It seems that in recent times, fascist powers in the country don’t want to leave any stone unturned in ruining the image of Muslims and portraying them in a negative image. It started with accusation of Muslim youth with terrorism charges and trapping them into false cases. But now its scope has widened and seems to encompass Islamic Shariah and Islamic History too. The hue and cry raised by the government and the media about the issue of triple talaq is part of this campaign whose aim is to show Islamic Shariah as an outdated law. Bollywood too seemed to have joined this campaign now. Bollywood Movies are being made in which aims at distorting Muslim history in India and portraying them in a negative way. Latest of this string is the Bollywood film “Padmavat” in which a medieval Muslim ruler Alauddin Khilji has been shown fallen prey to the love of a fictional Rajput Queen “Padmavati”. Padmavati is wife of Ratnasimha, the ruler of Chittor. Alauddin invades Chittor to get her. Soon after the war ends in Alauddin’s victory, Padmavati and the other women commit suicide by Jauhar (mass self-immolation). In this film, Alauddin Khilji has been portrayed as an ignorant, brutal and a transgressor. The history of his era too has been tampered with.

The epic love story of Alauddin Khilji and Padmavati was first mentioned by the sixteenth century sufi poet Malik Mohammed Jayasi (d. 1542) in his epic poem. All historians without any exception have regarded the character of Padmavati as a fictional one, having no historical relevance. However, since Padmavati fictionally belonged to Rajput community, she has acquired the status of Rajput Goddess. This led to an outcry among Rajputs and hardline Hindu organizations against the screening of this film and have sought ban on the film. But there is nothing in the movie, which distorts the character of Padmavati, even fictionally. In fact Muslims and every self-esteemed and realistic Indian should have protested against this film, because if anyone’s image has been distorted and portrayed in a negative way in this film, it is Alauddin Khilji, who is a reality not a legend and who is indeed a great ruler of medieval India.

Alauddin Khilji (1266-1316) was an extraordinary ruler of the medieval India. Very few rulers can match him in his bravery, heroism, acumen, brilliance and administrative skills. He was a great conqueror and a brilliant administrator. The boundaries of his kingdom have encompassed almost all territories of present Indian sub-continent. No one had established such a great kingdom in the history of India before the British. He achieved all these victories alone in his 20-year rule.

Alauddin’s biggest achievement perhaps was the successful confrontation and resistance of Mongols, and saving India from an imminent destruction. Mongols, who rose to power in the thirteenth century AD, annihilated the Central Asia and extinguished the Islamic and Arab world. They wiped out entire cities and populated regions from the surface of the earth. According to estimates, they killed more than 50 million (5 crore) people. The fear from the terror of Mongols in the thirteen century world may be assessed from the fact that fishermen in England abandoned their job for a long time due to the fear of Mongols. When these savage and barbaric people advanced towards India ruining one country after another, the man who stood in their way was Alauddin Khilji. Alauddin and his armies not only confronted Mongols aggressively, but they defeated Mongols in more than three dozen wars. Several times they crushed them decisively, and saved India from certain destruction.

Alauddin Khilji’s other achievement was the reforms which he introduced in order to control his vast dominions and to confront the internal and external threats. His intention was to establish a strong central government. These reforms include revenue reforms, market reforms, military reforms and social reforms. The structure of tax reforms for the government revenue introduced by Alauddin is by and large same today and followed both nationally and internationally. Under market reforms, Alauddin implemented price control measure for market goods which resulted in the spread of prosperity in the county. To control his vast territories, he maintained a large army and introduced the salary system in the army for the first time. He also introduced social reforms such as ban on alcohol consumption, gambling, adultery, prostitution and magic etc. Alauddin’s administrative and tax reforms are still prevalent even today.

Alauddin Khilji was a secular ruler. He officially did not patronize any religion. His goal was to establish a strong central government. Hence, whoever made or tried to make a rebellion against him, whether he or she is a Hindu or a Muslim, he punished them severely. At one time, he decided to form a new religion like Akbar, but on the advice of some scholars, he realized his mistake and abandoned the idea. Khilji was also the pioneer of Hindu Muslim unity. He, after conquering a number of Hindu kingdoms, left its administration to the ruling Hindu families themselves. After conquering Devagiri, Alauddin married Ramachandra’s (ruler of Devagiri) daughter Jhatyapali, who was the mother of his son and successor Shihabuddin Omar.

Alauddin was, indeed, one of the greatest rulers of Indian sub-continent. He was truly entitled to be called “Alexander the II”, as he used to title himself. He was the proud son of India, and every Indian in general and Bhansali and the likes in particular should especially be grateful to Alaudding Khilji that the continuation of their lineages to the present age owes to Alauddin Khilji. A film on Alauddin and Jhatyapali, instead of Alauddin and fictional and unrealistic ‘Padmavati’ might have been more meaningful and momentous, whom Alauddin married and their son become the successor of Alauddin and inherited the magnificent throne of India. This also bears a message of Hindu-Muslim unity.

The sexual waywardness of Alauddin and his commander Malik Kafur which has been depicted in this film is highly objectionable, regrettable and unacceptable on numerous historical grounds. Firstly, none of the contemporary historians mentioned it. Secondly, Alauddin was himself a torchbearer of social reforms. He had issued strict ordinances and decrees to eliminate social evils (i.e. alcohol consumption, gambling, adultery and prostitution etc.), and ordered severe punishment to those who violated them. Therefore, such allegations against this ruler seem not only baseless but also very offensive. Third and the most important is the fact that Alauddin was a great ruler, conqueror, strategist, reformer, and lover of knowledge. Historians have recorded that the number of scholars who have gathered in Capital Delhi in his times, never found in any other period in Delhi. Hence congregation of these high morals and qualities with vile and disgraceful social evils in a man is like co-existence of opposites which is extremely unlikely and the human wisdom doesn’t accept it. The world knows better that this culture could be a part of cultures of Ajanta Ellora and Khajuraho, and not the part of Islamic culture.

At the end of the film, objectionably, the rite of Jauhar, collective self-immolation of women, has been glorified which is against the prestige and self-esteem of woman, and which has been regarded as an uncivilized act and has been prohibited in the modern world. In a nutshell, this film is a deplorable attempt to mislay the actual history by messing fiction and myth with historical facts, which is condemnable in all respects.