Taoism have karmic laws like Buddhism?

[Marblehead]

 

Was Jesus a Buddhist?  Maybe.  Why do you think he was?

I have actually had similar thoughts but never did the research to support  or establish my thoughts.

[Brian]

Just for perspective... lots of important points relative to this conversation in this excerpt.

 

Ni Hua Ching's after-commentary on hexagram 45, Tsui, Congregation / Gathering the Essence (lake over earth), from The Book of Changes and the Unchanging Truth:

I rarely appreciate walls of quoted text, Daeluin, but I sincerely thank you for this one.

_/\_

[dust]

Was Jesus a Buddhist?  Maybe.  Why do you think he was?

 

I don't believe it, but.. I don't think it's entirely implausible that he was, at some point, a student of Hinduism or Buddhism.

 

Firstly: Teaching-wise, as Michael said; Jesus and the Buddha were kindred spirits. More so than Jesus and Muhammad, or Buddha and Laozi, etc.

 

Secondly: As I remember from the Gospels, he's born, and everyone makes a big fuss... then around 30 years later he begins his teaching. Actually, the Sinai Bible makes no mention of his life at all before he was 30 (nor of his resurrection). Where did he appear from? There's no evidence of him being in India or nearby, but there's no evidence of him being anywhere in particular, is there? Geographically, it's entirely plausible. Travel would've been pretty easy. And it seems likely to me that if he'd studied in India, he would have been just another robe in the crowd, hardly noteworthy enough for anyone around him to devote themselves to memorializing his travels. The world was just as full of inquisitive travelers and foreign students then as it is now.

 

Thirdly: The modern New Testament, as editorialized as it is, is clearly not a full and true testament to his life or teachings (the Sinai Bible, which contradicts much of the modern NT, is the earliest extant version, and even that was written over 300 years after his death). It seems very obvious to me that he wasn't born of a virgin, he didn't walk on water, he didn't raise the dead, and he didn't rise from the dead himself. I might look to the texts that did not garner such widespread popularity close to his lifetime, such as so-called “Gnostic gospels”. From the Gospel of Thomas (the extant manuscript dated to around 340AD -- as early as the Sinai Bible):

 

 

Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and it is outside you.

[Jeff]

I would also agree that the teachings of Jesus are very similar to Buddha.

[Apech]

I would also agree that the teachings of Jesus are very similar to Buddha.

 

 

In what way are they similar?

[Jeff]

In what way are they similar?

 

Actually, I have posted on this many times showing the direct comparisons and similar concepts. Such discussions have seemed to irritate many of the older (some not still members) Buddhists.

 

Such a comparison can done almost on a statement by statement basis with the words of Jesus. One just needs to realize the teaching context, Jesus was speaking to poor fisherman, while Buddha to a wealthy and educated class. As a simple example, take a look at verse 50 of the gospel of Thomas...

 

50. Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where have you come from?' say to them, 'We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.' If they say to you, 'Is it you?' say, 'We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.' If they ask you, 'What is the evidence of your Father in you?' say to them, 'It is motion and rest.'"

 

The motion and rest is the same concept as emptiness in the Heart sutra. Motion is energy/form. Rest is void. When one realizes that motion and rest are really the same thing, they are a "son of God". As the Heart sutra says...

 

Emptiness is the realization of Form=Void and Void=Form and that both are the same.

[Apech]

Actually, I have posted on this many times showing the direct comparisons and similar concepts. Such discussions have seemed to irritate many of the older (some not still members) Buddhists.

 

Such a comparison can done almost on a statement by statement basis with the words of Jesus. One just needs to realize the teaching context, Jesus was speaking to poor fisherman, while Buddha to a wealthy and educated class. As a simple example, take a look at verse 50 of the gospel of Thomas...

 

50. Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where have you come from?' say to them, 'We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.' If they say to you, 'Is it you?' say, 'We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.' If they ask you, 'What is the evidence of your Father in you?' say to them, 'It is motion and rest.'"

 

The motion and rest is the same concept as emptiness in the Heart sutra. Motion is energy/form. Rest is void. When one realizes that motion and rest are really the same thing, they are a "son of God". As the Heart sutra says...

 

Emptiness is the realization of Form=Void and Void=Form and that both are the same.

 

 

Ah ok thanks ... I have seen you post this before.  I thought you were meaning karma and so forth.

 

Actually motion and rest sounds like Ming and Xing (Life and Nature) from Daoist Internal Alchemy.

