Taoism doesn't teach one to transcend death and suffering

[Vajrahridaya]

Walking through the market is different from selling, negotiating, and competing in the market. The responsibilities of this are highly un-conducive to achieving Nirvana. We can still do innumerable wonderful things without Renunciation, but, regardless of how it may make us feel about ourselves, we won't make it to the other shore without the correct vehicle. That's the doctrine that I have chosen to accept.

 

The Buddha dharma has many vehicles. One can indeed sell, negotiate, and compete from the Tantric perspective. You'd have to get into it's teachings first though and understand how that's so, as it's an entirely different perspective from the renunciation precepts.

 

I agree that it is possible for laymen to be able to see through ignorance and live without attachment, but, uncomfortable as it might make people, The Teachings go further than that and are more difficult to adhere to throughout the day, every day, every feeling, every thought, when we have (noble as they may be) "worldly" responsibilities. That doesn't make everyone a bad person, it just means that they are not Buddhas. Just like, I can probably tell you various natural treatments for numerous ailments, that might make me extremely helpful in certain instances, but it doesn't make me a naturopathic doctor.

 

Well... I don't want to step on your process, as it's a good one. But, the way of renouncing the world is considered a pre-requisite before one starts with the Tantrayana or Mantrayana, then integration can happen and renunciation is not the pre-requisite anymore, it's a state of mind, a state of keeping ones energy and state of compassion and love, even while negotiating the price of a TV or Camera in a store. Enlightenment is rare in any form though and those that wear the robes of renunciation are generally looked upon as more enlightened simply due to cultural tradition. But, in enlightenment, one must renounce renunciation as well.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

Well... I don't want to step on your process, as it's a good one. But, the way of renouncing the world is considered a pre-requisite before one starts with the Tantrayana or Mantrayana, then integration can happen and renunciation is not the pre-requisite anymore, it's a state of mind, a state of keeping ones energy and state of compassion and love, even while negotiating the price of a TV or Camera in a store. Enlightenment is rare in any form though and those that wear the robes of renunciation are generally looked upon as more enlightened simply due to cultural tradition. But, in enlightenment, one must renounce renunciation as well.

 

I believe one must know Renunciation before it is truly renounced. And this doesn't mean that one must know hot-dogs before one renounces hot-dogs. I take the last chapter of The Surangama literally. I don't follow it loyally.

[C T]

Right. Here's a thing to consider; one can choose to become immersed in the questions of whether or not to BELIEVE a particular theory or idea (good for some purposes) Or one may suspend (put aside) both belief and disbelief and allow experience to bring its own answer (better for other purposes).

Yes, this could be one of the two better ways to catch a snake.... perhaps there are more.

 

Sometimes simply watching snakes do their own thing, without arousing any curiosity at all to find out if indeed they are as poisonous as they have been made out to be, could be the best option. In this instance, answers become obsolete. Some things are best left alone, or if they cannot be left alone, at the very least, exercise a watchful eye over them. It would appear more astute, and less prone to accidents.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yes, this could be one of the two better ways to catch a snake.... perhaps there are more.

 

Sometimes simply watching snakes do their own thing, without arousing any curiosity at all to find out if indeed they are as poisonous as they have been made out to be, could be the best option. In this instance, answers become obsolete. Some things are best left alone, or if they cannot be left alone, at the very least, exercise a watchful eye over them. It would appear more astute, and less prone to accidents.

 

Thanks for the discussion..

[Vajrahridaya]

I believe one must know Renunciation before it is truly renounced. And this doesn't mean that one must know hot-dogs before one renounces hot-dogs. I take the last chapter of The Surangama literally. I don't follow it loyally.

 

I agree, no argument there. Bless your path!

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Buddha's path is blessed

By this refreshing blessing

May we bloom in June

 

 

(I live in Montreal, man. It's COLD here in the winter! :lol: )

[Vajrahridaya]

Buddha's path is blessed

By this refreshing blessing

May we bloom in June

 

 

(I live in Montreal, man. It's COLD here in the winter! :lol: )

 

Yea man... I live in Toronto. I used to live in Florida until a few months ago.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Buddha's path is blessed

By this refreshing blessing

In the dew, we bloom

 

(I think I'll stick with that one )

[Aaron]

Yea man... I live in Toronto. I used to live in Florida until a few months ago.

