Emanation vs incarnation

[Dondrup Shugden]

"An emanation is something which emits from an original source. If it is from an infinite source such as  all embracing mind of a Buddha which is space like and unobstructed, it can have countless emanations in infinite forms all at one instance.
Reincarnation requires a mode of birth eg womb born, egg born , moisture born, etc in order for the rebirth entity to possess the characteristics of the being specific to that mode of birth. Eg, to take on human form and characteristics, one need to take rebirth through the womb of a female  human. This solves one of the mysteries of how a bodhisattvas help all sentient beings by able to control their rebirths to be amongst the beings of that particular realm so that they can teach them."

Reading the above sharing from Khedrup Gyatso on emanation matches my understanding that emanations can occur in many forms as the mindstream is vast and can be everywhere. 

However I have always thought the an incarnation can only be one at any one time.  This is very mind expanding to know that from enlightened beings there can be many incarnations in the human forms at any one time.

Glad to know that Tulku Dragpa Gyeltsen besides arising as Dorje Shugden and the 4 emanations are also among us in multiple forms.  The time has come for this Highly attained Buddha to arise in all emanations and forms.

[Matibhadra]

In the context of the bodhisattva path, “emanation” and “incarnation” are just alternative translations of the Sanskrit term “nirmanakaya”, which became the Tibetan “sprul ku”, or “tulku”, commonly translated as “emanation body”.

A bodhisattva on the first bodhisattva ground (bhumi) can emanate one hundred bodies simultaneously, on the second ground one thousand bodies, and so forth, until the eleventh ground of a buddha, who can emanate infinite bodies simultaneously.

Therefore, there is no need to invent theological hairsplitting differences where there are none.

As to the claimed “mind, speech, body, qualities, and activity” emanation bodies of an “attained Lama”, whatever authoritative basis there may be for such claim, including none, it is probably mainly used as a political device aimed at giving some theocratic status and authority to every member of Tibetan feudal lords and their families.

[eyesoftara]

In the context of the bodhisattva path, “emanation” and “incarnation” are just alternative translations of the Sanskrit term “nirmanakaya”, which became the Tibetan “sprul ku”, or “tulku”, commonly translated as “emanation body”.

A bodhisattva on the first bodhisattva ground (bhumi) can emanate one hundred bodies simultaneously, on the second ground one thousand bodies, and so forth, until the eleventh ground of a buddha, who can emanate infinite bodies simultaneously.

Therefore, there is no need to invent theological hairsplitting differences where there are none.

As to the claimed “mind, speech, body, qualities, and activity” emanation bodies of an “attained Lama”, whatever authoritative basis there may be for such claim, including none, it is probably mainly used as a political device aimed at giving some theocratic status and authority to every member of Tibetan feudal lords and their families.

Eleventh ground? What basis can you say that there is an eleventh ground ie beyond the tenth. Do you mean that of a Buddha ie beyond the tenth?

Also the emanation of the 5 bodies of the "attained Lama" correspond to the 5 Dhayani Buddhas, that is not to say that the 5 Budddhas actually emanated into that of the Lama; but the qualities of the 5 Dhayani Buddhas are what these emanations represent. Each encapsulate the others but the particular qualities is more prevalent to the observer.

[Matibhadra]

Eleventh ground? What basis can you say that there is an eleventh ground ie beyond the tenth. Do you mean that of a Buddha ie beyond the tenth?

Right. The tenth bodhisattva ground, known as “Cloud of Dharma”, is still included in the continuum of a sentient being, while the eleventh ground, known as the “Omnipresent Light”, is the ground of a buddha.

This explanation is offered by Yangchen Gawai Lodoe, or Akya Yongzin, a famous 18th century Gelugpa teacher, citing the great Indian pandita Abhayakaragupta (see Path and Grounds of Guhyasamaja According to Arya Nagarjuna, LTWA, p. 117)

Also the emanation of the 5 bodies of the "attained Lama" correspond to the 5 Dhayani Buddhas, that is not to say that the 5 Budddhas actually emanated into that of the Lama; but the qualities of the 5 Dhayani Buddhas are what these emanations represent. Each encapsulate the others but the particular qualities is more prevalent to the observer.

While the 5 Buddha-Families teaching is firmly based on the authority of Buddhist Tantras, the idea that “attained lamas” emanate 5 bodies corresponding to body, speech, mind, qualities, and activity, to my knowledge, is not. I have never heard of such 5 emanations nor in reference to the great Indian panditas and mahasiddhas, nor in reference to Tibetan Gelugpa lamas.

Indeed, such 5 bodily emanations of “attained lamas” are usually mentioned in reference to Bönpo lamas, and also within the heavily Bön-influenced Nyingmapa tradition, or other heavily Nyingma-influenced Buddhist traditions. Therefore, it is just reasonable to suspect that this might be rather a non-Buddhist, Bön-originated belief, imported into Buddhism.

Anyway, let's not forget the theocratic and feudal nature of old Tibetan society, and therefore the need felt by the noble, powerful, rich, land-owning families to assert and perpetuate their tyrannical authority over the masses of servants, slaves, and other destitute people.

In such context, multiplying 5 times the spiritual authority of each deceased “attained lama”, and distributing it among 5 noble scions, even the less spiritually inclined, thus awarding all of them the power and authority of some divine status, comes in pretty handy indeed.

Therefore, the likely lack of Buddhist scriptural authority, combined with the obvious political expediency of the 5 “attained lama” emanations theory in a theocratic-feudal context suggests that one should be at least careful before swallowing it as an authentic Buddhist teaching.