Daoism and Buddhism's Differences

[3bob]

emptiness is a misleading word in most cases...

[Marblehead]

40 minutes ago, 3bob said:

emptiness is a misleading word in most cases...

I'm glad I get to agree with you once again.

 

[Michael Sternbach]

41 minutes ago, 3bob said:

emptiness is a misleading word in most cases...

 

That may be so. However, it refers to an important concept not only in Buddhism, but also in Daoism.

 

I always liked chapter 11 of the DDJ:

 

Quote

Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub;
It is the center hole that makes it useful.
Shape clay into a vessel;
It is the space within that makes it useful.
Cut doors and windows for a room;
It is the holes which make it useful.
Therefore profit comes from what is there;
Usefulness from what is not there.

 

(Translation by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English)

 

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by Michael Sternbach

[morning dew]

 

Fascinating thread (what I can understand of it)

 

 

Quote

--Daoism deals with qi, qimai, yin/yang, and the five elements. Buddhism generally didn't place much emphasis on the energetic structures of the body (chakras, prana, etc.) until later Buddhist tantra which arguably arose under the influence of Daoist alchemy and Saivism. Daoism historically typically saw greater value in the body than Buddhism since the body is also qi and thus connected to the Dao whereas for Buddhism the body is non-self, suffering, and the result of illusion. As a result Daoism also has a greater focus on bodily health than Buddhism generally, which isn't to say it is neglected in Buddhism but rather that it is has been a major focus of Daoism.

 

This is probably a major factor as to why I am more drawn towards Taoism, personally – I'm just a bumbling newbie, but this seems reasonable to me.

 

I don't think anyone has mentioned proselytisation or seeking to convert people in this thread. I remember vaguely in BCE times, both Taoists and Buddhists were very keen to convert and gain political power in ancient China. In general, however, I get the impression Taoists aren't urged/keen to go out and convert people, unlike something like 'Mahayana' Buddhism. Is this a fair or accurate distinction? (I guess I see something like 'Hinayana' Buddhism more in line with Taoism for this issue, so maybe it isn't that much of a distinction.)

Edited June 19, 2017 by morning dew

[voidisyinyang]

It's a good point about missionary conversion. Buddhism spread via missionaries - to convert native indigenous tribes. But this is also called "sankritization" - for example converting to Buddhism in Nepal is also tied to being of a higher social rank. For example being vegetarian as Buddhist can be considered also being uppidity - or trying to be a higher social rank as purity.

 

So for example tribes in Thailand or Burma - they were to be "converted" by Buddhist missionaries - just as in Nepal or Tibet, etc.

 

Then like in Sri Lanka the Buddhist monks actually hid machine guns in the monasteries in the war against the Tamils.

 

So just now the Buddhists in Burma are putting the muslims in concentration camps while Aung San Suu Kyi claims it is not happening.

 

So since Asoka as an empire that spread out of Vedic Brahmin philosophy - the Buddhists have maintained nonviolence more like the Brahmin priest class so that the Buddhist monks will also be warriors or have a warrior caste to protect them. So Tibet at times was expansionary into China as Buddhism.

 

So Taoism then took up this missionary practice of Buddhism but again the Bronze Age chariot culture with the stupas - brought in alchemy training into China from ancient times - 3,000 BCE or so - and so Taoism is most likely tied to the older "three gunas" philosophy of India. For example Kriya Yoga has the same type of Taoist alchemy training of the "small universe" - even though in China the "small universe" alchemy meditation is not considered to have been created until later times - like the Song Dynasty.

 

So it is even said Buddhism spread to West Asia - and of course Alexander Great spreading East then changed Buddhism also. So the extent of Pythagorean philosophy tied to Buddhism is considered by some whereas in fact the philosophy of Pythagorean training is more closer to Taoist philosophy. Peter Kingsley has argued that the origin of Pythagorean philosophy is Central Asian shamanism.

 

So even within Buddhism there is a dynamic of the rich elite then sponsoring the "power yoga" meditation - like full lotus or what in Vedic philosphy is Raja yoga - royal - whereas the urban Buddhism is more like the jnana mind yoga of Vedic philosophy that requires again protection from the warrior caste.

 

So the royal elite will then sponsor the forest monks to be missionaries to convert the tribes using the power yogic abilities as better than the local shamans - and as to spread the elite dynasties, etc.

 

So in thailand for example - there was a royal "reform" of Buddhism that was a more elite sect of monks said to be more closely based on actual Buddhist texts - in terms of rituals, etc. But that sect does not get as much support from the lay people - and since Buddhism is dependent on donations of food from the lay people - then there has to be a certain level of local control.

 

So then in southeast Asia there were "democratic" reforms to Buddhism so that the monasteries were controlled by the lay people and not the actual monks - so then the urban monks focus more on charity and education training - doing teaching of writing, etc. to the masses.

 

But it is only the monks that really understand the truth of the meditation training - so to have the lay people control the monks then dissolves the actual purpose of the training.

 

The same problem happened with Tibetan monks - where after the Communists took over - then the actual yogi monks became scattered. The yogi monks would do the intense tummo training in caves nearby the monasteries and it was these tummo full lotus monks that were considered the real experts or "living Buddhas."

 

So this "cave" meditation also became considered the top Taoist training but this is also from Buddhist influence.

