"no forced conversion" - or aspects of same

[strawdog65]

[Vajrahridaya]

Back to the original quote....

 

It is my understanding that this was posted in response

to other posts in another thread which strongly suggest

that a Buddhist path to enlightenment is

somehow better than a Taoist path.

 

Since looking for converts is not at all Taoist....

where does this leave us?

 

Tao Is all and everything, and since Tao contains all, that would

mean to me that all religions are within the context that is Tao.

 

Each thread contributes to the whole of the fabric of Tao.

 

Peace!

 

That would be your understanding of the universe and not a Buddhist one. So, Buddhism points beyond this "one" that manifests, re-absorbs and recycles us to be re-manifest without memory of the prier, again and again. According to Buddhist cosmology, you are talking about Samsara, which is what we want to master and turn into the experience of Nirvana. So if we we're truly "one"... then there would be no possibility of escape from this ignorance recycling process. But, the Buddha revealed that we are not trapped by this "oneness" (even if one attains a blissful place in this one) at all, and that liberation is possible. There are lineages of Taoism that don't turn the "Tao" into a substratum like it appears you are doing. But rather just "the way" of mutually dependent arisings. Just as the term universe is really just a term used to conveniently say the process of everything. So the term Tao should not bring up a static idea of oneness, as if it truly existed.

 

Some lineages of Taoism I do believe lead to Buddhahood. But, not all spiritual traditions lead to the same place. Just like not all roads lead to Rome.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Procurator]

Back to the original quote....

 

..

Since looking for converts is not at all Taoist....

where does this leave us?

apparently not on "Lao-zi converting the barbarians"' team. but what the heck does he know?

[Aaron]

I wanted to make a comment, based on my own beliefs and not necessarily a Taoist idea. In my many years, part of them growing up in a very religious Southern Baptist family, I've been exposed to people who are highly religious. There is a difference between religious and spiritual in my opinion. The person that is religious is following tenets many times because they feel they are required to or have been taught that it is the right thing to do. People that are spiritual tend to follow their beliefs because they want to, there is something they find that compels them to "practice what they preach".

 

One thing I find with spiritual people is that they tend to be less pushy about their religions because they tend to have the opinion that they are not all that important to it, rather than be a gift to their ideology, they view their ideology as a gift to them. When you speak to these people there is a passion that is alive and often time you'll listen, not necessarily because you believe what they say, but because you see they have a deeply held belief that what they believe, isn't true by rote, but by practice.

 

In contrast, the religious people I see can be passionate, but often times that passion is motivated by something else, anger, hate, loathing, perhaps something they feel inside about themselves that they push on others. These people talk, not with passion, but zeal. They preach, not because they believe that their ideology works and that their lives reflect that, but rather that their ideology is the only true one that anyone can follow. These are the people who are in tolerant religions, but don't practice tolerance. These are the people that feel the need to go into a place, whether it's a forum or a neighborhood and preach the good word.

 

The need in these instances, isn't to convert because there is a love there, but rather because they feel it somehow makes them a better person and helps them to feel better about themselves. I'm not saying that anyone has done this here, but rather just giving my own opinion about the people I've met on the way.

 

An old saying is, "Religious people believe because they're afraid of going to hell, spiritual people believe because they've already been there."

 

Aaron

 

edited for lots of typos

Edited November 29, 2010 by Twinner

[strawdog65]

That would be your understanding of the universe and not a Buddhist one. So, Buddhism points beyond this "one" that manifests, re-absorbs and recycles us to be re-manifest without memory of the prier, again and again. According to Buddhist cosmology, you are talking about Samsara, which is what we want to master and turn into the experience of Nirvana. So if we we're truly "one"... then there would be no possibility of escape from this ignorance recycling process. But, the Buddha revealed that we are not trapped by this "oneness" (even if one attains a blissful place in this one) at all, and that liberation is possible. There are lineages of Taoism that don't turn the "Tao" into a substratum like it appears you are doing. But rather just "the way" of mutually dependent arisings. Just as the term universe is really just a term used to conveniently say the process of everything. So the term Tao should not bring up a static idea of oneness, as if it truly existed.

