The Second Buddhist Council was held at Vaisali (or Vaishali), an ancient city in what is now the state of Bihar in northern India, bordering Nepal under the patronage of King Kalasoka while it was presided by Sabakami. This Council probably was held about a century after the first one or one hundred years after the Buddha’s Parinibbana, or about 383 BCE.
 
The historical records for the Second Buddhist Council derive primarily from the canonical Vinayas of various schools. In most cases, these accounts are found at the end of the Skandhaka portion of the Vinaya. While inevitably disagreeing on points of details, they nevertheless agree that the root dispute was points of vinaya or monastic discipline.
 
The Second Council resulted in the first schism in the Sangha. Modern scholars see this event as probably caused by a group of reformists called Sthaviras who split from the conservative majority Mahāsāṃghikas. This view is supported by the vinaya texts themselves, as vinayas associated with the Sthaviras do contain more rules than those of the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya.
 
The Second Council was called in order to settle a serious dispute over the ‘ten points’. This is a reference to some monks breaking of ten minor rules. They were given to:

•  Storing salt in a horn.
•  Eating after mid-day.
•  To eating once and then going again to a village for alms.
•  Holding the Uposatha Ceremony with monks dwelling in the same locality.
•  Carrying out official acts when the assembly was incomplete.
•  Following a certain practice because it was done by one’s tutor or teacher.
•  Eating sour milk after one had had his mid-day meal.
•  Drinking strong drink before it had been fermented.
•  Using a rug which was not the proper size.
•  Using gold and silver.

Their misdeeds became an issue and caused a major controversy as breaking these rules was thought to contradict the Buddha’s original teachings. King Kalasoka was the Second Council’s patron and the meeting took place at Vesali due to the following circumstances.
 
One day, whilst visiting the Mahavana Grove at Vesali, the Elder Yasa came to know that a large group of monks known as the Vajjians were infringing the rule which prohibited monk’s accepting gold and silver by openly asking for it from their lay devotees. He immediately criticized their behaviour and their response was to offer him a share of their illegal gains in the hope that he would be won over. The Elder Yasa, however declined and scorned their behaviour. The monks immediately sued him with a formal action of reconciliation, accusing him of having blamed their lay devotees, the Elder Yasa accordingly reconciled himself with the lay devotees, but at the same time, convinced them that the Vajjian monks had done wrong by quoting the Buddha’s pronouncement on the prohibition against accepting or soliciting for gold and silver. The laymen immediately expressed their support for the Elder Yasa and declared the Vajjian monks to be wrong-doers and heretics saying, “the Elder Yasa alone is the real monk and Sakyan son. All the others are not monks, not Sakyan sons.”
 
The stubborn and unrepentant Vajjian monks then moved to suspend the Venerable Yasa Thera without the approval of the rest of the Sangha. When they came to know of the outcome of his meeting with their lay devotees. The Elder Yasa, however escaped their censure and went in search of support from monks elsewhere, who upheld his orthodox views on the Vinaya.
 
Sixty forest dwelling monks from Pava and eighty monks from the southern regions of Avanti who were of the same mind, offered to help him to check the corruption of the Vinaya. Together they decided to go to Soreyya to consult the Venerable Revata as he was a highly revered monk and an expert in the Dhamma and the Vinaya. As soon as the Vajjian monks came to know this they also sought the Venerable Revata’s support by offering him the four requisites which he promptly refused. These monks then sought to use the same means to win over the Venerable Revata’s attendant, the Venerable Uttara.
 
At first, he too, rightly declined their offer but they craftily persuaded him to accept their offer saying, that when the requisites meant for the Buddha were not accepted by him, Ananda would be asked to accept them and would often agree to do so. Uttara changed his mind and accepted the requisites.
 
Urged on by them he then agreed to go and persuade the Venerable Revata to declare that the Vajjian monks were indeed speakers of the Truth and upholders of the Dhamma. The Venerable Revata saw through their ruse and refused to support them. He then dismissed Uttara. In order to settle the matter once and for all, the Venerable Revata advised that a council should be called at Valikarama with himself asking questions on the ten offences of the most senior of the Elders of the day, the Thera Sabbakami.
 
Once his opinion was given it was to be heard by a committee of eight monks, and its validity decided by their vote. The eight monks called to judge the matter were the Venerables, Sabbakami, Salha, Khujjasobhita and Vasabhagamika, from the East and four monks from the West, the Venerables, Revata, Sambhuta-Sanavasi, Yasa and Sumana.
 
They thoroughly debated the matter with Revata as the questioner and Sabbakami answering his questions. After the debate was heard the eight monks decided against the Vajjian monks and their verdict was announced to the assembly. Afterwards seven-hundred monks recited the Dhamma and Vinaya and this recital came to be known as the Sattasati because seven-hundred monks had taken part in it.
 
This historic council is also called, the Yasatthera Sangiti because of the major role the Elder Yasa played in it and his zeal for safeguarding the Vinaya. The Vajjian monks categorically refused to accept the Council’s decision and in defiance called a council of their own which was called the Mahasangiti.