Taoism Today -- The Controversy Continues

[dwai]

I don't think the trappings are what's important.

 

As far as I can see, this is The Room Where All Paths Meet. My guess is because Tao encompasses all other religions and practices; others only encompass themselves.

 

There IS nothing other than the Tao

[manitou]

Hi Manitou. Maybe this is a good question for people to consider then. What makes Taoism be 'Taoism' and which separates it from everything else? I think a good comparison might be to compare to Buddhism. In some ways Buddhism is similar to Taoism. Buddhism has both religious aspects and self cultivation aspects, as Taoism does. Putting aside the surface differences in beliefs and religious practices, I wonder if there is anything else that makes them distinct from each other? They both have the spiritual/self cultivation aspect. Could it be just the difference in views and approach which makes them different? Other religious traditions also have self cultivation traditions as well. Maybe they really are not all that different under the surface. The surface religious beliefs are different but inside they all deal with spiritual needs and spiritual/self refinement, I am thinking. Maybe all not so different after all?

 

I couldn't agree with you more. In my view, it's all One. Shamanism got me here, Buddhism gets another here; Christianity can get one here. But it's my observation, through years of inner work, that the final path lies in going inward and discarding the structure of any path. My Shamanic ceremonies are merely trappings. There is nothing magic in and of themselves, other than my own understanding of my own human nature and my application of my understanding to assist another in getting past a junction of distorted fears (from childhood), which has affected their adult life, much as a snowball gets bigger as it rolls down the mountain. Our human nature is one, after everything is said and done. The Source, the Tao, lies at the bottom of the well, once we take the plunge. The Source is the same for everyone, because we are all One. It's there for the asking. Free to all.

We try very hard to describe that which is indescribable on this forum; we can almost get there, but not quite. Those who have found the Source within (or the Void, if you'd rather) have done so by self realization, not by reading a new book or finding a new master. Unless the master is relentless about his charge doing the inner work.

This I know because I have done it. It has taken many years; our current need for instant gratification and finding all answers through the left brain construct are what work against us in the long run. To admit to onesself that we have distortions within us that hamper a clear view is not something that we want to hear. We want to do it the easy way, the quick way. Such are the demands of Ego.

In my view, TWIV, you have not done it the quick way at all. You are perfectly seasoned as far as I can see. Your wisdom springs from the Source. I am not blowing smoke up your butt for any reason other than to say I am so glad you are here. I study your responses and often read them several times. You expand me. Thank you, my friend.

[The Way Is Virtue]

Thanks for the kind thoughts and for your insights manitou. Through sharing our ideas, thoughts, and experiences we can maybe help each other in some ways to make more sense of things and our experiences and to hopefully gain some insights into our selves. Maybe that is what life is at least in some part about. We each take our own approach and do things in our our own way, and we interact with others through the course of our lives. I agree with you that we all seem to be working towards the same thing, if one looks beneath the surface clutter. Very interesting idea about the fast and slow approaches. I had not really thought about things that way before. Lots to consider in this respect in regards to all the various practices and approaches that exist out there.

 

Best to everyone, and keep on smiling...

[Stigweard]

Extending on this dialogue, and I thank everyone who has participated.

 

We do find ourselves in an interesting position because most of us here are looking to tap into a pure spring of Taoist cultivation.

 

From my learning, the roots of Taoism, the organized religion, began in the simple, pure, spiritual tradition of ancient, indigenous China. Some have oft-used the term "shamanic" when describing this early tradition, and this is perhaps anthropologically correct. I personally feel it goes further than this, that the original tradition was perhaps more stately, sagely and scholarly, but this is no doubt my romanticism at play.

 

Nevertheless, early Taoism was steeped in simple purity and was highlighted with achieved ones who became Shen Rens through their practices and insight. Communities of students naturally gathered around these achieved ones and mutual support was established.

 

As society became more complex and communities expanded and began to compete for territory and resources, both the achieved ones and their students retreated further and further into the mountains and remote places in order to maintain their peaceful, undisturbed existence. When more communal based religions appeared like Buddhism, many traditionalists feared the ancient traditions would disappear altogether.

 

Thus in the Han Dynasty a great "synthesis" took place to try and preserve and exalt the indigenous traditions. The many diverse simple traditions were "brought into the fold" of a unified "state" tradition. Systems and structure were created around what used to be a simple, natural spiritual tradition.

