takaaki

You should care about sharing information that is purported to be factual. To say that India transmitted Kung Fu to China is to say that China transmitted 21st century technological innovation to America.

I thought Lao Tzu is a myth. Flowing Hands says he is no myth and existed as Li Erh and now communicates with him as an immortal. What do you say?

Spoken like an American (Taoist), a straight-shooter. No shit. But the world sees him as an unsophisticated, clumsy thinker, an unnuanced bumpkin with the mind of a blimp. Isn't this the description of the Dao?

I find this hard to swallow.

Why do you accuse me of this? Please back up your claim with evidence of me claiming that I am an authority on the Dao De Jing. Flowing Hands claims authority based on direct transmission of the Dao De Jing from Li Erh. Can you debunk that? I can't and have not done so. And as long as his claim stands in this forum, there is no other authority on the Dao De Jing except Flowing Hands. I can live with that status quo. Can you? You are making authoritative Dao De Jing pronouncements here. They are contrary to my ethos as an American Taoist. Compassion doesn't work for me. I am not a communist. I believe in self-reliance. Frugality is for people who are fearful. I focus on gain, not loss. I believe in abundance. Never striving to be first? What's the matter with you? I am not a shirker. I want to create and bring about a better world. Does it? Does my act make me appear spiteful and small-minded in showing undue concern for a trivial matter? I think we all need to pull up our bootstraps and look smart, brother. Maybe a stint for all Daoists in the US Army would do society a lot of good.

I did not say that you practise black magic. You said that you have nothing to do with such matters. I have no reason to disbelieve you even though the internet has nothing good to say about Mao Shan Daoism. I do give you the benefit of the doubt that you practise this form in your own good way.

Hey Mark, until you set up a forum in your blog, please talk with us here. Your Taoist blog site has potential because it seems like a good home for the American Taoist, someone who is more like Professor Bokenkamp, a straight up guy who is not into nonsense and joss-stick superstitions ranging from immortals to bed-chamber arts. The American Taoist, as exemplified by Marblehead mindset is the real deal and I am not laughing. For too long Americans have looked abroad towards the East for spirituality as if the US capitalist beast is spiritually destitute. America has always been a spiritual country, from the time of the early settlers, the Pilgrims and Puritans who escaped from the religious persecution in Europe to find the freedom to worship. The beauty of the land and Americ's own native culture inspired them and all that led to the transcendental movement upon which the guiding principles of the nation were founded. The affinity for spiritualism was always there in the American soul and in the sixties, it looked East towards India and China. I think it's time to come home to a spirituality that is made in America.

Of course, it's serious. Based on your clarifications, I now understand why you have such an astonishingly different take on what I commented earlier. You are, of course, entitled to your views just as Flowing Hands is entitled to practise Mao Shan Daoism even if it is black magic. All too often, we presume that our personal view is the objective view and therefore, the view of others. This is only true in science because there are painful consequences for those who don't get it right. In the matter of the Dao De Jing, there are no consequences. It's like playing with Barbie and each one is entitled to a personal, different one. You can brush her hair, dress it up anyway you want and even poke needles in her.

It seems to me, based on responses from Dawei and Manitou, that Tao Bums in particular have a different idea of the village idiot and the scholar. The former, to them, being far closer to the eternal Dao than the latter. I guess, I am not a Tao Bum because my idea corresponds to that of the world of Wikipedia: "The village idiot in strict terms is a person locally known for ignorance or stupidity,[1] but is also a common term for a stereotypically silly or nonsensical person. The term is also used as a stereotype of the mentally disabled.[2] It has also been applied as an epithet for an unrealistically optimistic or naive individual.[3]" Looks like we need to define the Imperial Chinese scholar too. According to Manitou and Dawei, He is manipulative, Machiavellian, arrogant and defiled by the "mechanations" (machinations?) of life. Here again, I beg to be different. My idea of the scholar corresponds with that of Confucius as set out in Wikipedia: "He (Confucius) puts the greatest emphasis on the importance of study, and it is the Chinese character for study (學) that opens the text. Far from trying to build a systematic or formalist theory, he wanted his disciples to master and internalize the old classics,.." and "One of the deepest teachings of Confucius may have been the superiority of personal exemplification over explicit rules of behavior. His moral teachings emphasized self-cultivation, emulation of moral exemplars, and the attainment of skilled judgment rather than knowledge of rules." So, my dear ChiDragon, what is your idea?

What is your idea of a village idiot? We need to define this silly, little bugger, needn't we? Dawei suggested he is closer to the newborn child. Would you consider tiny tots idiots because they have not been stuffed with our Daoist triangulation techniques yet? You are not suggesting that scholarly types like Professor Bokenkamp is mentally-challenged compared to two-year olds, are you?

So, idiocy is better than scholarship? Then, may your lineage be blessed with down syndrome.

What is your point, Templetao?

