The Times of India
Rajasthan minister drops Akbar’s name from Ajmer fort
Shoeb Khan | TNN | Updated: Mar 5, 2017, 01.51 AM IST
Highlights
- ‘Akbar ka Qila’ was quietly renamed ‘Ajmer ka Qila and Sangrahalaya’
- The name was changed on the orders of a BJP Rajasthan minister and RSS member
- The fort, built by Akbar in 1570, carried his name even when the Rathors, Marathas and the British ruled the land
JAIPUR: A fort built by Mughal emperor Akbar and known to the ages that followed as 'Akbar ka Qila' was quietly renamed 'Ajmer ka Qila and Sangrahalaya' in 2015 merely on the verbal orders of a sub-divisional magistrate acting on the proposal of a BJP Rajasthan minister and RSS member.
No expert committee. No scrutiny by a panel of academics. Nothing. Except the whim of Rajasthan education minister Vasudev Devnani who has in the past expounded on cow dung offering protection against radioactivity and cows exhaling pure oxygen. The fort, built by the Mughal emperor in 1570, carried his name even when the Rathors, Marathas and the British ruled the land.
The original name of the fort in Ajmer enjoys legal sanction from a gazette notification of December 12, 1968 that states the title of the fort is Akbar ka Qila, or Magazine, or Daulat Khana. No amendment has been effected since then.
Not until Rajasthan minister Vasudev Devnani, who is also an MLA from Ajmer North, had an idea he thought historic: Propose to the administration that the name be changed to 'Ajmer ka Qila'. The then sub-divisional magistrate, Harphool Yadav, consequently issued verbal orders that the name be changed. Officials then placed a plaque above the entrance that read 'Ajmer ka Qila and Sangrahalaya'.
The renaming surfaced after a letter in the last week of February by one Tarannum Chishti (identity not confirmed by police) threatened the minister, Devnani, with dire consequences if the name of the fort did not revert to the original.
Textbooks changed too
Major changes in textbooks in the state followed the 2015 renaming of the fort, including the education department dropping the suffix 'the Great' that usually follows emperor Akbar's name. Repeated calls and texts sent by TOI to the director of the state Archaeological Survey of India, Hridesh Kumar Sharma, elicited no response. The building is a declared protected site under the Archaeological Survey of India as 'Magazine building and Akbar Fort'.
Defending his decision, Devnani told TOI: "The renaming was done to respect the sentiments of the general public. This fort has always been named after the historic city of Ajmer, which has existed since the 9th century (AD), and nothing has been changed in the fort — the garden, arches, galleries etc. Above all, the structure has nothing which personally belonged to Akbar."
History contradicts Devnani's claims. The oldest reference to this fort is found in the journal of Sir Thomas Roe, the ambassador of King James I of England to the Mughal court. When Roe asked emperor Jahangir at the fort in 1615 for a piece of land in the Deccan, he referred to the fort as 'Akbar's palace'. A manuscript placed on a second entrance wall (on the right side) in 'Hindvi' script reads 'Akbar-Ki-Qila'. The script, in the old Devnagari, dates back 300 years.
Officials at the fort have repeatedly sought Hridesh Sharma's guidance regarding the new name on the board but have received no response.
'Ajmer Historical and Descriptive', a book by jurist and academic Har Bilas Sarda, describes the building as the royal residence of emperors Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan, indicating the historical significance of this fort.
|
Showing posts with label Monument. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Monument. Show all posts
March 06, 2017
June 15, 2015
'The Imambaras are not meant for tourism': Shia cleric locks the gates of Islamic heritage site
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3114570/The-Imambaras-not-meant-tourism-Shia-cleric-locks-gates-Islamic-heritage-site.html
By Piyush Srivastava
Published: 21:31 GMT, 7 June 2015 | Updated: 21:33 GMT, 7 June 2015
Noted Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Jawad has kicked up a controversy by saying the Bara Imambaras, popularly known as Bhool Bhulaiya and Chhota Imambara in Lucknow, are not meant for tourism.
His followers have locked its gates and declared that it will only be used for religious purposes and mourning during Moharram.
“The Imambaras are not meant for tourism. They are only for religious purposes like namaz and mourning. The authorities had thrown it open many decades ago for people to mint money. Although its earnings were not used for the welfare of poor Muslims, many officers became rich by siphoning off its income,” Jawad alleged.
Maulana Kalbe Jawad said the site was meant only for religious purposes
The Imambaras are managed by Hussainabad and Allied Trust (HAT), which is controlled by the state government through Lucknow District Administration.
Jawad is Imam-e-Juma of Asifi Masjid on the premises of Bhool Bhuliaya.
His followers have also launched protests and are holding a demonstration near the Imambara to mount pressure on the Samajwadi Party government to remove Waseem Rizvi from the post of chairman of Shia Muslim Waqf Board.
Reacting to Jawad’s statement, Rizvi said: “The two Imambaras had been thrown open for the tourists many decades ago. Since then thousands of tourists from across the country come here to see the monuments. It is simply illegal to lock the gates of the monument and deprive the people from seeing it.”
The followers of Maulana Kalbe Jawad put locks on the gates of Lucknow’s most prominent Islamic monument - the Asafi Imambara
“Instead of trying to impose a Talibani rule, those who have some grudges against us should talk to the government and reach a solution,” he said.
Bara Imambara was built by Asaf-ud-Daula, Nawab of Lucknow, in 1784 to provide jobs to the people who were suffering because of famine. The building is also known as Asafi Imambara.
The three-dimensional labyrinth with interconnected passages through 489 identical doorways is known as Bhool Bhulaiya (the labyrinth).
Since this occupies a major portion of the Imambara, the tourists conventionally refer the entire building as Bhool Bhulaiya.
A stranger cannot enter or come out of this passage without the help of a guide.
By Piyush Srivastava
Published: 21:31 GMT, 7 June 2015 | Updated: 21:33 GMT, 7 June 2015
Noted Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Jawad has kicked up a controversy by saying the Bara Imambaras, popularly known as Bhool Bhulaiya and Chhota Imambara in Lucknow, are not meant for tourism.
His followers have locked its gates and declared that it will only be used for religious purposes and mourning during Moharram.
“The Imambaras are not meant for tourism. They are only for religious purposes like namaz and mourning. The authorities had thrown it open many decades ago for people to mint money. Although its earnings were not used for the welfare of poor Muslims, many officers became rich by siphoning off its income,” Jawad alleged.
Maulana Kalbe Jawad said the site was meant only for religious purposes
The Imambaras are managed by Hussainabad and Allied Trust (HAT), which is controlled by the state government through Lucknow District Administration.
Jawad is Imam-e-Juma of Asifi Masjid on the premises of Bhool Bhuliaya.
His followers have also launched protests and are holding a demonstration near the Imambara to mount pressure on the Samajwadi Party government to remove Waseem Rizvi from the post of chairman of Shia Muslim Waqf Board.
Reacting to Jawad’s statement, Rizvi said: “The two Imambaras had been thrown open for the tourists many decades ago. Since then thousands of tourists from across the country come here to see the monuments. It is simply illegal to lock the gates of the monument and deprive the people from seeing it.”
The followers of Maulana Kalbe Jawad put locks on the gates of Lucknow’s most prominent Islamic monument - the Asafi Imambara
“Instead of trying to impose a Talibani rule, those who have some grudges against us should talk to the government and reach a solution,” he said.
Bara Imambara was built by Asaf-ud-Daula, Nawab of Lucknow, in 1784 to provide jobs to the people who were suffering because of famine. The building is also known as Asafi Imambara.
The three-dimensional labyrinth with interconnected passages through 489 identical doorways is known as Bhool Bhulaiya (the labyrinth).
Since this occupies a major portion of the Imambara, the tourists conventionally refer the entire building as Bhool Bhulaiya.
A stranger cannot enter or come out of this passage without the help of a guide.
March 26, 2015
India: RSS' Lawyers Move Court to Claim Taj Mahal as a Shiva Temple
DC | J. Venkatesan | March 26, 2015
New Delhi: At a time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is keen on avoiding any controversy on religious issues, six advocates with RSS leanings moved the Agra city civil court on Wednesday seeking a declaration that the Taj Mahal is actually a Shiva temple!
The plaintiffs, Hari Shankar Jain and five others, named Lord Agreshwar Mahadev as the main plaintiff to claim ownership of the property, now under the control and maintenance of the Archaeological Survey of India. The suit seeks a direction to remove all alleged burials under the Taj Mahal; as well as to restrain worship by Muslims and to allow worship of Lord Shiva by Hindus. This suit was filed even as the title suit for the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi site in Ayodhya is pending adjudication in the Supreme Court.
The suit claimed ownership for the building complex along with a building (claimed to be a masjid) towards the west and a replica building in the east, along with the garden, western, eastern and southern gates situated within a boundary wall over Khasra No. 12 measuring 77 bighas and four biswas.
The suit claimed the entire temple was the seat of Lord Agreshwar Mahadev Naagnatheshwar since time immemorial, and that the property belonged to the deity. It said: “The property in suit is not a burial ground and has never been so in the past. There exists no real grave in the entire suit property. The use of the suit property for purposes other than Hindu ‘pooja’ and worship of the deity is unlawful and has become unconstitutional since the enforcement of the Constitution. The deity is a perpetual minor under Hindu law. The property once vested in the deity continues to be the deity’s property and even the King could not have taken or transferred the possession of HIS property.”
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/150326/nation-current-affairs/article/%E2%80%98rss%E2%80%99-lawyers-now-move-court-claim-taj-mahal
New Delhi: At a time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is keen on avoiding any controversy on religious issues, six advocates with RSS leanings moved the Agra city civil court on Wednesday seeking a declaration that the Taj Mahal is actually a Shiva temple!
