COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS CONCERNING DAOISM (TAOISM)

[Stigweard]

Same back at cha', my friend.

 

Although we walk different paths, the journey is the same, so I see no reason why we cannot walk side by side when our paths do happen to merge for a while, and all paths do that now and again.

 

So are there any other misconceptions of anything we need address?

Hmmm ....

 

All good for now me thinks, I'll get back to ya if sometin comes to mind.

 

[Marblehead]

Hmmm ....

 

All good for now me thinks, I'll get back to ya if sometin comes to mind.

 

 

We could always talk about virtue again. This is such a challenging concept to discuss. Like, for example, the misconception that the Virtue of Tao is the same thing as the virtue of man.

[Stigweard]

We could always talk about virtue again. This is such a challenging concept to discuss. Like, for example, the misconception that the Virtue of Tao is the same thing as the virtue of man.

That would be a great discussion ... but unfortunately I know that you and I would already agree. Maybe I should deliberately disagree just to get the ball rolling

[Marblehead]

That would be a great discussion ... but unfortunately I know that you and I would already agree. Maybe I should deliberately disagree just to get the ball rolling

 

Hehehe. I thought disagreeing was my role to play here.

[Stigweard]

Hehehe. I thought disagreeing was my role to play here.

Woohoo! Lookee at what I dug up:

 

The Significance of Taoist Virtue

 

[Marblehead]

Woohoo! Lookee at what I dug up:

 

The Significance of Taoist Virtue

 

 

Yep. I just put a hit on the thread.

[Mark Saltveit]

Anyone still interested in this topic? I'm starting to actually draft my article on the conflict between scholars such as Komjathy and popularizers such as Ursula Le Guin. Saw this quote here:

 

"It is no surprise for instance that Ursula Le Guin is not a Taoist scholar and these are easy targets."

 

Hmmm, that's where you have to be a bit careful. Le Guin is not a Daoist scholar, but she is a Harvard graduate who grew up surrounded by the founding fathers of anthropology -- notably her own father, Alfred Kroeger. Not to mention that she co-wrote her Daodejing with J.P. Seaton, who is a scholar of classical Chinese and a translator of classical Chinese poetry.

 

Komjathy is an associate professor, and a Quanzhen initiate, but those disciplines may limit his understanding as well as expand it. As another Daoist scholar said to me recently, it's not that complicated to translate the words of the Daodejing. It's understanding what they mean, even in the original language, that is difficult.

 

It's not like it was a clear-cut, 5 step manual for living when it was first written.

[Aaron]

Anyone still interested in this topic? I'm starting to actually draft my article on the conflict between scholars such as Komjathy and popularizers such as Ursula Le Guin. Saw this quote here:

 

"It is no surprise for instance that Ursula Le Guin is not a Taoist scholar and these are easy targets."

 

Hmmm, that's where you have to be a bit careful. Le Guin is not a Daoist scholar, but she is a Harvard graduate who grew up surrounded by the founding fathers of anthropology -- notably her own father, Alfred Kroeger. Not to mention that she co-wrote her Daodejing with J.P. Seaton, who is a scholar of classical Chinese and a translator of classical Chinese poetry.

 

Komjathy is an associate professor, and a Quanzhen initiate, but those disciplines may limit his understanding as well as expand it. As another Daoist scholar said to me recently, it's not that complicated to translate the words of the Daodejing. It's understanding what they mean, even in the original language, that is difficult.

 

It's not like it was a clear-cut, 5 step manual for living when it was first written.

 

 

Very good points. I would say that we have enough translations of the Tao Teh Ching floating around now, that we can have a general idea of what was taught then and now. I think when one examines Taoism the easiest misconception is the idea of philosophical Taoism. This is primarily a Western idea and in China there is no separation of Taoism from traditional Chinese religious practices. One can even examine the Tao Teh Ching and see the cultural mythos present in the text itself, in particular the notion of spirits and also, if one examines the Chuang Tzu mythological creatures. It's easy for a westerner to discount much of this, but unless one actually understands the Eastern notion of nature, then they are missing out on a lot of the context.

 

Aaron

 

 

[JustARandomPanda]

Okay. Let's look at this.

 

You stated: Seeing that Daoist philosophy is more or less only a cultivation of the mind (which is an important aspect), then I maintain that, on its own, studying Lao-Zhuang philosophy is insufficient to achieve an experiential awareness of Dao.

