Takaaki's "American Taoism"

[takaaki]

Another good question to ask might be "What is Daoism"? After all, how can you argue about whether or not there can be an "American Daoism" if you can't state what "Chinese Daoism" is in terms that allow for a comparison?

 

Your question is not complete. The good question should be be framed as follows:

 

"What is Daoism to you?"

[Marblehead]

Although I disagree about "too much Yang", that is worthy of another thread. At birth we are the purest Yin we can be. There is an inevitable march towards too much Yang. Each person will possess this in different degrees and different lengths of time.

 

Goal? Is that related to 'too much yang' ?

Good question. I doubt that I can reply intelligently but I will try. (My knowledge of Yin and Yang is far less than is yours.)

 

Simply put, I see Yin as rest and Yang as action.

 

At birth I suggest that we are in perfect harmony regarding Yin and Yang. Our root is Yin, yes, but whenever we have a need we go Yang. When our need is satisfied we return to root Yin.

 

When I say "too much Yang" I am suggesting that we are trying to force things. Proper Yang is just doing what needs be done, nothing less, nothing more.

[Marblehead]

I'm surprised at a sentiment that I seem to see reflected here occasionally,

 

Nice post Thinker. Thanks for joining the discussion.

[Marblehead]

Maybe you should make that extended post because somehow you strike me as being honest without any clue as to what honesty is (i.e. no postering).

Hi Takaaki,

 

That's from Chuang Tzu. He expressed the concept in a number of different little stories.

 

I didn't refuse to reply to this post in full to be mean or anything like that. I don't want to compete with you.

 

Greed is an important concept for me just as is fear. (Almost opposites. Hehehe.) (The greedy will take chances, the fearful will not.) And yes, greed requires a greedy person, an unwillingness to share of their good fortune.

 

And I agree, it would be futile to discuss whether or not an American could be a Taoist without first identifying what a Taoist is. And we can't even define what Tao is. One having humane virtues? But even this would be questionable because we would be speaking of only one manifestation of Tao of the Ten Thousand Things.

 

But we must speak of the human because that is what we are.

[takaaki]

Greed is an important concept for me just as is fear. (Almost opposites. Hehehe.) (The greedy will take chances, the fearful will not.) And yes, greed requires a greedy person, an unwillingness to share of their good fortune.

 

Yes, greed does invite unnecessary risks. Unwillingness to share is something else.

 

The western mind perceives existence in terms of self among others and all are connected.

 

My Chinese mind perceives existence in terms of self unconnected to others. Your bad fortune has nothing to do with my good fortune. Each answers to Heaven for his lot. It is not my place to act on behalf of Heaven to effect change in your life. Non-interference. Each has his place. This is the basis of China's foreign policy which the western world does not understand.

[dawei]

Yes, greed does invite unnecessary risks. Unwillingness to share is something else.

 

The western mind perceives existence in terms of self among others and all are connected.

 

My Chinese mind perceives existence in terms of self unconnected to others. Your bad fortune has nothing to do with my good fortune. Each answers to Heaven for his lot. It is not my place to act on behalf of Heaven to effect change in your life. Non-interference. Each has his place. This is the basis of China's foreign policy which the western world does not understand.

 

I would say it is more like: The west tends to teach and live by the idea of self among others and all are connected; and the east tends to teach and live the idea of self unconnected to others.

 

But I would say it is not going to be a 100% application. Otherwise there is no acceptance for the possibility of variation in life, which is fundamental to Dao.

 

I also recall in another post you said that you wanted to improve this life. Is that improvement only for yourself or also for others?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

The PRC is considered communist, which is supposed to make the government take all people as one class all deserving the same thing. This seems far more inclusive sounding than capitalism. Yet in practice, which is more individualistic? Evidently, there is no "which one" since both places are comprised of so many varying groups, ideologies, histories, etc..

 

Maybe there is a better term than "American Taoist" to be used for the purpose here. Perhaps "fairweather Taoist." When the conditions are nice, the fairweather Taoist accords with Taoist teaching, when conditions make these principles difficult to follow, they don't follow them.

