The Film ‘ Chhaava’ and the Controversy Around Sambhaji Maharaj's Character- An Interview with Vishwas Patil

By Shantiswarup Tripathi

Since the trailer of Laxman Utekar's film ‘Chhaava’, which is set to release on 14th February, hit the market, the film has been facing a lot of criticism. On social media, there are even calls for the film to be banned. The accusations are that the filmmaker has done injustice not only to the portrayal of the character of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj but also to the depiction of the traditional Lezim dance. Furthermore, the demand for Hindavi Swaraj has also been undermined. In response to the increasing accusations on social media, Laxman Utekar has announced that he will be removing the song featuring the Lezim dance from the film. However, the criticism continues. The allegations also claim that there has been distortion in the portrayal of both Sambhaji Maharaj and Aurangzeb's characters, along with alterations to historical accuracy and costumes.

In this context, we had an extensive conversation with the renowned former IAS officer, novelist, historian, and director, Vishwas Patil.

Vishwas Patil, who served in the administrative services, is a prominent writer. He holds a Master's degree in English Literature and a law degree. He first authored the novel Panipat, which was based on the Third Battle of Panipat. Later, he wrote the biography of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj in Marathi, titled Sambhaji. The book has been translated into six languages, including Hindi, and has sold millions of copies. Additionally, Vishwas Patil has written ten other novels. He has received several prestigious awards, including the Nath Madhav Award in 1989 for Panipat, the Priyadarshini National Award in 1990 for Zadazadti, the Indian Language Council Award for Panipat, the Vikhe Patil Award for Zadazadti, the Sahitya Akademi Award in 1992 for Zadazadti, and the Gadkari Award in 1998 for Mahanayak.

Questions have been raised about whether actors Vicky Kaushal, who plays the role of Sambhaji, and Akshay Khanna, who portrays Aurangzeb, have read any books about Sambhaji Maharaj and conducted research for their roles. Did they do any research or not? In light of all these controversies and the trailer of the film Chhaava, we had an in-depth conversation with Vishwas Patil.

You wrote a book on Sambhaji, which has been translated into six languages and sold millions of copies. When did you feel the urge to work on Sambhaji's story?

I was working in the administrative services, in the Raigad district, about 20 years ago when I wrote the original Marathi book Sambhaji. It was a childhood dream of mine to write a powerful novel on Sambhaji, like I had written Panipat. However, I intended to do this 10 to 15 years later. But as my job took me around Raigad district, and I started seeing places like the Raigad BB Fort and the coastal areas, the history, the fortresses, and the surroundings, it all stirred something inside me. It made me feel that this was the right moment to start working on this subject. That’s when I decided to begin writing the novel. Before that, I spent about six years on research, and over two to three years, I completed the Sambhaji novel in Raigad.

What kind of research or study did you do?

Well, here's the thing: By the time I began my research, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj had already passed away in 1680. After that, I kept asking history repeatedly: After King Shivaji, who in Maharashtra had the strength to stand up to Aurangzeb? Because when our Shivaji Maharaj was ruling, only two generals came from Delhi—Mirza Raja Jai Singh and Diler Khan—and they had an army of only 60,000 or 70,000 soldiers. But even with Shivaji Maharaj leading here, he was forced to meet Aurangzeb in Agra. He was compelled to go there. But after Shivaji Maharaj's death, there weren’t just two generals, but 31 generals, Aurangzeb himself, and an army of 5 lakh soldiers along with 4 lakh infantry. History tells us that when Aurangzeb camped somewhere, the army's perimeter was spread out over 30 to 35 kilometers on both sides. It was a sea of soldiers. At that time, history told me that after Chhatrapati Shivaji, there was only one person who was able to stand against Aurangzeb, and that was Sambhaji Maharaj. He fought against Aurangzeb. So, this topic felt unique to me, and you know, when Sambhaji Maharaj ascended the throne, he was only 21 or 22 years old. When Aurangzeb ordered his assassination, he was just 32 years old. Now, think about it—what are young people doing at 32 today? But our Sambhaji Maharaj made history at that age.

