Stop Attacks on the Shankaracharya Tradition by the Sangh Parivar: Former CBI Director Writes to Three Shankaracharyas of Puri, Sringeri & Dwarka.

Former CBI Director M. Nageswara Rao Urges Puri, Sringeri and Dwarka Shankaracharyas to Intervene in Row Over Alleged Humiliation of Jyotirmath Shankaracharya.

Upananda Brahmachari | HENB | New Delhi | Feb 17, 2026:: A major controversy within sections of the Sanatan Hindu religious leadership has intensified after former Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Director M. Nageswara Rao wrote an open letter to three prominent Shankaracharyas, urging their intervention in what he described as the “humiliation” of Swami Avimukteshwarananda Saraswati, the Shankaracharya of Badrikashram Jyotirmath.

The letter was addressed to the heads of three of the four traditional Advaita peethas: the Shankaracharya of Govardhan Math in Puri, the Shankaracharya of Sringeri Sharada Peetham, and the Shankaracharya of Dwarka Sharada Peeth. Rao made the appeal public through his ‘X’ handle and indicated that the communication would likely also be sent physically.

Background: Cow Slaughter Ban Demand and Escalating Tensions

The controversy traces back to Swami Avimukteshwarananda’s public demands for a “nationwide blanket ban on cow slaughter,” a halt to beef exports from India, immediately from Uttar Pradesh, and a declaration of the cow as “Rashtra Mata” (Mother of the Nation). His stance, according to critics of the government, created friction with political authorities.

The Swami’s position was seen as sharply critical of the Union Government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Uttar Pradesh government headed by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, particularly on the issue of slaughterhouses and bovine meat exports. The Swami argued that such activities contravene the spirit of Article 48 of the Indian Constitution, which directs the state to prohibit the slaughter of cows and calves.

Magh Mela Incident and Public Confrontation

Tensions peaked during the Prayag Magh Mela in Prayagraj, particularly on the sacred occasion of Mauni Amavasya. According to the Swami and his supporters, he was prevented from taking the traditional holy dip at the Ganga–Yamuna–Saraswati confluence. His customary palanquin procession was allegedly obstructed, and his disciples were reportedly subjected to police action and torture. Authorities claimed that the Swami’s presence could create disorder in the Mela.

Further escalation occurred when police served communications questioning Swami Avimukteshwarananda’s status as Shankaracharya within the Mela premises, reportedly under instructions from the Uttar Pradesh government. Subsequently, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath criticized him publicly, referring to him (without taking his name) as “Kalnemi”—a demon disguised as a sage in Hindu mythology—and disputed his claim to the Shankaracharya title.

In response, Swami Avimukteshwarananda left the Magh Mela without taking the ritual bath and issued a 40-day ultimatum to the Chief Minister to prove his “Hinduness” by stopping cow slaughter and beef exports in Uttar Pradesh. He stated that failing this, he would publicly declare Adityanath a “fake Hindu” and a “real Kalnemi.” The episode led to visible divisions among monks, seers, their Sanatani followers and the dharmik Hindu society in general..

Nageswara Rao’s Appeal to Three Peethas

In what he described as a “crisis-ridden and calamitous time” for Sanatan Dharma, the former CBI Director M. Nageswara Rao appealed to the three Shankaracharyas to issue a joint statement condemning what he termed “well-orchestrated attempts” of Sangha Parivar to defame and destroy the Shankaracharya tradition in North India.

In his letter, Rao alleged that Swami Avimukteshwarananda was being continuously targeted through Central and State governments associated with the Sangh Parivar, with the cooperation of certain sadhus and saints. He referred to the prevention of the Mauni Amavasya bath and the alleged attempts to foist criminal cases as deliberate and malicious actions aimed at harming Sanatan Hindu Dharma.

Rao urged the three Jagadgurus to appeal to the President of India, the Prime Minister, and the Chief Justice of India for immediate intervention to halt what he described as anti-Hindu injustice. He concluded the letter with respectful salutations and signed it as “M. Nageswara Rao, IPS (Retd.), Former Director, CBI.”

In the same post, Rao attached a video showing the Shankaracharya of Sringeri, Sri Bharati Tirtha Mahaswamiji, conducting the Pattabhishek (holy coronation/consecration) of Swami Avimukteshwarananda for Jyotir Math and of Swami Sadananda for Dwarka Peeth, presenting it as evidence of traditional recognition.

Swami Avimukteshwarananda’s Counterattack

The row further intensified after an interview of the Jyotirmath Shankaracharya surfaced on ETV Bharat. In the interview, he strongly criticized Yogi Adityanath, stating that the Chief Minister was “daring in ego.”

He challenged the Chief Minister’s remarks regarding the definition of a Shankaracharya, asserting that no one can self-declare as Shankaracharya—just as no one can self-appoint as Chief Minister. According to him, recognition comes through established tradition, not political certification. He questioned whether a state government or the Bharatiya Janata Party had the authority to decide who qualifies as Shankaracharya.

He further argued that the other three Shankaracharyas have recognized him and maintained that there is no legal framework under which a Chief Minister can determine religious titles. Referring to statements made in the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly, he termed such remarks an unacceptable political intrusion into the religious sphere.

Swami Avimukteshwarananda also criticized the role of the Sangha and the BJP in projecting Swami Vasudevananda Saraswati as a Shankaracharya when he had been restricted by judicial forums and his case is still sub judice.

The Swami also claimed that while the judiciary has restrained certain individuals from using the Shankaracharya title in other contexts, his own position has been recognized by traditional authorities. He accused the Chief Minister of exceeding his constitutional role and described it as “arrogance” and interference in religious matters.

Security, Political Interference, and 40-Day Challenge

Addressing concerns over security, the Swami stated that he would not seek protection from either the Central or State government, asserting that “our protection will be our God.” He alleged that the Uttar Pradesh Police had acted against him and questioned how he could request security from authorities he believes are hostile to him.

He warned against what he described as increasing political interference in religion, likening it to the introduction of a “caliphate system” into Hinduism. He said that Sanatan followers must resist such encroachment.

On the political front, when asked about the 2027 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, the Swami declined to speculate but insisted that whoever becomes Chief Minister must uphold the law and treat citizens fairly. He said that a leader who is arrogant, hostile, or ready to compromise on core principles should not hold office and, if elected, should be corrected by the people.

He also mentioned that Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya had supported him, stating that capable individuals exist who deserve leadership opportunities. The Swami reiterated that he had questioned Adityanath’s credentials as a Sanatani and given him 40 days to respond to those questions, noting that nearly two weeks had already passed.

A Deepening Rift Within Hindu Religious Circles

The controversy has led to a pronounced divide among monks, seers, and followers within the broader Sanatan Hindu community. With the former CBI Director now formally urging intervention by the heads of the Puri, Sringeri, and Dwarka peethas, the matter has taken on national significance.

As of now, no joint statement from the three Shankaracharyas has been reported. However, the public exchange of accusations, institutional appeals, and religious-political confrontation has deepened an already sensitive debate about the boundaries between state authority and religious tradition in contemporary India.

After all, the silence of the Sangh Parivar and the central BJP on the issue involving Swami Avimukteshwarananda and Yogi Adityanath clearly shows indulgence and a secret move to defame the highest seats of Sanatan Dharma, while pursuing their own political interests and dividing Hindu society at bay.
…
_Inputs from Etv Bharat.