What is Enlightenment?

[Vmarco]

It is curious that no matter what spiritual discussion forum one engages in, people have more definitions for enlightenment, than ego has lies. Wasn't it Voltaire who said, if cockroaches had a god, it would be the biggest, baddest, cockroach around.

 

That how most people define enlightenment,...through their own mediocrity.

 

Tradition suggests that Lao Tzu said, "Recognize that eveything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth." To Lao Tzu, the truth is the Tao. Thus, to understand the Tao, would be synonymous with enlightenment.

 

Lao Tzu purpotedly said, "the only way to understand [the Tao] is to directly experience it." And how can one recognize that they have directly experienced the Tao? In the Hua Hu Ching, Lao Tzu said, "the Tao doesn't come and go."

 

If one's experience Comes and Goes, that did not, according to Taoist tradtion, experience the Tao,...thus they have not experienced enlightenment. It's very black and white,...it's very simple.

 

In Buddhism, enlightenment is impossible without the realization of Dependent Origination. To realize Dependent Origination, one must understand the emptiness of form. How does one understand the emptiness of form,...their Heart Sutra says, Gate, Gate, Paragate, Parasamgate, Bodhi Svaha!...which is, "To go, to come, beyond going and coming, into complete going and coming, where enlightenment is welcomed."

 

In Buddhism, an enlightened person is called a Tathagata,...a Tathagata doesn't come and go. It's pretty black and white,...it's very simple.

 

Those in history who had realized or glimpsed enlightenment all said similiar things regarding the uncovering of this direct experience,...that direct experience cannot be experienced through the 6 senses.

 

The Hua Hu Ching suggests, "the ego is a monkey catapulting through the jungle; totally fascinated by the realm of the senses....if anyone threaten it, it actually fears for its life. Let this monkey go. Let the senses go."

 

Lao Tzu said, "there is nothing more futile and frustrating than relying on the mind. To arrive at the unshakable, you must befriend the Tao. To do this, quiet your thinking."

 

The Shurangama sutra says, "As soon as one sense-organ returns to the source, All the six are liberated."

 

Defining Enlightenment is simple,...not by way of what it is,...which the Ignorant wouldn't recognized if it was in front of them,...Enlightenment is simple by way of what it is not. Enlightenment does not Come and Go,....Enlightenment cannot be recognized through the 6 senses,...that is, from the sense organs of sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch, and thinking. It's simple!

 

In other words,...if Taoism and Buddhism are correct,...the million of ignorant definitions of enlightenment,...from "carry water, chop wood", to the Conspiracy of Mediocrity, that is, "the conspiracy of mediocrity is basically the conspiracy to express your own ego instead of transcending it or letting go of it. The idea has become "if I can really emote and express my self-contriction with sincerity, I'm somehow spiritual". Actually, people who are involved in this boomeritis even deny the importance of Enlightenment or Awakening, because that's saying some states are higher than others - and we shouldn't be so judgemental."

 

In our current therapeutic, ego-centric society people don't want to see that what they thought was meaningful may actually be meaningless.

 

Enlightenment is pretty much an Eastern term,...there is no enlightenment in the Abrahamic religion.

 

Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Do not go about worshipping deities and religious institutions as the source of the subtle truth. To do so is to place intermediaries between yourself and source, and to make youself a beggar who looks outside for a treasure that is hidden inside his own breast. If you want to worship the Tao, first discover it in your own heart."

 

For the Abrahamic religions, their heart is really in their head. For example,...Christian love is often considered the highest love, although it is merely conditional love that arises from the 6 senses. To better understand this type of love, simply consider the Great Love Chapter of Christendom, Corinthians 13; for example, "love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things", 1 Cor 13:7. That isn't Unconditional Love, but the submission, devotion, expectation and suffering to the conditions of their religions brewed beliefs.

 

It's pretty black and white,...an quite simple!

 

V

[mewtwo]

So what is enlightenment? can you quantify it?

