From: Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: Peace Mumbai Re: [bharat-chintan] Re: Fwd: [Citizen-Mumbai] PRESS CONFERENCE & PROTEST AGAINST LIFTING OF JAMES LAINE BOOK ON CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ
dear suklaji, we have ended the debate.
The point here is that critiquing the book on whatever counts, which is a pretty legitimate exercise, and resorting to fascist intimidation demanding its ban are two very different cups of tea.Sukla--
On 14 July 2010 20:40, SADANAND PATWARDHAN <2sadanand@gmail.com> wrote:1.I found this "Lane ki iss kitab ka naam hi galat hai. Bharat kabhi b Islamic desh nahi thha. Na shivaaji hindu raja thha.", interesting observation in Kishore Jagtap's message. In fact the title "Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India" smacks of the Clash of the Civilization" thesis put forward by Samuel Huntington. Such reading of history is not only mischievous but downright malicious because it drives a wedge between people and is therefore anti-people. It also sees history through the extremely narrow vision of the courtiers with not a thought for the living conditions of the people or how the sovereign's policies affect them. Like other kings, who professed different religions, Shivaji too was interested in creating his own independent Kingdom and becoming a sovereign. His religious identity is of no consequence here from "People's History perspective" and has actually been thrust upon him. What is of interest is what were his policies in ruling over his kingdom and how they affected the common people. If truthful evaluation of history shows that under his rule people had a better sense of well being than otherwise, then he was a great king. Period.
Umpteen times it has been stated in email exchanges, that the "Book is otherwise very good, but for these few lines". It is quite possible that the title is not Laine's doing because often such things are decided by the publisher keeping "commercial angle" of what sells in mind. Nonetheless I am unable to understand this certificate given to the book once those offending lines are removed as demanded. Are we to believe that Laine was influenced only in those few lines but otherwise his book is free of such biases? I found and read some reviews about this book. According to them Laine's concern was with how different narratives about the life & times of Shivaji have struck roots in popular imagination, based not on historicity necessarily or substantially, but through interpretative readings foisted on to it to suit an agenda. Such studies about the mythologies associated with historical persons is in itself educative as it teaches how "his-story" is made – and there are many such competing histories. But if these reviews accurately describe the book, then it gives an "artistic license" to the author to deal with the subject matter as he deems fit without encumbered by facts or search for truth. This is where a problem arises as to what are, if any, limits to the "artistic license" and how are these to be exercised.
That a strong objection is taken to these lines is a very good occurrence. But by removing those what purpose is served? It would give burial to the "conspiracy" which put those lines in the book in the first place & give a small comfort of "victory" to those agitating for it. Is that what is sought? If this conspiracy is to be nailed and people educated, then in fact those lines should remain in the book forever as a constant reminder about the "Brahminical Perfidy" . Around this the quest for people's history may be pursued by studying historical sources, cross referencing, verifying, and then developing authenticated real narratives for real people. I feel this is what true Caste & class struggle should seek. But of course this would require monumental effort.
2.Someone has also raised an issue about the "insult to Jijau" and how in fact it should be actually viewed. But before that, a question? Leaving aside the historicity or rather lack of it; Is the issue about the progeny borne out of wedlock or of thrusting the fatherhood on a Brahminical father? Suppose the biological father belonged to Bahujan Samaj or was a Muslim or a Christian; would the objections to it had been absent? In this context it is a tribute to Jijau that she nurtured a son as a single parent, built an ambition in him to be his own master rather than be servile in someone else's court, and suffered hardships that such a course would have undoubtedly visited; rather than opting for the easier life of a wife of a ranking Sardar with different Shahis albeit separated by distance. If the objection is solely to foist a Brahminical biological father, that to without any proof, and what all such an agenda entails, then I support it. Else, this opposition is patently borne out of notions of sanctity of marriage institution, which even now provides livelihood to many Brahmins even from the pockets of Bahujan Samaj, and is prey unknowingly to the very evil it seeks to counter. In society today one comes across many instances where women are practically a single parent even if the husband when present is an abusive figure and a hindrance to bringing up children. Jijau's example should be so widely known as to make her a beacon for these women and others.
