A schism in the early Buddha sangha

[Jhanananda]

Devadatta represents a schism in the early Buddha sangha.  It could be useful to understand Devadatta and this schism.

Devadatta
Devadatta (Sanskrit and Pali: देवदत्त devadatta; Sinhalese: දේවදත්ත; Burmese: ေဒဝဒတ္; Thai: เทวทัต Thewathat; Chinese: 提婆達多; Japanese: 提婆達多 Daibadatta; Vietnamese: Đề-Bà-Đạt-Đa) was by tradition a Buddhist monk, cousin and brother-in-law of Gautama Siddārtha, the Śākyamuni Buddha, and brother of Ānanda, a principal student of the Buddha. Devadatta was a Koliyan and is said to have parted from the Buddha's following with 500 other monks to form their own Sangha, most of whom are said to have been Shakya clan relatives of both Devadatta and Siddhartha.

Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya research

According to Andrew Skilton, modern scholarship generally agrees that the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya is the oldest extant Buddhist Vinaya.[1] According to Reginald Ray, the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya mentions the figure of Devadatta, but in a way that is different from the vinayas of the Sthavira branch. According to this study, the earliest vinaya material common to all sects simply depicts Devadatta as a Buddhist saint who wishes for the monks to live a rigorous lifestyle.[2] This has led Ray to regard the story of Devadatta as a legend produced by the Sthavira group.[3] However, upon examining the same vinaya materials, Bhikkhu Sujato has written that the portrayals of Devadatta are largely consistent between the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya and other vinayas, and that the supposed discrepancy is simply due to the minimalist literary style of the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya. He also points to other parts of the same vinaya that clearly portray Devadatta as a villain, as well as similar portrayals that exist in the Lokottaravādin Mahāvastu.

Records from Chinese pilgrims to India

Faxian and other Chinese pilgrims who travelled to India in the early centuries of the current era recorded the continued existence of "Gotamaka" buddhists, followers of Devadatta.[5] Gotamaka are also referred to in Pali texts of the second and fifth centuries of the current era. The followers of Devadatta are recorded to have honored all the Buddhas previous to Śākyamuni, but not Śākyamuni. According to Faxian, Xuanzang and Yijing's writings, some people practised in a similar way and with the same books as common Buddhists, but followed the similar tapas and performed rituals to the past three buddhas and not Śākyamuni Buddha. Many followers of that sect listened to the lessons in the Nālandā with the others, but it is believed by many that they were not students of Devadatta. However, there are still those who say they follow Devadatta today at Bodh Gaya.

Devadatta in the Theravāda Vinaya
...Devadatta then decided to create a schism in the order, and collected a few monk friends and demanded that the Buddha accede to the following rules for the monks: they should dwell all their lives in the forest, live entirely on alms obtained by begging, wear only robes made of discarded rags, dwell at the foot of a tree and abstain completely from fish and flesh.

The Buddha refused to make any of these compulsory, however, and Devadatta went round blaming him, saying that he was living in abundance and luxury. Devadatta then decided to create a schism and recite the training rules (pātimokkha) apart from the Buddha and his followers, with 500 newly ordained monks.

The Buddha sent his two Chief Disciples Sāriputta and Moggallāna to bring back the erring young monks. Devadatta thought they had come to join his Sangha and, asking Sāriputta to give a talk, fell asleep. Then the Chief Disciples persuaded the young monks to return to the Buddha.[9]

The Buddha praised the Chief Disciples and blamed Devadatta saying that he was doomed to the Niraya Hell for his deeds, and it is reported that shortly thereafter he did in fact fall into Hell.

Theravāda account

According to the Pāli Canon, he taught his sangha to adopt five tapas (literally, austerities) throughout their lives:

    that monks should dwell all their lives in the forest,
    that they should accept no invitations to meals, but live entirely on alms obtained by begging,
    that they should wear only robes made of discarded rags and accept no robes from the laity,
    that they should dwell at the foot of a tree and not under a roof,
    that they should abstain completely from fish and flesh.

The Buddha allowed the monastics to follow all of these except the last if they so wished, but refused to make them compulsory. They are among the 13 ascetic practices (dhutanga).

Note:
I skipped some of the material in the Wiki page, because it is difficult to discern truth from fiction.  However, the story shows merit for discovery, and also shows Siddhartha Gautama as less than compassionate to Devadatta, which might have been the correct path to take regarding Devadatta and the schism he caused.

