Taoist views on Buddhist way

[Taomeow]

Li Hongzhi - the founder of Falun Gong?

Yes. Also a buddhist and taoist scholar, which is why I thought his opinion might count in a buddhist-taoist thread. I know about the controversy. I know the practice. It's a taoist practice within a framework of buddhist ideas. In fact, falun gong might be the closest thing to buddhist-taoist reconciliation I've ever encountered.

[Pero]

Yes. Also a buddhist and taoist scholar, which is why I thought his opinion might count in a buddhist-taoist thread. I know about the controversy. I know the practice. It's a taoist practice within a framework of buddhist ideas. In fact, falun gong might be the closest thing to buddhist-taoist reconciliation I've ever encountered.

 

Sorry Taomeow, but I don't find him credible at all. Actually I find him to be a little "out there". Son of Buddha, brother of Jesus? Uhm yeah...

[soaring crane]

Is it possible that 500 years is only meant to represent a really, really long time? 500 years is pretty long. 10,000 things are a lot of things. But it isn't all of them.

 

I think it's not so easy to separate Buddhism and Taoism. Buddhism has been integrated into Chinese thought and practice for 2,000+ years and contact with Buddhists goes back even further. You won't find an original Taoist text that wasn't transcribed by someone with at least a touch of Buddhist influence, anywhere.

 

You're also unlikely to find any Taoists who live and practice methods exactly as was done before the earliest inkling of Buddhist thought entered China. There's probably not one on the entire planet.

 

You don't meet many Taoists, period. Especially not on the internet. But you can't throw a brick into a crowd of moderate size anywhere without risk of hitting a Buddhist.

 

So, first thing to do is, find a Taoist to compare to. Gotta throw a lotta bricks.

 

One thing that I notice about the practicing western (the stress on western is important) Buddhists who I know personally, they all seem to concentrate so much on identifying what the Buddha is not, that they run a great risk of missing it when they meet it. They're not very happy people. No sense of humor, as stated previously. They remind me very much of Christians, in many ways. Their attitudes don't come from the original teachings of Siddhartha-Gautama, they come from the cult of personality that sprang up around him. They have the same human roots as the dogma you find in any religion, including religious Taoism, I suppose.

 

I wrote in a PM recently that I've only met one person so far who I really feel radiates Tao. He's in his mid-fifties and when you go for a walk with him, you have the feeling you're babysitting a highly gifted four-year-old. His knowledge on virtually any subject is encyclopedic, yet he'll stop suddenly, look at a particular tree, start laughing and say, "Do you see it?". You ask, "What?". His answer, "The Yin. The Yang". And you just can't help smiling with him because, the way he says it, yes, you see it. It's there. It's always there. Smile

 

He doesn't drive a car, but I doubt he'd honk if he did, except to enjoy the funny music it makes.

 

 

The original Buddha image:

 

 

 

Buddha on Tao:

 

 

 

That's kind of the difference as I sense it.

[Taomeow]

Sorry Taomeow, but I don't find him credible at all. Actually I find him to be a little "out there". Son of Buddha, brother of Jesus? Uhm yeah...

I've no idea whose son he is. The practice is superb though -- have you tried it?.. If I come across a better reference I'll give it, so far the only book I've got handy is My Country and My People by Lin Yutang, and buddhists would be very unhappy with what he presents as the traditional taoist view of buddhism. I don't want to be responsible for their unhappiness, so if interested, check it out yourself. Unlike Li Hongzhi, Lin Yutang is not controversial one bit, he's the translator of many classical taoist and buddhist texts into English, an Oxford-educated scholar, and the inventor of the Chinese typewriter.

 

Buddha on Tao:

 

That's kind of the difference as I sense it.

 

Right on!

[Pero]

I've no idea whose son he is. The practice is superb though -- have you tried it?..

 

Yes but for a very short time so I can't say much, but in any case I don't doubt it's a good practice. I doubt him. Not because of cult controversy but because of what he said in his books. I can't be more specific because I read them years back and so don't remember anymore, it's just the impression.

And then there's also that Verdesi once mentioned he learned from Wang Li Ping and then started teaching without his approval and caused problems... But then I don't Verdesi very credible either haha.

 

If I come across a better reference I'll give it, so far the only book I've got handy is My Country and My People by Lin Yutang, and buddhists would be very unhappy with what he presents as the traditional taoist view of buddhism.

 

I meant more like in which sutra he (the Buddha) says that.