The plaintiffs, Hari Shankar Jain and five others, named Lord Agreshwar Mahadev as the main plaintiff to claim ownership of the property, now under the control and maintenance of the Archaeological Survey of India. The suit seeks a direction to remove all alleged burials under the Taj Mahal; as well as to restrain worship by Muslims and to allow worship of Lord Shiva by Hindus. This suit was filed even as the title suit for the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi site in Ayodhya is pending adjudication in the Supreme Court.
The suit claimed ownership for the building complex along with a building (claimed to be a masjid) towards the west and a replica building in the east, along with the garden, western, eastern and southern gates situated within a boundary wall over Khasra No. 12 measuring 77 bighas and four biswas.
The suit claimed the entire temple was the seat of Lord Agreshwar Mahadev Naagnatheshwar since time immemorial, and that the property belonged to the deity. It said: “The property in suit is not a burial ground and has never been so in the past. There exists no real grave in the entire suit property. The use of the suit property for purposes other than Hindu ‘pooja’ and worship of the deity is unlawful and has become unconstitutional since the enforcement of the Constitution. The deity is a perpetual minor under Hindu law. The property once vested in the deity continues to be the deity’s property and even the King could not have taken or transferred the possession of HIS property.”
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/150326/nation-current-affairs/article/%E2%80%98rss%E2%80%99-lawyers-now-move-court-claim-taj-mahal
December 07, 2014
UP BJP chief Laxmikant Bajpai claims Tajmahal was an anciet temple
Taj Mahal part of ancient temple, claims UP BJP chief
PTI | Dec 7, 2014, 08.02 PM IST
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Taj-Mahal-part-of-ancient-temple-claims-UP-BJP-chief/articleshow/45404592.cms
PTI | Dec 7, 2014, 08.02 PM IST
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Taj-Mahal-part-of-ancient-temple-claims-UP-BJP-chief/articleshow/45404592.cms
November 22, 2014
October 05, 2013
India: six decades and more secularism has gradually been reduced to nothing more than a creed that is more professed than practiced
From: The Hindu
New Delhi, October 5, 2013
Heritage bartered
Sohail Hashmi
Can protected monuments be handed over to claimants? In Delhi, that is precisely what has been done
It is easy to inscribe secular on your constitution, it is easier to profess it and chant it ritually. But to adhere to the basics of secular conduct is no child’s play, more so in countries where the population is overwhelmingly aligned to one denominational category. Pakistan with 95-98 per cent Muslim population chose the easy way out and declared herself an Islamic republic. India, with 85 per cent of its population professing to be Hindus, chose the more difficult path and declared herself a secular democracy. Unfortunately, over the last six decades and more secularism has gradually been reduced to nothing more than a creed that is more professed than practiced.
The past is the arena of the battles being fought in the present for hegemony over the minds of the future generations. If the secularists win the battle of privileging and foregrounding the syncretic in our traditions there is hope for the idea of India as a secular and inclusive society, but if the obscurantists succeed in their efforts then we face a bleak future. A future that would mirror the goings-on in the ‘Islamic republic’ stares us in the face.
One could cite numerous examples to show how the secular is being constantly eroded in the name of secularism and harmony, but for the moment one should suffice to show how we approach our past.
The past we are talking about would perhaps fall between the late 14 to early 15 Century or a little later coinciding with the rule of the Tughlaqs, the Saiyads and the Lodis. A large baoli (step well) was constructed during this period in what is now the heart of New Delhi.
The well in this imposing structure is located to the south and steps descend from the north. The baoli measures approximately 60 metres from north to south. At the head of the steps there is a platform with a mosque on its western side, the entry to the baoli is also from an opening in the western wall, accessed through a staircase built along the western flank of the baoli. The construction is typically Sultanate period, rubble held together with a mortar of crushed bricks and slaked lime-stone with the exposed surfaces given a cladding of dressed stones. The stone used is the locally available Delhi Quartz that was mined from the Arravalis.
The Delhi Quartz could not be carved, because of the large size of its crystals and that is why all structures built during this period were given a thick layer of plaster that was later incised, while still wet, with calligraphic, floral or geometric designs known as stucco. The layers of plaster have peeled off, during the intervening centuries of neglect, revealing the bare walls that are exposed to the vagaries of the elements.
This then is the appearance of most structures built during the Sultanate period; exceptional structures like the Qutub Minar and the mausoleum of Ghyas-ud-Din Tughlaq make extensive use of sand stone and marble that must have been brought in from Rajasthan at great cost and after much effort.
For some strange reason this large baoli, marked with its typical Central Asian arches and built with rubble held together with lime stone and brick mortar -- a binding material whose extensive use is co-terminus with the Sultanate period -- has come to be associated, in popular perception, with Raja Ugrasen.
This association is despite the fact that there is no mention of a Raja Ugrasen in history text books, certainly not as a ruler or a major noble in the 15 and early 16 Century and despite the fact that monumental Indian architecture predating the arrival of the Central Asians was marked by the use of huge blocks of interlocking dressed stones with minimal use of binding material, those insisting on a Raja Ugrsen connection have persisted.
We are a democracy and we do not stop people from flying their own imaginary kites, but problems begin to crop up when popular perceptions begin to take precedence over established principles. Those who claim that this structure was built by Raja Ugrsen have been demanding that the structure be handed over to them. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has done precisely that, by signing an MOU with the claimants and entrusting them with the responsibility of looking after the monument.
The Aggarwal Samaj that claims descent from Raja Ugrasen has been handed over the monument. They have been given permission to place a guard on the premises and permitted also to keep a Porta Cabin inside the monument, a stack of chairs has been stored inside the mosque, a small room next to the mosque is now occupied by the chowkidar appointed by the Samaj. An ugly water tank has been installed near the entry to the baoli and the laundry of the chowkidar welcomes visitors to the site. All protected monuments open to public at sunrise but this baoli opens only at 9 am. Who is in-charge and who is setting the rules?
The issue was brought to the notice of the ASI and the Aggarwal Samaj was ticked off by the ASI. It wasn’t even a month ago that they had promised that these things will be discontinued, till 6 pm on Friday, Oct 3, 2013, nothing had changed
When a group of worshippers had taken over six mosques in different parts of south Delhi in March April 2009, the ASI was persuaded to move and evict the encroachers. But what do we do when the ASI begins to handover its own protected monuments?
This is a question that raises doubts even about the ‘sarvdharm sambhav’ twist that we have given to secularism. Do you apply the same principles in every case of claims and counter-claims on a heritage structure or do you succumb to those who can create a bigger nuisance and browbeat those who cannot?
New Delhi, October 5, 2013
Heritage bartered
Sohail Hashmi
Can protected monuments be handed over to claimants? In Delhi, that is precisely what has been done
It is easy to inscribe secular on your constitution, it is easier to profess it and chant it ritually. But to adhere to the basics of secular conduct is no child’s play, more so in countries where the population is overwhelmingly aligned to one denominational category. Pakistan with 95-98 per cent Muslim population chose the easy way out and declared herself an Islamic republic. India, with 85 per cent of its population professing to be Hindus, chose the more difficult path and declared herself a secular democracy. Unfortunately, over the last six decades and more secularism has gradually been reduced to nothing more than a creed that is more professed than practiced.
The past is the arena of the battles being fought in the present for hegemony over the minds of the future generations. If the secularists win the battle of privileging and foregrounding the syncretic in our traditions there is hope for the idea of India as a secular and inclusive society, but if the obscurantists succeed in their efforts then we face a bleak future. A future that would mirror the goings-on in the ‘Islamic republic’ stares us in the face.
One could cite numerous examples to show how the secular is being constantly eroded in the name of secularism and harmony, but for the moment one should suffice to show how we approach our past.
The past we are talking about would perhaps fall between the late 14 to early 15 Century or a little later coinciding with the rule of the Tughlaqs, the Saiyads and the Lodis. A large baoli (step well) was constructed during this period in what is now the heart of New Delhi.
The well in this imposing structure is located to the south and steps descend from the north. The baoli measures approximately 60 metres from north to south. At the head of the steps there is a platform with a mosque on its western side, the entry to the baoli is also from an opening in the western wall, accessed through a staircase built along the western flank of the baoli. The construction is typically Sultanate period, rubble held together with a mortar of crushed bricks and slaked lime-stone with the exposed surfaces given a cladding of dressed stones. The stone used is the locally available Delhi Quartz that was mined from the Arravalis.
The Delhi Quartz could not be carved, because of the large size of its crystals and that is why all structures built during this period were given a thick layer of plaster that was later incised, while still wet, with calligraphic, floral or geometric designs known as stucco. The layers of plaster have peeled off, during the intervening centuries of neglect, revealing the bare walls that are exposed to the vagaries of the elements.
This then is the appearance of most structures built during the Sultanate period; exceptional structures like the Qutub Minar and the mausoleum of Ghyas-ud-Din Tughlaq make extensive use of sand stone and marble that must have been brought in from Rajasthan at great cost and after much effort.
For some strange reason this large baoli, marked with its typical Central Asian arches and built with rubble held together with lime stone and brick mortar -- a binding material whose extensive use is co-terminus with the Sultanate period -- has come to be associated, in popular perception, with Raja Ugrasen.
This association is despite the fact that there is no mention of a Raja Ugrasen in history text books, certainly not as a ruler or a major noble in the 15 and early 16 Century and despite the fact that monumental Indian architecture predating the arrival of the Central Asians was marked by the use of huge blocks of interlocking dressed stones with minimal use of binding material, those insisting on a Raja Ugrsen connection have persisted.
