Daoism and Buddhism's Differences

[Michael Sternbach]

38 minutes ago, Kongming said:

 

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.

 

Which Buddhist sources state this? I recall reading somewhere that Buddhism assumes the universe to have existed and to continue to exist forever, and nothing needs to be in a hurry... Reminiscent of Fred Hoyle's cosmological Steady-State theory, BTW.

 

38 minutes ago, Kongming said:

The equivalent to the Dao in much of Hinduism is Brahman, but many Buddhists deny that there is anything similar to Brahman in Buddhism.

 

Well, Hinduism assumes a universe that ends and is reborn in cycles of incredible duration, thereby approaching Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. Brahman probably has its existence beyond time and space though.

 

38 minutes ago, Kongming said:

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.

 

I don't remember having heard of a clear cut Daoist view on the development of the universe, even though some passages in the DDJ seem to suggest Creation having a "before" and "after". A cyclic view would seem to be most in line with Daoism's general outlook on things, however.

 

Once again, sources that help clarify this would be appreciated, if anybody here knows any.

[Kongming]

44 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Which Buddhist sources state this? I recall reading somewhere that Buddhism assumes the universe to have existed and to continue to exist forever, and nothing needs to be in a hurry... Reminiscent of Fred Hoyle's cosmological Steady-State theory, BTW.

 

Well Buddhists also share the Vedic (and really Indo-European) tradition of cycles of creation and destruction as far as I am aware. Samsara would encompass all previous and all future universes and is thought to be beginingless and endless as noted. The difference is Daoism and Hinduism propose that this level of reality, the relative world of space-time and becoming, is an emanation of the supreme level of reality, the Dao or Brahman in its Absolute aspect.

 

Earliest Buddhism tended to be silent on this topic since they believed it was speculative or could lead to speculation and hence not conducive to liberation. Whether this means a total denial of an Absolute equivalent to Brahman or the Dao as many Buddhists, both in Theravada and in Mahayana especially Madhyamika, hold or whether the Buddha was essentially saying, "Obtain enlightenment and liberation and find out yourself" is debatable, but it seems mainstream Indo-Tibetan and SE Asian Buddhist scholasticism historically was in favor the former view.

 

Quote

I don't remember having heard of a clear cut Daoist view on the development of the universe, even though some passages in the DDJ seem to suggest Creation having a "before" and "after". A cyclic view would seem to be most in line with Daoism's general outlook on things, however.

 

Once again, sources that help clarify this would be appreciated, if anybody here knows any.

 

DDJ 43 is about the development of the world as I've been explaining. The Dao, timeless, absolutely simple and empty non-being which contains infinity in potential "births" the One, which is the hundun, the primordial chaos of qi prior to its division into yin-yang (the Two.) In other words the world or universe in an undifferentiated state is the One...the world was we know it, of change, multiplicity, and relativity, is the result of yin and yang's interaction (the Three birthing ten thousand things.)

 

As to cyclical time, Daoists held to the idea that water or fire would overcome the world before it was created anew. Later with the development of Shangqing and Lingbao traditions specific theories relating to cycles of time much like the Hindu "yugas" were explained. Here's a citation from Brill's Daoism Handbook:

 

Edited June 26, 2017 by Kongming

[3bob]

Btw,  if "I" and "we" are not "eternal" now then we will never be so in the future, so goes the game.

Also is anybody worried about not becoming enlightened at this time, or running out of time to become so even if they complete all the steps? - On that note beware of nihilism for dharma is smarter than it is. 

Edited June 26, 2017 by 3bob

[Marblehead]

6 hours ago, Kongming said:

 

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.

Excellent response and I see nothing to disagree with.

 

However, your first paragraph is why I have been avoiding the word/concept "Dao" as much as possible and use the word/concept "Tzujan" instead.  I don't ever want to be caught personifying Dao.  I feel that would be an error.

 

Buddhism doesn't have this problem.  Hindu has many gods and the followers have no problem with that.

 

 

[Kongming]

13 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Excellent response and I see nothing to disagree with.

 

However, your first paragraph is why I have been avoiding the word/concept "Dao" as much as possible and use the word/concept "Tzujan" instead.  I don't ever want to be caught personifying Dao.  I feel that would be an error.

 

Buddhism doesn't have this problem.  Hindu has many gods and the followers have no problem with that.

 

 

 

Well all three traditions traditionally accepted the existence of divinities/gods and other non-human entities (celestial bodhisattvas and Buddhas in Buddhism, immortals/perfected in Daoism.) In the Sangarava Sutta the Buddha answers the question about gods quite frankly and directly:

 

"When this was said, the brahmin student Sangarava said to the Blessed One: “Master Gotama’s striving was unfaltering, Master Gotama’s striving was that of a true man, as it should be for an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One. But how is it, Master Gotama, are there gods?” “It is known to me to be the case, Bharadvaja, that there are gods.”

 

Though you are correct that the Dao (as well as Brahman) is not a personal God but rather an impersonal Absolute. It is "ziran" which in this case doesn't mean "nature" or "natural" in the English sense of the word but rather "self-so", spontaneous, uncaused, without origin, etc.

[Sudhamma]

Let me post an extract from Chapter 16, Realms of Existence from the book "What Buddhists Believe" by Ven. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera. This is typical position of Theravadins in regards to: God or Gods, and in particular Creator God/Gods, the Heavenly Realms within the realms of existence notwithstanding.

Quote:

The speculative explanations of the origin of the universe that are presented by various religions are not acceptable to the modern scientists and intellectuals. Even the commentaries of the Buddhist Scriptures, written by certain Buddhist writers, cannot be challenged by scientific thinking in regard to this question. The Buddha did not waste His time on this issue. The reason for His silence was that this issue has no religious value for gaining spiritual wisdom. The explanation of the origin of the universe is not the concern of religion. Such theorizing is not necessary for living a righteous way of life and for shaping our future life. However, if one insists on studying this subject, then one must investigate the sciences, astronomy, geology, biology and anthropology. These sciences can offer more reliable and tested information on this subject than can be supplied by any religion. The purpose of a religion is to cultivate the life here in this world and hereafter until liberation is gained.

