What’s so provocative about Chhatrapati Shivaji killing Afzal Khan?

When Muslims in India start getting agitated over ‘threat/insult to Islam’ despite recorded history they are clearly motivated by the global Islamic brotherhood concepts. National interests are clearly not in play in such scheme of things. What ought to be blindingly obvious is needlessly obfuscated by the apologists. One would surmise that they are intentional on their part. After all if so many can see what’s going on, surely they can too.

The quality of public debate in India is remarkably lacking in quality. Any debate on our national TVs is nothing more than provoked discussions, angry reactions with little regard to facts, objectivity and national interest. Fortunately, many bloggers give hope.

Rape on Hindu girls by Muslims in Sindh, Pakistan(Not only Hindu girls, their own wives and cousins) is a non issue to media. But Varun Gandhi saying “Anyone who is against his religion, he will chop their hands” is a calamity.
Betryal to the country by having contact with LeT is a non-issue. but killing an islamic terrorist is certainly an issue.
Ajmal kasab, afzal guru trying to wage war on country is certainly not a crime, it is just another pick pocketing sort of thing and which shall be handled with care. He should be offered Urdu news paper as if he is a political prisoner. Now I’m afraid someone from islamic community will offer bride to him and then he will a legitimate Indian-Muslim.
Afzal guru do not need any punishment.

Why are we so tolerant wny?
My heart cries every day, every hour. I’m shocked to my roots, where the Maratha Warrior who saved this land from yavans and islamic invadors is becoming an provocative entity. I’m feeling that all the people out there have sold there freedom to the islam religion and christians.

I see a demise of nationhood.
I see my country and state dying and commiting ‘HARA-KIRI’ in front of these idiots.

**NOTE: I’m not blaming all muslims.**

Dear Shantanu

“CDs distributed by some Maharashtra BJP leaders”

What for did the CD distributed by a political party have to talk about history? Is BJP a political party or the Indian history association? Sounds suspiciously to me like mixing of religion with politics – which is typical of what BJP does. It is just not on for a political party to talk about history and promote mythological figures. That is rank opportunism and demagogy.

History is gone and over. Political parties are supposed to talk about current problems. Let’s get good parties in India that don’t mislead and emotionally destroy India.

Regards
Sanjeev

dear shantanu,

But why then is IBN Live now (Sept 16, 2009) telecasting the MNS “sponsored” violence which is also “inflammatory” as far as Bihari-Marathi relationships go.

Or am I so naive that i am missing something that everybody else in this world knows?

rgds/sridhar

Gypsy,

> It is sickening to see such partisanship, especially from a person like you, Mr. Sabhlok,.

Not fair at all.

You can say the same about Mr. Bhagwat’s reluctance towards highlighting BJP’s recent infighting as pointed out by another reader Vivekam Vairagyam.

Dr. Sabhlok is right. He’s talking about what a political party. A political party should avoid engage in history wars. Leave it to the academicians. But then, applying the same principle to FTI, one would wonder why this blog is listed on FTI site! On an average posts here address history (provocatively) most of the times than current events. I hardly notice any Dalit or Muslim posting any comments (most debates are one sided) and less posts addressing the real problems (poverty, education, basic health care, etc) which affect not just HINDUS but all CITIZENS of India..

As Dr. Sabhlok pointed out once on this blog, comments on this blogs are mostly chest-thumping by people who have too much time on computers.

Mr. Bhagwat, don’t mistake me, this is your blog and you should absolutely have total freedom to choose your content. I find this blog provocative and good entertainment (in a sad way) but offering less real solutions to BIG problems.
Please feel free to remove this comment if you think it is offensive!

Seriously, Mr. Bhagwat and Dr. Sabhlok, you have a wonderful opportunity to use this blog to offer more POSITIVE solutions and how you can work together to solve the current problems than worrying about Afzal Khan. As Dr. Sabhlok said, history is come and gone. Please increase the ratio of (Posts offering positive solutions)/(Posts with provocative history topics) by a order of magnitude. Just my honest 2 cents. Feel free to ignore it.

We human beings are very complex individuals. Meanwhile, I will go and protect my heritage, ancestry and culture which I got from my ancestors in Africa.

