THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF NEWAR BUDDHISMdespite the fact that there are ten other main biihiis of Sakyas where bare-
chuyegu initiations are performed. Both the main biihiis of the Aciirya-Giithi and
the ten Sakya biihiis also have branches. In Bhaktapur there are only nine main
btihtis, some Sakya and some mixed. All of the extant Bhaktapur btihiis are main
btihtis.
The bah!s form a separate class of monastery, but today the difference
between the two has been lost for all practical purposes. We have seen above
certain architectural differences between the two types. Certain other superficial
differences are obvious. Most of the bah!s are in a general state of disrepair in
contrast to the btihtis, especially the main btihtis of Patan, which have been kept
up and are periodically renovated. The sanghas of the bahls are small and
continually decreasing so that the membership of the bah!-sanghas accounts for
only 5.4% of the total bare in the Valley. Several institutions which were func-
tioning fifty years ago are now empty and falling into ruins. Because of their
small numbers, bah!s, except for Cikan Bah! in Patan, usually do not have
branches. In general the members of the bah!s are financially less well off than
the members of the btihtis. The organization of the sangha of a bah! is different
from that of a btihti. In Patan there are two groups of bah!s, one comprising ten
bah!s and the other fifteen. In Kathmandu there are sixteen bah!s. Though initia-
tions are (or were until recent times) performed in all of these vihtiras, each of
these three groups of bah!s had one overall sangha (sarva-smigha) with five
elders for each of the two groups of Patan and a group of sixteen elders in Kath-
mandu, one from each bah!. This system is somewhat modified now, as the two
groups in Patan have broken up in recent times, and several of the bah!-smighas
in Kathmandu have died out entirely.^26 In Patan, until recent times, the members
of a bah! were called brahmacarya-bhilcyu rather than stikya-bhilcyu or stikya-
VGI'flSG. Though the term is still known, most of these people today prefer simply
Sakya.
All of these are rather superficial differences, and if one asks bare today the
difference between btihti and bah!, they are hard pressed to give a meaningful
answer. Members of the btihtis will often say that the bah!s were later founda-
tions set up for people of mixed or lower castes. Historical evidence contradicts
this contention. A number of the bah is have definitely been in existence for six
hundred years or more. I Bah! and its associates in Patan are probably about nine
hundred years old, Guita Bah! in Patan existed in I 024 AD, Tharp Bah! in Kath-
mandu certainly existed in I 041 AD and Ca Bah! in Kathmandu certainly goes
back to Licchavi times, though the present sangha seems to be later. The
members of I Bah! claim brahman descent, and though this cannot be proven
with documentary evidence, some of their still current customs confirm this. It is
true that the members of the bah!safzghas were, until recent times, looked upon
as somehow slightly lower than members of a biihti. Members of a biihii would
usually not give their daughters in marriage to a bah/ nor would they take wives
from them. This prejudice has almost disappeared today. Others will say that the
organization of the bahi-safzgha is less structured and that the bah/ people have