In the eyes of the Buddha, the world is nothing but Samsara -- the cycle of repeated births and deaths. To Him, the beginning of the world and the end of the world is within this Samsara. Since elements and energies are relative and inter-dependent, it is meaningless to single out anything as the beginning. Whatever speculation we make regarding the origin of the world, there is no absolute truth in our notion.

'Infinite is the sky, infinite is the number of beings, 
Infinite are the worlds in the vast universe, 
Infinite in wisdom the Buddha teaches these, 
Infinite are the virtues of Him who teaches these.' - (Sri Ramachandra)

One day a man called Malunkyaputta approached the Master and demanded that He explain the origin of the Universe to him. He even threatened to cease to be His follow if the Buddha's answer was not satisfactory. The Buddha calmly retorted that it was of no consequence to Him whether or not Malunkyaputta followed Him, because the Truth did not need anyone's support. Then the Buddha said that He would not go into a discussion of the origin of the Universe. To Him, gaining knowledge about such matters was a waste of time because a man's task was to liberate himself from the present, not the past or the future. To illustrate this, the Enlightened One related the parable of a man who was shot by a poisoned arrow. This foolish man refused to have the arrow removed until he found out all about the person who shot the arrow. By the time his attendants discovered these unnecessary details, the man was dead. Similarly, our immediate task is to attain Nibbana, not to worry about our beginnings.

Unquote

Edited June 27, 2017 by Sudhamma

[Wu Ming Jen]

In difference there is sameness.

 

Lao Tzu's empty Tao is very similar to Shankara's Brahman, which is said to be without any quality (nirguna) and ontologically real. It is significant to note that in the Upanishads Brahman is sometimes described as "non-being." But Shankara explains that it does not mean that Brahman does not really exist, for it actually denotes the "substance" previous to its differentiation into "names and forms" (namarupa).19 The empty Tao, sunyata, and nirguna Brahman are similar in that they are empty of any quality, but they differ in their nature of "existence" or "non-existence." Each claims that human language is inadequate to describe the nature. There is however one important point that makes Lao Tzu's Tao radically different from the others. According to him, the empty Tao is also the dynamic source of the universe, and the myriad things are not illusory. Shankara and Buddhism in general cannot accept the seeming paradox that something can be empty, ultimately real, and at the same time the dynamic source of the universe in time and space.

 

In the West, the philosophical discussion of ultimate reality is focused on the conception of God, which has been formed under the influences of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and Greek philosophy. There are many basic assumptions in the Western conception of God that are not shared in Lao Tzu's thought. Three important ones may be mentioned here. First, God is conceived as a Being or some "substantial" existence. Second, He is believed to be ontologically different from the nature of the universe. Third, He is said to be in some important sense "personal" in essence. On these basic assumptions, there are many philosophical problems that are peculiar to the Western discussion of philosophy of religion.

[voidisyinyang]

prior to the emanation of qi

 

emanates creation which is of the substance of qi

 

spontaneously "give birth to" or emanate the One.

 

Kongming - you have made the above errors.

 

You have no claims that the Dao "emanates" qi as the "one."

 

I gave you very specific math as to why you have erred.

 

You quote an academic - Louis Komjathy - and yet no where does he state that the  Dao is prior to Qi.

 

I have given you very specific quotes that states Yuan Qi is formless - and "original" is the meaning of Yuan.

 

Yuan Qi does not "emanate" from something that you have constructed or reified as an error.

 

Now - the person you quote states this:

 

Quote

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”).

 

So qi=Dao.

 

Now the question is - how does it pervade and transform at the same time?

 

I have given you the answer - the 2, 3, infinity question is noncommutative phase from music theory.

 

You need to study what that means - the pdf I have posted gives the training details.

 

So it is true, as you quote,

 

Quote

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.

 

But for qi to be realized in a human - to be stored and built up so that the human "embodies" qi requires a harmonization process.

 

I can find reference to the claim that the Dao = qi just as the Dao "emanates" harmony.

 

So what that means is to build up qi requires the emanation as harmonization.

 

When you say emanate - you really mean resonate or harmonize and this is done specifically as complementary opposites - the secret of "noncommutative phase" or being in two places simultaneously as formless awareness - this is why Dao=formless awareness=qi energy.

 

As Zhong Gong teaches, based on Einstein, there is always energy - it is never created, nor destroyed, but simply transformed.

 

As Zhong Gong teaches - the "golden key" is thought as "yin matter" that is superluminal - something Einstein could not accept but Louis de Broglie figured out in his Law of Phase Harmony.

 

So Taoism or Daoism is based on the harmony of nature - and this is a specific training process.

 

Qi also means breath - but the original character for Qi is fire under water to create steam (qi).

 

So that is also shen under jing to create qi - and it is done through breath.

 

The water has to be oxygenated - and there is a secret science to this as alchemy.

 

So for example on Earth there have been periods of anoxic mass extinctions of life - due to too much carbon dioxide. We are going through a period like that just from the past boom of industry. So half of global warming gas is from the last 40 years - there is an exponential rise and acceleration in the anoxic mass extinction we are going through right now.

 

The Dao is based on harmony of the Moon with the Sun and Earth - and the Moon controls the water cycles on Earth - because modern civilization is based on Solar worship as "divide and average" math using the solar calendar as geometry - this tries to "contain" infinity as left-brain dominant concepts, as you are trying to do.

 

So Daoism is older - like the "three gunas" of India - not the Brahmin Vedic philosophy, not Buddhism that branched off from the Brahmin Vedic philosophy. Daoism is more like Pythagorean philosophy that is not Platonic philosophy.

