Ultimate Goal

[Kongming]

I have a question regarding what the ultimate goal of Taoism is or even if there is a single answer to that question considering the variety of forms Taoism has taken across the expanse of time. I sometimes hear people say that the goal is to be in harmony with the Tao, often with some notion of being in harmony with nature. Still other times i hear the goal is to become an immortal via internal alchemic transformation, or simply longevity and good health.

 

What I want to know is whether or not Taoism has the equivalent to what various Hindu philosophies call jivanmukta, what Buddhists often call enlightenment, or what often was known in Western traditions as gnosis. Does Taoism have a notion of a transcendent liberating experience that is equivalent to the highest knowledge, the fulfillment of the meaning of human life, or an attainment of a deathless state/unity with the Absolute?

 

I always thought that was the case and that was what Lao Tzu and Zhuangzi were getting at with the notion of "attaining the Tao", but I've had people tell me that this is mere "Buddhist interpolation" or a misunderstanding of Taoist soteriology. Of course the way I've read the TTC/Zhuangzi and what translations I could find of other pre-Buddhist Taoist works leads me to believe that is the goal thus precluding any notion of Buddhist interpolation, but perhaps I am wrong.

 

Perhaps a way to clarify the question would be this--is Taoism compatible with the so-called Perennial Philosophy or the Traditionalist School of thought?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_School

 

Thanks in advance to any insights anyone can provide.

 

 

[Stosh]

^{The traditionalist school (or perennial philosophies) of thought is making a silly claim if they think the eastern religions have much in common with the Abrahamic ones IMO except for hybrid institutions which do exist. Though such distinctions are arbitrary ,, the core reasonings around which various belief systems hover are just not the same , there is just so much bleed over from one system to another that iron clad distinctions arent there.}

^{I have known some folks whose only real attatchments to christianity was the golden rule and the ten commandments (logically) and that they thought there was some sort of god that made things . They just dont fit with much pre-suppositions about their beliefs (though they are very nice folks)}

^{Thats just my opinion . and I hope it bumps you up on the list so some other dudes who really know more on comparative religion notice your post.}

[silas]

I have a question regarding what the ultimate goal of Taoism is or even if there is a single answer to that question considering the variety of forms Taoism has taken across the expanse of time. I sometimes hear people say that the goal is to be in harmony with the Tao, often with some notion of being in harmony with nature. Still other times i hear the goal is to become an immortal via internal alchemic transformation, or simply longevity and good health.

 

What I want to know is whether or not Taoism has the equivalent to what various Hindu philosophies call jivanmukta, what Buddhists often call enlightenment, or what often was known in Western traditions as gnosis. Does Taoism have a notion of a transcendent liberating experience that is equivalent to the highest knowledge, the fulfillment of the meaning of human life, or an attainment of a deathless state/unity with the Absolute?

 

I always thought that was the case and that was what Lao Tzu and Zhuangzi were getting at with the notion of "attaining the Tao", but I've had people tell me that this is mere "Buddhist interpolation" or a misunderstanding of Taoist soteriology. Of course the way I've read the TTC/Zhuangzi and what translations I could find of other pre-Buddhist Taoist works leads me to believe that is the goal thus precluding any notion of Buddhist interpolation, but perhaps I am wrong.

 

Perhaps a way to clarify the question would be this--is Taoism compatible with the so-called Perennial Philosophy or the Traditionalist School of thought?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_School

 

Thanks in advance to any insights anyone can provide.

 

In classical Taoism (TaoTeChing, ChuangTzu, LiehTzu as one system of religion), the goal is to return to Tao intact by following one's inborn nature and achieving one's destiny. This is important because one's Te (soul) is part of Tao's own evolution.

