Communal clashes in Bihar after video on deities goes viral on WhatsApp

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.

In the wake of Saudi Arabia's assurance that Masjid al-Haram of Makkah and Masjid an-Nabawi of Madinah will be opened for believers after some days, a message has gone viral on social media claiming that both the holy mosques will open on Ramadan 8 (May 1).

The message which was widely circulated on Facebook and WhatsApp, also contained certain condition such as people should fetch their own prayer mats and that they should not use the washrooms in the mosques. 

Clarification

Meanwhile, the authorities of the two holy mosques, issued a clarification that the claims made in the viral post are false and baseless.

"The message being circulated about the opening date for Haramiain (two holy mosques) for public is completely baseless and false. The suspension of prayers for general public is still in effect," they said in a social media post.

Bengaluru, Jul 26: A year-long probe by Coffee Day Enterprises Ltd (CDEL) has found that its late founder V G Siddhartha routed Rs 2,693 crore out of the company to Mysore Amalgamated Coffee Estates Ltd (MACEL), another privately-owned entity of him.

The MACEL owes Rs 3,535 crore to subsidiaries of Coffee Day Enterprises as of July 31, 2019 of which only Rs 842 crore was accounted.

"Therefore, a sum of Rs 2,693 crore is the incremental outstanding that needs to be addressed," said the report of an investigation headed by Ashok Kumar Malhotra, a retired DIG of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and assisted by law firm Agastya Agastya Legal.

Siddhartha was found dead in early August 2019, and many suspected that he had committed suicide.

Steps are being taken by subsidiaries of CDEL for recovery of dues from MACEL, the company said.

"The board authorised the Chairman to appoint an ex-judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, or any other person of eminence, to suggest and oversee actions for recovery of the dues from MACEL and to help on any other associated matters," it said in regulatory filings at stock exchanges late on Friday.

The probe further gives clean chits to the Income Tax Department and the private equity firms who Siddhartha in his parting letter had alleged of harassment.

"We have not been provided with any documentary evidence to draw an inference that there may have been any advertent or inadvertent harassment from the Income Tax Department," said the probe report.

The probe also highlighted severe liquidity crunch at CDEL in the build-up to Siddhartha's death.

A committee supported by senior professionals was formed to protect the interest of all stakeholders. CDEL said the debt levels which were about Rs 7,200 crore on March 31, 2019 have been brought down significantly by Rs 4,000 crore. The present debt of the group is around Rs 3,200 crore.

"The disinvestment process in the group continues and we are confident to have effective solution to all stakeholders," it said.