 

 

[Kongming]

1 hour ago, Sudhamma said:

One day a man called Malunkyaputta approached the Master and demanded that He explain the origin of the Universe to him. He even threatened to cease to be His follow if the Buddha's answer was not satisfactory. The Buddha calmly retorted that it was of no consequence to Him whether or not Malunkyaputta followed Him, because the Truth did not need anyone's support. Then the Buddha said that He would not go into a discussion of the origin of the Universe. To Him, gaining knowledge about such matters was a waste of time because a man's task was to liberate himself from the present, not the past or the future. To illustrate this, the Enlightened One related the parable of a man who was shot by a poisoned arrow. This foolish man refused to have the arrow removed until he found out all about the person who shot the arrow. By the time his attendants discovered these unnecessary details, the man was dead. Similarly, our immediate task is to attain Nibbana, not to worry about our beginnings.

 

Yes, this essentially what I was referencing in an earlier post about Buddha wishing to avoid speculation and to focus on attaining nirvana. That silence on the issue and wish to avoid conceptual constructions seems later to have given rise to actual denials of a source or origin to the world, denial of anything similar to the Atman, a wish to contrast Buddhism to various Hindu traditions, etc.

 

Obviously this thread is about Daoism and Buddhism's differences and in this area Daoism is different than Buddhism because not only is a cosmogony rooted in an Absolute proposed, this very cosmogony has remained vital to Daoist understandings of the spiritual path, namely via man's personal reversal of the cosmogonic process to attain the Dao, hence the neidan theory of refining jing to qi to shen to Dao, the alchemical vision of the reversal of the cosmogonic process mentioned.

 

1 hour ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

In the West, the philosophical discussion of ultimate reality is focused on the conception of God, which has been formed under the influences of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and Greek philosophy. There are many basic assumptions in the Western conception of God that are not shared in Lao Tzu's thought. Three important ones may be mentioned here. First, God is conceived as a Being or some "substantial" existence. Second, He is believed to be ontologically different from the nature of the universe. Third, He is said to be in some important sense "personal" in essence. On these basic assumptions, there are many philosophical problems that are peculiar to the Western discussion of philosophy of religion.

  
These are indeed the general trends but of course there are many exceptions in Western tradition, whether among Plotinus and the Neoplatonists (many works highlight the near equivalence of much of Neoplatonism to Vedantic conceptions) and those later Christians that derive from that tradition (Dionysius, Eriugena, Eckhart, Nicholas Cusanus, Boehme, etc.), and among various Hermeticists, alchemists, Kabbalists, etc.
 

A problem also has to do with terminology and what words refer to. Non-being in Daoism is a translation of 无 "wu" meaning "without" and being a translation of 有 "you" or "having." The non-being of the Dao in its ultimate aspect doesn't mean it is a nihilistic nothingness or absence but rather that it is metaphysically prior to and higher than the world of being, which is the world that eventually differentiates into  objects and things.

 

As far as I understand it, being in much of pre-Christian Western discourse is that which contrasts with becoming, the world of change. Thus this sense of being is more closely approaching the Daoist conception of non-being. Of course with Christianity and the personalization of the Divine things became more confused, which is why you have figures like Eckhart putting forth the notion of the "Gottheit" or "Godhead" which is empty and prior to the highest being, namely the triune God, much in the same way Brahman is prior to Ishvara.

 

47 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

prior to the emanation of qi

 

emanates creation which is of the substance of qi

 

spontaneously "give birth to" or emanate the One.

 

Kongming - you have made the above errors.

 

You have no claims that the Dao "emanates" qi as the "one."

 

I gave you very specific math as to why you have erred.

 

You quote an academic - Louis Komjathy - and yet no where does he state that the  Dao is prior to Qi.

 

I have given you very specific quotes that states Yuan Qi is formless - and "original" is the meaning of Yuan.

 

Yuan Qi does not "emanate" from something that you have constructed or reified as an error.

 

Now - the person you quote states this:

 

 

So qi=Dao.

 

 

Qi is the Dao, but that's due to the Dao being the All, nothing can possibly not be "part of" or outside the Dao. This is why I kept stating Dao in its Absolute aspect, which could at best be said to be qi in potential prior to manifestation. Of course this emanation or manifestation isn't a temporal process, as though there was once the Dao alone and then out of it physically sprang a mass of qi in creation.

 

That said it most certainly was understood that the empty Dao is what "birthed" the One, equated with primordial qi. From Giradot's "Myth and Meaning in Early Taoism":

 

 

From "Taoism" edited by Zhongjian Mou describing the Tang Dynasty Daoist Cheng Xuanying's thought on the topic:

 

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by Kongming

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

This is why I kept stating Dao in its Absolute aspect, which could at best be said to be qi in potential prior to manifestation. Of course this emanation or manifestation isn't a temporal process, as though there was once the Dao alone and then out of it physically sprang a mass of qi in creation.

 

 

This is wrong - time is eternal change - this is how precognition happens.

 

So as Paul S. Wesson documented - there is a 5th dimension as noncommutative phase - that is "time-like" - it is phase but not space.

 

So you can LISTEN to the Dao but you can not see the Dao - that is why it's formless.

 

So you have reverse time - as reverse quantum relativity - reverse entropy as negentropy.

 

Linear time is from left brain dominance as entropy. It is real but can be reversed.

 

 

[Wu Ming Jen]

Tao means both existence and non exsistance two sides of the coin.

[Kongming]

11 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

This is wrong - time is eternal change - this is how precognition happens.

 

So as Paul S. Wesson documented - there is a 5th dimension as noncommutative phase - that is "time-like" - it is phase but not space.

 

So you can LISTEN to the Dao but you can not see the Dao - that is why it's formless.

 

So you have reverse time - as reverse quantum relativity - reverse entropy as negentropy.

 

Linear time is from left brain dominance as entropy. It is real but can be reversed.

