Review: Shivaji - the Grand Rebel
Whether you are one of those who have never heard of Shivaji (most people) or someone who knows all about Shivaji and his contribution to Hinduism and Hindu history, you will love this book. Written in the 1930s by an English author in Colonial India in the midst of the Indian freedom movement, this book recounts what many regard as an earlier freedom movement of the Hindus against another imperialism. Although ‘The Grand Rebel’ was written for an English audience, every Hindu should read it.
August 21st, 2006 at 7:39 pm
the trouble with hindus is that they are too wraped up in their own dogma to see and celebrate their famous people in history.
we bemoan our fate about muslim rule and attrocities commited by them rather than excepting that the hindus have been and are still a devided society . a me me me group.
first and foremost the hindus have to come to terms that they are not too good at supporting their fellow hindu brotherin . in contrast take the examples of the jews! that is what you call solidarity in a religion.
secondly it is time we start being proud of our religion and be prepared to shout from rooftop about it . also promote our past hindu leaders who fought and enhanced hindu culture. take a leaf out of jewish culture.
thirdly look at the westerners ie white westerners who have taken on certain hindu sects and promoted it and have huge beautifull places built enhancing for those beliefs . show me exaples of what hindus have done ?
so come on you hindus if you are true beliver of the religion , be prepared to put your hand in the pocket to promote and increase the profile of hinduism . support your fellow hindu brotherin in whatever capability you can. take a leaf from the mosques where they collect certain amount of money from each member and use the funds to assist those in need also help in buying houses for their members.
August 23rd, 2006 at 9:53 pm
^ Urm, Ash, I think u’ve gone totally of the point. What you have said is nothing to do with the review of SHIVAJI.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:28 am
Dear Amit,
Your review is a crisp summary of glorious life of Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj.
We are leading a happy life as Hindus in Maharashtra and down south; only because Shivaji. Common man reveres him as incarnation of ‘Shiva’. Shivaji Maharaj, as we fondly call him, was a Visionary leader; who converted poor farmers into world class Gorilla Fighters. Most of his army comprised of common men who believed in the vision and path towards ‘Swa-Rajya’ meaning self rule. Please note that the army was not the paid soldiers, generally employed by moguls.
On social front, Shivaji practiced equality and treated all the castes and creeds with equal respect. He during his life time, supported and empowered all the sections of the Hindu society especially the once who were treated as ‘Untouchables’.
His life portrait has some stunning examples of loyalty shown by his men in times of great difficulties. Some of them even sacrificed their own life for his safety and ensured that the mission ‘Swa-Rajya’ does not suffer. Shivaji’s life journey has no parallel in the global history, as the empires were built with the mission of building personal wealth and power and control over the land.
There are many books written in Indian language, describing the life and achievements of Shivaji. If you are interested any reading a balanced account of his life you must read ‘Raja Shivachattrapati’ written by famous historian B. M. Purandare. There are many books in various regional languages written to spread the message Shivaji’s life.
I suggest, you should amend the review title as Shivaji – The grand rebel and the founder of Hindu ‘Swa-Rajya’
Jay Bhavani! Jay Shivaji!!
August 24th, 2006 at 11:59 am
Quite agree with Rani regarding Ash’s comments.
August 24th, 2006 at 6:41 pm
There are a few inaccuracies in the article,
Rajgad was not the first fort he won, it is Torna.
Shahaji wasn’t always a vassal of the Adil Shahi of Bijapur, he was a king maker at the court of the Nizam of Ahmed Nagar, fought to save it from the Adil Shah and was defeated only when Adil Shah and the Moguls combined their strengths. He was a fiercely independent and established his kingdom in southern India with Tanjavur in Tamilnadu as his capital. He was a pragmatist who preferred to live to fight another battle rather than die a martyr. Shivaji inherited his father’s pragmatism, and independent spirit. His mother gave him his goal, that of Hindavi Swarajya. Shahaji laid the foundation for Shivaji. The article needlessly belittles Shahaji.
Shivaji’s vision of Hindavi Swaraj was not an antithesis of Islamic rule as your article alludes. It was more like a modern secular nation. He was a rebel in more than one sense. He dismantled the feudal structure of the state. Nationalised utilities and established a bureaucracy. He had a paid army with both standing and reserve forces. His fort building skills are more of a legend. He founded a strong navy which ensured that the Europeans for over 100 years stayed off the western coast of India.
In my opinion the best essay ever written on Shivaji is the preface written by Mr. Narhar Kurundkar to “Shriman Yogi” a historical novel written by Ranjit Desai.
August 24th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
A correction to my earlier post,
the line “He was a fiercely independent…’ should be read as “He was fiercely independent…”
August 24th, 2006 at 10:08 pm
“Shivaji’s vision of Hindavi Swaraj was not an antithesis of Islamic rule as your article alludes. It was more like a modern secular nation.”
Well soon we will also get told that Shivaji was essentially fighitng for secular reasons, Shivaji’s vision of Hindavi Swaraj was a kingdom where Hindus could freely practice their faith, where conversions by Christian missionaries are prohibited (he behaded four padres who said that Hindus should be massacred and had conflicts with the Portuguese because they were converting Hindus in their territories) and where the state assists the Hindu religion in the form of grants and patronising various Hindu saints, that definitely is not a secular state, a secular state is where the gov’t has no intereference with religion, Shivaji on the other hand was a staunch Hindu who made liberal grants towards all Hindu causes.
