Swapna Bhattacharya, former Professor and Head, South &
Southeast Asian Studies, Calcutta University
This writing restricted in its scope of projecting on some aspects of the History of the Marmas of Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh comes from my heart. The present contribution should also be read as a logical continuation of my previous one, published in this E. journal. Thus, to avoid repetition, facts about the northern Rakhine Muslims (Rohingyas) already highlighted there, have been kept outside focus. Nevertheless, the uncertain repatriation or challenging rehabilitation of the Rohingyas in general directly affects the Buddhist communities of CHT, the Marmas included. A recent publication entitled Rohingya Crisis; Response in Bangladesh adequately addresses the concern. Over the last few decades a large number of articles, Occasional papers and a few books on this corner of Bangladesh-Myanmar-Northeast India could be produced by me, a part of which has been included in the bibliography. Such gifts I could present before my readers as I had the fortune to meet many scholars at international conferences, workshops etc. and senior Rakhine monks, based in India and beyond. The History of Nation building process is an extremely fascinating phenomenon, in which the combined force of faiths and institutions plays an extremely constructive role. The Rakhine Buddhism and the Rakhine spirit of accommodation ( of various faiths and ideas) contributed a lot in this regard. Among many thinkers of India, Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore and Dr. B. R. Ambedkar( S. Bhattacharya, 2015 & 2019) could read this asset in the Rakhine people. The Marmas of CHT numerically a tiny community though, faithfully follow the Dhamma ( the righteous Path) and it is high time that the young generation in India should know more about this “forgotten ” chapter of combined History of Bangladesh-India-Myanmar. After all, Bangladesh and Myanmar are the two most trusted regional partners for India. All three countries have strong institutional bodies (Government, private, academic, religious), Think tanks, and vibrant civil societies . Thus, future challenges, if any, can certainly be fought out and solved jointly.
The CHT, or Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh, the valley of Feni, Karnafuli, Sangu and Matamuri, is home of about 1.2 million people. Most of them actually came from across the border and have their co brethren in the Arakan Hills and elsewhere in Myanmar. The major groups of CHT are: Chakma, Marma, and Tippera. The Chakmas and Marmas follow the orthodox Theravada faith of Myanmar model, while the third group, the Tipperas, adhere to Hinduism. According to dependable sources, the number of Marmas is just 3, 500 today, while in 1981 ( Bhattacharya , 2001: 321) their number was 1,20,000. The ever descending trend can be read either as their “failure” to accommodate with a Muslim majority state or it can also be due to peculiar challenges, faced by them. Most probably or as I argue here, it is the second factor. There are quite a few Bangladeshi and Indian scholars of eminence who ( Mustafa Majid, 2003: 149-152, A. Asad, 2014, S. Mukherje, 2000, S. Chakma, 1986) are equally concerned about the ever increasing settlements – legal or illegal- in the Hills of Chittagong, leading to pressure, if not displacement of the indigenous people. Bimal Parmanik in his extremely valuable work Hindu Decrescent: Bangladesh & West Bengal ( Pramanik, 2021: 19-21) highlighted the descending or unhappy trend also of the Buddhist population, taking examples from districts of Chittagong Bandarban, Khagrachhari and Rangamati. According to him), the Buddhist population in Bangladesh came down from 49.98% in 1981 to 37, 68% in 2011 ( Parmanik, 2021: 22). His study with concrete data skilfully projects upon the concerning downward trend of Hindu population of all the districts of Bangladesh.
