In e na ional Jou nal o Social Science and Human Resea ch
ISSN (p in ): 2644-0679, ISSN (online): 2644-0695
Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025
DOI: 10.47191/ijssh / 8-i10-28, Impac ac o - 8.007
Page No: 7782-7788
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7782
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian
Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
D . Amlan Lahi i
Ass . P o esso , Dep . o Sociology Cluny Women’s College Kalimpong, Wes Bengal
ABSTRACT: The Ma ua Mahasangha, a majo socio- eligious Hindu sec in Bengal, has emained in luen ial o e ime by
main aining a s ong and o ganized ins i u ional s uc u e. This amewo k no only os e s eligious and spi i ual li e among i s
ollowe s bu also plays a key ole in shaping he communi y’s isibili y and in luence in he socio-poli ical sphe e. E en as he
poli ical landscape o Bengal con inues o change, he Mahasangha has adap ed i s s a egies o s ay ele an and asse i e in public
li e. This pape examines he s uc u al and o ganiza ional dimensions o he Ma ua Mahasangha, wi h pa icula ocus on i s
hie a chical se up, collec i e mobiliza ion, and sec a ian consciousness. These elemen s ha e been c ucial in main aining he sec ’s
uni y and i ali y, e en as i aces in e nal challenges, including ongoing amilial con lic s a he co e o i s leade ship s uc u eThis
s udy highligh s how uni y, discipline, and adhe ence o cen al leade ship ha e been key o he Ma ua Mahasangha’s abili y o s ay
esilien in he ace o social and poli ical changes. By explo ing he ways in which he Mahasangha main ains i s o ganiza ional
s eng h and nu u es a s ong sense o sec a ian iden i y, he pape seeks o unde s and i s deepe sociological signi icance in an
inc easingly dynamic and shi ing wo ld.
KEYWORDS: Ma ua Mahasangha, O ganiza ional Resilience, Sec a ian Consciousness, Adap abili y
INTRODUCTION
In he socio- eligious ab ic o he Ma ua communi y, he o ganiza ional s uc u e o he Ma ua Mahasangha unc ions as a cen al
pilla , ca ying p o ound sociological impo ance. F om a unc ionalis s andpoin , his s uc u e is ins umen al no only in
acili a ing eligious engagemen bu also in shaping he b oade social dynamics o he communi y. O iginally es ablished o os e
and exp ess eligious de o ion, he Mahasangha has g own beyond i s adminis a i e ole o become a key ins i u ion o ein o cing
belie sys ems, enabling collec i e mobiliza ion, and p ese ing cul u al iden i y. This essay c i ically examines he ela ionship
be ween he o ganiza ional esilience o he Mahasangha and he e olu ion o sec a ian consciousness among he Ma ua communi y.
I a gues ha he Mahasangha’s s uc u al cohe ence and adap abili y ha e played a decisi e ole in sus aining communi y iden i y
amid in e nal ensions and ex e nal changes. The Mahasangha se es se e al co e unc ions ha con ibu e o he con inued i ali y
o he Ma ua mo emen . P ima ily, i ac s as he ins i u ional nucleus o spi i ual nu u ing. Th ough egula cong ega ional wo ship
(sangki ans), communi y es i als such as Ba uni mela and Ha ichand-Gu uchand Jayan i, eligious discou ses, and pilg images o
Thaku naga and O akandi, he Mahasangha acili a es deepened eligious expe ience and s eng hens communal bonds. These
ac i i ies no only sus ain de o ional e o bu also unc ion as i uals o iden i y and memo y, especially o Ma ua ollowe s
ac oss he Bengal-Bangladesh di ide. O e ime, he Mahasangha’s o ganiza ional amewo k has unde gone signi ican
ans o ma ion in esponse o changing socie al dynamics, pa icula ly in he con ex o mig a ion, poli ical mobiliza ion, and
inc easing isibili y in public discou se. I s leade ship s uc u e, once oo ed in he spi i ual au ho i y o di ec descendan s o
Ha ichand Thaku , has e ol ed in o a con es ed poli ical space, e lec ing b oade ensions be ween adi ion and mode ni y, kinship
and ins i u ionaliza ion, and sec a ian uni y e sus poli ical ac ionalism.
The o ganiza ional amewo k
The o ganiza ional amewo k o he Mahasangha is me iculously designed no only o bene i indi idual Ma uas bu also o bols e
he collec i e comba -e iciency o he mo emen in he wide socie al landscape. By es ablishing b anches in di e se geog aphical
loca ions inhabi ed by Ma uas, he Mahasangha ex ends i s each and in luence, c ea ing a obus ne wo k o suppo and solida i y.
This ne wo k empowe s Ma uas o collec i ely add ess common challenges, ad oca e o hei igh s, and asse hei eligious and
cul u al iden i y on a b oade pla o m. The hie a chical s uc u e o o ice bea e s wi hin he Mahasangha ein o ces he bu eauc a ic
se up and collec i e e o s aimed a sus aining sec a ian awa eness. Th ough he e ec i e dissemina ion and implemen a ion o
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7783
decisions and di ec i es om he cen al o ice and Thaku ba i, his s uc u e ensu es o ganiza ional cohe ence and uni y. By
p e en ing in e nal con lic s and di isions, i sa egua ds he in eg i y and s eng h o he Mahasangha as a uni ied en i y.
