Updated First Book Club Selection - Eva Wong's Taoism!

[doc benway]

Eva Wong's Shambala Guide to Taoism

http://www.amazon.com/Shambhala-Guide-Taoi...5575&sr=8-1

is now our new official first book club selection.

Sorry for any confusion.

We will try to begin discussing it at the beginning of March.

I recognize some people may get their books a bit late but we'll have until April to discuss it.

I'll post approximate chapter dates. I'll think a bit about how to segregate those discussions. Possibly new threads. We'll see.

Here's an approximate layout for when we'll begin discussions by section

March 1: Part I - History of Taoism

March 10: Part II - Systems of Taoism

March 20: Part III - Taoist Practices

If you get the book late, just jump in when you can. This was one excellent reason to stick with a relatively basic book.

[affenbrot]

Eva Wong's Shambala Guide to Taoism

http://www.amazon.com/Shambhala-Guide-Taoi...5575&sr=8-1

is now our new official first book club selection.

Sorry for any confusion.

We will try to begin discussing it at the beginning of March.

I recognize some people may get their books a bit late but we'll have until April to discuss it.

I'll post approximate chapter dates. I'll think a bit about how to segregate those discussions. Possibly new threads. We'll see.

Here's an approximate layout for when we'll begin discussions by section

March 1: Part I - History of Taoism

March 10: Part II - Systems of Taoism

March 20: Part III - Taoist Practices

If you get the book late, just jump in when you can. This was one excellent reason to stick with a relatively basic book.

i like that choice

i'll definately read this along, will still see how much I activly participate...

[Pero]

Wow, I just realized I own this book.

Used to write a report on Taoism in high school.

Maybe I'll join in...

[thelerner]

Works for me, even though I don't own the book yet. The most important thing is we have people on the same 'page' er book.

 

In some ways I'll miss the first choice. Taomeows criticisms of Luk formed a great basis for future discussions. Nothing more boring then everyone agreeing with each other Though sometimes its a nice change of pace.

 

 

Michael

[thelerner]

My local library had a copy of the book. Even if it didn't they could get one within a few days. My book shelves overfloweth, so my 2008 resolution is using the library more.

 

I just started reading the book. Her experience and enthusiasm really comes out.

 

Jumping the gun..

 

From the first chapter on Taoism shamanic roots, I can't tell how literally she takes the old legends. The early shamans who could turn into bears. Does she take the stories literally? Its not clear to me, doesn't really matter. Though in religion its interesting to see how fundamentalist the writer is. She certainly takes the concepts of magic and talismans seriously.

 

 

 

Michael

[Pietro]

My local library had a copy of the book. Even if it didn't they could get one within a few days. My book shelves overfloweth, so my 2008 resolution is using the library more.

 

I just started reading the book. Her experience and enthusiasm really comes out.

 

Jumping the gun..

 

From the first chapter on Taoism shamanic roots, I can't tell how literally she takes the old legends. The early shamans who could turn into bears. Does she take the stories literally? Its not clear to me, doesn't really matter. Though in religion its interesting to see how fundamentalist the writer is. She certainly takes the concepts of magic and talismans seriously.

Michael

 

Hi Michael,

so we're starting? Good!

 

Yes, she is definitly mixing her own tradition with the facts. But she her writing style is pleasent and interesting.

 

I think there are many traditions around the world where people transform into animals. Or have their soul get into animals, and then come back and report (A la Old Granny Weatherwax in Terry Pratchett ), or has the soul of an animal enter into theirs. after all werewolves are quite a universal tradition.

 

So I wonder how different those practices would be from sciamanic practices in other parts of the world.

 

I know someone asked Bruce at some point if there was still an unbroken sciamanic tradition in China, and he said that there was. It was a personal question, so I did not got to learn more about this, but maybe if anyone knows more on this they could share it.

[thelerner]

Lets make it personal. Where do we stand on Shamanistic transformation? Turning into an animal, I don't think so. Controlling an animal with ones thoughts and body language, yes. Transfering your consciousness into an animals body, maybe.

 

Another level- gaining knowledge through spirits? I don't know if I believe in that. I think we're smarter and more intuitive then we realize. I often think those who Channel are really accessing inner knowledge that they won't consciously cop to.