The Marmas live mostly in the areas like Bandarban, Rangamati and Khagrachari of Chittagong Hill Tracts, and in the plains of Cox’s Bazaar and coastal Patuakhali. As I have shown in one of my earlier writings ( S. Bhattacharya, 2011, 23 & 2015: 35), the Buddhism followed by the Chakmas is much more open than that followed by relatively more orthodox Marmas. The minor groups of CHT are Tongchengya, Mru ( L. G. Loeffler, 1990) , Mrung/ Riang, Bawm, Khumi, Sak, Pangkhua, Khyang and Lushai. Only the Lushai and a few other small groups follow Christianity, while Tongchengya, Mru, Mrung, Bawm, Khumi, Sak follow Buddhism and also worship nature. In the ethnographical literature written by a large number of colonial administrators, the Chakmas and Marmas are projected as the “Children of the River “ (Khyountha) category, while the rest as the children of the Hills or Toungtha. The word “ Toung” in Myanmar language means “ mountain”. Such “Plains-Hills Dichotomy” (Bhattacharya, 2001: 326) in reality is a myth, and often created by the colonial rulers and administrators (Lewin, 2004: 55-57) in their own interest. The armed resistance that the colonial rulers faced – which they often called “ raids” – made them extremely cautious in dealing with such frontier areas ( F.K. Lehman, 1980) as the Lushai Hills ( modern Mizoram), Chittagong Hill Tracts or Arakan Hills. The Plains dwellers were focused as more “civilized’ against the “Raiders” who were considered as “wild” or wild tribes.
The Magh – a generic name used widely in the colonial literature on Bengal-Burma Frontier actually — points to the Rakhines (Arakanese) of Myanmar. The Marmas do not use the term for themselves. Among many explanations for the popularity of the term may be the “Magadha connection” . After all, Magadha Empire emerged as the most supreme centre for spread of Buddhism. Hutchinson states “The Magh tribe is scattered throughout the District; the majority occupy the country south of the river Karnaphuli, and are under the Chiefship of the Bohmong who has his headquarter at Bandarban on the Sangu river “ ( Hutchinson, 2006: 42). According to Census of 1901, their total strength was 34,706 ( Hutchinson, 2006: 44). Hutchinson narrates further details of history regarding settlement of the 33, 000 Talaing ( Buddhist Mon) families in the Chittagong Hills in form of award favoured to the king of Arakan , as he helped the Myanmar ( king of Burma) in the war against king of Pegu. Thus, to understand the background-story of the “Magh Settlement”, one has to understand the complex episode of intra-ethnic struggle for expansion of various groups within Myanmar. The constant shift in alliance-politics of the Bamar ( Burmans ) of the Irrawaddy river with the Rakhines and the Mons are to be placed against their common opponents : the Shans, who belonged to the Tai-Shan group had their original base in the North ( China) and East ( Thailand). The Myanmar civilization, in which the Buddhist Bamars play the central role ( Bhattacharya, 2023) is a unique synthesis of Indic and Sino-Tibetan elements. The Rakhines and Mons represent the Indic and the Tai-Shans stand for the Sinic.
Given the fact that before the spread of Islam in Bengal, Bengal ( undivided Bengal and part of Bihar ) was a Hindu-Buddhist state, and much of the Samatata-Harikela ( Chittagong-Comilla-Noakhali) region of Bengal was a natural extension of the Buddhist kingdoms of the Kaladan valley based Dhanyavati-Vesali and cities of Lemro of the Rakhine state ( Pamela Gutman, 2001: 10-24), such immigration of the Marmas, for that matter, of all the Buddhist Hill Tracts people, can be seen as a kind of “ Home Coming”. But, this is only one side of the coin. The other side shows the “push factor”, causing the emigration of the Marmas from the Rakhine kingdom in the later period. Especially critical became the situation when the Mughals were approaching towards the Bay of Bengal. In the year 1666 Chittagong Port was occupied by the Mughals. However, the most brilliant chapter of the Rakhine History with Mrauk-U (S. Subrahmanyam, 2002: 107-126: ) showed the highest degree of liberalism and cosmopolitanism ( S.Bhattacharya, 2002: 199-212), otherwise rare elsewhere in Asia, world at large. The Rakhine-Portuguese alliance was only for a short period and targeted to resist Islam as a political force, represented aggressively by the Mughals.
How the term “ Mirma” or later “ Marma” became popular appears quite interesting. The origin is Burmese or better said “Mon-Bamar” unity within the visible or apparent dichotomy. This we can read in the modern renaming of Burma into Myanmar. L. Bernot, the most renowned scholar from France who lived in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and studied the Marmas, very rightly stated: the ethnic term that the Talaings ( Mons of Lower Myanmar ) gave to the Bamars ( Burmans) , with the same, the Talaings of Chittagong called the Rakhines ( Maghs). That is precisely the ethnic name “Mirma” ( Mey- Bhattacharya 1996, 43) . It is thus all too natural that in his essay on the Marma , U Saw Nue goes back to the 16th century when the Bohmong royal families living in the Mon capital Pegu ( 1531-1599). U Saw Nue shows the periodic limit 1614 – 1727, when the Bohmong kings ruled greater Chittagong region, and then the period from 1727- 1998, covering the British period and after when the Bohmong Rajas ruled and regarded as chief of their people (U Saw Nue, 2007: 121).
