Taoism Today -- The Controversy Continues

[The Way Is Virtue]

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.

 

Hi manitou. I agree with what you are saying, but I really don't think anyone has been implying (here anyway) that there are not different paths or that these different paths necessarily can't have similar or the same goals, and can't produce similar results and understanding. However, it seems to me that different traditions can take quite different approaches and have quite different points of view and even have quite different practices and goals, and so what is contained in one tradition may not always be easily translatable or easily understandable from the point of view of another trandition or culture. I think people are often inclined to make assumptions and value judgements that are based in their own culture and traditions and experience and way of thinking and thus can very easily misunderstand things and may also be inclined to want to dismiss or discard certain aspects of a different tradition as being of little or no value without fully understanding the true purpose and value behind those aspects. In the end talk is just talk and I think what matters more is what brings real meaning and understanding and growth to us and others. We ultimately each have to make our own way and choose what seems right for our self despite what anyone else might have to say or think. Misunderstanding is perhaps in a way a part of the process of growth. Maybe it is inevitable.

Edited March 13, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[The Way Is Virtue]

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 !!

 

Hi Stig. Sounds like a good way to view things. Everyone has their own specific areas and degree of interest, so I guess one has to take such things into account in discussion forums like this. It will be interesting to see how Taoism continues to evolve and be adapted to the circumstances of the modern world.

Best wishes...

[manitou]

Hi manitou. I agree with what you are saying, but I really don't think anyone has been implying (here anyway) that there are not different paths or that these different paths necessarily can't have similar or the same goals, and can't produce similar results and understanding. However, it seems to me that different traditions can take quite different approaches and have quite different points of view and even have quite different practices and goals, and so what is contained in one tradition may not always be easily translatable or easily understandable from the point of view of another trandition or culture. I think people are often inclined to make assumptions and value judgements that are based in their own culture and traditions and experience and way of thinking and thus can very easily misunderstand things and may also be inclined to want to dismiss or discard certain aspects of a different tradition as being of little or no value without fully understanding the true purpose and value behind those aspects. In the end talk is just talk and I think what matters more is what brings real meaning and understanding and growth to us and others. We ultimately each have to make our own way and choose what seems right for our self despite what anyone else might have to say or think. Misunderstanding is perhaps in a way a part of the process of growth. Maybe it is inevitable.

 

 

 

I wish I had an answer for these words, but I do not.

[Stigweard]

This is an appropriate article to add to the discussion:

 

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS CONCERNING DAOISM (TAOISM)

[Stigweard]

These couple of polls are also relevant:

 

What type of Daoist are you? -- Part 1

 

What type of Daoist are you? -- Part 2

[The Way Is Virtue]

I wish I had an answer for these words, but I do not.

 

All is good manitou, my friend. Sometimes I just want to try to externalize some thoughts or ideas to see where it might lead, so I do so. I certainly don't take myself or my thoughts too seriously however. If you think I am talking nonsense then feel free to say so. You certainly won't offend me. If we take all the craziness in this world too seriously all the time we may just end up going over the edge.

Best wishes and thanks for all your comments. It's been interesting...

[Mark Saltveit]

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.

 

 

I find it ironic how concerned people here are with names and labels such as "Taoist." When you define a Taoist, you create non-Taoists of course. But really who cares what names we call each other? Each of us has a belief and practice that is in some way unique -- and will remain so regardless of how we call it, or whether we group it with others of varying similarity.

 

You can say with certainty that someone is not a Quanzhen Taoist, or member of any other particular sect, if not initiated. But not a Taoist? Would you say that a nondenominational follower of Christ who reads the Bible daily is not a Christian, because they are not a baptized member of a Church?

 

For academics, of course, this is what they do for a living -- define, classify, group and analyze. And the people cited (Kirkland, Komjathy) are professors of religion, not philosophy -- so by definition, they do not consider non-religious Taoists as "real." A professor of philosophy might make the opposite judgment.

[Stigweard]

I find it ironic how concerned people here are with names and labels such as "Taoist." When you define a Taoist, you create non-Taoists of course. But really who cares what names we call each other? Each of us has a belief and practice that is in some way unique -- and will remain so regardless of how we call it, or whether we group it with others of varying similarity.

