Stigweard

Yes I am aware that this is a frequent occurrence: "The teaching of Tao originated in prehistoric times. For many generations people searched out methods by which to develop themselves. These methods are numerous and some have even been formalized as different schools which emphasize one or two things and make other aspects secondary to one's personal cultivation. Here I would like to give you some idea of the many effective methods which are practiced among achieved ones. ~ Nei Tan, Internal Medicine, which can support a person's spiritual future through refinement of the physical, mental and spiritual essence, ~ Tai Shi, Internal Breathing, which is higher than external breathing, although both are usually practiced together, ~ Tao Yin, Energy Channelling, for purposes of health and spiritual benefit, ~ Chun Shih, Visualization or concentration, ~ Fu Erh, External Nutrition, using natural herbs and other things, ~ Shing Jeau, Walking, for gathering and refining energy, ~ Fuh Chi, Internal Energy Maintenance, ~ Bei Gu, to stop eating food completely (especially helpful to those who are cultivating spiritually so that they can stop looking for and preparing food for themselves - eventually they combine their life with the environment), ~ Fu Chi, Intaking Natural Energy through breathing and swallowing, which should be practiced with Bei Gu, ~ Fang Jung, Sexual Cultivation, ~ Fu Jyeo, Secret Talismanic Characters, Words and also Invocations, ~ Jing Tan, Golden Elixir, ~ Shr Jeah, Method of Exuviation into a New Life." p3, Ni Hua Ching, "Workbook for Spiritual Development of All People", Seven Star Communication, CA, 2005 Yup I am digging what you are saying here

Excellent comments!

To the extent that I agree with Komjathy & Co., and I don't subscribe to their degree of exclusiveness, is that both the philosophy of Dao and the more, shall I say, esoteric practices of Dao are an integral part of the whole tradition. In my experience and learning you are only sailing half-masted to only pull out one part of the Daoist tradition and say, "This is the most pure part so this is all I will study". From my own experience the philosophy only comes alive when you engage in the practices that are synergistic with that philosophy. There is something quite profound when you take the words and philosophies from a text, for example Yin/Yang theory, and actually experience them as a living, breathing phenomena. It takes the philosophy from a level of understanding to a level of "knowing". The same with neidan practice. The philosophies of both Laozi and Zhuangzi are quite an accurate prescription on how to handle one's Qi for beneficial development. I love Zhuangzi's story of the butcher whose knife never finds obstructions. That is priceless neidan instruction. I also find it ironic that pretty much all Philosophical Daoists justify their position through the exclusive notions that somehow their Lao-Zhuang Daoism is somehow "purer" and "more authentic" to all other forms of Daoism. Especially since the fundamentals of their philosophical world view includes the inclusive liberality of Laozi. My point once again is that right from the outset Daojia included both philosophy and practical application. The philosophy guided the practice and the practice gave life to the philosophy. It was a synergistic and integral whole. Yes I believe that contemporary orthodox Taoism has become too contrived and enmeshed with religious artifice made worse by communist manipulation. So personally I would issue strong caution to anyone interested in going in that direction. I believe we do need to look much closer instead at the original texts of the Daojia, especially but by no means exclusively the Laozi and Zhuangzi, to reintegrate the fundamental world view that inspired all the associated practices. To do that though we must, like Zhuangzi's butcher, cut through the misinformation around Daoism. Part of it is what Komjathy has said in the OP. Part of it is the propaganda spawned by Protestant colonialists that there was a division of philosophical and religo-esoteric Daoism. And part of it is the cloud of artifice woven by centuries of orthodox Daoist exclusivity. Perhaps this reinvestigation will invigorate a new expression of Daoism that we could call Daobumjia (actually I think that is kinda cute ).

Actually on a personal level I entirely agree with you, and so does Master Ni Hua Ching whose teachings I adhere to. Master Ni has quite forthrightly said that alot of contemporary Taoism is far removed from the natural subtle way of ancient China; from the natural spiritual insight of the truly achieved Shenxian. It is for this reason that he refers to the tradition passed to him by his father as 全道 Quandao -- The Integral Way.

