Yaadhum: An analysis by a Hindu
“We create the history of things we don’t know based on things we know. That is very normal” said Prof. P.J.Cherian, in connection with a recent documentary ‘Yaadhum’ by Kombai S Anwar. As we know, Indian history is a hostage of ideological chauvinists who use the art of history writing as a tool to fulfill their agenda. The leftist school has an extra dimension as it aims to continue the ‘invader’s’ perspective of India by naming it as unbiased, scientific and secular history. The ‘secularisation’ of history-writing by leftist scholars denudes the influence of Hinduism (dharmic values) within the Indian society and they actively encourage projecting Christian and Islamic imageries as a compelling force on the actions, behavior, and opinions of the society. In this context, it is important to analyze Kombai S. Anwar’s documentary, ‘Yaadhum’, which traces the roots of Tamil Muslims. According to The Hindu, “It opens the window to the world where people of different communities co-existed, enriched each other’s lives and did not even think about it.” The documentary helps the producer to ascertain his identity as a ‘Tamil Muslim’, however it belittles the inherent plurality and tolerance of Hindu society and claims unique antiquity to the Muslim population in Tamilnadu by distortion of facts.
“Muslim” is an Arabic word meaning “one who submits to God (Allah)”. Muslims believe that Islam has been present since the time of the prophet Adam and prophets Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, among others, were all Islamic prophets, and they have equal veneration in the Qur’an. The Islamic world expanded to include people of the Islamic civilization, inclusive of non-Muslims living in that civilization. Anwar tries to put up an Islamo-centric interpretation of the history of south India through the Yaadhum documentary assuming anything which occurred in or related to the geographical entity of present day ‘Islamic world’ can be identified as Islamic by using carefully knit loose correlations and deductions.
Throughout history, merchants from other lands came to India in search of its exotic goods. ‘Yavana’ was the term used in Sanskrit to mention the people from Ionia (Greeks), later it became the general terminology for Greek or Roman or people of Mediterranean origin. Yavanas visited India including Tamilnadu and are referred to in Sangam literature and later literary works. However, the Yavana presence in Tamilnadu was very less and they came only as traders or as security guards to guard the king’s forts. This scenario was not reported after the 2nd century CE. They were illustrated as fierce and people kept away from them. Sassanian Empire was an Iranian (Persian) empire before the rise of Islam, ruled by the Sassanian dynasty from 224 CE to 651 CE. They maintained good trade relations with various kingdoms in India. Trade guilds and merchant communities were very active along the ports of ancient and medieval India. ‘TissaiairattuAinnuruvar’ or Five Hundred Lords of Ayyavolu were a group of 500 Swamis who constituted a board of merchants in Aihole having business in all directions. They moved into wherever Cholas had their presence. An inscription found near Vishakapattinam mentions a donation to Ainnuruvar Perumpalli in 1090 CE. Since the name of a person in the inscription is Arabic, Yaadhum cunningly reads ‘Palli’ as a mosque. Manigramam guild flourished in Tamilnadu in the Pallava and Chola periods and was active in South-east Asia. The Anjuvannam guild refers to the community of Jews of Kerala. Joseph Rabban was a Jewish merchant, possibly from Yemen, who came to the Malabar Coast in the mid-8th century. According to the traditions of the Cochin Jews, Joseph was granted the rulership of an area called Anjuvannam (Fifth Varna), near Kodungallur, and rights to seventy-two “free houses” by the Chera ruler Bhaskara Ravivarman II. Tharisappalli Copper Plate (849 CE) was issued by King Ayyan Atikal Tiruvatikal to the Nestorian Assyrian Christians in Malabar. The inscription describes the gift of land to the Teresa Church near Kollam to the Christians. The signatories signed the document in Hebrew, Pahlavi and Kufic languages. Which, of course, were the languages originated in west Asia, but were not exclusively Islamic. Y Subbarayulu in his paper defines Anjuvannam as a “body of west Asian traders” consisting of Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traders and operating in the ports of Malabar and Coromandel coasts and Java. A deliberate and loose correlation of different events like a Syrian Christian grant which bears signatures in Hebrew, Kufi, and Pahlavi scripts combined with an unrelated reference to a Tamil text for Muslim Anjuvannam (Fifth Varna – used for many Mlecchas) traders in Nagapattinam has been used to falsely include Muslims to the definition in the copper plate inscription mentioned. This documentary also suggests that the makers tried to build up etymological interpretations of the term ‘Anjuvannam’ by relating it to Hajamana, Hamyamana, and Anjuman – which goes against the established use of the word. Although the present world may consider most of the Persian names as Islamic, it was not so in the distant past. Yaadhum attributes Islamic connection to the Parsi settlements in western India for the Islamic sounding names in copper plates found north of Mumbai – Zorozastrians are treated as Muslims. Arab merchants married local women at Indian ports, giving rise to small Muslim communities who mainly indulged in horse trading and manning shipping fleets. Yaadhum refers to Muslim trading communities in the Rashtrakuta empire and Malabar on the west coast of India – trying to confuse the viewers to think of it as Muslim settlements in Tamilnadu (which is on eastern coast).