Theo e ical unde pinning
Max Webe ’s heo y o bu eauc acy, based on a ional-legal au ho i y, p o ides a use ul amewo k o unde s anding he
o ganiza ional s uc u e o he Ma ua Mahasangha. I exhibi s co e bu eauc a ic ea u es such as hie a chical au ho i y, o malized
oles, and ule-based adminis a ion. The cen al o ice and he Thaku ba i unc ion as sou ces o legi ima e au ho i y, while local
b anches—each wi h designa ed o ice-bea e s—implemen di ec i es om he op, e lec ing bu eauc a ic decen aliza ion aimed
a adminis a i e e iciency (Webe , 1947; Webe , 1978). A he same ime, he Mahasangha inco po a es elemen s o cha isma ic
au ho i y, pa icula ly h ough he endu ing ene a ion o he Thaku amily. This e lec s Webe ’s no ion o cha isma, whe e
au ho i y s ems om he pe sonal appeal o sanc i y o leade s a he han o mal s uc u es (Webe , 1978). Theo e ical insigh s
om sec s udies u he illumina e he Mahasangha’s dynamics. S a k and Bainb idge (1987) a gue ha sec s o en eme ge in
esponse o social disloca ion, o e ing membe s a sense o solida i y and pu pose— unc ions he Mahasangha con inues o ul ill.
Simila ly, T oel sch (1931) iews sec s as olun a y associa ions ha di e en ia e hemsel es om dominan eligious ins i u ions,
a pe spec i e ha aligns wi h he Mahasangha’s e o s o asse i s dis inc eligious and cul u al iden i y wi hin he b oade Hindu
amewo k.
The cen alized o ganiza ional s uc u e, i on discipline, and uni y wi hin he Ma ua Mahasangha se e as indispensable pilla s o
he unc ional ope a ion o he Ma ua communi y. By p o iding a obus amewo k o eligious exp ession, collec i e ac ion, and
social cohesion, he Mahasangha con ibu es signi ican ly o he esilience and adap abili y o he Ma ua mo emen , enabling i o
na iga e and h i e amids he winds o change in socie y.The Ma ua Mahasangha, cha ac e ized by a hie a chical py amidical
s uc u e, is led by h ee key igu es: he Mukhoupodes a (Chie Ad iso ), Sanghadhipa i (Chie O icial), and Saha Sanghadhipa i
(Join O ganisa ional Head). This hie a chical se up embodies a cen alized bu eauc a ic model, whe e all powe , be i spi i ual o
poli ical, emana es unidi ec ionally om he apex body down o he g ass oo s le el. Rule numbe 18 in he cons i u ion explici ly
manda es ha only membe s o he Thaku ba i amily, descendan s o Ha ichand Thaku , a e en i led o assume hese p es igious
posi ions. This ensu es a lineage-based succession ha unde sco es he o ganiza ion's commi men o adi ion and he i age.
T oel sch dis inguishes be ween wo ypes o eligious o ganiza ions: chu ches and sec s. Chu ches a e cha ac e ized by hei
accommoda ion o socie y, es ablished hie a chies, and b oad appeal, while sec s a e mo e exclusi e, cha isma ic, and o ien ed
owa ds a dis inc eligious o social ision (T oel sch, 1931). In he con ex o he Ma ua Mahasangha, we can in e p e i as
exhibi ing cha ac e is ics o bo h a chu ch and a sec . On one hand, i s hie a chical s uc u e, cen alized au ho i y, and adhe ence
o adi ion align wi h ai s ypically associa ed wi h chu ches. The Mahasangha's cen alized bu eauc a ic model and hie a chical
leade ship posi ions e lec a semblance o ins i u ional s abili y and con inui y, eminiscen o chu ch-like s uc u es. Howe e , i 's
essen ial o no e ha he mechanism o selec ing leade s in he Ma ua Mahasangha di e s signi ican ly om adi ional chu ch
models. Ins ead o o malized p ocesses, leade ship succession is based on lineage, wi h only descendan s o Ha ichand Thaku
en i led o assume p es igious oles. This depa u e om con en ional chu ch p ac ices highligh s he unique blend o ins i u ional
con inui y and cha isma ic au ho i y wi hin he Mahasangha, blu ing he lines be ween chu ch and sec cha ac e is ics. On he o he
hand, he Mahasangha also displays ea u es o a sec , pa icula ly in i s emphasis on exclusi i y, cha isma ic leade ship, and dis inc
eligious iden i y In his sense, he Mahasangha's insis ence on Thaku ba i lineage o leade ship posi ions can be seen as a way o
main ain pu i y and au hen ici y wi hin he o ganiza ion, akin o he sec a ian impulse o sa egua d agains dilu ion o de ia ion
om co e belie s. he Mahasangha's cen alized bu eauc a ic model, wi h powe lowing om he apex body down o he g ass oo s
le el, e lec s a hie a chical s uc u e commonly associa ed wi h chu ches. Howe e , he cha isma ic au ho i y es ed in he Thaku
amily, as descendan s o Ha ichand Thaku , imbues he o ganiza ion wi h a sense o spi i ual legi imacy and exclusi i y
cha ac e is ic o sec s.