 

I spent several years of my childhood in Maine. I remember waiting for the school bus standing next to snow banks taller than me. I was born in New York and lived there a few years as well, snow wasn't as bad. I spent the remainder of my childhood in Florida and eventually returned here after a ten year hiatus to Washington State. Florida is by far my favorite place to live, as long as the air conditioning is working.

 

Aaron

Edited June 7, 2011 by Twinner

[Vajrahridaya]

I spent my several years of my childhood in Maine. I remember waiting for the school bus standing next to snow banks taller than me. I was born in New York and lived there a few years as well, snow wasn't as bad. I spent the remainder of my childhood in Florida and eventually returned here after a ten year hiatus to Washington State. Florida is by far my favorite place to live, as long as the air conditioning is working.

 

Aaron

 

Yea, I just find the culture kind of... eh. I like the culture in the North more. Plus I enjoy all 4 seasons.

[Aaron]

Yea, I just find the culture kind of... eh. I like the culture in the North more. Plus I enjoy all 4 seasons.

 

I like the culture where I'm at (Orlando). It's heavily influenced by Puerto Rico (and a little bit of Cuba). I'm very fond of the Latino culture and food. I especially enjoy Roast Pork, rice and beans, and stuffed potato balls. Mmmmm... now I'm hungry.

 

Now I still love good old New England Clam Chowder and Shepherd's Pie, don't get my wrong, but it's a nice change of pace. It's funny, when I lived here as a teenager there were very few Latinos in Orlando, now they make up 40% of the population and I must say they've added character and life to the city. It's not so plain anymore.

 

Aaron

Edited June 7, 2011 by Twinner

[Vajrahridaya]

I like the culture where I'm at (Orlando). It's heavily influenced by Puerto Rico (and a little bit of Cuba). I'm very fond of the Latino culture and food. I especially enjoy Roast Pork, rice and beans, and stuffed potato balls. Mmmmm... now I'm hungry.

 

Now I still love good old New England Clam Chowder and Shepherd's Pie, don't get my wrong, but it's a nice change of pace. It's funny, when I lived here as a teenager there were very few Latinos in Orlando, now they make up 40% of the population and I must say they've added character and life to the city. It's not so plain anymore.

 

Aaron

 

Oh, do you live near downtown? Downtown Orlando is pretty cool, I must agree. They have quite the interesting night life there as well. Pretty hedonistic.

 

Orlando is probably my favorite city in Florida, it has good universities, good food, cool night life, wonderful amusement parks, which I love, but still, there is a lot of southern style ghetto crap, and I prefer to be around northern style ghetto crap, it's more easily digestible, and smarter as it's less repressed as it is in the south. So, NYC, Boston, San Francisco, Portland, Seatle, Chicago, Toronto, Vancouver are all much better cities in my opinion than anything the south can offer for more than just a vacation. I'd much rather live up here, and visit down there.

 

I've spent time in Orlando pedicabbing (bike taxi/rickshaw) on I-drive.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Stigweard]

I wouldn't say it's so black and white. Buddhism teaches both, the insight that liberates from the fear of death and suffering and acceptance but not as an excuse to just suffer, but to see through it even while it happens. Buddhism is not a stick your head in the dirt kind of path in it's overall mentality when it comes to pain and suffering.

 

I don't think Taoism is either and I think the goals of Taoism and Buddhism might be quite similar dependent upon who you talk to as true Taoist practitioners also increase joy, decrease psychological suffering and gain insight that helps them through the death process and I've heard even transcend it all together through various rare attainments exemplified by rarified masters of the deeper alchemical systems of Taoism.

I just want to say that this post shows a wonderful transition in your considerations and thoughts.

 

Thank you

[Vajrahridaya]

I just want to say that this post shows a wonderful transition in your considerations and thoughts.

 

Thank you

 

I've learned a lot more about Taoism since I've been here. I thought it was just a Subjective Monistic Idealism like most other non-dual traditions, but it seems there are approaches from different lineages that lead to the same results as some of the higher vehicles in Buddhadharma.