[rex]

I would also agree that the teachings of Jesus are very similar to Buddha.

Don't all the major world religions share the same basic morality? The differences are found in the different answers to the eternal questions of Who Am I? Where Have I Come From? Where Am I Going?

 

Back to the OP's original question regarding karma and rebirth and the similarities between Daoism and Buddhism. It's my understanding, and seasoned Daoists please correct me, is that in Daoism nothing of the personality survives the dissolution of the body and the Five Shen go back to be recycled and combined into different bodies with completely different personalities. There is no continuity of consciousness. So isn't one sense of the goal of Daoist immortality, is to be to able to remain as an independent recognisable entity after death with the Five Shen remaining together?

 

Sutric Buddhism is similar in the sense that there isn't a self that survives death, but a subtle continuity of consciousness is passed on like a flame being passed from one candle to another.

 

So the similarity appears to be that both hold that the personality that comprised the human being will no longer exist and was never a permanent entity in the first place, being a temporary composite of either skandas or Shen. Unlike Daoism, Buddhism seems to posit some continuity of process in that the previous life will have created causes and conditions for rebirth as described in the wheel of dependent origination. Not sure if Daoism has an equivalent of this, but isn't 'The Dao' and ideas of harmony and disharmony with the Dao similar to interdependence and karma?

[PLB]

Don't all the major world religions share the same basic morality? The differences are found in the different answers to the eternal questions of Who Am I? Where Have I Come From? Where Am I Going?

 

Back to the OP's original question regarding karma and rebirth and the similarities between Daoism and Buddhism. It's my understanding, and seasoned Daoists please correct me, is that in Daoism nothing of the personality survives the dissolution of the body and the Five Shen go back to be recycled and combined into different bodies with completely different personalities. There is no continuity of consciousness. So isn't one sense of the goal of Daoist immortality, is to be to able to remain as an independent recognisable entity after death with the Five Shen remaining together?

 

Sutric Buddhism is similar in the sense that there isn't a self that survives death, but a subtle continuity of consciousness is passed on like a flame being passed from one candle to another.

 

So the similarity appears to be that both hold that the personality that comprised the human being will no longer exist and was never a permanent entity in the first place, being a temporary composite of either skandas or Shen. Unlike Daoism, Buddhism seems to posit some continuity of process in that the previous life will have created causes and conditions for rebirth as described in the wheel of dependent origination. Not sure if Daoism has an equivalent of this, but isn't 'The Dao' and ideas of harmony and disharmony with the Dao similar to interdependence and karma?

I take your point about the return of individual consciousness.

What I hear listening to the Daoist message is that our idea of history is based upon an assumption of continuity that is not supported by what actually is happening. So the impulse to have a topology is under review. Can one live without a map?

Zhuangzi isn't promulgating a complete explanation. He is questioning the explainer.

[rex]

I take your point about the return of individual consciousness.

What I hear listening to the Daoist message is that our idea of history is based upon an assumption of continuity that is not supported by what actually is happening. So the impulse to have a topology is under review. Can one live without a map?

Zhuangzi isn't promulgating a complete explanation. He is questioning the explainer.

Thanks

[Geof Nanto]

Back on the subject of Daoist belief in any notion of karma.......

 

Here's an extract from a well known poem by T'ao Ch'ien written around 400AD showing no hint of belief in either karma or rebirth. Although T'ao Ch'ien was primarily a Daoist in outlook, he also had close ties with some prominent Buddhists of his time.

 

 

Young and old die the same death. When it comes, the difference between sage and fool vanishes.

 

Drinking every day may help you forget, but won't it bring an early grave?

 

And though good works may bring lasting joy, who will sing your praise?

 

Listen - it's never ending analysis that wounds us. Why not circle away in the seasons, 

 

adrift on the Great Transformations, riding its vast swells without fear or delight?

 

Once your time comes to an end, you end: not another moment lost to all those lonely worries.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Yueya

[Michael Sternbach]

Don't all the major world religions share the same basic morality? The differences are found in the different answers to the eternal questions of Who Am I? Where Have I Come From? Where Am I Going?

Back to the OP's original question regarding karma and rebirth and the similarities between Daoism and Buddhism. It's my understanding, and seasoned Daoists please correct me, is that in Daoism nothing of the personality survives the dissolution of the body and the Five Shen go back to be recycled and combined into different bodies with completely different personalities. There is no continuity of consciousness. So isn't one sense of the goal of Daoist immortality, is to be to able to remain as an independent recognisable entity after death with the Five Shen remaining together?