[Sunya]

the fat jolly monk is actually not Buddha, though everyone seems to think he is I lost count how many times I've explained to people that Buddha was not a fat nor Chinese it's actually Budai, who was a Chan monk living around the 10th century.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budai

[rex]

so far the only book I've got handy is My Country and My People by Lin Yutang, and buddhists would be very unhappy with what he presents as the traditional taoist view of buddhism. I don't want to be responsible for their unhappiness, so if interested, check it out yourself. Unlike Li Hongzhi, Lin Yutang is not controversial one bit, he's the translator of many classical taoist and buddhist texts into English, an Oxford-educated scholar, and the inventor of the Chinese typewriter.

Judging from Lin Yutang's spiritual history (Christian to Taoist to Buddhist to Christian) Taoists may be equally unhappy with his final view of Taoism as he refound his original Christian faith and dropped both Taoism and Buddhism.

Edited January 6, 2010 by rex

[Sunya]

Yes but for a very short time so I can't say much, but in any case I don't doubt it's a good practice. I doubt him. Not because of cult controversy but because of what he said in his books. I can't be more specific because I read them years back and so don't remember anymore, it's just the impression.

And then there's also that Verdesi once mentioned he learned from Wang Li Ping and then started teaching without his approval and caused problems... But then I don't Verdesi very credible either haha.

I meant more like in which sutra he (the Buddha) says that.

 

Hi Pero Happy new year brother! hope you are doing great

what other boards have you been carousing since E-Sangha went down (btw is it down for good?)

[Pero]

Hi Pero Happy new year brother! hope you are doing great

what other boards have you been carousing since E-Sangha went down (btw is it down for good?)

 

Thank you, happy new year to you too!

I'm doing pretty good, could be better though.

And you?

 

Actually I haven't been going to any other Buddhist forums. I'm like an old man regarding forums now, don't like changes, no moving elsewhere hehe. If E-Sangha doesn't come back online I probably won't post on a Buddhist forum ever again. Heck even when/if it does come back I'm not sure how much I'll be there. Maybe just for trolling a little haha.

Interestingly though I seem to have replaced the time I usually spent on E-Sangha with spending time on Facebook. Probably I had less comments on statuses in years before combined than in the months since E-Sangha went down.

[goldisheavy]

What problems does Buddhism solve in our society right now?

 

I am not sure I understand your question. Can you please be more specific?

And on a spiritual note;

 

"An uncomprimising theory of illusion solves no problem of our existence; it only cuts the problem out for the individual by showing him a way of exit."

 

"The theory of illusion cuts the knot of the world problem, it does not disentangle it; it is an escape, not a solution."

 

Sri Aurobindo - The Life Divine p. 486-487

 

Well, I disagree with that attitude. Seeing the world as an illusion simply adds more options. It doesn't eliminate the experience. It simply opens the experience up. You still have to deal with your experience. So there are plenty of knots to disentangle even after you view everything as an illusion.

 

I think the mistaken conclusion that Aurobindo has arrived at is that if you see something as an illusion, you no longer care about it and you don't get involved with it anymore. I completely disagree with that idea.

 

I've no idea whose son he is. The practice is superb though -- have you tried it?.. If I come across a better reference I'll give it, so far the only book I've got handy is My Country and My People by Lin Yutang, and buddhists would be very unhappy with what he presents as the traditional taoist view of buddhism. I don't want to be responsible for their unhappiness, so if interested, check it out yourself. Unlike Li Hongzhi, Lin Yutang is not controversial one bit, he's the translator of many classical taoist and buddhist texts into English, an Oxford-educated scholar, and the inventor of the Chinese typewriter.

Right on!

 

I don't care about anyone's view on Buddhism. But what would be interesting, is a cogent critique of the Buddhist doctrine. Now that would be interesting. I would love to see it. I don't think Buddha was perfect and a good critique could help broaden my understanding.

 

Heck even an abject idiot can have a view on Buddhism. That's not valuable. What's valuable is a cogent critique, and an idiot will not be able to produce one of those.

[Taomeow]

Judging from Lin Yutang's spiritual history (Christian to Taoist to Buddhist to Christian) Taoists may be equally unhappy with his final view of Taoism as he refound his original Christian faith and dropped both Taoism and Buddhism.

however, he doesn't present HIS views in the book. He relies on (and cites) taoists (and buddhists) who have spoken on the subject -- including a long and heart-wrenching poem by a buddhist nun I dare not quote here.

