Kongming

The realm of timeless transcendence also interpenetrates and subsumes space-time. Whether one is completely in space-time (ordinary mortals) or timeless transcendence operating in what others perceive as space-time (immortals, sages, etc.) is based on ones ontological status. Julius Evola mentions this in his book on Tantra: "According to this point of view there is no such thing as a relative reality and, beyond it, an absolute, impervious reality, but rather a relative, conditioned method of perceiving the only reality, and an absolute method." There are few things I am absolutely certain of due to experience, but a personal direct experience of transcendence is what put me on the spiritual path in the first place and its confirmation in the words of the world's sages leaves me without doubt of the truth of the matter. The root of the evil of modern civilization is the loss of the perception of the sacred and the abandonment of the sacred. That this will occur is part of the same cyclical process that occurs in all of nature: day turning to night, spring turning to winter, youth turning to old age, etc. The degenerative stage is known variously as Kali Yuga, the Dharma Ending Age/Latter Day of the Law, Hesiod's Iron Age, Ragnarok, etc. which we are currently in an advanced stage of. Well I know you have your own unique theory regarding mathematics, music theory, and solar calendars that you are continually propounding and sharing on this forum, and it's interesting, but I don't agree and, seeing as how passionate you are about these ideas, I can't expend time debating the finer details especially when I know it will ultimately fall on deaf ears. But it's not wrong. I never stated that Northern Europeans are white due to Indo-Europeans, I stated that the Indo-Europeans prior to admixture with other population groups were of a white/Northern European appearance. They mixed with pre-Indo-Europeans of Scandinavia who were of a similar appearance to them, but it doesn't change the fact that the Indo-Europeans originally were of that appearance as well.

Louis Komjathy's view on the topic is of interest and one I largely agree with: Popular Misconception: Daoism consists of two forms, “philosophical Daoism” and “religious Daoism.”1 Informed View: The distinction between so-called “philosophical Daoism” and so-called “religious Daoism” is a modern Western fiction, which reflects colonialist and missionary agendas and sensibilities. The use of such categories, even in scare quotation marks, should be taken, ipso facto, as indicative of ignorance concerning Daoism. From its beginnings in the Warring States period (480–222 bce), “Daoism” consisted of religious practitioners and communities. Considered as a whole, Daoism is a complex and diverse religious tradition. It consists of various adherents, communities, and movements, which cannot be reduced to a simplistic bifurcation. Its complexity may be mapped in terms of historical periodization as well as models of practice and attainment. Popular Misconception: “Philosophical Daoism” is the original form of Daoism and is best understood as “philosophy” (disembodied thinking/ way of thought). Informed View: Outside of the modern world, there is no form of Daoism that is not “religious.” Although there are aspects of Daoism that are “philosophical,” the category “philosophical Daoism” fails to consider the centrality of embodied practice (way of being), community, and place in Daoism, especially in “classical Daoism.” It is based on a systematic mischaracterization of the inner cultivation lineages of Warring States Daoism and a misreading of the earliest Daoist texts, namely, the Laozi (Lao-tzu; a.k.a. Daode jing) and Zhuangzi (Chuang-tzu), among others. Popular Misconception: Daojia 道家 and daojiao 道教 correspond to the Western categories of “philosophical Daoism” and “religious Daoism,” respectively Informed View: Daojia 道家, literally “Family of the Dao,” and daojiao 道教, literally “Teachings of the Dao,” are indigenous Chinese categories with no correspondence to the Western constructs of so-called “philosophical Daoism” and so-called “religious Daoism”. Each term has a complex history, with its meaning changing in different contexts. For example, in the fifth century, daojia referred to the Daoist religious community in general and the Daoist priesthood in particular. From: http://media.bloomsbury.com/rep/files/9781441168733_commonmisconceptions_daoisttradition.pdf