 

Afterlife And The Non-Being Self

[Kongming]

^{The traditionalist school (or perennial philosophies) of thought is making a silly claim if they think the eastern religions have much in common with the Abrahamic ones IMO except for hybrid institutions which do exist. Though such distinctions are arbitrary ,, the core reasonings around which various belief systems hover are just not the same , there is just so much bleed over from one system to another that iron clad distinctions arent there.}

^{I have known some folks whose only real attatchments to christianity was the golden rule and the ten commandments (logically) and that they thought there was some sort of god that made things . They just dont fit with much pre-suppositions about their beliefs (though they are very nice folks)}

^{Thats just my opinion . and I hope it bumps you up on the list so some other dudes who really know more on comparative religion notice your post.}

 

All religions have more in common with each other than with materialism, but really where the Traditionalist school posits the commonality (indeed unity) is in the esoteric or transcendent dimension. If one reads the words of Lao Tzu, Meister Eckhart, Adi Shankara, Ibn Arabi, Huang Po, Plotinus, or Longchenpa, one can see that they are speaking about the same One Truth. This isn't to say that "all religions are exactly the same" or that they have the same (or even similar) doctrinal or philosophical bases, but that they all lead to the same ultimate knowledge or experience. This image shows how they view the situation:

 

 

Really though, I just added a reference to that school to show what I am talking about. My primary question is what the ultimate goal of Taoism actually is. Attaining the Tao or returning to the Tao yes, but what does that mean? I agree with the Traditionalist perspective and that's what I've always thought Taoism was after, but I've had people telling me otherwise and that's why I asked.

 

To specify further, is there a transcendent goal to Taoism? A goal that is beyond living harmoniously in every day life? What is the true meaning of the Taoist "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal"?

 

Thanks for the above link by the way, I am reading now.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Kongming

[ChiDragon]

To specify further, is there a transcendent goal to Taoism? A goal that is beyond living harmoniously in every day life? What is the true meaning of the Taoist "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal"?

 

Yes, there is a transcendent goal for Taoism(religion wise). Let's look at the meanings of "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal".

 

True hu(man), Zhenren(真人) and immortal:

Zhenren(真人) is a real person. What is a real person...??? Well, a real person is always alive and breathing. Now, is a dead body a person....??? According to the given definition, a dead body is not a person. Then, the ultimate goal of a Taoist is to stay in longevity, as long as it can be, to be a Zhenren. Thus the transcendent goal of a Taoist is to be Zhenren, then an immortal. Please keep in mind, a Zhenren is only a real person but not an immortal yet. A Zhenren can be promoted to an immortal only by cultivation to a point that he/she doesn't require to breathe.

 

 

PS.....

The above is only my understanding from the mythology of the Chinese Taoist religion.

 

Edited March 16, 2013 by ChiDragon

[fizix]

Stop seeking, and it will find you. What is the ultimate goal of Taoism? Some would say that a Taoist has no goals, and is defined by such. So is the goal to have no goals? Yet paradoxically, that is a goal in and of itself. The Ultimate Goal. What does a Taoist strive for? Does he strive not to strive? I will attempt to speak pragmatically and eschew cryptic esoterica; (hint) the goal that can be named is not the true goal to attain, to retain. As Yoda said, (something along the lines of) to truly learn, you must unlearn everything you know. Living in the mystery, how could one know the goal? To "be", to live in a perpetual state of non-dual unity and enact the Will of the Mother of All Things, walk the Path of the Way. Alchemically, the goal is to raise one's energetic vibrational frequency along the infinite spiral of the Eternal Spirit as correlating consciousness unifies with the Universal Mind and non-being/doing truly occurs.

[opendao]

What I want to know is whether or not Taoism has the equivalent to what various Hindu philosophies call jivanmukta, what Buddhists often call enlightenment, or what often was known in Western traditions as gnosis. Does Taoism have a notion of a transcendent liberating experience that is equivalent to the highest knowledge, the fulfillment of the meaning of human life, or an attainment of a deathless state/unity with the Absolute?

 

This is a good question, because goals can tell something interesting about the teaching.

 

I would say Daoism speaks about different stages of the practice. The highest goal is Tian Xian (Heaven Immortal), that is usually described as unity with Dao and Emptiness. Nothing stays on Earth (see the story about Bodhidharma's shoe). The absolute knowledge is achieved at the previous stage - Shen Xian (Spirit Immortal). The fulfillment of the human life can be achieved even on the Earth Immortal stage, but the meaning - on Shen Xian only.

 

I always thought that was the case and that was what Lao Tzu and Zhuangzi were getting at with the notion of "attaining the Tao", but I've had people tell me that this is mere "Buddhist interpolation" or a misunderstanding of Taoist soteriology. Of course the way I've read the TTC/Zhuangzi and what translations I could find of other pre-Buddhist Taoist works leads me to believe that is the goal thus precluding any notion of Buddhist interpolation, but perhaps I am wrong.