 

I have gone from shamanism to atheism to Tibetan buddhism to taoism to proto-taoism back to shamanism, by the way. "To and fro goes the Way." In modern terms, "the Way evolves." "The Way of tao is motion and the pattern of this motion is return." So it's not unusual nor demeaning to revisit a starting point -- on a different level, enriched with the sights and sounds of everywhere you've been on the journey.

[bobby]

everything is created by the mind.....

 

physical and spiritual.....

 

if the mind is not calm....

 

it creates confusion....

 

serenity is the key to everything....

 

all masters know this.....

 

god is always at rest.

[goldisheavy]

however, he doesn't present HIS views in the book. He relies on (and cites) taoists (and buddhists) who have spoken on the subject -- including a long and heart-wrenching poem by a buddhist nun I dare not quote here.

You're a tease.

[exorcist_1699]

Being a Taoist, it seems I am too chattering . And, as one Taoist saying claims : " Whoever knows Tao, whoever keeps silent ; Whoever talks about it , whoever doesn't really know it" , (知者不言,言者不知) it seems inappropriate.

 

Yet in most cases, language is the only means to express Tao in this world .

 

Taoists , although not as ambitious as Buddhists try rescuing all people in this world , still think that part of the people can be led to a better place , higher level . So, they try to talk , and insist that a good philosophy is okay but not enough . When you suffer from a loose ,aching tooth and can't eat, no matter how good a philosophy about life you get, what use ? Yet real Taoists know that by refining jing to higher -quality qi ( where higher jing also hidden ) , loose tooth can be fixed , even fallen one reborn...and if they not try to tell, who will know???

 

Mediocre Buddhism will tell you that there is no loose tooth existed at all , no aching tooth , or even no tooth...

 

Of course, if your ability is high enough to forget all pains and sufferings at one stroke , Buddhist way of cultivation is really a superb one ...yet who know the secret of it ?

Edited January 6, 2010 by exorcist_1699

[innerspace_cadet]

I've struggled with this so much over the years. Am I "Taoist" or "Buddhist"? Then I ask myself, is the truth Buddhist or Taoist at all? I tell myself "no, the Truth is the Truth, and that's it." Life isn't about joining an ism it's about being free, totally free of all constraints.

[rex]

So it's not unusual nor demeaning to revisit a starting point -- on a different level, enriched with the sights and sounds of everywhere you've been on the journey.

Absolutely not, and it's also not unusual to use questionable sources to support partisan views. Edited January 6, 2010 by rex

[宁]

Being a Taoist, it seems I am too chattering . And, as one Taoist saying claims : " Whoever knows Tao, whoever keeps silent ; Whoever talks about it , whoever doesn't really know it" , (知者不言,言者不知) it seems inappropriate.

 

Yet in most cases, language is the only means to express Tao in this world .

 

I for one need your chattering I find it very informative.

 

Taoists , although not as ambitious as Buddhists try rescuing all people in this world , still think that part of the people can be led to a better place , higher level . So, they try to talk , and insist that a good philosophy is okay but not enough . When you suffer from a loose ,aching tooth and can't eat, no matter how good a philosophy about life you get, what use ? Yet real Taoists know that by refining jing to higher -quality qi ( where higher jing also hidden ) , loose tooth can be fixed , even fallen one reborn...and if they not try to tell, who will know???

 

Fallen teeth, reborn? Are you sure?

 

Mediocre Buddhism will tell you that there is no loose tooth existed at all , no aching tooth , or even no tooth...

 

Yes, the first step when a problem arises is denial...

[Taomeow]

Absolutely not, and it's also not unusual to use questionable sources to support partisan views.

Which sources are not questionable? oh, I get it... the ones that support the views or your party.

[rex]

Which sources are not questionable? oh, I get it... the ones that support the views or your party.

Strangely enough, contrary to what it may appear, I'm actually into live and let live (having Buddhist as well as non-Buddhist teachers), but when a bold loaded assertion like this:

 

Gautama Buddha explicitly stated that his dharma would be saving sentient beings for 500 years. It's well past expiration date by now.

 

boils down to this:

I read it in Li Hongzhi's book. He asserts his school is a buddhist-taoist one. I read it very long ago though, so I don't remember which sources he cited ...

 

then it appears that live and let die elements have announced themselves.

[宁]

Strangely enough, contrary to what it may appear, I'm actually into live and let live

 

Mmm... you can't. If you live and let live, you can't live.

