Minister Poojary hails Mangaluru police in R-Day address

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, July 17: An infant with heart-related complications died after 10 private hospitals in the city allegedly refused to admit him over coronavirus fears.

In search of a hospital to treat his one-month-old child, the helpless father drove around for 200km in the city. The child breathes its last after suffering for 36 hours.

The infant’s health worsened around 11am on Sunday. “A doctor from a nearby clinic visited our house and said the baby had heart-related issues. As advised, we decided to shift the child to a private hospital,” the father said. The family lives in Basaveshwaranagar.

The parents went to several private hospitals, but in vain. “We visited hospitals in Bavaveshwaranagar, Chord Road, Sheshadripuram, Goraguntepalya and Yeshwanthpur. None of them agreed to treat our baby, and we returned home at night,” the father said. 

“On Monday morning, we started the journey again. This time, we went to a hospital near Jayadeva flyover. We were driving near Marathahalli when our child stopped breathing. We rushed to a nearby private hospital, where doctors declared him brought dead,” he said.

Mangaluru/Udupi, Jul 25: Karnataka’s twin coastal districts of Dakshina Kannada and Udupi recorded 400 new covid-19 cases and nine fatalities in past 24 hours. While DK’s death toll mounted to 115, Udupi’s toll mounted to 15.

Dakshina Kannada

Dakshina Kannada alone recorded 218 new covid cases and eight deaths. The total number of positive cases mounted to 4,612. Out of these, 2,370 cases are currently active. As many as 2,127 persons have recovered and been discharged.

Of the 218 who tested positive on Saturday, 46 are primary contacts, 87 have ILI symptoms, 15 have SARI symptoms, and contacts of 70 are being traced.

Among the eight deaths that occurred on Saturday, the first is of a 44-year-old man from Mangaluru. He was admitted to private hospital on July 23, and breathed his last on same day. He was suffering from sepsis with septic shock and viral infection. 

The second is 78-year-old man from Bhatkal. He was admitted to a private hospital on July 18, and passed away July 23. He suffered from refractory hypoxemia, refractory ARDS and secondary bacterial infection. 

The third is an 88-year-old man from Mangaluru. He was admitted to a private hospital on July 10, and passed away on July 23. He suffered from hypoxemia, refractory ARDS and renal failure. 

The fourth is a 68-year-old man from Bantwal. He was admitted to a private hospital on June 7, and passed away on July 23. He suffered from septic shock. 

The fifth is a 68-year-old man from Mangaluru. He was admitted to a private hospital on July 17, and passed away on July 23. He was suffering from ARDS and Acute coronary event. 

The sixth is a 75-year-old man from Mangaluru. She was admitted to private hospital on July 14 and passed away on July 24. He was suffering from refractory hypoxemia, refractory ARDS and respiratory distress. 

The seventh is a 76-year-old female from Mangaluru. She was admitted to private hospital on July 21 and passed away on July 24. She was suffering from refractory hypoxemia, refractory ARDS, viral pneumonia, T2 DM and hypertension. 

The eighth is a 53-year-old female. She was admitted to private hospital on July 24 and passed away on July 24. She was suffering from sepsis with multi-organ dysfunction, cardiogenic shock, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and diabetic foot on right side LRTI.

Udupi

Udupi recorded 182 new covid cases in past 24 hours and the total reached 3,218. As many as 2,008 patients have been discharged so far including 79 on Saturday, and 1,199 cases are currently active. 

Among the new cases, 96 are in Udupi, 37 in Kundapur, and 49 in Karkala. They include 109 men and 68 women, and two boys and three girls. As many as 539 are under home isolation.

As many as 15 covid related deaths have occurred in the district so far including the one on Saturday. 

45-year-old man from Kollur was admitted to KMC Hospital, Manipal, as he was suffering from lung cancer. He was tested positive for coronavirus and then shifted to covid-19 hospital, where he breathed his last.