We are a democracy and we do not stop people from flying their own imaginary kites, but problems begin to crop up when popular perceptions begin to take precedence over established principles. Those who claim that this structure was built by Raja Ugrsen have been demanding that the structure be handed over to them. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has done precisely that, by signing an MOU with the claimants and entrusting them with the responsibility of looking after the monument.
The Aggarwal Samaj that claims descent from Raja Ugrasen has been handed over the monument. They have been given permission to place a guard on the premises and permitted also to keep a Porta Cabin inside the monument, a stack of chairs has been stored inside the mosque, a small room next to the mosque is now occupied by the chowkidar appointed by the Samaj. An ugly water tank has been installed near the entry to the baoli and the laundry of the chowkidar welcomes visitors to the site. All protected monuments open to public at sunrise but this baoli opens only at 9 am. Who is in-charge and who is setting the rules?
The issue was brought to the notice of the ASI and the Aggarwal Samaj was ticked off by the ASI. It wasn’t even a month ago that they had promised that these things will be discontinued, till 6 pm on Friday, Oct 3, 2013, nothing had changed
When a group of worshippers had taken over six mosques in different parts of south Delhi in March April 2009, the ASI was persuaded to move and evict the encroachers. But what do we do when the ASI begins to handover its own protected monuments?
This is a question that raises doubts even about the ‘sarvdharm sambhav’ twist that we have given to secularism. Do you apply the same principles in every case of claims and counter-claims on a heritage structure or do you succumb to those who can create a bigger nuisance and browbeat those who cannot?
March 08, 2012
Karnataka: Durga idol placed for worhsip at Buddhist stupa site
From: Tehelka, March 10, 2012
Idol Worship Sparks Buddhist Fury
By Imran Khan
A historical Buddhist site near Gulbarga, 584 km from Bengaluru, where the first inscribed image of Ashoka was discovered, has become the latest communal flashpoint in Karnataka. For the past two weeks, Dalit organisations and a Buddhist monk have been protesting against what they claim is an attempt by Hindus to appropriate the monument by placing a Durga idol. Four Dalits and a Buddhist monk have been arrested for removing the idol. However, the protesters claim that they had removed the idol only to take it to the deputy commissioner's office when they were arrested. In 1986, a Buddhist stupa dating back to 1st century BC was discovered in Sannati, around 70 km from Gulbarga. It is believed that Ashoka sent his son Mahindra and daughter Sanghamitra as emissaries to spread Buddhism in this region, which is now considered the most backward district in Karnataka. Subsequent excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) have established Sannati as an important historical site.
"On 5 February, a group of Dalits led by a Buddhist monk tried to forcibly take away the Durga idol," says R Vishal, deputy commissioner of Gulbarga city. "The area is a protected monument and ASI is conducting excavations there. When ASI men tried to stop them, they pushed them and ran away. Before the situation could get out of control and communal tension could be created, we caught them. A case has been lodged." Buddhist monk Bodhidhamma Banteji, who is in judicial custody, says, "A sinister plan has been carried out all over India. Look at the cases of Khaneri, Elephanta and Mahalakshmi in Mumbai and Karla and Mansari in Nasik and Nagpur. Efforts have been made to ascribe a Hindu connection to Buddhist places of worship." "I have been coming to this place for the past 10 years as part of my dissertation on Sannati. I never found this idol or any Hindu relic at this place. Suddenly we saw rituals taking place and this idol sprouting up," says Banteji.
Banteji and four Dalit leaders have been booked under various IPC sections for promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, unlawful assembly intended to outrage religious feelings. Surprisingly none of the accused have been booked for trespassing, theft or damaging a historical site. When contacted, DK Ravi, assistant commissioner of Sedam taluk (where the complaint has been lodged) and administrator of Sannati Budhha Stupa Development Authority, refused to comment. The accused allege that the complaint was filed based on Ravi's insistence.
"When I saw this idol, I immediately informed the local authorities and the district administration. Even after my constant reminders, they didn't take any action. I couldn't have just sat back and watched the cultural heritage of Buddhism being destroyed," says Banteji. "Look at the absurdity of this case. The complaint has been lodged by a Muslim (ASI worker Azeem) against Buddhists and Dalits for hurting his religious sentiments. Whereas the deity in question is a Hindu idol," says the defendants' lawyer Mazhar Hussain. He claims Banteji has been targeted specifically as he's been instrumental in converting over 15,000 Dalits to Buddhism since 1995.
ASI Deputy Superintendent Dr JK Patnaik rubbishes the claims. He cites a study conducted by ASI in 1989 to prove that the practice of Durga worship was prevalent at the time when the government acquired the place in 2002, and subsequently declared a protected site in 2003. "The idol dates back to the 9th century AD - Rashtrakutas period - and had not been installed there," he says. He admits that ASI is allowing rituals to take place as discontinuing the practice would incur "the wrath of locals". Local Hindu groups led by BJP MLA Valmiki Nayak have been demanding puja to be allowed at the site. "Twenty years ago, the site belonged to a villager who used to worship Durga. Hence we demanded that puja should be allowed. Those who say that the place only belongs to Buddhists and that this place is only Buddha Vihar are troublemakers," he says.
http://tehelka.com/story_main52.asp?filename=Ne100312Idol.asp
Idol Worship Sparks Buddhist Fury
By Imran Khan
A historical Buddhist site near Gulbarga, 584 km from Bengaluru, where the first inscribed image of Ashoka was discovered, has become the latest communal flashpoint in Karnataka. For the past two weeks, Dalit organisations and a Buddhist monk have been protesting against what they claim is an attempt by Hindus to appropriate the monument by placing a Durga idol. Four Dalits and a Buddhist monk have been arrested for removing the idol. However, the protesters claim that they had removed the idol only to take it to the deputy commissioner's office when they were arrested. In 1986, a Buddhist stupa dating back to 1st century BC was discovered in Sannati, around 70 km from Gulbarga. It is believed that Ashoka sent his son Mahindra and daughter Sanghamitra as emissaries to spread Buddhism in this region, which is now considered the most backward district in Karnataka. Subsequent excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) have established Sannati as an important historical site.
"On 5 February, a group of Dalits led by a Buddhist monk tried to forcibly take away the Durga idol," says R Vishal, deputy commissioner of Gulbarga city. "The area is a protected monument and ASI is conducting excavations there. When ASI men tried to stop them, they pushed them and ran away. Before the situation could get out of control and communal tension could be created, we caught them. A case has been lodged." Buddhist monk Bodhidhamma Banteji, who is in judicial custody, says, "A sinister plan has been carried out all over India. Look at the cases of Khaneri, Elephanta and Mahalakshmi in Mumbai and Karla and Mansari in Nasik and Nagpur. Efforts have been made to ascribe a Hindu connection to Buddhist places of worship." "I have been coming to this place for the past 10 years as part of my dissertation on Sannati. I never found this idol or any Hindu relic at this place. Suddenly we saw rituals taking place and this idol sprouting up," says Banteji.
Banteji and four Dalit leaders have been booked under various IPC sections for promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, unlawful assembly intended to outrage religious feelings. Surprisingly none of the accused have been booked for trespassing, theft or damaging a historical site. When contacted, DK Ravi, assistant commissioner of Sedam taluk (where the complaint has been lodged) and administrator of Sannati Budhha Stupa Development Authority, refused to comment. The accused allege that the complaint was filed based on Ravi's insistence.
"When I saw this idol, I immediately informed the local authorities and the district administration. Even after my constant reminders, they didn't take any action. I couldn't have just sat back and watched the cultural heritage of Buddhism being destroyed," says Banteji. "Look at the absurdity of this case. The complaint has been lodged by a Muslim (ASI worker Azeem) against Buddhists and Dalits for hurting his religious sentiments. Whereas the deity in question is a Hindu idol," says the defendants' lawyer Mazhar Hussain. He claims Banteji has been targeted specifically as he's been instrumental in converting over 15,000 Dalits to Buddhism since 1995.
ASI Deputy Superintendent Dr JK Patnaik rubbishes the claims. He cites a study conducted by ASI in 1989 to prove that the practice of Durga worship was prevalent at the time when the government acquired the place in 2002, and subsequently declared a protected site in 2003. "The idol dates back to the 9th century AD - Rashtrakutas period - and had not been installed there," he says. He admits that ASI is allowing rituals to take place as discontinuing the practice would incur "the wrath of locals". Local Hindu groups led by BJP MLA Valmiki Nayak have been demanding puja to be allowed at the site. "Twenty years ago, the site belonged to a villager who used to worship Durga. Hence we demanded that puja should be allowed. Those who say that the place only belongs to Buddhists and that this place is only Buddha Vihar are troublemakers," he says.
http://tehelka.com/story_main52.asp?filename=Ne100312Idol.asp
January 19, 2011
Unauthorised prayers at many heritage monuments in Delhi
Hindustan Times
‘Prayers are held at many protected sites’
Nivedita Khandekar, Hindustan Times
New Delhi, January 19, 2011
It isn’t just Noor Masjid incident in Jangpura that has seen Friday prayers turn into a dispute because of ownership of land. Several heritage monuments in the city have witnessed similar situation. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), the custodian of heritage monuments, has admitted in reply to a query under Right to Information (RTI) Act that there are a dozen monuments under its Delhi circle that witnesses Friday prayers in an unauthorised manner.
In reply to a query by Afroz Aalam Sahil, an RTI activist from Batla House, Jamia Nagar, the ASI has submitted a list of 12 monuments under its protection wherein Friday prayers are held in unauthorised manner against the provision of the Ancient Monuments & Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and Rules 1959 (AM & ASR Act 1958 and Rules 1959).