 

Of course the first formal school was the Tian Shi Dao, after which came a succession of diversifying sects and sub-sects until we see now in the modern era the main sects of the Quanzhen 全眞, Longmen 龍門 (a sub-sect of the Quanzhen), Zhengyi 正一, and some attribute Wudang Taoism 武當 as it's own sect.

 

Now these religious sects were very successful in preserving the texts and fundamental practices of the ancient tradition and, through their temples and priestly hierarchies, kept Taoism within the mainstream of the Chinese culture. However, some would argue, quite credibly, that through aeons of structuring and repeated restructuring as Taoism fell in and out of favor as the dynasties changed, the tradition of Taoism became quite an abstract and complex sculpture with only sentimental resemblances to the original, simple, pure tradition.

 

This vacancy of original purity was made even more barren through the Communist Cultural purges and modernization that has turned temples, grottoes, and priests into tourist attractions and tour guides.

 

The summation of this is that, whilst Prof Kirkland highlights the disparity between Western and Chinese Taoism, it could be equally argued that Taoism of modern China is a paltry shade of the original tradition of antiquity.

 

So it isn't any wonder that many Western students get terribly confused about Taoism. Most folks may have first learned about Taoism through Kung Fu, or Tai Chi, or Chi Kung, or maybe through some sort of Tao Te Ching translation, or even through popular literature like the Tao of Pooh.

 

They may get that rush of inspiration of, "Wow! That is awesome! That's exactly how I see the world". And they may jump online and do some Googling on Taoism, and sooner or later they may end up here on TaoBums.

 

And then they may just as quickly say "WTF!!! What's all this other stuff about?! What does penis size have to do with Taoism? Or kunlun ... or DMT ... or Zombie Fungus ... or Burning Palms ... or Lion Rolling Balls ... or religious sects ... or Qigong??? And who the hell is this Michael Lomax??!!!"

 

 

But I think what we have to remember is that ultimately all we are looking for is a way to learn to embody the same world view and state of being of those original, simple, and pure minded Shen Rens of ancient, indigenous China.

 

But we also have to acknowledge that the simple social environment of those ancient times no longer exists, except perhaps in extremely remote areas. The modern world is incredibly complex and intermeshed, and the demands and impositions on the individual’s freedom and liberty are becoming increasingly overbearing. Add to this is the kaleidoscopic frenzy of distractions and things clamoring for our attention. The modern student’s mind is a whirlwind of conditioning and befuddlement.

 

So in all of this we have to ask ourselves:

 

How can we cultivate the embodiment of the original Dao Shen Ren, even though we are living in the modern world and have available to us only limited learning resources delivered by a fractured and diluted Taoist tradition?

 

And, if you are interested in such things, what can we do to develop the tradition of Taoism so that it can better serve the promotion of social harmony and spiritual maturity in the Western world?

Edited March 10, 2011 by Stigweard

[Mark Saltveit]

... what do you see as the defining characteristics that make Taoism be Taoism and ... which separate it from say Buddhism?

 

I think this is a very interesting topic worth discussing at some length, probably in its own thread. I'm new here and can't tell if there is already such a discussion. Can anyone point me to one, or say whether it would be appropriate to start one?

 

Mark

[Otis]

Just like the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao, so too, the human who can be defined as an -ist, is not the true human.

 

I don't see freedom in being any -ist, because it's just new conditioning to replace the old. If our goal is to surrender the conceptual and follow an internal path, then any naming of that path, grounds it back in the conceptual realm. Taoism and Buddhism serve me as fingers that point toward the moon. Making the fingers important seems to miss the gloriousness of what it's like to live with the moon as my lover.

[Stigweard]

I think this is a very interesting topic worth discussing at some length, probably in its own thread. I'm new here and can't tell if there is already such a discussion. Can anyone point me to one, or say whether it would be appropriate to start one?

 

Mark

Good luck with this:

 

Longevity, Buddhist Vs Taoist Views And Wu Dang Yang Sheng Article...

What Buddhism and Taoism have in Common?

Why Taoism is different

Buddhism v. Taoism

Buddhism and taoism?

Taoist views on Buddhist way

Taoism Vs Buddhism

Tao beats Buddha

Buddhism transcends the Tao

Of Buddhists and Taoists

 

If we don't here from you in a week we will send a search party

[The Way Is Virtue]

The summation of this is that, whilst Prof Kirkland highlights the disparity between Western and Chinese Taoism, it could be equally argued that Taoism of modern China is a paltry shade of the original tradition of antiquity.