Hiya Devoid, Continuing on... Firstly, to your semantic argument that I am trying to differentiate the terms “Taoism” and “Taoist tradition”. In no place have I done this. To me these terms are synonymous. I apologize if my poor use of words has given any other impression. The point I made in my previous post is that Daojia in its inception during the Han dynasty was quite a clear distinction. Daojia was the classification of a body of texts gathered into the imperial library as an organized effort to synthesize the cultural world view of the time surrounding "the concept" of Tao. The classification of Daojia synergistically also included the collective of people who were adherents to those texts. However in the centuries that followed, Daojia morphed and evolved in pace with the succession of dynasties. There were repeated cycles of the Daojia texts being burnt or lost only be followed by renewed compilations. The current Daozang is the 正统道藏 Zhengtong Daozang collated during the Ming Dynasty (1368 to 1644) and contains nearly 1500 texts. So, following the original use of the word, the contents of the Zhengtong Daozang is Daojia/Daoism, and the lineages and sects that adhere to the ontology/world view of the Daozang are also Daojia/Daoism. For interest the Daozang include these subsections: 1. Original texts, which refer to the original true texts of the scriptures; 2. Divine talismans, which refer to the scripts of characters on seals and numinous talismans; 3. Jade formulae, which refer to the commentaries of Daoist books; 4. Numinous charts, which refer to the illustrations of the texts or scriptures mainly composed of charts; 5. Records of lineages, which refer to Daoist scriptures recording the deeds of Perfect Men and Sages' transformation and their merits and ranks; 6. Precepts, which refer to scriptures about commandments and Ledgers of Merits and Demerits ( 功過格 gongguo ge ); 7. Rituals, which refer to scriptures about Fasts and Offerings ( 齋醮 zhaijiao ) and rituals; 8. Methods, which refer to Daoist books on methods of cultivation of perfection, nourishing spiritual nature, worship and refinement; 9. Techniques, which refer to Daoist books on Outer Alchemy ( 外丹 waidan ) and Divinatory Calculation ( 術數 shushu ); 10. Biographies, which refer to the biographies and stele inscriptions of immortals and Perfect Men and annals of Daoist temples; 11. Hymns, which refer to scriptures lauding spirits; 12. Petitions and memorials, which refer to the petitions and Qingci (Daoist prayers written in vermilion on a kind of special paper) presented in fasts and offerings. http://en.daoinfo.org/wiki/The_Daoist_Canon

OK I sense a difference in scope in the usage of the term "Daoism". The English translation of Daoism/Taoism comes from the term Daojia 道家. Jia is nominally attributed to the meaning of a house, school, family or a specialization. [side Note: Funnily I just saw that the character pictographically shows pigs under a roof, so its like a pigsty. Stig, as in Stigweard, is the Old English for a pigsty How funny.] Now the first recorded usage of the term Daojia was in the Han Dynasty and referred to the synthesis of diverse cultural teachings of Dao under one banner. Included into this synthesis of course were texts like Laozi, Zhuangzi, Shenzi, Neiye, certain chapters of Guanzi, Paopuzi plus many others. These were the beginning of what would eventually become the Daozang, Treasury of Dao. Now it is important for this discussion I believe to highlight that the term Daojia was used as a bibliographical term to classify these texts as a cultural group. This term was used more and more often by scholars and historians of the Han dynasty, and eventually Daojia referred quite specifically to the texts in the Imperial Library classified as such. If the text was in the library it was Daojia ... Daoist. If it was not in the library it was not. It is important to note that in this collection were both the philosophical treatise of Laozi and Zhuangzi and ALSO the texts on rituals, alchemy, and hygiene like Neiye, and the Paopuzi. Thus the first distinctions of Daojia/Taoism intrinsically and indivisibly included both philosophical and religious teachings. But we have to remember that this synthesis was not just about gathering books. Along with the books inevitably came the practicing teachers, adherents, scholars and students. Out of this congregation eventually came the first formalization of an organized tradition of Daojia with creation of the Tian Shi Dao school. From this earliest outset, and through all subsequent sects and sub-sects, Daojia has very much consisted of "ordained priests and monastics and lay supporters" who adhered to the specific collection of texts and teachings first gathered in the Imperial Libraries of the Han Dynasty. However, this collection that would become known as the Daozang is an open source collection because in later centuries other texts like Liezi, Xuanxue, Qingjing jing, Xisheng jing, Yinfu jing, etc. also gained acceptance as being Daojia. So to be technically correct, as liberally minded as I like to be, the term Daojia, and its English Daoism/Taoism, does refer quite specifically to this exclusive list of texts and to the "ordained priests and monastics and lay supporters" who adhere to them.