This Act was amended last year.
The list includes heritage monuments like Nili Masjid, Qutb Mosque (inside the Qutb premises), Palam Mosque, Razia Sultan’s tomb, Jami Masjid inside Kotla Firozshah complex, Sunehari Masjid, just outside the Red Fort, Safdarjung mosque and Khairul Manzil mosque among others.
There are 174 monuments and heritage structures under the ASI. Of these, the agency claimed only 30 could be termed religious structures. “Out of these 30, prayers were organised at the time of notification at only three monuments — Palam Mosque, Nili Masjid and Sunehari Masjid,” the ASI said on December 27, 2010.
The reply is significant in wake of the Jangpura incident last week wherein there was a spurt in violence and the area was on the brink of violence following demolition of an allegedly illegal mosque on land belonging to Delhi Development Authority (DDA) following a Delhi High Court order.
Said Sahil, the RTI applicant, “There are a number of cases/disputes owing to Friday prayers. I wanted to analyse it to study community matters in view of the dispute between Wakf Board and the ASI.” “Under the AM&ASR Act 1958 and Rules 1959, prayers or any kind of worship is allowed at any protected monument only if the same was being held at the time of notification. We go by the land of the law,” said ASI director general Gautam Sengupta.
‘Prayers are held at many protected sites’
Nivedita Khandekar, Hindustan Times
New Delhi, January 19, 2011
It isn’t just Noor Masjid incident in Jangpura that has seen Friday prayers turn into a dispute because of ownership of land. Several heritage monuments in the city have witnessed similar situation. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), the custodian of heritage monuments, has admitted in reply to a query under Right to Information (RTI) Act that there are a dozen monuments under its Delhi circle that witnesses Friday prayers in an unauthorised manner.
In reply to a query by Afroz Aalam Sahil, an RTI activist from Batla House, Jamia Nagar, the ASI has submitted a list of 12 monuments under its protection wherein Friday prayers are held in unauthorised manner against the provision of the Ancient Monuments & Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and Rules 1959 (AM & ASR Act 1958 and Rules 1959).
This Act was amended last year.
The list includes heritage monuments like Nili Masjid, Qutb Mosque (inside the Qutb premises), Palam Mosque, Razia Sultan’s tomb, Jami Masjid inside Kotla Firozshah complex, Sunehari Masjid, just outside the Red Fort, Safdarjung mosque and Khairul Manzil mosque among others.
There are 174 monuments and heritage structures under the ASI. Of these, the agency claimed only 30 could be termed religious structures. “Out of these 30, prayers were organised at the time of notification at only three monuments — Palam Mosque, Nili Masjid and Sunehari Masjid,” the ASI said on December 27, 2010.
The reply is significant in wake of the Jangpura incident last week wherein there was a spurt in violence and the area was on the brink of violence following demolition of an allegedly illegal mosque on land belonging to Delhi Development Authority (DDA) following a Delhi High Court order.
Said Sahil, the RTI applicant, “There are a number of cases/disputes owing to Friday prayers. I wanted to analyse it to study community matters in view of the dispute between Wakf Board and the ASI.” “Under the AM&ASR Act 1958 and Rules 1959, prayers or any kind of worship is allowed at any protected monument only if the same was being held at the time of notification. We go by the land of the law,” said ASI director general Gautam Sengupta.
July 28, 2009
Save Ancient monuments from encroachment - SAHMAT
[recieved on 28 July 2009]
SAHMAT
29 , Ferozeshah Road , New Delhi -110001
Telephone-2 3070787,23381276
e-mail: sahmat(at)vsnl(dot)com
29.7.2009
Press Statement
We are deeply disturbed by attempts being made by interested quarters to take over several historically important and protected monuments in different parts of the country, in clear violation of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, on the excuse of offering worship there. Many of the monument are parts of the precious legacy of the country and under the rules framed under the Ancient Monuments Act, there can be no installation of worship wherever it had ceased.
We call upon the PM, who is also in-charge of the ministry of Culture to initiate immediate action to save these monuments from encroachment. We also call upon the Chief Minister of Delhi to rein in all such elements who are aiding and abetting the violation of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. We also call upon the authorities to initiate immediate steps to evict the encroachers and to take all steps to ensure the protection of all listed monuments. This should set a model for official action against law-breakers irrespective of the religious community or ritual concerned.
Irfan Habib, Ram Rahman, Amar Farooqui, D. N. Jha, Prabhat Shukla, Arjun Dev, Sohail Hashmi, Zahoor Siddiqui, Shireen Moosvi, Suraj Bhan, Suvira Jaiswal, Archana Prasad
Released to the press
Ashok
for
SAHMAT
SAHMAT
29 , Ferozeshah Road , New Delhi -110001
Telephone-2 3070787,23381276
e-mail: sahmat(at)vsnl(dot)com
29.7.2009
Press Statement
We are deeply disturbed by attempts being made by interested quarters to take over several historically important and protected monuments in different parts of the country, in clear violation of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, on the excuse of offering worship there. Many of the monument are parts of the precious legacy of the country and under the rules framed under the Ancient Monuments Act, there can be no installation of worship wherever it had ceased.
We call upon the PM, who is also in-charge of the ministry of Culture to initiate immediate action to save these monuments from encroachment. We also call upon the Chief Minister of Delhi to rein in all such elements who are aiding and abetting the violation of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. We also call upon the authorities to initiate immediate steps to evict the encroachers and to take all steps to ensure the protection of all listed monuments. This should set a model for official action against law-breakers irrespective of the religious community or ritual concerned.
Irfan Habib, Ram Rahman, Amar Farooqui, D. N. Jha, Prabhat Shukla, Arjun Dev, Sohail Hashmi, Zahoor Siddiqui, Shireen Moosvi, Suraj Bhan, Suvira Jaiswal, Archana Prasad
Released to the press
Ashok
for
SAHMAT
July 25, 2009
State Must Ensure That Protected Monuments Dont Get Used For Prayers! Is anybody listening?
The Telegraph
25 July 2009
Qutb barge-in for prayers
CITHARA PAUL
New Delhi, July 24: A group of 200 barged into mosques on the premises of three protected monuments in south Delhi, including the Qutb Minar, this afternoon and offered Friday prayers against the rules.
Prayers are not allowed at mosques or temples inside monuments protected by the Archaeological Survey of India “unless prayers were already being held there when the ASI took the monument over”, ASI Delhi circle chief K.K. Mohammad said.
“What happened today was unfortunate and can have a national ramification. What if similar demands are made by Hindus and Buddhists over the Ajanta, Ellora or Elephanta caves?” Mohammad said.
Today, a single group entered the three mosques one after the other, brushing aside the two security guards at each. It prayed for 10 minutes at the Qutb Minar, for another 10 minutes at Jamali Kamali — the tomb of Sufi saint Shaikh Fazlullah — and then for a longer time at the Rajakibawali monuments. Here, ASI officials and police arrived and persuaded them to leave. A case has been registered.
Mohammad said crowds had invaded mosques at heritage monuments and prayed there earlier too, in places such as Hyderabad and Bihar apart from Delhi. “We had brought the issue up but the police took no notice.”
25 July 2009
Qutb barge-in for prayers
CITHARA PAUL
New Delhi, July 24: A group of 200 barged into mosques on the premises of three protected monuments in south Delhi, including the Qutb Minar, this afternoon and offered Friday prayers against the rules.
Prayers are not allowed at mosques or temples inside monuments protected by the Archaeological Survey of India “unless prayers were already being held there when the ASI took the monument over”, ASI Delhi circle chief K.K. Mohammad said.
“What happened today was unfortunate and can have a national ramification. What if similar demands are made by Hindus and Buddhists over the Ajanta, Ellora or Elephanta caves?” Mohammad said.
Today, a single group entered the three mosques one after the other, brushing aside the two security guards at each. It prayed for 10 minutes at the Qutb Minar, for another 10 minutes at Jamali Kamali — the tomb of Sufi saint Shaikh Fazlullah — and then for a longer time at the Rajakibawali monuments. Here, ASI officials and police arrived and persuaded them to leave. A case has been registered.
Mohammad said crowds had invaded mosques at heritage monuments and prayed there earlier too, in places such as Hyderabad and Bihar apart from Delhi. “We had brought the issue up but the police took no notice.”
May 06, 2006
There’s a Taliban in Gujarat
The Hindustan Times
May 6, 2006
There's a Taliban in Gujarat
Javed Anand
Hate politics has claimed too many innocent lives in the last seven days. It’s victims could have been you or me, Hindu or Muslim, had we found ourselves in the wrong place, at the wrong time and belonging to the 'wrong' religion. Who got killed and who are the murderers?
On Sunday, the Taliban in Afghanistan butchered K Suryanarayana, an engineer from Hyderabad, who risked working in dangerous territory abroad only to earn some extra money for his family. The Taliban fanatics best remembered for the merciless massacre of their adversaries, fellow Muslims torture of those captured in barbaric ways, demolition of the Bayiman Buddhas despite the pleas and protests from Muslims worldwide, and barring women from educational institutions and workplaces. As a result a large number of widows in Afghanistan were forced into prostitution to feed their children.
Within hours of the killing of Suryanarayana, thirty muftis and muftias of Dar-ul-Iftah, Jamiat-ul-Mominath, Hyderabad, issued a fatwa condemning both the kidnapping act and subsequent killing of an innocent person as “inhuman” and “un-Islamic”. They charged the Taliban with having committed a “Gunaah-e-Kabira” (unforgiveable sin). “It seems the Taliban… have just gone mad,” said an outraged Moulana Mufti Abdul Mughni Mazaahiri, director of another Hyderabad-based institution, Sabeel-al-Falah.
