Karnataka turning into a safe haven for terrorists; ban PFI, KFD: Pratap Simha

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Bengaluru, April 3: Former prime minister HD Deve Gowda has written to Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan stating that he has communicated in writing to Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa to make arrangements for the passing of vehicles related to medical facilities and essential goods between Mangaluru and Kasargod.

"What made me write this letter is the pain and anguish I experienced when BM Farookhji, the national working president of JDS and K Krishnan Kutty, MLA and a member of your Cabinet and member of JDS, a coalition partner of your government brought to my notice the inhuman and inappropriate action on part of the authorities of Karnataka to block the interstate highway between Mangaluru and Kasargod, bringing the traffic movements between the two states and particularly to Kasargod district having a sizeable population of Kannadigas to a grinding halt," Gowda wrote in the letter.

"I immediately wrote a letter to Yeddiyurappaji, the Chief Minister of Karnataka to make arrangements to permit goods movement and the passage of ambulances and other vehicles for any emergency. But authorities of Karnataka government appears to be very adamant despite the assurance given before the High Court," it added.

Gowda said that the situation is very grim since he learnt that four to five patients died for want of medical facilities since the ambulances ferrying the patients were denied permission to cross the border, to avail treatment from the hospitals at Mangaluru.

He also condemned the Karnataka government for denying access to medical facilities to people in Kerala.

"I very strongly condemn the attitude of the BJP government in Karnataka denying access to people from Kerala to avail medical facilities on emergency and also the movement of essential goods for the survival of the people and deprivation of such emergency services amounts to violation of human rights and opposed to all norms of humanity and humanitarian considerations," the letter read.
Gowda said he will take up the issue with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

"I take this opportunity to assure you that I will take up this issue with the Prime Minister who had assured while imposing 21 days of lockdown that the supply of essential commodities will be maintained and hospital facilities will be kept open round the clock so as to prevent any untoward incident," he stated.

Bengaluru, Apr 13: Fifteen new positive cases of coronavirus have been confirmed in Karnataka, taking the total number of affected in the state to 247, the Health department said on Monday.

"Fifteen new positive cases have been reported from last evening to this noon.... Till date 247 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed. This includes 6 deaths and 59 discharges," the department said in a mid-day situation report.

Among the 15 new cases thirteen are contacts of patients already tested positive, while one from Dodabballapura in Bengaluru Rural is with a travel history to Delhi, the other from Bengaluru city has Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI).

Among the 13 contact cases tested positive four are from Hubballi in Dharwad district, three each from Malavalli in Mandya district and Raibag in Belagavi, two each from Bidar, and one from Mudhol in Bagalkote district.

Three out of 15 new cases are children- a 8 year-old girl from Malavalli in Mandya, 16-year old girl from Bidar and 14-year old boy from Raibag in Belagavi.

From across the state most number of infections have been reported in Bengaluru with 77, followed by Mysuru (48) and Belagavi (17).

Those discharged include 27 patients from Bengaluru, nine from Mysuru, seven from Dakshina Kannada, six from Chikkaballapura, three from Davangere, two each from Uttara Kannada and Kalaburagi, and one each from Udupi, Dharwad and Kodagu.

Among the dead, two are from Kalaburagi and one each from Bengaluru, Bagalkote, Gadag and Tumakuru.