This article concerns the concept of Sangha in Buddhism. For information on other senses, see Sangha (disambiguation).

Part of a series on Buddhism
History Buddhism History of Buddhism Timeline Councils Gautama Buddha Later Buddhists Category: Buddhism
Teachings concepts Dharma Four Noble Truths Five Aggregates Impermanence Suffering Non-self Dependent Origination Middle Way Emptiness Karma Rebirth Samsara Cosmology Category: Buddhist terms
Practices Threefold Training Three Jewels Noble Eightfold Path Morality Meditation Wisdom Perfections Mindfulness Compassion Aids to Enlightenment Monasticism Laity
Nirvana Nirvāṇa Four Stages Arahant Buddha Bodhisattva
Traditions Schools of Buddhism Hinayana Theravāda Mahāyāna Vajrayāna Tibetan
Texts Buddhist texts Pali Canon Chinese Buddhist canon
Buddhism by country General Countries India India Southern Transmission Sri Lanka Thailand Cambodia Laos Burma Eastern Transmission China Japan Korea Vietnam Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Northern Transmission Tibet Bhutan Mongolia Nepal Russia Western Transmission Western countries USA
Outline Buddhism portal view talk edit

Sangha (Pali: सन्घ saṅgha; Sanskrit: संघ saṃgha; Wylie: 'dus sde) is a word in Pali and Sanskrit meaning "association", "assembly," "company" or "community" and most commonly refers in Buddhism to the monastic community of ordained Buddhist monks or nuns. This community is traditionally referred to as the bhikkhu-sangha or bhikkhuni-sangha. Within this community those who have attained a higher level of realisation are referred to as the ariya-sangha or "noble Sangha".

Some may also claim that the Sangha also includes lay people who are personally dedicated to the discipline of dhamma-vinaya. This use of the word "Sangha" is not found in the Pali texts.^[1][2][3]

[edit] Defining Sangha

“Sangha. Community. This word has two levels of meaning: (1) on the ideal (arya) level, it denotes all of the Buddha’s followers, lay or ordained, who have at least attained the level of srotapanna; (2) on the conventional (samvtri) level, it denotes the orders of the Bhiksus and Bhiksunis” ^[4]

Some lay practitioners in the West these days use the word "Sangha" as a collective term for all Buddhists, but the Pali Canon uses the word parisā (Sanskrit, parisad) for the larger Buddhist community-the monks, nuns, lay men, and lay women who have taken the Three Refuges-reserving ‘Sangha’ for a more restricted use.” ^[5][6][7]

“The two meanings overlap but are not necessarily identical. Some members of the ideal Sangha are not ordained; some monastics have yet to acquire the Dharma-eye” ^[5]

“Unlike the present Sangha, the original Sangha viewed itself as following the mission layed down by the Master, viz, to go forth ‘…on tour for the blessing of the manyfolk, for the happiness of the manyfolk out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the blessing, the happiness of deva and men" ^[8]

Qualities of the Sangha[link]

The Sangha is the third of the Three Jewels in Buddhism. Due to the temptations and vicissitudes of life in the world monastic life is considered to to provide the safest and most suitable environment for advancing toward enlightenment and liberation.

In Buddhism, the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha each are described as having certain characteristics. These characteristics are chanted either on a daily basis and/or on Uposatha days, depending on the school of Buddhism. In Theravada tradition they are a part of daily chanting:

The Sangha: "The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples (Savakas) is:

1. practicing the good way
2. practicing the upright way
3. practicing the knowledgeable or logical way
4. practicing the proper way;

that is, the four pairs of persons, the eight types of individuals - This Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples is:

1. worthy of gifts
2. worthy of hospitalities
3. worthy of offerings
4. worthy of reverential salutation
5. the unsurpassed field of merit for the world."^[9]

Monastic tradition[link]

Upasakas and Upasikas performing a short chanting ceremony at Three Ancestors Temple, Anhui Province, China

Sangha(Laos, Luang Prabang)

The Sangha of monks and the Sangha of nuns were originally established by Gautama Buddha in the 5th century BC in order to provide a means for those who wish to practice the Dhamma full time, in a direct and highly disciplined way, free from the restrictions and responsibilities of the household life.^[10] The Sangha also fulfils the function of preserving the Buddha’s original teachings and of providing spiritual support for the Buddhist lay-community. The monastic sangha has historically assumed responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the doctrine as well as the translation and propagation of the teachings of the Buddha.

The key feature of Buddhist monasticism is the adherence to the vinaya which contains an elaborate set of rules of conduct including complete chastity and eating only before noon. Between midday and the next day, a strict life of scripture study, chanting, meditation, and occasional cleaning forms most of the Sangha's duties [1]. Transgression of rules carries penalties ranging from confession to permanent expulsion from the Sangha. The founder of Japanese Tendai decided to reduce the number of rules down to about 60 (Enkai). In Kamakura Era, many sects (Zen, Pureland and Nichiren) that originated from Tendai sect abolished vinaya entirely. Therefore Japanese Zen, Pureland and Nichiren, are led by priests (or minister) rather than by monks.

Monks and nuns may own only the barest minimum of possessions due to their samaya as renunciates (ideally, three robes, an alms bowl, a cloth belt, a needle and thread, a razor for shaving the head, and a water filter). In practice, they often have a few additional personal possessions.

Traditionally, Buddhist monastics eschew ordinary clothes and wear robes. Originally the robes were sewn together from rags and stained with earth. The idea that robes were dyed with saffron seems unlikely to be true since it was and still is a very expensive commodity, and monks were poor. The color of modern robes varies from community to community (saffron is characteristic for southeast Asian Theravada and Mahayana groups, maroon in Tibet, gray in Korea, black in Japan etc.)