 

Could be wrong though.

 

 

Michael

[jeffclist]

count me in

[Onigiri]

I don't want to start talking about it properly before we've all finished the first chunk but am I glad to be through the Transformation from Philosophy to Organised Religion bit. It's good and useful to know but all the unfamiliar language and the dates don't make for the most thrilling reading. I kept thinking of Monty Python's Life of Brian and the People's Front of Judea, "Splitters!" but that's just me being daft.

 

It's probably just the way the Chinese language works but the way it's written 'The Yellow Court Classic of External Images' lends it such gravitas. I mean, this is serious stuff ;-)

 

Eva Wong is a very accessible writer. I'm loving it. I just wish I had read more before I came onto the forum and made a fool of myself by knowing nothing. Looking forward to continuing.

[Pietro]

I don't want to start talking about it properly before we've all finished the first chunk but am I glad to be through the Transformation from Philosophy to Organised Religion bit. It's good and useful to know but all the unfamiliar language and the dates don't make for the most thrilling reading. I kept thinking of Monty Python's Life of Brian and the People's Front of Judea, "Splitters!" but that's just me being daft.

 

It's probably just the way the Chinese language works but the way it's written 'The Yellow Court Classic of External Images' lends it such gravitas. I mean, this is serious stuff ;-)

 

Eva Wong is a very accessible writer. I'm loving it. I just wish I had read more before I came onto the forum and made a fool of myself by knowing nothing. Looking forward to continuing.

Onigiri, please, let me correct you.

This book from Eva Wong is very accessible. I was given by Alan God of the Dao, also from Eva Wong, and girl, was it boring! I sincerely asked myself what misdeed must I have done for Alan to punish me in this way. It is a scolastic study of how Lao Tzu raised from being a mythical philosopher, to become a God who supposedly created the whole universe, appeared to transmit the Dao De Ching to the Gate Officer (who was then seen as another immortal), and then left, only to be then take a body again to become the Buddha, to convert the Barbarian, and so on. All this in the context of medieval debates between Buddhist and Daoists. Uff, made you wander when the next meeting with the dentist was, just to have more fun.

 

But yes, I do agree that this book we are reading tend to widen our understanding of what Daoism is.

[Onigiri]

Onigiri, please, let me correct you.

This book from Eva Wong is very accessible. I was given by Alan God of the Dao, also from Eva Wong, and girl, was it boring! I sincerely asked myself what misdeed must I have done for Alan to punish me in this way. It is a scolastic study of how Lao Tzu raised from being a mythical philosopher, to become a God who supposedly created the whole universe, appeared to transmit the Dao De Ching to the Gate Officer (who was then seen as another immortal), and then left, only to be then take a body again to become the Buddha, to convert the Barbarian, and so on. All this in the context of medieval debates between Buddhist and Daoists. Uff, made you wander when the next meeting with the dentist was, just to have more fun.

 

But yes, I do agree that this book we are reading tend to widen our understanding of what Daoism is.

 

Very useful to know Pietro, thank you. Saves me from spending money on something which is less enjoyable than root canal work

[Oolong Rabbit]

Well, I chewed through the first 200 pages while I was stuck for 8 hrs at LaGuardia (my flight got bumped twice ) coming back from Lin's meet. A lot of interesting details about the various sects, although it gets pretty confusing when you not only have sect X, but you then have Northern and Southern offshoots of sect X that differ greatly. I found the sections on ceremonial and divinational taoism slightly boring, but the sections on magical and alchemical taoism were terrific. It might have just been my state of mind at the time, or perhaps I just have more affinities with these paths. She sure demystifies some of the alchemical processes, and even takes a swipe at Charles Luk haha.... I am really looking forward to reading the next section on Meditation and discussing it with you all.

[MatthewQi]

Hi,

 

I got my copy in the mail yesterday. Excellent choice for a first book!

 

Matt

[Pietro]

Some time ago I was speaking with a Buddhist. Asking her about the concept of Death in Buddhism. Eventually we went on to speak on Daoism and Buddhism. And she asked me how old was Daoism. I said 5000 years. She found that very interesting, and asked me some references. On the spot I could only give her Eva Wong book. And reply that I remembered by teacher speaking about Daoism being 5000 years.

