regarding TULKUS

[Alexis (Canada)]

Concerning tulkus,

I meant to say that weterners often do the mistake to think that if someone has been recognized as the reincarnation of an enlightened being, that this person right there in front of them can read minds and has all the siddhis, etc. No! No! No!
this is not necessarily the case.

Once they incarnate again, Great Bodhisattvas have to go through all the stages again. From taking refuge up to removing small-small obstacles to omniscience. They have to go through the whole process birth after birth. Again and again each time the take birth in the world.

The only thing is that it becomes each time more easier. In any case they do have to abandon all worldly activities before they can get even the smallest siddhi.

Tulkus still have to work for it, even if they go through it faster that us worms. It still takes a life long commitment to meditation.

[David (USA)]

Dear Alexis,

May i ask where you get your information regarding tulkus?? Thanks

[Alexis (Canada)]

Hey David!

It's just common knowledge and you can also find here and there reference to this in the tibetan litterature and in the oral teachings.

If tulkus could generate enligthment right after birth, they would not need to study hard the scriptures as they do. They would not need also to receive all the initiations and practice hard the generation and completion stages of the deity as they do.

Both in study and practice, tulku need to work in order to attain previous realisations. Although in both cases, it is far more easier for them than for us due to their past mind generation and aspiration.

You can also find reference to this in the litterature. In Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand, Pabonkha rimpoche gives the exemple of Buton Je who did not achieve enlightment in that life because he was engrossed in astrology.

Zemey Rimpoche's exellent book also gives several examples of High incarnates who strayed and couldn't achieve liberation in that life.

Concerning Trijang chogtrul Rimpoche's disrobing. My own precious Guru, My Refuge and Protector, Kyabje Dagom Rimpoche said of this when he was in TBI in 2005:

Trijang Rimpoche's leaving the robe is due to:

1- Him being young and inexperienced

2- Dharamsala's pressure

3- Our own collective karma.

So, in achieving liberation or not in this life, an incarnate is subject to dependent arising same as we are, he need to create the causes and work to ripen the seeds of the past life by practicing unshakable guru yoga. Dorje Shugden said during an invocation (in answer to one of the questions) that the Guru yoga (and especially the Lama Chopa) is the way to ripen positive potentials in our mind stream.

Remember, tulkus take form in the world by entering the mother's womb and accepting contaminated aggregates. Also, they are subjet to dependent arising same as we are. Their study and practice is to ripen their past karmic seeds and mind generations.

Sorry, this post might seem a little confused. I had never really thought about this subject and English in not my first langage. Anyway, hope this helps......

[Alexis (Canada)]

Again,

In a particuliar line of incarnates (such as the Dalai-Lamas, the Panchen Lamas or Dorje Shugden's past lives), some incarnations will be great, some less great. Some will be famous, others less so. Some will perform extensive deeds for the teachings and beings, others not so much. Some will have long life, some not. This is due to dependent arising, phenomenon appearing in conjuction upon a series of causes and conditions and not existing on their own side. This is also true of a tulku's experiences and impact on the world and its beings. Once they incarnate in a set of conditionned, contaminated agregates, they are subject to impure winds and karma of the beings and the environnement.


Isn't it?

[david (USA)]

Dear Alexis,

I had some thoughts and questions to ask your engaging mind in reference to your provoking writing on tulkus. For a second language your English is excellent.. I can understand what you have wrote with no problems. Thank you.

1.What’s the point if Enlightenment is gained and then lost in the next life? If you have reached a certain state, wouldn’t it just continue from where you left off in your previous point of attainment? To continue in your next rebirth to carry on or start from where you left off. If not, then how can anyone REMAIN A BUDDHA? Example when Lord Buddha entered the world, he was a Bodhisattva, ripe and on the last stage toward his enlightenment. So in that life instead of re-learning what he had learned for many lifetimes, he continued and FINISHED.

2.In your 02-11-07 posting, you wrote if we had more merits, then we would see H.H. as Avalokitesvara. Not seeing him as that is our own fault? But your posting of 03-11-07 re Trijang Rinpoche disrobing, who’s fault would that be?

