Revisiting Sambhaji's Legacy After Watching 'Chhaava'

When the members of Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) lit an Effigy of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and started staging violent protests in Maharashtra , it was evident the group had been all of a sudden ignited by something that was not said somewhere in a public gathering. It was neither on a television show among verbally abusive anchors and guests. It was a rage, this time sparked by a Bollywood movie called Chhaava.

It’s a movie based on the life of Chatrapati Sambhaji , the son of Chatrapathi Shivaji, arguably the greatest Maratha hero, known for setting the roots of the Maratha empire.

The movie depicts Sambhaji as a Maratha heroe. A staunch fighter for Hinduism , and an enemy of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. The movie showed Sambhaji as someone pure of heart. Someone who was entirely just, surrounded by just people, and was victorious in every battle. His love for his people and the crown has been glorified again and again alongside his despise for Aurangzeb.

When it was said: “With great power comes great responsibility” in Spiderman, I was too young to pay heed to this. Only until recent years do I really get a hang of this sentence. Now these words hit deeper than ever.

I wish only if Laxman Utekar, the director behind the Chhaava movie had felt it in a similar if not the same way.

Behind some of the rom-coms such as Lukha Chupi, Mimi and Zara Hatke Zara Bachke, it is unusual for someone like him to take on a project like this . But I believe that in an industry where becoming big can only be achieved by either producing an anti-Pakistan flick or a Muslim berateting flick, Laxman Utekar might have little choice.

Aurangzeb’s Mastery in Administration and Economics: A Reappraisal of His Inclusive Governance and Political Demonization

Actor Vicky Kaushal has taken the role of a Chhaava that was flawless. A prophetic figure sent down from the heavens,who didn’t commit any mistake, Who was purest in every form.. This couldn’t be more wrong.

As someone who is interested in history , it deeply disturbed me to watch Chhaava. And decided to write something true about the Maratha hero Sambhaji.

Sambhaji was the eldest son of Shivaji with an entirely different attitude from his father. Unlike his father who approached a different ideology of peace and diplomacy, who turned to battle only when he had to. Who ensured the protection of civilians and minorities, Shambhaji was ruthless and aggressive. He opted for war in almost every situation. He was a purveyor of warfare and fighting. He and his men showed no mercy.

In the movie, Sambhaji is shown berating the son of emperor Aurangzeb (Akbar 2) who has waged a conflict with his own father. He despises Akar and says he has gone against his own father. According to the historical records Sambhaji was no different than Akbar 2.

Vaibhav Purandare, a Mumbai based author has a book (Shivaji: India’s Great Warrior King,) in the book not explicitly says that the young Sambnhaji has been found in quarrels and conflict with his own father multiple times. Unsatisfied with his position in the Maratha palace, Sambhaji is said to have even left his empire and joined the Mughals. He was under the command of Diler Khan who was the governor of Awadh. Just like the son of Aurangzeb , Smbhaji had rebelled against his own father too. After one year Sambhaji had returned after realizing he had no chance in convincing either of the sides. The movie did not show this side of the Maratha prince.

The Maratha royal family house was no different than its Mughal counterpart, where the biggest threats came from within the bloodline. After the death of Chatrapati Shivaji in 1680, a 9 month battle ensued within the Maratha empire for the throne. It was Sambhaji against his step-mother Soryabai.

Sorya bai wanted her 10 year old son Rajaram to ascend the throne. Eventually, Sa,mbhaji won and had his stepmother and his step brother under house arrest. Sambhaji in these months was vehement, merciless, and violent to anyone who came between him and the crown.

Even when named King, it was a challenge for Sambhaji to gain the favour of the court in which he was notorious. The ministers and the governors looked down upon Sambhaji for his lack of diplomatic tactics, his past rebellious shenanigans and an “always going for sword” approach.

In multiple records Hindu saint Swami Ramdas reminds Sambhaji, as the new king to be more like his deceased father. The saint recalls the merciful and shrewd Shivaji and urges him to follow his teachings. He asks Sambhaji to make better decisions, give up violence, and spare those who deserve.