A he helm o he Mahasangha was he e e ed igu e o he Mukhoupodes a, ini ially embodied by Ba oma Binapani De i. He
enu e symbolized a sup eme sou ce o spi i ual au ho i y, embodying he g ace o Ha ichand Thaku . Ba oma Binapani De i,
hailing om Jabdaka hi illage in he Ba ishal Dis ic (now in Bangladesh), was ma ied o P ama ha Ranjan Thaku a he ende
age o ou een. Toge he wi h he husband and a signi ican ollowing o Ma ua bhak as, she mig a ed o India in 1947, e en ually
se ling in Thaku naga . Following he passing o he husband in 1990, she ascended o he ole o he i s Mukhoupodes a,
becoming he ma ia ch o he Ma ua Mahasangha. The Mukhoupodes a's esponsibili ies we e mul i ace ed. No only did she se e
as he spi i ual gu u o he Ma uas, bu she also p o ided guidance o de o ees in hei daily i uals and socie al conduc . As ou lined
in he cons i u ion, he Mukhoupodes a held he au ho i y o designa e i les and hono s o Ma ua sadhus (sages) and pagols ( eligious
ana ics), supe ise Ha i Mandi s ( emples), and o e see he o mula ion o codes o conduc and i uals. Addi ionally, all
commi ees, sub-commi ees, and depa men al adminis a o s we e appoin ed unde he di ec ion, unde sco ing he pi o al ole in
shaping he o ganiza ion's s uc u e and go e nance.
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7784
Compe ing claims o au ho i y
Following he demise o Ba oma Binapani De i in 2019, he pos o Mukhoupodes a emained acan , empo a ily illed by Mama a
Bala Thaku , he wi e o Kapil K ishna Thaku . Howe e , his appoin men was me wi h opposi ion om Manjul K ishna Thaku ,
Benapani De i's younges son, highligh ing he complexi ies o succession wi hin he Thaku ba i amily Acco ding o Max Webe 's
heo y o cha isma ic au ho i y, leade ship succession in eligious mo emen s can be a con en ious issue, especially in cha isma ic-
led g oups whe e pe sonal quali ies play a signi ican ole The amilial i wi hin he Ma ua Mahasangha, wi h compe ing claims
o leade ship, exempli ies he challenges inhe en in main aining o ganiza ional s abili y and legi imacy ollowing he passing o a
cha isma ic leade . P esen ly, San anu Thaku , he younge son o Manjul K ishna Thaku , claims o head he o ganiza ion.
Howe e , he ollowe s a e di ided due o his amilial i . In collec i e pe cep ion, San anu Thaku seems o wield mo e powe
han Mam abala Thaku , as he se ed as a Membe o Pa liamen om he Bha a iya Jana a Pa y (BJP). This si ua ion e lec s he
complexi ies o powe dynamics wi hin eligious o ganiza ions, whe e poli ical in luence and amily ies in e sec wi h adi ional
eligious au ho i y s uc u es. This scena io esona es wi h William W. Zellne and Ma c Pe owsky's analysis o sec s and
cha isma ic communi ies, whe e succession s uggles and in a-g oup con lic s a e common ea u es (Zellne & Pe owsky, 1997).
The Ma ua Mahasangha's expe ience highligh s he challenges o main aining o ganiza ional cohesion and legi imacy in he absence
o a clea succession plan and amid compe ing claims o au ho i y.
In andem wi h he Mukhoupodes a, he Sanghadhipa i, ep esen ed by Kapilk ishna Thaku un il 2014, se ed as he adminis a i e
head o he Mahasangha. Howe e , simila o he Mukhoupodes a's posi ion, he ole o Sanghadhipa i has emained acan since
Kapilk ishna Thaku 's passing. The Sanghadhipa i held signi ican au ho i y, including he powe o appoin o ice-bea e s,
in e ene in depa men al ac i i ies, and pa icipa e as a cons i u ional head in a ious ce emonies and e en s.
In he absence o he Mukhoupodes a, he Sanghadhipa i assumes addi ional esponsibili ies, ensu ing he con inui y o
adminis a i e unc ions wi hin he Mahasangha. Howe e , he lack o cla i y ega ding he Saha Sanghadhipa i's ole poses
challenges, po en ially leading o con usion and a powe acuum du ing ansi ional pe iods. The absence o a clea succession plan
o p o ocol o ansi ional pe iods exace ba es hese challenges. Acco ding o Webe , bu eauc acies a e cha ac e ized by a a ional-
legal au ho i y s uc u e, whe e legi imacy de i es om adhe ence o es ablished ules and p ocedu es (Webe , 1978). Wi hou clea
guidelines o succession o in e im leade ship, he Mahasangha may expe ience a empo a y "powe acuum," whe e decision-
making au ho i y is unce ain and o ganiza ional con inui y is jeopa dized.
