This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-42048512

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Padmavati: Why a Bollywood epic is facing fierce protests Padmaavat: Why a Bollywood epic has sparked fierce protests
(2 months later)
Producers of a Bollywood period epic have indefinitely delayed its release following countrywide protests by Hindu right-wing and caste groups. Sudha G Tilak explains the controversy. The controversial Bollywood epic, Padmaavat, has prompted months of protests across India.
The film tells the story of a 14th Century Hindu queen and a Muslim ruler. The BBC explains why Hindu right-wing and caste groups believe it distorts history.
What is the dispute about?What is the dispute about?
The film Padmavati tells the story of a 14th-Century Hindu queen belonging to the high Rajput caste and the Muslim ruler Alauddin Khilji. Bollywood stars Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh play the lead roles.
Bollywood stars Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh play the lead roles in Sanjay Leela Bhansali's lavish production. The film tells the story of 14th Century Muslim emperor Alauddin Khilji's attack on a kingdom after he was smitten by the beauty of its queen, Padmavati, who belonged to the Hindu Rajput caste.
Hindu groups and a Rajput caste organisation allege that the movie depicts an intimate romantic scene between the two characters, a claim the producers of the film have denied. Hindu groups and a Rajput caste organisation allege that the movie includes an intimate scene in which the Muslim king dreams of becoming intimate with the Hindu queen.
Padmavati is a fictional queen in the epic poem Padmavat by 16th-Century poet Malik Muhammad Jayasi. Director Sanjay Leela Bhansali has said the film does not feature such a "dream sequence" at all.
The epic in Awadhi language extols the virtue of Padmavati who committed sati, the practice of a widow immolating herself on her husband's funeral pyre, to protect her honour from the invading Muslim emperor Khilji who had killed her husband, the Rajput king, in a battle. But rumours of such a scene were enough to enrage right-wing Hindu groups who called for the film to be banned.
Sati is believed to have originated some 700 years ago among the ruling class or Rajputs in India. Is the film historically accurate?
The Rajput women burnt themselves after their men were defeated in battles to avoid being taken by the victors. But it came to be seen as a measure of wifely devotion in later years. The custom was outlawed by India's British rulers in 1829 following demands by Indian reformers. While Khilji is a historical figure, historians believe that Padmavati is fictional.
Historians point out that Jayasi's epic ballad about a Muslim emperor attacking a kingdom smitten by the beauty of a Hindu queen was written in the 16th Century, more than 200 years after the historical record of the invasion. They say the folklore around Padmavati have also been problematic as they have glorified sati. The name of the queen, and the plot of the film, are believed to be based on an epic poem, Padmaavat, by 16th-Century poet Malik Muhammad Jayasi.
As the recent protests show, Padmavati is deified and held as a symbol of female honour among Rajputs even today. The poem extols the virtue of Padmavati who committed jauhar to protect her honour from Khilji who had killed her husband, the Rajput king, in a battle.
What are Hindu groups up in arms against the film? Jauhar, the mass self-immolation by women to avoid enslavement and rape by foreign invaders, is believed to have originated some 700 years ago among the ruling class or Rajputs in India.
Rumours of a scene in the film of the Muslim king dreaming of getting romantic with the Hindu queen enraged many like the Rajput Karnik Sena, a fringe caste group, who have called for the film to be banned. Women in the community burnt themselves after their men were defeated in battles to avoid being taken by the victors. But it came to be seen as a measure of wifely devotion in later years.
Last week, the group, which had disrupted the shooting and slapped Bhansali on the set of the film earlier this year, vandalised cinemas, and threatened to chop off Padukone's nose, referring to a story in the epic Ramayana where a character has her nose chopped off as punishment. Historians point out that Jayasi's ballad was written more than 200 years after the historical record of the invasion by Khilji. They say the folklore around Padmavati has been problematic as they have glorified sati.
The group also held protests against the film in several states, including Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, which are ruled by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party. But Padmavati is deified and held as a symbol of female honour among Rajputs even today.
Rajput community members have burnt effigies of Bhansali and sought a ban of the film. Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje has said it should not be released until "necessary changes are made so that sentiments of any community are not hurt". How bad have the protests been?
A regional leader of the BJP at the weekend announced a reward of nearly $1.5m (£1.3m) for anyone beheading Bhansali and Padukone. There have been protests over the film in different parts of the country since January 2017 when members of the Karni Sena, a Rajput caste group, vandalised the set and slapped Mr Bhansali.
Some former royals in Rajasthan also called for the film's release to be cancelled. One of them, Mahendra Singh, said it was "an artistic and historic fraud to portray an incorrectly attired courtesan-like painted doll in the song as the very "queen" the film purports to pay obeisance to" - referring to a song where Padmavati is dancing. Such scenes would lead to "anarchy." he said. The protests intensified in November as the movie's original date of release - 1 December - approached.
Bhansali has said the film does not feature such "dream sequence" at all. Rajput community members burnt effigies of Mr Bhansali.
"This movie embroiled into so many controversies because of some rumour," he said. The Karni Sena vandalised cinemas and threatened to chop off Ms Padukone's nose, referring to a story in the epic Ramayana where a character has her nose chopped off as punishment.
But his pleas have fallen on deaf ears among those who want to "protect the honour" of a fictitious queen. The group also held protests against the film in several states, including Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, which are governed by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party.
Many others have expressed shock against the open threats of violence against an actress and a filmmaker. Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje said the film should not be released until "necessary changes are made so that sentiments of any community are not hurt".
What are historians and scholars saying? A regional leader of the BJP announced a reward of nearly $1.5m (£1.3m) for anyone who beheaded Mr Bhansali and Ms Padukone.
Historians and scholars have thrown their lot behind Bollywood's filmmakers and actors, who have come together to protest against the threats and call for ban. Some former royals in Rajasthan also called for the film's release to be cancelled. One of them, Mahendra Singh, said it was "an artistic and historic fraud to portray an incorrectly attired courtesan-like painted doll in the song as the very "queen" the film purports to pay obeisance to" - referring to a song in which Padmavati is dancing. Such scenes would lead to "anarchy," he added.
They have called it absurd that fiction in a movie has evoked such violent reactions. Earlier this week, protesters in India's western state of Gujarat blocked roads, torched buses and vandalised a theatre after the Supreme Court cleared the release of the film.
Historian Irfan Habib of Aligarh Muslim University said Padmavati is not a "historical but an imaginary character". What did the court say?
Some liberals have complained that the trailer shows the Muslim emperor Khilji in a distorted fashion as a meat-eating, deranged marauder. On 18 January, the court cleared the film's release and overturned the decision by four states to ban it, citing fears of violence.
Author Devdutt Pattanaik tweeted that Bhansali's film "glamorises" sati. The film's producers had approached the Supreme Court to challenge the states' ban.
Others like Krish Ashok bemoaned the "pointless" media coverage about the controversy. "Cinemas are an inseparable part of right to free speech and expression," said Chief Justice Dipak Misra. "States... cannot issue notifications prohibiting the screening of a film."
Actress Shabana Azmi blamed India's BJP government and states where the party is in power of failing to protect the film. The court added in its ruling that the states should not have banned the film as it had already been cleared by India's censor board.
What happens next? The board had screened the film to historians, who suggested five modifications. One of them included changing the film's name from Padmavati to Padmaavat, after the 16th Century epic poem of the same name.
On Sunday the producers announced that the 1 December release had been indefinitely delayed following the protests. Padmaavat controversy - timeline:
And actress Twinkle Khanna hopes the film will prove to be a hit to give "befitting rejoinder to loony threats". Additional reporting by Sudha G Tilak