Skip to main content

On "Why I am an Atheist", an essay by Bhagat Singh

Bhagat Singh wrote "Why I Am An Atheist" in 1930 while he was a prisoner in the Lahore Central Jail. "The People", a weekly publication by Lala Lajpat Rai, published this book in 1931. To be clear, this is a 24-page essay rather than a book.



This essay opens with a question whether vanity was the cause of Bhagat Singh’s atheism. Obviously, so many people had blamed him of being an atheist and he responded to this accusation clearly through this essay. He claimed that neither arrogance nor vanity prevented him from keeping his belief. He rejects the existence of the omnipotent supreme entity; vanity is not the cause of his denial. 

Bhagat Singh has been atheist since he was a young, ordinary man. He comes from a pretty religious household. He used to spend hours reciting the Gayatri Mantra in class, in fact. But ultimately he started questioning his belief, and he began to think on disbelief. When he joined the revolutionary party and when he came to know his comrades well, he was surprised to find them having no idea of disbelief. In fact, these members were neither here nor there in matters of belief.

Bhagat Singh's revolutionary thoughts arose through reading. He first studied mysticism and blind faith and next he replaced them with the cult of realism. He explored and investigated the world's mysteries but was unable to uncover any concrete evidence to support them. As a result, he discovered a variety of religions that were contradictory with each other. As a result, the absence of a single, global faith in this planet was evidence that God did not exist. 

Bhagat Singh doesn't seem to consider the possibility that God may have let various people to worship him in various manners—one method is not any better or worse than another. Human actions might be the cause of the religious conflicts and incompatibilities.

Bhagat Singh continues by saying that a realist must confront faith with logic. If the religion fails, the realist must demolish the whole structure to make room for the development of a modern philosophy. (DIALECTICS!!!)

He raises crucial questions to the believers. The question of why God created all of these and the reason for creation is one he poses to believers. For believers, creation has no purpose, contrary to Bhagat Singh, and it is up to them to give it meaning and purpose by their deeds and thoughts. It is scarcely God's fault if they fail at this mission. Bhagat Singh claims that in this world created by God not a single soul is perfectly satisfied. He does not delve into the causes of this but explicitly ascribes it to the fault in the God.

According to Bhagat Singh, this world is a veritable hell. To buttress his claims, he calls out the ills of the world: poverty, suffering, slums, starvation; but, we wonder, why it does not strike Bhagat Singh that, after all, God did not create money. Bhagat Singh opines that the greatest sin in this world is to be poor — “Poverty is a sin. It is a punishment.” Again, the blame for creating money and the role money plays is placed at the door of God.

Bhagat Singh claimed that there are three different kinds of punishment: retributive, reformative, and deterrent. Since no one recalls their history, Hinduism does not allow for reformation, despite the fact that reformative has a tremendous amount of potential. As a result, one is deprived of the chance to change. Without understanding the causes or results, one keeps going through suffering blindly. Bhagat Singh does not appear to take into account the likelihood that remembering every detail of one's past may weigh heavily on the soul, thus one is given the chance to start over and find atonement through suffering. Bhagat Singh does not seem to consider the possibility that remembering all of one’s past will place an unbearable burden on one’s soul, and hence one is given the opportunity to reform with a clean slate and redemption through suffering.

Another question raised by Bhagat Singh is, "Why doesn't God stop every man from committing sin?" According to Bhagat Singh, God acts as an invisible barrier between us and the weaknesses, frailties, and limitations of humankind. However, one who hangs on God's mantle will only face suffering.

Like religions, casteism and Brahminism were harshly criticized in his article.

This essay depicts a young, revolutionary thinking that is challenged by questions. Bhagat Singh declares, "God did not create man," after witnessing the terrible cruelty of the imperialist towards the people of his nation. 

God was created by man, Man makes religion, religion does not make man.

This is a must read book for all truth seekers and learners.


Read Online: https://www.marxists.org/archive/bhagat-singh/1930/10/05-files/why-i-am-an-atheist.pdf

Amazon Product Link: https://amzn.eu/d/1VNnJVI





Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Marx’s Theory of Alienation

Capitalist alienation is a Marxist notion that refers to individuals' estrangement or separation from their work, the output of their labour, and each other within the capitalist mode of production. This phenomena arises from capitalism's fundamental contradictions, which result in a system in which labour is commodified and employees are reduced to mere appendages of the means of production. Capitalist alienation happens when labour is converted into a commodity that can be bought and sold on the market just like any other commodity. As a result, the labour of the worker is separated from the product, and the worker is alienated from the outcome of their labour. Furthermore, workers are cut off from their own creative potential because their job is dictated by the necessities of the capitalist system rather than their own aspirations and interests. "The alienation of man thus appeared as the fundamental evil of capitalist society.”   ―   Karl Marx , Selected Writings in
Post a Comment
Read more

On The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

Since the end of World War II, the bourgeois historiography has made an effort to embellish a number of events in order to disparage Socialism and the USSR. One of these occurrences, known as the "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact," was struck in 1939 and has served as a "banner" for supporters of imperialism and other anti-communists. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is portrayed by bourgeois propaganda as a tool of expansion policy by the USSR and Hitler's Germany in its illogical, unhistorical attempt to connect Communism with Nazism. By distorting historical facts and combining lies and half-truths, Imperialists and their allies hope to discredit the Soviet Union's significant contribution to the anti-fascist campaign during World War 2. The reality, however, is not the same as what the bourgeois historiography portrays. In order to disprove the anti-communist propaganda surrounding the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact, we will now look at the circumstances and e
Post a Comment
Read more

Analysis of Marx's "On the Jewish Question"

Marx's most explicit work on the subject of human rights is "On the Jewish Question" which appeared in 1844 in the "Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher". In this article, Marx takes a polemic against the ideas of his old friend and master Bruno Bauer, who had recently turned against the battle of German Jews for full citizenship rights, as has been the situation in France since Napoleon. Bauer's criticism of the Jewish citizen's rights campaign was based on the fact that as an emancipation movement it was not radical enough, in his opinion. According to Bauer... the people are guilty of a huge mistake in disconnecting the Jewish question from the general question of the time and [they] did not consider that not only the Jews, but also we want to be emancipated." According to Bauer, the Jewish question was not settled with the offering of citizens' rights to the Jewish population since the roots of this question were very deep, notably in the (Jewish
Post a Comment
Read more