 

 

 

You're talking about something different than me. I am stating that the cosmogony of DDJ 43 isn't entirely a temporal process...the Dao (that which births the One) as timeless origin is eternally present in each succession of moments at the level of the relative world of time and change. Thus in a higher sense there is an identity between the different levels, or in Mahayana terminology "samsara is nirvana." How reality is perceived is based on our own ontological status and wisdom. Thus a regular human experiences the world from the relative perspective, the sage or immortal or "zhenren" from the Absolute perspective, namely unity with the Dao.

 

This isn't a denial of time, but rather stating that time is "contained' in the timeless which is metaphysically prior to it.

 

14 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Tao means both existence and non exsistance two sides of the coin.

 

This indeed is true, but that is because often the term "the Dao" means both the Absolute and its function, or the Dao as origin/source/ and the Dao as the world. When I've been talking about the Dao in its Absolute aspect, I've been taking about the first sense of the term. This ultimate aspect of the Dao is equated with 无 "wu" or non-being in much of Daoist discourse, especially since the time of Wang Bi.

[Wu Ming Jen]

Thats awesome!

 

[voidisyinyang]

Just now, Kongming said:

 

You're talking about something different than me. I am stating that the cosmogony of DDJ 43 isn't entirely a temporal process...the Dao (that which births the One) as timeless origin is eternally present in each succession of moments at the level of the relative world of time and change. Thus in a higher sense there is an identity between the different levels, or in Mahayana terminology "samsara is nirvana." How reality is perceived is based on our own ontological status and wisdom. Thus a regular human experiences the world from the relative perspective, the sage or immortal or "zhenren" from the Absolute perspective, namely unity with the Dao.

 

This isn't a denial of time, but rather stating that time is "contained' in the timeless which is metaphysically prior to it.

 

 

 

 

Exactly we totally disagree and I want to make that clear.

 

I made the same error as you after my "enlightenment experience" - I thought the Emptiness was some static transcendence beyond time - due to my Western bias of monism or nondualism.

 

So I know exactly what error you are making. The qigong master said my mind was still confused.

 

So I kept studying and discovered - no - the Dao is eternal change - there is no "center" of the universe - there is no timeless transcendence.

 

So when the light or shen is "turned around" then time is zero for  light - but during that timeless spirit the Emptiness as Qi then continues creating change as information healing that is reverse spacetime creating new matter as yin matter or yuan jing.

 

This is the "golden key" - of how there is "doing" in "non-movement."

 

Please review the quotes and links I gave you so you can do deeper study to correct your error.

 

thanks.

 

 

[qicat]

32 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

So I kept studying and discovered - no - the Dao is eternal change - there is no "center" of the universe - there is no timeless transcendence.

 

So when the light or shen is "turned around" then time is zero for  light - but during that timeless spirit the Emptiness as Qi then continues creating change as information healing that is reverse spacetime creating new matter as yin matter or yuan jing.

 +1 on this, with little correction "there is no center of the universe" and at the same time "there is a center of the universe". it's complicated, but it's true... 

 

I am not aware of any human words to explain this though... you have to experience it... probably the same thing as "lama comes from afar... one buddha contains all buddhas...yab-yum..."

 

 

[Kongming]

41 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

Exactly we totally disagree and I want to make that clear.

 

I made the same error as you after my "enlightenment experience" - I thought the Emptiness was some static transcendence beyond time - due to my Western bias of monism or nondualism.

 

So I know exactly what error you are making. The qigong master said my mind was still confused.

 

So I kept studying and discovered - no - the Dao is eternal change - there is no "center" of the universe - there is no timeless transcendence.

 

So when the light or shen is "turned around" then time is zero for  light - but during that timeless spirit the Emptiness as Qi then continues creating change as information healing that is reverse spacetime creating new matter as yin matter or yuan jing.

 

This is the "golden key" - of how there is "doing" in "non-movement."

 

Please review the quotes and links I gave you so you can do deeper study to correct your error.

 

thanks.

 

 

 

That which is timeless is beyond change and hence unchanging. Thus:

 

The Daodejing 25:

 

Something mysteriously formed,
Born before heaven and earth.
In the silence and the void,
Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.

 

From the Liezi, wherein the Dao in its Absolute aspect is what is being referred to as "Unborn" and "Unchanging":

 

"There are the born and the Unborn, the changing and the Unchanging. The Unborn can give birth to the born , the Unchanging can change the changing. The born cannot escape birth, the changing cannot escape change; therefore birth and change are the norm. Things for which birth and change are the norm are at all times being born and changing. They simply follow the alternations of the Yin and Yang and the four seasons.

 

The Unborn is by our side yet alone,
The Unchanging goes forth and returns.
Going forth and returning, its successions are endless;
By our side and alone, its Way is boundless.

 

Therefore that which gives birth to things is unborn, that which changes things is unchanging.'"

 

From: http://www.corespirit.com/neidan-traditional-meditative-practice/

 

While Alchemy creates the production of a specific substance of elixir through the chemical process in a laboratory setting, the Inner Alchemy pursues an inner elixir, or an internal “substance of qi” through controlling mind, breath, and body posture in the human body in order to prolong life, thus, man can transcend time and space. As Fabrizio Pregadio comments, the alchemist rises through the hierarchy of the constituents of being by accelerating the rhythms of Nature. Bringing time to its end, or tracing it back to its beginning, is equivalent. In either case time is transcended, and the alchemist gains access to timelessness, or “immortality.” (Pregadio, 2 Doctrines) One becomes what Zhuangzi calls a zhenren 真人 or True Man.

