The essay Mazhab Te Sadi Azadi Di Jung (Religion and Our Freedom Struggle) was originally published in the May 1928 issue of Kirti. A political conference and a conference of the Naujawan Bharat Sabha was held in Amritsar in which intense debate on religion took place between Bhagat Singh and his friends. This essay sheds light on this problem. The outline of the idea of independent India was beginning to be portrayed more clearly. There are some concrete suggestions for unity among the people in this essay.
A political conference was held in Amritsar from 11 April to 13 April along with a youth conference. A large part of the debate and discussion centered around two or three points. One of the issues was religion. While no one would have raised the question of religion, a resolution was introduced against communal organizations, and those who supported these communal organizations on the pretext of religion wanted to defend themselves. This question could have remained a little more buried; But once it was brought into the public domain, it could be discussed and the concomitant question of resolving the issue of religion also arose.
Even on the subject committee of the regional conference, when Maulana Zafar Ali Sahab inscribed, God! AIf you are a missionary of religion, I am a preacher of unrighteousness’. Later, a meeting of the Youth Council was held in Lahore. Many speeches were made and advised by some gentlemen, who used religion to their advantage, and even by those who were afraid to discuss this divisive issue, lest it lead to tension.
The most important thing which was repeated again and on which Shriman Bhai Amar Singh Ji Jhabal laid special emphasis that the question of religion should not be touched at all. This was very good advice. If one’s religion is not hindering the happiness and peace of another person, then why should anyone have reason to raise their voice against it? But the question that arises is this: what has experience taught us so far? Even in the last movement, only one question of religion was raised and each one was given complete freedom. Along with this, mantras and verses were also read along with the Congress. In those days, if any person was left behind in religion, then it was not considered good. As a result, narrowness was increasing.
Its side effects are not hidden from anyone. Now nationalist people and lovers of freedom have understood the truth behind religion and think of it as an obstacle in their path.
The crowning point is that even if one puts one’s religion as a personal matter, does it not increase the feeling of alienation in the hearts of the people? Does it not affect the purpose of achieving complete independence for the country? At this time, the worshiper of complete freedom is called a kind of mental slavery. He also feels that telling a child that God is omnipotent and that man does nothing but mere clay idols makes the child weak forever. This is to destroy the strength of his heart and his sense of confidence.But even if we do not discuss it and go straight to the questions directly in front of us, we still see that religion is a hindrance in our path. For example, we want everyone to be the same. There should be no division of class between the capitalists, nor the untouchables and the untouchables. But Sanatan Dharma is in favor of this discrimination. Even in the twentieth century, if a low-caste boy garlands people like Pandits or Maulvis, they bathe with their clothes and refuse to give ‘janeu’, the sacred thread, to the untouchables. . Either we vow not to say anything against this religion and sit quietly in the house, or we should oppose it. People also say that we should rectify these diseases. Very good! Swami Dayanand abolished untouchability but could not go beyond the four varnas. Discrimination still persists. If Sikhs go to the gurudwara and sing are Raj Karega Khalsa ‘(May Khalsa rule!) And then come out and speak of a republic, what does it mean?
Religion says that infidels who believe in Islam should not be hacked; If a sign of unity is given here, what will be the result? We know that some higher commands and mantras can be chanted to attract different interpretations, but the question is, why should we not rid ourselves of this whole problem? Religion stands before us like a mountain. Suppose there is a freedom struggle spread across the country, armies with guns are standing face to face, shots are to be fired and if someone does what Mohammed Gauri did at that time – as the story goes on – and Even today, cows, pigs, Granth Sahib, Ved-Quran etc. in front of us, what will we do then? If we are staunchly religious, we will roll our beds and go back home.
Also read: Bhagat Singh Was a Thinking Individual, Not Just a Raw Nationalist
While there is religion, Hindus and Sikhs will not shoot cows or Muslims on a pig. Staunch believers will have to be rolled into the Somnath temple like thousands of priests in front of their idols, while others, atheists or unrighteous, will complete the task. So what conclusion did we reach? One is forced to think against religion. But let us also consider the argument given in favor of religion by those who say that the world will become a country of darkness and sin will increase in the absence of religion. All is well, we see it.
The Russian Mahatma, Tolstoy, writing about religion in his essays and letters, has divided it into three parts –
1. The imperative of religion, that is, the main principles of religion – telling the truth, not stealing, helping the poor, communicating with others, etc.
2. Philosophy of religion, ie philosophy of birth and death, rebirth, creation of the world, etc. In this, the person tries to think and understand things according to his wish.
This means that all religions are the same in the first part. All believe in telling the truth, not in lying, in keeping pace with others. Some people have called these things a personal religion. There is no question of dissatisfaction here. In fact, every human being should follow such great principles. The second is the question of philosophy. One has to accept that “philosophy is the result of human weakness” (originally in English). Where people can see, there is no problem. When things are not clearly visible, one’s brain works overtime and some specific results are dug. Philosophy is undoubtedly a very important thing because we cannot progress without it, yet peace is equally important.
Our elders have said that rebirth occurs, but Christians and Muslims do not believe it. Very well, each for their own! Let us sit and discuss it peacefully. Get to know each other’s thoughts. But when the question of the transition of soul is debated, Arya Samajists and Muslims come in the way. The thing is that both sides shut down their intelligence and give up their power to think and argue. They believe that God has written in the Veda in this way – and that is the ultimate truth. Others believe that in Quran Sharif, God has written this – and this is the only truth. These people have relinquished all powers of reasoning. If philosophy has no power greater than a person’s personal opinion and no separate group is formed due to belief in a particular philosophy, then what is there to complain about?Now we come to the third thing – rituals. On the day of Saraswati Puja, it is necessary to carry the idol of Goddess Saraswati to the procession and it is also necessary to bring a band to play music before the idol. But on the way there is a mosque on Harrison Road. Islam says that there should be no music in front of a mosque. What should be done now? Civil rights decide that one can pass through the music playing market, but religion says no. In one religion, the cow is sacrificed and in another the cow is worshiped. What to do under the circumstances? What should be done if a conversion takes place as soon as the peepal tree is cut down? And these slight differences in philosophy and rituals and customs later develop into a national religion and lead to the creation of separate organizations. The result is before we see it.
So if religion has to combine superstition with the third and second thing written above, then there is no need of religion. Not tomorrow, but today it should be blown away! If independent thought can be mixed with the first and second, can such a religion flourish! But it is necessary to remove factionalism and discrimination in the service and partnership of food; Words like untouchable have to be uprooted completely.
True unity cannot be achieved until we renounce our narrowness and become one. Therefore, only by following the above mentioned things can we move towards freedom. Our freedom does not merely mean escaping the grip of the British; It means complete freedom – when people will join each other freely and get rid of mental slavery as well.