Taoism Vs Buddhism

[Aaron]

I think that vs. threads are counter productive. In my experience Taoism and Buddhism both intend to do the same thing, ease one's suffering in this life. Taoism advocates an end to suffering through living in harmony with others, Buddhism does the same. The methods are infinitely different however. So one could say that it's not so much Taoism vs. Buddhism, so much as it is Taoism or Buddhism, or if it's your cup of tea, Taoism and Buddhism.

 

I personally shy away from religious ideology and practices, because I feel they are needless distractions. Lao Tzu made several comments regarding this in the Tao Te Ching and Hua Hu Ching. If one was going to note the greatest difference, that would be it. However one must also understand that this stems from my own very marginalized and unrelativistic approach to both.

 

I think that having grown up in the West, it is very difficult for me to understand the cultural context that Buddhism and Taoism hold to the Chinese, let alone assimilate it. In order for me to truly understand these phenomena on a deep level, I have to also understand the cultural context from which they came. This doesn't mean that I can't come to an understanding of what's being said within my own cultural context, only that my understanding will ultimately be tied to my own rationalizations and introspection, which in turn is based on my own cultural bias.

 

Even the word compassion can have a very different meaning for me than it does for someone from China or India for instance, just as my understanding of enlightenment can. When we look at teachers like Allan Watts or D. T. Suzuki, we find that the first thing they try to do is bring these ideas into context, because without being able to do this, we will invariably miss the actual teachings. We will learn something, but it wont be the same thing that is learned by the Eastern practitioner.

 

I liken it to learning to read with phonics. Yes it's a quick way to learn to read, but it's a horrendous way to learn to spell, since many words aren't actually spelled the way they sound. So one who starts to write utilizing phonics may be able to impart some of the message, but they will undoubtedly make mistakes along the way, without even knowing it. For the child learning to spell with phonics, they have no idea that fonix doznt aktualy werk tu exspress an ideuh, unless one also learns the rules for grammar, punctuation etc. So yes, we may grasp the basics, even begin to recognize some core concepts and extrapolate on them, but we can't actually express the practice with any kind of authenticity, because our cultural understanding is impeding us.

 

My recommendation for anyone that really wants to learn what Taoism and Buddhism were originally about is to spend time with practitioners from the East or if they can't do that, at the very least be satisfied that perhaps the most important messages will be understood, and use those as a foundation for your practice.

 

Aaron

 

edit- This response was inspired by Wu Ming Jen's response.

 

Also, this post was not intended to disparage or insult people whu lerned to rede uzing huked on fonix. I waz won of thoze peple and if it wasn't for spell checker, I'd probably sound pretty dumb half the time.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Aaron

[Vmarco]

I'm wondering if calling into question another person's knowledge or the validity of a topic in accordance with accepted anthropological and archaeological evidence is considered insulting?

I find all "knowledge" to be insulting,...from a Tao perspective. Same with "wisdom"....which is an accumulation of knowledge.

 

Thus,...perhaps more than 90% of the posts on TTB are insultive. Of course, for those who cling to knowledge (instead of the Tao) for their identity, only that which contradicts their knowledge (aka faith and beliefs) is insultive.

 

As the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Charles Townes said, “Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith.”

Edited May 13, 2013 by Vmarco

[Stosh]

I have nothing at all to do with this here thread but I am wondering what inspired the cautionary.

just a boo boo misread ?

And though it isnt posted to me personally ,

Yes it is counterproductive to make folks constantly suspect that what they do

isnt right , even when it is just fine... ( to the level of a third party saying something.

unless that third party would enjoy being treated as a suspect but not actually be charged

which in this country is thought to be unfair to the accused , who knows what it is elsewhere,

but here its innocent unless proven guilty , and our laws are meant to be applied evenhandedly and with restraint

it is that last part about even handedly and with restraint that gains any respect our system deserves because it allows for personal liberty , prevents the system from becoming onerous and yet allows a lid to be kept on things) .

Im not pointing any fingers at anyone here , Im just trying to point at common ground ,

because in the end, we really come here to joust in good fun.