 

The process of emanation is based on Laozi’s cosmogony: “Tao gives birth to one. One gives birth to two. Two gives birth to three. Three gives birth to ten thousand things.” In alchemical terms, Tao is xu 虛, or the void, the void emanates shen 神, or spirit, the spirit emanates qi, the qi emanates jing 精, or essence, the essence emanates xing 形, or body, the body emanates ren 人, or human. In order to gain longevity, or to access to timelessness, inner alchemist has to rise through the hierarchy of the constituents of being by reversing the rhythms of Nature, tracking time to its beginning. Thus, alchemical process aims at bringing three to two, two to one, and one to void. When one returns to the void of Tao, the ultimate enlightenment is attained.

 

Daoist Dong Yang mentioning timeless immortality:

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

7 minutes ago, Kongming said:

 

That which is timeless is beyond change and hence unchanging. Thus:

 

The Daodejing 25:

 

Something mysteriously formed,
Born before heaven and earth.
In the silence and the void,
Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.

 

From the Liezi, wherein the Dao in its Absolute aspect is what is being referred to as "Unborn" and "Unchanging":

 

"There are the born and the Unborn, the changing and the Unchanging. The Unborn can give birth to the born , the Unchanging can change the changing. The born cannot escape birth, the changing cannot escape change; therefore birth and change are the norm. Things for which birth and change are the norm are at all times being born and changing. They simply follow the alternations of the Yin and Yang and the four seasons.

 

The Unborn is by our side yet alone,
The Unchanging goes forth and returns.
Going forth and returning, its successions are endless;
By our side and alone, its Way is boundless.

 

Therefore that which gives birth to things is unborn, that which changes things is unchanging.'"

 

From: http://www.corespirit.com/neidan-traditional-meditative-practice/

 

While Alchemy creates the production of a specific substance of elixir through the chemical process in a laboratory setting, the Inner Alchemy pursues an inner elixir, or an internal “substance of qi” through controlling mind, breath, and body posture in the human body in order to prolong life, thus, man can transcend time and space. As Fabrizio Pregadio comments, the alchemist rises through the hierarchy of the constituents of being by accelerating the rhythms of Nature. Bringing time to its end, or tracing it back to its beginning, is equivalent. In either case time is transcended, and the alchemist gains access to timelessness, or “immortality.” (Pregadio, 2 Doctrines) One becomes what Zhuangzi calls a zhenren 真人 or True Man.

 

The process of emanation is based on Laozi’s cosmogony: “Tao gives birth to one. One gives birth to two. Two gives birth to three. Three gives birth to ten thousand things.” In alchemical terms, Tao is xu 虛, or the void, the void emanates shen 神, or spirit, the spirit emanates qi, the qi emanates jing 精, or essence, the essence emanates xing 形, or body, the body emanates ren 人, or human. In order to gain longevity, or to access to timelessness, inner alchemist has to rise through the hierarchy of the constituents of being by reversing the rhythms of Nature, tracking time to its beginning. Thus, alchemical process aims at bringing three to two, two to one, and one to void. When one returns to the void of Tao, the ultimate enlightenment is attained.

 

Daoist Dong Yang mentioning timeless immortality:

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

So you quote one phrase and try to ignore the following phrase.

 

Quote

Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.

 

So I watched the video. I totally agree with the video.

 

He says there is "no gap in time."

 

Can you quote him saying there is "timeless immortality"?

 

I don't think so.

 

At one time in the vid does he say that?

 

As I explained - when light is turned around them time is zero but during that experience the spiritual ego as light merges with the Emptiness as qi energy - which is reverse spacetime as energy healing.

 

So I am actually referring to the qigong master who befriended me - he explains this process.

 

There are others as well and I have then quoted the texts that corroborate this experience - along with the science.

 

So you quote an alchemy training - the qi goes to shen and the shen goes to Emptiness.

 

But this is simplistic - we know that the shen, qi, and jing also unify - it is a 3 in 1 unity.

 

So as I have stated - this "yin matter" is superluminal - that creates yuan jing from antimatter as virtual particles.

 

Light does not experience time nor space - therefore it is eternal but it is also in eternal motion.

 

Why? Because of the inherent noncommutative phase as the 5th dimension, causing light to create new matter as reverse spacetime - virtual matter.

 

Yan Xin calls it the "virtual information field" that he does healing with.

 

So since light has no rest mass then it easily can "capture" virtual photons and reverse them back into our 4D spacetime as new matter. This has been done in experiments - photons can be captured and then they are slowed down in frequency to create matter.

 

this is called 720 degree spin in quantum physics. So "zero" does not really exist - it is based on symmetric number as "negative infinity" and aristotle was against zero. Zero is used to create irrational magnitude are "alogon."

 

So trying to convert the teaching to Western math using zero is when this Taoist master causes confusion.

 

Gurdjieff made the same confusion when he still used "divide and average" harmonics like 5/4 and 8/5, etc. so people didn't realize his true teaching of the Law of Three - from Pythagorean harmonics of the Octave/Perfect Fifth/Perfect Fourth as noncommutative phase.

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by voidisyinyang

[voidisyinyang]

16 minutes ago, qicat said:

 +1 on this, with little correction "there is no center of the universe" and at the same time "there is a center of the universe". it's complicated, but it's true... 

 

I am not aware of any human words to explain this though... you have to experience it... probably the same thing as "lama comes from afar... one buddha contains all buddhas...yab-yum..."

 

 

there is a joke about this - that I should remember.

 

I posted the "no center" line as a direct quote from http://springforestqigong.com

 

But of course also as a slam against NeoPlatonic philosophy from John Scotus Erigena of the 9th Century stating how a circle with no circumference is infinity with no center - or something like that.

 

This is what is called logarithmic singularity in classical physics - for example a rainbow is a logarithmic singularity.

 

So because rain drops are spheres then you get a logarithmic singularity.

 

but that is still classical physics.

 

So - the joke is - and I still have not quite remembered it - but it is something to the effect of ...

 

He is like a ruler who makes a point without power, he has no magnitude.

 

That is the gist of the joke.

 

Quote

A scalar is just a real number, a directionless magnitude in vector space.

 

So John Scotus Erigena, as a NeoPlatonist was against the Lunar psychic energy.