3.Enlightenment is borrowed and lost at death? It has to be re-won again in a new birth?

4.So if Tsongkapa incarnated, he would be unenlightened again? And have to strive again to become enlightened in the new emanation or incarnation? Before he can begin to benefit others? So enlightened beings who manifest as a bridge, what does the bridge need to perfect before offering a ford to cross for beings?

5.We have to establish: Enlightened beings are enlightened or not? Is enlightenment and the eradication of the gross and subtle wrong concept of ‘I’ permanent or transitory? If it is permanent, can it be lost at birth, if so how is it permanent? If it cannot be lost at birth, then how can a new incarnation have lost everything?

6.So if Kyabje Dagom Dorje Chang appears in a new incarnation, how do you /we treat him? With great respect and place him on a high throne remembering his previous lives accomplishments, or place on throne in respect for the potential in this life to again do what he did in his previous lives? Or neither because his new incarnation due to :

a.inexperience
b.Dharamsala’s/samsara’s pressures
c.Our collective karma

Disrobes, not study, and just engage in wordly affairs? If so how would that affect your practice? So how do we treat him? Or treat him ordinary till he proves himself again??

So if that is the case, if in his previous life he was great and we recite the lineal liturgies in our sadhanas requesting for his blessing, but the new incarnation is a ‘disrobed layman with no studies’ then do we eliminate him from that liturgy? Because after all, the new lay incarnation is the continuum of the previous great Kyabje Dagom Rinpoche. So if after all that effort, in this life, he is a layman with no skills, doesn’t that lead us to believe we are going that direction if we invoke the blessings of the NOW INCARNATE LAYMAN?? Then how can we invoke the previous Dagom Rinpoche as a precious Refuge and Protector, but in this life he cannot offer any refuge to even himself?


7.What happens (in reference 02-11-07) if a tulku is born during the time that the Buddha’s teachings and authentic lineages are lost (5,000 years after shakyamuni’s parinirvana)? Then how do they engage in the practices of ‘taking refuge’ all the way up to ‘removal of obstacles to omniscience?’ So will all those tulkus go to ‘waste’ sort of to say? Or their past seeds remain dormant and they revel in samsara adding to more negative karma??

8.In reference to 02-11-07, Avalokitesvara’s actions are hard to judge. Thereby Amitabah-Panchen Lama, Heruka-Trijang Rinpoche, Yamantaka-Ling Rinpoche, Tsongkapa-Domo Geshe Rinpoche’s actions for example will be equally hard to judge. Thereby in every incarnation if they don’t ‘manifest’ enlightened activity, it is our own fault or theirs’? If theirs’ then outer conditions wouldn’t serve to benefit anyone’s practice? Therefore difficulties in life wouldn’t be seen as a means to exhaust negative karma but a source for a tulku’s downfall ‘if he is not careful?’ In the lojong teachings, all difficulties are to be used as part of the path. Thereby difficulties wouldn’t be impediments, but sources of spiritual advancement. Unless you’re a reincarnated tulku? Is that correct? So these difficulties would only be useful to ordinary non-tulkus?

If it is their fault, then enlightenment disperses at death? Only to be re-won at another incarnation’s hard work again? If they don’t manifest, and it’s not their fault, then ( ref: 02-11-07) they not being able to read minds and have all the siddhis is their lack of effort in this life again, or our lack of merit to see their ability and have their ability be recognized by us thereby appearing as if they don’t have these siddhis?
Example, if a mosquitoe was in front of Buddha, it doesn’t recognize that there is a Buddha in front of him. It doesn’t see the Buddha or cognize that Buddha has enlightenment or siddhis. Does that mean the Buddha doesn’t have those qualities or the mosquito doesn’t have the qualities to recognize and simply see Buddha as a food source (blood)!?

If it is the latter, then when we who don’t have siddhis, stands in front of a attained tulku, and will not recognize that he has these qualities. Therefore isn’t it that the tulku doesn’t have these qualities and it’s lost in rebirth to be won again?? Or the tulku DOESN’T MANIFEST these qualities as it serves no purpose, leaving us to believe he has these qualities intact but unused? But unmanifested due to environment and beings. Seemingly as if they were lost in rebirth to be regain by opening seeds again?