Maybe we could all agree on a 'safe word'

on second thought ,, agree!! AH ha ha ha

Edited May 13, 2013 by Stosh

[林愛偉]

It is the work of past historians and fame-seekers looking for an authoritative stance to create separations within the 3 schools of Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism.

 

due to their tremendous public relations work, and influence on the ignorant, we are left with an argument which was started a long time ago, by people who either didn't cultivate at all, or just cultivated and didn't follow the rules of their practice. It could be that, and or just people who originally had an interest, and then got big-headed over what they "knew", and then started a nonsense debate/claim that Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism are extremely different, with extreme views against and apart from each other.

 

Its just lots of heads talking and nothing to base the claims on.

[Vmarco]

 

 

The views expressed in this post are not affiliated with this poster.

 

You must be old enough to read to consume this product.

 

If you have blurriness or trouble reading see an eye doctor right away.

 

May contain sarcasm viewer discretion is advised.

 

Yes,...using age as a cop-out often appears to be standard practice here.

 

 

ChiDragon, 11 May 2013 - 01:40 PM.

I'm 16 so please go easy on the technical terms

[voidisyinyang]

 

. (3) Many groups in higher castes also who are not given status of equality within the same caste, can be identified as Buddhist of olden times. If some work is done on these lines, we feel that scholars would be surprised to find in the Brahmanic texts of medieval ages, a very large number of groups.

Though Hinduism has borrowed all these tenets from Buddhism, it is still different from Buddhism. Joshi observes:

 

"Although modern Hindu culture has a great many elements of the Buddhist culture, the two are not identical. The Hindus consider the Buddha as a maker of Hinduism and worship Him as an avatara of God; Hinduism has accepted all the great and noble elements of Buddhism. These facts do not alter the historical truth that Buddhism is different from Hinduism and Hinduism is different from Buddhism. The Hindus may worship the Buddha, because their religion is largely based on the teachings of the Buddha. The Buddhists do not worship either Vishnu or Siva, not is their religion based on the Vedas." [Joshi:p.330]

http://www.ambedkar.org/Tirupati/Chap1.htm

Fascinating book on what became of Buddhism in India - how it was absorbed by Hinduism....

 

After the death of Buddha his follower started setting up the image3s of the Buddha and building stupas. The Brahmins followed it. They, in their turn, built temples and installed in the images of Siva, Vishnu and Rama and Krishna etc., - all with the object of drawing away the crowd that was attracted by the image worship of Buddha. That is how temples and images which had no place in Brahmanism came in to Hinduism. The Buddhist rejected the Brahmanic religion which consisted of Yajna and animal sacrifice, particularly of the cow. The objection to the sacrifice of the cow had taken a strong hold of minds of masses especially as they were an agricultural population and the cow was a very useful animal. The Brahmins in all probabilities had come to be hated as the killer of the cow in the same as the guest had come to be hated as Goghna, the killer of the cow by the householder, because whenever he came, a cow had to be killed in his honour. That being the case, the Brahmins could do nothing to improve their position against the Buddhist except by giving up the Yajna as a form of worship and the sacrifice of the cow." [Ambedkar: Untouchables: 1969:146]

 

 

 

Lakshmi was a Buddhist deity

The idea of Lakshmi as one of the consorts of Vishnu is so deeply ingrained in present day Indian psyche that, the fact that She was originally a Buddhist monuments, and not a Brahmanic ones. Dr. Vasudeva Upadhyaya observes:

"...The birth of Buddha is depicted by many symbols, in addition to Bodhi tree, chakra and Stupa. In the toranas of Bharhut and Sanchi the birth of Buddha is depicted by an elephant (dream of Maya) and a devi sitting or standing on a lotus. ... In one place a devi seated on a lotus is being anointed with water from jars held over her head by two elephants. This is termed in Hindu art as Gaja Lakshmi. In Buddhist art this is considered a symbol of birth of Buddha. It is the opinion of western scholars that the idea of Gaja Lakshmi of Hindus is copied from this Buddhist symbol. Evidences of this is found from the artistic examples of Bharhut, Boudha Gaya and Sanchi. Gaja Lakshmi had a place in Buddhist art of Shunga times..."

