Is being a Daoist for the well off

[Rara]

On 28/04/2018 at 4:55 PM, Walker said:

 

Having affinity for Daoism has nothing to do with one's financial situation. I know some Daoists who came from what we could probably call grinding poverty, deep in very poor parts of China's countryside where people to this day still make do on a few hundreds dollars a year. I also know practitioners who come from backgrounds that, by comparison, qualify for the word "rich." I can't say I know any mega rich Daoists (USD millionaires and up), but I don't see why there couldn't be any.

 

"Living life in a simple way" and "living in hardship all one's life" are not contradictory things; nor are "living life in a simple way" and "living in material comfort all one's life." Simplicity is by and large a mental state, which, maintained, affects jing, qi, and shen. The question is how poverty or wealth affect a practitioner's mind. I think...

-If a person  is poor to the degree of being unable to stave off hunger and the elements, and faces an inability to mix in with society (i.e., no clean clothes, no place to shower, no transportation, way to find work or an education, etc), then it is probably unlikely that this person will be able to quiet his or her mind enough to practice well, unless this is a very rare person who has chosen a renunciate path, a Sun Bu'er, Ma Danyang, or Qiu Chuji type. 

-A person who is poor in comparison to his or her society but has no problems with nutrition, housing, and satisfying the human need for social contact could be in an excellent position for cultivating the Dao.

-Ditto for a middle class person or a rich person. But if the mind of the middle class or rich person cannot find rest, then again, it will always be difficult to practice. 

 

No matter what your background, entering into Daoism in some way or another will not sever your ties with your past, even if you become a monk or a nun in China. I know monks and nuns whose families are poorer than they are who feel pressure to make money in this or that way or help their family members get menial jobs or at least meals and bedrooms at their temples or what have you. Whether or not this sort of thing affects one's cultivation again comes down to one's mentality; certainly family and societal issues can be challenging for even richly experienced practitioners. I also know monks (I can't think of any nuns in this category off the top of my head, but I'm sure they're out there) who, upon realizing that talismans or fortune telling can be very lucrative, get carried away by the paper chase. Again, their troubles boil down to mentality. Regularly reading and reflecting upon the classics with a sincere mind helps tremendously in keeping one grounded.

 

As for studying, well, there are teachers out there who charge an arm and a leg for their techniques. There are teachers out there who charge very low tuition fees, are by donation only, or who teach for free. There are even teachers out there who, identifying needy and sincere students, give money to those students to help them on their paths. I have encountered more than one teacher in each category.

 

Ultimately it could be argued that most of the "real teachings" are already out there for free, but there aren't many people who can see them for what they are, put them into proper use, and take the path to fruition without the help of teachers. It certainly helps not to be indigent while you are on the path of a seeker and then an early- to mid-stage practitioner. But it also helps to view money with some detachment.

 

This will sound New Agey, but I learned it from a Daoist twelve years ago and experience has borne out truth in these words: money is just another form of energy. So, let some flow away, more will flow towards you. An empty vessel is easily refilled, eh? 

 

But if you're starving or can't afford heating in the winter, then a more yang approach may be necessary. 

 

Fair about the monks and nuns making money for those reasons. I'm not convinced about what you say about those that can afford good housing and nutrition etc though. That would be I, technically middle class...but my access to "real" Daoism requires me to jump on a plane and spend thousands of pounds at a school I would think.

 

It's not like we have Daoism where I live - temples etc...

[silent thunder]

58 minutes ago, Rara said:

 

Where did you train, if you don't mind me asking?

 

But this is what I meant. As far as I'm aware, to get the "real stuff", you gotta find it and pay some good dollar. The origins of these techniques though were surely practiced by the poor though, no?

My first exposure to Qi Gong was training with Larry Tan in NYC who taught a blend of Jeet Kun Do as learned from Bruce first hand and Shao Lin Five Animal.

 

I have since had the incredible good fortune to study with two lineage holders from Wu Dang.

 

Zhou Ting Jue and Wang Li Ping.  Both 18th generation in their respective traditions and both systems blend so well and support each other.

 

I am so blessed.