[Marblehead]

Got lost for words, did you?

 

Nope.  My error.  I spoke too soon.

 

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by Marblehead

[Michael Sternbach]

2 hours ago, Sudhamma said:

Let me post an extract from Chapter 16, Realms of Existence from the book "What Buddhists Believe" by Ven. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera. This is typical position of Theravadins in regards to: God or Gods, and in particular Creator God/Gods, the Heavenly Realms within the realms of existence notwithstanding.

Quote:

The speculative explanations of the origin of the universe that are presented by various religions are not acceptable to the modern scientists and intellectuals. Even the commentaries of the Buddhist Scriptures, written by certain Buddhist writers, cannot be challenged by scientific thinking in regard to this question. The Buddha did not waste His time on this issue. The reason for His silence was that this issue has no religious value for gaining spiritual wisdom. The explanation of the origin of the universe is not the concern of religion. Such theorizing is not necessary for living a righteous way of life and for shaping our future life. However, if one insists on studying this subject, then one must investigate the sciences, astronomy, geology, biology and anthropology. These sciences can offer more reliable and tested information on this subject than can be supplied by any religion. The purpose of a religion is to cultivate the life here in this world and hereafter until liberation is gained.

In the eyes of the Buddha, the world is nothing but Samsara -- the cycle of repeated births and deaths. To Him, the beginning of the world and the end of the world is within this Samsara. Since elements and energies are relative and inter-dependent, it is meaningless to single out anything as the beginning. Whatever speculation we make regarding the origin of the world, there is no absolute truth in our notion.

'Infinite is the sky, infinite is the number of beings, 
Infinite are the worlds in the vast universe, 
Infinite in wisdom the Buddha teaches these, 
Infinite are the virtues of Him who teaches these.' - (Sri Ramachandra)

One day a man called Malunkyaputta approached the Master and demanded that He explain the origin of the Universe to him. He even threatened to cease to be His follow if the Buddha's answer was not satisfactory. The Buddha calmly retorted that it was of no consequence to Him whether or not Malunkyaputta followed Him, because the Truth did not need anyone's support. Then the Buddha said that He would not go into a discussion of the origin of the Universe. To Him, gaining knowledge about such matters was a waste of time because a man's task was to liberate himself from the present, not the past or the future. To illustrate this, the Enlightened One related the parable of a man who was shot by a poisoned arrow. This foolish man refused to have the arrow removed until he found out all about the person who shot the arrow. By the time his attendants discovered these unnecessary details, the man was dead. Similarly, our immediate task is to attain Nibbana, not to worry about our beginnings.

Unquote

 

While this illustrates well the position taken by many Buddhists, I strongly disagree with this view. Our outlook on the universe (the macrocosmos) does carry implications for our microcosmic existence in it. Many people interested in cosmology feel that way and actually are motivated by a quest that is metaphysical in nature.

 

Case in point, I have repeatedly explained the impressive parallels between the revised Big Bang theory called Conformal Cyclic Cosmology on the one hand, and Hinduist and Kabbalistic conceptions on the other, both on this forum and, prior to that, on a congress held by the founder of this theory Roger Penrose and his supporting colleagues. Funnily enough, their reply to me was pretty much the same like Buddha's reply to Malunkyaputta in the parable above, just from the other side of the fence - namely that such religious considerations were outside the scope of science.

 

While this was honest enough, I did not find this position satisfactory. Scientific and religious/metaphysical/philosophical perspectives on the development of the universe can and should meet, eventually. Nothing less will be required in order to heal the split in modern human consciousness, And prior to that, there will be no true Theory of Everything possible.

 

 

[Aletheia]

Levi-Strauss was a structuralist! He believed in fundamental polar oppositions, most particularly culture and nature! Structuralism steps down from believing in universal essences whose substance is transcendently atemporal, but never-the-less still holds traces of logocentric thinking i.e. binary oppositions. You need to read Derrida's Structure, Sign, and Play.

 

Logocentric thinking first arises with Plato and Aristotle along with deductive logic, the past/present/future time continuum and predicates amongst other things. But the point here is the arrow of time and entropy can not be separated -- Reason puts the seed of nihilism at the core of Western thinking. Heidegger says before the birth of logic/propositional truths/Western metaphysics the logos was a cosmic gathering principle i.e. negentropic!

 

Anyway, I found someone talking about music and quantum reality in similar terms to Drew at around 1 hour in this podcast -

 

http://fivebodied.com/archives/audio/catalog/Bob_Audio/McLuhanOnMaui/2011-09-26--McLuhanOnMaui-25.mp3

 

accept they are talking about AI becoming consciously aware of itself and going through yogic enlightenment!

 

Most people are still thinking by the literal book and believe sometime in the near future we'll all be able to upload consciousness to computer networks and live forever! What they don't understand is it already happened when the world went post-apocalyptic during Baudrillard's pure simulation phase and in actual fact there really are no humans left on the planet right now.

 

 

Edited June 27, 2017 by Aletheia

[voidisyinyang]

8 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

While this illustrates well the position taken by many Buddhists, I strongly disagree with this view. Our outlook on the universe (the macrocosmos) does carry implications for our microcosmic existence in it. Many people interested in cosmology feel that way and actually are motivated by a quest that is metaphysical in nature.

 

Case in point, I have repeatedly explained the impressive parallels between the revised Big Bang theory called Conformal Cyclic Cosmology on the one hand, and Hinduist and Kabbalistic conceptions on the other, both on this forum and, prior to that, on a congress held by the founder of this theory Roger Penrose and his supporting colleagues. Funnily enough, their reply to me was pretty much the same like Buddha's reply to Malunkyaputta in the parable above, just from the other side of the fence - namely that such religious considerations were outside the scope of science.