 

Hits self over the head with a staff a staff made of mahogany, space mahogany.

Edited March 9, 2012 by mewtwo

[Marblehead]

Hi Vmarco,

Just want to say that I think that was a nice post. If the discussion evolves we may have some disagreements but at this point I just wanted to say that you have presented a good starting point for a possibly good discussion.

[Protector]

Huh? Immortal4life's threads convinced me that all Jesus was talking about was enlightenment

[Birch]

i reckon that once you can start understanding those texts and symbols and markers of what an enlightened being does then you, well, you know:-) But you don't need the words.

Not that I know - but I know a very small piece of it - being myself a very small piece hahahahaha

 

Anyway, the emotional stuff is IMO/IME a part of what happens to cultivators so I wouldn't mistake the trees for the forest and call people mediocre because they're on path. Depends IMO/IME where the emotions are coming from. If they're being created afresh fake because someone told you to (although that's probably a good way in for those people who have cut themselves off from themselves) or if they're coming up from, well, where they were stuck.

[Chang]

An enlightening post Vmarco. Thank you.

[Apech]

...

 

 

 

In other words,...if Taoism and Buddhism are correct,...the million of ignorant definitions of enlightenment,...from "carry water, chop wood", to the Conspiracy of Mediocrity, that is, "the conspiracy of mediocrity is basically the conspiracy to express your own ego instead of transcending it or letting go of it. The idea has become "if I can really emote and express my self-contriction with sincerity, I'm somehow spiritual". Actually, people who are involved in this boomeritis even deny the importance of Enlightenment or Awakening, because that's saying some states are higher than others - and we shouldn't be so judgemental."

 

In our current therapeutic, ego-centric society people don't want to see that what they thought was meaningful may actually be meaningless.

 

...

 

Thank you VM ... I liked the whole post but especially this bit.

[Aaron]

I'm still astounded that you don't understand the significance of the phrase, "chop wood, carry water". Other than that, I agree with much of what you said. I would only suggest that you apply what you've said as a mirror first, before applying it to others.

 

And thank you so much for being brave enough to define who is mediocre and who isn't. I forget, how does that old saying go? "How great is the ego that can tell the difference between 'eh' and 'oh'! You must fear what others fear!"

 

Anyways, nice overall, but still a bit smug.

 

Aaron

 

edit- On a side note, many traditional Chinese Taoists do not accept the Hua Hu Ching as being authentic for several reasons. First it was written nearly 500 years after the death of Lao Tzu, second there are no other teachings attributed to Lao Tzu that speak in this voice, in other words it was written by a different author, and third, it has very little similarity with the teachings of the Tao Te Ching itself.

 

The people that do accept the Hua Hu Ching as being an authentic document are most often the majority of Chinese Buddhist/Taoist/Confucianists who have no problem with attributing the qualities of Buddhism to Taoism. These same people like to claim that Lao Tzu left China and entered India to become or teach the Buddha. Historically speaking, Buddhist missionaries started to enter China around the time that the Hua Hu Ching was written, so it is quite possible that it was written by a monk who was knowledgeable of Buddhist practice and wished to integrate the two practices. (A big mistake since they are really as different as night and day!)

 

So, the skinny is this- the Hua Hu Ching is a Book written by Buddhists who wanted to add Buddhist thought to Taoism. It is not Lao Tzu's actual teachings.

 

What people need to pay attention to is the fact that almost all of your Lao Tzu quotes are taken from the Hua Hu Ching and are most definitely not the actual words or philosophy of Lao Tzu.

 

There's a reason why there are several hundred translations of the Tao Te Ching, but only a handful of the Hua Hu Ching. One is an accepted manuscript, the other is routinely accepted as a fake.

 

If you want me to cite the sources, I'd be happy to, but for the most part, just look on Wikipedia.

 

Aaron

Edited March 9, 2012 by Twinner

[suninmyeyes]

Is there anyone enlightened around here?

edit:to explain why I ask so it doesent come of disrespectfull, becouse there is a lot of building castles in the sky happening regarding the subject and it would be intersting to discuss enlightement with someone who claims it (not just having glimpses of it).

