Kongming

Since the Dao is the source of all reality, it precedes and transcends all relative categories, and is prior to the "Two" or differentiation into various polarities such as male/female, etc. Furthermore the Dao at the Absolute level is often described as wu or empty and pu or primordial simplicity, i.e. without differentiation and nondual.

The Dao itself is beyond distinctions of good and evil, moral and immoral, etc. since it is, at the Absolute level, transcendent and nondual. That said Daoism certainly has a moral or ethical dimension, which can be read about in titles such as Livia Kohn's "Cosmos and Community: The Ethical Dimension of Daoism": http://www.uhpress.hawaii.edu/p-4211-9781931483025.aspx

Depends on which Daoists you ask. Historically there have been plenty of Daoists who have professed the Indic vision of transmigration, and as far as I am aware this is the view held by Quanzhen and hence most Daoists in China. Even prior to the influence of Buddhism there was a Daoist notion of transmigration under the concept of bianhua 變化 or metamorphosis, such as in the 2nd century Laozi bianhua jing 老子變化經 "Scripture of the Transformations of Laozi", though here applied to the many incarnations of a deity. Personally I am in agreement with Julius Evola's viewpoint that this concept also existed in the early Daoism as explained by him from his introduction to an Italian translation of the Daodejing, in turn translated into English as a pamphlet entitled "Taoism: The Magic, the Mysticism" (sorry had to use a screen capture to post this):

What is the relationship between qi/chi and consciousness or Mind? It's often said that jing, qi, and shen (which is seen as consciousness, spirit, or mind) are actually one. Does this mean that qi is related to, possesses, or actually is identical to consciousness? On the topic of qi, is anyone aware of a good study of the topic from a Daoist perspective which perhaps might go in greater depth than is typically found, i.e. an entire article or book devoted to the topic? Thanks.

Well I can't recall the exact source, but I believe I read Liu Yiming in some Fabrizio Pregadio article (or perhaps Pregadio himself) stating that they three are actually different aspects of one "thing", I'll have to see if I can find the citation. Anyway, what spurred my question was contemplating how various traditions, specifically Pratyabhijna or Kashmir Shaivist philosophy, but also Chan depending on how you read it (concepts of One Mind, etc.) claim that all of reality is consciousness or exists within consciousness/awareness. The Daoist tradition of course tends to say that all of manifest reality is qi, with the most purified and subtle qi being heavens, deities, etc. and the coarsest being matter, but all qi nonetheless. This got me thinking about the relationship between the two views and how Daoist's view consciousness/awareness. I've seen some Daoists speak of the Dao mind (道心) and even say a variation of Bodhidharma's famous statement with, "The Dao is the Mind and the Mind is the Dao", but I am still unsure on how Daoists view the topic, specifically consciousness or Mind's relation to qi. What is it described as then? Non-consciousness or unconsciousness? Of course when speaking of consciousness in these contexts, sometimes regular or human consciousness, such as the consciousness skandha in Buddhism, is seen as being "anatta" or not myself, of a lower and corruptible sort, but then there's also a higher consciousness or Mind too, so it gets confusing.

Another interesting finding I figured I'd share, from an old book on Yoga in its various forms across the world by William Joseph Flagg discussing the impersonal trinities in Daoism and in Plotinus:

First let me say I appreciate your reply and agree with the content of your post, and the portion about Western spiritual exile is part of but not the only reason I created this thread. I've noticed a lot of Westerners interested in Eastern traditions sometimes also want to become Easterners and strip themselves of everything Western, but I somehow I feel this is a mistake. It's interesting that when the Chinese and Japanese, for example, received Buddhism, they made this Indian religion Chinese and Japanese respectively, whereas it seems there is none of this occurring with the transmission of Eastern traditions into the West in modern times. Perhaps the general nihilistic and materialist atmosphere that pervades in the West today is preventing this, but ideally what should happen would be for the introduction of these Eastern traditions to be able to provide a means of awakening the spirit that animated the ancient and to lesser extent medieval Western world, whether Greek, Roman, Germanic, or Celtic. As to the point about the Celtic traditions being exotic, I suppose I would agree in part. From what little can be gleamed about the ancient Druidic lore, it seems they were roughly the equivalents to the Brahmins and also shared similar beliefs (indestructibility of the spirit, transmigration, etc.) When one considers the similarities between the Neoplatonic tradition and the Vedic/Upanishadic tradition, one then can assume that the Celts likely also fit into that general schema and therefore wouldn't be entirely exotic. The Germanic traditions largely find their expression in a modified Christian form in medievalism and the heroic tradition therein, perhaps also the German mystical tradition of Eckhart, Tauler, Suso, Cusanus, Boehme, and Angelus Silesius, being as different from mainline Western Christian material as it is, could be a continuation of the old Germanic mystical tradition, which later found expression in a purely philosophical form within German idealism.