“Animangalam Copperplate” of Kulothungachola states that Sri Vijayathunga Varman of Sri Vijaya kingdom of Java built Raja Raja Perumpalli with the patronage of Raja Raja Chola in 1006 CE. This Bauddha vihar was also called ‘Chudamani viharam’. Anwar mentions a Turk named Ahmed as a Signatory in this deed. Given that the entire fold of Turks got Islamized only by late12th-century one cannot conclude that the mere presence of a name can prove the role of Islam in an event happened which happened far away from Turk lands and which involved the building of a Buddhist monastery – unrelated to Islam whose adherents had wiped Buddhism away from the face of Central Asia.
From Mecca to Spain and to the frontiers of India, it took only a century for Islam to broaden its political frontiers through an unprecedented amount of bloodshed and conquests – Islamic scholars prefer a ‘hand of God’ to explain this conquest of the world by a group of people, the Arabs, who were earlier abhorred as the epitome of savagery and tardiness. Native faiths and cultures were ravaged. After the fall of the Sassanid Empire, the indigenous fire worshiping community – Zoroastrians (Parsis) – fled Iran (Persia) in terror. Only the Hindus gave refuge to the Parsis and even allowed great freedom to follow their customs and keep their faith. Same is the story of Jews. Hence, one does not need much smartness to understand how tolerant and open-hearted Hindu society was to other faiths and cultures.
Historian Will Durant considered the Islamic conquest of India as probably the bloodiest story in history. The population of Indian subcontinent reduced by almost 80 million between 1000 and 1525. But Anwar speaks about how Islam came to Tamil Nadu by peaceful means through trade – implying violent conquests as distortions in the history written by the British. But history clearly shows repeated invasions of Tamilnadu in the fourteenth century by the Delhi sultanate after the arrival of Islamic invaders in India. Invasion of Malik Kafur in 1311 CE ransacked Madurai. In1314 CE an army of marauders led by Khusrav Khan and in 1323 CE an army led by Ulugh Khan pillaged every corner of the Pandyan land. Later in 1335, Jalaluddin Ahsan Khan set up the Madurai Sultanate. From contemporary historical accounts, the rulers of the Madurai Sultanate come across as tyrants and persecutors of Hindus. Both Ibn Batutta and Gangadevi depict atrocities committed by the Muslim Sultans on the Hindu population.
On the condition of Madurai under the Muslim rule, Gangadevi writes:
“I very much lament for what has happened to the groves in Madhura. The coconut trees have all been cut and in their place are to be seen rows of iron spikes with human skulls dangling at the points.
In the highways which were once charming with the sounds of anklets of beautiful women, are now heard ear-piercing noises of Brahmins being dragged, bound in iron fetters.
… The waters of Tambraparni which were once white with sandal paste rubbed away from the breasts of charming girls are now flowing red with the blood of cows slaughtered by the miscreants ”
Ibn Batuta describes Ghiyasuddin Dhamgani’s actions as:
“The Hindu prisoners were divided into four sections and taken to each of the four gates of the great catcher. There, on the stakes they had carried, the prisoners were impaled. Afterwards, their wives were killed and tied by their hair to these pales. Little children were massacred on the bosoms of their mothers and their corpses left there. Then, the camp was raised, and they started cutting down the trees of another forest. In the same manner, did they treat their later Hindu prisoners. This is shameful conduct such as I have not known any other sovereign guilty of. It is for this that God hastened the death of Ghiyaz-ud-din.
One day whilst the Kadhi (Kazi) and I were having our food with (Ghiyaz-ud-din), the Kazi to his right and I to his left, an infidel was brought before him accompanied by his wife and son aged seven years. The Sultan made a sign with his hand to the executioners to cut off the head of this man; then he said to them in Arabic: ‘ and the son and the wife. ‘ They cut off their heads and I turned my eyes away. When I looked again, I saw their heads lying on the ground.