[liminal_luke]

This isn`t my thread, but I`d like to throw out an alternative and more personal question for contemplation.  Rather than asking "is being a Daoist for the well-off,"  how about asking - is being a Daoist for me?  Is it for someone in my economic situation?  If you want to be a Daoist, I`ll bet the answer is Yes.

 

There`s plenty of Taoist stuff I`d do more of if money was a non-issue  --- or at least that`s the story I`m telling myself.  I`d like to travel to China every year to do retreats with Wang LiPing.  I`d like to go to spendy healer training workshops with Sifu Jenny Lamb.  And while I`m at it, why not fly to the east coast and spend a long weekend or two learning Stillness-Movement?  These would all be very valuable experiences I`m sure and they all cost money.  And yet I don`t feel like finances are the limiting factor in my spiritual development.  Not at all.  The limiting factor in my spiritual development is me.  I am as spiritually developed at the moment as I`m willing to be, no more and no less.

[Lost in Translation]

I really don't see any relationship between being a Taoist and financial comfort. Taoism is not about wealth or poverty, at least not in a material sense. One can be rich and a Taoist. One can be poor and a Taoist. One can live surrounded by many people in a bustling community and be a Taoist. One can live as a hermit, sequestered in the mountains and be a Taoist.

 

The defining character of a Taoist is relation to Tao - nothing more, and nothing less. Beyond that are all personal preferences.

[wandelaar]

@ Lost in Translation

 

I haven't followed this topic until now so it might have been said before, but I see a relation between being a Taoist and ones economic situation. First: an ideal Taoist should be able to live in almost any circumstances. But most of us are not ideal Taoists, so lets see what we have for non-ideal Taoists (n-Taoists for short).

 

A n-Taoist living in luxury might get used to having everything as he wishes, and consequently get in trouble in case he loses his wealth. And in the measure that he realizes what might happen his peace of mind will get disturbed even if it doesn't happen. So that might be a problem for a rich n-Taoist.

 

The situation of a hermit n-Taoist is quite different. He has simplified his life so that living naturally becomes a real-life possibility. So in a sense I guess it's easier for a hermit n-Taoist to life as a Taoist then for a rich n-Taoist.

 

Perhaps the best thing one could do (at least from the perspective of Lao tse) is avoiding the extremes and living in ordinary circumstances. That is - when one has the choice.

 

[KuroShiro]

4 hours ago, Rara said:

As far as I'm aware, to get the "real stuff", you gotta find it and pay some good dollar. The origins of these techniques though were surely practiced by the poor though, no?

 

Very interesting question, I've read that the most high level healing "stuff" was for the Emperor but I've also read/know that the poor practiced it.

It also seems that in ancient times, very much like today, you had to be "lucky" to come across such knowledge, one way or the other.

[Lost in Translation]

15 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

A n-Taoist living in luxury might get used to having everything as he wishes, and consequently get in trouble in case he loses his wealth. And in the measure that he realizes what might happen his peace of mind will get disturbed even if it doesn't happen. So that might be a problem for a rich n-Taoist.

 

The situation of a hermit n-Taoist is quite different. He has simplified his life so that living naturally becomes a real-life possibility. So in a sense I guess it's easier for a hermit n-Taoist to life as a Taoist then for a rich n-Taoist.

 

I disagree. I am of the belief that one should learn to be a Taoist in their own back yard, so to speak. If one's ability to maintain a "Taoist-y" life is dependent upon the external environment then one is a poor Taoist. If a hermit is a "good" Taoist then he can move to the city and still be good. The opposite is true.

[wandelaar]

2 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

I disagree. I am of the belief that one should learn to be a Taoist in their own back yard, so to speak. If one's ability to maintain a "Taoist-y" life is dependent upon the external environment then one is a poor Taoist. If a hermit is a "good" Taoist then he can move to the city and still be good. The opposite is true.

 

You are free to belief so, but Chuang tse didn't. Every creature (and that includes human beings) has his own possibilities and impossibilities, and it is only sensible to arrange your life's circumstances in such a way that you may flourish. That may not always be possible, but there is nothing non-Taoist in recognizing your own limitations as an individual human being, and trying to be a Taoist within the range of possibilities.