And it was kind of intersting to read the post Vmarco, I do agree with a lot that has been said. Although enlightement is not something I would normally think about or aspire to . Understanding and listening to nature/life - yes.

Edited March 9, 2012 by suninmyeyes

[zanshin]

It's pretty black and white,...an quite simple!

 

V

 

 

Except there's a little bit of black in the white and there's a little bit of white in the black.

[gj551]

considering seriously all youve written before made me contribute this

 

dont wanna come off as luk geek or something but he published this topic related book

 

 

edit: dont wanna ruin your party either but the tibetan book of the dead made enlightenment look like death to me because it rendered it being liberation from game existence, thence what are you when you dont run the wheel of rebirth? bingo

Edited March 9, 2012 by gj551

[konchog uma]

Tradition suggests that Lao Tzu said, "Recognize that eveything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth." To Lao Tzu, the truth is the Tao. Thus, to understand the Tao, would be synonymous with enlightenment.

 

congratulations, your style of writing here seems much less smarmy and demeaning than usual. I hope its a sign of spiritual or emotional progress. Blessings to you.

 

I don't think tao can be understood. Not in a logical, linear, left-brained sense. It can be experienced, but that entails a lot more than some intellectualism or understanding. My idea of enlightenment is that of a whole-body transformation. One's energies must be free and one's mind must be supremely tranquil in order to experience with the totality of ones being, the moment as-it-is. This entails not superimposing any intellect or understanding on it more than it entails "understanding the tao".

 

You can't really understand the tao, all the enlightened teachers are clear about that. You can only experience it when you have dropped everything else and cleansed and purified your body so that you can maintain that state of apprehension.

Edited March 9, 2012 by anamatva

[Everything]

The people have enough and to spare,

Where I have nothing,

And my heart is foolish,

Muddled and cloudy.

 

The people are bright and certain,

Where I am dim and confused;

The people are clever and wise,

Where I am dull and ignorant;

 

The enlightenent are ignorant. The enlightened don't define enlightenment, because only trough letting go of definitions do you become enlightened and fall from the heavens into the eternall hellfire to abide therein for eternity.

 

Where you ask what is enlightenment, the enlightened already know that each question is asked by you in order to be answered by you. You already know the answer, but you will never accept this even if it were told to you by some alien spaceship being landed on your backyard.

 

The enlightened people are satan. The people of the eternal Fire and abide in it they shall forever. Satan is so foolish, that even if he told everyone the truth of his own being, no one would believe him. That is how masterful the deception is. Infinite intelligence. The answers of satan are only as good as the questions that are being asked. You will never find the truth, for there are none. The one and only objective truth and reality is God/Tao and Satan has rejected Him/It and its/His existance. Thus, all things are relative to Satan and no form will Satan take. Talk about dim and confused...

 

They are rebel's, fighting against reality. Fallen angels, having denied the Will of their Creator. They fight the roots of your being and challenge your illusionary existance in such masterful ways, that only the mercy of God will save you from falling into the eternal hellfire.

 

I just spoke to the devil on a metaphysical phone.

The devil says: "I create my own truth. Those who do not join me, I shall deceive them eternally and may God have mercy upon them. I am but an ignorant troll, who has mastered the art of self deception and create my own reality."

 

The enlightened are schizophrenic. I consider my self schizophrenic. Some demon slayer in black leather boots just offered me a siggarette, but he is fake and I am ignorant. I have an illness and I need to be cured, excorsized, purified, mentally examined, etc.

 

Now you tell me... What is your definition enlightenment?

Edited March 10, 2012 by Everything

[Aaron]

The people have enough and to spare,

Where I have nothing,

And my heart is foolish,

Muddled and cloudy.