The word which is usually translated as monk is bhikkhu in Pali or bhikshu in Sanskrit. The feminine form is bhikkhuni or bhikshuni. These words literally mean "beggar", learner, auspicious, adept, endowed with harmony and order; ^[8]and it is traditional for bhikkhus to beg their food. In most places this has become an elaborate ritual, where lay people feed monastics in order to obtain merit which will ensure them a fortunate rebirth. Although monastics in India traditionally did not work for income, this changed when Buddhism moved to east Asia, so that in China and the surrounding countries monks often engage in agriculture.

The idea that all Buddhists, especially monks and nuns practice vegetarianism is a Western misperception. In some Sanskrit Mahayana Sutras meat eating is strongly discouraged. In Pali Canon the Buddha rejected a suggestion by Devadatta to impose vegetarianism on the Sangha. According to the Pali Texts, the Buddha ate meat [as long as the animal was not killed specifically for Him]. According to the Mahayana Sutras, the Buddha does not eat meat. The Buddha [in the Pali Texts] allowed Sangha members to eat whatever food is donated to them by laypeople, except that they may not eat meat if they know or suspect the animal was killed specifically for them. Consequently, the Theravadan tradition (Sri Lanka, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Burma) which follows the Pali scriptures does not practice vegetarianism though an individual may do so at his or her personal choice[2]. On the other hand, the Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions accept both Theravada and Mahayana scriptures, and consequently the practice will vary depending on their interpretation of the sutras. In particular, East Asian monastics take on the bodhisattva vows from the Brahma Net Sutra which has a vow of vegetarianism as part of the Triple Platform Ordination where they receive the sramanera/sramanerika, bhikshu/bhikshuni and bodhisattva vows, whereas the Tibetan lineages transmit the bodhisattva vows from Asanga's Yogacarabhumi, which does not include a vow of vegetarianism. In some areas such as China, Korea and Vietnam one expects the Sangha to practice strict vegetarianism while in other areas such as Japan or Tibet one does not.

The lay community is responsible for the production of goods and services in society, and for the production and raising of children. According to Mahayana sutras, the Buddha always maintained that lay persons were capable of great wisdom in the Buddhadharma and of reaching enlightenment. In the west, there is a misconception that Theravada regards enlightenment to be an impossible goal outside the Sangha. This is incorrect. In Theravada suttas, it is clearly recorded that the Buddha's uncle—who was a lay follower—reached enlightenment by hearing the Buddha's discourse.

An almsbowl used by members of the Sangha.

The distinction between Sangha and lay persons has always been important and forms the Parisa, Buddhist community. Here, monastics teach and counsel the laity at request while laymen and laywomen offer donations for their future support. This inter-connectedness serves as a marriage and has sustained Buddhism to this day.

Women's role in the Sangha[link]

Although always maintaining that women were just as capable of attaining enlightenment as men, the canonical texts depict the Buddha as being reluctant to permit women to join the Sangha. After several entreaties from his aunt and foster-mother, Maha Pajapati Gotami, who wished to become ordained, and from his cousin and aide Ananda, who supported her cause, the Buddha relented and ordained Maha Pajapati and several others as nuns. It is interesting to note that this was one of the few issues about which the Buddha is recorded to have changed his mind. The Buddha later established the condition that each new ordination would be sanctioned by at least five bhikkhunis.

There have been several theories regarding the Buddha's reluctance to ordain women, including the possibility that it was due to fears that a community of women would not be safe in the society of his day. According to the scriptures the reason the Buddha himself gave was that the admission of women would weaken the Sangha and shorten its lifetime, and he laid down strict rules subordinating nuns to monks (The Eight Garudhammas).

Before the modern era, the Bhikkhuni Sangha spread to most Buddhist countries including Burma (also known as Myanmar), with the notable exceptions being Tibet and Thailand. However, in Sri Lanka, it died out in the 11th century during a civil war and was not revived. Consequently, as Theravada Buddhism spread to Thailand, the Theravada Sangha consisted only of monks.

In recent decades, there has been a serious attempt to revive the Theravada Bhikkhuni Sangha with the assistance of Mahayana bhikkhunis from the Chinese lineage. These were introduced from Sri Lanka in 433 C. E., following the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, and subsequently spread to Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. This has resulted in a small but thriving community of nuns in Sri Lanka, who in turn ordained the first Theravada Buddhist nun in the history of Thailand, Ven. Dhammananda. However, the validity of these ordinations is strongly disputed by some of the conservative Theravada establishment.

Meanwhile, a similar process has produced the first fully ordained bhikkhunis in Tibetan Buddhism, where only the novice ordination for bhikkhunis existed. In the west, where feminism has been a strong influence, there have been many remarkable Buddhist nuns: three notable examples are Pema Chodron, Ayya Khema and Tenzin Palmo.

The first bhikkhuni ordination in Australia in the Theravadin tradition was held in Perth on October 22 2009 at Bodhinyana Monastery. Venerable Ajahn Vayama together with Venerables Nirodha, Seri and Hasapanna were ordained as bhikkhunis by a dual sangha act of bhikkhus and bhikkhunis in full accordance with the pali vinaya.

Sangha as a general reference to Buddhist community[link]

Some^[11][12] commentators have noted that sangha is frequently (and according to them, mistakenly) used in the West to refer to any sort of Buddhist community. This could be problematic in a doctrinal sense insofar as a given collection of Buddhists might not fully constitute a triple gem (of Buddha, dharma, and sangha) where other sentient beings could take refuge, and as such, might not merit the reverence and the measure of community support (i.e., recourse to bhiksa in whatever form) provided for in the sutras for the sangha formative of the triple gem.