If you read his own letters he quite clearly says that he wants to get rid of Muslim rule precisely because they were persecuting Hindus, so Muslim rule of the time was a direct anti thesis to Shivaji’s vision, he was not against the common Muslims but the Muslim rulers had to go if Hindus were to ever live with dignity, those were his thoughts that we glean from his letters and doings.
The following is one of his proclamations:
“Shivaji issued a proclamation to the Hindus of Goa in 1668. An extract from it will reveal the intensity of his religious and patriotic sentiments and the means adopted by him to prevent conversion. Here is a small extract from the long document. ” Slaughter of the most revered cows by Yavanas and Mlechhas, destruction of our Hindu
temples, disrespect of our all-honoured and all-pervading religion shown by these low people, violation of the most sacred chastity of our sisters and mothers brought about by these villains—such horrible things happen constantly. - Does it become us who call ourselves Kshatriyas to silently see these acts like cowards, and to turn a deaf ear to them ? Alas! Alas! It is a most shameful thing that instead of striving restlessly till death for the uplift of our country which should be dear to us like our parents, we should be
whiling away our time foolishly, tactlessly and indifferently even in the critical times like the present. What more deplorable thing can there be than the fact that we, with our own hands, should destroy our houses, our gods, our religion and culture by adopting a fawning attitude towards the Mlechhas, only for the sake of a little livelihood ? ”
Shivaji The Great, Bal Krishna, Pg 179.
August 26th, 2006 at 11:22 am
Well Shivaji acted against those who procecuted Hindus. He never procecuted Muslims. Just as his state gave grants to Hindu temples so there were grant to mosques and darghas.
Shivaji killed Afzal Khan, but a decent burial was given to the Khan by him. A tomb was built as a mark of respect. This tomb has grown into a large dargha at the foothills of Pratapgad
Harish you are right about the definition of secular as non-religious, but there is another meaning to the word which is more contemperory and that is treating all religions as equal. “Sarva Dharma Samabhav”.
I am not sure about the beheading of padres. That was probably “military excess as an individual’s action”. The same way as we have troops raping women in Kashmir. Will you hold Manmohan Singh responsible for it. Or will you call that the policy of the UPA government. Prosecution of minorities was never Shivaji’s policy.
There is the fabled loot of the treasure of the Subhedar of Kalyan. The daughter-in-law of the Subhedar was presented to Shivaji as a part of the loot. Shivaji severly punished those responsible for mistreating the lady.
The lady was very beautiful, this promped Shivaji to remark:
“Ashishcha amuchi aai asati sunder rupavati,
amhi hi zalo asato sunder rupavate”
“Had my mother been as beautiful,
I would have been born handsome”
The lady was sent back to her father-in-law, in the same way a father sees his daughter off.
His edicts (Firmans) dealt with the treatment of POW’s, non-combatants, espcially women and children. There were instructions that even his occupying army BUY produce from farmers and traders.
As I have written he was well ahead of his times.
August 26th, 2006 at 11:36 pm
“Harish you are right about the definition of secular as non-religious, but there is another meaning to the word which is more contemperory and that is treating all religions as equal. “Sarva Dharma Samabhav”.”
No that is a convenient change made up by Gandhi and the Congress gov’t so that they can patronise Islam at Hindu expense (in the form of Hajj subsidy and other appeasement policies), either we have a full Hindu state where other religions are patronised along with Hinduism or we have a completely secular state, we shouldn’t be having all this “all religions are equal” nonsense, they are not equal and no Hindu scripture tells us that they are equal, it is more of a convenient slogan adopted during the freedom struggle to rope in Muslims (but we all know where it led to).
“I am not sure about the beheading of padres. That was probably “military excess as an individual’s action”. The same way as we have troops raping women in Kashmir. Will you hold Manmohan Singh responsible for it. Or will you call that the policy of the UPA government. Prosecution of minorities was never Shivaji’s policy.”
Firstly those padres urged the governor of Goa to massacre Hindus so they deserved to be beheaded and secondly that is not an instance of any minority persecution, that is an instance of justice being served towards intolerant bigots.
August 28th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Well I should have written “treating all religions equally” to make it clearer. Modern democracies with exceptions like France, give considerable freedom of religious expression both to those who form the minority and those who are in the majority.
One should not forget that the money that goes to the government as tax is both Hindu money and Muslim money. Why should it be considered inappropriate if some of that money is used to subsidise a Muslim ritual.
There are many instances where tax payer’s money is used to facilitate Hindu rituals.
Harish you write and I quote, “…that is not an instance of any minority persecution, that is an instance of justice being served towards intolerant bigots.” Which is what I have written in the first place, Shivaji was not a Hindu religious extremist, He acted against Islamic terror. He never perpetrated it. So I repeat Shivaji’s vision of Hindavi Swaraj was not an antithesis of Islamic rule as the article alludes.
