Ace filmmaker Mani Ratnam’s magnum opus Ponniyin Selvan—a movie that brings alive the life and times of the famed Chola dynasty—has revived the debate on whether the legendary Raja Raja-I, who built the famous Brihadeeswarar Temple in Thanjavur, can be called a “Hindu emperor” with many arguing that Hindu religion didn’t exist then.
The latest round of debate was kickstarted by popular film director Vetrimaaran, of Asuran and Visaranai fame, when he expressed concern over misappropriating identities that are native to Tamil Nadu. In this context, Vetrimaaran referred to Raja Raja Cholan being called a “Hindu king” and Tamil poet-saint Thiruvalluvar’s portrait being painted with saffron.
Vetrimaaran’s comments came a few days after Ponniyin Selvan, an adaptation of Tamil writer Kalki’s fictional novel based on the life of Raja Raja Cholan, hit theatres on September 30.
Misappropriating identity
“It is very important to treat art in the right form. We will soon lose our identities if we don’t treat them properly. Our identities are being constantly misappropriated,” Vetrimaaran said, implying that Cholas were Shaivites, and Hinduism never existed during their time.
Though the remarks stoked a row with many criticising Vetrimaaran and accusing him of misinterpreting history and “Hindu icons”, the director received support from actor Kamal Haasan, and politicians such as Thol Thirumavalavan of Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi and Naam Tamizhar Katchi’s S Seeman.
“There was no Hinduism during the time of Raja Raja Cholan. Only religions that were known as Vaishnavism, Shaivism, and Samanam (Jainism) existed then. The name Hinduism was coined by the British. They gave the name Hindu as they didn’t know what to call. It is like renaming Thoothukudi as Tuticorin,” Kamal Haasan said on Wednesday.
Essentially Shaivites
The debate on whether erstwhile emperors who ruled modern day Tamil Nadu can be called Hindu kings isn’t new in the state as questions were raised in the past over the tag as they were essentially Shaivites.
In his brief comments on the controversy, iconic Tamil author and playwright Indira Parthasarathy said the argument that Raja Raja Cholan was a “Saiva and not a Hindu is just quibbling.”
“Was Rajaraja a Hindu king or a Saiva king is the raging question after the release of Ponniyin Selvan. That he imported Brahmins from the north and settled them in 'Agaram' (Agraharam) for temple duty has epigraphical evidence. That he was a Saiva not a Hindu is just quibbling,” Parthasarathy said.
Thirumavalavan and Seeman, too, spoke on similar lines by questioning the attempts made to “project Shaivite kings” as Hindu emperors.
Integral part of Hinduism
“It is atrocious to term my ancestor Raja Raja Chola as a Hindu. It is like saffronising Thiruvalluvar. This country and this religion (Hinduism) didn’t exist during the time of Raja Raja Chola. The entire world knows he belongs to the Shaivite tradition and worshiped Lord Shiva,” Seeman said.
However, Vetrimaaran received condemnation from Telangana Governor Tamilisai Soundararajan and BJP leader H Raja who said Shaivite and Vaishnavite traditions are integral part of Hinduism and efforts to “distort history” cannot be accepted.
“Vetrimaaran should tell us where Raja Raja Chola built churches and mosques. All that he built was temples. According to the Indian Constitution, the erstwhile king is a Hindu. Shaivism and Vaishnavism are part of Hinduism. Every religion that was born out of the Hindu nation is Hinduism,” Raja said.
Soundararajan said attempts to “hide the identities” won’t work any longer and accused that cultural identities of Tamil Nadu have been concealed for a very long time. “Hindu is a cultural identity and you cannot interpret it the way you want. Tamils are religious by nature. Saivam and Vainavam are identities of Hindu religions and there is no second opinion on that,” the Telangana governor said.