 

Much of this new found knowledge is thanks to reading plenty of your posts in secret.

[Stigweard]

I've learned a lot more about Taoism since I've been here. I thought it was just a Subjective Monistic Idealism like most other non-dual traditions, but it seems there are approaches from different lineages that lead to the same results as some of the higher vehicles in Buddhadharma.

 

Much of this new found knowledge is thanks to reading plenty of your posts in secret.

LOL thanks for the ego stroke, but you probably had better not use my comments as any sort of definitive measure of Daoism. I doubt my understanding would rate any more than a pea-brained maggot

 

It is truly nice though to see some balance in your comments.

 

[Vajrahridaya]

I doubt my understanding would rate any more than a pea-brained maggot

 

It is truly nice though to see some balance in your comments.

 

 

Well, I've always been a fan of Chinese medicine, including Herbal as well as Needle. The herbal cured a chronic ulcer within 1 month that Western doctors said they could do nothing about. Freakin' AMAZING! Also, I've been doing I-Ching divination my entire life, as interpreted by my deeply wise Mother. Again, Amazing, I have stories!! So, I didn't start out completely ignorant, but at least I learned about some of the finer tuning involved, and got some interpretational perspective from some of the seasoned Taoist philosophers in here. Taoism has always been one of my favorites, but now it's on a list that even transcends Shaivism, which was my 1st favorite my entire life, then second favorite when I came in here due to having taken up Buddhism in 04', and now Shaivism is my 3rd pushed out by Taoism... thanks to this room entirely. LOL! I think some of the more secret lineages that I've heard about might even tie with Dzogchen for me, which is saying a lot! But, I wouldn't know without any direct experience, which will most likely not happen due to how freakin' secret it all is. For good reason, I understand...

[Marblehead]

There ain't no secrets in Taoism. Hehehe.

 

But it is true that oftentimes we have to try a little bit harder in order to understand some of the mysteries.

[manitou]

I think that folks often overlook the virtues of the Sage during discussions of this nature. He possesses 3 treasures. The reason he possesses 3 treasures is because he's spent a lifetime doing the inner cultivation, much the same as a Buddhist who meditates upon losing attachment.

 

One of the treasures is Love. To have true 'agape' love for everyone and everything; this is not our normal state. This must be arduously cultivated. No judgment.

 

Another treasure is Never Be The First in the World. This seems to go directly to our egos. To not be the 'first' on this forum (or to not have to be 'right'). We play with this problem every day in our discussions. Ego jumps into our threads at the drop of a hat. So the Sage has done the inner cultivation to tame his ego.

 

The third treasure is Never Too Much. This goes directly to balance in everything in our lives; food, sex, booze, whatever. The Dao is like a butterfly landing on a bubble, it's so delicate.

 

The Sage and the Buddhist master have developed the same inner strengths but by different methods. Arguments between Daoists and Buddhists are just plain silly, if you ask me - we all get to the same wonderful place if we're impeccable with the inner work.

 

Otherwise it's just all words.

[Walker]

This sounds exactly like the goal of Dzogchen Buddhism.

 

Haha, reminds me of a few years ago when a Nyingma Rinpoche and Dzogchen teacher in the US kindly sat down and gave me a very consice explanation of the goals of his tradition. When I related the conversation to my Daoist teacher, he said, "that's exactly what Daoists cultivate, except using different vocabulary."

 

I should really be studying, but a quick story. Here in China I meet many monks and nuns as well as lay teachers and practitioners. It is a question I often put to them... Are the three schools really one, or not? And specifically, can a practitioner of Daoism transcend the cycle of reincarnation? I've gotten a lot of different answers, but usually, frankly, the Buddhists will say, "no," the Daoists will say, "yes," and the laypeople will offer a variety of answers, usually quite ecumenical and sometimes rooted in serious study and attainment obtained outside of monastic life. I've considered stopping asking the question because I have seen it bring a bit of vitriol into the timbres of even famous, respected Buddhists and Daoists, but it is of too much interest to me... Ah, curiosity!