Func ional Di isions o Ma ua Mahasangha
The Ma ua Mahasangha, as de ined in Rule 7 o i s Cons i u ion, ope a es as a socio- eligious o ganiza ion s uc u ed h ough a
cen alized au ho i y model. Go e ned by he Cen al Execu i e Commi ee based in S idham Thaku naga , i unc ions h ough
mul iple subcommi ees—such as he B anch Commi ee, Ha i Mandi Commi ee, Householde Sangha, Women’s Depa men ,
and o he s—each akin o unc ional depa men s. Sec e a ies a e appoin ed wi h he app o al o key leade s (Mukhoupodes a and
Sanghadhipa i), ensu ing alignmen wi h he co e alues o Ma ua dha ma.The B anch Commi ee (Rule 13) plays a c i ical ole in
o ganizing eligious e en s, o ming new b anches, and supe ising de elopmen e o s, while he Ha i Mandi Commi ee o e sees
emple cons uc ion unde cen alized di ec i es, ensu ing dona ions a e egis e ed as Debo a p ope y. The Householde Sangha,
a illage-le el uni o med by a minimum o i e membe s, acili a es g ass oo s pa icipa ion and emphasizes inancial sol ency,
e lec ing he Ma ua ideal o p oduc i e engagemen wi h socie y.
This o ganiza ional model e lec s Max Webe ’s heo y o bu eauc acy wi h i s hie a chical s uc u e, codi ied oles, and a ional-
legal au ho i y (Webe , 1947). I also aligns wi h unc ionalis pe spec i es ha iew eligious ins i u ions as mechanisms o social
in eg a ion and alue ein o cemen (Du kheim, 1915). Th ough i s s uc u ed commi ees, he Mahasangha os e s eligious
pa icipa ion, communi y de elopmen , and sec a ian solida i y, se ing bo h spi i ual and socio-economic unc ions o i s la gely
ma ginalized ollowe base.
Du ies and unc ions pe o med by he Ma ua Mahasangha
The Ma ua Mahasangha emphasizes s uc u ed membe ship oo ed in bo h spi i ual commi men and o ganiza ional esponsibili y.
Membe ship anscends social di isions, e lec ing he sec ’s inclusi e e hos. Joining in ol es submi ing an applica ion o a local
b anch o he cen al o ice, pa icula ly in a eas wi hou o mal b anches. Mo e han a symbolic ges u e, membe ship en ails ac i e
pa icipa ion in Sangha ac i i ies, paymen o ees, and adhe ence o cen al guidelines, aligning wi h Webe 's a ional-legal
au ho i y model (Webe , 1947).
Ri ual p ac ices, such as es ablishing a Mangal Gha a home and con ibu ing ice daily, e lec he usion o eligious de o ion
wi h collec i e esponsibili y. These ac s se e as mic o-le el exp essions o solida i y and o ganiza ional sus ainabili y, embodying
he unc ionalis iew o eligion as ein o cing social cohesion and sha ed mo al o de (Du kheim, 1915). Thus, he Mahasangha
ins i u ionalizes bo h spi i ual and ma e ial con ibu ions o os e uni y and uphold sec a ian iden i y. A he co e o he Ma ua
Mahasangha lies a deep commi men o he egali a ian and spi i ual ideals o S ee Ha ichand and S ee Gu uchand, who a e e e ed
as mo al and philosophical guides. Emphasizing equali y beyond ba ie s o cas e, gende , o social s a us, he Mahasangha os e s
an inclusi e communi y whe e all membe s a e encou aged o embody hese alues in e e yday li e. The o ganiza ional cul u e
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7785
p omo es pa icipa o y go e nance, wi h Sangha mee ings se ing as o ums o open dialogue and collec i e decision-making.
While indi idual oices a e espec ed, consensus-based decisions a e binding, e lec ing democ a ic unc ioning wi hin a eligious
amewo k. Membe s a e also u ged o engage wi h sac ed ex s and eachings, ein o cing spi i ual and ideological commi men .
Educa ion, pa icula ly o child en, is p io i ized as a ool o empowe men and social p og ess. The Mahasangha espouses
a e ni y and solida i y, nu u ing a s ong sense o communi y and belonging. Disc imina ion in any o m is explici ly ejec ed,
posi ioning he Mahasangha as a p og essi e eligious body ad oca ing o social jus ice. The Mahasangha’s inclusi e philosophy
and collec i e e hos align wi h Émile Du kheim’s iew o eligion as a uni ying o ce ha ein o ces mo al o de and social solida i y
(Du kheim, 1915). I s pa icipa o y model also e lec s aspec s o delibe a i e democ acy wi hin a sec a ian eligious con ex ,
highligh ing i s sociological ele ance in con empo a y socie y.
The e se om Gu uchand Cha i (p. 547) — "Pabi a, sa ya bakya, manushe biswas / Tin a na ya ache ha i a bash" —
encapsula es he e hical and spi i ual ounda ion o he Ma ua philosophy. T ansla ed as “Pu i y, ue wo ds, and ai h in humani y—
one who possesses hese h ee gems is close o di ini y,” he line o e s a mo al iad ha e lec s he co e alues o Ma ua dha ma
and he expec a ions om i s adhe en s.
