Taoism Vs Buddhism

[surfingbudda]

Hi Everyone,

I am new to this forum and am sorry if there has been any discussion on this topic already. Anyways, I have recently become very moved by both of these religion/philosophies about life. I am fairly new to both concepts and know that much can be said in terms of my question. I am just a bit confused about the differences between both Taoism and buddhism. Could someone be both a buddhist and a taoist? Also what are the main differences between buddhist qigong and taoist qigong? Thank you, I appreciate all the help and clarifications anyone is willing to give.

BTW does Taoism predate buddhism?

[C T]

This is the best forum to extract some meaningful answers to that which you hope to understand. I am quite sure very soon there will be plenty of worthy responses for you to consider.

 

Enjoy your time here, surfingbudda.

 

Wishing you all the best on your quest.

 

 

 

[The Way Is Virtue]

[Edit:] I need to start using a spell checker.

 

I am just a bit confused about the differences between both Taoism and buddhism. Could someone be both a buddhist and a taoist?

Regarding what is different between Buddhism and Taoism, I think the answer is not so straight forward. The reason is that what is called Taoism actually covers everything from Chinese folk religion practices, philosophy, formal Taoist religious sects (many of which have come and gone), and even some Taoist traditions/sects that have combined features of Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism. Like Buddhism, Taoism is a religion in China, and despite the wide variety of traditions and practices that are referred to as Taoism, most Taoists in China view Lao Tzu as being the main founder of Taoist thought, although there were others as well, and he is considered to be a deity by most Taoists. Formal religious Taoism did not start till a few centuries or so after Lao Tzu's time though. The concept of Taoism is further complicated these days where many lay practitioners refer to their practices as 'taoist', although there may be little real connection to formal Taoist religious organizations or Taoist followers.

 

What is referred to as Buddhism today has a more clear origin starting with the teachings of Sakyamuni Buddha (AKA Gautama Buddha) somewhere in or near India, but which branched out into a wide variety of practices and traditions over the centuries and which spread all over the East. Buddhism is alo considered to be a religion although some of the practices in Buddhism focus more on self cultivation, as is the case with Taoism.

 

[Edit:] Technically one can't be both a Buddhist and Taoist since they are both formal religions and one would traditionally follow one or the other, but considering that some later sects of Taoism incorporated aspects of Buddhism, and there are probably also people who respect and follow practices from both traditions so practically yes some people may consider themselves a follower of both religions. Nowadays, especially in the West, people are mixing and matching from various traditions and may refer to themselves as Taoists or Buddhists, but by the traditional definitions they would not really be a true follower of either, in my view anyway.

 

Also what are the main differences between buddhist qigong and taoist qigong?

It is just an indication of what tradition the qigong is supposed to have originated from although Taoist qigong overall seems to place more emphasis on the cultivation of internal energy while Buddhist qigong may be more externally based generally, but that is no hard and fast rule.

 

 

BTW does Taoism predate buddhism?

Lao Tzu and Gautama Buddha were supposed to have lived around the same time give or take a century or two, but many Taoists say that many of the practices that are part of what is called Taoism actually go back for several thousand years prior to Lao Tzu. How far the practices really go back is hard to say for certain now though. The practices of Taoism are mainly of Chinese origin, while Buddhism originated from somewhere in the vicinity of India.

Edited November 6, 2010 by The Way Is Virtue

[surfingbudda]

I would say i understand the just of buddhism, however i cannot say the same for Taoism. Does Taoism have a similar ideology of reincarnation and a system of karma similar to buddhism? What are the main defining characteristics of Taoism that set it apart from Buddhism? Also is neigong usually associated with taoist energy practices, while qigong is usually buddhist?

Also I would be grateful if someone could describe in their own words a definition of qi, jing, and shen. Is one enlightened once these three are in perfect balance and have reached their full potential? Are these three concepts a from Taoism?

[Marblehead]

Regarding what is different between Buddhism and Taoism, ...

 

Very nice summery and quite accurate according to my understanding.