In reference to the Dalai Lama, the previous Trijang Rinpoche, Dorje Shugden, and Nechung recognizes him as a direct incarnation of Avalokitesvara. Mao Tse Tung however saw the Dalai Lama as a serf-lord exploiting the Tibetan Populace through religion. Who is right?

Then the Tibetans should dispel all notions of tulkus as they have to start from the beginning (albeit faster due to latent seeds). So why respect them or recognize them? Then Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama, Gaden Tripa, Trijang Rinpoche, Dilgo Kyentse, Sakya Trizin shouldn’t make such efforts to recognize the many tulkus they have recognized and leave them be as they have lost their attainments during migrational transition anyway. I mean, why bother? No one recognized Langri Thangpa or Atisha. They climbed their way to the top? So these lamas should stop recognizing new lamas?

9.So if we make aspirational prayers of enlightenment, then in our next lives, we fulfill these prayers and become enlightened. Then we pass away, and the life after that we are not enlightened again?? So aspirational prayers to become enlightened and it’s fruits last one lifetime only?? So each enlightened tulku loses his enlightenment at the time of death and just takes the ‘seeds’ to be redeveloped again in the next life? Is that what we should conclude?

It has been indeed thought provoking and interesting to read what you have wrote. It made me think harder to write the above. I thank you for your writing and time spent.
I also again thank the creators of this website who make this all possible.

[Alexis (Canada)]

Dear David,

You understand your post's questions requires a PhD Thesis lenght answer. so you will have to give me some time. I cannot answer quickly to all your questions.

However let me dispell some confusion that has arisen due to my obscure wrtings. I did not say enligntement is wasted after death. NO! However, after having achieved enligthment and being reborn in a mandala as the principal deity, and after having casted away his coarse ordinary body. If an enlightened being chooses to incarnate again for the sake of ordinary sentient beings, he has to enter a contaminated continuum of agregates coming from the union of the father and mother (in order for these beings to be able to interact with him). These contaminated agregates are going to determine his gross level of consciousness (and his actions) until that incarnate starts meditating a lot in order to ripen the seeds present in his subtle mind. That enlightened being's subtle mind is unchanging and has powerfull potentialities from past lives. However, that subtle mind is attached to a grosser level of mind that is determined by the contaminated agregates he choose to be reborne into. If a tulku does nothing to ripen potentialities in his subtle mind, then not much is going to happen. The ripening of the enlightened potential in his mind is dependent on strong guru yoga. Also, potentialities in the tulku's mind make them generally very eager to practice dharma and also makes them capable of greater auterities than most of us. But still they can go astray and can go wrong. If Tulkus could not go wrong, then we would not need a special protector like Vajradhara Dorje Shugden.
Remember he hooked back Pabongkha Rimpoche into the right path at the beginning of his life.
Pabonkha was practicing all sorts of funny things which did not please Dorje Shugden. Due to Dorje Shugden hooking him back in the right track of Lam Rim, Lojong and Mahamudra, he became a teacher like the sun, unhindered throughout the three realms. Also, even if Tsongkhapa had achieved enlightment previously, Manjushri still adviced him (if he wanted to achieve correct view and enlightment) to purify negativities, accumulate merit and make fervent request to his guru indivisible from his deity. If Tsongkhapa would not have practiced according to majushri's advice, he would not have generated that same level of achievement.

Also, there are different 'levels' of tulkus. the newer tulkus like your local geshe's reincarnation up to the higher tulkus, called the 'Chogtruls' (supreme emanations). It is said that newer tulkus can more easily stray from previous mind generation. Chogtruls however, will generate their previous mind generation much more easily and even under great difficult circumstance. This is due to the very strong imprint in their minds from many many lives of viruous practice.


That's it for now, I'll come back to you later on....I hope I did't make it even more confusing for me and you!

[Roland (Singapore)]

Re the posting 03-11-07 by David on Tulkus is FANTASTIC!!! THOROUGHLY FANTASTIC! I understand so much more after reading David's nine point 'questions.'  Thank you David. I understand this ancient system of Tulkus much more and have gained much more faith in them as the Tibetans have for centuries. Since they are pragmatic people, it must serve many positive functions.