 

You can say with certainty that someone is not a Quanzhen Taoist, or member of any other particular sect, if not initiated. But not a Taoist? Would you say that a nondenominational follower of Christ who reads the Bible daily is not a Christian, because they are not a baptized member of a Church?

 

For academics, of course, this is what they do for a living -- define, classify, group and analyze. And the people cited (Kirkland, Komjathy) are professors of religion, not philosophy -- so by definition, they do not consider non-religious Taoists as "real." A professor of philosophy might make the opposite judgment.

 

In the first instance you argue that we are unable to make definitive classifications of Taoists. But in the second instance you disqualify certain peoples right to make such definitions based on whether they are defined as a professor of religion vs a professor of philosophy.

 

I believe the fundamental observation that the likes of Kirkland, Kohn and Komjathy (lol nice alliteration) are making is that the way in which traditional Chinese Taoists view themselves and their own religion/cultural tradition is a far cry from what many westerners like to call Taoism.

 

One of the main problems this causes is that many "teachers" proclaim they are teaching "authentic Taoism" when that is simply not true by the standards of Taoist adherents who certainly DO have the right to say so. I agree with our esteemed scholars in this sense that you can call yourself a Taoist sympathizer all you want, but if you want to call yourself a Taoist then I think you are obligated to ensure that you adhere to the qualifications as determined by the Chinese religion/cultural tradition.

 

I will reemphasize here though what I said in an earlier post: "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."

 

Thus, whilst I am a Taoist sympathizer, what I am "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."

[Marblehead]

I am still an Atheistic-Nietzschian-Optimistic-Philosophical Taoist.

 

Just wanted to throw that label out into the wind.

 

I am enjoying reading the discussion.

[宁]

IMO, the importance of the -ist, and -ism is as follows:

 

- it's as important as describing yourself as a engineer or a lawyer or whatever.

- what gives you competence in a specific field

- which in turn makes your opinions more valid in that specific field

 

There is no shame to be less than a specialist, if you are happy living as a sympathizer, why not.

Why not admitting that we only dabble these issues.

Why returning to the old new age rethoric, of all is one and one is all.

Obviously this is not the case - if it would be, this Universe wouldn't be that diverse, we'd still be a uniform mass of pudding floating into nothingness.

 

We are individuals!

And as such, we have features, which grow and develop thru work over long periods of time (gongfu).

 

This is not to say that I agree with the age-old pointless battles between scholars.

There is a measure to everything

[devoid]

I am still an Atheistic-Nietzschian-Optimistic-Philosophical Taoist.

 

Just wanted to throw that label out into the wind.

 

I am enjoying reading the discussion.

 

Hi Marblehead,

 

Among all the Atheistic-Nietzschian-Optimistic-Philosophical Taoists I know, I can whole-hearted and honestly say that you're my favorite one of them!

 

NB I am also enjoying this discussion very much - even if I haven't posted a lot on it till now

[manitou]

Marbles! I couldn't agree more. I second your description and each and every word of it applies to me as well. I could throw in shaman, artist, musician as well.

 

We are here because we all see the beauty of formlessness and the freedom it creates.

 

Call me optimistic, overly-simplistic, naive, or whatever: I really do see an Order emerging through all of this; the separateness of the religions becoming One - yes, even the Buddhists - and the separateness of the citizens of the world all becoming One. Did anyone catch Mr. Obama saying 'At the bottom of everything, We Are All One', yesterday when he was talking about the conditions in Japan?

 

It is happening. It is gelling, somehow. Although it appears that things are exactly the opposite sometimes, that thing we call Intelligence or Spirit or God or Whatever seems to be continuing in its upward journey, upward toward the light. My guess is that It Knows What It's Doing.

 

Does anybody want to sit here on the corral fence with me and watch the rodeo go by?

[Mark Saltveit]

 

In the first instance you argue that we are unable to make definitive classifications of Taoists. But in the second instance you disqualify certain peoples right to make such definitions based on whether they are defined as a professor of religion vs a professor of philosophy.