F om a sociological s andpoin , his iadic ideal can be unde s ood as bo h a pe sonal e hical code and a collec i e social e hic ha
binds membe s o he Ma ua Mahasangha. Pu i y (pabi a) deno es no me ely i ual cleanliness bu also mo al in eg i y—an in e nal
discipline ha aligns wi h he spi i ual pa h laid ou by S ee Ha ichand and S ee Gu uchand. T u h ul speech (sa ya bakya) is a
commi men o anspa ency, hones y, and mo al cla i y in one’s in e pe sonal and communal dealings. Fai h in humani y (manushe
biswas) e lec s a adical egali a ianism a he hea o Ma ua ideology—an a i ma ion o he in insic digni y o all human beings,
i espec i e o cas e o s a us. Toge he , hese " h ee gems" unc ion as no ma i e pilla s ha guide Ma ua conduc , posi ioning
e hical li ing as a p e equisi e o spi i ual p oximi y o he di ine (Ha i a bash). Membe ship in he Ma ua Mahasangha, he e o e,
is no limi ed o o mal a ilia ion, bu en ails a disciplined mo al li e shaped by hese alues. As Gu uchand Cha i u he sugges s,
membe s a e expec ed o ac i ely pe o m hei du ies in acco dance wi h hese ideals (p. 547), ein o cing he idea ha eligious
belonging is insepa able om e hical ac ion.
The Gene al Rules (Rule No. 11) o he Ma ua Mahasangha a icula e a codi ied amewo k ha in eg a es p ocedu al egula ion
wi h spi i ual discipline, e lec ing a syn hesis o bu eauc a ic a ionali y and eligious au ho i y. Annual membe ship enewal and
s uc u ed amily en ollmen , wi h clea ly de ined inancial con ibu ions, exempli y Webe ian p inciples o a ional-legal au ho i y
and adminis a i e cohe ence (Webe , 1947). These p ac ices no only sus ain he o ganiza ion's unc ioning bu also ein o ce
communal solida i y h ough symbolic ac s, such as he mon hly ice g ain collec ion and dis ibu ion—a i ualized o m o
collec i e economic pa icipa ion.
Indi isibili y o S ee Ha ichand and S ee Gu uchand
Doc inally, he indi isibili y o S ee Ha ichand and S ee Gu uchand as Ha i-Gu uchand a i ms he heological co e o Ma ua
dha ma, while canonical ex s like S ee Ha ileelam i a and Gu uchand Cha i a a e posi ioned as immu able sou ces o eligious
legi imacy. This ex ual ixi y, combined wi h e e ence o lineage-based spi i ual au ho i y, embeds he Mahasangha wi hin a
adi ion-bound ye unc ionally adap i e eligious sys em. Impo an ly, he ejec ion o indi idualized spi i ual leade ship—such
as he i les Acha ya Gonsain, Pagol, o Gu u— easse s Ha ichand as he sole spi i ual au ho i y, p ese ing doc inal pu i y and
p e en ing sec a ian agmen a ion. These ules hus se e no only as mechanisms o go e nance bu also as ins umen s o
main aining sec a ian cohesion and ideological cla i y wi hin he Ma ua communi y.
The e se om Gu uchand Cha i a (p. 573)—“Ma ua ek gu u innyo gu u nai / O akandi p abhu yini khi ode sai”—encapsula es
he cen aliza ion o spi i ual au ho i y in Ma ua dha ma. In Webe ian e ms, his e lec s cha isma ic au ho i y, whe e legi imacy is
de i ed om he pe cei ed ex ao dina y quali ies o a singula leade (Webe , 1978). O akandi P abhu, e e ed as he sole gu u,
embodies his cha isma ic ideal, commanding deep de o ion and allegiance om ollowe s. This exclusi e spi i ual allegiance
ein o ces he sec ’s cohesion by consolida ing ai h a ound a singula , di inely sanc ioned igu e. Such cha isma ic cen ali y,
especially in a his o ically ma ginalized communi y, se es bo h a heological and sociological unc ion—o e ing di ec ion,
iden i y, and esis ance agains dominan eligious s uc u es. The a i ma ion o one gu u also ac s as a sa egua d agains doc inal
agmen a ion, sus aining uni y wi hin he b oade o ganiza ional amewo k o he Mahasangha.
The e se “Samal! Samal! ai Ma ua gan, Haja kakhono keho ka ona ha an” (Gu uchand Cha i a, p. 573) se es as an e hical
injunc ion wi hin he Ma ua Mahasangha, emphasizing he sanc i y o eligious o e ings. In he con ex o a sec oo ed in bo h
spi i ual de o ion and social se ice, his cau ion unde sco es he mo al esponsibili y o de o ees o p ese e he in eg i y o
con ibu ions made o he di ine. Beyond i s de o ional meaning, he e se unc ions as a egula o y no m—guiding inancial and
e hical conduc wi hin he Mahasangha’s o ganiza ional amewo k. I ein o ces he sec ’s ounda ional emphasis on hones y,
accoun abili y, and igh eous li ing, especially c i ical o a communi y his o ically posi ioned on he ma gins o cas e socie y. In
line wi h Webe ian hough , his e hical di ec i e helps sus ain he legi imacy o he Mahasangha's au ho i y by upholding a sha ed
mo al o de ha binds he collec i e.