Although David writes out questions in NINE POINTS. I dont think he is actually asking alexis or anyone any questions. I read it through a few times, and if you read it carefully, the questions are in the form of actually answering the questions in themselves. I dont think David is asking, more of using question format to answer. Wow. Am I right David?

[Roland (Singapore)]

Dear David, you must of studied many years. Your teacher(s) is/are great.

Happy to see more non-Tibetans (assuming you're not Tibetan) absorbing the Dharma on such a high calibre. Salute to you and Folded hands to your great Teacher(s).

[Alexis (Canada)]

David,

I think the main point in this discussion is the relationship between the samboghakaya and the Nirmanakaya, which I am not really sure about. Once a being attains the Samboghakaya & Dharmakaya (enlightment), he will not fall back from that. This much we know. However, their successive Nirmanakayas are subjet to the karma of their parents and the environnement in which their are born (war, disease, moral degeneration, etc.). This environnement conditions the gross level of consciousness of the Tulku
and will influence his actions, state of mind, etc. Young tulkus will cry if they loose their parents, will feel scared in the dark, will have the mistaken view of a rope appearing as a snake in the dark, etc. It will be like that until the learn again to tame their minds and meditate and re-manifest their previous mind generation.
What is not subjet to these conditions is that being's subtle mind which carries the potentialities from past lives. These potentialities need to be ripenend in order to manifest fully (to blossom) in the specific conditionned environnment that being choose to be reborn into.

Also, let's take it the other way. If the Nirmanakayas could manifest enlightment spontaneously and independently of the specific conditionned environnement the choose to be reborn into, they would not need to study and practice. They would not need to receive teachings, etc. because their specific form would already be abiding on the ground of a No More Learner.
Anyone who has been living close to a young tulku or that has taught to a reincarnate knows this is not the case. Tulkus ofter need to be disciplined. Ling rimpoche struck HHDL with a stick in order to discipline him. Dorje Shugden did the same to Pabongkha. Some protectors might even kill a tulku if that particuliar incarnation has gone astray. there are a few stories on this. This shows that once they enter a stream of conditionned contaminated agregates, tulkus need to work in order to ripen enlightment factors (although much less than us).

That is, the Nirmanakaya is subjet to causality as he is initially physically and mentally conditionned from the parents's diet, culture, language, standard of living, superstitions, attitudes, etc. All these factors will dertermine that Nirmanakaya's gross level of consciousness at the begining of his life. No? If a Nirmanakaya would not be subjet to causality, he could not enter the wother's womb and be reborn in the world! He would remain outside time and space.

The point is, the Samboghakaya is beyond conditionned phenomena. In order to help sentient beings, they willingly emanate into a conditionned contaminated set of aggregates and from that moment on are therefore subject to dependent arising and conditionned phenomenon. What they carry with them is the powerfull potentialities from the subtle mind. this is what is hidden like a treasure inside the contaminated aggregates of a tulku.

If we hold to the view that a Nirmanakaya's manifestation of enlightment is not dependent on specific causes and conditions, then we are upholding the Dzogchen view which rejects causality.

Concerning my relationship to the next Dagom Chogtrul (question #6),
Rimpoche himself said that we should not show too much respect to a tulku until he achieves a certain level of realisation. A young tulku should not be treated like Mr President! Never! this would damage his practice. Therefore, I will pray to the Great 12th Dagom until the 13th shows signs of accomplishment. That is, I will follow my Lama's own advice on the subject.

Cheers,

Alexis

[Alexis (Canada)]

Siddharta becoming Shakyamuni is dependent upon him having the four visions (sick man, old man, dead man, etc.). It is dependant upon him leaving the palace. It is dependent upon him studying meditation with the ascetics. Its is dependent upon him sitting under the bodhi tree. Finally, it is dependent upon him accepting the milk-rice from Sujata and going on to vanquish the Host of Mara that night. If you remove any of these elements you still get a Chakravartin king but no Buddha.

The Nirmanakaya's manifestation of enlightment is necessarily, like everything else, a dependant phenomena. It is, like all other phenomenas in the three realms, subject to dependant origination.