 

I agree. That is, I agree if that is all we do with the wisdom (couldn't use the word 'knowledge') we gain from understanding the philosophy of Taoism. That is, we talk our talk but we walk a different path.

 

However, if we walk our talk, that is, we apply the wisdom of Taoist philosophy to our everyday life, including our thoughts and actions, we will be living the Way of Tao.

 

Now, this is not meant to downplay the importance of supplimental aspects of taoism including religion, the arts, spirituality, etc. It is just saying that I think it is possible to have the total without studying and ritualistically following these supplimental aspects.

 

Sure, I will grant you that Philosophical Taoism does not place very much attention on spirituality. Chuang Tzu does to a degree. But I still think that once we have grasped the concept, I mean really grasped, of Oneness, spirituality will always be in the background of every thought we have.

 

Your turn Stig. Hehehe.

 

 

Marble is a Philosophical "Virtue-Cultivator Taoist"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shhhhhh...don't tell him but from the above post he let the cat out of the bag he's a closet Confucian as well.

[Marblehead]

Marble is a Philosophical "Virtue-Cultivator Taoist"

 

Shhhhhh...don't tell him but from the above post he let the cat out of the bag he's a closet Confucian as well.

 

Hehehe. Actually, I missed this post until someone brought it to my attention. Perhaps you are right. I have already over-labelled myself so I see no reason to add additional attachments to the label of "me".

 

Yeah, Confucius is another subject. I don't normally talk about it but yes, there is much structure in my life although I don't think it would be fair for me to blame Confucius for that.

[Mark Foote]

 

Anyone still interested in this topic? I'm starting to actually draft my article on the conflict between scholars such as Komjathy and popularizers such as Ursula Le Guin.

 

 

Hope you'll let us know when your article is written, I've never found a way into the text and I think your approach might interest me.

 

As to finding the use of the descriptions/relationships, ain't that the truth! I've come to the conclusion that the only significant sacred teachings are the ones where the speaker (or writer) taught themselves in the process, whether they understood and let on that they were engaged in self-education or not. When the teaching is a compilation, the result is hit-and-miss sometimes. Too bad we don't have the history to know how the text evolved.

[Erdrickgr]

*Bump*

 

Anyone still interested in this topic? I'm starting to actually draft my article on the conflict between scholars such as Komjathy and popularizers such as Ursula Le Guin.

 

Yep, I'm interested, anyway

 

 

Also, regarding what was said earlier about pronouncing Taoist with a T, fwiw while I've never heard anyone pronounce it that way, I do have a book in front of me where they recommend that pronunciation...

 

"Taoist - It is convenient to pronounce the first syllable as tow in towel (instead of dow), following the accepted anglicized pronunciation of the word." - (Ed. by Lin Yutang, The Wisdom of Laotse, p. v)

 

They don't say to pronounce Tao with a T sound, but rather with a D sound.

[JustARandomPanda]

And I STILL don't understand how he gets the whole Taoism pronounced with a hard "t" thing. I mean, maybe someone with no exposure to the concept would read it this way, but that is not at all common usage. He makes it seem like in the West Taoism is mostly pronounced with a hard "t" and that The Tao of Pooh, for instance, is intended to be pronounced that way. BS!

 

I have a friend who only pronounces Taoism with a hard 't'. This despite me telling him multiple times it's pronounced with a 'd'. So yeah...I suspect there's plenty of people just like my friend who insist on pronouncing it the way it's spelled in english.

[JustARandomPanda]

 

 

From my own experience the philosophy only comes alive when you engage in the practices that are synergistic with that philosophy. There is something quite profound when you take the words and philosophies from a text, for example Yin/Yang theory, and actually experience them as a living, breathing phenomena. It takes the philosophy from a level of understanding to a level of "knowing".

 

The same with neidan practice. The philosophies of both Laozi and Zhuangzi are quite an accurate prescription on how to handle one's Qi for beneficial development. I love Zhuangzi's story of the butcher whose knife never finds obstructions. That is priceless neidan instruction.

 

I also find it ironic that pretty much all Philosophical Daoists justify their position through the exclusive notions that somehow their Lao-Zhuang Daoism is somehow "purer" and "more authentic" to all other forms of Daoism. Especially since the fundamentals of their philosophical world view includes the inclusive liberality of Laozi.