Upadhyaya, however, does not agree that Hindus copied her from Buddhist, and thinks that Hindus originated the idea from the Shrutis. However, he admits that no Brahmanic image of Lakshmi before the Christian Era is found. [upadhyaya: 312- emphasis ours] Whether Gaja Lakshmi of Hindus is influenced by Buddhist or not, the fact remains that the earliest archaeological representation of this form of devi is found only in Buddhist sculpture, and not in Brahmanic ones. The earliest Brahmanic representation is at Mahabalipuram:

"...Gajalaxmi ... in Varaha temple at Mamallapuram (being first to appear in the Hindu garb, though the Buddhism had used it from the times of stupa of Bharhut)..." [bhattacharya: 1967: 329]

 

 

 

Before Lakshmi came to be recognized as one of the consorts of Vishnu, her position in Brahmanic tradition was not very steady. Dr. J. N. Banerjea observes:

"...The tendency to regard some of the goddesses as indispensable consorts of the major gods, led to the multiple matrimonial alliances of Sri and of Saraswati. As noted above Sri and Lakshmi (regarded as two personalities) appear in the Vajasanniyi Samhita as two wives of Aditya. Later tradition made Sri and Mahaveta the two wives of Surya, one on either side of the Sun Image. This was followed by the still later conception in North India (especially Bengal) of Lakshmi and Saraswati as the two wives of Vishnu, placed on two sides of Vishnu image. Identification of Lakshmi with Durga, Amba, Devi or Ekanasa is also not unknown. Even Skanda's wife of Devasena has Lakshmi as one of her names, and Kubera, too claimed her as wife at a later time. Popular belief, however, made her wife of Vishnu, and in some Puranas his creative activity; and in Vishnudharmottara it is mentioned that gifts dedicated to Lakshmi should be given only to one well versed in the Pancharatra doctrine. Her figure appears in the lintels of Vishnu temples at Badami and Aihole, and latterly she degenerates into a parivardevata in the temple of Brahma as Visvakarma. If she had not lost her hold on veneration of men, it is because she represents the docile type of womanhood intensely attached to the husband and devoted to his service, and also because she is looked upon as goddess of wealth in the pursuit of which all sects are equally interested." [banerjea J. N.: 1970: 452]

 

Edited May 14, 2013 by pythagoreanfulllotus

[voidisyinyang]

 

"...the word "Dravida" is not an original word. It is the Sanskritised form of the word `Tamil' when imported into Sanskrit became Damila and later on Damila became Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not denote the race of the people. The third thin o remember is that Tamil of Dravida was no merely the language of South India but before the Aryans came it was the language of the whole of India, and was spoken from Kashmir to Cape Camorin. In fact it was the language of the Nagas throughout India..." [ibid: 75]

Nagas were Buddhists

That the Nagas were sympathizers and followers and followers of Buddha is well knows. Dr. Ambedkar in 1956, while converting half a million of his followers to Buddhism at Nagpur, had remarked that his selection of Nagpur was due to the historical association of the area with the Nagas, who were friendly towards Buddhism. We might also quote a Buddhist tradition from Mahavatthu:

"Nagas are generally devoted to the Buddha. The enthusiastic devotion that our compilers believed Nagas to possess towards the Teacher and the Teaching finds expression in the popular episode of Mucalinda's extraordinary way of protecting the Exalted One during the seven days of untimely rain. The were also among the beings who formed a body of guards protecting the Bodhisattva and his mother. At the Bodhisattva"s birth some Nagas came to bathe him, a scene that had long been a favourite among sculptors. On the Buddha's visit to Vaisali they displayed their respect for Him in a magnificent demonstration of bearing parasols. From other sources we learn how they happened to obtain relics of the Buddha, which they jealousy guarded for a long time." [bhikku Telwate:1978:172]

