Nagara Panchami: Hindus in Mangaluru express reverence towards Serpent

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, Mar 25: The COVID-19 count in Karnataka went up by 10 on Wednesday, reaching 51. The 10 new positives included two girls aged seven and nine who contracted the infection from their father.

The 34-year-old man had returned from Amsterdam on March 19 and tested positive as the 17th confirmed case in Karnataka.

Though his family were kept in isolation and under quarantine in their house, the children developed a cold. They were confirmed for COVID-19 infection while their mother is still negative.

The government remained tightlipped over whether or not a 70-year-old woman from Gouribidanuru who was put under house quarantine and died on Wednesday morning, tested positive for COVID-19. Government officials would neither confirm nor deny anything on the results of tests on the woman.

This evening’s bulletin issued by the Karnataka health department continued to indicate the strong correlation of coronavirus infection and foreign travel.

Among the positive cases identified today were

A 63-year-old Bengaluru man and his 59-year-old wife, with a history of travel to Brazil and Argentina.
Two 26-year-old men with a history of travel to Spain and arrived back in Bengaluru via Dubai.
Two others, a 63-year-old woman and her 69-year-old husband, had a history of travel to Athens and London.
A 34-year-old man, a resident of Udupi, who returned from Dubai
A 37-year old woman, a resident of Chitradurga, with a history of travel to Guyana and arrived back in Bengaluru via Delhi
Speaking to the media, medical education minister K Sudhakar said health officials were apprehensive the positives may go up tonight.

Of the corona positive cases detected in Karnataka so far, three have been discharged after quarantine, and 47 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals in a stable condition. There has been one fatality.

As per a recommendation by the high-level health committee, the government has decided to convert the Bowring Hospital into a coronavirus treatment hospital facility along with the Rajiv Gandhi Hospital for Chest Diseases and Victoria Hospital. 

“The number of positive cases are growing at an alarming rate and the government needs more treatment facilities. The government is for burning of COVID-19 death cases. However, due to some religious practices, it has been decided they would be buried in 8 ft deep pits,'' Dr Sudhakar said.

Bengaluru, Feb 28: Bengaluru Police Commissioner Bhaskar Rao on Friday said that Section 144 will be imposed near Vidhana Soudha for Budget session starting from March 2.

"Section 144 of the CrPC (prohibits assembly of more than 4 people in an area) will be imposed in the area around Vidhana Soudha from March 2 to March 31 ahead of the Budget session,"Bhaskar Rao said.

The police said that they have intelligence inputs of protests near Vidhana Soudha.