An excellent post! The purpose for my current little campaign was to stimulate/provoke exactly the sort of post that you have just made. Thank you for your consideration and sincere response. Over in Taoism Today -- The Controversy Continues I mentioned that I had recently came into contact with a gentleman who was starting a documentary project about Taoism in today's world. One of the things I strongly suggested was that the documentary should not just be about Taoism in modern China, but also about Taoism in the west. So I will confess fully that I started these topics fore-mostly to stimulate a cross-section of people's impressions about how Taoism expresses itself in the western world. Hopefully the caliber of the responses in these topics gives my documentary friend some inspiration to work with. Secondary to this prime motive is that I wanted to become clearer on my thoughts and impressions around the subject, and there is nothing like mixing it with the Bums to get that happening in short order. Additional to this is my own advocacy, as I have stated previously, that regardless of whether you chose the more philosophical side of the tradition IMHO serious students of Taoism must have at least an educated awareness of the full scope of what Taoism is. And in regard to your post, you are absolutely right. Taoism will naturally have a new expression in the Western world. As I have also said elsewhere, the orthodox religion of Taoism arose firstly from the ancient indigenous world view of ancient China and then was conditioned into shape by eons of social transformation. The western ancient world view was different and we have had a different passage of social conditioning through the centuries. So, again, it is only natural that we will have a different "view" on the fundamental principles of the Taoist ontology. So another, perhaps deeper, cross-purpose I have in provoking this dialogue is to delve deeper into this phenomena that we may call Western Taoism. Let's explore this landscape like the pioneers we in fact truly are. For the reality is that the conversations here are the leading edge of this new cultural evolution, and that is very, very exciting!

Sorry I am being a smarty pants: happy [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/1.gif] sad [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/2.gif] winking [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/3.gif] big grin [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/4.gif] batting eyelashes [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/5.gif] big hug [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/6.gif] confused [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/7.gif] love struck [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/8.gif] blushing [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/9.gif] tongue [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/10.gif] kiss [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/11.gif] broken heart [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/12.gif] surprise [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/13.gif] angry [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/14.gif] smug [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/15.gif] cool [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/16.gif] worried [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/17.gif] whew! [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/18.gif] devil [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/19.gif] crying [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/20.gif] laughing [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/21.gif] straight face [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/22.gif] raised eyebrows [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/23.gif] rolling on the floor [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/24.gif] angel [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/25.gif] nerd [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/26.gif] talk to the hand [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/27.gif] call me [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/101.gif] on the phone [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/100.gif] at wits' end [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/102.gif] thinking [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/39.gif] applause [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/41.gif] thumbs up [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/113.gif] I don't know [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/106.gif] pig [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/49.gif] praying [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/63.gif] peace sign [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/67.gif] dancing [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/69.gif] not worthy [img=http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/77.gif] Stig's secret is out

Awww ... comon ... you know you want to Don't miss the important nuance of: The mind (Ren) is the instrument to unite the spirit (Tian) with the body (Di). And especially the guidance of: Three breaths as one.

Yup ... fair comments.