The e se om Ha ileelam i a (p. 217) — “Maha sawbe baje ko ha kohi e dibe na / Khabe a ha inam gabe sa bajana / Ha i nam
inno a nahi ka gandogal / Sudhu ma o balaibe sudha ha ibol” — a icula es he sec a ian discipline and de o ional e hos cen al
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7786
o Ma ua p ac ice. I manda es ha du ing Maho sa s ( eligious ga he ings), all dis ac ions mus be se aside o main ain a sanc i ied
en i onmen cen e ed exclusi ely on Ha inam. This di ec i e ein o ces he Ma ua Mahasangha’s emphasis on collec i e spi i ual
ocus, whe e he chan ing o Ha i’s name is no only a i ual ac bu a uni ying o ce o he communi y. By p ohibi ing idle alk and
emphasizing Ha inam as he sole spi i ual nou ishmen , he passage unde lines he ans o ma i e and egali a ian powe o
de o ional chan ing. I also e lec s he unc ionalis iew o eligion as a mechanism o social in eg a ion and mo al egula ion
(Du kheim, 1915). Thus, he e se encapsula es how Ma ua sec a ian ideology me ges disciplined eligious p ac ice wi h communal
solida i y, making Ha inam bo h he medium and message o spi i ual egali a ianism.
The esilience and adap abili y obse ed wi hin he Mahasangha
To unde s and he esilience and adap abili y o he Ma ua Mahasangha, he social esilience pe spec i e p o ides a use ul heo e ical
amewo k. Social esilience e e s o he abili y o social sys ems—such as communi ies, o ganiza ions, o eligious g oups— o
abso b dis u bances, eo ganize, and e ain hei essen ial iden i y, unc ions, and s uc u es in he ace o s ess o c isis (No is e
al., 2008; Folke e al., 2010). Applying his amewo k o he Mahasangha e eals how a combina ion o cul u al embeddedness,
g ass oo s o ganiza ional s eng h, and adap i e eligious p ac ices ha e enabled i o su i e and e ol e amid socio-poli ical and
economic dis up ions.
The Ma ua Mahasangha de i es much o i s esilience om he deep cul u al and eligious oo edness o Ma ua dha ma, which
cen e s on he eachings o S ee Ha ichand and Gu uchand. These eachings o e no only spi i ual guidance bu also a coun e -
hegemonic discou se o ma ginalized Namashud a communi ies his o ically excluded om uppe -cas e Hindu amewo ks. This
endu ing cul u al na a i e unc ions as a s abilizing o ce, gi ing he communi y a sense o iden i y, digni y, and his o ical pu pose
e en in imes o displacemen , such as he Pa i ion o Bengal o subsequen mig a ion wa es (Chak abo y, 1985). The i ual
cen ali y o Ha inam, annual pilg images o Thaku naga and O akandi, and collec i e Maho sa s se e o con inually e-ancho
he g oup o his sha ed symbolic o de . The Mahasangha's s uc u e—comp ising local uni s such as dals, Householde Sanghas,
and B anch Commi ees— e lec s an adap i e, polycen ic go e nance sys em, which aligns wi h Folke e al.’s (2010) emphasis on
he impo ance o mul ile el, edundan ins i u ions in esilience-building. These g ass oo s ins i u ions pe o m mul iple oles:
o ganizing eligious es i als, coo dina ing elie e o s du ing c ises (e.g., na u al disas e s, COVID-19 pandemic), acili a ing
dispu e esolu ion, and main aining communica ion wi h cen al leade ship. Fo ins ance, dals in u al Bengal o en ake on he ole
o mobilizing communi y pa icipa ion in Sanki ans, ebuilding emples, o helping ma ginalized Ma ua households access s a e
wel a e schemes. Thei capaci y o ac au onomously ye in conce wi h cen al di ec i es enhances he Mahasangha’s adap i e
lexibili y, a key ai o esilien sys ems. While he Mahasangha exhibi s ea u es o Webe ian cha isma ic and bu eauc a ic
au ho i y, i s abili y o nego ia e be ween adi ion and mode ni y also con ibu es o i s esilience. Leade s wi hin he Thaku amily
ha e his o ically ac ed no only as spi i ual guides bu also as poli ical mobilize s—shi ing s a egies ac oss ime o engage wi h
changing elec o al, legal, and adminis a i e sys ems. The ac i e ole o leade s like Binapani De i ("Bo o Maa") and hei
successo s in secu ing poli ical ep esen a ion o Ma uas illus a es how ans o ma i e leade ship helps in na iga ing sys emic
cons ain s and asse ing communi y claims.
