
--My dad’s unimpressed expression and reply would return over a decade later, when I told him about the first “economics” book I was reading for personal interest (by free market fundamentalist Mises), listing the author’s claims of why free market capitalism is ideal. By abstracting away deeper structures and critical history (which Western primary education was already sparse on), Mises would target existing biases in Western state capitalist/imperialist world views.
...I remember reciting to my dad how free market capitalism hinders wars because both countries are freely trading with each other (i.e. the civilized ones), thus mutually dependent; imagine telling this to someone brought up in the context of China and its “Century of Humiliation” from Western/Japanese imperialism cloaked under free trade/civilizing mission (Opium Wars/Unequal Treaties/colonization/invasions):
-Ghosh’s trilogy of novels features vivid passages: Sea of Poppies, River of Smoke, and Flood of Fire
-Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World
--This vulgar “economics” was paired with my initial explorations of “politics” which led me to the “New Atheists”; yet another teenage boy hypnotized by edgy takes, reveling in a plethora of Hitchslaps, picking the lowest hanging fruit of “debunking” mass religion. This eventually eroded thanks to the clash between:
(i) New Atheist Sam Harris’s devotion to deciphering ancient texts in order to translate into US's “War on Terror” foreign policy, vs.
(ii) Critical history of imperialism I was learning (starting with Chomsky's Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance).
...I never properly closed this chapter as I wasn’t writing reviews back then (Hedges’ I Don't Believe in Atheists was the last book in this debate that I bothered with).
--It’s crucial to note I was privileged to come from an immigrant context, which is a fascinating contradiction between:
i) Individualist escapism (in my case, with higher education and not refugees), acceptance of Western assimilation, while
ii) Still recognizing the reach of Western imperialism back “home”.
…While September 11 (2001 in the US… not 1973 in Chile, backed by the US) burst my Western bubble, I was equally as shocked by the reaction from the immigrant context, i.e. wait until you hear the violence Western imperialism imposes daily.
…For intros on US imperialism:
-Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations
-The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World
-American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People's History of Fake News―From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror
3) Socialism and Institutional Religion?:
--Since escaping the reactionary red-pilling of ignorant default-liberals, I’ve been focusing on deciphering the underlying structures of real-world capitalism/imperialism and finding structural alternatives to fulfil social needs (“socialism”).
--I’ve kept some distance debating “religion” in the abstract. Maybe due to my upraising as an atheist/agnostic, I do not see much distinction in substance between religion and philosophy, esp. on the personal level, although I would use “spirituality” to describe the personal experience, whereas religion and philosophy are systematized institutions with societal consequences.
--Given how contradictory the real-world is:
i) I’m not particularly bothered by scientists who are (personally) religious (ex. Stephen Jay Gould, a natural scientist who does not bypass critical social sciences: The Mismeasure of Man) [Correction: Gould is not personally religious, but proposed “science” and “religion” can co-exist because they occupy different domains, i.e. “Non-overlapping magisteria”]
ii) I can support religious struggles for social needs (ex. Liberation Theology, the heretic movements described in Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation, etc.)
--However, there are some strong critiques of institutional religion to synthesize:
i) Contrasting the animism (spiritual relationship with the natural world) of many pre-capitalist societies (from pagans to Native Americans) vs. capitalism (Enclosures, colonialism) weaponizing institutional religion to enforce dualism/dominion (objectifying the material world, so land/labour can be commodified and exploited; thus, land/labour markets are unique capitalist markets featuring “fictitious commodities”, i.e. nature/humans are not actually produced in factories for buying/selling in markets).
…This is introduced in Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World, which references Caliban and the Witch. Naturally, I find attempts to synthesize animist spirituality with the scientific method compelling:
-The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness, and Healing in a Toxic Culture
-Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants
ii) Institutional religion’s role manufacturing social consent for the status quo:
--Marx’s famous passage [bold emphases added]:
The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.--Varoufakis’ Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works—and How It Fails [emphases added]:
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.
Bureaucracies and armies were made possible by agricultural surpluses, which in turn created the need for bureaucracies and armies. The same was true of the clergy. The clergy? Yes, surplus begat organized religion! Let’s see why.
Historically, all the states resulting from agricultural societies distributed their surplus in an outrageously unequal manner, to the benefit of those with social, political and military power. But as strong as these rulers were, they were never strong enough to face down the vast majority of impoverished farmers, who if they joined forces could overthrow the exploitative regime in a matter of hours. So, how did these rulers manage to maintain their power, distributing surplus as they pleased, undisturbed by the majority?
The answer is: by cultivating an ideology which caused the majority to believe deep in their hearts that only their rulers had the right to rule. That they lived in the best of all possible worlds. That everything was the way it was destined to be. That the situation on the ground reflected some divine order. That any opposition to them clashed with that divine power’s will, threatening to send the world spinning out of control.
Without this legitimizing ideology, the power of the state didn’t stand a chance. Just as the state had to exist in perpetuity, surviving the death of its ruler, the ideological crutch for state power needed to be institutionalized too. The people who performed and instituted the ceremonies that served this purpose were the clergy.
Without a large surplus there would be no capacity to create religious institutions with complicated hierarchies of clergy, since the ‘holy’ men and women did not produce anything. At the same time, without organized religion the rulers’ authority over the generation and distribution of the surplus would be very unstable and prone to insurrections by the majority, whose share of the surplus was usually tiny. This is why for thousands of years the state and the clergy were one and the same.
…See comments below for the rest of this review…
June 18, 2020
"If you oppose a prevailing belief, if you criticize a great person who is considered to be an incarnation, you will find that your criticism will be answered by calling you vain and egoist."