Excellent inquiry! The first place to look for the trinity of Tian-Ren-Di is in the Laozi, Chapter 25: 故道大， 天大， 地大， 人亦大。 域中有四大， 而人居其一焉。 人法地， 地法天， 天法道， 道法自然。 Therefore Tao is great, Heaven is great, Earth is great, And man is also great. Existence contains these four greats. Thus Man is one of the great universal manifestations. Man follows Earth, Earth follows Heaven, Heaven follows Tao, And Tao follows its own nature. Following this discourse then, just as Mr Marbles has said, the sequence could be Ren-Di-Tian followed by Tao. Here is what I have also learned: From the subtle, mysterious Tao, spontaneity arose as a universal law. The light, clear energy rose to become the heavens whilst the dark, dense energy sank to become the earth. The sacred intercourse of these two universal forces gave birth to a third sphere of energy: humanity. The human being is an integration of dense earthly elements and clear heavenly elements. When the practitioner of Tao successfully completes the sacred marriage within, their essence will sublimate into the purity of Tao. So in this view the sequence would be Tian-Ren-Di. The Three Realms of the Universe To have some understanding of the subtle workings of the universe, we categorize the different energies as "realms". There are three realms of existence. The spiritual realm, referred to as "Heaven," or the Realm of Utmost Purity, contains spiritual power. The mental realm, referred to as "Man," or the Realm of Crystal Purity, contains rational power. The physical realm, referred to as "Earth," or the Realm of Great Purity, contains organic power. Those realms also exist in the physical body. The spiritual realm resides in the head. The mental realm resides in the heart. The physical realm resides below the navel. These are the three Tan Tien. Since a human being is a miniature universe, all cosmic laws are the individual's laws. Gathering the coarse and subtle in his form, a person stands between Heaven and Earth. The mind is the instrument to unite the spirit with the body. Ni, Hua-Ching, Workbook for Spiritual Development The early form of Daoism (Taoism) held that its body of belief was made up of the tenet of "the ascent of the three in one," that is, "the unity of heaven, earth, and man for the attainment of the Great Peace" (tian-di-ren, sanzhe heyi yi zhi taiping); "the blending of the essence, breath, and shen to become a saint" (jing-qi-shen, sanzhe hunyi er cheng shenxian). From this it evolves into "non-death and eternal life" (zhongshen busi), "resurrection of the bodies" (routi feisheng), and "transformation of the breath into the three pure ones" (qihua sanqing), thus forming the basis of Daoism (Taoism). http://www.crvp.org/book/Series03/III-3/chapter_vii.htm Another more anthropological view of the development of Tian-Ren-Di is the story of human awareness and understanding of the major forces that influence human life (in no way will I try and establish this as factual, it is just a story that I have come upon). In ancient times of the cave dwellers humans would wonder at the phenomena of the sky. The celestial bodies were awesome and mysterious and were seen to be the law givers of life. Thus the earliest cultures were sky worshipers. [Note that Heaven was also known as the "great one" and thus Tian 天. Primitive cultures personified this sky force and this god became known as Ti 帝 or, in the Shang dynasty, Shang Ti 上帝. This god persists even today in religious Taoism, some referring to "him" as the Jade Emperor.] Then, with the development of agriculture, humans learned of the cycles and forces of the earth. As the human populations became more and more dependent of agriculture the powers of the earth became viewed as equally important. Thus veneration of the earth developed. But human populations grew ever-steadily larger to the point where people began competing for territory and resources to maintain their populations. Politics, economics and ever-increasingly sophisticated human interactions developed. Thus humanity also became seen as an equally important force in life. There you go, that should be enough for now.