The Marmas were seen by the colonial rulers as trusted partner in the expansion of their power-base in the Hills, as they ( the Rakhines or Marma Rakhines) were most literate, intelligent, and tolerant. In the context of this, no wonder that various clan leaders from the Marma communities were patronized by the colonial power and settlements were made for tax collection. Such regionalization (or centralising move) helped the colonial rulers to get hold of forest and other resources in Chittagong Plains and Hills. Such developments needed manpower from the plains who could only be Bengalis, Muslims or Hindus. Such middlemen and intermediaries were made part of the socio-economic system, which slowly, but steadily changed the entire geography – physical and spiritual – of this important frontier region.
In 1869, the Marmas were under two clan chiefs: the Bohmong Raja of Bandarban and Mong Raja of Ramgarh. The Marma villages, south of the karnafuli river, emerged as the domain of the Bohmong Raja, while villages to the north was the area of the Mong Raja ( A. Mohsin, 2002: 14). Two clans (called amyo) , Palaingsa and Regretsa were socially quite well-placed, as Chiefs were selected from these two clans ( Mey-Bhattacharya, 107) . Like in Myanmar, the villages were the most important political-social-economic units. The village headman was called Raoza, whose office followed hereditary order. His duty was to collect the tax and other dues, to be further handed over to the Chiefs, directly or via Headman. Actually, Jhum cultivation as well as settled Plough cultivation, both, were practised in the Marma villages. Ultimately, the Mouza system was found the most suitable one, as the Dewans and Roazas could be checked, and so far right over land was concerned, none stood between the three chiefs and the colonial rulers. The long enjoying of semi-autonomy or pseudo-autonomy left the chiefs in dilemma since 1935 Government of India Act and Government of Burma Act. The Excluded Area status for CHT became such a burden for the Chakma Chief that Tridiv Roy, the Chakma Raja, left his own subjects ( Chakma people) and took the citizenship of Pakistan.
As mentioned, the Marmas carry a rich legacy of this liberal Theravada Buddhism, which gives the highest importance to the Pali Tripitaka and observance of Vinay rule by the monks. The Rakhine State ( Bhattacharya, 2015) was the major centre of scholarship and wisdom; the Rakhine monks were invited by the Chakma royalties and the Buddhist people of eastern Bengal in general when reform in the Buddhist Sangha was urgently needed (Bhattacharya, 2013) This fact alone places the Marma community above all other Buddhist communities within Bangladesh. Here in India, the Rakhine monks attached as Head of their respective monasteries (Sarnath, Kushinagar U.P, Bodhgaya Bihar, Barasat in W. Bengal) enjoy a high respect among all religious communities and across institutions .