 

In fact, right now, that I am writing I remember that when I went to my first Kung Fu school, there also they said that we should imaging on the altar a 5000 years old sage. Again 5000 years. And people who play Go (in Chinese WeiQi), say that the game is also 5000 years. And interestingly according to Eva Wong Daoism came down from Tibetan mountains. Which also the game of Go is said to come fown from.

 

SO in any case eventually I went to Alan to ask for clarification. I thought that being an archeologist he would be able to tell me better, but I would never have expected his answer.

 

Alan- The story of 5000 years, is essentially bollocks. 5000 years ago China was essentially in stone age. There is no evidence whatsoever that Daoism is that old. The oldest copies of the DDJ is about 400 to 300 BC. Confucius is a couple of centuries earlier. Lao Tzu probably never existed, as there are conclusive evidence that the DDJ was written by multiple hands. Then the story of Lao Tzu being older than Confucius is essentially a story in the Chuang Tzu placed there for Chinese Politics. But the fact is that there is no evidence whatsoever that Daoism is older than Confucianism.

 

Me- But Eva Wong, Bruce.

 

Alan- Eva Wong, is essentially telling her own oral tradition, and so is Bruce. But one thing is the oral tradition that is passed down, and one thing are external evidences.

 

Me- if somwthing is passed through Oral tradition, they need to register the time. And some how update their story as time goes by.

 

Alan- Exactly

 

Me- So if Bruce hard 5000 years from his teacher, than it should be 5030 by now, but he is not going to make this change. So the oral tradition has a serious difficulty in estimating big length of time

 

Alaon- yes.

 

Me- But I heard about ancient remainings, and tombs, and drawing in caves...

 

Alan- [sorry, guys I do not remember all here] Yes, we have drawings of people in Chi Gung postures from ..., and we even have a tomb from the ... period, where the dead person was placed between a mosaic [if I remember well] of a dragon and a mosaic of a tiger. But what is all this telling us?

 

Me- that the concept of duality was already present.

 

Alan- yes, and maybe more. Also that the position of being between the duality was considered beneficial. But we have no books, no scrolls. Consider that even the words "yin" and "yang" were not even being developped at the time of the DDJ [this is particulary sweet if you find them in translations of the DDJ in english. Where a chinese word is being translated into another chinese words that didnt exist at the time!]. They only started appear later. So there might be a tradition in the making, or an oral tradition that with the DDJ suddenly emerges to the light. But at the moment we have no proofs of this. And in any case 5000 years is just bollocks.

 

From that moment "5000 years"became a standing joke between me and Alan. I know he gets really annoyed when Bruce says that Daoism is 5000 years old. While I get really annoyed when anyone, and in particular Bruce, says that some effect in meditation are due to "quantum effects". So we often push each other buttons by joking on it.

 

I thought I would put this here, as people are starting to read the book. I think it is important to consider how much of what we read is objective, and how much is Eva's particular oral tradition. Still I think that as we move from the shamanic origin to more recent history the book become more historical and less mythological.

 

Pietro

[Oolong Rabbit]

Hi Pietro,

 

I guess it maybe depends on what you define as "Taoism". The shamanistic religions certainly seemed much closer to the Tao than modern society even though the term taoism may not not have been formally used, and some of the concepts may have been crude. I think that's where Eva is getting her date from and she says as much in the book.

 

Brgds!

[Pietro]

Hi Pietro,

 

I guess it maybe depends on what you define as "Taoism". The shamanistic religions certainly seemed much closer to the Tao than modern society even though the term taoism may not not have been formally used, and some of the concepts may have been crude. I think that's where Eva is getting her date from and she says as much in the book.

 

Brgds!

Agreed. It surely depends on the definition!

But the definition must make sense.

If you find the same cave with similar remainings in China or somwhere else in the world, then in the one case you call it shamanism, and in the other daoism? Such a definition looks preposterous to me (or actually post-pre-erous ).

 

At some point you need to draw the line. And there seem to be some qualitative difference between the Daoism of the classical period, and the Shamanism before that. So I think you might find some of that "Daoism which is similar to the one in the classical period, and different from the one in the shamanic period" before Lao Tzu. But certainly not thousands of years before. And hardly not in the stone age.

