Schism

Vocabulary of schism

Monks of the ‘same communion’ are called samānasaṃvāsaka monks. They may be resident monks (āvāsike bhikkhū), or visiting monks (āgantukā bhikkhū). ‘Same communion’ means that if they are together in the ‘same sima’ (samānasīmā), they should perform the uposathakamma together (ekato uposathaṃ karonti) (Vin.1.143). This means they have a united uposatha (ekuposathā), which means that they have ‘harmony in the Sangha’ (saṅghasāmaggiṃ) (Vin.1.357).

Monks of ‘different communions’ are called nānāsaṃvāsaka monks (Vin.1.134). If they live in the ‘same sima’ (samānasīmā) they should perform the Uposatha separately (pāṭekkaṃ uposathaṃ karonti or nānuposathaṃ kātunti) (Vin.1.134; Vin.2.300). This is because there is division in the Sangha (saṅghabhedo) (Vin.1.357).

Routes to schism

There are five types of nānāsaṃvāsaka monk:

Schismatic leaders: saṃghabhedaka. For instance, Devadatta said he intended to carry out uposathakamma and formal Sangha business without the other monks (Vin.2.198). This would be a thullaccaya offence (Vin.1.131).
Schismatic partisans (bhedakānuvattakā bhikkhū) who support schismatic leaders by voting for schism: (Vin.2.201; Vin.2.199; Vin.1.340). Such support is also a thullaccaya offence (Vin.2.201).
Those suspended by the Sangha (Vin.1.340). These are called nānāsaṃvāsaka presumably because they are forbidden to join uposathakamma (Vin.1.135). They are not schismatics unless they then hold sanghakamma separately.
Partisans of suspended monks (pakkhā). They are not schismatics unless they join suspended monks for sanghakamma (Vin.1.338). At such separate sanghakamma, they can legitimately restore the suspended monk if they think their conduct is according to Dhamma (Vin.1.357). Doing this, however, would likely compound the schism, making it more difficult to resolve.
A fifth group, alluded to in Vinaya: Some nānāsaṃvāsaka monks are said to be 'speakers of Dhamma'. Therefore they are neither suspended nor schismatics. They presumably arise from the necessity of ordination: all monks are inevitably nānāsaṃvāsaka with regards to monks of other saṃvāsas. Respect should be paid to this fifth group by all monks, even of different saṃvāsas, according to seniority. But it is a dukkata offence for such monks to join uposathakamma of other groups (Vin.1.134), and if attending sanghakamma, they do not count in a quorum, and they cannot protest sanghakamma (Vin.1.321). However, any gains to the Sangha should be distributed equally to them, and to all monks of any saṃvāsa at alms donations (Vin.1.356).

Discouraging persistent efforts to cause a schism

If there are three or less schismatics, the guidelines described in Sanghdisesa 10 and 11 can be used to pressurise them to desist from schismatic activities:

Sanghadisesa 10: If a monk attempts to cause a schism in a united Sangha, or persists in implementing and promoting Sangha business conducive to schism, the monks should tell him: "Do not, Venerable, attempt to cause a schism in a Sangha that is united or persist in implementing and promoting Sangha business conducive to schism. Let the venerable one be reconciled with the Sangha, for a Sangha that is united, on friendly terms, free from dispute, having a united recitation, dwells in comfort". Should that monk, having been spoken to by the monks persist as before, the monks should up to three times formally tell him to desist. If, having been formally told up to three times, he desists, that is good. If he does not desist, it is a sanghadisesa offence.

Sanghadisesa 11: Followers and partisans of that monk - one, two, or three monks - might say “Do not, Venerables, admonish that monk; he is an exponent of Dhamma and Vinaya. He speaks in accordance with our wishes and preferences. He knows us and speaks for us, and that meets our approval”. Other monks should say to them: "Do not say that, Venerables. That monk is neither an exponent of Dhamma nor Vinaya. Do not, Venerables, favour schism in the Sangha. Let the Venerables be reconciled with the Sangha, for a Sangha that is united, on friendly terms, free from dispute, with a united recitation, dwells in comfort". Should those monks, thus admonished, persist as before, the monks should, up to three times, tell them to desist. If, having been formally told up to three times they desist, that is good. If they do not desist, it is a sanghadisesa offence.

Treatment of nānāsaṃvāsaka monks

Monks of different communions must not perform uposathakamma together (Vin.1.135), nor sanghakamma (Vin.1.320-1), nor sit on a seat together. (Thus, after schism, Venerable Sariputta refused Devadatta’s invitation to share his seat: Vin.2.200). They are not allowed to drink conjey together, sit in a refectory together, lie down together under a roof (see Word Analysis to Pacittiya 69), bow to each other according to seniority, rise up before one another, salute each other, or do proper duties (Vin.1.339).

But if there is friendliness, monks of different communions can sit one seat’s width apart (āsanantarikāya nisīditabba’nti (Vin.1.341). Monks may bow to a senior monk of a different communion if he is one who speaks Dhamma (Vin.2.162). “One who speaks Dhamma” is defined at Vin.1.354: briefly, it means someone who explains Dhamma as Dhamma, and not-Dhamma as not-Dhamma.

Gains should be distributed equally amongst all monks, regardless of saṃvāsa (āmisaṃ kho sāriputta sabbesaṃ samakaṃ bhājetabban’ti: Vin.1.356) unless the offerings are given specifically to one or other faction (pakkhassevetaṃ: Vin.1.308).

Restoring harmony

The Buddha said there are two grounds for belonging to a different communion: either one makes oneself belong to a different communion (attanā vā attānaṃ nānāsaṃvāsakaṃ karoti i.e. schismatic cases 1, 2, 4, 5), or the Sangha suspends one (case 3). There are two grounds for belonging to the same communion: either one makes oneself belong to the same communion (attanā vā attānaṃ samānasaṃvāsakaṃ karoti), or, as a suspended monk, one is restored by the Sangha (Vin.1.340).

Before harmony is restored, the cause of the schism must be settled legitimately. For this, the Sangha must investigate the case (vattha vinicchinitvā) and get to the root of the problem (mūlā mūlaṃ gantvā). If they do that, the harmony they achieve is according to Dhamma (dhammikā saṅghasāmaggī) (Vin.1.358). Otherwise it is not (adhammikā sā upāli, saṅghasāmaggī'ti).

Schismatics partisans must confess thullaccaya offences, as happened with Devadatta’s schismatic group. Perhaps in this case, too, the Sangha must investigate the case (vattha vinicchinitvā) and get to the root of the problem (mūlā mūlaṃ gantvā). Partisans of suspended monks, like the Kosambi monks, probably also have to confess thullaccaya offences if they rejoin the other Sangha, but this is not mentioned as having happened at the end of the Kosambi schism (Vin.1.357). What happens to the fifth group is unsure: it seems that they have nothing to confess, and may, according to Vin.1.340, simply ‘make themselves belong to the same communion’.

Schism is formally ended by ñattidutiyakammaṃ, a motion and one invitation, followed by a united recitation of the Patimokkha (Vin.1.357).