Coastal Karnataka has become a hotbed of ‘jihadi activities: Shobha in Lok Sabha

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, Jan 10: Working President of Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee, Eashwar Khandre on Friday said that his party has extended its support to the demand made by the former chief minister of Karnataka, HD Kumaraswamy, that a House Committee should be formed to probe into Mangaluru violence.

Emphasising the need for a judicial probe into the incident, Khandre said, "Congress has always said that the truth should prevail and that there should be a judicial inquiry and investigation by a sitting Supreme Court judge or a High Court judge into the incident."

"We support his (HD Kumaraswamy) statement that a House Committee should be set up to probe into the incident of Mangaluru violence. Two innocent people lost their lives during the anti-CAA protest, it is very unfortunate," he added.

Two people were killed in Mangaluru in the alleged police firing after protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act turned violent on December 19.

The Act grants Indian citizenship to refugees from Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist and Parsi communities fleeing religious persecution from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh who entered India on or before 31, 2014.

Mangaluru, Jan 26: Minister for Muzrai, Inland Water Transport, Port and Fisheries Kota Srinivas Poojary in his Republic Day address praised the Dakshina Kannada district and Mangaluru city units of Karnataka police.

Poojary, also district in-charge minister, was speaking after unfurling the National flag as a part of 71st Republic Day celebrations held at Nehru Maidan in the city on Sunday.

He said that the police department had been successful in tackling the challenges posed by anti-social elements to the law and order situation from time to time.

He also lauded the police department for effectively handling the recent bomb threat incident at Mangalore International Airport.

He said, the state government is committed to protect the welfare of the oppressed and backward classes, minority, women, farmers, differently abled and the elderly.

“People from all these sections are guaranteed government benefits in one way or the other,’’ the minister said and called upon the people to strive towards social harmony and to help the departments concerned in keeping anti-social elements away.

The state government will release its share of Rs 4,000 to the farmers under Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Yojana, to which Central government has credited Rs 6,000 per eligible farmer. As many as 1,33,247 farmers are benefited by the scheme in the district, the minister said.

Stating that the coastal region of Karnataka has been placed in the ninth position in the country in fisheries, Poojary said that the coastal line of Karnataka, comprising backwaters and inland water, houses immense resource for fishes.

“Thrust will be laid on boat tourism and development of ports in the coastal districts,’’ he said.

The minister, meanwhile, said that the state government had implemented various programmes for the development of fishermen community.

“Loans to the tune of Rs 60.54 crore availed by 23,000 women belonging to fishing community will be waived. Diesel subsidies amounting to Rs 28.09 crore has been transferred to the bank accounts of owners of 954 mechanized boats during the year 2019-20. As many as 2,500 houses have been sanctioned under Matsyashraya scheme,’’ Poojary said.

Dakshina Kannada district has incurred a loss of Rs 893 crore during the recent floods. Financial assistance has been extended to 1,914 families affected by the floods to buy essential commodities, he said.

Services recognised

The minister thanked the Central government for announcing Padma Vibhushan awards to late Vishwesha Theertha Swami and George Fernandez and Padma Shri award to Harekala Hajabba.

‘’The selfless services to the nation by these stalwarts have been recognised,’’ he said. Educationist Harekala Hajabba was felicitated on the occasion.

Zilla Panchayat President Meenakshi Shanthigodu, MLAs D Vedavyas Kamath, Dr Y Bharat Shetty and U T Khader, MLCs Ivan D’Souza and S L Bhoje Gowda were present. Various troupes conducted march past on the occasion. Schoolchildren took part in cultural programmes.