Yenepoya Foundation invites applications for scholarships

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, Feb 1: The police have arrested two miscreants belonging to a saffron outfit after they threatened students in the city who were protesting the firing incident near Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia, telling them they would meet the same fate as the injured student.

Saffron extremist Gopal Sharma had opened fire at students protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act near the Delhi varsity on Thursday, injuring one.

The Bengaluru incident took place at Maurya Circle, where the nightlong demonstration against the Jamia firing and CAA began around 7.30pm. By 11pm, the number of protesters reduced to 30 but the group decided to stay back after getting the news of another alleged attack on women and Jamia students by Delhi police.

According to Adrian, a student who was at the scene, the small group of protesters stayed within a barricaded area on the road, chanting slogans, singing patriotic songs and playing music. “While we were raising anti-CAA slogans, two men from among us began shouting pro-CAA slogans. The duo was unknown and when we looked at them, they quietly moved away,” said Adrian, adding they were drunk and returned after a few minutes.

Saqib Idrees, another student protester, said the duo began to issue verbal threats. “They threatened us in Kannada that they would repeat the Jamia incident in Bengaluru,” said Saqib, adding the duo also taunted them saying ‘it’s not CAA down down, but you all will be brought down’.

When the students questioned the miscreants, cops stationed at the spot detained the duo. “Police were very cooperative. Almost 20 personnel were with us till 5am,” said Saqib.

Meanwhile, a friend of the duo watched the drama from a distance and approached the protesters to apologise on their behalf. “He said they belonged to the working class and FIRs would destroy their lives. He apologised to us and we decided to let the matter go. After all, we are Gandhians,” added Saqib.

Adrian said though the two men were drunk, their threats exposed their ideology. After the duo was detained, the students continued their protest till 5am and dispersed after singing the national anthem.

According to High Grounds police, the men are bank employees and were detained for disturbing the protesters at Maurya Junction. “They are from Andhra Pradesh and work in a PSU bank in the city. One of them is set to get married in February. He had thrown a party for his other friends for the same reason. The duo was drunk when confronted by the protesters. We booked a case of public nuisance and let them off after a warning,” police said.

Jan 14: A police complaint was lodged on Tuesday against BJP West Bengal unit president Dilip Ghosh for his threat to "beat up" and "shoot' " anti-CAA protesters, whom he called "infiltrators".

The complaint was registered in Ranaghat police station of Nadia district by a Trinamool Congress worker Krishnendu Banerjee, who alleged that Ghosh was inciting communal passion.

Addressing a party rally on Sunday in Ranathat, about 80 km from Kolkata, Ghosh went ballistic, saying the governments in BJP-ruled Assam, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh have shot dead "like dogs" those protesting against the new Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

Alleging there were one crore infiltrators in the state, Ghosh had accused them of destroying public property worth Rs 500-600 crore during the violent protests against the CAA last month

"Friends, please know these people who are opposing Hindus and Bengalis. In whose interest are they doing this? There are one crore infiltrators. They are having their meals and staying here on our money".

He accused the state's Mamata Banerjee government of remaining silent a spectator to the violence.

"This (violence) happened because there was neither any baton charge, nor firing, nor was any FIR filed. Why? Didi's police did not arrest anybody... because they vote for her".

He then referred to the three states ruled by the BJP.

"In Assam, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh, our governments have shot dead these devils like dogs. They were taken elsewhere and then again cases were filed against them. They will come here, eat, stay, and then destroy property. Do they think this is their zamindari?"

He had said once a BJP government was installed in Bengal, "We will hit them with sticks, shoot them and also send them to jail. Our governments have done exactly that. Mamata Banerjee doesn't have the guts to do anything".

However, his incendiary comments did not meet the approval of sections in the party.

Union Minister Babul Supriyo came out with a tweet slamming Ghosh and distancing the BJP from the comments.

"Very irresponsible of Dilip Da to have said what he said. It is a figment of his imagination... BJP governments in UP and Assam have never resorted to shooting people for whatever reason," he tweeted.

Supriyo's tweet was retweeted by nominated Rajya Sabha member Swapan Dasgupta, considered close to both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah.

But Ghosh did not budge and aggressively asked whether the party was being run by Shah or Supriyo.

"People comment according to their understanding. What I feel is that our governments have done it, and so I said all that. If we get a chance we will also do such things," he said, sticking to his earlier comments.

Supriyo also hit back. "Just as he has remarked 'whatever Babul Supriyo has understood he has said', similarly I am saying this is Dilip da's personal opinion, and it has no connection with the party".