A Fourth Branch of Buddhism

Today it is there a three main branches of Buddhism. Each of these branches are somtimes given a deographic description.
  • Vajrayāna - Northern Buddhism
  • Mahāyāna - Eastern Buddhism
  • Theravāda - Southern Buddhism
Have a fourth branch of what can be called 'western' Buddhism develop sometime after 500BC, and before 1500AD.
How would this branch be different from the other branches? What similarites would it share with the other branches? How would this branch be influenced by it's environment(Perhaps Abrahamic Faiths)?

Edit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism
 
If Central Asia remains free of Islamic and Zoroastrian influence, I could see Buddhism taking up the region and created a fourth branch there.
 
What about hellenistic buddhism amongst the indo-greeks? could it make its way back to the mediterranean and become a major branch?
 
What about hellenistic buddhism amongst the indo-greeks? could it make its way back to the mediterranean and become a major branch?
I'm a little rusty on this area, but wasn't Greek culture mostly limited to the elites? How appealing would Buddhism be to them? I guess this would inform on how it would differ from the OTL branches.
 
How would it look or the main premises of this fourth branch would be?

I think its answer can lead to an outline of its emerge and development.
 
If Buddhism managed to spread to the Mediterranean in the Hellenistic era, it'd probably preempt Christianity. A universalist, salvationist religion that doesn't require you to give up your gods and traditions or believe that your ancestors are being tortured for all eternity is going to be far more appealing. You could even end up with yet another branch forming in West Africa if it speads down along the trade routes like Islam did OTL.
 
If you get a philhellene like Artabanus I to visit the east earlier as a prince or during his aid of the Greco-Bactrian kingdom and assume Buddhism as the Indo-Greeks such as Menander had done you could get him to adopt it.

Say sometime around the 1st century AD this school noticeably deviates from Mahayana teachings and in insult from the Theravada school they start calling themselves the 'Maggavada' or Questing School taking influence from neo-Platonic thought. Slowly we could see Buddhism spread as far as Greece or even Rome.
 

Deleted member 67076

You could even end up with yet another branch forming in West Africa if it speads down along the trade routes like Islam did OTL.
Buddhism's conception of reincarnation and Dhukka (among other things) in general is pretty anathema to West African traditions. Like, for example reincarnation is considered a good thing that only virtuous people can get in Ifa. Other West African faiths have attachment as a good thing, and necessary for virtue and a positive afterlife.
 
Buddhism's conception of reincarnation and Dhukka (among other things) in general is pretty anathema to West African traditions. Like, for example reincarnation is considered a good thing that only virtuous people can get in Ifa. Other West African faiths have attachment as a good thing, and necessary for virtue and a positive afterlife.
That's interesting. Is this more serious a conflict than ancestor-worship in China? Could Buddhism be adapted to West African beliefs? And what about East Africa? Could a form of Buddhism spread to there, either from Southern India, Arabia or Egypt?
 

Deleted member 67076

That's interesting. Is this more serious a conflict than ancestor-worship in China? Could Buddhism be adapted to West African beliefs? And what about East Africa? Could a form of Buddhism spread to there, either from Southern India, Arabia or Egypt?
Far more of a conflict, in my opinion.

It involves either giving up reincarnation as a bad thing for many Benin/Nigeria/Cameroon faiths or attachment as a bad thing, which defeats the Buddhist purpose of seeking enlightenment or the reverse for West African traditional faiths, which is such an important tenant for many faiths in the region. For that reason I don't think it could be syncretized effectively or whole scale adopted.

Unfortunately I don't know enough about East African religious traditions to effectively give commentary on how they viewed things and how its cosmology and conceptions would interact with Buddhist influence.
 
Greco-Roman-Buddhism is one idea, surprised Persian-Buddhism was not really a thing despite there being historical accounts of Persian Buddhists.

Other interesting ATL Buddhist branches would be Syrian (or Romano-Syrian - perhaps established by someone like Elagabalus in place of the latter attempting to set up his own cult), Arabian, Egyptian and Aksum / Ethiopian / East African.
 
So a long practising buddhist (now buddhistish) perspective, there are a few things worth considering.

Whilst the Wikipedia entry does list a lot of Buddhist schools, it is largely incorrect RE the idea of 3 schools as it is portrayed. Namely, Vajrayana and its adherants are a subset of Mahayana rather than a seperate branch altogether.

The most fundamental difference between Therevada and Mahayana (the old and young vehicles respectively) is the basis of authority and authenticity. The prior accepts only the words of Siddartha, whilst the latter accepts other figures as authoratative. In particular, Mahayana lineages trace themselves back to Nagarjuna, and his philosophy was flexible enough to allow great divergenced within Mahayana (I.e. Zen and Vajrayana recognising Mahayana as a founder/patriarch of their respective paths).

To some extent, I would argue that pureland has the closest claim to being a pre 1900 third school (not that they would claim as such) due to it adding yet another deviation in authority. Namely, pure land sects often come to the idea that whilst Siddartha was correct, mankind has spiritually degraded to a point where the path layed by Amithaba (i.e. salvation through faith in him or other pure land buddhas) is the more important focus, albeit the philosophical and theological underpinnings of this are still firmly rooted in Mahayana.

Post 1900, I think Secular Buddhism actually has the best claim to being a fourth distinct school due to, again, its take on scriptural authority. Namely, through application of the guidelines set in the Kalama sutta, texts and practices can and should be held up to scrutiny, essentially taking the exam of practice as the authority on practice rather than specific dogma.


So to get more to the point, before wr have a fourth Buddhist school, we need a definitive third.
 
Top