Talk:Tulku
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] From article
Personalities can be recognized as tulkus later in life: an example of this is actor Steven Seagal, an advocate for Tibetan Buddhist causes. Seagal was recognized as the reincarnation of a lama by Pema Norbu, but has never been trained or enthroned as a Buddhist teacher. [this was in main body of the article]
- A Tulku is one who has activily CHOSEN their rebirth, rather than being at the mercy of ones own karma during the rebirth process like the rest of us.
- There have been many examples of Western tulkus, but Steven Seagal is not one of them. He has never received a letter of confirmation nor been enthroned. A Tulku needs both.
- Many powerful tulkus have had their rebirths disputed, but this usually clarifies with time as their personalities evolve.
- An incarnate lama with the title TULKU, as opposed to the title RINPOCHE, is traditionally considered to be the lesser incarnation, although a humble person may insist on using the former. So traditionaly although every Rinpoche is a Tulku, not all Tulkus are Rinpoches. However these days many non-tulkus give themselves, or are appointed, the title Rinpoche hence a confusion between the traditional meaning of the word and the literal meaning today.
- [this was below the see also]
So what about [[1]], then ? --219.110.235.188 12:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- what indeed?
- Zero sharp 21:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- 219.110. is rigth, that's what. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 05:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Definition
The first sentence, which should be a definition, has gotten all messed up. I realise that the situation is complicated because tülku literally means nirmanakaya in Tibetan, but, in English, it almost always means a reincarnated lama. It certainly does not mean "an epithet used to refer to a high lama or other spiritually significant figure". We should lead with the English usage and explain nuance later on. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 05:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Two points
I rewrote the section on ==Meaning==. There were a couple things I wanted to mention:
1) The author of the previous version seems to have a slightly different idea of why tülkus are called tülku than I have. However, I'm not an expert on these things, so maybe I'm wrong, in which case I will be happy to change it back. What is agreed upon is that tülku literally means something like avatar. However, the previous author believes that the implication is that the tülku is an avatar of some supernatural entity, such as Avalokita or Amitabha. On the other hand, I have reworded it to say that the tülku is an avatar (although I don't use the word avatar) of the first lama in the tülku lineage (although, in fact, many tülkus are also seen as manifestations of supernatural entities as well).
2) I also took out, "In this sense, the Tibetan use is hardly innovative: many Buddhist figures within the Mahayana tradition have been declared nirmanakayas, both inside and outside Tibet." I wouldn't find this shocking, but I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, so I removed it as an unsubstantiated claim. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 06:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)