Yes, this could all be fragmented remains of a the Primordial Wisdom as it were, or as per the philosophy of the Sophia Perennis, the similarities among the traditions of diverse people can be the results of mystics, yogis, occultists, and sages of different groups encountering the same objective structures of reality; likely it is a case of both of these factors. That said, what I wonder is for a Westerner interested in Daoism or an Easterner interested in Western traditions how useful and fruitful such comparisons can be for ones own spiritual quest and whether they can be made in earnest without too much of it being a rough approximation or guessing. Say for example a modern Westerner interested in or studying/practicing Daoism who encounters the examples I mentioned earlier of the Jade Emperor or Kunlun could think, "Yes, this is also what my own ancestors understood as Zeus/Odin and Olympus/Asgard" and thereby not only reinvigorate and give greater meaning to those old but largely dead traditions, but also maintain a sense of history and Western-ness while doing so (or vice versa for the Easterner interested in Western traditions.) On more correlations, how could I forget this one: Many say that the concept of chi/qi is roughly equivalent to the ancient Greek concept of pneuma, but I never investigated the latter in enough detail to say whether it is or not. I wonder also if the Anglo-Saxon concept of "wyrd" has a Daoist equivalent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyrd

In my opinion the best way to bring about real change in the outward world is to change ourselves, namely to produce more enlightened sages. The influence of the sage is what brings about real positive change and a restoration of the true order, but modern secular culture doesn't consider this an important goal at all generally, and certainly doesn't see this goal as having the possibility to bring about positive changes on a social and political level rather than just on an individual spiritual level. Beyond that, if we take what the ancients said about human decline seriously that I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, we can see that the disorder of modern society is due, beyond just a loss of a sense of the sacred, to the loss of the previous hierarchical structure that existed in the ancient world and traditional societies in general. What is missing in our society is the two upper castes of traditional societies or variations on same, i.e. a true sacred caste (Brahmins, Druids, Priests, etc.) and warrior-nobility caste (Kshatriya, Knights, Samurai, etc) or, in a slightly different model, something similar to the literati nobility of old China. In other words, we just have a mercantile caste ruling us (corporations, banks) who treat man as a mere economic unit and thereby man's sacred and noble nature is suppressed, and certainly has no real presence in the mechanisms of government or society. While coming from a specifically Hindu perspective, Prabhupada discusses this point here in this video (ignore the silly title of the video) starting around 3:10 in:

How should one understand a mystical experience that doesn't lead to enlightenment? In the context of the various Eastern traditions (Daoism, Buddhism, Hinduism), how would such an experience be understood in relation to the spiritual path in general and what are some possible names for these experiences? Here of course I am talking about spontaneous mystical experiences which occur to some people that make them take the spiritual path more seriously and which can alter their entire perception of reality. These experiences often aren't the result of any particular practice and sometimes can even happen to non-believers/materialists/atheists, etc. An important concept in many traditions and especially in Eastern traditions is transcendence, here of space and time, but also individuated consciousness or ego. Let's say someone had an experience of complete transcendence of time, space, ego, etc. which is sometimes how samadhi is described, but also did not become permanently enlightened, still committed moral offences, etc. How should this be understood? What is the significance of such an experience? Has anyone here had a mystical experience such as this, spontaneous or otherwise? In short, can we have a general discussion of mystical experiences and their relationship to enlightenment or spiritual perfection? Please share any thoughts on the topic.

According to Daoism and other traditional teachings, this happened to humanity: See also: Kali Yuga: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_Yuga#Attributes_of_Kali_Yuga Dharma Ending Age: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Ages_of_Buddhism#Latter_Day_of_the_Law Hesiod's Iron Age: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_Man#Hesiod.27s_Five_Ages The Norse notion of Ragnarok, beyond just meaning the end-times, also has the connotations of "twilight of the gods" or the decline of the gods in the life of men. Also the Abrahamic notion of the fall from paradise is a related notion of the decline of the spiritual state of mankind.