 

So for example Mt. Qingcheng, the main TAoist alchemy training site - or Qingchenshan - it has 72 caves because of the 72 main "nadis" or energy channels in Vedic alchemy.

 

So just as the pagodas in Burma are still based on vedic alchemy - yet are Buddhist - even the Taoist alchemy training as strong Vedic ties as well - via Buddhism.

 

Of course I am just giving a general overview - based on my own readings. But in the Bronze Age it was the aristocratic class who originally had the chariots but also did the alchemy training - and so aristocratic chariot battles were more like the knights of medieval times. It is similar to native indigenous shamanic training - if your read I think it is Peter Nabakov, an anthropologist on the Cree I think - or actually the Crow tribe - he points out how the more an native indigenous person wanted to have success in hunting or in fighting - then the more meditation energy training the person needed to do. This goes back to the original human culture when the males - all the males trained in spiritual alchemy in order to have better success in hunting. The qi energy is used to attract and track the animals and then the animal meat is used to increase the female iron in the blood. The females in turn sing all night to transmit their N/om or jing energy into the males who then dance all night to turn the jing N/om into qi-shen which is then sent back into the females to heal the females.

 

So what happened is that the females would throw cold water on the males to stop the males from leaving their bodies in spirit travel - so that the males focused on healing the females. But sometimes the more dangerous astral travel was necessary to communicate with a lion or to find out where the animals were to hunt, etc. So then on occasion a male would separate on his own from the original human tribe - and so on his own he developed the Yang Shen bodies - he could transform into lions and so the rest of the villagers became afraid of him - and this is how alchemy developed and also religion.

 

So for example an early debate in Buddhism versus Brahmin vedic philosophy is what does an eclipse of the Sun by the Moon signify - when you have the black halo around the Sun? The vedic philosphy says the One as wholeness while Buddhism says the Emptiness - what this debate really means is that the Lunar and Solar calendar are always in a dynamic exchange of energy.

 

So the first example of religion - in the West is from pastoralism splitting off from early solar plow religion. So the Turkana tribe - if there is an eclipse of the Sun by the Moon - then an animal is sacrificed to save the energy of the Son. In other words - the  Son is Solar while the Moon is female energy. So an animal is sacrificed and then the entrails are used for divination.

 

So the same is in Taoism where if there is an eclipse of the Sun - this is considered when evil energy can be strong - but the lunar energy has to be developed first. In Buddhism then the Theravada monks do all night meditation at the full moon with the females there - and so this is the same as the original human culture doing the trance dancing healing by the males during the full moon.

 

So what happened is the Solar calendar energy took over more - for example to do the math to subtract the Lunar from Solar calendar - you can not do that easily with the ideograms used in Sumerian culture, etc. and so that is why phonetic language developed really. It is much easier to do the math.

 

So then in China they began using rods - and counting is faster in Chinese compared to in English - for example.

 

But 60-based number system is tied then to the Lunar calendar more than to the Solar calendar - and the rod number counting system is 10-based number system.

 

So then for example Christianity was largely based on making the solar calendar more prominent - so for example Easter has to be closer to the Full Moon after spring equinox, instead of closer to the New Moon. Why? Because the New Moon can cause an eclipse of the Sun whereas the Full Moon can not cause an eclipse of the Sun. And remember the Sun is the Son's energy.

 

So in Taoism - the Hun spirit is actually only activated after the person leaves the womb - so the Hun spirit is actually post-celestial and the Hun spirit is directly from the father's energy passed to the children.

 

This is also why ancestor worship is so important in China because it's directly tied to alchemy training - just like in Egypt the body and how it is preserved - buried in China - but in China when the bones are clean then it is reburied for alchemy - and so this is like in Egypt.

 

So around 1200 BCE in India then iron became more valuable than silver - whereas silver was the lunar energy in the temples and gold was the solar energy.

 

So then with rectilinear ritual geometry developed based on Solar priest sacrifice rituals - then the lunar female energy was not valued as much and instead iron became more valuable since iron is used for weapons. And so then it is iron used in alchemy to transform into steel for weapons.

 

So traditionally it was the blacksmith caste - in Africa and Asia - who then are separated out as males and do the alchemy training - in Egypt this was called "absorbing the power of the crocodile" - the water N/om snake reptile kundalini energy.

 

So even in Nepal then it was the blacksmiths who served as local shaman intermediaries with the Vedic Brahmin priests - and the bronze age alchemy tradition then is tied to this blending of shamanism and the blacksmiths.

 

For example in Islam - it was because the local tribe had learned the blacksmith secrets from the local Jews - and the Arabs up till then had not learned the blacksmith secrets. So then the local tribe could expand as Islam based on the alchemy power with Muhammed fasting for 40 days - as is still done in Sufi training and Taoist alchemy, etc.

 

So then Mohammed says that the Sun is the right hand and the Moon is the left hand - and so he rejects alchemy on the exterior - and instead embraces the monotheistic view of religion based on, "I Am that I Am" from symmetric math secrets of Vedic and Zoroastrian culture.

 

So it is the older training of lunar and solar principles - with fire and water - going back to the original human culture - and actually modeled on music theory - that is able to blend Buddhism, Taoism and local shamanic indigenous training - and even Christian mysticism, Sufism, etc.

