And now, I personally think that to hold that culture, institutionalized Tulku. That culture is dying; it’s not going to work anymore. And even if it… And if it doesn’t work, I think it’s almost for the better because this tulku, it’s going to… If the Tibetans are not careful, this Tulku system is going to ruin Buddhism. At the end of the day Buddhism is more important [than] Tulku system, who cares about Tulku... [and] what happens to them.
Kyosan wrote:Where did the tulku system come from; who made it up? According to Khyentse Rinpoche, there is no mention of it in the Buddhist sutras.
Pero wrote:Kyosan wrote:Where did the tulku system come from; who made it up? According to Khyentse Rinpoche, there is no mention of it in the Buddhist sutras.
It's a Tibetan invention which started with the Karmapa as far as I know. Then others followed suit, though probably not out of the same, originally altruistic, intentions hehe.
Lars wrote:Scholar monk Ahjan Sujato points out in his video lecture "the great Santi spin" that in the Vinaya which is common to every school the word "abbot" or "leader" does not appear once. There is nothing in the Vinaya that gives any monk or nun authority to tell any other monk nun or layperson what to do. every relationship is purely consensual.
Astus wrote:"You must see the difference between Dharma and tradition. When problems occur, understand that they do not come from the enlightened ones, but from the administrators. Even the Chinese communists who do not believe at all in religion nevertheless use it from time to time for their own political ends. This is because the administration system is so well established and is so powerful." (The Shamarpa, No Need for Too Much Tradition)
J-Bird wrote:Would like to hear thoughts on Khyentse Rinpoche's assertion in the short video clip below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T83qPWcE ... re=related
J-Bird wrote:I think as Khyentse Rinpoche was inferring, the Tulku systems arose as a Tibetan cultural mechanism for succession planning.
It is a system unique to Tibetan Buddhism, however the merits of such a system should not be thrown out with the bath water in the discussion.
The Tibetan tradition has produced many accomplished meditators, scholars & monastics through the Tulku system.
catmoon wrote:If the tulku system were valid, and from a valid lineage of practice, then surely the disciples of Buddha would have begun the search for the next incarnation of Buddha shortly after his death. Instead, we read that there are to be no successors and no leaders in the Sangha, and that authority is to reside solely in the teachings.
When I look at our current forms of institutionalized Buddhism, with it's bhikkus, abbots, masters, lamas and priests, with it's stupas, monasteries, gilded temples, posh retreat centres and giant statuary, I cannot help but think we have gone completely off the rails.