What is the relationship between Daoism and the warrior ideal? Is there a true Daoist equivalent to the Zen-inspired (and to a lesser degree, Shingon-inspired) samurai ideal outside of the popular image of various wuxia novels and films? How has Daoism treated the warrior and battle historically and how has Daoism viewed a warriors death in battle? As mentioned, in popular wuxia material like Legend of Condor Heroes, Daoist figures like the Quanzhen Perfected Seven were transformed into great martial arts heroes, and this precedent of Daoist warrior heroes goes back even further, say like Gongsun Sheng from the Water Margin. However, does anyone know how historic Daoism, such as Huang-Lao, Tianshi, Shangqing, Lingbao, and Quanzhen viewed the position of the warrior and the hero? Is there any connection in the Daoist viewpoint between the warrior, or his implements such as the sword, and spiritual growth/practice? Obviously many martial art traditions, especially Neijing, are connected with Daoism, but I've heard claims that this connection is tenuous and not a true historic reality. In short, please discuss anything and everything regarding Daoism's relation with the warrior spirit and its relation, if any, to the spiritual path.

I've heard from some that the jian sword is important to Daoism: it features in liturgical rituals, Lu Dongbin carries a jian, Zhang Daoling also has a jian, and of course there's martial forms some connect to Daoism such as Taijijian. Baolin Wu has a book entitled "The Eight Immortals' Sword of Pure Yang" which apparently deals with the jian as a tool for spiritual development, though I've heard some say the book is filled with much fiction. In any case, is anyone aware of the position of the sword in Daoism and where one might be able to read more?

Also, did I accidentally post this topic in the Daoist Textual Studies subforum or did a mod move it here? I just ask because my original intention was to post it in the Daoist discussion forum.

My original question (the relation between mystical experiences and the spiritual path, how they are viewed and what they are called) and what we are discussing (the nature of time and becoming in relation to the end or ultimate goal of the spiritual path) are two different things, so I couldn't have wanted to debate under the guise of asking questions. In any case, I offered those statements and inquiries not out of debate or wanting to assert my position, but merely to better understand what you were trying to tell me. I will give your material a further read when time permits. That said, perhaps we come from different modes of understanding because you seem to rely on or place value on science, quantum or otherwise, in your way of approaching and understanding metaphysics, spirituality, esotericism, mysticism, etc. whereas I tend to avoid science all together when approaching these areas.

I somehow doubt with a religious tradition spanning anywhere from 2000-5000 years or more (depending on how you view the origins of Daoism) with such varied currents that the answer can be this simple. One glaring example otherwise would be the Yellow Turban movement which was related to the Tianshi Dao and based around the Taiping jing that certainly engaged in warfare, and I believe Zhang Lu, supposed grandson of Zhang Daoling, killed a rival in order to establish his theocratic Daoist state in Sichuan during the Three Kingdoms period. While I am sure that Daoism, like all sophisticated religious and philosophical traditions, prefers and emphasizes peace and non-violence, I somehow doubt that they had absolutely no connection with any martial, warrior, or heroic traditions and viewed all of them with aversion and disgust always. As far as I know, the DDJ is also against weapons and war, but it also states that when their use is unavoidable that the best way is use them with detachment (rather than hatred or anger) and to not celebrate victory.

Just a few points to address or make comments on: Well I suppose this depends on how you define "universe." Typically when one says universe they mean the cosmos, namely space-time, whereas the experience I am speaking of is that which transcends space-time, yet also encompasses it as well. So the end of all that hard work is a dispersion of this pure qi into formlessness and then still being dependent on an external will or process (manifesting into what the universe wants)? Isn't this a lack of freedom, being dependent on the flux of changes and manifestations the universe wants to take? Also where does awareness or Mind or Atman fall into this notion? I was just using this example as a way to illustrate the seal of certitude or reality of the experience, i.e. it was so real that everything else in the mundane world, even mathematical truths, could be seen as less real or possibly called into question in comparison. What you seem to be saying here sounds like pantheism to me, or that the universe, again space-time, is all there is, especially since to transform requires before and after, or in other words depends on time. It seems various other mystics and sages from all traditions (including Daoism) have spoken of entering timelessness, a transcendent level or state where all time and hence the flux of becoming has ended. The energy still does constantly transform, but this occurs at the lower level of the immanent universe and in the personal experience of the non-sage, whereas the inner state of the sage even while in this lifetime on Earth brings transcendence into immanence. Meister Eckhart described this state here: "There exists only the present instant… a Now which always and without end is itself new. There is no yesterday nor any tomorrow, but only Now, as it was a thousand years ago and as it will be a thousand years hence." This Daoist teacher here also describes this situation which he refers to at one point as "another dimension":