Why were the Indian masses affected so deeply by Bhagat Singh? The book doesn't address this question directly, but the deeply penetrable words, unshakable beliefs and selfless charisma of the author implicitly furnish an answer. Moreover, he was a very well read man - his mind told him to study, study and study as it will enable him to face opposition to his ideas.
Most freedom fighters we read have written their texts in the grey old age, thus comes the finesse and the ability to move souls. But to be able to write an impactful letter like 'Why I am an Atheist' at the age of 22 is a remarkable feat in itself!
Rebellion against king is always a sin according to every religion.
October 3, 2020
The content of the book is worth 5 stars. The incidents revolving around his upbringing (he was 7 when he visited the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre site, hours after the pogrom), how he became a revolutionary, why he acted the way he did, and everything about his life is out in the open. What this collection of letters brings to the public is the sheer maturity of this young gentleman, while dealing with issues that are difficult to comprehend even at much older age. Not going into spoilers, Singh's letters reflect the man he was, the ideals he believed in and ever held onto till his last breath.
Now about this edition, though it is understandable that to keep the prices low, the quality of paper has been compromised, but the matter within SHOULDN'T be. There are n number of printing errors, and complete sentences missing in two of the letters. Therefore, 4 stars for this edition.
Now about this edition, though it is understandable that to keep the prices low, the quality of paper has been compromised, but the matter within SHOULDN'T be. There are n number of printing errors, and complete sentences missing in two of the letters. Therefore, 4 stars for this edition.
September 9, 2024
Every Indian knows of Bhagat Singh, of course, as a revolutionary, as a revered hero, as one of the most recognizable names of the Indian freedom struggle - but what I did not know him as, was a well-read, curious-minded, deep thinker with wisdom beyond his years. He wrote "Why I am an Atheist" when he was 23, and I'm glad I read this while I am 23. He feels both like a peer I would have loved having long conversations with, and an inspiring historical figure who thought ahead of the time he was born in.
Any man who stands for progress has to criticize, 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 philosophy, 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. 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.
He says criticism and independent thinking are the two indispensable qualities of a revolutionary. He refuses to put anyone on a pedestal - whether it's an omnipotent omnipresent being, any other person, say Mahatma Gandhi, or even himself and his own thoughts. Despite being more well read than perhaps a majority of Indian population at the time, he admits he hasn't studied enough, and would loved to have done so. And I really wish we had got to see what further intellectual and revolutionary ripples this young man could have created.
Some reviews tend to reduce this essay to "If God is real, why did he create this unfair world" but Singh goes beyond that. While he doesn't attribute the genesis of religion to the ingenuinity of exploiters, he does say the core purpose of religion has always been to maintain the status quo and keep the strong in power. If the conditions you were born in today are a result of the sins of your previous life - then it trivializes the need for justice within this one, doesn't it? He traces the origin of God to the comfort he brings to a man in distress, which helped mankind in the primitive age, but now serves the interests of the privileged.
Rebellion against King is always a sin according to every religion.
Why I am an Atheist is not the only work in this book though, so I am going to have to judge it based on everything else too. It's all mostly letters, say to the British asking for basic rights, or asking to be shot instead of hanged, or to his father with deep indignation for the efforts he made to free Bhagat etc. Those letters shed light into his sharp personality and deep resolve, but require context, and don't offer much in terms of an argument as the first essay does. And speaking of the argument, I really do wish he had elaborated more on atheism. The writing was electric, and the ideas well-expressed, but I really wish he had more time.
What impressed me most about the guy though, was his courage. I don't mean it just in terms of having the courage to do things that few were willing to do, or just to fight for the freedom of his country - but the courage to think differently and commit to those beliefs, whether politically, religiously, or individualistically. He's the first to admit that believing in a God or reincarnation or some sort of higher divine purpose is going to make the final days of his life much easier, as many of his peers suggest as well - but he doesn't forego rationality for comfort. While I wish he had allowed himself the opportunity to do even more alive than dead - I can't help but appreciate the sheer strength of his character. The choice to die that this 23-year-old took was not brought upon by the lure of salvation or some religious redemption - it was done in full awareness of the void, to create a symbol for the masses, a blazing beacon of revolution for something that mattered more to the man than his own life.
3/5
Any man who stands for progress has to criticize, 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 philosophy, 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. 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.
He says criticism and independent thinking are the two indispensable qualities of a revolutionary. He refuses to put anyone on a pedestal - whether it's an omnipotent omnipresent being, any other person, say Mahatma Gandhi, or even himself and his own thoughts. Despite being more well read than perhaps a majority of Indian population at the time, he admits he hasn't studied enough, and would loved to have done so. And I really wish we had got to see what further intellectual and revolutionary ripples this young man could have created.
Some reviews tend to reduce this essay to "If God is real, why did he create this unfair world" but Singh goes beyond that. While he doesn't attribute the genesis of religion to the ingenuinity of exploiters, he does say the core purpose of religion has always been to maintain the status quo and keep the strong in power. If the conditions you were born in today are a result of the sins of your previous life - then it trivializes the need for justice within this one, doesn't it? He traces the origin of God to the comfort he brings to a man in distress, which helped mankind in the primitive age, but now serves the interests of the privileged.
Rebellion against King is always a sin according to every religion.