Anyway, this is the view, I think, of our father Tsongkhapa. If you uphold other views, you will fall in the trapping of substantialisme or nihiliisme, no?

The mind of clear light is not inherently existent. It is also a conditionned phenomena dependent on the mind of black near-attainment, itself depending upon the mind of red-increase, etc. etc. etc.

Everything falls within the law of dependant arisising (or dependant origination) as does a tulku's manifestation of enlightment at any particuliar time and place of the world. They have to make it happen.

Alexis

[David (USA)]

Dear Roland, You are sharp and perceptive.

I am a firm supporter of the tulku system. If the high lamas of tibet exert so much energy to find reincarnations and much is put into reinstalling them. There must be a purpose beyond my contaminated criticisms. I will respect them whether they have openly shown their attainments or not.

I have met several reknowned reincarnations themselves and at a very young age they have clearly exhibited clairvoyance relating to me directly what had happened to me in the past. There would be no way of knowing. I am sure that is just the tip of the iceber of what they can do. There are other signs of course.

I respect their highly evolved mind that is even able to reincarnate again and again. Some even leaving clear dates, time and situation of their deaths. Also clear indications of time, place of their rebirth, even their future parents names. That is much much much more than i can ever hope for. If i dont go to the three lower realms in my next life i am alread not bad.

I respect and remember what they have done in their previous incarnations which is much more than myself. And I respect what they can do again if my/our merit is ripe for them to act. In order for the moon's reflections to reflect on the lake, the lake must be still, calm and without alot of floating debris.

It is safer to show respect to them, not only when they 'prove' themselves to me. Who am I?? It is better to show respect to them as they are for their past and their future. What do I lose??

I fold my hands to the mighty tulkus who have benefitted so much by actualizing Shantideva's aspirations. My own gurus, who are very high lamas both in learning, rank and attainments themselves showed great respect to incarnates. I follow their many examples.

That is how i wish to relate to them. Good Luck.

[Alexis (Canada)]

David,

That's not the point.

I didn't condemn the tulku system. We all fold our hands, even to senior students. At a young age, they will show some signs of accomplishment. But they will not manifest the deed of attaining Union of No More learning (enligntment) in this life until they practice properly. Even Pabongkha said this. Not me, Pabongkha!

This is a fact. Not an opinion. Every monk in the monasteries know this.
I have a tulku in my family and he is being treated with some extra respect but not like Mr president or like a god because he still has to finish his studies, do some retreats, meditate, etc. If he was in the exact same mental continuum as the previous one, he wouldn't have had to take boddhisattva and tantric vows again.

What I am laying out in my post is the Tibetan monastc view on Tulkus, not the layman's view of them, which often equates tulkus with external permanent gods manifesting the supreme siddhi outside of dependant origination.

Love,

Alexis

[Roland (Singapore)]

No offense Alexis, but what you write sounds like you are somehow envious of the tulku (or all tulkus in general) in your family and your doing everything you can to make tulkus as ordinary as possible. Perhaps so that you get attention/respect also?? I hope I am wrong and I do apologize for my assumptions..

[Alexis (Canada)]

You should read my posts properly.

Any abbot, old geshe or high lama is going to give you the same answer as me.

What I write is supported by scripture and oral tradition alike.

Faith is good. Blind faith will only take you so far.

Tulkus are not Avatars. Please know the difference between the two! If you rely on tulku in the same manner as Hindus believe in Avatars, your guru devotion will not be profound.

Good bye.

[Roland]

Dear Alexis, you contradict yourself. You said in your earlier post that if we had the merits, we would see the Dalai Lama as Avalokitesvara.  So doesnt that make him a avatar.  Either he is or he isnt. Either there are or there isnt any avatars isnt a spiritually healthy way to think. You go to tibet or within the Geshes, tulkus, abbots, monks of the monastery or EVEN ordinary  lay ppl, they WILL DEFINITELY TELL YOU HE IS AN AVATAR! He is an avatar of Avalokitesvara. And I certainly believe that.