Late night the same Sunday, a group of the Pakistani Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists stormed inside homes of Hindu families living in scattered hamlets in Doda district of Jammu and Kashmir and massacred 32 men, women and children. This is not the first time that terrorist outfits trained and armed by the Pakistani establishment have committed such an outrage on Indian soil. And Hindus are not their only targets. In the pursuit of their ugly design, they have never shown any qualm in killing or maiming Muslims either.
With Spain’s Muslims having taken the lead last year, there has been a spate of fatwas from religious leaders across the world condemning Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda and other terrorist outfits in unequivocal words for their “inhuman” and “un-Islamic” misdeeds. In India, the terrorist attack on the Sankat Mochan temple in Varanasi in February was greeted with fatwas from muftis in Varanasi, Lucknow, Hyderabad as elsewhere.
In short, the Taliban, Osama Bin Laden and their kind are human abominations masquerading as “Allah’s army”. But what does one say, or do, when an administration sworn to uphold constitutional values and the rule of law act in criminal fashion?
If the dastardly deeds of the Taliban and the terrorists in Doda were naked in their design, the civic administration and the police that targeted Vadodara’s Muslims last Monday were insidious in their shameless bid to couch their blatant communal conduct as an “even-handed” civic anti-encroachment drive.
For the crusaders of Hindutva in Vadodara, the Dargah of Hazrat Rashiduddin that was bulldozed to oblivion last Monday was obviously a huge “embarrassment”, a constant “eyesore”. The shrine has been on the sanghi hit list since 1969, never mind the fact that the dargah, as most others in the country, was the common meeting place for Hindus and Muslims. Or, all the more reason perhaps why it had to go.
Along with mass killings, loot and gangrape, as many as 270 places of religious and cultural importance to Muslims were desecrated or destroyed all over Gujarat in a single week following the Godhra carnage in 2002. Among them was the mazaar of the renowned poet Wali Dakhani just outside the office of the police commissioner of Ahmedabad. The façade of the tomb of Ustad Faiz Khan in Vadodara was also vandalised. How embarrassing, in this background, for a Vadodara sanghi to see the Dargah Hazrat Rashiduddin intact, a constant reminder of the unfinished agenda of 2002. Who'll wait for the next full-blown carnage to provide the pretext? The “development” of Vadodara was good enough cover for the destruction of a 300-year-old monument. If a few makeshift roadside temples also need to be knocked down for pretence of even handedness, that’s fair barter.
For those who think that the genocide in Gujarat in 2002 is a thing of the past, last week’s ugly incidents in Vadodara are a reminder, albeit on a miniscule scale, that in the land of the Mahatma, many of the ingredients and the official instruments that made the earlier conflagration possible are still intact.
A “compromise” formula — local Muslims to hand over two-and-a-half feet of the dargah space that the civic administration wants for road widening — is unilaterally rejected. Civic bulldozers with the city’s BJP mayor, Sushil Solanki, BJP leaders including Nalin Bhatt descend on the dargah, servile policemen in tow. In no time, the entire dargah is turned to rubble and the road is tarred, amidst provocative slogans by cheerleaders from the BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal: “Destroy the mini-Babri masjid”, “If the corporation fails, the VHP and Bajrang Dal will”. As Muslims protest, the police shoot to kill, claiming three victims.
Later that night, a mob blocks the car of 38-year-old Rafiq Abdul Ghani Vora on a main road while he is returning home from work. In the two hours during which time the mob swells to around 1,000 (under curfew) and finally burns Vora alive. The police is nowhere in sight. Local Muslims claim they made nearly 200 phone calls in their frantic bid for help. Vadodara’s police commissioner, Deepak Swaroop, they claim, kept cutting off their calls while all they got from the police control room was advice: “Go to Pakistan!”
The timing of the eruption in Vadodara may be politically very inconvenient to chief minister Narendra Modi. But it is he alone who bears the responsibility for hounding or sidelining honest police officers, while PC Pandey, the then police commissioner of Ahmedabad who oversaw the killing of nearly 500 Muslims in his city is elevated to the post of Gujarat’s director general of police. When you turn the police force into a servile tool force and nurture mass murderers what else can you expect?
(The author is the co-editor of Communalism Combat)
May 6, 2006
There's a Taliban in Gujarat
Javed Anand
Hate politics has claimed too many innocent lives in the last seven days. It’s victims could have been you or me, Hindu or Muslim, had we found ourselves in the wrong place, at the wrong time and belonging to the 'wrong' religion. Who got killed and who are the murderers?
On Sunday, the Taliban in Afghanistan butchered K Suryanarayana, an engineer from Hyderabad, who risked working in dangerous territory abroad only to earn some extra money for his family. The Taliban fanatics best remembered for the merciless massacre of their adversaries, fellow Muslims torture of those captured in barbaric ways, demolition of the Bayiman Buddhas despite the pleas and protests from Muslims worldwide, and barring women from educational institutions and workplaces. As a result a large number of widows in Afghanistan were forced into prostitution to feed their children.
Within hours of the killing of Suryanarayana, thirty muftis and muftias of Dar-ul-Iftah, Jamiat-ul-Mominath, Hyderabad, issued a fatwa condemning both the kidnapping act and subsequent killing of an innocent person as “inhuman” and “un-Islamic”. They charged the Taliban with having committed a “Gunaah-e-Kabira” (unforgiveable sin). “It seems the Taliban… have just gone mad,” said an outraged Moulana Mufti Abdul Mughni Mazaahiri, director of another Hyderabad-based institution, Sabeel-al-Falah.
Late night the same Sunday, a group of the Pakistani Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists stormed inside homes of Hindu families living in scattered hamlets in Doda district of Jammu and Kashmir and massacred 32 men, women and children. This is not the first time that terrorist outfits trained and armed by the Pakistani establishment have committed such an outrage on Indian soil. And Hindus are not their only targets. In the pursuit of their ugly design, they have never shown any qualm in killing or maiming Muslims either.
With Spain’s Muslims having taken the lead last year, there has been a spate of fatwas from religious leaders across the world condemning Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda and other terrorist outfits in unequivocal words for their “inhuman” and “un-Islamic” misdeeds. In India, the terrorist attack on the Sankat Mochan temple in Varanasi in February was greeted with fatwas from muftis in Varanasi, Lucknow, Hyderabad as elsewhere.
In short, the Taliban, Osama Bin Laden and their kind are human abominations masquerading as “Allah’s army”. But what does one say, or do, when an administration sworn to uphold constitutional values and the rule of law act in criminal fashion?
If the dastardly deeds of the Taliban and the terrorists in Doda were naked in their design, the civic administration and the police that targeted Vadodara’s Muslims last Monday were insidious in their shameless bid to couch their blatant communal conduct as an “even-handed” civic anti-encroachment drive.
For the crusaders of Hindutva in Vadodara, the Dargah of Hazrat Rashiduddin that was bulldozed to oblivion last Monday was obviously a huge “embarrassment”, a constant “eyesore”. The shrine has been on the sanghi hit list since 1969, never mind the fact that the dargah, as most others in the country, was the common meeting place for Hindus and Muslims. Or, all the more reason perhaps why it had to go.
Along with mass killings, loot and gangrape, as many as 270 places of religious and cultural importance to Muslims were desecrated or destroyed all over Gujarat in a single week following the Godhra carnage in 2002. Among them was the mazaar of the renowned poet Wali Dakhani just outside the office of the police commissioner of Ahmedabad. The façade of the tomb of Ustad Faiz Khan in Vadodara was also vandalised. How embarrassing, in this background, for a Vadodara sanghi to see the Dargah Hazrat Rashiduddin intact, a constant reminder of the unfinished agenda of 2002. Who'll wait for the next full-blown carnage to provide the pretext? The “development” of Vadodara was good enough cover for the destruction of a 300-year-old monument. If a few makeshift roadside temples also need to be knocked down for pretence of even handedness, that’s fair barter.
For those who think that the genocide in Gujarat in 2002 is a thing of the past, last week’s ugly incidents in Vadodara are a reminder, albeit on a miniscule scale, that in the land of the Mahatma, many of the ingredients and the official instruments that made the earlier conflagration possible are still intact.
A “compromise” formula — local Muslims to hand over two-and-a-half feet of the dargah space that the civic administration wants for road widening — is unilaterally rejected. Civic bulldozers with the city’s BJP mayor, Sushil Solanki, BJP leaders including Nalin Bhatt descend on the dargah, servile policemen in tow. In no time, the entire dargah is turned to rubble and the road is tarred, amidst provocative slogans by cheerleaders from the BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal: “Destroy the mini-Babri masjid”, “If the corporation fails, the VHP and Bajrang Dal will”. As Muslims protest, the police shoot to kill, claiming three victims.
Later that night, a mob blocks the car of 38-year-old Rafiq Abdul Ghani Vora on a main road while he is returning home from work. In the two hours during which time the mob swells to around 1,000 (under curfew) and finally burns Vora alive. The police is nowhere in sight. Local Muslims claim they made nearly 200 phone calls in their frantic bid for help. Vadodara’s police commissioner, Deepak Swaroop, they claim, kept cutting off their calls while all they got from the police control room was advice: “Go to Pakistan!”
The timing of the eruption in Vadodara may be politically very inconvenient to chief minister Narendra Modi. But it is he alone who bears the responsibility for hounding or sidelining honest police officers, while PC Pandey, the then police commissioner of Ahmedabad who oversaw the killing of nearly 500 Muslims in his city is elevated to the post of Gujarat’s director general of police. When you turn the police force into a servile tool force and nurture mass murderers what else can you expect?