August 28th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
“Why should it be considered inappropriate if some of that money is used to subsidise a Muslim ritual.
There are many instances where tax payer’s money is used to facilitate Hindu rituals.”
No one gives me subsidy to journey to Amarnath, last I heard Hindus had to pay extra taxes and not shout Bharat Mata Ki Jai because the Indian gov’t is too impotent to protect them.
Firstly the gov’t has control of Hindu temples so it takes a lot of money from them and funds a few Hindu rituals but the gov’t does not have any minority institutions in control (refer to Article 30) so why exactly should it fund the Hajj subsidy and why exactly should a Hindu pay tax so that Muslims could go to Hajj (I am reminded of the jizya payment Hindus had to make in medieval times)?
If the gov’t is so keen on assisting Muslims then ask them to take over Muslim institutions and get the funds for hajj subsidy from those funds, not by imposing a modern day Jizya on Hindus.
Like I said, either we have real secularism in India (meaning, ban on hajj subsidy, implementation of UCC and many other eminently secular things) or completely disown secularism but Indian politicians can’t have their cake and eat it too.
“So I repeat Shivaji’s vision of Hindavi Swaraj was not an antithesis of Islamic rule as the article alludes.”
If something is “antithesis” then it means:
“Antithesis (Greek for “setting opposite”, from ἀντί against + θέσις position) means a direct contrast or exact opposition to something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antithesis”
So Shivaji’s rule was an antithesis to Islamic rule whichever way you look at it, the Muslim rulers persecuted non Muslims while Shivaji established a Hindu state in which non Hindus were not persecuted, Shivaji did the exact opposite of what Muslim rulers did so his rule was an antithesis to Islamic rule (unless you have a different definition of “antithesis” which we all don’t know about).
August 28th, 2006 at 9:27 pm
I am with Harish on this one.
Yogesh - Shivaji’s rule, a Hindu rule which did NOT persecute non-Hindus is a better antithesis of Islamic rule in India compared with a Hindu state which persecuted non-Hindus (in which case it would have shared something in common with it).
August 29th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
Guys the double negative did me in, I am very sorry. And since I had made the mistake once I overlooked it every time I quoted it. Ofcourse it was an antithesis. I don’t remember my stream of thought. But I really wanted to write that Shivaji was not a Hindu Babar.
Another thing which I agree to and which I was thinking about was the taxes which Hindu temples pay. Are you sure Muslim trusts pay no taxes.
One should not worked too much over this Hindu Muslim stuff.
Let me give it a simple analogy. In this world, left handed people are minorities. Every thing is almost always designed to be used by right handed. Every thing is loaded in their favour. Or rather every thing is loaded against left handed people. Now hypothetically the government decides that since the left handed are always at a disadvantage, it to gives a 1% rebate on taxes. Would you consider this unfair?
In my opinion religion is a bit like sex as long it is done in private it is all fine, the moment you bring it out in the open it becomes pornography.
I am again sorry about the “antithesis”. Check the time of the 24 Aug post . Past midnight. I guess you will forgive me.
August 29th, 2006 at 8:44 pm
^^ No problem brother
August 29th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
The times shown here are GMT, add 4 1/2 hours in summer to get IST, the time I am located at.
August 29th, 2006 at 9:40 pm
No the time shown here is -5 1/2 hours IST, why? Summer time is supposed to be an hour ahead.
August 30th, 2006 at 2:15 am
“Are you sure Muslim trusts pay no taxes.”
Yes I am sure that besides the normal taxes they don’t pay any extra stuff like Hindus do and since they are the so called minority (but act like the majority) their institutions are under their own control.
“One should not worked too much over this Hindu Muslim stuff.”
Ya that’s the attitude that kept us under slavery of the Mughals for 200 years, there is no reason to accept unfair treatment and nothing in our dharma teaches us to do so.
“Would you consider this unfair?”
Ahh but Muslims are not discriminated against in India, infact they live like kings with special rights and privileges, plus they got their own separate bank accounts in the form of Pakistan and Bangladesh but India is a joint account evidently. So I do consider it unfair to give them special rights when there is no good reason for it, if you bring up backwardness, may I bring your attention to the fact that other so called minorities have prospered very well in India, take the Sikhs as an example, even after the Khalistani movement they have good representation in the army, in sports etc, that is because of their hardwork, if you keep yourself limited to only Islamic education then your community is bound to be backward in this modern world.
Like I keep repeating, either we follow true secularism as it is defined in the West or we discard it altogether, there is no middle ground here.
August 30th, 2006 at 8:28 am
Reference Muslim backwardness, it is interesting to note the differences between the Hindu and Muslim communities in Britain. Though both communities arrived in Britain at essentially the same time and under essentially the same circumstances, the Hindu community has thrived whilst the Muslim community remains backward. Given that, as I have said in another thread (’Hindus worried over plans for racial profiling’) the majority white Christian (at least nominally) British society not only cannot tell the difference but I would argue until relatively recently did not even realise that there even was a difference, buzzwords and modern-day PC concepts like institutional racism, etc. cannot be to blame. A popular quote that is generally attributed to Hamid Dalwai (though I do not know its actual source - I would appreciate any lead) suggests a possible explanation:
“The explanation of Muslim backwardness is to be found in the very make-up of the Muslim mind. Indian Muslims believe that they are a perfect society and are superior to all other communities in India. One of the grounds for this belief is the assumption that the Islamic faith embodies the vision of a perfect society and, therefore, being a perfect Muslim implies not having to make any further progress. This is an unacceptable claim by modern criteria.”