 

This would more than likely describe 85%+ of people who try to live by the guidance of one sage or another though, so it might be a bit too inclusive in this case...

[dawei]

The PRC is considered communist, which is supposed to make the government take all people as one class all deserving the same thing. This seems far more inclusive sounding than capitalism. Yet in practice, which is more individualistic? Evidently, there is no "which one" since both places are comprised of so many varying groups, ideologies, histories, etc..

 

The long history of xenophobia cannot be overlooked; Chinese have never trusted foreigners (external fear) and their history could almost be summed up with this attitude. But once you look to the inside, it is 'group' rather than 'individual' from birth (just as the west is the other way around from birth). But the group has individual fear as well and this may insulate them their fellow man. This could be easily seen with the news of the girl who was run over by a car in china and nobody would attempt to lead any help or hand. The west was outraged. For chinese, this was common practice as if they saw nothing [which prompts them to need to act for another].

 

 

Maybe there is a better term than "American Taoist" to be used for the purpose here. Perhaps "fairweather Taoist." When the conditions are nice, the fairweather Taoist accords with Taoist teaching, when conditions make these principles difficult to follow, they don't follow them.

 

This would more than likely describe 85%+ of people who try to live by the guidance of one sage or another though, so it might be a bit too inclusive in this case...

 

The only objection I have to "American Taoist" is simply I have yet to hear a proper homogeneous explanation that explains why every single westerner who wants to label themselves as Taoist should then be labeled as American Taoist.

 

If this is purely a cultural assignment, then why not Canadian Taoist, Mexican Taoist, German Taoist, etc? One answer may be because it has not evolved to that point of distinction. So are we saying it has evolved to the point of distinction of American Taoist simply because some in america choose the Taoist label?

[ChiDragon]

Your question is not complete. The good question should be be framed as follows:

 

"What is Daoism to you?"

 

An American who studies Taoism may be called as a Taoist. Thus an American Taoist may not be practicing the religion of Taoism.

 

A Chinese who practice the religion of Taoism is called a Taoist. Those Chinese who only study Taoism may not be called as a Taoist.

 

Do you all see the nuance in the two statements....???

Edited February 8, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Brian]

This resonates with me.

 

I agree with this. Bold part mine.

 

But to take the concept further, given that Taoism is a practical thing, that a person can be a (any country) Taoist, I say also a person can be AND anything else.

 

Why? Depends on what one believes I guess. But why does anyone practice any particular method, whether it be religion, philosophy, or internal technique? I would submit the reason is that they feel it leads them to truth. If this is so, if Taoism is truth, and if it IS practical, then one could practice Taoism and any other thing that contained truth. For truth is truth and it doesn't matter if it comes from whether Christianity, Buddhism, Native American Spirituality, etc

 

Of course some of the tenants of any particular thing would not be embraced as when one begins practicing a truth illusions can drop to the wayside. But if the core is truth, why can't there be a Taoist Buddhist, a Taoist Christian, a Taoist ANYTHING? How many have thought along this pattern? In other words a Christian Mystic that allows Wu Wei is doing the same thing that a Taoist does, is she not? He/she is dancing to the same pattern, is he/she not? In that sense, I am a Taoist Christian Buddhist Zoroastrian Zen Shaman. In other words the universal truth from anything HAS to be the same IF it is truth.

 

And it certainly doesn't matter what country or planet in our universe that it is practiced in, nor does it matter what you call it. Personally, I found as much Truth from Lightning as I found from practicing Buddhism or Taoism, although the Truth in each is the same. In fact, I would prefer to take the ism out and just say that Tao practices me.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

The long history of xenophobia cannot be overlooked; Chinese have never trusted foreigners (external fear) and their history could almost be summed up with this attitude. But once you look to the inside, it is 'group' rather than 'individual' from birth (just as the west is the other way around from birth). But the group has individual fear as well and this may insulate them their fellow man. This could be easily seen with the news of the girl who was run over by a car in china and nobody would attempt to lead any help or hand. The west was outraged. For chinese, this was common practice as if they saw nothing [which prompts them to need to act for another].