(The author is the co-editor of Communalism Combat)
India: Killing zeal in Vadadora
(Frontline
May 6-19, 2006)
Killing zeal
BY DIONNE BUNSHA
in Vadodrra
Perhaps the riot in Vadodara could have been averted if the administration was less foolhardy.
AFP
A corporation bulldozer razes the dargah of Rashiduddin Chisti in Vadodara on May 1.
THIS is a story of a riot in Vadodara that could have been prevented. Like in most other riots, the script was painfully predictable. Everyone could see it coming. But Mayor Sunil Solanki was adamant to rush recklessly into a confrontation. The result: six dead, 42 injured (including 16 in police firing), five days of curfew and further polarisation of the population.
The story started when a demolition notice was dropped at the doorstep of the 300-year-old shrine of the Sufi saint Syed Rashiduddin Chisti on Fatehpura-Chappaner Road, Vadodara's old city. The municipal corporation wanted to knock down the dargah as it was blocking the road. Muslim groups objected and were talking to the administration. "We had reached a compromise the day before the demolition. We agreed to their proposal to keep only the shrine intact and demolish everything around it. Why did they go ahead and raze it all on May 1?" asked Zuber Goplani from the Anjuman-e Indad-e-Bahami.
"The police had warned of a communal flare-up during the demolition. But the municipal corporation was insistent. We were prepared for trouble," Deepak Swaroop, Vadodara's Police Commissioner, told Frontline.
As the bulldozers closed in, a crowd started gathering. They threw stones and tried to stop the demolition. The police burst tear gas shells and later fired on the mob. Two people were killed. That was when things took a turn for the worse. The angry crowd went on the rampage in other areas close by. It stormed the Nyay Mandir (District Court) and burned vehicles outside. Curfew was imposed by 1 p.m. Two people were stabbed. The violence was beyond control.
That night was crucial in deciding the turn of events. "Unfortunately, the power supply went off in the Panigate area [in the old city]. This increased the tension. Rumours spread that mobs from the other community were preparing to attack. People came out on the streets, and incidents of arson followed," said Swaroop. The next day, the funeral procession of those killed in police firing turned violent. People threw stones at the police and burned vehicles along the way. The night was tense, particularly after a Muslim boy was burned alive inside his car. It was only on May 4, when the Army was called in, that the violence seemed to be dying down.
Unlike the pogrom of 2002, this was only a riot. There were spontaneous clashes between two communities. There were casualties on both sides, of innocent people. The violence of 2002 was a far more widespread, state-sponsored, planned and systematic targeting of Muslims. This was a situation that spiralled out of control and hurt both communities. It died down soon because it was not premeditated.
Yet, it could have been averted if Mayor Sunil Solanki had not been quite so aggressive. Despite warnings, he was intent on going ahead at any cost. He dismissed compromise. And refused to postpone the demolition to prevent trouble.
"As part of our road-widening project, we have been demolishing all kinds of encroachments for the last four months," said the young Mayor, keen to project himself as a man of action. "We have already removed 20 temples and three dargahs. It's only with this structure that some people were insistent that it should not be removed, even though it is an illegal structure. But you cannot get in the way of the law. There can be no progress if you think of Hindu and Muslim, rich or poor, residential or commercial. We treat everyone the same."
The Mayor felt vindicated when the Gujarat High Court took up the matter suo motu on April 2 and ordered that "encroachments on public roads cannot be tolerated". It ruled that if necessary, "anti-socials" opposing the demolitions must be arrested before carrying out the demolition. However, this judgment was quickly overturned by the Supreme Court on April 4, which temporarily stayed the demolition of all illegal religious structures "in view of the extremely volatile situation". The stay order would give time for the State to negotiate and resolve apprehensions, it said.
"The temples that the Mayor claims were removed are actually small deras [private shrines] put up recently or the stairs of a small temple. This was a historic monument marked in the 1912 town plan, even before the municipal corporation existed," said Goplani. There are several temples that have sprung up more recently, like the Hanuman temple at Old Padra Road, that are bang in the middle of the road.
A car in flames in a curfew-bound area on May 3.
Why was law and order not a concern in the case of the Rashiduddin Chisti dargah? Even when the mob gathered, the bulldozers did not stop to defuse the tension. Instead, in a matter of hours, the dargah had vanished. It was totally flattened and a tarred road was laid over the site.
During the 2002 violence, there had been similar demolitions of historic dargahs. Within a matter of hours, the shrine of Wali Gujarati, a famous Sufi poet, was obliterated just outside the Ahmedabad Police Commissioner's office. When it wants to, the administration can be extremely efficient.
The Rashiduddin Chisti dargah was a place of worship not only for Muslims, but also for Hindus. "We feel bad that they broke down the dargah. All of us had a lot of faith in this shrine. Our contributions kept it going," said Harish Panchal, who lives close to where the dargah stood. Rashiduddin Chisti was a distant relative of the well-known Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti from Ajmer. His followers believed in peace to all.
The families of innocents who died from both communities were going through the same trauma. Biren Shah, 27, was stabbed on the day of the demolition while he was on his way home for lunch. "Just the day before he died, he had opened a new shop. I had called and told him that it was OK for him to come home for lunch. I didn't know that they had imposed a curfew. The police should at least have let people know," said Binduben Shah, Biren's mother. "What did my son do to deserve such a death? His killers should get the death sentence. Only then the innocent like Biren will get justice."
AJIT SOLANKI/AP
Chief Minister Narendra Modi with Mohammad Hajimiyan Shaikh, a riot victim in hospital.
Mehmood Gani ran through a stone-throwing mob to save his brother Mohammed Rafiq. But it was too late. "We knew mobs were gathering from all four sides of our colony, so we sat on a terrace to keep guard," said Mohammed. "Then, I saw my brother's car enter. They stopped the car. Took him out, killed him and then threw him into the burning car. I ran to save him, but couldn't. If the police were there, he could have been saved." But they arrived one and a half hours later. "We tried calling them but they wouldn't pick up the phone. Our neighbours were on the road asking people for help, but one person told them: `Go to Pakistan'. When my sister-in-law was crying for her husband, the police hit her with their lathi," he said. "So many innocent people have been killed. We would also like to meet the families of Hindu boys who are suffering like us for no reason."
There were several complaints of police inaction. The police did not even respond to calls and fax appeals from human rights groups such as the People's Union for Civil Liberties, which has been actively trying to broker peace during communal conflicts. At the hospital, most of those admitted with bullet injuries were Muslims. "I was selling vegetables on my cart. The police asked me my name and then told me to go and shot me in the back," said Ali Salim Pathan, 16.
Chief Minister Narendra Modi visited the injured in the hospital during his whistle-stop visit to Vadodara, on the third day of the violence. He warned the culprits of stern action, but his visit had no effect beyond the tokenism.
The turn of events has helped the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to polarise people and re-enforce all the stereotypes about Muslims that it propagates - `fundamentalists', `law-breakers', `trouble-makers' and `illegal encroachers'. However, its role in pushing the minority to act out the stereotype has been ignored. Many Muslims feel that it is time that their leaders re-invent their response to provocation. A community that has been marginalised, demonised and beaten into submission must avoid biting the bait.
Until the players act out of character, defying their typecast, the predictable riot story will not have an ending that is anything other than tragic.
May 6-19, 2006)
Killing zeal
BY DIONNE BUNSHA
in Vadodrra
Perhaps the riot in Vadodara could have been averted if the administration was less foolhardy.
AFP
A corporation bulldozer razes the dargah of Rashiduddin Chisti in Vadodara on May 1.
THIS is a story of a riot in Vadodara that could have been prevented. Like in most other riots, the script was painfully predictable. Everyone could see it coming. But Mayor Sunil Solanki was adamant to rush recklessly into a confrontation. The result: six dead, 42 injured (including 16 in police firing), five days of curfew and further polarisation of the population.
The story started when a demolition notice was dropped at the doorstep of the 300-year-old shrine of the Sufi saint Syed Rashiduddin Chisti on Fatehpura-Chappaner Road, Vadodara's old city. The municipal corporation wanted to knock down the dargah as it was blocking the road. Muslim groups objected and were talking to the administration. "We had reached a compromise the day before the demolition. We agreed to their proposal to keep only the shrine intact and demolish everything around it. Why did they go ahead and raze it all on May 1?" asked Zuber Goplani from the Anjuman-e Indad-e-Bahami.
"The police had warned of a communal flare-up during the demolition. But the municipal corporation was insistent. We were prepared for trouble," Deepak Swaroop, Vadodara's Police Commissioner, told Frontline.
As the bulldozers closed in, a crowd started gathering. They threw stones and tried to stop the demolition. The police burst tear gas shells and later fired on the mob. Two people were killed. That was when things took a turn for the worse. The angry crowd went on the rampage in other areas close by. It stormed the Nyay Mandir (District Court) and burned vehicles outside. Curfew was imposed by 1 p.m. Two people were stabbed. The violence was beyond control.
That night was crucial in deciding the turn of events. "Unfortunately, the power supply went off in the Panigate area [in the old city]. This increased the tension. Rumours spread that mobs from the other community were preparing to attack. People came out on the streets, and incidents of arson followed," said Swaroop. The next day, the funeral procession of those killed in police firing turned violent. People threw stones at the police and burned vehicles along the way. The night was tense, particularly after a Muslim boy was burned alive inside his car. It was only on May 4, when the Army was called in, that the violence seemed to be dying down.
