History and anger around Padmavati’s purity and Alauddin Khilji’s sweet dreams

Padmavati row: Since matters of faith continue to occupy the elevated sphere, it is only logical to cool matters with a compromise.

Written by Manvendra Singh | Updated: November 14, 2017 8:14 pm
Outrage on Padmavati and Allaudin Khilji linked to history In the case of Rani Padmini it is the particularly hated Allaudin Khilji who is considered evil personified. (File/Photo)

The roots of Rajput anger are a combination of various events that have happened in the recent years. An accumulated past of wrongs finds a new fireplace on which to stoke its ire. Such perceptions are shaped by a sense of identity attack, and seeming irrelevance. Events have conspired to create this perception, and a sense of victimhood in Rajasthan is seamlessly transmitted to fellow Rajputs who share the digital space.

They, in turn, inform the unconnected. Hence the mammoth gathering of Rajputs in Gandhinagar to protest against the supposed visuals in Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s upcoming extravaganza on Rani Padmavati. Voices are being raised in various pockets and parts of the country, wherever there is a Rajput presence. Discourse on community history in the age of social media knows no bounds.

Identity is rooted in those stones on which Rani Padmini performed ‘jauhar’ more than 700 years ago. Her sacrifice continues to reverberate through ballads and folk tales. And every year on that date, by the Indian calendar, a vast gathering takes place in Chittorgarh to remember her and the hundreds of women who immolated themselves. Rajputs predominate in the gathering, but are not the only ones there who pay their respects. The ‘Johar Kund’ in Chittorgarh occupies the same status as does, for example, the Ka’ba, the Wailing Wall, or the Church of Nativity. It becomes a principal of faith, and identity.

In a country that has been vivisected by faith, sensitivities continue to run high when it comes to matters of belief. History and memory shape belief. Not the textbook variety of history, but the one that is passed down through generations of village fireside talks and gatherings. The Shi’a marsiya has a Rajasthani equivalent, and it is through this medium that the message of Rani Padmini traveled hundreds of years, to become a sacred memory. So any visualisation, depiction, other than one rooted in popular perception comes to be taken as an affront, an insult, thus adding to the crisis of identity in the modern political milieu.

Rani Padmini’s ‘jauhar’ elevated her to goddess-hood. Though she is not worshipped in a ritualistic sense, the former Queen of Chittorgarh now resides in the sanctum sanctorum of the holy. Hers was the first of three major Sakas performed in Chittorgarh. The last of which happened during the siege launched by Akbar. It is for this reason that Akbar is not regarded as ‘The Great’ in Rajasthan.

Much like Tipu Sultan and the Kodavas of Coorg, there is a local version of story telling that prevails in the public sphere in Rajasthan. And the local tale overrides all other versions.

In the case of Rani Padmini it is the particularly hated Allauddin Khilji who is considered evil personified. Therefore any image of Khilji in the proximity of Rani Padmini is taken as an affront, to community, to identity, and to a self perception built up over centuries of story re-telling. A marsiya recounting the martyrdom of Imam Hussain in Karbala finds its local counterpart in Rajasthan, in pristine purity.

From her birthplace in Pugal, the romantically beautiful desert oasis in Bikaner district, to her immolation in Chittorgarh Rani Padmini remains a venerated figure. And when that venerated figure is shown near a despised marauding invader a short fuse can light the ire of a community that carries a feeling of being wronged, repeatedly. Thus the demand to review scenes from the movie before its release. In an India where faith prevails over logic, and precedence shows the way, this demand is sure to gain further traction. After all India is not a post-enlightenment post-reformation society where faith has receded from public space. In fact the partition of India has only added to the awe of faith. And coupled with the awe in which Rani Padmini is regarded it is a combustible concoction with an easily available trigger to set things afire.

On 15 October 1988 a Joint Secretary in the then Prime Minister’s Office announced that India would not allow the screening of Last Temptation of Christ, becoming the first country to do so. It remained one of the few countries to ban that famous movie. Months before that India has also banned Satanic Verses, the book that led to its author Salman Rushdie banishment from public view. In August of that year a play in Malyalam, based on Last Temptation of Christ, was also banned. This precedence encourages more to demand the same, but in this case the current call is only to delete scenes that are deemed offensive to the sacred memory of Rani Padmini.

