Can a lay person commit sangha-bedha?(five heinous acts) Anantarika-karma

Question

https://info-buddhism.com/sangha_schism.html

“A bhikkhunī does not split a Community even if she strives for a split. A female trainee does not split a Community. A novice … A female novice … A male lay-follower … A female lay-follower does not split a Community even if she strives for a split. A regular bhikkhu, of common affiliation, standing in the same territory splits the Community.” — Cv.VII.5.1

It seems from this scripture that only a monk can commit this heinous karma/sangha bedha?(Anantarika-karma)

Is this rightly understood by me?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anantarika-karma

Take Care

Answer 1

A lay person cannot commit “Sangha Bedha” as it is only when bhikkhus are concerened, but “Sangha Bedha” is not division among bhikkhus, but the fact of the matter is that today every single Bhikkhu commits schism or “Sangha Bedha” knowingly or unknowingly.

The Buddha condemned schism in strong terms, saying that a person who starts or joins a schism in a Community knowing or suspecting that he is not on the side of the Dhamma and Vinaya, is destined to be boiled for an aeon in hell (AN V.129; Cv.VII.5.3-4). Buddha’s instruction is to look into the matter and to side with the faction on the side of the Dhamma. The Buddha does not advocate superficial unity for its own sake at the expense of the Dhamma, but instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear.

When a bhikkhu has learned that a dispute has led to a schism and he wants to get involved, he is to side with whichever faction sides with the Dhamma. According to Mv.X.5.4, a speaker of non-Dhamma is to be recognized as such if he “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …

Thus the ability to take sides requires that one be well-informed about the Buddha’s teachings. A schism can be rightfully ended only if both sides are able to investigate the grounds (i.e., the point of dispute around which the schism crystallized), get to the root (the mind-states motivating the schism — see Cv.IV.14.3-4), and then resolve which side was right, based on the Dhamma and Vinaya.

There are cases where bhikkhus have started or joined a schism rooted in corrupted intent, knowing or suspecting that their views and actions deviate from the Dhamma-Vinaya. Those who joined the schismatic faction through ignorance should be won over to the Dhamma side by explaining the true Dhamma-Vinaya to them.

Ven. Sāriputta: “How am I to behave with regard to these (schismatic) bhikkhus?” The Buddha: “In that case, Sāriputta, take your stance in line with the Dhamma.” Ven. Sāriputta: “And how should I know what is Dhamma and what is not-Dhamma?” — Mv.X.5.3 The Buddha: “There are these eighteen grounds by which a speaker of not-Dhamma is to be known. He explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …

Answer 2

It would be very foolish and dangerous to believe that there is an area of "Narrenfreiheit" (fools-liberality).

Violation of rules (Vinaya) and kammic actions (although often related), are two different things. Of course everybody, not having found firm footing in the Dhamma is capable of all Anantarika-kamma. Note also that in kammic issues, others that Vinaya again, the Schism has to be done in between Noble Ones, at least a valid Sangha. And as Nyom Saptha Visuddhi used only in regard of Bhikkhus: "fact of the matter is that today" is that many "Buddhist" are very virtual in conducting that kind of Kamma and of course do not only have already cut them of of any attainments in this life but also will Devattada like bear the fruits.

May one take care not to associate with fools and giving into their evil and deluded objectives.

[Note that this is not given for stacks, exchange, trade or giving into efforts of common nourished Schism but as a means to escape for this course]