Voidisyinyang, I am not sure what you are getting at. I've never claimed that only Aryans are white people-- the non-Indo-Europeans of Europe and other locales such as Western Russia and the Caucasus and even North Africa (various Berbers, etc.) were also "white people" you've noted. I've never claimed that modern Europeans are "pure Aryans." I've never mentioned the origins of white skin or other European features. The only claim I've made, which is absolutely certain, is that the original proto-Indo-Europeans and the early Indo-Europeans as they spread across Eurasia were of an ethnic type that mostly correlates to Northern Europeans, insofar as they were Caucasoids often with fair hair, skin, and eyes. Even the idea that there is some sort of supremacy involved in this claim is unfounded because often these Aryans invaded and conquered peoples who were more sophisticated than they were, such as the civilizations of Mesopotamia or the Indus Valley or the Mediterranean, much in the same way the less advanced Turco-Mongol steppe people often invaded and conquered the more advanced Chinese civilization. Though one area where the Indo-Europeans or Aryans certainly were advanced and influential is in religion, mysticism, esotericism, philosophy etc. The influence of various traditions ranging from Brahmanism to Zoroastrianism to Greek thought to Druidism to Buddhism to Manichaeism, etc. on other religious traditions and peoples has been massive.

Also interesting to note the settlement of the Alans in medieval Europe, with the tribal name "Alans" just being a form of "Aryan." They most settled in what is now France and likely are the origin of the popular Breton/Norman name "Alan." Some of the eastern R1b (R1b ht35) has been found in fair number in and around the Scottish Border where my direct paternal ancestors hail from, though interestingly a contingent of related peoples, the Sarmatians, also were placed along Hadrian's Wall to defend against the Picts and remained after the Romans left. Anyway, to show some images reinforcing what I argued earlier about the original ethnic element of Indo-Europeans, here are various Indo-European peoples who display that original type: Tocharian Mummy: Sogdian or Tocharian monk next to an East Asian monk: Uighur girl with likely Indo-European (Tocharian, etc.) ancestry: Nuristani man: Afghan man: Pamiri Girl: Kalash man: Iranian politician Mohammad Ali Ramin: Kurdish Girl:

Historically has there ever been the use of specifically Buddhist mantras, say particularly those with more mundane effects besides their purely spiritual effects (such as changing destiny, protection, etc.), by Daoists? From what I've read it seems the Daoists have their own mantras and even created some pseudo-Sanskrit mantras, but is there any precedent for a Daoist using Buddhist mantras and spells for their own use? Is there any examples of contemporary Daoist use of Buddhist mantras? I figure someone with more direct knowledge of Chinese Daoism will likely have greater insight into this than me. I ask because not only is the interaction between the two traditions historically an interest of mine, but I also find myself in the position where I tend to have more interest in Daoism as a personal path but also have practiced a Buddhist mantra (Cundi mantra) that I've found and continue to find useful. That said I don't wish to create my own personal New Age mishmash but rather am interested in being a sincere and traditional practitioner. Thus I'm in a bind as to whether, as someone interested in Daoism, it would be proper for me to recite this mantra. So far the only rationalization I can give is that Cundi is seen as a manifestation of Guanyin, who is also important in Daoism, and that Cundi is also often associated with the specifically Daoist goddess "Doumu" (they share the same mudra for example.) Or is all of this just a case of me not understanding either tradition and the relationship between the two? In short, I wonder what a modern Quanzhen Daoshi/priest would think of the matter. Thanks in advance for any insight and assistance.