I was another time with the Sultan Ghiyaz-ud-din when a Hindu was brought into his presence. He uttered words I did not understand, and immediately several of his followers drew their daggers. I rose hurriedly, and he said to me ; ‘ Where are you going ‘? I replied: ‘ I am going to say my afternoon (4 o’clock) prayers.‘ He understood my reason, smiled, and ordered the hands and feet of the idolater to be cut off. On my return, I found the unfortunate swimming in his blood.”
The native Hindus could regain their political dominance and liberal cultural religious policy by putting off the tide of Muslim invasion and protect the Hindu Dharma in the peninsula from 1336 CE to 1565 CE under the Vijayanagar Empire. The empire was in a constant tussle with the neighboring Islamic kingdoms and its capital city finally fell into the hands of notorious Muslim rulers due to treachery.
Vijayanagar lost the Battle of Talikota on 23rd Jan 1565 due to treachery of the Gilani brothers who switched sides in the midst of the battle, leading to a disastrous rout of the Vijayanagar army which was poised to win the battle till then.
After three days, Muslim troops entered the city. There was no one to stop them. They looted, plundered and destroyed the city. Men, women and children were killed. Shops, temples and houses burnt and the Hindu deities destroyed. This destructive episode continued for six months. Robert Sewell, in his book The Forgotten Empire, concludes thus — “With fire and sword, with crowbars and axes, they carried on a day after day their work of destruction. Never perhaps in the history of the world has such havoc been wrought, and wrought so suddenly, on so splendid a city; teeming with a wealthy and industrious population in the full plenitude of prosperity one day, and on the next seized, pillaged, and reduced to ruins, amid scenes of savage massacre and horrors beyond description”. All these factual episodes of Islamic savagery in southern India are conveniently omitted by Anwar.
Anwar’s documentary then brings in Dravidian Islamic architecture citing the mosque in Kilakarai in Tamilnadu and claiming it as the oldest mosque in Tamil Nadu – supposedly built in 628 AD which is a false claim not supported by any evidence. Claiming that the Tamil Muslim Mosques also followed the same Dravidian style with Islamic sensibilities of avoiding the human figure, he tries to distort the historical facts to sneak in Islam into the grand legacy of Dravidian architecture. The Kilkarai mosque lacks a minaret and is made of granite stones like ancient Tamil temples which give it a temple appearance. He also says that all the mosques don’t need to have minarets. It is true that many ancient mosques in Arabia didn’t have minarets, but that was at the time of the prophet. 100 years after the prophet’s death, minarets appear in the mosque architecture and have ever since been a part of it. Also, the inscriptions speak about its presence only in the 11th century which the Muslims call as ‘renovation’ without any evidence. Even scholars such as Eaton capably point at the ‘political processes’ at work when Muslim armies dismantled Hindu temples and reused parts of them in later constructions. By the same token, we can also assume, the Dravidian sensibilities on the pillars of the mosque as ruins of a Jaina or Hindu temple reused by the Islamic invaders.
Yaadhum says it is not mandatory for an Indian Muslim to speak Urdu and Muslims in Tamilnadu consider the Tamil language as his mother tongue which is why he deserves reverence for his tolerance and plurality. However, Islamic scholars remain divided in this regard. Most of the Islamic religious teachers think that “the Quran is only read in Arabic, and Sharia has forbidden errors in reading it because that would change the meaning,” Quran is written in Arabic. In fact, most scholars believe that if it’s not in Arabic it’s not the Quran, since Muslims believe it as the direct word of God in Arabic, a translation inserts a human (and therefore imperfect) element. Every Muslim has to learn to read and write in Arabic to practice their religion. In fact, this universal credence on a single language is one of the binding forces for Muslim brotherhood worldwide.
Further, the film hints at the contribution of Muslims to Tamil literature, such as the Mehraj Malai, which talks about Prophet Mohammed’s journey to Mehraj. In this context, one must note that Muslims never wrote poems or other stuff about anything except Allah. Even the example in the film shows that. He says “ And there are some scholars, including M.M. Ismail, who were Ramayana experts. Gunangudi Mastan Saheb can be compared to the Azhwars in his devotion to Allah, whom he visualised as a woman. Expressing his love for ‘Her,’ Saheb concludes on this poignant note: “You may have many suitors, but you are my only Light of Life.” It goes ahead by calling Islam the saviour of Tamil literature in it’s ‘Dark age’. As a matter of fact, the decline of the Vijayanagara empire and the constant plight of Hindus due to the savage wars gave no peace of mind for Hindus to engage in major literary activities for about two centuries. Moreover, Muslims and Christians were growing in Tamilnadu with the influences of the Nawab and the growing European missionaries, which is why post 17th century also saw for the first time literary works by Muslim and Christian authors. But even then, these works were outnumbered by local Hindu literary works of that era. There is no question of Islam ever being the saviour of Tamil literature. It never was.