Sutric Buddhism is similar in the sense that there isn't a self that survives death, but a subtle continuity of consciousness is passed on like a flame being passed from one candle to another.

So the similarity appears to be that both hold that the personality that comprised the human being will no longer exist and was never a permanent entity in the first place, being a temporary composite of either skandas or Shen. Unlike Daoism, Buddhism seems to posit some continuity of process in that the previous life will have created causes and conditions for rebirth as described in the wheel of dependent origination. Not sure if Daoism has an equivalent of this, but isn't 'The Dao' and ideas of harmony and disharmony with the Dao similar to interdependence and karma?

 

We know that the matter we are made of on the physical level is completely exchanged once in seven years, yet we have a feeling of continuity well beyond that. It is obviously based on an information pattern. Does that pattern always rely on a physical carrier? No, for we have subtle bodies consisting of etheric substance.

 

These seem to be in a state of flux much like the physical body, they are not necessarily permanent. However, they can be made more permanent by Internal Alchemy (in one of its various forms).

 

This goes hand in hand with the attainment of extended spititual awareness. How so? The various subtle bodies belong to different levels of non-physical reality, and it depends on our awareness of our existence on those levels during our physical incarnation how far we remain "ourselves" in between physical incarnations.

 

It is not easy to describe by words... Astral travel during lucid dreams can give some clues.

 

On the innermost level, we are one with Divinity, which is of course totally indestructable, but few come to appreciable awareness of their innate Divinity during physical incarnation.

[Marblehead]

Nice post Michael except for the use of the word "Divinity".  That word has too many connotations, IMO, to be associated with (Philosophical) Taoism.

[Michael Sternbach]

Nice post Michael except for the use of the word "Divinity".  That word has too many connotations, IMO, to be associated with (Philosophical) Taoism.

 

No need to fuss over semantics here, imo. But feel free to feed my post into your MS Office and replace "Divinity" with "Dao". No copyright issues either, as long as it's only for your personal use!

[tao1]

i don't like some people here telling taoism and pure taoism doesnt recognize such thing as karma 

 

"Karma is an important concept in Taoism. Every deed is tracked by deities and spirits. Appropriate rewards or retribution follow karma, just like a shadow follows a person^"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma#Taoism

 

i think taoism and hermetism are very related, i personally don't like the teaching in buddhism that beings don't have souls (as contrary as taoism teach) they reencarnate but they have no souls

[shanlung]

i don't like some people here telling taoism and pure taoism doesnt recognize such thing as karma 

 

"Karma is an important concept in Taoism. Every deed is tracked by deities and spirits. Appropriate rewards or retribution follow karma, just like a shadow follows a person^"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma#Taoism

 

i think taoism and hermetism are very related, i personally don't like the teaching in buddhism that beings don't have souls (as contrary as taoism teach) they reencarnate but they have no souls

 

 

Please run that pass me again.

My apologies that as I am a self confessed idiot and therefore not very clever.

 

That what is written in wiki, or placed in wiki carry a lot more weight than words from a  recognised and reknowned  Taoist Master  like Tsen Lao Weng

And what of those pious recluses who rattle mallets against wooden-fish drums from dusk to dawn, groaning out liturgies like cholera-patients excreting watery dung? They are penitents longing to rid themselves of a burden they never had.

 

 

And will Taoism be definative because some entities wrote of that in Wikipedia? and that you quote that next as your version?

 

But again, who am I to speak against you who sincerely believe in karma?

 

Why not you go into Buddhism or Christianity and wear a hair shirt and flagellate yourself to cleanse yourself of the sins and karmas (even if you do not believe in rattling mallets against wooden fish drums from dawn to dusk)  that you felt to be crawling out not just from your nooks and crevices but of everyone else nooks and crevices and who must be dragged kicking and screaming into your particular brand of karmic laden Taoism?

 

How can one be on the Path of Wuwei and Tze Ran if the mind must perpetually  wrestle with burdens that they never had but want to self inflict themselves with?

 

To each their own demons and their own roads.

 

 

Idiotic Taoist happy to eat when hungry , drink when thirsty and fornicate when horny as wu wei and tzerun as can be.