 

Perhaps a way to clarify the question would be this--is Taoism compatible with the so-called Perennial Philosophy or the Traditionalist School of thought?

 

 

If we define Tradition as something that is passed from an eternal source, then yes, Daoism can share this idea and that is why lineages are so important in Daoism. But even Genon's philosophy has many other ideas, so it's hard to say is it fully compatible or not. You need to know completely both ways to do such work

Edited March 17, 2013 by opendao

[DiamondEyE]

Whats a good book/ source on the different stages of practice?

[Stosh]

All religions have more in common with each other than with materialism, but really where the Traditionalist school posits the commonality (indeed unity) is in the esoteric or transcendent dimension. If one reads the words of Lao Tzu, Meister Eckhart, Adi Shankara, Ibn Arabi, Huang Po, Plotinus, or Longchenpa, one can see that they are speaking about the same One Truth. This isn't to say that "all religions are exactly the same" or that they have the same (or even similar) doctrinal or philosophical bases, but that they all lead to the same ultimate knowledge or experience. This image shows how they view the situation:

 

 

Really though, I just added a reference to that school to show what I am talking about. My primary question is what the ultimate goal of Taoism actually is. Attaining the Tao or returning to the Tao yes, but what does that mean? I agree with the Traditionalist perspective and that's what I've always thought Taoism was after, but I've had people telling me otherwise and that's why I asked.

 

To specify further, is there a transcendent goal to Taoism? A goal that is beyond living harmoniously in every day life? What is the true meaning of the Taoist "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal"?

 

Thanks for the above link by the way, I am reading now.

That one must look to the esoteric to find commonality ,hmm, well I think the definition of a faith is best definable by what the people who have the faith think of it , not the select few ,, but I see your point if one is looking to find acedemic understanding of it as a subject.

I still feel that the basic idea that religions have a common root regarding some high truth is misled. Humans have common needs-questions to answer regarding origins and meaning and world structure.. so the tendency is to come up with similar answers ,, and if one is willing to swap faces of magical beings-deities ,one can say they are pointing at the same thing.

What was explained-described to me was that there is an essential difference between the eastern religious traditions versus western,, that being , the relationship of man to god. In the western -view god is external humanlike ,, man is faulty weak sinner ,, and the only relief for men is in the afterlife by grace of Gods forgiveness.

In the eastern -view ,the grace of spirit lies internal hidden unrevealed man himself has the capacity to exceed the mortal coils, samsara and the like. Its not an issue of forgiveness.

For Judaism , the relationship with god is flavored by the aspect of their being the chosen people.

In Islam there is a flavor that the worshippers are the loyal and obedient children of god.

In some Buddhism, Gotama could be called a prophet-guide rather than a god himself

And in 'atheistic Taoism' there is no god at all! ( yes there are lots of versions)

 

One has also to approach polytheisms and less common religious faiths if one is trying to point at a single encompassing epitome for religions ( which I think is rarely done with respect to the older traditions , shamanism etc , instead it gets treated like a dim witted sibling who hasnt matured enough to embrace monotheism)

 

To sum up my stance ...1) folks find similar answers to common problems 2) the essential thread of individual faiths is in the relationship and place in regard to the powers that be.

 

The ultimate question for every man woman and child is "what do I do now" because humans have little functional instinct -

we also have big brains capable of entertaining that which has not happened , remembering things that have , and drawing associations or building constructs to sustain us (despite the lack of much -aforementioned- instincts.) Religions - faiths are culturally generated things , I doubt very much that individuals would arrive at them all by their lonesome at all so society is likely the generator of the things not spiriual insight of the individuals themselves.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Stosh

[hydrogen]

 

Yes, there is a transcendent goal for Taoism(religion wise). Let's look at the meanings of "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal".