September 1st, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Any Hindu with self-worth should know about Chattrapatti Shivaji Maharaj. The one who ran circles around Jahangir and ripped Afzal Khan open with his tiger-claws!
What a hero!
Jai Haindaiva Bharat!
September 1st, 2006 at 12:46 pm
For just a sneak preview into Shivaji’s life. I reckon “INDIA Mystics Heroes {and something else…}” by Sadhu Mukundcharandas is excellent. It also features Kanad Rishi(Founder of Atomic Principle) Rana Pratap etc etc. Great read!!!I bought it from a BAPS Swaminarayn temple
September 2nd, 2006 at 5:57 am
Dear Suvarna,
“The one who ran circles around Jahangir and ripped Afzal Khan open with his tiger-claws! ”
Well Jahangir ruled between 1605-1627, before Shivaji was born, I’m sure you mean somebody else.
September 2nd, 2006 at 7:19 am
(This thread is probably getting out of hand, with reference to the original article, however that is for the web master to act on.)
I very much agree and feel strongly about the following statement of statement of Mr. Duggirala:
“…plus they got their own separate bank accounts in the form of Pakistan and Bangladesh but India is a joint account evidently.”
Well what about that now?
I did not write “discriminated”, I wrote that they are at a disadvantage, you cannot just shut your eyes and mind, for instance just look at the calendar, (in Mumbai) you start from Ashadhi Ekadashi, Narali Pournima, you have Ganesh Chathurti-Chaturdashi, Navaratri-Vijayadashmi, Diwali- Chat, Makar Sankrant, Maha Shivaratri, Chaitra Padva, Ram Navami, Hanuman Jayanti. Then you have celebrations associated with Hindu (and non - Muslim) personalities, Guru Nanak Jayanti, Shiva(ji) Jayanti, Ambedkar Jayanti, Maha Nirvan Divas, (many Hindus complain about this, once a year on 6th December, you have Dadar Chowpatty under siege, every place or rather whichever already isn’t, since most of Mumbai is one, converted into an open air toilet ). Contemporary god men and do gooders, Satya Saibaba, Nana Dharmadikari, (Late) Athavale’s Swadhyaya Parivar, Ramdeo Baba…. They occupy public space (not just in the spatial sense) and consume public money. All these festivities involve the government spending public taxpayer’s money in the form of security, transport arrangements, use of infrastructure, roads, open spaces, beaches. I wonder why nobody has calculated this expense. Or is it conveniently ignored? Why then should the majority grudge a few paisa (from the statistical pie) spent on the Haj?
Well we are into definitions. We have so many questions and it is very difficult to say one has the correct answer; however we can always exchange facts and views.
But no wild allegations and insinuations, please.
(Like Mr. Duggirala’s:
“Ya that’s the attitude that kept us under slavery of the Mughals for 200 years, there is no reason to accept unfair treatment and nothing in our dharma teaches us to do so.”)
1) What is the role of religion in 21st century public life?
2) How should a secular state function vis a vis the minorities? (VERY FEW Western states are secular.)
3) How should minorities be treated, should they have special rights?
(Eg. Some US states, India allow polygamy to their Mormon/ Muslim minority, Pakistan exempts non-Muslims from the civil strictures of the Shariat, say regarding consumption of alcohol.)
4) How should the Muslims be treated, by a secular government? (A separate question as Muslims are getting into trouble across the globe)
5) Are the Muslims pampered at the expense of the Hindus in India?
6)Is non implementation of the uniform civil code in India hurting the interests of Hindus? Is it hurting the interests of Muslims?
7)Was the French government right in disallowing religious symbols(Crosses, Scarves, turbans) in schools?
Well no yes and no answers please, justify remarks with references.
1) What is the role of religion in the 21st century public life?
2) How should a secular state function? (VERY FEW Western states are secular)
3) How should minorities be treated, should they have special rights?
(Eg. Some US states, India allow polygamy to their Mormon/ Muslim minority, Pakistan exempts non-Muslims from the civil strictures of the Shariat, say regarding consumption of alcohol, attire.)
4) How should the Muslims be treated, by governments? (A separate question as Muslims are getting into trouble across the globe)
5) Are the Muslims pampered at the expense of the Hindus in India?
6)Is non implementation of the uniform civil code in India hurting the interests of Hindus? Is it hurting the interests of Muslims?
7)Was the French government right in disalllowing religious symbols(Crosses, Scarves, turbans) in schools?
Well no yes and no answers please, justify remarks with references.
September 2nd, 2006 at 7:29 am
Folks there has been an editing mistake in the above post. Kindly bear.