Why I am an Atheist is not the only work in this book though, so I am going to have to judge it based on everything else too. It's all mostly letters, say to the British asking for basic rights, or asking to be shot instead of hanged, or to his father with deep indignation for the efforts he made to free Bhagat etc. Those letters shed light into his sharp personality and deep resolve, but require context, and don't offer much in terms of an argument as the first essay does. And speaking of the argument, I really do wish he had elaborated more on atheism. The writing was electric, and the ideas well-expressed, but I really wish he had more time.
What impressed me most about the guy though, was his courage. I don't mean it just in terms of having the courage to do things that few were willing to do, or just to fight for the freedom of his country - but the courage to think differently and commit to those beliefs, whether politically, religiously, or individualistically. He's the first to admit that believing in a God or reincarnation or some sort of higher divine purpose is going to make the final days of his life much easier, as many of his peers suggest as well - but he doesn't forego rationality for comfort. While I wish he had allowed himself the opportunity to do even more alive than dead - I can't help but appreciate the sheer strength of his character. The choice to die that this 23-year-old took was not brought upon by the lure of salvation or some religious redemption - it was done in full awareness of the void, to create a symbol for the masses, a blazing beacon of revolution for something that mattered more to the man than his own life.
3/5
November 4, 2020
"Where is God? What is he doing? Is he enjoying all these woes of human race? A Nero; a Changez. Down with him! "
"If you oppose the prevailing faith, if you 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."
I can go on and on with quotes from this little treasure called 'Why I Am an Atheist'.
Comrade Bhagat Singh, my hero! After admiring him for all these years I finally devoured his valued writings. How could he, a boy of 23, write these powerful words? How could he think of nothing but revolution when he was in prison? Writing down the reasons for being an atheist and sending it out to the world so boldly, dear comrade, I have never admired anyone so deeply! You are an inspiration, you are a role model, you are nothing but revolution.
If there is one book that I insist everyone has to read, it is this book. If you are an Indian, you must read this book because it's time you choose a right role model. If you are not an Indian, you must read this too because it's important that you understand the true Indian spirit before calling my India a third world country.
"If you oppose the prevailing faith, if you 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."
I can go on and on with quotes from this little treasure called 'Why I Am an Atheist'.
Comrade Bhagat Singh, my hero! After admiring him for all these years I finally devoured his valued writings. How could he, a boy of 23, write these powerful words? How could he think of nothing but revolution when he was in prison? Writing down the reasons for being an atheist and sending it out to the world so boldly, dear comrade, I have never admired anyone so deeply! You are an inspiration, you are a role model, you are nothing but revolution.
If there is one book that I insist everyone has to read, it is this book. If you are an Indian, you must read this book because it's time you choose a right role model. If you are not an Indian, you must read this too because it's important that you understand the true Indian spirit before calling my India a third world country.
April 22, 2020
Amidst the Corona pandemic that has affected the world, today also happens to be the Martyrdom Day of Bhagat Singh along with Sukhdev & Rajguru. All three were in their early 20s when they were hanged in 1931 for the Lahore conspiracy case.
An atheist & socialist, Bhagat Singh expressed himself fearlessly through his writings which luckily are accessible & this book is a collection of some of them. How to write a "review" of such a book which actually should be read by every single citizen of the country? Published by Srishti publication , I believe there couldn't have been a better time to come out with a book like this when our country has been engulfed by hatred & propaganda. These are two of his quotes which I believe is the need of the hour, "Merciless criticism and independent thinking are the two necessary traits of revolutionary thinking." "Love always elevates the character of man. It never lowers him, provided love be love."
An atheist & socialist, Bhagat Singh expressed himself fearlessly through his writings which luckily are accessible & this book is a collection of some of them. How to write a "review" of such a book which actually should be read by every single citizen of the country? Published by Srishti publication , I believe there couldn't have been a better time to come out with a book like this when our country has been engulfed by hatred & propaganda. These are two of his quotes which I believe is the need of the hour, "Merciless criticism and independent thinking are the two necessary traits of revolutionary thinking." "Love always elevates the character of man. It never lowers him, provided love be love."
January 7, 2021
"My life is not so precious, at least to me, as you may probably think it to be. It is not at all worth buying at the cost of my principles." - Bharat Singh
Read
April 4, 2024my first audiobook with patience, beautiful narration and of course, ideals of Bhagat Singh took a new form in my mind today
July 10, 2024
I have the copy and read it 10 times and still forgot to put it on Goodreads.
February 7, 2025
Reading this book at the age of 25, I was very heartbroken remembering that bhagat singh never got to live till my age. He died at 23. Every page of this book fills me with surprise, respect, sadness, courage , thoughtfulness and a plethora of emotions like these. I am left speechless thinking about the brave heart he had and the immense reasoning and knowledge he possessed. Even in jail , his spirit was not crushed even a little. The book serves as a testimonial for the people who believe in serving humanity, questioning and reasoning. Must, must, must read.
April 17, 2025
There is an upfront honesty to every piece in this collection that is refreshing and inspiring. He was a critical thinker and tried to stay humble about where he had strayed wrong and what his updated thoughts were. He genuinely believed himself to be a true revolutionary for the people- not just a nationalist but one for socialism and against all imperialism and gave what he could.
September 13, 2025
I am definitely going to revisit this book whenever I am in self-doubt. Along with that, I am going to explore other writings about the revolution.
Being ignorant and relying only on textbooks and borrowed praise about him, I never read his works for myself, and I now realize that I missed something important.
I have a feeling that we are losing the freedom for which our revolutionaries and martyrs fought, both to Western, international, and intranational conflicts, along with delusions. I am motivated to find the true meaning of such freedom, one that is as clear as water and as rightful to us as oxygen.
Let us see where it takes me, and us.