“Onre Kulam, Oruvane Devan” comes from Tirumandiram. Yakoba was a Vaishnavite, who after meditation found himself transported to Mecca. Bhogar too had a similar experience,” claims Anwar. Baseless claims are made to convert Tamil Hindu saints into Islamic followers. This reminds us of the Christian missionaries’ attempt to paint Tiruvalluvar as a Christian monk. Pious forgery is very much the bread and butter of these groups whose only aim is to destroy Hinduism by hood or crook.
Anwar set out to explore and trace his roots as an answer to the identity crisis he suffered as a Muslim in a secular society. “When there are so many layers to one’s identity, religion alone cannot be a determining factor. I may be a Muslim by birth, but I also carry several other identities. I am also a Tamilian, an environmentalist and a ‘Maduraikaaran’,” he says. Interestingly, one cannot see in his words, the consciousness of an identity as an Indian. Instead, the film and the interviews of the film-maker fuels Tamil chauvinism – perhaps a subtle attempt in fomenting separatism. In a spree to brag about Islam’s role in nurturing a pluralistic society, where people from various social and religious backgrounds coexisted he depicts the harmonious relationship between the Hindu and Muslim communities in Tamilnadu while he undermines the violence committed by Islamic extremists spreading their wings over the land.
“Documenting the history of Muslims opened my eyes to the misrepresentations that filled the so-called history books. They were simply loaded against the community. I decided to focus on the subject and throw light on the misunderstandings.” he confesses to The Hindu. He neglects the religious identity of pre-Islamic traders from west Asia and falsely paints them as Muslims to prove an active presence of Muslim traders in Tamilnadu and attribute a role for Islam in the Chola heydays in south-East Asia. On the other hand, he asks not to cite religion to describe jihads and conquests of heathens by Islamic rulers by pointing out that non-Muslims existed in those regions. In addition to that, brings up a tale of Cholas attacking a Buddhist country (which had nothing to do with religion but mere political war – not a war to destroy Buddhism) and Christian persecution of Jews (which has nothing to do with Indian Hindus). Hence, the so-called secular liberal Muslim turns out to be an emotional closet Islamist.
Yaadhum ignores that the concepts of tolerance and pluralism are the very essence of Hinduism and its manifestation through diverse Hindu practices and its centuries of peaceful coexistence with various faiths is used to paint Islam as a religion which supposedly acknowledges diversity. If he had wanted to prove the presence of plurality in Islam, he should have given examples from the Arabian peninsula or other such Islamic lands – where such examples simply do not exist as Pagans were never tolerated. The film wilfully distorts history by portraying the peaceful coexistence of traders from various religions and nationalities over thousands of years in India as an example of Islamic plurality where in reality, it is due to the inherent tolerance of the Hindu faith and has nothing to do with Islam.
On one hand, he says that architecture has no religion and nevertheless elucidated on Dravidian ‘Islamic’ architecture. His Hinduphobia is emerging before our eyes – as he has a problem with identifying ‘Hindu’ architecture only. With a narrow linear perspective of Hinduism, Anwar tries to shroud the Tamil society and history in Islamic garb. He talks about secularism and pluralism to keep the Hindu tag away but fails to keep his religion aside while narrating the story of his place. Only a leftist can bring such oxymorons explicitly as intelligent research work. Like every Sharia Bolshevik of the time, he too imagines victim-hood for his community and tries to narrate the story of a culturally rich and diverse land exclusively through & on behalf of his religion – which had next to no role to play in the grand scheme of things in said land’s pluralism and prosperity. By conveniently covering up the brutal conquests and wars, he blames Crusaders and Britishers for the image of Islam as a murderous violent cult. “So right-wing groups continue to harbour imaginary wounds from the past, which they use to radicalise their followers, leading to riots, which in turn create a sense of fear and alienation among Muslims. Added to this is the current international scenario. In its 1,400-year-long history, Islam finds itself in a crisis.” Anwar not only decidedly denies the genocide of Hindus done by the Islamic invaders in India – which is a much bigger whitewash than Holocaust denial but also insinuates communal hatred as the crime of the other communities, especially Hindus. His attempt is a classic case of blaming the victim as the aggressor. In addition to that, like any moderate Muslim apologist, he undermines the threat of present day global Islamist terror.
“Now, I am sure of my roots. I belong to this place,” proclaims Anwar after making a movie with distorted facts to confirm if he belongs to Tamilnadu or not. We are indeed sure of his roots.
