SAṀGHABHEDA AND NIKĀYABHEDA: A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SCHISM, ORIGIN AND FORMATION OF SECTS AND SECTARIANISM IN EARLY BUDDHISM A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Religious Studies University of the West In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Lokānanda C. Bhikkhu Spring 2016 APPROVAL PAGE FOR GRADUATE Approved and recommended for acceptance as a dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Religious Studies. Lokānanda C. Bhikkhu, Candidate 08/09/2016 Saṁghabheda and Nikāyabheda: A Critical Study of the Schism, Origin and Formation of Sects and Sectarianism in Early Buddhism APPROVED: Joshua Capitanio, Chair 5/5/16 Jane N. Iwamura, Committee Member 5/5/16 Miroj Shakya, Committee Member 5/5/16 I hereby declare that this dissertation has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at any other institution, and that it is entirely my own work. © 2016 Lokānanda C. Bhikkhu ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have consulted and utilized many scholarly works by various scholars, alive or dead, to whom I am under endless debt. I have no possible means to repay my debt to them, with the exception of mere acknowledgement and gratitude, which is due here: thank you all. While in school, a number of people have helped me in my progress; unfortunately, I cannot mention all of theirs names here, but I must name a few. I must, with due respect, remember the late Dr. Kenneth Locke, who very kindly admitted me into the program. Dr. Joshua Capitanio, my Dissertation Committee Chair, has been very kind to me during every step of my progress since I was admitted to the program. Every class I have taken with him, he showed very keen interest, as he was critical in every paper I wrote for his class. He guided me patiently and thoroughly, until I reached at the end of the tunnel. Dr. Miroj Shakya, who also very kindly agreed to serve on my Dissertation Committee, was freely available to consult with whenever needed. Dr. Jane N. Iwamura, the Chairperson of the Department of Religious Studies, has been a great source of courage. She allowed me to audit any of her classes without officially registering for it, yet was very strict. She allowed me to ask or interrupt with questions during or between classes. Her kind and strict “do-it-again-and-again” approach forced me to work harder. I remain very grateful to all of them. (Hurray, I can escape the kraal now!) I also enjoyed taking classes with Dr. William Chu, Dr. Bruce Long, and Dr. Darui Long. I appreciate their unselfish tutelage. The International Buddhist Education Foundation (IBEF) supported my studies at the University of the West; I remain very grateful to every single member of the Board of ii the Directors of the IBEF. I also remain very grateful to Ms. Grace Hsiao, the Co- Coordinator of the IBEF, who was very kind to me and attentive to my needs. In fact, I should note here that, without the financial support from the IBEF, my studies here at the University of the West could not have been possible. Ms. Lezli Fang and Ms. Jamie Johnston of the University of the West Financial Aid Office were very helpful. I cannot forget the kind gestures offered by the University Registrar, Ms. Jeanette Anderson. I also should like to note my gratitude here to Ms. Alma R. Ramón, the manager of the Academic Assisting Office at the University, who allowed me to work at her office and to Mr. Glenn Dunki-Jacobs of the Office of Extended Studies, for his constant encouragement. Ms. Ling-Ling Kuo and Ms. Judy Hsu in the Library of the University of the West were very attentive to my needs; whenever I needed any item that was not available at the home library, they borrowed it from other libraries as soon as possible, which made my research work very smooth. I could consult with Judy in the midst of her busy schedule, without any exception. I remain very grateful to them. I should note here also the kind help I received from the Hòa Thượng Master Ven. Thích Viên Thành, Hòa Thượng Dr. Ven. Master Thích Viên Lý, Ven. Bhikshu Ấn Minh, Ven. Haemin Sunim of the Chùa Diệu Pháp of San Gabriel and Hòa Thượng Ven. Thích Viên Huy, Ven. Dr. Phra Piya Rajcharoen of Chùa Điều Ngự of Westminster. Master Ven. Dr. Thích Viên Lý took special interest in me while I was attending school, providing me housing in his vihāra and financial support. I also should record my sense of gratitude to Novice Ấn Nguyên and all nuns and every single member of the iii congregation of Chùa Diệu Pháp for their kindness. I also should like to note my debt to sister Bhikshuni Nguyên Hiếu, who kindly corrected my Vietnamese