 

True hu(man), Zhenren(真人) and immortal:

Zhenren(真人) is a real person. What is a real person...??? Well, a real person is always alive and breathing. Now, is a dead body a person....??? According to the given definition, a dead body is not a person. Then, the ultimate goal of a Taoist is to stay in longevity, as long as it can be, to be a Zhenren. Thus the transcendent goal of a Taoist is to be Zhenren, then an immortal. Please keep in mind, a Zhenren is only a real person but not an immortal yet. A Zhenren can be promoted to an immortal only by cultivation to a point that he/she doesn't require to breathe.

 

 

PS.....

The above is only my understanding from the mythology of the Chinese Taoist religion.

 

 

yep, my understanding too. I'll know for certain when I become Zhenren.

[DiamondEyE]

Yes, there is a transcendent goal for Taoism(religion wise). Let's look at the meanings of "True Man/Zhenren" and "Immortal".

True hu(man), Zhenren(真人) and immortal:

Zhenren(真人) is a real person. What is a real person...??? Well, a real person is always alive and breathing. Now, is a dead body a person....??? According to the given definition, a dead body is not a person. Then, the ultimate goal of a Taoist is to stay in longevity, as long as it can be, to be a Zhenren. Thus the transcendent goal of a Taoist is to be Zhenren, then an immortal. Please keep in mind, a Zhenren is only a real person but not an immortal yet. A Zhenren can be promoted to an immortal only by cultivation to a point that he/she doesn't require to breathe.

PS.....

The above is only my understanding from the mythology of the Chinese Taoist religion.

 

So how is this acheived from your understanding of Taoist mythology?

[ChiDragon]

I am a born native, I just picked up the knowledge throughout my life time within my own society.

[dawei]

Please keep in mind, a Zhenren is only a real person but not an immortal yet. A Zhenren can be promoted to an immortal only by cultivation to a point that he/she doesn't require to breathe.

 

It may not be that cut and dry...

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhenren

Xu Shen's Shuowen Jiezi (122 CE), the first Chinese dictionary of characters, gives Small seal script and Guwen forms of zhen 眞, noting origins in Daoism. It defines 眞 as "A xian (Daoist "transcendent; immortal") transforming shape and ascending into Heaven" (僊人變形而登天也), and interprets 眞 as an ideogram with 匕 "upside-down person", 目 "eye", and ∟ "conceal" representing the xian plus 八 representing the conveyance.

Duan Yucai's Shuowen commentary (1815 CE) confirms that zhen originally depicted a Daoist zhenren and was semantically extended to mean cheng 誠 "sincere; honest; true; actual; real". It explains the ideographic components in Daoist xian terms, 匕 for hua 化 "change; transformation" (see the Huashu), 目 for the "eyes; vision" in neidan practices, ∟ "conceal" for invisibility; and, it notes three traditional xian conveyances into the heavens (qi, Chinese dragon, and qilin).

Miura (2007:1266) notes that religious Daoism associated the zhenren with the xianren "transcendent; immortal" and quotes the Ziyang zhenren neizhuan 紫陽真人內傳 "Inner Biography of the True Person of Purple Yang" (4th century CE) that there are upper, middle, and lower degrees of xian, with zhenren occupying the upper rank in the celestial bureaucracy.

[ChiDragon]

Well, Dawai...

You're always have a tendency to break down the characters to the radicals when a term was discussed. I am amazed how much you are familiar with the composition of the individual characters. However, this is not a pictographic contest. I had passed that stage long time ago and advanced to a higher level of comprehension already. The reason I didn't go into too much details is because I don't want to make things too complicate to loose the interest of the readers.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Hey, come on Chi Dragon.. no need for thinly veiled personal attacks.

[ChiDragon]

Hey, come on Chi Dragon.. no need for thinly veiled personal attacks.

 

This is not a personal attack. I am trying to bring everything to reality. This is not the first time people are doing this character breakdown. It was really not necessary. And I know dawai had been doing this for a long time. I need to let him know at least once. I want this to be a personal advice rather than a personal attack. I hope was I treated as a friend.

Edited March 19, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

It may not be that cut and dry...

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhenren

Xu Shen's Shuowen Jiezi (122 CE), the first Chinese dictionary of characters, gives Small seal script and Guwen forms of zhen 眞, noting origins in Daoism. It defines 眞 as "A xian (Daoist "transcendent; immortal") transforming shape and ascending into Heaven" (僊人變形而登天也), and interprets 眞 as an ideogram with 匕 "upside-down person", 目 "eye", and ∟ "conceal" representing the xian plus 八 representing the conveyance.