I've read Kukai and am fairly familiar with Shingon (at least intellectually) as it is one of the sects of Buddhism (along with general East Asian esoteric Buddhism) that most interests me. That said I can't agree with Kukai or much of Buddhist polemics regarding their unique superiority over every other tradition...to be honest in another thread I recently posted on Daoism and Buddhism's difference, where they do differ doctrinally I am mostly in agreement with Daoism's positions. Furthermore Kukai's assessment of Daoism seems to largely be a straw man since he portrays Daoism as being concerned with getting into heaven, which according to Buddhism is samsaric, and therefore not leading to true liberation. Problem is this is not only a simplified and inaccurate view of Daoism but also fails to take Daoism on its own terms when it (usually) portrays immortality or "xianhood" or becoming a "zhenren" as being equivalent to Buddhist liberation, namely permanent and unable to be lost. Another problem is the primary form of Daoism today and the one which interests me most, namely Quanzhen/Neidan, postdates Kukai. Personally I am a bit of a perrenialist in many respects, so I'd say Shingon's Vairocana is equivalent to a personalized form of the Dao, and hence their powers would be equal. Interestingly in the Buddhist hierarchy of traditions, particularly that employed in Tibet, Buddhism is supposed to be superior to all other traditions, Mahayana superior to Hinayana, Vajrayana as superior to "regular" Mahayana, and sometimes Dzogchen/Mahamudra put as superior to "regular" Vajrayana/tantra. Daoist alchemy in its methodology and framework is closer to tantric Buddhism than other forms and in its dialectic is often similar to Chan/Zen, which in turn is often seen as similar to Dzogchen in many respects. In other words, if Daoist alchemy/Quanzhen were a form of Buddhism it would be placed very highly on Tibetan (and Shingon) hierarchies of potency. Daniel Reid compares Quanzhen favorably with Dzogchen here for example: http://danreid.org/daniel-reid-articles-practice-makes-perfect-dzogchen-chuanchen.asp In short, I don't think Daoism is inferior to Buddhism in any way or I would just be a Buddhist, and indeed I personally often am in agreement with Daoism where the two differ. Back to the primary topic, again I do find the Cundi mantra useful for a variety of reasons while being more interested in Daoism, but as noted am weary of falling into personalized paths of a New Age mishmash.

I can't be arsed to debate your shotgun argumentation ramblings voidisyinyang and so I won't. I will say in conclusion that due to a wish to disprove the National Socialists many have tried to argue that the Proto-Indo-Europeans and Indo-Europeans as they spread across Eurasia weren't of a Northern European racial type, but its most certainly the case. That the Nazis used the term Aryan is, again, irrelevant because it was in use in the sense in which they used it prior to the Nazis, after the Nazis, and by people who held no political sentiments similar to the Nazis. The way these older scholars used the term "Aryan" is equivalent to how we now use the term "Indo-European" and "Proto-Indo-European", but now the emphasis is entirely linguistic rather than carrying an ethnic element which again stems entirely from the stigma associated with the Nazis. To sum up: --Celts, Germanics, Slavs, Balts--the current day Northern European peoples--possess the features I am discussing. It also so happens that the most commonly proposed Indo-European urheimat, the Steppes of Ukraine/Russia and or around the Caucasus, are homes to modern populations that display these features in large part. --Of all the various phenotypes associated with Indo-Europeans today, the only one which has a historical presence in all groups to varying degrees is the Nordic one discussed whereas other types (Mediterranean, Near Eastern, Indian, etc.) are not found in other groups. Therefore it is the only pan-Indo-European type. --We have the Tocharian/Indo-European mummies of the Tarimm basin preserved which shows the most Easterly Aryan group looked similar to modern day Europeans. There are also isolated population groups in the Near East/Central Asia who possess these features in decent number today, such as the Pamiris, Kalash, various Pashtuns, Nuristani, etc. Further to the West, various Kurds also possess these features in fair number. Punch these tribes into Google Images along with "light hair" or "light eyes" and see the evidence for yourself. --In India R1 genetics are highest in the North and among the upper two castes, which also happens to be the part of the population that have higher incidences of fair skin, light eyes,. etc. Compare Nakul Mehta to your average Indian today to take one example. --One of the major pan-Indo-European gods, the Thunderer Thor/Indra/Taranis, etc., is almost always described as a red bearded masculine man. Almost always historically people modeled the gods in their own image. --Always fascinating to note these ancient Etruscan tomb paintings which shows the ethnic difference between the native, Mediterranean, non-Indo-European Etruscan dancer and the Latin/Indo-European dancer:

It's not about "claiming" anything and the term "Aryan" is as valid as the more politically correct and updated "Indo-European" and "Proto-Indo-European." The term "Aryan" was used by a wide variety of scholars with no connection with the National Socialists and, as I've shown, actually has cognates and connections with the various Indo-European cultures unlike the term "Indo-European." In the end you can call them what you wish. Indo-European is the preferred term today primarily due to the controversy surrounding the employment of the term "Aryan" by NS Germany. That said I find that shaping my choice of words or language or life based around what the Nazis may or may not have said or done to be a bore and therefore I do not. After they had spread across Eurasia and mixed with various other non-Indo-European people, they could be said to be no longer defined by a particular ethnic type or appearance, such as the situation is today where Irishmen, Greeks, Iranians, and Indians all look very different. Though you can see this even in ancient times where some Persians, who had mixed with the more Mesopotamian/Near Eastern peoples of the area, looked different to the various Iranic speaking people of the steppe such as the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, who were often noted to have blonde hair and confused with the Celts and other northern barbarians by the ancient Greeks. The point is that the Indo-Europeans or Aryans come from one root people who were of a particular ethnic type, namely Caucasoids with more Northern European associated features. The evidence is what I discussed earlier and it boggles my mind how anyone could really deny it after reviewing the evidence. The main sources of denial in this regard are political and emotional first and foremost: "Well the Nazis believed that therefore it's bad and we must believe something else" and because it irritates some Indian Hindu nationalist types who don't like the idea that their religious tradition and culture has roots in a people with a European phenotype, especially since the British had just left.

Of the various methods that fall under the various headings of qigong, daoyin, neigong or other related terms which are those most explicitly associated with Daoist religious or spiritual aims historically and today? We know that qigong is sometimes lumped into categories such as medical, martial, and religious, some associated with Daoism and some with Buddhism, etc. So to your knowledge which are the most important neigong practices associated with Daoist internal cultivation and religious aims? Which if any have a connection to traditional Daoist meditation and/or neidan?

It's not about Nordics as in the people of Scandinavia, although the Germanic culture was spread there with R1 genetics which do exist in substantial number across Scandinavia. Its about what me may perhaps describe as "Nordish" or "Northern European" features, namely being Caucasoids with fair skin, hair ranging in colors but possessing red and blonde hair, and light eyes. Of course not every single Indo-European to the man would look like this, but it is interesting to note for further confirmation of the reality of this type that the upper castes of Northern India where there is higher concentration of R1 genetics also happens to be where you find higher incidences of light eyes, fairer skin, etc. That said the Proto-Indo-European homeland is still a matter of debate, though most favor the Caucasus or steppes of Ukraine/Russia. I don't recall which sources offhand, though a quick search on Google Books for "Bodhidharma red hair" turns up some results to pursue.