So you have Shamanism (undifferentiated, thousands of years ago), Shamanic Daoism (differentiated, have some of the elements that are then carried out as modern Daoism), Classical Daoism (the one of Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, etc...). How far will you make the Shamanic Daoism go back? Before it is just the same as everywhere else in the world.

Edited February 27, 2008 by Pietro

[doc benway]

Agreed. It surely depends on the definition!

But the definition must make sense.

If you find the same cave with similar remainings in China or somwhere else in the world, then in the one case you call it shamanism, and in the other daoism? Such a definition looks preposterous to me (or actually post-pre-erous ).

 

At some point you need to draw the line. And there seem to be some qualitative difference between the Daoism of the classical period, and the Shamanism before that. So I think you might find some of that "Daoism which is similar to the one in the classical period, and different from the one in the shamanic period" before Lao Tzu. But certainly not thousands of years before. And hardly not in the stone age.

So you have Shamanism (undifferentiated, thousands of years ago), Shamanic Daoism (differentiated, have some of the elements that are then carried out as modern Daoism), Classical Daoism (the one of Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, etc...). How far will you make the Shamanic Daoism go back? Before it is just the same as everywhere else in the world.

It seems to me that it's not unusual for people to look for the origins of things in antiquity.

This tendency leads us to look as far back as we can to see the roots of development of a tradition or system.

The earliest roots may be barely recognizable but can give us some insight into what gave birth to our traditions.

In fact, if you trace things back far enough or deep enough - they're all the same...

[Procurator]

And there seem to be some qualitative difference between the Daoism of the classical period, and the Shamanism before that.

given that not many people have a clue (or hard data) about "

the Daoism of the classical period" and the "Shamanism before that" this statement is not quite meaningful.

 

what is that difference, again? what is the classical period?

 

Also you guys seem to be pretty sure that shamanism was "before". amusing.

[Pietro]

And there seem to be some qualitative difference between the Daoism of the classical period, and the Shamanism before that.

given that not many people have a clue (or hard data) about "

the Daoism of the classical period" and the "Shamanism before that" this statement is not quite meaningful.

 

Well, considering that this is a discussion internos between person who are in the book club;

given that the book club is at the moment reading a book from Eva Wong on the History of Taoism;

given that such book has two chapters (chapter number 1, and number 2) describing two different type of Daoism, one called the shamanic origins, and the other called the classical period;

given that such chapters don't just describe the period in which those type of Daoism mostly originated (or emerged), but also how were the Daoism from those periods different;

given that we do have hard data (texts) from both those perios. (For example for the Classical period we have the Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu. While for the shamanic period we have texts that are collected in The Daoist Experience);

given that more than this we have the luck to have the possibility to ask to an archeologist for descriptions abotu more non textual data, archeologist who is particularly interested in that period;

given that some of us (me in particular) is studying with a Daoist, who is a recognised lineage master, and claims that the teaching he received are coming directly through oral tradition from the Lao Tzu tradition.

 

I would claim that instead we do have enough material for this discussion.

 

what is that difference, again? what is the classical period?

We are here refering to the period in which the DDJ was written to about when Daoism became a religion.

Circa 300/400 BC to 300 AD. Some people would make it start earlier.

 

Also you guys seem to be pretty sure that shamanism was "before".

Well, the archologists seem to be pretty sure that shamanic practices were present before the philosophy that gave rise to the DDJ was developed. Now this about the origin. No one here have said that Shamanism stopped there.

 

amusing.

are you really amused, or are you just pretending to show a superiority that you don't really posses?

 

"Procurator", I appreciate your comments. They are often harsh, and direct. But please as you ask (actually require) everybody to do their homework, do yours to. We are here discussing the Shambhala Guide to Taoism, from Eva Wong. Have you read it?

 

In fact, if you trace things back far enough or deep enough - they're all the same...

agreed

[Procurator]

We are here discussing the Shambhala Guide to Taoism, from Eva Wong. Have you read it?

 

no, i read academic works not pop history. Wong is a valid practitioner but her attempts at historicity are flawed and often naive.