It is suggested by these commentators that the terms parisa or gana would be a more appropriate reference to a community of Buddhists. Parisa means "following" and it refers to the four groups of the Buddha's followers: monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen. [3] The Sanskrit term gana has meanings of flock, troop, multitude, number, tribe, series, class, and is usable as well in more mundane senses.

However, application of sangha to any sort of Buddhist community is backed by other commentators, mainly coming from movements with a significant proportion of lay people, and often among Mahayana, Vajrayana and Vipassana groups. They refer to the word sangha being traditionally also used to encompass lay followers, in sutras like Anguttara-Nikaya II.1.vii.^[13] The doctrinal problem of sangha-as-gem-to-be-revered they solve in two ways: firstly by stressing that the arya sangha is a much greater refuge than the lower levels of sangha, and secondly by stressing that sangha denotes the sacred dimensions of gathering as a community of Buddhists, in contrast with its more mundane dimensions. The sacred dimensions of such peer relationships are governed by the concept of kalyana mittata.

Samgha In Mahayana Buddhism[link]

In Mahayana Buddhism, the Samgha includes laymen (Upasaka), laywomen (Upasika) as well as monks (Bhikshu) and nuns (Bhikshuni).^[14] In the Lotus Sutra the 'Bodhisattvas of the Earth' include laity.

See also[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

• "The Bhikkhus' Rules, A Guide for Laypeople" by Bhikkhu Ariyesako.
• "What is Satsang"
• "Duties of the Sangha" by Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo
• Jealousy among the Sangha quoting from Jeremy Haywards book on Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche Warrior-King of Shambhala: Remembering Chögyam Trungpa.

Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (Tib. o thog bstan 'dzin dbang rgyal) is a teacher (lama) of the Bon Tibetan religious tradition.^[1][2] He is founder and director of the Ligmincha Institute^[2] and several centers named Chamma Ling, organizations dedicated to the study and practice of the teachings of the Bon tradition.^[1]

Life[link]

Tenzin Wangyal's parents fled the Chinese invasion of Tibet^[2] and later, in 1961, he was born in Amritsar, India.^[2] At the age of thirteen, he began dzogchen training from both Buddhist and Bon teachers.^[1][2] He began an eleven year traditional course of instruction at Bonpo Monastic Center^[1] and in 1986 attained the degree of Geshe,^[1] the highest academic degree of traditional Tibetan culture. That same year, Tenzin Wangyal began employment at the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives in Dharamsala, India.^[1]

In 1988 he began to teach in Italy at the invitation of Chögyal Namkhai Norbu.^[2] In 1991, he was awarded a Rockefeller Fellowship at Rice University in Houston, Texas.^[2] A second Rockefeller Fellowship followed in 1993.^[2]

Tenzin Wangyal has chosen to stay in the United States and teach ancient Bon traditions to Western students.^[2]

Tenzin Wangyal has an interest in the interpretation, control and application of dreams and has written fairly extensively on lucid dreaming and dream yoga as well as Dzogchen in Bon tradition.

Bibliography[link]

• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (1998). The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep. Snow Lion Publications. ISBN 1-55939-101-4. 
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (2000). Wonders of the Natural Mind. Snow Lion Publications. ISBN 1-55939-142-1. 
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (2002). Healing with Form, Energy, and Light. Snow Lion Publications. ISBN 1-55939-176-6. 
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche; Anne Carolyn Klein (2006). Unbounded Wholeness, Dzogchen, Bon and the Logic of the Nonconceptual. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-517850-5. 
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (2006). Tibetan Sound Healing. Sounds True. ISBN 1-59179-427-7. 
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (2011). Awakening the Sacred Body. Hay House. ISBN 1-4019-2871-4. 

See also[link]

• Dzogchen
• Tsa lung
• Tummo
• Dream Yoga

References[link]

External links[link]

• The Ligmincha Institute, founded in 1992 by Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche
• Chamma Ling Retreat Center of Crestone, Colorado, founded in 2004.
• The Lishu Institute India, founded in 2006
• The Three Doors founded in 2010
• Audio Interview Series on Buddhist Geeks

Bhagat Singh
Bhagat Singh, This is the photograph in a photo studio of Delhi before going for Central Assembly Hall action in first week of April 1929
Born	27 September 1907 Chak No. 105, Banga village, Jaranwala Tehsil, Lyallpur (Present Faisalabad,(Pakistan)), Punjab, British India[1]
Died	23 March 1931 (aged 23)[2][3] Lahore, Punjab, British India
Influenced by	Anarchism, Communism, Socialism
Religion	Sikhism (early life), Atheism (later life)[4][5][6][7]

Bhagat Singh (IPA: [pə̀ɡət̪ sɪ́ŋɡ] ( listen); 28 September 1907 – 23 March 1931) was an Indian nationalist 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 Indian languages.^[8][2][3]

Born into a Sikh Jat 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.^[9][10][11]

Seeking revenge for the death of Lala Lajpat Rai at the hands of the police, Singh was involved in the assassination of British police officer John Saunders. He eluded efforts by the police to capture him. Together with Batukeshwar Dutt, he undertook a successful effort to throw two bombs and leaflets inside the Central Legislative Assembly while shouting slogans of Inquilab Zindabad. Subsequently they volunteered to surrender and be arrested. Held on this charge, he gained widespread national support when he underwent a 116 day fast in jail, demanding equal rights for British and Indian political prisoners.^[12] During this time, sufficient evidence was brought against him for a conviction in the Saunders case, after trial by a Special Tribunal and appeal at the Privy Council in England. He was convicted and subsequently hanged for his participation in the murder, aged 23. His legacy prompted youth in India to begin fighting for Indian independence and he continues to be a youth idol in modern India, as well as the inspiration for several films.^{[13][14][15][16]} He is commemorated with a large bronze statue in the Parliament of India, as well as a range of other memorials.