 

 

More or less true, and appropriately so. I don't disqualify anyone from making definitions; but academic fields are themselves disciplines, with their own perspectives, assumptions and judgments that should be taken into account. The study of religion, by definition, excludes non-religious, philosophical approaches to Taoism. A professor of philosophy should have a different perspective. If they don't, they're not doing their job correctly.

 

Also with analysis itself; it's a powerful intellectual tool, I went to college myself and use it all the time to great effect. I'm using it here, to analyze academia on its own terms. In some cases, it's valid to apply it to Taoism; as I said, it's perfectly appropriate for Komjathy to say Westerners aren't real Quanzhen Taoists (his expertise). That's a tangible manifestation, one of the 10,000 things.

 

But not a "Daoist"? There's a certain irony in a 21st century Western professor claiming control of an ancient word and announcing what the rules are for its true meaning, especially when doing so in the name of fighting Western appropriation of Chinese traditions. Maybe Komjathy and Russell Kirkland are correct; they certainly raise many fascinating questions about East - West cultural interactions, the nature of religion and academia's ability to understand it, etc.

 

It seems to me that if you are going to make strong declarations about who is a real Daoist or not, you need to take great care in defining what that word means, and you must do so fully informed by the Daoist perspective, on its own terms, as well as the academic perspective. Daoism has a lot to say about names, and manifestations vs. sources, and ossified traditions that lose vitality; and I don't see these addressed in the essays that you've posted here. (Then again, these appear to be factsheets posted on a website, not scholarly papers which might well be more carefully phrased.)

Edited March 15, 2011 by Mark Saltveit

[Mark Saltveit]

One of the main problems this causes is that many "teachers" proclaim they are teaching "authentic Taoism" when that is simply not true by the standards of Taoist adherents who certainly DO have the right to say so. I agree with our esteemed scholars in this sense that you can call yourself a Taoist sympathizer all you want, but if you want to call yourself a Taoist then I think you are obligated to ensure that you adhere to the qualifications as determined by the Chinese religion/cultural tradition.

 

I don't know who these "authentic" teachers are, and they sound full of crap, but I'm not sure about your statement that Taoist adherents (presumably, Quanzhen initiates in China) themselves get to decide who is really Taoist.

 

For one thing, there is not a single, coherent Chinese religion/cultural tradition of Taoism. Do these adherents even accept members of other Taoist sects in China?

 

Again, compare Christianity. There are many fundamentalists who say that Mother Theresa, for all her good works, was not a real Christian and burns now in Hell because she did not accept Jesus Christ as her personal savior. There are many who say Thomas Merton fell under the spell of the Devil (or pagan religion) because of his study of Chuang Tzu. The people who say this are certainly completely valid, initiated members of sects by the standards of any professor of religion.

 

But I still think it's BS. And if Komjathy or Kirkland endorsed those declarations and called Mother Theresa and Thomas Merton "Christian sympathizers" but not real Christian adepts, I would have a real problem with that too. Wouldn't you?

Edited March 15, 2011 by Mark Saltveit

[宁]

I don't know who these "authentic" teachers are, and they sound full of crap, but I'm not sure about your statement that Taoist adherents (presumably, Quanzhen initiates in China) themselves get to decide who is really Taoist.

 

For one thing, there is not a single, coherent Chinese religion/cultural tradition of Taoism. Do they accept other Taoist sects even in China?

 

Again, compare Christianity. There are many fundamentalists who say that Mother Theresa, for all her good works, was not a real Christian and burns now in Hell because she did not accept Jesus Christ as her personal savior. There are many who say Thomas Merton fell under the spell of the Devil (or pagan religion) because of his study of Chuang Tzu. The people who say this are certainly completely valid, initiated members of sects by the standards of any professor of religion.

 

But I still think it's BS. And if Komjathy or Kirkland endorsed their declarations and called Mother Theresa and Thomas Merton "Christian sympathizers" but not real Christian adepts, I would have a real problem with that too. Wouldn't you?

 

 

I think Stig's initiative is more about honesty than anything else.

And as such am sure he will agree with you on more than one points that you made.

The main idea seems to be, not rushing into attaching tags...