 

This is one reason why I know more about Buddhism and Zen than I do about Taoism or Hinduism. I do not have anyone who practices Taoism near where I live whereas I do for the other two. And I believe that getting the majority of one's understanding from texts short changes one's growth of wisdom. Wisdom not being the same as understanding. Someone who is wise will also have understanding but someone who understands is not thereby automatically wise.

 

Besides..."taoism" was surely around before anyone thought to put it down in writing. As I understand it knowing how to read or write at all was for the elite of any society. Most wisdom later put into text was first transmitted orally. Who knows what 'pure taoism' really had that's been lost?

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Perhaps we can hold a Q&A about the misconceptions of T/Daoism in chat some time, Stig


Doesnt have to be ME of course though i think i'd like to get some of my own answers too lol

[Stigweard]

Crikey !! We are bringing out some ghosts aren't we ;-)

 

More than happy to play

[Taomeow]

That Chinese sound used to be rendered in Wade-Giles as a T and then revised in Pinyin and designated as a D. In reality it is both and neither.

Not a single sound of Chinese has an exactly corresponding English sound. Older English renditions say "tao" and newer say "dao," which is why people tend to think "dao" is correct -- audio material wasn't readily available in Wade-Giles times and when it became available, Pinyin already took over.

I prefer to write "tao" but pronounce "dao," write Wen-tzu but Laozi, and so on. It's a matter of tradition -- Lao Tze was translated so many times as Laozi by now that it's not a problem to adopt the modernized version, while the latest translation of Wen-tzu I've read still says Wen-tzu, and since I didn't do the work of translating it, I use it out of respect for the translator. I use Pinyin for most other purposes (e.g. qigong rather than chi kung, taiji rather than tai chi, etc.) The advantages of Pinyin are not phonetical -- I can't honestly tell which is closer to the Chinese version (and in Russian we have a totally different way of representing Chinese sounds, obviously... and our way to say "taoist/daoist" is "daos"). The part which is a huge improvement with Pinyin IMO is the abandonment of the prior tradition to split Chinese words and names into the constituent syllables, something that made them hard to "hear" and harder to remember. Imagine how difficult your name would be for a foreigner if it was written as An Drew Ri Chard Son or Kim Ber Ly Do No Van or Mar Ga Ret That Cher. But that's exactly how older versions of Romanization of Chinese went about it. Pinyin set that part straight, which is why I prefer it for most purposes.

[JustARandomPanda]

Thanks TM

 

Reading your posts always makes me regret there is no recognized Taoist lineage holder near where I live. I'd sign up in a heart beat to learn from them directly if I could.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Crikey !! We are bringing out some ghosts aren't we ;-)

 

More than happy to play

 

 

Well we need a time/day then dont we? lol! and more questioners i dont really have that many questions off hand (but who knows when it comes down to it, huh?)

[Taomeow]

Thank you, SB.

 

It's not unusual to formulate this goal first and have some circumstances come together to provide an opportunity later. Many of the most famous and accomplished taoists were late bloomers.

[Mark Saltveit]

A while back I mentioned an article I was working on, concerning the controversy over religious vs. philosophical Daoism, Professors Komjathy and Kirkland, etc. Mark Foote and others asked me to share the article when I was done with it.

 

Well, the topic keeps growing as I try to write it, so I'm probably going to put it out in chunks. The first, very broad overview just came out. Here it is: http://www.realchange.org/taoish/philosophy-or-religion/

 

Mark

[dawei]

Hi Mark,

 

Not sure if you prefer to discuss it at your site or here but it seems on topic here, so I'll continue.

 

I would personally say there is at least one more time period before the Warring States, otherwise we have no continuity; it would be a kind of 'big bang' approach to say it all started from nothing... Not saying that is what your saying but any missing pre-state is suggestive to not having an influence.

 

I tend to see it as evolving in stages in history like this:

 

Primitive Naturalism > Divining and Mythology > Shamanism/Spiritualism > Political Philosophy > Alchemy > Religion > Dark Philosophy > Modern Philosophy

 

I am in the camp which says there is no difference. I remember traveling through Sichuan and going to a few Daoist temples and we asked them to explain the difference between Dao Jia and Dao Jiao (often western-speak for Philosophical Daoism and Religious Daoism) and we always got the same answer; there is no difference... they are part of the whole.

