Of Buddhists and Taoists

[Stigweard]

Taken from the Taoist "Treatise on the Mysterious Orifice" written by Xuanweilun in the sixteenth century:

 

"Original nature is spirit, and life is generative and vital energy. Original nature is the Limitless (Wuji), and life is the Great Ultimate (Taiji). Each cannot exist without the other. Some say that Buddhists cultivate only original nature and Taoists cultivate only life. They are wrong, because they don't know that the Buddhist teachings of dissolving the self and eradicating desire are equivalent to the Taoist practice of holding on to the Mother and valuing the emptiness of the Great Beginning."

Translated by Eva Wong.

[Vajrahridaya]

Taken from the Taoist "Treatise on the Mysterious Orifice" written by Xuanweilun in the sixteenth century:

 

"Original nature is spirit, and life is generative and vital energy. Original nature is the Limitless (Wuji), and life is the Great Ultimate (Taiji). Each cannot exist without the other. Some say that Buddhists cultivate only original nature and Taoists cultivate only life. They are wrong, because they don't know that the Buddhist teachings of dissolving the self and eradicating desire are equivalent to the Taoist practice of holding on to the Mother and valuing the emptiness of the Great Beginning."

Translated by Eva Wong.

 

We don't have a cosmic mother or a great beginning in any literal sense. There's no beginning according to Buddhist Cosmology. No point of origin. There's not even a great spirit shared by all beings, as this is considered a Samsaric interpretation that leads to re-absorption at the end of this universe's expression.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

We don't have a cosmic mother or a great beginning in any literal sense. There's no beginning according to Buddhist Cosmology. No point of origin. There's not even a great spirit shared by all beings, as this is considered a Samsaric interpretation that leads to re-absorption at the end of this universe's expression.

 

I do not believe that the author meant the word "equivalent" to mean the same. Of course the practices and philosophical interpretations are different for the two traditions, but this is trying to remind us that both Buddhism and Taoism have tools to address form and formlessness, body and mind, samsara and nirvana, and as such, both systems will develop all aspects of the spiritual aspirant.

 

This is a wonderful quote given some of the discussions that have been circulating TTBs lately. It is important to remember that although Taoism seems to put more emphasis on the body and energy and Buddhism on the mind and emptiness, that both have tools to address all aspects of enlightenment and spiritual immortality (so to speak).

 

It is sometimes easy to get caught up in terms and philosophy while totally loosing the spirit of the practice.

[Vajrahridaya]

I do not believe that the author meant the word "equivalent" to mean the same. Of course the practices and philosophical interpretations are different for the two traditions, but this is trying to remind us that both Buddhism and Taoism have tools to address form and formlessness, body and mind, samsara and nirvana, and as such, both systems will develop all aspects of the spiritual aspirant.

 

This is a wonderful quote given some of the discussions that have been circulating TTBs lately. It is important to remember that although Taoism seems to put more emphasis on the body and energy and Buddhism on the mind and emptiness, that both have tools to address all aspects of enlightenment and spiritual immortality (so to speak).

 

It is sometimes easy to get caught up in terms and philosophy while totally loosing the spirit of the practice.

 

To a Buddhist the whole point to weather a practice will lead to the result of liberation is starting with the view of liberation. Method alone will not lead to liberation from Samsara which is the entire point of Buddhism. So, though a Buddhist could say... hey, that's wonderful, you practice a way that leads to a higher capacity in your next life, but it's not at all going to lead to the same result as Buddhism. So a Buddhist can merely accept another system as being what it is, and leading to where it leads, but as a Buddhist one can't lie to them self and say that they are the same good as they are different paths leading to different results. Though some of the outer aspects might indeed be the same. Also, Vajrayana spends tons of time working on the body and energy. I don't think Chinese Buddhism does the same at all because it's not Tantric. So, this quote is not at all talking about Vajrayana Buddhism because Vajrayana applies just as much time to body and energy as Taoism does, but also has much more philosophical clarity as to the reasons why one does the body and energy practices and how to think about them so that the intent towards the result is absolutely clear as body/mind are not separate.

 

Buddhism has always been a path that has made more of a point to show the differences, while other paths try to be the same, but as Buddhism is more clear about what the goal of itself is, we can never agree with these assumptions of sameness, even if there are points of similarity, we interpret the entirety differently so really these apparent similarities are illusions based upon a mis-interpretation according to us Buddhists.