Aryan is just a term that various pre-Second World War scholars gave to the wider Indo-European family. That the National Socialists may have used the term is irrelevant to the validity of the term. Some retort that Aryan specifically refers to the Indo-Aryans of Persia and India, and this in part is true, but it also has a cross cultural referent and cognate in other Indo-European cultures. One example of this is the pan-Indo-European or pan-Aryan god Aryaman, who in the Avestan is Airyaman, appears as the legendary king Eremon in the Irish, and likely is related to the Irmin of the Germanic tribes. The freemen and nobles of Irelend were bóaire or "cattle lords" and the same cognate is connected to the Greek "aristos" as in "aristocracy." That these ancient Aryans prior to admixture with other population groups were of a Nordic European type is really undeniable to anyone who studies the matter without bias....the main source of controversy and denial in this area is due to Second World War. Prior to this it was accepted by most scholars including often Indian scholars and they were working with less evidence than we now possess. One of the most solid pieces of evidence is the Tarimm mummies, showing the Far Eastern Indo-Europeans had a similar appearance to those in Europe. The frequency of this phenotype among various isolated people such as the Pamiris, Kalash, various Afghans, various Kurds, etc. lends further confirmation to this fact. Further evidence is the presence of this Northern European racial type among all the various Indo-European peoples to varying degrees (various ancient Greeks, Romans, Armenians, Kurds, Persians, Indians, Thracians, Celts, Germanics, Slavs, Balts, etc.) but the absence of other types, such as the more normative Indian type, the Mediterranean and Near Eastern types, etc. in other groups...in other words, it is the only pan-Indo-European type, even if it is now a minority among non-Europeans. That these people had an impact on Chinese religion seems quite likely in regards to early Daoism and certain in relation to Buddhism of course (earliest sources describe Bodhidharma as a "red haired blue eyed barbarian.") Victor H. Mair proposes an Indo-European origin of the word "Dao" itself and Kunlun, a concept matching Mt. Olympus or Sumeru, likely has Tocharian etymological origins. The myth of Pangu which matches that of Purusa and Ymir in the Norse (as well as medieval Irish myths regarding Adam) is another example. Finally, while perhaps not the result of direct influence but rather dealing with the same objective realities, it is interesting to note how similar the cosmology of the Norse myths is to that of Daosim as this man explains (albeit there are different interpretations given and terms used than those he uses):

So are there any particular sets that come to mind which would fit into the category I mentioned initially, namely qigong/neigong with a specifically Daoist spiritual orientation rather than martial or medical? Has anyone read the book "Qigong Empowerment" which has a section devoted to supposedly Daoist qigong? If so is this book worth purchasing? How about the whole Kunlun/Jenny Lamb's "Yigong" exercise? What is the goal of these sorts of practices and how do they relate, if at all, to the higher goals of neidan? How about Feng Zhiqiang's "Hunyuan Qigong"? I know he is mostly known for martial arts, but I've been practicing this set for 2 or 3 years now and have had some powerful experiences with it. Is this known to have purely spiritual aims or any relation to the goals of neidan, even if in a preparatory capacity?

To what degree are the path and practices of Daoism, whether meditation or qigong/neigong or neidan, compatible with other pursuits and activities? In particular I was curious if things like lifting weights (not necessarily for either serious strength training or trying to be like Arnold Schwarzenegger) or boxing/Muay Thai/other non-qi based or traditional martial arts could possibly get in the way of serious Daoist praxis. So for example, would lifting weights be bad for qigong practitioners? Would having a vested interested in working out and/or martial arts such as those mentioned get in the way of someone committed to neidan or is a balance possible? In short, when one is truly dedicated to the Daoist path and seeing it through, is there enough time/energy left over to be dedicated to other pursuits?

Thanks. It seems to me that Daoism and qigong, things like Taijiquan, etc. tend to emphasize softness, fluidity, flexibility, lightness, etc. whereas things like weight lifting and boxing seem a bit "harder" or perhaps more violent. Therefore not only does the whole aura seem contrasted, but I also was curious if lifting weights could be detrimental to the goals of qigong and neidan. An example you often see is of the ideal Daoist or even Daoist inspired warrior....usually a more gracile, gentlemanly type who wields a jian sword, etc. One just wonders if one could simultaneously be a muscular Conan the Barbarian type while also fully engaged in the Daoist path. Another factor of interest: how about social life? Serious Daoists often are associated with hermits, mountain ascetics, monks, wanderers, etc. To what degree does a social life become harmful or an obstacle?

Was reminded of a few other differences between Buddhism and Daoism earlier today: --Astrology has been much more vital to the Daoist tradition than the Buddhist one, both in its normal sense and in astrological imagery playing a large role, traditions of ingesting light/qi from the heavenly bodies, astrological (and seasonal) attunement, etc. As far as I am aware Buddhism has had an astrological tradition but relatively minor in importance and especially compared to Daoism where it has played a large role. --Daoism has, thanks to its connection with and use of the the Yijing/Book of Changes (despite often being seen as a Confucian work), a much larger use and acceptance of divination of various sorts. I believe the Buddha spoke against the use of divination. --Returning to the topic of the body, not only has there been more emphasis and positive perspective of the body in Daoism compared to Buddhism where it is seen as an illusion and suffering, Daoism also has, in line with its view of the body as a microcosm, viewed the body as containing various divine landscapes and reflections of the cosmos, such as the two eyes being the sun and moon, the dantian's being the microcosm of various heavens, containing bodily deities in the same way there are heavenly deities, etc.