 

 

To Surfingbuddha's last post and the question:

 

Does Taoism have a similar ideology of reincarnation and a system of karma similar to buddhism?

 

It depends on which Taoist you ask this question to. Some would respond "Yes". Others, like myself, a Philosophical Taoist, will say "No". In Philosophical Taoism upon death there is a return to the Source (in parts, not all in one piece) and 'cause and effect' replaces 'karma'.

[circlework]

[adept]

Throughout the years on Taobums this topic has caused much debate. It has led to heated discussions and arguments and in the end it has gotten nowhere.

If you drop the versus, and look instead to the source, there is no difference.

It is when orthodox religions are built up around the Way, that the essence is lost in a sea of ritual, dogma, sectarian abuse and inter-school fighting.

 

All the best on your quest.

[Jetsun]

Chan Buddhism is a good mix of Taoism and Buddhism so that is a good place to look at.

 

Personally on a practical level I found there is a difference in starting point between Taoism and Buddhism in that Taoism starts by trying to bring a person into balance before developing them spiritually, whereas Buddhism generally presumes a decent level of health and balance in the practitioner already.

[adept]

Chan Buddhism is a good mix of Taoism and Buddhism so that is a good place to look at.

 

Agreed. Maybe we should start a thread on how the traditions compliment each other, rather than the differences.

[adept]

Agreed. Maybe we should start a thread on how the traditions compliment each other, rather than the differences.

 

Just found one.

[The Way Is Virtue]

I would say i understand the just of buddhism, however i cannot say the same for Taoism.

A little more background before I try to answer some of your questions:

Although Taoism has a broad and diverse background, there are some fairly common beliefs and practices amongst the different traditions, and a few different versions of a Taoist canon were compiled in the past, which is a collection of what were considered to be the most important taoist writings. The point being that because Taoism was comprised of many diverse traditions and practices it is hard to make wide sweeping generalizations about Taoism. There are two main branches of Taoism that have survived today in China. They are Quanzhen Taoism and Zhengyi Taoism. Because Quanzhen Taoism places more emphasis on things like meditation and internal cultivation pracitces by its followers, some westerners may mistakenly think that Quanzhen Taoism does not include the religious beliefs and associated practices of Taoism, but this is not the case. Both branches include similar religious beliefs and associated practices although there are distinct differences in some their views and practices and they come from different traditions.

 

Does Taoism have a similar ideology of reincarnation and a system of karma similar to buddhism? What are the main defining characteristics of Taoism that set it apart from Buddhism?

From A General Introduction to Daoism in China (from the Chinese Taoist Association website)

(This article is a very good short overview of Taoist beliefs and some of its history and should help regarding your questions on the main Taoist characteristics.)

"Daoism believes that the universe contains 36 heavens above and 36 hells below. The highest heaven is called Da-luo Heaven. The next three heavens are the Realm of Absolute Purity; the four heavens after that are the Four Brahmas; while the rest of the 28 heavens include the Immaterial Realm (four heavens), the Material Realm (18 heavens), and the Realm of Desire (six heavens).

 

Da-luo Heaven is wherein dwells the Celestial Worthy of Primordial Beginning, the Celestial Worthy of Numinous Treasure and the Celestial Worthy of the Way and Its Virtue; the Realm of Absolute Purity is the abode of nine grades of saints, realized beings and immortals. Those in the Four Brahmas are free of the pain of life and death; those in the Immaterial Realm enjoy longevity but are not free from the pain of life and death; while the people in the Realm of Desire experience all manner of desire as well as pain.

 

The 36 hells are the netherworld where the souls of the deceased dwell. Daoism believes that the deceased will be judged by the Ten Kings of the netherworld. A benevolent person will be reincarnated, while an evil-doer will be subject to punishment in these hells."

 

Also is neigong usually associated with taoist energy practices, while qigong is usually buddhist?

No, not necessarily. Neigong is an older term for internal qi cultivation and practices while qigong is a newer term that is generically used for all forms of qi cultivation and practices. Dao yin is also an older term for some forms of qigong practice that are somewhat yoga like.