T. A. Gopinath Rao discussing Hindu iconography has agreed that majority of Buddhists were Nagas. This is what he said, quite a long time back:

"In historical times, portions of India were inhabitated by race of men who went by the name of Nagas and they are said to have formed the majority of persons who joined the newly started Buddhistic religion. Some scholars of Malabar are inclined to believe that the modern Nayars (Shudras) of Malabar might be descendants of early Nagas as name within modern times might have been corrupted into Nayars. The hypothesis is more fictitious and fanciful than real and tenable." [Rao: II,554 emphasis ours]

Prof. Rao, who categorically mentions Nayars were Shudras, finds the theory untenable. It is difficult to understand what faults Prof. Rao found with the theory. At least, I do not find any particular reason to disbelieve this theory. One thing is certain that the Nayars were the original inhabitants of the region, they did not come from outside. Before the Brahmins came from the North and establish 'sambamdhams' with the female folks of Kerala, and thus dominate the Nayar community, the original inhabitants were the Nagas only. From 'Naga' they could have become 'Nayar'. What is so peculiar in this, that Prof. Rao finds, is hard to understand. Let it be as it may, the fact remains that the Nagas became Buddhist in great numbers, is a fact that is certain. Todays Indian society is made up of and is developed from the erstwhile aboriginal tribal people, is a fact recognized by all the scholars. Then what is the difficulty in accepting that the word 'Nayar' might have come from 'Naga'?

There was a casteless society among the Naga culture

The non-aryan Naga people were believers in Buddhistic social culture. During their rule, there was a society based on social equality in India, because their cultural values were influenced by the Buddhist traditions. This social system of Nagas, even in those early days, is noteworthy in contrast to Brahmanical social system of inequality. It is unfortunate that the modern high caste scholars, while narrating the greatness of ancient Indian culture, ignore this fact. Shri H. L. Kosare opines:

"As all the elements in the Nagas society were treated with equal status, casteless social order was the main basis of social system of Nagas. As the Naga culture was based on Buddha's principles of equality, it received the status of Buddha's religion. Thus, Naga culture played the greatest role in the process of establishing a casteless egalitarian and integrated society in Indian cultural life." [Kosare: 256]

"A. L. Basham has shown that there is no mention of caste anywhere in ancient Tamil literature. But after Aryan influence increased, and political and social system became more complex, caste system which was somewhat more severe than in north, evolved even here. ('The wonder that was India', Rupa & Co., 1975, p.151) The period of Sangam literature is third century A.D., This shows that during the Satavahana rule there was no caste system." [Kosare: 251]

 

 

So it would appear again the Buddhism was a reform reaction to the Aryan Vedic religion and Buddhism became more popular - spread across India -- but then the Brahmins reasserted and assimilated Buddhism into what became Hinduism.

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.ambedkar.org/Tirupati/Chap30.htm

 

 

 

Precedents of usurping Buddhist Temples for Brahmanic use

It was shown that Image Worship originated amongst the Buddhist and that the struggle between Brahmins and Buddhists was the cause of it. Brahmanism took over many Buddhist Temples for Brahmanical use, for example Ter, Chezarala, Aihole, Undavali, Ellora. It was shown that chiseling out Buddhist images was the method used in many temples, and Shaivas and Vaishnavas were together in this. Various other examples from Bengal, Puri, Badrinatha, Delhi, Nalanda, Ayodhya, Bodh Gaya, Sarnath and Sringeri are also seen, with special reference to Guntepalli, and also role of Puranas in claiming the Buddhist places and retaining them. We summarized the scholars' views who have proved that Jagannatha of Puri, Vitthala of Pandharpur, Lord Ayyappa of Sabarimala in Kerala, Draksharama and Srisailam in Andhra were once Buddhist Temples. The relation of Tribals with Buddhism with reference to Puri, Srisailam, and Pandharpur was also discussed.

[Maddie]

http://www.ambedkar.org/Tirupati/Chap30.htm

Do you have any knowledge of how Buddhist cosmology differs from Taoist cosmology?