[Marblehead]

"Karma is an important concept in Taoism. Every deed is tracked by deities and spirits. Appropriate rewards or retribution follow karma, just like a shadow follows a person^"

It is my opinion that whoever said that is totally confused regarding Taoism, especially Philosophical Taoism.

 

Now, I'm not saying that they don't have the right to be confused.  But confused they truly are.

[Daeluin]

It is my opinion that whoever said that is totally confused regarding Taoism, especially Philosophical Taoism.

 

Now, I'm not saying that they don't have the right to be confused.  But confused they truly are.

 

Journey to the West might disagree with you.

 

tl: Anthony C. Yu:

The Handsome Monkey King had enjoyed this insouciant existence for three or four hundred years when one day, while feasting with the rest of the monkeys, he suddenly grew sad and shed a few tears Alarmed, the monkeys surrounding him bowed down and asked, "What is disturbing the Great King?" The Monkey King replied, "Though I am very happy at the moment, I am a little concerned about the future. Hence I'm distressed." The monkeys all laughed and said, "The Great King indeed does not know contentment! Here we daily have a banquet on an immortal mountain in a blessed land, in an ancient cave on a divine continent. We are not subject to the unicorn or the phoenix, nor are we governed by the rulers of mankind. Such independence and comfort are immeasurable blessings. Why, then, does he worry about the future?" The Monkey King said, "Though we are not subject to the laws of man today, nor need we be threatened by the rule of any bird or beast, old age and physical decay in the future will disclose the secret sovereignty of Yama, King of the Underworld. If we die, shall we not have lived in vain, not being able to rank forever among the Heavenly beings?"

 

When the monkeys heard this, they all covered their faces and wept mournfully, each one troubled by his own impermanence. But look! From among the ranks a bareback monkey suddenly leaped forth and cried aloud, "If the Great King is so farsighted, it may well indicate the sprouting of his religious inclination. There are, among the five major divisions of all living creatures, only three species that are not subject to Yama, King of the Underworld." The Monkey King said, "Do you know who they are?" The monkey said, "They are the Buddhas, the immortals, and the holy sages; these three alone can avoid the Wheel of Transmigration as well as the process of birth and destruction, and live as long as Heaven and Earth, the mountains and the streams." "Where do they live?" asked the Monkey King. The monkey said, "They do not live beyond the world of the Jambudvipa, for they dwell within ancient caves on immortal mountains." When the Monkey King heard this, he was filled with delight, saying, "Tomorrow I shall take leave of you all and go down the mountain. Even if I have to wander with the clouds to the corners of the sea or journey to the distant edges of Heaven, I intend to find these three kinds of people. I will learn from them how to be young forever and escape the calamity inflicted by King Yama."

 

Lo, this utterance at once led him

To leap free of the Transmigration Net,

And be the Great Sage, Equal to Heaven

 

But then, achieving power and flaunting it, heedless of the nature of balance, becomes trapped by his deeds:

 

The brash, baneful monkey in revolt against Heaven

Is brought to submission by Tathagata.

He drinks melted copper to endure the seasons,

And feeds on iron pellets to pass the time.

Tried by this bitter misfortune sent from the Sky,

He's glad to be living, though in a piteous lot.

If this hero is allowed to struggle anew,

He'll serve Buddha in future and go to the West.

 

Another poem says:

 

Prideful of his power once the time was ripe,

He tamed dragon and tiger, flaunting wily might.

Stealing peaches and wine, he roamed Heaven's House.

He found trust and grace in the City of Jade.

He's now bound, for his evil's full to the brim.

By good stock unfailing his breath will rise again.

If he's indeed to flee Tathagata's hands,

He must await from Tang court the holy monk.

 

We do not know in what month or year hereafter the days of his penance will be fulfilled; let's listen to the explanation in the next chapter.

 

 

 

In any case.... we have those who study the dao, and their study oft includes fascination over the unfolding of the 10,000 things.

 

And then we have those who cultivate the dao, and their progress sticks to what is most simple. Knowing things creates obstruction between being and non-being.

 

Journey to the West is said to be a story like encoding of daoist internal alchemy, and Liu Yiming urges those who read it to treat it with the utmost of respect and reverence, calling it the most extraordinary daoist book of all time. That said, perhaps we can see this as a much more rich and complicated look back to the dao from a perspective buried deeply within the 10,000 things (where many of us find ourselves "beginning" from), and thus from this perspective, the detailings of karma are a natural facet.

 

As ever, everything is relative, nothing is absolute.