 

So while I hold this position, I came to the same conclusion that we may be missing the point of the discussion because what we do see in reality is a western (and even eastern) focus on the philosophy... but I think there are reasons which I won't go into since it may not matter for the here-and-now...

 

But someone can take a hold of any stage of interest and 'focus' there if they wanted to. I do think it is a little like studying a part of history and maybe missing what leads up to that part and where it goes on, etc... but I think in the end, it is not prohibited to do. I will say that I see it much more like 3 or 4 dimensional than my example provides but it's a simple example to a dynamic issue.

Edited January 29, 2013 by dawei

[Mark Saltveit]

Thanks for that, dawei. I'd love to hear more about your experiences in Sichuan, either here or on my website. I traveled a bit there, years ago, and really enjoyed it.

 

No doubt there were significant influences on Daoism before the Warring States period, but it is a strikingly unique school of thought. Similarly, we can find influences on Plato and Socrates, but no one objects to seeing them (or Aristotle, or Jesus or Buddha) as the start of something unique and worth naming.

 

The distinction between Daojia and Daojiao is sometimes dismissed as a Western misunderstanding, but it goes back at least to Wang Bi, and I'm pretty sure all the way to Sima Qian circa 100 BCE. (Someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.) It may be irrelevant in China today, but it was important enough to merit a mention in the premiere history of its age, 2200 years ago.

 

And that's part of my point. Modern China is also very distant from Han China and Warring States-era Chu. Not quite as distant as the modern U.S., but nearly; the language and culture have changed a great deal in China during that time.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mark Saltveit

[Mark Foote]

Interesting post, there, Mr. Saltveit. Led me to your post "mirror...mirror...mirror", and to your translation of the line of the DDJ:

 

 

"Through cleansing the mirror of mystery, can you make it without flaw?"

 

 

and Wang Bi's translation of the mirror line:

 

 

“Can you erase the deviant and ornamental and so gain a totality of vision whose brightness things cannot block and whose spirituality cannot be flawed?”

 

 

I like that the erasure is aimed at one thing and the gaining occurs with respect to another, in Wang Bi's translation, though he sure doesn't keep it simple.

 

The question that Dogen had before he left for China was why anyone should have to practice something that is inherent in human nature. The words that somehow convey a practice that is inherent in human nature fail to say that anything in particular should be done, yet they convey a sense of the relationships involved.

 

The difficulty in writing a manual of meditation is that meditation is fundamentally the induction of a hynogogic state, a state between waking and sleeping where the location of awareness is free to move and the movement of breath acts without will. Such a state cannot be attained through the exercise of volition, yet calm and relaxation can induce such a state.

 

The writings of what I understand from your article to be religious Daoism are concerned with alchemy, with ji, chi, and shen, and the transmutation of one to the other (hope I'm getting that right!). I would contend these are phenomena of the hypnogogic state which are quite real, and the effects can be felt by someone who doesn't have a practice conducive to the induction of a hypnogogic state. Nevertheless, they can't be "done", and they are usually taught through a master-disciple relationship rather than through any scriptural or textual study.

 

They are the same as philosophical Daoism in that the "not-doing" that is at the heart of the philosophy is also at the heart of the practice; it just doesn't seem that way when the immortality that is sought is interpreted to include a longer life, rather than simply an entrance to the kingdom of heaven (as Jesus put it in the Gospel of Thomas- a kingdom of heaven which, he said, is within).

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mark Foote

[Mark Saltveit]

Thank you for the kind words. However, that translation and article (Mirror, mirror) are not mine. I only know a handful of Chinese words, traveler's terms. I did write the piece "Philosophy or Religion," "Comedians as Daoist Missionaries," and pretty much all the rest of the blog (so far) to be honest.

 

The translation and "Mirror, Mirror" are by Prof. Stephen Bokenkamp of the Arizona State University, who (along with Livia Kohn) is one of the leading Western experts on Han and later Daoist practice. His book "Early Daoist Scriptures" is one of the leading books on the subject. I'm very honored to have him as a contributor to my blog.

 

in the comments to Bokenkamp's article, Scott ("Bao Pu") Barnwell makes an interesting point, that when the DDJ was written, mirrors were bronze, and rather rougher than today's mirrors. We're accustomed to silvered glass, which gives essentially a perfect reflection; but a bronze mirror (I imagine) would metaphorically be an always approximate reflection of reality, which changes the metaphor entirely.