People of Bantwal will make you MLA once again: Poojary tells Ramanath Rai

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, Jul 8: The expert committee constituted by the Karnataka government to look into imparting online education in the wake of the COVID-19 lockdown submitted its report on Tuesday to the Minister for Primary and Secondary Education, S Suresh Kumar.

Amid growing pressure by educational institutions to allow them to run online classes for the students, the government set up the committee headed by noted educationist M K Sridhar.

The Minister told reporters that some schools wanted to run online classes, including for LKG and UKG students. It had also come to the government's notice that schools were reportedly charging hefty fees in the name of online teaching, he added.

"To address the concerns of parents, schools, and the future of the children, the committee was formed,"Kumar said. He further said that the government would study the recommendations and hold discussions with officials and various stakeholders before arriving at a decision.

The Education Department said that the committee, in its report, titled "Continuation of Learning in School Education of Karnataka: Guidelines During COVID-19 Pandemic for Technology Enabled Education and Beyond", has recommended teaching online or by using printed material. The committee suggested that children in the age group of three to six be taught online by way of story-telling, rhymes and games strictly in the presence of parents thrice a week just for one session a day For students from class one to three, it advised two periods a day and three days a week for online teaching.

Students from class three to five would have classes five days a week and two classes for 30 minutes a day. For students from class six to eight, there could be three classes a day for a duration of 30 minutes to 45 minutes each, while for students of class nine and 10 there would be four sessions a day between 30 and 45 minutes each.

The committee also suggested usage of Doordarshan and Akashwani for the government school children. Suresh Kumar said there were a few petitions filed in the Karnataka High Court regarding online teaching to the children.

Mangaluru, May 22: An elderly cardiac patient from Dakshina Kannada, who was stranded in Saudi Arabia due to covid-19 lock-down, has finally reached his homeland thanks to the timely intervention by Humanity Forum Jubail and Indian Social Forum.

The elderly man hailing from Kadaba area of Dakshina Kannada was admitted to a hospital in Madinah. However, his condition continued to worsen due to lack of proper treatment. The efforts by his family members to bring him back home had not yielded results.

Meanwhile, one of the relatives of the patient, Ansari Suratkal, who happens to be a DKSC activist, brought the issue to the notice of the Karnataka unit of the Indian Social Forum in Dammam. ISF contacted Humanity Forum president Zakariya Jokatte, who helped the patient to speak directly union minister D V Sadananda Gowda in a video conference organised by coastaldigest.com.

Humanity Forum also persuaded the Indian Embassy to allow the stranded cardiac patient to fly back to India through Dammam-Bengaluru repatriation flight on May 20. 

However, it was not easy for the patient to travel from Madinah to Dammam International Airport due to lock-down and curfew. ISF not only obtained travel permission for him but also arranged vehicle. Jeddah and Riyadh units of ISF helped in obtaining permission letter in their respective places in spite of travel ban imposed by the police. Madinah unit of ISF arranged vehicle for transportation. Zakariya Jokatte bore the air ticket and other expenses of the patient.