Where did you go for research, and what materials did you collect? Did you research the attire, culture, and the period's rule?

I conducted extensive research on history. I read "Junath's Written Volumes" on Aurangzeb's life, as well as studies by Italian travelers like Manucci, who had visited during that time, and all the foreign historians and travelers of that era. I studied the records of Sir Desai's state in Marathi, the Anu Puran, Shiv Bharat, and whatever correspondence existed in Marathi, whether from the Peshwa office, the Pune district office, or Dalton College. Wherever I found material, I read it. I traveled across Madras (now Chennai) to Delhi, collecting every document I could find. Additionally, my personal journey—from the valleys of Sahyadri to the coastlines—came together in my novel Sambhaji. This entire journey of mine is reflected in that book.

When your novel was first released in Marathi, what kind of response did you receive from the public?

The important thing is that before this, the image of King Sambhaji was portrayed in such a distorted manner, especially by Marathi playwrights, who presented him as unfaithful, immoral, someone who was always after alcohol, women, or spending time in brothels. They depicted him as someone hopping from one brothel to another. This portrayal was completely divorced from the truth. But when I began my research, I discovered that Sambhaji was the only man with an army of just one lakh or one and a quarter lakh soldiers, fighting against 500,000 enemies. Sambhaji didn’t just fight Aurangzeb, he fought five major enemies of that time, including the Portuguese and the British, and won. He didn’t even have time to eat, so how could such a king be roaming around brothels? It became clear to me that it wasn’t Sambhaji who was wandering around in brothels wearing a false persona, it was the drunken characters from Marathi plays. Sambhaji fought valiantly until his last breath.

In Marathi plays, when Sambhaji was being misrepresented in such a way, did it make you angry? Now, a film on Sambhaji’s life,  Chhaava, directed by Laxman Utekar, is releasing, and its trailer is already out. You must have seen the trailer. What was your first reaction?

I’ve seen the trailer. But I don’t believe in giving my opinion about a film until I have seen it in its entirety. A film involves crores of rupees and the hard work of thousands of people. But I do have a complaint regarding the trailer. The way Sambhaji is shown performing the Lezim dance in the trailer is incorrect. Anyone who has studied or witnessed the Maratha family or Maratha culture will not accept this. Even today, our Maratha women do not step out of their homes. Back in those days, when Maharani Yesubai managed the kingdom or when Sambhaji Maharaj’s court would host women, there was always a curtain that separated them from the men. These royal women would always sit behind the curtain. So, how could they possibly perform Lezim dance in public? How could someone from that royal family, like the women in Sambhaji Maharaj’s court, dance in such a way? It is simply impossible.
I’m not just talking about the film  Chhaava about Sambhaji Maharaj; I’ve been observing this for the past 25 years that Bollywood is spreading this “dance epidemic.” They make every great hero or saintly figure dance. In Bollywood films, Bajirao dances, Mastani dances. Fine, Mastani had a brothel, and dancing was her profession. But how can Kashibai, Bajirao’s wife, dance? Kashibai was actually disabled and couldn’t even walk properly. But the filmmakers, using their financial power, cast two heroines and set them up in competition, showing something completely unjustified. When Bajirao dances, his deity is Ganesh. So, at least make him dance to a Ganesh song! But no, they make him dance to Malhari. It’s wrong! And the same with Tanhaji, who also dances. Our filmmakers are making everyone dance, and this is completely incorrect. It’s nothing less than a distortion of history.