3. In summary it would be better not to force editing out of hurtful passages, even if patently false, but build struggle and real education by using such artifices as markers of what is wrong with current dispensation. Congress/ BJP/ SS/ MNS are going to impose/ have imposed a de facto ban in any case. They have done so in the past & are going to pretend that they are the true inheritors of the legacy of Shivaji whatever that means. They would be more than happy in flexing their muscles, scoring brawny points in front of the camera, and listing it as their achievements in election manifestos. The controversy will have a quiet death & burial. It would be return to business as usual.
This is not what, I understand, is aimed here. Therefore, there is a need to think of innovative ways of keeping this struggle alive and taking it forward, rather than get divided over conventional stratagems of "Bans". Everyone participating here should be or I believe are in essence on the same side.
Sadanand.
From: bharat-chintan@googlegroups.com [mailto:bharat-chintan@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Feroze Mithiborwala
Sent: 14 July 2010 15:40
To: anand patwardhan
Cc: Kunda Pramilani; sangharaj.rupwate@gmail.com; Sukla Sen; Avinash Kadam; kishorda_jagtap@yahoo.co.in; peace-mumbai; cairo-rafah; citizen-mumbai; awami_bharat@googlegroups.com; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; grey-youth-movement@googlegroups.com; mumbai_intellectuals_voice_and_media_source@yahoogroups.com; muslim_youth_connection@yahoogroups.com; snajeebr@gmail.com; aamir.edresy@gmail.com; shanul_s@yahoo.com; fg-discussions; akhaliq@commitindia.com; Palash Biswas; bharat-chintan@googlegroups.com; Free Binayak Sen; peoples media
Subject: [bharat-chintan] Re: Fwd: [Citizen-Mumbai] PRESS CONFERENCE & PROTEST AGAINST LIFTING OF JAMES LAINE BOOK ON CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ
dear anand bhai,
typical, very typical - as i said n repeatedly - it is only about the few lines on pg 93. they are not based on any research but they are based on a joke - a joke with a devious political agenda to insult the memory of Shivaji Maharaj & Rajmata Jijau.
in fact i got to know, who these 12 brahmins are. we will be going in for legal action against them. i do not see this as a mere joke or a coincidence.
When 12 brahmins whisper a certain canard into the ears of laine, i see it is part of the brahmanical agenda of vilifying Maharaja Shivaji's legacy. that certainly is the case as the masses perceive it.
or are you saying that the brahmanical sections do have an agenda to vilify Shiavaji Maharaj or the political & especially his social agenda ?? compare the rss-brahmanical writings on Shivaji Maharaj - to the writings by Maratha, OBC & Dalit writers. there is a world of difference.
and that is what this battle is all about.
The forces that are out to vilify Shivaji Maharaj & the assassins of Mahatma Gandhi & are from the same mindset & caste backgrounds. i do not see this as a mere coincidence - it is the logic of brahmanism - an issue that you refuse to include in the debate.
similar 'jokes' have been made in the meetings of the RSS, from their very stage & can give you the specific names of those rss-brahmins.
and that is what i had tried to explain to u, that this is the larger question of caste struggle - that u wish to reduce to freedom of speech.
and sudhir & shyam are opposed to the book, but do not believe in the ban, but all the others names on the original invitation that set of this debate are with us & the list is only growing.
arjung dangle, comrade prakash reddy, namdeo dhasal, mahadev jankar, hanumant upre, baba dalvi, madhav wagh, retd justice kolse patil - dalit, obc, marathas from across maharashtra are part of the opposition to this supposed joke - they all see it in the larger context of the brahmanical hegemony.
yes n there must be people from all walks of life with you, but the overwhelming number of brahmins on your side n the very very few here - are also a pointer.
the right to insult - is not part of the freedom of expression. -
This has rightly pointed out by the Bahujan media, articles, editorials & the MAHANAYAK - the best Dalit paper run by Sunil Khobragade has asked the very simple & pertinent question - JAMES LAINE CHE DOKE KAUN ?? - WHO IS THE BRAIN BEHIND JAMES LAINE ?? -
both u n me know that answer. the only point is we are stating the same openly - whilst you want to obfuscate the matter.