Do read his works, especially his letter to his father when his father requested him to prove his innocence, as well as his writing to Sukhdev, where he urged him not to commit suicide.
Being ignorant and relying only on textbooks and borrowed praise about him, I never read his works for myself, and I now realize that I missed something important.
I have a feeling that we are losing the freedom for which our revolutionaries and martyrs fought, both to Western, international, and intranational conflicts, along with delusions. I am motivated to find the true meaning of such freedom, one that is as clear as water and as rightful to us as oxygen.
Let us see where it takes me, and us.
Do read his works, especially his letter to his father when his father requested him to prove his innocence, as well as his writing to Sukhdev, where he urged him not to commit suicide.
November 10, 2020
First, The title is misleading, I had expected a pretty long reading about being atheist ,but it was just 10 min read. And I don't agree with him. Anyways, personal choice
But at the later stages of this collection of letters, it gets pretty boring. Seems like blabbering of a 24yr old young man, who was inspired with Utopian Socialist Ideology, following closely the works of LENIN, Marx , frequently drawing comparisons with Bolshevik revolution...well we all know how that turned out.
Probably, he would had changed his opinion , had he lived longer.
..wont recommend this to others..
As per the authors own words in one of his letters "PLEASE DO NOT READ IT TO FOLLOW BLINDLY AND TAKE IT FOR GRANTED WHAT IS WRITTEN ON IT. READ IT, CRITICIZE IT, THINK OVER IT, AND TRY TO FORMULATE YOUR OWN IDEAS"
But at the later stages of this collection of letters, it gets pretty boring. Seems like blabbering of a 24yr old young man, who was inspired with Utopian Socialist Ideology, following closely the works of LENIN, Marx , frequently drawing comparisons with Bolshevik revolution...well we all know how that turned out.
Probably, he would had changed his opinion , had he lived longer.
..wont recommend this to others..
As per the authors own words in one of his letters "PLEASE DO NOT READ IT TO FOLLOW BLINDLY AND TAKE IT FOR GRANTED WHAT IS WRITTEN ON IT. READ IT, CRITICIZE IT, THINK OVER IT, AND TRY TO FORMULATE YOUR OWN IDEAS"
March 25, 2020
" I am such a lunatic that I am free even in jail " - Bhagat Singh (23)
Asking to be shot dead as instead of being Hanged was the extent to which Bhagat Singh was ready to go as written in his final letter so have his message sent out to everyone across nation to how determined he was to strengthen the cause of a national movement , The raw letters will definitely make you wonder of the what he could have achieved had he lived longer and was not executed .
His 18 letters complied into this book is definitely a must read.
Asking to be shot dead as instead of being Hanged was the extent to which Bhagat Singh was ready to go as written in his final letter so have his message sent out to everyone across nation to how determined he was to strengthen the cause of a national movement , The raw letters will definitely make you wonder of the what he could have achieved had he lived longer and was not executed .
His 18 letters complied into this book is definitely a must read.
January 19, 2021
Goosebumps
November 19, 2021
Why I am an Atheist and Other Works
by Bhagat Singh
One unusual feature of this book is absence of another name in title- that of an editorial, a compiler, who'd generally press his own agenda, attempting to make a reader believe at a cursory reading that this is Bhagat Singh's opinion. It takes usually a thorough reading, sometimes of the same book where such an agenda - usually not just leftist, but stridently and abusively anti Indian, anti Hindu leftist, although why the two go together can't be explained except by a slave mindset that seeks to replace West with another "foreign" source for reassurance - is being pushed.
But funnily enough, the book information page before contents says
"Copyright © Sanjay Sharma, 2019 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 This is a work of fiction. The characters, places, organisations and events described in this book are either a work of the author’s imagination or have been used fictitiously. Any resemblance to people, living or dead, places, events, communities or organisations is purely coincidental. The author asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work."
A book titled "Why I am an Atheist and Other Works", and credited "by Bhagat Singh" in the title, is asserted to be "work of fiction"???? And since contents page displays titles of his known writings, how's the claim of "characters, places, organisations and events described in this book are either a work of the author’s imagination or have been used fictitiously. Any resemblance to people, living or dead, places, events, communities or organisations is purely coincidental" going to be justified, if there's any truth to the title and contents?
Bhagat Singh is a part of history of India, as are characters related to him, and he certa6did not write fiction. Everything related to his life is part of history of India.
Or is this like one of those Hindi films where an intriguing title would merely prove two names of characters coupled with no relationship whatsoever with the meaning or connotations of the title?
*****
Contents
*****
Know the Revolutionary: Bhagat Singh
1. Why I Am An Atheist
2. I Would not Defend Myself
3. Letter To Shaheed Sukhdev
4. The Red Pamphlet
5. Statement of Bhagat Singh and B.K Dutt in the Assembly Bomb Case
6. Demands for Political Prisoners
7. Reiterating Hunger-Strikers’ Demands
8. Message To Punjab Students' Conference
9. When Sukhdev Thought of Suicide
10. On Why He Refused to Attend Court
11. Regarding the LCC Ordinance
12. Letter to Jaidev Gupta
13. For the Removal of Justice Hilton
14. Letter to B.K. Dutt
15. To Young Political Workers
16. Line of Defence inHari Kishan’s Case
17. Introduction to ‘The Dreamland’
18. Don’t Hang us; Shoot us
*****
Review
*****
Know the Revolutionary: Bhagat Singh
*****
This introductory chapter, presumably written by the "author" identified as Sanjay Sharma on the book info page, contains a succinct historical sketch of life of Bhagat Singh as known, and it's hard to detect where his claim of any imaginary and fictional characters or events would be called justified. Unless, of course, it's to his claim as author on the book info page, rather than compiler - and to the said claim that this whole book is a work of fiction.
