Woman sets herself on fire; dies after giving statement against hubby, in-laws

Bengaluru, Jan 2: Accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of "neglecting" Karnataka ahead of his visit on Thursday, the state Congress questioned why he did not give adequate relief and pay a visit to the state, when most of its parts were affected by severe floods last year.

Modi will begin his two-day visit to the state on Thursday afternoon.

The Congress' Karnataka unit in a series of tweets also questioned the Prime Minister about not conferring the "Bharat Ratna" on Shivakumara Swamiji of Siddaganga Math, who passed away last year at the age of 111 years.

"Why you did not visit the state, when it was affected by floods? Despite the damage of over Rs 1 lakh crore why you did not declare it as a national disaster? Why you did not give interim relief? When the state government has given a report that the damage caused was to the tune of Rs 35,300 crore why did you sit quiet by giving just Rs 1,200 crore," the state Congress tweeted.

As many as 103 taluks in 22 districts of Karnataka were affected due to unprecedented floods in August, in which over 80 people were killed.

Around seven lakh people were shifted to safe areas during the deluge and thousands of houses were damaged.

In October, various parts of the state faced a deluge for the second time in two months, killing over 13 people and damaging thousands of houses.

Asking as to why the Centre was not giving the state's share of GST amount adequately, the Congress questioned as to why dues under MNREGA programme were not paid so far, and why Karnataka was being neglected while allocating grants.

Questioning Modi as to why he did not visit Tumakuru when Shivakumara Swamiji of Siddaganga Math passed away, the principal opposition party in the state Assembly, also sought to know why the seer was not conferred with the Bharat Ratna yet.

It also pointed out that former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah had written a letter in this regard in January 2018.

The Congress has also hit out at the BJP-led Central government over imposition of Hindi language by neglecting regional languages and mother tongue.

The Prime Minister will kickstart his visit to the state by paying tributes to the late pontiff's 'Gadduge' (final resting place) at the Math premises near Tumakuru.

Later, he will attend an event organised to give away Krishi Karman awards and to distribute fishing equipment at the government college ground in Tumakuru, before leaving for Bengaluru where he will be attending a DRDO event.

On Friday he will be inaugurating 107th Indian Science Congress here.

Udupi, May 23: Five more persons tested positive for coronavirus in the coastal district of Udupi today. 

They include three men aged 37, 55, 31 and two women aged 48 and 34. 

Among them four are returnees from Mumbai and one is foreign returnee.

With this the total number of covid-19 cases in the district rose to 55.

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.