September 2nd, 2006 at 1:02 pm
“I wrote that they are at a disadvantage, you cannot just shut your eyes and mind”
No you need to open your eyes and mind, the Hindus besides paying everyday taxes (and extra taxes in the case of Amarnath pilgrimage) pay for all this by giving a lot of revenue of their institutions to the gov’t which has control of these institutions, do you know how much revenue the gov’t makes of the TTD, here is a sample:
“TIRUMALA: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) revenue from various sources including collections from the temple hundi is expected to touch Rs. 738.36 crores for the fiscal 2006-07
http://www.hindu.com/2006/03/11/stories/2006031105860500.htm”
When the gov’t takes control of Jama Masjid and Aligarh Muslim University (centre for partition activities) and other Muslim institutions they can fund hajj subsidy.
By the way the money is spent on electricity, sanitation etc., proper state duties for the benefit of any citizens, equally provided to Muslim pilgrims to Ajmer (”the poor man’s hajj”), not on the pilgrimage itself. On the contrary, Hindu pilgrims to Hindu sites mostly have to pay special taxes on the spot, contributing to the discharge of the said governmental duties.
Here is an instance of Hindus paying special taxes:
“He said while a grant of Rs 22,500 was given every year for Haj pilgrimmage and crores doled out as grant to the three lakh Madarasas in the country, the Sabarimala pilgrims were being forced to pay hefty fares in buses run by the state-owned KSRTC. The Amarnath and Kumbh Mela pilgrims also had to pay pilgrim tax.
http://sify.com/news/politics/fullstory.php?id=13302183″
The very act of a secular gov’t funding a religious school (madrasa) is a blatant violation of secularism (if it does want to fund madrasas then it should fund all other religious schools equally), I have never heard of the gov’t funding Hindu schools, infact the Ramakrishna Mission tried to get itself declared as non Hindu because they were afraid that the Communist gov’t in Bengal would take over their institutions, the same Communist gov’t funds madrasas fully in WB.
So Khandke you are the one with your eyes shut.
“They occupy public space (not just in the spatial sense) and consume public money. All these festivities involve the government spending public taxpayer’s money in the form of security, transport arrangements, use of infrastructure, roads, open spaces, beaches. I wonder why nobody has calculated this expense. Or is it conveniently ignored? Why then should the majority grudge a few paisa (from the statistical pie) spent on the Haj?”
And you mean to tell me Muharram doesn’t occupy public space and security measures (for fear of riots between Shias and Sunni’s) and you mean to tell me that all these Muslim do gooders like Imam Bukhari and the MIM in Hyderabad don’t occupy public space when they make inflammmatory speeches against Hindus?
Did you also conveniently forget that just a few years ago the Namaaz of Muslims in the middle of roads in Mumbai used to stop traffic and cause havoc until the Shiv Sena organised the Maha Aarti’s or do you also forget that the blaring of Namaaz 5 times a day on loud speakers is a disturbance. You seem to have a selective memory Mr. Khandke.
“3) How should minorities be treated, should they have special rights?
(Eg. Some US states, India allow polygamy to their Mormon/ Muslim minority, Pakistan exempts non-Muslims from the civil strictures of the Shariat, say regarding consumption of alcohol.)”
US does not allow Polygamy for Mormon’s, Polygamy is a criminal offense in US. Pakistan is an Islamic state that is violating all the basic religious rights of its minorities so there is no comparison between India and Pakistan, minorities have no right to special rights.
“5) Are the Muslims pampered at the expense of the Hindus in India?”
Yes they are, I have already given some instances of blatant discrimination against Hindus above.
“6)Is non implementation of the uniform civil code in India hurting the interests of Hindus? Is it hurting the interests of Muslims?”
It is hurting the national interests when some backward mullah can control the destiny of the whole community and it is blatantly anti secular, if India calls itself a secular state then it has to implement UCC and our Constitution also calls for its implementation.
“7)Was the French government right in disallowing religious symbols(Crosses, Scarves, turbans) in schools?”
If the schools had a particular uniform and if the school authorities had a feeling that wearing certain things is violating the norms of the school uniform then they have a right to prohibit it in their school but the gov’t has no right to do any such thing all over the country because what we wear is upto us as long as it’s in accordance with the local school rules, so the French gov’t was wrong.
September 2nd, 2006 at 4:56 pm
“I wrote that they are at a disadvantage, you cannot just shut your eyes and mind”
No you need to open your eyes and mind, the Hindus besides paying everyday taxes (and extra taxes in the case of Amarnath pilgrimage) pay for all this by giving a lot of revenue of their institutions to the gov’t which has control of these institutions, do you know how much revenue the gov’t makes of the TTD, here is a sample:
“TIRUMALA: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) revenue from various sources including collections from the temple hundi is expected to touch Rs. 738.36 crores for the fiscal 2006-07
http://www.hindu.com/2006/03/11/stories/2006031105860500.htm”
When the gov’t takes control of Jama Masjid and Aligarh Muslim University (centre for partition activities) and other Muslim institutions they can fund hajj subsidy.
By the way the money is spent on electricity, sanitation etc., proper state duties for the benefit of any citizens, equally provided to Muslim pilgrims to Ajmer (”the poor man’s hajj”), not on the pilgrimage itself. On the contrary, Hindu pilgrims to Hindu sites mostly have to pay special taxes on the spot, contributing to the discharge of the said governmental duties.