*****
1. Why I Am An Atheist
*****
Bhagat Singh wrote this to clear his stance, first of all making it clear that he did not think he was great, and the stance did not come from such a feeling, nor does it seem harmonious to atheism to consider oneself a demigod.
More than anything, one gets the impression of a discourse straight from hearrt of a very sincere youth who's not relying on external strength such as usually understood in religion, especially religions not stemmed from india. If hed known, hed have realised hus was a greater Karmayoga, devoted to his nation.
*****
"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 after 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 vain-gloriousness 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 indispensable 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 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. ... 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 controlled the universe. ... "
It's clear that his atheism is basically from study of various authors' works that basically responded to domination of Europe by church of Rome, which was more about control of minds rather than exploring Truth. But why he didn't stop in his tracks to realise that those works, understanding of those authors, left out everything India knew and offered, precisely because church had painstakingly prevented such seeking of Truth by knowledge seekers, to the extent of burning them at stake for centuries, can only be because he was young, and born and brought up under dominance of invading cultures.
"In May 1927 I was arrested at Lahore. The arrest was a surprise. I was quite unaware of (the 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 connection with the Kakori Party and my other activities in connection 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. Newman, 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 connection with Kakori Case and for brutal murders in connection 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 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."
"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."All too true, and even now,
mostly so.
"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."
But that comes across as not quite related to India! "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 create it? This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal combination of numberless 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 and 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 organizers 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'?"
Some of the greatest souls were in India during, and just before, his time. If only he'd known better, if only he'd been even slightly curious, hed have had not only answers, but far more.
November 13, 2021.
*****
2. I Would not Defend Myself
*****
"You know that we have been pursuing a definite policy in this trial. Every action of mine ought to have been consistent with that policy, my principle and my programme. At present the circumstances are altogether different, but had the situation been otherwise, even then I would have been the last man to offer defence. I had only one idea before me throughout the trial, i.e. to show complete indifference towards the trial inspite of serious nature of the charges against us. I have always been of opinion that all the political workers should be indifferent and should never bother about the legal fight in the law courts and should boldly bear the heaviest possible sentences inflicted upon them. They may defend themselves but always from purely political considerations and never from a personal point of view. Our policy in this trial has always been consistent with this principle; whether we were successful in that or not is not for me to judge. We have always been doing our duty quite disinterstedly.
"In the statement accompanying the text of Lahore Conspiracy Case Ordinance the Viceroy had stated that the accused in this case were trying to bring both law and justice into contempt. The situation afforded us an opportunity to show to the public whether we are trying to bring law into contempt or whether others were doing so. People might disagree with us on this point. You might be one of them. But that never meant that such moves should be made on my behalf without my consent or even my knowledge. My life is not so precious, at least to me, as you may probably think it to be. It is not at all worth buying at the cost of my principles. There are other comrades of mine whose case is as serious as that of mine. We had adopted a common policy and we shall stand to the last, no matter how dearly we have to pay individually for it.
"Father, I am quite perplexed. I fear I might overlook the ordinary principle of etiquette and my language may become a little but harsh while criticizing or rather censoring this move on your part. Let me be candid. I feel as though I have been stabbed at the back. Had any other person done it, I would have considered it to be nothing short o treachery. But in your case, let me say that it has been a weakness – a weakness of the worst type."
November 13, 2021.
*****
3. Letter To Shaheed Sukhdev
*****
"This letter deals with the views of Bhagat Singh on the question of love and sacrifice in the life of a revolutionary. It was written on April 5, 1929 in Sita Ram Bazar House, Delhi. The letter was taken to Lahore by Shri Shiv Verma and handed over to Sukhdev. It was recovered from him at the time of his arrest on April 13 and was produced as one of the exhbits in Lahore Conspiracy Case."
***
"Dear Brother,
"By the time you receive this letter I will be gone, going to a far off destination. Let me assure that I am prepared for the voyage in spite of all the sweet memory and in spite of all the charms of my life here. Up to this day one thing pinched in my heart and it was this that my brother, my own brother, misunderstood and accused me of a very serious charge — the charge of weakness. Today I am quite satisfied, today more than ever do I feel that was nothing, but a misunderstanding, a wrong calculation. My overfrankness was interpreted as my talkativeness, and my confession as my weakness. And now I feel it was misunderstanding and only is understanding. I am not weak, not weaker than anyone amongst us, brother. With a clear heart I go, will you clear too? It will be very kind of you. But note that you are to take no hasty step, soberly and calmly you are to carry on the work. Don't try to take the chance at the very outset. You have some duty towards the public, and that you can fulfill by continuing this work. As a suggestion I would say that M.R. Shastri appeals to me more than ever. Try to bring him in the arena, provided he himself may be willing, clearly knowing the dark future. Let him mix with men and study their psychology. If he will work in the right spirit, he will be the better judge. Arrange as you may deem fit. Now, brother, let us be happy ....
by Bhagat Singh
One unusual feature of this book is absence of another name in title- that of an editorial, a compiler, who'd generally press his own agenda, attempting to make a reader believe at a cursory reading that this is Bhagat Singh's opinion. It takes usually a thorough reading, sometimes of the same book where such an agenda - usually not just leftist, but stridently and abusively anti Indian, anti Hindu leftist, although why the two go together can't be explained except by a slave mindset that seeks to replace West with another "foreign" source for reassurance - is being pushed.