[宁]

To a Buddhist the whole point to weather a practice will lead to the result of liberation is starting with the view of liberation. Method alone will not lead to liberation from Samsara which is the entire point of Buddhism. So, though a Buddhist could say... hey, that's wonderful, you practice a way that leads to a higher capacity in your next life, but it's not at all going to lead to the same result as Buddhism. So a Buddhist can merely accept another system as being what it is, and leading to where it leads, but as a Buddhist one can't lie to them self and say that they are the same good as they are different paths leading to different results. Though some of the outer aspects might indeed be the same. Also, Vajrayana spends tons of time working on the body and energy. I don't think Chinese Buddhism does the same at all because it's not Tantric. So, this quote is not at all talking about Vajrayana Buddhism because Vajrayana applies just as much time to body and energy as Taoism does, but also has much more philosophical clarity as to the reasons why one does the body and energy practices and how to think about them so that the intent towards the result is absolutely clear as body/mind are not separate.

 

Buddhism has always been a path that has made more of a point to show the differences, while other paths try to be the same, but as Buddhism is more clear about what the goal of itself is, we can never agree with these assumptions of sameness, even if there are points of similarity, we interpret the entirety differently so really these apparent similarities are illusions based upon a mis-interpretation according to us Buddhists.

 

There you go

[Vajrahridaya]

We do at times exemplify the similarities in books or talks, but this is only in order to fulfill a deeper agenda, which is to make people of other traditions more comfortable with Buddhism by equating some aspects with their own religions. That way in the long run, the conversion process is not such an alien and sudden shock, but rather just a slow assimilation and eventual domination. I know, sounds cunning. But, we really have the best intentions, as we really do see Buddhism as being the most complete path on the planet. Of course, to outright say this, is probably detrimental to my cause.

 

I'm really just being honest. Though at times, 100 percent honestly may not be the most desirable thing to be if one has a motive? I guess I don't have much of a motive... I just like to share and be completely honest and upfront about everything... it's a life long habit.

[Vajrahridaya]

But... we do believe that all traditions lead to spiritual and human advancement if rightly utilized.

 

In that, we are all the same and that's a very important similarity!

[Stigweard]

In my view Taoism is about integration, it is a path of fusion of disparity and polarity. In this manner I am very much inclined toward Master Hua-Ching Ni in referring to Taoism as the "Integral Way" or "The Path of Subtle Integration". As such I am always allowing myself to be mindful of the interdependence and oneness inherent within all people and their beliefs.

 

Sometimes though clarity is to be found through contrast. Sometimes we can only discover what we truly want by experiencing those things we don't want. Sometimes that different view point can help illuminate our own path.

 

And this is how we travel until we learn the wisdom that the pairs of opposites ... favor and disgrace, joy and suffering, right and wrong, better and worse, superior and inferior ... are equal expressions of the one universal nature and that it is only the conceptual deviations of our own conditioned mind that gives them distinctions of preference.

 

I think it is great Vajrahridaya that you are here amongst us, sharing the convictions of your own views, study and practice. You stir the pot with your resolute assertions which is fine because without movement and change life would stagnate and I am sure you would agree that Tao/Dharma is ever in flux whilst also inherently having universal constancy.

 

And yet the human sphere is one of the great environments in our lives and if we are to discover harmony, peace, and productivity within our relationships we must discover the Tao within our interactions with others. It is here that virtue is the pivotal practice in Taoism and in regard to virtue we have the elucidation of Laozi when he says:

 

我有三寶持而保之

一曰慈

二曰儉

三曰不敢為天下先

 

There are three treasures

which I embrace and follow closely:

the first is to be kind;

the second is to be simple;

the third is to not put one's own importance

first in the world.

 

To be kind, compassionate and frugal in our words with each other and to embrace one another's interdependent importance and value is the path of interpersonal Tao and is the way through which we will truly be of mutual benefit.

 

Blessings

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

And this is how we travel until we learn the wisdom that the pairs of opposites ... favor and disgrace, joy and suffering, right and wrong, better and worse, superior and inferior ... are equal expressions of the one universal nature and that it is only the conceptual deviations of our own conditioned mind that gives them distinctions of preference.