Yes, weird pairs of opposites there. Either in a close group resistant to involvement with the populace at large, or a people with fewer loyalties to those around them but with perhaps a stronger concern for strangers than first group.

 

My guess would be that Christianity had a lot to do with this difference, not to look at other side(s) of it's influence. Giving charity to strangers is one of the most encouraged activities in churches, with churches themselves usually being involved in international and community charity work, as the way to "practice" love and humility. Though it can be sort of an insulated way to look at it, Christianity does tend to make Christians think "if we won't then who will?" in their sort of "it's on us to save the world since we have the answer." Of course they don't have all the answers so lots a problems there... hwv..

 

The only objection I have to "American Taoist" is simply I have yet to hear a proper homogeneous explanation that explains why every single westerner who wants to label themselves as Taoist should then be labeled as American Taoist.

 

If this is purely a cultural assignment, then why not Canadian Taoist, Mexican Taoist, German Taoist, etc? One answer may be because it has not evolved to that point of distinction. So are we saying it has evolved to the point of distinction of American Taoist simply because some in america choose the Taoist label?

 

Right, or Chinese Christian, Japanese Christian, Korean Christian...? One eats more sushi and the other eats more chicken... What about the macaroni and ketchup Taoists? Where do we fit in?

Edited February 8, 2013 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Marblehead]

Yes, greed does invite unnecessary risks. Unwillingness to share is something else.

 

The western mind perceives existence in terms of self among others and all are connected.

 

My Chinese mind perceives existence in terms of self unconnected to others. Your bad fortune has nothing to do with my good fortune. Each answers to Heaven for his lot. It is not my place to act on behalf of Heaven to effect change in your life. Non-interference. Each has his place. This is the basis of China's foreign policy which the western world does not understand.

Good points all. I think you may have misread the Western mind though.

 

Regarding fortune - I presently have good fortune, there are many who have bad fortune right now. Because I have an excess most of the time I can share that excess with the less fortunate. If I didn't have good fortune I wouldn't be able to do that. And had I not become a Taoist I doubt that I would have done it.

[dawei]

ChiDragon, on 07 Feb 2013 - 14:53, said:

An American who studies Taoism may be called as a Taoist. Thus an American Taoist may not be practicing the religion of Taoism.

 

A Chinese who practice the religion of Taoism is called a Taoist. Those Chinese who only study Taoism may not be called as a Taoist.

 

Do you all see the nuance in the two statements....???

 

So let's take this line of thought.

 

Do you mean study Taoism exclusively in the sense that one wants to be a Taoist or anyone who picks up the book to read and study it?

 

What if one studies Existentialism, are they an American Existentialist? Or what is one studies all eastern philosophies, are they an American Eastern Philosopher?

 

Are all american sinologist who dedicated most of their life study to the translation of the DDJ an American Taoists?

[ChiDragon]

You'll see the nuance, only if you understand definition of Taoist in the mind between an American and a Chinese thinking. It is very clear to me that the definition of Taoism, in the west, are very inclusive; while the Chinese definition is very exclusive.

[dawei]

You'll see the nuance, only if you understand definition of Taoist in the mind between an American and a Chinese thinking. It is very clear to me that the definition of Taoism, in the west, are very inclusive; while the Chinese definition is very exclusive.

 

The point of a discussion forum is to discuss the issue raised. You raised a question to everyone... I asked you to explain your point with gave specific examples.

 

If you don't want to explain your assertions then why state them? What is the reluctance in folks to discuss what they claim?

 

---

 

How about we take what may appear to be a fairly easy example.

 

Is this guy, John Chang, a Taoist? After a one word answer, Why?

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Magus-Java-Teachings-ebook/dp/B004DNW61G/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1

[takaaki]

Do you all see the nuance in the two statements....???