But funnily enough, the book information page before contents says
"Copyright © Sanjay Sharma, 2019 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 This is a work of fiction. The characters, places, organisations and events described in this book are either a work of the author’s imagination or have been used fictitiously. Any resemblance to people, living or dead, places, events, communities or organisations is purely coincidental. The author asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work."
A book titled "Why I am an Atheist and Other Works", and credited "by Bhagat Singh" in the title, is asserted to be "work of fiction"???? And since contents page displays titles of his known writings, how's the claim of "characters, places, organisations and events described in this book are either a work of the author’s imagination or have been used fictitiously. Any resemblance to people, living or dead, places, events, communities or organisations is purely coincidental" going to be justified, if there's any truth to the title and contents?
Bhagat Singh is a part of history of India, as are characters related to him, and he certa6did not write fiction. Everything related to his life is part of history of India.
Or is this like one of those Hindi films where an intriguing title would merely prove two names of characters coupled with no relationship whatsoever with the meaning or connotations of the title?
*****
Contents
*****
Know the Revolutionary: Bhagat Singh
1. Why I Am An Atheist
2. I Would not Defend Myself
3. Letter To Shaheed Sukhdev
4. The Red Pamphlet
5. Statement of Bhagat Singh and B.K Dutt in the Assembly Bomb Case
6. Demands for Political Prisoners
7. Reiterating Hunger-Strikers’ Demands
8. Message To Punjab Students' Conference
9. When Sukhdev Thought of Suicide
10. On Why He Refused to Attend Court
11. Regarding the LCC Ordinance
12. Letter to Jaidev Gupta
13. For the Removal of Justice Hilton
14. Letter to B.K. Dutt
15. To Young Political Workers
16. Line of Defence inHari Kishan’s Case
17. Introduction to ‘The Dreamland’
18. Don’t Hang us; Shoot us
*****
Review
*****
Know the Revolutionary: Bhagat Singh
*****
This introductory chapter, presumably written by the "author" identified as Sanjay Sharma on the book info page, contains a succinct historical sketch of life of Bhagat Singh as known, and it's hard to detect where his claim of any imaginary and fictional characters or events would be called justified. Unless, of course, it's to his claim as author on the book info page, rather than compiler - and to the said claim that this whole book is a work of fiction.
*****
1. Why I Am An Atheist
*****
Bhagat Singh wrote this to clear his stance, first of all making it clear that he did not think he was great, and the stance did not come from such a feeling, nor does it seem harmonious to atheism to consider oneself a demigod.
More than anything, one gets the impression of a discourse straight from hearrt of a very sincere youth who's not relying on external strength such as usually understood in religion, especially religions not stemmed from india. If hed known, hed have realised hus was a greater Karmayoga, devoted to his nation.
*****
"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 after 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 vain-gloriousness 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 indispensable 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 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. ... 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 controlled the universe. ... "
It's clear that his atheism is basically from study of various authors' works that basically responded to domination of Europe by church of Rome, which was more about control of minds rather than exploring Truth. But why he didn't stop in his tracks to realise that those works, understanding of those authors, left out everything India knew and offered, precisely because church had painstakingly prevented such seeking of Truth by knowledge seekers, to the extent of burning them at stake for centuries, can only be because he was young, and born and brought up under dominance of invading cultures.
"In May 1927 I was arrested at Lahore. The arrest was a surprise. I was quite unaware of (the 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 connection with the Kakori Party and my other activities in connection 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. Newman, 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 connection with Kakori Case and for brutal murders in connection 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 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."
"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."All too true, and even now,
mostly so.
"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."
But that comes across as not quite related to India! "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 create it? This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal combination of numberless 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 and 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 organizers 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'?"
Some of the greatest souls were in India during, and just before, his time. If only he'd known better, if only he'd been even slightly curious, hed have had not only answers, but far more.
November 13, 2021.
*****
2. I Would not Defend Myself
*****
"You know that we have been pursuing a definite policy in this trial. Every action of mine ought to have been consistent with that policy, my principle and my programme. At present the circumstances are altogether different, but had the situation been otherwise, even then I would have been the last man to offer defence. I had only one idea before me throughout the trial, i.e. to show complete indifference towards the trial inspite of serious nature of the charges against us. I have always been of opinion that all the political workers should be indifferent and should never bother about the legal fight in the law courts and should boldly bear the heaviest possible sentences inflicted upon them. They may defend themselves but always from purely political considerations and never from a personal point of view. Our policy in this trial has always been consistent with this principle; whether we were successful in that or not is not for me to judge. We have always been doing our duty quite disinterstedly.
"In the statement accompanying the text of Lahore Conspiracy Case Ordinance the Viceroy had stated that the accused in this case were trying to bring both law and justice into contempt. The situation afforded us an opportunity to show to the public whether we are trying to bring law into contempt or whether others were doing so. People might disagree with us on this point. You might be one of them. But that never meant that such moves should be made on my behalf without my consent or even my knowledge. My life is not so precious, at least to me, as you may probably think it to be. It is not at all worth buying at the cost of my principles. There are other comrades of mine whose case is as serious as that of mine. We had adopted a common policy and we shall stand to the last, no matter how dearly we have to pay individually for it.
"Father, I am quite perplexed. I fear I might overlook the ordinary principle of etiquette and my language may become a little but harsh while criticizing or rather censoring this move on your part. Let me be candid. I feel as though I have been stabbed at the back. Had any other person done it, I would have considered it to be nothing short o treachery. But in your case, let me say that it has been a weakness – a weakness of the worst type."