spellings. Additionally, Mr. Bakul Chowdhury and Ms. Nisha Talukder deserve special thanks for their hospitality. I remain ever thankful to little Barnil Chowdhury (añjalī) for her presence. Mr. Ashok Kumar Barua, Prof. Anouttar Kumar Barua, Engr. Kiran Bikash Barua, Mr. Palash Barua, Mr. Pallab Barua, Mr. Samar Barua, computer engineer Mr. Palash Barua, Mr. Kakan Talukder, Ms. Soma Barua (Kiran), Ms. Soma Barua (Anu), Ms. Rumpa Barua, Ms. Setu Barua (Dharma school teacher at the Sambodhi Vihāra), Ms. Chaity Barua, Ms. Jaba Barua, Ms. Pallabi Chowdhury, and Ms. Nabanita Barua all took special care of me while attending school. I was blessed with the support from my dear ones—Ripa, Epa, Srijonee, Aishi, Prajikta, Prapti, Snigdha, Jayatu, Pragga, Sopak, Geet, Rup, little Sudipta, Simon, Himel, Saumen and Barnil, all of whom made my life very pleasant and peaceful. I remain thankful to every one of them; I dedicate all the merit (puṇya) I earnt from my monastic life for their welfare. Finally, I used both Pali and Sanskrit words liberally throughout this study, and I tried to make it readable, so that an academic understanding could be gleaned; I hope I achieved this. Any shortcoming is mine and I am responsible for it, no one else. I also should like to note here an important issue regarding the use of Pali or Sanskrit Labioguttural (kaṇṭhoṣṭhya) alphabates अं and ङ (Ṃ, Ṁ, and Ṅ) (anusvara) “ṃ”, “ṅ”, “ṁ” throughout this dissertation; I referred to various reference sources where I found that there is no unified agreement using of these alphabates, rather different souce used different form. I have followed all wherever it was convenient for me. iv ABSTRACT Saṁghabheda and Nikāyabheda: A Critical Study of the Schism, Origin and Formation of Sects and Sectarianism in Early Buddhism By Lokānanda C. Bhikkhu About one hundred years after the great decease of the Buddha (Mahāparinibbāna), his democratically well-established Saṁgha community split, first into two major groups as the Sthaviravāda and Mahāsāṁghika sects. Later, each group split repeatedly, creating eighteen or more sub-sects. Nevertheless, a general curiosity prevails as to why the Saṁgha split. Hence, a number of treatises both in Pali and in Sanskrit were written by experts, and following these treatises, a number of modern scholars formed into two groups, each concluding that the splits were due to one of two reasons: (a) a monastic disciplinary reason centering on the dasavatthu (Ten Points), which were introduced by a group of bhikkhus from Vaiśālī, and on the other hand, (b) a doctrinal debate due to the dispute on pañcavatthu (Five Points), which was propounded by a monk named Mahādeva of Kukkuṭārāma. However, after thorough examination of the existing treatises, scholastic monographs, and academic writings, a few modern scholars, viz., Charles Prebish and André Bareau, came to conclude that the split was not due to either of these two reasons, and further suggested that scholars must find other reasons. v This dissertation is an attempt to address this suggestion and addresses schism and its applicability in the Buddhist Studies arena; it analyses the meaning of sect and schism from a comparative perspective. It further examines the social, political, and geographical circumstances of ancient India, which actually influenced and contributed to the first and later splits in the Saṁgha community. The present work also observes that there were personal conflicts among the disciples of the Buddha, which later emerged as confrontations and caused splitting. Additionally, it also examines and finds that there were different groups of bhikkhus within the Buddhist Saṁgha who were under the tutelage and leadership of a certain prominent disciple of the Buddha. These were proto- sectarian elements and separate fraternities (nikāya); the royal patronage of these proto- sectarian fraternities caused the formation of various sects. Royal patronage helped these small groups spread to various geographic localities at home and abroad. Ultimately, after comparing and examining the issues, this dissertation concludes that the root of split was embedded in early Buddhism. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. ii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ v CHAPTER ONE Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER TWO First Schism in the Buddhist Monastic Establishment ........................ 57 CHAPTER THREE The Theory of Sects and Sectarianism According to Different Experts and Sects of Buddhism ......................................................................................... 79 CHAPTER FOUR The Admission