 

Blessings

 

We do agree with this, except we see the experience of the nature of things as not a substance but rather merely the realization of the inherent non-abiding nature, non-self nature, or non-inherent nature of all phenomena and experiences. The realization is not of a thing that is behind all things. That's where the Buddha get's quite sure in his assertion, that it's not the experience itself that is different, it's the way that it's interpreted that differs which leads either to total liberation, or re-absorption at the end of a cosmic eon. For us Buddhists... the experience of non-duality arises by seeing that all things are equally empty of inherent nature, thus the consciousness expands past phenomena, including itself, but where most paths reify this calling this experience the absolute Self, or true identity of all things, we see it as an experience that arises dependent upon the condition of seeing the real condition of all conditions. Get it?

 

So anyway... yes indeed...

 

I do agree with your tone and your virtue though... In that, we are quite the same.

 

Tashi Delegs!! (Blessings)

Edited August 18, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[宁]

I am familiar with many Daoist sciences and technologies that change the world for better in fields as medicine, human society, astronomy, self-defense, chemistry, mathematics, study of nature, animals and plants, strategy and logistics, governing a state or country, doing business, building a house, enriching the relationship between human beings, between male and female, raising children, being devoted and honouring the ancestors and parents/grandparents, nutrition, detox...

 

However, I know much less about Buddhist contribution regarding ACTUAL and Material well-being and care.

[Vajrahridaya]

I am familiar with many Daoist sciences and technologies that change the world for better in fields as medicine, human society, astronomy, self-defense, chemistry, mathematics, study of nature, animals and plants, strategy and logistics, governing a state or country, doing business, building a house, enriching the relationship between human beings, between male and female, raising children, being devoted and honouring the ancestors and parents/grandparents, nutrition, detox...

 

However, I know much less about Buddhist contribution regarding ACTUAL and Material well-being and care.

 

Indeed, well... that's fine.

 

Your main focus is Taoism... yes?

 

Buddhism has done the same as well as your lists above.

 

Buddhism disarmed Ashoka too. The big king who conquered India in the late 200's B.C. can be read about a bit here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka_the_Great

[宁]

I don't think that's true

 

All I know about buddhists is that they don't ever get enough of writing and commenting sutras

 

See, hence your activity on the forum... simmilar... heady heady heady... tisk tisk

 

However, I did apreciate one or two of your comments

 

I hope you can apreciate honest feedback

 

Also for what I know, all that buddhist Used about the fields I described above was borrowed from other systems/cultures, and mixed up with their own religious symbols.

I still don't get it... being an somewhat atheistic and agnostic religion, it couldn't care less about practical things... i think it should be the other way around...

[xabir2005]

Edited August 18, 2009 by xabir2005

[宁]

Edited August 18, 2009 by Little1

[nac]

I don't think that's true

 

All I know about buddhists is that they don't ever get enough of writing and commenting sutras

 

See, hence your activity on the forum... simmilar... heady heady heady... tisk tisk

 

However, I did apreciate one or two of your comments

 

I hope you can apreciate honest feedback

 

Also for what I know, all that buddhist Used about the fields I described above was borrowed from other systems/cultures, and mixed up with their own religious symbols.

I still don't get it... being an somewhat atheistic and agnostic religion, it couldn't care less about practical things... i think it should be the other way around...

What you know is wrong. Tibetan Buddhism is a lot like Taoism... With fake medical theories and everything!

[Vajrahridaya]

I don't think that's true

 

All I know about buddhists is that they don't ever get enough of writing and commenting sutras

 

See, hence your activity on the forum... simmilar... heady heady heady... tisk tisk

 

However, I did apreciate one or two of your comments

 

I hope you can apreciate honest feedback

 

Also for what I know, all that buddhist Used about the fields I described above was borrowed from other systems/cultures, and mixed up with their own religious symbols.

I still don't get it... being an somewhat atheistic and agnostic religion, it couldn't care less about practical things... i think it should be the other way around...

 

 

Yeah... you don't know what your talking about, but that's ok, most people don't.

 

 

Thank you

 

Likewise, you should be familliar with Daoist view on suffering:suffering is not necesarelly something bad.

[

 

There are two types of suffering, physical and psychological.

 

Physical suffering is unavoidable, but experienced as Bliss when one is fully realized. Psychological suffering is something completely unnecessary according to Buddhism and basically a revelation of a lack of wisdom.