Throughout the period starting from 1950s to 1990s, European (French, German, Dutch) and American scholars remained seriously engaged with the region of Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh (former East Pakistan), Chin State of Myanmar and their counterpart in Mizoram. Discussions with scholars of such stature as Lorenz G. Loeffler, F.K. Lehman, Pamela Gutman, Abdul Mabud Khan, and Denise Bernot (renowned French scholar of Myanmar Language, Linguistics and Literature and wife of L. Bernot) enriched my understanding considerably. Scholars like Willem van Schendel and Wolfgang Mey can be called the next generation, while Michael Charney and Jaques Leider also represent this generation from the Myanmar History angle. Honouring a request from National Research Professor (late) Jayanta Kumar Ray from my University (Calcutta University) who also introduced me to this centre (CRIBR) I agreed to translate a valuable piece of work on CHT written in German by eminent German anthropologist Wolfgang Mey. I used the term kaumasamaj ( tribal society) and entitled my Bengali translation Parvatya Chattagramer kaumsamaj ekti Arthsamajik Itihas ( Tribal Society of Chittagong Hill Tracts: A Socio-economic History). After exploring the rich cultural heritage of the people of the Chittagong Plains, Chittagong Hill Tracts within the regional context of Bengal-Tripura and the Rakhine State-Lower Myanmar for many years, I ask myself: was the word kaumasamaj a right choice by me? After all, the word kauma stands for “Tribal”. The “Tribal-Non-Tribal Dichotomy” is a myth: such paradigm of measuring the cultural achievement (standard) of any civilization is a colonial construct. Thus what concerns me are the following: What makes the Marmas historically distinct? What were their dilemmas in the past and how and to what extent they overcame the difficulties within the given national framework of Bangladesh? Could their pure Theravada Buddhist heritage contribute in bringing peace and stability in the CHT and adjoining areas? How important is their role as a bridge-maker between South Asia and Southeast Asia? What role the Marmas could play in bringing the three countries, Bangladesh, Myanmar and India closer to each other? How important a role the Marmas could play in bringing back the “lost linguistic heritage” of Pali language?
So far material culture (food, dress, handicraft etc.) is concerned, it is known from the large body of ethnographical literature ( S. Ahasan, 1995) that the Marmas faithfully follow a way of life, similar, if not the same as their co-brethren in the Rakhine state. Linguistically they are also identified with their Myanmar-Rakhine counterparts, as they speak the same language, the standard Myanmar (Bamar) language with a few exceptions existing in the vocabulary. My little knowledge in Myanmar language helps me to identity the Myanmar (Burmese) root or derivation. Still, the problem lies with a kind of spiritual vacuum, as there is no active communication between Sanghas of the Rakhine State and the Sangha of the Marmas. However, the Marma community of CHT appears engaged in religious activities of all kinds. This vacuum ( Abud Mabud Khan, 1999: 127) appeared in the past so acute that even Head Monks ( Sangha Nayakas) left their followers and turned back to Rakhine State. The reason must have been the increasing tension mounting in the CHT ( Chittagong Hill Tracts) from mid 1970s onwards. It continued throughout 1980s, when CHT became a unsafe place for anyone, let alone the Buddhists! During this years of 1980s Tripura saw surge in Mog ( Marma Rakhines) refugees, at least a part of whom preferred India or even Myanmar as their destination. The increasing militarisation, if not also the Islamization (radical Islam) of CHT — made them extremely nervous and restless ( Mey, 1991).
There is no doubt that a general stability in CHT was restored through signing of the Peace Accord in 1997 between PCJSS headed by Jyotirindra Bodhipriya Larma and the then Awami League Govt. of Bangladesh, headed by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. The refugees living in the camps of Tripura– Chakmas being numerically stronger than other communities — went back to their villages in CHT. Today, there is no Shanti Bahini, no insurgency, but the people of CHT still have to live with an uncertain future. If this is due to partial failure of the local, regional or central institutions or governments bodies, it is also due to increasing involvement ( (interference ? ) of outside powers into the domestic affairs of Bangladesh or in the bilateral affairs between Bangladesh and Myanmar or in the triangle relation of Bangladesh – India- Myanmar.
In recent times, there has been inspiring developments in the neighbouring state of Tripura, so far Buddhist resurgence and various connectivity projects between Tripura and Bangladesh are concerned. Bangladesh itself has a very thriving Buddhist population, well-connected and well-placed within the country and beyond. At every visit to Bangladesh I witnessed this spirit. I travelled (2011) across Chittagong, Cox’s bazaar and Ramu area and have seen Rakhine monasteries which are open to public. It may be true that a part of the Marmas turned back to Rakhine State of Myanmar in 1960s and 1970s. Though Buddhism always enjoyed a special patronage in Myanmar, but in the past political understanding, if not axis, between Pakistan and China came as a compelling factor for the Myanmar Govt. to take a side, not expected at all otherwise from such neutral country. The Kaptai hydro-electric project complex at Kaptai village on the Karnafuli between Rangamati and Chandraghona drew also American companies to work on the spot. Various experiments by Pakistan in the CHT during 1950s and 1960s to “industrialize and develop” the region caused massive displacement and exodus of homeless Chakmas to India. Interestingly, it also happened in and around the time when China attacked India in 1962.