@trying_to_help

Thank you for your helpful response. I am afraid you seem to have followed the comment and missed content of the blog and the videos which this blog circulated. Moreover, the focus also appears to have been lost: the present discussion is about what is happening in Meeraj and Sangli. My objection is about the partisan action taken by the police and commentators alike: A man from the minority community climbs on the roof of the vehicle of the Superintendent of Police, waves a green flag and what does the SP do? He lets loose his policemen with lathies and beats up people from the majority community. I had been a senior officer of Indian paramilitary forces, often called for Internal Security duties. The first principle in riot control is the minimum use of force, and the second, no partiality in dealing with miscreants; protect life and property irrespective of the faith and religion of the affected people. We did precisely that in 1969 riots in Ahmedabad, 1970 in Bhivandi and elsewhere in the country. It is upsetting to see that now these principles are shelved to appease the power that be. In Maharashtra, where the present events took place, we know which party is in power. Yet, Mr. – I mean Dr. Sabhlok preferred to criticize the favorite whipping boy of Indian mainstream media. My angst is against double standards.

And you are right: people with too much time on computers do chest thumping. Is it why you and Dr. Sabhlok have joined the party in the present subject matter of this blog? Also thank you for reminding me of our African gene. However, do you practice what you preach? How many Africans have you invited in your parlor for tea? I have. I did not have to be reminded of my identity!

On a closing note, I want to say that I used a rather strong word (“it is sickening to see…” etc.) in my previous comment. My apologies to Dr. Sabhlok for that.

Mr.Bhagwat,

When will we be able to face up our past ? Your question reminds me towards the answer which Hindu radicals used to give as arguments to support the demolition of Babri mosque in 1992. The RSS and VHP people said that the mosque represented the symbol of Muslim dominance and injustice on Hindus, so demolishing the structure meant as taking revenge from Muslims for what their ruler did to innocent Hindus. The Hindu radicals asked themselves that why their society is not bold enough to face the past, and to take action to undo that. This argument was political but against the ethos of republic, such argument could only lead to instigate the religious identity based polity, and it played very well.

We need to look at this issue in more liberal way. Indeed it’s not about history but about identity based radicalized politics. Actually identity of any community(based on nationality, language, region, religion, race, caste etc) depends on more invisible bonds of emotions and less rational, reasoning elements.

In this case, showing the picture of Shivaji defeating Afzal Khan can be outrageous to certain section of the Muslim community. This does not mean that they don’t like Shivaji or they reject that part of history. In fact they(those who know about Mararashtra’s history) are quite aware of what some Muslim rulers did to Maratha and Sikh warriors. But showing that picture today(in Hindu majority India) sends a signal from the Maratha community to the Muslim one that: look! how our Shivaji(god like iconic nationalist warrior) defeated and punished your leader. On one side here it symbolizes the Maratha community as victorious and nationalist, on the other side, it asks the question about Muslims being true to India’s nationalism. So here the personality of Shivaji does not remain just a historical figure but moves far ahead on to become a symbol of the victorious Maratha community where as Afzal khan being a historical character takes the form of Muslim icon. This is because he fought, and got defeated for the interests of Muslims(in global view). So Muslims don’t see this picture in historical context but see it in emotional way, and find that majority Hindu-Maratha community want to menace them by their superiority in number. Therefore the emotion of feeling insecure converts Afzal khan from a traitor to a martyr. Ultimately this instigates a kind of separatist view and gethoization process in larger section of the Muslim people(but not all) which prepares a ground for religious based identity politics for both majority and minority.

Mr. Bhagwat, being a believer in liberal thoughts, one should not give ways to such issues because it does not include all community of our republic, it rather divides them into various category. Where as our efforts should be to understand that problems and encourage the peaceful co-existence of all communities within the boundary of India.
I think that there’re many other political issues which challenges the territorial integrity of India like Naxal movement, free human-right violation in the North-East and more importantly the issue of poverty and corruption in the whole country. One more issue needs our closer look is the regional disparity in terms of development between southern states and Hindi speaking states.

Lastly let me appreciate your efforts, Mr.Bhagwat, of posting everyday something new related to national and international politics. It seems you’ve good control on your time management. I’ll look forward to having your views on my way seeing the whole issue.

=>
(in Hindu majority India)
=>

Hmmmm…..when did the Hindus in India get united and became one monolith? Seems to me that Hindus are the minority in India, as there’s no unity among the different caste-based groups.