To sustain your living you have to consume others' life. Just think about

- food

- clothes

- home

- work

- etc

 

Live and let live is relativism...

Relativism is not associated with success in practice.

You need to focus on some things that are more important than others, this way you establish what your values are. Your values are the ones that shape the way you act and live.

 

Live and let live sounds good, but... I haven't found an efficient way to do it....

Edited January 6, 2010 by Little1

[Taomeow]

Strangely enough, contrary to what it may appear, I'm actually into live and let live (having Buddhist as well as non-Buddhist teachers), but when a bold loaded assertion like this:

 

boils down to this:

then it appears that live and let die elements have announced themselves.

 

This is the single most dramatic reaction I've ever managed to elicit by honoring a request for a reference.

 

Man, some people's lives are eventful... everything is life and death... reference a book they dislike and they scream bloody murder. OK, OK, Lin Yutang and Li Hongzhi are both clueless where you're an expert, and my having nothing else within an arm's reach or a memory's stretch and being too lazy to get up and go invest a few hours of research at the local library obviously makes me a criminal. I confess. I was too lazy to look for what might satisfy your specs any harder. But I didn't know it was killing you. Really sorry. Om Tat Sat Om. Om Mani Padme Hum. Om Namo Gurudev Namo. Meow.

[C T]

 

"To and fro goes the Way." In modern terms, "the Way evolves." "The Way of tao is motion and the pattern of this motion is return." So it's not unusual nor demeaning to revisit a starting point -- on a different level, enriched with the sights and sounds of everywhere you've been on the journey.

Sights and sounds are pretty interesting stuff for us "tourists" - you forgot to mention 'Air Miles' Taomeow...

without them the endless hopping on and hopping off this ginormous Ferris Wheel could be expensive, especially in these recessionary times!!

[rex]

I confess. I was too lazy to look for what might satisfy your specs any harder. But I didn't know it was killing you. Really sorry. Om Tat Sat Om. Om Mani Padme Hum. Om Namo Gurudev Namo. Meow.

Woof! It's nothing personal and I'm quite dispassionate about this exchange but trying to use a purported and unattributable quote from a tradtion to try and discredit that same tradition is cheeky. That's all, no hassle really, just an exchange in the market place of spiritual ideas. Edited January 6, 2010 by rex

[bindo]

 

Well, I disagree with that attitude. Seeing the world as an illusion simply adds more options. It doesn't eliminate the experience. It simply opens the experience up. You still have to deal with your experience. So there are plenty of knots to disentangle even after you view everything as an illusion.

 

I think the mistaken conclusion that Aurobindo has arrived at is that if you see something as an illusion, you no longer care about it and you don't get involved with it anymore. I completely disagree with that idea.

ummmmmmmm,no. Never mind. Go higher.

[exorcist_1699]

If our body is something illusory, why most kinds of Buddhist meditation/practices ask people to start from certain posture of sitting and mudra ( special positions of hands)? Is it not contradictory ? The explanation can only be , by following certain posture and mudra , people can initialize some kind of energy or qi that help them towards Enligtenment. If it targets at getting a peaceful mind, then nothing better than lying or sitting there in freeform styles; sitting there straight in certain uncomfortable posture conversely makes our mind unrest .

 

Please don't think that I am anti-Buddhism ; quite the contrary, what I am against are those vulgar , mediocre Buddhists who only have superficial understanding of Taoist practice. Taoist jing-qi-shen framework is much delicate and deep than what they can understand .

 

We Taoists adopt a much realistic attitude towards our physical body and its spiritual aspects. To me, better able to fight off every loose tooth or wrinkle on our face before talking about those big things. Why ? Unable to fight off a loose tooth or a wrinkle means the qi we initialize likely be low -quality one, which accordingly defintely can't help us jumping upwards to the level of Shen ( something similar to Awakening or Enlightenment in Buddhism ) . So, they are not only related , but closely interlinked .

 

Of course, if you think that your body is illusory, then there is no need to worry about the wrinkles on your face. Or, why should there exist a relationship between those wrinkles and Enlightenment? Just shake off the pseudo ego then Enlightenment come upon you . Easy and quick?

 

However, without pushing to the utmost of emptiness,hardly can a mind generate a Buddha Heart; And, Taoism sharply notices that without jing and qi's help, hardly can a mind settle down and push itself to the utmost of emptiness.