n that is why the overwhelming number of secular people from across the world are opposed to the cartoons to vilify Prophet Muhammad. the right to demonise or insult or spread calumny n slander is not covered under the right to freedom of expression -
we have the right to criticize n nobody is opposed to that right - moreso for a historian - it needs to be based on factual research n not hearsay. folklore n myths are also different -
true, there is a thin line between the two - u take it as a joke - we take it as an insult - a calculated insult with a deepseated political & social agenda.
or agreed the current joke is part of "brahmanical folklore". - but we still see it is part of the larger brahmanical agenda against the hero & icon of the Bahujan movement.
another point about your brahmin sub-conscious - u referred to - "if u have the brains" n the like - anand bhai - this is the typical brahmanical language of superiority.
in counter look on your track record on terror. you have never gone beyond the line as set by the state n the media. only after Shaheed Hemant Karakare came on board, did your line change.
I request you to do some "research" on 9/11 instead of what bush n blair would have us believe. at the least - do read richard gage who leads a movement of "1000 architects n engineers for the truth of 9/11". they now number more than 1200. also do read david ray griffin, who has written more than 5 books on this subject n has demolished the bush-cheney version.
On Obama too you have been miserably wrong. n i had warned you much earlier. you have to see issues in the longer term. have to have the knack of seeing afar. even on something as simple as guantanamo you have been wrong, leave alone his heightened militarism, extended wars, his hypocritical nuclear policy on buttressing the israeli nuclear bombs n the like, the very issues that are close to your heart & too which your contribution is immense. here too you have failed too understand n fathom the deeper politics of which obama is only a face, a mere charade.
the above two issues I have included as I have deeply 'researched' & know exactly what I am talking about. its not only hearsay from the "whisperings" of bush-cheney-blair-obama-cameroon-wolfowitz-feith-wursmer-dennis ross-elliot abrams-hiilary-gates-rahm emmanuel. that would be 12 i believe. and that is a coincidence.
As for the Sambhaji Brigade, i know they are a rad flag for brahmins of all hues, either on the right, centre or left. so i understand your 'emotions'.
Both the Maratha Seva Sangh, led by Purshottam Khedekar & the Sambhaji Brigade, led by Pravin Gaikwad are part of ther Phule-Shahu-Ambedkari movement. They have contributed to ending the brahmanical intellectual hegemony within the Marathas.
They have blunted the sword that led the Marathas to commit atrocities on the Dalits & spew communal invective against the Muslim community. Both Khedekar & Pravin Gaikwad have contributed immensely to the cause of secularism, yes, but from a Bahujan perspective.
They have interpreted history from a Phule-Shahu-Ambedkarite perspective & done away with the Brahmanical historiography, which was in a large part responsible for the anti-Dalit n anti-Muslim sentiment that pervaded the Maratha consciousness.
we do not agree with them on everything, don't have to, but on the other hand, we dont agree at everything do we??
and at our meeting yesterday on iran, israel, palestine - the sambhaji brigade karyakartas attended & they said that they are beginning to see the issue in a different light.
actually this work amongst the bahujan sections has never really been done - n this is where the brahmanical media has wrought disaster.
thus when they see the linkages between brahmanism n zionism & the rss n israel on the other - things are crystal clear for them, very easy actually.
both the MSS n the SB are part of the Phule-Ambedkari movement - clarify this fact with Sudhir Dhawale & Shyam Sonar.
this despicable attempt to push them over to the side of the rss-bjp-ss-mns was actually laughable n downright ignorant.
this debate seems to have been enlightening for all.
but i again request all those involved to try n answer the issues raised by Kishore. by saying that we cannot read what he is saying or writing - is just another brahmanical way of running away from the debate.
CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ - ANI - RAJAMAT JIJAU YANCHA VIJAY ASO.
