How Chinmoy Krishna Das became the face of Hindu resistance in Bangladesh
Makarand R Paranjape Makarand R Paranjape | 06 Dec, 2024
Chinmoy Krishna Das (Illustration: Saurabh Singh)
AS I BEGAN to write this column, there were fresh reports of violence against Hindus and their places of worship from Bangladesh. Muslim vandals attacked three shrines in Chattogram (formerly Chittagong)—Shantaneshwari Matri Temple, Shoni Temple, and Shantaneshwari Kalibari Temple. These are located in the Harish Chandra Munsef Lane. As Islamist mobs run amok, there have been calls on Hindus in Bangladesh to hide their identities to save themselves.
This reminds us eerily of the lynch mobs against the Jews during the Holocaust and against Hindus during the Partition riots. It is not that there was no violence against Muslims during those bloody clashes or later in the subcontinent’s blood-soaked history. But what seems increasingly clear is that attempts to equalise religious violence, let alone raise the bogey of saffron terror or Hindutva extremism, will not work anymore. Religious violence is much more readily identifiable with political Islam the world over than any other creed or faith. The sooner we accept this, the better it is for the rest of the world. We cannot be in denial, or worse, make excuses for it.
As to Bangladesh, there comes a time in a nation’s history when it is at a crossroads, facing, in fact, an existential crisis. For the second time in its history. At such a moment, one man or woman often becomes the symbol of hope and resistance. We have seen this again and again. Lech Walęsa in Poland, Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, and even earlier, Mahatma Gandhi in India, the Dalai Lama in Tibet, and Sheikh Mujibur Rahman when Bangladesh became independent, to name just a few. Has Chinmoy Krishna Das, the ex-ISKCON monk, inadvertently become such a symbol against Hindu persecution in Bangladesh?
I say inadvertently because the International Society of Krishna Consciousness is a totally non-violent, pure vegetarian sampradaya, with very strict adherences. It is a kirtan (chanting) and seva (service) campaign, started by HC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Prabhupada created a reformist international sect from the larger Gaudiya Chaitanya Vaishnava bhakti or devotional movement which traces its roots to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the 16th century. Their mainstay is the Mahamantra, “Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna Hare Hare, Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.”
ISKCON, Bangladesh, put a statement clarifying its own stance and protesting against the religious intolerance of which it is clearly the victim: “The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) condemns the recent violence in Bangladesh and calls for calm and cooperation between religious communities in Bangladesh”. It asserts that “ISKCON has been falsely and viciously accused of wrongdoing.” What is more, it alleges a pattern in these attacks, even a conspiracy: “Any sincere observer can understand the conspiracy and perfidious engineering by some evil vested groups.” Without naming them, it says, “some groups are trying to destabilize the religious harmony in Bangladesh. They are trying to exploit the religious sentiments of common people in order to slur and destroy the century-old communal coherence between the Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh.”
As to ISKCON itself, the statement says that it is “distinctively recognized as a torchbearer for uplifting humanity by spearheading peace and compassion in the conflict-ridden world” which is “completely nonviolent, nonpolitical, nonpartisan, and non-sectarian spiritual organization having an impeccable legacy of over 50 years.” Furthermore, “There has never been a single instance of ISKCON’s involvement in any kind of extremist activities in Bangladesh or anywhere else in the world.” Clearly, a smear campaign to tar its reputation and accuse it of being a radical organisation is afoot.
Chinmoy Krishna Das did not set out to be a hero or a martyr. He became so after the murder of his fellow-monks and the burning of Hindu temples
Instead, the statement continues, “ISKCON is engaged in various interfaith dialogues, sociocultural welfare activities such as distributing free sumptuous meals, free clothes, offering affordable treatment, fostering sustainability, educating children etc.” Moreover, “How can those who refrain from killing even animals be involved in killing humans? ISKCON is always very respectful towards all faiths and is fully against hurting anyone’s religious feelings.”
Absolutely correct.