[voidisyinyang]

Do you have any knowledge of how Buddhist cosmology differs from Taoist cosmology?

 

 

Well the Nagas are the underground water snake spirits but also the Melanesian race of India that speaks Tamil. Yeah so Buddha was "black" -- the original humans from the Bushmen traveling out of Africa.....

 

http://www.nairaland.com/68677/ancient-black-buddha

 

This is the same as the Dragons that control the water of China.

 

So the cosmology of Buddhism is based on the Nagas as the underworld spirits and the same in Taoism.

 

This is the same as the Rainbow Spirit as the water spirit of the origins of Dakota cosmology -- Native American Indian.....

 

I think this rainbow water spirit energy was originally called N/om by the original human culture - the Bushmen -- as I've detailed elsewhere - traced to 70,000 BCE, a snake statue as N/om or kundalini energy - the prenatal vitality as the shen spirit energy or rainbow energy within the jing kundalini Naga energy.

 

Reality is holographic - cosmology is within the body - hell the lower half of the body and heaven the upper half.

 

So for Taoism you live in Heaven if your spirit is in the upper half of your body.

[voidisyinyang]

There is nothing absurd about this suggestion of swallowing the moon. Celestial dragons are, in reality, personifications of clouds; and among the most primitive and widespread impressions respecting lunar eclipses is the notion that a monster is devouring the moon. Dark and writhing clouds advancing as if alive, and finally extinguishing its light, might easily suggest a similar thought; and it was a matter of early experience that after these hungry cloud-dragons had completed their feast, fertilizing rain usually blessed the thirsty fields and pastures, so that the dragons got the credit. Hence artists liked to represent these public benefactors playfully contending for the opportunity to devour the 'queen of night' and so produce a crop-saving fall of showers for which they (the dragons) would enjoy grateful appreciation.

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/etc/ddl/ddl12.htm

 

 

"The cultural drift from West to East, along the south coast of India," Dr. Smith reminds us, "was effected mainly by sailors who were searching for pearls. Sharks constituted the special dangers the divers had to incur in exploiting pearlbeds to obtain the precious 'giver of life.' But at the time these great enterprises were undertaken in the Indian Ocean the people dwelling in the neighbourhood of the chief pearlbeds regarded the sea as the great source of all life-giving, and the god who exercised these powers was incarnated in a fish (ancestor of Dagon). The sharks therefore had to be brought into this scheme, and they were rationalized as the guardians of the storehouse of life-giving pearls at the bottom of the sea. . . . Out of these crude materials the imaginations of the early pearl-fishers created the picture of wonderful submarine palaces of Naga kings in which vast wealth, not merely of pearls but also of gold, precious stones, and beautiful maidens, were placed under the protection of shark-dragons."

 

http://theendlessfurther.com/tag/the-naga-princess/

 

The Sanskrit word “naga” actually refers to the King Cobra snake, but the Chinese translated it as dragon. In Buddhism, the Nagas are supernatural beings who live on Mount Semuru and in the depths of the ocean. It was from the underwater Naga Kings that Nagarjuna (“dragon-tree”) is said to have received the Mahayana sutras.

The story of the Dragon King’s Daughter is the lone example in Buddhist literature of a mortal being becoming a Buddha, with the notable exception of the Buddha himself. It’s meant to convey the universality of Buddha-nature. And it’s about a woman becoming a Buddha, which is significant not only for the statement it makes but also because it came out of a patriarchal culture that tended to view women as inferior.

Edited May 14, 2013 by pythagoreanfulllotus

[voidisyinyang]

Edited May 14, 2013 by pythagoreanfulllotus

[Maddie]

Well the Nagas are the underground water snake spirits but also the Melanesian race of India that speaks Tamil. Yeah so Buddha was "black" -- the original humans from the Bushmen traveling out of Africa.....

 

http://www.nairaland.com/68677/ancient-black-buddha

 

This is the same as the Dragons that control the water of China.

 

So the cosmology of Buddhism is based on the Nagas as the underworld spirits and the same in Taoism.