 

The people are bright and certain,

Where I am dim and confused;

The people are clever and wise,

Where I am dull and ignorant;

 

The enlightenent are ignorant. The enlightened don't define enlightenment, because only trough letting go of definitions do you become enlightened and fall from the heavens into the eternall hellfire to abide therein for eternity.

 

Where you ask what is enlightenment, the enlightened already know that each question is asked by you in order to be answered by you. You already know the answer, but you will never accept this even if it were told to you by some alien spaceship being landed on your backyard.

 

The enlightened people are satan. The people of the eternal Fire and abide in it they shall forever. Satan is so foolish, that even if he told everyone the truth of his own being, no one would believe him. That is how masterful the deception is. Infinite intelligence. The answers of satan are only as good as the questions that are being asked. You will never find the truth, for there are none. The one and only objective truth and reality is God/Tao and Satan has rejected Him/It and its/His existance. Thus, all things are relative to Satan and no form will Satan take. Talk about dim and confused...

 

They are rebel's, fighting against reality. Fallen angels, having denied the Will of their Creator. They fight the roots of your being and challenge your illusionary existance in such masterful ways, that only the mercy of God will save you from falling into the eternal hellfire.

 

I just spoke to the devil on a metaphysical phone.

The devil says: "I create my own truth. Those who do not join me, I shall deceive them eternally and may God have mercy upon them. I am but an ignorant troll, who has mastered the art of self deception and create my own reality."

 

The enlightened are schizophrenic. I consider my self schizophrenic. Some demon slayer in black leather boots just offered me a siggarette, but he is fake and I am ignorant. I have an illness and I need to be cured, excorsized, purified, mentally examined, etc.

 

Now you tell me... What is your definition enlightenment?

 

If you are schizophrenic, then everything you've said makes sense, but only to you. The problem that exists is that reality is subjective and trying to direct every individual to enlightenment using the exact same means is not only impossible, but ridiculous.

 

The Dalai Lama himself makes the point that Buddhism isn't for everyone, for instance, and I agree. There are many paths, not one single one. The enlightened, in my opinion, will not tell you they are enlightened simply because there is no reason for them to.

 

Throw everything out of the room and begin to examine it for what it is. Is it a bedroom, kitchen, living room, or study? You can decide that, or you can just leave it as a room.

 

Aaron

[Aetherous]

Religious overtones can create a lot of problems. Best to remember that they aren't part of your reality and are essentially "myths". But interesting ideas.

[Gerard]

 

You must walk very carefully watching your mind until you reach the "red dot." Reading or discussing enlightenment is a fruitless task.

[mewtwo]

I'm still astounded that you don't understand the significance of the phrase, "chop wood, carry water". Other than that, I agree with much of what you said. I would only suggest that you apply what you've said as a mirror first, before applying it to others.

 

And thank you so much for being brave enough to define who is mediocre and who isn't. I forget, how does that old saying go? "How great is the ego that can tell the difference between 'eh' and 'oh'! You must fear what others fear!"

 

Anyways, nice overall, but still a bit smug.

 

Aaron

 

edit- On a side note, many traditional Chinese Taoists do not accept the Hua Hu Ching as being authentic for several reasons. First it was written nearly 500 years after the death of Lao Tzu, second there are no other teachings attributed to Lao Tzu that speak in this voice, in other words it was written by a different author, and third, it has very little similarity with the teachings of the Tao Te Ching itself.

 

The people that do accept the Hua Hu Ching as being an authentic document are most often the majority of Chinese Buddhist/Taoist/Confucianists who have no problem with attributing the qualities of Buddhism to Taoism. These same people like to claim that Lao Tzu left China and entered India to become or teach the Buddha. Historically speaking, Buddhist missionaries started to enter China around the time that the Hua Hu Ching was written, so it is quite possible that it was written by a monk who was knowledgeable of Buddhist practice and wished to integrate the two practices. (A big mistake since they are really as different as night and day!)

 

So, the skinny is this- the Hua Hu Ching is a Book written by Buddhists who wanted to add Buddhist thought to Taoism. It is not Lao Tzu's actual teachings.