That is why it is evident that Chinmoy Krishna Das did not set out to be a hero or a martyr. But after the murder of his fellow-monks and the burning of Hindu temples, he became the face of the Hindu resistance, the spokesperson of the Bangladesh Sommilito Sanatan Jagaran Jot. For this act of going beyond his duties and responsibilities as an ISKCON monk, he was, so to speak, defrocked. After a considerable gap, his congregation has now spoken out in his support. A prisoner of conscience, Das is languishing in jail for the crime of sedition.
What is his sin? He has been accused of placing the saffron flag higher than the flag of Bangladesh. Let us understand the context. The Jamaat-e-Islami, the fundamentalist Muslim party which is spearheading the violence against the Hindus in post-Hasina Bangladesh, has been frequently pictured with Islamic and Jamaat flags higher than the Bangladesh flag. The message is clear. Bangladesh is an Islamic country first and foremost; Islam is higher than the constitution and the government of Bangladesh. We have also seen how several Jamaat and other so-called student activists have been trampling upon the Indian flag, to show their disrespect and contempt for “Hindu” India. If so, the accusation against Das, even if true, seems like a minor infraction for which he may not even be personally responsible.
There is no question that Bangladesh is sliding in political chaos and Islamist religious violence. But who is responsible for this? The present Bangladesh “caretaker” government, led by “advisor” Muhammad Yunus? The US, which many claim, is behind the coup which unseated the duly elected former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina? Or, at least partly, the Indian government, which was unable to anticipate, let alone prevent, such a turn of events? And, in the ongoing mayhem, which has not done much, at least overtly, except issue statements deploring the violence against minorities?
The role of the secular Hindu intelligentsia has been noticeably abhorrent and morally repugnant. They can mobilise for distant causes such as “Black Lives Matter” or the cause of Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands, but when it comes to fellow-Hindus in neighbouring Bangladesh, the cat gets their tongue. Does this mean that to them the only good Hindu is one who dies silently and politely, without as much as a mutter or protest? Sad. A beaten down people with so much internalised self-loathing and collective Stockholm syndrome?
The political upheaval in Bangladesh has not gone unnoticed on the international stage. Concerns over the plight of the Hindus, Buddhist, and Christians in Bangladesh have been raised in the United Nations, in the UK parliament, and on Capiton Hill, Washington DC. But the international community’s response has been nowhere near the levels needed to change the narrative or stem the tide of anti-Hindu hatred and violence. The global narrative is still blind, it would seem, when it comes to the persecution of Hindus.
Chinmoy Krishna Das’ case transcends his personal fate; it symbolises the broader struggle for religious freedom, identity, and expression in Bangladesh. His arrest poses fundamental questions about the future of Hindus in Bangladesh. It also highlights the use of sedition laws in the service of suppressing targeted religious minorities. If displaying a religious symbol is seditious, what space is left for the expression of minority identities? What happens to justice, fairness, and human rights in such a situation? Instead, we see a dangerous tendency to weaponise legal systems against legitimate dissent.
Not just Indians, especially Hindus, but Bangladesh’s own citizens, must reflect on the trajectory the country is taking. Are they willing to let religious freedom and individual rights be supplanted by extremist ideologies? Or will they rally around figures like Das, seeing in his struggle a call to reaffirm the secular, democratic values that should define Bangladesh? The answer to this question will determine not just Das’ fate, but the very character of Bangladesh for generations to come.
Chinmoy Krishna story isn’t just about a flag or a law; it is about the survival of a nation when political instability has opened the door to religious extremism. Das has become a symbol of resistance, not just for Hindus but for anyone who believes in a future for Bangladesh.
The alternative is that Bangladeshi minorities must pay a penalty and live in perpetual fear just because they are not Muslim. Jizia, the tax on non-Muslims in a Muslim country, has no place in the modern world.
More Columns
Muses by the Mandovi Abhilasha Ojha
All Are Equal? Alok Prasanna Kumar
Sagas from Solapur Aditya Mani Jha