 

This is the same as the Rainbow Spirit as the water spirit of the origins of Dakota cosmology -- Native American Indian.....

 

I think this rainbow water spirit energy was originally called N/om by the original human culture - the Bushmen -- as I've detailed elsewhere - traced to 70,000 BCE, a snake statue as N/om or kundalini energy - the prenatal vitality as the shen spirit energy or rainbow energy within the jing kundalini Naga energy.

 

Reality is holographic - cosmology is within the body - hell the lower half of the body and heaven the upper half.

 

So for Taoism you live in Heaven if your spirit is in the upper half of your body.

Isn't a serpent also important in the Australian aboriginal beliefs?

 

I like the holographic comparison of the universe to the body :-)

[voidisyinyang]

Isn't a serpent also important in the Australian aboriginal beliefs?

 

I like the holographic comparison of the universe to the body :-)

 

 

yeah -- ummm.......... Christopher Knight anthropologist has an article on this....

 

http://www.radicalanthropologygroup.org/old/class_text_041.pdf

 

 

 

Knight argues that the rainbow snake was not invent ed by men. He rejects

previous interpretations of the snake as representing water, the weather or

the phallus

These interpretations are

Eurocentric, too one-sided and do not do justice to the way

that the rainbow snake is seen by native informants.

According to Knight’s interpretation: ‘The snake was an ancient menstruation-

inspired construct which men had taken over for their own use. It was ‘blood

relations’ in masculinised form’ (Knight 1991,p. 42).

 

In a detailed examination of the myth of the rainbow snake and other myths found in traditional societies, Knight shows how they reflect the origins of culture as founded on female solidarity, menstrual synchrony and the periodicity of sex-strike action.

 

Edited May 14, 2013 by pythagoreanfulllotus

[blindeye]

http://xuanfa.net/articles/the-manifestation-of-the-body-of-a-saint-or-holy-being/

[RongzomFan]

American mom does hardcore porn with 14 year old daughter, also involving dudes

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/mom-made-child-porn-with-daughter-sentence-trial-new-hampshire_n_3328450.html

[RongzomFan]

Americans gangrape girl and post video to facebook

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/chicago-teens-gang-raping-girl-facebook_n_3303311.html

[Maddie]

wow that's so sad

[Marblehead]

American mom does hardcore porn with 14 year old daughter, also involving dudes

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/mom-made-child-porn-with-daughter-sentence-trial-new-hampshire_n_3328450.html

The truth is the truth. However, let us not forget that people of all nationalities do the same thing. The human animal is what it is. There are no differences between an American or a Chinese person or an African person doing it.

 

Let us not be limiting in our criticism of humanity.

[Apech]

Americans gangrape girl and post video to facebook

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/chicago-teens-gang-raping-girl-facebook_n_3303311.html

 

I;m trying to work out why this and the previous post are on this thread. i.e. a thread about Taoism vs. Buddhism ... I know we wander off topic a lot but ... ?

[RongzomFan]

I;m trying to work out why this and the previous post are on this thread. i.e. a thread about Taoism vs. Buddhism ... I know we wander off topic a lot but ... ?

 

go to about page 39.

Edited May 25, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

American teens plot and murder classmate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/25/skylar-neese-murder-rachel-shoaf-plot-confession_n_3336364.html

[RongzomFan]

American mom does hardcore porn with 14 year old daughter, also involving dudes

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/mom-made-child-porn-with-daughter-sentence-trial-new-hampshire_n_3328450.html

 

bump

[RongzomFan]

Americans gangrape girl and post video to facebook

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/chicago-teens-gang-raping-girl-facebook_n_3303311.html

 

 

bump

[Marblehead]

Chinese men gangrape young girls. Japanese men gangrape young girls. African men gang rape young girls. German men gangrape young girls. Some men gangrape little boys.

 

Your post really didn't need to be bumped. Those interested had already seen it. Most made no comment. Shall we start pointing out the evils of different societies around the world beyound only Americans? Maybe the Islamist extremists?

Edited May 27, 2013 by Marblehead