November 13, 2021.
*****
3. Letter To Shaheed Sukhdev
*****
"This letter deals with the views of Bhagat Singh on the question of love and sacrifice in the life of a revolutionary. It was written on April 5, 1929 in Sita Ram Bazar House, Delhi. The letter was taken to Lahore by Shri Shiv Verma and handed over to Sukhdev. It was recovered from him at the time of his arrest on April 13 and was produced as one of the exhbits in Lahore Conspiracy Case."
***
"Dear Brother,
"By the time you receive this letter I will be gone, going to a far off destination. Let me assure that I am prepared for the voyage in spite of all the sweet memory and in spite of all the charms of my life here. Up to this day one thing pinched in my heart and it was this that my brother, my own brother, misunderstood and accused me of a very serious charge — the charge of weakness. Today I am quite satisfied, today more than ever do I feel that was nothing, but a misunderstanding, a wrong calculation. My overfrankness was interpreted as my talkativeness, and my confession as my weakness. And now I feel it was misunderstanding and only is understanding. I am not weak, not weaker than anyone amongst us, brother. With a clear heart I go, will you clear too? It will be very kind of you. But note that you are to take no hasty step, soberly and calmly you are to carry on the work. Don't try to take the chance at the very outset. You have some duty towards the public, and that you can fulfill by continuing this work. As a suggestion I would say that M.R. Shastri appeals to me more than ever. Try to bring him in the arena, provided he himself may be willing, clearly knowing the dark future. Let him mix with men and study their psychology. If he will work in the right spirit, he will be the better judge. Arrange as you may deem fit. Now, brother, let us be happy ....
December 20, 2022
Book : Why I am an athiest and other works
Author : Bhagat singh
Publication : Srishti publishers and distributors
Pages : 126
"They can kill me, but they cannot kill my ideas.
They can crush my body, but they will not be a able to crush my spirit."
Bhagat Singh
Image of a round capped figure with a sharp moustache in a poster sticked in my high school class room is my first ever memory of Bhagat singh and I don't even remember if I read about him in my school books. Armed struggle book by Aman choudhary is the biggest eye opener for me in getting to know those least or never uttered names of our freedom struggle. So the names and events in this book were already familiar to me. The unfamiliar one is getting to know the strong willed young man who laid down his life for the nation at a very young age and even more surprising is his thought process and knowledge on world politics.
The man behind that image etched in my mind is someone who had done far beyond any 23 year old could have done for a nation. Inspiring many to aspire for an independent nation. He dreamed of independence, he died for it.
This book is a compilation of 18 letters written by Bhagat singh at different times of period most of them while he was in jail. Though most of this letter were translated from Punjabi,it clearly conveys his revolutionary thoughts , his unbroken spirit despite going through hardships at a tender age and the resolution that even though he will be dead his ideas will never die. A fearless soul, well articulated, opinionated young man, patriotist, a well read soul with immense knowledge on world politics, whose only aim is to fight for complete freedom of the nation from British.
Definitely an unsung hero who deserves a better recognition in my opinion .
Happy to note that the bus stand near my place in Thiruchendur is named after him.
Author : Bhagat singh
Publication : Srishti publishers and distributors
Pages : 126
"They can kill me, but they cannot kill my ideas.
They can crush my body, but they will not be a able to crush my spirit."
Bhagat Singh
Image of a round capped figure with a sharp moustache in a poster sticked in my high school class room is my first ever memory of Bhagat singh and I don't even remember if I read about him in my school books. Armed struggle book by Aman choudhary is the biggest eye opener for me in getting to know those least or never uttered names of our freedom struggle. So the names and events in this book were already familiar to me. The unfamiliar one is getting to know the strong willed young man who laid down his life for the nation at a very young age and even more surprising is his thought process and knowledge on world politics.
The man behind that image etched in my mind is someone who had done far beyond any 23 year old could have done for a nation. Inspiring many to aspire for an independent nation. He dreamed of independence, he died for it.
This book is a compilation of 18 letters written by Bhagat singh at different times of period most of them while he was in jail. Though most of this letter were translated from Punjabi,it clearly conveys his revolutionary thoughts , his unbroken spirit despite going through hardships at a tender age and the resolution that even though he will be dead his ideas will never die. A fearless soul, well articulated, opinionated young man, patriotist, a well read soul with immense knowledge on world politics, whose only aim is to fight for complete freedom of the nation from British.
Definitely an unsung hero who deserves a better recognition in my opinion .
Happy to note that the bus stand near my place in Thiruchendur is named after him.
October 30, 2022
This book contains letter exchanges between bhagat singh , other friends and various British authorities.
After reading this ,you can imagine bhagat singh was really a fire. He developed insight of true revolution even at a very young age. Even gandhiji and other Indian politicians were never thought of total independence. He was not blind follower instead he was an avid reader and he almost read all the revolutions, philosophy of the world. You can imagine a 22-23 year old age boy who was inspired by Vladimir Lenin and devoted his life for greater cause which is total independence and social rebuilding of Indian society.
Truly inspiring.
His own quote from the book: "They can kill me, but they cannot kill my ideas. They can crush my body, but they will not be able to crush my spirit"
After thought:
Once you read this noble person, you will find that today's life is so easy. You'll feel that you are born with a golden spoon. Life is meant for a greater cause like this. Even we can start with small steps like helping others 🙂
After reading this ,you can imagine bhagat singh was really a fire. He developed insight of true revolution even at a very young age. Even gandhiji and other Indian politicians were never thought of total independence. He was not blind follower instead he was an avid reader and he almost read all the revolutions, philosophy of the world. You can imagine a 22-23 year old age boy who was inspired by Vladimir Lenin and devoted his life for greater cause which is total independence and social rebuilding of Indian society.