=>
Mr. Bhagwat, being a believer in liberal thoughts, one should not give ways to such issues because it does not include all community of our republic, it rather divides them into various category.
=>

You can’t please everyone all the time, and it is next to impossible to come up with something that will include each and every member of all communities of our republic. One way or the other, someone is not going to be happy.

Mr.Bhagwat,
People from every community look up to Shivaji as inspiration figure. Every political party in Maharashtra asks vote in elections by showing themselves a true follower of Shivaji(that’s not my topic here). No one from any community should and ask any questions at his statues being installed anywhere(the present controversy surrounding his statue worth 350 crores is because of drought and suicide committed by farmers, it does not mean that people don’t want his statue or picture to be shown or installed). People at large harbor a deep love for his historical achievements which they should. When I say people it means citizens of every community including Muslims admire him as Maratha hero. Everybody knows that his only adversary was the Mogul empire. So by showing him with Afzal khan does it pump extra love and respect in people’s mind? The answer is no!

People love his overall aura but may not like his specific picture of defeating a Mogul warrior. By showing him with Afzal Khan, a question arises in mind which is what is the need of showing this when we know that whom he defeated and how. We know that Indian Muslims (most)consider themselves as descendant of the Moguls. So showing Shivaji with a Mogul warrior gives a message of Maratha vs Muslims. I concede that it’s very emotional way of looking at things from their part if they do so. But at the same time, this is also worth questioning what is the need of showing him with Afzal khan; show him with his mother, his son or even Goddess Durga(as he is often shown). History is a book of lesson so it should be sometimes used selectively if certain points of it slightly tries to disturb the cord of today then just we should try to keep silence on that(or rather hide that). By keeping mum or hiding that part does not mean that the person whom you’re talking is not aware of that fact. In response that person will also accept and respect your story for the fact that you’ve shown regard for his history. Past is there to help us understand the present and to make our future better. We’re very much facing our past, we should mold it to make our present an atmosphere of mutual understanding.

We all agree that this mutual understanding should be based on shared ethos and culture. This very gesture is also a positive step, then other side will take reciprocate in that way.
If any of my writings appeared unpleasant to you, then I beg your pa

Well well! So as per Mr. Sanjeev Chh. Shivaji is a ‘mythological’ figure!

Such a shame that we have among us people who don’t respect ‘their’ history and don’t pay any regard to’their’ existsnce – I feel probably thats one of the reasons behind conversions…

Mr.Bhagwat,
Sorry to respond so late! Actually during the week, I hardly get time for myself.

I said about RSS & VHP giving that argument in response to demolition of the mosque because this is what I read and heard number of times from them at that time(1991-2). But I don’t have any reference to pass on to you. During my university studies at Varanasi, out of interest I used to go to listen to the talks given by RSS Sangh prachark in and out-side campus, this is where I heard how giving historical explanation they used to justify the demolition. The RSS is a big and old cultural organization, its humanitarian work is beyond doubt laudable, but their lectures are divisive too. Those who have gone to their shivir and heard them talking will agree with me.

I read the article whose link you’d sent to me. The article talks about Gulam Navi Azad’s brother’s opinion on the Ram temple issue. I don’t think anybody should give even a pinch of importance to what he said because we all know in what position he is saying that (after being denied a ticket from congress), so he could have easily reversed his statement if he had been given a ticket from congress. Firstly this is the way most politician (especially those who have no moral standing) behave; secondly being a brother of Gulam Navi Azad, there is no need to take his statement seriously. Gulam Navi himself practices politics of using rough controversial statements sometime to grab headlines or sometime to anger his anti-party. You must have heard his recent statement as health minister of curbing the country’s population growth which became a topic of joke in the media. Or you must be remembering his statement during 1997-8 election when he had called Vajpayee a wine lover and womanizer as counter attack in order to protect Sonia Gandhi. So all I want to say here is that his brother also loves making such statements to get his things done, and he’s neither a historian nor a muslim scholar, so let’s just ignore his words.

I hope I answered your questions.

@ kaffir
RSS is a cultural organisation, it raison d’etre is to generate cultural nationalism(at least as it claims to do) in every citizen of the indian « republic ». So they should not be selective in their approach by tilting towards one and rejecting others, because it’s against republic, as the latter does not discriminate people on such basis.

A particular religion might discriminate people among believer of one faith and that of others(though teaching does not allow, but it can be interpreted in wrong way according to the interests of some group).Passive discrimination is one thing but strategically divinding people within a nationalistic format(in a country where religion has already caused a division) is irrational and even un-nationalisitc (if this word exists). So such views cause all sorts of damage instead of serving any purpose to nation.