 

 

[Cookie Monster]

.

Edited May 4, 2021 by Ocean Form

[Kongming]

Another possible difference seems to be on the nature of or actualization of liberation and the underlying cause behind not being liberated. In Buddhism the cause of our transmigration through samsara is ignorance and the cause of our liberation is enlightenment, variously termed bodhi (such as in anutarra samyak sambodhi) or jnana/prajna. Thus it is a matter of realization or awakening, a matter of supra-conceptual and liberating knowledge or wisdom that sets us free in Buddhism.

 

Within Daoism there certainly are equivalents to this idea and especially with influence of Buddhism, but from what I understand Daoism doesn't understand our origin in becoming or transmigration through time as being rooted in ignorance but rather that all life is a natural and spontaneous emanation of the Dao, hence where the Daodejing says heaven and earth treat creatures like straw dogs. In other words, an impersonal principle doesn't have any partiality toward creatures and so our presence here isn't the result of a punishment or error such as in the Christian conception of the Fall of Man nor is it necessarily rooted in ignorance as in Buddhism.

 

In the Daoist and especially alchemical view, since life is the result of a spontaneous and natural emanation from the Absolute, it naturally "follows the course" to death, the dispersal of the hun/po or yang/yin souls, and change of state, i.e. becoming again in another life form. Thus immortality or the attainment of the Dao is a matter of reversing the course and returning....in neidan this is the famous process of refining jing to qi to shen to Dao but other Daoist movements may have envisioned this process in a different manner.

 

In sum, the root of becoming is ignorance in Buddhism, a natural and spontaneous process of emanation in Daoism. Liberation is entirely seen as a matter of wisdom or awakening in Buddhism, a transformation or return (usually involving energetic components) in Daoism. Perhaps it is the case that to attain the Dao at the end of that process is also equivalent to awakening in that we "realize" the Dao, but it seems the understanding of the nature or process of the matter is a bit different.

 

Buddhist conceptions are here more in line with Vedanta or other systems where it is a matter of knowing or awakening, whereas Daoism seems more in line with the Christian notion of theosis and/or other Hermetic/alchemical systems where it is a matter of refining our substance to achieve an ontological change of state, i.e. transforming lead into gold. It may well be the case that the "gold" is always there and there is no real change at the depths, but there is nonetheless a process of unveiling via refinement, namely praxis.
 

[voidisyinyang]

transcendent wisdom or prajna is the shen - in Taoism the yin shen has to be changed into Yang Shen by increasing the Yuan Qi levels to then increase the Shen - so the yin qi as Lunar increases to Gold from the solar - but alchemy is still limited since in the end the yang shen returns to the Yuan Qi which is also the Emptiness. The Emptiness flows eternally - like time that we exist in but also as complementary opposites of shen and jing - and so there is no "end of that process" as you state. At the end of alchemy - the Emptiness will decide to create the yang shen at another time-space, etc. and so the Yang Shen is actually an impersonal manifestation of the Emptiness - kind of like a white hole in physics from a black hole.

 

So Christianity is based on the Solar calendar - and no yoga full lotus meditation nor any concept of complementary opposites as harmonics of body-mind transformation. Buddhism was a reform of Vedic philosophy - and so the lunar energy was still maintained in Buddhism but the Solar energy was still the focus - so Buddhism is more about mind transformation and less about the body. But you can't make the Gold in alchemy unless the lunar silver energy is built up first -as it's stated that generative force as yin qi energy is just immature yuan qi.

 

So it is like a black hole - the Emptiness stores the future and past - and 4D spacetime with energy mass is a holograph - and so Yuan Qi is actually reverse spacetime as negentropy or reverse entropy. This is how precognition works, how to reverse aging and achieve longevity - and how to heal broken bones and cause physical transformations - the Yang Shen is when the Yuan Jing is full, etc.

 

There is a fundamental difference between Western esoteric traditions ever since Plato because of the wrong math from Plato, with the infinite defined as a contained geometry using symmetric math. Alchemy is based on noncommutative phase as complementary opposites at the same time - nonlocal entanglement as macro quantum resonance. This is not possible using Western technology and math, etc.

 

Buddhism, as a reform of Vedic philosophy, is also based on "neti, neti" or "divide and average" symmetric math - and so it is not the same as Taoism.

 

Taoism is akin to the older "three gunas" of India - and those two are from music theory. All human cultures use the 1-4-5 music intervals. So yes then the truth as the Yuan Qi energy is always there as the truth of the Universe but there is a specific philosophy naturally resonate with it - I give the details in my free pdf https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/04/10/idiot-s-guide-to-taoist-alchemy/

[roger]

What about their similarities?

 

Some basic, obvious ones would be:

 

- pantheism

 

- emphasis on meditative practices

 

- compassion

 

I know this is very simple, but simplicity is a key concept in Daoism.

[Kongming]

8 hours ago, roger said:

What about their similarities?

 

Some basic, obvious ones would be:

 

- pantheism

 

- emphasis on meditative practices

 

- compassion

 

I know this is very simple, but simplicity is a key concept in Daoism.

 

 

Well they do have many similarities especially after interacting with and influencing each other in the Chinese world for nearly two millennia. The problem is it seems that sometimes people treat them as though they were essentially the same, with Daoism perhaps being the Chinese Buddhism with qi and monks/priests with hair. Of course the reality is there are doctrinal and philosophical differences between the two, which is why I wanted to start the thread to explore these differences.