 

I think Dr. Russell Kirkland's view is more along the lines that the common Western view of Taoism does not have a whole lot to do with the actual Taoism that has been practiced in China for thousands of years. Here is a link to a transcript of a talk Dr. Kirkland gave on this topic in 1997. Of course this is Dr. Kirkland's opinion on the matter, and he is himself a Westerner, and this is from 14 years ago, but a lot of what he is saying still seems to be of at least some relevance today. This is an academic presentation so it takes a little bit of effort to wade through it all , but I think it is an interesting read anyway.

The Taoism Of The Western Imagination And The Taoism Of China: De-Colonializing The Exotic Teachings Of The East

Edited March 11, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[manitou]

Dwai said: There IS nothing other than the Tao.

 

I truly am laughing out loud. The dichotemy of all this is that the -ist component of Taoist has to offend each and every one of at a very deep level. This is what we're all about. We are all One, formless. To put us in an -ist compartment is to insinuate that there is something outside of the One that made the compartment. Thumbs down to -ists wherever they exist, as far as I'm concerned.

 

We've again run into the distinctions between ancient shamanism being not the quite thing as we think of today when we say shamanism; unless we specify that it's the ancient kind. The new age shamans develop a path where the third eye is developed, although there is a different vocabulary for it, and Castaneda is often a basis for it, although not necessarily. I am sure the Buddhists develop a third eye as well, as do those that understand the workings of the Tao. (No -ist, you'll notice)

 

I would go so far as to say that all ancient shamans, whether on this continent or another, were given the owners manual for how to handle emotions and get what they need. From them we are descended. Their ceremonies, I'm guessing, were to scare the emotions, to trick the mind, as we are finding that we can do today. Perhaps a very high premium was placed on the emotions back around the campfire. They would have seen them as demons most likely, but same difference. The mind was tricked and the body reflected a healthier awareness. But everything since then has been a distortion, generation after generation, a little at a time.

 

The ancients knew they were connected to the earth by energy; they were given the insight to manipulate energy, my guess is they could attach to each others thoughts as well. Well, now we're starting to find out that everything we've cavalierly considered Myth all these centuries may not have been Myth at all. But there are those of us to are WILLINGLY, with awareness, trying to tap into the ancient understanding of how to manipulate energy; realizing that somehow thought, intentional thought, is what is first needed to generate energy. Only the illusion of time is what prevents it from happening instantaneously. But the new age shaman, and I'm sure all the other paths that are here in this Room, have found out that it's necessary to STOP TIME in order to effect a cause and effect.

 

We stop time by what Ram Dass would simply call Being Here Now. I'll bet this ties in with every type of discipline that has arrived in this room. Don Juan has taught that to us shamans; Jesus taught it to the Christians when he told them to have no fear for the morrow, as it will take care of itself. He didn't mean that in some far out philosophical way; he meant it Really. Be here now. You are okay right now. Now cut loose of your fear; you are taken care of, dammit. I'm sure the same can be applied to the Buddhists, the Hedonists, the Nihlists, ad infinitum....lol.....what a wonderful and mixed group we are.

Edited March 11, 2011 by manitou

[Mark Saltveit]

I think Dr. Russell Kirkland's view is more along the lines that the common Western view of Taoism does not have a whole lot to do with the actual Taoism that has been practiced in China for thousands of years.

 

I don't think anyone would argue this point. But your implication is that the Western view of Taoism is wrong.

The understanding one gets from reading the Christian Bible is very different than the way Christianity is practiced in the current Catholic Church, among Jehovah's Witnesses, and in various snake-handling churches, also.

[The Way Is Virtue]

I don't think anyone would argue this point. But your implication is that the Western view of Taoism is wrong.

The understanding one gets from reading the Christian Bible is very different than the way Christianity is practiced in the current Catholic Church, among Jehovah's Witnesses, and in various snake-handling churches, also.

 

Hi Mark. I was talking about Dr. Kirkland's point of view as expressed in his paper which I provided the link to. I personally think nowadays at least some in the West are starting to get a somehwat better idea of what Taoism is about, but I do think there are still a lot of very questionable assumptions being made by many in the West yet, as well.