Early life[link]

Bhagat Singh was born to Kishan Singh Sandhu and Vidyavati Kaur at Chak No. 105, Banga village, Jaranwala Tehsil in the Lyallpur district of the Punjab Province of British India.^[1][17] He belonged to a patriotic Jat Sikh family, some of whose members had participated in Indian Independence movements, and others had served in Maharaja Ranjit Singh's army.^[18] His ancestors hailed from the village of Khatkar Kalan near the town of Banga in Nawashahr district Jalandhar (now renamed Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar) of Punjab.^[19][20] Singh's given name of "Bhagat" means 'devotee' and he was nicknamed "Bhaganwala" ('the lucky one') by his grandmother, since the news of the release of his uncle Ajit Singh from Mandalay jail and that of his father from Lahore jail both coincided with his birth.^[19][21] His grandfather, Arjun Singh, was a follower of Swami Dayananda Saraswati's Hindu reformist movement, Arya Samaj,^[22] which had a considerable influence on the young Bhagat.^[23] His father, and uncles Ajit Singh and Swaran Singh, were members of the Ghadar Party, led by Kartar Singh Sarabha and Har Dayal.^[24] Ajit Singh was forced to flee to Persia due to pending court cases against him, while Swaran Singh died at home in 1910 following his release from Borstal Jail in Lahore.^[24]

Unlike many Sikhs of his age, Singh did not attend the Khalsa High School in Lahore, because his grandfather did not approve of the school officials' loyalism to the British authorities.^[25] Instead, his grandfather, enrolled him in the Dayanand Anglo Vedic High School, an Arya Samaji institution.^[26][27] Singh was influenced by a number of incidents during his childhood which instilled in him a deep sense of patriotism to eventually take up the struggle for India's independence.^[28] In 1919, at the age of 12, Bhagat Singh visited the site of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, where non-violent people gathered at a public meeting were fired upon without warning, killing hundreds and wounding thousands. Bhagat Singh participated ardently in Mahatma Gandhi's Non-Cooperation Movement in 1920,^[5] and openly defied the British by following Gandhi's wishes of burning his government school books and any imported British clothing he could find.^[29] At the age of 14, he welcomed in his village, protestors against the Gurudwara Nankana Sahib firing of 20 February 1921 which killed a large number of unarmed protesters.^[1][30] Disillusioned with Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence, after Gandhi called off the non-cooperation movement, following the violent murders of policemen by villagers, which were a reaction to the police's killing of three villagers by firing at Chauri Chaura in the United Provinces in 1922, he joined the Young Revolutionary Movement. Henceforth, he began advocating the violent overthrow of the British in India.^[29]

In 1923, Singh joined the National College in Lahore, where he not only excelled in academics but also in extra-curricular activities.^[1] He was a participant of the dramatics society in the college.^[1] By this time, he was fluent in Hindi, English, Urdu, Punjabi and Sanskrit languages.^[1][31][32] In 1923, Singh won an essay competition set by the Punjab Hindi Sahitya Sammelan. In his essay on Punjab's Language and Script, he quoted Punjabi literature and showed a deep understanding of the problems of afflicting Punjab.^[1] He joined the Indian nationalist youth organisation Naujawan Bharat Sabha (Hindi: "Youth Society of India") along with his fellow revolutionaries, and became popular in the organisation.^[9] He also joined the Hindustan Republican Association,^[30] which had prominent leaders, such as Ram Prasad Bismil, Chandrashekhar Azad and Ashfaqulla Khan. The name of the organisation was changed to Hindustan Socialist Republican Association at Singh's insistence.^[10] A year later, to avoid getting married by his family, Singh ran away from his house to Cawnpore.^[1] In a letter he left behind, he stated:

"My life has been dedicated to the noblest cause, that of the freedom of the country. Therefore, there is no rest or worldly desire that can lure me now ..."^[1]

It is also believed that he went to Cawnpore to attempt to free the Kakori train robbery convicts from jail, but returned to Lahore for unknown reasons.^[33] On the day of Dussehra in October 1926, a bomb exploded in Lahore.^[1] Singh was arrested for his alleged involvement in this Dussehra bomb case on 29 May 1927,^[34] but was released for exhibiting good behaviour against a steep fine of Rs. 60,000,^[1] about five weeks after his arrest.^[35] He wrote for and edited Urdu and Punjabi newspapers, published from Amritsar.^[36] In September 1928, the Kirti Kisan Party (Hindi: "Workers and Peasants Party") organised an all-India meeting of revolutionaries in Delhi by Singh as its secretary .^[1][1] He later rose to become this association's leader.^[1]

Later revolutionary activities[link]

Lala Lajpat Rai's death and murder of Saunders[link]