Here is an instance of Hindus paying special taxes:
“He said while a grant of Rs 22,500 was given every year for Haj pilgrimmage and crores doled out as grant to the three lakh Madarasas in the country, the Sabarimala pilgrims were being forced to pay hefty fares in buses run by the state-owned KSRTC. The Amarnath and Kumbh Mela pilgrims also had to pay pilgrim tax.
http://sify.com/news/politics/fullstory.php?id=13302183″
The very act of a secular gov’t funding a religious school (madrasa) is a blatant violation of secularism (if it does want to fund madrasas then it should fund all other religious schools equally), I have never heard of the gov’t funding Hindu schools, infact the Ramakrishna Mission tried to get itself declared as non Hindu because they were afraid that the Communist gov’t in Bengal would take over their institutions, the same Communist gov’t funds madrasas fully in WB.
So Khandke you are the one with your eyes shut.
September 3rd, 2006 at 9:37 pm
Arrey Yogeshbha. Please read “Aurrangzeb” instead of “Jahangir.”
I errored onthe book name as well, its actually “Rishis, Mystics and Heroes of India” and the forward to the book by D. D Frawley is also pleasing.
Thanx Yogeshbhai
September 3rd, 2006 at 9:42 pm
Hey just one thing, some claim that Afzal Khan had a go into Shivaji’s back b4 Shivaji ripped him open.
Some say so.
poor Afzal
September 4th, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Yeh Suvarna, it’s said that when Afzal Khan greeted Shivaji, he hugged Shivaji then tried to stab his back with a dagger. But Shivaji being a clever guy (unlike many of the Rajputs) anticipated something like this happening. So he put a metal plate on his back and chest before the meeting. As soon as Afzal Khan made his move, Shivaji gave him what he deserved.
September 5th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
Mr. Duggirala,
Well isn’t TTD’s revenue its own? How does it become the government’s revenue?
And on funding Muslim religious schools and pilgrimage you need to address the issue in its complete form and then try to answer the question whether it is justifiable. There is a cause and there is effect. The minority as in the left handed right handed analogy, probably deserves in the view of the framers of our constitution a few sops, in order to counterbalance the disadvantage of numbers.
September 5th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
And Mr. Duggirala both the links you want me to follow are not working.
September 6th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Namaste
Yogesh, I just want to leave a couple of thoughts with you about this ’special minority rights in India’ business.
One thing is that in the last thousand years or so, Hinduism has not generally been in a prosperous, privileged or even equal position in most of India, compared with first Islam and then Christianity - under the influence of the rulers. Hindu institutions are VERY impoverished. For example, there are few (if any) Hindu universities that can teach in a specialised way about Hindu dharma and Hindu civilisation (Benares Hindu University is not an exception) but several university and seats of learning that specialise in Islam. Yet under Article 30 of the Indian constitition, considerable government funding is available for funding and maintaining INDEPENDENT Islamic institutions, but NONE for Hindu insitutions. Yet to redress the balance of the last 1000 years, and help Hinduism’s recovery, funding for Hindu institutions was necessary. As for the reason why there are so mant Christian missionary schools in India as opposed to Hindu schools - that is largely due to the fact that under Article 30 of the Indian constitution, NO STATE FUNDING IS TO BE GIVEN TO INDEPENDENT HINDU RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.
That is why the Ramakrishna Mission, founded by Swami Vivekananda applied for non-Hindu status simply to become eligible for some state funding without interference. The Arya Samaj did likewise (applied for non-Hindu status).
When you look at the way that Hinduism is practised in India, it is often the worst, superstitious forms of Hinduism, devoid of any understanding of the higher philiosophies and meanings and power. This is very much due to the fact that Hindu institutions do not have the benefit of any state aid and furthermore Hindu institutions are taxed heavily, whereas ‘minority institutions’ have an exempt status.
If you want, I shall provide you with a few links that corroborate what I’ve said in this post.
Regards, Danger
Jai Bhagvan
September 6th, 2006 at 7:59 pm
“Well isn’t TTD’s revenue its own? How does it become the government’s revenue?”
No TTD is under gov’t control so the gov’t siphons off a lot of the revenue and even has the audacity to appoint closet communists on the board and we have the supreme court saying that it’s ok to have atheists (well in the Indian context this primarily means communists) managing Hindu mandirs:
“NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has held that Hindu Ministers in the Council of Ministers in a State need not have faith in God and temple worship to nominate members to the managing committee of a temple.
http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/23/stories/2005042307240300.htm”
Would the same court allow Ali Sina to manage madrasas and mosques?
“And on funding Muslim religious schools and pilgrimage you need to address the issue in its complete form and then try to answer the question whether it is justifiable. There is a cause and there is effect. The minority as in the left handed right handed analogy, probably deserves in the view of the framers of our constitution a few sops, in order to counterbalance the disadvantage of numbers.”