 

For academic critique of her version of history see this:

http://venus.unive.it/dsao/pregadio/articles/notes/wong.html

 

but far it be from me interrupt your learened discussion, mine was just a tangential comment in passim

Edited February 27, 2008 by Procurator

[WhiteTiger]

given that not many people have a clue (or hard data) about "

the Daoism of the classical period" and the "Shamanism before that" this statement is not quite meaningful.

 

what is that difference, again? what is the classical period?

 

Also you guys seem to be pretty sure that shamanism was "before". amusing.

 

This is totally off the topic of this forum... so i'll make this short but sweet.

 

When I did the little studying of history I learned. That the definition of Shamanism (or at least the word) was very widely used to mean slightly different things through different cultures. A more modern definition that encompasses many different cultures definition was basically Shamanism means a practice of practices (some call them religion's) that was different or not accepted throughout the specific culture calling the other practice shamanism. For example, Roman's called the Hun's belief practices shamanism. (At least the parts that couldn't be understood) This word is often similar or the same as when talking about religions in the eastern world as esoteric. (but when you study the practices, or religion, even through there are considered esoteric you realize that they seem perfectly normal. Just the outside views them as esoteric)

[Pietro]

no, i read academic works not pop history. Wong is a valid practitioner but her attempts at historicity are flawed and often naive.

 

For academic critique of her version of history see this:

http://venus.unive.it/dsao/pregadio/articles/notes/wong.html

 

but far it be from me interrupt your learened discussion, mine was just a tangential comment in passim

 

Hello Procurator, I think you must have confused the links. Pregadio is of course a serious academic voice, and he is indeed making a review of Eva's work. But only in respect to the book "Understanding Stillness". If you have a specific review on this book I am sure we are all interested. In the link you provided (thanks, by the way) the only part that seem to be more general to me seems:

 

Wong's judgment on medieval Taoist texts is as valid as any personal view can be, but is not documented. Certainly the Qingjing jing is terse, devoid of symbolism, and apparently easier to understand than neidan texts, but the doctrine, not the language, is the main point of a scripture. The description of the alchemical process in the introduction diverges from those available in studies of neidan. It may reflect the particular brand of practice that Wong learned from her master.

 

Which indeed again shows Wong as a person who is presenting her own version of Daoist History. Which by the way is also something that she is presenting in the introduction of her book.

 

We chose this book for various reasons, but essentially because it was accessible, introductory, and had some historical information (albeit not always objective). Getting immediatly into something harder might not have been fair for all the people who had up to now a passing interest in Daoism.

 

If you had doubts on the book we were reading you should have voice your opinion before. Like Taomeow, who by writing a critique of Luk's book was able to stir the whole group from that book. If you make the critique in the right moment you will indeed have an effect on the whole community. So, please do. FOr example right now we are collecting suggestions for the next book to read. Isabelle Robinet, History of Taoism, has been suggested. Regrdless of the fact that I will read that book anyway, I have some doubts over reading two books on the history of Daoism. One after the other.

 

Considering that we need a book in English (either written in English, or translated). Considering that it needs to be accessible for the current minimal level of this group (not the average, not the top, the minimal). What would you suggest?

[Procurator]

Considering that we need a book in English (either written in English, or translated). Considering that it needs to be accessible for the current minimal level of this group (not the average, not the top, the minimal). What would you suggest?

that is a tough one. There are not many books that are both easy to read and serious.

 

you guys could read this website for general reference and discuss individual articles one by one.

http://www.eng.taoism.org.hk/general-daois...m/pg1-2-1-1.asp

 

This one is informative and lively written (i am not sure 'sup with the crazy price on amazon now)

http://www.amazon.com/Taoist-Master-Chuang...6376&sr=8-1

 

this one is considerably more boring but the presentation is simple

http://www.amazon.com/Taoist-Body-Kristofe...6649&sr=1-1

[Ian]

but far it be from me interrupt your learened discussion, mine was just a tangential comment in passim

Talking of homework, "passim" is a latin adverb meaning everywhere.

"In passim" is meaningless.

[Procurator]

"In passim" is meaningless.

(shrug)

 

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geu6...r=&ei=UTF-8