Akhilesh Mithal & 'Solve Et Coagula'

©P.J. Mascarenhas, Bombay. 2nd December 2003. This page is copyright.

An open letter to Akhilesh Mithal.

Sir,

I have been for a long time an admirer of your writings, for you present a more detailed account of historical episodes that our educational system coyly compresses and passes over in a shamed silence... Again, your version is, rather than not, different from the official "Nationalist" hagiographies forcefed us in schools and colleges.

Therefore, I take the liberty of seeking your clarification over a you recently wrote in your column in the Asian Age.

Akhilesh Mithal's column "Itihaas", in the Asian Age, Bombay, 23rd November 2003. "During the British period, sectarian riots were engineered as required by simple tricks such as the sudden appearance of a Shivalinga in an area with mixed population.

The idol would soon attract worship as a
Swayambhoo (or "self-created" miracle of the power of Shiva). Then a dog would lift a leg to "desecrate" it and the rumour spread taht this act of provocative sacrilege was the handiwork of the Muslims.

The tension caused would be fuelled by rumours such as the alleged abduction ofa girl or the alleged stabbing of an innocent Hindu boy or old man by Muslim ruffians. Communal violence would start and the minority be attacked.

Similar provocation would be engineered in Muslim majority areas by the throwing of a pig's head into a mosque.

The riots that followed made sure that Hindus suffered in Muslim majority areas and Muslims in Hindu majority areas and the communal divide widened.

The trick may appear crude to readers, but, as the Babri Masjid history shows simple tricks work."

Soon after India's independence, the Babri Masjid was invaded by a mob and contemporary 20th century images of Ram Lalaa and Lakshaman Lalaa were planted int eh structure to make it into a "disputed" site.

The communalised police force and the officials (including an ICS officer) had their sympathy not with the Muslim victims of the outrage but with the Hindu perpetrators.

The tension, the agony and the suffering were prolonged by introducing all sorts of quibbles and continues to date.

The issue we face is whether the state should enforce the Rule of Law or get carried away by petty and narrow sectarian considerations.
The above text is full of unstated insinuations against the English - the same indirect allegations taught us in the educational system. I am not one to either whitewash or demonify the English; I do not believe that they were either a bunch of saints or a bunch of unredeemed monsters...

However, I object, as I have always objected, to any attempt to demonify either the English or any other category of people. Usually than not, this is merely a red herring used by lazy and sloppy minds in order to cover up for their own deficiencies, and by wicked liars and "Indian Nationalists" in order to counterpose themselves as unvarnished saints...

For me, the truth is above all other considerations.

Therefore, in contraposition to your text as above, I put to you the following and seek your clarification:

While reading the history of Shivaji, I found the narration of how his mother's father, a descendant of the Devnagari Jadhav imperial dynasty, once playfully took two little children, Shivaji's immediate parents, on his laps and announced that he would have them married. While he meant it as a jest, Shivaji's grandfather took it seriously. As Shivaji's father grew up, his grandfather demanded from the Jadhav that he give his daugher, Jijai, as his bride. Now the Jadhavs were socially much higher than the newly immigrated Bhonsle family of Shivaji, and therefore, he refused.

Thereafter, Shivaji's grandfather appealed to the Nizamshah of Ahmadnagar, the reigning Bahamani King. The King did not want to disturb the political balance in his state by antagonizing the powerful Jadhav so he ignored the request. Thereafter, Shivaji's grandfather and his (grandfather's) brother, relatively minor military leaders in the state of Ahmadnagar, slew a pig and cast its carcass into a mosque.

They were apprehended and brough before the King. The King demanded from them the reason for this mischief, whereupon, they narrated their grievance against the Jadhav and demanded that Jijai be given in marriage to Shahaji, failing which they would repeat their act many more times. The Nizamshah ordered the Jadhav to fulfil his "promise" which he had made in jest, and thus Jijai Jadhav and Shahaji Bhonsle were married to each other, going on to beget Shivaji Bhonsle.

I would like to ask you whether this act by Shivaji's grandfather was instigated and inspired by the English?

Again, I remember that when the Hindus and Muslims of North and Central India jointly rebelled against the English during the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, they came to an agreement by which the Muslims handed over to the Hindus the disputed site of the Babri Masjid which the Hindus have been agitating over for more than five hundred years, claiming that their temple of the birthplace of Rama (Ram Jamnabhoomi Tirth) was demolished to build that mosque. And further, when the English prevailed and suppressed the rebels, they disregarded and forbade that agreement...

Kindly explain to me how you synthesize these facts with your account and claim as you have published above?

I would also like you to kindly certify that there had never been inter-religious strifes, riots, pogroms, etc., in India before the advent of the English and outside of the areas of their influence.

Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

Prakash J. Mascarenhas, Bombay.
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1