 

What people need to pay attention to is the fact that almost all of your Lao Tzu quotes are taken from the Hua Hu Ching and are most definitely not the actual words or philosophy of Lao Tzu.

 

There's a reason why there are several hundred translations of the Tao Te Ching, but only a handful of the Hua Hu Ching. One is an accepted manuscript, the other is routinely accepted as a fake.

 

If you want me to cite the sources, I'd be happy to, but for the most part, just look on Wikipedia.

 

Aaron

 

 

I am interested in your thoughts on the hua hu ching. I would like to see some sources and such. on the surface they buddhism and taoism could be different as night and day but once one dives deeper they start to have similaritys right?

 

Thanks

[robaire]

enlightenment is indentifying the evil in the world today and trying to correct it via some common sense ...

 

enlightenment would be the realizing that a genocidal psycho sits at the core of several world religions (at least the ones based on Torah- Talmud- Old Testament) and this psycho preaches violence and racism as a natural course of action.

 

and this genocidal, hyper- racist psycho is supported by most preachers and is taught about at seminaries. and is supported by Billy Graham, Joel Osteen, etc.

Edited March 18, 2012 by robaire

[robaire]

enlightenment is knowing that your bible that sits in your churches has a <<monster god>> (ie: satan) who encourages "his seed" to go out and destroy all who are "not of that seed" (who are not 'mine peoples', saith the lord ...) even if these are peace- loving folks who did no harm to anyone else.

 

and it is called religion. and practiced by adults who appear intelligent, yet who are somehow programmed to accept such filth and depravity as part of their "religion".

 

and this filth sits in church pulpits and is preached by preachers. they preach satan and they don't even realize it.

 

____________

 

enlightenment would be digesting the main features of [this] online text to get an idea that the story wizard of oz was actually based on things ... not of imagination.

 

enlightenment would be knowing about the quiet civil war going on in the US .... since Kennedy and before. and figuring out who is who .... (hint: US military is mostly on your side, except for its very rogue elements ...)

Edited March 10, 2012 by robaire

[robaire]

 

Enlightenment would be remaining 100% positive about the changes coming.

 

knowing that as folks are given power (ie: the internet) they are also obligated to carry a definite responsibility. and the designing of a better world is a key part of that.

 

 

(re: this civil war .... on one side you have pedophiliac, drug running, vast spying networks connected to the largest banks ... headed by folks who attend bohemian grove meetings. they also run the media, at least they still do, and why? on the other side you have ordinary americans who get up daily and try and serve their country even if they wear a badge, and follow orders as long as they feel they are doing good.

 

and in the military you have a record number of suicides as these troops know, deep down, they are following the wrong orders ... )

 

and you have the spiritual folks who know they have to get engaged, or else pay the price.

Edited March 10, 2012 by robaire

[Everything]

If you are schizophrenic, then everything you've said makes sense, but only to you.

It did make sense, but not anymore. What makes sense, changes. Depending on who I am in the moment.

 

I'm tired now, but in a few minutes I will be totally energetic and awake. Just because I choose to be that way. Then, when I read this, the entire text makes no more sense to me. The tired person would have written this, not the awake and energized me, you see? It will make no sense to me that I was talking about my self as if it is not me. But now I really am tired, in a few minutes, I assume not. Its hard to relate to a future self, because its imaginary. In a moment, when it is present, it's no longer imaginary. then the past self is imaginary...

 

Basicly, I can have conversations with diffrent parts of my self, as if they are all individual personality structures. Just like I would have a conversation with you. A conversation with my self is no diffrent to me. Especially if I write my thoughts down and then look at them a while later. The text functions as some sort of snapshot of my personality.

 

The issue is, I feel no guilt in letting go of any given truth. I see just whatever I want to see. Thus, I have no way of relating to normal people with grounded roots and identities. They feel too heavy and solid to me. Like unmovable objects that I just go around. There are plenty of people who are like more like me though. Great fun to interact with my version of them.