F om a heo e ical s andpoin , he Mahasangha's esilience also esona es wi h Pie e Bou dieu’s concep o symbolic capi al. The
communi y's spi i ual p ac ices, ex s (e.g., Ha ileelam i a, Gu uchand Cha i a), and emple spaces unc ion as eposi o ies o
symbolic powe . This capi al is mobilized o esis cas e-based ma ginaliza ion and asse eligious au onomy, especially agains
mains eam B ahminical Hinduism. Fo ins ance, he insis ence on ecognizing S ee Ha ichand as he sole spi i ual au ho i y, and
he ejec ion o o he gu u igu es (Acha ya Gonsain, e c.), e lec s a sec a ian bounda y main enance ha p ese es in e nal
cohesion and iden i y. The dals o he Ma ua Mahasangha ep esen a i al g ass oo s s uc u e ha sus ains bo h he spi i ual and
social ab ic o he communi y. Typically comp ising 100–150 membe s and led by a dalapa i— o mally ecognized by he cen al
Mahasangha— hese local bodies unc ion as decen alized nodes o eligious p ac ice, cul u al con inui y, and collec i e
mobiliza ion. Mee ing weekly unde adi ional spaces like he banyan ee, dal membe s engage in de o ional p ac ices such as
Ha inam, ma an (p ocessional wo ship), and communal i uals, accompanied by ins umen s like he danka d um ha ancho hei
sha ed hy hm and spi i ual uni y. F om a sociological pe spec i e, dals e lec he mic o-le el esilience mechanisms o he
Mahasangha, p o iding localized pla o ms o spi i ual ein o cemen , mo al guidance, and communi y cohesion. The dalapa i,
e e ed no only o adminis a i e abili y bu also o spi i ual leade ship, embodies a o m o localized cha isma ic au ho i y,
unc ioning wi hin he b oade bu eauc a ic s uc u e o he Mahasangha (Webe , 1978). Addi ionally, he p esence o pagols—
indi iduals belie ed o possess mys ical insigh —adds a mys ical and a ec i e laye o dal ga he ings. Thei oles align wi h wha
Webe calls cha isma o he ex ao dina y, u he en iching he eligious expe ience and sus aining a di ec connec ion be ween
he communi y and pe cei ed di ine powe . Collec i ely, dals se e as a model o e nacula eligiosi y and decen alized
go e nance, enabling he Ma ua Mahasangha o main ain cul u al con inui y, spi i ual i ali y, and social solida i y ac oss
gene a ions. In imes o bo h celeb a ion and c isis, hese g ass oo s uni s ein o ce he communi y’s esilience, adap abili y, and
deep- oo ed commi men o Ma ua dha ma.
The Ma ua Mahasangha, hough ins i u ionally s uc u ed, does no command uni e sal allegiance ac oss he b oade Ma ua
communi y. Mul iple au onomous ac ions ope a e independen ly, o en leading o dispu es o e he in e p e a ion o S ee Ha i-
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7787
Gu uchand’s eachings and he s a egic di ec ion o he mo emen . This in e nal di e gence e lec s he agmen ed na u e o
con empo a y sec a ian au ho i y. A key challenge lies in he weakening o cen alized leade ship. The cu en Saha Sanghadhipa i,
Manjul K ishna Thaku , has la gely dis anced himsel om ac i e o ganiza ional a ai s, c ea ing a leade ship acuum. In esponse,
his son San anu Thaku —also a Membe o Pa liamen —has aken on a p ominen adminis a i e ole, le e aging his poli ical
posi ion o consolida e in luence wi hin he Mahasangha. His ise illus a es how poli ical capi al is now in e sec ing wi h eligious
au ho i y. Meanwhile, Mam abala Thaku and he ac ion challenge his consolida ion, ad oca ing o hei own leade ship model,
u he in ensi ying he spli . The con o e sy a ound he Ci izenship Amendmen Bill (CAB) exposed hese di isions. While he
Mahasangha has his o ically championed e ugee ci izenship igh s, San anu’s poli ical alignmen wi h he BJP and condi ional
suppo o he CAB aliena ed segmen s o he communi y, dilu ing he Mahasangha’s long-s anding ad ocacy. Despi e
con es a ions, San anu’s leade ship appea s mo e s able, pa ly due o he pa ia chal and gu u-cen ic s uc u e o he Mahasangha,
which a o s male lineage con inui y. His posi ion hus e lec s how adi ional au ho i y pa e ns a e being eshaped by
con empo a y poli ical s a egies, complica ing he sec ’s in e nal cohesion and public o ien a ion.
The quasi-decen alized s uc u e o he Ma ua Mahasangha, suppo ed by i s g ass oo s dals, enhances i s esilience by allowing
esponsi eness o local con ex s (Zellne & Pe owsky, 1997). These dals— ypically composed o 100–150 membe s—mi o he
b oade o ganiza ional amewo k and se e as i al uni s o eligious and social li e. Despi e leade ship dispu es and ins i u ional
agmen a ion a he cen al le el, dals ancho he communi y h ough egula Ha inam ga he ings, ma an p ocessions, and spi i ual
men o ship unde dalapa is. Thus, while he Mahasangha’s apex au ho i y may ace in e nal di isions, he dals unc ion as cohesi e
uni s ha p ese e Ma ua cul u al iden i y and mobilize collec i e s eng h. Thei esilience lies in hei oo edness, adap abili y,
and unwa e ing adhe ence o he communi y’s spi i ual e hos—ensu ing he con inui y o he Ma ua mo emen e en amid
o ganiza ional lux.
CONCLUSION
This s udy has examined he s uc u al, ideological, and unc ional dimensions o he Ma ua Mahasangha h ough a sociological
lens, wi h pa icula a en ion o i s o ganiza ional esilience, sec a ian consciousness, and in e nal con es a ions. D awing on
concep ual amewo ks such as Max Webe ’s heo y o au ho i y, Émile Du kheim’s no ion o collec i e e e escence, and he
social esilience pa adigm (No is e al., 2008; Folke e al., 2010), he analysis has shown how he Mahasangha na iga es complex
challenges while e aining i s ounda ional e hos.