Since matters of faith continue to occupy the elevated sphere, the hallowed space, it is only logical to cool matters with a compromise. Allauddin Khilji’s sweet dreams are no reason to incite a people for whom memory and history are intertwined with identity, and a diminishing sense of self. A combustible situation is best handled by hosing down that which is deemed to be offensive.

The almost 100,000 people who came to express that demand in Gandhinagar were motivated by the ire of their clansmen in Rajasthan. It is for the first time that such a community gathering has happened in Gujarat, testament to the veneration accorded to Rani Padmini. Fear that her standing is being encroached by freedom to film, and depict, is incendiary to a community fiercely protective of its heroes, gods, and also those who are deemed goddesses. Rani Padmini is the first amongst them, and should be allowed to remain untouched.

Manvendra Singh is the BJP MLA from Shiv constituency in Rajasthan and tweets @mallanikop

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App

  1. V
    Vijay
    Nov 17, 2017 at 11:31 am
    I dont understand faith preceding logic. Do you think education, getting to know few facts, make us like computers. Whether faithful or not, humans have their limitations, and are irrational to some extent.....So flagging science and using it as a vehicle to condemn others and proclaiming oneself....does not help anyone....it only adds fuel to the fire.
    (0)(1)
    Reply
    1. M
      manu gameuri
      Nov 16, 2017 at 7:39 am
      The last temptation of Christ was screened in most christian nations , Salman rushdies book was released in most western nations , albeit Ayatollah Khomeini decreed that Salman should die for insulting someone , the ayatollah is long dead and salman is alive and enjoying life .There have been numerous murderous attacks by followers who felt slighted in the west as well as in India , the most famous being 26/11 . Those of whom whose feelings are easily hurt should learn yoga and control their feelings , most of what sanjay bhansali makes is not great art , i don't care to watch it , those with tender feelings should not watch it .
      (2)(1)
      Reply
      1. Sudheer Thaakur
        Nov 16, 2017 at 1:08 am
        i hope all english lamguage tv anchors read this piece especially likes of nidhi razdan and rajdeep
        (0)(2)
        Reply
        1. N
          neem
          Nov 17, 2017 at 6:54 am
          Many are agenda anchors.They will give lecture on why always majority community close to wrong in India.There fantasies are real because of approval of freedom of speech and expression.They always claim they are messengers pretending they do not know their hidden agenda before their own audience.They are giving an impression media is very close to bad journalism..
          (0)(0)
          Reply
        2. D
          D.S.Rathore
          Nov 15, 2017 at 10:56 pm
          A scholarly article which is way beyond the comprehension of democratic mediocracy.
          (0)(2)
          Reply
          1. V
            Vnk
            Nov 15, 2017 at 3:53 am
            Censor board should ensure that no scenes that are offensive or offending, are permitted in this film in the name of liberalism.
            (0)(1)
            Reply
            1. N
              neem
              Nov 16, 2017 at 9:49 pm
              If you don't like the film don't see the film. Similarly if the the producer has some apprehension with a particular community please do not take film on the community. There are many many topics on which film can be produced.. Today producer will take on some community. If unchecked the same the same will continue you tomorrow. Habit dies hard.More than the producer TV channels are more upset? Why? Best reasons known to them and public.
              (0)(0)
              Reply
              1. V
                Vijay
                Nov 17, 2017 at 11:34 am
                Is it really that simple....let's say somebody is spreading nonsense in your regard.... will u simply say i wont hear and i dont care what others hear??
                (0)(0)
                1. N
                  neem
                  Nov 17, 2017 at 4:47 pm
                  Mr. Vijay that is called tolerance.Natural expectation from people of this country after independence because our fathers have given blood by getting beaten by British not through guns and wars. It is said that once Netaji took arms for battle then only Britishers started seriously thinking about giving freedom to India.
                  (0)(0)
              2. Load More Comments