The Sthaviravada in Ceylon underwent 2 schisms producing:

The school is called the Dharmaguptika after its founder Dharmagupta and apparently originated in the Aparanta country. It seems generally to agree closely with the Sthaviravada (eg. on the arhat) except that it had some leanings toward the Mahasanghika. According to Vasumitra it attached special importance to gifts "to the Buddha" rather than to the Community and also to the honouring of pagodas (confirmed by the extant Dharmaguptika texts).

After establishing themselves as far west as Parthia they followed the 'silk route', the East-West axis of Asia, eastwards across Central Asia and on into China, where they effectively established Buddhism in the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D.

This school made greater efforts than any other schools in spreading Buddhism outside India to Iran, Central Asia and China with success. It was the Dharmaguptakas who were the first Buddhists to establish themselves in Central Asia. They appear to have carried out a vast circling movement along the trade route from the West into Iran and at the same time into Uddiyana (North of Gandhara, which became one of their main centers).

Alone with Mahisasakas and Kasyapiyas, Dharmaguptikas are found to break away respectively to the South of the Southern point (in Mahisa), North and North East of Mathura (Himavant) and West of the Southern point (in Aparanta, but especially Gujarat and Sindhu). The Mahisasakas and Kasyapiya appear to have followed them across Asia to China for the earlier period of Chinese Buddhism, it was the Dharmaguptikas who constituted the main and most influential school and even later their Vinaya remained the basis of the discipline there.

The Sthaviravada in Ceylon underwent 2 schisms producing:

a) the Abhayagirivasins (Dharmarucis after their founder) in 38B.C.

b) the Jetavaniyas (or Sagaliyas after their founder) in ~ 300 A.D.

Around 190 B.C., the Sthaviras of the Himavant country (Haimavatas) became an independent school called the Kasyapiyas. It is after one of the original leaders of the mission to their country, Kasyapa. The Kasyapiyas in fact were a group of the Sthaviravada cut off from the main Sthavira 'territory' in Avanti by the seceded Sarvastivada.

For a long time they kept in touch with their original base near Vidisa (Caityagin, Sanci, where their inscriptions are found). Sometimes their opponents refer to them as simply Sthaviras but they modified some of the Sthaviravada views.

They represent a compromise between the Sthaviravada and the Sarvastivada. The Sthaviravada and the Mahisasaka adhere to the view that an arhat is beyond the reach of any seduction, cannot relapse, whereas the Sarvastivada and Kasyapiya adopt the Mahasanghika opinion that the arhat's perfection is not absolute.

The Kasyapiyas differed on minor points from the Sarvastivadins and the Dharmaguptikas and were closer to the Sthaviravadins, therefore they are also called the Sthavariyas. They believed that the past which has borne fruit ceases to exist but which has not yet ripened continues to exist therefore partially modifying the position of the Sarvastivadins, for whom the past also exists like the present. They are sometimes represented as having effected a compromise between the Sarvastivadins and the Vibhajyavadins.

Similar to the Mahisasakas and Dharmaguptikas, Kasyapiyas are found to break away respectively to the South of the Southern point (in Mahisa), North and North East of Mathura (Himavant) and West of the Southern point (in Aparanta, but especially Gujarat and Sindhu).

The Hinayana is subdivided into Vaibhasika and Sautrantika where the Vaibhasika equals to the Sarvastivada school. The Sarvastivadins were like the Theravadins, a conservative school of the Hinayana.

The president of the Council of Kanishka was Vasumitra, a Sarvastivadin. It is the Sarvastivadins who formed the majority in this Council. In this Council the Vibhasas (commentaries or discussions) were compiled, this includes the opinions of the different schools on the sutra, vinaya and Abhidharma. The Vibhasa denoted the literature of the Sarvastivadins. After this Council the Sarvastivada school rose to its highest importance.

They held almost the same views about the human life and the universe as the Theravadins, and believed in the non-existence of soul, impermanence, law of Karma etc. The only difference between the doctrines of the Sarvastivadins and those of the Theravadins lies in that the former admitted the reality of the elements (Skandhas) that compose a being as against the latter's view of their unreality. Both the schools admitted the continual flux of elements i.e. the momentary existence of the elements. One school believed that the elements of the past as disappearing to give rise to the present and the present as giving rise to the future. The other school believed that the elements of the past underwent changes to develop into the present and the present developed into the future. Thus the Sarvastivadins admitted the reality of elements as existing in all times --- past, present and future.

In Buddhalogical speculations, the Sarvastivadins looked upon Buddha as a man possessing divine attributes. Sarvastivadins believe that an arhat could fall and that heretics could also attain miraculous powers.

In the movement North and West, the Sarvastivada maintained establishments in Kosala (Sravasti), Varanasi as well as Mathura (their main center at first) but tended to concentrate in Gandhara and Kasmira. The Sarvastivadins in the region produced the Samkrantikas, the Sautrantikas (a trend which began about 50 A.D. and was consolidated into a school probably early in the 2nd century A.D.) and the Mulasarvastivada (in the 3rd or 4th century A.D. mainly in the countries as Gandhara and Kasmira). In a relatively late period we find the Sarvastivadins in Central Asia and China.

If different languages were used - Paisaci (of which Pali is a dialect) by the Sthaviravada group of schools, Prakit by the Mahasanghika, Apabhramsa by the Sammitiya (Vatsiputriya) group and Sanskrit by the Sarvastivada.

All those schools of Buddhism which make this distinction of principles in time into categories those which "exist" and those which do not "exist" are sometimes called vibhajyavadins. The Samkrantikas support the concept of past principles that had not yet produce their results could be said in any sense to exist (being still in a sense effective) and continue to exist. This implies eternalism.

The Sarvastivada school has quite often been accused of holding a view indistinguishable from the Brahmanical Samkhya philosophy (a form of "eternalism").

Probably towards the end of the 3rd century B.C. the school known as Mahisasakas seceded over some points in the Abhidhamma in which they agreed with the Sarvastivadins. According to Pali sources, this school branched off from the Sthaviravadins and gave rise to the Sarvastivadins. The name of the school seems to be a corruption of an original name indicating their origin in the Mahisa country (the Central Narmada valley).

The Sthaviravada and the Mahisasaka adhere to the view that an arhat is beyond the reach of any seduction, cannot relapse, whereas the Sarvastivada and Kasyapiya adopt the Mahasanghika opinion that the arhat's perfection is not absolute.

The confusion regarding this school among various authorities is largely due to the fact that there were 2 groups of this school at 2 different periods. The earlier Mahisasakas may probably be traced back to Purna who withheld his consent to the decisions arrived at the First Buddhist Council. The later Mahisasakas held views contrary to those held by the earlier followers of the sect. For the former they believed that the past and future did not exist while the present did. The later believed in the existence of past, future and present like the Sarvastivadians.