The British government created a Commission under Sir John Simon to report on the then current political situation in India in 1928.^[37] The Indian political parties boycotted the Commission, because it did not include a single Indian in its membership, and the Commission was met with country-wide protests.^[37] When the Commission visited Lahore on 30 October 1928, Lala Lajpat Rai led a non-violent protest against the commission in a silent march, but the police responded with violence.^[37] The superintendent of police, James A. Scott, ordered the police to lathi charge the protesters and personally assaulted Rai, who was grievously injured.^[37] When Rai died on 17 November 1928, it was widely assumed that Scott's blows had hastened his demise.^[37] However, when the matter was raised in the British Parliament, the British Government denied any role in Rai's death.^[38] Although some sources mention that Singh witnessed the event,^[39] while others dispute this,^[35] he vowed to take revenge,^[38] and joined other revolutionaries, Shivaram Rajguru, Sukhdev Thapar, Jai Gopal and Chandrashekhar Azad, in a plot to kill Scott.^[39] Jai Gopal was supposed to identify the chief and signal for Singh to shoot. However, in a case of mistaken identity, Gopal signalled Singh on the appearance of John P. Saunders, an Assistant Superintendent of Police.^[40][41] He was shot by Rajguru and Singh while leaving the District Police Headquarters in Lahore at about 4:15 pm on 17 December 1928.^[40][41] Head Constable Chanan Singh was also killed when he came to Saunders' aid.^[40][41]

Pamphlet by HSRA after Saunder's murder, signed by Balraj, the pseudo name for Chandrashekhar Azad

Dramatic escape[link]

After killing Saunders, the group escaped through the D.A.V. College entrance, across the road.^[40] Chanan Singh, a Head Constable who was chasing them, was fatally injured by Chandrashekhar Azad's covering fire.^[40][42] They then fled on bicycles to pre-arranged places of safety.^[40][43] The police launched a massive search operation to catch the culprits and blocked all exits and entrances^[40][43] from the city; the CID kept a watch on all young men leaving Lahore.^[40][43] They hid for the next two days.^[40][43] On 19 December 1928, Sukhdev called on Durga Devi Vohra, their friend Bhagwati Charan Vohra's wife, for help, which she agreed to do.^[40][43] They decided to catch the train departing from Lahore for Howrah (en route to Bathinda) early the next morning.^[40][43] To avoid recognition, Singh shaved off his beard and cut his hair short.^[44]

They left the house early the next morning. Dressed in a Western attire, Singh carried Vohra's sleeping child on his shoulder.^[40][43] Singh and Vohra passed off as a young couple with a child, while Rajguru carried their luggage as their servant. At the station, Singh, managed to conceal his identity, and bought three tickets to Cawnpore — two first class tickets for Vohra and himself, and a third class one for Rajguru.^[40][43] Both men had loaded revolvers with them to deal with any unanticipated incident.^[40][43] They avoided raising the suspicions of the police and boarded the train.^[44] Breaking journey at Cawnpore, they boarded a train for Lucknow since the CID at Howrah railway station usually scrutinised passengers on the direct train from Lahore.^[40][43] At Lucknow, Rajguru left separately for Benares while Singh, Vohra and the infant went to Howrah, with all except Singh returning to Lahore a few days later.^{[40][45][46][47]}

1929 Assembly bomb throwing incident[link]

To subdue the rise of revolutionaries like Bhagath Singh in the country, the British government decided to implement the Defence of India Act 1915, which gave the police a free hand.^[48] Bhagath Singh was Influenced by a French anarchist, who bombed the French Chamber of Deputies ^[49] Singh planned a proposal to the HSRA to explode the bomb inside the Central Legislative Assembly, which was agreed to. Initially he decided that Batukeshwar Dutt and Sukhdev would plant the bomb while Bhagath Singh would travel to USSR.^[49] However later he changed the plot. He entrusted Dutt to plant the bomb.^[49] On 8 April 1929, Singh and Dutt threw the two bombs inside the assembly rushing from Visitor's Gallery. The smoke was filled in the Hall and they shouted slogans of "Inquilab Zindabad!" (Hindi-Urdu: "Long Live the Revolution!") and they showered leaflets.^[50][51][52] The leaflet claimed that the act was done to oppose the Trade Disputes and the Public Safety Bill being presented in the Central Assembly and the death of Lala Rajapath Rai.^[53] Few sustained injuries in the explosion but there were no deaths; Singh and Dutt claimed that the act was intentional.^[54] Singh and Dutt were arrested,^[54] as planned.^[55][56]

The Tribune reported the incident as:

When Mr Patel from India got up to give his ruling on the Public Safety Bill, two bombs were thrown from a gallery near the seat of George Schuster. The whole House was dispersed in the panic caused. Seorge Schuster and B. Dalal were injured while few other members received minor injuries. Bhagat Singh and Dutt were arrested by the British. Ten minutes later the Assembly got reassembled. The Chamber was filled with smoke. Mr Patel adjourned the House till next Thursday. A red pamphlet "Hindustan Socialist Republican Army" signed by Bal Raj, Hony. Chief, was thrown. The police locked the Council House and prevented the movement of the visitors. J. Simon was also in the President's Gallery when the bomb fell. Sir G. Schuster, Sir B. Dalal, Mr Raghavendra Rao and Mr Shanker Rao were among the injured. Butukeswara Datta from Bengal and Bhagat Singh from the Punjab were arrested.^[57]

Assembly bomb case trial[link]

Singh and Dutt were charged with attempt to murder, and the trial magistrated by British Judge P.B. Pool and prosecuted by Rai Bahadur Suryanarayan began on 7 May 1929.^[55] Doubts have been raised about the accuracy of testimony offered at the trial. One key discrepancy related to the automatic pistol that Singh had been carrying prior to his arrest. One witness told the court that Singh had been firing the pistol two or three times before it jammed, and some policemen stated that Singh was pointing the gun when they arrived.^[58] Sergeant Terry, who had confronted and arrested Singh, testified that the gun was pointed downward when he took it from Singh and that Singh "was playing with it."^[58] According to the India Law Journal, however, even this was incorrect, as Singh had turned over the pistol himself.^[55] According to Kooner,^[59] Singh "committed one great blunder" by taking his pistol on that day "when it was clear not to harm anybody and offer for police arrest without any protest." Kooner further states that the police connected "the shell of the gun fire found from the (Saunders') murder site and the pistol." The two were sent to the Sessions Court of Judge Leonard Middleton,^[60] who ruled that Singh and Dutt's actions had undoubtedly been 'deliberate' as the bombs had shattered the one and a half inch deep wooden floor in the Hall.^[55] Dutt was defended by Asaf Ali, while Singh defended himself.^[61] Their appeal was turned down and they were sentenced to 14 years life imprisonment.^[40][62]

