Devadatta used some dhutaṅgas to create a schism in the Sangha. He proposed to Lord Buddha to make some of these practices obligatory. Of course, Lord Buddha refused and said that it is up to each person to decide whether they want to follow them or not. See Saṅghabhedakakkhandhaka
The Buddha replied, “No, Devadatta.
“Alaṁ, devadatta.
Those who wish may stay in the wilderness and those who wish may live near inhabited areas.
Yo icchati, āraññiko hotu; yo icchati, gāmante viharatu.
Those who wish may eat only almsfood and those who wish may accept invitations.
Yo icchati, piṇḍapātiko hotu; yo icchati, nimantanaṁ sādiyatu.
Those who wish may wear rag-robes and those who wish may accept robe-cloth from householders.
Yo icchati, paṁsukūliko hotu; yo icchati, gahapaticīvaraṁ sādiyatu.
I have allowed the foot of a tree as resting place for eight months of the year,
Aṭṭhamāse kho mayā, devadatta, rukkhamūlasenāsanaṁ anuññātaṁ;
- See the Dhutaṅga #8,3,1,9 on my post above this reply.
I highly recommend reading this sutta, as it discusses Devadatta’s wrongful actions. The sutta is particularly interesting because it delves into Sangha Bheda, which is one of the 5 anantariya kamma. It’s worth noting that lay people, nuns (bhikkhunis), and novices are unable to cause Sangha Bheda, even if they attempt to do so.
A nun cannot cause a schism in the Sangha, even if she makes an effort to do so. A trainee nun,
Na kho, upāli, bhikkhunī saṅghaṁ bhindati, api ca bhedāya parakkamati, na sikkhamānā saṅghaṁ bhindati …pe…
a novice monk, a novice nun, a male lay follower, or a female lay follower cannot cause a schism in the Sangha, even if she makes an effort to do so.
na sāmaṇero saṅghaṁ bhindati, na sāmaṇerī saṅghaṁ bhindati, na upāsako saṅghaṁ bhindati, na upāsikā saṅghaṁ bhindati, api ca bhedāya parakkamati.
- Lord Buddha said that there are cases where a sangha bheda does not lead to rebirth in nirayas. The key is intention whether wholesome or unwholesome.
What sort of person who causes a schism in the Sangha isn’t irredeemably destined to an eon in hell?”
“Katamo pana, bhante, saṅghabhedako na āpāyiko, na nerayiko, na kappaṭṭho, na atekiccho”ti?
“In this case, a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it.
“Idhupāli, bhikkhu adhammaṁ dhammoti dīpeti.
He has the view that what he says is legitimate and the view that the schism is legitimate. He doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true, his belief of what’s true, his acceptance of what’s true, or his sentiment of what’s true. He makes a proclamation and distributes ballots, saying,
Tasmiṁ dhammadiṭṭhi, bhede dhammadiṭṭhi, avinidhāya diṭṭhiṁ, avinidhāya khantiṁ, avinidhāya ruciṁ, avinidhāya bhāvaṁ, anussāveti, salākaṁ gāheti—
‘This is the Teaching, this is the Monastic Law, this is the Teacher’s instruction; take this, approve of this.’
‘ayaṁ dhammo, ayaṁ vinayo, idaṁ satthusāsanaṁ, imaṁ gaṇhatha, imaṁ rocethā’ti.
When such a person causes a schism in the Sangha, he’s not irredeemably destined to an eon in hell.
Ayampi kho, upāli, saṅghabhedako na āpāyiko, na nerayiko, na kappaṭṭho, na atekiccho.
- All this information is in the same sutta Saṅghabhedakakkhandhaka.