[Michel]

Theravāda account

According to the Pāli Canon, Devadatta taught his sangha to adopt five tapas (literally, austerities) throughout their lives:

    that monks should dwell all their lives in the forest,
    that they should accept no invitations to meals, but live entirely on alms obtained by begging,
    that they should wear only robes made of discarded rags and accept no robes from the laity,
    that they should dwell at the foot of a tree and not under a roof,
    that they should abstain completely from fish and flesh.

The Buddha allowed the monastics to follow all of these except the last if they so wished, but refused to make them compulsory. They are among the 13 ascetic practices (dhutanga).

Michel:

It is noteworthy that the Buddha allowed his monks the option to choose whatever they wished to practice of these austerities, except for abstaining from eating meat and fish.

I wonder what training rules the Buddha insisted upon for the sanga in the suttas? I'll be looking out for these as I read the suttas.

Interesting article on Devadatta's attempts to create a schism in the sanga.

[Jhanananda]

Actually, vegetarianism is the only optional monastic rule, and since it was not optional in Devadatta's monastic discipline, it suggests that vegetarianism was the source of the conflict.

In the past much of the offensive emails I received from Buddhist monks called me a modern day Devadatta, because they believed that jhana was the issue of the schism.  They erroneously claimed that Devadatta's achievement of jhana caused him to become arrogant.  Since the 8th fold is defined throughout the suttas in terms of the attainment of jhana, then we can conclude that these monks are clearly following a deeply flawed form of Buddhism.

However, I suspect that the conflict was deeper than the issue of vegetarianism.  There are 2 other possibilities that occurred to me.

1) Devadatta was delusional, because claiming ownership of the Buddha sangha after only belonging to it for a year is surely insufficient time to become a master, although jhana attainment is certainly possible in that time.

2) Another possibility for the schism is in the Samyutta Nikaya there are suttas that refer to mass suicides among Siddhartha Gautama's disciples.  Whatever drove them to the suicides is likely to be the cause of the schism, if the occurrences are coincidental.

[Michel]

In the past much of the offensive emails I received from Buddhist monks called me a modern day Devadatta, because they believed that jhana was the issue of the schism. They erroneously claimed that Devadatta's achievement of jhana caused him to become arrogant.  Since the 8th fold is defined throughout the suttas in terms of the attainment of jhana, then we can conclude that these monks are clearly following a deeply flawed form of Buddhism.

Who are the Buddhist monks that accused you of trying to cause a schism by having the correct view that the entire N8P points to the practice of jhana as the doorway to liberation? You have clearly show this to be the case in a very convincing essay, and well supported by the suttas.

2) Another possibility for the schism is in the Samyutta Nikaya there are suttas that refer to mass suicides among Siddhartha Gautama's disciples.  Whatever drove them to the suicides is likely to be the cause of the schism, if the occurrences are coincidental.

I recall reading that there was an instance of mass suicide at the time of the Buddha's death,  if I'm correct. The monks felt abandoned. There may have been a schism at that time as well.

I have all the Kindle versions of the Wisdom Publications' Nikayas. I can search, annotate, and hi-light passages. Unfortunately there are only a limited number of copy and pastes of passages allowed due to copyright.

I just did a search on the suicides in the Samyutta, but it only searches in the commentaries and not the suttas themselves. So Wisdom Publications screwed up.

[Jhanananda]

Who are the Buddhist monks that accused you of trying to cause a schism by having the correct view that the entire N8P points to the practice of jhana as the doorway to liberation? You have clearly show this to be the case in a very convincing essay, and well supported by the suttas.

Most of the accusations are in private emails, but you can get the more public version of how I was treated by reading the essays at the following link. The Demonizing of Ecstatic Meditation (Jhana) by the Institutions of Buddhism.  The point of exposing the people who were behind much of the character assassination was to stop it.  When I started publishing their offensive emails they stopped sending them to me.

I recall reading that there was an instance of mass suicide at the time of the Buddha's death,  if I'm correct. The monks felt abandoned. There may have been a schism at that time as well.

I have all the Kindle versions of the Wisdom Publications' Nikayas. I can search, annotate, and hi-light passages. Unfortunately there are only a limited number of copy and pastes of passages allowed due to copyright.

I just did a search on the suicides in the Samyutta, but it only searches in the commentaries and not the suttas themselves. So Wisdom Publications screwed up.

I was not aware of suicides in the sangha after Siddhartha Gautama's death, but I believe the suicides that occurred before his death were very probably related to the schism.  If his treatment was anything like the way I have been abused; and I believe it is reasonable that he was, because most mystics in history are marginalized; then it is reasonable that he might have lost some of his compassion toward the end of his life.