 

Some lineages of Taoism I do believe lead to Buddhahood. But, not all spiritual traditions lead to the same place. Just like not all roads lead to Rome.

 

 

Hello Vaj!

 

I am always so impressed by the content and thoroughness of your posts.

 

Your knowledge and understanding of Buddhism is very humbling.

 

I have learned much from reading your posts, thank you!

 

I do not mean to present what I believe as a static form of Taoism.

Life is nothing if not constant, unending change, sometimes cyclic, sometimes not.

 

As far as escaping from the recycling.... escaping to where?

When the Buddha escaped from his own existence cycle... who is to say where he went?

 

A higher plane of existence, a plane of bliss, Nirvanna.... ALL are contained within the Tao.

 

Many ways.... all leading to what may be perceived to the individual as different, but in fact

is only perceived to be because of their perspective, which many times has been ingrained

into this individual from childhood. Of course this does not say that this "experience" is not

"real", for again "reality" is relative. And what's real to one... is not to someone else.

 

Vaj, your belief is Valid... to you, to me, and anyone else that accepts,

that regardless of semantics, experiential evidence, and differing explanations,

we are ALL just the innumerable facets of the jewell that is the TAO.

 

We are all existing side by side, claiming that there is only one method

beyond this madness that we see in the world... all except Tao...

Tao is both the sanity and the madness at the same time

I will be plain in what I say. My understanding, my intuitive grasp of what Taoism is

is that of the Tao being the fabric of all physical, and non-physical reality, The visible

universe is but a small part of this.

 

Indoctrination into a belief system such as Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam,

or anything else, influences all you see, all you experience and all thats distinguished

as your perceived reality. Being immersed within a Buddhist belief system, I fail to see

how anything presented as real, or proof, can ever be considered impartial... therefore

nullifying any actual effect to be evidence of anything at all.

 

Taoism, is impartial by it's very origination.

Dualistic, non-deterministic, and accepting of all outcomes.

 

Tao is the void we all exist within.

 

Peace!

[Vajrahridaya]

Hello Vaj!

 

I am always so impressed by the content and thoroughness of your posts.

 

Your knowledge and understanding of Buddhism is very humbling.

 

I have learned much from reading your posts, thank you!

 

You come across as a soft hearted and soft spoken person, and that's what I feel about you. These are good qualities.

 

I do not mean to present what I believe as a static form of Taoism.

Life is nothing if not constant, unending change, sometimes cyclic, sometimes not.

ok

 

As far as escaping from the recycling.... escaping to where?

When the Buddha escaped from his own existence cycle... who is to say where he went?

 

He went to a Pureland, which is a realm and dimension that stays constant due to the constant need of endless Samsarins to be free from Samsara.

 

A higher plane of existence, a plane of bliss, Nirvanna.... ALL are contained within the Tao.

 

Within a process of constant change and transformation, but not as a static void, as that does not self exist either according to Buddhadharma, but arises simultaneous with content. The experience of the void in meditation is merely a yogin's attempt at suppressing through intense focus, all impressions latent in the vastness of their unconscious. There is no inherent void either. It's really just an experience, as well as a logical inference, but without inherent existence.

 

The concepts you are engendering here are very familiar to me and sound much like Kashmir Shaivism, or Bhairava, the deep void! Considered the absolute truth of existence, if you think that, this will be your home at the end of the cosmic eon.

 

Many ways.... all leading to what may be perceived to the individual as different, but in fact

is only perceived to be because of their perspective, which many times has been ingrained

into this individual from childhood. Of course this does not say that this "experience" is not

"real", for again "reality" is relative. And what's real to one... is not to someone else.

 

Yes, there are many paths within Buddhadharma to liberation.