 

Though on pantheism: pantheism is the perspective that the world of space-time, the universe we are familiar with, is equivalent to the Divine. This fails to take into perspective that which transcends space and time, such as the Dao in its Absolute aspect. Thus Daoism would be better be described as panentheism.

 

As far as I understand it, most Buddhists deny that Buddhism is panentheism, pantheism, monism, etc. though personally I believe Buddhism is monistic, especially Chan and other forms of East Asian Buddhism, but I am a minority in this view from what I can tell.

[Michael Sternbach]

Whereas I am a minority in maintaining that Buddhism (as well as Christianity etc) is essentially polytheistic (whether you talk about gods or bodhisattvas, angels, etc is of no consequence, in my view).

[Michael Sternbach]

On 23.6.2017 at 3:43 PM, Kongming said:

Another possible difference seems to be on the nature of or actualization of liberation and the underlying cause behind not being liberated. In Buddhism the cause of our transmigration through samsara is ignorance and the cause of our liberation is enlightenment, variously termed bodhi (such as in anutarra samyak sambodhi) or jnana/prajna. Thus it is a matter of realization or awakening, a matter of supra-conceptual and liberating knowledge or wisdom that sets us free in Buddhism.

 

Within Daoism there certainly are equivalents to this idea and especially with influence of Buddhism, but from what I understand Daoism doesn't understand our origin in becoming or transmigration through time as being rooted in ignorance but rather that all life is a natural and spontaneous emanation of the Dao, hence where the Daodejing says heaven and earth treat creatures like straw dogs. In other words, an impersonal principle doesn't have any partiality toward creatures and so our presence here isn't the result of a punishment or error such as in the Christian conception of the Fall of Man nor is it necessarily rooted in ignorance as in Buddhism.

 

In the Daoist and especially alchemical view, since life is the result of a spontaneous and natural emanation from the Absolute, it naturally "follows the course" to death, the dispersal of the hun/po or yang/yin souls, and change of state, i.e. becoming again in another life form. Thus immortality or the attainment of the Dao is a matter of reversing the course and returning....in neidan this is the famous process of refining jing to qi to shen to Dao but other Daoist movements may have envisioned this process in a different manner.

 

In sum, the root of becoming is ignorance in Buddhism, a natural and spontaneous process of emanation in Daoism. Liberation is entirely seen as a matter of wisdom or awakening in Buddhism, a transformation or return (usually involving energetic components) in Daoism. Perhaps it is the case that to attain the Dao at the end of that process is also equivalent to awakening in that we "realize" the Dao, but it seems the understanding of the nature or process of the matter is a bit different.

 

Buddhist conceptions are here more in line with Vedanta or other systems where it is a matter of knowing or awakening, whereas Daoism seems more in line with the Christian notion of theosis and/or other Hermetic/alchemical systems where it is a matter of refining our substance to achieve an ontological change of state, i.e. transforming lead into gold. It may well be the case that the "gold" is always there and there is no real change at the depths, but there is nonetheless a process of unveiling via refinement, namely praxis.
 

 

Ignorance may be seen both as a cause and a result.

[Kongming]

1 hour ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Whereas I am a minority in maintaining that Buddhism (as well as Christianity etc) is essentially polytheistic (whether you talk about gods or bodhisattvas, angels, etc is of no consequence, in my view).

 

It's true enough that they are polytheistic but they all deal with an absolute principle which in Daoism or most forms of Hinduism is monistic/panentheistic (Dao, Brahman, Parashiva, etc.) while most forms of Christianity are a bit more dualistic since many theologians were at pains to distinguish God from His Creation, though the Eastern Orthodox idea of God's energies infusing creation and many Western Christian mystics/Neoplatonists approach a more panentheistic perspective.

 

I believe East Asian Buddhism, as per the Awakening of the Faith or the Chan/Zen notion of "One Mind" or Mahavariocana in Shingon/Mikkyo, is by and large monistic though some contest this. Yogacara some have tried to paint as idealistic monism whereas others against contest this. There seems to be a large controversy within Buddhism regarding affirming an Absolute or any substance as per certain viewpoints relating to the doctrines of "anatta" and "sunyata."

 

In any case, I suppose the difference here is that Daoism has a clear cut doctrine of a monistic/panentheistic Absolute that emanates creation which is of the substance of qi and thus puts forth the notion of the microcosm mirroring the macrocosm, whereas in much of Buddhism this isn't the case or at least not a center of focus.

[rene]

On 06/19/2017 at 0:19 PM, morning dew said:

 

I don't think anyone has mentioned proselytisation or seeking to convert people in this thread. I remember vaguely in BCE times, both Taoists and Buddhists were very keen to convert and gain political power in ancient China. In general, however, I get the impression Taoists aren't urged/keen to go out and convert people, unlike something like 'Mahayana' Buddhism. Is this a fair or accurate distinction? (I guess I see something like 'Hinayana' Buddhism more in line with Taoism for this issue, so maybe it isn't that much of a distinction.)

 

morning dew, hello!

 

I was wondering about this aspect as well... perhaps those who know might share their thoughts on it.

 

p.s.. I'm really enjoying your posts, there is a distinct gentleness to your energy.

