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.
Responding to queries of media persons regarding the anti-hijab agitation in some colleges in the state by Sangah Parivar backed students, the minister said thathijab' should not be identified with any religion.
Comments
Sreenivasa for you if u say all muslims goto GCC country to follow the rukes of islam thn were you will send the to the rajsthani women everyone cover there head even we cant see there face until they show there face and even many hindus also use to cover there head with there saree and were you will send thm can you tell me whn you people do pooja u also cover your head with ur saree or duppata wht abt tht were you will send GCC or the other country do u have dont blame other religons they do wht they blive india is not made only for RSS and hindus india is of maltiple religon and maltiple caste and multiple festivle dont blame others b like a brother if u cant let others live like brothers dont try to do brain wash of good hindus ok
@shrinivas.
That means Sita mata is Muslim. we can see that Sita Mata is wearing hijab in all her pictures and idols.
Dear Srinivas, the comments from your side shows how much childish you are. If eductaed, they will utter these type of words. India Is the country for all religon and practicing their faith is given to every one by constitution. If you think that you are not happy with this , you can search for the place of your choice , where you can practice your faith. So don't try to misguide the people. Simply relcoate yourself to the place where you can practice your religion. India is not suitable for people like you. Because in india every one want to live togtehr. If we united we can develop. If we devided we will perish. That what otehr countries want with india.
@ Srinivasa, why you people are wearing threads around wrist and Panganama on foreheads.... Any one is opposing... that is your culture and ideology .....Dear Sini, have you checked the reality... have you seen girls covering their faces in the CLASS ROOM
@srinivaasa. If Hindus want hindutwa and blah blah blah let them go to Nepal. India is the country of Muslims, Hindus, christian, and many more .. in short it's the country of Indians. And coming back to sharia.. it's the constitution rights what Muslims
whether you take it as positive or negative, my comments upon the subject is: Dear non hijab ladies, Kindly don't start to wear hijab. you want to expose your figures to public and public simply enjoys it. i too feeling lot of things in my mind. it just because of you only force me to think such manner. specially young ladies (College Students) whoever not wearing hijab please don't wear. if you start wear it is very boring to come out from the home.
Good move from the education minister, thank you sir. India is a secular nation and anyone can follow their own tradition and custom.
@Sreenivas, dont provoke the matter, instead of wasting your time in getting yourself provoked please understand with any good muslim person about Sharia Law by that you will come to know what Islam is and what it teaches, you said to follow sharia we should go to muslim countries (LOL). Everywhere you find Islam you will find sharia law. My brother please dont provoke any matter and dont come to conclusion soon.
Such issues began only after communal force came into power,
If sita mata can wear hijab. Then all hindu womens should wear hijab.
Add new comment