Edited March 11, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[henro]

Kirkland's paper is extremely dated at this point. Though I understand his assumptions, which western taoists did he interview to form this opinion ? Did he just pick up Tao te ching translations at B. Dalton to form his opinions ? Has he spent time in China speaking with various taoist sects there ? Did he interview lay-practitioners from both China and the USA ? Why would anyone but a fundamentalist believe that someone is less of a Taoist, Christian, or Muslim if they don't follow every orthodox rule set out in their respective scriptures ? Is someone less of a Christian if they concentrate on just one of the books of the bible and meditate on God and his teachings daily ? Where do you draw the line ? Hell, most Chinese don't even know what Taoism is about. . . .

[Mark Saltveit]

Hi Mark. I was talking about Dr. Kirkland's point of view as expressed in his paper which I provided the link to. I personally think nowadays at least some in the West are starting to get a somehwat better idea of what Taoism is about, but I do think there are still a lot of very questionable assumptions being made by many in the West yet, as well.

 

Wow, Kirkland sure has some strong feelings on the subject, huh? Is anyone carrying on his line of thought currently? It seems pretty far out on a limb to argue, as he does, that the Tao Te Ching itself does not represent Taoism correctly, but was "sanitized" as part of a "marketing ploy" by its author in the 3rd century BC.

[The Way Is Virtue]

Kirkland's paper is extremely dated at this point. Though I understand his assumptions, which western taoists did he interview to form this opinion ? Did he just pick up Tao te ching translations at B. Dalton to form his opinions ? Has he spent time in China speaking with various taoist sects there ? Did he interview lay-practitioners from both China and the USA ? Why would anyone but a fundamentalist believe that someone is less of a Taoist, Christian, or Muslim if they don't follow every orthodox rule set out in their respective scriptures ? Is someone less of a Christian if they concentrate on just one of the books of the bible and meditate on God and his teachings daily ? Where do you draw the line ? Hell, most Chinese don't even know what Taoism is about. . . .

 

Hi robmix. Dr. Kirkland would have to answer those questons. I just posted the link to his paper up for interest's sake since it directly relates to this whole idea of 'Western Taoism'. I think that Kirkland's main point in his paper is really that one can't just simply read a few ancient books and such on Taoism and then reasonably expect to understand what Taoism is really all about. That point at least seems reasonable enough to me. I personally don't necessarily agree with some of his other ideas expressed in that paper, although he does bring up some interesting ideas in there.

 

I think one important difference between Taoism and some of the other world religions is that much of Taoism until very recent times has been based on fairly closed traditions of secrecy and oral teaching from teacher to disciple, and also many Taoist writings used a lot of deliberate symbolism and such, as many of these writings were not intended for the uninitiated to be able to understand. Without the guidance of a knowledgeable teacher (a student often had to be approved and initiated by a teacher first, from what I understand) much that is contained in Taoists writings is not easily understandable even by those who are fluent in Chinese and have some general background knowledge in Taoism. When one adds in other factors like the large cultural differences that existed between China and the West, and the different ways of communicating and writing and such in ancient times in China, it would seem quite a stretch indeed that your average Westerner could read some translations of a few of these ancient texts and have a realistic idea of not only just what those texts were really all about, but also be able to reasonably extrapolate from there and really know what the full extent of all the views and practices of the people who wrote those texts were. That is quite a huge reach when one thinks about it that way, no? .

 

There are a number of Taoist teachers who are teaching Western students these days, both in the East and in the West, so there are no doubt more opportunites for Westerners to learn from a (hopefully) authentic Taoist teacher these days than there were say 15 years ago, I think. Whether any given Taoist teacher is teaching authentic Taoism is another matter though, and it will be pretty much up to the interested student to do their own research and make their own judgement calls in that respect.

Edited March 11, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[The Way Is Virtue]

Wow, Kirkland sure has some strong feelings on the subject, huh? Is anyone carrying on his line of thought currently? It seems pretty far out on a limb to argue, as he does, that the Tao Te Ching itself does not represent Taoism correctly, but was "sanitized" as part of a "marketing ploy" by its author in the 3rd century BC.

 

Ha Ha. Yeah some of his ideas (speculation?) on the origin of the Tao Te Ching do seem to be quite a reach, but I have run across writings from some other current day Taoist scholars who do also seem to at least hold the view that the Tao Te Ching was likely a compilation of various older oral teachings and writings, and does not necessarily originate from one single source. I personally don't pretend to know one way or the other though. I try to keep an open mind and give consideration to all points of view, but there seem to be a whole of points of view about Taoism out there. In the end one really has to go with their own personal gut feelings on what seems right for themself, and I guess that is the bottom line. Some people prefer a teacher, some do not. Some only have a passing or minor interest in such things, others are inclined to want to delve deeper.