MAHATMA GANDHI - MAHATMA PHULE - BHARAT RATNA DR BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR KI JAI.
regards
feroze
On 13 July 2010 18:53, anand patwardhan <anandpat@gmail.com> wrote:
dear all
feroze makes light of the fact that in the only purported quote he circulated widely from a book he never read, he substituted the word "maharashtrians" for the words "12 brahmins". he then went on to issue an indirect threat to those 12 mythical Brahmins by saying "we will find out who they are".
feroze is trying to say that his views have the support of "dalits" and progressives but sad as this may be, luckily it is just one side of the story.
we have also received many congratulations for winning this case, both from marathas and dalits. these include people like shyam gaekwad (republican panthers) eknath awad (champion fighter against anti-dalit atrocities) and many others.
also several people like shyam sonar and sudhir dhawle who were wrongly named as signatories in feroze's first press release, have asked him why their names were included without permission and have asked him to delete their names.
incidentally in case feroze has not noticed, the three petitioners who fought against the ban also come from different castes although all three of us believe in the annihilation of caste.
why should dalits worry about "kula" and "vansh"? this is the language of the upper castes who had to prove their upper caste lineage.
it is commonly accepted that shivaji's mother and father did not live together for many years. rumours about his parentage have always existed. but that did not and should not make shivaji either less or more great.
is it not crystal clear that all anger about those who dare to record the fact that there are differing versions about shivaji's possible parentage comes from deep rooted sexist and casteist thinking ?
in what way does laine insult jijabai? is a single, separated woman an object of scorn or is it to her credit that she still manages to raise her son to greatness ?
all attempts to have only an officially approved mythology which does not allow for research and debate is unscientific and deeply dangerous to the cultural and psychological health of a people.
people are being misled with the blind (those who have not read the book) leading the blind. who is the gainer? as always it is the backward views of the upper caste that leads. everyone knows that sp (sharad pawar) started and continues to sustain sb (sambhaji brigade). incidentally feroze should check what sp feels about israel and america.
those who are the bacchadas in a sher-bacchade ka alliance should keep one ear open as they sleep.
as for avinash criticizing the book, fair enough. at least he has got hold of a copy to read. a historian may make errors. it is is for others to point this out. still others may find other evidences for or against. and so on. that is what makes a healthy historical practice, not banning, politicizing and mythologizing.
anand
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com> wrote:
are yaar shuklaji, my caps lock was on - so that was what happened - and u can interpret it that way - its - ok, nothing better can b expected of u - breathing down my back as usual - find a better job
Rohini is the only person who stood by us during & after 26/11 & i respect her for that - most people have seen the ss/mns on the tv screens n hv got taken in by tht line - as i said - arjun dangleji the RPI's - com prakash reddy - CPI - all are taking tht position - n we r one on tht.
you sound more & more desperate, clutching at straws - i guess after your daily debacle on obama - u will only get more shrill n worse - read about obama's guarantees to the Israeli nuke programme.
you've got it wrong - we said - go ahead with the book - apart from the few lines whispered into the ears of senor laine - by 14 brahmins who have done it on the basis of an anti-Shivaji agenda - this goes all the way back to when this lot targeted him for his political & social views - that is why Shivaji Maharaj is loved by the Bahujans of Maharashtra.
And as we said - the issue is of a few lines - based on some stupid whispering campaign - no research - which is meant to b the norm for any historical work.
under freedom of expression - amongst many caluses - the issue over the matter of 'insult' - is part of it. that is where we base our stand. - u guys are more understanding n sympathetic towards Muslims - than the Dalits & OBC's.
even after the government passes the law - it will be interesting to see who are the icons - definitely - i can only imagine - there is a fine line between critique & an insult - i'm willing to tread it - always have.
& stop boring me yaar - u have lost too many issues on foreign policy with me in any case - o-blimey.
regards
feroze
On 13 July 2010 08:45, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@gmail.com> wrote:
Capital letters, i.e. shouting and screaming, reserved for Rohini!
Not too surprising.
(Now, one can expect in response to this one.)
The book, as the press reports go, is an exploration of myths - history of myths. Not history per se.
No one here is defending the book. Except obviously for Feroze and Kishor all others here stood up for freedom of conscience, academic enquiry and free speech and against any gag on the ground of blasphemy.
The state government is coming with a general law on books banning defamation/desecration of icons/idols to the satisfaction of the fascist opponents of free speech.
That's the outcome.
Just recall what Kunda had warned.
Once the Act is in place, if at all, be ready for more fascist tamasha with routine display of ugly muscle power and all!
Sukla
On 13 July 2010 04:20, Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Avinash bhai, you are amongst the few non-Brahmins that I know that find it amusing.
I also thank you for getting me the entire quote.
And that is what we are saying - this joke as you say is not as innocent as it looks.