Vaj, your belief is Valid... to you, to me, and anyone else that accepts,

that regardless of semantics, experiential evidence, and differing explanations,

we are ALL just the innumerable facets of the jewell that is the TAO.

 

The way you are expressing Tao seems to correlate to some sort of essence, or substratum of everything. For me, Tao just means dependent origination/emptiness and nothing more, nothing less, because there is nothing more or less.

We are all existing side by side, claiming that there is only one method

 

There are many methods in Buddhadharma.

 

beyond this madness that we see in the world... all except Tao...

Tao is both the sanity and the madness at the same time

 

Now, I know you're talking about some inherent essence. I can't agree with you.

 

I will be plain in what I say. My understanding, my intuitive grasp of what Taoism is

is that of the Tao being the fabric of all physical, and non-physical reality, The visible

universe is but a small part of this.

 

Sounds like your talking about God?

[Vajrahridaya]

Indoctrination into a belief system such as Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam,

or anything else, influences all you see,

 

Buddhism isn't a belief system in the sense you are insinuating and it's nothing like the other traditions you've named. People who say this, I know have not studied Buddhism much beyond the surface at all, and don't have experiential insight into the intention of Buddhism. It cannot be compared to other traditions in that way, only ignorantly can one do this. It's not a tradition that indoctrinates. Yes, there are those that are, but those that are have not delved into it's meaning much at all, or maybe were just brought up in it and just do it because the family does it... etc. This is not my experience, nor is it the Buddhas intention behind his teaching. Buddhahood does not belong to Buddhism, but Buddhism is the path that is most clear with the most methods on how to get there without faltering or being ambiguous about the meaning and intention of the methods and philosophy, like most other systems are.

 

all you experience and all thats distinguished

as your perceived reality. Being immersed within a Buddhist belief system, I fail to see

how anything presented as real, or proof, can ever be considered impartial... therefore

nullifying any actual effect to be evidence of anything at all.

 

 

It's not a belief system. It's an elaboration of the system of experience and the methods of how to master the system of experience... period. It's goal is nothing like that of Christian mysticism or Islamic mysticism, or Hindu mysticism and it only seems that some Taoist lineages go all the way there, and I don't even know if they go all the way there with as much clarity? This I can't say either way. The universe is not that simple, and all traditions take a person someplace and some places are somewhat the same, depending on the individual and some are very different, as there are many, many realms, all talked about by the Buddha and subsequent Buddhas. An individual within any contemplation can have the realization of dependent origination/emptiness, but this would transcend most belief systems and lead one karmically to Buddhadharma anyway, either in this life, the next or in an astral realm. Because one cannot be a Theist in the Monotheistic sense and see dependent origination.

 

Taoism, is impartial by it's very origination.

Dualistic, non-deterministic, and accepting of all outcomes.

 

Sounds Totalitarian and Imperialistic, kind of like Hinduism the way you put it. As if any distinction made is nullified by this overarching "ULTIMATE TRUTH OF EXISTENCE!"

 

Don't mean to dent your cup, but Buddhism has an entirely different view of reality, based upon experiencing beyond the void.

 

Tao is the void we all exist within.

 

Peace!

 

Actually, everything is dependently originated and empty of inherent existence, including the void.

 

Dependent origination/emptiness is a contemplation, as well as the fruit of contemplation that leads to an entirely different experience of the "how" and the "why" of everything. The Buddhist "emptiness" and the "void" that all things exist in are not talking about the same truth. The void is a meditative experience, an absorption... in Buddhism it's called the Jhana of nothingness, beyond that is the Jhana or Samadhi (meditation) of neither perception nor non-perception, and Dependent Origination is an insight that transcends that as well.