Edited March 11, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[Mark Saltveit]

Hi robmix. You would have to ask Dr. Kirkland those questons. I just posted the link to his paper up for interest's sake since it directly relates to this whole idea of 'Western Taoism'. I think that Kirkland's main point in his paper is really that one can't just simply read a few ancient books and such on Taoism and then reasonably expect to understand what Taoism is really all about. That point at least seems reasonable enough to me. I personally don't necessarily agree with some of his other ideas expressed in that paper, although he does bring up some interesting ideas in there.

 

I think one important difference between Taoism and some of the other world religions is that much of Taoism until very recent times has been based on fairly closed traditions of secrecy and oral teaching from teacher to disciple, and also many Taoist writings used a lot of deliberate symbolism and such, as many of these writings were not intended for the uninitiated to be able to understand. Without the guidance of a knowledgeable teacher (a student often had to be approved and initiated by a teacher first, from what I understand) much that is contained in Taoists writings is not easily understandable even by those who are fluent in Chinese and have some general background knowledge in Taoism. When one adds in other factors like the large cultural differences that existed between China and the West, and the different ways of communicating and writing and such in ancient times in China, it would seem quite a stretch indeed that your average Westerner could read a few of these ancient texts and have a realistic idea of not only just what those texts were really all about, but also be able to reasonably extrapolate from there and really know what the full extent of all the views and practices of the people who wrote those texts were. That is quite a huge reach when one thinks about it that way, no? .

 

There are a number of Taoist teachers who are teaching Western students these days, both in the East and in the West, so there are no doubt more opportunites for Westerners to learn from a (hopefully) authentic Taoist teacher these days than there were say 15 years ago, I think. Whether any given Taoist teacher is teaching authentic Taoism is another matter though, and it will be pretty much up to the interested student to do their own research and make their own judgement calls in that respect.

 

Is Dr. Kirkland on this website? I would love to have him in the discussion. Unlike the Tao Te Ching, we don't actually HAVE to speculate on the author's intent.

 

Tao Bum, you're right. It is quite a stretch to imagine we can take a short cut directly through one or two books and understand a whole tradition without going through those intermediate steps. The questions that remain, though, are 1) How authentic are ANY of the current Taoist traditions, after 2400 years? and 2) Do those original source books describe a universal reality that any human can apprehend directly, through contemplation, action or whatever? If the answer to #2 is no, then it's basically all BS anyway, or a type of Chinese literature at best. But if the answer is yes, then there may be many paths to that source, including some not transmitted person to person through Chinese teachers and traditions.

[henro]

It is quite a stretch to imagine we can take a short cut directly through one or two books and understand a whole tradition without going through those intermediate steps. The questions that remain, though, are 1) How authentic are ANY of the current Taoist traditions, after 2400 years? and 2) Do those original source books describe a universal reality that any human can apprehend directly, through contemplation, action or whatever? If the answer to #2 is no, then it's basically all BS anyway, or a type of Chinese literature at best. But if the answer is yes, then there may be many paths to that source, including some not transmitted person to person through Chinese teachers and traditions.

 

 

I think one important difference between Taoism and some of the other world religions is that much of Taoism until very recent times has been based on fairly closed traditions of secrecy and oral teaching from teacher to disciple, and also many Taoist writings used a lot of deliberate symbolism and such, as many of these writings were not intended for the uninitiated to be able to understand. Without the guidance of a knowledgeable teacher (a student often had to be approved and initiated by a teacher first, from what I understand) much that is contained in Taoists writings is not easily understandable even by those who are fluent in Chinese and have some general background knowledge in Taoism. When one adds in other factors like the large cultural differences that existed between China and the West, and the different ways of communicating and writing and such in ancient times in China, it would seem quite a stretch indeed that your average Westerner could read some translations of a few of these ancient texts and have a realistic idea of not only just what those texts were really all about, but also be able to reasonably extrapolate from there and really know what the full extent of all the views and practices of the people who wrote those texts were. That is quite a huge reach when one thinks about it that way, no? .

 

 

 

One could easily make the same argument for those reading their religious text in anything but the original language and form -Christian, Judaism, Buddhism, etc.

