Origins of Daoism

[Kongming]

What are your thoughts on the origins of Daoism? I've seen three primary views, among some others, that people tend to put forth:

 

1) Daoism originating with Laozi/the Daodejing and later with Zhuangzi and other classical material (like the Huainanzi, etc.)

 

2) Daoism originating with Zhang Daoling and Tianshi Dao/Way of Celestial Masters.

 

3) Daoism being the primordial Chinese spiritual tradition, having its ultimate roots in prehistory and later among legendary sage-rulers like Fuxi, Huangdi, etc. In this scenario the Yijing is considered as a root of Daoism.

 

It seems different groups tend to emphasize one of these views over the others, with academics, esotericists, practitioners, and others having different views on the matter.

 

Of course, there's other more esoteric or questionable theories, such as Daoism being related to the Atlantean (or Hyperborean) tradition that spread into East Asia, some notions concerning the so-called 'Sons of Reflected Light', and the possibility of Daoism having some relation to Indo-European spiritual traditions, transmitting to the Chinese and their native shamans through the Tocharians/Da Yuezhi (I think Victor H. Mair may have conjectured something along those lines.)

 

I'm personally partial to number 3, which could possibly be related to some of the more esoteric or questionable theories above. This view would fit in with what appears in Thomas Cleary's translation of The Book of Balance and Harmony introduction:

 

 

Ironically, one of the most comprehensive descriptions of Taoism as it is understood in advanced Taoist circles can be found in a Buddhist text, the Avatamsaka-sutra or Flower Ornament Scripture, which is held to contain the totality of all religion:

 

The various methods and techniques if the enlightened adapt to worldly conditions in order to liberate people. The enlightened provoke deep faith by being in the world yet unaffected by it, just as the lotus grows in water yet water does not adhere to the lotus.

 

With extraordinary thoughts and profound talent, as cultural leaders, like magicians the enlightened manifest all the various arts and crafts if the world, like song and dance, and conversation admired by the people.

 

Some become grandees, city elders; some become merchants, caravan leaders. Some become physicians and scientists, some become kings and officials.

 

This Buddhist scripture uses the same idea to explain one of the most ancient associations of Taoism, that of the originators of civilization itself as people of higher knowledge attained through extradimensional awareness: "If they see a world just come into being, where the people do not yet have the tools for livelihood, the enlightened become craftsmen and teach them various skills." From this point of view, the Taoist vision of ancient Chinese culture heroes as esoteric adepts is more than a pleasant myth. In essence it means that Taoism is not, as usually thought, a product of Chinese civilization. Rather it is the other way about--Chinese civilization was originally a product of Taoism in the sense that like all successful original cultures it was initiated and guided by people in contact with the Tao or universal law.

 

Extravagant as this idea may seem to modems who conceive of ancient humans as semiconscious primitives who somehow slowly evolved by fits and starts into civilized nations, it nevertheless explains something about the concentration of knowledge for which neither written history nor conventional psychology can account. It also means that the fundamental nature and mission of Taoism is not Chinese; again, as the Flower Ornament Scripture says, "All-sided goodness abides by reality, not in a country. "

 

Your thoughts?

[Marblehead]

I have always wanted #1 to be the correct answer but I know that the truth lies more in #3 than anywhere else.

[Taoist Texts]

What are your thoughts on the origins of Daoism? I've seen three primary views, among some others, that people tend to put forth:

 

1) Daoism originating with Laozi/the Daodejing and later with Zhuangzi and other classical material (like the Huainanzi, etc.)

 

2) Daoism originating with Zhang Daoling and Tianshi Dao/Way of Celestial Masters.

 

3) Daoism being the primordial Chinese spiritual tradition, having its ultimate roots in prehistory and later among legendary sage-rulers like Fuxi, Huangdi, etc. In this scenario the Yijing is considered as a root of Daoism.

 

To ask at which point did  daoism appear is really to ask what is daoism? so why people dont ask that question outright? because they know they aint gonna like the answer.

[dawei]

To ask at which point did  daoism appear is really to ask what is daoism? so why people dont ask that question outright? because they know they aint gonna like the answer.

 

Yes. those threads never go well 

 

IMO, daoism starts with Dao... we're just not around yet to mentally understand it till we arise.  So it starts with the first impulse of division from one.

 

But from the perspective of when did Mankind seem to begin to start with daoism, it seems as soon as they arise really...and then creating fire... counting cords, observing the stars.   Most of the time it tends to go back to Fuxi but there is lots of neolithic evidence that it is inherently understood in the soul of arising man... following nature.

[ChiForce]

I thought the Tao has no beginning and has no ending.  Is in a perpetual state of emptiness.   

[Taoist Texts]

3) Daoism being the primordial Chinese spiritual tradition, having its ultimate roots in prehistory and later among legendary sage-rulers like Fuxi, Huangdi, etc. In this scenario the Yijing is considered as a root of Daoism.

