BJP MP warns ofHindu backlash' in Dakshina Kannada

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, Mar 15: The Karnataka government on Saturday said it would advice IT companies to allow employees to work from home as most coronavirus  affected patients or their relatives were from this sector.

"If anybody (IT companies) asks (employees to work in the office),I will speak to them through the deputy chief minister so that they take steps to issue a definite order. We have very clearly said, Stay Home, stay safe," medical education minister Dr K Sudhakar said. He recalled that the chief minister himself had issued a strict advisory to allow employees work from home.

The minister said the IT sector understands the gravity of the situation because they are educated, have travelled abroad and have more exposure to information world. "No action," he said to a question on what action would be taken against companies who do not follow the instructions.

"There is no action to be taken. We have not promulgated any law. It should be a kind of a cohesive approach from the government and the responsible citizen," he said.

The minister said he had also acted on the advice of Infosys Foundation chairperson Sudha Murty, who had told him that all areas where public and students gather, including malls, theatres, schools and colleges, should be closed.

Sudhakar claimed that the woman whose husband had tested positive for cornavirus here, had flown straight to Delhi from the city and had not come out of Bengaluru airport. He said the newly-wed couple came to Bengaluru airport on March 8 night and early on March 9, she flew alone to Delhi. From there she travelled to Agra by train. She did not come out of the airport, said the minister.

To a question on legal action being contemplated against her, the minister said he would take a call said he was not thinking of legal action at present and would take a call only after the woman, who has also tested positive for the virus, comes out of isolation. He insisted that the purpose of getting details was not to scare people.

On the preparedness in Kalaburagi, where the first Coronavirus death in India was reported, he said the administration had 'clamped down" the entire district. Meanwhile, the deputy commissioner of Ballari district ordered cancellation of tourists' entry to the world heritage site of Hampi from March 15 to 22 to prevent further spread of the virus.

Bengaluru, May 30: Health Minister B Sriramulu banned the consumption of chewing tobacco in public places on Saturday, which is marked as World Tobacco Day. The ban would include chewing paan masala and spitting in public places.

In June 2013, the state banned the manufacture, storage, sale, or distribution of gutka and paan masala containing tobacco or nicotine as ingredients to reduce the prevalence of tobacco use. On October 26, 2016, the state proscribed all kinds of chewing tobacco, containing tobacco or nicotine or both in accordance with the Supreme Court order.

Karnataka is the second state in India to ban e-cigarettes. The state also prohibited single cigarettes. Until September 2019, the state counselled 15,698 patients in tobacco cessation centres set up in private dental colleges.