by Norwegian » Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:56 pm
The problem is that we take these things on faith, and we don't really know, unless we're very advanced bodhisattvas on the stages, and I'm not sure many of us are that. I for one am not. And as such, it's very hard for me to say "Yes this and that tulku is real, and this and that tulku is not." I just cannot say that.
Therefore, for me the things that matter is not name or recognition, but it is view and action, the knowledge and wisdom of a teacher, their qualifications. These things decide for me whether a teacher is good or not, and not a name.
So with regards to the 2x Karmapa issue, all I can say is does it matter (which is the true Karmapa, and whether there's one of them or two)? Maybe, if you want to look at traditional positions, history and all of these things. But what does the two teach? How are they as teachers? And so on. Because if both are very good Dharma teachers, then that's a very good thing. Look at that instead, and then perhaps the whole Karmapa issue isn't so important after all. At least I'd hope so, because who sits on what throne and who holds what hat has very little to do with the essence of Dharma.