 

Also I would be grateful if someone could describe in their own words a definition of qi, jing, and shen. Is one enlightened once these three are in perfect balance and have reached their full potential? Are these three concepts a from Taoism?

Hmm, I'm no expert but here goes (this is more from the Taoist perspective, I believe):

jing - vital essence

qi - vital energy (vitality)

shen - spirit

These terms are used in both Traditional Chinese Medicine and Taoism, although there may be differences in exactly how these terms are used in TCM and Taoism. I don't know the exact origin of these terms. I'm no expert on Taoist internal alchemy, but I don't think the idea is of cultivating perfect balance between the three treasures but more of cultivating positive essence, positive vitality, and then positive spirit. When one has fully cultivated positive spirit, one will have reached a stage of 'spiritual immortality'. So the alchemical process has more to do with transformation and refinement of jing, qi, and shen. That is just my limited understanding though and there are different Taoist traditions that include internal alchemy practices so some traditions may view it differently. The article I referenced above gives an overview of some of the different levels that Taoists believe are attainable through Taoist cultivation practices. There are different levels of 'immortality' in Taoism. The highest level of attainment in Taoism, although apparently indescribable, is somtimes referred to as complete integration with 'tao', which is also apparently indescribable.

[Vajrahridaya]

and look instead to the source

 

There is no primordial source in Buddhism, there is only beginningless flow of interdependence.

[Vajrahridaya]

whereas Buddhism generally presumes a decent level of health and balance in the practitioner already.

 

That's not true for Vajrayana. We receive preliminary contemplations, and physical practices such as physical yoga and prostrations, and chanting, other such things that progressively gets more intense or subtler as one progresses, the teacher starts introducing deeper and deeper, and more involved methods.

[Gerard]

If you look at both at a deep level and if you ask very highly realised spiritual practitioners there is no difference between these two and even other practices like Sufism, Mystic Christianity, Hinduism, etc.

 

I have come across Buddhist Chan monks practising Taijiquan and Daoists doing walking meditation Vipassana.

[The Way Is Virtue]

If you look at both at a deep level and if you ask very highly realised spiritual practitioners there is no difference between these two and even other practices like Sufism, Mystic Christianity, Hinduism, etc.

Some might express it as the different religions are different manifestations that arose in response to different specific needs in different places and times. If that is the case then it might be more correct to say that though they arise from the same source their manifestations are not exactly the same. Another more abstract way to say it is the normal creates the abnormal which attracts the normal, or in other words ponder the tai chi symbol (the yin yang symbol).

Edited November 6, 2010 by The Way Is Virtue

[goldisheavy]

Hi Everyone,

I am new to this forum and am sorry if there has been any discussion on this topic already. Anyways, I have recently become very moved by both of these religion/philosophies about life.

 

Same here.

 

I am fairly new to both concepts and know that much can be said in terms of my question. I am just a bit confused about the differences between both Taoism and buddhism. Could someone be both a buddhist and a taoist? Also what are the main differences between buddhist qigong and taoist qigong? Thank you, I appreciate all the help and clarifications anyone is willing to give.

BTW does Taoism predate buddhism?

 

Here's how I see it. I've studied a bit of both Buddhism and Taoism, and have some amount of spiritual practice which is neither specifically Taoist nor specifically Buddhist.

 

Taoism is much less formal than Buddhism. Chuang Tzu (Zhuangzi) is mostly a series of damn good questions, or statements that are meant to provoke questions. There is also plenty of humor in Chuang Tzu, whereas Buddhists seem to lack humor. So while Buddhists always smile, they are also always serious. Taoists seem to laugh a lot and they are much less serious and less constipated than Buddhists. It's not uncommon to find two Buddhists splitting infinite hairs over some doctrinal point, whereas you likely won't find Taoists engaged in such behavior.