Further trial and execution[link]

On 15 April 1929, the 'Lahore bomb factory' was discovered by the police, leading to the arrest of other members of HSRA, out of which 7 turned informants, helping the police to connect Singh with the murder of Saunders.^[49] Singh, Rajguru, and Sukhdev were charged with the murder of Saunders. Singh decided to use the court as a tool to publicise his cause—the independence of India.^[63]

Hunger strike and Lahore conspiracy case[link]

Singh was re-arrested for murdering Saunders and Chanan Singh based on substantial evidence against him, including the statements of his associates, Hans Raj Vohra and Jai Gopal.^[55] His life sentence in the Assembly Bomb case was deferred till the Saunders' case was decided.^[64] Singh was sent to the Mianwali jail from the Delhi jail,^[56] where he witnessed discrimination between European and Indian prisoners,^[65] and led other prisoners in a hunger strike to protest^[65] this illegal discrimination.^[66]

They demanded equality in standards of food, clothing, toiletries and other hygienic necessities, as well as availability of books and a daily newspaper for the political prisoners,^[66] who they demanded should not be forced to do manual labour or any undignified work in the jail,^[67][68] as detailed in their letter to the Home Member on 24 June 1929.^[69]

Jinnah made a powerful speech in the Assembly supporting Singh,^[70] and sympathised with the prisoners on hunger strike. He declared on the floor of the Assembly:

"The man who goes on hunger strike has a soul. He is moved by that soul, and he believes in the justice of his cause ... however much you deplore them and however much you say they are misguided, it is the system, this damnable system of governance, which is resented by the people."^[71]

Jawaharlal Nehru met Singh and the other strikers in Mianwali jail. After the meeting, he stated:

"I was very much pained to see the distress of the heroes. They have staked their lives in this struggle. They want that political prisoners should be treated as political prisoners. I am quite hopeful that their sacrifice would be crowned with success."^[72]

The Government tried to surreptitiously break the strike^[73] by placing different food items in the prison cells to test the hungry prisoners' resolve.^[65] Water pitchers were filled with milk so that either the prisoners remained thirsty or broke their strike.^[65] But nobody faltered and the impasse refused to break.^[65] The authorities then attempted forcing food using feeding tubes into the prisoners, but were resisted.^[65] Kishori, a hunger striking prisoner swallowed red pepper and drank hot water to clog his feeding tube.^[74] The Indian Viceroy, Lord Irwin, broke his vacation in Simla and came to discuss the matter with the jail authorities.^[73] There was still no resolution.^[73] Since the activities of the hunger strikers had gained popularity and attention amongst the people nationwide, the government decided to advance the start of the Saunders murder trial, which was henceforth called the Lahore Conspiracy Case. Singh was transported to the Borstal jail.^[55][75] This trial began on 10 July 1929 in Borstal jail, Lahore,^[75] in the court of the first class magistrate, Rai Sahib Pandit Sri Kishen.^[55] In addition to charging them for the murder of Saunders, Singh and 27 other prisoners were charged with plotting a conspiracy to murder Scott and waging a war against the King.^[55] Singh, still on hunger strike, had to be carried to the court handcuffed on a stretcher since he had lost 14 pounds (6.4 kg) weight from 133 pounds (60 kg) before the strike.^[75]

By now, the condition of another hunger striker, Jatindra Nath Das, lodged in the same jail had deteriorated considerably.^[75] The Jail committee recommended his unconditional release, but the government rejected the suggestion and offered to release him on bail.^[75] On 13 September 1929, Das breathed his last after a 63 day hunger strike.^[75] After his death, Lord Irwin informed the British prime minister Ramsay MacDonald:

"Jatin Das of the Conspiracy Case, who was on hunger strike, died this afternoon at 1 pm Last night, five of the hunger strikers gave up their hunger strike. So there are only Bhagat Singh and Dutt who are on strike ..."^[75]

Almost all the nationalist leaders in the country paid tribute to Das' death.^[76] Mohammad Alam and Gopi Chand Bhargava resigned from the Punjab Legislative Council in protest.^[76] Motilal Nehru moved an adjournment motion in the Central Assembly as a censure against the 'inhumane treatment' of the Lahore prisoners, that was carried by 55 votes against 47.^[76] Singh finally heeded to a resolution of the Congress party and his father's request and ended his 116 day long hunger strike^[55] on 5 October 1929, that was longer than 94 day long hunger strike (from 11 August to 12 November 1920) of Irish prisoners at Cork.^[55] During this period, Singh's popularity among common Indians.^[77] grew beyond Punjab.^[77][78] Singh attention now turned to his trial.^[55] The team for the British Crown was composed of C.H. Carden-Noad, Kalandar Ali Khan, Gopal Lal and the prosecuting inspector, Bakshi Dina Nath.^[55] The defence was composed of eight lawyers. When Jai Gopal turned into a prosecution witness, Prem Dutt, the youngest amongst the 28 accused, threw his slipper at Gopal in court.^[79][80] The magistrate ordered to handcuff all the accused, despite all other revolutionaries having dissociated themselves from the act.^[81] Singh and others refused to be handcuffed and were therefore subjected to brutal beating.^[81] The revolutionaries refused to attend the court and Singh wrote a letter to the magistrate citing various reasons why they had done so.^[82] The trial was henceforth ordered to be carried out in the absence of the accused or members of the HSRA.^[40][83] This was a setback for Singh as he could no longer use the trial as a forum to publicise his views.^[40][83]