 

So anyway a few weeks back I had a strange bout of night sweats and went off in search of herbs. I ended up at a small store, not really a pharmacy but loaded with herbs nonetheless, across from the butchers and veggie sellers in an indoor market near my house. Sitting in there was a Buddhist nun whom I greeted with an "Amituofo," though I think at first she may have thought I was mocking her. I bought my herbs and then got into a conversation with the shopkeeper, who it turned out is a lay Buddhist. Suddenly it popped into my head to ask their advice on healthy vegetarian eating and soon enough I was offered a seat.

 

After introducations were made the nun (she is a Han Chinese Gelugpa whose home temple is in a Tibetan area of Sichuan) and I got to chatting and I posed my old question to her. She said that Daoists and Buddhists generally cultivate the same thing, but the problem is that Daoists often cultivate to the level of lower heavens and then, due to attachments, do not continue on the path to liberation, and eventually fall back to the human realm or lower when their karma to enjoy life in the heavens is exhausted. I asked, "but if a Daoist has cultivated with the goal of true understanding and liberation, even if he or she was not a Buddhist in terms of affiliation and identity in this life, wouldn't that will itself be enough to help them have the karma to meet further teachers and continue cultivating in the heavenly realms? Furthermore, surely there are no Daoists in modern China who have not encountered Buddhism, so one could say there are no Daoists who completely lack karmic affinity for Buddhism. Shouldn't these things be enough to ensure that these Daoists who have reached the heavenly realms receive further guidance, provided they have the will to cultivate true understanding of reality?"

 

The nun responded that a Daoist with a will to keep cultivating all of the way to liberation would surely receive guidance, and that it is indeed true that pretty much all Daoists must also have quite a bit of yuanfen with Buddhism--the only obstacles then to further realization to a practitioner who has landed in the heavenly realms, then, would be attachment to one's attainments, or even outright aversion to further learning.

 

We chatted some more and the nun explained that what she believes sets Buddhism apart from other religions is that it specifically is centered around one goal: liberation from unconsciously cycling through the six realms for all eternity, ignorantly buffeted along by one's karma. I asked if one could not then say that another way to refer to Buddhism is as "the path of liberation." She said this is correct. I then asked if one could conclude that Daoism, essentially, is not a path that can lead one to liberation from the cycle of reincarnation.

 

She said, yes, well, that is unless a Daoist cultivates to the level of the 33rd heaven or higher, where reincarnation ceases.

 

My eyebrow went up... This exactly reflects what I have heard from my Daoist teacher.

 

Anyway, Vaj and Stig getting along so well? Auspicious, auspicious, most auspicious indeed!

Edited June 7, 2011 by Walker

[Vajrahridaya]

Wow Walker... indeed. You just echoed my thoughts through your own way of explaining things. So concise and true. What a beautiful story!

 

One could unpack a lot of what you said as well, but that goes for anything.

 

Cheers for that, my brother on the way. Awesome insight, what an auspicious set of questions as well. What a nice and patient enough Nun to entertain your inquiry too.

 

This is what I found happens with a lot of religions in their concepts, not those extraordinary individuals that never give up cultivating regardless of religious background, but religions in general that do not see, "right view" of dependent origination/emptiness which leads one to not get stuck in all sorts of fabulous attainments that can happen along the way. The higher heavens are very, very attractive indeed, and many of them are super long lived as well. This is all I've said here really, is that Buddhism is very clear about the "goal" from the very beginning when most traditions are not, but that doesn't mean an individual is not, which is where re-organizing and re-vamping of a tradition happens from time to time by certain individuals.

 

Buddha - "My Bodhisattvas will manifest in other traditions."

 

So many Buddhist Sutras say this in various ways, that even if the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas were to manifest as a god, like Shiva, or an immortal... etc. to an individual who is capable of understanding to whatever degree, it will be to guide that person in the language they are able to hear into deeper and deeper inner states of insight, bliss and freedom. This is the great promise of the Mahayana view.

 

In my practice we make vows all the time, that if the people I meet become Buddhas before me, may I be disciples of them, and if I am to be a Buddha before them, may I never rest and give teachings of awakening to all beings I have made connections with since beginning-less time.

 

That prayer can be seen as a metaphor for a general attitude as well.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[C T]

I think that folks often overlook the virtues of the Sage during discussions of this nature. He possesses 3 treasures. The reason he possesses 3 treasures is because he's spent a lifetime doing the inner cultivation, much the same as a Buddhist who meditates upon losing attachment.