I can agree that such an experience might not be the ultimate, but I don't know if one could call it an illusion entirely either. I didn't want to put too much of my own personal experience into this question to keep it more neutral and based on generalities, but I had such an experience in the past which prompted me to devote my life to these matters. And yet I am no sage, no Buddha, not enlightened, not liberated, etc., indeed I have plenty of faults and struggle to attain self-mastery. That said, on reality vs. illusion, the experience I had was so powerful (the most meaningful thing to occur in my life) and so real that I've often described it to friends in the past like it was as if everything could be called into question, even obvious truths like 2+2=4, but never the truth and reality of this experience, which had a seal of certitude to it that is quite beyond description. So if it was illusion, then I could only conclude that all is illusion, which indeed does seem to be the position held by some traditions or figures. If it were my lone experience that would be one thing, but it seems that many others have had descriptively identical experiences, and furthermore after the experience suddenly metaphysical or sacred texts suddenly made sense. So it seems there is a commonality involved here. Furthermore it involved conceptions or experiences that I was previously unaware even existed or were possible, namely the experience of timelessness/changelessness and transcendence of space, etc. That said, again I remain an unenlightened mortal with plenty of faults and weaknesses and don't see myself as much more either. So is there any explanation for these experiences other than it was all a grand illusion? If it was illusion, does it lose its meaningfulness or importance? If all is illusion, doesn't even things like beauty or sacred scriptures or the teachings of the sages and all else also lose their meaning? I know one shouldn't be overly attached to experiences, however grand, and in general I am not, but my main confusion lies on how to understand it. Thanks for the help and if anyone else has had similar experiences or questions about these experiences, do share.

It's interesting that, at least in Hindu systems and perhaps for Buddhists too, samsara is becoming, and so liberation is the end of becoming, i.e. entering timelessness/changelessness. Similarly for Daoism, neidan or otherwise, transcending space and time is seen as the ultimate end or goal. Christian mystics, Sufis, Neoplatonists, Hermeticists, etc. have also mentioned these things. So it seems this is seen as the peak or ultimate of many traditions. How then is it possible that some people directly experience or see this, and yet do not right then and there become liberated, Buddhas, Daoist perfected/celestial immortals, etc.? Could it be that people who have experienced this have had an initial awakening as per the Chan/Zen tradition that needs to be followed up with gradual cultivation? Do people who have had such experiences belong to a new ontological status as it were, perhaps something akin to the so-called "stream enterer" in Buddhism and/or being an ariya rather than a puthujjana? I suppose what confuses me is how one could have a glimpse at the ultimate as is reported by these mystical experiences people have had and yet remain mere mortals or unenlightened, non-liberated, subject to fear and delusion, still able to commit moral faults, etc.

I also love Chinese landscape paintings. Here's some interesting quotes on them I figured would be worth sharing since it relates them to Daoism. From John Blofeld's book on Daoism: From Julius Evola's introduction to the Daodejing, which was published in English as a sort of pamphlet or stand alone 'mini book': And on a similar note, from another Traditionalist, Frithjof Schuon: Finally, to share a few examples:

Hello, I was wondering if anyone could tell me or point me to a list of which original Taoist material has been translated as I plan on expanding my Taoist library if possible. As of now I own some of the obvious ones such as the Tao Te Ching, Chuang-Tzu, Wen-Tzu, Lieh-Tzu, and Secret of the Golden Flower. I also have "Jade Writing: Yellow Court Classic." With that said, are there any more important texts out there which are translated? Particularly interested in any of a philosophical, alchemic, or meditation focus in a similar vein to those listed previously. Wikipedia says that the Daozang consists of over 1400 texts so I imagine there has to be more material out there. Also a sub-question instead of creating an entire thread: How reliable/accurate/respected is the Jonathan Star translation of the TTC? Thanks in advance for any information!