Ah so if you are minority then you are disadvantaged, I wonder when secularism came to be defined as that, in the West Hindus are a minroty and don’t get any special rights and we have no need for any either, Mr.Khandke you seem to not understand that in a secular country there is no distiction whether you belong to the majority community or the minority community, everyone has equal rights and responsibilites, by this ridiculous logic all linguistic groups in India should now get special privileges because they are at a disadvantage in numbers compared to Hindi language speakers.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:00 pm
The above link is not working, the correct link is:
http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/23/stories/2005042307240300.htm
September 7th, 2006 at 11:15 am
All the ‘broken links’ above work if you remove the ” at the end of them (Copy & Paste rather than just clicking on the link).
September 8th, 2006 at 6:46 am
Wish there were more Shivaji nowadays.Hindus really need them.
September 8th, 2006 at 3:32 pm
Dear Duggirala et al,
(A)
Mr. Duggirala Says:
“…Ah so if you are minority then you are disadvantaged, I wonder when secularism came to be defined as that, in the West Hindus are a minority and don’t get any special rights and we have no need for any either,”
My reply is:
Well Mr. Duggirala had made a gross generalisation, West is too vague a term, most western countries are not secular, in England the Anglican church is the state religion.
Follow this link for further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion#Christian_countries.
On special rights a few musings:
(1)Canada is in the west and is a secular country, it allows its religious minorities special rights, read this extract,
“…He finds it ironic that Heritage Minister Sheila Copps visited his south-end temple earlier this month, singing the praises of Canada’s multicultural diversity. ‘Sheila Copps came to the gurdwara, the Sikh temple, last Sunday and she was talking about visible minorities and equal rights and multiculturalism. This is all baloney.’ Suzanne Meunier, a spokeswoman for the passport office, an agency of the Department of Foreign Affairs, says the rules for headgear in photographs have not changed for several years. Normally, the office does not accept any kind of head-covering in submitted photos. However, it will make allowance on religious grounds. ‘If it’s proven and clear that a person belongs to a religious faith, and he has to wear his turban, then we would make an exception,’ said Ms. Meunier. ‘It’s standard procedure to ask for confirmation.’ The important thing, added Ms. Meunier, is a clear view of the facial features, from the eyebrows down.”
—
“Sikhs have fought many battles over the wearing of turbans in Canada. In 1990, there was a national debate over whether a turban could be worn by a Sikh R.C.M.P. officer in place of the traditional dress hat. The federal government eventually relented, but not before a heated discussion about the conflict between national symbols and religious freedom. In 1994, the issue flared again when some branches of the Royal Canadian Legion refused to admit patrons wearing any kind of head covering, because the removal of hats is considered a sign of respect for Canada’s war dead. The defence minister of the day, David Collenette, went so far as to vow to boycott any legion halls that refuse admittance to Sikhs or Jews wearing religious head coverings.”
Follow this link for further details:
http://www.sikhtimes.com/news_061103a.html
(2)Even though Britain is non-secular it gives special privileges to its religious minorities read this extract:
Britain has officially decreed that its future generations of Indian-origin schoolchildren may substitute Christian prayer with morning mantras, aartis and Vedic ritual, with the announcement that it will pay for the country’s first, government-sponsored Hindu school.
News that the school will be established with 10-million pounds of government money and run by the I-Foundation, a religious partner of the persuasive, power-networked and peaceful ISKCON movement, prompted a cheer from much of the UK’s estimated 700,000 Hindus.
Follow this link for further details:
http://www.nchtuk.org/content.php?id=151
(B)Mr. Duggirala adds:
“…Mr.Khandke you seem to not understand that in a secular country there is no distinction whether you belong to the majority community or the minority community, everyone has equal rights and responsibilities, by this ridiculous logic all linguistic groups in India should now get special privileges because they are at a disadvantage in numbers compared to Hindi language speakers.”
My reply is:
India is a union of states. A STATE is considered as a UNIT in determining the status of a linguistic community, whether majority or minority. Linguistic minorities in a state ARE given special rights, for example IN MAHARASHTRA Hindi, Gujarati, Urdu, Tamil, Sindhi communities DO HAVE special rights which manifest themselves in the form of
(1) Criteria for establishing, funding and managing educational institutions
(2) Setting up of academies such as Sindhi academy, Urdu academy for preserving their linguistic identikit. ETC.
To give a practical example if you Mr. Duggirala, assuming that you are a Telgu speaker like many Duggiralas are, feel that you need to start a Telgu school in say Nagothane (a town in Maharashtra), there obviously won’t be enough students to pay fees and break even or even justify establishing a school, but since you are a linguist minority, the Maharashtra state government is bound to fund your school. There is one rule for the majority Marathi speakers, another for the minority Telgu speakers. The duty of the state government to protect the linguistic identity of the Telgu speakers in Nagothane is enshrined in the Indian constitution.
AM I CLEAR Mr. DUGGIRALA?
September 8th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
Dear Dangerous and every body,
I have followed the link that our friend Mr. Duggirala wants us to, and to good effect.
It effectively gives the rulings of the Supreme Court on the definition of,
(1) Secular. (I do not agree to it)
(2) Hindu. (I do).
Here it is for you:
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has held that Hindu Ministers in the Council of Ministers in a State need not have faith in God and temple worship to nominate members to the managing committee of a temple.