 

 

The Sage and the Buddhist master have developed the same inner strengths but by different methods. Arguments between Daoists and Buddhists are just plain silly, if you ask me - we all get to the same wonderful place if we're impeccable with the inner work.

 

Otherwise it's just all words.

Actually i think in real Buddhism, not the new age kind, it does not adhere to nor promote the notion of going to any wonderful place. Its more about realizing, as serious practice will reveal in time, that we have never been separated from this 'wonderful place' at all, and thru cultivation, the layers get washed away and gradually the clear sight returns. Its like removing mental cataracts. Then things are seen for what they are, just as they are in this very moment. There is no better home to go to - we are already home, fed and all. Perhaps this is also true for real Taoism - i dont know yet because i have not known any Taoists who promote or have put forward in the past something similar to the Two Paths/One Ground concept that is offered in Vajrayana.

 

I hope you do not assume that i am looking to start a debate here on which path is the right one. A few members here have had their views narrowed by being led to believe that Buddhists are a condescending, controversial bunch. This brings about cynicism and hypocrisy. In some ways, we have to share the responsibility for this happening. It needs to be addressed, and we as Buddhists ought to maintain a conduct that is conducive to promoting understanding so that open dialog can continue, without people who are non-Buddhists assuming what Buddhists ought to say or do or what they should be practicing. This is least helpful and minds can close up in the process. Those who speak for Buddhism can help by always keeping this in mind, and those who are not committed Buddhists, or who only study and adopt certain helpful aspects and discard some others, can help by not assuming they know what the ultimate goal of Buddhism is, and how Buddhists ought to practice in order to get there.

 

I think as Buddhists we ought to respect others and give room for others to find their own way. But their own way need not be our interpretation of what that way should or could be - it means what it says on the tin - its their own way.. full stop.

 

For want of an example, we could look at the discussions between Goldisheavy and Vaj - it gets very heated at times, yet beneath it all, there is an understanding that both are man enough to rise above trivialities and know that its nothing personal. I think they both understand each other very well, but this understanding is one borne of continued conflict and disagreement, yet i do not think there is any animosity nor contempt held by either party. On the contrary, i think what they have shown is that a relationship can be formed despite differences of opinions. This is the mature, healthy approach. But i also see a lot of cheap potshots being taken by others, like snipers laying in ambush... they show up on threads, make a few wise remarks, and retreat to the underbrush, without engaging dialog at all. They think they know better, and wanted to make sure that others know that they know better. This i see as hypocritical behavior, and should not be condoned. Just be open enough to disagree with concepts, and not attack the person... be engaging, or else exercise the right to remain silent.

 

I for one have learnt plenty from these two guys, and i am glad they did not simply agree to go around patting one another on the back and stoking the fires of consent.

 

I am sorry, Manitou, for addressing this through your post. I hope you do not mind. Its been on my mind quite a bit, and somehow it needed to be said here.

 

For a start, i will try to keep this advise in mind always, as lessons to rectify my own lack of judgement that comes out every once in a while.

Edited June 7, 2011 by CowTao

[C T]

Haha, reminds me of a few years ago when a Nyingma Rinpoche and Dzogchen teacher in the US kindly sat down and gave me a very consice explanation of the goals of his tradition. When I related the conversation to my Daoist teacher, he said, "that's exactly what Daoists cultivate, except using different vocabulary." ....

 

Excellent share! Thank you sincerely for this, Walker.

[Vajrahridaya]

For want of an example, we could look at the discussions between Goldisheavy and Vaj - it gets very heated at times, yet beneath it all...i do not think there is any animosity nor contempt held by either party.

 

He's a smart and interesting guy, and he's humorous from time to time. I do enjoy that. I feel that he is genuine as well.

[Aaron]

Haha, reminds me of a few years ago when a Nyingma Rinpoche and Dzogchen teacher in the US kindly sat down and gave me a very consice explanation of the goals of his tradition. When I related the conversation to my Daoist teacher, he said, "that's exactly what Daoists cultivate, except using different vocabulary."