Truly inspiring.
His own quote from the book: "They can kill me, but they cannot kill my ideas. They can crush my body, but they will not be able to crush my spirit"
After thought:
Once you read this noble person, you will find that today's life is so easy. You'll feel that you are born with a golden spoon. Life is meant for a greater cause like this. Even we can start with small steps like helping others 🙂
April 28, 2024
इस पुस्तक की समीक्षा मातृभाषा में करना ही उचित लग रहा है, मैं इसे पढ़ने से पहले जितना उत्साहित था अभी उतना ही भावुक एवं गौरवान्वित हूं कि ऐसे महान क्रांतिकारियों की जन्मभूमि मां भारती है ।
यह पुस्तक भगत सिंह के लिखे पत्रों का संकलन है जिससे हमें विभिन्न मुद्दों पर उनके विचार एवं सोच की स्पष्टता का पता चलता है। एक २३ वर्ष की आयु के युवक के इतने स्पष्ट तथा क्रांतिकारी विचार होना ही मेरे लिए असाधारण बात है। भगत सिंह का समाजवाद व रूस के प्रति प्रेम, साम्राज्यवाद तथा अंग्रेजी हुकूमत को गिराकर क्रांति लाने के विचार, अपने लक्ष्य के प्रति ईमानदारी व त्याग एवं विश्व क्रांति पर उनका गहरा अध्ययन आपको इस पुस्तक के लगभग हर पत्र में नज़र आएगा ।
लेकिन जो मेरे साथ रहने वाला है वो है इसका अंतिम पत्र "शहादत से पहले साथियों को अंतिम पत्र"....
यह पुस्तक भगत सिंह के लिखे पत्रों का संकलन है जिससे हमें विभिन्न मुद्दों पर उनके विचार एवं सोच की स्पष्टता का पता चलता है। एक २३ वर्ष की आयु के युवक के इतने स्पष्ट तथा क्रांतिकारी विचार होना ही मेरे लिए असाधारण बात है। भगत सिंह का समाजवाद व रूस के प्रति प्रेम, साम्राज्यवाद तथा अंग्रेजी हुकूमत को गिराकर क्रांति लाने के विचार, अपने लक्ष्य के प्रति ईमानदारी व त्याग एवं विश्व क्रांति पर उनका गहरा अध्ययन आपको इस पुस्तक के लगभग हर पत्र में नज़र आएगा ।
लेकिन जो मेरे साथ रहने वाला है वो है इसका अंतिम पत्र "शहादत से पहले साथियों को अंतिम पत्र"....
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 11, 2025
It is not lost on me that much of the freedom I enjoy today has reached me through the sacrifices of great men like Bhagat Singh. A revolutionary to the core with an extraordinary foresight into the future of India after it fell into the hands of Indian Capitalists after being wrested from the British through blood and fire by the Socialists. His ideals about feminism, nationalism and freedom continue to inspire me. His tragic legacy along with his intellect, eloquence and courage have long outlived his enemies. His words transcend centuries and his soul permeates the meaning of the word “Indian”. Standing tall in the face of death requires a man bigger than it. Absolutely beautiful piece of work.
Inquilaab Zindabaad
Inquilaab Zindabaad
May 16, 2021
The ideologies explained in the essays of this book tells a lot about Bhagat Singh. The first essay of the book has been written beautifully and clearly explains his thought process, this made me read the first chapter twice. Some of his actions mentioned in this book explains what a great revolutionary he was. Overall its a great book.
August 10, 2021
It is a great book. In just letters, Bhagat Singh had explained his thoughts on revolution, god and what not so well that as a reader you might doubt your own beliefs. I wish he could have written his autobiography.
September 15, 2021
So many thoughts going on in my mind I don't know how to put them together, but I'm glad I read this book, a must read.
July 29, 2024
Brilliant.
January 3, 2025
captivating and thought provoking views
October 3, 2025
4.5/5 ⭐
December 29, 2024
His writings do not contain novel ideas, but he sure knew what he believed in. A truly principled revolutionary whom I wish more people read. While the letter titled "Why I Am An Atheist" is the largest in the book, I believe his more important letters are those that talk about capitalism, its ills, imperialism, the importance of revolution, and the principles a revolutionary must have.
December 31, 2024
Liked the two essays in particular:
1. Why I am an Atheist
2. To Young Political Workers
1. Why I am an Atheist
2. To Young Political Workers
December 16, 2020
This book is a collection of essays, letters, statements of Bhagat Singh during his lifetime. In just 100 pages, this book has the ability to change the way you think and the way you perceive situation around you.
I cannot recommend this book enough. Everyone should read this.
I cannot recommend this book enough. Everyone should read this.
February 28, 2025
It's absolutely mind-blowing to think that someone had this kind of mindset all the way back in the 1930s—a way of thinking that even in 2025, many are either too afraid to embrace or simply don’t.
Shahid Bhagat Singh Ji was truly ahead of his time. To be honest, we need someone like him now more than ever. He was a true revolutionary, with an indomitable spirit. And to think he was only 23 when he died!
I’m so grateful that figures like him are a proud part of Indian history.
Shahid Bhagat Singh Ji was truly ahead of his time. To be honest, we need someone like him now more than ever. He was a true revolutionary, with an indomitable spirit. And to think he was only 23 when he died!
I’m so grateful that figures like him are a proud part of Indian history.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 231 reviews