 

Yijing is fairly new rather than primordial since its text can not be earlier than  f"ounding of the Shang dynastyvary from about 1760 to 1520 bce,"

[Taoist Texts]

IMO, daoism starts with Dao... 

the paradigm of it - may be. but the concrete received practices and verbiage are a bit younger.

[Marblehead]

I thought the Tao has no beginning and has no ending.  Is in a perpetual state of emptiness.   

Hehehe.  How about a perpetual state of fulness? 

[Apech]

Yijing is fairly new rather than primordial since its text can not be earlier than  f"ounding of the Shang dynastyvary from about 1760 to 1520 bce,"

 

The text of the Zhouyi may be ... or even the founding of the Zhou dynasty (1046BC) but the Gua themselves attributed to Fu Xi predate this by a long way.

[Taoist Texts]

The text of the Zhouyi may be ... or even the founding of the Zhou dynasty (1046BC) but the Gua themselves attributed to Fu Xi predate this by a long way.

I am not aware of any archaeological or historical  evidence of that but i like Fuxi and his missus. she probably lent a tail  hand  too

 

[Apech]

I am not aware of any archaeological or historical  evidence of that but i like Fuxi and his missus. she probably lent a tail  hand  too

 

....

 

 

Not much evidence for anything prior to the Xia dyn. so maybe fall back on legend - usually contain elements of historical fact.

[dawei]

the paradigm of it - may be. but the concrete received practices and verbiage are a bit younger.

 

Yes... as 'practice' is not natural (according to Baopuzi)... there is a sense of a primitive natural following of nature/universe... which was likely lost or misunderstood at some point. Folks got sick and didn't understand how to interact with the environment anymore... and arose Dao Yin like movements, dancing, and the rest is history...

[dawei]

The text of the Zhouyi may be ... or even the founding of the Zhou dynasty (1046BC) but the Gua themselves attributed to Fu Xi predate this by a long way.

 

Could you share more on the Gua or any links?

[Taoist Texts]

Yes... as 'practice' is not natural (according to Baopuzi)... there is a sense of a primitive natural following of nature/universe... which was likely lost or misunderstood at some point. 

Traditional theory is that humans devolve rather than evolve.

 

On gua i remember reading somewhere that first jiaguwen (divination bone inscriptions) used chinese digits like 六  and 九 and switched to solid and broken lines much later. That would make guas and Yijing younger than traditionally thought, its just one of the oldest received piece of writing , the origin of which is beyond the observable timeline. Cant find the link thou.

[Apech]

Could you share more on the Gua or any links?

 

 

Its in the Xici or Great Treatise commentary to the I Ching:

 

https://books.google.pt/books?id=F06FKmKKIXwC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=xici+gua+attributed+to+fu+xi&source=bl&ots=E6eDN--UkS&sig=c5naeus2NTsTOhclTkOSShbwvHo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cqCWVfiIGczlUrbOuYAO&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=xici%20gua%20attributed%20to%20fu%20xi&f=false

[RiverSnake]

I think Daoism originates from The Dao. So you could say that Daoism originates from many sources. The Trees, Birds, Land, Deer, Void....etc

Edited July 3, 2015 by OldChi

[Kongming]

Yijing is fairly new rather than primordial since its text can not be earlier than  f"ounding of the Shang dynastyvary from about 1760 to 1520 bce,"

 

That is true, which is what I tried to emphasize by stating it was a root of Daoism rather than the root of Daoism, perhaps a codification of earlier traditions. This fits in with my general opinion that many of the practices or currents which are dated to a certain period due to extant written or archaeological material likely have much older oral roots, such as neidan often being given a Tang Dynasty origin at earliest by some scholars but likely having more ancient origins.

 

In any case, does anyone have a source for the concept of the so-called 'Sons of Reflected Light'? I never heard of this while reading Daoist texts or scholarly works and only came across it on the internet.

 

Edit: As to those saying Daoism has its origins in the Dao, well that's a given considering everything has its origins in the Dao, and if the tradition associated with the Huahujing can be trusted, then the Dao is also the source of other wisdom/esoteric traditions such as Buddhism, Manichaeism, or even Hermeticism, etc.

 

Giving the Dao as the origin would likely make Daoism's origins fall into category 3 of my original post.

Edited July 3, 2015 by Kongming

[Taoist Texts]

That is true, which is what I tried to emphasize by stating it was a root of Daoism

I dont know what has Yijing to do with daoism at all but thats just me;)

 

 

 such as neidan often being given a Tang Dynasty origin at earliest by some scholars but likely having more ancient origins.

 

why?

 

In any case, does anyone have a source for the concept of the so-called 'Sons of Reflected Light'?