 

While this was honest enough, I did not find this position satisfactory. Scientific and religious/metaphysical/philosophical perspectives on the development of the universe can and should meet, eventually. Nothing less will be required in order to heal the split in modern human consciousness, And prior to that, there will be no true Theory of Everything possible.

 

 

 

Roger Penrose says that the greatest mystery in science is that time is asymmetric and to take this into account a whole new type of quantum physics would have to be created.

 

So what he is referring to is the fact that quantum and relativity can not be unified.

 

But the big problem - is that the entropy that Penrose is referring to is an artifact of classical math - symmetric mathematics.

 

So the real issue in terms of cosmology is actually that time is speeding up on Earth as space is being destroyed and contained by classical physics based on symmetric math.

 

So physicists do not talk about ecology nor see the connection between the observed entropy of the Universe with the destruction of negentropy or ecology on Earth.

 

Penrose has figured this out with his work with Stuart Hameroff. I have corresponded with Hameroff.

[Kongming]

32 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

 

So you quote one phrase and try to ignore the following phrase.

 

I don't try to ignore that bit or I would have left it out of the quotation altogether. The "ever present and in motion" bit is about Dao in activity, the Dao as the world process, whereas the "standing alone and unchanging" bit is about the Dao in its Absolute aspect, as the source and ground of all reality, which is what I've been discussing. Changes themselves are the result of the interaction of yin and yang, and yet the polarization into yin and yang is "the Two" of the cosmogony we've been referencing. In other words the Dao as Absolute is prior to change.

 

Did you ignore the Liezi which is even more straightforward?

 

 

32 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

So I watched the video. I totally agree with the video.

 

He says there is "no gap in time."

 

Can you quote him saying there is "timeless immortality"?

 

 

 

He's saying that there is no difference between "no beginning and no ending" because there is no time gap, namely no temporal process at all, no change. He is referencing the state of the 仙 "xian",  to be immortal, namely to attain eternity which is not endless change alone but that which is unchanging and timeless.

 

Interestingly another connotation and translation of 仙 "xian" is "transcendent"....what have they transcended exactly that makes them immortal? Time and change, which is why they are like the Dao in its Absolute aspect, namely unborn and unchanging. Yet similarly to the Dao, the immortal can also "enter" and participate in temporality while having his inner state remain rooted in transcendent timelessness. This is called bringing transcendence into immanence, or immanent transcendence.

[voidisyinyang]

1 hour ago, Kongming said:

 

I don't try to ignore that bit or I would have left it out of the quotation altogether. The "ever present and in motion" bit is about Dao in activity, the Dao as the world process, whereas the "standing alone and unchanging" bit is about the Dao in its Absolute aspect, as the source and ground of all reality, which is what I've been discussing. Changes themselves are the result of the interaction of yin and yang, and yet the polarization into yin and yang is "the Two" of the cosmogony we've been referencing. In other words the Dao as Absolute is prior to change.

 

Did you ignore the Liezi which is even more straightforward?

 

 

 

He's saying that there is no difference between "no beginning and no ending" because there is no time gap, namely no temporal process at all, no change. He is referencing the state of the 仙 "xian",  to be immortal, namely to attain eternity which is not endless change alone but that which is unchanging and timeless.

 

Interestingly another connotation and translation of 仙 "xian" is "transcendent"....what have they transcended exactly that makes them immortal? Time and change, which is why they are like the Dao in its Absolute aspect, namely unborn and unchanging. Yet similarly to the Dao, the immortal can also "enter" and participate in temporality while having his inner state remain rooted in transcendent timelessness. This is called bringing transcendence into immanence, or immanent transcendence.

Quote

The "ever present and in motion" bit is about Dao in activity, the Dao as the world process, whereas the "standing alone and unchanging" bit is about the Dao in its Absolute aspect, as the source and ground of all reality, which is what I've been discussing.

 

What doesn't change is the process of change.

 

So it's another order of logical type.

 

Are you getting it yet?

 

Quote

namely no temporal process at all, no change.

 

No he doesn't say that! Show me where he says that.

 

Noncommutative phase is time-like - and occurs when time is zero as quantum entanglement.

 

So light is a point at zero time (classical symmetric math) but at the same time (simultaneously) light is a wave as reverse time (noncommutative phase as infinite complementary opposites).

 

Why? Because light has no rest mass but light does have momentum due to quantum relativity, so light has mass due to the inherent noncommutative phase as the foundation of reality.

 

So the Taoists figured this out in experience. Science has also figured it out but science can not unify the math - because science has a classical math foundation.

 

Empirically science knows that quantum physics is the foundation of reality - but quantum technology is still based on symmetric math. So you have noncommutative phase as "time-frequency uncertainty" or "Fourier uncertainty" - and so if you can bypass Fourier Uncertainty - as was done in the experiment I referred to - then light can actually harness and "emanate" the virtual photons from reverse spacetime. So it's been proven that virtual photons are real and can be turned into photons - but the virtual photons are real energy.

 

So you want to separate the absolute from the change.

 

I pointed out - they are in the same sentence. The absolute is change as "noncommutative phase" - so the change is the same process as change that is infinite.

 

How is that possible? I have given many quotes - that the Yuan Qi is formless and original - and that the Yuan Qi is the One Vitality when yin and yang are "undivided" and "united" and "formless" and that is the secret of the Tai Chi "at rest."

 

I have pointed out that the symbol for the Wu Chi was not created until the Song Dynasty. So it is easy to see how Wu Chi can then be changed to Zero and then you get this Western projection of a static transcendent absolute that is somehow different from change.

 

What that means is the shen is put under the jing as reverse spacetime that creates the yuan qi. The Emptiness is time, the Shen is frequency, the Qi is momentum (noncommutative phase), and the Jing is wavelength as mass.

 

It is a three in one unity.

 

So there is no transcendent "escape" - the immortal is a Yang Shen but as the book Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality details - the Yang Shen still "vaporizes" back into Yuan Qi. The Yang Shen is only created by converting all the yin qi into yuan qi so that the yin shen converts to yang shen. You only build up the shen by building up the qi, but first the jing has to be built up - so it is a 3 in 1 process that is eternal motion.