 

Very good, sir. You've got it nailed down right on the button like a straight-shooting American.

 

The American Taoist does not practise anything because his life is a natural movement of inborn spontaneity - no acting according to politically-correct sentiments, no rehearsed good manners, no responses conditioned by fear of breaking the law (e.g. Muhamad Ali's refusal to fight Vietcongs).

 

The Chinese scholar is the guiding light of society. The sage, whose life is an instinctive movement of perfection, has no need to practise anything. If Jesus had been Chinese, I would grant him the respect accorded to a Chinese scholar.

 

Therefore,

all western translators like (Watts, Legge, Wilhelm) of the Tao Te Ching are western intellectuals.

all Chinese translators (like John Wu, Lin Yutang, Gia Fu Feng) of the Tao Te Ching are Chinese intellectuals.

 

To set the record straight, Mao Zedong (who was a Chinese intellectual) destroyed the works of intellectuals (but not the Chinese classics) because they bred superstitions that hold back social progress.

Edited February 9, 2013 by takaaki

[takaaki]

Good points all. I think you may have misread the Western mind though.

 

Regarding fortune - I presently have good fortune, there are many who have bad fortune right now. Because I have an excess most of the time I can share that excess with the less fortunate. If I didn't have good fortune I wouldn't be able to do that. And had I not become a Taoist I doubt that I would have done it.

 

The Catholic Church does a lot of good works among the sick, the poor and the uneducated all over the world. The US Government has its marvellous Peace Corp. I suppose nothing would have been done also if these two organizations didn't have their "teachings" and the money to do all that.

 

True charity is invisible; when it has acted, its tracks can be seen on the ground of heartlessness.

[takaaki]

The point of a discussion forum is to discuss the issue raised. You raised a question to everyone... I asked you to explain your point with gave specific examples.

 

If you don't want to explain your assertions then why state them? What is the reluctance in folks to discuss what they claim?

 

Perhaps, it is because of a your lack of receptivity on account of low I.Q.. I have said what I truly feel and this is expected to upset you and cause disharmony even thought you asked for it. It is uncomfortable for a Chinese to be brutally frank. Westerners have no qualms about being offensive in social interaction.

 

The point of a discussion forum is to discuss the issue raised. You raised a question to everyone... I asked you to explain your point with

How about we take what may appear to be a fairly easy example.

 

Is this guy, John Chang, a Taoist? After a one word answer, Why?

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Magus-Java-Teachings-ebook/dp/B004DNW61G/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1

 

Yes, John Chang is a Taoist. The reason is because his brain is fried like Colonel Sander's Kentucky Chicken.

 

A Taoist is a person whose brain works like a computer hard drive with a Taoist operating system (TOS).

 

You are a Taoist, Dawei, and you are proud of it. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

John Wu was a Catholic. He was a person whose brain worked like a computer hard drive with a Catholic operating system (IOS).

[dawei]

Perhaps, it is because of a your lack of receptivity on account of low I.Q.. I have said what I truly feel and this is expected to upset you and cause disharmony even thought you asked for it. It is uncomfortable for a Chinese to be brutally frank. Westerners have no qualms about being offensive in social interaction.

 

Specific examples were asked four times... never an example offered. The assertions being made have no merit until some examples can be discussed.

 

Yes, John Chang is a Taoist. The reason is because his brain is fried like Colonel Sander's Kentucky Chicken.

 

A Taoist is a person whose brain works like a computer hard drive with a Taoist operating system (TOS).

 

You can belittle him if you want.. but he is not a Taoist... he categorically stated as such. Others label him.

 

 

You are a Taoist, Dawei, and you are proud of it. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

I am not a Taoist. And there is nothing wrong with that.

[gendao]

This could be easily seen with the news of the girl who was run over by a car in china and nobody would attempt to lead any help or hand. The west was outraged. For chinese, this was common practice as if they saw nothing [which prompts them to need to act for another].

That is actually also a cross-cultural phenomenon seen in various high-population densities known as "diffusion of responsibility/bystander effect/Genovese syndrome."