Duan Yucai's Shuowen commentary (1815 CE) confirms that zhen originally depicted a Daoist zhenren and was semantically extended to mean cheng 誠 "sincere; honest; true; actual; real". It explains the ideographic components in Daoist xian terms, 匕 for hua 化 "change; transformation" (see the Huashu), 目 for the "eyes; vision" in neidan practices, ∟ "conceal" for invisibility; and, it notes three traditional xian conveyances into the heavens (qi, Chinese dragon, and qilin).

Miura (2007:1266) notes that religious Daoism associated the zhenren with the xianren "transcendent; immortal" and quotes the Ziyang zhenren neizhuan 紫陽真人內傳 "Inner Biography of the True Person of Purple Yang" (4th century CE) that there are upper, middle, and lower degrees of xian, with zhenren occupying the upper rank in the celestial bureaucracy.

 

Well that makes a lot more sense for the Taoist usage of zhen 眞 than it formerly meaning "delicacy."

[ChiDragon]

 

Well that makes a lot more sense for the Taoist usage of zhen 眞 than it formerly meaning "delicacy."

 

HE....

Please don't take this as not an insult. I just have to bring things to reality.

 

You have to becareful with the pin yin.

眞（zhen１）: real, genuine

珍（zhen１）: delicacy

 

 

 

 

 

[dawei]

Hey, come on Chi Dragon.. no need for thinly veiled personal attacks.

 

 

I'll let the quotes spanning almost 2,000 years speak for themselves. It is consistent to what I have studied and one can find in many ancient texts as the link provides.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

lol, thanks ChiDragon, and no that wasn't insulting at all..

 

I'm getting "delicacy" from:

 

http://www.yellowbridge.com/chinese/character-etymology.php?searchChinese=1&zi=%E7%9C%9E

 

眞 Pictographic. Picture of spooning out food from container being cooked , representing its original meaning of "delicacy"

[ChiDragon]

ME.....
I don't know what to say. It is a bit confusing. I know you are eager to learn. Perhaps, If you want to learn the meaning of the characters from that site, it is better for you to have a tutor by your side to sort out the misleading information for you to have better comprehension.

It seems to me it would be better off just look up the character, in the Chinese Etymology for you, instead of learning it by pictorial.
Etymology

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Thanks for the help CD. i usually at least compare that website and the other one when I'm not sure of the word, though the other one goes more into the radicals which is needed I think especially for poetic style.

 

 

A quote for the earlier discussion, from The Huainanzi:

 

"At the very beginning, people were born from non-being and formed of being. Once they had form they were constrained by things. If they can go back to where they were born and be as if formless, they are called real people. Real people are never separate from the great unity." (Cleary trans.)

 

Sorry, I don't have the original characters.

[ChiDragon]

A quote for the earlier discussion, from The Huainanzi:

 

..... If they can go back to where they were born and be as if formless, they are called real people....." (Cleary trans.)

 

It seems to me there is something wrong with the logic. How can a formless called the real person.

 

Let me make it real simple to understand by comparing with two religions, Buddhism and Taoism.

In reality,

1. The ultimate goal of a living Buddhist monk is to become a Buddha.

2. The ultimate goal of a living Taoist priest is to become a Zhanren(a real person).

 

A Zhanren is a living person who tries to keep his body in good health with no sicknesses from Taoist cultivation. By Taoist cultivation, it means that Taoists are in celibacy, eating special diet, and practice chi kung to preserve their bodies for longevity. In reality, if a Zhanren can live over 100 years, may be considered to be an immortal. In mythology, an immortal is when the soul left the body and rose to heaven.

 

Note: This is only my understanding gathered through out the years for my own interest. It may not be used as facts for research.

 

 

 

[dawei]

 

It seems to me there is something wrong with the logic. How can a formless called the real person.

 

The key is in the phrase "as if":

..... If they can go back to where they were born and be as if formless, they are called real people....." (Cleary trans.)

[ChiDragon]

The key is in the phrase "as if":

..... If they can go back to where they were born and be as if formless, they are called real people....." (Cleary trans.)

 

Okay, so what? It still didn't make any sense.