 

warm greetings

[morning dew]

1 hour ago, WuDao said:

 

morning dew, hello!

 

I was wondering about this aspect as well... perhaps those who know might share their thoughts on it.

 

p.s.. I'm really enjoying your posts, there is a distinct gentleness to your energy.

 

warm greetings

 

Thanks  I'm having a great time getting to know everybody and learning lots of new interesting things.

[voidisyinyang]

4 hours ago, Kongming said:

 

It's true enough that they are polytheistic but they all deal with an absolute principle which in Daoism or most forms of Hinduism is monistic/panentheistic (Dao, Brahman, Parashiva, etc.) while most forms of Christianity are a bit more dualistic since many theologians were at pains to distinguish God from His Creation, though the Eastern Orthodox idea of God's energies infusing creation and many Western Christian mystics/Neoplatonists approach a more panentheistic perspective.

 

I believe East Asian Buddhism, as per the Awakening of the Faith or the Chan/Zen notion of "One Mind" or Mahavariocana in Shingon/Mikkyo, is by and large monistic though some contest this. Yogacara some have tried to paint as idealistic monism whereas others against contest this. There seems to be a large controversy within Buddhism regarding affirming an Absolute or any substance as per certain viewpoints relating to the doctrines of "anatta" and "sunyata."

 

In any case, I suppose the difference here is that Daoism has a clear cut doctrine of a monistic/panentheistic Absolute that emanates creation which is of the substance of qi and thus puts forth the notion of the microcosm mirroring the macrocosm, whereas in much of Buddhism this isn't the case or at least not a center of focus.

 

Have you read David Loy's book on nondualism?

 

The analysis you give, to me, does not even acknowledge the truth of Taoism or even the real truth of Pythagorean philosophy.

 

So you speak of concepts - and you use dualistic language. So something is one as in monism or two as in dualism or one as in beyond space/time - Buddhism based on neither this nor that, neither not one nor not-one, etc.

 

It's all left brain dominant discussion. For example you state "many" Christian mystics/NeoPlatonists had a "panentheistic" view - but this is not Platonic philosophy since the math of Plato is "materialistic idealism."

 

If math is materialistic - then the philosophy will be materialistic. I agree that individual mystics had experiences but to try to fit their experiences into a Platonic philosophy to me is totally wrong. There is a great worship of Plato that I completely disagree with as this view of Plato as some panentheistic is not accurate.

 

I have posted many mathematicians who expose the math of Plato and this was interwoven into his philosophy. Plato did not understand real Pythagorean philosophy.

 

Now there is no need for you to learn the real truth about Plato since all of Western civilization is a "footnote" to Plato. So you can go on and on about how great Plato was, etc. and no one will disagree with you.

 

The mathematicians I have cited about Plato - they publish their works but no one promotes their views - there is no public acceptance because again there is no alternative.

 

The idea of complementary opposites in Taoism is not easily understood - I have posted a few people who figured it out from the math - so it is a case of being in two places at the same time but as eternal motion of complementary opposites.

 

So even when you say qi as the foundation - the symbol for qi is fire under water to create steam and so qi itself is a process of "three in one" unity.

 

And this process is not just a concept but a specific training based on say the left hand as yang and lower body yin and right hand is yin and upper body yang.

 

So this was discovered again as "noncommutative phase" in Western science - but only Eddie Oshins realized this connection. The math can not be extended - he discusses this in terms of quantum psychology.

 

David Loy did not understand this in his detailed comparison of various philosophies of nondualism, etc.

 

People can easily spend their lives mired down in the details of all sorts of concepts and yet never even realize the truth of Taoist philosophy.

 

If you study the book "Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality" - the truth is in there, but it is just part of the whole training.

 

I recently posted a Tai Chi teacher who also revealed this truth and I cite in my free pdf as well -

 

So it's not really a "philosophy" as in a left-brain dominant discussion or debate - but a philosophy based on complementary opposites to turn your body-mind into a living battery generator, plugged into the Earth-Moon-Sun natural generator.

 

So you discuss Christianity - but the Solar calendar religions became dominant around 1200 BCE - and so Buddhism was an attempt to reform a solar calendar religion.

 

Taoism and Pythagorean philosophy is older - from the "three gunas" of India - all of them based on music theory.

 

Quote

Also much Hindu thought – and consequently Buddhist philosophy – is highly characterized by panentheism and pantheism.^[4][5] The basic tradition however, on which Krause's concept was built, seems to have been Neoplatonic philosophy and its successors in Western philosophy and Orthodox theology.

 

That's WIKI - but Wiki is notoriously materialistic - Western-biased - against paranormal training, etc.

 

So all those examples of "panentheism" are actually based on Solar calendar philosophies that are really materialistic idealism.

 

I just searched "materialistic idealism" in Wiki - and I get ONE hit.

 

So when I search materialistic idealism plato in google - I get a hit stating Plato abandoned idealism in his later years.

 

But the problem with that view is that, as Peter Kingsley points out, Plato never really understood Pythagorean philosophy, that was supposedly his inspiration.

 

So there is this view that we can have some kind of left-brain philosophy but that ignores that left brain dominance is inherently tied to right-handed technology. There is no "pure" math.