[Mark Saltveit]

I think Stig's initiative is more about honesty than anything else.

And as such am sure he will agree with you on more than one points that you made.

The main idea seems to be, not rushing into attaching tags...

 

Agreed. The focus on precise names makes me think of "Three in the Morning." Sure. go ahead, call me what you want.

 

How about if I call myself "Taoish" ? Does that work for everybody?

[lazy cloud]

Agreed. The focus on precise names makes me think of "Three in the Morning." Sure. go ahead, call me what you want.

 

How about if I call myself "Taoish" ? Does that work for everybody?

What if THE TAO looks at you as a taoist? If this is so, does it matter what

label anyone puts on you?

[manitou]

This site could just as well be called the Evolved-Bums. It doesn't matter, lol.

 

 

My inner journey led me to the One; the inner voice said:

 

Hey! There's some Tao-bums over there! Never thought about those guys

before!

 

My Castaneda journey taught me the art of Do-Nothing, or the Power of Silence. The inner voice, delighted, shouted:

 

Hey, they have this thing called wu-wei! and Holy Smokes, it's the very

same thing!!

 

All these years of metaphysics are actually paying off! Inner voice:

 

Gee! These TaoBums get out there as far as I do! They understand me!

Yeehaw!

 

I'm glad I found the TTC at a yard sale! Inner voice:

 

Wow! I would never have met these souls if I hadnt!

 

We are all evolving together!................Wow!

 

We are all evolving together!! Wow!

 

 

Love you guys.

 

Well, I guess this doesn't make me a Taoist at all. But even if I'm not, I'd sure appreciate it if you'd let me hang around...

Edited March 13, 2011 by manitou

[宁]

I've got some piece of news to you, manitou: WE're not Taoists or Daoists EITHER!

Were Tao-bums. Tao-bummers. Wannabes.

There may not be any remarkable achievements, yet there are no strings attached either, no obligations, a whole lot of freedom & freestyling..!

 

It would be a waste to explore all that freedom alone!

That's why we meet here

Edited March 13, 2011 by Little1

[Mark Saltveit]

Were Tao-bums. Tao-bummers. Wannabes.

 

Half the time, the banner looks like "The Tao Burns" to my weak eyes, and I think "You might be doing it wrong."

 

I'm guessing this site wasn't started in England though, huh? Cause then it would basically mean "The Tao Arses."

Or maybe that's the idea.

[Apech]

Half the time, the banner looks like "The Tao Burns" to my weak eyes, and I think "You might be doing it wrong."

 

I'm guessing this site wasn't started in England though, huh? Cause then it would basically mean "The Tao Arses."

Or maybe that's the idea.

 

Lucky its not called The Arse Burns ... that would be bad.

[Apech]

Now a serious comment.

 

There seems to be an implication in this whole train of thought about Taoism that somehow the cultural phenomenon of Taoism in China is more important than the core of Taoism, the Tao itself. This might be partly a reaction to the Tao being trendy and subject to New Agey type interpretation ... i.e. nice sounding words without any real understanding .... or it might be a kind of protectionism. Also to somehow to suggest that it is easier or lesser to pick up a copy of the TTC and get some meaning from it that is relevant to your life and understanding of reality than it is to pick up the robes and trappings of ancient China and follow their rituals, is quite frankly bizarre. And even more so to suggest that the cause or basis of those (mostly) Westerners who do become Taoists is anything other than the Tao itself, if one is a Taoist, then is illogical.

 

If a western taoist finds meaning in the Tao and puts this into practice then what are we supposed to call this other than Taoism????? And why isn't this perceived by the Chinese orthodox Taoist as a source of renewal ... rather than say ... 'oh another sympathizer????'

 

There needs to be rigor in thought and practice that is true ... so I am not saying just anything goes - but if Taoism has a future surely it is here with people like you guys.

[Marblehead]

I believe that for Religious Taoists labels are important; not so with Philosophical (meaning a way of living one's life) Taoists.

[manitou]

The core of most of us seems to be the trend upward. Upward in understanding, upward in tolerance. Upward in compassion. This happens to be the dance floor we landed on.

[Stigweard]