And quiet interesting that all the ones who created this joke about Shivaji Maharaj's parentage, all belonged to a particular caste & they have all been identified & named.
Thus the simple solution is to delete these few offensive lines & carry on with the rest of the book.
And as we have repeatedly said - no freedom is absolute - people have felt & rightly so that these lines need to be expunged, as they believe & rightly so that their icons have been insulted.
And Kishore has written a good piece.
Tomorrow, there is a meeting at the Marathi Patrakar at 2.30pm, where Retd Justice Kolse Patil, Purshottam Khedekarji, Brigadier Sudhir Sawant, Arjun Dangle, S S Yadav kaka & many representatives of Dalit-OBC-Maratha organizations will be present.
And at least you should have understood the issue by now - it is about caste struggle - as well as freedom of expression.
The state is already panicking & so is the RSS - Mr. Bal Thackeray is already trying to divert the issue to Marathi & FM radios.
The Brahmanical sections did not have a clue as to the self-goal that they were about to strike.
Regards
Feroze
On 13 July 2010 03:37, Avinash Kadam <avinashh50@gmail.com> wrote:
It is amusing this thread carried thus far by those who have not read the book by James Lane "Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India"
Quote
As for the James Lane Book, we are only opposed to the few lines on page number 93, which seek to question the very parentage of Shivaji Maharaj.
On that page, James Lane writes that it was the whispering of 12 Punekar Brahmins in the Bhandarkar institute that told him that the father of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was Dadaji Kondev (a Brahmin.....
Unquote
Feroze's quotation of James Lane is totally wrong.
Here it is what Jame Lane writes on page 93 of his book:-
" The repressed awareness that Shivaji had an absentee father is also revealed by the fact that Maharashtrians tell jokes naughtily suggesting that his guardian Dadaji Kinddev was his biological father. In a sense, because Shivaji's father had little influence on his son, for many narrators it was important to supply him with father replacement, Dadaji and latter Ramdas......."
It is true that the above quoted piece by James Lane is a mockery of historical writing. How one can take naughtily told jokes as evidence of historical fact. James Lane's book is full of such slips. It is not at all a good example of writing of history. So one can severely criticise the book and bring about the linkages of James Lane's writing with the tradition of Brahmanical interpretations of Shivaji's history.
Banning the book is not acceptable.
Avinash
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:39 PM, kishorda_jagtap@yahoo.co.in <kishorda_jagtap@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Sry mainey by mistek likha k i m totaly against of Brahmin
Actualy muze likhna thha i m totaly against of brahmanwaad
Sleep of key board of nokia
Sent from my Nokia phone-----Original Message-----
From: Sukla Sen
Sent: 11/07/2010 1:20:30 pm
To: peace-mumbai; cairo-rafah; citizen-mumbai; awami_bharat@googlegroups.com; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; grey-youth-movement@googlegroups.com; mumbai_intellectuals_voice_and_media_source@yahoogroups.com; muslim_youth_connection@yahoogroups.com; snajeebr@gmail.com; aamir.edresy@gmail.com; shanul_s@yahoo.com; fg-discussions; akhaliq@commitindia.com; Palash Biswas; bharat-chintan@googlegroups.com
Cc: Feroze Mithiborwala; anandpat@gmail.com
Subject: Fwd: [Citizen-Mumbai] Re: PRESS CONFERENCE & PROTEST AGAINST LIFTING OF JAMES LAINE BOOK ON CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: anand patwardhan <anandpat@gmail.com>
Date: 11 July 2010 11:48Subject: Re: [Citizen-Mumbai] Re: PRESS CONFERENCE & PROTEST AGAINST LIFTING
OF JAMES LAINE BOOK ON CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJTo: free-binayaksen@googlegroups.com
dear feroze and friends
i must repeat as this never seems to sink in (as a filmmaker who has tried
to talk about this for decades i feel like a failure when my close friends
still do not reflect):
the concept that women must be *PURE* is a deeply Bramhinical, patriarchal
and fascist concept.
unfortunately those who carry this historical cultural baggage of
patriarchal religion (as they all are except to some extent, buddhism) never
understand where their own emotion springs from.