 

Even Scientists have found that there is something in that void of space, and there going to find something in that something and something in that something. Infinite regress, no rooftop. There really is no inherent void, just like there is no inherent existence to anything, or any non-thing. Non-existence and existence, neither have inherent precedence.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[strawdog65]

Buddhism isn't a belief system in the sense you are insinuating and it's nothing like the other traditions you've named. People who say this, I know have not studied Buddhism much beyond the surface at all, and don't have experiential insight into the intention of Buddhism. It cannot be compared to other traditions in that way, only ignorantly can one do this. It's not a tradition that indoctrinates. Yes, there are those that are, but those that are have not delved into it's meaning much at all, or maybe were just brought up in it and just do it because the family does it... etc. This is not my experience, nor is it the Buddhas intention behind his teaching. Buddhahood does not belong to Buddhism, but Buddhism is the path that is most clear with the most methods on how to get there without faltering or being ambiguous about the meaning and intention of the methods and philosophy, like most other systems are.

 

 

 

It's not a belief system. It's an elaboration of the system of experience and the methods of how to master the system of experience... period. It's goal is nothing like that of Christian mysticism or Islamic mysticism, or Hindu mysticism and it only seems that some Taoist lineages go all the way there, and I don't even know if they go all the way there with as much clarity? This I can't say either way. The universe is not that simple, and all traditions take a person someplace and some places are somewhat the same, depending on the individual and some are very different, as there are many, many realms, all talked about by the Buddha and subsequent Buddhas. An individual within any contemplation can have the realization of dependent origination/emptiness, but this would transcend most belief systems and lead one karmically to Buddhadharma anyway, either in this life, the next or in an astral realm. Because one cannot be a Theist in the Monotheistic sense and see dependent origination.

 

 

 

Sounds Totalitarian and Imperialistic, kind of like Hinduism the way you put it. As if any distinction made is nullified by this overarching "ULTIMATE TRUTH OF EXISTENCE!"

 

Don't mean to dent your cup, but Buddhism has an entirely different view of reality, based upon experiencing beyond the void.

 

 

 

Actually, everything is dependently originated and empty of inherent existence, including the void.

 

Dependent origination/emptiness is a contemplation, as well as the fruit of contemplation that leads to an entirely different experience of the "how" and the "why" of everything. The Buddhist "emptiness" and the "void" that all things exist in are not talking about the same truth. The void is a meditative experience, an absorption... in Buddhism it's called the Jhana of nothingness, beyond that is the Jhana or Samadhi (meditation) of neither perception nor non-perception, and Dependent Origination is an insight that transcends that as well.

 

Even Scientists have found that there is something in that void of space, and there going to find something in that something and something in that something. Infinite regress, no rooftop. There really is no inherent void, just like there is no inherent existence to anything, or any non-thing. Non-existence and existence, neither have inherent precedence.

 

 

Vaj,

 

Wow!

 

I will be reading and trying to digest what you have said.... there's a lot there!

 

I enjoy the fact that you are content to agree to disagree.

 

I am just a humble traveler... and I accept what you have said as your truth.

 

My words can not, more fully express...

that which is true to me, more so than I have already stated.

 

I have reached the end... of words.

 

That which can be named is not the true Tao.

 

And so it is....

 

 

 

 

 

peace!

[Vajrahridaya]

Vaj,

 

Wow!

 

I will be reading and trying to digest what you have said.... there's a lot there!

 

I enjoy the fact that you are content to agree to disagree.

 

I am just a humble traveler... and I accept what you have said as your truth.

 

My words can not, more fully express...

that which is true to me, more so than I have already stated.

 

I have reached the end... of words.

 

That which can be named is not the true Tao.

 

And so it is....

 

 

 

 

 

peace!

 

I understand that realization very well, and would have said much the same thing a number of years ago, thinking the non-conceptual as an ultimate truth of everything. Then I came to dependent origination/emptiness...

 

I also accept that your truth originates dependent upon various experiences, and readings, and experiences based upon readings and experiences interpreted later through such readings... etc. All inter-dependent, but empty of any sort of self existence what-so-ever.

 

I respect your state of mind, because yes, it's peaceful, but for a Bodhisattva, that's just the beginning...

 

I respect your sense of inner security and non-egotistical reaction to anything I have said. That's awesome!

 

May peace only deepen in your every experience.