Another known Hindu saint, Samarth Ramdas, also can be seen showing his concerns in multiple historical records with Sambhaji’s temper, violent way of ruling, and cruelty.

This clearly states that the real Sambhaji was not a responsible and mindful leader, unlike the one portrayed in Chhaava. He represented the levels of cruelty and violence that Emperor Aurangzeb has been accused of for all these decades.

Now let’s come to the fact that the film has shown Sambhaji as an undefeated warrior , brought down only after someone had betrayed him. These historical records show otherwise.

With such a king of Sambhaji’s nature, the kingdom is bound to decline And it did happen.
Under Smbhaji’s leadership, the Maratha kingdom spent most of the time fighting wars instead of establishing trade and infastructure. Most of the kingdom’s wealth came less from taxes and businesses and more from loot. But even after a series of consistent battles, the Marathas did face defeats under Sambhaji.

In 1682, Sambhaji invaded the kingdom of Mysore. The ruling Wodeyar dynasty of Mysore (also Hindu) were less likely to surrender and fought the Maratha warriors back. A claimant of Hindu nationalism and values of Sanatan Dharma, Sambhaji’s forces caused havoc in a kingdom that was as Hindu as they were. But things did not favour the so-called brave Marathas. The forces of Mysore king Chikkadevaraja proved too powerful for Sambhaji’s forces and they had to retreat. After an embarrassing failure to capture Mysore, the Marathas had to evacuate the region.

In the same year, Sambhaji attempted to take over the Konkan coast of modern day Maharashtra which was under the Abyssinian Siddi rulers (A small Muslim dynasty of African origin). A battle ensued which was partly successful but had drained much of the Marathas’ resources. It was an overall pyrrhic victory in which Sambhaji and his commanders failed to evaluate the outcomes.

In 1683, A violent attack on the Portuguese colony of Goa was planned. Historic records show Sambhaji and his army violently attacking civilians, raping women, and destroying buildings. Moor Edwards writes of an incident in one of his works regarding the surrender of the Margaon city in 1683:

“There were about 200 women in the church,…and the enemy were so barbarous that they ravished those whom they liked. Many of the women of Margaon…threw themselves into the wells and were drowned. Others, who valiantly resisted the evil designs of some of the enemy’s soldiers were killed by the sword or by having their breasts cut off. The same thing occurred throughout the lands of Salsette traversed by the enemy.”

The Marathas had to flee back once the powerful Mughal reinforcement arrived on the site. More multiple accounts highlight the atrocities and the brutalities committed by the Maratha army under Sambhaji, something that sharply contrasts with what they’ve shown in the movie Chhaava.

This shows that Sambhaji was not a successful king in terms of his military campaigns and achievements. He too, just like any other king, faced defeats and had to retreat on multiple occasions. The movie Chaava however fails to show this reality.

Furthermore, incidents of violence and looting and even temple burinings have been recorded by Maratha armies even after Sambhaji. And many of these towns had a Hindu majority. All of these campaigns were never driven by religion for politics, wealth, and power. Maratha ruler, particularly Sambhaji, was driven by wealth and influence rather than by love for his Dharma.

Famous Indian historian Jadunath Sarkar also writes about the atrocities under Sambhaji’s campaign. His accounts include the sale of captive women and children to traders, the destruction of churches, and the burning of entire villages.

The records reveal the true side of Sambhaji, otherwise hailed as a peaceful and honourable king as shown in the movie.

Another thing to highlight is the image of Sambhaji as a tolerant ruler- this indeed is not true. Numerous historical accounts show Sambhaji outright desecrating religious sites, not sparing even Hindu temples, as mentioned earlier. There are records of him even insulting Islam in front of Aurangzeb when the Mughal emperor asked him to surrender and hand over all the Maratha territories. Kashitij Rawat mentions this in one of his blogs on Lifestyle Asia.

Religion has very little to do with being a king, but it can be a powerful tool to achieve one’s goals. History has shown time and time again when kings opt for religious extremism as a tool to launch their own materialistic campaigns. This applies to Sambhaji as well as any other king at the time. And to show him as a corruption-free figure in a movie to fulfill one’s own selfish agenda is nothing but preposterous.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are solely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of ARYNews or its management.