Special Tribunal[link]

To speed up the slow trial,^[55] the Viceroy, Lord Irwin, declared an emergency on 1 May 1930, and promulgated an ordinance setting up a special tribunal composed of three high court judges for this case. The ordinance cut short the normal process of justice as the only appeal after the tribunal was at the Privy Council located in England^[55] The Tribunal was authorised to function without the presence of any of the accused in court, and to accept death of the persons giving evidence as a concession to the defence.^[40] Consequent to Lahore Conspiracy Case Ordinance No.3 of 1930, the trial was transferred from Rai Sahib Pandit Sri Kishan's court to the tribunal composed of Justice J. Coldstream (president), Justice G. C. Hilton and Justice Agha Hyder (members).^[84]

The case commenced on 5 May 1930 in the Poonch House, Lahore against 18 accused.^[85] On 20 June 1930, the constitution of the Special Tribunal was changed to Justice G.C. Hilton (president), Justice J.K. Tapp and Justice Sir Abdul Qadir.^[85] On 2 July 1930, a habeas corpus petition was filed in the High Court challenging the ordinance and said that it was ultra vires and therefore illegal,^[55] stating that the Viceroy had no powers to shorten the customary process of determining justice.^[55] The petition argued that the Act, allowed the Viceroy to introduce an ordinance and set up such a tribunal only under conditions of break down of law-and-order, whereas there had been no such breakdown. However, the petition was dismissed as 'premature'.^[86] Carden-Noad presented the government's grievous charges of conducting dacoities, bank-robbery, and illegal acquisition of arms and ammunition amongst others.^[55] The evidence of G.T.H. Hamilton Harding, the Lahore superintendent of police, shocked the court, when he stated that he had filed the First Information Report against the accused under specific orders from the chief secretary (D.J. Boyd^[87]) to the governor of Punjab (Sir Geoffrey Montmorency^[87]) and that he was unaware of the details of the case.^[55] The prosecution mainly depended upon the evidence of P.N. Ghosh, Hans Raj Vohra and Jai Gopal who had been Singh's associates in the HRSA.^[55] On 10 July 1930, the tribunal decided to press charges against only 15 of the 18 accused, and allowed their petitions to be taken up for hearing the next day.^[55] The tribunal conducted the trial from 5 May 1930 to 10 September 1930.^[55] The three accused against whom the case was withdrawn included Dutt, who had already been awarded a life sentence in the Assembly bomb case.^[40][88]

The ordinance (and the tribunal) would lapse on 31 October 1930 as it had not been passed in the Central Assembly or the British Parliament. On 7 October 1930, the tribunal delivered its 300-page judgement based on all the evidence and concluded that participation of Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru was proved beyond reasonable doubt in Saunders' murder, and sentenced them to death by hanging.^[55][89] The remaining 12 accused were all sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment.^[90] The warrants for the three had a black border.^[40][55][90]

Appeal to the Privy Council[link]

In Punjab, a defence committee drew up a plan to appeal to the Privy Council.^[91] Singh was initially against the appeal, but later agreed to it in the hope that the appeal would popularise the HSRA in Great Britain.^[91] The appellants objected to the ordinance that created the tribunal as invalid.^[91] The government again plead that the Viceroy was completely empowered to create such a tribunal under the said Act (Section 72 ).^[91] The appeal was dismissed by Judge Viscount Dunedin.^[55][91]

Reactions to the judgement[link]

After the rejection of the appeal to the Privy Council, Congress party president Madan Mohan Malviya filed a mercy appeal before Lord Irwin on 14 February 1931.^[92] An appeal was sent to Mahatma Gandhi by prisoners to intervene.^[55] In his notes dated 19 March 1931, the Viceroy recorded:

"While returning Gandhiji asked me if he could talk about the case of Bhagat Singh, because newspapers had come out with the news of his slated hanging on March 24th. It would be a very unfortunate day because on that day the new president of the Congress had to reach Karachi and there would be a lot of hot discussion. I explained to him that I had given a very careful thought to it but I did not find any basis to convince myself to commute the sentence. It appeared he found my reasoning weighty."^[93]

The Communist Party of Great Britain expressed its reaction to the case:

"The history of this case, of which we do not come across any example in relation to the political cases, reflects the symptoms of callousness and cruelty which is the outcome of bloated desire of the imperialist government of Britain so that fear can be instilled in the hearts of the repressed people."^[92]

An abortive plan had been made to rescue Singh and fellow inmates of HSRA from the jail. HSRA member Bhagwati Charan Vohra made bombs for the purpose, but died making them when they exploded accidentally.^[33]

Writings in prison[link]

Singh also maintained the use of a diary, which eventually grew to include 404 pages. In this diary, he made numerous notes regarding the quotations and popular sayings of various people whose views he agreed with. Prominent in his diary were the views of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.^[94] The comments in his diary led to an understanding of the philosophical thinking of Singh.^[95] In his prison cell, he also wrote a pamphlet entitled Why I am an Atheist, in response to him being accused of vanity by not accepting God in the face of death.^[4] It is also said that he signed a mercy petition through a comrade Bijoy Kumar Sinha on 8 March 1931.^[96]

Execution[link]

Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev were sentenced to death in the Lahore conspiracy case and ordered to be hanged on 24 March 1931.^[97] On 17 March 1931, the Home Secretary, Punjab, sent a telegram to the Home Department, New Delhi, fixing the execution on 23 March 1931.^[98] Singh was informed that his execution had been advanced by 11 hours on 23 March 1931, just a few hours before his execution.^[87][99] Singh was hanged on 23 March 1931 at 7:30 pm^[100] in Lahore jail with his fellow comrades Rajguru and Sukhdev. It is reported that no magistrate of the time was willing to supervise his hanging. The execution was supervised by the Honorary Magistrate of Kasur, Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan Kasuri, who also signed Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev's death warrants as their original warrants had expired.^{[101][102][103]} The jail authorities then broke the rear wall of the jail and secretly cremated the three martyrs under cover of darkness outside Ganda Singh Wala village, and then threw the ashes into the Sutlej river,^[87] about 10 km from Ferozepore (and about 60 km from Lahore).^{[87][97][104]}

Criticism of the Special Tribunal and method of execution[link]

Singh's trial is generally considered to be an important event in the Indian history, as it went contrary to the fundamental doctrine of criminal jurisprudence.^[105] An ex-parte trial was against the principles of natural justice that no man shall be held guilty unless given an opportunity to defend in a hearing.^[105] The Special Tribunal was a departure from the normal procedure adopted for a trial.^[55] The decision of the tribunal could only be appealed to the Privy Council located in Britain.^[55] The accused were absent from the court and the judgement was passed ex-parte.^[106] The ordinance, which was introduced by the Viceroy to form the Special Tribunal, was never approved by the Central Assembly or the British Parliament, and it eventually lapsed without any legal or constitutional sanctity.^[107]

It was probably for the first time, that executions were carried out in the evening, by advancing the date of execution. The families of the accused were not allowed to meet them before the execution nor were they informed about it, even the bodies of the three were not given to their relatives after the execution to perform last rites, but were removed by demolishing the rear wall of the jail since there was an angry crowd at the front gate and were disposed off by cutting them into pieces and burning with the help of kerosene^[108] after which the remains were thrown into Satluj river.^[109]

Reactions to the executions[link]

Front page of The Tribune announcing Bhagat Singh's execution

The execution of Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev were reported widely by the press, especially as they were on the eve of the annual convention of the Congress party at Karachi.^[110] Gandhi faced black flag demonstrations by angry youth who shouted "Down with Gandhi".^[10] The New York Times reported:

A reign of terror in the city of Cawnpore in the United Provinces and an attack on Mahatma Gandhi by a youth outside Karachi were among the answers of the Indian extremists today to the hanging of Bhagat Singh and two fellow-assassins.^[111]

Hartals and strikes of mourning were called.^[112][113] The Congress party, during the Karachi session, declared:

While dissociating itself from and disapproving of political violence in any shape or form, this Congress places on record its admiration of the bravery and sacrifice of Bhagat Singh, Sukh Dev and Raj Guru and mourns with their bereaved families the loss of these lives. The Congress is of the opinion that their triple execution was an act of wanton vengeance and a deliberate flouting of the unanimous demand of the nation for commutation. This Congress is further of the opinion that the [British] Government lost a golden opportunity for promoting good-will between the two nations, admittedly held to be crucial at this juncture, and for winning over to methods of peace a party which, driven to despair, resorts to political violence.^[114]

In the 29 March 1931 issue of Young India, Gandhi wrote:

"Bhagat Singh and his two associates have been hanged. The Congress made many attempts to save their lives and the Government entertained many hopes of it, but all has been in a vain.
Bhagat Singh did not wish to live. He refused to apologize, or even file an appeal. Bhagat Singh was not a devotee of non-violence, but he did not subscribe to the religion of violence. He took to violence due to helplessness and to defend his homeland. In his last letter, Bhagat Singh wrote, " I have been arrested while waging a war. For me there can be no gallows. Put me into the mouth of a cannon and blow me off." These heroes had conquered the fear of death. Let us bow to them a thousand times for their heroism.
But we should not imitate their act. In our land of millions of destitute and crippled people, if we take to the practice of seeking justice through murder, there will be a terrifying situation. Our poor people will become victims of our atrocities. By making a dharma of violence, we shall be reaping the fruit of our own actions.
Hence, though we praise the courage of these brave men, we should never countenance their activities. Our dharma is to swallow our anger, abide by the discipline of non-violence and carry out our duty."^{[115][116][117]}

Popularity among people[link]

In the words of Subhash Chandra Bose: "Bhagat Singh had become the symbol of the new awakening among the youths ...". Nehru acknowledged that the popularity of Singh was leading to a new national awakening, saying

"He was a clean fighter who faced his enemy in the open field ... he was like a spark that became a flame in a short time and spread from one end of the country to the other dispelling the prevailing darkness everywhere."^[10]

Four years after Singh's hanging, the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Sir Horace Williamson, wrote:

"His photograph was on sale in every city and township and for a time rivalled in popularity even that of Mr. Gandhi himself."^[10]

Ideals and opinions[link]

Influences[link]

Singh was attracted to anarchism and communism.^[9] He was an avid reader of the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky and Bakunin.^[118][119] Singh did not believe in the Gandhian ideology—which advocated Satyagraha and other forms of non-violent resistance, and felt that the politics of Gandhism would replace one set of exploiters with another.^[120] Singh was also an admirer of the writings of Irish revolutionary Terence MacSwiney.^{[121][122][123]} Some of his writings like Blood Sprinkled on the Day of Holi Babbar Akalis on the Crucifix were influenced by the struggle of Dharam Singh Hayatpur.^[124]