 

Us Buddhists completely escape psychological suffering, while fully accepting and seeing through physical suffering, as it's just energy, and right view of energy actually transforms the experience into bliss and wisdom.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[宁]

ok

 

edit: but ah, the article was mentioning psychological suffering as well.

as for what you said, i'm cool with it.

i keep reminding myself that buddhist argue better than daoists

 

Edited August 18, 2009 by Little1

[Marblehead]

When I read the first sentence of the quote I got really nervous. But then, after reading the entire paragraph I felt more at ease. (I guess that would be an example of taking words out of their context.)

 

I do agree with the quote in its essence although (and this is already obvious) there will be many who would argue the semantics of the words used.

 

There is only one One. Different people emphasize different aspects of that One but our arguements change nothing. What is, is. That's all.

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

ok

 

edit: but ah, the article was mentioning psychological suffering as well.

as for what you said, i'm cool with it.

i keep reminding myself that buddhist argue better than daoists

 

 

I don't care about the article really. I'm talking about Buddhist realization and experience. There is as mentioned in the article a practice of the Tibetans to take on the suffering of others on a physical level in order to help, but their psychology experiences this suffering as a bliss simultaneous with the seeming burning.

[Marblehead]

ok

 

edit: but ah, the article was mentioning psychological suffering as well.

as for what you said, i'm cool with it.

i keep reminding myself that buddhist argue better than daoists

 

 

No. It is just that Buddhists use more words and oftentimes use contradictory words in order to confuse the issue or they use flowery words in order to cause the dull to appear fancy.

 

Regarding suffering, I suggest that the only kind of suffering is psychological. Pain covers everything else. (Yes, nearly all suffering is self-induced.)

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

No. It is just that Buddhists use more words and oftentimes use contradictory words in order to confuse the issue or they use flowery words in order to cause the dull to appear fancy.

 

 

That's a subjective interpretation that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. But of course, there is a reason why Buddhists are Buddhists and Taoists are not.

 

It has to do with capacity.

 

Eh... let it flow... let it flow...

[Marblehead]

That's a subjective interpretation that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. But of course, there is a reason why Buddhists are Buddhists and Taoists are not.

 

It has to do with capacity.

 

Eh... let it flow... let it flow...

 

Oh! But it does hold up to my scrutiny and for me that's all that matters. Hehehe.

 

Indeed, my friend. It seems the Buddhists hold the 10 ounce glass and we Taoists say "we are ocean".

 

Be well!

[Fruitzilla]

That's a subjective interpretation that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. But of course, there is a reason why Buddhists are Buddhists and Taoists are not.

 

It has to do with capacity.

 

Eh... let it flow... let it flow...

 

Sonny, you're too much. Really, you are.

 

To make use of any kind of "spiritual" experience, or whatever you want to call it, you need a bit of maturity.

 

You really can't behave like you do and claim any kind of capacity. Get real, for god's sake.

[Marblehead]

Okay. Story time. Everyone get comfortable and try to find a lesson in the story.

 

A short time after Buddhism was introduced in China it bacame a common occurance when visiting the town square to see Buddhists arguing over various concepts.

 

On this one particular day there were two Buddhists, one on each side of a table arguing. On the table was a glass, half filled with water. The arguement was to whether the glass was half empty or half full. The agruement had been going on for over an hour.

 

When suddenly, a Taoist Sage approached, and being thirsty, picked up the glass, drank the water, replaced the glass on the table, said "Thank you" to the Buddhists and went along his happy way.

 

Be well!

[nac]

edit: but ah, the article was mentioning psychological suffering as well.

Necessary for what, exactly? "Taoist technologies"? Don't you mean Taoist alchemists discovered several useful chemical substances, and many Chinese scientists, engineers and artists were adherents of Taoism and Zen? I doubt the yin-yang theory directly resulted in scientific discoveries any more than ancient Greek, Indian or Middle Eastern metaphysics did. That's the stuff science fiction is made of. (In fact, there really is a science fiction novel about this. Anyone remember what it's called?)

 

PS. Buddhist temples did spread education (reading & writing, classics, logic, mathematics, etc) throughout the eastern half of Asia. Does that count? During the Shogunate, over 40% of Japan was literate.

 

When suddenly, a Taoist Sage approached, and being thirsty, picked up the glass, drank the water, replaced the glass on the table, said "Thank you" to the Buddhists and went along his happy way.

So what you're saying is ... anyone who doesn't think drinking water is better than arguing over it is a crank? Guess Issac Newton should have just eaten that apple.

Edited August 18, 2009 by nac