 

Buddhism is more useful than Taoism to someone who has a lot of questions and who wants answers instead of counter-questions. Buddhism is more down to earth than Taoism in the sense that Buddhist practices are easy to explain and anyone can practice them. Taoist practices can be a bitch to explain and are somewhat elitist. It makes sense because Buddhism stresses compassion. So accessibility and digestibility are important values in Buddhist teachings, but Taoists are equally happy if no one understands what they say and thus, they are less compassionate and more snobbish than Buddhists. I love Chuang Tzu, but I fear Chuang Tzu is impenetrable for most people. Even when I re-read Chuang Tzu, I get a different understanding from it every time. On the other hand, Buddhist sutras have simple and down to earth explanations that even children can understand. This is because Buddhist compassion leads to skill in means.

 

I love both flavors and I am moved by and learn from them both. I think Taism and Buddhism are like apples and oranges, they are both part of a balanced diet.

 

As for qi gong, Buddhists do not emphasize energy practice because Buddhist believe that energy is essentially a trick of consciousness, empty, and not worth trying to micromanage. Thus even when Buddhist engage in energy-like practices, their point of focus is emptiness rather than energy accumulation. Buddhists don't believe things can be accumulated. Trying to accumulate energy is like trying to accumulate rainbows or like trying to accumulate rabbit horns, from a Buddhist perspective. Taoists tend to take a more substantialist view of energy and to them it makes more sense to try to refine and to accumulate energy, although I must say, this isn't consistent with what the founders like Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu have said. So in a sense, Taoists ignore what their founders have said (especially alchemists who do things that downright contradict the spirit of Chuang Tzu) while Buddhists tend to listen to Buddha pretty faithfully in comparison.

 

Still, I find alchemy interesting anyway. Substantial or not is important for the sake of ultimate understanding, but in day to day experience alchemy can yield results even given a mind that's chained by subtle substantialist ignorance. And to most people results matter.

Edited November 6, 2010 by goldisheavy

[The Way Is Virtue]

I thought I should also mention that there is the outer formal Daoist Religion and its doctrines and practices which is practiced by ordinary people, and there are the inner teachings and practices of Daoism that are passed in private from teacher to student. These may be somewhat different than what is presented outwardly in the religious doctrines and practices. As an example of what I am getting at, I remember reading a description of reincarnation and karma from a Taoist monk (I'll use the word monk for lack of a better term) based on his own personal understanding he had gained when practicing his sect's inner cultivation practices, and his description of rencarnation and karma were fairly similar to the concepts as they are described in Buddhism, but the outer religious teachings of Taoism do no describe the concepts in the same way. So there are different aspects to Taoism, the outer and the inner, so to speak.

Edited November 6, 2010 by The Way Is Virtue

[Vajrahridaya]

If that is the case then it might be more correct to say that though they arise from the same source their manifestations are not exactly the same.

 

What source?

[Vajrahridaya]

If you look at both at a deep level and if you ask very highly realised spiritual practitioners there is no difference between these two and even other practices like Sufism, Mystic Christianity, Hinduism, etc.

 

I have come across Buddhist Chan monks practising Taijiquan and Daoists doing walking meditation Vipassana.

 

There is a difference between sharing practices and view. The view is different in Buddhism, as they do not aim at the same goal. Doing a practice is something else entirely.

 

There is a question as to weather some versions of Taoist interpretation are somewhat the same as Buddhist, but all in all... I doubt it, unless you are just talking to an individual who might have an insight that transcends the norm taking them beyond this idea and experience of a single primal source to everything. Most historical Buddhist masters actually don't think that all traditions lead to the same destination and even explain in exhaustion, why this is so.

 

To the original poster. If you want to know one vital thing that makes Buddhism and Taoism different, it's the fact that Taoism subscribes to one eternal source of all existence that is the primal essence of all things, beyond explanation and thought. Buddhism does not.

[goldisheavy]

To the original poster. If you want to know one vital thing that makes Buddhism and Taoism different, it's the fact that Taoism subscribes to one eternal source of all existence that is the primal essence of all things, beyond explanation and thought. Buddhism does not.

 

I strongly disagree with this view. The Tao is not really the source, but it is the way of things, so to speak. The Tao is the experiential ground of things, but it's not some kind of substance and Chuang Tzu makes it pretty clear because the Tao is neither being nor non-being. The idea of the Tao is more of a teaching device, to get the person to think about the common pattern or the common reality behind the 10,000 things.