 

"Early Daoism", "Philisophical Taoism", "Allegorical Daoism", they are all different, yet all one. Attaching to only following what "early daoism" teaches, and yet being unable to understand how to fully dissolve the noise of one's contemporary predicament leaves one just as blocked as any other, even as they refuse to acknowledge the contemporary tools available for their use. Liu Yiming advises complete investigation of principle before embarking on the journey. Then one can release it all and return to what is simple.

 

In the dance of the five elemental forces, the dao is found at the center, yet the center is difficult to find without understanding just how far the extremes of truth (the depths, water) and lies (the surface expressions, fire) have separated, just how vast the discrepancy between benevolence (wood) and understanding/righteousness (metal), that have been engraved in one's environs over time, and ingrained in one's self through one's contemporary upbringing.

 

The concept of karma is simple enough to understand, and understanding it we can dissolve it, putting it into practice by simply following our original naturalness, and naturally dissolving the karmic patterns with enough sincerity to also dissolve the imbalance created by understanding what karma is in the first place.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Daeluin

[Brian]

Very nice, Daeluin. Thank you.

[Marblehead]

Journey to the West might disagree with you.

But then, I tried reading that and about 1/3 of the way through I had to put it down because I disagreed with it.  Some things just aren't meant for everyone.

[Orion]

Re: main topic, no I don't believe so. The Dao, which is unnameable and unknowable, is at the center of the philosophy. Though with Buddhism, and especially Tibetan Buddhism, they acknowledge that this unknowable emptiness rests at the upper levels of achievement within the religion. The problem I have with Buddhism is that it's very apparent that there's nothing in here for karma to attach to, so what's the point of accumulating merit over a non-existent karma? It seems like a lot of work to ultimately prop up an ego that's not supposed to exist in the final stage. Buddhism is an excellent psychological system for people who are still on the ego path. I ultimately had to say, "It's all empty. I love you. Goodbye!" to Buddhism years ago because of this.

 

Daoism hints more at the ultimate inward and outward emptiness, without the frills that Buddhism tends to go for. It's all just the Dao doing itself. The Dao and the 10,000 things seemingly co-exist but it's all just the Dao. There's no "you" in here to speak of, you're not in control because no one is at the steering wheel. Sinking into the Way and watching the grand masterpiece unfold without any help from "anyone" is kind of the point. Buddhism gets this, but then adds unnecessarily layers like karma. There ultimately is no karma. How can there be when there's no "you" except that which you've created and identified with?

Edited August 17, 2015 by Orion

[Marblehead]

Daoism hints more at the ultimate inward and outward emptiness, without the frills that Buddhism tends to go for. It's all just the Dao doing itself. The Dao and the 10,000 things seemingly co-exist but it's all just the Dao. There's no "you" in here to speak of, you're not in control because no one is at the steering wheel. Sinking into the Way and watching the grand masterpiece unfold without any help from "anyone" is kind of the point. Buddhism gets this, but then adds unnecessarily layers like karma. There ultimately is no karma. How can there be when there's no "you" except that which you've created and identified with?

I liked your post.  I don't agree with how you expressed this second paragraph but I have had the discussion before and don't really want to go through it all again.

 

I will always have a problem when I see "emptiness" associated with Dao.  Dao is "fullness".  The thousand things are real even though they are not permanent.  They are the manifested aspects of Dao.  (But still, these ten thousand things are only 4% of the totality of Dao so they don't hold that much weight against the totality of Universal Dao.)

Edited August 17, 2015 by Marblehead

[dust]

I will always have a problem when I see "emptiness" associated with Dao.  Dao is "fullness".

 

Pretty sure it's both. Or neither..

[Brian]

Both and neither.

[Apech]

Not one for quotes usually but :

 

 

To quote Stanislav Grof on page 30 of his book, 'The Cosmic Game':

"When we encounter the Void, we feel that it is primordial emptiness of cosmic proportions and relevance. We become pure consciousness aware of this absolute nothingness; however at the same time we have a paradoxical sense of its essential fullness. This cosmic vacuum is also a plenum (full assembly) since nothing seems to be missing in it. While it does not contain anything in a concrete manifest form, it seems to comprise all of existence in a potential form. In this paradoxical way we can transcend the usual dichotomy (division into two) between emptiness and form, or existence and non-existence. However, the possibility of such a resolution cannot be adequately conveyed in words; it has to be experienced to be understood." ³