 

[KuroShiro]

2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

I really don't see any relationship between being a Taoist and financial comfort. Taoism is not about wealth or poverty, at least not in a material sense. One can be rich and a Taoist. One can be poor and a Taoist. One can live surrounded by many people in a bustling community and be a Taoist. One can live as a hermit, sequestered in the mountains and be a Taoist.

 

The defining character of a Taoist is relation to Tao - nothing more, and nothing less. Beyond that are all personal preferences.

 

54 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ Lost in Translation

 

I haven't followed this topic until now so it might have been said before, but I see a relation between being a Taoist and ones economic situation. First: an ideal Taoist should be able to live in almost any circumstances. But most of us are not ideal Taoists, so lets see what we have for non-ideal Taoists (n-Taoists for short).

 

A n-Taoist living in luxury might get used to having everything as he wishes, and consequently get in trouble in case he loses his wealth. And in the measure that he realizes what might happen his peace of mind will get disturbed even if it doesn't happen. So that might be a problem for a rich n-Taoist.

 

The situation of a hermit n-Taoist is quite different. He has simplified his life so that living naturally becomes a real-life possibility. So in a sense I guess it's easier for a hermit n-Taoist to life as a Taoist then for a rich n-Taoist.

 

Perhaps the best thing one could do (at least from the perspective of Lao tse) is avoiding the extremes and living in ordinary circumstances. That is - when one has the choice.

 

 

33 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

I disagree. I am of the belief that one should learn to be a Taoist in their own back yard, so to speak. If one's ability to maintain a "Taoist-y" life is dependent upon the external environment then one is a poor Taoist. If a hermit is a "good" Taoist then he can move to the city and still be good. The opposite is true.

 

4 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

You are free to belief so, but Chuang tse didn't. Every creature (and that includes human beings) has his own possibilities and impossibilities, and it is only sensible to arrange your life's circumstances in such a way that you may flourish. That may not always be possible, but there is nothing non-Taoist in recognizing your own limitations as an individual human being, and trying to be a Taoist within the range of possibilities.

 

 

 

- Jingxiu (Quanzhen): "What is to you the most important if one wants to practice the Tao?"

 

- Master Meng (Quanzhen - White Cloud Temple, Beijing):

"The most important is to know if you are able to completely withdraw yourself from the world. This is the most important. Someone who is very attached to worldly things can't follow the Way of Tao. You have to know how to let go of the material."

[Lost in Translation]

1 hour ago, KuroShiro said:

 

 

 

 

 

- Jingxiu (Quanzhen): "What is to you the most important if one wants to practice the Tao?"

 

- Master Meng (Quanzhen - White Cloud Temple, Beijing):

"The most important is to know if you are able to completely withdraw yourself from the world. This is the most important. Someone who is very attached to worldly things can't follow the Way of Tao. You have to know how to let go of the material."

 

What does it mean to completely withdraw yourself from the world? What does it mean to not be very attached to worldly things?

[Rocky Lionmouth]

7 hours ago, KuroShiro said:

 

Very interesting question, I've read that the most high level healing "stuff" was for the Emperor but I've also read/know that the poor practiced it.

It also seems that in ancient times, very much like today, you had to be "lucky" to come across such knowledge, one way or the other.

 

This is what i have heard also, from a source i trust deeply. In his perspective the only people who’d really have a chance to be able to study, develop and transmit qi gong, nei gong etc would be people who had time on their hands, ate well, slept well and werent affected too negatively by illness or injury.

”How can you take care of energy development if you’re spending more energy than gained since you cannot afford to take care of your body?” was his reasoning.

That’s of course a matter of geography, economy, skill and knowledge.

I think this derivable from having enough resources and a mind honed or talented enough to cultivate. 

 

I think Daoism is for those who are well off in terms of cultural capital first and foremost, and lucky enough to have met someone willing to teach them. A rich life can mean many things, so a rich person might no be wealthy but they have life skills and mindset to create a mounting momentum with the resources at hand.

[9th]

[Rara]

12 hours ago, silent thunder said:

 

I have since had the incredible good fortune to study with two lineage holders from Wu Dang.

 

Zhou Ting Jue and Wang Li Ping.  Both 18th generation in their respective traditions and both systems blend so well and support each other.