feroze and allies, without disrespect, i ask you to again reflect on what
makes you angry without reading the book ??? how is your reaction different
from the reaction of Savarkarites when they perceive the difilement of
Bharat Mata, from christian fanatics who defend the VIRGIN mary, from
religions that insist that women's sexuality must be suppressed and hidden
inside a veil ?
i do not demand that you break with your allies and friends whose judgement
you so much trust (did any of them read the book??? if so where did they get
it???) and whose propensity to fascist violence you so conveniently forget,
but when your own common sense and instinct tells you that you are embarked
on a wrong mission, and yet you refuse to change track out of loyalty to
your friends, then i think you do an injustice both to yourself and to your
friends.
btw if you brain tells you that your lawyer lost because he was a malayali,
i would like to say that my lawyer won because he was a malayali!!!
anand
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Daniel Mazgaonkar <daniel.mazgaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Feroze,
>> I totally agree with Sukla. So I do not repeat what he has emphasised from
> his heart.
>
> I only say, that in your reply to all of us, you go to the extent of
> comparing bigger evil, which you assume is siding with Sambhaji Brigade,
> because they do no violence, but you accept that they attacked Bhandarkar
> Insti. and then you go on saying many of us hob nob with leftist who do more
> violence.
>
> Just re-consider Feroze. This again is a very dangerous argument.
>
> Why dont you just think that the Hindutwa's anger began gathering slowly
> step by step for Gandhi, which ultimately culminated in his assasination.
> And shamelessly they call it "Vadh", you know that.
>
> Just consider all these points plus what others like Sukla have brought to
> your notice.
>
> See, we are actually struggling against a very big "Rakshas", which we
> recognise, each one of us, in a different way. You work on Gaza prob,
> Palestinians, we work on globalization, some work on Bhopal, some work on
> women's issues, some on education, of childrens etc. some work on slums. but
> unfortunately, we do not recognise that these are all the different "dresses
> of the one and the same Bahurupia" identity. And we must all stand together
> to give a last and the best fight of all uptil now.
>
> This message, by the way, was very loud and clear in Dr. Anil Sadgopal's
> yesterday's talk. But so many of you have other important things to do, so
> you never attend.
>
> Daniel.
>
>
> On 11 July 2010 07:27, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This culture of banning books, the ugly display of muscle powers, the
>> motto of Democracy for Bush and Autocracy for Me is deeply disturbing.
>>
>> If one has a problem with a book, or a portion of a book, which one can
>> very well have, one is welcome to contest.
>> But demanding a ban on the ground of sacrilege is truly disturbing. That
>> too when it comes with the threat of using violence.
>>
>> As I've not read the book, I've personally nothing to defend the book nor
>> there is any point in my taking up cudgel against it.
>> But the essential point is trying to gag the voice is rather imprudent and
>> morally unacceptable.
>>
>> Here there is another disturbing trait. The attempt to play up the
>> historical frictions between Bramhins and Marathas in the implied belief
>> that it will act as a glue for a projected Bahujan-Muslim alliance.
>> Even if we overlook the ethical basis for such exclusionist alliances
>> based on birth, the implied assumption is all Bramhins are the historical
>> legatees of the sins of their Bramhin ancestors and Marathas the virtues of
>> their Maratha ancestors. And they must be treated accordingly.
>> This implied call for righting *now* the historical wrongs committed in
>> the *past*, too familiar otherwise, is evidently too dangerous.
>>
>> Sukla
>>>> On 11 July 2010 06:50, Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Kavita, Jyoti, Mallika Sarabai, Anand bhai & Daniel bhai,
>>>
>>> As for the James Laine Book, we are only opposed to the few lines on page
>>> number 93, which seek to question the very parentage of Shivaji Maharaj.
>>>
>>> On that page, James Lane writes that it was the whispering of 12 Punekar
>>> Brahmins in the Bhandarkar institute that told him that the father of
>>> Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was Dadaji Kondev (a Brahmin), thus insulting the
>>> very memory of Rajmata Jijau & claiming that Shivaji was a Brahmin - whilst
>>> conveniently forgetting that Shivaji Maharaj was refused his Rajabhishek by
>>> the Brahmin priests of Maharashtra & that the first fatal atack on Shivaji
>>> Maharaj was by Bhaskar Rao Kulkarni, another Brahmin & not by Afzal Khan.