Edited March 11, 2011 by robmix

[The Way Is Virtue]

Tao Bum, you're right. It is quite a stretch to imagine we can take a short cut directly through one or two books and understand a whole tradition without going through those intermediate steps. The questions that remain, though, are 1) How authentic are ANY of the current Taoist traditions, after 2400 years? and 2) Do those original source books describe a universal reality that any human can apprehend directly, through contemplation, action or whatever? If the answer to #2 is no, then it's basically all BS anyway, or a type of Chinese literature at best. But if the answer is yes, then there may be many paths to that source, including some not transmitted person to person through Chinese teachers and traditions.

 

One has to do their own research and go out and meet some of the various teachers and then make up their own mind. I don't think anyone is saying that there are not many different paths and points of view out there. In the end one has to make up their own mind and do what seems right for themself. We each have our own point of view and we each have to make our own choices. That doesn't mean that people can't throw different ideas around for consideration and discussion. Sometimes looking at things from different perspectives helps us to gain some new insights into something, even if they are only small insights. It doesn't mean we have to agree with any or all of those points of view, but I think it doesn't hurt to at least give some consideration to different points of view sometimes.

[The Way Is Virtue]

One could easily make the same argument for those reading their religious text in anything but the original language and form -Christian, Judaism, Buddhism, etc.

 

Hi robmix. I agree. Some texts may be somewhat more straightforward than others depending on the exact circumstances, but possible problems that can apply to any can be translation issues, misunderstandings that can come from cultural differences, misunderstandings that can arise from the different ways of thinking and communicating and writing in ancient times, texts can potentially have been deliberately altered from the original in some ways, potential transcription errors, was the particular text even meant to be a comprehensive description of a system or concepts or was it just a loose collection of some ideas or deliberately constrained to a very narrow topic for a very specific purpose and such, etc. The bottom line I guess is people have to go with what feels right for them personally, (if they live in times or countries where they have the freedom to make their own choices anyway).

Edited March 12, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[manitou]

I'm only seeing one half of the equation being talked about here.

 

We read tomes. We read them over and over, from different angles. We read other tomes and find that they intersect with what we've already studied, and find that they overlap and say the same things.

 

But what you're not talking about is the Aha! process, the other half of the equation, where Experience is the entity that ties together the thing that you've learned and retained in your left brain, with the new experience where you're able to step outside of yourself in a type of Christ-consciousness and have it hit you between the eyes with a two by four. Aha! Eureka! This is what the old bird was talking about all these years.....it just happened to me! Now I SEE it!

[henro]

Hi robmix. I agree. Some texts may be somewhat more straightforward than others depending on the exact circumstances, but possible problems that can apply to any can be translation issues, misunderstandings that can come from cultural differences, misunderstandings that can arise from the different ways of thinking and communicating and writing in ancient times, texts can potentially have been deliberately altered from the original in some ways, potential transcription errors, was the particular text even meant to be a comprehensive description of a system or concepts or was it just a loose collection of some ideas or deliberately constrained to a very narrow topic for a very specific purpose and such, etc. The bottom line I guess is people have to go with what feels right for them personally, (if they live in times or countries where they have the freedom to make their own choices anyway).

 

 

I completely agree, and this is something that is on my mind a lot when I teach tai ji, and during my studies of Chinese medicine. I have always believed that to truly understand martial arts, and Chinese Medicine one should make every effort to understand the language and culture from which they were born. That's the part I agree with in Kirkland's paper.

[Mark Saltveit]

I'm only seeing one half of the equation being talked about here.

 

We read tomes. We read them over and over, from different angles. We read other tomes and find that they intersect with what we've already studied, and find that they overlap and say the same things.

 

But what you're not talking about is the Aha! process, the other half of the equation, where Experience is the entity that ties together the thing that you've learned and retained in your left brain, with the new experience where you're able to step outside of yourself in a type of Christ-consciousness and have it hit you between the eyes with a two by four. Aha! Eureka! This is what the old bird was talking about all these years.....it just happened to me! Now I SEE it!

 

Well put! These books aren't sacred objects to me, the way some idolatrize the Koran or the Bible. They're just tools, guides to something we should all be able to experience in daily life. As Chuang Tzu said, "Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words." And I might add, if the words don't connect you to the meaning, you can also forget them (and maybe try a different path).

[The Way Is Virtue]

I'm only seeing one half of the equation being talked about here.

 

We read tomes. We read them over and over, from different angles. We read other tomes and find that they intersect with what we've already studied, and find that they overlap and say the same things.