 

To speak of pantheism versus panentheism is totally absurd considering that civilization has wiped out life on earth faster than any previous mass species extinction. How can there be any pantheism?  And if no real pantheism how can there by an panentheism? These are just Western constructs that try to idealize left brain dominance.

 

So we are told, online, that "materialistic idealism" is half way between materialism and pantheism.

 

But again it's all just a footnote to Plato. Why does Buddhism so easily align with Western science? Most think this is great and no one seems to argue against it. In Western science it's called the "negative paradox judgment" from mathematics - in Buddhism it's from the "Neti, neti" philosophy of Vedic philosophy.

 

For example it is only in music training from before the age of 7 that the corpus callosum is then greatly enlarged - this is a mind-body transformation from someone at a young age training on a musical instrument. It's not just from listening to music. No other art training will do that.

 

Someone training in philosophy - there has never been a claim it creates such a brain transformation.

 

Meditation depends on the style - mindfulness which is the current Western Buddhism craze is still left brain dominant, as it the Socratic method, like vichara of Vedic philosophy.

 

Jnana yoga is considered the highest level of yoga but mind yoga depends on the proper context, created by the caste system.

 

So Buddhism basically tried to recreate the mind yoga training without the caste system - instead using monasteries.

 

Obviously that claim is based on a huge debate - but that's the whole point. This "debating" about "philosophies" is all a big left brain dominant scam.

 

It's all the same left-brain dominant scam.

 

Now real Pythagorean training required 5 years of silence. Also as with Taoism - there was a math system based on complementary opposites.

 

Most people just brush this off as numerology - 1 is not a number - what does that mean? 1 is male, 2 is female as matter but resonates from the formless awareness as Apeiron, the  Cosmic Mother.

 

That is Taoism, plain and simple. But only in Taoism do we have the specific mind-body training maintained as a nonwestern science.

 

So "nondualism" - it does not even acknowledge the reality of the concept of noncommutative phase.

 

Because the Brahmin Vedic philosophy imposed itself on the other "three gunas" - then you have the older truth of the lunar calendar energy needed to be built up first.

 

But this gets covered over easily.

 

For example Acharya S. has a great book called SUNS OF GOD - and the subtitle is on Jesus, Buddha and Krishna. They are all Suns of God. I recommend you read it.

 

For example if you read scientific promotion of Hindu metaphysics and philosophy then you get this quantum view of reality. But what is not mentioned is that quantum physics still necessitates the Western symmetric math that has been the case since Plato.

 

So  yes quantum nonlocal reality is "noncommutative phase" but even this gets ignored in quantum physics primarily.

 

People think it's some break through that science and spirituality can finally "merge" via Buddhism when in fact, as Professor David F. Noble details in his book, "The Religion of Technology" science is the religion of the West. haha.

 

 

[Kongming]

14 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

So you speak of concepts - and you use dualistic language. So something is one as in monism or two as in dualism or one as in beyond space/time - Buddhism based on neither this nor that, neither not one nor not-one, etc.

 

It's all left brain dominant discussion. For example you state "many" Christian mystics/NeoPlatonists had a "panentheistic" view - but this is not Platonic philosophy since the math of Plato is "materialistic idealism."

 

If math is materialistic - then the philosophy will be materialistic. I agree that individual mystics had experiences but to try to fit their experiences into a Platonic philosophy to me is totally wrong. There is a great worship of Plato that I completely disagree with as this view of Plato as some panentheistic is not accurate.

 

Monism is the idea that all is one principle or substance ultimately. The Dao is the All. Panentheism states that the Divine both encompasses all of space-time--the universe or world as we know it--but also is the transcendent and timeless source of that universe. The Dao gives birth to the One, the One being the primordial chaos or hundun of qi not yet polarized into yin-yang, and in verse 25 of the DDJ  it is stated: "There was something undefined and complete, coming into existence before Heaven and Earth." In other words the Dao, in its Absolute aspect, is prior to creation and prior to the universe (if not temporally/horizontally then metaphysically/vertically), namely transcendent.

 

Given the above, it's no wonder scholars like Komjathy have this to say:

 

"From a classical and foundational Daoist perspective, the Dao has four primary characteristics: (1) the Source of everything; (2) an unnamable mystery; (3) an all-pervading sacred presence (qi); and (4) the universe as transformative process (“Nature”). That is, the primary Daoist theology is monistic (there is one impersonal Reality), panentheistic (the sacred is both in and beyond the physical world), and panenhenic (Nature itself is sacred). The secondary Daoist theology is at once animistic (there are spirits in nature) and polytheistic (there are multiple gods)."

 

As to Plato, I was mostly speaking about Plotinus and his successors. The mystical theology of certain Christian mystics and Sufis like Ibn Arabi is mostly grounded on a Neoplatonic framework. Thus Toshihiko Izutsu's work highlighting the striking similarities between Daoism and Ibn Arabi also applies to Neoplatonism. Neoplatonism also has been commented to be strikingly similar to Brahmanism, especially that of the Upanishads. Here's an interesting article comparing the Dao to Brahman:

 

http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp252_dao_brahman.pdf

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

You are quoting stuff - that is a good step - but try to really comprehend what I am saying.

 

I understand your points. Arabs passed on Platonic math to the Benedictine monks in the 9th century.