>>>
>>> The Dalit-OBC & Maratha organizations are going to find out who these 12
>>> Brahmins were.
>>>
>>> There is no other problem with the book. Many articles &
>>> books critiquing Shiavji Maharaj have been written & none have objected &
>>> called for a ban.
>>>
>>> The only demand is to delete those few lines & the rest of the book is
>>> very good.
>>>
>>> I have personally not read the book & I have not even been able to obtain
>>> a copy of the same.
>>>
>>> But I trust my Dalit-OBC-Maratha friends in what they say - & they have
>>> never knowingly misled me.
>>>
>>> The greater fault in this entire matter lies with the Maharashtra
>>> government for failing to win the battle mainly due to their lackadaisical
>>> attitude. They had a lawyer from Kerala defending their case, whilst they
>>> could have got the best from Bombay. Intriguing.
>>>
>>> True, Sambhaji Brigade did attack the Bhandarker institute & we, the
>>> Awami Bharat or Bharat Bachao Andolan - have not supported that action.
>>>
>>> Most of the Secular & Left political parties that we all hob-nob with are
>>> far more violent & have killed far more people than the Sambhaji Brigade.
>>> And to my knowledge the Sambhaji Brigade has not killed anybody. Do correct
>>> me if I am wrong.
>>>
>>> The other is the Maratha movement in Maharashtra, especailly the Maratha
>>> Seva Sangh that is trying to break the shackles of Brahmanic Religion &
>>> Culture that the dominant Maratha castes still follow. The Shiv Dharma
>>> movement was initiated by them as well amongst other key people as well -
>>> namely A H Salunke.
>>>
>>> The Maratha Seva Sangh has blunted the anti-Dalit & anti-Muslim edge of
>>> the RSS lobbies active within the Maratha community, as the overwhelming
>>> atrocities on the Dalit community have been perpetrated by the Marathas.
>>>
>>> And today also at the Press Conference we made it very clear that we will
>>> oppose the James Laine book through non-violent stayagraha & will not be
>>> part of any violent action.
>>>
>>> I understand the sentiment with which people are reacting, but our ground
>>> realities are for us to assess. Many a Left Union works with the Shiv Sena &
>>> its affiliates, just as the Left Unions do work with the BJP & its Unions,
>>> both at the State & the National level.
>>>
>>> Though for me the Sambhaji Brigade is a Secular organization & I know
>>> them personally & all our Dalit & OBC friends attend their meetings & we
>>> have not found them otherwise.
>>>
>>> Our friends from other castes could have a different opinion.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Feroze
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10 July 2010 16:47, Kavita Srivastava <kavisriv@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Feroze,
>>>>
>>>> I was very disturbed to read your email. Not only do you believe in
>>>> promoting undemocratic values like banning books but I also see the
>>>> name of Sambhaji Brigade which is your partner in organising this
>>>> press conference.
>>>>
>>>> I remember very clearly that Sambhaji Brigade had lead the attacks on
>>>> the Bhandarkar Oriental research Institute in 2003 when James Laine's
>>>> book was out. They had destroyed the Institute. I remember hearing
>>>> the tragedy of it all from the late Prof Dilip Chitre's himself. How
>>>> call you ally with those who epxress their opinion with a lathi. If
>>>> there was a difference with the book there are other democratic ways
>>>> of responding
>>>>
>>>> And Feroze, while we all have tremendous problems with the biases of
>>>> the Judiciary. But you cannot say that a judgement of upholding the
>>>> Freedom of Speech and expression is out of a Brahmanical bias of the
>>>> SC. That is being very short sighted. I hope you will call of this
>>>> programm of yours and also delink yourself from organisations like
>>>> sambhaji brigade. Which are clones of the Shiv Sena.
>>>>
>>>> Kavita
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Feroze Mithiborwala
>>>> <feroze.moses777@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > SHIVRAJYA PARTY / SAMBHAJI BRIGADE / BHARAT BACHAO ANDOLAN / MARATHI
>>>> BHARTI
>>>> > PROTEST AGAINST LIFTING OF JAMES LAINE BOOK ON CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI
>>>> MAHARAJ
>>>> > PRESS CONFERENCE: MARATHI PATRAKAR, CST / JULY 10, SATURDAY, 2009 /
>>>> 3-4pm.