Unlike the pogrom of 2002, this was only a riot. There were spontaneous clashes between two communities. There were casualties on both sides, of innocent people. The violence of 2002 was a far more widespread, state-sponsored, planned and systematic targeting of Muslims. This was a situation that spiralled out of control and hurt both communities. It died down soon because it was not premeditated.
Yet, it could have been averted if Mayor Sunil Solanki had not been quite so aggressive. Despite warnings, he was intent on going ahead at any cost. He dismissed compromise. And refused to postpone the demolition to prevent trouble.
"As part of our road-widening project, we have been demolishing all kinds of encroachments for the last four months," said the young Mayor, keen to project himself as a man of action. "We have already removed 20 temples and three dargahs. It's only with this structure that some people were insistent that it should not be removed, even though it is an illegal structure. But you cannot get in the way of the law. There can be no progress if you think of Hindu and Muslim, rich or poor, residential or commercial. We treat everyone the same."
The Mayor felt vindicated when the Gujarat High Court took up the matter suo motu on April 2 and ordered that "encroachments on public roads cannot be tolerated". It ruled that if necessary, "anti-socials" opposing the demolitions must be arrested before carrying out the demolition. However, this judgment was quickly overturned by the Supreme Court on April 4, which temporarily stayed the demolition of all illegal religious structures "in view of the extremely volatile situation". The stay order would give time for the State to negotiate and resolve apprehensions, it said.
"The temples that the Mayor claims were removed are actually small deras [private shrines] put up recently or the stairs of a small temple. This was a historic monument marked in the 1912 town plan, even before the municipal corporation existed," said Goplani. There are several temples that have sprung up more recently, like the Hanuman temple at Old Padra Road, that are bang in the middle of the road.
A car in flames in a curfew-bound area on May 3.
Why was law and order not a concern in the case of the Rashiduddin Chisti dargah? Even when the mob gathered, the bulldozers did not stop to defuse the tension. Instead, in a matter of hours, the dargah had vanished. It was totally flattened and a tarred road was laid over the site.
During the 2002 violence, there had been similar demolitions of historic dargahs. Within a matter of hours, the shrine of Wali Gujarati, a famous Sufi poet, was obliterated just outside the Ahmedabad Police Commissioner's office. When it wants to, the administration can be extremely efficient.
The Rashiduddin Chisti dargah was a place of worship not only for Muslims, but also for Hindus. "We feel bad that they broke down the dargah. All of us had a lot of faith in this shrine. Our contributions kept it going," said Harish Panchal, who lives close to where the dargah stood. Rashiduddin Chisti was a distant relative of the well-known Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti from Ajmer. His followers believed in peace to all.
The families of innocents who died from both communities were going through the same trauma. Biren Shah, 27, was stabbed on the day of the demolition while he was on his way home for lunch. "Just the day before he died, he had opened a new shop. I had called and told him that it was OK for him to come home for lunch. I didn't know that they had imposed a curfew. The police should at least have let people know," said Binduben Shah, Biren's mother. "What did my son do to deserve such a death? His killers should get the death sentence. Only then the innocent like Biren will get justice."
AJIT SOLANKI/AP
Chief Minister Narendra Modi with Mohammad Hajimiyan Shaikh, a riot victim in hospital.
Mehmood Gani ran through a stone-throwing mob to save his brother Mohammed Rafiq. But it was too late. "We knew mobs were gathering from all four sides of our colony, so we sat on a terrace to keep guard," said Mohammed. "Then, I saw my brother's car enter. They stopped the car. Took him out, killed him and then threw him into the burning car. I ran to save him, but couldn't. If the police were there, he could have been saved." But they arrived one and a half hours later. "We tried calling them but they wouldn't pick up the phone. Our neighbours were on the road asking people for help, but one person told them: `Go to Pakistan'. When my sister-in-law was crying for her husband, the police hit her with their lathi," he said. "So many innocent people have been killed. We would also like to meet the families of Hindu boys who are suffering like us for no reason."
There were several complaints of police inaction. The police did not even respond to calls and fax appeals from human rights groups such as the People's Union for Civil Liberties, which has been actively trying to broker peace during communal conflicts. At the hospital, most of those admitted with bullet injuries were Muslims. "I was selling vegetables on my cart. The police asked me my name and then told me to go and shot me in the back," said Ali Salim Pathan, 16.
Chief Minister Narendra Modi visited the injured in the hospital during his whistle-stop visit to Vadodara, on the third day of the violence. He warned the culprits of stern action, but his visit had no effect beyond the tokenism.
The turn of events has helped the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to polarise people and re-enforce all the stereotypes about Muslims that it propagates - `fundamentalists', `law-breakers', `trouble-makers' and `illegal encroachers'. However, its role in pushing the minority to act out the stereotype has been ignored. Many Muslims feel that it is time that their leaders re-invent their response to provocation. A community that has been marginalised, demonised and beaten into submission must avoid biting the bait.
Until the players act out of character, defying their typecast, the predictable riot story will not have an ending that is anything other than tragic.
September 25, 2004
Maharashtra: A tomb as target by the VHP (Anupama Katakam)
[Frontline, Volume 21 - Issue 20, Sept. 25 - Oct. 08, 2004
URL: http://www.flonnet.com/fl2120/stories/20041008006701100.htm ]
A tomb as target
ANUPAMA KATAKAM
in Mumbai
The VHP's failed attempt to demolish the tomb of Mughal general Afzal Khan, an enemy of Chhatrapati Shivaji, is part of a larger Hindutva strategy that usually precedes elections.
SEBASTIAN D'SOUZA/AFP
At a checkpoint in Panchwad in Maharashtra's Satara district on September 12.
BY threatening to demolish the tomb of Mughal general Afzal Khan in Pratapgarh, Satara district, the saffron brigade in Maharashtra seems to be running out of ideas to catch the imagination of the voters in Maharashtra. Although the Bharatiya Janata Party-Shiv Sena combine cannot be held directly responsible for this particular agitation by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, there is no doubt, say observers, that it is adopting a dual strategy - make the voters believe that it has given up its hardline communal stand even as its foot soldiers carry out the Hindutva agenda.
The Afzal Khan issue has from time to time been debated in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council. Saffron parties have been demanding the removal of a building constructed in modern times by the Hazrat Afzal Khan Memorial Society, a charitable trust managing the property, near the site of the 17th century tomb of Afzal Khan, a general in the Army of Sultan Adil Shah of Bijapur, a powerful enemy of the Maratha king Shivaji. The building has a hall and several rooms, which are used by the society. The saffron brigade's grouse is that the building is illegal and that the Congress-led government is pandering to the sentiments of a minority community by allowing it to exist. Besides, they contend, it is unnecessary to "glorify" a man who is a desh drohi (enemy of the country). The issue remained in cold storage until the VHP decided to rake it up under the pretext of a campaign against the "unauthorised" structures. But political observers see a link between the VHP campaign and the elections.
The Pratapgarh Fort where the memorial of Afzal Khan is located.
It was in late July that the VHP's campaign took a serious turn. The VHP, in a letter to Chief Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, threatened to demolish the tomb if the government did not remove the structures near the tomb by August 31. If the government did not concede their demands, the letter stated, lakhs of VHP workers would head towards the tomb on September 12 and demolish the structures. The VHP also demanded that the State government deregister the Hazrat Afzal Khan Memorial Society, that the forest department take back the land leased to the trust, and that a statue of Shivaji be placed on the site of the tomb.
But the State government did not give in, and said that the memorial was an authorised structure. VHP leaders, workers and "Shiv bakhts", numbering about 1,200 (not lakhs, as the VHP had declared), assembled at Panchwad near Pratapgarh on September 12 to participate in a protest march. .
Unfortunately for the VHP, the agitation did not gather much steam. Attempts to head towards the tomb were foiled thanks to the timely intervention of the Satara district administration, which threw a cordon around the site and sealed off all roads leading to Pratapgarh well in advance. When the VHP activists began throwing stones and blocking traffic on the busy Pune-Satara highway, the police resorted to lathi-charge and arrested 286 protestors, including VHP leaders Venkatesh Abdeo, Babuji Natekar and Milind Ekbote, on charges of unlawful assembly and destruction of public property.
SEBASTIAN D'SOUZA/AFP
Policemen clash with VHP activists on September 12 in Panchwad.
"Although we were able to control the situation from getting out of hand, there is no denying that the VHP has made its point," an official in the district administration told Frontline. According to the official, the mob was restive. "With a little more provocation and if they were larger in number they would have clashed with the police and perhaps made it to the tomb. The illegal structure was an excuse. I am quite certain they would have destroyed the tomb," he said.
An eyewitness said: "When a VHP leader asked the crowd whether it wanted Afzal Khan's tomb here or not, they shouted: `No!' Judging from their mood, it is unlikely they would have left the tomb untouched had they made it to the hill-top."
As the agitation began to attract adverse public attention, the BJP and the Shiv Sena quickly distanced themselves from the entire incident. However, they condemned the lathicharge on a "peaceful demonstration". Speaking to Frontline, senior BJP leader Prakash Javadekar said: "We are concerned about the police brutality and will take it up with the Shinde government." As regards the structures near the tomb, he said: "Why is the government supporting a trust which looks after an enemy's tomb? Why do they permit annual celebrations at the site? We are against this and we want all illegal constructions there to be removed." According to Javadekar, the entire episode was "a deliberate effort by the Democratic Front government in the State to rouse communal tensions."
VIVEK BENDRE
VHP and Bajrang Dal activists at a "victory" rally in Poladpur after they were prevented from marching to Pratapgarh.
The Shiv Sena, which is normally the first to take offence at any perceived slight to the Maratha king, has been silent on the incident. "We condemn the violent attack on the demonstrators. But we cannot speak for the VHP. We do not know what their intentions were," said a Sena spokesperson.