You should have entitled your thread "The Legitimacy of Daoist Practices". This would definitely draw in the crowds. Bodily harm is a good criterion. Shouldn't this also cover bodily harm to all beings and not just the practitioner? What about psychological harm such as causing fear and anxiety as well as delusions of grandeur? Immoral act is a good criterion. Good is no longer good and bad is great these days. Satan rules. The Bible warns about this as we approach the end of the world. We need a moral compass. How do we pin this down? Many here will not like this. According to Wikipedia, shamanism is: "Shamanism is a practice that involves a practitioner reaching altered states of consciousness in order to encounter and interact with the spirit world.[2] A shaman is a person regarded as having access to, and influence in the world of benevolent and malevolent spirits, who typically enters into a trance state during a ritual, and practices divination and healing." Are you sure shamanism was not practised by Chinese Emperors? This doesn't mean they are practising legitimate Daoism. They could well be deviants.

Ok, then. Let's examine the Mao Shan sect in your new thread to determine the truth about the deviant harmful derivative of the Dao De Jing. I also need to know if Marblehead's American Taoism is either kosher or falls into the evil category.

I would consider you the founder of American Taoism. I like that more than the Wudang sect. It all begins and ends with me. This even sounds right. Instead of trying to figure out Chapter 67, I don't see why I can't define my own three treasures. To each his own. I would be damned if I were to cede my right to self-determination to some Chinese guy who plucked three treasures right out of his ass in ancient China. Let's see what you've got. Compassion, Conservatism and Humility. You sure that's what you want? Would you explain how these treasures work for you? I am sure you must have given a lot of thought to picking them for yourself. I don't want to waste effort re-inventing the wheel. If your analysis works for me, then I will adopt your treasures as my own;otherwise, I will dig around for what works for me. That's your attitude too, right? Hey, I feel like an American Taoist already.

I don't mean to get "personal" personal but we are discussing an introspective topic. It would be difficult to avoid being up close and personal unless we treat the subject as culinary art and view the Dao De Jing as a cook book. Still, I need to respect boundaries. I will take care not to fly too close to your territorial limits. The Chinese, figuratively-speaking, sees no division between the individual and the universe. Thus, principles for ruling the world are the same as those for ruling the self. Harmony, the Chinese believe, is wholistic in nature when the individual is one with the universe. The only other way for the individual to get what you are after, regardless of the universe, is great fortune. And I don't mean getting a good omen from the I Ching. I mean money, tons of it. There is no greater freedom than private jets and living across multiple geographies. No one would get in your way, that's for sure. The only people who will ever get close to you are the ones falling over themselves to make sure no one gets in your way to wherever you want to be. So, there you have it. There is the Dao way and there is the American way. I understand your impatience with history class. I feel the same way with every subject when it gets too academic for its own sake. There must be a reason for the rigor, though. This is just the opposite to the classical Chinese approach to learning. It's never about you. It's always about the lesson.

Thank you for your kind comment. This thread is about the Way of living in accordance with the Dao. I thought this would be a good place to separate the wheat from the chaff, to polish our mirror and remove all blemish including the illegitimate and the false. The key person of this thread is you because you started it, haven't you? Your view can only contaminate this thread if it is driven by personal agenda and not by objective facts in the search for truth. Even if you were to proceed with honesty, there would be opposition. Should you defer to opposition or be bold? One of your three treasures talks about a mercy that enables one to be bold in war against opposition. The only direct opposition will come from Flowing Hands. Do be merciful towards him in your attack and you will be strong in the defense of your case as you proceed to win the argument against the legitimacy of the Mao Shan sect. Let's put your first treasure to the test.

I like Steve Bokenkamp's post on Mark's blog. Have you read that? It is well-written. I especially like Steve's characterization of the Dao De Jing as a hatrack on which "many fine minds have hung their hats". Perhaps, a fly-paper plastered with insects would be a my choice of a metaphor instead of a hatrack full of hats. Seriously, and aside from the entertainment the world have gotten from the outrageous performances from Daoists of all shades on this wonderful platform of a Broadway stage that the Dao De Jing has provided through the ages, are you not a little flabbergasted? After all, it is rather heavy reading even for the scholarly elite of Imperial China. How come even the village idiot is now able to grasp the eternal Dao?

Is it important to you that those three treasures you identified above are precisely what the Chinese text says? Even the Chinese themselves are not in agreement on what the Chinese text says.

Yours is a great blog site. How come it does not have a discussion forum to draw in the bugs?

My checks on the internet generally yielded a negative image of Mao Shan practices. Flowing Hands may be following a different Mao Shan form unconnected with the "bad guys" Why was Mao Shan considered illegitimate? I don't mean in the eyes of the Chinese Government which has its political reasons. In what way is it fundamentally deviant in the eyes of a scholar of the Dao DeJing? Do you know of any accredited scholarly opinion against the Mao Shan Religion which, I understand, is based on Chang Tao Ling's commentary called Xiang'er?

Yes, I do. To be able to draw wisdom from the Dao De JIng is a significant benefit; otherwise, self-cultivation bears no fruit. How has the Dao De Jing empowered you in dealing with conflicts in the running of your company and the managing of relationships at home? How would that be different from advice of self-help gurus? Let's use the one you like from Flowing Hands.

You must have good reason to gravitate to the Mao Shan sect. Do you believe that there are more than one way to skin the cat and that it is up to each individual to choose his own way to live the Dao De Jing? Or, there is only one Way and the other sects along with the rest of the philosophical derivatives in the west are heresies?

So where are you on your path? Let's use the words in Chapter 67. Please elaborate a little, with regard to application in your own life, on the the three levels: 1. Daily living. 2. Command or Leadership, and 3. Mystical understand of existence.