As a widely referred book by an American diplomat Archer K. Blood (A.K. Blood, 2023) indicates, the US was fairly interested in the affairs of Bangladesh or former East Pakistan. Indeed, Pakistan’s policy in camouflage was to use the area as a meeting place for bringing the powers like China and General Ne Win- ruled Myanmar together. A photograph shows East Pakistan General Monem Khan presenting Minister Maung Shwe Prue Chaudhury to Chinese Prime Minister Liu Shaoqui at Dhaka airport ( Schendel, Mey, Dewan: 2001: 81). The same source presents a photograph of General Ne Win at the Kaptai dam area (Schendel et all: 198). Unfortunately, Sheikh Mujibar Rahman ( Moudud Ahmed, 1983) did not live long to see any permanent peace and stability in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, in his own country at large. He tried his best, but the seed of separatism was already there in the soil. Evil forces were too formidable and aimed at isolating him from the Indian people. General Zia-ur Rehman and General Ershad, tried their best to keep the area of CHT under strongest possible control, but the CHT remained further under severe challenges. It is important to remember that great monk like popularly called Ven. Vana Bhante , with his indomitable spirit of metta ( Maitri: loving kindness), stood firm, preached tirelessly the basic principles of dhamma. Without his presence among the Buddhists of CHT, the region would have faced major challenges of unknown nature. Thus, I was only too happy to read an article on this great monk in the last issue of this journal published by the Centre (CRIBR).
Bibliography
Ahasan, Selina. 1995. The Marmas of Bangladesh. Dhaka: AHASAN Publication.
Ahmed, Moudud.2017 ( first pub. 1983). Bangladesh: Era of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Dhaka: UPL.
Asad, Asuduzzaman. 2014. Bangladesher Khudra Nri-Gosthhir Jiban Baicitra o Itihas. Dhaka Bangla Bazar: Kakoli Prakashani.
Bhattacharya, Swapna (translator). 1996. Parvatya Chattagramer Kaumasamaj: Ekti Arthasamajik Itihas. Kolkata: Firma KLM Pvt. Ltd. ( original German title Politische Systeme in den Chittagong Hill tracts, Bangladesh by Wolfgang Mey). In the series International Centre for Bengal Studies.
Bhattacharya, Swapna.2001.‘The refugee-generating Chittagong Hill Tracts: Past, Present and Future’(345-360). In Refugees and Human Rights, ed. by Sanjoy Roy, Jaipur & Delhi: Rawat Publications, .
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2002. ‘Myth and History of Bengali Identity in Arakan’(199-212). In Maritime Frontier of Burma Exploring Political, Cultural and Commercial interaction in the Indian Ocean World 1200-1800, ed. by Jos Gommans and Jaques LeiderKITLV Press: Amsterdam.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2008. ‘ Religion and Colonial Politics: Assam, Myanmar and Buddhism’ ( 309-329). In Development Dynamics in North East India , ed. by Jayanta Kumar Ray and Rakhee Bhattacharya. Ansah Publishing House ( Delhi) & MAKAIAS / Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies, Kolkata.
Bhattacharya, Swapna.2011. ‘ Society, Culture and Religion of the Chakmas with special reference to their unique Heritage’ (21-42). In Four Decades of Mukta Bangladesh and Indo-Bangladesh Relations : Commemorative Volume, edited by Dr. Tapan Pan & Sri Arindam Mukherjee. Kolkata: Institute of Social and Cultural Studies.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2013. ’ Buddhism in Arakan: Some Observations’ ( 63-78).. In Script Identity: A Study in Sylhet Nagri, ed. Anuradha Chanda. Kolkata: Dey’s Publishing & MAKAIAS,
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2015. The Rakhine ( Arakan) State of Myanmar: Interrogating History, Culture and Conflict. Delhi & Calcutta: Manohar & MAKAIAS
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2019. Rabindranath Tagore and Myanmar: India’s Act East Policy and India-Myanmar Relations. Kolkata: Firma KLM Pvt. Ltd.