In 1964, Kitty Genovese, a New York woman, was raped and stabbed to death near her apartment in the presence of several witnesses (reports vary wildly as to the actual number of witnesses). Reports of witnesses' inaction prompted research into possible explanations, which helped develop the concepts of diffusion of responsibility and the bystander effect.

So, Seth would probably brand your ethnic attribution as:

Slightly Biased information is Hate speech.

It Infects the minds of less discerning readers and breeds more homophobes, who then go out and help make some poor persons life a living Hell.

 

Not to mention how welcome it makes them feel when they are here.

 

Not very welcoming.

 

Maybe we should put a sign at the door saying No Blacks, No Gays!

Personally, I prefer the forum of free debate, though! But, that's just me - everyone has a different threshold!

Edited February 9, 2013 by vortex

[dawei]

That is actually also a cross-cultural phenomenon seen in various high-population densities known as "diffusion of responsibility/bystander effect/Genovese syndrome."

 

Have you have spent any time living with chinese or in china? For myself, I see much more going on than a simple case of a diffusion of responsibility.

 

But your welcome to have other conclusions based on any direct experience and discussions with hundreds who have similar experiences too.

[takaaki]

The PRC is considered communist, which is supposed to make the government take all people as one class all deserving the same thing. This seems far more inclusive sounding than capitalism. Yet in practice, which is more individualistic? Evidently, there is no "which one" since both places are comprised of so many varying groups, ideologies, histories, etc..

 

Of course there is "which one". Cross any border and the change in the place is dramatic in terms of language, social norms and values.

 

Both capitalism in the US and communism in the PRC are as individualistic.

 

In the US, everyone eats at the buffet table laden with food and you are on your own: you grab what you can and it's each man for himself. Americans call this capitalism.

 

In the PRC, everyone eats in the dining hall all seated down nicely as the food is doled out on every man's plate. The American-style free-for-all takes place in the kitchen and the chock full pantry where the guys in charge - from the Central Committee in Bejing right down to the Headman in Menghai County - are. Americans call this corruption.

 

Maybe there is a better term than "American Taoist" to be used for the purpose here. Perhaps "fairweather Taoist." When the conditions are nice, the fairweather Taoist accords with Taoist teaching, when conditions make these principles difficult to follow, they don't follow them.

 

This would more than likely describe 85%+ of people who try to live by the guidance of one sage or another though, so it might be a bit too inclusive in this case...

 

I think I'd better have "American Taoist" copyrighted and go after anyone messing around with it for trademark infringement. I see billions of dollars in the picture and need to protect the brand.

[takaaki]

I am not a Taoist. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

I am not a Taoist. I can throw the Tao Te Ching in the rubbish bin.

 

You are not a Taoist, you say. Can you throw the Tao Te Ching in the rubbish bin?

[takaaki]

That is actually also a cross-cultural phenomenon seen in various high-population densities known as "diffusion of responsibility/bystander effect/Genovese syndrome."

So, Seth would probably brand your ethnic attribution as:

Personally, I prefer the forum of free debate, though! But, that's just me - everyone has a different threshold!

 

What is your point? Can you clarify?

[dawei]

I am not a Taoist. I can throw the Tao Te Ching in the rubbish bin.

 

You are not a Taoist, you say. Can you throw the Tao Te Ching in the rubbish bin?

 

You've been here such a short time but so quickly have made pronouncements and assigned labels without even knowing people.

 

Why do I care if the TTC is in a rubbish bin or not? I have studied and looked at and researched 100's of topics and books. I am simply reading it at this point in time; I have about 30 books I would like to spend some time to appreciate as well.

 

I would probably have to admit I enjoyed my time spent reading Zen more than the TTC. And I suspect I will enjoy some later books more than the TTC as well.

 

Words in a book can be interesting but life is where we find Dao... The TTC may be a finger pointing to Dao... for those that need it. There are too many books out there to care about one book... and Dao is still known without books.