 

So the Yuan Qi decides if and when the Yang Shen will manifest next and where.

 

The more an immortal builds up energy, the more impersonal they become into the Yuan Qi.

 

For example if you have spirit travel without enough Qi that surrounds the light - this causes dizziness and confusion. I compare this to the difference between special relativity and general relativity. So if you have enough qi it creates a spacetime bubble that surrounds the light and then the light is turned around to zero time - as the point. This is called the "point of origination" in Ch'an Buddhism. But the qi energy then does the healing on its own - so the Emptiness does the healing, not the "immortal."  So if you have enough qi energy then you can maintain a constant velocity of spacetime. And so this is why the lower tan tien is the "cavity of spirit-vitality" because the qi has to built up enough to surround the shen in the lower tan tien. Otherwise you get a loss of spacetime as a vortex spinning around you - I have experienced this problem. It is detailed in chapter 11 of the book Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality. So the healing is literally a "virtual information field" as master Yan Xin calls it - it is literally a reverse spacetime field. So the qigong master who befriended me states how he literally goes back in time and heals someone - at the point of origination - from before their physical blockage actually occurred. And also he then experiences the past as a holographic 4D field - since for example a house will store the strong emotional blockages - the strong qi energy with the shen - it is stored as a virtual black hole. So light goes into a black hole and seems to disappear but because reality is quantum the energy as information is stored as virtual energy and virtual mass with reverse spacetime - and this process continues infinitely as the 5th dimension of reality or noncommutative phase - it is the unified Tai Chi as Yuan Qi.

 

The difference between the spirit as spiritual ego is when the light is turned around - there is zero time at that moment but there is also reverse time - at the same time - as noncommutative phase - as virtual energy.

 

Does it make sense yet? It is turning a black hole into a white hole.

 

That is the difference between psychic energy that is yin qi and yin shen - and spiritual healing that is yuan qi and yuan shen.

 

That is the difference between shakti energy which is from the formless awareness versus Siddhis based on the spiritual ego.

 

 

 

 

[Kongming]

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

What doesn't change is the process of change.

 

So it's another order of logical type.

 

Are you getting it yet?

 

You're ignoring where the Liezi states:

 

The Unborn can give birth to the born, the Unchanging can change the changing.
Therefore that which gives birth to things is unborn, that which changes things is unchanging.

 

That which is born and changing is the world, which is another facet (or rather the function or power of) of the Dao  but not its Absolute aspect, whereas the latter is that which is unborn and unchanging. A rough metaphor would be the sun and sunlight...they are one, but the sun in and of itself (the Dao as Absolute) is what emits the light (the Dao as being, change, the world, etc.)

 

Again change itself is the result of the interaction of yin and yang. Yin and yang's polarization is "the Two" and their interaction is "the Three." The Dao precedes the One, let alone the Two or Three, and thus precedes change.
 

 

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

No he doesn't say that! Show me where he says that.

 

First he refers to it as another dimension, referencing transcendence. Then he speaks of "crossing the barrier" by attaining that which has "no beginning and no ending", a reference to eternity. He then states that there is no point in that "other dimension" which can differentiate "no beginning" and "no ending" due to the fact that there is "no time gap and no space gap", referencing the timeless and spaceless qualities of transcendence.
 

 

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

So it is easy to see how Wu Chi can then be changed to Zero and then you get this Western projection of a static transcendent absolute that is somehow different from change.

 

So there is no transcendent "escape" - the immortal is a Yang Shen but as the book Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality details - the Yang Shen still "vaporizes" back into Yuan Qi.

 

Did you miss the part where I stated that the unchanging Absolute contains the world of change and thus is not separate from it? That how we perceive reality, whether we are mere men or immortals, is based on our ontological state and wisdom, with the relative state being that of mortals and the Absolute state that of immortals? This is what is being discussed in what I quoted earlier:

 

As Fabrizio Pregadio comments, the alchemist rises through the hierarchy of the constituents of being by accelerating the rhythms of Nature. Bringing time to its end, or tracing it back to its beginning, is equivalent. In either case time is transcended, and the alchemist gains access to timelessness, or “immortality.” (Pregadio, 2 Doctrines) One becomes what Zhuangzi calls a zhenren 真人 or True Man.

Also did you miss where I stated the immortal brings transcendence within immanence, being within the temporal world while having his inner nature being rooted in timelessness? That isn't an escape to some other world. Here's Julius Evola discussing this point from his "Path of the Cinnabar":

 

"It is only in my later commentary on the text that I clearly emphasized how Taoism is defined by a kind of 'immanent transcendence': by the direct presence of non-being (in its positive sense of supra-ontological essentiality) within being, of the infinitely remote (the 'Sky') in what is close, and of what is beyond nature within nature. Only then did I clearly point out that Taoism is equally remote from both pantheistic immanence and transcendence, as it is founded on the direct sort of experience which underlies the specific existential structure of primeval humanity."

 

Similarly from Hans-Georg Moeller's "Daoism Explained" (brackets mine):

 

The timeless Daoist sage does not take anything away from the authenticity of the temporal. Unlike [most] Western conceptions of eternity, which tend to devaluate all that is merely temporal, the Daoist concept of timelessness affirms the realm of temporality and of passing time. Just as the sage affirms both life and death, the sage also affirms the course of time. While he is without presence, without beginning and end, he still always "goes in accord with the course of things." He is the nonpresence that always accompanies the sequence of presence. While the Daoist sage is timeless within time, he is well aware of change. 

 

Eva Wong from her "Harmonizing Yin and Yang":

 

Taoist alchemy is also concerned with spiritual transformation. This transformation involves changing the body and mind from a mundane state to one that mirrors the timeless and permanent reality of the Tao.