xuanying

tcii, this is about the second point in your earlier post... It's not easy to talk about this. Anyway, the formal explanation is the difference between "superior virtue" and "inferior virtue", or between Internal Medicine and External Medicine. (This has fundamentally nothing to do with the difference between Neidan and Waidan.) The External Medicine is obtained through practice, which is a form of "doing" (youwei) and is the way of "inferior virtue". If everything goes well, it leads to the Internal Medicine, which is "non-doing" (wuwei) and is the way of "superior virtue". The External Medicine is obtained, as you say, by "a lot of hard work". The Internal Medicine fundamentally does not need any "work". It is inherently possessed by every human being. Thus, the Internal Medicine can be realized either through the Neidan practice (formally timed as "100 days, 10 months, 9 years"), or in just "one instant". This is, approximately, the explanation given by some Neidan masters, at least by those who talk about it. -- PS. I wrote "This has fundamentally nothing to do with the difference between Neidan and Waidan", and in fact it doesn't. But the terms Waidan and Neidan that we use nowadays to mean "external alchemy" and "internal alchemy" originally referred to the difference between the External Medicine and the Internal Medicine. In other words, both of them were originally Neidan terms.

Wow, I have written 26 posts and now it says Tao Master under my picture! I thought it's easy to become a Taoist in the West, but it's even easier to become a Tao Master! Just write 25 posts!!! Anyone knows how many posts it takes to become an Immortal?

Never say this in front of a group of scholars! More or less. It's one of the most difficult fields to study. Many scholars are doing an excellent work in this area, either historically or in the present day. I think you should not discount it, even if you are interested in other aspects of Taoism.

Daode, I know it's very hard to convince you... , but the difference is not between Waidan and Neidan: it is between "superior virtue" and "inferior virtue". Believe it or not, according to the Cantong qi, alchemy is the way of "inferior virtue". Since you read Chinese, read very carefully sections 6 and 7 in the text you downloaded. Section 6 describes "superior virtue". Section 7 describes the difference between "superior" and "inferior" virtue. Then it continues with a description of "inferior virtue". And that description is about alchemy. (It is irrelevant whether it is about Waidan or Neidan.) Don't forget that other versions of the Cantong qi have yi 飴 ("putty" or "candy") instead of qian 鉛 "lead": "... and its flesh is as smooth as putty". -- The Cantong qi is a tricky text! There is another explanation: Fire (7), Wood (8), and Metal (9) return to the 1 of Water, but since Water (6) has 1 as its own "generation number", it does not need to return to it, and thus it "remains".

We are enjoying this discussion -- maybe forgetting the ritual traditions of Taoism. For many scholars, those are "real Taoism".

It's all about the first sentence: 道可道非常道. The rest is just a footnote.

It seems we fully agree. I would use your words, "is the basis for...", in most discussions that involve the relation between the Daode jing and specific forms of practice. For several years now, some scholars have been thinking that the Daode jing directly derives from groups that practiced some form of "self-cultivation". This is difficult both to prove and to deny. Of course, there is also the question of the importance that the Daode jing gives to the ruler (for other scholars, the Daode jing is first of all a treatise on politics) -- but the two topics are not necessarily in contradiction. I think most scholars (at least most of those who, within Taoism, study the "self-cultivation" traditions) would basically agree with this point of view.

Daode, you picked up one of the most difficult passages in the whole Cantong qi! In my way of seeing, it's about the origins of life, about how individual existence begins. Later, the Neidan commentators took this passage (especially the final verses) as a description of how the "inner embryo" is formed. I was glad to see that you read the verses "九还七返，八归六居" basically in the same way as I read them. But shouldn't gui 归 mean "to return, go back" instead of "reside"?