Whether he is an art curator or not doesn't prevent him from having sound understanding of what the source texts say. Are you ignoring where the Xuanlan renniao shan jingtu states that yuanqi issued, i.e. emanated, from the Dao or earlier in the thread where Cheng Xuanying states that the original qi is born from the Dao? Either way, it is the case that Daoism is a diverse tradition with diverse perspectives on various topics without central dogmas in the way of Christianity or Islam and thus there may be different views on cosmogensis and the relation of hundun or yuanqi or the universe to the Dao. Hence differing opinions among Daoists themselves on Wuji/Taiji, Dao and Yuanqi, etc. Furthermore what I've been saying doesn't make the yuanqi or the One or the universe not the Dao due to being an emanation of the Dao in its Absolute aspect. They are two facets of one unified reality, like sun and sunlight or ocean and ocean wave. Though it is quite clear that Daoism has dealt with metaphysics or 性而上学 "xingershang xue" and the metaphysical is precisely what is beyond the physical, namely beyond space-time. Or as AK Coomaraswamy once had it, "To say, for example, that “I am a pantheist” is merely to confess that “I am not a metaphysician,” just as to say that “two and two make five” would be to confess “I am not a mathematician.”

And? It is well known that those numbers are sacred in Daoism and that they therefore match various sacred numbers in Western esotericism, whatever the ultimate reasoning or origin of the two sets. That they are related is secondary to the primary point, which is that Daoism's numbers and emphasis on numbers differs from Buddhism. Sigh....why are you so insistent to debate? I'd like not to derail, but for amusement here we go...a brief search turns up: Komjathy: "Introduction to World Religions: Communities and Cultures": "Taoism and the Arts of China": From http://www.goldenelixir.com/taoism/ill_yuanqi.html: "The Original Breath (yuanqi) issued from the Dao." From the thesis "DAOIST ELEMENTS IN CAI GUO-QIANG’S INOPPORTUNE AND HEAD ON" (http://www.mhsl.uab.edu/dt/2011m/wockenfuss.pdf): "Translated as meaning “the way,” Dao is believed to have begun as an empty stillness out of which the primal energy yuan qi emerged. “For many cosmic eons,” this energy swirled in a state of chaos called hundun, eventually forming into the corresponding forces of yin and yang. From this energy the universe was formed, encompassing the force of qi. Described as energy, qi permeates all matter, thus matter and energy are interchangeable, as expressed in the basic principles of nuclear physics. Though Daoism is a diverse tradition with many viewpoints throughout its long history, so perhaps there have been some that shared the perspective you are arguing for.

I had not read that treatise by Evola you mentioned, I will have to seek it out so I thank you for sharing. As to subtle anatomy, it seems it wasn't as prominent or detailed in the Western tradition, though perhaps this is due to the different religious conditions in the West where dogmatic orthodoxy and suspicion of non-Christian material were prevalent. In such a case perhaps the knowledge was truly esoteric, as in secret and hidden. Gichtel is interesting in this regard:

Just posted this in another thread actually: Renaissance esotericists also used number schemas to elaborate their cosmological symbolism encoded in archetypal patterns of three, seven, nine and twelve, as do many of the Daoist masters, particularly using schemas of three, five, nine, and twelve. From: http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/VolumeVI/Dao.htm Though while they match on 3, 9, 12 (these were also sacred in non-Platonic influenced cultures such as that of the pre-Christian Celts and Norsemen), Daoists have placed more emphasis on 5 (due to Wuxing.) Your viewpoint on the matter is on topic and I am glad you shared it, an in depth debate on the nature of emptiness and time in Daoism is not related to the topic. Aside from not being related to the topic, I am not interested in continuing the debate as I've already shared and argued my perspective and remain convinced of it. If you feel that my view is incorrect that's fine, but again we'll have to agree to disagree.

