Emirate Khader Bhai: Loved by everyone; hated by none

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 7: Karnataka government on Monday allowed bakeries and related product food units in the state to open and function with minimum staff amid a coronavirus nation-wide lockdown.

A circular issued by Rajendar Kumar Kataria, Secretary to the government said, "The Central government has permitted the functioning of food units engaged in bakery and biscuit, condiments, confectionery and sweet for manufacturing, supply and operating retail outlets with minimum staff/labour."

The circular said these units shall strictly follow the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Department of Health and Family Welfare, Karnataka government with regard to the preventive measures to be ensured for combating COVID-19.

"It is stated that all employers shall ensure that these units maintain high standard of health, hygiene, sanitation and social distancing. The units shall not permit serving/dining in the premises and only parcel/takeaways are permitted," the circular added.

Apr 12: The board and management of troubled NMC Healthcare should be held accountable for the financial irregularities, said Abdulaziz Al Ghurair, chairman of the UAE Banks Federation.

"Banks have dealt with the exposure professionally and they lent to a company which was listed on FTSE-100 index with world-class regulator and the world's largest audit firm doing their audit. Even if they present their balance sheet today, people will still lend to them. This is a world-class fraud and the management and board members should be held accountable. We should have a different track to handle this company. It is not a normal track that we can go," Al Ghurair said during a virtual press conference on Sunday.

It is estimated that the more than 80 local, regional and international banks have exposure to healthcare firm. The UAE bourses had asked all the listed companies in the UAE to announce their exposure. The UAE banks last week announced nearly Dh10 billion exposure to NMC Healthcare, which is owned by the billionaire BR Shetty.

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank has the highest exposure to NMC at Dh3 billion. Dubai Islamic Bank and its subsidiary Noor Bank announced Dh2 billion exposure while Emirates NBD and its Shariah-compliant unit Emirates Islamic Bank revealed Dh747.34 million exposure. Ajman Bank has Dh151.8 million while Al Salam Bank pegged its exposure at Dh161.5 million. All these lenders revealed their exposure for the first time on Sunday.

Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank said it had extended Dh1.07 billion in financing to NMC Healthcare, and an additional Dh113.67 million exposure to Islamic bonds issued by NMC.National Bank of Fujairah pegged its exposure to NMC at Dh289.1 million, while Sharjah-based United Arab Bank said its exposure was Dh135.3 million.

NMC recently revised its debt position to $6.6 billion, well above earlier estimates.

London's High Court last week placed hospital operator NMC Health into administration, on the application of Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank.

"I know leading bank in UAE have already legal guardian of the company so now management cannot hide anything. The new team will manage and discover what happened," said Al Ghurair.