There should be more "academics" here. I cannot and do not represent a large group of people who have quite different views and opinions. I'm just enjoying being here and I am talking for myself. Let me reply only to your first point first. Not only I have complete respect for this view, but I share it -- except for one detail. The important thing about the relation between the Daode jing (etc.) and Neidan, is that the Daode jing does not need Neidan, but Neidan needs the Daode jing. The Daode jing is entirely self-contained, and does not require anything outside itself. Its doctrine can be applied, in full or in part, to different fields (replace "fields" by practices, arts, sciences, etc.). Now, a Neidan practitioner could claim that the Daode jing is a Neidan text. But, say, an army general who practices the "art of war" could claim that the Daode jing is about making war. So, would the Daode jing be about Neidan or about war? I would say it is about neither -- but its teachings (and its words) can be applied to an indefinite number of fields. Neidan is one of these fields. (Neidan also needs other supports, but let's leave this aside now.) In other words, the Daode jing contains the most important statement of doctrines that are fundamental in Neidan, but is not "a Neidan text" of its own. Take for example, the famous passage: "The Dao generates the One, the One generates the Two, the Two generate the Three, the Three generate the ten thousand things". Neidan masters of all times have applied these words to the Neidan practice, which goes through those stages in a reverse order for "returning to the Dao". Does this mean that the Daode jing was describing the Neidan practice? I think the answer is obvious. Good question! I think there is no way to harmonize them. The most fruitful attitude is to accept both of them.

Just because a text says that the qi of Yin and Yang are not only in the cosmos (Sun and Moon) but also in the human body, it is a Neidan text?

The text at the basis of Chen Zhixu's commentary is quite good. You can find here: http://www.daoism.cn/up/data/012zhyctq.htm ... and in many other websites. When you see a Cantong qi divided into 35 sections, it's Chen Zhixu's text. Let us know what you find out about Waidan/Neidan, it's a very interesting topic!

In the previous topic (see here) Daode said: Entirely agreed, and thanks for pointing this out. I have the utmost respect for the tradition itself. I think history provides (if necessary) a better way to understand the tradition. I often think of a statement by A.K. Coomaraswamy, a modern but thoroughly traditional exponent of the Hindu tradition, who wrote: "That the doctrine has no history by no means excludes the possibility, or even the necessity, for a perpetual explicitation of its formulae, an adaptation of the rites originally practiced, and an application of its principles to the arts and the sciences." Alchemy, in all of its forms, and wherever it is practiced, is one of those "sciences". Maybe my sentence was not well written. I did not mean that the Elixir is made of postcelestial ingredients, but of precelestial ingredients. The precelestial ingredients are now found within the corresponding (opposite) postcelestial entities. The first statement about this that comes to my mind is by Chen Zhixu (ca. 1330) who wrote about the "Metal" (i.e. the Elixir): "This Metal is the Ancestral Breath prior to Heaven, but is generated in the state posterior to Heaven." It seems that all texts agree that these periods (usually 100 days, 10 months, and 9 years) are purely metaphoric. Some masters, anyway, say that it all happens in "one instant" (yike 一刻).

I think we shouldn't hijack this topic, which had begun discussing other issues. I have started a new topic, with a similar title: Critical issues in Taoist alchemy. Click the title to move to the new topic. Daode, thanks for your comments, I'll respond under the new topic. See you there!

This is an important point. It's not just a matter of "language". The emblems of the Yijing (Book of Changes) are needed to represent the stages of generation from the Dao to the cosmos, and the reverse process from the cosmos to the Dao (Neidan). Using Qian, Kun, Kan, and Li makes it possible to represent the process in three stages, and accordingly to frame the reverse process (Neidan) in three stages. The same is for the alchemical emblems. Native lead and cinnabar are the Yin and Yang of the postcelestial world (our world). They contain True Lead and True Mercury, which are the Yang and Yin of the precelestial world. The joining of True Lead and True Mercury produces the Elixir, the unity of True Yin and True Yang. These are, again, the three stages of Neidan. I think you can talk of Neidan when you see this representation of the process and of its reversal. It's not a definition for academic purposes. It's the same representation used in the home page of your website! (Which adds the ultimate stage, "refine emptiness and merge with the Dao") Of course, the "process" happens in one instant, and so can its reversal, too.