When I said the East was steadfast, I wouldn't imply that the traditional or sacred mode of perception was completely intact, just much better than in the West where over the past few centuries a complete loss of the sense of the sacred has taken place. In other words, the concept of the sage (rather than mere saint) wasn't completely lost like in the West outside some esoteric orders. Liu Yiming and other Daoists, as well as various Chan Buddhists, were known to complain about the perceived degeneration of their respective spiritual traditions when compared to the heights of the Tang (for Chan) or early Song (for neidan.) In other words, the same roots were in place both East and West, but the West was first to manifest the outward symptoms over a longer period whereas in the East they lay dormant. Reading Guenon or the other Traditionalists would give one a much better insight into these matters than I can provide. Specifically this book may be of interest: http://www.amazon.com/East-West-Rene-Guenon/dp/0900588349 Interesting you say this, especially regarding the intellect. Frithjof Schuon mentions some interesting insights on the intellect (and metaphysics vs philosophy) in this short citation: http://www.sophia-perennis.com/philosophy/meta_philo.htm

I'd say the perceived difference between Western and Eastern psyche isn't so much geographical, racial, or cultural so much as a difference between a modern and traditional psyche. The origins of the divergence can be traced in various lines to various points in history, but until the High Middle Ages the Western and Eastern psyches weren't so different. It was through the trajectory of the rise of nominalism, the rise of secular humanism, the Renaissance, the Protestant revolution, and thereafter the scientific revolution, the so-called 'Enlightenment era', the industrial revolution, and thereafter the rise of Marxism, Darwinism, Freudianism, relativism, and materialistic atheism that the Western and Eastern minds diverged, the latter remaining rooted in ancient, spiritual, and sacred conceptualizations with the former transforming from the same mindset to the modern one. In other words, this was a process of centuries involving many factors and spiritual and intellectual movements. While the divergence begins in the Middle Ages, from my perspective the 18th century and onward the divergence becomes especially pronounced and accelerates. I (and others, like Rene Guenon, Ananda Coomaraswamy, etc.) attribute this trajectory not to something inherent within Western culture or people or mindset so much as the progress of spiritual forces at work in history, namely the so-called Kali Yuga/Dharma-Ending Age/Iron Age of Hesiod, etc. This is why these trends have ceased to be a merely Western phenomena and have spread across the globe with such ease. So, as noted at the start of my post, the difference isn't East vs West so much as traditional vs modern. It is interesting that what took the West centuries has happened in the East at a much faster during the past century or two, which shows that the same roots or spiritual decline that took place in the West were also present in the East, albeit to a lesser degree, probably due to the East focusing on the production of sages whereas Christianity only reserved this area for a small elite of mystics (often treated with suspicion) and with the increasing anti-Hermetic/alchemic/occult stance of the Catholic Church after the Renaissance, forcing those Western sages underground.

I wouldn't say this is necessarily the case. The Neoplatonists had exercises, primarily of an apophatic or emptying nature, and later Neoplatonic theurgy and ancient Greek alchemists had exercises of one might call a 'yogic' type, or at least esoteric/occult. The ancient Greeks also had various 'direct introduction' initiations within the various mystery traditions, such as the Eleusinian mysteries. Later the Greeks, after converting to Christianity, had a variety of exercises that one can read about in the Philokalia and other texts (some of which likely had antecedents in ancient Platonic exercises), with the primary focus being on hesychasm, a repetitive prayer akin to Sufi dhikr and Hindu/Buddhist mantras. Take this example from Evagrius Ponticus speaking on prayer: Edit: The works of Algis Uzdavinys are worth investigating for those interested in these matters.

I am personally of the opinion that the European Middle Ages' reputation for being a dark epoch is unfounded and that an influx of knowledge from the Islamic world isn't the only bright light or even the primary source of light or 'renaissance' during the period. A good book in this regard is Those Terrible Middle Ages: Debunking the Myths by Regine Pernoud. After all, the Middle Ages produced Gothic architecture, Gregorian chant, European polyphony, various advances in technology, great literature and poetry, and a variety of great philosophers and mystics, such as John Scotus Eriugena, the Victorines, the author of the Cloud of Unknowing, Dante, Meister Eckhart, Johannes Tauler, Nicholas of Cusa, etc. along with esotericism surrounding the Knights Templar, the Grail cycle, and medieval alchemy/Hermeticism. All and all a great era, and as once Juan Donoso Cortes praised that civilization: In any case, regarding the original topic, I doubt Daoism is an offshoot of earliest Buddhism, but it could have had contacts with some Indo-European spiritual tradition via the Tocharians that may have influenced it and hence would have been related to the spiritual family that gave birth to Buddhism, but even that is conjecture. Often when people encounter similarities in spiritual or esoteric traditions, they ask "Did this influence this?" when it might not be a matter of influence but rather different traditions and people encountering the same truths, the same obstacles on the way to that truth, the same intuitions about reality, etc. Hence to so-called Sophia Perrenis and the striking similarities between the heights of truth found in Daoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sufism, Christian mysticism, etc.