 

But what you're not talking about is the Aha! process, the other half of the equation, where Experience is the entity that ties together the thing that you've learned and retained in your left brain, with the new experience where you're able to step outside of yourself in a type of Christ-consciousness and have it hit you between the eyes with a two by four. Aha! Eureka! This is what the old bird was talking about all these years.....it just happened to me! Now I SEE it!

 

Hi manitou. My comments in this reply are not directed to you personally, so please don't take this personally. I do want to try to clarify where I am coming from though so I am using your comment above as a starting point to do that. I personally don't rule out the intuition process in anything. I also certainly would not not try to discourage anyone from reading the various Taoist or other writings and trying to gain what understanding and insights they can from them. What I have been talking about is where people read some of these texts and then seem to think that they then understand what Taoism is all about and what it isn't all about. I see a big difference between trying to gain whatever insights and ideas and understanding one can from the various texts while still keeping in mind that what one may think they understand could actually be incorrect or only superficial or only part of the picture, and one reading such texts and then assuming one understands much of it correctly and deeply and then to also exptrapolate from there and assume one also pretty much understands the core of Taoism as a whole. To me that is a big difference, but unfortunately the second scenario does not appear to be all that uncommon in the West from what I see. Hence my comments.

 

I have little doubt that anyone can pick up and read some of these texts and gain at least some value and insight from doing so, but if such a person were to then start calling themself a Taoist and saying they now understand quite well what Taoism is and what it isn't then I'd say they are likely not being very realistic with themself. My response to this is if it were really as straightforward and easy as all that, why would so many Taoists through the centuries have dedicated themself to rigorous practice and study and service throughout their lives? I guess maybe they were all not so bright and insightful as us modern folk?

 

What a waste that all these poor ignorant people spent their lives in such dedicated practice and service while all we have to do in the modern world is maybe read a few texts, do some qigong and a maybe a few other practices and we already have it all figured out. That is not to say that the practices and concepts necessarily have to be complicated in any way because I don't think they necessarily have to be at all, but the work and dedication that leads one to true understanding (not just the assumptions and fancies of the conscious mind) is real work and requires real dedication and constant self examination and refinement, IMO. Could it be that at least some of the traditional Taoists/Buddhists/Hindus etc. actually have some something real and concrete to contribute if we could just get past some of our own assumptiomns and preconceptions and such? I don't claim to have any definite answers in this regard, but I think it is worth reminding ourselves that maybe we don't have everything quite all figured out yet, and taking some care to not accidentally throw out the baby with the bath water.

Best to everone and keep smiling...

Edited March 12, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[manitou]

Well put! These books aren't sacred objects to me, the way some idolatrize the Koran or the Bible. They're just tools, guides to something we should all be able to experience in daily life. As Chuang Tzu said, "Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words." And I might add, if the words don't connect you to the meaning, you can also forget them (and maybe try a different path).

 

And I'll go one step further. Think in terms of triangulation, a skill which I refer to as shamanic, but every other adept tradition has the vocabularity for the same thing. But for my purposes here and now, I'll call it shamanic.

 

When a discipline is ascended to the point of nothingness; the point of elimination of the 10,000 things is where we all meet. By transcending ego, we can admit that our path is but one of many; some traditions have hard headedness wired into them; they too must transcend that in order to evolve upward. The mere and humble question that binds together in our hearts is the desire to know Why?

 

Once we figure out Why (a left brain pursuit), we then turn our sight inward to Who? (a right brain pursuit). The answer will surprise us.

 

Once this level is achieved, we develop the eyes and ears to see it in others. We see differently the little black dot in the middle of my eye and your eye and even the eye of that insect over there on the wall; we see what that web of awareness, really is. Awareness will always seek awareness.

[Stigweard]

I agree with you completely TWIV. Perhaps people are so eager to describe themselves that they pin the Taoist badge to themselves prematurely. Perhaps Western culture is so spiritually malnourished that people grasp for the Taoist banner like a starving man grasping for a scrap of food.

 

I think Livia Kohn provides the most pragmatic view in saying that you have Taoist sympathisers, those who subscribe to the philosophy and may engage in some Taoist practices, and Taoist adherents, those who have both passed through formal initiations and have dedicated their lives to traditional Taoist cultivation.

 

Personally I would say that I am on the cusp due to the fact that I haven't "passed through formal initiations" per se.

 

Oh and manitou, I looove your posts !!