 

Plato is based on irrational magnitude with some mysticism thrown it. It is not Taoism. Irrational magnitude is symmetric math.

 

Now you say Taoism is Monism, blah blah.

 

What I am stating to you is a subtle difference that is crucial and missed by Westerners and Westernized thinking.

 

This is something I realized fairly recently. My handle is "voidisyinyang" - does that give you a hint?

 

As I stated - the character for qi is not monism it is fire under water to create steam. There is a process there.

 

The process is not Whitehead - the process is "noncommutative phase."

 

This is modeled by Pythagorean music theory which is also empirically true - not the Platonic music mysticism that poses as monism - that is fake.

 

Western civilization "works" but only for the elite. The planet is being killed off by Platonic mysticism - called the religion of technology.

 

Buddhism easily is assimilated into that Freemasonic genocidal agenda because Buddhism, like Christianity, is just a reform of the Solar symmetric math mysticism.

 

So you give some quotes.

 

Let me give you quotes from actual training manuals for Taoism that will clarify your quotes.

 

By the way - these quotes are from the link I gave you. So apparently you didn't read the link. This is from my blog http://ecoechoinvasives.blogspot.com

 

 

Quote

 

"If then all things are One, what room is there for speech? On the other hand, since I can say the word 'one' how can speech not exist? If it does exist, we have One and speech -- two; and two and one -- three(14) from which point onwards even the best mathematicians will fail to reach (the ultimate); how much more then should ordinary people fail?">"

- Chuang Tzu, 300 BCE

 

 

Now according to Plato mathematicians can indeed reach the ultimate - based on his irrational magnitude alogon mysticism.

 

But if you really study mathematics - they admit this is not true. math professor Borzacchini states the cover up by Plato of real music theory is "really astonishing" and "shocking."

 

Now for Westernized thinkers they see, 1, 2, 3 and infinity and think - so what - it's just counting.

 

But for mathematicians who know some music theory - this is not true - there is more to it.

 

Quote

a “universal scaling system”, ... this discrete scaling manifests itself in acoustic systems, as is well known in western classical music, where the two scalings correspond, respectively, to passing to the octave (frequency ratio of 2) and transposition (the perfect fifth is the frequency ratio 3/2), with the approximate value log(3)/ log(2) ∼ 19/12 responsible for the difference between the “circulating temperament” of the Well Tempered
Clavier and the “equal temperament” of XIX century music. It is precisely the irrationality of log(3)/ log(2) which is responsible for the noncommutative [complementary opposites as yin/yang] nature of the quotient corresponding to the three places {2, 3,∞}. -

 

So suddenly those few numbers mean something different.

Quote

 

So light as a photon is a point but as a wave it is nonlocal - but this means it is in 2 places at the same time - as the 5th dimension that is noncommutative.

People think that doesn't make sense - how can it be in two places at the same time? Actually basic music theory explains this.

So for example the Perfect Fifth is C to F as subharmonic 2/3 while the Perfect Fifth is C to G overtone harmonic as 3/2.

So C = 2 while F=3=G at the same time. That is noncommutative phase. It is also called "Fourier Uncertainty" or "time-frequency uncertainty" - and that is the true foundation of reality.

 

 

So that is not monism - it means that the complementary opposites are at the same time - that is called noncommutative phase.

 

Do you see the difference yet?

 

Not yet? O.k. I'll give some Taoist quotes now.

 

Quote

According to him [Liu Huayang], the prenatal jing and the prenatal shen were identical....In the moment of chaos [prenatal shen], there is movement in peace [prenatal jing].

 

So what the means is that qi is shen under jing at the same time - noncommutative phase.

 

Quote

Zhang, Guangbao states indeed - this "jingqi" is the primordial cosmic yuanqi - from this process of the shen being contained internally along with the jing to bring out the qi energy.

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/225213533/Taoism

 

So I am referring to the essay in that book by Zhang Guangbao.

 

Here's another one:

 

Quote

When t’ai chi is at rest, yang and yin are united;
when t’ai chi is in motion, the two opposing forces separate. Herein
lies the secret of immortality.

 

The Magus of Java: Teachings of an Authentic Taoist Immortal (on John Chang).

 

So notice it says - that is the "secret."

 

Secret is in you did not pick this up.

 

I hope now you are picking it up. This is all from my blog.

 

Quote

 

"The whole process is ruled by Spirit....It's movement in 'non-doing' is called Original Spirit." Wang Mu, Foundations of Internal Alchemy.

 

 

So what that means is when the light is turned around then time goes to zero and the yuan qi is created from virtual photons as the hidden momentum of light from relativity - the inherent noncommutative phase of spacetime as the 5th dimension.

 

That is the "Movement in non-doing" of yuan shen - the creation of yuan qi.

 

Quote

 

In this more advanced practice, both agonist and antagonist contract simultaneously - the first isotonically in shortening, and the latter eccentrically in lengthening, in effect they work against each other and create a dynamic tension between the paired muscles.

internal oppositional exertion....is more than anything a mental shift in awareness....such omni-directional mutually cancelling efforts engage the connective tissue web continually, they increase the elastic strength of the frame even while an external observer discerns no apparent movement.

 

 

 Citing the book

Masters of Perception: Sensory-Motor Integration in the Internal Martial Arts.

by Jan Dipersloot

Vol. 3, 2013.

