The Telugu movie Shyam Singha Roy, starring Nani and Sai Pallavi in lead roles, recently released on Netflix, after its theatrical release. The movie, directed by Rahul Sankrityan, had grand visuals, and a reincarnation theme seems to have been getting much appreciation. The movie that is set in two time periods, contemporary and the late 1960s, though comes across as a period love drama has turned out to be a problematic one in terms of Hindumisia. The blatant propaganda and deliberately kept provocative scene against the Hindu faith needs to be called out.
It is to be noted that the entire idea of reincarnation comes from Hinduism. So, directly or indirectly, the origin of the movie is based on Hinduism. While the movie was celebrated by many, a Twitter user Priyamvada, rightly pointed out that the movie was Hinduphobic (the most appropriate term would be Hindumisia) by all means. The very introduction to the character ‘Shyam Singha Roy’ comes with a scene where Hindu upper castes and Brahmins are the villains in the scene, not allowing a lower caste to use water from the well. Yes, the caste system did exist in India. But, the hero uses a phrase, “This is not your Rig Veda times,” which has is not just offensive but downright derogatory to Hindus on various levels. What is appalling is that the movie hit the screens without the dialogue being censored.
Imagine someone makes a movie on the atrocities of the invaders and places a dialogue like “This is not your Biblical times” or “This is not Babur’s times”. The same left ecosystem would go bonkers and suffer a meltdown.
The so-called ‘reformist’ hero wears Western attires and always smokes a cigarette, to show that he is against Indian outfits and culture. This demarcation comes after his 3 older brothers who are portrayed as ‘backward’ and are seen wearing Indian attires and Hindu symbols. It is surprising that the director, through these scenes, is trying to convey that Western outfits are good or cool and Indian outfits are backward. It is quite understandable as the hero himself is portrayed as a ‘revolutionary’ subscribing to the idea of ‘Communism’, an imported idea.
Now, the story moves onto introducing Sai Pallavi as Maitreyi, a Devadasi. For the unversed, Devadasis are those who are considered “wives of God” and they dedicate their entire life to performing arts. They learn all kinds of artforms in order to perform for God, which traditionally a part of the Agamas of temples. While this was the original way of living for Devadasis, this scenario had some changes in India. When the British learnt that the Devadasis were losing their significance and their high rank in society, they introduced the Bombay Devadasi Protection Act in 1934 itself.
As mentioned earlier, this part of the movie is precisely set in 1969-1970. It shows Sai Pallavi and her Devadasi clad bound inside the temple, not being able to step out at all. However, this portrayal is false, as even in Mrcchakatika (Sanskrit play by Shudraka) times, Devadasis were recorded as women with free movement.
Yes, there could’ve been instances where they would’ve been subject to abuse. But to brandish the Hindu faith as regressive is tad bit going over board. Let’s see if the film and the sponsors of this anti-Hindu propaganda grow a pair to take on Church abuse that keeps nuns within the premises of the Church, without free movement and even rapes them.
Devadasis on the other hand, lived in colonies near the temple, and were not bound inside the temple like slaves. This is true because, temples were are kept extremely pure and clean, and therefore these women were not allowed to constantly reside in temples. In fact, Devadasis had high societal ranking at one point in the Indian community, because they were considered the wives of God.
The movie also shows a ‘Mahant’, a typical Brahmin priest, who is apparently so powerful that he could make the Devadasi women stand in a line and choose one for himself. He is even portrayed as a pedophile who once chooses an 8-yr-old child. He then thrashes the Heroine for protecting the child, and urinates on her while placing his sacred thread (janeau) on his ear. It is highly surprising that a priest has so much power, and even strength like a body-builder, that he could lift the hero with just one bare hand. The portrayal is just over exaggerated and false because Brahmin priests are always eking out a living for themselves, and in no way could afford to be as strong as a body-builder, or as powerful.
The so-called ‘hero’ tries to convince the heroine to marry him, as she hesitates to let go of her Devadasi status. While he speaks sugar-coated words in an attempt to convince her, he also says, “In companionship with a stone,” indirectly insinuating and taking jibes at pagan idol worshippers. This is where the skeletons tumble out from the closet as we all know how the Abrahmic faith sees Hinduism and other pagan faiths. Idol worshippers have no place in their world.
The hero also then goes on to say heroic dialogues like, “Women are slaves to none. The one who desires enslavement cannot be God,” subtly reshaping and giving a different meaning to the Devadasi system itself, and setting a narrative that it was just enslavement in terms of worship.
He also changes her name from Maitreyi, and ‘christens’ her as Rosie, an English and Christian name, because she is as beautiful as the Rose, which is called Roja in Telugu. Again, the heroine says that she was exchanged for a ‘bag of rice’, which is a clever turning of tables to hit at Hindus, as it is a well known fact that Christian missionaries coerce to convert practitioners of native faith through inducements.
The movie’s most disrespectful and Hindumisic scene is when Shyam Singha Roy defeats the Mahant. When fighting with him, Shyam Singha Roy steps on Maa Kali with his footwear clad feet, in order to take the knife from her hand, and slay the Mahant. The scene is wrong on so many levels, as he literally steps foot on the Murti of Godess Kali.
Hindus believe that nothing should be touched or kicked with the feet in general. However, the hero here, places his ‘Chappal-clad’ feet on the Godess, and takes her knife to put an end to the Mahant. He also rides his bike right into the Homa kund, disrespecting the Yagna that was taking place, too. However, all of these scenes were considered ‘Heroic’ as Shyam Singha Roy apparently defeats ‘evil’.
It is not the villain that the Communist rebel is hitting at. He is attacking the Hindu faith itself which the director has made a character in celluloid through the idol of Goddess Kali, Yagna, and the Pandit.
While the Hero repeatedly keeps saying that he is an atheist, he marries ‘Rosie’ in a traditional Hindu way, and also loves adorning the Sindoor on her forehead. Placing a sindoor on the forehead is without doubt a Hindu practice. Also, after he becomes successful and starts helping the people around him, he suddenly reverts back to the Indian way of clothing by wearing a Dhoti and a Kurta.
The movie also shows that Shyam Singha Roy was murdered by his own brothers, who all belong to the upper caste, because he married a Devadasi. This just shows how this gripping reincarnation story subtly and overtly brings in narratives to portray the Hindu faith as regressive. We live in times where an Abdul becomes Akash to trap a Lavanya and forces her to convert to his faith and even kills her if she disagrees.
The two leads of the movie are ironically also Hindus. The movie’s Hindumisic ideas were not discussed in even one review of the movie. In fact, for all those who were not aware of the Devadasi practice at all, this is the only version that exists to them. The movie is one of the rarest that talks about the Devadasi culture, and has false portrayals all throughout.
Hindumisia in movies is not new. There have been opposition against many movies and series for having Hindumisic scenes and dialogues. However, this movie’s Hindumisic ideology has been pointed out only by some like the Twitter user Priyamvada, while others are largely made to believe this false portrayal. That way, the movie has succeeded in subtly conveying their hatred for Hindus and Hinduism.
Check out the tweets by Priyamvada here:
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
