The most influential Taoist figure in last century: Chen Ying Ning

[Ya Mu]

Apologies if my posts seemed 'snippy' Michael, that was not the intention.

Perhaps the situation in the USA is better regulated than here in the UK.

We have enough critics on the outside without falling out amongst ourselves.

I cannot fault your posts here at all and will leave it at that with good wishes.

"We have enough critics on the outside without falling out amongst ourselves."

I agree 100%.

 

edit to add: This is one reason I favor Sean's idea to have an optional subforum where everyone there uses real names. I find that a person with a name is a heckuva lot easier to get to know than one without one and the TTBers I have met in person would have been difficult, except for their energetic signatures, to know from their writings - all have been amazingly neat folks to be around and worldwide friends are a treasure to have.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Ya Mu

[Simple_Jack]

The important thing is its content. Taoist canon is very different from the collection of Buddhist sutras, for it includes a lot of medicine , medical qigong or daily life health related stuff so detailed that hardly the Buddhist sutras can match to ; for example, at what time ,facing what direction should we do our qigong, or eat what medicine or food , massage what acupuncture points to make our practice progress faster .. etc.

 

I don't know, but if it's limited it to the Taisho Tripitaka, that's still a vast amount of material to make any sort of generalizations about without having read it myself (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taish%C5%8D_Tripi%E1%B9%ADaka). If I had to make a guess, I would say stuff dealing with tantric anatomy, astrology, and medicine (Religion, Medicine, and the Human Embryo in Tibet [http://www.misterdanger.net/books/Buddhism%20Books/Religion%20medicine%20%26%20human%20embryo%20Tibet.pdf]) would be found in the Buddhist Tantras.

 

The aspects of the Canon referred to are the Ling Bao scriptures and to describe the creative adaption which the Daoists performed on some of the Buddhist literature as 'plagiarism' is a real disservice to them and definite overstatement, leaning more in the direction of religiously motivated polemics than to open minded scholarship.

 

The book was written by a sociologist, and the citation was from a Japanese professor affiliated with the "Society for the Research of Daoism" in Japan (http://en.daoinfo.org/wiki/Research_of_Daoism_in_Japan), so I don't think it was motivated by "religious polemics". The Japanese contributed a great deal to East Asian studies before and after WW2 (they are still among the top departments in the world). Stephen Bokenkamp, among a number of other scholars, cites Ofuchi Ninji's research.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

The book was written by a sociologist, and the citation was from a Japanese professor affiliated with the "Society for the Research of Daoism" in Japan (http://en.daoinfo.org/wiki/Research_of_Daoism_in_Japan), so I don't think it was motivated by "religious polemics". The Japanese contributed a great deal to East Asian studies before and after WW2 (they are still among the top departments in the world). Stephen Bokenkamp, among a number of other scholars, cites Ofuchi Ninji's research.

 

The book was written by a sociologist:: Doesn't matter, sociologists can be as biased as anyone else and based on what I discovered looking a little closer, I would say that he is very biased.

 

the citation was from a Japanese professor affiliated with the "Society for the Research of Daoism" in Japan: I am quit familiar with Ofuchi Ninji and other Japanese scholars of Daoism and have been for decades, at the very least since I bought my, now falling apart through overuse, copy of Saso's, Taoism and the Rite of Cosmic Renewal, almost 40 years ago.

 

Doing a search in Google Books for 'ofuchi ninji 1979 I got this result:

 

Baltimore: Penguin Books. (ed.). 1980. Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ofuchi, Ninji. 1979. "The Formation of the Taoist Canon." In Welch and Seidel, 1979. OHI = The Oxford History of … (The Sociology of Philosophies, Bibliography, p.1058, Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

Based on this, the reference 'Ofuchi, 1979:267' would be to an essay, “The Formation of the Taoist Canon”, in Facets of Taoism, edited by Holmes Welch and Anna Seidel, Yale University Press, 1979, p. 267. I happen to have this book and probably read the essay back in the early 1980s, though that is so long ago that I had forgotten about it, my principle studies of the Canon being more in the period from 1990 to 2003, having pretty much eclipsed this early essay. What is odd is that nothing on page 267 can really back up Randall Collin's statement:

 

"...In the early 500s in the south, a canon of Taoist scriptures was formulated, an imitation of Buddhist sutras which came close to plagiarism (Ofuchi, 1979:267)". (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

At no point is the term 'plagiarism' used in the essay, nor, while there is an interesting discussion of the interaction between Buddhist and Daoist traditions during the period from roughly 300 CE to 800 CE, is there anything pointing in the direction that some sort of wholesale 'imitation of Buddhist sutras' took place in the formulation of the Daoist canon.