So does anyone here engage in a mutual study and practice of Western alchemy/Hermeticism and Neidan/Daoism? Would such a dual study or cultivation be useful or merely confusing? Are they complementary and working toward the same goal or are they essentially different? This article tends to see some strong similarities: Source: http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/VolumeVI/Dao.htm

Perhaps you should start a new thread on the topic on the nature of the Dao, yinyang, time, etc. since it is off topic here. That said I remain convinced of my own position outlined yesterday, so as far as me personally we will have to settle on agreeing to disagree. Returning to the topic, it also seems that Daoism and Buddhism share differences regarding sacred numbers. In Daoism sacred numerology plays a large role whereas in Buddhism it plays a considerably lesser role as far as I've studied it. Not only is sacred numerology more important in Daoism, the two traditions are different in what numbers they consider sacred. Daoism closely mirrors Western esotericism in this regard, with emphasis on 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, whereas in Buddhism it seems 8 and 10 received greater emphasis.

Well I am of the opinion that intellectualism and debate won't bring anyone any closer to enlightenment, but the Buddha himself debated various critics and rivals and India has had a long tradition of debate which they considered important, and this has passed over into Tibetan Buddhism. That said, the goal of this thread is to highlight what differences exist between Daoism and Buddhism. Whether one feels the differences are unimportant or not is a personal sentiment unrelated to the thread.

Well returning to the topic matter, one other difference between Daoism and Buddhism is on whether there is an enduring subject of any sort across moments of time or not. Buddhism famously declares that there is no connecting subject between each succession of moments and the belief in such is illusory. As far as I am aware Daoism, aside from the possibility of individual Daoists heavily influenced by Buddhist thought later in history, would be more in agreement with the following perspective of Kashmir Shaivism vis a vis Buddhism: This is further confirmed by another difference between some sects of Daoism and Buddhism, namely Daoism's emphasis on ancestral connections and even the ability to liberate some of your ancestors via your own liberation (as well as inheriting the negative "karma" or guilt of your ancestors, etc.) From Robinet's book "Taoist Mediation": Thus it is said that an adept's faults are wiped away; that all the germs of death in him have disappeared; that sometime after his purification in the fire within the Southern Palace, he will be reborn within an immortal embryo; and that after his name is inscribed in the heavens, he will be called to assume divine functions and converse with the deities. As especially noted in the Great Purity texts, he will rescue his parents and all of his ancestors up to the seventh generation. Death is not a separation. The merits of the dead either acquired during their lifetime or gained after their passing can fall upon their descendants. Thus T'ao Hung-ching explains that one may be moved to practice the "liberation from the corpse" because of the merits of one's ancestors (he stipulates, however, that purification is not complete in this case and a leg must be donated as an offering to the ancestors). The Pa-su ching, one of the basic works of the Mao-shan movement, says that: "the kuei (souls of the dead who are in the hells) can practice achieving immortality (hsien) like human beings; they can practice in the direction of the Tao and, after seven generations (of ancestors) are established in virtue, their merits fall upon their descendants which leads them toward the divine (shen) and immortal condition." It is therefore the case that salvation is not an individual matter. The adept, after all, cannot be saved by himself. It is a matter that involves the adept together with his family down through seven or nine generations. We must note, however, that this familial solidarity primarily applies to a single individual and his ancestors. The link with one's descendants appears to be less strong and the texts only rarely mention such a connection. On the other hand, the adept's task seems to be concerned simultaneously with his own and his ancestors' salvation. And this seems to imply that he could also expect that his salvation, or the aggravation of his sufferings, will be effected by his descendants. This emphasis on a linkage with preceding rather than posterior generations seems to be particularly Chinese. As an interaction oriented to past generations, this appears to be a characteristic clearly distinguished from the concept of karma since, in Buddhism, the believer by his own faults does not aggravate the sufferings undergone by his ancestors in the other-world.