Thank you for asking It all depends on where you sit on the sliding scale from inclusiveness to exclusiveness. If we were to be totally liberal and inclusiveness we would say, "Hey it's all good, you want to call yourself a Taoist? That's fine. You want say that your practice is Taoist? That's fine too." Obviously Komjathy has taken the extreme exclusive stance in this article with clear and technically correct definitions of what Taoism is an is not. Personally I sit somewhere in the middle. I think the modern student should have at least an educated awareness of Taoist orthodoxy. This is the reality of where the Taoist religion is today. And if you are ever going to raise a banner saying "I am Taoist and/or my practice is Taoist" than you have to be prepared to have someone from the exclusive camp beating a drum saying, "Please explain". I also think it would be unskillful to be too loose with the term "Taoist", and I agree here with Komjathy that being too inclusive can and has led to a certain degree of exploitation and appropriation of the Taoist tradition. This reminds me of my incessant advice to my Taiji students: "We have to find the right balance between Song and Gun." Song is the looseness of long flowing hair, it is fluid without structure. Whilst Gun is the rigidness of a wooden club, it is strong but it can be brittle. So in Taiji we must be song, song, song ... loose, relaxed, and fluid. And yet we must have enough 'rigidness' to maintain correct posture and alignment. So perhaps my stance is 60% inclusiveness and 40% exclusiveness. Let people find their own way, but let them honor and respect the tradition that inspires their journey.

Yup I sure did. Just as you challenged Komjathy's credibility. Fairs fair wouldn't you say? Absolutely! You have to accept that anything posted on this forum is going to be examined and cross examined. And if criticism is given you also have to accept that the validity and credibility of that criticism is also going to come under the same rigor. Your comments stand on their own Whilst he may have only been ordained in 2006, his study seems to have extended much earlier. He has written two books on the subject: * Cultivating Perfection: Mysticism and Self-transformation in Early Quanzhen Daoism (Brill, 2007), and * Handbooks for Daoist Practice (Yuen Yuen Institute, 2008) With third on the way: * The Way of Complete Perfection: A Quanzhen Daoist Anthology That, in my mind, gives him a decent amount of credibility to back his views. Enough so for me to consider his words diligently even if I may not agree with them all. I would suggest that you back up your criticisms with some credible foundations. Discussion and debate is great. Presenting views and counter views is part of how we learn on this forum. You don't agree with Komjathy ... GREAT! Hell I don't agree with all of what he says either. But don't just throw about your ad hominem remarks like a troll, tell us WHY you think his views are incomplete or incorrect by using real substance and real information that we can chew over and make up our own minds. So instead of skulking off, give us what you have. Do you have a counter-view? Do you have knowledge and experience about this that would provide greater clarity? You never know, stepping up to the plate "could be for your own good."

Quite to the contrary, there is plenty to share. Your above comment along with the following is laced with insinuations: "Do you know of any very senior Quanzhen members and speak to them often about Quanzhen practices and beliefs over the past two decades?" It insinuates that: * You know senior Quanzhen members * You speak to them often about Quanzhen practices and beliefs over the past two decades * You have more than four years personal training in Quanzhen * You have the requisite access to be "in the know" And you are using these insinuations as social ornaments to prop up your self-assumed authority. Now if your statements are true then you are doing us all a disservice by your reticence. And whilst you remain skulking behind your vagueness, your purpose of discrediting Komjathy only serves to discredit yourself. Now I would like nothing more than to respectfully learn from your experience. But your current approach of shooting barbs from the shadows prohibits this.

Hi Mark, no I don't know Komjathy personally, only through some of his published works. You may be able to contact him through the Daoist Centre Contact Page. I would love to read your article when you are finished.

You didn't answer my question: "What do you believe the Daoist tradition is if you so adamantly disagree?" You find this statement unfounded: "The Daoist tradition consists, first and foremost, of ordained priests and monastics and lay supporters." Exactly what part of that do you find objectionable/questionable. And if you so strongly disagree then please give me your alternative view. If you had to complete this sentence what would you say: The Daoist tradition consists of....

If you think your achievement in the Quanzhen surpasses Komjathy enough for you to feel you can pass judgement then out with it ... let's hear who you are and let's hear about the experiences you have had. If you have had the sort of contact that you insinuate then many of us here, myself included, would benefit greatly and we would be very grateful for your contribution. After all, I am just a dim-witted, try-hard Aussie who is bumbling and fumbling along making do with the scraps of resources available to me.

Your energy feels different, like you have had a recent "interesting" journey. Good to hear from you.

If I may ask, what makes you think you have the authority to say so?? Are you personally trained to a superior level in Quanzhen Taoism that would give you the ability to accurately assess someones achievement??