I can give you an example of how history was respected in big Hindi films. Take the movie Mughal-e-Azam, where the most powerful hero of the time, Dilip Kumar, played the role of Prince Salim. Did Dilip Kumar not know how to dance? He could have danced in the song "Lad gayi hai manwa man mein ghungroo baandh ke meri chaal dekho," but even though there were 13-14 songs in Mughal-e-Azam, he never danced a single step. Because the filmmakers and directors at that time were the custodians of history and culture. People may not know that I was the Joint Director at Film City in Mumbai for four years. During that time, Dilip Kumar was directing Kalinga. I often sat with him during lunch breaks. We became good friends, and he often shared old memories with me. Once, he told me about a scene from Mughal-e-Azam—the song "Teri mehfil mein kis tarah aa kar hum bhi dekhenge…" In the film, Dilip Kumar’s character, Salim, is sitting, and Madhubala is some distance away. When the shot started, Dilip Kumar suddenly got up, walked a couple of steps forward, and gave Madhubala a flower. Director K. Asif immediately called "cut" and said, “This is wrong.” Dilip Kumar threatened him saying, “If you disturb me like this, I’ll quit the film.” Asif replied, “I don’t care. I don’t care if it’s Dilip Kumar. In my film, I’m not seeing Dilip Kumar, I’m seeing Emperor Akbar and his son Salim. And Salim won’t go to a maid; instead, the maid will come to him. I’m directing the scene my way. You keep your opinions aside.” This was the courage of Director K. Asif. So, my point is that filmmakers should stay true to the character. They should stay close to the essence of the character and the history.

People are also questioning the costumes of Sambhaji?
What should I say right? Not only Sambhaji in the film ' Chhaava', but before this Jodha Akbar and all the historical films made in Bollywood, the costumes of the characters are wrong. It is not close to the culture of India. Look at the costumes of Aapke Asif's film 'Mughal-e-Azam'. In Marathi, look at the clothes of Bhalji Pendharkar's film 'Raja Shivaji'. Every filmmaker of the present time is working under the influence of Hollywood. Everyone is copying Hollywood. For example, Hollywood actor Brad Pitt's film 'Alexander' was released in 2004. We see Sambhaji wearing the same kind of dress in ' Chhaava'. The cap that Sambhaji is wearing, what do you call that helmet which we call zero tip in Marathi, is not zero tip, it is from a foreign country. It is a foreign helmet. Even the clothes of the small soldiers of Maratha or Mavala are different. I am not just talking about the film ' Chhaava'. There was a big advertisement of a film named 'Vedat Marathe Veer Daudle Saat'. Its costume designer and makeup man had given grave bottoms to those seven people who were going to jump to death for Shivaji of Maratha, or how to show the feet of the seven people. 6-7 players were brought from some African state and they were shown as Marathas. The same thing happened in the film 'Adipurush' on Ramayana. What I am saying is that we are not making historical or mythological films according to our own culture. I am going

I saw Sambhaji's picture somewhere and it was written below it - "Hindavi Swaraj is the wish of Shri..". Do you see anything like this in the trailer of 'Chhaava'?
No! In this trailer, they have called him Maratha Empire instead of 'Hindavi Swaraj'. This term Maratha Empire is wrong. Because Shivaji Raja and Sanjiva Raja worked for 'Hindavi Swaraj'. Sambhaji worked for Hindavi Swaraj. Tarabai worked for Hindavi Swaraj. And when the Peshwai came to Pune, Bajirao was not there. Bajirao's son Nana Saheb's period started small Maratha states in North India like Baroda, Indore etc... This is called Maratha Conflict. In history, it is called Maratha Conflict which means Maratha Empire. There was never a Maratha Empire during Shivaji's period. That was our sacred Hindu Swarajya.

You are also a writer, historian and film director. You have directed three films. You said that you talked about cinematic freedom. But to what extent should a director tamper with history in the name of cinematic freedom? Is it not his responsibility to do proper research?
What can I say on this now? I gave you the example of the film 'Mughal-e-Azam'. What a sweet story Salim and Anarkali is? But you know that in reality there was no Anarkali in history. In history, Salim became a rebel against his father. This is true. He started a fight against his father. This was a son's fight to capture the umpire. But not for any rebel or any dancer. He did not stop anything. There was no name Anarkali. Yes! In Jahangir's Mukhtār Khanā, that is, where the food is cooked, there was a cleaning girl, whose name was Anarkali. Which has nothing to do with this. But in 1920, there was a playwright near Agra. His company was sinking. People were not coming to see the plays. So he thought that something should be made that would make people come to see the play. Then he thought that a boy rebels against his father. He becomes a rebel by rebelling. But he becomes a rebel for his love. So who did he find as the greatest man in the country - Akbar. That is why Jahangir and Salim rebelled against Akbar. The same playwright used Anarkali for this. But that whole story was justified with the time. It was with the costumes. It was with nature. It was with music and it was with the history of India.