 

Thanks Silent Thunder. Do these two still reside in Wudang?

[Rara]

12 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

This isn`t my thread, but I`d like to throw out an alternative and more personal question for contemplation.  Rather than asking "is being a Daoist for the well-off,"  how about asking - is being a Daoist for me?  Is it for someone in my economic situation?  If you want to be a Daoist, I`ll bet the answer is Yes.

 

There`s plenty of Taoist stuff I`d do more of if money was a non-issue  --- or at least that`s the story I`m telling myself.  I`d like to travel to China every year to do retreats with Wang LiPing.  I`d like to go to spendy healer training workshops with Sifu Jenny Lamb.  And while I`m at it, why not fly to the east coast and spend a long weekend or two learning Stillness-Movement?  These would all be very valuable experiences I`m sure and they all cost money.  And yet I don`t feel like finances are the limiting factor in my spiritual development.  Not at all.  The limiting factor in my spiritual development is me.  I am as spiritually developed at the moment as I`m willing to be, no more and no less.

 

Now this is true. I talk about wanting to do similar things - but I have practical reasons not to right now. That doesn't stop me from getting as much practice in as I know/can do for the time being.

[9th]

Why not just "be yourself"?

 

Is being a "taoist" more important?

 

 

[Rara]

1 hour ago, Rocky Lionmouth said:

 

This is what i have heard also, from a source i trust deeply. In his perspective the only people who’d really have a chance to be able to study, develop and transmit qi gong, nei gong etc would be people who had time on their hands, ate well, slept well and werent affected too negatively by illness or injury.

 

 

Yes, time is a big factor, as well as money. I quit a job a few weeks ago because it took me away from home too much, and often when I was at home, I was bringing the work back with me. It seriously interfered with my cultivation.

 

My colleague was semi-retired and had half of the duties that I did. He's not a Taoist but he certainly has more capacity to live the life than I (did)

[9th]

Yes, yes.  But of course it is such and such.

 

So, therefore, please continue discussing your own problems amongst yourselves...

 

ALONE

[Rara]

9 hours ago, KuroShiro said:

 

Very interesting question, I've read that the most high level healing "stuff" was for the Emperor but I've also read/know that the poor practiced it.

It also seems that in ancient times, very much like today, you had to be "lucky" to come across such knowledge, one way or the other.

 

I feel it must go further back...I mean, the term "folk Taoism" comes to mind. I get this picture of villagers living in very poor, modest conditions using remedies from the land, singing around a fire, having a good community spirit etc.

 

If Lao Tzu did leave his post and become a hermit, he must have found value in what his ancients practiced...far away as possible from the material world.

 

Chuang Tzu speaks of a time before the Tao was disrupted...before emperors and sages interfered.

[Marblehead]

9 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

What does it mean to completely withdraw yourself from the world? What does it mean to not be very attached to worldly things?

Excellent question.  I think that this is one of the concepts where the difference between Taoism and Buddhism can be easily seen.

 

Lao Tzu isn't very descriptive about this but Chuang Tzu is.

 

[wandelaar]

Lao tse has his chapter about the small village where people live a simple modest life and don't desire anything else, so I think there is reason to believe Lao tse would have though it important to adapt our life's circumstances (when that's possible) with an eye on making it easier to life a Taoist life.

[Marblehead]

Great example.  He knew what happens when you put too many rats in a cage.

 

[wandelaar]

Discussing Lao tse and Chuang tse I find there is much more common sense in those guys than I expected.

[Daemon]

You seem to have a knack for extracting that common sense, my friend.

 

☮️

[wandelaar]

I think it is not enough to read the Tao Te Ching (or Chuang tse) once or twice, one has to read the chapters over and over again until they become thoroughly familiar. Eventually you will kind of automatically think of the relevant texts when they are needed. (I'm not there yet, but it's getting better. I still needed a good night's rest to come up with the village-chapter.)

 

So here again we have the two components of learning/training and letting go.

Edited April 30, 2018 by wandelaar

[Daemon]

You are saying that they can only be truly apprended in the same way as poetry or mythology (in the body, rather than in the intellect)?

 

☮️