Exactly for the same reason, they (RSS) should not divide people in the name of Hindu and non-Hindu. Firstly because they don’t have a super magnifying glass through what they can see in the mind of all 14-15 crores of minority, and paint them with the same brush by calling them anti-indian. This is illogical and unethical.

Secondly, Gandhi & Gokhale were first nationalist then anything else(I don’t agree with you at all on them); thirdly, there’re (a)views(opinion) which almost all of us harbour; then (b)idea: when a view can be considered to be practicd then it is called idea; when the same idea can become so much popular that it can be used for entire society, then it becomes a (c)philosophy, it no more remains a view or idea. So what you and I have can be called opinion or view(that can be found in the world as much as you want). But what Gandhi had was and is a philosophy, because that was very well tested and practiced around the world; so calling his philosophy just a view shows sign of immaturity.

Ajitabh:

“A particular religion might [1] discriminate people among believer of one faith and that of others(though teaching does not allow [2], but it can be interpreted in wrong way according to the interests of some group).”

Your ultra soft criticism [1] and ignoring the facts [2] about the two monotheistic religions (and their history or persecution of infidels/pagans) tells me all I need to know. 🙂

Kaffir,

I liked the way you tried to make out a conclusion by deconstructing my words. I appreciate that, it seems you’ve been a journalist or teacher!
I think you understood something what I’ve not said. Let me explain,when I say “a particular religion might discriminate”, it means a particular form of religion which is here a radicalized form. Actually by my particular religion, I’m not indicating toward A or B religion, because radicalism exists in every religion. Here one needs to go a little deeper actually in non-brahmanic religion there are more scopes of radicalization because there’re more dogmatic, they’ve one sacred book, one priest (who exercised power heavily). But for Christianity, the enlightenment era and gradual progression of nation-state’s secularism left them(religious authority) with almost no power. But for Islam, such things did not happen; secondly democracy did not flourish in their world so another chance is there to get radicalized. But for Brahmanic religion, there should not be any such problem because all these religions (in India) they appeared first as school of thoughts, and none of them have inculcated dogmatic fashion. They were all open for reform according to time, that’s why so many religions originated, and lived together without much contradiction.

But today the way things happening in the country, it seems alarming call for future. Some group which claim to be representative of Hindus are trying to radicalize Hinduism(which it was never in the past); so they’re trying to make it something which is against its nature. In strong word, if I say they’re trying to Islamize(here I mean radical form of Islam, but not just global form of this religion) Hinduism. How can it be done and why? What’s is the need to do so? If one wants to make India a peaceful nation, then hinduize all other communities(it does not mean to saffronize or radically transform them into hindu). But it means, be so liberal, develop respect and understanding for other’s faith, so that others themselves will get dereligioninzed after sometime(I’m sure this word does not exist, it’s my fabricated one). So there’re two option: to Islamize Hinduism or dereligionize other faith(by practicing tolerant Hinduism for what it’s been known). The first brings destruction, and the second, peace and prosperity.

Thanks

The killing fields of Islam, this is a case of Good Terrorists killing the Bad Terrorists!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091014/ts_afp/pakistanunrestnorthwest

The forest department says that “Shivaji treacherously killed Afzal Khan”

Jai Hind!

Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) not to permit anyone to put up posters of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj killing Afzal Khan, a general of the Bijapur Sultanate, anywhere in the city.

Jai Hind!

People like Abhijit DAS & Sanjeev Sabhlok are a bigger threat to India than any jihadi terrorist because they try to whitewash history. They are very similar to the Neo Nazis who insist that the Holocaust never happened.

If one cannot display photos of Shivaji’s achievements in India in his home state then where does Abhijit propose Hindus display them in Pakistan & Bangladesh?

Have you no shame?

In Spain they are not ashamed of the reconquista which was much more brutal towards the invading Muslims than the Hindus were when they destroyed Muslim rule under the Marathas.

Sabhlok & his ilk will always make excuses for any Jihadi action. They specialize in blaming the victims.

“Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it”.

Sabhlok & his cronies want us to forget the brutality of Muslim rule and the continuing brutality of the Muslim community (anyone remember the mass expulsion of Kashmiri Hindus in 1989) so that their jihadi brothers can easily reconquer us “kaffirs” as they call us.