A Bench, comprising Justice H.K. Sema and Justice S.B. Sinha, upheld the judgment of the Kerala High Court and dismissed a petition seeking to debar all Hindu Ministers of the former Left Democratic Front Government in Kerala from nominating members to the managing committee of the Guruvayur Sri Krishna temple.
The Judges said: “A Hindu may or may not be a person professing the Hindu religion or a believer in temple worship. A Hindu has a right to choose his own method of worship. He may or may not visit a temple. He may have political compulsion not to openly proclaim that he believes in temple worship. Idol worships, rituals and ceremonials may not be practised by a person although he may profess Hindu religion.”
Secularism under the Constitution did not mean constitution of an atheist society but it merely meant equal status to all religions without any preference in favour of or discrimination against any one of them. In this case, the Bench said, the Kerala legislature had not chosen to qualify the word “Hindu” in any manner in the Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1978 under which appointments were made to the managing committee.
“The meaning of the word is plain and who is a Hindu is well known. Hindu is a comprehensive expression giving the widest freedom to people of all hues, opinion, philosophies and beliefs to come within its fold.”
Any move “to debar all `Hindu’ Ministers of the State Government from nominating members to the managing committee of the Guruvayoor Devaswom would lead to a stalemate in the management of the Devaswom,” the Bench said.
“The management of the temple primarily is a secular act. Indisputably, the State has the requisite jurisdiction to oversee administration of a temple subject to Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India.”
The petitioners, M.P. Gopalakrishna Nair, president of the Kerala Kshetra Samarakshina, and the general secretary of the Kerala unit of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, had challenged the Kerala High Court judgment saying that the Ministers owed allegiance to the Marxist ideology and were against any religious practice.
Hence, they should not nominate members to the managing committee.
Differentiating matters relating to worship of the deity and the management of the Devaswom, the Bench described as absurd the insistence that persons nominating the members to the managing committee should also believe in temple worship.
“To insist on such a qualification in the electorate will be as bad as saying that when the law relating to a temple is under consideration in the legislature, only Hindu legislators can vote and they must further be qualified as believers in temple worship.”
I suppose Dangerous it sets the record straight.
September 8th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Thanks Satya
September 8th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
Dear Mr. Duggirala,
Followed the other link reg. TTD as far as I understand not a paise has paid to the government.
Here is the article:
TIRUMALA: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) revenue from various sources including collections from the temple hundi is expected to touch Rs. 738.36 crores for the fiscal 2006-07 as against last year’s Rs. 674.20 crores recording an overall increase of 9.52 percent, which is Rs. 64 crores higher than its 2005-06 budget.
Of the total income the temple hundi alone accounts for Rs. 311.41 crores as against Rs. 296.47 crores last year.
Another major source of revenue — Rs. 172.84 crores — is by way of interest on investments. While the sale of arjitham seva tickets is likely to earn Rs. 65 crores, the sale of darshan tickets and laddu prasadam is likely to fetch Rs. 36 crores and Rs. 35.50 crores respectively.
The TTD expects to net Rs. 33 crores by way of sale of human hair and Rs. 29.42 crores by way of choultry receipts.
Of the total of Rs.738.35 crores shown on the payments side major outgo was on wage bill — Rs.149.09 crores. Other payments were Rs. 134.40 crores towards fixed assets, Rs. 116.77 crores towards investments, Rs. 111.54 crores towards accrued interest loans and advances including security deposits loans to other institutions and Rs. 92.70 crores for donations and contributions.
A major bulk of Rs. 55.10 crores was marked for miscellaneous expenses.
Priority areas
TTD Board Chairman T. Subbirami Reddy, who also happens to be Union Minister of State for Mines, said that construction of choultries, cottages and guesthouses were accorded top priority.
Focus would also be on educational institutions, hospitals, computerisation, construction of kalyana mandapams, residential buildings for archakas, renovation of temples and regulating water supply at Tirumala etc.
A sum of Rs. 1.5 crores would be allotted for the construction of TTD community hall in New Delhi.
Yogesh
September 8th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
…has been paid
September 10th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Mr.Khandke here is something for you to chew on:
” Regarding the provision in the Act, which makes it mandatory for a notified temple to contribute 5 per cent of its total annual income to the “Common Pool Fund”, regulated by the Endowment Commissioner, the court said there cannot be compulsion only for Hindu temples to provide assistance to institutions of other religions. “Devotees of Hindu temples provide money for temple purposes and it cannot be spent for non-Hindu causes,” the court observed.”
http://www.haindavakeralam.org/PageModule.aspx?PageID=1802&SKIN=B
So until now Hindu temples have been providing money for “Common Pool Fund” and even now this thing has only been struck down in Karnataka not other states.
September 11th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
Dear Mr. Duggirala,
Systems are dynamic and every body should be on a learning curve.
Yogesh
September 13th, 2006 at 6:08 pm
Hey this place has a censor. One of my posts is missing.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:09 am
Hi,
Can some one tell me where i can order this book from?? or provide a link to the appropriate place.
Thank you
September 30th, 2006 at 8:25 am
Yo Anil try the following links:
https://www.vedamsbooks.com/no39125.htm
http://www.indus-intl.com/bookdetails.cfm?bookid=IN-21065
http://www.magpie-books.com/si/17536.html