>>>> > FOLLOWED BY A PROTEST- JAIL BHARO ANDOLAN & COURT ARREST: AZAD
>>>> MAIDAN, CST / JULY 10, SATURDAY, 2009 / 4-5pm
>>>> > WE OPPOSE THE LIFTING OF THE BAN ON THE BOOK BY JAMES LAINE THAT HAS
>>>> INSULTED THE MEMORY OF CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ BY QUESTIONING HIS VERY
>>>> FAMILY ANTECEDENTS. HIS VERY MOTHER, THE REVERED RAJMATA JIJAU, WHO IS A
>>>> VENERATED FIGURE WITHIN THE NON-BRAHMIN MASSES OF MAHARASHTRA HAS BEEN THE
>>>> TARGET OF THIS CALUMNY & THUS THE UPROAR AMONGST THE BAHUJAN-DALIT, OBC &
>>>> MARATHA MASSES & THIS CUTS ACROSS ALL RELIGIONS OF THE MARATHI PEOPLE.
>>>> > THIS IS CLEARLY THE RESULT OF THE STRANGLEHOLD OF THE CASTEIST
>>>> BRAHMANICAL FORCES WITHIN THE BUREAUCRACY, ESPECIALLY THE JUDICIARY.
>>>> > WE THUS ALSO DEMAND THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF RESERVATION BE EXTENDED TO
>>>> THE JUDICIARY, IF THIS DISCRIMINATION & CASTEIST BIAS IS EVER TO END.
>>>> > BRIGADIER SUDHIR SAWANT (STATE PRESIDENT, SHIVRAJYA PARTY),
>>>> > KISHORE JAGTAP (NATIONAL PRESIDENT, MARATHI BHARTI),
>>>> > FEROZE MITHIBORWALA (NATIONAL PRESIDENT, BHARAT BACHAO ANDOLAN),
>>>> > JYOTI BADEKAR, VILAS GAIKWAD, YAWAR ALI KAZI, SANJAY SAKHARKAR, PRAMOD
>>>> SHINDE, JAGDISH NAGARKAR, MULNIWASI MALA, PRAVEEN AMRE, SUDHIR DAWALE, SHYAM
>>>> SONAR, AVINASH KAMBLE, HARSHAVARDHAN VARTAK, PRAVEEN BANGERA, POOJA BADEKAR,
>>>> AARTI BONKAR, AMOL MADAME & OTHERS.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Kavita Srivastava
>>>> (General Secretary) PUCL Rajasthan
>>>>
>>>> Address for correspondence :
>>>>
>>>> 76, Shanti Niketan Colony, Kisan Marg, Barkat Nagar, Jaipur-302015
>>>> Tel. 0141-2594131
>>>> mobile: 9351562965
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Feroze Mithiborwala
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Citizen-Mumbai" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to citizen-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to>>> citizen-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<citizen-mumbai%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/citizen-mumbai?hl=en.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -->> Peace Is Doable
>>
>> -->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Free Binayak Sen" group.
>> To post to this group, send an email to free-binayaksen@googlegroups.com.>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> free-binayaksen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<free-binayaksen%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at> --
> You may charge me with murder --
> Or want of sense
> (We are all of us weak at times):
> But the slightest approach to a false pretence
> Was never among my crimes.
>
> --> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Free Binayak Sen" group.
> To post to this group, send an email to free-binayaksen@googlegroups.com.> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> free-binayaksen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<free-binayaksen%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Free Binayak Sen" group.
To post to this group, send an email to free-binayaksen@googlegroups.com.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
free-binayaksen+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<free-binayaksen%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
.
For more options, visit this group at--
Peace Is Doable
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Citizen-Mumbai" group.
To post to this group, send email to citizen-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to citizen-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/citizen-mumbai?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Citizen-Mumbai" group.
To post to this group, send email to citizen-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to citizen-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/citizen-mumbai?hl=en.
--
Feroze Mithiborwala
--
Peace Is Doable
--
Feroze Mithiborwala
--
Feroze Mithiborwala
--
Peace Is Doable
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peace Mumbai" group.
To post to this group, send email to peace-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to peace-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/peace-mumbai?hl=en.
--
Feroze Mithiborwala
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment