I am trying to come to terms with the new type of Buddhism that Brahmavamso and his colleagues represent. Formerly Brahmavamso has been a student of Ven. Ajahn Chah, and member of the Thai Forest Sangha, but after his expulsion he makes a lot of strange statements like: "Buddha Gotama is not a Sammasambuddha, since he studied with previous Buddhas".
The videos and statements like:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOZtpCo3Vpk
make me wonder, what kind of Buddhist tradition is that.
So far I would call it "Australian Brahmic Buddhism".
Its typical features I observed are:
- Reliance on Sarvastivada Chinese Agamas, which are considered more reliable that Pali Nikayas;
- Usage of Dharmagupta Vinaya lineage for nuns ordination;
- The notion that the jhanas don't invlove any physical perception, lead by themselves to Nibbana, and there can be no attachment to jhanas;
- The notion that Nirodha-samapatti is essentially the same as Nibbana;
- Rejection of Pali Commentaries.
The origin of this kind of Buddhism can be traced to the works of Roderick Bucknell, former monk and scholar of Agama texts, but I would call it "Brahmic" since Brahmavamso gave it a defined form.
Any thoughts of how this new lineage may be called, and its relationship to Theravada?