• "I guess you could regard the instructions as weidan falling into the category of it "could" be symbolic speech for neidan practices" No please, this is a recipe to fall back into Original Chaos Waidan is Waidan, and Neidan is Neidan. Ge Hong essentially quotes the texts of the Taiqing (Great Clarity) tradition of Waidan, which he had received from his master (actually, they already belonged to his family, and he just received the instructions). If you read the texts, you will be able to say when a Waidan text talks about Waidan, or when a Neidan text uses Waidan language to talk about Neidan. There are no doubts about this. If you have doubts, well, you could even say that Waidan has never existed, and it's all Neidan. • "What then about the nei yeh 內業 ?? I know Kirkland dates it's authorship 350-300 BCE " Kirkland and Harold Roth (who has written an excellent little book on the Neiye) do not say that the Neiye is a Neidan text (if they said it, they would lose their jobs). The Neiye is about inner cultivation, not about Neidan. • "And if this is to be credibly discounted also, how do you account for the development of neidan for it to have "emerged" in the 8th century?" It's hard to say it in a few words. There are several trends that need to be followed: (1) The first clearly identifiable Waidan tradition is Taiqing (Great Clarity). It develops in the 2nd-4th centuries AD in Jiangnan (southeastern China), and is documented by a few extant texts, and indirectly also by Ge Hong (Baopu zi). The elixirs are made of different ingredients. The focus is on ritual, not on cosmology. (2) Taoist meditation on the inner gods develops from the 2nd century AD (some say a bit earlier) and is documented by the Scripture of the Yellow Court (Huangting jing) and the Central Scripture of Laozi (Laozi zhongjing). These texts also circulated in Jiangnan. They use certain alchemical metaphors, but do not intend to generate an Internal Elixir. The focus is on the inner gods. The innermost god is the Red Child (Chizi), said to represent the "true self" (zhenwu 真吾). He is a clear precursor of the Internal Elixir (especially in its representation as an embryo). (3) From the late 4th century, the revelations of Shangqing Taoism occur in Jiangnan. Shangqing inherits and develops the earlier meditation practices, and uses an even stronger "alchemical" language to describe them. It also mentions, for the first time in an explicit way, the creation of an immortal "embryo" by means of meditation. By that time, the Han-dynasty cosmological traditions based on the Book of Changes had been transmitted to Jiangnan. The Cantong qi is initially a product of those traditions. In Jiangnan, the cosmological portions of the Cantong qi are integrated with new portions that, using the emblems of the Book of Changes, propose a new alchemical model based on the conjunction of Lead and Mercury. No Waidan text (and, of course, no meditation text) uses the Lead-Mercury model until the end of the Six Dynasties. From the early Tang period (7th century), instead, the Lead-Mercury model begins to be used in Waidan. Shortly later, this model also begins to be used for inner practices. The inner gods are discarded, and are replaced by abstract emblems: Lead-Mercury, trigrams and hexagrams of the Book of Changes, and other cosmological emblems. Neidan begins here. This is the very short version of the story. Essentially, an earlier model is replaced with a new one both within Waidan and within Taoist meditation. The new model is the same, and is described in the Cantong qi. The replacement occurs first in Waidan, and paves the way for the emergence of Neidan.

You perfectly detected one of the many problems in this bibliography--at least, one of those I was aware of. I have included the Longhu jing (Scripture of the Dragon and Tiger) because historically it is an important text, but also because there is an English translation. It is important historically because the Cantong qi is said to derive from it, but actually it derives from the Cantong qi. Zhu Xi (the famous Neo-Confucian philosopher, who wrote a commentary to the Cantong qi from his own perspective) and Yu Yan (who wrote a very learned Taoist commentary) were the first ones to notice this. As for the English translation, well, it is disastrous in certain points. Should I omit the text just for this reason? Maybe... The Zhong-Lü chuandao ji is another important text. Strictly speaking, it should be a general description of the Zhong-Lü teachings, but historically, it enjoyed much wider renown because the two immortals featured in this work (Zhongli Quan and Lü Dongbin) later became important figures in both the Southern Lineage (Nanzong) and the Northern Lineage (Beizong, i.e. Quanzhen). The main omission that I regret in this short bibliography is the Yinfu jing (a title almost impossible to translate... maybe Scripture of the Hidden Accordance). But this is a text so difficult -- despite, or just because of, its conciseness: only 300 or 400 characters -- that can be left for a later time... The best thing would be learning classical Chinese, and read the texts in the original language, instead of depending on translations. It's not impossible, and anyway, whether you start at 15 or 50 or later, you will never be able to say "I've learned it", so it's never too late to begin.

This is perfectly true, but for Ge Hong, the Elixir is made of minerals and metals heated in a crucible. Look at chapters 4 and 16 of his Baopu zi and this is beyond any doubt. The only type of inner practice that Ge Hong mentions in the Baopu zi, like anyone else at his time, is meditation on the inner gods.

