TANTRIC BUDDHISM (INCLUDING CHINA AND JAPAN)What this seems to indicate is that the bahis are relics of an earlier and celi-
bate tradition. For a long time after the distinctive feature of these communities,
their celibacy, had been abandoned they continued many of their traditions.
Finally, in the face of the overwhelming popularity of the biihii traditions, the
ritual and social high status of the Vajracaryas, and the official sanction of this
tantric Buddhism (with its round of ritual which fit so well into the structure of
'Hindu society') by the ruling elite, the bah!s were relegated to a place outside
the mainstream ofthe Buddhist tradition of the Valley. Perhaps it is in this sense
that the term bahir (outside) has the greatest import.
This line of reasoning is confirmed by the relevant passage in Wright's chron-
icle. Siddhi Narasirpha, the king of Patan, had called together the elders of the
'Fifteen Baha', and made arrangements for their government. He then called the
elders of the twenty-five bah!s of Patan. The chronicle calls these vihiiras 'nir-
viil)ik vanaprastha'. Wright explains this term as meaning "the inhabitants did not
marry", though it is abundantly clear from the chronicle that they were in fact
married. The term seems meaningless because Wright's translators have omitted
the contrasting term which the chronicle writers used for the biihiis: 'saf!lsiirik
tantrik vihiira' ('this-worldly tantric vihiira'). The chronicle clearly contrasts
nirviil)ik vanaprastha vihiiras (bah!s) and saf!lsiirik tantrik vihiiras (biihiis). When
the king tried to make reforms in the bah!s similar to the reforms he made in the
biihiis, the members of I Baht complained that since they followed the other-
worldly forest-dwelling dharma they could not take the tantric initiation of those
who are members of a worldly tantric vihiira. The chronicle then describes the
arrangements made for the bah!s in general and especially for I Baht concluding:"In this way the rules were established both for the worldly tantric
(saf!lsiirik tantrik) monasteries and for the other-worldly forest-
dwelling (nirviil)ik vanaprastha) monasteries."^59One sees here an intermediate stage. Celibacy had disappeared, but the bah!s
were still repositories of a different tradition which their members wanted to
preserve. However, their efforts were doomed as they were caught in an anom-
alous situation. They were custodians of the tradition of the celibate monks, but
they were not celibate. The king was anxious to make all of his subjects conform
to the traditional customs of Hindu society. One of these customs was the
performance of the fire sacrifice (homa) after the death of a member of a family
in order to purify the household and its members. Since they were married men
with families, they must also adopt this custom, and for this they must have a
priest who is empowered to perform such a sacrifice. He may be Buddhist, but
he must be a Vajracarya, as the priests from bah!s were not recognized (by their
own people or the majority community) as Vajracaryas and hence did not
perform the fire sacrifice. So Vajracaryas from Dhwp Baha were assigned to be
the priests of I Bah!. The bah! priests continued to function for rituals pertaining
to the monastery itself, but Vajracaryas from the biihiis became the family