A king who is brave. Who lifts the sword. Will the same king dance by raising his elbows and shoulders?

- No no..this is a dirty thing. What are you talking about? Hey, when Sambhaji Raje left for Agra with his father, he was 8 years old. When he reached Aurangzeb's court, he was only 9 years old. And he was representing Hindavi Swarajya. Shivaji Maharaj had made an excuse of illness and in place of Shivaji Maharaj, this 9-year-old boy went to Aurangzeb's court with great pomp. There was a crowd on the way to Agra to see his behavior, is he a king? Is he the son of a king? Maratha and history have spoken. All the foreigners who had come there told that Sambhaji was much more handsome than Shivaji. He was not like the street singer seen in ' Chhaava'. He cannot dance like that. How will he lift his shoulders like this? Here, shoulder-lifting happens in our Lavani dance. Now how will Sambhaji Raja dance in Lavani dance? It is impossible. It is wrong to justify it.

It is said about Aurangzeb that he was very dreadful, evil. But he was handsome. In the film Chhaava, the look given to Akshay Khanna as Aurangzeb, doesn't it look strange?
What to say about the look? Not only Sambhaji's character in ' Chhaava', every film is being wrong. History tells us that there was only one most beautiful and best woman in the world, whose name was Mumtaz Mahal. She was Shahjahan's Begum and Mumtaz Mahal's fourth son was named Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb's mother was so beautiful and Aurangzeb was also handsome. As a writer, the cobra comes in front of me, the snake with a hood. The more beautiful the cobra looks, the more poisonous it is. So Aurangzeb had such an image. But in ' Chhaava', Aurangzeb is seen roaming around with his hair dishevelled, as if he was some fakir roaming around in front of Jama Masjid. Aurangzeb also had his own mind. He had his own style. He had his own vision.

I have never been in favour of banning any film. Because cinema should be made with cinematic freedom. But what can be the way to curb such things that are happening?
In my opinion, if the film is good, it will definitely be a hit, if it is not, it will not be. To be honest, we are disappointed after watching the trailer. But we are still hoping that the film will be many times better than the trailer. All my best wishes are with the film " Chhaava". But I feel that they should pay a little attention to the country's history and culture. Because I have worked on the subject of Sambhaji. Lakhs of readers have read my story of Sambhaji. After watching the trailer of the film, I got thousands of calls asking whether Sambhaji used to dance like this? Will Jesus Maai, being a queen, dance like this? But I want to wish good luck to the film.

After the trailer was released, many organizations have opposed it. Maharashtra minister Uday Samant has also tweeted against it. Now the news is that the director of this film, Laxman Utekar, talked to Raj Thackeray and now Laxman Utekar's statement has come that he will remove this song from the film. What is your opinion on this?
We have not seen the film yet except the trailer. It is possible that the film has been made very well. Therefore, it is not right to comment on the film right now.

Don't you think that whenever a film is made on a historical character, it is the responsibility of the producer, director, writer and artist to do in-depth research on it themselves. Should everyone be collectively responsible or not?
There should be collective responsibility. Everyone should be responsible. I think they should associate with them the best writer. We talk about Mughal-e-Azam. But in those days, Kamal Amrohi, Aman sahab and many other big writers like Hindustani Asif worked together for 6-7 years to work on the script, and then Mughal-e-Azam was made. The point is that if you want to make a good film, you should hire a good team.

Read also:

• Ghajini sequel: Allu Aravind clarifies collaboration with Aamir Khan
• Before Chhaava release, Vicky Kaushal performs Aarti at Grishneshwar Temple
• Will a documentary be made on Hrithik Roshan? Director Shashi Ranjan reveals
• Janhvi Kapoor pens emotional note for Khushi Kapoor ahead of Loveyapa release.