I can't waste time going in circles with you or addressing all the extraneous material you post. That said its really quite simple: 1) Laozi, Huainanzi, Liezi, and other texts, as well as most academics I've read, describe the Dao as the unchanging origin of the cosmos 2) The cosmos is space and time, thus that which produces space-time cannot be space-time, hence it is timeless 3) Change is the result of yin-yang interacting, yet as per DDJ 42 the Dao precedes or gives birth to yin-yang and thus is prior to change For further confirmation, read this from the Dao Companion to Daoist Philosophy: Perhaps the most influential typological approach was that of FENG Youlan 馮友蘭 (1895–1990), whose “A Preliminary Draft of New Essays on the History of Chinese Philosophy” 中國哲學史新編試稿 distinguishes between several senses of the term "Dao": (1) the origin of the myriad phenomena (e.g., chapter 4, “as if it were the founding ancestor of the myriad things,” si wanwu zhi zong 似萬物之宗), (2) the origin of all transformations (e.g., chapter 42, “Dao gives birth to one, one to two, two to three, three to the myriad things,” Dao sheng yi, yi sheng er, er sheng san, san sheng wanwu 道生一,一生二,二生三,三生萬物), and (3) the imperceptible transcendent, that is, the one thing that does not transform (e.g., chapter 25, “it proceeds in a cycle without ever tiring,” zhou xing er budai 周行而不殆, see Hu 2006: 64–65). Of the first sense, in this early work from the 1960s, Feng writes that phenomena must be produced according to a “basic principle” (yuan li 原理), and that is Dao. Here, the examples Feng chooses tend to relate Dao to the phenomenal world in a temporal or developmental sequence (e.g., chapter 25, “Something came forth chaotic and complete, born prior to Heaven and Earth,” you wu huncheng, xian tiandi sheng 有物混成, 先天地生). Yet other sections of the Laozi promote a second, more abstract sense of Dao that is distinct from both the concrete world of phenomena and the world (presence, you 有) that gives birth to them in the manner of the first sense. Instead, this second sense of the term is the realm of absence (wu 無) that gives birth to that world (e.g., chapter 40, “the myriad things in the universe are born from presence, and presence is born from absence” tianxia wanwu sheng yu you, you sheng yu wu 天下萬物生 於有, 有生於無) and therefore lies outside time and space. Finally, the last sense defines Dao through negation, expressing its meaning not by its relationship to the phenomenal world, but rather by denying basic contrasts, such as between this (ci 此) and that (bi 彼). Indeed, the first two senses of the Dao—as an originating principle for the creation of the phenomenal world and as an entity outside of both principle and phenomena and so responsible for their creation—are both, in this third view, things that can be named and therefore are not Dao (cf. chapter 32, Dao chang wu ming 道常無名, Hu 2006: 70–71). This is my perspective and I believe it is correct, if you feel otherwise we will have to agree to disagree.

What you've posted is about wuwei, not the unchanging origin of the cosmos (remember the cosmos is space-time, thus what "births it", namely the Dao giving birth to the One, etc.. is necessarily beyond time.) These are two different topics. The references you are quoting from Pregadio is not the same one I am referencing, which is a clear reference to the timeless immortality goal of neidan via reversing the cosmogonic process. Again two different topics. Another note from Pregadio from "Transforming the Void: Embryological Discourse and Reproductive Imagery in East Asian Religions": "From this perspective, the relative domain, define by space and time, does not even exist." This is the attainment of the Absolute perspective, the becoming a "zhenren" or "xian" I've been mentioning and is the perspective of one rooted in that which is timeless and transcendent while still being in the world as also noted (the metaphor of the lotus flower, with its roots in the water/mud, i.e. the physical world of space-time but with its flower above the water, i.e. transcendence, is referencing the same thing.)