A he hea o he Mahasangha’s endu ance lies i s quasi-decen alized s uc u e, whe e g ass oo s uni s like dals play a c i ical ole
in sus aining eligious p ac ices, cul u al iden i y, and social solida i y. These local bodies mi o he o ganiza ional e hos o he
cen al Mahasangha, ye e ain he lexibili y o espond o communi y-speci ic needs, exempli ying bo om-up esilience. The
cen al ene , “ja dal nai a bol nai” (“ hose wi hou an o ganiza ion lack s eng h”), encapsula es he li ed philosophy o collec i e
s eng h and spi i ual ellowship wi hin he Ma ua communi y. Simul aneously, he s udy has explo ed he limi a ions o cen alized
con ol and he agmen a ion caused by in e nal poli ical i al ies—no ably he con es be ween San anu Thaku and Mam abala
Thaku —highligh ing he ension be ween inhe i ed spi i ual au ho i y and con empo a y poli ical ambi ion. Despi e his, he
cha isma ic and symbolic au ho i y o S ee Ha ichand and Gu uchand con inues o se e as he mo al and ideological ancho o
he communi y. Theologically, ex s like Ha ileelam i a and Gu uchand Cha i a unc ion as ixed doc inal sou ces ha guide
beha io and s uc u e communi y li e. Ve ses such as “Samal! Samal! ai Ma ua gan...” and “Maha sawbe baje ko ha...” ein o ce
a disciplined eligious li e cen e ed on Ha inam, e hical conduc , and communal wo ship. These a e no me ely spi i ual injunc ions
bu sociological ins umen s o cohesion and no m en o cemen . Ul ima ely, his s udy in ended o demons a e how he Ma ua
Mahasangha, as a dynamic eligious sec , a icula es sec a ian esilience by using cha isma ic de o ion, o ganiza ional a ionali y,
and g ass oo s pa icipa ion. In doing so, i p o ides an impo an case o unde s anding how ma ginalized communi ies use
eligious ins i u ions no only as a sou ce o spi i ual meaning bu also as pla o ms o social ep oduc ion, cul u al esis ance, and
poli ical exp ession. The Mahasangha’s abili y o balance adi ion wi h adap abili y, hie a chy wi h pa icipa ion, and doc ine wi h
e e yday p ac ice illus a es he complex wo kings o a li ed eligious mode ni y in con empo a y Bengal.
REFERENCES
P ima y Sou ces
1) Gu uchand Cha i a. (n.d.). Thaku naga : Ma ua Mahasangha Publica ion. (P ima y Religious Tex )
2) Ha ileelam i a. (n.d.). Thaku naga : Ma ua Mahasangha Publica ion. (P ima y Religious Tex )
3) Fieldwo k Da a. (2022–2024). Au ho ’s e hnog aphic esea ch and in e iews conduc ed ac oss Ma ua-domina ed egions
in Wes Bengal, including Thaku naga , Cooch Beha , Nadia, and No h & Sou h 24 Pa ganas. (P ima y Field Da a)
Seconda y Sou ces
1) Chak abo y, R. (1985). Dali Mo emen in Bengal: A Sociological S udy. Calcu a: Mine a. (Seconda y)
Ma ua Mahasangha's O ganisa ional Resilience and Sec e a ian Consciousness in a Changing Wo ld
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 7788
2) Du kheim, É. (1915). The Elemen a y Fo ms o he Religious Li e (J. W. Swain, T ans.). London: Geo ge Allen & Unwin.
(O iginal wo k published 1912). (Seconda y)
3) Folke, C., Ca pen e , S., Walke , B., Sche e , M., Chapin, T., & Rocks öm, J. (2010). Resilience hinking: In eg a ing
esilience, adap abili y and ans o mabili y. Ecology and Socie y, 15(4), A icle 20. h ps://doi.o g/10.5751/ES-03610-
150420 (Seconda y)
4) No is, F. H., S e ens, S. P., P e e baum, B., Wyche, K. F., & P e e baum, R. L. (2008). Communi y esilience as a
me apho , heo y, se o capaci ies, and s a egy o disas e eadiness. Ame ican Jou nal o Communi y Psychology, 41(1–
2), 127–150. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10464-007-9156-6 (Seconda y)
5) Sa ka , S. (2018). Ma ginal Sec s and he S a e: The Poli ics o he Ma ua Mahasangha in Wes Bengal. Kolka a:
P og essi e Publishe s. (Seconda y)
6) S a k, R., & Bainb idge, W. S. (1987). A Theo y o Religion. New B unswick, NJ: Ru ge s Uni e si y P ess. (Seconda y)
7) T oel sch, E. (1931). The Social Teaching o he Ch is ian Chu ches (Vol. 2, O. Wyon, T ans.). London: Geo ge Allen &
Unwin. (Seconda y)
8) Webe , M. (1947). The Theo y o Social and Economic O ganiza ion (A. M. Hende son & T. Pa sons, T ans.). New Yo k:
Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. (Seconda y)
9) Webe , M. (1978). Economy and Socie y: An Ou line o In e p e i e Sociology (G. Ro h & C. Wi ich, Eds.). Be keley:
Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. (Seconda y)
10) Zellne , M. L., & Pe owsky, M. C. (1997). Decen aliza ion and social esilience: A compa a i e analysis. Jou nal o
Poli ical and Mili a y Sociology, 25(1), 1–16. (Seconda y)
The e is an Open Access a icle, dis ibu ed unde he e m o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion – Non Comme cial 4.0 In e na ional (CC BY-NC 4.0)
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which pe mi s emixing, adap ing and
building upon he wo k o non-comme cial use, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