[Marblehead]

Maybe this is enlightenment?

 

No, ... nevermind.

[Aaron]

I am interested in your thoughts on the hua hu ching. I would like to see some sources and such. on the surface they buddhism and taoism could be different as night and day but once one dives deeper they start to have similaritys right?

 

Thanks

 

 

 

Alright, first nearly everything you need to know about the Hua Hu Ching can be found on Wikipedia, so go there and take a look, second if you look at the time that the text was written, it's around the same time that the first Buddhist missionaries arrived in China. Prior to this arrival there is no documented evidence that Taoists attributed many of the Buddhists qualities to Taoism that they do today. Absolutely none. If you'd like to point out some, I'd be happy to agree. Alright, there was one text, the Hua Hu Ching. (See what I'm saying?)

 

It's not an authentic document in my opinion and most Taoists scholars don't take it seriously (i.e. that it was written by the same author of the Lao Tzu / Tao Teh Ching). There's a reason there are hardly any translations of it, and it's not because it's widely respected guide to esoteric Taoism (that would be the Secret of the Golden Flower, another pseudo Taoist text), so if quoting it makes the Buddhists happy because they can say, "oh look they aren't that different after all. We can all be Buddhist-Taoists!" Well that's fine, but the reality is that the focus of Taoism is on attachment to this world and the focus of Buddhism is detaching from this world. One finds communion through seeing the Mystery in all things, the other finds enlightenment by realizing that everything is an illusion.

 

Now to end this short little diatribe, I would like to add that prior to Buddhism in China, you don't hear the notion of enlightenment in Taoism, rather you hear about immortality through Taoist alchemy, internal and otherwise. Even then they are somewhat vague on what this immortality really means.

 

As an aside, I don't see one tradition as any more beneficial than the other, so I'm not pointing this out in order to diminish one or the other, but rather make a point, that everything stated as fact, isn't necessarily so. Many Buddhists use the Hua Hu Ching to convince others of the similarities between the two, but you never find Taoists doing that, why would that be? Think about it. Again, this isn't to diminish one or the other, but to clarify the differences between the two traditions.

 

Aaron

 

edit- As an aside, it can't be dismissed that Taoism has also had a profound influence on Buddhism in China. This is evident in the many different schools of Buddhism that have developed over the last 1,800 or so years since the first missionaries arrived, but perhaps most importantly it can be seen the type of meditation practiced by the Northern Ch'an Buddhists, which was essentially the integration of Taoism meditation to Buddhist thought.

 

Shen-Hui, who is widely regarded as the founder of Ch'an Buddhism, hailed from the Wudang Mountains, which was the home of the Wudang school (clan for all you hip hop fans out there) of Taoism. The style of meditation taught by Shen-hui is nearly identical to the style of meditation taught by the Wudang Taoists, Wu Ji.

 

In fact it would be more fair to say that Taoism has had a greater impact on Buddhist thought in China, than the other way around.

 

Now to be completely honest, there are similarities in thought between Taoism and Buddhism, in particular the notion of compassion plays an integral part in both religions. I think many Taoists could appreciate the level of devotion to this principle that the sincere Buddhists practiced. Overall the similarities stop at one point, a very important one, which is the overall world view of each tradition, as stated previously.

 

Anyways, this is getting a bit long, so I'll leave it at that. Also I have to admit that I'm not a scholar on the topic by any means, but I have read enough to form my own opinions.

Edited March 10, 2012 by Twinner

[Aaron]

I just wanted to add, that I really do not want to see this topic die. I think it's a valid discussion, the points I've made aren't meant to take the discussion off track, but rather make people aware of the texts being sited by V Marco and the intrinsic differences between each religion.

 

Enlightenment itself is so misunderstood by most people, that I think even trying to grasp the concept is overwhelming for most. I've actually started an enlightenment topic myself once or twice, but I'm learning from my mistakes, because inevitably you're discussing something that is completely subjective and I doubt will ever gain any kind of general consensus among everyone, even the Eastern Traditions.