Bhattacharya, Swapna. 2023. ‘Nuances of power-sharing, Conflict and Consensus in the Light of Dhamma: Myanmar at the Crossroad’ (3-15). Revisiting MYANMAR: Present through Past, ed. by Vinod Anand and Cchavi Vasisht. Delhi: Vivekananda International Foundation, Pentagon Press LLP.
Bleie, Tone. 2006. Tribal people’s Nationalism and Human Rights Challenge: The Adivasis of Bangladesh. Dhaka: University Press Limited.
Blood, Archer K.2023 (first pub. 2002) The Cruel Birth of Bangladesh: Memoirs of an American Diplomat. Dhaka: UPL.
Chakma, Siddharta. 1985. Prasanga Parvatya Chattagram. Kolkata: Nath Publishers.
Devbarma, Naresh, Biman Dhar & Kumud Kundu Chaudhury ( eds). 2010. Tripuar Adivasi. Agartala: pub. By Reena Roy, Tripura Darpan.
Fleischmann, Klaus. 1981. Arakan: Ein Konfliktregion zwischen Birma and Bangladesh. Hamburg: Institut fuer Asienkunde.
Gomamns, Jos and Jacques Leider eds. 2002. The Maritime Frontier of Burma: Exploring Political, Cultural and Commercial interaction in the Indian Ocean World 1200-1800. KNAW, Amsterdam. Leiden: KITLV Press.
Gutman, Pamela. 2001. Burma’s lost Kingdom: Splendours of Arakan. Bangkok: Orchid Press.
Hutchinson, R.H. Sneyd. 2004 (first pub. 1872). Kolkata: KREATIVMIND
Khan, Abdul Mabud. 1999. The Maghs: A Buddhist Community in Bangladesh. Dhaka: UPL
Lehman, F.K. 1980. The Structure of the Chin Society. Kolkata: Firma KLM on behalf of Tribal Research Society of Govt. Of Mizoram.
Lewin, T.H. Captain. 2004 (1869). The Hill Tracts of Chittagong and Dwellers therein. Aizawl: Tribal Research Institute.
Lewin, T.H. Captain. 2005 ( first pub. 1912). A fly on the Wheel or how I helped to govern India. Aizawl: Tribal research Institute.
Loeffler, Lorenz G. And Claus Dieter Brauns.1990.Mru : Hill People on the Border of Bangladesh. Basel: Birkhaueser Verlag.
Majid, Mustafa. 2003. Bangladesher Rakhine . Dhaka: Bangla Academy , Dhaka.
Mey, Wolfgang. 1991. Vielleicht sind diese Dinge die einziges Spur die wir hinterlassen. Galgenberg: Musen Paedagogisch dienst , Hamburg.
Mohsin, Ameena. 2002. The Politics of Nationalism. The Case of Chittagong Hill Tracts Bangladesh. Dhaka: University Press Limited.
Mukherji, Saradindu. 2000. Subjects, Citizens and Refugee: Tragedy in the Chittagong Hill Tracts ( 1947-1998). N. Delhi: Indian centre for the Study of Forced Migration.
Pramanik , Bimal. 2021. Hindu Decrescent: Bangladesh and West Benga . Kolkata: Centre for Research in Indo- Bangladesh Relations.
Rohingya Crisis: response in Bangladesh: Do we need a strategic shift from the current approach ? 2023. Composed by Research Team from the Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka & from the Advocacy for Social Change, BRAC. Dhaka: UPL.
Subrahmanyam, Sanjay. 2002. ‘And a River runs through it: The Mrauk U Kingdom and its Bay of Bengal Context’ (107-126). In The Maritime Frontier of Burma: Exploring Political, Cultural and Commercial interaction in the Indian Ocean World 1200-1800. KNAW, Amsterdam. Leiden: KITLV Press.
U Saw Nue. 2007 ‘ Marma’ ( 117-139). In Indigenous Communities edited by Mesbah Kamal, Zahidul Islam & Sugata Chakma. Dhaka, Bangladesh: Asiatic Society of Bangladesh.
Van Shendel, Willem, Wolfgang Mey & Aditya Dewan. 2001. The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Living in a Borderland. Dhaka: UPL