Who was Shivaji

by Govind Pansare

Muslims should not equate Shivaji with his image created by these so-called Shivabhaktas. They should look at history; they should appreciate his attitude to Islam. Only then should they form their opinion.

Shivaji was Hindu and he believed in his religion. But, as the king, he did not discriminate against his people on the basis of religion. He did not treat Hindus in one way and Muslims in another. He did not discriminate against Muslims because they belonged to another religion. Both Hindus and Muslims must understand this.

Shivaji writes, “The Quran is the word of God himself. It is a heavenly Book. It calls God the “God of the entire World.” It does not call him the God of Muslims alone. This is because both Hindus and Muslims are one before him. When the Muslims pray in the mosques, they in fact pray to Bhagwan. And Hindus too do the same when they toll the bell in a temple. To oppress a religion is therefore to pronounce enmity with God.”

Aurangzeb, by taxing poor people, acted against the principles of Islam. If the Quran is the word of God, for God Hindus and Muslims are not different. If the king harms people, they will destroy him, however powerful he might be.

Shivaji taught us that other religions are as great as one’s own religion, and that though the forms of worship in each religion are different their goal is one. The thoughts of Akbar, Dara Shikoh and Ibrahim Adil Shah were not different from this.

To attach titles to great historical figures as a matter of convenience is an act, at the most, of cleverness and cunning. Such acts go unnoticed as long as people do not go to the root of the matter. But this does not make such an act of cunning a historical truth.

Brahmans do not seem to have any privileges in Shivaji’s kingdom. In a letter, Shivaji writes about a Brahman who had done some mischief and says that he should not be spared punishment because he is a Brahman. He says, “Those who behave as an enemy, will be treated as such.” All Brahmans did not side with Shivaji. It is a good indicator of why he did not adopt the title, Go-Brahman Pratipalak.

To oppose Shivaji, some Brahmans in his kingdom performed a yajna called Kot Chandi Yajna. They conducted this yajna on behalf of Mirza Raja Jai Singh, the mighty nobleman who served the Emperor of Delhi; they wished him victory.

Many Brahmans of Maharashtra opposed the anointment of Shivaji as king. This is a well-known fact. According to the system of Chaturvarna and the old Hindu laws, only Brahmans and Kshatriyas had the right to become a king. Even though Shivaji was a warrior, even though he had conquered what could easily be a kingdom, religious law said that he was not entitled to be a king. Some doubted his being a Kshatriya. And others did not bother whether he was a Kshatriya or not. For them, even if he belonged to the Kshatriya kula, he did not remain a Kshatriya because he had suffered samskar kshaya. His maunji bandhan [thread ceremony] was not performed. His wedding was not performed according to proper rituals. How, then, could he be king?