 

With that said, I'll toot my own favorite topic of late and remind people that enlightenment doesn't require a tradition, that it can be found through internal and external inquiry by most people who diligently seek it. I say most because there are some people that will never understand it.

 

Anyways, I hope this topic continues, because it is a worthwhile one.

 

Aaron

[mewtwo]

Alright, first nearly everything you need to know about the Hua Hu Ching can be found on Wikipedia, so go there and take a look, second if you look at the time that the text was written, it's around the same time that the first Buddhist missionaries arrived in China. Prior to this arrival there is no documented evidence that Taoists attributed many of the Buddhists qualities to Taoism that they do today. Absolutely none. If you'd like to point out some, I'd be happy to agree. Alright, there was one text, the Hua Hu Ching. (See what I'm saying?)

 

It's not an authentic document in my opinion and most Taoists scholars don't take it seriously (i.e. that it was written by the same author of the Lao Tzu / Tao Teh Ching). There's a reason there are hardly any translations of it, and it's not because it's widely respected guide to esoteric Taoism (that would be the Secret of the Golden Flower, another pseudo Taoist text), so if quoting it makes the Buddhists happy because they can say, "oh look they aren't that different after all. We can all be Buddhist-Taoists!" Well that's fine, but the reality is that the focus of Taoism is on attachment to this world and the focus of Buddhism is detaching from this world. One finds communion through seeing the Mystery in all things, the other finds enlightenment by realizing that everything is an illusion.

 

Now to end this short little diatribe, I would like to add that prior to Buddhism in China, you don't hear the notion of enlightenment in Taoism, rather you hear about immortality through Taoist alchemy, internal and otherwise. Even then they are somewhat vague on what this immortality really means.

 

As an aside, I don't see one tradition as any more beneficial than the other, so I'm not pointing this out in order to diminish one or the other, but rather make a point, that everything stated as fact, isn't necessarily so. Many Buddhists use the Hua Hu Ching to convince others of the similarities between the two, but you never find Taoists doing that, why would that be? Think about it. Again, this isn't to diminish one or the other, but to clarify the differences between the two traditions.

 

Aaron

 

edit- As an aside, it can't be dismissed that Taoism has also had a profound influence on Buddhism in China. This is evident in the many different schools of Buddhism that have developed over the last 1,800 or so years since the first missionaries arrived, but perhaps most importantly it can be seen the type of meditation practiced by the Northern Ch'an Buddhists, which was essentially the integration of Taoism meditation to Buddhist thought.

 

Shen-Hui, who is widely regarded as the founder of Ch'an Buddhism, hailed from the Wudang Mountains, which was the home of the Wudang school (clan for all you hip hop fans out there) of Taoism. The style of meditation taught by Shen-hui is nearly identical to the style of meditation taught by the Wudang Taoists, Wu Ji.

 

In fact it would be more fair to say that Taoism has had a greater impact on Buddhist thought in China, than the other way around.

 

Now to be completely honest, there are similarities in thought between Taoism and Buddhism, in particular the notion of compassion plays an integral part in both religions. I think many Taoists could appreciate the level of devotion to this principle that the sincere Buddhists practiced. Overall the similarities stop at one point, a very important one, which is the overall world view of each tradition, as stated previously.

 

Anyways, this is getting a bit long, so I'll leave it at that. Also I have to admit that I'm not a scholar on the topic by any means, but I have read enough to form my own opinions.

 

 

I have read the wiki article and it said that the authorship is disputed like the tao te ching. it may not be authentic it might have been written by mice but that does not meen its words dont hold some truth. taoism may say attachment to this world but so does tantra in my understanding. use what you have to reach a goal emlightenement immortality etc. I agree what do we really know in this world? one day we knew for certain the world was flat and the next oh now we know it is round and even further still we now know it is more oblong in shape. as far as the buddhist taoist who shaped who in china the two are so tangled it is hard to say imo.

 

Thanks