You also said there are many level of tulkus such as choktruls, or just 'ordinary' geshe incarnations. You made the distinction and  now you say ALL tulkus arent avatars. Isnt it possible that out of hundreds of tulkus ONE JUST MIGHT BE. Or even two or three or four?? You mean Buddhas dont ever emanate? And if Buddhas emanate they cannot emanate as clowns, prostitutes, insane ppl, sweepers, kings, ministers, the teacher and the ones being taught, monks, nuns, or tulkus??

I think sweeping statements to put all tulkus 'in their place' is not healthy for anyone's spiritual practice. There are ppl with blind faith and there are not. I dont think everything is so black and white. To use dependent origination, supported by scriptures, oral tradition, abbots, high lama or geshe to support your point re tulkus is very 'big support'. But it doesnt convince me. I have observed quite different..

I think as one abbot said that we shouldnt criticize the tulkus, great beings, masters or teachers. Even among the sangha of the great monasteries there are living bodhisattvas, arhats in the congregation that are not recognized so imagine the ones that are recognized. If we think in such a way then he said that pretty soon we lose respect for everyone. Then this person or that person or those ppl arent that level or a level to be respected in our judgement. The scriptures are a general guide for us to master and get those attainments then we can see for ourselves who we are not who they are necessarily.  The scriptures arent for ordinary ppl like us to use as  point of argument to put tulkus down.  Does that mean the monasteries should remove all thrones to Trijang Tulku, Ling Tulku, Pabongkha Tulku, Panchen Lama and just seat them on a cushion higher than other monks till they prove themselves again.  Does that mean when the 15th Dalai Lama comes, we shouldnt make a big deal, no thrones, or just a small tiny one and no long life pujas, prostrations, making offering, requesting himt to turn the wheel of dharma again UNTIL HE HAS PROVEN HIMSELF. AND IF HE DOES PROVE HIMSELF, DO I HAVE THE MERITS TO RECIEVE THAT PROOF OR SHALL I QUOTE FROM SCRIPTURES AND JUST BELIEVE I CAN PERCIEVE EVERYTHING.  And they have to REGAIN their attainments again?? I dont think true attainments can be lost. Otherwise buddhas shouldnt emanate for fear of losing theire attainments. Since there are many stages of realization such as NO MORE LEARNING, IT IS DEFINITELY POSSIBLE FOR SOME TULKUS TO HAVE REACHED THAT LEVEL. It is impossible no one has.


Did the elephants, birds, deer, and all inhabitants percieve shakyamuni as a Buddha and relate to him as one? IF not, then is it their karma or Buddha didnt prove to them enough who he is?

I think we have to be very respectful and not just generalize regarding many attained beings. Simply to just put tulkus to a simple one 'box' would hurt alot of disciples, believers, teaches, centres, and accomplishments.

I think you should read David's posts properly. I think what he wrote is unbiased, discerning, critical without being critical, repsectful, authoritative, scholarly and leaves room for highly attained tulkus and 'ordinary' tulkus to both exist. Why not?

I mean you no harm in this reply. Please do not take offence. I will not write on this any more. You have issues with this tulku phenomena and you need to work it out. Not bombast it with your rhetoric and big sounding basis. I think we shouldnt put down tulkus, or just be so sweeping in our statements and put them into one arena or level only. It would hurt many i stress again. I think we should encourage people to look without jugdement, or based one's limited past experiences (be it good or bad) or being so one sided.

To tell you the truth, i feel you are very unhappy re this due to personal issues. Certainly we have much more broader subjects to forum about besides putting tulkus down. When my guru's incarnation passes and his reincarnation returns, i will treat him exactly as before. This was directly advised by Dorje Shugden in the form Dulzin when he took trance and advised us with foreigners and tibetans alike. I was present many years back during that. He told us that our lama has many incarnations, but we have the mind emanation, so we should be very happy we have that karma to be with him now and should pray to be with him again in the future. When dorje shugden as tulku Trakpa Gyeltsen was 'murdered' then afterwards taking the form of wrathful protetor Dorje Shugden, did he have to go and study, meditate, retreat, and prove himself again. Or we instantly took faith in him due to his exalted past??

Forgive me if I have sounded rude to you. But I do not mean it in that way. My apologies.