 

I should really be studying, but a quick story. Here in China I meet many monks and nuns as well as lay teachers and practitioners. It is a question I often put to them... Are the three schools really one, or not? And specifically, can a practitioner of Daoism transcend the cycle of reincarnation? I've gotten a lot of different answers, but usually, frankly, the Buddhists will say, "no," the Daoists will say, "yes," and the laypeople will offer a variety of answers, usually quite ecumenical and sometimes rooted in serious study and attainment obtained outside of monastic life. I've considered stopping asking the question because I have seen it bring a bit of vitriol into the timbres of even famous, respected Buddhists and Daoists, but it is of too much interest to me... Ah, curiosity!

 

So anyway a few weeks back I had a strange bout of night sweats and went off in search of herbs. I ended up at a small store, not really a pharmacy but loaded with herbs nonetheless, across from the butchers and veggie sellers in an indoor market near my house. Sitting in there was a Buddhist nun whom I greeted with an "Amituofo," though I think at first she may have thought I was mocking her. I bought my herbs and then got into a conversation with the shopkeeper, who it turned out is a lay Buddhist. Suddenly it popped into my head to ask their advice on healthy vegetarian eating and soon enough I was offered a seat.

 

After introducations were made the nun (she is a Han Chinese Gelugpa whose home temple is in a Tibetan area of Sichuan) and I got to chatting and I posed my old question to her. She said that Daoists and Buddhists generally cultivate the same thing, but the problem is that Daoists often cultivate to the level of lower heavens and then, due to attachments, do not continue on the path to liberation, and eventually fall back to the human realm or lower when their karma to enjoy life in the heavens is exhausted. I asked, "but if a Daoist has cultivated with the goal of true understanding and liberation, even if he or she was not a Buddhist in terms of affiliation and identity in this life, wouldn't that will itself be enough to help them have the karma to meet further teachers and continue cultivating in the heavenly realms? Furthermore, surely there are no Daoists in modern China who have not encountered Buddhism, so one could say there are no Daoists who completely lack karmic affinity for Buddhism. Shouldn't these things be enough to ensure that these Daoists who have reached the heavenly realms receive further guidance, provided they have the will to cultivate true understanding of reality?"

 

The nun responded that a Daoist with a will to keep cultivating all of the way to liberation would surely receive guidance, and that it is indeed true that pretty much all Daoists must also have quite a bit of yuanfen with Buddhism--the only obstacles then to further realization to a practitioner who has landed in the heavenly realms, then, would be attachment to one's attainments, or even outright aversion to further learning.

 

We chatted some more and the nun explained that what she believes sets Buddhism apart from other religions is that it specifically is centered around one goal: liberation from unconsciously cycling through the six realms for all eternity, ignorantly buffeted along by one's karma. I asked if one could not then say that another way to refer to Buddhism is as "the path of liberation." She said this is correct. I then asked if one could conclude that Daoism, essentially, is not a path that can lead one to liberation from the cycle of reincarnation.

 

She said, yes, well, that is unless a Daoist cultivates to the level of the 33rd heaven or higher, where reincarnation ceases.

 

My eyebrow went up... This exactly reflects what I have heard from my Daoist teacher.

 

Anyway, Vaj and Stig getting along so well? Auspicious, auspicious, most auspicious indeed!

 

Am I the only one that found this attitude a bit condescending? Not you Walker, but the general Buddhist idea about Taoism and Taoists as it was told through your conversation. "Oh, yes, those funny little Taoists can become enlightened, but even a dog, if he tries long enough, will find a way to open a door." Just from the general nature of how they talk about Taoists, you hear a bit of contempt in their voices.

 

Aaron

Edited June 7, 2011 by Twinner

[manitou]

Actually i think in real Buddhism, not the new age kind, it does not adhere to nor promote the notion of going to any wonderful place. Its more about realizing, as serious practice will reveal in time, that we have never been separated from this 'wonderful place' at all, and thru cultivation, the layers get washed away and gradually the clear sight returns.

 

 

My error, I should have been more succinct. The wonderful place I refer to is the place of clarity of which you speak. I'm not talking about any wonderful Taoist heaven. It's right here. We're on the same page, CowTao.