It "could" be a Neidan text, not in the sense that maybe it is a Neidan text, but in the sense that it can be read as a Neidan text. The first Neidan reading is by Tao Zhi (about 800 AD), and the first Neidan commentary is by Peng Xiao (947 AD). Thus the Cantong qi was first read as a Neidan text 600/700 years after its supposed date of composition in the mid 2nd-century AD. It's a bit ironic that you say Neidan and Daoism are "floating signifiers", since this is one of the favorite views of the "academics"... I think Neidan should be defined, first of all, as a doctrine that teaches that the human being inherently possesses the so-called Elixir, and/or that the Elixir can be generated or manifested by means of appropriate practices. After this, there are almost infinite ways of expressing the same point. There are also several practices to "compound" or "refine" the Elixir, and this is where the problems among the different schools, lineages, and practitioners begin.

Tian Chengyang is a very important contemporary master. There are now several books similar to the one he wrote (containing a summary of the practices, explanations of the main terms, anthologies of texts, etc.), but his is especially well done and detailed. The Xingming guizhi and the Dacheng jieyao are well known (especially the former one). They are both late texts, and intend to give an overview of Neidan. But then, this is true of many other works. Daniel Burton-Rose has written an MA dissertation on the Xingming guizhi, a bit disenchanted, which contains translations of some parts, and should be available somewhere online. Sorry for not replying earlier.

Then my plan didn't work out... In my way of seeing, there is very little "academic" in this bibliography. I give references to texts in Chinese, but one doesn't need to be an academic to read them. I quote books published by academic presses, because in several cases those are the only available translations of a text. I give the main details on each text (author, date) because I think they are useful to everybody, and here I have omitted as many technical details as possible. I mention lineages, because one should know what kind of text one is reading. I reproduce translations of a few passages for almost all texts, so that those who don't know them can get a glimpse and decide whether they may be interesting. I point out problems in certain "popular" translations of Taoist texts (or popular websites such as Wikipedia), because I think everyone should know what they are reading (believe me, here I could have been much nastier). The last point is especially important. If you cannot compare many of those translations to the original texts, you have no idea of how much their translators omit from (and in some cases, add to) a text. As a rule, everything that is too difficult, or would at least require an explanation, is omitted. Then a good editor cleans up their English, their prose sounds smooth and captivating, and everybody says "wow". The original Chinese text, however, says something else. The "historical" reconstructions of Taoism and Taoist alchemy found in those books are often works of fantasy. For example, to compile this bibliography, I checked Eva Wong's "The Tao of Health, Longevity, and Immortality". In the space of three pages (p. 6 and p. 8), she is able to say, first, that "the alchemists of the late Han through the Chin (254-420 CE) dynasties" practiced "internal alchemy", and then that "the early phase of internal alchemy started around the end of the Tang dynasty". So, did it start in the 2nd/4th century, or in the 9th century? We know for sure now that there are no sources, references, or allusions to internal alchemy before the 8th century in Taoist, Confucian, Buddhist, medical, or literary works. There are a lot of reciprocal biases between academics and non-academics (sorry, I don't know what other term I should use here, but I don't want to say "practitioners", because that's not the point of the distinction). This is perhaps implied in the very essence of the "academia". But I find it unfortunate that the non-academics can rarely benefit from the views or the works of the academics. Maybe we should continue this discussion in a separate topic?

Here it is: 9 Taoist Books on the Elixir I hope it's more or less what you meant... Let me know. The bibliography of Western-language works is found in the appendix at the end. Fabrizio

It's all clear now... Give me a few days and I'll post it here. Fabrizio

Shawn, Please let me understand... First, you mean a bibliography to Wang Mu's "Foundations of Internal Alchemy", right? -- Not to "Awakening to Reality", I guess, which already has a short bibliography. Second, you mean a bibliography of Chinese texts quoted by Wang Mu? -- Not a bibliography of Neidan, I hope ... Third, how many works?... Well, I would try to include all works quoted by Wang Mu, with at least a minimum of information on their authors. Please let me know if this is what you meant. Fabrizio

Thanks Shawn, it's a real pleasure for me to be here. Fabrizio

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say! Why don't you post your list? You never know, someone here might try to translate them!