 

So that again is the secret of noncommutative phase.

 

O.K. Now I'll open up my pdf and quote from that. too bad I can't cut and paste it!

 

Quote

When Chaos was dark, the yin-yang air was undivided; and....Hence, motion and rest have no end, and the Yin-yang have no beginning.

 

 

So you quote the Tao Te Ching taking about before Heaven and Earth was created - but try to realize that the Wu Chi symbol was created in the Song dynasty when the elite were claiming Confucianism and Taoism and Buddhism were all the same. haha.

 

Quote

The primal qi (li yuanqi) ....formless

 

So that quote is stating that Taoist masters embody the Emptiness as the Yuan qi that is formless awareness.

 

How do they do that? By putting shen below the jing - for fire under the water to create steam.

 

Now a different translation of the Tao Te Ching states, "Indeterminate yet the Great Ultimate" or "wuji is taichi and taichi is also wuji."

 

O.K.

 

here is the final quote from Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality:

 

"Since is it the undivided yin-yang it is called the One Vitality."

 

If you want the other sources then you gotta open up my pdf for the hypertext links.

 

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/04/10/idiot-s-guide-to-taoist-alchemy/

[Marblehead]

Interesting discussion y'all.  I had my shot at a very similar discussion years ago here.  My opponents ran away.

 

And actually, Buddhism and Daoism do not differ much in regards t the concept of "beginnings".

 

I will butt back out for now.

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

Interesting discussion y'all.  I had my shot at a very similar discussion years ago here.  My opponents ran away.

 

And actually, Buddhism and Daoism do not differ much in regards t the concept of "beginnings".

 

I will butt back out for now.

 

 

 

Yeah you said you don't get 12) any more in qicat's personal practice thread - you can find the solution to that in the Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality book.

 

 

[Kongming]

22 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

Now you say Taoism is Monism, blah blah.

 

Well let's take a step away from mathematics and the nature of yin-yang, etc. and just contemplate the following line of inquiry: Does the Dao, the Absolute, encompass all of reality, both space-time and that which transcends space-time? We know it was prior to heaven and earth, prior to the emanation of qi, prior to the polarization of yin-yang, etc. yet also always present. Zhuangzi notes that it's also in grass, rocks, feces, and urine...in other words a more shocking way of saying it is all things. So all is the Dao and adepts have striven to attain unity with the Dao. You also have concepts like "guarding the One" and sayings like, "Know the One and the myriad affairs are done."

 

In other words, all of reality is of one substance or emanates from one Absolute, namely the Dao. Thus Daoism is monistic....whether it is monistic in the same way of Plotinus or Vedanta is a different topic.

 

12 hours ago, Marblehead said:

And actually, Buddhism and Daoism do not differ much in regards t the concept of "beginnings".

 

How so? Daoism starts with the Dao spontaneously emanating reality. Earliest Buddhism didn't mention emanation and ignored metaphysical or ontological questions in favor of epistemological issues, placing the root of samsara with ignorance and from that ignorance the chain of interdependent origination. Later Buddhist theories dealing with Sunyata also don't seem to propose a process of emanation, indeed they often deny creation at all and state that the world is a misconstruction based entirely in thought.

[3bob]

to no one in particular :  Spirit is smarter than us smarties...

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Kongming said:

 

How so? Daoism starts with the Dao spontaneously emanating reality. Earliest Buddhism didn't mention emanation and ignored metaphysical or ontological questions in favor of epistemological issues, placing the root of samsara with ignorance and from that ignorance the chain of interdependent origination. Later Buddhist theories dealing with Sunyata also don't seem to propose a process of emanation, indeed they often deny creation at all and state that the world is a misconstruction based entirely in thought.

I can go only so far with this before I start talking out my butt.

 

It is my understanding that Buddhism suggests no beginning of the universe but rather cycles of universes.

 

In Daoism, all that is, is, always has been, and always will be.  The universe simply takes different forms over time.  (Think unmanifested energy.)

 

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, 3bob said:

to no one in particular :  Spirit is smarter than us smarties...

Yeah, I have never hesitated to state my ignorance of whatever topic/concept.

 

[Kongming]

54 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

I can go only so far with this before I start talking out my butt.

 

It is my understanding that Buddhism suggests no beginning of the universe but rather cycles of universes.

 

In Daoism, all that is, is, always has been, and always will be.  The universe simply takes different forms over time.  (Think unmanifested energy.)

 

 

 

 

 

This is correct, though the difference seems to be that Buddhism states samsara is beginingless and endless but either denies or refuses to comment on the source or origin of this cyclical universe whereas Daoism states that the source and ground of the world of change is the Dao. The equivalent to the Dao in much of Hinduism is Brahman, but many Buddhists deny that there is anything similar to Brahman in Buddhism.

 

Though the universe that always has been and always will be which takes different forms over time is the One (undifferentiated qi or hundun chaos), which polarizes into Two (yin-yang), which meet together (the Three), which produces the "ten thousand things" or myriad phenomena. The Dao, in its ultimate and Absolute aspect, is metaphysically prior to or above this in timeless purity and empty non-being (wu) and its function is to spontaneously "give birth to" or emanate the One. In other words, the Dao isn't limited to our universe or the state of becoming (samsara) but rather simultaneously transcends and encompasses this level of reality.