Thorny issue of turning history into film
THE report “Padmaavat screening still a no-go” (The Star, Jan 31) is referred.
It would seem that many are unhappy with the decision of the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia (LPF) in banning the screening of Padmaavat.
If the ban was solely based on the villainous portrayal of Sultan Alauddin Khalji, then it is equivalent to digging up the history of Spanish Conquistador Hernando Cortes, who led an expedition that caused the fall of the Aztec Empire, revising and editing it and finally canonising him.
However, I am more inclined to believe that LPF judiciously arrived at their decision, having in mind that our society is not yet aware, exposed or ready to accept much of world history.
It is common knowledge that some movies distort history for the sake of entertainment; at the same time, however, the pages of history are also soaked in blood by the deeds of many tyrants and invaders such as Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Mahmud of Ghazni, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Aurangzeb, Babur and Hernando Cortes.
There is a general tendency by some people to wrongly associate the deeds of these historical personalities with the respective religions while some take exception to their portrayal.
The movie was based on the poem Padmavat by a Muslim poet named Malik Muhammad. Where did he get the inspiration from? Besides the possible link to the episode of Alauddin’s raid before he became Sultan in the Seuna kingdom, where he was given treasures and a Seuna bride as part of the withdrawal terms, it was not without concrete and well-documented evidence that historian Will Durant stated in The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage that the foreign invasions of India were probably the bloodiest story in history
However, these invasions were individual quests for supremacy. The killing and rapine that occurred were not sanctioned by any religion especially Islam, a religion of peace.
These invaders were ruthless and even Muslims were not spared. For instance, during an invasion in Baghdad, Tamerlane slaughtered 20,000 innocent Muslims. By their intolerance, these invaders caused colossal damage to both the Hindu and Islamic civilisations. Like the IS today, their methods were totally un-Islamic.
Having understood that the acts of these invaders were contrary to Islam, let us explore the history of Sultan Alauddin Khalji.
In 1296, to gain power, he inveigled his uncle and father-in-law, Sultan Jalaluddin Firuz Khalji, into visiting him. The Sultan was cut down and, according to the accounts of Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi, “while the head of the murdered sovereign was yet dripping with blood, the ferocious conspirators brought the royal canopy and elevated it over the head of Alauddin”.
To safeguard his throne, he killed all his relations. Soon, he invaded other kingdoms and destroyed many temples for its gold while his army raped and massacred the inhabitants.
Alauddin wanted more booty and one of these was the Somnath temple in Gujarat. It was destroyed for its wealth and the queen of Gujarat was captured and thrown into his harem. After the destruction, he unleashed fire and sword on its inhabitants.
When Chittor fell to Alauddin after killing Rana Rattan Singh, the Rajput women refused to submit and instead performed the jauhar (self-immolation).
After a reign of terror, Alauddin died in 1316. His general, Malek Kafur, a eunuch and believed to be his lover, killed the Khaljis and took over as ruler.