Reacting to the Sena's stand, well-known Islamic scholar Asghar Ali Engineer said: "Of course they will not openly associate themselves with the incident. It would put them in the dock with the Election Commission. This double talk is a typical tactic of the saffron parties."
PRATAPGARH was a well-chosen target. The threat to demolish the so-called illegal structures was just an excuse to attack another Muslim monument. What the Hindutva brigade fails to realise is that the tomb has no religious significance. In fact, the local Muslim community resents the VHP's attempt to turn it into a religious issue. "The enmity between Shivaji and Afzal Khan was not based on religion. It was a political rivalry which is well documented in history texts," points out Asghar Engineer.
Historian Jadunath Sarkar in his book Shivaji and his times notes that after the Mughal invasion of the Deccan in 1657 rolled back, the Bijapur government (then a powerful force in the Deccan) had decided to punish its refractory vassals. The Sultan deputed Afzal Khan, a general of the "highest standing in the kingdom", to take on Shivaji, who was emerging as a threat to the Bijapur kingdom. Shivaji invited Afzal Khan for a meeting on November 10, 1659 at the foothills of Pratapgarh. Anticipating an attempt by the Bijapur general to kill him, Shivaji had prepared himself well. The encounter eventually resulted in the death of Afzal Khan. Shivaji's men beheaded Afzal Khan and buried his head beneath a tower called Abdullah burj on the southeastern side of the Pratapgarh fort. Later Shivaji apparently gave land in Pratapgarh for the burial of Afzal Khan's body.
Historians say treachery was a commonly used tool in medieval warfare. Even if Afzal Khan had planned to kill Shivaji in that meeting, it was one such act of treachery. In fact, in one of his early conquests Shivaji used the pretext of marriage to wrest control of a territory. After promising to marry the daughter of Chandra Rao More, the ruler of Javli, he killed More and took over Javli.
Moreover, Shivaji fought Afzal Khan for political, territorial and economic power, and not to assert his religious supremacy. At the time he met Afzal Khan, Shivaji's command was rising. He had already conquered several hill forts - which was one of the reasons why the Bijapur kingdom wanted to suppress him. "We must explode this myth that Shivaji fought as a Hindu against Muslims. He fought purely for power," said Engineer.
The State government has assured the VHP that its demands, except the one on erecting Shivaji's statue, would be considered. Whether the VHP's whole operation in Pratapgarh is aimed at creating another Ayodhya-type agitation is debatable. But what is clear is that the Hindutva agenda is very much alive.
URL: http://www.flonnet.com/fl2120/stories/20041008006701100.htm ]
A tomb as target
ANUPAMA KATAKAM
in Mumbai
The VHP's failed attempt to demolish the tomb of Mughal general Afzal Khan, an enemy of Chhatrapati Shivaji, is part of a larger Hindutva strategy that usually precedes elections.
SEBASTIAN D'SOUZA/AFP
At a checkpoint in Panchwad in Maharashtra's Satara district on September 12.
BY threatening to demolish the tomb of Mughal general Afzal Khan in Pratapgarh, Satara district, the saffron brigade in Maharashtra seems to be running out of ideas to catch the imagination of the voters in Maharashtra. Although the Bharatiya Janata Party-Shiv Sena combine cannot be held directly responsible for this particular agitation by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, there is no doubt, say observers, that it is adopting a dual strategy - make the voters believe that it has given up its hardline communal stand even as its foot soldiers carry out the Hindutva agenda.
The Afzal Khan issue has from time to time been debated in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council. Saffron parties have been demanding the removal of a building constructed in modern times by the Hazrat Afzal Khan Memorial Society, a charitable trust managing the property, near the site of the 17th century tomb of Afzal Khan, a general in the Army of Sultan Adil Shah of Bijapur, a powerful enemy of the Maratha king Shivaji. The building has a hall and several rooms, which are used by the society. The saffron brigade's grouse is that the building is illegal and that the Congress-led government is pandering to the sentiments of a minority community by allowing it to exist. Besides, they contend, it is unnecessary to "glorify" a man who is a desh drohi (enemy of the country). The issue remained in cold storage until the VHP decided to rake it up under the pretext of a campaign against the "unauthorised" structures. But political observers see a link between the VHP campaign and the elections.
The Pratapgarh Fort where the memorial of Afzal Khan is located.
It was in late July that the VHP's campaign took a serious turn. The VHP, in a letter to Chief Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, threatened to demolish the tomb if the government did not remove the structures near the tomb by August 31. If the government did not concede their demands, the letter stated, lakhs of VHP workers would head towards the tomb on September 12 and demolish the structures. The VHP also demanded that the State government deregister the Hazrat Afzal Khan Memorial Society, that the forest department take back the land leased to the trust, and that a statue of Shivaji be placed on the site of the tomb.
But the State government did not give in, and said that the memorial was an authorised structure. VHP leaders, workers and "Shiv bakhts", numbering about 1,200 (not lakhs, as the VHP had declared), assembled at Panchwad near Pratapgarh on September 12 to participate in a protest march. .
Unfortunately for the VHP, the agitation did not gather much steam. Attempts to head towards the tomb were foiled thanks to the timely intervention of the Satara district administration, which threw a cordon around the site and sealed off all roads leading to Pratapgarh well in advance. When the VHP activists began throwing stones and blocking traffic on the busy Pune-Satara highway, the police resorted to lathi-charge and arrested 286 protestors, including VHP leaders Venkatesh Abdeo, Babuji Natekar and Milind Ekbote, on charges of unlawful assembly and destruction of public property.
SEBASTIAN D'SOUZA/AFP
Policemen clash with VHP activists on September 12 in Panchwad.
"Although we were able to control the situation from getting out of hand, there is no denying that the VHP has made its point," an official in the district administration told Frontline. According to the official, the mob was restive. "With a little more provocation and if they were larger in number they would have clashed with the police and perhaps made it to the tomb. The illegal structure was an excuse. I am quite certain they would have destroyed the tomb," he said.
An eyewitness said: "When a VHP leader asked the crowd whether it wanted Afzal Khan's tomb here or not, they shouted: `No!' Judging from their mood, it is unlikely they would have left the tomb untouched had they made it to the hill-top."
As the agitation began to attract adverse public attention, the BJP and the Shiv Sena quickly distanced themselves from the entire incident. However, they condemned the lathicharge on a "peaceful demonstration". Speaking to Frontline, senior BJP leader Prakash Javadekar said: "We are concerned about the police brutality and will take it up with the Shinde government." As regards the structures near the tomb, he said: "Why is the government supporting a trust which looks after an enemy's tomb? Why do they permit annual celebrations at the site? We are against this and we want all illegal constructions there to be removed." According to Javadekar, the entire episode was "a deliberate effort by the Democratic Front government in the State to rouse communal tensions."
VIVEK BENDRE
VHP and Bajrang Dal activists at a "victory" rally in Poladpur after they were prevented from marching to Pratapgarh.
The Shiv Sena, which is normally the first to take offence at any perceived slight to the Maratha king, has been silent on the incident. "We condemn the violent attack on the demonstrators. But we cannot speak for the VHP. We do not know what their intentions were," said a Sena spokesperson.
Reacting to the Sena's stand, well-known Islamic scholar Asghar Ali Engineer said: "Of course they will not openly associate themselves with the incident. It would put them in the dock with the Election Commission. This double talk is a typical tactic of the saffron parties."
PRATAPGARH was a well-chosen target. The threat to demolish the so-called illegal structures was just an excuse to attack another Muslim monument. What the Hindutva brigade fails to realise is that the tomb has no religious significance. In fact, the local Muslim community resents the VHP's attempt to turn it into a religious issue. "The enmity between Shivaji and Afzal Khan was not based on religion. It was a political rivalry which is well documented in history texts," points out Asghar Engineer.
Historian Jadunath Sarkar in his book Shivaji and his times notes that after the Mughal invasion of the Deccan in 1657 rolled back, the Bijapur government (then a powerful force in the Deccan) had decided to punish its refractory vassals. The Sultan deputed Afzal Khan, a general of the "highest standing in the kingdom", to take on Shivaji, who was emerging as a threat to the Bijapur kingdom. Shivaji invited Afzal Khan for a meeting on November 10, 1659 at the foothills of Pratapgarh. Anticipating an attempt by the Bijapur general to kill him, Shivaji had prepared himself well. The encounter eventually resulted in the death of Afzal Khan. Shivaji's men beheaded Afzal Khan and buried his head beneath a tower called Abdullah burj on the southeastern side of the Pratapgarh fort. Later Shivaji apparently gave land in Pratapgarh for the burial of Afzal Khan's body.
Historians say treachery was a commonly used tool in medieval warfare. Even if Afzal Khan had planned to kill Shivaji in that meeting, it was one such act of treachery. In fact, in one of his early conquests Shivaji used the pretext of marriage to wrest control of a territory. After promising to marry the daughter of Chandra Rao More, the ruler of Javli, he killed More and took over Javli.
Moreover, Shivaji fought Afzal Khan for political, territorial and economic power, and not to assert his religious supremacy. At the time he met Afzal Khan, Shivaji's command was rising. He had already conquered several hill forts - which was one of the reasons why the Bijapur kingdom wanted to suppress him. "We must explode this myth that Shivaji fought as a Hindu against Muslims. He fought purely for power," said Engineer.
The State government has assured the VHP that its demands, except the one on erecting Shivaji's statue, would be considered. Whether the VHP's whole operation in Pratapgarh is aimed at creating another Ayodhya-type agitation is debatable. But what is clear is that the Hindutva agenda is very much alive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
