Ram Puniyani
(Asian independent) Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is the most popular King in Maharashtra. Currently he is also being popularized in other places of the country as the major Hindu nationalist icon. Controversies have surrounded him time and over again. His popularity is not restricted to one section of society but cuts across different sections of society. His anniversary is celebrated with great enthusiasm all over the state and powadas (Folk songs) praising him are sung all over the state. The controversies surface as his interpretation by diverse sections of society is very diverse.
The earlier controversies were around his statue committee being headed by Babasaheb Purandare, as many accused him of presenting Maharaj in Brahminical colours. Similarly, the Handbook of history prepared by the Human rights activist Teesta Setalvad recounted the incident of Shivaji not being crowned by Brahmins as he was not a kshatriya. At yet another time the arch prepared during Ganeshosva (Ganesh Festival) showing Shivaji stabbing Afzal Khan with a dagger provoked hate sentiments amongst a large section of society.
Currently two controversies have come up. One was the statement of Bageshwar Dham baba at an RSS function in Nagpur. Incidentally Dhirendra Krishna Shastri, the Baba, is resorting to blind faith techniques to attract a large following. He takes out a chit to show the credentials of the people by using various tricks. His following is growing to the extent that even retired Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai visited him with his family to seek his blessings. Shyam Manav, working against blind faith has observed that during the central rule of BJP, the blind faith has gone up and Baba’s have proliferated.
Anyway, in the RSS function this charlatan Baba stated that Shivaji Maharaj was tired of wars so he went to his Guru Samarth Swami Ramdas, put his crown on his feet and requested him to take over his kingdom. There were two gross fallacies in this statement. First that Ramdas was not his guru, this is a make believe Brahminical version of Shivaji narrative. The matter had gone to the Court which gave the verdict that Ramdas was not Shivaji’s Guru. There is no mention of such an incident in Shivaji’s life. This was stated in presence of RSS Chief Dr. Mohan Bhagwat, Central Minister Nitin Gadkari and Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. None of whom objected to his statement.
When the hue and cry was raised Baba apologized saying that he draws his inspiration of Hindu Rashtra from Shivaji’s Hindvi swaraj among other things. This again is far from the truth. Shivaji’s Hindvi swaraj was area specific, Hind being a geographic term rather than a religious term. Shivaji’s life exemplifies this. He respected all religions. His army had nearly 12 generals who were Muslims, Siddi Sambal, Ibrahim Gardi, Daulat Khan among them. He had also got a mosque made in his forte of Raigad for his Muslim officers and subjects. His confidential secretary was Maulana Haider Ali. He respected women to the core. His army had brought the beautiful daughter in law of Muslim ruler of Bassein as a gift for him. He had morals enough to return her to her family home with due respect. The Brahminical version based on which this Baba had made his remarks is the narrative which RSS promotes.
The other controversy relates to BJP ally Eknath Shinde Shiv Sena MLA from Buldhana, Sanjay Gaikwad. Shiv Sena MLA Sanjay Gaikwad triggered a controversy by threatening to “chop off the tongue” of a publisher regarding the 1988 book ‘Shivaji Kon Hota?‘ (Who was Shivaji?) by Govind Pansare. Gaikwad objected to the alleged disrespectful, singular reference to Shivaji Maharaj in the title and content, accusing it of distorting history. He called up the distributor of the book Prashant Ambi threatening him that he will meet the same fate as Govind Pansare. Just to remind, Govind Pansare was killed during a morning walk, mostly by those belonging to Hindu nationalist groups. In a recorded phone call, Gaikwad allegedly used abusive language and threatened Kolhapur-based publisher Prashant Ambi, telling him that he would “meet the same fate as Pansare”.
Govind Pansare, the CPI leader and rationalist activist wrote this book, after painstaking research and titled in Marathi, Shivaji Kon Hota (Who was Shivaji). Addressing him in singular form. This form is used for most intimate persons. Gaikwad is objecting to that as an insult to Shivaji. The book was published in 1988 and since then has sold lakhs of copies and has been translated in many languages. In a way this has become a basic book on Shivaji for average people. It shows the concern of Shivaji for raiyats (poor farmers) and respect for all religions. His grandfather Maloji Rao Bhosle had prayed at a Sufi saint (Shah Sharif) Dargah, as he had no children. Later when he got two sons, he named them Shahji and Sharifji. Shivaji was son of Shahji Bhosle.
He built his kingdom by attacking the neighbouring Hindu Kings like Chandra Rao More. In his fight with Afzal Khan, the general of Adil shah of Bijapur, he was given the iron claws by a Muslim bodyguard, Rustom-e-Jaman. Interestingly Afzal khan had performed a Yagna through local Brahmins to defeat Shivaji. Also, his secretary was Krishnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni. Interestingly Shivaji’s humane values were matchless. He did kill Afzal Khan but later he also built a tomb for Afzal Khan, which is present even today. The likes of Gaikwad and Hindu nationalist narratives omit these aspects of Shivaji to present him as an anti-Mulim King, which he was not. In Maharashtra and now all over India the propaganda is that Shivaji was anti-Muslim king. This narrative falls flat if we study the life and work of Shivaji. His main concern was the poor peasants for whose protection he stopped the atrocities of middle men, to a great relief for the poor peasants.
So, the Brahminical tendencies interpret and propagate Maharaj as anti-Muslim, distorting the whole truth, this is what Gaikwad is aiming at. Dhirendra Shastri and RSS combine want to project it for their agenda of Hindu Rashtra, while his Hindvi was not synonymous with Hindu Rashtra.
The most interesting part of the whole controversy is that most book sellers are facing the demand for this book in increasing numbers. At the same time the Human rights groups are organizing the mass reading of the book, a very healthy response!