 

Rather the focus of the essay is on the formation of the 'Three Tung' as an organizing concept of the Daoist Canon:

 

In considering this problem it seems necessary to look more closely at the concept of the Three Tung. The term itself is generally thought to be an imitation of the usual designation of the Buddhist Canon, the "Three Receptacles" (San-tsang) However, the organization of the Three Tung of the Taoist Canon in no way corresponds to the tripartite division of its Buddhist counterpart, p. 260

 

and

 

. . .it is quite inconceivable that Chinese popular religion should long before the end of the Six Dynasties have been so greatly influenced by the notion of a Tripitaka as to produce the Three Tung.

 

In fact, the use of the expression "Three Tung" in early Taoist writings ought not to be compared with the Three Receptacles, but rather with another Buddhist technical term, the Three Vehicles (san ch'eng, triyana) P. 261 (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

so I don't think it was motivated by "religious polemics": Whatever the reason for this Sociologist to so radically misinterpret Ninji's essay, the quote certainly doesn't indicate much respect for Daoism on Collin's part. Of course that doesn't matter since he is only a sociologist and not a Sinologist, but then perhaps you weren't looking for respect when you went searching for Taoism copy of buddhism and got this link:

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=2HS1DOZ35EgC&pg=PA280&dq=Taoism+copy+of+buddhism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=THYeUay1BLOt0AH2o4DoDQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=Taoism copy of buddhism&f=false

 

I leave it to you to explain why you were doing such a search and why you chose to post such a derogatory quote.

[Simple_Jack]

No other reason than to stir shit up and maybe even learn something in the process (which I have by the way). Thanks for the info!

[Simple_Jack]

By 'stir shit up', I mean sectarian degradation as a means of 'getting off'.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

No other reason than to stir shit up and maybe even learn something in the process (which I have by the way). Thanks for the info!

 

Your welcome, I'm always happy to help someone learn something.

[Ormus]

Dear all,

 

I see that Master Chen Yingning was Longmen Pai.From what I learn I see that his students where connected with Yin Xian Pai(Hidden Immortal sect) on Taiwan and that he personaly used teachings of Nanzong(Southern school) of Master Zhang Boduan.Can someone provide better information about his initiations in various lineages and is there some of his students or school today?

 

All the best,

 

Ormus

[Ormus]

I hear that Master Chen met Immortal Huang Yuanji and to learn from him methods of Yin Xian Pai.Also his teachings looks to be little diferent then branch of Yin Xian Pai known as Le Yu Tang.

 

After passing of Hu Haiya I find only Hu Fuchen as Chen student in today China.

 

Ormus

[Walker]

I hear that Master Chen met Immortal Huang Yuanji and to learn from him methods of Yin Xian Pai.Also his teachings looks to be little diferent then branch of Yin Xian Pai known as Le Yu Tang.

 

After passing of Hu Haiya I find only Hu Fuchen as Chen student in today China.

 

Ormus

No idea about Chen meeting Huang Yuanji, whose story seems to be shrouded in much mystery and legend.

 

It's not likely that Hu Fuzhen studied with Chen Yingning. Chen passed away in 1969, whereas by his own account Hu Fuzhen didn't even hear that there was such thing as the Daoist Canon until 1980. Hu Fuzhen did have some manner of relationship with Hu Haiya, but it's circumstances make the chances that Fuzhen received some sort of "full transmission" from Haiya most unlikely.

[Ormus]

Hi Walker,

 

I hear that Immortal Master Huang Yuanji apear in XIX century and have some disciples.I think 5 of them and that this man continued their lineage till today under name Le Yu Tang.

 

Do you consider that Huang Yuanji was Yin Xian Pai or Zhong Pai of Master Li Daochun?

 

Do you know who initiated Master Chen Yingning in Yin Xian Pai and how looks this lineage before him as chain of Masters?

 

I hear that Yin Xian Pai from Chen Yingning exsist in China from Hu Haiya and also in Taiwan.

 

And big suprise is that there are some masters in China and Taiwan today who claim to meet Huang Yuanji.

 

Ormus

Edited February 24, 2017 by Ormus

[Walker]

Sorry to say that I can offer no answers to any of your questions. I will say, regarding your last sentence, that this is no surprise--grandiose claims like this are a dime a dozen out here. Doesn't mean they're all false, but...

[Mig]

And now who's The most influential Taoist figure today both in Taiwan or mainland China. Maybe another country?