Mahasthabir Nikaya

The Mahasthabir Nikaya is a Bengali order of Buddhist monks. They were anti-reformists and anti-foreign influence who attempted to replace the movement led by Saramitra Mahasthabir ("Saramedha Mahasthavira" in Pali), which led to the formation of the Sangharaj Nikaya in 1864.

Part of a series on
Buddhism
History Timeline Gautama Buddha Pre-sectarian Buddhism Councils Silk Road transmission of Buddhism Decline in the Indian subcontinent Later Buddhists Buddhist modernism
Dharma Concepts Four Noble Truths Noble Eightfold Path Dharma wheel Five Aggregates Impermanence Suffering Not-self Dependent Origination Middle Way Emptiness Morality Karma Rebirth Saṃsāra Cosmology
Buddhist texts Buddhavacana Early Buddhist Texts Tripiṭaka Mahayana Sutras Pāli Canon Tibetan canon Chinese canon
Practices Three Jewels Buddhist Paths to liberation Five precepts Perfections Meditation Philosophical reasoning Devotional practices Merit making Recollections Mindfulness Wisdom Sublime abidings Aids to Enlightenment Monasticism Lay life Buddhist chant Pilgrimage Vegetarianism
Nirvāṇa Awakening Four Stages Arhat Pratyekabuddha Bodhisattva Buddha
Traditions Theravāda Pāli Mahāyāna Hinayana Chinese Vajrayāna Tibetan Navayana Newar
Buddhism by country Bhutan Cambodia China India Japan Korea Laos Mongolia Myanmar Russia Sri Lanka Taiwan Thailand Tibet Vietnam
Outline  Religion portal

The anti-reformation movement came into being in order to counter-act that which was led by Saramitra Mahasthabir. This movement became known as the Mahasthabir Nikaya and was led by Radha Charan Mahasthabir, the Bengali monk who first invited Saramitra Mahasthabir to Bangladesh.

However, the Mahasthabir did not oppose the Sangharaj on doctrinal grounds - they did not advocate the practices the Sangharaj Nikaya attempted to eradicate. They are doctrinally identical to the Sangharaj Nikaya. The Mahasthabir Nikaya believed that a Bengali Buddhist order should not come under a powerful influence from a foreign entity. They opposed the Sangharaj Nikaya on the grounds that the Sangharaj Nikaya was foreign in origin, not on the grounds that the Sangharaj Nikaya was degenerate. Differences between the lineages are purely practical, i.e., they advocate different day-to-day practices for their monks. As such, differences are extremely minimal, and important only to the monastic sangha. Laity following the different traditions did not particularly differentiate between the two. The distinction served only to maintain an organizational front, not a doctrinal opposition.