Emperor Raja Raja Chola: Erasing Tamil identity or Hindutva appropriation

“There was no Hinduism before British” remark of actor-turned-politician Kamal Hassan has raised the hackles of the Sangh Parivar. Hassan had come out in support of award-winning filmmaker Vetrimaaran's outburst against saffronizing Tamil icons, the latest being that of Raja Raja, fueling the debate on whether the emperor is the pride of Tamils or a Hindu king. The war of words has taken a feverish pitch in the context of Mani Ratnam's magnum opus, Ponniyin Selvan, running to packed halls. Writes ETV Bharat's, M C Rajan.

Chennai: More than a millennium has passed since emperor Raja Raja established the first empire of the Tamil country, yet it is surprising that he continues to occupy the public discourse even now. Renewed interest in the imperial Cholas has been kindled by the movie, Ponniyin Selvan. However, the fierce debate is not about the development of agriculture as well as trade and commerce during his reign but, whether he is an icon of Tamil pride or a Hindu king.

In history and school textbooks, Raja Raja I, who brought much of peninsular India and Sri Lanka under his rule, is known for building the Big temple in Thanjavur, an engineering marvel in the granite that leaves everyone awestruck. Besides being the patrons of art and culture, the Cholas are remembered for their water management and rapid expansion of agriculture as well as land revenue administration. Mani Ratnam's dream project is an adaptation of the hugely popular historical fiction 'Ponniyin Selvan' by 'Kalki R Krishnamurthy. Born as Arulmozhivarman, Raja Raja is also known as Ponniyin Selvan meaning son of Cauvery, since Ponni is another name for the river, the lifeline of the Tamil country.

With the film bringing back the nostalgia of the imperial past, Ventrimaaran lashing out at attempts to saffronize popular Tamil icons had opened the floodgate of a debate on the emperor's religious identity. And Hassan endorsing it had set the internet on fire.

“Our symbols are snatched away and erased to no end. Saffronising Valluvar (saint-poet Thiruvalluvar, who composed “Thirukural”) or calling Raja Raja Chola a Hindu King is continuing.

Painting Raja Raja as a Hindu monarch is being carried out systematically. We have to be vigilant and protect our identities. It is happening in films too. If we fail to handle art properly, we will be deprived of our identities. And, political vision and clarity are necessary to guard our freedom and safeguard our distinctive identity,” he had said at a felicitation for VCK president Thol Thirumavalavan's 60th birthday.

This invited sharp reactions from the BJP and other Sangh Parivar outfits. In their view, not only Raja Raja, but the Cholas were devout Saivites and erected many temples with land grants for their upkeep. As such, what is wrong with calling them, Hindu kings?

“In many of his inscriptions, Raja Raja took pride in calling himself Sivapatha Sekaran (devotee serving the feet of lord Siva). Wasn't he a Hindu? If he isn't then who is,” asks political analyst Sreenivasan Ravichandran, adding that the famed Brihadeeswara temple itself is enough to prove that he is a Hindu.

BJP leader H Raja, known for his acerbic retorts, said “I am not well versed in history like Vetrimaaran. Let him show a couple of mosques or churches built by Raja Raja to prove otherwise.”

When Vetrimaaran became the target of right-wing trolls, he found support from Hassan who said that the nomenclature 'Hindu' itself was given by the British. “The name 'Hindu Religion' was nonexistent during the period of Raja Raja Chola. Then, we had only Saivism, Vaishnavism, and Jainism. It was the British who coined the term 'Hindu' since they didn't know how to name it. It was like changing Thoothukudi to Tuticorin.

There were several sects and it was Adhi Sankara, who in the 8th century CE established the Shanmadha Stabanam,” the Makkal Needhi Maiam president, after watching the movie with the cast and crew. “Let us refrain from twisting history or exaggerating it or bring in language to play a discordant note,” he maintained, adding that it was a moment to celebrate a fiction based on history.

Similar views were advanced in support of Vetrimaaran and Hassan. “Raja Raja was a Saivite and a Tamil King. He is not a Hindu,” says DMK spokesperson TKS Elangovan. Naam Tamilar Katchi president Seemaan, Congress MP Jothimani, and many CPI(M) functionaries had argued that the emperor is a Tamil king and imposing saffron on him is unacceptable.

This has further polarised the discourse with some asking whether the different denominations of Christianity or Islam or seen in that way. “What has been in existence has been called Hinduism and that can't be a reason to deny a person's religious identity. Everywhere it happens,” argues Ravichandran.
While the pro-Tamil view is to retain Raja Raja's Tamil identity despite him being a Saivite, the Parivar is out to appropriate him into a Hindutva narrative.

In the view of Professor A Gangatharan, teaching history at Banaras Hindu University, the construction of a new identity for Raja Raja is part of a grand attempt at using history for political purposes. Clearly, it is a political project, taking history backward and making Tamil and Hindu look synonymous. Nowhere in ancient Tamil literature or in inscriptions, the word Hindu is found. Unless it gains popular currency, it cannot be sustained,” he reasons, adding “territoriality and linguistic affinity was the dominant identity than faith in the making of the state and empire.”