 

Some Buddhists ignorantly ascribe monism to Taoists, but this way you only trick yourself.

 

The biggest difference between Taoism and Buddhism are not their ultimate views on reality, which I think are comparable, but different emphasis on different virtues. For example, compassion and skillful means (or skill in means) is a Buddhist distinction.

 

I think we should make a distinction between what the Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu and Lieh Tzu said and what others who call themselves "Taoist" say, which is very different sometimes. Taoism in some ways is a wide umbrella like Hinduism, under which all kinds of views and practices get lumped, sometimes mutually incompatible views and practices. I think all in all, religious Taoists have done a piss-poor job of studying what their founders said. But whose fault is that? Chuang Tzu is awesome and is beyond reproach in my view. No Buddhist thinker could hold a candle to the man if he was alive today to answer questions.

[Aetherous]

To the original poster. If you want to know one vital thing that makes Buddhism and Taoism different, it's the fact that Taoism subscribes to one eternal source of all existence that is the primal essence of all things, beyond explanation and thought. Buddhism does not.

 

I was just reading The Dark Red Amulet today, and at the beginning of Chapter 7 it says the following:

 

The essence element (thigle) is the source of great bliss, which is beyond the ordinary sensations of bliss. The ultimate state of the essence element is the great bliss-emptiness of primordial wisdom. It is not subject to change, so we cannot say it is permanent or impermanent. This is why it is called "the great permanence". The siddha king Indrabhuti said, "Great bliss is not impermanent," which implies that it is permanent. But this permanence goes beyond relative permanence and impermanence. The higher teachings use the Sanskrit prefix maha or the Tibetan suffix chenpo, which means "great," to symbolize what is beyond duality.

 

So not all Buddhists believe the same thing about this, it seems. And what it really comes down to is that it's a difference in belief...because experientially, is there really a difference between the two opinions?

[Birch]

"So not all Buddhists believe the same thing about this, it seems. And what it really comes down to is that it's a difference in belief...because experientially, is there really a difference between the two opinions?"

 

Nope

[surfingbudda]

Thanks everyone for the great responses . I think i'm starting to get a feel for both of these amazing religions. I found a good article just addressing enlightenment using taoism and tibetan buddhist philosophies.

http://www.sacredtransformation.com/article2.html

My link

[adept]

There is no primordial source in Buddhism, there is only beginningless flow of interdependence.

 

Agreed, maybe the word source was a wrong way to put it. Sourceless source would be a better way of describing it.

I tend to agree with GIH in that the Tao is just the flow of life, the constant change and not a fixed point where everything comes from and returns to. Dependent co-arising under a different name.

There can be harmony between the two traditions I think. Lets look to the similarities and not the differences.

 

Do No Harm

[adept]

I strongly disagree with this view. The Tao is not really the source, but it is the way of things, so to speak. The Tao is the experiential ground of things, but it's not some kind of substance and Chuang Tzu makes it pretty clear because the Tao is neither being nor non-being. The idea of the Tao is more of a teaching device, to get the person to think about the common pattern or the common reality behind the 10,000 things.

 

Some Buddhists ignorantly ascribe monism to Taoists, but this way you only trick yourself.

 

The biggest difference between Taoism and Buddhism are not their ultimate views on reality, which I think are comparable, but different emphasis on different virtues. For example, compassion and skillful means (or skill in means) is a Buddhist distinction.

 

I think we should make a distinction between what the Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu and Lieh Tzu said and what others who call themselves "Taoist" say, which is very different sometimes. Taoism in some ways is a wide umbrella like Hinduism, under which all kinds of views and practices get lumped, sometimes mutually incompatible views and practices. I think all in all, religious Taoists have done a piss-poor job of studying what their founders said. But whose fault is that? Chuang Tzu is awesome and is beyond reproach in my view. No Buddhist thinker could hold a candle to the man if he was alive today to answer questions.

 

Very good post. A lot of Chan masters also studied Chuang Tzu.

link

Edited November 7, 2010 by adept