 

sure. they were invented by this gentleman

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee-style_t'ai_chi_ch'uan

 

in this book 

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Chinese-Art-Tai-Chuan/dp/0850303877

 

 

 

 

 

I never heard of this while reading Daoist texts or scholarly works 

 

there is a reason for that;)

[Kongming]

I dont know what has Yijing to do with daoism at all but thats just me;)

 

Well I've heard some ancient Daoists (can't recall which, but might have been one of the Xuanxue folks like Wang Bi) claim that what is in Laozi is already present in the Yijing. Furthermore, scholars like Kohn and others note that the Yijing had immense influence on Daoism over its history, most obviously being used in alchemy and in relation to yin-yang. Other admittedly non-specialist authors but generally knowledgeable figures, such as Rene Guenon and others of the Traditionalist school, point out a relationship between Daoism and the Yijing.

 

 

why?

 

Judging by how esoteric and spiritual traditions work more generally. Often specific esoteric techniques, such as the case of neidan, have long secret histories before ever being written down, even if that writing is in a coded language. Furthermore it is known and accepted that many of the elements of mature neidan have much earlier origins, dating back to Ge Hong, Shangqing texts such as the Huang ting jing, etc.

[Taoist Texts]

. Furthermore it is known and accepted that many of the elements of mature neidan have much earlier origins, dating back to Ge Hong, Shangqing texts such as the Huang ting jing, etc.

 

its quite like saying that the electric bulb dates back to the iron age because it was then that glass and iron were first produced.

 

But i understand what you are saying, thanks.

[dawei]

Well I've heard some ancient Daoists (can't recall which, but might have been one of the Xuanxue folks like Wang Bi) claim that what is in Laozi is already present in the Yijing. Furthermore, scholars like Kohn and others note that the Yijing had immense influence on Daoism over its history, most obviously being used in alchemy and in relation to yin-yang. 

 

I thought , strictly speaking, the Yijing was a Confucian text... and which the Yin-Yang school also used, as well as Daoist at some point.    But I've not really researched it enough to say with too much authority

[rene]

Yes. those threads never go well 

 

IMO, daoism starts with Dao... we're just not around yet to mentally understand it till we arise.  So it starts with the first impulse of division from one.

 

But from the perspective of when did Mankind seem to begin to start with daoism, it seems as soon as they arise really...and then creating fire... counting cords, observing the stars.   Most of the time it tends to go back to Fuxi but there is lots of neolithic evidence that it is inherently understood in the soul of arising man... following nature.

 

My slight variation on your idea:  "But from the perspective of when did Mankind seem to begin to start with daoism, it seems as soon as they arise really...and then tried to explain the fire they created...etc.

 

All 'isms' - imho - begin with the attempt to put into a framework for understanding, and expressing,  that for which words dont work. But we all keep blathering on, eh? LOL I'm glad we do. (-:

 

 

[Apech]

I thought , strictly speaking, the Yijing was a Confucian text... and which the Yin-Yang school also used, as well as Daoist at some point.    But I've not really researched it enough to say with too much authority

 

No, the root text of the Zhouyi is older than that.  The Ten Wings commentaries which where later added to form the Yijing are Confucian. 

[Taoist Texts]

I thought , strictly speaking, the Yijing was a Confucian text... 

of course it is. the core of Yijing its guas were first invented and used to prognosticate for war expeditions and bloody sacrifice to ancestors. They were used by the tribal kings and specialist divinators cum king's advisor. which and who of these are daoist in any respect?

[Kongming]

 

its quite like saying that the electric bulb dates back to the iron age because it was then that glass and iron were first produced.

 

But i understand what you are saying, thanks.

 

That's only if we look at the surface and see neidan only having "influences" from the various ancient connections mentioned but accept that the core only came later.  In other words, it could be that the light of the light bulb was being produced prior to the accepted invention of the bulb, i.e. there could have been (and likely was in my opinion) an internal alchemic process of converting jing to qi to shen and thence returning to the Dao prior to the first dissemination of neidan texts during the Tang, using similar if not the same methodologies. Again, a broad study of various esoteric and spiritual traditions reveals that this is usually the case, namely that the codification in text comes later.

 

When contrasting the methods of neidan to other methods, such as the stillness or samadhi of various Buddhists and Daoists, Qiu Chuji seems to feel that this was the case (bold emphasis mine):

 

 

 

What is described above is “the Exercise of Refining the Spirit and Merging with the Tao, Abandoning the Shell, and Ascending to Immortality”, which arrives at self-so-ness. As for Buddhist monks who enter into samadhi and die while seated in meditation, and Taoists who enter into stillness and this send out yin spirits, these [spirits that they let out] are [nothing but] ghosts of pure vacuity and are not pure yang immortals. They are distantly faint with no appearance and in the end have no place to go to. Why do people who study [the way to immortality] make these mistakes? They especially do not understand that pure yang qi is born after the essence is refined and made into an elixir. After you refine the qi and complete the Spirit, the Realized Numinous Divine Immortal transcends the ordinary and enters into sacredness. You abandon your shell and ascend to immortality, and this is called “transcending and escaping”. This is the method of divine immortals that has not changed for a hundred million years!